Against the Revolt to a Foreign Jurisdiction, Part 2 · Chapter 10
Chap. X. Some Questions about General Councils, to be resolved before all the World can subject Kings, Kingdoms, Souls and Scripture to their Government or Decrees, and take them for the Vnifying Ruling-Power over the Vniversal Church.
NOthing can be more necessary to all Christians, Learned and Unlearned, than to be sure of the truth of that which must be the foundation of all our obedience and our hopes: And therefore if it be the General Councils Actual or Virtual (in the chief Patriarchs and Metropolitans, or supposed College of Bishops) which is the Unifying or Constitutive Regent part of the Universal Church, and on whose credit we must take the Scripture to be God's Word, and from whose Judgment we must not appeal to Scripture or to God; it's the primum necessarium that we be sure of the Authority and Infallibility or Credit of such Councils.
And first, we are to consider the matter of their Determining Power. 1. There are Things; 2. Words; 3. The signification of words to be judged of.
2. There are Truths of Natural and of Supernatural Revelation to be judged of.
3. There are the Essentials of Christianity, the Integrals and the Accidents to be judged of.
4. And the Judgment is, 1. Witnessing, 2. Teaching, 3. Or judicially Deciding.
We must first know who are the Judges. 2. What is their work. 3. How certain they are.
Qu. 1. Did not Apostles and other Preachers singly convert men (even thousands) before there was any General Council? and that by such evidence as the single Preacher brought? Or was it by the Argument of Universal Consent that every one then was converted? e. g. the Eunuch, Act. 8. The Jailor and Lydia, Act. 16. Cornelius and his house, Act. 10. The three thousand, Act. 2.37, &c.
Q. 2. Did none that St. Paul wrote his Epistles to believe them till they were told that all the Teachers and Bishops of the Churches gave them their Authority? Were the Gospels written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John received only by the Argument of the Councils or Colleges Authority?
Q. 3. Did not Christ that sent out his Preachers by two and two, and bid them shake off the dust of their feet as a Witness against those that did not receive them, expect that they should be received and believed without the Authority of a Council?
Q. 4. Did Christ or his Apostles ever institute a General Council, or Unifying College of Bishops to be the standing Aristocratical Government of all the Universal Church as one?
Q. 5. Would not this have been plainly done, if the certainty of Scripture and Salvation, and the Churches Unity had been founded on it?
Q. 6. If thousands were then made Christians without the knowledge of Councils or College, may they not be so now?
Q. 7. Was the Church no Church, or ungoverned for the first 300 years when there was no General Council?
Q. 8. And were not Christians all that while sure that the Scripture was true? And were they not of the same Faith as now?
Q. 9. Was it not Constantine that called the first General Council at Nice? and had he any Authority to call any but his Subjects?
Q. 10. Do not the Subscriptions of the Antient Councils shew that they were General only as to the Roman Empire, and not to all the World?
Q. 11. How shall we be sure that the Council of one Nation or Empire is Ruler of all the other Kingdoms of the World?
Q. 12. When Councils of equal number, and called by equal Authority of Emperors, condemned one another (in the days of Constantius, Valens, Valentinian, Gratian, Arcadius and Honorius, Theodosius senior and junior, Martian, Zeno, Basiliscus, Leo, Philippicus, Anastasius, Justinian, &c. how were all men and women sure which was of Conciliar Power, and which not? As to their faulty carriage each accused other.
Q. 13. Seeing so many then erred, and are called Hereticks at this day, (as the Councils of Tyre, Ephes. 2. Arimin, Sirmium, Milane, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Rome, &c.) how shall we now be sure which err not?
Q. 14. If we must believe Scripture on the credit of Councils, must we not also believe which Councils are true upon the credit of Councils? And if so, is it on the Authority of that same Council, or another? If of the same, then must every Council, even the Heretical, be so believed, or which, and how known? If of another, must the Church suspend its belief of one Council till ano…her is called to attest it? And on what account is that other to be believed? And what if the later condemn the former, and the next condemn that (as Florence and Pisa, Constance and Basil?)
