this often hapned I think S. Austin is the chiefe Argument and Authority we have for the Assumption of the Virgin Mary the Baptism of Infants is called a Tradition by Origen alone at first and from Salmeron disput 51. in Rom. him by others The procession of the holy Ghost from the Sonne which is an Article the Greek Church disavowes derives from the Tradition Apostolicall as it is pretended and yet before S. Austin we heare nothing of it very cleerly or certainly for as much as that whole mystery concerning the blessed Spirit was so little explicated in Scripture and so little derived to them by Tradition that till the Councell of Nice you shall hardly find any form of worship or personall addresse of devotion to the holy Spirit as Erasmus observes and I think the contrary will very hardly be verified And for this particular in which I instance whatsoever is in Scripture concerning it is against that which the Church of Rome calls Tradition which makes the Greeks so confident as they are of the point and is an Argument of the vanity of some things which for no greater reason are called Traditions but because one man hath said so and that they can be proved by no better Argument to be true Now in this case wherein Tradition descends upon us with unequall certainty it would be very unequall to require of us an absolute beliefe of every thing not written for feare we be accounted to slight Tradition Apostolicall And since no thing can require our supreme assent but that which is truly Catholike and Apostolike and to such a Tradition is requir'd as Irenaeus sayes the consent of all those Churches which the Apostles planted and where they did preside this topick will be of so little use in judging heresies that besides what is deposited in Scripture it cannot be proved in any thing but in the Canon of Scripture it selfe and as it is now received even in that there is some variety And therefore there is wholy a mistake in this businesse for when the Fathers appeal to Tradition and with much earnestnesse Numb 8. and some clamour they call upon Hereticks to conform to or to be tryed by Tradition it is such a Tradition as delivers the fundamentall points of Christianity which were also recorded in Scripture But because the Canon was not yet perfectly consign'd they call'd to that testimony they had which was the testimony of the Churches Apostolicall whose Bishops and Priests being the Antistites religionis did believe and preach Christian Religion and conserve all its great mysteries according as they had been taught Irenaeus calls this a Tradition Apostolicall Christum accepisse calicem dixisse sanguinem suum esse docuisse novam oblationem novi Testamenti quam Ecclesia per Apostolos accipiens offert per totum mundum And the Fathers in these Ages confute Hereticks by Ecclesiasticall Tradition that is they confront against their impious and blaspemous doctrines that Religion which the Apostles having taught to the Churches where they did preside their Successors did still preach and for a long while together suffered not the enemy to sow tares amongst their wheat And yet these doctrines which they called Traditions were nothing but such fundamentall truths which were in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Irenaeus in Eusebius observes in the instance of Polycarpus and it is manifest by considering Lib. 5. cap. 20. what heresies they fought against the heresies of Ebion Cerinthus Nicolaitans Valentinians Carpocratians persons that Vid. Irenae l. 3 4. cont haeres denyed the Sonne of God the Unity of the God-head that preached impurity that practised Sorcery and Witch-craft And now that they did rather urge Tradition against them then Scripture was because the publike Doctrine of all the Apostolicall Churches was at first more known and famous then many parts of the Scripture and because some Hereticks denyed S. Lukes Gospel some received none but S. Matthews some rejected all S. Pauls Epistles and it was a long time before the whole Canon was consign'd by universall Testimony some Churches having one part some another Rome her selfe had not all so that in this case the Argument from Tradition was the most famous the most certain and the most prudent And now according to this rule they had more Traditions then we have and Traditions did by degrees lessen as they came to be written and their necessity was lesse as the knowledge of them was ascetained to us by a better Keeper of Divine Truths All that great mysteriousnesse of Christs Priest-hood the unity of his Sacrifice Christs Advocation and Intercession for us in Heaven and many other excellent Doctrines might very well be accounted Traditions before S. Pauls Epistle to the Hebrews was publish'd to all the World but now they are written truths and if they had not possibly we might either have lost them quite or doubted of them as we doe of many other Traditions by reason of the insufficiency of the propounder And therefore it was that S. Peter took order that the Gospel 2 Pet. 1. 13. should be Writ for he had promised that he would doe something which after his decease should have these things in remembrance He knew it was not safe trusting the report of men where the fountain might quickly run dry or be corrupted so insensibly that no cure could be found for it nor any just notice taken of it till it were incurable And indeed there is scarce any thing but what is written in Scripture that can with any confidence of Argument pretend to derive from the Apostles except ritualls and manners of ministration but no doctrines or speculative mysteries are so transmitted to us by so cleer a current that we may see a visible channell and trace it to the Primitive fountaines It is said to be a Tradition Apostolicall that no Priest should baptize without chrism and the command of the Bishop Suppose it were yet we cannot be oblig'd to believe it with much confidence because we have but little proofe for it scarce any thing but the single testimony of S. Hierom. And yet if it were this is but a rituall of which in passing by I shall give that account That Dialog adv Lucifer suppose this and many more ritualls did derive clearly from Tradition Apostolicall which yet but very few doe yet it is hard that any Church should be charged with crime for not observing such ritualls because we see some of them which certainly did derive from the Apostles are expir'd and gone out in a desuetude such as are abstinence from blood and from things strangled the coenobitick life of secular persons the colledge of widowes to worship standing upon the Lords day to give milk and honey to the newly baptized and many more of the like nature now there having been no mark to distinguish the necessity of one from the indifferency of the other they are all
at this day vex Christendome And both speak true The first Ages speak greatest truth but least pertinently The next Ages the Ages of the foure generall Councels spake something not much more pertinently to the present Questions but were not so likely to speak true by reason of their dispositions contrary to the capacity and circumstance of the first Ages and if they speak wisely as Doctors yet not certainly as witnesses of such propositions which the first Ages noted not and yet unlesse they had noted could not possibly be Traditions And therefore either of them will be lesse uselesse as to our present affaires For indeed the Questions which now are the publike trouble were not considered or thought upon for many hundred years and therefore prime Tradition there is none as to our purpose and it will be an insufficient medium to be used or pretended in the determination and to dispute concerning the truth or necessity of Traditions in the Questions of out times is as if Historians disputing about a Question in the English Story should fall on wrangling whether Livie or Plutarch were the best Writers And the earnest disputes about Traditions are to no better purpose For no Church at this day admits the one halfe of those things which certainly by the Fathers were called Traditions Apostolicall and no Testimony of ancient Writers does consign the one halfe of the present Questions to be or not to be Traditions So that they who admit only the Doctrine and Testimony of the first Ages cannot be determined in most of their doubts which now trouble us because their Writings are of matters wholy differing from the present disputes and they which would bring in after Ages to the Authority of a competent judge or witnesse say the same thing for they plainly confesse that the first Ages spake little or nothing to the present Question or at least nothing to their sense of them for therefore they call in aid from the following Ages and make them suppletory and auxiliary to their designs and therefore there are no Traditions to our purposes And they who would willingly have it otherwise yet have taken no course it should be otherwise for they when they had opportunity in the Councels of the last Ages to determine what they had a mind to yet they never nam'd the number nor expressed the particular Traditions which they would faine have the world believe to be Apostolicall But they have kept the bridle in their own hands and made a reserve of their own power that if need be they may make new pretensions or not be put to it to justifie the old by the engagement of a conciliary declaration Lastly We are acquitted by the Testimony of the Primitive Fathers from any other necessity of believing then of Numb 11. such Articles as are recorded in Scripture And this is done by them whose Authority is pretended the greatest Argument for Tradition as appears largely in Irenaeus who disputes professedly for the sufficiency of Scripture against certain Hereticks who L. 3. c. 2. contr haeres affirm some necessary truths not to be written It was an excellent saying of S. Basil and will never be wipt out with all the eloquence of Perron in his Serm. de fide Manifestus est fidei lapsus liquidum superbiae vitium vel respuere aliquid eorum quae Scriptura habet vel inducere quicquam quod scriptum non est And it is but a poore device to say that every particular Tradition is consigned in Scripture by those places which give Authority to Tradition and so the introducing of Tradition is not a super-inducing any thing over or besides Scripture because Tradition is like a Messenger and the Scripture is like his Letters of Credence and therefore Authorizes whatsoever Tradition speaketh For supposing Scripture does consign the Authority of Tradition which it might doe before all the whole Instrument of Scripture it self was consign'd and then afterwards there might be no need of Tradition yet supposing it it will follow that all those Traditions which are truly prime and Apostolicall are to be entertain'd according to the intention of the Deliverers which indeed is so reasonable of it selfe that we need not Scripture to perswade us to it it selfe is authentick as Scripture is if it derives from the same fountain and a word is never the more the Word of God for being written nor the lesse for not being written but it will not follow that whatsoever is pretended to be Tradition is so neither is the credit of the particular instances consign'd in Scripture dolosus versatur in generalibus but that this craft is too palpable And if a generall and indefinite consignation of Tradition be sufficient to warrant every particular that pretends to be Tradition then S. Basil had spoken to no purpose by saying it is Pride Apostasy from the Faith to bring in what is not written For if either any man brings in what is written or what he sayes is delivered then the first being expresse Scripture and the second being consign'd in Scripture no man can be charged with superinducing what is not written he hath his Answer ready And then these are zealous words absolutely to no purpose but if such generall consignation does not warrant every thing that pretends to Tradition but only such as are truly proved to be Apostolicall then Scripture is uselesse as to this particular for such Tradition gives testimony to Scripture and therefore is of it selfe first and more credible for it is credible of it selfe and therefore unlesse S. Basil thought that all the will of God in matters of Faith and Doctrine were written I see not what end nor what sense he could have in these words For no man in the world except Enthusiasts and mad-men ever obtruded a Doctrine upon-the Church but he pretended Scripture for it or Tradition and therefore no man could be pressed by these words no man confuted no man instructed no not Enthusiasts or Montanists For suppose either of them should say that since in Scripture the holy Ghost is promised to abide with the Church for ever to teach whatever they pretend the Spirit in any Age hath taught them is not to super-induce any thing beyond what is written because the truth of the Spirit his veracity and his perpetuall teaching being promised and attested in Scripture Scripture hath just so consign'd all such Revelations as Perron saith it hath all such Traditions But I will trouble my selfe no more with Arguments from any humane Authorities but he that is surprized with the beliefe of such Authorities and will but consider the very many Testimonies of Antiquity to this purpose as of a Orat. ad Nicen PP apud Theodor. l. 1. c. 7. Constantine b In Matth. l. 4. c. 23. in Aggaeum S. Hierom c De bono viduil c. 1. S. Austin d Orat. contr gent. S. Athaenasius e In
subjects to kill him Pasce agnos said Christ the third time And pasce is doce and pasce is Impera and pasce is occide Now if others should take the same unreasonablenesse I will not say but the same liberty in expounding Scripture or if it be not licence taken but that the Scripture it selfe is so full and redundant in senses quite contrary what man soever or what company of men soever shall use this principle will certainly finde such rare productions from severall places that either the unreasonablenesse of the thing will discover the errour of the proceeding or else there will be a necessity of permitting a great liberty of judgement where is so infinite variety without limit or mark of necessary determination If the first then because an errour is so obvious and ready to our selves it will be great imprudence or tyranny to be hasty in judging others but if the latter it is it that I contend for for it is most unreasonable when either the thing it selfe ministers variety or that we take licence to our selves in variety of interpretations or proclaime to all the world our great weaknesse by our actually being deceived that we should either prescribe to others magisterially when we are in errour or limit their understandings when the thing it selfe affords liberty and variety SECT IV. Of the difficulty of Expounding Scripture THese considerations are taken from the nature of Scripture it selfe but then if we consider that we have no certain Numb 1. wayes of determining places of difficulty and Question infallibly and certainly but that we must hope to be sav'd in the beliefe of things plaine necessary and fundamentall and our pious endeavour to finde out Gods meaning in such places which he hath left under a cloud for other great ends reserved to his own knowledge we shall see a very great necessity in allowing a liberty in Prophesying without prescribing authoritatively to other mens consciences and becomming Lords and Masters of their Faith Now the meanes of expounding Scripture are either externall or internall For the externall as Church Authority Tradition Fathers Councels and Decrees of Bishops they are of a distinct consideration and follow after in their order But here we will first consider the invalidity and uncertainty of all those meanes of expounding Scripture which are more proper and internall to the nature of the thing The great Masters of Commentaries some whereof have undertaken to know all mysteries have propounded many wayes to expound Scripture which indeed are excellent helps but not infallible assistances both because themselves are but morall instruments which force not truth ex abscondito as also because they are not infallibly used and applyed 1. Sometime the sense is drawn forth by the context and connexion of parts It is well when it can be so But when there is two or three antecedents and subjects spoken of what man or what rule shall ascertain me that I make my reference true by drawing the relation to such an antecedent to which I have a minde to apply it another hath not For in a contexture where one part does not alwayes depend upon another Where things of differing natures intervene and interrupt the first intentions there it is not alwayes very probable to expound Scripture take its meaning by its proportion to the neighbouring words But who desires satisfaction in this may read the observation verified in S. Gregory's moralls upon Job lib. 5. c. 29. and the instances he there brings are excellent proofe that this way of Interpretation does not warrant any man to impose his Expositions upon the beliefe and understanding of other men too confidently and magisterially 2. Another great pretence of medium is the conference of places which Illyricus calls ingens remedium faelicissimam expositionem Numb 2. sanctae scripturae and indeed so it is if well and temperately used but then we are beholding to them that doe so for there is no rule that can constrain them to it for comparing of places is of so indefinite capacity that if there be ambiguity of words variety of sense alteration of circumstances or difference of stile amongst Divine Writers then there is nothing that may be more abused by wilfull people or may more easily deceive the unwary or that may amuse the most intelligent Observer The Anabaptists take advantage enough in this proceeding and indeed so may any one that list and when we pretend against them the necessity of baptizing all by authority of nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aquâ spiritu they have a parallel for it and tell us that Christ will baptize us with the holy Ghost and with fire and that one place expounds the other and because by fire is not meant an Element or any thing that is naturall but an Allegory and figurative expression of the same thing so also by water may be meant the figure signifying the effect or manner of operation of the holy Spirit Fire in one place and water in the other doe but represent to us that Christs baptism is nothing else but the cleansing and purifying us by the holy Ghost But that which I here note as of greatest concernment and which in all reason ought to be an utter overthrow to this topique is an universall abuse of it among those that use it most and when two places seem to have the same expression or if a word have a double signification because in this place it may have such a sense therefore it must because in one of the places the sense is to their purpose they conclude that therefore it must be so in the other too An instance I give in the great Question between the Socinians and the Catholikes If any place be urg'd in which our blessed Saviour is called God they shew you two or three where the word God is taken in a depressed sense for a quasi Deus as when God said to Moses Constitui te Deum Pharaonis and hence they argue because I can shew the word is used for a Deus factus therefore no Argument is sufficient to prove Christ to be Deus verus from the appellative of Deus And might not another argue to the exact contrary and as well urge that Moses is Deus verus because in some places the word Deus is used pro Deo aeterno Both wayes the Argument concludes impiously and unreasonably It is a fallacy à posse ad esse affirmativè because breaking of bread is sometimes used for an Eucharisticall manducation in Scripture therefore I shall not from any testimony of Scripture affirming the first Christians to have broken bread together conclude that they liv'd hospitably and in common society Because it may possibly be eluded therefore it does not signifie any thing And this is the great way of answering all the Arguments that can be brought against any thing that any man hath a mind to defend and any man that reads any controversies
