World And if so How could the trial of Religions depend upon the Press in those early days when as yet it had no being And because the true Christian Faith is the same in all the Ages of the Church since the Apostles days we must measure our own Religion by the same Rules by which the Primitive Saints measured theirs and what were they Not the voluminous Writings of Men which the Press hath now brought forth but the sacred Oracles of God This is the Course to which the Prophet directs us To the law and to the Testimony This Course did the Bereans take when to examine the Doctrines even of the Apostles themselves They searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so and for their doing so they are highly commended And indeed the Scripture is the lapis Lydius the Touchstone the Canon the only Authentick Rule of Manners Faith and religious Worship a Rule so plain and easie in all necessary points that in order to the trial of our Religion we have no absolute need of any Book but Gods though other good Books do well towards the better understanding of some passages in this 'T is the great Privilege of our Church that we have this Rule of Scripture in such great Quantities that every Man who can and will may at an easie rate have it in his custody and thereby examine his Religion when he pleaseth Nor can we justly blame the restraint of the Press so long as it is permitted to Print our Bibles and prohibited to publish no Man's Book but such only as are contrary to Gods Indeed were the Press in England restrained as it is in Popish Kingdoms from printing the Bible in our Vulgar Tongue this Authors Argument would have had much strength in it but since it is otherwise since we have the Scriptures those Tests and Standards of our Religion preached in our Publick Churches and easily to be had and read as oft as we please in our private Families this Author's Argument against the Restraint of the Press is invalid and unconcluding for it doth not prove that for which he pleads it But to proceed SECT IV. II. THE Second Allegation which this Author urgeth as a grand inconvenience against the Restraint of the Press is this Such a Restraint saith he deprives Men of the most proper and best means to discover truth To which I answer thus There is a very close Connexion betwixt this Argument and the former a Connexion as between an Antecedent and a Consequent or between the Premises and the Conclusion In the former Argument he mentions the examination of Religions and in this as the end and consequence of that the discovery of Truth for to what purpose should any Religion be impartially examined were it not to discover whether it be true or false And for this reason the same answer which I have given to the former Argument might serve well enough for this for since the restraint of the Press doth not as I have there proved prevent the due Examination of Religion it cannot prevent the discovery of Truth But that so it doth our Author is very positive yea and he tells us by what means it doth so namely By hindering Men from seeing and examining the different Opinions and the Arguments alledged for them But let this Author tell us how this can be true can a Restraint of the Press for time to come hinder any Man from seeing and examining the different Opinions of Men and their Arguments for them Are there not already great numbers of printed Books exposed to common Sale wherein the different Opinions of Men about matters of Religion are throughly discussed May not every Man that will and can sufficiently inform himself by Books already extant what Arguments have been pleaded by all Sects of Christians in the defence of their respective Professions And since the Press hath already brought forth such a numerous issue of this kind methinks every future birth of the same sort would be but a Superfetation I am persuaded that should all the Presses in the Christian world be absolutely forbidden to print any more New Books of Controversy and Polemick Divinity it would be no injury to the Catholick Church nor to any one Member of it for nihil dici potest quod non dictum est priùs Prints indeed may be new but Arguments either for old Truths or against old Errors can hardly be so But when all is done Religious Truths cannot be discovered by Humane Arguments any further than those Arguments are grounded upon the infallible word of God 'T is a Rule in Mathematicks Rectum est index sui Obliqui He that would discover the Rectitude or Obliquity of a Line must bring it to and compare it with such a Rule as is already found to be exactly streight So in our present Case he who would discover the truth or falshood of any Opinion in matters of Religion must apply them to and judg them by that infallible Rule which St. James very deservedly Styles The word of Truth And this Rule in all Points necessary to Salvation is so plain and easie that every Man who hath not lost the use of common Reason may thereby judg for himself There are indeed in the word of God as the Apostle saith Some things hard to be understood but in what Texts do these difficulties lie St. Austin answers Non quoad ea quae sunt necessaria saluti c. The Scriptures are not difficult in any of those Points which are necessary to Man's Salvation So thought St. Chrysostom who thus demands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what Man is there to whom all the necessary Truths of the Gospel are not clear and manifest He saith elsewhere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Husbandman the Servant the Widow the Boy Persons of very mean Capacities may easily understand what the Scriptures teach about such Points as are Fundamental That this was the Doctrine of the Primitive Church before St. Chrysostom's time is evident from that Testimony of Irenaeus Universae Scripturae Propheticae Evangelicae in aperto sine ambiguitate similiter ab omnibus audiri possunt The whole Scripture the Prophets the Evangelists in such Points as most concern us are so plain express and open that all sorts of Men may equally apprehend them Now if a Man may discover the truth of all those Doctrines which are necessary to Salvation by Scripture Rules if his Faith be grounded on them and his Practice be suitable to them what hazard would that Man run should he never see the different Opinions of Men about them nor weigh their Arguments against them Suppose a Man being well informed by the express word of God do stedfastly believe the Resurrection of the dead what were this Man the worse should he never see nor examine the reasonings of Pagans and Sadducees against this great Article of our Creed Suppose a Man be
