have a Rule and a Law which he is to follow in giving Judgement that his Sentence may be just and secure This Rule is the Word of God which rightly applyed renders Judgement highly equitable Now the Synod of Dort acknowledges that an Assembly of lawful Pastors representing the Body of the true Church is this Judge to whom it appertains to judge of the true sence of the Word of God and afterwards to resolve according to this Rule any cause depending 12. I do now earnestly beseech our Brethren of the Reformed Churches to reflect seriously upon these two Propositions I am now about to make The first is That as the Word of God is infallible in it self so certainly the Judgement of him who truely judges according to this Rule is also Infallible and consequently they are obliged to believe that the Church when she Judges according to this Rule or the Word of God does not onely not err but that she also cannot err The second is that they are bound as well as we to believe that the Church of God deciding controversies of Faith does judge according to the true sence of the Word of God because upon the matter it is concerning this very sence that she gives Judgement between the Parties who give it a different sence and who are obligâ— in Conscience to submit to her Judgement under pain of being Schismaticks and Hereticks as their Synod of Dort has positively declared From hence follows by necessary consequence according to their own Principles that they are bound to believe with us that the True Church of Jesus Christ is infallible in the Judgement she judicially pronounces touching matters of Faith 13. I think there can now be no 〈◊〉 but they are obliged according to their own grounds to acknowledge the infallibility of the Church of Christ But I am contented for the present not to press them so far nor to make use of that right which I might justly challange It is sufficient that the Synod which in these Gentlemens opinion represents the True Church is lawful judge in this case as the Synod is self declares obliging them in Confidence to adhere to and obey the Decisions made therein It is not then lawful for them who are of that Church and are at Difference amongst themselves to condeman the Synod of Error then judgement â—s given in order to the clearing Points of Faith confessed among them They have no power to frame a different Judgement from that of the Synod and adhering to it to seporâ—are themselves from communion with the rest They are bound to acknowledge the Authority of the Synod which is lawfull Judge and submit unto it believing that what is there desined 〈◊〉 Truth it self stand this without any necessity of entring upon the question of its Infallibility I demand nothing more for the preseâ—s I will content my 〈◊〉 with what themselves do grant That Church of which the Partins Contesting are members be she fallible or infallible has full Power to Debide differentes and 〈…〉 oblige under the penâ—ry of being Schismaticks And now having as I make my self believe give Monsient Claude all the satisfaction he can in 〈◊〉 require concerning this Point I 〈◊〉 on my course perceably and quietly and make bold to give him notice that 14. Here is that the Prescription that 〈◊〉 Point anâ—â—oisputable Pâ—â—ciple to which a receisary adhfione required when there arise Disputes between Parties for the discovering whether an Opinion be or be not contrary to the true Rule of Faith which is the Word of God and whether we stand bound to believe it as a Point of Faith Were it antecedently distinctly believed as such or no. Disputation will only serve to render the Debate eternal Both Parties will go on challenging the true sence of Scripture and Tradiuon on their sides Books shall be written without number for the asserting of it and that without any hopes or appearance of any end of these learned indeed but redious Contests which prove many times so intricate and confused that every one standing his ground and being strongly and willfully resolved not to yield reproaches his Adversary with affected Obstinacy against known Truth We must then make up to that unquestionable Point in which both Parties meet and which Tertullian so boldly establishes as the principal Rule or Prescription for the ending all differences which may arise about the agreeing or conformity with the Word of God which every one is so ready to challenge to himself This Learned Father having said in his twentieth Chapter A quibus traducem fidei semina doctrinae caeterae deinde Ecclesiae mutuatae sunt quotidie mutuontur ut Ecclesiae fiant Ataque tot ac tantae Ecclesiae una est illa ab Apostolis prima ex qua ommes Quid autem praedicavevint id est quid eis Christus revelaverit hÃc praescriham non alite pâ—obari debere nisi per easdem Ecclesias quas ipsi condiderunt ipsi eis praedicando tam vivâ quâ—d â—iunt voce quà m per epistolas postea de Praes c. 21. that the Apostles who were sent by our Blessed Saviour Founded many Churches in several places and that many others came from these by communication of the same Doctrine and that they all of them together make but one true Catholick and Apostolick Church he adde in the next Chapter that true Prescription is that nothing be received but what he revealed unto his Apostles whom he sent to Preach his Doctrine unto the world But in case there does arise any Contest concerning any particular Point and that we be in some trouble or doubt whether they Preacâ—â—ed it or no and by consequence whether they learned it of their Master or no behold here his solid Rule or Prescription in this great maxime that this is not to be made out or cleared by any other means but by those Churches which they founded either by Preaching or by Writing and which as we lately touched all of them make but one only Church To this Church then it does belong to determine what our Blessed Saviour did reveale in his Holy Word whensoever there is any cause of doubt in such Contests as do arise and what she defines what she declares in the case whatever former times did believe it now to be held as matter of Faith 15. As Protestants do acknowledge this Verity as I have made it appear so do we also most willingly submit unto it and intirely profess that the holy Church is lawful Judge of Controversies and that as Tertullian sayes addresses are to be made to her upon difference of Opinions that we may learn what the Son of God revealed unto his Apostles that is what is the true meaning of Holy Scripture and what Consequences are to be drawn from those Principles We have a very pregnant example of this in that famous Contest which has been for some Ages past between Catholicks concerning the Immaculate Conception
