Historical Defense of the Reformation, Part 1 · Chapter 8
CHAP. VIII.
A Further Examination of that Authority of the Prelats, and that abſolute Obedience which they pretend ought to be given them.
IT is an amazing thing to behold a prejudice and a preſent Intereſt, ſo far to blind thoſe, who ſet before us this abſolute Obedience to the Governours of the Church, and who would have the Faithful ſtrip themſelves intirely of the care of their Souls, to place it in their Paſtors hands, that they ſhould not have conſidered, that it is the moſt pernitious Maxim in the World, the moſt contrary to the Glory of God, to the Intereſts of his Juſtice, and his ſervice, to the ſubſiſtence of his true Church. They will themſelves I hope be perſwaded of it, if they will but make with me theſe following Reflexions.
1. The firſt is, That by that Principle they juſtify the people of the Jews, when they adhered to that falſe worſhip brought into their Church by the Authority of their Ordinary Paſtors, or practiſed with their conſent and approbation, which fell out 1. Kings 14.very often, as we have before noted, and as it appears from the Hiſtory of the Old Teſtament. The people in that Story, were not in the leaſt culpable either for ſacrificing upon the high places, or in the Groves, as they had began to do under the Reign of Rehoboam, nor for having of Images, or as the Scripture ſpeaks carved Idols, nor in offering up incenſe to the Brazen Serpent, as they did even down to the reign of Hezekiah, ſince in doing all thoſe things they did but follow their Prieſts, and could ſay that they referred themſelves to them to ſee for them, according to what they were bound. They were not to be blamed then, when under 2. Kings 16.the reign of Ahaz they offered their oblations on a ſtrange Altar, made after the manner of that of the Syrians, ſince it was Ʋriah the Prieſt that ordered it, and ſet it up in the place of the Altar of God, to the end that the people ſhould there offer up their Devotions. They were not in the leaſt to be blamed in thoſe days wherein their Prophets charged their Prieſts and ordinary Paſtors with having ſinned againſt God and propheſied by Baal, Jerem. 2.and ſaying to a ſtock, Thou art my Father, and to a ſtone, Thou art my Mother, and by that means to have corrupted the people of God. For what could thoſe people do more then follow their Paſtors, if it were true, that we ought to ſee with their eyes, and to tread always in their ſteps.
2. But if by eſtabliſhing that Principle, they juſtify a People in their Idolatry and Violation of the Law of their God, if they acquit them of all fault in that reſpect, it is not leſs certain, that at the ſame time they condemn God for Injuſtice, in having ſent his chaſtiſements upon an innocent people, who had done nothing but what they were bound to do, in following their guides, in that he was not ſatisfied with puniſhing only the Authours of thoſe Crimes, I mean, thoſe Guides who only were culpable. For why ſhould he puniſh thoſe who ſubmitted themſelves to their guides, whom they could do no otherwiſe, then obey? They condemn all the Complaints of the Prophets, which they addreſt immediately to the People, and all the Threatnings, and ſtinging Cenſures with which their writings are full. For to what purpoſe ſhould they complain, cenſure and threaten with ſo much Exaggeration and vehemency, if the people ought not by themſelves to examine the points of Religion, and that they ought on the contrary to commit themſelves only into their Paſtours hands? They condemn all thoſe holy men, who did not adhere to their Errors, and Profanations; and they muſt ſee themſelves reduced to the neceſſity of condemning them of raſhneſs and preſumption, for having been willing to make uſe of their own Eyes, and not to refer themſelves wholly to the conduct of their Church. They condemn all thoſe in that Church who have firſt ſpoke of a Reformation, and all thoſe who have followed them in it. For thoſe who would not ſee but by the Eyes of the Church, would never have a Tongue to ſpeak any thing againſt its preſent State, nor ears to hear any thing that could be ſaid upon that ſubject. So thoſe good Kings, as Hezekiah and Joſiah, who ſet up the true worſhip of God, and did pull down Idolatry, would have been no other but raſh perſons, who had Executed that which they ſhould not have ſo much as undertaken.
What can they anſwer to that? Will they ſay that all thoſe Reformers wrought miracles, to Authoriſe their Calls? But that is not true. For neither Hezekiah nor Joſiah, nor thoſe other Kings who aboliſhed thoſe Superſtitions, and Errors, did any Miracle; for that, they had recourſe to nothing but the Law of God. Will they ſay, that they were the Eccleſiaſties themſelves who laboured in thoſe Reformations? I confeſs it. But that alone lets us ſee, that they had done ill in referring themſelves meerly to their Authority, ſince they themſelves had comdemned what they had before approved of, and by their change and their Repentance, they acknowledged they had done ill, whence it may follow, that the people had done ill alſo in repoſing their truſt in in them. Will they ſay, that the True Worſhip of God having been of primitive Inſtitution, and by conſequence the firſt Church having been pure, the people would have done ill, if when a change ſhould have happened, they had not abode with, and ſtuck to their firſt Paſtors; and that by that means of rendring to the Church that ſubmiſſion which they owed to it, they would have hindred its Corruption. But to aſſert that, is but to affirm well nigh what we would have. When the Latin Church began to corrupt it ſelf, the people ought to have ſet themſelves in Oppoſition to it, in ſticking cloſe inviolably to their firſt guides, and if they had done ſo, they had not needed ever to have ſpoke of a Reformation. Notwithſtanding, the have not done ſo, and the Jews likewiſe had not done ſo, they have not failed of walking after that inclination which all men have to do ill. The Faithful Iſaiah 1.City became an Harlot, its ſilver was turned into droſs, and its Wine was mixt with Water, as one Prophet reproaches them. What ought they to have done in that Miſery, muſt they have remained in that State, under pretence of no more ſeeing, then by the eyes of the Church of walking only in its Steps, and of deveſting themſelves of their own conduct to reſt upon that of the Church? No certainly, whatſoever the Author of thoſe Prejudices ſays. They ought on the contrary to have re-aſcended up to the Primitive Church, to the firſt Inſtitution of their Religion, to have ruled themſelves by that, and to have laboured to ſave the preſent Church from that ruin where into its Corrupters would have precipitated her. That had been the duty of all good men, and a contrary ſentiment would have been criminal. But all that lets us diſtinctly ſee how falſe and pernitious that Maxime of the Author of the Prejudices is.