is this There is no medium between Men's judging for themselves and giving up their Judgments to others We grant it but what then His Inference is this If the first be their Duty the Press ought not to be restrained But why not His Reason is again the same because it debars Men from seeing those Allegations by which they are to inform their Judgments That 's his Argument to which I answer thus We must distinguish betwixt Man and Man betwixt such as can judge for themselves and such as cannot where the Scripture is express the Words plain and the Sense easie every Man who hath a competent use of Reason and can read his Bible may judge for himself But when several Interpretations are given of any Texts when Doubts are raised when Arguments are produced to defend both Parts of a Contradiction there is a vast number of Men who are no more able to judge which is true and which is false than a blind Man is to distinguish betwixt a good Colour and a bad one 'T is the great unhappiness of such Persons that in matters of Controversy they cannot rely upon their own weak Reason but must either suspend their Judgments or else give it up to the Conduct of some other Person and who is so fit to be trusted with it as their own Ministers provided they be as every Minister should be Men of Piety and Parts able to satisfie Doubts remove Scruples and convince Gainsayers But if Men give up their Reason to the Clergy this Author who vilifieth our Clergy as much as possible he can gives our People an intimation that by so doing they make us the Lords of their Faith But how doth that follow suppose two Persons are engaged in a doubtful Controversie about an Estate claimed by both these Persons being of themselves unable to determine the Case appeal to the King's Judges but do they thereby make those Judges the Lords of that Estate which is contended for surely no the Judge doth no more than according to Evidence and Law declare to which Person that Estate doth justly belong So it is in our present Case several Parties of Men lay Claim to Truth as theirs and produce Evidences for it Now a Man unable to satisfie himself which side Truth is to be found consults his Minister who by Evidence of Scripture which in this case is the only Law assures his Neighbour the Truth lieth here or there And indeed that the Minister is the most proper Judge in Controversies relating to Religion we cannot doubt if we dare believe the Prophet who saith The Priest's lips should preserve knowledge and they should seek the Law at his mouth for he is the messenger of the Lord of Hosts This Text doth not constitute us nor do we pretend to be Lords of our People's Faith but as the Apostle speaks Helpers to the Truth We do not require any weak Believer's assent to any one Article of Faith whereunto God requires it not though the Church of Rome doth so And how unjustly then without Modesty or Truth doth this Man stigmatize us as Lords of our People's Faith But beside those weak Christians who in controverted Points cannot judge for themselves there are some other of clearer Heads and more improved Understandings that can and for their sakes this Author saith that the Press ought not to be restrained and his Reason is this Because the Restraint of the Press debars them from seeing those Allegations by which they are to confirm their Judgments This Argument in effect hath already been offered once and again and hath as often been replied to but for the greater satisfaction of my Reader I shall again consider and enlarge my Answer to it and this it is Not knowing and intelligent Christian who is well able to judge for himself can want any new Allegations from the Press to confirm his Judgments in any disputed Points of Faith or Worship because we have already sufficient Rules to judge by For 1. We have the Scripture preached in our publick Churches and if we please we may read and consider them in our private Families and Closets And here I do again affirm that all matters of revealed Religion must be examined proved and determined by the written Word of God This is the only sure balance to weigh and touch stone to try all Matters of Faith and Worship To this our Lord sent his hearers Search the Scriptures and again How readest thou And which is remarkable the ignorance of Scripture did he make the only occasion and ground of Error in Points of Faith so he told the Sadducees Ye err but why not knowing the Scriptures by which our Lord himself proved that great Doctrine of the Resurrection which they denied And when our Lord would prove himself to be a greater Person than David he did it by that Text The Lord said unto my Lord c. This course took our blessed Saviour and so did his Apostles too and so must we we must take the Scripture for our Guide in Matters of Religion for that is the only and infallible Rule and unalterable Standard to measure all the Doctrines and Practices which such or such a Church doth teach recommend or require from us But if it shall be again demanded who must be the Judg whether amongst different Interpretations of Holy Writ this or that be the true one whether in controverted Points such or such a Text do certainly warrant such or such a Doctrine as is grounded thereon I answer again 2. We have the united Judgment and Decrees of several Councils those I mean that were convened in the first and purest times before the Superstitions and Idolatries of Rome had crept in by degrees thro' carelesness vice and ignorance and over-spread the Church The grand Controversie now on foot amongst us concerns the Divinity of Christ the Personality and Deity of the Holy Ghost that Christ in the most strict and proper Sense of that Notion is truly God that the Holy Ghost is a Person and a Divine Person we affirm but our Socinians who are the spawn of old Arius make bold to deny To justifie our Doctrine we cite such and such Texts and to establish their Opinions as well as they can they do the same thing as for the Scripture which we produce to prove the Doctrine of the Trinity because humane Reason cannot comprehend it they do either question the Authority of such Texts or else they wrest them to such an intolerable Sense as every sober Man's Reason may justly abhor Now the Question is Who must judge betwixt us and them Who must determine whether the Scripture be on their side or ours I answer That Heterodox Opinion now much contended for which we call Socinian did appear under some other Names very early in the Christian Church In the first Age the Godhead of Christ was denied by the Jews and particularly by Ebion in the Third Century by