temporall felicities and this thing proceeding from so great an Authority as the testimony of Papias drew after it all or most of the Christians in the first three hundred years For besides that the Millenary opinion is expresly taught by Papias Justin Martyr Irenaus Origen Lactantius Severus Victorinus Apollinaris Nepos and divers others famous in their time Justin Martyr in his Dialogue against Tryphon sayes it was the beliefe of all Christians exactly Orthodox 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet there was no such Tradition but a mistake in Papias but I find it nowhere spoke against till Dionysins of Alexandria confuted Nepo's Book and converted Coracion the Egyptian from the opinion Now if a Tradition whose beginning of being called so began with a Scholar of the Apostles for so was Papias and then continued for some Ages upon the meer Authority of so famous a man did yet deceive the Church much more fallible is the pretence when two or three hundred years after it but commences and then by some learned man is first called a Tradition Apostolicall And so it hapned in the case of the Arrian heresy which the Nicene Fathers did confute by objecting a contrary Tradition Apostolicall as Theodoret reports Lib. 1. hist. c. 8. and yet if they had not had better Arguments from Scripture then from Tradition they would have faild much in so good a cause for this very pretence the Arrians themselves made and desired to be tryed by the Fathers of the first three hundred years which was a confutation sufficient to them who pretended Vide Petaâ— in Epiph. her 69. a clear Tradition because it was unimaginable that the Tradition should leap so as not to come from the first to the last by the middle But that this tryall was sometime declined by that excellent man S. Athanasius although at other times confidently and truly pretended it was an Argument the Tradition was not so * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matt. diâ—l ad Tryph. Iud. clear but both sides might with some fairnesse pretend to it And therefore one of the prime Founders of their heresy the Heretick †Euse. l. 5. c. ult Artemon having observed the advantage might be taken by any Sect that would pretend Tradition because the medium was plausible and consisting of so many particulars that it was hard to be redargued pretended a Tradition from the Apostles that Christ was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that the Tradition did descend by a constant succession in the Church of Rome to Pope Victors time inclusively and till Zepherinus had interrupted the series and corrupted the Doctrine which pretence if it had not had some appearance of truth so as possibly to abuse the Church had not been worthy of confutation which yet was with care undertaken by an old Writer out of whom Eusebius transcribes a large passage to reprove the vanity of the pretender But I observe from hence that it was usuall to pretend to Tradition and that it was easier pretended then confuted and I doubt not but oftner done then discovered A great Question arose in Africa concerning the Baptism of Hereticks whether it were valid or no. S. Cyprian and his party appealed to Scripture Stephen Bishop of Rome and his party would be judged by custome and Tradition Ecclesiasticall See how much the nearer the Question was to a determination either that probation was not accounted by S. Cyprian and the Bishops both of Asia and Africk to be a good Argument and sufficient to determine them or there was no certain Tradition against them for unlesse one of these two doe it nothing could excuse them from opposing a known truth unlesse peradventure S. Cyprian Firmilian the Bishops of Galatia Cappadocia and almost two parts of the World were ignorant of such a Tradition for they knew of none such and some of them expresly denyed it And the sixth generall Synod approves of the Canon made in the Councell of Carthage under Cyprian upon this very ground because in praedictorum praesulum locis solum secundum Can. 2. traditam eis consuetudinem servatus est they had a particular Tradition for Rebaptization and therefore there could be no Tradition Universall against it or if there were they knew not of it but much for the contrary and then it would be remembred that a conceal'd Tradition was like a silent Thunder or a Law not promulgated it neither was known nor was obligatory And I shall observe this too that this very Tradition was so obscure and was so obscurely delivered silently proclaimed that S. Austin who disputed against the Donatists upon this very Question was not able to prove it but L. 5. de baptism contr Donat. c. 23. by a consequence which he thought probale and credible as appears in his discourse against the Donatists The Apostles saith S. Austin prescrib'd nothing in this particular But this custome which is contrary to Cyprian ought to be believed to have come from their Tradition as many other things which the Catholike Church observes That 's all the ground and all the reason nay the Church did waver concerning that Question and before the decision of a Councell Cyprian and others might dissent without breach of charity It was plain then there was no clear Tradition Lib. 1. de baptism c. 18. in the Question possibly there might be a custome in some Churches postnate to the times of the Apostles but nothing that was obligatory no Tradition Apostolicall But this was a suppletory device ready at hand when ever they needed it and De peccat original l. 2. c. 40. contra Pelagi Caelest S. Austin confuted the Pelagians in the Question of Originall sinne by the custome of exorcisme and insufflation which S. Austin said came from the Apostles by Tradition which yet was then and is now so impossible to be prov'd that he that shall affirm it shall gaine only the reputation of a bold man and a confident 2. I consider if the report of Traditions in the Primitive Numb 4. times so neare the Ages Apostolicall was so uncertain that they were fain to aym at them by conjectures and grope as in the dark the uncertainty is much encreased since because there are many famous Writers whose works are lost which yet if they had continued they might have been good records to us as Clemens Romanus Egesippus Nepos Coracion Dionysius Areopagite of Alexandria of Corinth Firmilian and many more And since we see pretences have been made without reason in those Ages where they might better have been confuted then now they can it is greater prudence to suspect any later pretences since so many Sects have been so many warres so many corruptions in Authors so many Authors lost so much ignorance hath intervened and so many interests have been served that now the rule is to be altered and whereas it was of old time credible that that was Apostolicall whose beginning they
alike necessary or alike indifferent if the former why does no Church observe them if the later why does the Church of Rome charge upon others the shame of novelty for leaving of some Rites and Ceremonies which by her own practice we are taught to have no obligation in them but to be adiaphorous S. Paul gave order that a Bishop should be the husband of one wife The Church of Rome will not allow so much other Churches allow more The Apostles commanded Christians to Fast on Wednesday and Friday as appeares in their Canons The Church of Rome Fasts Friday and Saturday and not on Wednesday The Apostles had their Agapae or love Feasts we should believe them scandalous They used a kisse of charity in ordinary addresses the Church of Rome keeps it only in their Masse other Churches quite omit it The Apostles permitted Priests and Deacons to live in conjugall Society as appears in the 5. Can. of the Apostles which to them is an Argument who believe them such and yet the Church of Rome by no meanes will endure it nay more Michael Medina gives Testimony that of 84 Canons Apostolicall which Clemens collected De sacr hom continent li 5. c. 105. scarce six or eight are observed by the Latine Church and Peresius gives this account of it In illis contineri multa quae temporum corruptione non plenè observantur aliis pro temporis De Tradit part 3. c. de Author Can. Apost materiae qualitate aut obliteratis aut totius Ecclesiae magisterio abrogatis Now it were good that they which take a liberty to themselves should also allow the same to others So that for one thing or other all Traditions excepting those very few that are absolutely universall will lose all their obligation and become no competent medium to confine mens practises or limit their faiths or determine their perswasions Either for the difficulty of their being prov'd the incompetency of the testimony that transmits them or the indifferency of the thing transmitted all Traditions both rituall and doctrinall are disabled from determining our consciences either to a necessary believing or obeying 6. To which I adde by way of confirmation that there are some things called Traditions and are offered to be proved to Numb 9. us by a Testimony which is either false or not extant Clemens of Alexandria pretended it a Tradition that the Apostles preached to them that dyed in infidelity even after their death and then raised them to life but he proved it only by the Testimony of the Book of Hermes he affirmed it to be a Tradition Apostolicall that the Greeks were saved by their Philosophy but he had no other Authority for it but the Apocryphall Books of Peter and Paul Tertullian and S. Basil pretend it an Apostolicall Tradition to sign in the aire with the sign of the Crosse but this was only consign'd to them in the Gospel of Nicodemus But to instance once for all in the Epistle of Marcellus to the Bishop of Antioch where he affirmes that it is the Canon of the Apostles praeter sententiam Romani Pontificis non posse Conciliae celebrari And yet there is no such Canon extant nor ever was for ought appears in any Record we have and yet the Collection of the Canons is so intire that though it hath something more then what was Apostolicall yet it hath nothing lesse And now that I am casually fallen upon an instance from the Canons of the Apostles I consider that there cannot in the world a greater instance be given how easy it is to be abused in the believing of Traditions For 1. to the first 50. which many did admit for Apostolicall 35 more were added which most men now count spurious all men call dubious and some of them universally condemned by peremptory sentence even by them who are greatest admirers of that Collection as 65. 67. and 8 ⅘ Canons For the first 50 it is evident that there are some things so mixt with them and no mark of difference left that the credit of all is much impared insomuch that Isidor of Sevill sayes they were Apoeryphall made by Hereticks and published under the Apud Gratian. dist 16. c. Canones title Apostolicall but neither the Fathers nor the Church of Rome did give assent to them And yet they have prevail'd so farre amongst some that Damascen is of opinion they should Lib. ◠c. 18 de Orthod fide be received equally with the Canonicall writings of the Apostles One thing only I observe and we shall find it true in most writings whose Authority is urged in Questions of Theology that the Authority of the Tradition is not it which moves the assent but the nature of the thing and because such a Canon is delivered they doe not therefore believe the sanction or proposition so delivered but disbelieve the Tradition if they doe not like the matter and so doe not judge of the matter by the Tradition but of the Tradition by the matter And thus the Church of Rome rejects the 84 or 85 Canon of the Apostles not because it is delivered with lesse Authority then the last 35 are but because it reckons the Canon of Scripture otherwise then it is at Rome Thus also the fifth Canon amongst the first 50 because it approves the marriage of Priests and Deacons does not perswade them to approve of it too but it selfe becomes suspected for approving it So that either they accuse themselves of palpable contempt of the Apostolicall Authority or else that the reputation of such Traditions is kept up to serve their own ends and therefore when they encounter them they are more to be upheld which what else is it but to teach all the world to contemn such pretences and undervalue Traditions and to supply to others a reason why they should doe that which to them that give the occasion is most unreasonable 7. The Testimony of the Ancient Church being the only Numb 10. meanes of proving Tradition and sometimes their dictates and doctrine being the Tradition pretended of necessity to be imitated it is considerable that men in their estimate of it take their rise from severall Ages and differing Testimonies and are not agreed about the competency of their Testimony and the reasons that on each side make them differ are such as make the Authority it selfe the lesse authentick and more repudiable Some will allow only of the three first Ages as being most pure most persecuted and therefore most holy least interested serving fewer designs having fewest factions and therefore more likely to speak the truth for Gods sake and its own as best complying with their great end of acquiring Heaven in recompence of losing their lives Others * Vid. Card. Petron. lettre an Sieur Casaubon say that those Ages being persecuted minded the present Doctrines proportionable to their purposes and constitution of the Ages and make little or nothing of those Questions which