Will they ſay, to defend themſelves, that their is a very great difference between the Jewiſh Viſible Church, and the Chriſtian, that this has its Rights, Priviledges and Promiſes which the other had not. For ſhe has a Soveraign Authority over the Faith of her Children, a priviledge, that ſhe can never err, and promiſes of a perpetual viſibility? But to come to that, they ought firſt to renounce all thoſe general proofs upon which they found that Abſolute Obedience to the Latin Church. They need ſay no more as the Author of the Prejudices has done, that, the darkneſs of our minds, our perſonal Prejudices, the uncertainty wherein we are of being deceived in our Judgments, the being overwhelmed with a thouſand cares, and a thouſand Temporal neceſſities which almoſt In the Preface.wholly take us up, and which will not allow us to give more then a very little Time to the Examining the Truths of Religion, the want of neceſſary helps, the ignorance, narrow and limited underſtandings of the greateſt part of mankind, conſtrain us, to refer our ſelves to the Church. All that would be to no purpoſe, if they reſtrain it to a priviledge of the Chriſtian Church. For theſe very ſame general reaſons had place in the time of the Jewiſh Church, men ſaw not then more clearly then they do in theſe days, they were not more aſſured in their Judgments, they were not leſs cumbred with worldly affairs, they were not leſs unprovided of neceſſary helps for the Examination of the Truths of Religion, they were not then leſs ignorant, and their minds leſs narrow, then men are now in theſe days, and yet notwithſtanding, all that did not make it their duty blindly to follow their Paſtors, or Ordinary Guides. Theſe are then nothing but ſhadows, and frivolous pretences, which having been of no force then, cannot have any weight now. We need not further ſay, as the Author of Prejudices has done, In the Preface.That it is certain that God can ſave men, and even the moſt ignorant and ſimple. That yet he does not offer them any other way to Salvation, then that of the True Religion. That it is therefore neceſſary that that ſhould be not only poſſible, but eaſy to be known; that yet notwithſtanding it is clear, that there is no way more difficult, more dangerous, and leſs fitted to all capacities then that of examining all its Tenets. One may equally apply all thoſe propoſitions to the Times of the Old Teſtament, as well as to thoſe of the New. God could ſave men there. He made no other way to Salvation then that of the True Religion. That ought then to have been eaſily known, and that way of Examination was not leſs dangerous, nor more fitted to all ſorts of capacities, then it is now. Notwithſtanding all that had not any force to hinder the Faithful from Examining it. They cannot then in theſe days draw any conſequence from what they ſo propoſe. I affirm the ſame thing of all thoſe other inconveniences which they invent to take away from every one that right of Examining the State of Religion by the Scripture, and not wholly to believe their Paſtors, as, that it would be to introduce a Principle of Schiſm and Diviſion, that every one might make himſelf a Judge of the Church, that every one might make a Religion according to his Fancy, that it is a great raſhneſs for private Perſons to imagine that they have more Underſtanding and more Wiſdom than the whole Church, and other ſuch like things. They may ſee that all thoſe arguings are brought in vainly and to no purpoſe; for if they were good and ſolid, being ſo general as they are, they would ſerve for all Times and all Places, and would have their Force in favour of the Jewiſh Church, as well as they would have them conclude in Favour of the Latin.
In the ſecond place, thoſe Rights, Priviledges, and Promiſes which they would aſcribe to the Chriſtian Viſible Church, in excluſion of the Jewiſh are evidently null, if they would make them depend preciſely on Chriſtianity. For as I have before noted, the Greek Church, the Armenian, the Neſtorian, and Aethiopian might pretend to them as juſtly as the Latin, and yet, the Latin applies them to her ſelf in particular, to the prejudice of all the others. They ought then either to ſhew us what reaſon ſhe has to appropriate thoſe Rights, Priviledges, and general Promiſes, and to make that, that regards the Body of the Univerſal Church become particular to her; or it is neceſſary they ſhew us that indeed they are not thoſe Rights, Priviledges, and Promiſes that are common to all Chriſtian Societies, and that they are peculiar to the Latin Church. But they know not how to do either the one or the other. For neither Nature nor Grace have given any of thoſe Priviledges or Rights to the Latins, in excluſion from all other Chriſtians. They are neither more Lords of our Conſciences, nor more Infallible than others. Chriſtianity is Uniform throughout. The Scripture alſo does not contain any one particular promiſe for them. On the contrary, Saint Paul ſays, That in Jeſus Chriſt there is neither Jew nor Greek, nor Barbarian, nor Scythian, nor Bond nor Free, but Chriſt is all and in all. So that the Latin Church has no reaſon to draw that to her ſelf which is a common Right, nor to pretend any peculiar Priviledges.
But, in the ſumm of all, we have made it appear in the foregoing Chapters that thoſe pretended Priviledges of Infallibility which they aſcribe to the Chriſtian Church Viſible, and thoſe promiſes of perpetual Viſibility, in that Sence of Viſibility wherein they underſtand it, are Chimaeras which have not any Foundation either in Scripture or Reaſon. And as to that right of Soveraign-Authority, it cannot here be alledged but to very ill purpoſe. For it is that which is yet in Diſpute, and whereof we have ſhewn the falſity from the example of the Jewiſh Church. But they may draw from that example a conſequence againſt the Latin one, becauſe that if that pretence would have been heretofore pernicious and deſtructive to Religion and the true Church, as they may ſee it would have been, it follows that it will be ſo yet in theſe days. If then they cannot ſet before us any other difference between thoſe two Terms, and thoſe two Churches, which hinders my Concluſion, the Argument will hold intire; for it will not be enough to overthrow it, meerly to ſay, that the Chriſtian Church has that Authority, and that the Jewiſh had it not, but they ought to give us a reaſon for it.
3. But to proceed with our Reflexions, If that Maxim whereof we treat, were true, that is to ſay, if men were bound to give to their ordinary Paſtors a blind obedience in the matters of Religion, to ſee with their Eyes, to tread in their Steps, and to deveſt themſelves of their own conduct to reſt upon theirs, the Jews who rejected Jeſus Chriſt and his Doctrine, during the time of his Preaching, thoſe who demanded of Pilate his Death by crying againſt him, away with him, away with him, Crucify him, and thoſe in fine who rejected the word of his Apoſtles, and who inſtead of being converted by them, perſecuted them, would be ſufficiently juſtified in their bold unbeleif, and that deteſtable Parricide which they committed on the Perſon of the Son of God. For what were all thoſe things but juſt conſequences of that Principle? They would not hearken to the Cenſures that Jeſus Chriſt made of the Traditions and Doctrine of the Scribes and Phariſees; their Church admitted thoſe Traditions. They would not believe that Jeſus was the true Meſſiah; their Church had determined that whoſoever did believe it ſhould be caſt out of their Synagogues. They rejected the Proofs that he gave them from the Scripture; it was not for them to judge of the true meaning of the Scripture, and the Church underſtood it otherwiſe. They demanded that he might be Crucified; the Church had condemned him for a Seducer, as an Enemy to Moſes and the Law; it was not for them to inform themſelves any farther. They rejected his Miracles; the Church did ſo too, and ſaid, that he caſt out Devils by the power of Beelzebub. They would not hearken to his Apoſtles, the Authority of the Church forbad them. Hitherto their conduct is within due Rules, ſuppoſing that the Principle of the Author of prejudices, might be juſt and lawful, and thoſe miſerable People are very much obliged to him for furniſhing them with arms wherewith to defend themſelves.
