prevailed with him without that false belief of a deceiver When it is once become a Sanctifying Belief then there is no doubt but the Man hath better Evidence than the uncertain word of man He hath the witness in himself And it is not a Glorifying Faith till it be a Sanctifying Faith. But the Question is What soundness of Reason or proof that this is God's Word is necessary to make it a Sanctifying Faith at least as most prevalent and trusted in By this you may know what I judge of the Faith of honest illiterate Papists and of illiterate Protestants for a great number of them who live in Love and Obedience to God. And yet to speak both more concisely and distinctly I. I may believe by Historical Tradition all that matter of Fact which those that saw Christ's and the Apostles Miracles and heard their words did know by sense and those that saw not believed on the credit of the reporters II. And yet I may know by reason through God's help that these Miracles and this Scripture Impress and Efficacy are God's attestation and none but God could do it And of this all Believers have some perception in various degrees III. And then we know it to be true because it is sealed by those attestations and is the Word of God. Obj. VII But would you have men take the matters of Fact for uncertain that this is a true Bible and Copy and was given the Church by the Apostles c. and so not pretend to be certain of them Ans I have oft said and elsewhere largely proved that as 1. A Humane Faith of highest probability prepareth the way so 2. These things are known by an Historical Evidence which hath a proper certainty above meer Humane Faith For Humane Faith resteth on mens Veracity or Fidelity which is uncertain But there is a History such as that there is such a City as Rome Venice c. which is evident by a surer ground than mens fidelity even from such a concurrence of consenters and circumstances as will prove a forgery impossible Obj. VIII You seem to favour the Popish Doctrine of Ignorance while you would have all our Knowledge confined to a few plain and easie things and perswade men to doubt of all the rest Ans 1. I perswade no man to doubt of that which he is certain of but not to lie and say he is certain when he is not 2. I am so far from encouraging Ignorance that it is Ignorance of your Ignorance which I reprove I would have all men know as much as possibly they can of all that God hath revealed And if the self-conceited knew more they would doubt more and as they grow wiser will grow less confident in uncertainties It is not knowing but false pretending to know that I am against Do you think that a thousand self-conceited men and women do really know ever the more for saying they know or crying down that Ignorance Doubting and Uncertainty which they have themselves How many a one yea Preachers have cryed down the Popish Doctrine of Uncertainty of Salvation who had no Certainty of their own but their neighbours thought by their lives were certainly in the way to Hell. Obj. IX But you would have men resist the Spirit that convinceth them and make so long a work in doubting and questioning and proving every thing as that Christians will come but to little knowledge in your way Ans They will have the more knowledge and not the less for trying Peremptory confidence is not knowledge The next way here is farthest about Receive all Evidence from God and Man from the Word and Spirit with all the desire and all the delight and all the speed that possibly you can Study earnestly Learn willingly Resist no Light neglect no Truth But what 's all this to foolish conceit that you know what you do not What 's this to the hasty believing of falshoods or uncertainties and troubling the Church and World with self-conceit and dreams I remember two or three of my old acquaintance who suddenly received from a Seducer the Opinion of Perfection that we might be perfectly sinless in this life And because I denied it they carryed it as if I had pleaded for sin against perfection and they presently took themselves to be perfect and sinless because they had got the Opinion that some are such I told them that I desired Perfection as well as they and that I was far from hindering or disswading any from Perfection but wisht them to let us see that they are so indeed and never to sin more in thought word or deed And ere long they forsook all Religion and by Drunkenness Fornication and Licentiousness shewed us their Perfection So here it is not a conceit that men have Faith and Knowledge and quickly saying I believe or turning to the Priest or Party that perswadeth them which maketh them ever the wiser men or true Believers Obj. X. But that may seem certain to another which seemeth uncertain or false to you Therefore every man must go according to his own Light. Ans 1. Nothing is Certain which is not true If that seem True to you which is False this is your Errour And is every man or any man bound to err and believe a falsehood Being is before Knowing If it Be not true you may Think it to be so which is that which I would cure but you cannot Know it to be so much less be Certain of it 2. If it be Certain to you it is Evidently True And if so hold it fast and spare not It is not any mans Certainty but Errour which I oppose Obj. XI But if