Psal. 132. S. Hilary f L. 2. contra heres tom 1. haer 61. S. Epiphanius and divers others all speaking words to the same sense with that saying of S. g 1. Cor. 4. Paul Nemo sentiat super quod scriptum est will see that there is reason that since no man is materially a Heretick but he that erres in a point of Faith and all Faith is sufficienly recorded in Scripture the judgement of Faith and Heresy is to be derived from thence and no man is to be condemned for dissenting in an Article for whose probation Tradition only is pretended only according to the degree of its evidence let every one determine himselfe but of this evidence we must not judge for others for unlesse it be in things of Faith and absolute certainties evidence is a word of relation and so supposes two terms the object and the faculty and it is an imperfect speech to say a thing is evident in it selfe unlesse we speak of first principles or clearest revelations for that may be evident to one that is not so to another by reason of the pregnancy of some apprehensions and the immaturity of others This Discourse hath its intention in Traditions Doctrinall and Rituall that is such Traditions which propose Articles new in materiâ but now if Scripture be the repository of all Divine Truths sufficient for us Tradition must be considered as its instrument to convey its great mysteriousnesse to our understandings it is said there are traditive Interpretations as well as traditive propositions but these have not much distinct consideration in them both because their uncertainty is as great as the other upon the former considerations as also because in very deed there are no such things as traditive Interpretations universall For as for particulars they signifie no more but that they are not sufficient determinations of Questions Theologicall therefore because they are particular contingent and of infinite variety and they are no more Argument then the particular authority of these men whose Commentaries they are and therefore must be considered with them The summe is this Since the Fathers who are the best Numb 12. Witnesses of Traditions yet were infinitely deceived in their account since sometimes they guest at them and conjectured by way of Rule and Discourse and not of their knowledge not by evidence of the thing since many are called Traditions which were not so many are uncertaine whether they were or no yet confidently pretended and this uncertainty which at first was great enough is increased by infinite causes and accidents in the succession of 1600 yeares since the Church hath been either so carelesse or so abused that shee could not or would not preserve Traditions with carefulnesse and truth since it was ordinary for the old Writers to set out their own fancies and the Rites of their Church which had been Ancient under the specious Title of Apostolicall Traditions since some Traditions rely but upon single Testimony at first and yet descending upon others come to be attested by many whose Testimony though conjunct yet in value is but single because it relies upon the first single Relator and so can have no greater authority or certainty then they derive from the single person since the first Ages who were most competent to consign Tradition yet did consign such Traditions as be of a nature wholy discrepant from the present Questions and speak nothing at all or very imperfectly to our purposes and the following Ages are no fit Witnesses of that which was not transmitted to them because they could not know it at all but by such transmission and prior consignation since what at first was a Tradition came afterwards to be written and so ceased its being a Tradition yet the credit of Traditions commenc'd upon the certainty and reputation of those truths first delivered by word afterward consign'd by writing since what was certainly Tradition Apostolicall as many Rituals were are rejected by the Church in severall Ages and are gone out into a desuetude and lastly since beside the no necessity of Traditions there being abundantly enough in Scripture there are many things called Traditions by the Fathers which they themselves either proved by no Authors or by Apocryphall and spurious and Hereticall the matter of Tradition will in very much be so uncertain so false so suspitious so contradictory so improbable so unproved that if a Question be contested and be offered to be proved only by Tradition it will be very hard to impose such a proposition to the beliefe of all men with any imperiousnesse or resolved determination but it will be necessary men should preserve the liberty of believing and prophesying and not part with it upon a worse merchandise and exchange then Esau made for his birth-right SECT VI. Of the uncertainty and insufficiency of Councels Ecclesiasticall to the same purpose BUt since we are all this while in uncertainty it is necessary that we should addresse our selves somewhere where we Numb 1. may rest the soale of our foot And nature Scripture and experience teach the world in matters of Question to submit to some finall sentence For it is not reason that controversies should continue till the erring person shall be willing to condemn himselfe and the Spirit of God hath directed us by that great precedent at Jerusalem to addresse our selves to the Church that in a plenary Councell and Assembly shee may synodically determine Controversies So that if a Generall Councell have determin'd a Question or expounded Scripture we may no more disbelieve the Decree then the Spirit of God himselfe who speaks in them And indeed if all Assemblies of Bishops were like that first and all Bishops were of the same spirit of which the Apostles were I should obey their Decree with the same Religion as I doe them whole preface was Visum est Spiritui Sancto nobis And I doubt not but our blessed Saviour intended that the Assemblies of the Church should be Judges of Controversies and guides of our perswasions in matters of difficulty But he also intended they should proceed according to his will which he had revealed and those precedents which he had made authentick by the immediate assistance of his holy Spirit He hath done his part but we doe not doe ours And if any private person in the simplicity and purity of his soule desires to find out a truth of which he is in search and inquisition if he prayes for wisedome we have a promise he shall be heard and answered liberally and therefore much more when the representatives of the Catholike Church doe meet because every person there hath in individuo a title to the promise and another title as he is a governour and a guide of soules and all of them together have another title in their united capacity especially if in that union they pray and proceed with simplicity and purity so that there is no disputing against the pretence
For others I shall be incurious because the number of them that honour you is the same with them that honour Learning and Piety and they are the best Theatre and the best judges amongst which the world must needs take notice of my ambition to be ascribed by my publike pretence to be what I am in all heartinesse of Devotion and for all the reason of the world My Honour'd Lord Your Lordships most faithfull and most affectionate servant J. TAYLOR The Contents of the Sections SECTION I. OF the Nature of Faith and that its duty is compleated in believing the Articles of the Apostles Creed Pag. 5. SECT II. Of Heresy and the nature of it and that it is to be accounted according to the strict capacity of Christian Faith and not in Opinions speculative nor ever to pious persons pag. 18. SECT III. Of the difficulty and uncertainty of Arguments from Scripture in Questions not simply necessary not literally determined pag. 59. SECT IV. Of the difficulty of Expounding Scripture pag. 73. SECT V. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Tradition to expound Scripture or determine Questions pag. 83. SECT VI. Of the uncertainty and insufficiency of Councels Ecclesiasticall to the same purpose pag. 101. SECT VII Of the fallibility of the Pope and the uncertainty of his Expounding Scripture and resolving Questions pag. 125. SECT VIII Of the disability of Fathers or Writers Ecclesiasticall to determine our Questions with certainty and Truth pag. 151. SECT IX Of the incompetency of the Church in its diffusive capacity to be Iudge of Controversies and the impertinency of that pretence of the Spirit pag. 161. SECT X. Of the authority of Reason and that it proceeding upon the best grounds is the best judge pag. 165. SECT XI Of some causes of Errour in the exercise of Reason which are inculpate in themselves pag. 171. SECT XII Of the innocency of Errour in opinion in a pious person pag. 184. SECT XIII Of the deportment to be used towards persons disagreeing and the reasons why they are not to be punished with death c. pag. 189. SECT XIIII Of the practice of Christian Churches towards persons disagreeing and when Persecution first came in pag. 203. SECT XV. How farre the Church or Governours may act to the restraining false or differing opinions pag. 210. SECT XVI Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give toleration to severall Religions pag. 213. SECT XVII Of compliance with disagreeing persons or weak Consciences in generall pag. 217. SECT XVIII A particular consideration of the Opinions of the Anabaptists pag. 223 SECT XIX That there may be no Toleration of Doctrines inconsistent with piety or the publique good pag. 246. SECT XX. How farre the Religion of the Church of Rome is Tolerable pag. 249. SECT XXI Of the duty of particular Churches in allowing Communion pag. 262. SECT XXII That particular men may communicate with Churches of different perswasions and how farre they may doe it pag. 264. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 OF THE LIBERTY OF PROPHESYING THe infinite variety of Opinions in matters of Religion as they have troubled Christendome with interests factions and partialities so have they caused great divisions of the heart and variety of thoughts and designes amongst pious and prudent men For they all seeing the inconveniences which the dis-union of perswasions and Opinions have produced directly or accidentally have thought themselves obliged to stop this inundation of mischiefes and have made attempts accordingly But it hath hapned to most of them as to a mistaken Physitian who gives excellent physick but mis-applies it and so misses of his cure so have these men their attempts have therefore been ineffectuall for they put their help to a wrong part or they have endeavoured to cure the symptomes and have let the disease alone till it seem'd incurable Some have endeavoured to re-unite these fractions by propounding such a Guide which they were all bound to follow hoping that the Unity of a Guide would have perswaded unity of mindes but who this Guide should be at last became such a Question that it was made part of the fire that was to be quenched so farre was it from extinguishing any part of the flame Others thought of a Rule and this must be the meanes of Union or nothing could doe it But supposing all the World had been agreed of this Rule yet the interpretation of it was so full of variety that this also became part of the disease for which the cure was pretended All men resolv'd upon this that though they yet had not hit upon the right yet some way must be thought upon to reconcile differences in Opinion thinking so long as this variety should last Christ's Kingdome was not advanced and the work of the Gospel went on but slowly Few men in the mean time considered that so long as men had such variety of principles such severall constitutions educations tempers and distempers hopes interests and weaknesses degrees of light and degrees of understanding it was impossible all should be of one minde And what is impossible to be done is not necessary it should be done And therefore although variety of Opinions was impossible to be cured and they who attempted it did like him who claps his shoulder to the ground to stop an earth-quake yet the inconveniences arising from it might possibly be cured not by uniting their beliefes that was to be dispaird of but by curing that which caus'd these mischiefes and accidentall inconveniences of their disagreeings For although these inconveniences which every man sees and feeles were consequent to this diversity of perswasions yet it was but accidentally and by chance in as much as wee see that in many things and they of great concernment men alow to themselves and to each other a liberty of disagreeing and no hurt neither And certainely if diversity of Opinions were of it selfe the cause of mischiefes it would be so ever that is regularly and universally but that we see it is not For there are disputes in Christendome concerning matters of greater concernment then most of those Opinions that distinguish Sects and make factions and yet because men are permitted to differ in those great matters such evills are not consequent to such differences as are to the uncharitable managing of smaller and more inconsiderable Questions It is of greater consequence to believe right in the Question of the validity or invalidity of a death-bed repentance then to believe aright in the Question of Purgatory and the consequences of the Doctrine of Predetermination are of deeper and more materiall consideration then the products of the beliefe of the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of private Masses and yet these great concernments where a liberty of Prophecying in these Questions hath been permitted hath made no distinct Communion no sects of Christians and the others have and so have these too in those places where they have peremptorily been determind on either side Since then if men are
baptized in the name of Jesus because unus Deus unum baptisma and as it is still one Faith which a man confesseth severall times and one Sacrament of the Eucharist though a man often communicates so it might be one baptism though often ministred And the unity of baptism might not be deriv'd from the unity of the ministration but from the unity of the Religion into which they are baptized though baptized a thousand times yet because it was still in the name of the holy Trinity still into the death of Christ it might be unum baptisma Whether S. Cyprian Firmilian and their Collegues had this discourse or no I know not I am sure they might have had much better to have evacuated the force of that Argument although I believe they had the wrong cause in hand But this is it that I say that when a Question is so undetermin'd in Scripture that the Arguments rely only upon such mysticall places whence the best fancies can draw the greatest variety and such which perhaps were never intended by the holy Ghost it were good the rivers did not swell higher then the fountaine and the confidence higher then the Argument and evidence for in this case there could not any thing be so certainly proved as that the disagreeing party should deserve to be condemn'd by a sentence of Excommunication for disbelieving it and yet they were which I wonder at so much the more because they who as it was since judg'd had the right cause had not any sufficient Argument from Scripture not so much as such mysticall Arguments but did fly to the Tradition of the Church in which also I shall afterward shew they had nothing that was absolutely certaine 3. I consider that there are divers places of Scripture containing Numb 6. in them mysteries and Questions of great concernment and yet the fabrick and constitution is such that there is no certain mark to determine whether the sense of them should be literall or figurative I speak not here concerning extrinsecall meanes of determination as traditive Interpretation Councels Fathers Popes and the like I shall consider them afterward in their severall places but here the subject matter being concerning Scripture in its own capacity I say there is nothing in the nature of the thing to determine the sense and meaning but it must be gotten out as it can and that therefore it is unreasonable that what of it selfe is ambiguous should be understood in its own prime sense and intention under the paine of either a sinne or an Anathema I instance in that famous place from whence hath sprung that Question of Transubstantiation Hoc est corpus meum The words are plain and clear apt to be understood in the literall sense and yet this sense is so hard as it does violence to reason and therefore it is the Question whether or no it be not a figurative speech But here what shall we have to determine it What mean soever we take and to what sense soever you will expound it you shall be put to give an account why you expound other places of Scripture in the same case to quite contrary senses For if you expound it literally then besides that it seems to intrench upon the words of our blessed Saviour The words that I speak they are Spirit and they are life that is to be spiritually understood and it is a miserable thing to see what wretched shifts are used to reconcile the literall sense to these words and yet to distinguish it from the Capernaiticall fancy but besides this why are not those other sayings of Christ expounded literally I am a Vine I am the Doore I am a Rock Why doe we flie to a figure in those parallel words This is the Covenant which I make between me and you and yet that Covenant was but the sign of the Covenant and why doe we fly to a figure in a precept as well as in mystery and a proposition If thy right hand offend thee cut it off and yet we have figures enough to save a limb If it be said because reason tells us these are not to be expounded according to the letter This will be no plea for them who retaine the literall exposition of the other instance against all reason against all Philosophy against all sense and against two or three sciences But if you expound these words figuratively besides that you are to contest against a world of prejudices you give your selfe the liberty which if others will use when either they have a reason or a necessity so to doe they may perhaps turn all into Allegory and so may evacuate any precept and elude any Argument Well so it is that very wise men have expounded things * Sic S Hieron In ad â—esâ—entiâ provocatus ardore studio Scriptuarum allegoricè interpretatus sum Abdiam Prophetam cujus historiam nesciebam De sensu Allegorico S. Script dixit Basilius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Allegorically when they should have expounded them literally So did the famous Origen who as S. Hierom reports of him turned Paradise so into an Allegory that he took away quite the truth of the Story and not only Adam was turned out of the Garden but the Garden it selfe out of Paradise Others expound things literally when they should understand them in Allegory so did the Ancient Papias understand Apocal. 20. Christs Millenary raign upon earth and so depressed the hopes of Christianity and their desires to the longing and expectation of temporall pleasures and satisfactions and he was followed by Justin Martyr Irenaeus Tertullian Lactantius and indeed the whole Church generally till S. Austin and S. Hierom's time who first of any whose works are extant did reprove the errour If such great spirits be deceiv'd in finding out what kinde of senses L. 23. de Civit. Dei c 7. praefat â— 19. in Isai. in c. 36. Ezek. be to be given to Scriptures it may well be endur'd that we who sit at their feet may also tread in the steps of them whose feet could not alwayes tread aright 4. I consider that there are some places of Scripture that Numb 7. have the selfe same expressions the same preceptive words the same reason and account in all appearance and yet either must be expounded to quite different senses or else we must renounce the Communion and the charities of a great part of Christendome And yet there is absolutely nothing in the thing or in its circumstances or in its adjuncts that can determine it to different purposes I instance in those great exclusive negatives for the necessity of both Sacraments Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aquâ c. Nisi manducaveritis carnem filii hominis c. a non introibit in regnum coelorum for both these Now then the first is urg'd for the absolute indispensable necessity of baptism even in Infants insomuch that Infants goe to part of Hell if