Men to peep into Heretical Books cannot be lawful because they do thereby run themselves into a very dangerous Temptation Our Lord hath left us this Caution Beware of false Prophets it seems they are dangerous Men so we are told again and again They creep into houses and there find success for They lead Captive silly women and again They overthrow the faith of some nay They subvert whole houses it seems that Heresie is a contagious Disease apt to over-run whole Families And doubtless this Poyson may be conveyed in a peice of Paper as successfully as any other way this infection may be received as well by the Eye from a Book as by the Ear from a Tongue for when unlearned Men meet with Socinian Arguments drawn either from Humane Reason or abused Scripture since they themselves cannot confute them they are apt to yield up their own Reason and give up those Truths for lost which they are not able to defend And I think that it will be no breach of Charity if I tell my Reader that I am verily persuaded that the great Reason why this Author pleads so many Arguments though no good ones for the unlimited liberty of the Press is this namely that our Socinians may without controul publish their Books full of subtile but fallacious Arguments to Surprize and Captivate the Judgments of illiterate and undiscerning Men. We know that in the late Reign an Universal Liberty of Conscience was pleaded for and granted by a Declaration upon a design to bring in Popery so now an universal Liberty of the Press is contended for by those Men whose design it is to introduce Socinianism the very worst of Heresies for it totally subverts the very Foundation of our Christian Faith and Hope Indeed to my best observation this Author hath not in his whole Letter so much as once named Socinian nor drop'd one plain word in favour of it but yet Latet anguis in herba This was very prudently done to prevent Suspicion but if he be not a Man of that sort why doth he tell us that if the Press must be Regulated it must be done by some Lay-man for which he can have no substantial Reason save only this namely because from a Clergy-man no Socinian Book can ever expect an Imprimatur But this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only by the way In short the substance of my Answer to this Allegation is this 'T is not lawful for Men of weak Understandings to mind subtile Arguments contained in Heretical Books lest thereby they might be ensnared and for that Reason the Press should not be permitted to publish any such Books unless security could be given that they should never come into Vulgar hands SECT XII 8. THIS Authors Eighth Allegation against the Restraint of the Press is this The Press ought not to be Restrained because the Reformation is wholly owing to it I answer There is no liberty denied to any English Press to publish any Book which tends to help the Devotions to reform the Lives or confirm the Judgments of Men in the true Faith of Christ but as for the Established Religion of our Church in matters of Faith and Worship it is so well refined already from the dregs of Popery and Superstition that we do not need another Luther nor the help of any Press to reform and make it better He that would reform our Religion in any of its substantial Parts must reform the Scriptures too for our Church teacheth no other Doctrines in the great Points of Faith and Worship than Christ and his Apostles taught the World if we may believe those Sacred Writings which they have left us But since I have already under another Head given a sufficient answer to this Allegation I need not here say any more about it SECT XIII 9. THE Ninth Allegation which this Author urgeth against the Restraint of the Press is this Our Divines condemn the Popish Clergy for not suffering their Laity to read Protestant Authors We do so and very justly too but what then The Inference which he intends must be this Our Protestant Clergy must be Condemned for not suffering our Laity to Read Socinian Books and for watching the Press to prevent it To this I answer thus this Inference is a Non Sequitur it is wild and extravagant for there is a great difference in the Case the prohibition of Books may be an Act either to be blamed or commended according as the Books prohibited are either really good or really bad to forbid Men the use of such Books as tend to the benefit of Mankind the advantage of True Religion and the Salvation of Souls is an Act Impious and Tyrannical And this is the known Practice of the Roman Church which forbids Lay-men to Read the Bible and the Writings of such Protestant Authors as teach nothing but what the Scriptures teach and for this do we very justly Condemn them But on the other Hand to forbid injudicious Men the use of such Books as tend to promote Errors and Heresies to distract their Readers Judgment and rather to shake their Faith than to confirm it is an Act laudable Charitable and necessary for the Age we live in for those Predictions of Christ and his Apostles false Prophets shall arise and again false Teachers shall be among you are fulfilled in these times for there are amongst us Romish Priests and Jesuits yea and some far more dangerous than they I mean our Socinians who cannot corrupt so many Souls by their Personal Conferences as they may by their Books And is it not high time to watch the Press lest any thing steal from thence which may Poyson the Heads of unwary Men Or must the Press be permitted freely to spread that destructive Heresie which hath been long since Condemned by the Catholick Church and its Representatives met in General Councils But here this Author to justifie his own Opinion