substance now that it was before the Reformation then it is plain that by our Reformation we made no Separation from the Church we only laid aside the corruptions i. e. those unsound and unwholsome additions which the Church of Rome had made to the ancient Structure of Christ's Religion and when those were removed the Church which was by them obscured appeared again in her primitive Lustre and Beauty Now if the Church be the same still it will necessarily follow that we who are of that Church do now hold the same Communion in all the Substantials and Essentials of Religion with all other Christian Churches that we did before For as to all the Essentials of a Church we hold the same Faith the same Worship and the same Government now that we did before the Reformation and which now is and always hath been owned by the Catholick Church in all Ages And if so then can we not possibly be guilty of any Schismatical Separation 2. Schism is a Separation from a Christian Church i. e. from such a Society between which and us there is or ought to be a Religious Union and Conjunction That we cannot upon that score be justly charged with any Schismatical Separation either from the Catholick or any particular Christian Church I hope is sufficiently made out in the 4th Sect. of this Discourse to which I refer the Reader being unwilling either to give him or my self an unnecessary trouble 3. Schism is a Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church in Faith Worship and Government considered as Bonds of Communion And here we are roundly charged by the Church of Rome with a Schismatical Separation from her and a manifest breach of all these great Bonds of Communion But having in the beginning of this Sect. I hope sufficiently vindicated the Church of England from any Schismatical Separation from the Catholick or any other Christian Church in her Reformation and cleared her innocency as to the breach of any of these great Bonds of Communion in the 5th 6th 7th and 8th Sections I shall not need to say any more of it here There is only one thing which as yet I have taken no notice of and with which they often twit us viz. The Derivation of our Orders from them Mr. Harding in his answer to Bishop Jewel's Apology doth mightily triumph in this telling us That a Church cannot subsist without lawfull Pastours and Governours that there can be none such without lawfull Ordination by imposition of hands that we neither have nor ever had any such but from the Church of Rome that those who received that power from her becoming Schismaticks and Hereticks by their Separation from her forfeited that power and could not convey it to others that therefore we have now no such thing as lawfull Priests and Bishops among us without which we cannot be a Church that herein we have broken the great Bond of Communion viz. Government by departing from that Church from which ours had its Being and therefore cannot be excused from the sin of Schism To this B. Jewel hath given a long learned and full answer to which I shall refer the Reader He may find it in the second part of the defence of the Apology of the Church of England Chap. 5. Division 1. But to shew you in how empty and insignificant a show this mighty triumph ends I shall here offer some few things to consideration 1. That the conferring of Orders giveth no Power or Jurisdiction to him or them by whom they are conferred over him or them on whom they are conferred For do we not know that the Bishop of Rome is always consecrated by the Bishop of Hostia and yet I hope they will not say that the Bishop of Hostia is therefore above the Bishop of Rome 2. Let it be granted that we derive our Orders from the Church of Rome not as from the Fountain or Original of Orders but as from the conduct or means of conveyance I would ask this question do they believe their Orders to be good and valid or not If not why do they presume to exercise those high and holy Functions to which they are admitted thereby If they do then our Orders must be good and valid too and we have as good right as they have to that Succession which they so much boast of 3. That the Bishops and Pastours of the Church of England are true and rightfull Successours to those that have been before them being elected consecrated confirmed and admitted in as an effectual a manner as they were If their Predecessours were deceived in any thing they succeed them in Place but not in Errour For though they were indeed their Predecessours in Office yet were they not the Rulers and Standards of their Faith. And it cannot be denyed but that a Succession in Faith and Doctrine is far more considerable than a Succession of Persons and that God be thanked we are able to make good from the pure and uncorrupted Fountain In Doctrine therefore we succeed the Church of Rome as the Day succeedeth the Night as the Light succeedeth Darkness and as Truth succeedeth Errour 4. That those Bishops and Pastours who have once been duly elected consecrated confirmed and admitted in and to those sacred Functions do not by departing from the Errours and Superstitions of any other Church though it be that from which they received their Orders lose the power that was thereby committed to them but are still in a capacity to convey the same unto others 5. That the Bishops and Pastours of the Church of England being legally possessed of having duly exerted and constantly and regularly exercised this power the Orders conferred by them by virtue thereof are to all intents and purposes good and valid and consequently our Church cannot be said to want true and lawfull Pastours and Governours 6. That though the Church of England in her Reformation have cast off the Usurpations and laid aside the corruptions of the Church of Rome yet hath she not thereby broken any Bond of Communion with the Christian Church and therefore cannot justly be charged with the guilt of Schism For whilst she holds fast those three great Bonds of Communion viz. Faith Worship and Government in all the substantial and essential Parts thereof the guilt of that horrid Schism which hath so much bruised and wounded rent and torn the Church of God can never be laid at her door These things I thought good to offer to consideration and when they are seriously and deliberately weighed I do not doubt but that the ingenuous Reader will so well improve them as to satisfie himself and others that all this mighty triumph is no more than a vain and empty show 4. Schism is a voluntary and causeless Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church i. e. When men have full liberty to make their own choice having no force nor constraint put upon their inclinations nor any cause or