Q. 15. Is it all the Council agreeing, or the major Vote against the rest that hath the credit or authority aforesaid?
Q. 16. How shall we be sure that the minor part are not in the right?
Q. 17. How shall all the distant World be sure the Votes were truly taken?
Q. 18. Why was the major Vote counted invalid if the Patriarchs were against it? And are those Patriarchs of Divine Authority & infallible?
Q. 19. What if one or two Votes turn the scales for a majority? and what if afterward more come in on the other side and turn it back the other way (as the Constantinopol. Council did in Nazianzens case) are both the sides infallible or authoritative? So at Eph. 1.
Q. 20. Who must call a valid Council? What if the Pope call one, and the Patriarch of Alexandria another, and the Emperor another? which is valid?
Q. 21. Is the Church no Church in the long intervals of Councils?
Q. 22. If it be, where is the Visible Constitutive Supremacy or Power? If in the Patriarchs and Metropolitans they are divided, and account each other sometime Hereticks, and sometime Schismaticks?
Q. 23. Who hath Authority to make Patriarchs now or Metropolitans for all the Christian World?
Q. 24. Must we now obey the major part of the old Patriarchal Seats?
Q. 25. If it be in all the Bishops of the Earth, 1. Who shall go to them all over the World with all our Church cases? 2. Who shall judge which of them are Hereticks while they hereticate each other? 3. Who shall assure us that their Votes are truly gathered? 4. Who shall bring them from all over the Earth to the person to be judged? 5. Can they judge truly without hearing the accused and their witnesses? 6. Where at this day may we find their Decrees by which they Rule, except in Councils?
Q. 26. Must a General Council (or this College) consist of all the Bishops of the World, or but of part?
Q. 27. If of all, is such a Council possible, or lawful?
Q. 28. If of part, who shall chuse them? And seeing undoubted experience tells us that most of the Clergy every where in such cases obey the Power that hath the Sword, whether the choice that is made in the Turks Empire will not be made by the Turk, and in other Kingdoms of Heathens, Infidels, Papists, Hereticks, by their several Kings and Magistrates? And can we be sure such are infallible?
Q. 29. If the Empire of Abassia have but one Bishop (the Abuna) shall that Empire have but one Vote in Councils, and be ruled by the rest? And is it not certain that those next the Antipodes, and remotest Kingdoms, can send but few? and must they therefore be ruled by those near the place who will be many?
Q. 30 Yea, is it not wickedness or madness to attempt to call aged Bishops (or any) from all the Christian World, to displease prohibiting Princes, to hazard their lives in travel many years, to forsake their Flocks so long, and by differing Languages not able to understand each other; nor like to live long enough to bring home the Decrees, when perhaps they must sit so many years in Council as they did at Trent (wearing out the lives of many Popes) (And what is the necessity of all this?)
Q. 31. If those few that are sent do that which the rest at home dissent from, is it valid? e. g. King James chose Six to go to the Synod at Dort, and most then consented, and most now dissent; The Parliament chose a Synod of one Mind, and the King by his Clergy one of another.) And how shall we know that the Churches own the Acts of their Delegates, and dissent not (as the Greeks did after the Council of Florence? Can all Men and Women rest on things no better known to them?
Q. 32. Seeing that it is notorious that the Bishops of almost all the Christian World, except part of Europe, are very unlearned ignorant Men, (Armenians, Georgians, Iberians, Mengrelians, most of the Greeks, Moscovites, and the numerous Easterns called Nestorians, and Jacobites, and Copties, &c. and abundance of the Papists also in Europe) How shall we be sure that so many Ignorant Men (and too vicious) will do the work of Wise or Infallible Judges of the Christian World, if they do but meet together in Council? (much less as scattered and called a College.) Must not this be by an undeniable Miracl…? And hath God promised to Govern his Church by constant Miracles; yea, as many Miracles as there be ignorant and wicked Bishops, and that through all Generations?
Q. 33. Doth it not require great Knowledge of History to be sure what Councils there have been, and which were Orthodox and which Heretical, which valid and which invalid, and what they did? and which side had the Major Vote? And is all this Historical Knowledge necessary to Salvation, in Learned and Unlearned?
Q. 34. Yea, Is there one Priest of many that hath such certainty of such History of Councils, when Writers so much disagree?