Cites a learned Divine of our own Church and borrows this Passage from him They that have a good Cause will not fright Men from considering what their Adversaries say against them nor forbid them to Read their Books but rather encourage them so to do that they may see the difference between Truth and Error Reason and Sophistry with their own Eyes c. That we may see how little service this Passage doth our Author let us view it again They who have a good Cause but who are they We cannot doubt but this good Man meant the Church of England of which he himself was a very worthy Minister but what saith he of this Church of Ours It will not fright Men from considering c. but what Men This eminent Divine was the Lecturer of Gray's Inn where his Auditory did chiefly consist of such Persons as had been blest with a learned Education and might Charitably be presumed to be well skilled in the Law of God as well as in the Law of Man Now that this
but of one medium and that a false one too for 't is nothing else but a groundless supposition that Men would want due means for the examination of their Religion were the Press any whit restrained I say any whit for we do not plead for a total Restraint but for a just and due Regulation And were the Press so regulated yet would it not be attended with any of these ill Consequences with which this Author is pleased to charge it for since Men have sufficient means for the trial of their Religion if they do it not their fin and folly must be imputed not to the Restraint of the Press but to their own Ignorance or Negligence for as some cannot so others will not But our Author goeth on and so must we SECT VII 5. THis Author's fifth Allegation against the Restraint of the Press takes up more than three Pages but the full Substance of it is this It prevents Acts of Charity to the Souls of Men it invades the natural Rights of mankind and destroys the common Tyes of humanity so he This is Dogmatically and Magisterially delivered and since it is such ◠grievous Charge it had need be very well proved And how doth our Author make it out He tells us That all Men are obliged especially in Matters of Religion to communicate to one another what they think is the Truth and the Reasons by which they endeavour to prove it To which I answer thus That we are indeed concerned not only to profess a Religion but promote it too I think that he who hath one jot thereof will never deny We are bound by several Obligations to instruct and teach our Neighbour in the Principles of that Religion which we own our selves St. Paul commands it Edify one another and so again Teach and admonish one another We are engaged by the frequent Commands of God and that eternal Law of Charity in our Capacities and as occasion is offered to propagate our Religion to plant it where it is not and to water it where it is But then methinks before we do this we should not only think as this Author saith but secure our selves and others too that the Religion which we advance in the World be indeed the Religion of God we must be sure that we plant not Weeds instead of Flowers that we sow not Tares instead of Wheat For to promote a Religion which may possibly be false were a desperate Venture indeed and he that doth it hazards the Honour of God and the Souls of Men. I find that our blessed Saviour and his Apostles taught no Doctrine but what they were sure of We speak that we know saith our Lord and thus St. John We know that we are of the Truth Certainly whosoever undertakes and is obliged to instruct another in matters of Religion had need be very well informed himself For if our Directions should chance to prove wrong What Excuse could we make Suppose we instil into the minds of Men Error and Heresie instead of Truth What were this but to ruin the Souls of Men though we might think to save them It 's true our good Intention and Ignorance may excuse such an ill Act à tanto but though such a mistake may somewhat extenuate the Fault yet can it no way lessen the fatal Consequence that doth attend it Suppose a Physician who really intends to cure his Patient by a mistake of his Remedy should chance to kill him the poor Patient who dieth only by a mistake suffers as great an injury as if his Physician had poysoned him knowingly and with design 'T is indeed an Act of Charity to instruct the Ignorant and lead the Blind but withal the Man who undertakes it must have Eyes in his own Head lest if the blind lead the blind they both fall into and perish in the Ditch Certain it is we are much engaged very strictly to sift the Grounds of that Religion which we are to propagate in the World and teach our Neighbours lest otherwise through our own mistake and his confidence we become guilty of cruel Charity and prove instrumental to damn that Person whom we should endeavour as far as we can to save And as it is a dangerous thing for private Persons to promote any false Religion though they themselves being mistaken do think it true so to permit other Men to publish heretical Doctrins cannot be the Duty of those Persons who have Authority and should have Zeal to prevent it To restrain this unchristian Liberty of the Tongue Pen and Press is not as this Author doth boldly assert To invade the natural Rights of mankind nor to destroy the common Tyes of humanity For if it be a Man's natural Right to persuade his Neighbour either by his Tongue or his Pen to entertain an Opinion really heretical whether he thinks it so or not 't is also his natural Right to draw him into Sin for if he prevail that will be finis operis though not operantis it will be the issue of the Act though it were not the intention of the Agent We cannot doubt but that St. Paul very well understood what natural Right every Man hath to use his Tongue and in what cases he ought to do it and thereby to communicate his Thoughts to his Neighbours but suppose a Man's Thoughts be wild and his Opinions heretical must he be left at Liberty to impart such Thoughts and vent such Opinions even as he pleaseth See what St. Paul saith concerning Hereticks Their mouths must be stopped i. e. they must not be permitted by personal Conferences to communicate their ill Opinions to inform or which is all one to corrupt the Judgments of other Men so thought St. Paul Now he who pleads for an