who before their condemnation were of the same Church must not say that she is unchurched and that it is they themselves who now make up the Church under pain of being held not onely Schismaticks but also very extravagant fantastical persons And those who follow them after this and declare for them at what time soever it be become fully as criminal as those who first separated themselves from the Church in so unreasonable and so unjustifiable a manner This Assembly or Representative having examined the proofs and reasons on both sides and consulted with the Holy Scriptures which are the Rule of Faith has often declared that the Rea Presence and a substantial Change are to be believed and has condemned as an Heresie that opinion which stands for Real Absence Of all that I have now said I cannot imagin any one Point which can be call'd in question as I have stated the business And I think I have made it appear by the very words and Principles of Monsieur Claude himself that he is bound to agree with me in every particular since by following his own conduct we find our selves exactly and precisely in the state and condition of the Synod of Dort In the mean time those who first stood for a Real Absence against those who proposed a Real Presence when they saw themselves condemned by that Church of which they were and which before their condemnation was to all intents and purposes the real True Church as we are agreed undertake to say that she is not so and that they onely who maintain what she condemns do constitute the True Church Now according to the Principles a greed upon I cannot discover how they can avoid being held Schismaticks And by unavoidable consequence all those who have taken part with them these five hundred years must needs be subject to the same censure It being certain that they joyn with those who separated themselves from the True Church of Christ for no other reason but because they found themselves condemned by her It is true that that Church which is acknowledged to have been at that time the True Church was indeed the Church of Rome or Roman Church But what follows from thence according to the Principles agreed upon but that we must conclude for Her all that has been said in behalf of the True Church even by the consent of our adversaries themselves And that those who were of that Church before they withdrew themselves upon that Judgement she gave against them could not in reason and suffice say that she did now cease to be the True Church and that she misunderstood the meaning of Holy Scripture For she being the True Church as themselves grant before this happened 't was she that was Judge thereof according to the Decree of the Synod of Dort and not they who according to the same Synod were bound to submit to her Judgement and to hold that for the true sence of Scripture which she followed in her decisions All this is so clearly proved without mixture of any proofs by way of Disputation that I think I shall do well to stop here without pretending any further that I may peaceably draw those consequences which this great Principle affords us CHAP. IV. The Consequences which naturally flow from this Principle by a due application thereof 1. IN the second Chapter you may have seen how the True Church when contests do arise has power to decide them according to the Word of God and to propose that unto Christians as matter of Faith which antecedently to such decision they were not obliged to believe because it was not clearly and distinctly known but remained as yet involved in a general and confused knowledge In the third Chapter we did apply that uncontroulable Principle unto the subject of the Holy Eucharist and have clearly shewed that the Church of which the first contestors then were and which being the onely Church before separation made by one of the Parties was also the True Church did decide this matter according to method and Rule in favour of the Real Presence From these two Verities thus established even without Dispute and by-wayes we were all the way agreed upon taking along with us the thoughts of Monsieur Claude and allowing him whatsoever he was pleased to ask it will not be hard in this Chapter to to draw some consequences which offer themselves unto us and which it is impossible not to discover how little soever we desire to reflect upon what we have fairly and candidly acknowledged to be true 2. For first who does not see that it is necessarily inferred from thence that although the Real Presence had not been believed before the tenth Age which notwithstanding is a great mistake yet we are now obliged to believe it Because the True Church of which the first Contesting Parties were members and before their being condemned acknowledged her for such has put an end to the quarrel giving Sentence for and proposing as matter of Faith the said Real Presence Moreover that those first Abettors of a Real Absence by refusing to submit to her Judgement became Schismaticks and that all those who declared afterwards for that Faction are as faulty and in the same crime with them I do absolutely believe with the Authour of The Perpetuity c. that considering some circumstances and certain matters of fact which cannot be denied it was morally impossible that such an insensible change should have been made by passing imperceptibly from a belief which is pretended to have been of a Real Absence to that which we now have of a Real Presence But in case such a change was made not by way of negation but of Addition passing from an obscure confused kind of knowledge to a distinct positive Belief of the Real Presence proposed for the lucidation or clearing this great Mysterie in such manner as Monsieur Claude is pleased subtily enough to imagin yet the obligation of believing it would still subsist and stand in force Because the same Church of which the Parties who were first in Dispute about this matter were lawful subjects having heard and examined their Reasons did judge according to Rule that it was of Faith It is not therefore now lawful to follow those who revolted against their Mother Church for the same cause that Monsieur Claude will without question freely grant that it was not lawful in Conscience to side and take part with the Monothelites who would by no means receive the Decree and decision of the Church they lived in touching two wills and operations in Christ On the contrary I am sure he does reteive and reverence that Doctrine as an apputtenance of faith although here was also a change in the same manner by way of Addition in the belief of the Church and that this distinction of wills and operations was not before clearly and distinctly known Some body perchance may here tell me that for this very reason the Protestants of