Q. 35. Seeing Historians are but like other men, and all men are lyars or untrusty, and it's notorious that Ignorance, Faction, Temerity and Partiality, if not Malignity, hath filled the World with so much false History, that except in Matters of Publick uncontradicted Evidence, no man well knoweth what to believe, How shall all Christians lay their Salvation on so great knowledge of History as is necessary to certainty herein?
Q. 36. If the belief of Councils (or the College of Bishops as wide as the World) be fundamentally necessary to Duty, Unity, or Salvation, Is it not necessary that all know what are their Decrees and Laws? And how can they know this when Councils and Decrees are so Voluminous; and few Priests know them? and when the World is yet disagreed, what Canons or Laws are obligatory, and what not? But they contradict and condemn each others Laws?
Q. 37. If a Lay-man should know but one part of the Councils Decrees about Faith or Obedience, will such a defective half Faith and Obedience save him? or must he know all?
Q. 38. If you say that all this Historical Knowledge is not necessary to the Laity, but they must believe herein the Priests or Bishop that is over them. 1. How is this then a belief of Councils? 2. What shall the poor People do, that one of many hundred of them never see their Bishop, much less ever spake with him. 3. And are their Priests infallible herein or not?
Q. 39. Doth not this by the deceitful noise of the Catholick Church and Councils, and a College of Bishops, make every Parish Priest's word the very Foundation into which all mens Faith must be resolved? And he that saith [I believe the Scripture, because the Church and Councils propose it or attest it, and I believe that the Church and Council say it, because the Priest saith it] Doth he not say as much as [I believe the Scripture, Church and Councils upon the bare word of the Priest?]
Q. 40. Is it not hard for the People that know their Priests to be sottish, ignorant, prophane, drunken, malicious men, to lay all their Salvation on a supposed certainty that these Priests say true?
Q. 41. If the Parishioners know also that their Priests never read the Councils, and confess that he is ignorant of them, and know him also to be a common lyar, Can they certainly believe the Scripture and the Councils, and the Matters of Faith, and duty contained in both, upon the word of such a Priest?
Q. 42. Can they that are unlearned and never see a Bishop, tell whether the Parish Priest and the Bishop say the same? Or whether their Bishop be of the same Mind with the other Bishops? and whether the Bishops e. g. of England be of the same Mind with the Bishops of France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, &c. and they of the same Mind with the Greeks, &c.
Q. 43. Is it a Divine Faith that is resolved thus into the meer belief of Man; yea, of an Ignorant Priest or Prelate? or but a Humane?
Q. 44. If we and all men had no other certainty of the Scripture but the word of such a Priest, or the Decree of a Council, would it be more or less certain to us than now it is?
Q. 45. Have none of all those Christians a true Divine Faith, who are converted by Protestant Preachers, who teach them to believe the Scripture upon other Evidence than a Councils word?
Q. 46. By what Evidence doth a Council know the Scripture to be God's Word? Is it only by the Testimony of a former Council? If so, How did that former Council know it? and so the first Council that had none before to testifie it? And what use is there for the assertion of the later Council, when it's done already by a former?
Q. 47. Why doth not one Council determine of all that is necessary to Salvation, but leave it still undone? But if it be done, must new ones be called to the end of the World, to say the same thing over again, and do that which others had done before them?
Q. 48. Is not the Law the Rule of Duty and Judgment? and must all Christians be Judged at last by the Bishops Canon Law? And seeing Sin is a Transgression of the Law, and it's harder to obey a Thousand Laws than a few; Are not they the most Mortal Enemies to Christians who make them so many Laws, and make Salvation so hard a work?
Q. 49. Seeing Christ was above three Years teaching his Apostles before he died, and after his Resurrection [was seen of them fourty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God, and being assembled together with them, commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the Promise of the Father, even the Spirit to lead them into all truth, and bring all things to their remembrance, and their Commission was to teach all Christians to observe whatever Christ commanded (Act. 1.3, 4. Math. 28.19, 20.) is it to be believed that yet Christ by himself and his Spirit in these Apostles did not make all the Laws that are Divine, and enow for the Universal Church to observe as necessary to Salvation and Universal Concord?