false Prophets out of the Holy Scriptures to whom St. Peter compares false Teachers in the time of the Gospel And by this you may easily discern them for if you find any at this day so teaching and so doing as they then taught and did you ought to mark them for false Teachers and such whose business it is to deceive you and privily bring in damnable Heresies But there is once place of Scripture more in which we have a more particular account of the Nature of Heresie and from which we may more plainly learn what it is that makes an Heretick And that is in St. Paul's Epistle to Titus where he gives him this direction Tit. 3.10 11. A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition reject Knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth being condemned of himself In this place St. Paul directs Titus and not onely him but all the Governours of the Church how to deal with Hereticks and instructs both them and us what Heresie is and what it is that makes an Heretick Hereticks are to be dealt with in this manner 1. They are to be admonished i. e. they are by the Governours of the Church to be warned to forsake that or those errours which they have espoused For that they are in an Errour is implyed otherwise there would be no occasion for an admonition 2. That admonition is to be repeated i. e. they are to be admonished a first and second time 3. If they continue obstinate after the first and second admonition they are to be rejected i. e. the Censure of the Church is to pass upon them and they are thereby to be cast out of the Society of Christians and avoided lest others should be infected by them What Heresie is or what it is that makes an Heretick he likewise teacheth us when he describes the Heretical man he here speaks of 1. A man that is an Heretick is one that is subverted i. e. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that is gone astray who hath turned aside from the right path forsaken and corrupted the true faith Thus their own Lyra understands it saying Lyra in loc A man that is an Heretick is one who having received the Catholick Faith doth afterwards corrupt it Gl. Ord. apud Lyr. And with him the ordinary Gloss agreeth telling us he is an Heretick who by the words of the Law opposeth the Law it self and puts his own sense thereupon that by the Authority thereof he may strengthen himself in the naughtiness of his own mind 2. A man that is an Heretick is one that sinneth i. e. one that sinneth knowingly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Int. Gl. Or as the word imports one who is fallen from the way of Truth and hath embraced the way of Errour violently opposing the one and as obstinately defending the other 3. A man that is an Heretick is one that is condemned of himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For that Faith which he once received and owned as true he now opposeth and condemneth as false saith Lyra in Loc. Or because he commendeth Errour and reproacheth Truth saith Gl. Ord. Having thus considered both the importance of the word and the nature of the thing I am treating of I shall now adventure to lay down this short but full and comprehensive Definition of it Heresie is an Errour in the Foundation of Religion openly taught and obstinately defended I call Heresie an Errour in Religion to distinguish it from Philosophical Errours for those according to the strict Ecclesiastical notion of the word cannot fall under that Head. As also to difference it from Schism for though Schism be an Errour yet is it not properly an Errour in the Faith It concerns not the Doctrine but Discipline of the Church i. e. Manners Order and Government I call it an Errour in the Foundation of Religion to distinguish it from Errours in the less considerable parts of Religion For in speculative points such as are matters of Controversie or mere School-niceties relating to times or places or other Circumstances of Religion not being plainly delivered in the word of God nor can be proved thereby Men may safely differ in their opinions without incurring the Guilt of Heresie I say this Errour must be openly taught because though men may be Hereticks by espousing some fundamental Errour and tenaciously holding the same Yet so long as they keep their opinion to themselves and do not endeavour to infect others therewith they are no Hereticks in the Eye of the Church The Church can take no cognizance of their thoughts nor pass any Judgment upon them In this case they stand accountable onely to God and their own Consciences Lastly I say that this Errour must be defended with obstinacy to distinguish it from bare Errour For though a man be as all men are subject to be in an Errour yet if he be willing to be instructed and upon better information to relinquish his Errour he cannot be said to be an Heretick Having thus stated the notion of Heresie I shall now proceed to consider how far it is appliable to the Church of England and for this purpose I shall take the Definition in pieces and consider each part severally 1. Heresie is an Errour in Religion 2. It is an Errour in the foundation of Religion 3. This Fundamental Errour must be openly taught 4. It must be obstinately maintained SECT II. I. Heresie is an Errour in Religion THAT every Heresie is an Errour and an Errour in Religion will be owned by all but that every Errour or every Errour in Religion is Heresie must not be granted for Errour and Heresie are not terms convertible It will be necessary therefore to explain this part of the Definition i. e. to see what it is we stand charged with before we go about to discharge our selves of it By Religion here Jude v. 3. I understand that Faith which was once delivered to the Saints and for the maintenance of which we are commanded earnestly to contend or that common Christianity which we have received from Christ and his Apostles which we all do or ought to profess and defend And by Errour here I understand an Opinion which is contrary to or at least not agreeable with that Faith and common Christianity Every Errour supposeth a Rule and an aberration from that Rule for what is Errour but a wandring out of the right way mistaking one thing for another esteeming that false which is really true or that true which is really false Heresie therefore being an Errour in Religion must be a going astray from that Rule which the Author of our Religion hath given us to walk by Now who is the Author of our Religion but he who is styled the author and finisher of our faith Heb. 12.2 viz. Jesus Christ the righteous And what standing Rule hath he left us to go by John 5.39 2 Tim. 3.14 15 16
they never charged us with any of these things for that I very well know they both do and have done but I do say that they neither have nor ever can prove any of these things against us And here now were a fit opportunity to examine the particulars of their charge and the validity of them but before I do that it will be requisite to make good our own ground and by giving you some account of these Propositions that either are or will be denied to make it appear that they are not the issue of a rash and inconsiderate zeal but the offspring of deliberate and well digested thoughts And though it be contrary to the Laws and Rules of Disputation to put one upon proving a Negative and therefore I need not doe it yet for once and to gratifie our Adversaries I will endeavour to doe a work of Supererogation To make it appear that none of all these things have been by our Adversaries proved against the Church of England though it would be no very difficult yet would it be a very tedious business For to doe it effectually I should be obliged to examine not only all the particulars of their charge but also the strength or weakness of every Argument which they have at any time brought to make it good which would take up so much time and paper as the designed brevity of this small Treatise cannot allow I shall therefore wave this and instead thereof take a more short and compendious but every way as effectual a course It is acknowledged by all that when an Adversary is pressed with an Absurdity which he cannot escape the Argument is conclusive against him If therefore I can make it appear that it is a thing impossible for our Adversaries according to their own Notion of Heresie to make good their charge against the Church of England I may safely conclude that they have never done it because they could not doe that which is impossible to be done A thing is then said to be impossible either when it is simply and absolutely so in it self or when it is so only upon supposition It is then said to be simply and absolutely impossible when it implies a contradiction or is altogether repugnant to the nature of the thing as for instance That one and the same Body may be in more places than one at one and the same time is a proposition so repugnant and contradictious to the nature of Bodies that he must be wilfully