4. That Maxim of the Author of thoſe Prejudices, draws yet far greater abſurdities after it. It miniſters accuſations againſt Jeſus Chriſt himſelf, againſt his Apoſtles and all thoſe who were converted by their Words. If the Faithful, by thoſe Laws of their ſubmiſſion to the Church, ought not to have any other Eyes than hers, why did Jeſus Chriſt preſent himſelf immediatly to the People, when he ſhould firſt of all have made known his call from Heaven the Glory of his Perſon, and the Dignity of his Office to the Church, to have made them own it by proving it to them before he Preach't to the People? He was they will ſay her Lord, and the Church her ſelf would have had no Authority but by him; that is true; But if the People owed the Church an abſolute obedience, they would have owed it all that time that the Lord would have remained unknown. He ought then to have began to make himſelf known to her, and to have opened her Eyes, that he might at the ſame time have opened thoſe of all the People. If Jeſus Chriſt had been known to have been indeed what he was there is no doubt to be made, but that he would alone have been heard without any dependance on the Church, of which he is the Soveraign Lord; but as yet he was not, and till that knowledge had obtained, the People would have been always bound, according to the Principle of the Author of Prejudices, not to have ſeen but by the Eyes of the Church to which God had ſubjected them. To ſpeak then home to this Queſtion, whether Jeſus Chriſt was the Son of God, the promiſed Meſſiah, or whether he was not, the Faithful being bound to believe nothing but what the Church ſhould tell them, he could not but have addreſt himſelf to her, and not to the Faithful People immediatly. Nevertheleſs, it is moſt true that he addreſſed himſelf neither to the Prieſts, nor to the Scribes, nor to the Phariſees, nor to the Doctors, he Preached his Goſpel to the ſimple People, out of them he took his Diſciples, and it was among them that he did almoſt all his Miracles, in fine he himſelf gives thanks to his Father for that he had hid his Myſteries from the Wiſe and Prudent, and had revealed them unto Mat. 11.Babes. Whence could ſuch a conduct proceed ſo contrary to that Soveraign Authority, wherewith at this day they would inveſt the Church, that is the Paſtors, in reſpect of the Lay-men? It is not difficult to underſtand, that it was becauſe Jeſus Chriſt did no ways act from that Principle, nor owned it for a good one; for if he had owned it, he had never ſuffered the People to have violated it, he had made uſe of another way to make himſelf known to them, and he would have employed the Miniſtry of the Church for that end.
5. One may ſee the ſame thing of the Apoſtles, if the People ought entirely to refer themſelves to the Church, in matters of Faith and Religion. Why did the Apoſtles ſollicit the Jews to embrace their Doctrine, when they could not ſo much as hear them without being criminal? They will ſay they had a commandment from their Maſter to Preach this Goſpel; I confeſs it, but the Jews lived under a Church that had openly declared it ſelf againſt their Preaching, and they might tell them according to the Maxim of thoſe Gentlemen, It is vain that you Preach to us, that you work Miracles, that you alledge the Scriptures; We ſee by the Eyes of the Church, we hear by her Ears, we march after her Steps, and we deveſt our ſelves of our own guidance to reſt our ſelves upon hers; This is our Duty, and the Law that is impoſed on us, why do you go about to tempt us to violate it? Suppoſe we that a Jew after having heard one of thoſe Divine and admirable Sermons of Saint Paul ſhould have addreſt himſelf to him, and have demanded of him what Authority he pretended to give to that new Chriſtian Church which he took ſuch care to eſtabliſh, whether he did not mean that its Children ſhould render a blind Obedience to it, and that they ſhould refer themſelves wholly to their Paſtors for deciding matters of Faith, without intermedling themſelves to ſearch out the true ſence of the Scripture? Suppoſe yet, that that great Apoſtle ſhould have anſwered him according to In the Preface of that prejudices.that Maxim of the Author of Prejudices; That it was true that the darkneſs of our underſtandings, and our prejudices, might be able to hinder us from ſeeing in the Scriptures thoſe Truths that are clearly contained in them, that a man could not aſſure himſelf that he was not of the number of thoſe who deceived themſelves. That that doubt is terrible, but that which yet infinitely heightens that dread which it muſt needs cauſe, is, that men are neceſſarily bound to chuſe their Party, and to make ſo weighty a choice (to wit of that Religion that they ought to follow) amidſt the cumbrances of a thouſand cares, and a thouſand worldly neceſſities that almoſt wholly take them up, and that will allow them but a very little time to examine the Truths of that Religion. That the greateſt part of Mankind wanted neceſſary helps, that the half of Chriſtians could not tell how to read, that others did not underſtand any Language but their own, that others had ſo narrow and limited a Capacity, that they could but very difficultly conceive the moſt eaſie things. In fine, that there was no way more dangerous, more difficult, and leſs fitted to all ſorts of Capacities then that of a particular examination of its Tenets. That the cutting off of that way, led of it ſelf to that of the Authority of the Church, ſince every man is bound to know the truth of ſomething, and he that could not learn by himſelf, muſt neceſſarily learn it of another. They will then have no reaſon to doubt whether they ſhall take the Catholick Church for their Guide, and borrow its Eyes to diſcern the Truths of the Faith, and they will believe themſelves a thouſand times more aſſured in following that, than if they were left to the weak ef-forts of their own Reaſon. Tell me I pray, whether that diſcourſe would have been very proper for the Converſion of that Jew? and whether he might not juſtly have anſwered, That he was alſo uncertain whether he ſhould not deceive himſelf, and take the wrong ſide, from the very ſame Reaſons that he had alledged; from whence he might as well conclude that he was bound to yeild himſelf to the Authority of the Jewiſh Church, which had been the moſt eminent one that was ever in the World; becauſe that although it had Sects among it who diſputed the Truth of its Tenets, yet it had nothing that could make that high Authority which aroſe from external ſigns, to be oppoſed with any colourable pretence. To ſpeak in the ſame Language that the Author of Prejudices uſes, That he ſought then to take her for his Guide, and to believe himſelf a thouſand times more aſſured in following her, than if he had been left to the weak ef-forts of his own Reaſon. Furthermore, he might think it very ſtrange that the Apoſtles of Jeſus Chriſt ſhould go about to violate, in reſpect of the Jewiſh Church, a Principle, which in the end they had a deſign to eſtabliſh for the preſervation of their own, that they ſhould then plead for that Maxim, that every one ought to examine the Tenets of the Faith, and ſearch out the true Religion by himſelf, without abſolutely truſting to his ordinary Paſtors, ſince that they would have them to hear them, notwithſtanding the condemnation that their Church had pronounced againſt them. But that afterwards they ſhould quickly change that Maxim towards thoſe whom they ſhould have converted, and have bound them to have depended blindly on their Guides. That Inequality would not have appeared fair. Tell me I pray yet once more, whether the Jew had not had ſome Reaſon of his ſide? and whether that Maxim of the Authour of Prejudices is not far more deſtructive of the Intereſts of Chriſtianity than can be eaſily conceived? It opens a Gate to the Jews to defend their Unbelief, to juſtify all their bold attempts, and to calumniate Jeſus Chriſt himſelf and his bleſſed Apoſtles.
