The Christian Life Volume 5, Discourse 3
OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE Holy Scripture.
JOHN V. 39.
Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life.
BY the Scriptures here must be meant the Old Testament; for as yet the greatest Part of the New was unrevealed, and the whole of it unwritten. They were those very Scriptures which the unbelieving Iews, to whom our Saviour was now preaching, owned and acknowledged to be the Word of God; for in them, says our Saviour, ye think ye have eternal life; which it's certain they did not think of any other Scriptures but only those of the Old Testament; and they are they, says he, which testify of me. And to be sure there were no other Scriptures which could testify of Christ to the unbelieving Iews, but only those of Moses and the Prophets, these being the only Scriptures whose Testimony they credited. But yet the Reason which our Saviour urges to move them to read the Old Testament, doth as much oblige us to read the New as well as the Old, as it did them to read the Old; for in them ye think to have eternal life; that is, in them ye think ye have eternal Life promised, and all the Necessaries to be believed, and done by you in order to your obtaining it, proposed to you. And indeed as they thought, so it was; they had eternal Life proposed to them in Hieroglyphicks; for that was the Mystery of their Holy of Holies, that was the Interpretation of their Land of Canaan, and the spiritual Sense of all their general Promises of good Things to come: They had all the Articles of Faith, and all the Instances of Duty that were necessary to their Attainment of eternal Life exhibited to them in the Writings of their Prophets, and the Types and Figures of their Law. For it was by this Rule alone that all the holy Men of the Iewish Nation did live and believe; and either this was sufficient to guide and direct them to eternal Life, or they were left under a fatal Necessity of falling short of it: It was the Law of the Lord that did enlighten their Eyes, and rejoyce their Hearts, and convert their Souls; and it was in keeping it that they found great Reward, Ps. 19. 7, 8, 11. And therefore either they fell short of the Reward of eternal Life notwithstanding this their Illumination and Conversion, or they found it in keeping that Law by which they were illuminated and converted; and if in keeping their Law they found eternal Life, then it's certain that in their Law they had it. So that these Words of our Saviour (for in them ye think ye have eternal life) do not imply that they were mistaken in thinking so, or at least they only imply that they were mistaken in thinking to obtain eternal Life by adhering to the prime and literal Sense of their Law without pursuing the Mystery and Spiritual Meaning of it; which was indeed the Error of the Pharisees, with whom our Saviour is here discoursing. For the internal Sense and Mystery of their Law was the Gospel, all whose Articles of Faith, and Precepts of Duty, were (though darkly and obscurely) expressed and represented in the Types and Figures of the Mosaick Institution. And hence the Apostle tells us, that both the Priests and their Oblations, did serve unto the example, and shadow of heavenly things, Heb. 8. 5. So that the heavenly Things contained in the Gospel were the substantial Idea's which those Legal Types and Patterns contained and represented; and the same Author calls that Law a shadow of good things to come, Heb. 10. 1. that is, it was an obscure Scheme or Prefiguration of the Mercies of the Gospel, of which eternal Life is a principal Part. Since therefore the Law was nothing else but only the Gospel in dark and obscure Cyphers, if in this we Christians have eternal Life, in that the Iews had it also: And therefore the Reason which our Saviour here urges to oblige the Iews to search the Scriptures of the Old Testament; [for in them ye think ye have eternal life] doth at least equally oblige us Christians to search the Scriptures both of the Old and New. For if they had just Reason to think they had eternal Life in the Old Testament, and were thereupon obliged to search into it, we have rather more Reason to think that we have eternal Life in the New, since the New Testament is nothing else but only the Old decyphered and unriddled; and therefore we must not only have eternal Life in this, as they had in that, but we must also have it far more expresly than they. In the Prosecution of this Argument therefore, I shall endeavour these Two Things:
I. To shew you that in the Holy Scriptures we have eternal Life.
II. That this is a very forcible Reason to oblige us to search them.
I. First, that in the Holy Scriptures we have eternal Life; that is, that in them we have eternal Life proposed to us, together with all that is necessary to be believed, and practised by us in order to our obtaining it; or in other words, that the Holy Scripture is a sufficient Rule both of Faith and Manners to guide and direct … to eternal Happiness. And this is one Article of the Faith of the Church of England, which we are required to explain to the People; for so in her sixth Article our Church professes, that the Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to Salvation; so that whatsoever is not read therein, or may be proved thence, is not required of any Man that it should be believed as an Article of Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to Salvation. Now to make the Scripture a sufficient Rule as to all Things necessary to Salvation, there are two Things necessary; First, That it should be full; and, Secondly, That it should be clear: both which the Holy Scripture is in an eminent Degree, as containing in it all that is necessary to be believed, and done in order to eternal Life. And this will evidently appear from these three following Propositions:
1. That the Holy Spirit inspired the Writers of the Scripture with all that is necessary to eternal Life.
2. That they preached to the World all those Necessaries with which the Holy Spirit inspired them.
3. That all those necessary Truths which they preached, are comprehended in those Sacred Writings of theirs of which the Holy Scripture consists.