blind who doth not see an impossibility therein A thing may be also said to be impossible upon supposition of an incapacity or insufficiency either in the active or passive power in the Efficient or Matter that is to be wrought upon Though the thing be possible in it self yet if the Agent be not of sufficient power to produce the effect designed it is impossible upon that account As for instance if ten unarmed men should undertake to beat ten thousand well appointed and well disciplined Souldiers in open field it is possible indeed that those ten thousand may be beaten but not by those ten because they have not power sufficient to doe it Again a thing may be said to be impossible upon supposition of an incapacity in the passive power or matter that is to be wrought upon for if the subject matter be wholly incapable of receiving such an impression as the Agent would stamp upon it though there may be no defect in the active power yet in respect of the passive there is an impossibility Let us now apply this to the case in hand The Church of Rome chargeth the Church of England with the guilt of Heresie and the question is Whether they can make good this charge against her I do not question the power of our Adversaries to doe the thing if it were to be done but if it be not to be done then notwithstanding the sufficiency of their power there is an incapacity in the subject they are to work upon which renders their attempt impossible If therefore I do make it appear that it is impossible for them to prove this against us it will be a fair Justification of the Minor Proposition in all the foregoing Arguments and consequently a clear discharge of the Church of England from that foul aspersion so unjustly cast upon her by the Church of Rome Now this I shall endeavour to make good in this manner The Notion of Heresie here laid down I have made appear to be that which is allowed by them as well as us and therefore that must be the Standard we are to be tried by Their work therefore will be to make it manifest that there are some Doctrines received believed and taught by the Church of England which are Errours in the foundation of Religion and those obstinately defended and maintained by her Now the only way to know what Doctrines are received believed and taught by any Church or Society of Christians is to have recourse to the publick Acts and authentick Records of that Church or Society and that is no difficult task for ours are made publick and exposed to the view of all And if they know not what we own as authentick Records I shall here inform them 1. The Holy Scripture is the foundation of our Faith and the Rule of our Religion 2. The 39 Articles agreed upon by the Archbishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year 1562 which are partly Positive and partly Negative where they declare the Faith and Religion of the Church of England they are positive and where they reject the Additions Alterations and Innovations of the Church of Rome they may be termed Negative 3. The Book of Homilies wherein the Doctrines of our Church briefly declared in the Articles are more largely explained These are the publick Acts and authentick Records wherein the Doctrines of the Church of England are to be found Art. 6. for she publickly declares That all things necessary to Salvation are contained in the Holy Scripture and that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to Salvation She also declares Art. 8. That the three Creeds the Nicene Creed Athanasius's Creed and that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed ought thoroughly to be received and believed for they may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture Unless therefore our Adversaries can find Heresie in the Holy Scripture or in the Articles of Faith summarily contained in the three ancient Creeds it will be impossible for them to find it in the Church of England because she doth not receive believe or teach any other Doctrine but what is contained therein or may be proved thereby This is that Faith and common Christianity which we received from Christ and his Apostles and
which we resolve by God's grace to hold fast This is that which hath been always held and taught by the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church This is the foundation upon which our Religion is built viz. upon the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone And therefore unless they can shake this Foundation unless they will impeach Christ and his Apostles unless they will charge the whole Church of God with the guilt of Heresie all their attempts and batteries levelled against us will be vain and fruitless The Church of England will still stand like a Rock against which those waves may break themselves whilst she remains unbroken by them Thus you see how impossible it is for our Adversaries to make good their charge against the Church of England and if they cannot doe it we may safely conclude they have not done it and if they neither have nor can doe it then is it a foul aspersion by them unjustly cast upon us For which their unjust uncharitable and unchristian censure I pray God forgive them Having thus secured that Post which was most likely to be attacqued by the Enemy I shall now take the boldness to make a short Sally upon them and take an account of their strength by considering some of the most material Arguments which have been offered by their Champions to make good their charge Arg. 1. Pope Nicholas as I find him cited by Bishop Jewel in the defence of his Apology p. 2. makes short work of it and very magisterially doth at once determine the whole matter For saith he Whoso denieth the privilege and supremacy of the See of Rome hath renounced the Faith and is an Heretick De Major Obed. unam Sanctam Dist 22. Omnes Ans To this I answer 1. If the privilege and supremacy of the See of Rome be an Article of Faith we desire to know in which of the three Creeds or in what part of the Bible we may find it for we would not willingly be wanting in our compliance with any Article of Faith. 2. If this be so then the Council of Chalcedon consisting of 630 Bishops and Reverend Fathers gathered together from all parts of the world was a pack of Hereticks for they gave equal privileges to the See of Constantinople with that of Rome 3. If this be so then Pope Gregory the great and I take him to be altogether as infallible as Pope Nicholas was an Heretick for he calleth him who usurps such an arrogant style the forerunner of Antichrist 4. If subjection to the see of Rome be a necessary part in the Definition of Heresie then all the Christians in the world except those of the Roman Communion are Hereticks for all of them as well as we do unanimously oppose the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome Arg. 2. Their Angelical Doctour and Canonized Saint S. Tho. Aquinas thus argueth 22. q. 11.2.3 When a matter is once determined by the Authority of the Catholick Church if any one shall obstinately gainsay such Determination he is to be reputed an Heretick which Authority saith he doth principally reside in the Pope Ans This Argument is founded upon several false Suppositions viz. 1. That the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church which we cannot consent to because we cannot believe that a part is the whole 2. That the Determinations of that Church are obligatory to all other Churches This we cannot agree with him in because Par in parem non habet imperium Equals have no authority over one another 3. That the Authority of the Catholick Church is principally lodged in the Bishop of Rome This we cannot believe because we have no warrant for it either from the Holy Scriptures or from the four first General Councils or from any authentick Antiquity Arg. 3. Protestants are Hereticks because they oppose divers Truths propounded for divine by the visible Church Ans This Argument is also supported by these false Suppositions 1. That to oppose any Truth propounded by the Church is Heresie This we deny We grant indeed that to oppose any Truth howsoever or by whomsoever propounded is an Errour but it cannot be called an Heresie unless it be such a Truth as is an Essential part of the Gospel of Christ 2. That the Doctrines of the Church of Rome which are opposed by Protestants are divine-Truths This we take to be a false Supposition for we do not oppose any Truth much less any divine Truth that is held by them but only such false and new invented Articles as are by them superadded to the Catholick Faith. 