universal Liberty as the natural Right of all Mankind to communicate to other Men whatever they think to be a Truth whether it be so or not must censure St. Paul as a Man either ignorant or else an invader of Men's natural Right since he so positively declares that some Men's Mouths must be stopped And in order to this the same Apostle gave Bishop Titus this Direction A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject i. e. excommunicate him cast him out of the Church and certainly if the Person of an obstinate Heretick must be rejected his Books may not be admitted for as to his Person his Breath is infectious His words eat like a Canker and as to his Writings there is in his Ink more Poysons than one Now since there are so many heretical Pens at work amongst us there is great need now if ever that some spiritual Argus should attend and watch the Press lest more venemous Doctrins should steal from thence to infect and kill the Souls of Men. And this I think is a sufficient Answer to this Author's fifth Allegation SECT VIII 6. THis Author's sixth Allegation against the Restraint of the Press
fair Trial but do what they can to Stifle all the Reasons that can be urged against it But Sir Pray tell us can any sound Reason be ever urged against a Religion such as ours is Instituted by Christ Taught by his Apostles Embraced by the Primitive Church and Sealed by the Blood of thousands of Martyrs But 't is not strange to hear Men speak against the very best of things or Persons for our Lord told his Apostles Men shall revile you and say all manner of evil against you Thus were their Persons treated yea and their Doctrine too The Jews spake against those things which were spoken by Paul Nay the Psalmist tells his God They speak against thee and what wonder then if they speak against his Religion too But what do they speak That which this Author styles Reason is but Pretence and Sophistry and were such Pretences though never so plausible yet being fallacious buried in perpetual Oblivion and stifled for ever what harm were in it What one single Soul would be the worse But our Author replieth that when there is a Contest between Men of two different Opinions they have not fair Play if their respective Reasons be not heard equally on both sides we grant it what Seneca saith is true Qui statuit aliquid parte inaudita altera Aequum licet statuerit haud aequus fuit Well the main Parties now contending are the Church of England and our Socinians and have not these Men very often been heard already their Opinion and their Arguments for it being much the same with those of the Old Arians have been frequently debated all their Witnesses have been heard all their Evidences have been maturely Considered Baffled and Overthrown and Condemned by several Councils by many pious and learned Fathers by a great number of worthy Divines by Papists by Protestants by Calvinists by Lutherans by all sorts of Christians but themselves Now when a Cause Condemned by several able and impartial Judges at several times and in several places is by a Bill of Revival renewed and brought upon the Stage again with the self same Witnesses and the self same Evidence if the Proper Judges to free themselves and others from a great deal of needless trouble should reject and cast it out of the Court without any further Hearing I think there would be no foul play in doing so But we have not treated our modern Socinians thus For did any of them ever desire a personal Conference with any of our Learned Divines and was rejected Did any of them ever provoke the professours of Divinity in either of our Universities to a publick Disputation and was refused Are not their Writings and ours to be seen and had in many Shops in London Oxford Cambridge and other great Towns and Cities Have they not received our printed Answers to their printed Objections If they have Why should this Author complain for want of fair Play Why should he unworthily tell the World that we dare not suffer our Religion to undergo a fair Trial for fear it should prove False No we do not doubt the Truth of our Religion nor the Ability of our Church to defend it but our Lord tells False Prophets shall deceive many and St. Peter saith They shall bring in damnable Doctrines and yet he tells us Many shall follow their pernicious ways These Texts do make us jealous that many weak easie and credulous Men may be corrupted by the Sophistry and Fallacies of Socinian Arguments which for that Reason should not be published But may our Author reply and in effect he doth so What danger can there be in publishing such Arguments since if they be false we have great store of Divines able to confute them We have so and bless God for it But what then Must we permit the Souls of Men to be poysoned because we abound with Sovereign Antidotes Must we permit the Church our Mother or her Sons who are our Brethren to receive Wounds in their Heads because we have Balsam enough to Cure them We would take a better course than so and follow the old Rule venienti occurrite morbo prevent the Poyson and then we need not use any Antidotes prevent the Wound and then there is no need of Plaisters so here if we can by a due Regulation of the Press prevent the spreading of erroneous Doctrines there will be no need of Confutations But if Men of restless Spirits be still permitted to disturb the Peace of our Church and stagger the Faith of weak Believers by publishing Arguments which only seem to be plausible against the Fundamental Articles of our Creed we shall be concerned to spend more time and blot more Paper in returning just Answers to them we must not quit the Field so long as there are Enemies in it And so I pass from this Paragraph to the next SECT XVI 12. THis Paragraph begins thus It may be objected saith he and very justly say we that by such a Latitude People may be seduced into false Religions or into Heresies and Schisms The Truth hereof this Author doth not deny but though it should be so yet he insinuates that there would be but very little or no Danger in it for thus he tell us If two Persons profess two different Religions the one a True the other a False one yet if they have been equally sincere in their Examination they are equally in the way to Heaven This Assertion were it true would be very