1. That the Holy Spirit inspired the Writers of the Scripture with all that is necessary to eternal Life. For, first, our Saviour, by whom they were originally instructed, declares, that as the Father loved him, and shewed him all things that himself did, Ioh. 5. 20. so he had made known to them all things that he had heard of his Father, Ioh. 17. 8. And then when he went from them, and ceased to instruct them in his own Person, he promised that by his Spirit he would teach them all things, and bring all things to their remembrance whatsoever he had said unto them, Ioh. 14. 26. and that by the same Spirit he would guide them into all Truth, Ioh. 16. 13. If therefore the Spirit did perform this Promise to them, (as there is no doubt but he did) then we are sure that he did teach them over again whatsoever Christ had taught them before, and if Christ had taught them whatsoever he had heard of his Father, (as he declares he had) then it is certain either that he taught them all Things necessary to eternal Life, or that he himself had not heard from his Father all Things that are necessary thereunto.
2. That as they were taught by the Spirit, all Things necessary to eternal Life, so what they were taught, they preached and delivered to the World. For so our Saviour commanded them to go forth into all the World, and teach all Nations to observe all those things which he had commanded them, Matth. 28. 19, 20. Which Injunction of his they strictly observed; for so we are told, that in Obedience to it, they went forth, and preached every where, Mark 16. 20. And that their preaching extended to all Things necessary to Salvation, is evident from their own Testimony: For thus St. Paul tells the Ephesians that he had not shunned to declare unto them the whole Counsel of God, Acts 20. 27. And to be sure in the whole Counsel of God, all that is necessary to Salvation must be included. And concerning that Gospel which he had preached to the Corinthians, he thus pronounces, By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in Memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain, 1 Cor. 15. 1, 2. But how could they be saved by that Gospel, he preached to them, unless it contained in it all Things necessary to Salvation? And this very Gospel which the Apostles in their constant Ministry proposed to the World, St. Iames calls the ingrafted Word, which is able to save our Souls, Iam. 1. 21. And for the same Reason it is also called the Word of Reconciliation; 2 Cor. 5. 19. The Word of Salvation, Acts 13. 26. And the Word of Life, Acts 5. 20. And the Savour of Life unto Life, 2 Cor. 2. 16. And also the Power of God unto Salvation to every one that believes, Rom. 1. 17. Neither of which it could be justly stiled, supposing it to be defective in any Things necessary to the eternal Happiness of Men.
3. And lastly, That all those necessary Truths which they preached, are comprehended in those Writings of theirs, of which the Holy Scripture consists. It is true, before the Christian Doctrine was collected into those Scriptures of which the New Testament now consists, it was all conveyed by Oral Tradition from the Mouths of the Teachers, to the Ears of the Disciples; but in a little Time those holy Men who first preached it, found an absolute Necessity of committing it to Writing, as a much surer Way of preserving it uncorrupted, and transmitting it down to all succeeding Generations; for thus Eusebius tells us,
1Hist. Eccles. l. 2. c 15.That the Romans not being satisfied with St. Peter's preaching of Christianity to them, earnestly desired St. Mark, his Companion, that he would leave them in Writing, a standing Monument of that Doctrine which St. Peter had delivered to them by Word of Mouth, which was the Occasion, says he, of the writing of St. Mark's Gospel: Which thing St. Peter understanding by a Revelation of the Spirit, being highly pleased with their earnest Desire, he confirmed it by his own Authority, that it might afterwards be read in the Churches. It seems in those Days the Romans did not think oral or unwritten Traditions a sufficient Conservatory of divine Truths, nor did their Bishop then forbid the reading of the Scriptures to the Laity in their own Language. After which he tells us 2L. 3. c. 24., that St. Matthew and St. John were the only Disciples of our Lord, who had left written Commentaries of the Things which they had preached behind them; and it was, says he, Necessity that impelled them to write. For Matthew having preached the Faith to the Hebrews, and intending to go from them to other Nations, wrote his Gospel in his own Country-Language, that thereby he might supply the Want of his Presence to those whom he left behind him. And afterwards when Mark and Luke had published their Gospels, John who had hitherto only preached the Gospel by Word of Mouth, being at length moved by the same Reason betook himself to write. And the Three former Gospels, says he, arriving to the Knowledge of all Men, and particularly of St. John, he approved them, and with his own Testimony confirmed the Truth of them. From which Relation it's evident, that that which moved those holy Men to commit their Gospels to Writing, was this, that they judged it necessary for the Conservation of the Christian