3. That whatsoever is propounded by the Church of Rome is propounded by the visible Church This we cannot allow because we know that the Church of Rome is but a part and God knows a corrupted part too of the visible Church Arg. 4. The visible Church is Judge of Controversies and therefore Infallible To oppose her therefore is to oppose God. This Protestants doe and therefore are guilty of Heresie Ans It is here taken for granted 1. That the visible Church is Judge of Controversies 2. That she is Infallible 3. That the Roman Church is this visible Church 4. That to oppose her is to oppose God. All which Suppositions are matters of Dispute between us and yet undetermined and therefore very insufficient grounds to build such a charge upon Arg. 5. Want of Succession of Bishops and Pastours holding always the same Doctrine and of the Forms of Ordaining Bishops and Priests which are in use in the Roman Church is a certain mark of Heresie But Protestants want all these things Therefore c. Ans We deny the Major For 1. Nothing but want of Truth and holding Errour can make or prove a Man or Church to be Heretical 2. Because it is not a Succession of Persons but of Doctrine that can secure a Church from Heresie And to such a Succession there are two things necessary 1. That there be an agreement with the Apostles Doctrine 2. That there be an uninterrupted conveyance of it down to them who challenge it Both which we have Arg. 6. Protestants have forsaken a Church confessedly very ancient and besides which there could be demonstrated no other visible Church of Christ upon earth Therefore c. Ans To this I answer 1. That against God and Truth there lies no prescription and therefore it is great wisedom to forsake ancient Errours for more ancient Truths 2. That there are many other visible Churches of Christ upon earth besides the Roman These are the most material Arguments I have yet met with by which our Adversaries have attempted to make good their charge of Heresie against us and how rotten a foundation these are to build such a mighty Superstructure upon I shall now leave to the impartial Reader to judge And because I design brevity and am unwilling to draw out this discourse to too great a length I shall now hasten to a conclusion The CONCLUSION IN this Discourse I have laid down such a Notion of Heresie as is generally received and owned by our Adversaries themselves and by that have strictly examined the Charge which they bring against us and I hope have made it very plain and manifest That the imputation of Heresie to the Church of England is a soul aspersion and cannot without great injustice be cast upon Her. Which is the only thing I have undertaken to make good in this short Treatise I am heartily sorry that there should be any occasion for a Discourse of this nature I am a great lover of Peace and Truth and do greatly abhor both Schism and Heresie by the former of which the Church's peace is disturbed and her Members crumbled into parties and factions and by the latter of which her Truth is fullied her Doctrine perverted and the whole frame of Religion put out of order And therefore I do earnestly pray as my dear Mother the Church of England hath taught me that all those who have erred and are deceived may be brought into the way of truth and that Unity Peace and Concord may flourish in all Nations I have no pleasure in strife and debates and if I were not commanded to contend earnestly for the Faith which was once delivered to the Saints should be very unwillingly drawn to engage in them But when I meet with a loud and ungrounded clamour branding those who embrace and endeavour to hold fast the holy Catholick Faith with the odious names of Schismaticks and Hereticks I cannot forbear according to my poor ability to stand up in the defence of injured Innocency and abused Truth This is that which I did design and have attempted to doe in both the Parts of this discourse and if our Adversaries be angry with me for it I cannot help it nor am I much concerned at it But if through weakness or inadvertency I have failed in my design or not defended the Church of England so well as I ought and as one more able might have done from those foul Aspersions which have been so unjustly cast upon her I humbly beg her pardon and do freely submit both my self and undertaking to her censure well knowing that she is an indulgent Mother and will put a favourable construction upon what was well meant I shall conclude all with a passionate intreaty and earnest request both to those of the Roman and those of our own Communion that they would all devoutly joyn with me in this humble and hearty prayer to Almighty God From all Sedition privy Conspiracy and Rebellion from all false Doctrine Heresie and Schism from hardness of Heart and contempt of thy Word and Commandment Good Lord deliver us FINIS ADVERTISEMENTS SOme Queries to Protestants Answered And an Explanation of Roman Catholick's Belief in Four Great Points considered 1. Concerning their Church 2. Their Worship 3. Justification 4. Civil Government Also lately printed A Seasonable Prospect for the View and Consideration of Christians Being a brief Representation of the Lives and Conversations of Infidels and Heathens as to Religion and Morality in our Age. Together with some Reflexions thereupon in Relation to us who profess Christianity Written by a Gentleman Both Printed for Luke Meredith at the King 's Head in St. Paul's Church-Yard
occasion given to justifie their Separation then may they be truly said to act voluntarily and without cause And if this be our case we must confess our selves guilty of Schism but if not then are we unjustly charged with it That our recession from the Church of Rome was not a voluntary act in us but a necessity upon us occasioned by force and violence constraint and compulsion is plain and evident We did not attempt a Separation but only desire a Reformation that so we might walk together in the House of God as friends If they would have hearkned to us and removed those errours and abuses those Superstitions and corruptions that tyranny and usurpation which they had introduced into the Faith Worship and Government of Christ's Church we had still peaceably continued in Communion with them But so far were they from hearkning to these our just desires that instead thereof we were menaced with fire and fagot with imprisonment with confiscation of our Estates with all kind of sufferings and even death it self if we refused to comply with their Corruptions and innovations And therefore we may truly say with the Learned Causaubon Causaub ad Peron Non fugimus sed fugamur We did not run away from them but were driven away by them But yet notwithstanding all this force and violence if we had not sufficient cause to justifie our recession we must still be criminal Eusch l. 6. c. 44. for we are of opinion with Dionysius Alex. in his Epistle to Novatus That any thing must rather be born than that we should rend asunder the Church of God. But alas we had too great cause for what we did The Church of Rome had corrupted the Faith of God's