Q. 50. Is it not enough to Salvation and Church Concord for all the Pastors of the Churches to agree, 1. In preserving these Laws and Doctrines of Christ? 2. And to teach the People to know and obey them? 3. And to defend them against Adversaries? and 4. To make them the rule of their Communion by the exercise of the Keys? 5. And by their own Authority to determine of variable Circumstances of Worship (such as the Place of meeting, the time, the translation, the subject for the day, &c.) Is there besides all this a necessity of Universal Laws for the Salvation and Concord of Believers, and of a standing Soveraign Power in Priests, Prelates or Patriarchs or Pope to make such Laws?
Q. 51. Have we not better assurance that the foresaid Apostles taught by Christ, and inspired by the Holy Ghost, had Authority and Infallibility for this work, than we can have that Pope, Patriarchs, Prelates or Priests have it?
Q. 52. When some English Prelates and Priests tell us that he is a Schismatick that obeyeth not the Universal Church, and that Schism is a damning Sin, do they not Preach meer desperation to all that have not more knowledge than I have, who cannot possibly find out a Governing Universal Church, nor its Laws, though I would willingly find it and obey it?
Q. 53. Do they not Preach common desperation who say that Schism is a damnable Sin, and he is in that guilt who suffers himself to be Excommunicated by Prelates for not obeying them in any unsinful condition of Communion? (as H. Dodwell speaketh.) Do not such Carnifices animarum make it necessary to Salvation, to know all the unsinful things in the World which a Prelate may impose to be unsinful? And is any man on Earth so Skilful? How many indifferent things are there which the wisest man may doubt whether they be indifferent: Of old it was thought enough to know the few things which God made necessary: and now these Tormenting Uniters make it necessary to know the multitude of things indifferent to be such?
Q. 54. Must we needs know what sense perceiveth, by the credit of a General Council or all the Bishops of the World? As whether I see the Light or Colours? What taste my Meat hath, &c? If not, why may I not take Bread to be Bread, and Wine to be Wine, on the credit of my senses, though the Bishops or Council say the contrary?
Q. 55. Must I have the Authority of a Council or College of Bishops to believe that there is a God, and that he is most Great and Wise and Good, most Holy, Merciful, True and Just? or to know that there is a Life to come, and the Soul Immortal? or that men must not hate the Good, and love the Evil as such, nor live in Murther, Theft, Adultery, Perjury, &c. Doth not the Law of Nature bind men without a Council of Prelates? And can they null that Law by their pretended Soveraignty?
Q. 56. Must every man have the Sentence of a General Council (or College as wide as the Christian World) to satisfie him of the truth of Christianity before he is Baptized, and made a Christian?
Q. 57. Must we know what the Council or spacious College saith, before we believe the Creed, Lord's Prayer, and Ten Commandments? or did the ancient Christians receive them only on such Authority? Did not every Baptizer expect a Profession of the Creed?
Q. 58. Was not the Bible received before there was a General Council?
Q. 59. Have not Councils differed about the Canonical Books of Scripture? See Bishop Cousins of the Canon, Compared with the Council of Trent.
Q. 60. Must we have new Councils to deliver us again the same Creed and Bible?
Q. 61. Is it not a reproaching of Christianity, to tell the World that after 1691 Years it is not yet fully known what it is, but we must have new Councils to tell it us, and to make it up?
Q. 62. Did Councils only receive the old Apostles Creed, when they made so many new ones, or added so many Articles?
Q. 63. Was the Primitive Church of the same Species with the present Romish and Imposing Church, when he was then a Christian who profest belief of the Creed as the Christian Symbol, and to desire according to the Lord's Prayer, and Practise according to Christ's Commands? And now so many other things are made necessary hereto.
Q. 64. Do not those men deal falsely who subscribe the 39 Articles of the sufficiency of the Scripture as to all things necessary to Salvation, and yet say that it's necessary to Salvation to obey the Bishop of the place in all unsinful things, and consequently to Believe them all to be unsinful?
Q. 65. Is it by the Divine Authority of a Council or Mundane College of Prelates, that we know which are the true Writings of Ignatius, Irenaeus, Clemens R. & Alex. Tertullian, Cyprian, Hierom, Augustin, &c? Or do their Critical Writers send us to the College or Council to know? If not, why may not the Canon of Scripture be known (yea much better) by meer Historical Tradition and inherent Evidence?