we must write or utter nothing but Certainties you would have but a small Library Ans 1. The World might well spare a great many uncertain Writings 2. But I say not that you must think say or write nothing but Certainties There is a lawful and in some cases necessary exercise of our understandings about Probabilities and Possibilities The Husbandman when he ploweth and soweth is not certain of an increase 1. But call not that certain which is not 2. And be not as vehement and peremptory in it as if it were a Certainty 3. And separate your Certainties and Probabilities asunder that confusion fill not your minds with Errour Obj. XII While you perswade us to be so diffident of mens reports and to suspend our belief of what men say you speak against the Laws of Converse Ans I perswade you not to deny any man such a Belief as is his due But give him no more If a man profess himself a Christian and say that he sincerely believeth in Christ and consenteth to his Covenant though you may perceive no ascertaining Evidence that he saith true yet you must believe him because he is the only opener of his own mind and the Laws of God and Human Converse require it But what is this believing him Not taking it for a
Layman that can not tell him what is in the Councils or by a Priest that never read the Councils and whether the variety of natural capacities bodily temperaments education and course of Life before do not make as great variety of proportions to be necessary to the sufficiency of this Proposal And what mortal man can truly take the measure of them And how then can any man be Certain what those points are which are necessary for him to believe X. Those things are uncertain which depend upon an uncertain Author or Authority For instance the Roman faith dependeth on the exposition of the Scriptures by the consent of the Fathers and on the Tradition of the Church and the decrees of an authorized Council And here is in all this little but uncertainties 1. It is utterly uncertain who are to be taken for Fathers and who not Whether Origen Tatianus Arnobius Lactantius Tertullian and many such be Fathers or not Whether such a man as Theophilus Alexandrinus or Chrysostom was the Father when they condemned each other Whether such as are justly suspected of Heresy as Eusebius or such as the Romanists have cast suspicions on as Lucifer Calaritanus called a Heretick Socrates Sozomens falsly called Novatians Hilary Arelatensis Condemned by the Pope Leo and Claud. Turovens Rupertus Tuitiens and such others When the ancients renounced each others Communion as Martin did by Ithacius and Idacius and their Synod when they describe one another as stark Knaves as Socrates doth Theophil Alexandrin and Sulpitius Severus doth Ithacius which of them were the Fathers 2. How shall we know certainly which are the true uncorrupted writings of these Fathers among so many forgeries and spurious Scripts 3. How shall it be known what exposition the Fathers consented on when not one of a multitude and but few in all have commented on any considerable parts of the Scripture and those few so much often differ 4. When in the Doctrine of the Trinity it self Petavius largely proveth that most of the writers of the three first Centuries after the Apostles were unsound and others confess the same about the Millennium the corporeity of Angels and of the Soul and divers other things doth their consent bind us to believe them If not how shall we know in what to believe their consent according to this Rule 2. And as to the Church they are utterly disagreed among themselves what that Church is which hath this authority 1. Whether the Pope alone 2. Or the Pope with a Provincial Council 3. Or the Pope with a General Council 4. Or a General Council without the Pope 5. Or the universality of Pastors 6. Or the universality of the people with them 3. And for a Council 1. There is no certainty what number of Bishops and what consent of the Comprovincial Clergy is necessary to make them the true representatives of any Church 2. And more uncertain in what Council the Bishops had such consent 3. And uncertain whether the Popes approbation be necessary The great Councils of Constance and Basil determining the contrary 4. And uncertain which were truly approved 5. And most certain that there never was any General Council in the world unless you will call the Apostles a General Council but only General Councils of the Clergy of one Empire with now and then a stragling Neighbour even as we have General Assemblies and Convocations in this Kingdom And who can be certain of that faith which dependeth upon all or any of these uncertainties XI That must needs be an uncertainty which dependeth on the unknown thoughts of another man. For instance with the Papists the Priests intention which is the secret of his heart is necessary to the being of Baptism and Transubstantiation And so no man can be certain whether he or any other man be baptized or not Nor whether it be Bread or Christs Body which he eateth We confess that it is necessary to the being of a Sacrament that the Minister do seem or profess to intend it as a Sacrament But if the reality of his intent be necessary to the being of it no man can be certain that ever he had a Sacrament XII It is a hard thing