Church with her unwarrantable additions and alterations The primitive beauty and purity of God's Worship she had defaced with Superstitions That goodly and well compacted structure of Government which had been erected and established in the Church of God she had quite demolished and instead thereof had erected an unheard of tyrannical Government unknown to the Primitive Church and condemned by all other Churches ever since it appeared in the World. In a word she had made the terms of her Communion such as could not be complied with without sin and when it is sin to communicate it cannot be sin to separate Thus much I hope may suffice to satisfie any indifferent and unprejudic'd Reader that the recession of the Church of England from that of Rome in her Reformation was neither owing to a dividing humour nor without just cause And therefore she is unjustly charged with the guilt of Schism by the Church of Rome upon that account 5. Schism is a voluntary and causeless Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church of which we are Members i. e. which hath a Jurisdiction over us and to which we owe Subjection and Obedience Schism imports a breach of Unity a dividing of that Body which before was but one it implies the casting off of a lawfull Jurisdiction to which we were obliged to yield Subjection and Obedience Now if we neither are nor ever were of right Subjects of that Church if we neither are nor ever were such parts of that Body as are to depend upon the Head of it then can we not justly be charged with breaking the Unity of that Church or dividing of that Body because that Church or that Body doth still remain the same it was notwithstanding our recession therefrom And if it neither hath nor ever had any lawfull Jurisdiction over us then we neither do nor ever did owe any subjection or obedience thereunto and therefore cannot without great injustice be charged with a Schismatical Separation therefrom To prove this Negative would require a much longer Discourse than is now designed and therefore at present I shall only say that this we insist upon That the Church of England neither is nor ever was by any divine Authority bound to be in obedience to the Church of Rome And whenever they please to make their claim we are ready to defend our selves against it In the mean time till they make this good they have no reason to brand us as hitherto they have unjustly done with the odious Names of Schismaticks and Hereticks Thus have I taken a review of the several parts of the Definition which if it be allowed will fairly acquit the Church of England from the guilt of Schism And now let us see whether the Church of Rome can so well discharge her self of it SECT XIII The Church of Rome guilty of that Shism with which they charge the Church of England IT is a rule generally allowed that the Cause makes the Schism If the Church gives cause of Separation there is the Schism if not the cause of Schism is in the Separatist So that where the cause is found there the charge of Schism resteth If therefore the Church of Rome hath given just cause of Separation from her then is she causally guilty of that Schism and I am afraid will hardly be able to acquit her self from being so of almost all other Schisms in the Church Their ingenuous Cassander confesseth Cass de Offic. boni viri c. that the Roman Church is not a little changed from her ancient beauty and brightness and that she is deformed with many diseases and vicious distempers And being thus sick Bernh de vita solit St. Bernhard undertakes to be her Physician and prescribes her a Diet which he tells us must be profitable though unpleasing i. e. she ought to be reproved and a Reformation required And if thereupon an offence be taken Bernh ad Hug. de Sancto vict Epist 77. the same Saint Bernhard shall acquaint you where the scandal will rest When saults are taxed and scandal grows thereupon He is the cause of the scandal who did that which was worthy to be reproved not he that reproved the ill doer And that the Church of Rome hath given occasion both to the reproof and scandal let their own President in the Council of Trent inform you Who saith Orat. praes Concil Trident Sess 11. That the Depravation and Corruption of Discipline and Manners in the Church of Rome was in a great measure the Cause and Original of all those Schisms and Heresies which then troubled the Church But that it may appear that I have a desire to deal fairly and friendly with them I shall here present them with a Copy of their Charge and give them time to plead to it The Charge was long since drawn up by two great men of our Church viz. Bishop Hall and Bishop Bramhal and never yet pleaded to that I know much less cleared Bishop Hall in a little Book intituled The Old Religion dedicated to his Diocess of Exeter chap. 4. lays down their Charge in these five particulars 1. Nothing can be more plain than that the Roman is a particular Church as the Fathers of Basil
17. but only the holy Scriptures These we are told are able to make us wise unto salvation and to make the man of God perfect And what can we desire more Heresie therefore must be such an Errour in Religion as is against the truth of God's word being neither contained therein nor to be proved thereby And whosoever is guilty of such an Errour and proceedeth openly to teach and obstinately to defend the same the whole guilt of Heresie and all the mischievous consequences thereof will lie at his door And now let us see how far this first part of the Definition doth affect the Church of England Doth she not embrace the Faith which was once delivered to the Saints Is it not that which she doth so earnestly contend for doth she not profess that common Christianity which she hath received from Christ and his Apostles doth she not own Jesus Christ to be the authour and finisher of her Faith and the holy Scripture to be the rule of her Religion Doth she teach any Doctrine that is not agreeable to the Word of God or profess any Errour that is contrary to the Truth thereof If she do let her Adversaries implead her and if she cannot defend her self she will be so far from being obstinate that she will readily own her fault and by God's assisting grace repent and reform But if they cannot justly charge her with any of these things let them for shame forbear their ungrounded clamour against her as an Heretical Church The Innocency of the Church of England in this point will manifestly appear if we consider what she doth publickly profess and teach her Children to believe in her Articles of Religion 1. She doth declare her Belief Art. 6. That the holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation 2. That whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation 3. That the three Creeds viz. The Nicene Art. 8. the Athanasian and that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed ought thoroughly to be received and believed because they may be proved by most certain warrants of holy Scripture And after such a Declaration as this with what face can the Church of Rome charge her with the guilt of Heresie The Church of England indeed is so modest as not to challenge to her self an Infallibility as that of Rome unwarrantably doth She is willing to acknowledge that she may err but she as firmly resolves that she will never be obstinate in an errour and therefore cannot be justly burdened with the guilt of Heresie SECT III. II. Heresie is an Errour in the Foundation of Religion THE Church of God is said to be built upon the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Eph. 2.20 Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone Where by the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets St. Lyr. in loc Paul means as their own Lyra informs us the Doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets the one foretelling and the other preaching Christ Jesus And the same Apostle tells us That 1 Cor. 3.10 As a wise Master Builder he had laid the foundation i. e. saith Lyra the Faith of Christ and none other which Faith worketh by love And in another place he saith 2 Tim. 2.19 The foundation of God stands sure i.e. saith Lyra Fides Resurrectionis the Faith or Doctrine of the Resurrection These Scriptures will help us to explain what we mean by the foundation of Religion in this part of the Definition viz. some principal and fundamental point or points of Faith or as their own angelical Doctour styles them Th. Aq. 22. qu. 11. art 2. c. some Article or Articles of Faith or some Doctrines which necessarily follow therefrom And by an Errour in this Foundation I understand not only a dissenting therefrom but also a making of something to be Religion or an Article of Faith which really is not so And whether we be guilty of such an Errour I leave to the impartial Reader to judge when he hath carefully perused these Papers That the Church of England is not guilty of any such Errour methinks is very plain For she doth publickly declare Art. 6. That whatsoever is not read in the holy Scriptures which contain the Doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets and the Faith or common Christianity which was once delivered to the Saints nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation She also receiveth the three ancient Creeds Art. 8. and teacheth her Children to receive and believe every Article therein And whilst she doth this with what colour can the Church of Rome brand her with Heresie or charge her with an Errour in the foundation of Religion A general charge without any particular instances will not doe to such an one this general answer may suffice and when our Adversaries think fit to descend to particulars they may be further considered SECT IV. III. This fundamental Errour must be openly taught THE Church cannot and therefore doth not pretend to take cognizance of the thoughts of mens hearts that is the sole prerogative of Almighty God who is the searcher of hearts and trier of reins By the law of God a false Prophet or dreamer of dreams was to be slain but then he must be such an one as had endeavoured thereby to seduce the people from the worship of the true God Deut. 13.1 2 3 c. And our Saviour tells us of some who should be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven i. e. should have no place in the Church but be cast out of it as rotten and unsound members And that we may not be ignorant what sort of men these are he describes them to us telling us They are those who break his commandments and teach men so Matt. 5.19 And St. Peter tells us of some who should privily bring in Damnable Heresies and these he calls False Teachers 2 Pet. 2.1 And St. Pauls tells us of some who caused divisions and offences in the Church whom he warns us to avoid but how shall we shun them unless we know them He therefore gives us their character telling us they are such as by good words and fair speeches deceive the simple Rom. 16 17 18. These instances may sufficiently justifie this expression and shew you that it is not without cause that I have given it a place in the Desinition of Heresie For though a man have not only a kindness for some heretical opinions or fundamental errours but do heartily espouse and embrace them yet so long as he keeps all this lockt up in the cabinet of his own breast he is not censurable for it nor can any one without great rashness pronounce him an
Heretick for not to be and not to appear in foro Ecclesiae are the same Heresie then which is so great and heinous a crime an errour so mischievous to the Church of God and of so dangerous consequence to the Heretick himself ought certainly to be very well proved and made mighty clear and manifest before it be charged upon any man or any society of men who profess Christianity For though every Heresie be an Errour yet every Errour is not Heresie It must be an Errour in Religion and in the foundation of Religion too and that fundamental Errour must be divulg'd and openly taught i. e. there must be an endeavour to instill the poison of it into others thereby to seduce and withdraw them from fundamental Truth and Holiness and all this must be own'd stoutly and maintain'd obstinately before it can merit the name of Heresie Till therefore the Church of Rome by plain and undeniable Arguments hath proved all this particularly upon the Church of England she cannot without great rashness and presumption charge her with it A general imputation without particular proofs will amount to no more than a malicious scandal which will betray a great want of true Christian charity in them and the weight thereof will at last fall heavy upon their own heads Alphonsus de Castro de Haer. l. 1. c. 7. p. 79. For as one of their own Doctours saith Those that so rashly pronounce and call every thing Heresie not considering whereof they speak are often stricken with their own dart and fall into the same pit that they themselves had digged for others So far is the Church of England from openly teaching any fundamental errour in Religion that she neither is nor can be proved guilty of any such as is made appear in the preceding Section She teacheth nothing but the pure Word of God nor receiveth any thing as an Article of Faith or necessary to Salvation but what is contained in holy Scripture or may be proved thereby and therefore cannot be justly charged with the guilt of Heresie upon this account SECT V. IV. This fundamental Errour must be obstinately defended and maintained THIS is the last part of the Definition and that which gives spirit and life to all the rest for though we should be guilty of Errour and of Errour in Religion yea though that Errour should be a fundamental one and openly taught by us yet if we be not obstinate therein but upon fair and full conviction are willing to reform our Judgments and relinquish the same we cannot be justly burdened with the guilt of Heresie Such is the modesty of the Ch. of England that she doth not believe much less boast her self to be infallible as the Ch. of Rome unwarrantably doth As the Church of Jerusalem Alexandria and Antioch have erred so she or any other particular Church may err but such is her piety and humility that she is very desirous of and always ready to receive better information and thereupon to reform and amend her Errours She is and ever hath been willing to submit all her Doctrines to be tried by the touchstone of God's Word by the primitive Doctours and Pastours of Christ's Church and by the four first General Councils and therefore without great injustice cannot be thought to be obstinate or contumacious To make a Fundamental Errour become Heresie two things you see are required 1. That Fundamental Errour must be defended 2. It must be defended with obstinacy SECT VI. I. Of Defending a Fundamental Errour TO be guilty of a fundamental Errour in Religion is a great and dangerous crime but to persist in it and undertake the defence of it renders it yet greater and more dangerous for Religion is that upon the due observance of which depends all our happiness here and all our hopes of happiness hereafter and therefore to mistake therein is like an errour in War which is hard to be retrieved but to go on in so doing and set our wits upon the rack to invent arguments to maintain it is to form weapons against our selves with which to batter down all our hopes of future felicity Yet even this may admit of some alleviation for if those who embrace those errours be fully perswaded that they are that Faith which was once delivered to the Saints then are they obliged earnestly to contend for them or if in the defence thereof they do not contend so much for victory