Doctrine, that so these in their Absence might be standing Monuments of the Faith, to preach that Gospel to Mens Eyes which they had preached to their Ears: And if they wrote to preserve the Faith, to be sure they would leave no necessary or essential Part of it unwritten. There are several Propositions in these Gospels which, though very useful, are far from being essential Parts of Christianity; and can we imagine that those holy Men who wrote on purpose to conserve Chrictianity, should take so much Care to write many Things which are not necessary Parts, and in the mean time omit any Things that are? Eusebius tells us of St. Mark in particular, foreign; i.e. he took great Care of this more especially, not to pretermit any of those Things which he had heard, (even from St. Peter) nor to affix any thing to them that was false: And if he were so careful not to omit any Thing, to be sure he would be particularly careful not to omit any Thing which he judged necessary to the eternal Happiness of Men. But what need we depend upon humane Authority, when as, if we consult those Sacred Writings themselves, (which so far as they go, all Christians allow to be the Word of God) we shall find they give this Testimony of themselves, that they comprehend in them all Things necessary to eternal Life. For thus the Writers of the New Testament testify of the Old, That they are able to make us wise unto Salvation through Faith which is in Iesus Christ, 2 Tim. 3. 15. And if the Old Testament alone was able to do this, then much more the Old and New together; but how could they make Men wise to Salvation, if they were defective in any Article that is necessary to Salvation? And then the same Author goes on and tells us, that all Scripture is given by Inspiration of God, and is profitable for Doctrine, for Reproof, for Correction, for Instruction in Righteousness; that the Man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works, v. 16. 17. And if the Old Scriptures were sufficient to make the Man of God perfect, and to furnish him throughly unto all good Works, one would think that the New and Old together should not be defective. For that the Scriptures of the New Testament as well as of the Old contain in them all Things necessary to eternal Life, they themselves do plainly testify of themselves: For thus St. Luke in the Beginning of his Gospel tells his Theophilus, to whom he writes, that forasmuch as many had set forth a Declaration of those things that were surely believed among Christians, it seemed good unto him also having had a perfect understanding of all things from the first, to write them down in order that he might know the Certainty of those things wherein he had been instructed: From whence I infer, that supposing St. Luke performed what he promised, his Gospel must contain a full Declaration of the Christian Religion: For, First, by promising to give an Account of those Things which were surely believed among Christians, he engaged himself to give an entire Account of Christianity, unless we will suppose that there were some Parts of Christianity which the Christians of that Time did not surely believe. Secondly, In promising to give an Account of those Things of which he had a perfect Understanding from the first, and in which his Theophilus had been instructed, he also engages himself to give a compleat Account of the whole Religion, unless we will suppose that there were some Parts of this Religion which St. Luke did not perfectly understand, and in which Theophilus had not been before instructed. Thus also St. Iohn testifies of his Gospel, Chap. 20. 31. These things are written, that ye might believe that Iesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life through his name. And if it be objected, that by these Things the Apostle only means the Miracles of Christ which are the Motives of our Belief, and not his Doctrines which are to be believed by us; this is notoriously false, since by these Things St. Iohn means his Gospel in which not only the Miracles, but the Doctrines of Christ are contained; and therefore in his first Epistle, chap. 5. 13. he saith, These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God, that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe, or continue to believe on the name of the Son of God: Where by These Things it's plain he means only that Christian Doctrine which he had been teaching throughout the whole Epistle. From which two Places I argue, that all Things necessary to eternal Life are written, because he expresly tells us that These Things were written to this end, that they might beget and nourish in us that Faith by which we may obtain eternal Life; but if that Faith which these written Things was designed to beget in us, be not sufficient to eternal Life, then were these Things written in vain, and the End of writing them, which was that we might obtain eternal Life by believing them, was wholly frustrated; but if that Faith were sufficient to eternal Life, then these written Things which begot that Faith, and were the Object of it, must contain in them all Things necessary to eternal Life; for how can they beget in us a Faith that is sufficient to eternal Life, unless they propose to our Faith all Things that are necessary thereunto?