inculpably both on their own and their Parents part they misse of baptism for that is the doctrine of the Church of Rome which they learnt from S. Austin and others also doe from hence baptize Infants though with a lesse opinion of its absolute necessity And yet the same manner of precept in the same forme of words in the same manner of threatning by an exclusive negative shall not enjoyn us to communicate Infants though damnation at least in forme of words be exactly and per omnia alike appendant to the neglect of holy Baptism and the venerable Eucharist If nisi quis renatus shall conclude against the Anabaptist for necessity of baptizing Infants as sure enough we say it does why shall not an equall nisi comederitis bring Infants to the holy Communion The Primitive Church for some two whole Ages did follow their own principles where ever they lead them and seeing that upon the same ground equall results must follow they did Communicate Infants as soon as they had baptized them And why the Church of Rome should not doe so too being she expounds nisi comederitis of orall manducation I cannot yet learn a reason And for others that expound it of a spirituall manducation why they shall not allow the disagreeing part the same liberty of expounding nisi quis renatus too I by no meanes can understand And in these cases no externall determiner can bee pretended in answer For whatsoever is extrinsecall to the words as Councels Tradition Church Authority and Fathers either have said nothing at all or have concluded by their practise contrary to the present opinion as is plaine in their communicating Infants by vertue of nisi comederitis 5. I shall not need to urge the mysteriousnesse of some points in Scripture which ex natura rei are hard to be understood Numb 8. though very plainly represented For there are some secreta Theologiae which are only to be understood by persons very holy and spirituall which are rather to be felt then discoursed of and therefore if peradventure they be offered to publike consideration they will therefore be opposed because they runne the same fortune with many other Questions that is not to be understood and so much the rather because their understanding that is the feeling such secrets of the Kingdome are not the results of Logick and Philosophy nor yet of publike revelation but of the publike spirit privately working and in no man is a duty but in all that have it is a reward and is not necessary for all but given to some producing its operations not regularly but upon occasions personall necessities and new emergencies Of this nature are the spirit of obsignation beliefe of particular salvation speciall influences and comforts comming from a sense of the spirit of adoption actuall fervours and great complacencies in devotion spirituall joyes which are little drawings aside of the curtaines of peace and eternity and antepasts of immortality But the not understanding the perfect constitution and temper of these mysteries and it is hard for any man so to understand as to make others doe so too that feele them not is cause that in many Questions of secret Theology by being very apt and easy to be mistaken there is a necessity in forbearing one another and this consideration would have been of good use in the Question between Soto and Catharinus both for the preservation of their charity and explication of the mystery 6. But here it will not be unseasonable to consider that Numb 9. all systems and principles of science are expressed so that either by reason of the Universality of the termes and subject matter or the infinite variety of humane understandings and these peradventure swayed by interest or determin'd by things accidentall and extrinsecall they seem to divers men nay to the same men upon divers occasions to speak things extremly disparate and sometimes contrary but very often of great variety And this very thing happens also in Scripture that if it were not in re sacrâ seria it were excellent sport to observe how the same place of Scripture serves severall turns upon occasion and they at that time believe the words sound nothing else whereas in the liberty of their judgement and abstracting from that occasion their Commentaries understand them wholy to a differing sense It is a wonder of what excellent use to the Church of Rome is tibi dabo claves It was spoken to Peter and none else sometimes and therefore it concerns him and his Successors only the rest are to derive from him And yet if you Question them for their Sacrament of Penance and Priestly Absolution then tibi dabo claves comes in and that was spoken to S. Peter and in him to the whole Colledge of the Apostles and in them to the whole Hierarchy If you question why the Pope pretends to free soules from Purgatory tibi dabo claves is his warrant but if you tell him the Keyes are only for binding and loosing on Earth directly and in Heaven consequently and that Purgatory is a part of Hell or rather neither Earth nor Heaven nor Hell and so the Keyes seem to have nothing to doe with it then his Commission is to be enlarged by a suppletory of reason and consequences and his Keyes shall unlock this difficulty for it is clavis scientiae as well as authoritatis And these Keyes shall enable him to expound Scriptures infallibly to determine Questions to preside in Councels to dictate to all the World Magisterially to rule the Church to dispence with Oaths to abrogate Lawes And if his Key of knowledge will not the Key of Authority shall and tibi dabo claves shall answer for all We have an instance in the single fancy of one man what rare variety of matter is afforded from those plain words of Oravi pro te Petre Luk. 22. for that place sayes Bellarmine is otherwise to be understood of Peter otherwise of the Popes and otherwise of the Church of Rome And pro te Bellar. lib. 1. de Pontif. c. 3. § respondeo primò signifies that Christ prayed that Peter might neither erre personally nor judicially and that Peters Successors if they did erre personally might not erre judicially and that the Roman Church might not erre personally All this variety of sense is pretended by the fancy of one man to be in a few words which are as plain and simple as are any words in Scripture And what then in those thousands that are intricate So is done with pasce oves which a man would think were a commission as innocent and guiltlesse of designs as the sheep in the folds are But if it be asked why the Bishop of Rome calls himselfe Universall Bishop pasce oves is his warrant Why he pretends to a power of deposing Princes Pasce oves said Christ to Peter the second time If it be demanded why also he pretends to a power of authorizing his
to speak better Latine then his Translatour had done And if it be thus in Translations it is farre worse in Expositions Quia scil Scripturam sacram pro ipsa sui altitudine non uno eodemque sensu omnes accipiunt ut penè quot homines tot illic sententiae erui posse videantur said Vincent Lirinensis in which every man knows In Commonit what innumerable wayes there are of being mistaken God having in things not simply necessary left such a difficulty upon those parts of Scripture which are the subject matters of controversy ad edomandam labore superbiam intellectum à fastidio revocandum as S. Austin gives a reason that all that erre honestly are therefore to be pityed and tolerated because Lib. 2. de doctr Christian. c. 6. it is or may be the condition of every man at one time or other The summe is this Since holy Scripture is the repository Numb 8. of divine truths and the great rule of Faith to which all Sects of Christians doe appeale for probation of their severall opinions and since all agree in the Articles of the Creed as things clearly and plainly set down and as containing all that which is of simple and prime necessity and since on the other side there are in Scripture many other mysteries and matters of Question upon which there is a vaile since there are so many Copies with infinite varieties of reading since a various Interpunction a parenthesis a letter an accent may much alter the sense since some places have divers literall senses many have spirituall mysticall and Allegoricall meanings since there are so many tropes metonymies ironies hyperboles proprieties and improprieties of language whose understanding depends upon such circumstances that it is almost impossible to know its proper Interpretation now that the knowledge of such circumstances and particular stories is irrevocably lost since there are some mysteries which at the best advantage of expression are not easy to be apprehended and whose explication by reason of our imperfections must needs be dark sometimes weak sometimes unintelligle and lastly since those ordinary meanes of expounding Scripture as searching the Originalls conference of places parity of reason and analogy of Faith are all dubious uncertain and very fallible he that is the wisest and by consequence the likelyest to expound truest in all probability of reason will be very farre from confidence because every one of these and many more are like so many degrees of improbability and incertainty all depressing our certainty of finding out truth in such mysteries and amidst so many difficulties And therefore a wise man that considers this would not willingly be prescrib'd to by others and therefore if he also be a just man he will not impose upon others for it is best every man should be left in that liberty from which no man can justly take him unlesse he could secure him from errour So that here also there is a necessity to conserve the liberty of Prophesying and Interpreting Scripture a necessity deriv'd from the consideration of the difficulty of Scripture in Questions controverted and the uncertainty of any internall medium of Interpretation SECT V. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Tradition to Expound Scripture or determine Questions IN the next place we must consider those extrinsecall meanes Numb 1. of Interpreting Scripture and determining Questions which they most of all confide in that restraine Prophesying with the greatest Tyranny The first and principall is Tradition which is pretended not only to expound Scripture Necesse enim est Vincent Lirinens in Commonitor propter tantos tam varii erroris anfractus ut Propheticae Apostolicae interpretationis linea secundum Ecclesiastici Catholici sensus normam dirigatur but also to propound Articles upon a distinct stock such Articles whereof there is no mention and proposition in Scripture And in this topick not only the distinct Articles are clear and plain like as the fundamentals of Faith expressed in Scripture but also it pretends to expound Scripture and to determine Questions with so much clarity and certainty as there shall neither be errour nor doubt remaining and therefore no disagreeing is here to be endured And indeed it is most true if Tradition can performe these pretensions and teach us plainly and assure us infallibly of all truths which they require us to believe we can in this case have no reason to disbelieve them and therefore are certainly Hereticks if we doe because without a crime without some humane interest or collaterall design we cannot disbelieve traditive Doctrine or traditive Interpretation if it be infallibly prov'd to us that tradition is an infallible guide But here I first consider that tradition is no repository of Numb 2. Articles of Faith and therefore the not following it is no Argument of heresy for besides that I have shewed Scripture in its plain expresses to be an abundant rule of Faith and manners Tradition is a topick as fallible as any other so fallible that it cannot be sufficient evidence to any man in a matter of Faith or Question of heresy For 1. I find that the Fathers were infinitely deceived in Numb 3. their account and enumeration of Traditions sometimes they did call some Traditions such not which they knew to be so but by Arguments and presumptions they concluded them so Such as was that of S. Austin ca quae universalis tenet Ecclesia nec à Conciliis Epist. 118. ad Ianuar. De bapt contr Donat. lib. 4. c. 24. instituta reperiuntur credibile est ab Apostolorum traditione descendisse Now suppose this rule probable that 's the most yet it is not certaine It might come by custome whose Originall was not knowne but yet could not derive from an Apostolicall principle Now when they conclude of particular Traditions by a generall rule and that generall rule not certain but at the most probable in any thing and certainly false in some things it is wonder if the productions that is their judgements and pretence faile so often And if I should but instance in all the particulars in which Tradition was pretended falsly or uncertainly in the first Ages I should multiply them to a troublesome variety for it was then accounted so glorious a thing to have spoken with the persons of the Apostles that if any man could with any colour pretend to it he might abuse the whole Church and obtrude what he listed under the specious title of Apostolicall Tradition and it is very notorious to every man that will but read and observe the Recognitions or stromata of Clemens Alexandrinus where there is enough of such false wares shewed in every book and pretended to be no lesse then from the Apostles In the first Age after the Apostles Papias pretended he received a Tradition from the Apostles that Christ before the day of Judgement should reign a thousand yeares upon Earth and his Saints with him in
knew not now quite contrary we cannot safely believe them to be Apostolicall unlesse we doe know their beginning to have been from the Apostles For this consisting of probabilities and particulars which put together make up a morall demonstration the Argument which I now urge hath been growing these fifteen hundred years and if anciently there was so much as to evacuate the Authority of Tradition much more is there now absolutely to destroy it when all the particulars which time and infinite variety of humane accidents have been amassing together are now concentred and are united by way of constipation Because every Age and every great change and every heresy and every interest hath increased the difficulty of finding out true Traditions 3. There are very many Traditions which are lost and yet they are concerning matters of as great consequence as most of Numb 5. those Questions for the determination whereof Traditions are pretended It is more then probable that as in Baptism and the Eucharist the very formes of ministration are transmitted to us so also in confirmation and ordination and that there were speciall directions for visitation of the sick and explicite interpretations of those difficult places of S. Paul which S. Peter affirmed to be so difficult that the ignorant doe wrest them to their own damnation and yet no Church hath conserved these or those many more which S. Basil affirms to be so many that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the day would faile him in the very simple enumeration of all Cap. 29. despir Sancto Traditions Ecclesiasticall And if the Church hath fail'd in keeping the great variety of Traditions it will hardly be thought a fault in a private person to neglect Tradition which either the whole Church hath very much neglected inculpably or else the whose Church is very much too blame And who can ascertain us that she hath not entertained some which are no Traditions as well as lost thousands that are That she did entertain some false Traditions I have already prov'd but it is also as probable that some of those which these Ages did propound for Traditions are not so as it is certain that some which the first Ages cald Traditions were nothing lesse 4. There are some opinions which when they began to be publikely received began to be accounted prime Traditions Numb 6. and so became such not by a native title but by adoption and nothing is more usuall then for the Fathers to colour their popular opinion with so great an appellative S. Austin cald the communicating of Infants an Apostolicall Tradition and yet we doe not practise it because we disbelieve the Allegation And that every custome which at first introduction was but a private fancy or singular practise grew afterwards into a publike rite and went for a Tradition after a while continuance appears by Tertullian who seems to justifie it Non enim existimas tu Contra Marcon licitum esse cuicunque fideli constituere quod Deo placere illi visum De coron milit c. 3. 