comfortable to all sober Jews Turks and Pagans who have been serious in examining the Grounds of their respective Religions and yet I cannot think them equally in the way to Heaven with all such Christians as have done as much And 't is easie to believe that those Christians who after an impartial search into Scripture-Truths do own the Divinity of Christ and the Holy Ghost as fundamental Articles of our Faith are in a much fairer Capacity of Salvation than our Socinians who after all their Examinations embrace a Doctrine contrary to the Faith of the Catholick Church even denying the Lord that bought them a Doctrine which St. Peter stiles Damnable St. Paul tells us There is one Faith one true Religion and no more and this one true Religion is the only right Path which leads towards Heaven and he who is mistaken in the Choice of his Religion is like a Traveller who after all his enquiries mistakes his way and if he continue under that mistake he hath little hopes to attain his desired Journey 's end But to justifie this strange Paradox this Author subjoyns this Reason two such Persons the one after a due examination professing a true Religion the other a false one are equally in the way to Heaven because in following their Reason they both have done what God requires That 's his Argument but there 's a fallacy in it for doth not God require and doth not Reason oblige us in order to our Salvation
one Theodatus Artemon and Beryllus and Sabellius in the Fourth Century by Arius Eunomius and some others And in the same Age the Personality and Divinity of the Holy Ghost was denied by Macedonius and some others who were there branded by a particular Name and called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Oppugners of the Holy Ghost These Heterodox Opinions beginning to spread and disturb the Peace of the Christian Church and some other ill Opinions arising too several General Councils were summoned by several Christian Emperors the Nicene Council by Constantine the Great whose main work was to examine the Opinion of Arius the Council of Constantinople called by Theodosius the First to debate the Opinion of Macedonius the Council of Ephesus called by Theodosius the Second to consider the Opinion of Nestorius and the Council of Chalcedon summoned by the Emperor Martian to consult about the Opinion of Eutyches These Councils consisting of some Hundreds of Bishops having the Glory of God in their Hearts the Settlement of the Church in their Eyes and the Bible in their Hands did after a mature deliberation pronounce the Opinions of these Men to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Gospel and the obstinate defenders of them to be Hereticks And certainly the determinations of these General Councils which were made up of Persons exemplary for their Piety and eminent for their Learning who resolved on nothing without mature Advice and Deliberation are of as great Authority and afford as much Satisfaction in Matters of Religion as any thing of Man can be or do For the Truths of God once taught the World by Christ and his Apostles being unchangeable for ever and our Bibles which are the only Rule to measure Religions by continuing one and the same for ever that which was an Error in those early days must needs be an Error still and that which was a Truth then must needs be a Truth now And if we cannot think of any more proper means for the right understanding of Scripture and the discovery of Truth and Error than the deliberate and unanimous Judgment of so many hundred pious learned and unbiassed Men assembled together then certainly the determinations of those antient Councils are very considerable Evidences for Truth and against Error And the rather because they consisted of such Persons who besides their eminent Piety and Learning had the great Advantage of living nearer the Apostles age and thereby were the better able to inform themselves and us what was certainly believed and done in the very infancy of the Christian Church SECT IX 3. THE Writings of the Antient Fathers those especially that lived within the first six Centuries where-ever they agree and are not since corrupted or maimed by the Frauds and Forgeries of the Roman Church are of singular use in this Matter too That Ignatius Clemens Origen Athanasius Cyril Nazianzene Basil Chrysostom Hierom Austin and many others both in the Eastern and Western Churches were indeed Persons of great Piety and excellent Parts our Socinians without breach of Modesty cannot deny And although some of these great Names in some particular Matters had their peculiar mistakes and shewed themselves to be but Men yet in all Points where we find an unanimous Consent amongst them we are to have so much Veneration for their Authority as not easily to suspect or contradict it True it is if we take these Fathers singly Man by Man where we find any of them alone in their Opinions as Origen in reference to the Punishments of Hell and St. Austin in reference to Infants that die unbaptised we are not in this case much more obliged to accept their Judgment than the Judgment of some single Person yet alive But if we take All the Fathers who lived within six hundred Years after Christ together and in a lump where we find them One in Judgment they are enough to make a wiser Council than any hath been since their time they are enough to inform us what is Error and what is Truth But SECT X. 4. BEcause Learned Men whose Fortunes are Mean cannot purchase and unlearned Men whose Intellectuals are weak cannot read and understand the voluminous Writings of the Fathers we have several Systems of Divinity Confessions of Faith short Abridgments of Christian Religion which are especially to unlearned Persons great helps in this matter too And here methinks those antient Creeds of the Apostles Nice and Athanasius which are so generally received by the Church of God are of great Authority to settle our Judgment in the main and most necessary Points of Faith Besides we have many Choice and Excellent Catechisms composed by Men that were Pious Judicious acquainted with Scriptures well versed in the Primitive Councils and Fathers These short Catechisms compiled by Persons of singular Endowments and approved by the Church are little less than contracted Bibles containing in them whatever