as for truth being ready upon better information to relinquish them or if by the misfortune of an ill education or otherwise they be prepossessed therewith and only hold them till they are better instructed not being averse to hearken thereto such an Errour or such a defence of it will not amount to Heresie But God be thanked the Church of England hath no need of any excuse in this case for she receiveth nothing as an Article of Faith but what is contained in holy Scripture nor defends any Doctrine but such as may be proved thereby and therefore it is a manifest injury and malicious scandal in those who charge her with the defence of any fundamental Errour in Religion 'T is true she contends earnestly but it is for the Faith that was once delivered to the Saints She strenuously defends the Religion which she professeth but it is because she hath received it from Christ and his Apostles and because it is well warranted by the Word of God. And if this be Heresie then is she guilty of it if not then is she unjustly charged with it by the Ch. of Rome SECT VII II. Of defending a fundamental Errour with Obstinacy HOW dangerous it is to espouse a fundamental Errour in Religion and how much more dangerous it is to engage in the defence and maintenance of such an errour I have already told you But if that defence be managed with stubbornness and obstinacy it renders the matter not only more dangerous but very desperate Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit Prov. 26.12 there is more hope of a fool than of him saith the wise Solomon If a fool offend it is usually out of ignorance but the sin of the other commonly proceeds from malice a fool sometimes will be counselled but he that is wise in his own conceit shutteth both his eyes and his ears against all advice and instruction And of such St. Hilary saith well They i. e. Hilar. de Trin. l 6. fools forasmuch as they know not the Truth may have their salvation in safety if afterward they believe but all hope of salvation is shut from thee i. e. who art wise in thy own conceit because thou deniest that thing which thou canst not chuse but know This is the case of him who obstinately defends a fundamental errour in Religion and it is this stubbornness and obstinacy that doth complete and perfect his Heresie and by reason whereof he is justly styled an Heretick But to make a man so obstinate
as to deserve this title two things are to be supposed viz. Admonition and Conviction 1. That he hath been admonished and that more than once of the evil of his way of the danger of it and of the necessity of leaving it 2. That he is convinced in his own mind of all this These two are expresly contained in that direction and advice which St. Paul gives to his Son Titus A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition reject Knowing that he that is such is subverted or perverted and sinneth being condemned of himself Tit. 3.10 11. Secing therefore these two are so necessary to complete the character of an Heretick it may not be amiss to take a view of them severally before we apply the Character SECT VIII Of Obstinacy in Errour against Admonition THAT men in Errour ought to be admonished will be own'd by all and that in case of Heresie the Admonition is to be repeated is plainly intimated by St. Paul in his advice to his Son Titus already quoted And in what manner and by whom this Admonition is to be given our Saviour's Rule in the case of trespasses and offences between brethren will very fully instruct us Matth. 18.15 16 17. which is this If thy brother trespass against thee go and tell him his fault between thee and him if he hear thee thou hast gained thy brother But if he hear thee not take with thee one or two that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be confirmed And if he refuse to hear them tell it unto the Church and if he refuse to hear the Church let him be unto thee as an Heathen and a Publican Where we may observe that our Saviour speaks of a twofold Admonition viz. one that is to be given in private and in a brotherly and friendly manner and another that is to be given in publick by those who had jurisdiction over the offending person and are vested with power and authority to censure him Now let us apply this to the case in hand If thy Brother offend by embracing and tenaciously holding some fundamental errour in Religion and this come to thy knowledge it will be a charitable work in thee if in a brotherly and friendly manner thou dost privately admonish him between thee and him alone if thou beest successfull therein thou hast done a good work thou hast gained thy brother But if this will not doe thou must not leave it so but take others with thee and admonish him before them Thus far may a private person interess himself in admonishing another who is faln into or in danger of falling into Heresie and if the person admonished continue obstinate against such admonition he doth by that stubbornness very much add to his crime and incur the guilt of Heresie yet properly speaking he cannot truly be called an Heretick in the eye of the Church because she hath not yet taken cognizance thereof And therefore it follows if he refuse to hear them tell it to the Church i. e. bring the cause before them who have a jurisdiction over him and sufficient power and authority to censure and punish him And being once and again admonished by the Church if he still remain contumacious then let him be rejected saith St. Paul or as our Saviour here let him be unto thee as an Heathen and Publican i. e. let him by Excommunication be cast out of the Church and counted unworthy the society of Christian men This is the method in which we ought to proceed against Hereticks they must be admonished and that Admonition must be repeated and they must be obstinate against that Admonition before we ought to censure them But it is not a private but publick not only a friendly but authoritative Admonition and stubbornness against that which will truly denominate a man or any Society of men to be Hereticks For Heresie is an Opinion contrary to that of the Catholick Church Aug. cont Faustum saith St. Aug. And whosoever doth obstinately believe that which is contrary to the holy Catholick Faith is an Heretick In Enchirid c. 11. p. 141. n. 2. if he be baptized saith their Navar. Doctor And whosoever despising the authority of the Church doth obstinately defend wicked opinions Part. 1. in expos art 9. Symbol p. 76. n. 2. he is to be called an Heretick saith their Trent Catechism Now if the Church of Rome can prove that the Church of England hath espoused and publickly taught any fundamental Errour in Religion and hath been thus regularly dealt withall and duely admonished by those who had authority so to doe and yet continued obstinate in her errour against such Admonition then is she guilty otherwise not But this I shall have Occasion to consider more particularly hereafter and therefore at present I shall proceed SECT IX Of Obstinacy in Errour against Conviction AN Heretick is one that is not only subverted or perverted Tit. 3.