6. What might not thoſe unbelievers have ſaid againſt thoſe who were Converted? They might have treated them as raſh, preſumptuous, as Rebels and Schiſmaticks, as diſturbers of Order, as a ſort of men of a private ſpirit, who would make themſelves Judges of the Church, and deſpoil it of its lawful Authority, to inveſt themſelves in it. But that which is moſt ſcandalous, is, that as that Principle which we oppoſe opens the mouths of the Enemies of the Goſpel, ſo it ſhuts up thoſe of the new Chriſtians, and deprives them of the means of juſtifying themſelves. For what could they have ſaid, to which thoſe others might not immediately have repli'd by the meer application of that Principle? Could they have ſaid that they had known out of the Scripture, out of Moſes and the Prophets, that Jeſus was the true Meſſiah? But they might have anſwered them, that it belonged to the Church and not to them to judge of the true meaning of the Scripture. Could they have ſaid that Jeſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles had an extraordinary Call? But they might have told them alſo, That it was not for private men to judge whether thoſe who ſaid they were extraordinarily ſent, were ſo indeed, that that would be to give way to impoſtors, that the Church ought to make that diſcernment, and that ſhe had loudly declared that they were no other then ſuch. Could they have alleadged the Miracles of Jeſus and his Apoſtles? But they might have given them the very ſame for an anſwer, that ſeeing there were true and falſe miracles, it was not for the common people who ow'd an abſolute obedience to their Guides, to undertake to diſcern between them, but for the Church, which had then explained them, when ſhe ſaid that Jeſus caſt out Devils by the Prince of Devils. Could they have complained of the Diſorders and Mark 3.Corruptions that then reigned in the Jewiſh Church? But they might have told them, That they were ingrateful and unnatural Children, who lifted themſelves up againſt their Mother, and thought of nothing elſe but diſhonouring her, and that whatſoever they might ſay, they ought to borrow her eyes, for the diſcerning the Truths of the Faith, and to reſt aſſured in following of her. In fine, that Principle ſeems to do nothing elſe but to give a compleat Victory to Judaiſm over Chriſtianity.
7. But there is more in it yet; for the Heathens might ſo have prevailed againſt the firſt Preachers of the Goſpel, and have ſtopt its Progreſs. I confeſs that the Heathens did not call their Religious Society by the name of the Church. But what does the Name ſignify? Were they not all united in one Religious Society? Had they not all their Guides, their Prieſts, thoſe that offered up their Sacrifices, and their high Prieſts? Put into their hands then that Maxim of the Author of Prejudices, with the grounds upon which it is eſtabliſhed, the obſcurity of mens underſtandings, that doubt of being deceived, the cumbrance of worldly affairs, the want of neceſſary helps, and all thoſe other pretences which they propoſe to us to make us blindly follow their conduct, and it will work the ſame effect as it did in the hands of the Jews. The Heathens would not have failed to have made uſe of it, for the hindring their hearkning to thoſe Preachers, to juſtify that obſtinacy with which they reſiſted the Goſpel, to elude thoſe Miracles, to condemn the Apoſtles themſelves and thoſe who had been converted by hearing them, as a ſort of men who had broken that Order, which they themſelves acknowledg'd ſo neceſſary to be kept. They might very well have told them, You have not the True Religion, you are not that Church to which we ought to give an abſolute ſubmiſſion, we have a Heavenly and an extraordinary Call, and we prove it by Miracles. The Heathens might have anſwered them, out of the Inſtructions of the Author of theſe Prejudices, All thoſe things are in queſtion between our Guides and yours, we cannot of our ſelves decide them, the darkneſs of our underſtandings, the little aſſurance we can have that we are not deceiv'd, the juſt fear that that doubt muſt infer, the cumbrance of a thouſand cares will not allow us to give more then a very little time for the examining the Truths of Religion; all that hinders us from hearkning to you, and makes us to cleave inviolably to the higheſt Authority that can be in the World, and that we diſcover without any difficulty in our Society, becauſe that though there are Sects among us who diſpute the Truth of its Tenets, yet there is nothing in it that can make that Height of Authority which has ſo many external marks to be oppoſed with any colourable pretence. In effect ſetting aſide their Opinions, their Worſhip, and their Religion it ſelf in the Foundation of it, they cannot diſpute with that Heathen Society from thoſe external marks upon which they would found that Authority. And the Chriſtians would not have been in a condition to have equal'd themſelves with them in that regard. Would you have the conſent of many people? They had all the World of their ſide. Would you ſeek for Antiquity? They had been almoſt throughout all Ages. Do you require Temporal Proſperity? It was, ſay they, their Religion that gave them their Empire. Would you have Magnificence? Where was there any thing more Magnificent then their Temples, and more ſplendid then their Solemnities? Would you have Unity? In the Plurality of their Gods, and Varieties of their Ceremonies, they kept peace among themſelves, and adopted the Gods of one an other. Do you demand Miracles? They boaſted that they had them, and the moſt Illuſtrious ones, as thoſe Oracles which foretold things to come, thoſe Apparitions of their Gods, their Recoveries and Reſurrections from the dead. There was nothing then that could juſtify the Apoſtles, but the falſeneſs of the Pagan's Religion, and the Truth of the Chriſtian. But for that they muſt of neceſſity enter upon that way of Examination, and make thoſe people to ſet about it whom they deſired to convert. But this is plainly that which that principle of the Author of thoſe Prejudices would have hindred as we have ſhewn. Whence it follows that it is a pernitious Principle, contrary of Jeſus Chriſt, to his Apoſtles, and to the true Intereſts of the Goſpel.
But can they anſwer nothing to theſe laſt Reflexions that I have made? It ſeems to me that they can poſſibly ſay but two things; the one, That thoſe who were converted by the word of the Apoſtles and the other Preachers of the Goſpel, were conſtrained to hear them, againſt that Order, by a ſecret inſpiration which dictated to them to make uſe of it alſo. The other thing is, That Jeſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles proved their Call to be Extraordinary, from Heaven, and more eminent then that of their ordinary Paſtors by Miracles, and that in that Caſe, the Faithful are bound to go beyond that Rule, and to hear thoſe that ſhall be ſo ſent to them againſt that very Authority of the Church.