Man is obliged to know and delivering enough in easie Terms to inform us in Matters of Practice to secure us from Errors and confirm our Judgments in all the great Points of Faith In short the substance of my Answer to this Argument is this since we have the written Word of God to be our Rule and since this Word in some material Cases according to the different Fancies and Interests of Men hath different Interpretations given concerning its true Sense and Meaning 't is our safest way for our better Satisfaction to betake our selves to the most able faithful and unbiassed Judges and they are the most antient Councils and the Primitive Fathers whose Judgments are declared in our several Creeds in other publick Confessions of Faith and Orthodox Catechisms set forth or approved by the Church of God And since we are very well stored with these excellent Helps I do once more conclude that no Man whether learned or unlearned can need any new Arguments from the Press to confirm his Judgment in Matters of Religion SECT XI 7. THis Author's seventh Allegation against the Restraint of the Press runs thus If it be unlawful to let the Press continue free lest it furnish Men with the Reasons of one Party as well as the other it must be as unlawful to examine those Reasons To this I answer thus We must distinguish between Party and Party between one who is Orthodox and one who is Heretical this distinction being premised I shall resolve this Hypothetical Proposition into these two Categorical ones That it is not lawful for many Orthodox Christians to Examine those Reasons which Hereticks may urge in defence of their ill Opinions And therefore that the Press should not be permitted to furnish such Christians with any such Reasons 'T is notoriously known that there are amongst us vast numbers of Persons who are of weak Judgments not firmly established in their Faith not able to distinguish Truth from Falshood in a fallacious Argument and therefore are apt to be Tossed up and down by every wind of doctrine now for such
to obey one Command as well as another One Command is this prove all things another immediately follows hold fast that which is good Now if one Man obey the first of these Commands only and another obey them both they do not equally do what God requires nor consequently are they equally in the way to Heaven And this is the Case of two Persons who after an equal Examination hold two different Religions the one a True and the other a False one the Obedience of the one is only secundùm quid he obeyeth but this single Command prove all things but the other obeyeth this and that too hold fast that which is good which a False Religion can never be And if so How can two such Persons be in an equal Capacity of Salvation except a wrong way do as directly lead to Heaven as the right one There is another Assertion in the same Paragraph which I cannot pass over without some Reflections upon it and 't is this The perverse holding of Religion i. e. taking it up on trust whether it be true or false is Heresie This definition of Heresie is to me a new one and repugnant to many old ones which I have met with It is true the different Opinions of the old Philosophers whether True or False are indifferently stiled by Epiphanius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Heresies of the Philosophers But in Matters of Religion this word Heresie is very seldom if ever used in any Sense but a bad one the Evangelist mentions the Sect in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Heresie of the Pharisees and the Sadducees an Expression which doth no way commend them Nor did the Jews intend the credit of the Christian Religion when they called it this Sect or as it is in the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this Heresie And as for the Pagans many of them had as bad an Opinion of it and stiled it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Atheistical Heresie so Eusebius Sure it is the word is now generally used in an ill Sense and doth necessarily imply nothing else but an unsoundness and tenacity of Opinion about Matters of Religion accordingly the old Canon Law of the Greek Church defines an Heretick thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that is not right in his Judgment The Council of Carthage describes them thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hereticks are they who have wrong apprehensions about the Christian Faith Tertullian defines Heresie thus quodcunque adversùs veritatem sapit whatsoever makes against not the Laws of God but his Truth accordingly an Heretick in the Language of Hesychius is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that chuseth some Opinion besides or against the Truth These Definitions of Ancient Divines inform us what their Thoughts were concerning Heresie namely that it was nothing else but an Opinion held against some Truth But this late Author is of another mind for he tells us That the taking up a Religion on trust though the true one is Heresie and according as Men are more or less partial in examining they are more or less heretical But if this be so then must the Nature and Essence of Truth depend on the bare act of Examination which cannot be because Truth will remain Truth whether it be examined or not the strictest Examination doth not constitute Truth but only makes it evident Indeed he who takes up a true Religion barely upon trust may be to blame but his Fault is not Heresie but Negligence and Disobedience 't is not as Heresie is an Errour in point of Judgment but a Sin in point of Practice 't is not the Violation of a Doctrine but the Transgression of a Command So that whatever Title we may give such a Man we cannot justly brand him with the Name of Heretick But yet our Author from these foregoing Premises infers this as an Epiphonema or granted Conclusion so that 't is not what a Man professeth but how that justifieth or condemns him before God No. Is the what excluded And is the how all Suppose a Man profess the Religion of Mahomet with the greatest Devotion that can be would not the what condemn him or would the how excuse him Suppose a Jew with the highest Reverence should have offered up a Swine instead of a Lamb would not the what the matter of his Sacrifice notwithstanding its exactest manner