explication oâ— their Doctrine so fully as it was afterwards thought fitting to do and thâ— they did not judge it necessary to descend to all those particulars which were examined and looked into in afteâ— Ages It was possible also that the would not deduce all those particular sequels which were inclosed or shut up as it were in those Principles which they established as our Blessed Saviour himself had formerly dealt with theâ— It is also very likely that men oâ— of neglect not preserving those Truth in memory as they ought to have done they came insensibly to â—e forgotten or that whilest mens wits were wholly taken up in defending some part oâ— them against Hereticks who opposed them there was not so much heed taken of those others which never came into Controversy However it be this iâ— indubitably certain that a time there was when many things were not clearly and distinctly known nor at such time obligatory as to exercise of faith which the Church has since placed in the number of such things as are belonging to Faith For although all those things were comprehended in Holy Scripture and in the Doctrine of the Apostles and that there alwayes were the same marks to know them by yet they were not alwayes taken notice of with the same reflexion or application But now by occasion of Disputes which have been raised at certain times the Church having set her self to examine them legally and according to form and making reflexions upon Holy Scripture and looking back upon the neighbouring times of the Apostles making up by such means unto the Fountain-head of true Apostolical Tradition she has declared them to be of faith as being exactly conformable to the Rule of Belief 6. I do not say therefore what some haply of our Adversaries who are not so well acquainted with our Tenets may reproach me with that the Church has Authority to frame new Articles of Faith No I do acknowledge together with them that she cannot act but according to Rule which is the holy Scripture and Tradition truely and purely Apostolical from which also we have received the holy Scripture it self She holds forth nothing new but she proposes unto us Antiquity which we knew not before She does not give new birth to Scars which never were before but she makes them appear in that Instre which formerly they had done by removing those clouds which did obscure them She has no new revelations she onely publishes those antient ones of which we had no formeâ— assurance Finally she settles no other Principles but such as she receiveâ— from our Saviour himself out of which by force of her light and certain necessary sequels she makes those Veritieâ— appear which were hidden and as 〈◊〉 were Quid est Depositum Id est quod tibi creditum est non à te inventum quod acceptisti non quod excogitasti 〈◊〉 rem non ingenii sed doctrinae non usurpationiâ— privatae publicae traditionis rem ad te perductam non a te prolatam in quae â—on author debes esse sed custos non instituâ—or sed sectator non ducens sed sequens Comment 1. c. 27. shut up in those Principles This is that which Vincentius Lirineâ— sis expresses most admirably applying unto the Church those words of S. Paâ— to his Disciple Timothy Depositum câ—stodi keep well the Depositum which 〈◊〉 put into your hands What is the meaning of this Depositum saith he speaking of matters of Faith It is that which you are intrusted with and by no means that which your self have invented It is that which you have received and in no wise that which your self have found out it is not the result of your own Wit or understanding but it is what you learn from that Doctrine which has been taught you It is not any thing which you have established in the World by your own private Authority it is a Point of Tradition which you have been trusted with for the publick good It is a Treasure of which there was no Mine in your own Land You are not the Author â—ut the conserver of this Doctrine You are not here the Guide but he that follows the Guide What Guide The Word of God which is this Guide and the true Rule of Holy Church Vald. l. 2. Doct. fid c. 22. Can. l. 2. de Com. 7. à castro de Luâ— go valentia alii Videte quid dicat qui fuerunt non qui sunt ut exceptis Apostolis quodcunque aliud postèa dicetur abscindatur Hier. in Ps 86. All our Divines agree in this Doctrine which they have taken from the Holy Fathers For St. Hierome has it in exâ—ess terms upon the 86. Psalm where he Psalmist sayes that Our Lord will delare in Scriptures of People and of Prinoes and of those that have been in her He makes use sayes St. Hierome of a word signifying time past fuerunt that have been because we are to hold nothing for a Point of Faith in the Church but what we find in the Prophers and in the Apostles who are the Princes of the Church And upon this ground it is that St. Irenaeus and after him S. Augustine saith That the faith of our Ancestors and ours makes but one and the same Faith because we believe nothing at this day which was not contained in the whole Body of their Faith The Church therefore never did make Iren. l. 3. c. 2 lib. 4. c. 13 Aug. Ep. 51 and undoubtedly never will make any new Articles of Faith since it is not in her power to define any thing but according to the Word of God which she is alwayes to consult with as with her Oracle and the Rule she is bound to follow But there is no question also but upon occasion of Differences from time to time in mens judgements and opinions she has often declared for and defined some Points which were antecedently by some questioned and that without offence or at least were not known before unless in general and by a confused kind of knowledge There is nothing more certain nor more common in the History of the Church and Councils where you shall frequently see defined and proposed as a Point or Principle of Faith that which before Conteâ—â—s did arise and before that violent clashing which has been in almost every Age of the Church about some Point or other in Controversy which was neither defined nor so much as thought of For example concerning the authentickness of some Canonical Books concerning the validity of Baptisme conferred by Hereticks concerning one or two Wills and operations in our Blessed Saviour concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost and many such like All which are now no more to be called in question although before the definition of the Church it might have been done without offence For if it be true that it belongs unto her to propose that as matter of Faith which was not before