As to the firſt, I do not believe that wiſe perſons ought to admit of it: For if they take thoſe ſecret inſpirations, to be inward motions that form within a man frequent and ſtrong deſires to do a thing, without ſuggeſting any Reaſon; the Spirit of God does not work ſo in the Converſion of men. It works, according to the Teſtimony of St. Paul, as a light, that inlightens the underſtanding, to the end we may know what is the hope of our calling. Then when thoſe deſires and inward motions are contrary to that duty to which we are all naturally engaged, they ought rather to paſs for Temptations, then for Inſpirations, and a man would be very much bound to repreſs them under that Quality, inſtead of following and obeying them. Thoſe pretended Inſpirations then which tended to make the firſt Preachers of the Goſpel be heard, would have been ſo far from having had that effect, that on the contrary, they would have gone farther againſt their Conſciences, becauſe they would have been found to have been contrary to a Duty, ſuppoſing that intire obedience to the Church in matters of Faith a Duty. They would have been troubled to know whether they ought to examine Religion or not: That Rule, might they ſay, would have me not do it; a blind Inſpiration which is not ſupported by any Reaſon, and which cannot have any certain mark of Divinity, can never be ſtrong enough to Authoriſe the breaking of that Rule. But it cannot be yet alleadged to ſerve for an excuſe towards that Religious Communion to which they had ſubmitted themſelves, for if that Communion had a right of Soveraignty over them, ſhe would not be bound to ſtrip her ſelf of it when an inſpiration ſhould ſpeak to them, and we can, but very ill defend the cauſe of the firſt Chriſtians, by that way. If they would underſtand it ſo as thoſe inward motions ſhould be ſupported by ſome Reaſon, that they ſhould not be intirely blind, it is neceſſary that they produce that Reaſon, and not ſpeak any more of Inſpiration.
That Reaſon then, in my Judgment, can be no other, then thoſe Miracles that Jeſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles wrought, and by which they proved their Call to be divine and extraordinary. I confeſs, that if we ſuppoſe that all men have a right to make clear the Truth of things by themſelves, there is nothing more true then to ſay, that Jeſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles made themſelves to be heard by their Miracles, and that their Miracles were made uſe of to prove their Heavenly Call. For their Miracles were plainly applied to the minds of men, to make them conſider that which they taught, and in the end joyning their Miracles to their Doctrine, they ſaw that they both mutually upheld one another, that neither of them were falſe, and that both the one and the other had the Characters of Divinity, they did then conclude from thence that their Call was Divine and Extraordinary. But if we ſuppoſe that Principle of the Author of Prejudices, there is nothing more falſe, then to ſay that their Miracles bound men to hear them, and prov'd their Call to be Extraordinary. For that Principle being, as it is, founded upon the darkneſs of our underſtanding, upon the uncertainty of our Judgments, and the eaſineſs wherewith we are liable to deceive our ſelves, it is manifeſt that it ought to be extended even unto Miracles, becauſe that there are true and falſe Miracles, good and bad, and thoſe that falſe Prophets work as well as they that are ſent from God. We ought then to make a diſtinction, and a diſtinction that is not eaſy to be made, the Angels of darkneſs ſo diſguiſing themſelves into Angels of Light. But that Reaſon of the darkneſs of the Underſtanding, the uncertainty of our Judgments, and that readineſs we have to deceive our ſelves, has (if you pleaſe) more place in that Diſtinction, then in that of that Doctrine. We may be eaſily ſurprized, and by conſequence we ought to give over that Diſcerning to the Church, and yet follow in that its light and its deciſions. And if you would give to the ſimpler ſort, to thoſe Babes for Example whereof Jeſus Chriſt ſpeaks, that his Myſteries have been revealed unto them, if you give them I ſay that right and liberty to judge of that important and fundamental Queſtion, to wit, Whether the Call of a man be Extraordinary and Divine, or whether it be not ſo, whether his Miracles are thoſe of a true Miniſter of God, or of a falſe Prophet, whether it be a true Angel of Light, or a diſguiſed Angel of darkneſs, and to judge of all thoſe things after the Church and againſt the Church, I ſee no Reaſon why they ſhould refuſe them the right and liberty of judging alſo of its Doctrine and the points of Religion, whereof the true knowledge is by nothing near ſo difficult.
God had forewarned his People that they ſhould not give themſelves over to be deceiv'd by the firſt appearances of Miracles, and he had appointed that they ſhould judge of them by the Doctrine they accompanied. Whence it follows, that the diſcerning of Miracles, and judging of that Doctrine, are two inſeparable things, and that their right belongs to the ſame perſons. If there ariſe, ſaith God, among you a Prophet, or a dreamer of dreams; and giveth thee a ſign or a wonder, And the ſign or the wonder come to paſs whereof he ſpake unto thee, ſaying, Let us go after other Gods, (which thou haſt not known) and let us ſerve them: Thou ſhalt not hearken unto the words of that Prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: For the Lord your God proveth you to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart. It appears from thence, that the way for men to judge well of Miracles, is to examine the Doctrine of him that works them. So that if they will a gree to give the people a right to diſcern Miracles, they cannot take away from them that of diſcerning that Doctrine they uphold. Jeſus Chriſt ſuppoſes the ſame thing when he ſays, that there ſhall ariſe falſe Chriſts and falſe Prophets, and that they ſhall work great ſigns and wonders, to ſeduce if it were poſſible the very Elect. For how could they otherwiſe diſcern thoſe Miracles of the falſe Prophets, but by examining their words?
So a famous man of the Roman Communion has not ſcrupled to write, that we are bound to reject Miracles, and thoſe men who make uſe of them, then when they are joyned with a Doctrine which the Church has condemned, his words are conſiderable, and very well deſerve to be tranſcrib'd. The Application, ſays he, Le P. Annae dans un Ecrit centre le pretendu miracle du Port. Royal.and direction of a miracle to prove the Truth of a Doctrine, is an enterpriſe ſo raſh, and ſo ſcandalous, that it deſerves to be puniſhed. There is not any Catholic in the World, who knows his Creed and underſtands it, that can be capable of ſuch a perſuaſion. What if the appearance of a Miracle is contrary to the definitions of the Church, can any one heſitate or doubt, whether it would be better to adhere to the Church ſupported by the truth of a Miracle, or to deny the truth of a Miracle founded upon the Authority of the Church? Saint Peter has taught us a great while ſince what we are to do on that occaſion. He had been an eye Witneſs of the Transfiguration of our Saviour, and of that glory that lay hid under the Vail of a Suffering and Mortal ſtate, and yet nevertheleſs he truſts more in the obſcurity of Prophets, than to the clear and manifeſt experience of his Eyes; we have a more ſure word of Propheſie. The Authority of the Church which is in nothing leſs than that of the Prophets, breaks in pieces all thoſe reaſons that oppoſe it, and we ought to take to our ſelves in regard of the Church that which Saint Peter ſays with reſpect to the Prophets, To which we do well that we take heed, gathering together all our attention to know the true ſence of the Church, and turning aſide from all the Miracles, and all thoſe Reaſons the men propound to us to make us call into queſtion that which we know the Church to have determined. We may ſee clearly, by that paſſage, how far one may carry that Principle of the Authority of the Church, in the thoughts of thoſe that admit of it, that is to ſay, even to make Miracles themſelves ſubmit to it. He ſays, that we ought to Collect all our attention to know the true Sentiments of the Church, and to turn aſide from all thoſe Miracles which would make us call into queſtion that which the Church has determined. He ſays, that to go about to make uſe of Miracles for the proving of a Doctrine that is condemned by the Church, is a raſh and ſcandalous enterpriſe, and ſuch as deſerves to be puniſhed. In effect, if they ſuppoſe that Maxim that we ought to give to the Church an abſolute obedience, to ſee with her Eyes, and to reſt upon her Conduct, thoſe Miracles could not make them be heard, whom the Church ſhould have condemned, and by which they ſhould have been looked on as falſe Miracles: the Conſequence is good and juſt. But becauſe that very thing applied to the times of the firſt riſe of Chriſtianity, juſtifies the Unbeleivers, condemns the proceedings of Jeſus Chriſt and his Appoſtles, accuſes thoſe of raſhneſs who have believed on their preaching, deſtroys the Goſpel, and overthrows the Chriſtian Church, it is a manifeſt proof that that Maxim it ſelf is falſe and raſh, ſince thoſe Conſequences that ariſe from it are ſo deteſtable, that they leave neither to Jeſus Chriſt nor to the Apoſtles any way to make their Goſpel to be heard by men, with a good Conſcience, and the care of their Salvation.