to be certain on either side in those controversies which have multitudes and in a manner equal strength of Learned Judicious Well-studyed Godly Impartial men for each part I deny not but one clear-headed man may be certain of that which a multitude are uncertain of and oppose him in But it must not be ordinary men but some rare illuminated person that must get above a probability unto a Certainty of that which such a company as aforesaid are of a contrary mind in XIII There is great uncertainty in matters of private impulse When a man hath nothing to prove a thing to be Gods will but an inward perswasion or impulse in his own Breast let it never so vehemently incline him to think it true it 's hard to be sure of it For we know not how far Satan or our own distempered Phantasies may go And most by far that pretend to this do prove deceived That which must be certain must be somewhat equal to Prophetical Inspiration Which indeed is its own Evidence But what that is no man can formally conceive but he that hath had it Therefore we are bid to Try the Spirits XIV It is a hard thing to gather certainties of Doctrinal conclusion from Gods Providences alone Providential changes have their great use as they are the fulfilling or execution of the word But they that will take them instead of the Scripture do usually run into such mistakes as are rectifyed to their cost by some contrary work of Providence ere long These times have fully taught us this XV. It is hard to gather Doctrinal certainties from Godly mens Experiences alone Even our Experimental Philosophers and Physicians find that an experiment that hits oft-times quite misseth afterwards on other Subjects and they know not why A course of effects may oft come from unknown causes And it 's no rare thing for the common Prejudices Selfconceitedness or corruption of the weaker and greater number of good people which needeth great repentance and a cure to be mistaken for the Communis Sensus Fidelium the Inclination and Experience of the Godly Especially when consent or the honour of their Leaders or Themselves hath engaged them in it In my time the common sense of the strictest sort was against long hair and taking Tobacco and other such things which now their common practice is for In one Countrey the common consent of the strictest party is for Arminianism In another they are zealously against it In Poland where the Socinians are for sitting at the Sacrament the Godly are generally against it In other places they are for it In Poland and Bohemia where they had holy humble perswading Bishops the generality of the Godly were for that Episcopacy as were all the ancient Churches even the Novatians
By doing thus the Church notoriously declared that they took not all the Scripture to be equally necessary to be understood but that the Govenant of Grace and the Catechism explaining it is the Gospel it self that is the Essence of it and of the Christian Religion and that all the rest of the Scriptures contain but partly the Integrals and partly the Accidents of that Religion He is the wisest man that knoweth Most and Best and every man should know as much of the Scriptures as he can But if you knew all the rest without this the Covenant of Grace and its explication it would not make you Christians or save you But if you know this truly without all the rest it will. The whole Scripture is of great use and benefit to the Church It is like the body of a man which hath its Head and Heart and Stomach c. And hath also Fingers and Toes and flesh yea Nails and Hair. And yet the Brain and Heart it self fare the better for the rest and would not be so well Seated separate from them Though a man may be a man that loseth even a Leg or Arm. So is it here But it is the Covenant that is our Christianity and the duly Baptized are Christians whatever else they do not understand These are the things that all must know and daily live upon The Creed is but the Exposition of the three Articles of the Baptismal Covenant I believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost Though the Jews that had been bred up to a preparing knowledge were quickly baptized by the Apostles upon their Conversion Acts 2. Yet no man can imagine that either the Apostles or other Ministers did use to admit the Ignorant Gentiles into the Covenant of God without opening the meaning of it to them or Baptize them as Christians without teaching them what Christianity is Therefore Reason and the whole Churches subsequent Custom assure us that the Apostles used to expound the three great Articles to their Catechumens And thence it is called The Apostles Creed Marcus Bishop of Ephesus told them in the Florentine Council as you may see Sgyropilus that we have none of the Apostles Creed And Vossius de Symbolis besides many others hath many Arguments to prove that this so called was not formally made by the Apostles Bishop Usher hath opened the changes that have been in it Sandford and Parker have largely de Descensu shewed how it came in as an Exposition of the Baptismal Articles Others stifly maintain that the Apostles made it But the case seemeth plain The Apostles used to call the Baptized to the profession of the same Articles which Paul hath in 1. Cor. 15.1 2 3 c. and varied not the matter