And thus I have endeavoured to demonstrate from Scripture it self, which all agree is the Word of God, and consequently the most concluding Authority in the World, that the Holy Scripture is in it self a sufficient Rule of Faith and Manners to direct Men to eternal Life. And if this be so, I would fain know by what Warrant or Authority any Man, or Church, can pretend to obtrude upon the Faith of Christians any unwritten Traditions, or Doctrines of Faith, and Rules of Worship, not recorded in Scripture as of equal Authority with those recorded in Scripture, and equally necessary to the eternal Happiness of Men. For that there have been such bold Imposers in the Christian World, Irenaeus assures us in the 2d Chapter of his 2d Book against Heresies; where he tells us of a sort of Hereticks who taught, that the Truth could not be found in the Scriptures by those to whom Tradition was unknown; for as much as it was not delivered by Writing, but by Word of Mouth. And these Hereticks1De Praescrip. Haeret. c. 25., as Tertullian observes, confessed indeed that the Apostles were ignorant, and that they did not at all differ among themselves in their Preaching, but said they revealed not all Things unto all Men; some Things they taught openly and to all, some Things secretly, and to a few; which secret Things were the unwritten Traditions which they sought to impose upon the Faith of Christians. And how far the Church of Rome it self doth in this matter tread in the Footsteps of these ancient Hereticks, is but too notorious: For thus in the Preface of their Catechism it is expresly affirmed by the Council of Trent, that the whole Doctrine to be delivered to the Faithful, is contained in the Word of God, which Word of God is distributed into Scripture and Tradition. And in the Council it self they declare, and define, that the Books of Scripture and unwritten Traditions are to be received and honoured with equal pious Affection and Reverence: In which Words they expresly own another Word of God besides the Scripture, viz. Tradition, which they equalize with the Scripture it self. And this is almost verbatim the very Assertion which both Irenaeus and Terullian condemn for Heresy; and as they are the same, so we find they are grounded on the same Authority: For those very Texts of Scripture which those ancient Hereticks urged for their Tradition, are urged by Bellarmin for the Tradition of his Church. Thus for their Tradition, as Irenaeus and Tertullian acquaints us, they urged that of St. Paul, We speak Wisdom among them that are perfect; and also, O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust; and again, That good Thing which is committed to thee, keep: All which Texts are urged by Bellarmin in his 4th and 5th Books de Verbo Dei, in behalf of that Tradition which the Church of Rome contends for: And 'tis something hard that that which was damned for Heresy in the Primitive Church, should be made an Article of Faith in the present Roman. Not that we do disallow of Traditions universally received in all Churches and Ages; for we frankly acknowledge that what is now contained in Scripture was Tradition before it was Scripture, as being first delivered by Word of Mouth before it was collected into Writing; and therefore whensoever it can be made evident to us that there are any unwritten Doctrines bearing the same Stamp of Divine Authority with those that are written, we are ready to receive them with the same Veneration as we do the Scriptures themselves. For it is not their being written that doth authorize them, but their being from God, and our Saviour, and his Apostles; and therefore when once it's made appear to us that Christ or his Apostles taught so and so, that is sufficient to command our Assent and Submission whether it be made appear from Scripture or Tradition. So that the Reason why we embrace some Doctrines and reject others, is not merely because the one are written, and the other not; but because to us, who live at so great a distance from Christ and his Apostles, it can never be made so evident, that what is not written, was taught by them, as what is. What is written hath been delivered down to us by the unanimous Tradition and Testimony of the Church of Christ in all Ages, which I am sure can never be justly pretended of any one of those unwritten Traditions which the Church of Rome now imposes upon the Faith of Christians. Let them but produce the same unanimous Testimony that any one of those Twelve Articles which they have thought meet to superadd to the ancient Creeds, was taught by Christ or his Apostles, as we do that what is contained in Scripture was so, and we will as readily embrace it as any Proposition in Scripture; but if this Article be neither to be found in Scripture, nor delivered down to us as taught by Christ or his Apostles, by the unanimous Testimony of the Church of Christ through all Ages, we must crave their pardon if we cannot receive it as Part of the Word of God. But how impossible it is to prove by the unanimous Testimony of the Church, that any unwritten Doctrine is Part of the Word of God necessary to be believed by all Christians, is evident from hence, because for several Ages after our Saviour