4. fuerit ad disciplinam salutem And againe A quocunque traditore censetur nec authorem respicias sed authoritatem And S. Hierome most plainly Praecepra majorum Apostolicas Tradiones Apud Euseb. l. 5. c. 20. quisque existimat And when Irenaeus had observed that great variety in the keeping of Lent which yet to be a fourty dayes Fast is pretended to descend from Tradition Apostolicall some fasting but one day before Easter some two some fourty and this even long before Irenaeus time he gives this reason Varietas illa jejunii coepit apud Majores nostros qui non accuratè consuetudinem eorum qui vel simplicitate quâdam vel privatâ authoritate in posterum aliquid statuissent observarant ex translatione Christophorsoni And there are yet some points of good concernment which if any man should Question in a high manner they would prove indeterminable by Scripture or sufficient reason and yet I doubt not their confident Defenders would say they are opinions of the Church and quickly pretend a Tradition from the very Apostles and believe themselves so secure that they could not be discovered because the Question never having been disputed gives them occasion to say that which had no beginning known was certainly from the Apostles For why should not Divines doe in the Question of reconfirmation as in that of rebaptization Are not the grounds equall from an indelible character in one as in the other and if it happen such a Question as this after contestation should be determin'd not by any positive decree but by the cession of one part and the authority and reputation of the other does not the next Age stand faire to be abused with a pretence of Tradition in the matter of reconfirmation which never yet came to a serious Question For so it was in the Question of rebaptization for which there was then no more evident Tradition then there is now in the Question of reconfirmation as I proved formerly but yet it was carried upon that Title 5. There is great variety in the probation of Tradition so that whatever is proved to be Tradition is not equally and Numb 7. alike credible for nothing but universall Tradition is of it selfe credible other Traditions in their just proportion as they partake of the degrees of universality Now that a Tradition be universall or which is all one that it be a credible Testimony S. Irenaeus requires that Tradition should derive from all the Lib. 3. c. 4. Churches Apostolicall And therefore according to this rule there was no sufficient medium to determine the Question about Easter because the Eastern and Western Churches had severall Traditions respectively and both pretended from the Apostles Clemens Alexandrinus sayes it was a secret Tradition Li. 1. Stromat from the Apostles that Christ preached but one year But L. 2. c. 39. Irenaeus sayes it did derive from Hereticks and sayes that he Omnes Seniores testantur qui in Asiâ apud Iohannem Discipulum Domini convenerunt id ipsum tradidisse eis Iohannem c. qui alios Apostolos viderunt haec eadem ab ipsis audierunt testantur de ejusmodi relatione by Tradition first from S. John and then from his Disciples received another Tradition that Christ was almost fifty years old when he dyed and so by consequence preached almost twenty years both of them were deceived and so had all that had believed the report of either pretending Tradition Apostolicall Thus the custome in the Latine Church of fasting on Saturday was against that Tradition which the Greeks had from the Apostles and therefore by this division and want of consent which was the true Tradition was so absolutely indeterminable that both must needs lose much of their reputation But how then when not only particular Churches but single persons are all the proofe we have for a Tradition And
it upon others And upon this ground how easy it is to elude the pressure of an Argument drawn from the Authority of a Generall Councell is very remarkable in the Question about the Popes or the Councels Superiority which Question although it be defin'd for the Councell against the Pope by five Generall Councels the Councell of Florence of Constance of Basil of Pisa and one of the Lateran's yet the Jesuites to this day account this Question pro non definitâ and have rare pretences for their escape as first It is true a Councell is above a Pope in case there be no Pope or he uncertain which is Bellarmine's answer never considering whether he spake sense or no nor yet remembring that the Councell of Basil deposed Eugenius who was a true Pope and so acknowledg'd Secondly sometimes the Pope did not confirm these Councels that 's their Answer And although it was an exception that the Fathers never thought of when they were pressed with the Authority of the Councell of Ariminum or Syrmium or any other Arrian Convention yet the Councell of Basil was conven'd by Pope Martin V. then in its sixteenth Session declar'd by Eugenius the IV. to be lawfully continued and confirmed expresly in some of its Decrees by Pope Nicholas and so stood till it was at last rejected by Leo X. very many years after but that came too late and with too visible an interest and this Councell did decree fide Catholicâ tenendum Concilium esse supra Papam But if one Pope confirms it and another rejects it as it happened in this case and in many more does it not destroy the competency of the Authority and we see it by this instance that it so serves the turns of men that it is good in some cases that is when it makes for them and invalid when it makes against them Thirdly but it is a little more ridiculous in the case of the Councell of Constance whose Decrees were confirm'd by Martin V. But that this may be no Argument against them Bellarmine tells you he only confirm'd those things quae facta fuerant Conciliaritèr re diligenter examinatâ of which there being no mark nor any certain Rule to judge it it is a device that may evacuate any thing we have a mind to it was not done Conciliaritèr that is not according to our mind for Conciliaritèr is a fine new nothing that may signifie what you please Fourthly but other devices yet more pretty they have As Whether the Councell of Lateran was a Generall Councell or no they know not no nor will not know which is a wise and plaine reservation of their own advantages to make it Generall or not Generall as shall serve their turns Fifthly as for the Councell of Florence they are not sure whether it hath defin'd the Question satis apertè apertè they will grant if you will allow them not satis apertè Sixthly and lastly the Councell of Pisa is neque approbatum neque reprobatum which is the greatest folly of all and most prodigious vanity so that by Bellar. de conc l. 1. c. 8. something or other either they were not conven'd lawfully or they did not proceed Conciliariter or 't is not certain that the Councell was Generall or no or whether the Councell were approbatum or reprobatum or else it is partim confirmatum partim reprobatum or else it is neque approbatum neque reprobatum By one of these wayes or a device like to these all Councels and all Decrees shall be made to signifie nothing and to have no Authority 3. There is no Generall Councell that hath determined Numb 7. that a Generall Councell is infallible No Scripture hath recorded it no Tradition universall hath transmitted to us any such proposition So that we must receive the Authority at a lower rate and upon a lesse probability then the things consigned by that Authority And it is strange that the Decrees of Councels should be esteem'd authentick and infallible and yet it is not infallibly certain that the Councels themselves are infallible because the beliefe of the Councels infallibility is not prov'd to us by any medium but such as may deceive us 4. But the best instance that Councels are some and may all be deceived is the contradiction of one Councell to another Numb 8. for in that case both cannot be true and which of them is true must belong to another judgement which is lesse then the solennity of a Generall Councell and the determination of this matter can be of no greater certainty after it is concluded then when it was propounded as a Question being it is to be determin'd by the same Authority or by a lesse then it selfe But for this allegation we cannot want instances The Councell of Trent allowes picturing of God the Father The Councell of Nice altogether disallowes it The same Nicene Sess. 25. Councell which was the seventh Generall allows of picturing Christ in the form of a Lamb But the sixth Synod by no Act. 2. meanes will endure it as Caranza affirms The Councell of Neocaesarea confirm'd by Leo IV dist 20. de libellis and approv'd Can. 82. by the first Nicene Councell as it is said in the seventh Session of the Councell of Florence forbids second Marriages and imposes Penances on them that are married the second time forbidding Priests to be present at such Marriage Feasts Besides that this is expresly against the Doctrine of S. Paul it is also against the Doctine of the Councell of Laodicea which took off such Cap. 1. Penances and pronounced second Marriages to be free and lawfull Nothing is more discrepant then the third Councell of Carthage and the Councell of Laodicea about assignation of the Canon of Scripture and yet the sixth Generall Synod approves both And I would faine know if all Generall Councels are of the same mind with the Fathers of the Councell of Carthage who reckon into the Canon five Books of Solomon I am sure S. Austin reckoned but three and I think all Christendome L. 17. de cul Dei c. 20. beside are of the same opinion And if we look into the title of the Law de Conciliis called Concordantia discordantiarum we shall find instances enough to confirm that the Decrees of some Councels are contradictory to others and that no wit can reconcile them And whether they did or no that they might disagree and former Councels be corrected by later was the beliefe of the Doctors in those Ages in which the best and most famous Councels were conven'd as appears in that famous saying of S. Austin speaking concerning the rebaptizing of Hereticks and how much the Africans were deceived in that Question he answers the Allegation of the Bishops Letters and those Nationall Councels which confirmed S. Cyprians opinion by saying that they were no finall determination For Episcoporum literae emendari possunt à Conciliis nationalibus L. 2.
having had most of the Copies in their own hands together with an unsatisfiable desire of prevailing in their right or in their wrong they have made an absolute destruction of this Topick and when the Fathers speak * Videat Lector Andream Cristovium in Bello Iesuitico Ioh. Reinolds in hbr. de idol Rom. Latine or breathe in a Roman Diocese although the providence of God does infinitely over-rule them and that it is next to a miracle that in the Monuments of Antiquity there is no more found that can pretend for their advantage then there is which indeed is infinitely inconsiderable Yet our Questions and uncertainties are infinitely multiplȳed in stead of a probable and reasonable determination For since the Latines alwayes complain'd of the Greeks for privately corrupting the Ancient Records both of Councels and †Vid. Ep. Nicolai ad Michael Imperat. Fathers and now the Latines make open profession not of corrupting but of correcting their writings that 's the word and at the most it was but a humane authority and that of persons not alwayes learned and very often deceiv'd the whole matter is so unreasonable that it is not worth a further disquisition But if any one desires to enquire further he may be satisfied in Erasmus in Henry and Robert Stephens in their Prefaces before the Editions of Fathers and their Observations upon them in Bellarmine de script Eccles. in Dr. Reynolds de libris Apocryphis in Scaliger and Robert Coke of Leedes in Yorkeshire in his Book De censura Patrum SECT IX Of the incompetency of the Church in its diffusive capacity to be judge of Controversies and the impertinency of that pretence of the Spirit ANd now after all these considerations of the severall Topicks Numb 1. Tradition Councels Popes and ancient Doctors of the Church I suppose it will not be necessary to consider the authority of the Church apart For the Church either speaks by Tradition or by a representative body in a Councel by Popes or by the Fathers for the Church is not a Chimaera not a shadow but a company of men beleeving in Jesus Christ which men either speak by themselves immediately or by their Rulers or by their proxies and representatives now I have considered it in all senses but in its diffusive capacity in which capacity she cannot be supposed to be a Judge of Controversies both because in that capacity she cannot teach us as also because if by a Judge we mean all the Church diffused in all its parts and members so there can be no controversie for if all men be of that opinion then there is no question contested if they be not all of a mind how can the whole diffusive Catholike Church be pretended in defiance of any one article where the diffusive Church being divided part goes this way and part another But if it be said the greatest part must carry it Besides that it is impossible for us to know which way the greatest part goes in many questions it is not alwaies true that the greater part is the best sometimes the contrary is most certain and it is often very probable but it is alwayes possible And when paucity of followers was objected to Liberius he gave this in answer There was a time when but three Children of the Captivity Theod. l. 2. c. 16. hist. resisted the Kings Decree And Athanasius wrote on purpose against those that did judge of truth by multitudes and indeed Tom. 2. it concerned him so to doe when he alone stood in the gap against the numerous armies of the Arrians But if there could in this case be any distinct consideration of Numb 2. the Church yet to know which is the true Church is so hard to be found out that the greatest questions of Christendome are judged before you can get to your Judge and then there is no need of him For those questions which are concerning the Judge of questions must be determined before you can submit to his judgement and if you can your selves determine those great questions which consist much in universalities then also you may determine the particulars as being of less difficulty And he that considers how many notes there are given to know the true Church no less then 15. by Bellarmine and concerning every one of them almost whether it be a certaine note or no there are very many questions and uncertainties and when it is resolved which are the notes there is more dispute about the application of these notes then of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will quickly be satisfied that he had better sit still then to goe round about a difficult and troublesome passage and at last get no further but returne to the place from whence he first set out And there is one note amongst the rest Holiness of Doctrine that is so as to have nothing false either in Doctrina fidei or morum for so Bellarmine explicates it which supposes all your Controversies judged before they can be tryed by the authority of the Church and when we have found out all true Doctrine for that is necessary to judge of the Church by that as Saint Austin's councell is Ecclesiam in verbis Christi investigemus then we are bound to follow because we judge it true not because the Church hath said it and this is to judge of the Church by her Doctrine not of the Doctrine by the Church And indeed it is the best and only way But then how to judge of that Doctrine will be afterwards inquired into In the meane time the Church that is the Governours of the Churches are to judge for themselves for all those who cannot judge for themselves For others they must know that their Governours judge for them too so as to keepe them in peace and obedience though not for the determination of their private perswasions For the Oeconomy of the Church requires that her authority be received by all her children Now this authority is divine in its originall for it derives immediately from Christ but it is humane in its ministration We are to be lead like men not like beasts A rule is prescribed for the guides themselves to follow as we are to follow the guides and although in matters indeterminable or ambiguous the presumption lyes on behalfe of the Governours for we do nothing for authority if we suffer it not to weigh that part down of an indifferency and a question which she chooses yet if there be error manifestus as it often happens or if the Church-Governours themselves be rent into innumerable sects as it is this day in Christendome then we are to be as wise as we can in choosing our guides and then to follow so long as that reason remains for which we first chose them And even in that Government which was an immediate sanction of God I mean the Ecclesiasticall government of the Synagogue where God had consign'd the High-Priests authority