against the Custome and practice of the first Council of Nice of Constantinople of Ephesus of Calcedon where the Bishops who were from the first against the opinions of Arius Macedâ—nius Nestorius and Eutyches did not cease notwithstanding to be their lawful Judges in those sacred Assemblies which represented the Church unto which all Parties owed subjection That if that Protestation were admitted as reasonable it never was The Judgement of the Divines of Hesse nor ever could be possible to assemble a lawful Council for the deciding of Controversies and suppressing of Errors fince the most zealous Pastors and the ablest Divines were alwayes those who either by Word of Mouth or by Writing made chief opposition against such Opinions as they esteemed Heretical That if one upon such grounds must lose his right of assisting at Councils The Judgement of the Divines of Bremen all the Heresies imaginable might be eflablished without refrstance none opposing them for fear of bringing so great a prejudice upon themselves That it cannot be said upon that score that a man is judge in his own cause because in Contests of that nature when it is in question Which is Orthodox Doctrine it is not properly the Cause of every or any particular person but it is in reality the Cause of God and his Holy Church which is in agitation That for the deciding of this The Judgement of the Divines of the Palatinat when Disputes do arise we are not to apply our selves to the Jews and Gentiles who may seem nenters in the case as having no interest in either Opinion but that it ought to be referred to the Pastors and Brethren of the same Church being met together to decide it according the Word of God Optat. Milevit l. 5. advers Parmenian whatever Opinion they happened to be of during the time of the Contest And finally that Sentence being given by the Assembly submission is to be yielded and that if the Remonstrators do refuse to conforme adhering still to their Protestation they do thereby declare that they do renounce Communion with the Reformed Churches and that in that case it belongs to the Soveraign Power to determine what is to be done In these very words did the Divines of Geneva declare themselves Upon this the Deputies of the States General declared against the Protestanon of the Remonstrators that the National Synod was lawful and Soveraigâ— Judge in this Controversy as the same Synod had formerly declared in the 26. Autoritatem ejus non defugerent sed eandem pro legitimo causae judice agnoscerent Session In pursuance hereof they summoned them to renounce their Proteslation and to give in Writing what they had to say in defence of their five Articles which in conclusion they did After this all the Reasons of both sides being fully examined in several Sessions Sess 138.24 Apr. 1619. the Synod Condemned the five Propositions of the Arminians as full of Error and contrary to the Word of God and forbad them to be held or taught in any of the Reformed Churches as also to admit any person to the Minislery who had not subscribed the contrary Doctrine which was approved as onely True and Orthodox by the Decree of the Council 2. Jul. 1619 The States General hereupon sent Orders into all the Provinces forbidding any other Doctrine to be taught but what did punctually agree with the Judgement of the Synod concerning these five Articles with express Command to all Governours and Magistrates to see the said Decrees exactly observed Moreover Barnevelt who had been the Head and chief Protector of the Remonstrators and had endeavoured in their defence to hinder the convocating of the National Synod was seised upon 24. Aug. 1618. and taken Prisoner some three months before the beginning of thâ— said Synod 14 May 1619. and four dayes after thâ— concluding thereof with a Condemnâ—tion of the Arminians was Condemned to dy Merc. Franc. To. 5. pag. 43 and was beheaded Because as is specified in the first and second Article of the Sentence given againâ—â— him he had raised troubles in Religiâ— and contristated as much as in him lay the Church of God in maintaining aâ—â— causing by his Partisans to be maintarxed and instill'd into the minds of maâ—â— people that extravagant and pernicion Maxime That it belongs to every particular Province within their Precinctâ—â— to ordain of matters of Religion withâ—â— any obligation of giving notice thereof 〈◊〉 other Provinces And for having pretested without Commission in the name of thâ— Provinces of Holland Uâ—recht and Overisle that the Deputies of the other Province who did press for and forward the convocation of a National Synod would be thâ— cause and Authors of much danger 〈◊〉 mischief After this who can any longer question but the Protestant Churches 〈◊〉 England rance Germany Swisserland and the Low-Countries do hold as a Fundamental Maxime That in such Controversies as do arise concerning Doctrine in matters of Religion tho True Church of which the dissenting Parties are members has full and Soveraign Power to declare according to the Word of God what is of Faith and that there is an obligation of standing to her Decrees under pain of being Schismaticks We know very well also that in conformity with this priviledge and practise the like Synods have been held in France concerning some other Points wherein the Ministers were 〈◊〉 some variance and that it has been absolutely and authoritatively defined what was to be believed After which The Judge ment of the Divines ofâ— Geneva it has not been held lawful to contest or argue for the contrary without incurring the penalty of being cut off from the Body of the Church and this because the Gospel sayes That he who does not admit of the decisious of the Church is to be accounted as an Infidel and Publican 9. Ordo obfervatur qualem Deus sancivit sanctificavit exemplo Apostolorum omnium aetatum Ecclesiae confirmavit reduetivè ad dictum Christi dic Ecclesiae si Ecclesiam non audierit c. The Divines of Geneva thought good to make use of this passage in the Judgement they gave against the Protestation of the Arminians to proâ—â— that Verity in the Synod of Dort whiâ—â— also confirmed it Wherefore I do now before hand humbly befeech Monsieur Claude thâ—â— he go not about to tell me that according to their Doctrine even the Trâ— Church is not infallible and that shâ— may have het errors Whether Monsieur Claude whom I hold to be â— man of too much Wit and Reason 〈◊〉 be of that opinion does for his partiâ— cular Quare in sententià omninò debent stare judicio corporis repraesentati per Synodum loquentem mandato ore ex sensu totius corporis nec licet ipsis corpus in partes vncare vel sibi adversarium fingere vels sibi jus corporis arrogarâ—â— quod ipsis nullâ lege permiâ—titur really