All this was but more particularly to profess Faith in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost Two or three further Expository Articles are put into the Creed since Otherwise it is the same which the Apostles used not in the very syllables or forms of words but in the same sense and the words indeed being left free but seldom much altered because of the danger of altering the matter Of all the Antientest Writers not one repeateth the Creed in the same words that we have it nor any two of them in the same with one another Irenaeus once Tertullian twice hath it all in various words but the same sense That of Marcellus in Epiphanius cometh nearest ours called the Apostles and is almost it Afterward in Ruffinus and others we have more of it Yet no doubt but the Western Churches at least used it with little variation still The Nicene Creed is called by some Antients the Apostles Creed too And both were so for both are the same in sense and substance For it is not the very words that are truly fathered on the Apostles About 30â— years a go Mr. Ashwel having published a Book for the Necessity and Honour of the Creed I wrote in the Postscript to my Reformed Pastor Ed. 2. a Corrective of some passages in which he seemeth to say too much for it or at least to depress the Scripture too much in comparison of it But long experience now telleth me that I have more need to acquaint men with the Reasons and Necessity of the Creed Seeing I find a great part of ignorant Religious people much to slight the use of it and say It is not Scripture but the work of man Especially taking offence at the harsh translatiâ—n of that Article He descended into Hell. which from the beginning it 's like was not in It is the Kernel of the Scripture and it is that for which the rest of the Scripture is given us even to afford us sufficient help to understand and consent to the Covenant of Grace that our Belief our Desires and our Practice may be conformed principally to these Summaries It is not every Child or Woman that could have gathered the Essential Articles by themselves out of the whole Scripture if it had not been done to their hands Nor that could have rightly methodized the Rule of our desires or gathered the just heads of natural duty if Christ had not done the first in the Lords Prayer and God the second in the Decalogue Obj. But I believe these only because the Matter of the Creed and the words also of the other two are in the Scripture and not on any other Authority Ans If you speak of the Authority of the Author which giveth them their truth it is neither Scripture nor Tradition but God for whose Authority we must believe both Scripture and them But if you speak of the Authority of the Deliverers and the Evidence of the Delivery be it known to you 1. That the Creed Lords Prayer Decalogue and the Baptismal Covenant have been delivered down to the Church from the Apostles by a distinct Tradition besides the Scripture Tradition Even to all the Christians one by one that were Baptized and admitted to the Lords Table and to every particular Church So that there was not a Christian or Church that was not even Constituted by them 2. Be it known to you that the Church was long in possession of them before it had the Scriptures of the New Testament It 's supposed to be about eight years after Christ's Ascension before Matthew wrote the first Book of the New Testament and near the year of our Lord one hundred before the Revelation was written And do you think that there were no Christians or Churches all that while Or that there was no Baptism Or no Profession of the Christian Faith in distinct Articles No Knowledge of the Lords Prayer and Commandements No Gospel daily preached and practised What did the Church-assemblies think you do all those years No doubt those that had Inspiration used it by extraordinary gifts But that was not all Those that had not did preach the Substance of the Christian Religion contained in these forms and did Pray and Praise God
and celebrate the Lords Supper provoking one another to Love and to good works 3. Be it known to you that these three Summaries come to us with fuller Evidence of Certain Tradition from God than the rest of the Holy Scriptures Though they are equally true they are not equally Evident to us And this I thus prove 1. The Body of the Scriptures were delivered but one way but the Covenant Creed Lords Prayer and Decalogue are delivered two ways They are in the Scripture and so have all the Evidence of Tradition which the Scriptures have And they were besides that delivered to the memories of all Christians If you say that the Creed is not in the Scripture or that the Scripture is not altered as it is I answer 1. That it is in the Scripture as to the matter signified in as plain words even of the same signification 2. There is no alteration made but a small addition which is no disparagement to it because the ancient substance of it is still known and the additions are not new made things but taken out of Scripture And if yet any Heretick should deny that God is Wise and Good and Just and Merciful it were no dishonour to the Creed nor weakening of its certainty to have these attributes yet added to it 2. These Summaries as is said were far ancienter than the