8. They muſt give me leave to ſpeak a little earneſtly for the intereſt of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt. The more I conſider theſe inevitable Conſequences of that Maxim, the more I am aſtoniſhed. If thoſe firſt Chriſtians, who had been Jews, could not hear the Doctrine of the Son of God, nor receive his Miracles, without violating of their Duty toward the Church that had condemned them, what ſcruples might not all that caſt into all the Chriſtians that are at this day in the World? For in fine we are the Succeſſors of that people, our Fathers were not Converted but by their Miniſtry. If then we cannot ſee clearly that they themſelves had a right to be Converted; if they laid down on the contrary a Principle, which of right ought to have hindered their Converſion, where then are all we, as many as we are? The Reaſons that the Author of thoſe Prejudices produces to make us deveſt our ſelves of our own guidance in favour of the Church, that we ſhould ſee with her Eyes and tread in her ſteps, had as much place with the Jews as they have with us, they could not doubt but that their Church was the Church of God, none can diſpute with them that eminent Authority which had ſo many external marks. To her belonged the Adoption, the Glory, and the Covenants, and the giving of the Law, and the ſervice of God, and the Promiſes; of whom were the Fathers, and who had the Oracles of God committed unto them, and in whoſe boſom Chriſt according to the fleſh was born. If that Maxim of the Author of Prejudices were good, it muſt neceſſarily have been good for that Church which had condemned Jeſus Chriſt, his Perſon, his Call, his Miracles, his Doctrine, and what right then had his Diſciples to hear and follow him? We have ſeen them from Reaſon, and from the Teſtimony of a very conſiderable perſon of our Age, and to whom one of the greateſt Kings has given the honour of committing the concerns of his Conſcience to him, that if that Maxim had place, that we ought entirely to refer our ſelves to the Authority of the Church, we could not any more regard thoſe Miracles when they were oppoſite to that Authority. Let them tell us then what right the Diſciples had to follow Jeſus Chriſt, by what right did the firſt Converts, and thoſe who were afterwards Converted by others, embrace the Goſpel? And if they did it without any right, and againſt their duty, into what Labyrinths we caſt you? What would become of the Chriſtian Church, what would become of you your ſelves? You form prejudices againſt us, drawn from the faults that have, ſay you, appeared in the perſons of our firſt Reformers. You tell us of a pretended precipitancy, by which the Magiſtrates of Zurich Reformed themſelves; you conclude from thence without entring upon the points in diſpute, that we ought to renounce the Reformation of our Fathers. Anſwer then your ſelves to the Prejudices, that according to your Maxim, the Jews may form againſt the firſt Diſciples of Jeſus Chriſt, and to the Conſequence that they may draw from thence, that without entring any further into a Diſcuſſing of the Points of that Religion, without examining either the Miracles or the Antient Prophecies, or the ſucceſs of the Preaching of the Goſpel, or all the other things that we could alledge in our favour, we ought to renounce our Chriſtianity. You your ſelves Authoriſe their Principle, by one that is altogether like it, which you lay down, and which you know not how to make uſe of againſt them, without overthrowing your ſelves; in a word, you draw the ſame Conſequence from it with them, ſhew us then by what ſecret Art both you and we may get out of that Abyſs whereinto you have plunged us. If your Fathers, ſay you, have Reformed themſelves with an ill deſign, you ought without farther examination to renounce their Reformation. If the chief Authors of your Religion, a Jew will ſay, have adhered to Jeſus with an ill deſign, againſt the obligation which they had to cleave to the Church, you ought to renounce their Chriſtianity. Anſwer if you can to thoſe Arguments, and ſet our Conſciences in quiet. As for us indeed, we are not in pain: for we know that that Principle which you urge to thoſe unbelievers is falſe. There is not any perſon who has not right to examine the points of that Religion, and to diſcern by himſelf the true from the falſe, the good from the bad, that which is from God, from that which which from men. The Authority of the Church never goes ſo far as to hinder us with any juſtice from it, and ſo there is nothing to reproach the firſt Chriſtians.