think so I cannot tellâ— but in this I am very well satisfied thaâ— there are many Ministers who have heâ— it and who for all that I know 〈◊〉 at this very day as much in the 〈◊〉 mour to maintain it resolutely and poâ—tively as ever And for this very reason I do declare that as I am resolved to have no deâ—â—ings of this nature neither with his nor them so will I not run riot 〈◊〉 forsake the quiet path I am already 〈◊〉 to engage my self in the way of 〈◊〉 guing and Disputing which I purpoâ—â— to avoide * Liv. 1. c. 13. Cardinal Richelicu has 〈◊〉 ready treated that Controversy with all the vigour imaginable and has demonstrated by most convincing Reafons that the True Church of God being guided by the Spirit of God as we must suppose her to be Vel abjiecere debent omnem Protestationem ad versus Synodum subjicere sua dogmata illius judicio vel certè si manent in Protestatione immoti eo ipso se declarant Unioâ—i Ecclesiarum ReformataruÌ„ renuntiare quod si faciant dispiciat postea summa potestaâ— quid facto sit opus cannot be deceived But that I may not be obliged to fight though with so much advantage under the conduct of so great a Person I am resolved not to enter into the field Let that passe then for the present untouched whether the Church can or cannot be deceived this is not the business now in agitation It is sufficient for what I would be at that our Brethren the Protestants do avert as von have seen in the proceedings of the Council of Dort that those who are of this Church are obliged to hold that she is not deceived that what she defines is the pure Truth according to the true meaning of the Word of God and consequently that they must submit to all her Decisions in matters of Faith under pain of being excommunicated and declared Hereticks and Schismaticks notwithstanding they still Protest as the Arminians and all other Hereticks have ever done that they have the Word of God on their side For of this very poinâ— it was that the Reformed Church gave Judgement in the Synod of Dort In reality as we are agreed on aâ— sides that in all Contests we are 〈◊〉 stick to that which is conformable to thâ— Word of God and that we are to reject what is not so the question is finally reduced to this how that the Word of God is to be understood when it is alledged by both sides for the supporting their Opinions The Disciples of Arminius had their placeâ— of Holy Scripture in defence of theâ— five Articles The Gomarists maintained a Doctrine contrary to those Articles by other passages which they produced out of the same Holy Scripture They were at as great odds concerning the sence or meaning of those Places and Passages each Party challenging the true one on their side It being then avouched that it belongs unto the Synod to end the Debate it does also without all doubt belong to the same Synod to determine in what sence the words cited out of Holy Scripture are to be understood Now I would gladly desire these Gentlemen to tell me whether that Synod which represented as they believe the True Church was infallible oâ— no. If it was infallible then Infallibly the objection they make is of no force since they agree with us that the True Church cannot err But now if it was not infallible they must at least affirm that this did not hinder but they were obliged to submit to the Decisions made therein under the penalty of being Schismaticks the Divines Deputed from their several Churches having solemnly declared that they were to subscribe to the Decrees and reject as Erroneous what should be condemned But that which the Synod of Delpht does clearly and positively declare upon this occasion takes away all force from enervates and quite destroys this objection The Remonstrators at the first would not be brought to submit to the National Synod because said they amongst other reasons which they alledged for their refusal it may erre as all other even Oecumenical Councils may they being not infallible as the Apostles were Christus Dominus qui Apostolis promisit Spiritum Veritatis qui ipsos ducturus esset in omnem veritatatem Ecclesiae quoque suae pollicitus est se cum eâ usque ad finem saeculi mansurum Mart. 28.20 Et ubi duo vel tres c. Matt. 18.10 who were guided immediately by the Holy Ghost The Statesâ— Holland and Westfriesland advised aboâ—â— this with their Synod which was theâ— held at Delpht And it was answered thaâ— that reason did not hinder but that they were obliged to receive the decisions oâ— the Synod and to follow the Judgement thereof when a doctrine is condemned because as Christ our Lord did promise his Spirit unto the Apostles for the instructing them in all Truth he has also promised his Church to be with her to the end of the world and that when two or three of them should be assembled together in his Name he would be in the midst of them The same Synod adds that when * Quando piiac docti Pastores ex diversis Ecclesiis diversisque regionibus orâ—â— Christiani in timore Domini conveniunt ut ex Dei verbo justcent quid in Ecclesiâ Dei doceri aut non deceri conveniat â—â—nino credendum est Christum juxta promissionem suam ejusâ—adi conventui interfuturum at que â—undum sancto suo Spiritâ— illustraturum ac recturum ut nihil in eo quod ad veritatis aâ— regni ejus detrimentum verti possit decernatur Nullus ords nulla pax esse poterit in Eccliâ Dei si eâ—ilibet quidlibet docere permiâ—tatur nec ad rationem doctrinae sat reddendam nec se judicio alicujus Synodici conventus submittendum obligetur juxta praeceptum Apostoli 1 Cor. 14 2. 31. ut judicetur de his quae Prophetae loquuntur Prophetarum spiritus Prophetis subjecti sint Jud Syn Delph Sess 26. Syn. Derdr many pious and learned Pastours sent from several Churches of Christendome do meet together to determine according to the Word of God what is to be taught or rejected in his Church it is to be believed with all confidence that our Blessed Saviour according to his promise will be present at such an Assembly and will not fail to enlighten and guide them by his Holy Spirit that they may not determine any thing prejudicial to Truth After which towards the end follows that there would be no Order in the Church of God nor ever could be any hopes of Peace if every one were permitted to teach what he pleased and not bound to give any account of his Doctrine nor submit himself to the judgement of a Synod according to the Command of the Apostle who ordains that what is taught by Prophets should be judged of by the Spirit of