with a menace of death to them that should disobey that all the world might know the meaning and extent of such precepts and that there is a limit beyond which they cannot command and we ought not to obey it came once to that pass that if the Priest had been obeyed in his Conciliary decrees the whole Nation had been bound to beleeve the condemnation of our blessed Saviour to have been just and at another time the Apostles must no more have preached in the name of JEsus But here was manifest error And the case is the same to every man that invincibly and therefore innocently beleeves it so Deo potius quà m hominibus is our rule in such cases For although every man is bound to follow his guide unless he beleeves his guide to mislead him yet when he sees reason against his guide it is best to follow his reason for though in this he may fall into error yet he will escape the sin he may doe violence to truth but never to his own conscience and an honest error is better then an hypocriticall profession of truth or a violent luxation of the understanding since if he retains his honesty and simplicity he cannot erre in a matter of faith or absolute necessity Gods goodness hath secur'd all honest and carefull persons from that for other things he must follow the best guides he can and he cannot be obliged to follow better then God hath given him And there is yet another way pretended of infallible Numb 3. Expositions of Scripture and that is by the Spirit But of this I shall say no more but that it is impertinent as to this question For put case the Spirit is given to some men enabling them to expound infallibly yet because this is but a private assistance and cannot be proved to others this infallible assistance may determine my own assent but shall not inable me to prescribe to others because it were unreasonable I should unless I could prove to him that I have the Spirit and so can secure him from being deceived if he relyes upon me In this case I may say as S. Paul in the case of praying with the Spirit He verily giveth thanks well but the other is not edified So that let this pretence be as true as it will it is sufficient that it cannot be of consideration in this question The result of all is this Since it is not reasonable to limit and prescribe to all mens understandings by any externall rule in the Numb 4. interpretation of difficult places of Scripture which is our rule Since no man nor company of men is secure from error or can secure us that they are free from malice interest and design and since all the wayes by which we usually are taught as Tradition Councels Decretals c. are very uncertain in the matter in their authority in their being legitimate and naturall and many of them certainly false and nothing certain but the divine authority of Scripture in which all that is necessary is plain and much of that that is not necessary is very obscure intricate and involv'd either we must set up our rest onely upon articles of faith and plain places and be incurious of other obscurer revelations which is a duty for persons of private understandings and of no publike function or if we will search further to which in some measure the guides of others are obliged it remains we inquire how men may determine themselves so as to doe their duty to God and not to diserve the Church that every such man may doe what he is bound to in his personall capacity and as he relates to the publike as a publike minister SECT X. Of the authority of Reason and that it proceeding upon best grounds is the best judge HEre then I consider that although no man may be trusted to judge for all others unless this person were infallible and Numb 1. authorized so to doe which no man nor no company of men is yet every man may be trusted to judge for himself I say every man that can judge at all as for others they are to be saved as it pleaseth God but others that can judge at all must either choose their guides who shall judge for them and then they oftentimes doe the wisest and alwayes save themselves a labour but then they choose too or if they be persons of greater understanding then they are to choose for themselves in particular what the others doe in generall and by choosing their guide and for this any man may be better trusted for himselfe then any man can be for another For in this case his own interest is most concerned and ability is not so necessary as honesty which certainly every man will best preserve in his owne case and to himselfe and if he does not it is he that must smart for 't and it is not required of us not to be in errour but that we endeavour to avoid it 2. He that followes his guide so far as his reason goes along with him or which is all one he that followes his owne reason Numb 2. not guided onely by naturall arguments but by divine revelation and all other good meanes hath great advantages over him that gives himselfe wholly to follow any humane guide whatsoever because he followes all their reasons and his own too he follows them till reason leaves them or till it seemes so to him which is all one to his particular for by the confession of all sides an erroneous Conscience binds him when a right guide does not bind him But he that gives himselfe up wholly to a guide is oftentimes I meane if he be a discerning person forc'd to doe violence to his own understanding and to lose all the benefit of his owne discretion that he may reconcile his reason to his guide And of this we see infinite inconveniences in the Church of Rome for we finde persons of great understanding oftentimes so amused with the authority of their Church that it is pity to see them sweat in answering some objections which they know not how to doe but yet beleeve they must because the Church hath said it So that if they reade study pray search records and use all the means of art and industry in the pursuite of truth it is not with a resolution to follow that which shall seem truth to them but to confirm what before they did beleeve and if any argument shall seeme unanswerable against any Article of their Church they are to take it for a temptation not for an illumination and they are to use it accordingly which makes them make the Devill to be the Author of that which Gods Spirit hath assisted them to find in the use of lawfull means and the search of truth And when the Devill of falshood is like to be cast out by Gods Spirit they say that it is through Beelzebub which was one of the worst things
no ends upon them or something that is of an equall height to fit their understandings If you tell them they must beleeve the Church you must tell them why they are bound to it and if you quote Scripture to prove it you must give them leave to judge whether the words alledged speak your sense or no and therefore to dissent if they say no such thing And although all men are not wise and proceed discreetly yet all make their choice some way or other He that chooses to please his fancie takes his choice as much as he that chooses prudently And no man speaks more unreasonably then he that denyes to men the use of their Reason in choice of their Religion For that I may by the way remove the common prejudice Reason and Authority are not things incompetent or repugnant especially when the Authority is infallible and supreme for there is no greater reason in the world then to beleeve such an authority But then we must consider whether every authority that pretends to be such is so indeed And therefore Deus dixit ergo hoc verum est is the greatest demonstration in the world for things of this nature But it is not so in humane dictates and yet reason and humane authority are not enemies For it is a good argument for us to follow such an opinion because it is made sacred by the authority of Councells and Ecclesiasticall Tradition and sometimes it is the best reason we have in a question and then it is to be strictly followed but there may also be at other times a reason greater than it that speaks against it and then the authority must not carry it But then the difference is not between reason and authority but between this reason and that which is greater for authority is a very good reason and is to prevaile unless a stronger comes and disarms it but then it must give place So that in this question by Reason I doe not meane a distinct Topick but a transcendent that runs through all Topicks for Reason like Logick is instrument of all things else and when Revelation and Philosophie and publick Experience and all other grounds of probability or demonstration have supplyed us with matter then Reason does but make use of them that is in plain terms there being so many wayes of arguing so many sects such differing interests such variety of authority so many pretences and so many false beliefes it concernes every wise man to consider which is the best argument which proposition relies upon the truest grounds if this were not his only way why doe men dispute and urge arguments why do they cite Councels Fathers why do they alledge Scripture and Tradition and all this on all sides and to contrary purposes If we must judge then we must use our reason if we must not judge why doe they produce evidence Let them leave disputing and decree propositions magisterially but then we may choose whether we will believe them or no or if they say we must believe them they must prove it and tell us why And all these disputes concerning Tradition Councells Fathers c. are not arguments against or besides reason but contestations and pretences to the best arguments and the most certain satisfaction of our reason But then all these comming into question submit themselves to reason that is to be judged by humane understanding upon the best grounds and information it can receive So that Scripture Tradition Councells and Fathers are the evidence in a question but Reason is the Judge That is we being the persons that are to be perswaded we must see that we be perswaded reasonably and it is unreasonable to assent to a lesser evidence when a greater and cleerer is propounded but of that every man for himselfe is to take cognisance if he be able to judge if he be not he is not bound under the tye of necessity to know any thing of it that that is necessary shall be certainly conveyed to him God that best can will certainly take care for that for if he does not it becomes to be not necessary or if it should still remain necessary and he damned for not knowing it and yet to know it be not in his power then who can help it there can be no further care in this business In other things there being no absolute and prime necessity we are left to our liberty to judge that way that makes best demonstration of our piety and of our love to God and truth not that way that is alwayes the best argument of an excellent understanding for this may be a blessing but the other onely is a duty And now that we are pitch'd upon that way which is most naturall Numb 6. and reasonable in determination of our selves rather then of questions which are often indeterminable since right reason proceeding upon the best grounds it can viz. of divine revelation and humane authority and probability is our guide Stando in humanis and supposing the assistance of Gods Spirit which he never denies them that faile not of their duty in all such things in which he requires truth and certainty it remaines that we consider how it comes to pass that men are so much deceived in the use of their reason and choice of their Religion and that in this account we distinguish those accidents which make error innocent from those which make it become a heresie SECT XI Of some causes of Errour in the exercise of Reason which are inculpate in themselves 1. THen I consider that there are a great many inculpable causes of Errour which are arguments of humane imperfections Numb 1. not convictions of a sinne And 1. the variety of humane understandings is so great that what is plaine and apparent to one is difficult and obscure to another one will observe a consequent from a common principle and another from thence will conclude the quite contrary When S. Peter saw the vision of the sheet let downe with all sorts of beasts in it and a voice saying Surge Petre macta manduca if he had not by a particular assistance beene directed to the meaning of the holy Ghost possibly he might have had other apprehensions of the meaning of that vision for to my selfe it seemes naturally to speake nothing but the abolition of the Mosaicall rites and the restitution of us to that part of Christian liberty which consists in the promiscuous eating of meates and yet besides this there want not some understandings in the world to whom these words seeme to give Saint Peter a power to kill hereticall Princes Me thinkes it is a strange understanding that makes such extractions but Bozius and Baronius did so But men may understand what they please especially when they are to expound Oracles It was an argument of some wit but of singularity of understanding that hapned in the great contestation betweene the Missalls of Saint Ambrose and
bibliotheca capit It is impossible for any industry to consider so many particulars in the infinite numbers of questions as are necessary to be consider'd before we can with certainty determine any And after all the considerations which we can have in a whole age we are not sure not to be deceived The obscurity of some questions the nicety of some articles the intricacy of some revelations the variety of humane understandings the windings of Logicke the tricks of adversaries the subtilty of Sophisters the ingagement of educations personall affections the portentous number of writers the infinity of authorities the vastnesse of some arguments as consisting in enumeration of many particulars the uncertainty of others the severall degrees of probability the difficulties of Scripture the invalidity of probation of tradition the opposition of all exteriour arguments to each other and their open contestation the publicke violence done to authors and records the private arts and supplantings the falsifyings the indefatigable industry of some men to abuse all understandings and all perswasions into their owne opinions these and thousands more even all the difficulty of things and all the weaknesses of man all the arts of the Devill have made it impossible for any man in so great variety of matter not to be deceived No man pretends to it but the Pope and no man is more deceived then he is in that very particular 3. From hence proceeds a danger which is consequent to this proceeding for if we who are so apt to be deceived so insecure Numb 4. in our resolution of questions disputable should persecute a dis-agreeing person we are not sure we doe not fight against God for if his proposition be true and persecuted then because all truth derives from God this proceeding is against God and therefore this is not to be done upon Gamaliel's ground lest peradventure we be found to fight against God of which because we can have no security at least in this case we have all the guilt of a doubtfull or an uncertaine Conscience For if there be no security in the thing as I have largely proved the Conscience in such cases is as uncertaine as the question is and if it be not doubtfull where it is uncertaine it is because the man is not wise but as confident as ignorant the first without reason and the second without excuse And it is very disproportionable for a man to persecute another certainly for a proposition that if he were wise he would know is not certaine at least the other person may innocently be uncertaine of it If he be kill'd he is certainly kill'd but if he be call'd hereticke it is not so certaine that he is an hereticke It were good therefore that proceedings were according to evidence and the rivers not swell over the banks nor a certaine definitive sentence of death pass'd upon such perswasions which cannot certainly be defin'd And this argument is of so much the more force because we see that the greatest persecutions that ever have been were against truth even against Christianity it selfe and it was a prediction of our blessed Saviour that persecution should be the lot of true beleevers and if we compute the experience of suffering Christendome and the prediction that truth should suffer with those few instances of suffering hereticks it is odds but persecution is on the wrong side and that it is errour and heresie that is cruell and tyrannicall especially since the truth of Jesus Christ and of his Religion are so meeke so charitable and so mercifull and we may in this case exactly use the words of S. Paul But as then he that was borne after the flesh persecuted him that was borne after the spirit even so it is now and so it ever will be till Christs second coming Numb 5. 4. Whoever persecutes a disagreeing person armes all the Quo comperto illi in nostram pemiciem licentiore audacia grassabuntur S Aug. epist. ad Dona. Procons Contr. ep Fund ita nunc debeo sustinére tantâ patientiâ vobiscum agere quantâ mecum egerunt proximi mei cum in vestro dogmate rabiosus ac cacus errâ—rem world against himselfe and all pious people of his owne perswasion when the scales of authority return to his adversary and attest his contradictory and then what can he urge for mercy for himselfe or his party that sheweth none to others If he sayes that he is to be spared because he beleeves true but the other was justly persecuted because he was in errour he is ridiculous For he is as confidently beleeved to be a heretick as he beleeves his adversary such and whether he be or no being the thing in question of this he is not to be his owne judge but he that hath authority on his side will be sure to judge against him So that what either side can indifferently make use of it is good that neither would because neither side can with reason sufficient doe it in prejudice of the other If a man will say that every man must take his adventure and if it happens authority to be with him he will persecute his adversaries and if it turnes against him he will bear it as well as he can and hope for a reward of Martyrdome and innocent suffering besides that this is so equall to be said of all sides and besides that this is a way to make an eternall disunion of hearts and charities and that it will make Christendome nothing but a shambles and a perpetuall butchery and as fast as mens wits grow wanton or confident or proud or abused so often there will be new executions and massacres Besides all this it is most unreasonable and unjust as being contrariant to those Lawes of Justice and Charity whereby we are bound with greater zeale to spare and preserve an innocent then to condemne a guilty person and there 's lesse malice and iniquity in sparing the guilty then in condemning the good Because it is in the power of men to remit a guilty person to divine judicature and for divers causes not to use severity but in no case is it lawfull neither hath God at all given to man a power to condemne such persons as cannot be proved other than pious and innocent And therefore it is better if it should so happen that we should spare the innocent person and one that is actually deceiv'd then that upon the turn of the wheele the true believers should be destroyed And this very reason he that had authority sufficient and absolute to make Lawes was pleased to urge as a reasonable inducement Numb 6. for the establishing of that Law which he made for the indemnity of erring persons It was in the parable of the tares mingled with the good seed in Agro dominico the good seed Christ himselfe being the interpreter are the Children of the Kingdome the tares are the children of the wicked one upon this comes