9. But we ought not to give over theſe reflections, without making one upon the ſtate of the Church in the times of the Councils of Sirmium, of Milan, and of Ariminum, whereof I have ſpoken before. There is no perſon who knows not that the Arrians were then Maſters of the Eccleſiaſtical Miniſtry, which they called the Catholick Church, treating the Orthodox as Hereticks and Diſturbers of its Peace, depoſing them and ſending them into baniſhment. The Poyſon of the Arrians, ſays Vincentius Lirinenſis, had not only infected one part, but almoſt all the world, and almoſt all Vincent Lirinenſ. Com. 1. cap. 6.the Latin Biſhops, ſome by force, others by ſimplicity giving themſelves over to be deceived, found themſelves engaged in the darkneſs of Error. We are in that condition, ſaid Phaebadius, that if we would be called Catholicks, it is neceſſary that we embrace Hereſie; and yet Phaebad. contra Arrianos Statim ab enitio.nevertheleſs if we do not reject Hereſie, we cannot be truly Catholicks. God did yet keep to himſelf notwithſtanding ſome Biſhops, few in number, but great in Courage, and that ſmall remnant in the end ſerv'd for a ſpark to rekindle the Fire of the Faith in the Church. Apply then to them that Maxim which we have before oppoſed, and weigh thoſe Conſequences that may be drawn from it, againſt thoſe, and againſt the Faithful who Heard them and Read their Writings. The leaſt is, that they were Schiſmaticks, and Corruptors of the people, who after having themſelves broken off that obedience which they owed to the Church, ſollicited others to do the like. They might have very well urged, that they had the Scriptures on their ſide, that they had the Council of Nice for them; but they would have anſwered them, That it was no longer time to diſpute, that they ought to ſubmit themſelves to, and acquieſce in the definitions of the Church. Since it was the duty of the Faithful to ſtrip themſelves of their own Conduct, to reſt upon that of the Church. Nevertheleſs, they did not fail generouſly to maintain the Truth, to diſpute and write for it, to addreſs themſelves not only to the Biſhops, but to the people, and to defend it againſt that ſpecious name of a Church, which they ſet before them, and the words of Saint Hilary upon this ſubject are worthy of a particular conſideration. The Church, ſays Hilar. adv. Arrianos.he, terrified men by Baniſhments, and by Priſons, and conſtrained them to believe what ſhe tells them, ſhe that her ſelf had never been believed, but by the Exile and Priſons which ſhe ſuffered. She which had been only Conſecrated by the Perſecution of men, Bene & a dignatione Communicantium. She drives away the Prieſts, forgetting that by the Baniſhment of her Prieſts ſhe increaſed. She boaſts that ſhe is beloved by the world, but ſhe could not belong to Jeſus Chriſt unleſs the world hated her. Haec de comparatione traditae nobis olim Eccleſiae, nunc quam de perditae res ipſa que in oculis omnium eſt at que ore clamavit. Can any one be raſh enough to maintain, that he was bound then to refer himſelf to the Authority of that Church, to ſee with its Eyes, to tread in its Steps, and to reſt himſelf upon its Conduct? Will any ſay that that handful of good men who have ſince re-eſtabliſhed Chriſtianity, was nothing elſe but a company of Rebels, and of preſumptuous minds? Will they charge their Writing and their Letters to the people with Forgeries and Subornations? Will they juſtifie their being Depoſed, their Baniſhments, the Perſecutions which they ſo conſtantly ſuffered? Will they ſay that the Faithful that heard them were raſh and Sacrilegious, and that thoſe on the contrary who ſubmitted themſelves to the deciſions of the Church, were thoſe good men, who did nothing but their duty; and that we our ſelves at this day, who have received our Chriſtianity from the hands of that ſmall number, are but the followers of Rebels and Schiſmaticks? Yet all that they muſt ſay, if they lay down that Principle of abſolute Obedience. It appears then that that Principle is falſe and unjuſt, and invented for the ruin of Religion.
10. In effect, an abſolute obedience, and an intire reſigning of ones ſelf to the Conduct of another, as to thoſe matters that regard the Faith and the Conſcience, is a duty that we can render lawfully to none but God, who is the firſt Truth, the firſt Principle of all Juſtice. A man cannot ſubmit his underſtanding and his heart to the word of any one, ſo as to believe blindly that which he ſays, without giving him a kind of Adoration, for there can be no homage greater than that of an inward blind ſubmiſſion. It is an infinite act, according as a creature may be ſaid to act infinitely, that is to ſay without bounds, without reſerve, without meaſure. It is then an act that can belong to none but God immediately, that we ought not to transfer to the Church, if we would not adore the Church; and to which by Conſequence a Church can never pretend without uſurping the juſt rights of God.
11. God himſelf has ſo far forborn his right, that he does not very often abſolutely make uſe of it, but leaves it to our minds to judge of the Truths that he propounds to us. For there are often in thoſe things that he teaches us, Characters that equally note their Truth and their Divinity, ſo that at all times we may draw theſe two concluſions from them, This Doctrine is true, this Doctrine is of God, without their depending one upon the other. We may ſay the ſame of his Commandments, they bear moſt frequently Characters of their Natural Juſtice, as well as thoſe of their Divinity; and they give us leave to receive them not only by an Act of Obedience, but by an Act of Judgment alſo. As it is from him that we hold that admirable faculty of diſtinguiſhing the true from the falſe, the good from the bad, by Characters impreſt in thoſe things themſelves, ſo he would not take a way the uſe of it in matters of Religion. On the contrary, it is ordinarily by the uſing of that, that he draws us, that he convinces us firſt of all of the Truth of ſome Doctrines, that he makes us afterwards acknowledg the neceſſary connexion that they have with others which he has revealed to us, the Truth whereof appears not ſo clearly, abſtractly conſidered at firſt, and by that connexion he makes us receive them. He ſhews us the equity of his Precepts, the horror of thoſe Vices that are contrary to them, and in that manner he gains our Hearts, by making uſe of our own Reaſon. Not that we may lawfully reject any of thoſe things which he teaches us; we have no right for that without doubt, becauſe where our Underſtandings are wanting to diſcover thoſe Characters of Truth or of Equity in thoſe things which he teaches us, there he has ordained that his Authority ſhall help us. It is God that ſays it, it is God that commands it: but it is not the ſame with reſpect to the Church; the Church is not God, ſhe is but an Interpreter and Servant of God: ſhe ought then to ſhew us in all that ſhe teaches us as matter of Faith, or that ſhe commands the Conſcience to ſubmit to, thoſe Characters of Truth and Equity in the things themſelves, or elſe thoſe of their Divinity; when ſhe fails in that, ſhe cannot ſupply that defect by her Authority; for in that caſe her Authority is purely no other than Humane, and an Humane Authority is not ſufficient either for the Faith, or for the Conſcience: ſo that every man has right to examine that which ſhe teaches, and to reject that that is beyond the word of God.
12. In fine, Let thoſe Gentlemen tell us if they pleaſe, whether in this ſame Queſtion concerning the Soveraign Authority of the Latin Church, and the Obligation that lies upon every one to hold himſelf to its deciſions, they mean, that every one ſhould refer himſelf to the Latin Church, and believe alſo meerly becauſe that ſhe ſays ſo, without any other examination; or whether they would grant that every one may have right to examine of what nature, of what extent, and of what force that Authority is, and how far that Obedience goes which he ought to render to it. There is no likelyhood they will ſay the former; for that Authority cannot eſtabliſh it ſelf; when it ſhall be eſtabliſht, a man may refer himſelf to it for other things, but while her own eſtabliſhment is diſputed, it is requiſite it ſhould come from ſomewhat elſe, and that there ſhould be for that proofs capable of perſwading us. To what purpoſe do they tell us of its external marks which makes us, ſays the Author of the Prejudices, diſcover without any difficulty that height of Authority which is in the Catholick Church, if they would not leave the Faithful a right to ſee thoſe external marks, and to examine them not any farther by the Eyes of the Church, but by their own? That being ſo, they may ſee that they ought always to give men a right of making a Judgment by their own light, and to give them in that Queſtion the moſt important matter of all, to wit, that of chooſing a Rule and a ſetled Principle for their Guidance and their Faith, an Authority upon which their Minds and Conſciences may reſt, and lye down in perfect Peace. They muſt give them that in that Queſtion which it is no ways eaſie for them to decide; For beſides that they ought to ſee thoſe external marks of the Latin Church, which ſay they, gain her ſo great an Authority, they ought alſo to ſee whether there are not others which they take away more reaſonably from her then thoſe that they give her; they ought to ſee whether thoſe marks are not common to other Religious Societies, that may by that means diſpute with the Latin Church that Authority; they ought to ſee whether thoſe marks when they ſhall become peculiar to the Latin Church, may be capable of giving her ſo Soveraign an Authority over mens Faith and Conſciences. which ſeems naturally to belong to none but God. And becauſe in that Queſtion, we treat not of the whole Body of the Church, but only of the Prelats, and thoſe who take up the Eccleſiaſtical Function, they ought to know whether thoſe external marks can hinder them from believing that thoſe Prelats have abuſed their charges, and brought in, or ſuffered to be brought in divers Corruptions into the Church. All that is not ſo eaſie as the Authour of the Prejudices tells us it is. There is ſome difficulty to get thither; and yet that belonging of right to the examination of all men, the darkneſs of the underſtanding, the eaſineſs wherewith men may deceive themſelves, the want of neceſſary helps, the ignorance and ſimplicity of the greateſt part of men, would not hinder it. Thoſe are then no other than frivolous Reaſons, which cannot take away from men that right that God and Nature have given them. They ought therefore to enjoy it, at leaſt in ſome reſpect, to wit, for the deciding of the queſtion, whether they ought to loſe it or no.