Prophets This makes it further more manifest that it cannot be said that the Decrees of Synods are onely Rules of Policy which do not reach unto Doctrine and only serve for exterior order which is the utmost limit of their authority For it is most evident that this Assembly at Dort did pretend to regulate iâ— self according to the four first Councils whose example they proposed unto themseles In the mean time these Gentlemen do acknowledge that those Councils did condemn the doctrine of those Arch heretiques whom they gave Sentence against in such manner that it was not lawful to hold it not adhere unto their Party without becoming like unto them Hereticks and Schismaticks It cannot then be doubted but this Synod pretended to the same thing and that by declaring that the Doctrine of the Arminians was full of errors and contrary to the Word of God they intended to say an obligation of renouncing the said Doctrine by subscribing to their Decrees that they might not become guilty of Schisme and Heresie But without any great necessity of reasoning the business it is but hearing how the Synod delivers it self upon this subject For you must know that the Arminians refused to observe the Order which was appointed for the discussion and examination of their Articles Nay they were so bold as to maintain that they could not in Conscience accommodate themselves to that Method which they apprehended to be so prejudicial to the good Cause The Synod thereupon declares Quin potius si conscientiae suae quam debent rationem habereve lint eâ—s ad obtemper andum aequissimis supremarum potestarum mandatis hujúsque Synodi ordini judicio acquiescendum teneri Seff 42. die 29 Decembâ—is that it belongs to them as Judges to prescribe the Order which was to be observed in a Hearing of that nature and not at all to the Parties upon whom Sentence was to pass and that the pretext of Conscience which was laid hold on upon this occasion is no wayes jufâ—ifiable because there being nothing here in concern but the examination of the business their Consciences in this can suffer nothing Then they add these decisive words That if they on the contrary intend to have any regard to their Consciences as they ought in duty they are obliged to obey the Commands of Higher Powers to follow Orders and to acquiesce unto the Judgement of the Synod To this purpose it is that they alledge that passage of the Gospel which commands to esteem him as an Infidel who does not obey the Church It is pretended then that this Synod which represents their Church obliges to another kind of Obedience then meerly Political and that in matters of Faith where there is an obligation to believe under pain of damnation there is a duty incumbent upon Conscience to submit unto her Decrees Eandem pro legitimo causae Judice agnoscerent because as is there expresly determined in the 26. Sess It is The Synod which is Lawful Iudge in this Cause 11. Certainly the Synod had a great deal of reason to speak in that mannen For in so remarkable a Contest as this between two such Parties who were in Dispute of matters of such importance presupposed that they looked upon themselves as the Representative Body of the Church of Christ theâ— could not in reason discover any other Judge but themselves For they saw manifestly in that conjuncture that the Scripture could not be it for so much as the two Parties upholding theâ—â— Opinions by Scripture as it has always happened in all the Conrests which have risen in the Primitive Church the Controversie between them was concerning the true meaning of those passaged which were alledged on both sides Neither these Passages then nor those other which were brought for the explication of these and about which there was as hot a Dispute as about the former could ever end the difference between them because indeed they were the very Subject of the Dispute And consequently they found that there was a necessity of some other Supreme Authority which should give Sentence about the matter in contest and appease those troubles which otherwise must prove endlesse in the same Church This is the very Reason the Synod gives when they cite the Remonstrators to appear Sess 5.16 November Sess 23.7 Decembr Pro certâ ac indubitatâ fidei regulâ adqibiturum and oblige them to submit to their Decrees This is that makes them protest so often and take their solemn Oaths that they will determine things according to the Word of God Which they will make use of as a certain and indubitable Rule in matters of Faith In which proceeding of theirs they shew excellently well that there is a great distinction to be made between him that Judges and the Rule he follows to Judge well by In all the well govern'd Societies of the world there may arise differences yea even such as may by the contesting parties be managed bona fide But for the ending of them it is requisite there be a Court appointed and authorized from the Highest Power to Judge of them and by pronouncing Sentence to give clear notice to the Parties which of them has got the day Behold here â— Judge Behold a Court But this Judge and this Court are not without Lawes and Orders according to which Judgement is to be given Which Laws and Orders are many times the Subject of great Disputes each Party endeavouring to make them appear favourâ—ble to their side which Point is to 〈◊〉 cleared by the Sentence of the Judgâ— Here is the Rule he is to follow It 〈◊〉 not the Law it self the meaning whereof is actually in dispute that is Judge Were it otherwise it were impossible ever to determine any thing For the Law it self cannot explicate nor declare it self for either side but it is He that has received Authority who is to enâ— the strife according to Law the meaning whereof he determines and applyes to the present case The Assembly of Dort knew very well that this was the very state and condition of things in the Church of God which is without doubt the most holy and best ordered Community in the world In this Community notwithstanding there have happened great differences in matters of great importance and where the Contest has also been managed many times with a great deal of good meaning on all sides every one believing they had the Scriptures on their sides Witness S. Hierâ—me and S. Augustine in that difference between St. Peter and St. Paul witness S. Cyprian who was so earnest against the validity of the Baptisme of Hereticks and a thousand others of the same nature It is necessary there be a Judge Synodi mandato morem gerant quo praesentem hanc Synodum pro legitimo causae Judice agnoscere jubentur Sess 25. who has received power and Authority from our Blessed Lord to decide all these differences and that this Judge