the greatest vanity in the world For when God hath made a Promise pertaining also to our Children for so our Adversaries contend and we also acknowledge in its true sense shall not this Promise this word of God be of sufficient truth certainty and efficacy to cause comfort unlesse we tempt God and require a sign of him May not Christ say to these men as sometime to the Jewes a wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign but no sign shall be given unto it But the truth on 't is this Argument is nothing but a direct quarrelling with God Almighty Now since there is no strength in the Doctrinall part the Numb 23. practise and precedents Apostolicall and Ecclesiasticall will be of lesse concernment if they were true as is pretended because actions Apostolicall are not alwayes Rules for ever it might be fit for them to doe it pro loco tempore as divers others of their Institutions but yet no engagement past thence upon following Ages for it might be convenient at that time in the new spring of Christianity and till they had engag'd a considerable party by that meanes to make them parties against the Gentiles Superstition and by way of pre-occupation to ascertain them to their own sect when they came to be men or for some other reason not trasmitted to us because the Question of fact it selfe is not sufficiently determin'd For the insinuation of that precept of baptizing all Nations of which Children certainly are a part does as little advantage as any of the rest because other parallel expressions of Scripture doe determine and expound themselves to a sence that includes not all persons absolutely but of a capable condition as adorate eum omnes gentes psallite Deo omnes nationes terrae and divers more As for the conjecture concerning the Family of Stephanus Numb 24. at the best it is but a conjecture and besides that it is not prov'd that there were Children in the Family yet if that were granted it followes not that they were baptized because by whole Families in Scripture is meant all persons of reason and age within the Family for it is said of the Ruler at Capernaum Ioh. 4. that he believed and all his house Now you may also suppose that in his house were little Babes that is likely enough and you may suppose that they did believe too before they could understand but that 's not so likely and then the Argument from baptizing of Stephen's houshold may bee allowed just as probable But this is unman-like to build upon such slight aery conjectures But Tradition by all meanes must supply the place of Scripture Numb 25. and there is pretended a Tradition Apostolicall that Infants were baptized But at this we are not much moved For we who rely upon the written Word of God as sufficient to establish all true Religion doe not value the Allegation of Tradions And however the world goes none of the Reformed Churches can pretend this Argument against this opinion because they who reject Tradition when t is against them must not pretend it at all for them But if wee should allow the Topick to be good yet how will it be verified for so farre as it can yet appeare it relies wholly upon the Testimony of Origen for from him Austin had it Now a Tradition Apostolicall if it be not consign'd with a fuller Testimony then of one person whom all after-Ages have condemn'd of many errors will obtain so little reputation amongst those who know that things have upon greater Authority pretended to derive from the Apostles and yet falsly that it will be a great Argument that he is credulons and weak that shall be determin'd by so weak probation in matters of so great concernment And the truth of the businesse is as there was no command of Scripture to oblige Children to the susception of it so the necessity of Paedobaptism was not determin'd in the Church till in the eighth Age after Christ but in the yeare 418 in the Milevitan Councell a Provinciall of Africa there was a Canon made for Paedo-baptism never till then I grant it was practiz'd in Africa before that time and they or some of them thought well of it and though that be no Argument for us to think so yet none of them did ever before pretend it to be necessary none to have been a precept of the Gospel S. Austin was the first that ever preach'd it to be absolutely necessary and it was in his heat and anger against Pelagius who had warm'd and chafed him so in that Question that it made him innovate in other doctrines possibly of more concernment then this And that although this was practised anciently in Africa yet that it was without an opinion of necessity and not often there nor at all in other places we have the Testimony of a learned Paedo-baptist Ludovicus Vives who in his Annotations upon S. Austin De Civit. Dei l. 1. c. 27. affirms Neminem nisi adultum antiquitùs solere baptizari But besides that the Tradition cannot be proved to be Apostolicall we have very good evidence from Antiquity that it Numb 26. was the opinion of the Primitive Church that Infants ought not to be baptiz'd and this is clear in the sixth Canon of the Councell of Neocaesarea The words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sence is this A woman with child may be baptized when she please For her Baptism concernes not the child The reason of the connexion of the parts of that Canon is in the following words because every one in that Confession is to give a demonstration of his own choyce and election Meaning plainly that if the Baptism of the Mother did also passe upon the child it were not fit for a pregnant woman to receive Baptism because in that Sacrament there being a Confession of Faith which Confession supposes understanding and free choyce it is not reasonable the child should be consign'd with such a mystery since it cannot doe any act of choyce or understanding The Canon speaks reason and it intimates a practise which was absolutely universall in the Church of interrogating the Catechumens concerning the Articles of Creed Which is one Argument that either they did not admit Infants to Baptism or that they did prevaricate egregiously in asking Questions of them who themselves knew were not capable of giving answer And to supply their incapacity by the Answer of a Godfather Numb 27. Quid ni necesse est sie legit Franc. Iunius in notis ad Tertul. sponsores eti am periculo ingeri qui ipsi per mortalitatem destituere promissiones suas possint proventu malae indolis falli Tertul lib. de baptis cap. 18. is but the same unreasonablenesse acted with a worse circumstance And there is no sensible account can be given of it for that which some imperfectly murmure concerning stipulations civill perform'd by Tutors in
Whence it is evident that then it was the beliefe of Christendome that the holy Ghost was by no ordinary ministery given to faithfull people after Baptisme but only by Apostolicall or Episcopall consignation and imposition of hands What also the faith of Christendome was concerning the Minister of confirmation and that Bishops only could doe it I shall make evident in the descent of this discourse Here the scene lies in Scripture where it is cleare that S. Philip one of the 72. Disciples as antiquity reports him and an Evangelist and a Disciple as Scripture also expresses him could not impose hands for application of the promise of the Father and ministeriall giving of the holy Ghost but the Apostles must goe to doe it and also there is no example in Scripture of any that ever did it but an Apostle and yet this is an ordinary Ministery which de jure ought de facto alwaies was continued in the Church Therefore there must alwaies be an ordinary office of Apostleship in the Church to doe it that is an office above Presbyters for in Scripture they could never doe it and this is it which we call Episcopacy 3. THe Apostles were rulers of the whole § 9. And Superiority of Iurisdiction Church each Apostle respectively of his severall Diocesse when he would fixe his chaire had superintendency over the Presbyters and the people and this by Christs donation the Charter is by the Fathers said to be this Sicut misit me Pater Iohn 20. 21. sic ego mitto vos As my Father hath sent me even so send I you Manifesta enim est sententiae Domini nostri Iesu Christi Apostolos suos mittentis Lib. 7. de baptism Contra Donatist c. 43. vide etiam S. Cyprian de Unit. Eccles. S. Cyrill in Ioh. lib. 12. c. 55. ipsis solis potestatem à Patre sibi datam permittentis quibus nos successimus eâdem potestate Ecclesiam Domini gubernantes said Clarus à Musculâ the Bishop in the Councell of Carthage related by S. Cyprian and S. Austin But however it is evident in Scripture that the Apostles had such superintendency over the inferior Clergy Presbyters I mean and Deacons and a superiority of jurisdiction and therefore it is certain that Christ gave it them for none of the Apostles took this honour but he that was called of God as was Aaron 1. Our blessed Saviour gave to the Apostles plenitudinem potestatis It was sicut misit me Pater c. As my Father sent so I send You my Apostles whom I have chosen This was not said to Presbyters for they had no commission at all given to them by Christ but at their first mission to preach repentance I say no commission at all they were not spoken to they were not present Now then consider Suppose that as Aërius did deny the Divine institution of Bishops over the Presbyters cum grege another as confident as he should deny the Divine institution of Presbyters what proof were there in all the holy Scripture to shew the Divine institution of them as a distinct order from Apostles or Bishops Indeed Christ selected 72. and gave them commission to preach but that commission was temporary and expired before the crucifixion for ought appeares in Scripture If it be said the Apostles did ordaine Presbyters in every City it is true but not sufficient for so they ordained Deacons at Ierusalem and in all established Churches and yet this will not tant ' amount to an immediate Divine institution for Deacons and how can it then for Presbyters If we say a constant Catholick traditive interpretation of Scripture does teach us that Christ did institute the Presbyterate together with Episcopacy and made the Apostles Presbyters as well as Bishops this is true But then 1. We recede from the plain words of Scripture and rely upon tradition which in this question of Episcopacy will be of dangerous consequence to the enimies of it for the same tradition if that be admitted for good probation is for Episcopall preheminence over Presbyters as will appeare in the sequel 2. Though no use be made of this advantage yet to the allegation it will be quickly answered that it can never bee proved from Scripture that Christ made the Apostles Priests first and then Bishops or Apostles but only that Christ gave them severall commissions and parts of the office Apostolicall all which being in one person cannot by force of Scripture prove two orders Truth is if we change the scene of warre and say that the Presbyterate as a distinct order from the ordinary office of Apostleship is not of Divine institution the proof of it would be harder then for the Divine institution of Episcopacy Especially if we consider that in all the enumerations of the parts of Clericall Ephes. 4. 1. Corinth 12. offices there is no enumeration of Presbyters but of Apostles there is and the other members of the induction are of guifts of Christianity or parts of the Apostolate and either must inferre many more orders then the Church ever yet admitted of or none distinct from the Apostolate insomuch as Apostles were Pastors and Teachers and Evangelists and Rulers and had the guift of tongues of healing and of Miracles This thing is of great consideration and this use I will make of it That either Christ made the 72 to be Presbyters and in them instituted the distinct order of Presbyterate as the ancient Church alwaies did believe or else he gave no distinct commission for any such distinct order If the second be admitted then the Presbyterate is not of immediate divine institution but of Apostolicall only as is the Order of Deacons and the whole plenitude of power is in the order Apostolicall alone and the Apostles did constitute Presbyters with a greater portion of their own power as they did Deacons with a lesse But if the first be said then the commission to the 72 Presbyters being only of preaching that we find in Scripture all the rest of their power which now they have is by Apostolicall ordinance and then although the Apostles did admit them in partem sollicitudinis yet they did not admit them in plenitudinem potestatis for then they must have made them Apostles and then there will be no distinction of order neither by Divine nor Apostolicall institution neither I care not which part be chosen one is certain but if either of them be true then since to the Apostles only Christ gave a plenitude of power it followes that either the Presbyters have no power of jurisdiction as affixed to a distinct order and then the Apostles are to rule them by vertue of the order and ordinary commission Apostolicall or if they have jurisdiction they doe derive it à fonte Apostolorum and then the Apostles have superiority of Iurisdiction over Presbyters because Presbyters only have it by delegation Apostolicall And that I say truth besides that
in veritate So that this succession of Bishops from the Apostles ordination must of it selfe be a very certain thing when the Church made it a maine probation of their faith for the books of Scripture were not all gathered together and generally received as yet Now then since this was a main pillar of their Christianity viz. a constant reception of it from hand to hand as being delivered by the Bishops in every chaire till wee come to the very Apostles that did ordain them this I say being their proof although it could not be more certain then the thing to be proved which in that case was a Divine revelation yet to them it was more evident as being matter of fact and known almost by evidence of sense and as verily believed by all as it was by any one that himselfe was baptized both relying upon the report of others * Radix Christianae societatis Epist. 