the Church unanimously taught, that whatsoever was necessary to be believed was contained in Scripture; and for the same Church at the same time to testify that this or that unwritten Doctrine is a Part of God's Word necessary to be believed, and yet that all Doctrines necessary to be believed are written, is plainly to contradict it self. And yet we find the Primitive Fathers unanimously attesting that the Scripture is the Rule from whence we draw all the Assertions of our Faith, the last Will and Testimony of our Saviour by which all Controversies are to be decided, the Boundaries of the Church, out of which it is not to depart, the Touchstone of Truth, the Foundation and Pillar of our Faith for the Time to come, and the only certain Principle of Christian Doctrine and Demonstration in Matters of Faith. These are their own Expressions, and abundance more than these we meet with to the same purpose; and which is very observable, they not only assert the Scripture to be a full and adequate Rule of Faith, but severely declaim against all Additions to it. Thus Eusebius Pamphilus in the Name of the Fathers of the Council of Nice, foreign; i. e. those Things which are written, believe; those Things which are not written, neither think upon, nor enquire after. Thus also St. Austin, Quicquid inde audieritis è Scripturâ sacrâ, hoc vobis bene sapiat; quicquid extra est, respuite, ne erretis in nebula: Whatsoever ye hear from the Holy Scriptures let it savour well with you; whatsoever is without them, refuse, lest ye wander in a Cloud. St. Bazil declares, that it is a manifest falling from the Faith, and an Argument of Arrogancy either to reject any point of those Things that are written, or to bring in any of those which are not written; and that it is the Property of a faithful Man to be fully perswaded of the Truth of those Things that are delivered in the Holy Scripture, and not to dare either to reject or to add any thing thereunto. Thus Tertullian, advers. Hermog. Si enim non est scriptum, timeat Vae illud adjicientibus aut detrahentibus destinatum: If what he pretends be not written, let him fear that Woe that is denounced against such as add or take away. What Likelihood therefore is there that they who thus severely forbid adding any thing to the written Word of God, did ever so much as dream of another Word of God consisting of unwritten Traditions? And indeed methinks it is very strange if there had been any other Word of God besides what is written, there should no notice be taken of it in that which is written; especially considering that if it be as necessary to be believed as the Roman Church defines it; it is as necessary that we should have Direction where to find it, and how to know it when we have it; but of this we have not the least Intimation in Scripture. For as for those Words of St. Paul, 2 Thess. 2. 15. Hold the Traditions which ye have been taught, whether by Word, or our Epistle, all that can be justly inferred from them is only this, that the Thessalonians at the Writing of this Epistle had only an Oral Tradition of a great Part of that Gospel which St. Paul had preached to them, the Gospels being as yet either not collected into Writing, or not dispersed abroad into the Churches; so that then this, and his former Epistle to them, were perhaps the only written Part of the New Testament that was yet arrived to their hands; and if so, then this Command of holding the Traditions by word, did oblige no longer than till they had received the written Gospel; because then those Traditions by Word were all recorded in Scripture, and being there recorded, they were thenceforth obliged to hold them as Scripture, and no longer as Traditions by Word. But supposing there are still unwritten Traditions in the Church that are not in Scripture, but yet were delivered by Christ or his Apostles, and so are equally the Word of God with the Scripture; I would fain know how we who live at so great a distance from Christ and his Apostles, should either know where to find, or be assured that they are such when we have them. We know very well that even in the Primitive Ages there were sundry counterfeit Traditions which Hereticks pretended to derive from Christ and his Apostles; and if it were so easy a matter to counterfeit Traditions then, how much more easy is it now? I confess Vincentius Lirinensis gives us a very good Rule how to distinguish counterfeit from true Traditions; Quod ubi que quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est, hoc est vere proprie que Catholicum That which was every where, and always, and by all Christians believed, that is truly and properly Catholick. And by this Rule we are willing to abide; if they can shew us any Article of Christianity not recorded in Scripture, which hath been every where, and always believed by all Christians, we will readily admit it as an unwritten Word of God, and with the same Respect and Reverence as we do that which is written: But this we are fully assured they will never be able to perform, seeing, as was shewn before, the Primitive Church doth with one Consent attest the Scripture to be an entire Rule of Faith, in which all the Articles of Christianity are contained.