Q. 66. Is it not by History and not Church Power that we know what Popes have been at Rome, what Councils have been called, and what they decreed? And may not the same way secure us of the Matter of Fact about the Scripture?
Q. 67. Hath any Council or College yet Decreed which are the true and current Copies of the Original of the Scripture? and which of the various Lections are true? If they had agreed but of the vulgar Latin, would Sixtus 5th and Clemens 8th, have Published Editions so vastly different? If they never did it yet, when will they do it?
Q. 68. Did ever Council or College determine which is the truest Translation?
Q. 69. Did ever Council or College give the Church a Commentary on the Bible?
Q. 70. Did they ever write a Decision of the multitudes of Controversies about the meaning of several Texts, and the multitudes of Doctrines which are yet controverted among Papists themselves and all the World?
Q. 71. Is it a Satisfaction, or a gross Cheat to tell us of a necessary Church Power, to Expound Scripture, and Judge of Controversies, who yet will not do it, but leave all unexpounded and undecided?
Q. 72. Was Gregory Nazianzen a Fool, that spake so much of the hurt that Councils do, and resolved never to go to more?
Q. 73. Can I know that Pope or Council have Authority given them by Christ, before I believe that Christ is Christ, and had Authority himself?
Q. 74. Can I know that Christ's Promise to Pope, Council or Prelate is true, before I know that the Promise of Justification, Adoption and Salvation are true: that is, Before I am a Christian?
Q. 75. Can I believe the Promise of Pardon and Salvation, or the Promise made to General Councils or Prelates, without knowing the meaning of those Promises? And can I believe the Churches Power from God, without believing the Promise of it? And if I can understand all these Promises without a Council, why may I not understand more? And how then do I receive all Scripture from a Council?
Q. 76. Do those that Preach to convert Infidels, in Congo, China, Japan, Mexico, among Turks, &c. Preach first the Authority of General Councils (or a Mundane College) as the Primum credendum, upon whose credit Christianity is to be received? Hath this been the way to Convert the World?
Q. 77. If Paul curse an Angel from Heaven if he bring another Gospel, and Paul charge Timothy to see that men Preach no other or new Doctrine, must there be Councils or a College to make either a new Gospel, or a new Doctrine, or Universal Law?
Q. 78. If men were saved without believing the Canons and Decrees of Councils before they were made, even by simple Christianity, is it not necessary Mercy to let men be so saved still?
Q. 79. If it be not a new Gospel, but mutable Accidents which the Church Laws do determine of, what need there an Universal Power or Soveraignty, or an Universal Law for such, when divers Churches and Countries may have divers such Accidentals, and the same Churches may change them as they see cause?
Q. 80. If it be not Legislation but Judicature that we must have an Universal Judge or Power for, what are the Cases that they must Judge? Sure it is not whether John or Thomas shall be judged capable of Baptism? or of the Lord's Supper? or whether he be an Adulterer, a Drunkard, and impenitent therein, and so to be Excommunicate? Must all the World come before all the World? Shall Millions of Sinners be unjudged till all the Bishops of the World Judge them? If it be Persons accused of Heresie, Schism or any Sin that must be judged, must they not be heard, and their witness heard before they can be judged justly? But if they Judge not of Persons but of Doctrines, whether they be Heresie or not, this will make no Alteration or Reformation, till it be judged what persons are guilty of such Errors or Heresies; And if particular Pastors on the place must judge all such persons, is not the Scripture the Rule of Faith a sufficient Rule to judge of Heresie by?
Q. 81. If it be whole Churches that are to be judged, will not a brotherly power of disowning their Communion serve, without a Governing Power? Had every one a Governing Power to whom the Apostles commanded with such not to eat, nor bid them good speed? May not Princes renounce Communion with Neighbour Princes and Nations without being their Governour?
Q. 82. In conclusion doth it not remain that this pretended Universal Soveraignty (Monarchical or Aristocratical) is the device of the Prince of Pride, a Treasonable Usurpation over all Princes, disobedience to Christ, Luke 22. and Antichristian Usurpation of his Prerogative, and a base Captivating of the Souls and Reason of Mankind, to a pretended Power which common sense, reason and experience, fully proveth to be a natural impossibility, or that which in practice no Mortal Man or College is capable of.