rest of the New Testament as written and known and used long before them 3. These Summaries being in every Christians mind and memory were faster held than the rest of the Scriptures Therefore Parents could and did teach them more to their Children You never read that the Catechizers of the people did teach them all the Bible nor equally ask them who Jared or Mehaleel or Lamech was as they did who Christ was Nor put every History into the Catechism but only the Historical Articles of the Creed 4. Therefore it was far easier to preserve the purity of these Summaries than of the whole Body of the Scriptures For that which is in every mans memory cannot be altered without a multitude of reprovers Which makes the Greeks since Photius keep such a stir about Filioque as to think that the Latines have changed Religion and deserved to be separated from for changing that word But no wonder that many hundred various Readings are crept into the Bible and whole Verses and Histories as that of the Adulterous Woman are out in some that are in others For it is harder to keep such a Volume uncorrupt than a few words Though writing as such is a surer way than memory and the whole Bible could never have been preserved by memory Yet a few words might especially when they had those words in writings also 5. Add to this that the Catechistical Summaries aforesaid were more frequently repeated to the people at least every Lords day Whereas in the reading of the Scriptures one passage will be read but seldom perhaps once or twice in a year And so a corruption not so easily observed 6. And if among an hundred Copies of the Scripture ten or twenty only should by the Carelesness of the Scribes be corrupted all the rest who saw not these Copies would not know it and so they might fall into the hands of Posterity when many of the sounder might be lost 7. And Lastly The danger of depravation had no end For in every age the Scripture must be written over anew for every Church and person that would use it And who that knoweth what writing is could expect that one Copy could be written without errors and that the second should not add to the errors of the 1st as Printers now do who print by faulty Copies And though this danger is much less since Printing came up that is but lately And the mischiefs of Wars and Heretical Tyrants burning the truest Copies hath been some disadvantage to us Obj. Thus you seem to weaken the Certain incorruption of the Scriptures Ans No such thing I do but tell you the case truly as it is The wonderful Providence of God and care of Christians hath so preserved them that there is nothing corrupted which should make one Article of faith the more doubtful I assert no more depravation in them than all confess but only tell you how it came to pass and tell you the greater certainty that we have of the Essentials of Religion than of the rest And whereas every man of brains confesseth that many hundred words in Scripture by Variety of Copies are uncertain I only say that it is not so in the Essentials And I do not wonder that Virgil Ovid Horace Cicero c. Have not suffered such depravations For 1. It is not so easy for a Scribes error to pass unseen in oratione ligata as in oratione soluta in verse as in prose 2. And Cicero with the rest was almost only in the hands of Learned men whereas the Scriptures were in the hands of all the Vulgar Women and Children 3. And the Copies of these Authors were comparatively but few Whereas every one almost got Copies of the Scripture that was able And it 's liker that some depravation should be found among ten thousand Copies than among a hundred So that I have proved to you that the Creed Lords Prayer Commandments and Covenant of Baptism are not to be believed only because they are in the Scripture but also because they have been delivered to us by Tradition and so we have them from two hands as it were or ways of Conveyance and the rest of the Scriptures but by one for the most part I will say yet more because it is true and needful If any live among Papists that keep the Scripture from the people or among the poor Greeks Armenians or Abassines where the people neither have Bibles commonly nor can read or if any among us that cannot read know not what is in the Bible yea if through the fault of the Priest any should be kept from knowing that ever there was a Bible in the world Yet if those persons by Tradition receive the baptismal Covenant the Creed Lords Prayer and Commandments as Gods Word and truly believe and Love and Practice them those persons shall be saved For they have Christs promise for it And the very Covenant itself is the Gift of Christ and Life to consenters Whereas he that knoweth all the Scripture can be saved only by consenting to and performing this same Covenant But having greater helps to understand it and so to Believe it and Consent he hath a great advantage of them that have not the Scripture And so the Scripture is an unspeakable mercy to the Church And it is so far from being too little without the supplement of the Papists Traditions and Councils as that the hundredth part of it as to the bulk of words is not absolutely it self of necessity to Salvation Yet I say more If a man that hath the Scripture should doubt of some Books of it whether