42. per sedes Apostolorum successiones Episcoporum certâ per orbem propagatione diffunditur saith S. Austin The very root and foundation of Christian communion is spread all over the world by the successions of Apostles and Bishops And is it not now a madnesse to say there was no such thing no succession of Bishops in the Churches Apostolicall no ordination of Bishops by the Apostles and so as S. Paul's phrase is overthrow the faith of some even of the Primitive Christians that used this argument as a great weapon of offence against the invasion of haereticks and factious people It is enough for us that we can truly say with S. Irenaeus Habemus annumerare eos qui ab Apostolis Ubi supra postolis instituti sunt Episcopi in Ecclesiis usque ad nos We can reckon those who from the Apostles untill now were made Bishops in the Churches and of this we are sure enough if there be any faith in Christians THe summe is this Although we had not prooved § 19. So that Episcopacy is at least an Apostolicall ordinance of the same authority with many other points generally believed the immediate Divine institution of Episcopall power over Presbyters and the whole flock yet Episcopacy is not lesse then an Apostolicall ordinance and delivered to us by the same authority that the observation of the Lord's day is For for that in the new Testament we have no precept and nothing but the example of the Primitive Disciples meeting in their Synaxes upon that day and so also they did on the saturday in the Iewish Synagogues but yet however that at Geneva they were once in meditation to have chang'd it into a Thursday meeting to have showne their Christian liberty we should think strangely of those men that called the Sunday-Festivall lesse then an Apostolicall ordinance and necessary now to be kept holy with such observances as the Church hath appointed * Baptisme of infants is most certainly a holy and charitable ordinance and of ordinary necessity to all that ever cryed and yet the Church hath founded this rite upon the tradition of the Apostles and wise men doe easily observe that the Anabaptists can by the same probability of Scripture inforce a necessity of communicating infants upon us as we doe of baptizing infants upon them if we speak of immediate Divine institution or of practise Apostolicall recorded in Scripture and therefore a great Master of Geneva in a book he writ against the Anabaptists was forced to fly to Apostolicail traditive ordination and therefore the institution of Bishops must be served first as having fairer plea and clearer evidence in Scripture then the baptizing of infants and yet they that deny this are by the just anathema of the Catholick Church confidently condemn'd for Hereticks * Of the same consideration are diverse other things in Christianity as the Presbyters consecrating the Eucharist for if the Apostles in the first institution did represent the whole Church Clergy and Laity when Christ said Hoc facite Doe this then why may not every Christian man there represented doe that which the Apostles in the name of all were commanded to doe If the Apostles did not represent the whole Church why then doe all communicate Or what place or intimation of Christ's saying is there in all the foure Gospells limiting Hoc facite id est benedicite to the Clergy and extending Hoc facite id est accipite manducate to the Laity This also rests upon the practise Apostolicall and traditive interpretation of H. Church and yet cannot be denied that so it ought to be by any man that would not have his Christendome suspected * To these I adde the communion of Women the distinction of bookes Apocryphall from Canonicall that such books were written by such Evangelists and Apostles the whole tradition of Scripture it selfe the Apostles Creed the feast of Easter which amongst all them that cry up the Sunday-Festivall for a Divine institution must needs prevaile as Caput institutionis it being that for which the Sunday is commemorated These and divers others of greater consequence which I dare not specify for feare of being misunderstood rely but upon equall faith with this of Episcopacy though I should wave all the arguments for immediate Divine ordinance and therefore it is but reasonable it should be ranked amongst the Credenda of Christianity which the Church hath entertained upon the confidence of that which we call the faith of a Christian whose Master is truth it selfe VVHat their power and eminence was and § 20. And was an office of power and great authority the appropriates of their office so ordain'd by the Apostles appears also by the testimonies before alleadged the expressions whereof runne in these high termes Episcopatus administrandae Ecclesiae in Lino Linus his Bishoprick was the administration of the whole Church Ecclesiae praefuisse was said of him and Clemens they were both Prefects of the Church or Prelates that 's the Church-word Ordinandis apud Cretam Ecclesiis praeficitur so Titus he is set over all the affaires of the new-founded Churches in Crete In celsiori gradu collocatus plac'd in a higher order or degree so the Bishop of Alexandria chosen ex Presbyteris from amongst the Presbyters Supra omnia Episcopalis apicis sedes so Philo of that Bishoprick The seat of Episcopall height above all things in Christianity These are its honours Its offices these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. To set in order whatsoever he sees wanting or amisse to silence vaine prating Preachers that will not submit to their superiors to ordaine elders to rebuke delinquents to reject Hereticks viz. from the communion of the faithfull for else why was the Angell of the Church of Pergamus reprov'd for tolerating the Nicolaitan hereticks but that it was in his power to eject them And the same is the case of the Angell of Thyatir a in permitting the woman to teach and seduce the people but to the Bishop was committed the cognisance of causes
let it rest upon * Apologiae pro Ignatio Vedelius a man who is no waies to be suspected as a party for Episcopacy or rather upon the credit of a Lib. 3. hist. c. 30. Eusebius b De Script Eccles. S. Hierome and c Apud Eusebquem Latine reddidit Ruffinus who reckon the first seven out of which I have taken these excerpta for naturall and genuine And now I will make this use of it Those men that call for reduction of Episcopacy to the Primitive state should doe well to stand close to their principles and count that the best Episcopacy which is first and then consider but what S. Ignatius hath told us for direction in this affaire and see what is gotten in the bargaine For my part since they that call for such a reduction hope to gaine by it and then would most certainly have abidden by it I think it not reasonable to abate any thing of Ignatius his height but expect such subordination and conformity to the Bishop as he then knew to be a law of Christianity But let this be remembred all along in the specification of the parts of their Iurisdiction But as yet I am in the generall demonstration of obedience The Councell of Laodicea having specified some Can. 56. particular instances of subordination and dependance to the Bishop summes them up thus * Idem videre est apud Damasum Epist. de Chorepiscopis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So likewise the Presbyters let them doe nothing without the precept and counsell of the Bishop so is the translation of Isidore ad verbum This Councell is ancient enough for it was before the first Nicene So also was that of Arles commanding the same thing exactly * Vt Presbyteri sine conscientiâ Episcoporum Can. 19. nihil faciant Sed nec Presbyteris civitatis sine Episcopi praecepto amplius aliquid imperare vel sine authoritate literarum ejus in Vnaquaque parochiâ aliquid agere saies the thirteenth Canon of the Ancyran Councell according to the Latine of Isidore The same thing is in the first Councell of Toledo the very Can. 20. same words for which I cited the first Councell of Arles viz. That Presbyters doe nothing without the knowledge or permission of the Bishop * Esto SUBIECTUS Epist. ad Nepotian PONTIFICI Tuo quasi animae parentemsuscipe It is the counsell of S. Hierome Be subject to thy Bishop and receive him as the Father of thy soule I shall not need to derive hither any more particular instances of the duty and obedience owing from the Laity to the Bishop For this account will certainly be admitted by all considering men God hath intrusted the soules of the Laity to the care of the Ecclesiasticall orders they therefore are to submit to the government of the Clergy in matters Spirituall with which they are intrusted For either there is no Government at all or the Laity must governe the Church or else the Clergy must To say there is no Government is to leave the Church in worse condition then a tyranny To say that the Laity should governe the Church when all Ecclesiasticall Ministeries are committed to the Clergy is to say Scripture means not what it saies for it is to say that the Clergy must be Praepositi and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and praelati and yet the prelation and presidency and rule is in them who are not ever by Gods spirit called Presidents or Prelates and that it is not in them who are called so * In the mean time if the Laity in matters Spirituall are inferior to the Clergy and must in things pertaining to the Soule be rul'd by them with whom their Soules are intrusted then also much rather they must obey those of the Clergy to whom all the other Clergy themselves are bound to be obedient Now since by the frequent precept of so many Councells and Fathers the Deacons and Presbyters must submit in all things to the Bishop much more must the Laity and since the Bishop must rule in chiefe and the Presbyters at the most can but rule in conjunction and assistance but ever in subordination to the Bishop the Laity must obey de integro For that is to keep them in that state in which God hath placed them But for the maine S. Clement in his Epistle to S. Iames translated by Ruffinus saith it was the doctrine of Peter according to the institution of Christ that Presbyters should be obedient to their Bishop in all things and in his third Epistle that Presbyters and Deacons and others of the Clergy must take heed that they doe nothing without the license of the Bishop * And to make this businesse up compleat all these authorities of great antiquity were not the prime constitutions in those severall Churches respectively but meere derivations from tradition Apostolicall for not only the thing but the words so often mentioned are in the 40 th Canon of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same is repeated in the twenty fourth Canon of the Councell of Antioch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Presbyters and Deacons must doe nothing without leave of the Bishop for to him the Lords people is committed and he must give an account for their soules * And if a Presbyter shall contemne his owne Bishop making conventions apart and erecting another altar he is to be deposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the 32. Canon as a lover of Principality intimating that he arrogates Episcopall dignity and so is ambitious of a Principality The issue then is this * The Presbyters and Clergy and Laity must obey therefore the Bishop must governe and give them lawes It was particularly instanc'd in the case of S. Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Theodoret He adorned and instructed Pontus with these Lawes so he reckoning up the extent Lib. 5. cap. 28. of his jurisdiction * But now descend we to a specification of the power and jurisdiction * of Bishops § 36. Appointing them to be Iudges of the Clergy and spirituall causes of the Laity THe Bishops were Ecclesiasticall Iudges over the Presbyters the inferiour Clergy and the Laity What they were in Scripture who were constituted in presidency over causes spirituall I have already twice explicated and from hence it descended by a close succession that they who watched for soules they had the rule over them and because no regiment can be without coërcion therefore there was inherent in them a power of cognition of causes and coërcion of persons * The Canons of the Apostles appointing censures to be inflicted on delinquent person's makes the Bishop's hand to doe it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 33. If any Presbyter or Deacon be excommunicated BY THE BISHOP he must not be received by any else but by him that did so censure him vnlesse the BISHOP THAT CENSUR'D HIM be dead The same is repeated in the Nicene Councell only
have thoughts ambitious incroaching of usurpation and advantages of purpose to devest their Brethren of an authority intrusted them by Christ and then too when all the advantage of their honour did only set them upon a hill to feele a stronger blast of persecution and was not as since it hath been attested with secular assistance and faire arguments of honour but was only in a meere spirituall estimate and ten thousand reall disadvantages This will not be suppos'd either of wise or holy men But however Valeat quantum valere potest The question is now of matter of fact and if the Church of Martyrs and the Church of Saints and Doctors and Confessors now regnant in heaven be faire precedents for practices of Christianity we build upon a rock though we had digg'd no deeper then this foundation of Catholick practise Upon the hopes of these advantages I proceed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Apost 32 If any Presbyter disrespecting his own Bishop shall make conventions apart or erect an altar viz. without the Bishops license let him be deposed clearely intimating that potestas faciendi concionem the power of making of Church-meetings and assemblies for preaching or other offices is derived from the Bishop and therefore the Canon adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He is a lover of Rule he is a Tyrant that is an usurper of that power government which belongs to the Bishop The same thing is also decreed in the Councell of Antioch and in the Councell of Chalcedon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ca. 5. Act. 4. All the most Reverend Bishops cryed out this is a righteous law this is the Canon of the holy Fathers This viz. The Canon Apostolicall now cited * Tertullian is something De baptism more particular and instances in Baptisme Dandi baptismum jus habet summus Sacerdos qui est Episcopus Dehinc Presbyteri Diaconi non tamen sine Episcopi authoritate propter honorem Ecclesiae quo salvo salva pax est alioquin etiam Laicis jus est The place is of great consideration and carries in it its own objection and its answer The Bishop hath the right of giving baptisme Then after him Presbyters and Deacons but not without the authority of the Bishop So farre the testimony is clear and this is for the honour of the Church * But does not this intimate it was only by positive constitution and neither by Divine nor Apostolicall ordinance No indeed It does not For it might be so ordained by Christ or his Apostles propter honorem Ecclesiae and no harme done For it is honourable for the Church that her Ministrations should be most ordinate and so they are when they descend from the superior to the subordinate But the next words doe of themselves make answer Otherwise lay-men have right to baptize That is without the consent of the Bishop Lay-men can doe it as much as Presbyters and Deacons For indeed baptisme conferred by Lay-men is valid and not to bee repeated but yet they ought not to administer it so neither ought Presbyters without the Bishops license so saies Tertullian let him answer it Only the difference is this Lay-men cannot jure ordinario receive a leave or commission to make it lawfull in them to baptize any Presbyters and Deacons may for their order is a capacity or possibility ** But besides the Sacrament of Baptisme Tertullian affirmes De coronâ milit c. 3. vide S. Chrysost. hom 11. in 1. Tim. S. Hieron dial adv Lucifer the same of the venerable Eucharist Eucharistiae Sacramentum non de aliorum manu quà m Praesidentium sumimus The former place will expound this if there be any scruple in Praesidentium for clearly the Christians receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist from none but Bishops I suppose he means without Episcopall license whatsoever his meaning is these are his words The Councell of Gangra forbidding conventicles Can. 6. expresses it with this intimation of Episcopall authority If any man shall make assemblies privately out of the Church so despising the Church or shall doe any Church-offices 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the presence of a Priest by THE DECREE OF A BISHOP let him be anathema The Priest is not to be assistant at any meeting for private offices without the Bishops license If they will celebrate Synaxes privately it must be by a Priest and he must be there by leave of the Bishop then the assembly is lawfull * And this thing was so knowne that the Fathers of the second Councell of Carthage call it ignorance or hypocrisy in Priests to doe their offices without a Ca. 9. license from the Bishop Numidius Episcopus Massilytanus dixit In quibusdam locis sunt Presbyteri qui aut ignorantes simplicitèr aut dissimulantes audactèr praesente inconsulto Episcopo complurimis in domicilijs agunt agenda quod disciplinae incongruum cognoscit esse Sanctitas vestra In some places there are Priests that in private houses doe offices houseling of people is the office meant communicating them at home without the consent or leave of the Bishop being either simply ignorant or boldly dissembling Implying that they could not else but know their duties to be to procure Episcopall license for their ministrations Ab Vniversis Episcopis dictum est Quisquis Presbyter inconsulto Episcopo agenda in quolibet loco voluërit celebrare ipse honroi suo contrarius existit All the Bishops said if any Priest without leave of his Bishop shall celebrate the mysteries be the place what it will be he is an Enemy to the Bishops dignity After this in time but before in authority is the great Councell of Chalcedon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 8. part 2. Act. 14. Let the Clergy according to the tradition of the Fathers remaine under the power of the Bishops of the City So that they are for their offices in dependance of the authority of the Bishop The Canon instances particularly to Priests officiating in Monasteries and Hospitalls but extends it selfe to an indefinite expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They must not dissent or differ from their Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c All they that transgresse this Constitution in ANY WAY not submitting to their Bishop let them be punish'd canonically So that now these generall expressions of obedience and subordination to the Bishop being to be Understood according to the exigence of the matter to wit the Ministeries of the Clergy in their severall offices the Canon extends it's prohibition to all ministrations without the Bishops authority But it was more clearely and evidently law and practice in the Roman Church we have good witnesse for it S. Leo the Bishop of that Church is my author Sed neque coram Episcopo licet Presbyter is in baptisterium introire nec praesente Antistite infantem Epist. 86. tingere aut fignare nec poenitentem sine praeceptione Episcopi sui reconciliare nec