of our Blessed Lady It is certain that in former times men did not set themselves to search into that particular subject because they did not so much as reflect upon it There was onely a confused kind of knowledge and a general Idâ—â— of the priviledges and Prerogatives of the Blessed Virgin above the rest of Mankind without descending to particulars People were wholly taken up with opposing those Hereticks who drew up against the Honour of the Blessed Virgin who would have deprived her of the glory of her admirable and perpetual Virginity even after Child-bearing and above all those who so violently pleaded against thâ— glorious title of Mother of God which is the ground of all her other Priviledges They were satisfied to ascertain that true source or fountain of all her greatness fortifying it by Scripture and Apostolick Tradition without regarding to penetrate further into that suite or train of other priviledges which did accompany that one great prerogative or examining particularly whether it were to be concluded by a legall ensequence flowing from that Principle that she was preserved at the first instant of her being from Original sin It was not at that time positively believed that she was exempt from that stain neither was the contrary in their Creed And this because it was not so much as thought upon At another time it has been thought good to employ many serious-thoughts upon this subject and to search more narrowly into the business Great Contests have risen about it Whole Volames have been written by Learned men who have produced strong and clear testimonies out of the Holy Scriprures for it and have endeavoured to derive it from the very Fountain of Apostolical Doctrine by the way of Tradition Whole Universities and especially that of Sorbon have spoken loud in favour of that Opinion and engaged themselves by solemn Oath to maintain it And yet notwithstanding the Church has not thought fit absolutely to determine any thing concerning this matter of so great importance But leaves us at liberty to believe what we please concerning it She has not proceeded in the same manner concerning her exemption from all guilt even of venial sin For this she has decided and resolved upon as a matter of Faith not that she had any new revelation thereof since the time of the Apostles but that before the proposing this verity to the world 〈◊〉 be believed she consulted with the holy Scriptures Apostolical Tradition and the opinions of holy Fathers coâ—cerning the preeminence and qualition of the Mother of God for the finding out the whole extent of them An having discovered by this means thâ— her being exempted from venial sin wâ— comprehended in that Supreme Dignty as a necessary consequence is â—â—cluded in its Principle she has defined as a Point of faith revealed in the We of God in which it is contained Thâ— is the reflexion of the most eminent as Learned Cardinal de Lugo in his excâ—lent Treatise of Faith Disp 3. Sect. 5. n. 7. Let us now imagine the Churd should do the same concerning the 〈◊〉 emption of the Blessed Virgin from Original sin Let us suppose that she hâ—ving examined the passages of Host Writ and the Testimonies of Tradâ—â— on which are alledged upon this subject should find this also included as in necestary consequence as she did the other as it is not unlikely she would If she should think fit to proceed to a further examin of the business then all we who are Catholicks and agreed in this that the Church is Judge of Controversies and that we are bound to submit to her Decrees should quickly lay aside all difference of opinions â—â—d although we had not hitherto held seas matter of Faith should then believe it to be so not because there had been any new Revelation concerning it â—â—t because the Church should have declared it to have been alwayes revealed although there was not a general Agreement concerning that Revelation 16. Behold then us and Protestants agreed as I take it upon this Principle that the true Church of Christ has power to decide and propose that as an Article of Faith which antecedently to that decision and proposal was not of obligation to be believed From whence is easily concluded that for the franing an exact rational discourse in matters of Faith it is necessary to avoid these two extremes which a loose kind of reasoning is apt enough to fall into The first is That this has not alwayes been believed therefore it is not now to be believed The second This is 〈◊〉 believed ergo it has alwayes and in aâ— Ages of the Church been distinctly believed It is evident by our Principleâ— that this way of reasoning is very salk and erroneous Here then is the reason why when there happens a Contest between two Parties of the same Church supposed alwayes the true Church as we shall by and by shew it is not alwayes necessary that we search narrowly into the doctrine of Antiquity for the discovering what was held in those dayes concerning the matter in Dispute It suffices for ending all debates that we know what the Church having taken full cognisance of the matter shall have determined by a solemn judgement and Sentence according to the usuall form and method What she resolves in such occurrences according to the Word of God the true meaning whereof she faithfully gives us is to be received as matter of Faith whether it were beforehand known or not known to be so And the contrary is an Error which we are obliged with her to condemn and anathematise unless we intend to become Infidel and Schismaticks Here is the Principle we are agreed upon on all sides as I have made appear both by the Doctrine and proceedings of our Adversanes themselves It imports now very much to apply this to the particular subject we have in hand and it shall be my endeavour to effect it CHAP. III. The applying this agreed-on Principle to the Subject of the Holy Eucharist TO make a due Application of this general Principle to the subject of the Holy Eucharist with the same peaceableness and quiet we have hither to endeavoured to maintain and together with the consent of Parties we must needs step a little aside but still in such order and measure that we may go friendly on in the same path hand in hand together without justling one another still laying all Disputes aside The first step therefore that I make of this kind is to produce what is agreed upon on all sides to have been in all Ages believed concerning the Holy Eucharist to wit that it is a Sacrament which is a Memorial of the Death of our Lord Jesus Christ who is there present and wherein his blessed Body and precious Blood are truely received by the Faithful according to the express words of the Son of God himself who says Take and eat this is my Body do this in memory of me This is what