13. But it is certain they can never ſo enjoy it in that regard, nor decide that Queſtion without entring upon an examination of all their Doctrines, which lets us ſee yet more and more the abſurdity of our Adverſaries Principle. For there is not any Principle more abſurd, than that which deſtroys it ſelf, which cannot be eſtabliſhed but by making uſe of a contrary Principle, and which preciſely can have no place, but there where it cannot be of any uſe. But all that may be ſaid of that Principle of thoſe Gentlemen, ſince it is moſt true that to eſtabliſh it, one muſt neceſſarily proceed to examine their Doctrines, and that they can never know whether they ought to refer themſelves to the Latin Church, or examine that Doctrine by themſelves, till they have made that examination, that is to ſay, till there ſhall be no farther occaſion to refer themſelves to that Authority of the Latin Church, which makes pleaſant ſport enough. This is that which is evidently manifeſt, if one conſider it, that before one can acknowledge the Authority of the Latin Church, it muſt be ſuppoſed, that one is aſſured that among all the Religious Societies that are in the World, the Chriſtian is the only one in which one ought to place himſelf; and that can never be known but by one way only, which is that of examining its Doctrine and its Worſhip. In effect there is not any one of thoſe external marks that can make that difference. The Jews had their Miracles, Antiquity, Succeſſion, an uninterrupted Duration, the Holineſs of their Patriarchs, the Light of their Prophecies, the Majeſty of their Ceremonies; we do not diſpute theſe marks with them, and as to Temporal Proſperity, they had it heretofore, and we are not aſſured that we have always had that, whereof we make ſuch boaſting, which nevertheleſs is not very great. The Mahometans glory that they have the ſame things, with the conſent of the People, and the admirable ſucceſs of their Arms; and as for Antiquity, which they fail in, they ſay, that as Jeſus Chriſt did but ſucceed Moſes, ſo Mahomet alſo has ſucceeded Jeſus Chriſt. As for the Heathens they had, as I have ſaid, their Miracles, their Saints, their Prophets, their Ceremonies, their Succeſſion, their uninterrupted Duration, their Temporal Proſperities; and if we ſtrive with them about Antiquity, and Multitude, the advantage will not lye on our ſide. There is then nothing more deceitful than thoſe external appearances, ſeparated from their Doctrines, they are as proper to make a Jew remain a Jew, a Heathen a Heathen, and a Mahometan to remain a Mahometan, as to make a Chriſtian to remain a Chriſtian; whence it follows, that to form well that difference, and to be aſſured that the Chriſtian Communion is the only good one, one ought to examine its Worſhip and its Doctrines.
Moreover, before they could acknowledge the Authority of the Latin Church, they muſt ſuppoſe, that a man is ſure that among all the Chriſtian Sects, the Latin only is the true Church, and that cannot be known but by the examination of its Doctrines. Thoſe external marks can be no ways proper for it. The Greeks, the Abyſſines, the Neſtorians aſcribe to themſelves Antiquity, Succeſſion, Miracles, an uninterrupted Duration, as well as the Latins. They have their Saints, their Prophets, their Ceremonies, and their Multitude, which is not leſs conſiderable; and as to worldly Proſperity, the Abyſſines may boaſt of it, and the Muſcovites alſo, who make a part of the Greek Church, and who knows whether that of the Latin Church ſhall never change? It is then manifeſt, that they can conclude nothing from thoſe marks ſeparated from their Doctrine, they are ſo ambiguous, and uncertain, that they cannot fix any ſetled Judgment upon them, concerning the truth of the Latin Church.
But, ſuppoſing that they could by thoſe external marks, or by any other ways which they would take, be aſſured that the Latin Church was the true Church, I ſay, it muſt neceſſarily be underſtood in this Sence, to wit, that in that viſible Communion God brings up and preſerves his truly Faithful ones; For it is in thoſe only that that name of the viſible Church is verified, and not in the prophane, the wicked, and the worldly, who are mingled with them, and who are none of that Body that is the Spouſe of Jeſus Chriſt. They muſt then be aſſured, before they can know whether they ought to refer themſelves abſolutely to that Body of Paſtors that governs the Latin Church, that the prophane and the worldly do not prevail in that Body, and that they never have prevailed; for if they do prevail, or if they ever have prevailed, they may introduce errours into the publick Miniſtry, and falſe Worſhip, or ſuffer them to come in through their negligence or otherwiſe, or ſcatter abroad the ill Doctrines of the Schools amongſt the People, favour ill cuſtoms, and in a word, corrupt that Communion, as it appears that that did come to paſs in the Jewiſh Church, and ſometimes in the Chriſtian. But how can any be fully aſſured that it may not be ſo at preſent, otherwiſe then by the examining of her Doctrine? They ought then to give up that point of external marks; our Fathers have gained their cauſe without going any farther, by the Prejudices of Corruption which I have ſet down in the ſecond and third Chapters. But if you take them only as meer conjectures, and if you will reckon them to be nothing, it is certain, that to be aſſured that there is nothing corrupted in a Communion where God brings up and preſerves his true Faithful people, that the publick Miniſtry is pure in all its Doctrines and in its Worſhip, one muſt of neceſſity take that way of examination, and that examination muſt be very exact. So that before we can enter only upon that Queſtion, whether we ought to give to the Latin Church a Soveraign Authority over our Faith and Conſciences, the diſcuſſing of which they know not how to avoid, all muſt be examined: from whence it follows that that Principle which I have oppoſed is abſur'd, becauſe it deſtroys it ſelf, and none can ever practiſe it, till it cannot be any more of any uſe; and more abſur'd yet, in that when it would hinder us from examining, it conſtrains us to make an examination as exact as can be thought of.