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but self-condemned saith St. Paul i. e. One who having once received and owned the true Faith doth now oppose and condemn it as false saith their own Lyra in loc or one who commendeth Errour and reproacheth truth saith the Ord. Gl. Who like those who accused the Woman taken in Adultery before our Saviour John 8.9 is convicted by his own Conscience i. e. who is conscious to himself of the evil of his own doings Self-condemnation always supposeth conviction an Heretick therefore being one that is self-condemned must also be convinc'd of the errour of his way and one who notwithstanding that conviction still remains stubborn and obstinate therein i. e. who resists the repeated admonition of the Church For if a man labour under an invincible ignorance and be thereby betrayed into some dangerous errour or by the misfortune of an ill education have his judgment perverted and prepossessed with wrong notions and sentiments of things his case is truly pityable and it would be very hard and injurious to burden him with the guilt of Heresie But if such an one being admonished of the evil of his way shall happen to be convinc'd of his errour and yet after such admonition and conviction contumaciously continue therein he will have no plea left to excuse him from the guilt thereof By the old Law Numb 15.24 25 26 27 c. if a man sinned through ignorance there was an atonement provided for him but if he sinned presumptuously there was no atonement for him but he was to be cut off from among the people This was St. Paul's case in the time of the Gospel for he himself tells us That he was a blasphemer and a persecutor and an oppressor 1 Tim. 1.13 but he obtained mercy because he did it ignorantly through unbelief But if after he was converted he had been guilty of these crimes his plea of ignorance and unbelief would then have been out of doors and his case would
have been very dangerous For it is impossible Heb. 6.4 5 6. that they who were once enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost And have tasted of the good word of God and of the powers of the world to come If they fall away that they should be renewed again by repentance seeing they crucifie again to themselves the Son of God and put him to open shame These Instances do plainly discover to us that before conviction though men be in errour yea though it be a dangerous and fundamental errour and industriously propagated by them yet may their case be pityable But when they are better informed or at least have means sufficient for their better information if after this they still remain stubborn and contumacious in their errour and persist in the defence and propagation thereof this their obstinacy will alter the nature of their crime and render their condition very dangerous if not desperate 1 John 3.20 21. For if our heart condemn us God is greater than our heart and knoweth all things But if our heart condemn us not then have we boldness toward God saith the Apostle John. And Blessed is he who condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth Rom. 14.22 saith St. Paul. SECT X. The Church of England acquitted from the guilt of Heresie THIS notion of Heresie which hath been laid down and explained in the foregoing Sections being not only Ours but Theirs also being supported by so great and eminent Authorities as that of St. Aug. of their own Angelical Doctour and canonized Saint St. Tho. Aquinas of their great Martin Navarrus and of the most authentick Authority of their own Church at this day the Council of Trent in its Catechism ad Parochos Our Adversaries can have no colourable pretence to except against it And if it be admitted we are ready to joyn issue with them and contented to stand or fall by it The point in difference between us is briefly this Whether the guilt of Heresie according to this Notion be justly or unjustly charged upon the Church of England by the Church of Rome To acquit the Church of England is my task at present in order whereunto I shall take a review of what hath been said and as briefly as may be apply it to our present case 1. If it cannot be proved that the Church of England doth receive believe or teach any other Doctrine than what hath been received believed and taught by the Catholick Church nor broach any new Opinions thereby to divide the Church for any secular advantage to her self nor obstinately defend any false Opinions Then by St. Austin's rule before quoted she cannot be justly charged with Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be proved against her And therefore according to this Rule she is unjustly taxed with Heresie by the Church of Rome 2. If it cannot be made appear that the Church of England doth corrupt the Faith which was once delivered to the Saints nor teach any Doctrine contrary thereunto nor dissent from any known established Article thereof nor obstinately maintain any such dissent therefrom Then by the rule of their own Angelical Doctour she ought not to be charged with Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be made appear against her Therefore by this Rule she ought not to be charged with Heresie by the Church of Rome 3. If it cannot be made manifest by any publick Act or Record owned as Authentick by the Church of England that she hath renounced or forsaken that Faith into which she was baptized and of which she once made profession nor embraced any false and new Opinions which are contrary thereunto nor doth obstinately believe and maintain any such false and new Opinions Then by the Rule of their Navar. Doctour she cannot be justly charged with the guilt of Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be made manifest against her Therefore by this Rule she is unjustly charged with the guilt of Heresie by the Church of Rome 4. If it cannot be proved that the Church of England either doth or ever did neglect and despise the Authority of the holy Catholick Church or doth embrace and hold any wicked Opinions in despight and defiance of that Authority or with a wilfull and obstinate mind defend and maintain any such wicked Opinions Then by the judgment of the Council of Trent in their Catechism ad Parochos she ought not to be held guilty of Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be proved against her Therefore by the Judgment of that Council she ought not to be held guilty of Heresie 5. If there be not pregnant proof that the Church of England hath embraced some Opinions which are contrary to or at least not agreeable with that Faith and common Christianity which was taught by Christ and his Apostles or hath laid a new foundation i. e. made something to be Religion and an Article of Faith which really is not so being not built upon the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets or doth openly teach any Fundamental Errours in Religion thereby to seduce and withdraw people from fundamental Truth and Holiness or doth stubbornly maintain and defend a fundamental Errour in Religion against repeated Admonitions and clear Convictions Then can she not if this Notion of Heresie be true be justly burdened with the guilt thereof But there is not nor indeed can be any pregnant proof of any thing of all this against her Therefore according to this Notion of Heresie she cannot be justly charged with the guilt thereof I am well aware that the Minor Proposition in all these will stiffly be denied by our Adversaries they will with great boldness and confidence tell the world that all this and more hath been and still may be proved against the Church of England But God be thanked though this may soon be said it can never be proved That they frequently call us Hereticks and both do and have all along endeavoured to represent us as such to the world we very well know and if they were allowed to be Judges it would go very hard with us we should not be able to acquit our selves at their Bar. But this we think to be a very unreasonable thing that they being Parties should be Judges too and therefore we appeal from them And if they ask whither we do appeal I answer we appeal to the Holy Scriptures to the primitive Fathers and to the four first General Councils But because this may seem to be either too tedious or too troublesome a way of trial I have made choice of one more short and easie I have here laid down a Notion of Heresie which is agreed upon both by them and us and therefore unexceptionable by this we are willing to be tried and by this to stand or fall I do not say in any of these Propositions that