have rendred it abominable The Truth is God considers both the what and the how the substance of his Worship and its circumstances too and if so Why doth this Man tell us 't is not the what but the how And now being wearied with pursuing this Author through so many impertinent Allegations against the Restraint of the Press I shall take my leave of him when I have propounded two Arguments against that unlimited Liberty of the Press for which he is so zealous an Advocate and and that I fear upon an ill Design and my first Argument is this 1. Since this unlimited Liberty of the Press would certainly be as this Author himself doth not deny an in-let to Schisms Heresies and a great variety of Opinions and Practices in Matters of Religion the allowance of it can never consist with that Command of God contend earnestly for the Faith once delivered to the Saints This Text supposeth that the true Faith or which is all one the true Religion is but one and that for that one we are to Contend and that Earnestly too Now to allow an unlimited Liberty to the Press which will open a wide Gap to introduce false Religions is so far from a contending for the one true Faith that it is indeed a contending against it and therefore such an allowance is a direct breach of this Command 2. Since this unlimited Liberty of the Press would certainly prove an in-let to Schisms Heresies and false Religions the allowance of it would be contradictory to the Judgment and Practice of the universal Church in all Ages It is true the Church of Christ in all Ages had not the use of a Press but if the late Art of Printing without any due Restraint should prove a means to introduce an inundation of Heresies the allowance of such a Liberty and those numerous Errours with which it would be attended would be diametrically opposite to the Judgment and Practice of the Catholick Church from one Generation to another Now the Question which relates to the Case in hand is this How did the Primitive Saints deal with those Men who differed in Opinion from the received Doctrine of the Catholick Church They followed St. Paul's Rule 2 Tim. 2. 25. In meekness instruct those that oppose themselves they did so they used all gentle and rational means to reduce them but when this would not do What course took they then Did they indulge them Did they give them an universal Liberty of Conscience Surely no and to prove this three Things shall be shewed First That an unlimited Toleration
by Dr. Wake Epictetus's Morals with Simplicius's Comment Octavo A Sermon preached upon the Death of the Queen Both by Mr. George Stanhope The Doctrine of a God and Providence vindicated and asserted Octavo Discourses on several Divine Subjects Octavo These Two by Thomas Gregory Lecturer of Fulham Dr. Gregory's Divine Antidote in Answer to an heretical Pamphlet entitled An End to the Socinian Controversy Octav. Compleat sets consisting of 8 Volumes of Letters writ by a Turkish Spy who lived 45 Years at Paris undiscovered giving an Account of the principal Affairs of Europe Twelves Human Prudence or the Art by which a Man may raise himself and Fortune to Grandeur Twelves Moral Maxims and Reflections written in French by the Duke of Roachfoucault now Englished Twelves The Art both of Writing and Judging of History with Reflections upon antient and modern Historians Twelves An Essay upon Reason by Sir George Mackenzie Twelves Death made Comfortable or the way to die well by Mr. Kettlewell Twelves The Parson's Counsellor or the Law of Tythes by Sir Simon Degg Octavo The unlawfulness of Bonds of Resignation Octavo An Answer to all the Excuses and Pretences which Men ordinarily make for their not coming to the Holy Sacrament Octavo Price 3 d. By a Divine of the Church of England Remarks on a Book entitled Prince Arthur an Heroic Poem by Mr. Dennis Octavo Fortune in her Wits or the Hour of all Men written in Spanish by Don Fran de Quevedo translated into English Octav. Price 1 s. 6 d. A Gentleman's Religion in Three Parts the first contains the Principles of Natural Religion the second and third the Doctrines of Christianity both as to Faith and Practice with an Appendix wherein it is proved that nothing contrary to our Reason can possibly be the object of our Belief but that it is no just Exception against some of the Doctrines of Christianity that they are above our Reason Twelves Examen de Ingenios or the Trial of Wits discovering the great difference of Wits among Men and what sort of Learning suits best with each Genius published originally in Spanish by Dr. Juan Huartes and made English from the most Correct Edition by Mr. Bellamy useful for all Fathers Masters Tutors c A Compleat List of the Royal Navy Prov. xx â—â— Matth. vi 2â— Rom. i. 21. â—rig adv Celsus l. 5. â— 24. Joh. viii 12. Matt. v. 14. Tit. i. 11. 1 Thess v. 21. 1 Joh iv 1. Jam. i. 18. 2 Pet. iii. 1 Ep. 3. T. 2. â— Orig. in laz T. 1. p. 244 In Mat. Hoâ— 1. p. 5. Iren l. 2. c â— â— Thess v. 11. Joh. iii. 11. 1 Joh. iii 9. Tit. i. 11. Tit. iii. 10. 2 Tim. ii 17. Mal. ii 7. â—h v. 39. â—uke x. 26. â—att xxii 29. â—sal cx 1. Matth. vii 1â— 2 Tim. iii. 6 2 Tim. ii 18 Tit. i. 11. Matth. xxiv â— 2 Pet. ii 1 Matth v. 11. Act. xiii 45 Ps cxxxix 20. Matt. xxiv 1 2 Pet. ii 2. Pet. ii 2. â—phes iv 54 Epiph. Haer. 8. â—â—seb Hist â— c. 18. â—ll Constitut â—t 12 â—nc Carthag â—n 25 â—ertull de â—irg Velandis Jude 3. Tertull. ad Scapulam Pamel in Locum Tertull. in Scorp Hieroymus â— Gal. 5. 9. Fevard in renaei Praefa August in E 61. Luk. xiv 23. â—yril Hierosol â—atech 6. â—ono Carthag â—ant 122. Apost Can. Conc. Antioc Can. 2. Conc. Laod. Can. â—9 Apost Can. 66. Conc. Gangz Can. 5. 6. Lorinus in Act. 10. v. 30. Aqu. 2. 2. qu. 11. Art 3. Maldonat in Luc. 9. v. 55. Maldonat in Matth. 13. v. 26. Maldonat in Matth. c. 13. 26. Cor. viii 7. Socr. l. 5. c. 7. Eus Hist l. 10. cap. 5. Eus de Vit. Const l. 2. c. 56. Euseb de vita Const l. 2. c. 45. Euseb de vita Const l. 4 c. 23. Socr. l. 1. c. 18. Soz. l. 2. c. 16. Soz. l. 2. c 32. Eus de vita Const l. 4. c. 18 Justin in Ep de fide Orthodoxa Balsam in Coll. Const Ex l. 1. Coâ— Blastaris Synt lit A. Blast Syntag. Alphab lit A. Idem ibid. Concil Carth. Can. 96. Matth. 13. 30. Chrysost in locum Tit. 1. 11. 1 Cor. 4. 21 Chrysost in locum Act. viii 10. 1 Tim. i. 20. 1 Tim. i. 19. 2 Tim. ii 18.