these dayes ought to stick to the decisions of their Church in matters contested between them and us because they own her for the True Church But I think it is not at all hard to discover a great difference For making up to the head or source of the decision we shall find those who first raised the doubt and brought these Points into debate were of the same Church which was accordingly the True because the onely Church and owned for such by both Parties before she declared her self upon the matter in dispute which without trouble we are agreed upon with Monsieur Claude The case is not here so Because we who are at Dispute with Protestants are not of the same Church with them and so are not within the limits of thy maxime which has with mutual corsent been established and received Again they having taken part with those who at that time revolted from the True Church because they would not obey her Decrees made by Canonical Judgement it is manifest that their Community is but a false and Schismatical Church according to the Principles received from them in the Synod of Dort 3. Secondly the Church before she gives Sentence upon any Point proposed examining it by Scripture and real Tradition and for the better understanding them searching into the Sentences of the Ancient Holy Fathers endeavouring thus to reascend unto the Apostles themselves we are from hence to conclude that she being inspir'd by the Holy Ghost who has promised to teach her all Truths as occasions require what she defines is alwayes conformable both to Scripture and Tradition Thus it is that we are to learn by her definitions what is the true meaning or sence of Scripture when there is place for doubting thereof Before the Council of Nice there were most desperate Disputes concerning certain passages of Scripture which the followers of Arius alledged for the upholding their upstart doctrine As for example about that in the fifth of St. Iohn where our Blessed Saviour says that his Father is greater than he Quia Pater major me est Joh. 5. from whence they inferred that he was not of the same Substance The others on the contrary maintained that this passage was to be understood of the Son of God considered according to Humane nature which places him infinitely below the Father and makes him submit even to the death of the Cross but not according to his Divine nature which renders him equal and makes them both to be of one and the same Substance These two sence were hotly maintained by the two Parries each of them challenging the true sence or meaning of Scripture on their side But when the Council having throughly examined this important question had defined the Consubstantiality of The Word making use of a terme which is not found in Holy Writ for the clearer expressing that Truth which she discovered there then was there no more time nor place to doubt what was the lawful sence thereof and there arose an obligation through this definition of believing that that was the true one which was given by the Divines vvho opposed the faction of the Arians The same is certainly to be said upon this occasion especially our present cause being upon much better termy and more strongly provided for by the evidence of the Texts alledged for it When at first the poposition vvas made concerning the Real Presence in the time of Pascasius as Mr. Claude pretends and presently opposition was made as he is pleased to say for at present we will assume nothing but of his free gift there happened a great Contest which grew yet much greater after some time concerning the true sence of those words This is my Body One side maintaining that they did express a Real Presence and the other pretending that they onely signified that that which our Blessed Saviour gave unto his Apostles represented his Body Both parties as we have often taken notice were of the same Church which they acknowledged and owned to be the True Church This Church having throughly examined the business in her General Councils defines a Real Presence and substantial change even to the making use of the word Transubstantiation which is not literally found in the Gospel for the expressing more clearly that verity which she discovered therein and for the efficacious obstructing any other sence which might be given to those words This is my Body From that time forward it was no longer lawful to doubt of the sence of them And by this definition men stood obliged to believe that they were to be understood plainly and literally not metaphorically When there is really place of doubt it is not for particular persons who are at strife to determine the sence of the Text in Dispute but this belongs properly to the Church which is Judge in the case For else there could never be any end of Disputes and God should not have furnished us with any certain means for the finding out Truth when doubts do arise concerning Holy Scripture nor consequently for the clearing those debates which may arise in matters of Religion Which certainly would be the same as to say that he had not provided for the Government quiet and peace of his Church Non quia Canon solus non sibi ad universa sufficiat sed quia verba divina pro suo quique arbitratu interpretantes varias opiniones errorèsque concipiant Atque ideo necesse fit ut ad unam Ecclesiastici sensus regulam scriptueae caelestis intelligentiae dirigatur Common 2. c. antep Cap. Penul It is not as Vincentius Lirientius sayes that the Word of God does not contain all the Verities which we believe but because many presuming to interpret the Holy Text according to their fancy mishape their errors accordingly Thus it becomes necessary upon such occurences to regulate the sence we are to give to Holy Scripture by that meaning which the holy Church gives it And from hence it was that he took occasion some three years after the Council of Ephesus to enveigh so sharply against that desperate presumption of wicked Nestorius who had the impudence to maintain that he alone had the gift of Understanding those Texts of Scripture which he alledged for the authorising his impious blasphemies and that the whole Church represented in that Council had erred grosly for want of understanding them Thus when Disputes arise we ought not to judge of the Doctrine of the Church by that sence which our selves give of Holy Scripture but we must iudge of the true sence of Holy Scripture by the Doctrine of the Church The same in proportion is to be said of the passages of Holy Fathers For it being the custome and order of the Church to advise with them concerning the Judgement she is to give regularly speaking we ought to understand them according to her Doctrine whenever these arises a controversy concerning the meaning of their words which do not alwayes