But we are told that for these unwritten Traditions we must rely upon the present Church of every Age, and receive as a divine Tradition whatsoever she defines to be so; where by the present Church is meant the present Roman Church; that is to say, whatsoever this Church defines we must believe it, because she defines it; which we cannot but think is a hard Case; First, Because we know very well that the Roman Church is at best but a Part of the Church universal, and we know no Right that any Part hath to impose upon the Whole, and to oblige it to believe whatsoever she proposes, meerly because she proposes it. Secondly, Because in Fact we are very well assured that the Roman Church is so far from being a sincere Preserver of Tradition, that there is no Church in the World hath more studiously attempted to counterfeit and deprave it; of which innumerable Instances are given by our Authors, many of which are now acknowledged even by their Authors to be true. For even their Vulgar Latin Edition of the Bible it self, which they prefer before the Originals, is confessed by themselves to abound with manifest Errors and Corruptions; and even to the very Canon of the Bible they have added sundry Apocryphal Books which we certainly know the Primitive Tradition never admitted as Parts of the sacred Scripture; and it is notorious to all the World how many Books and Writings they have forged, and how many of the Writings of the Ancients they have gelded and interpolated to defend and support those pretended Traditions which they have imposed upon the World as Articles of Faith. And after she hath been guilty of so many apparent Falsifications, we cannot but think it a very hard Case that we should still be obliged to believe her upon her own bare Word. For in the third Place, at this rate of Proceeding we must in many Instances condemn the Traditions of the Primitive Church in Complement to those of the present Roman; which if we believe our own Eyes, and the most authentick Histories and Records of those Times, do expresly thwart and contradict one another; and since, if we would never so fain we can never believe both Parts of a Contradiction, we must in believing the one give the Lye to the other. Nay, Fourthly and lastly, though we should be perswaded, as we think we have Reason to be, that many of the Traditions of the present Church of Rome are not only not mentioned in Scripture, but directly contrary to it; (as for Instance, their performing Divine Service in an unknown Tongue, which we think is as contrary to 1 Cor. 14. as one Proposition can be to another:) yet if that Churches Definitions do by their own Authority oblige our Faith, we must believe her against Scripture it self. And this we think intollerable, that any Church of Christian should be obliged to believe the unwritten Word of the Church of Rome in a Matter wherein, upon the most diligent and impartial Search, they are verily perswaded it contradicts the written Word of God; and if the Sentence of the one or t'other must be made void, we think it is very reasonable that the Voice of her pretended unwritten Word should be silenced by that more certain one of the lively Oracles of God. But after all, if what I have endeavoured to prove be proved, viz. that the Holy Scriptures are a sufficient Rule of Faith and Manners to conduct us to eternal Life, this will be enough to evacuate all that is pretended for this unwritten Word of God. For God and Nature we know do nothing in vain; and therefore if one Word of God be sufficient, viz. that which is written, what need have we of this other which is unwritten? And so I have done with the first necessary Property of a Rule of Faith, viz. that it be full; and shewn at large that the Holy Scripture is so as to all Things necessary to Salvation; and therefore shall now proceed to
II. The Second, viz. That it be clear and intelligible to those whose Faith and Manners are to be regulated by it.
I do not mean when I say that the Scripture is clear, and plain, and intelligible to all those to whom it is a Rule of Faith and Manners, that it is throughout so in all its Proposals. For it cannot be denied but there are many Things not only in St. Paul's Epistles, but also in other Parts of Scripture, hard to be understood; and such as do not only exceed the Apprehension of common Capacities; but also puzzle the Understandings of the most acute and profound Enquirers. But that which I assert is this, That all those Doctrines of Faith, and Rules of Manners which are necessary for Men to believe and practise in order to their Attainment of eternal Life, are so plainly and clearly revealed in Scripture that there is no honest teachable Mind that is capable of understanding common Sense, but may from thence receive full Information of them upon faithful and diligent Enquiry. And though in some Texts these Necessaries are not so plainly proposed as in others, yet in some Text or other they are all of them so plainly proposed that no Man can read the Scripture, and still be ignorant of them without being wilfully blind; for which there is no Remedy either in the Scripture, or out of it. And this I shall endeavour to prove,
1. From the express Testimony of Scripture.
2. From the avowed Design of writing the Scripture.
3. From the frequent Commands God lays upon us to read the Scripture.
4. From the Obligation that lies upon us under Pain of Damnation to believe, and receive all those Necessaries to Salvation contained in it.
1. From the express Testimony of Scripture it is evident, that in all Things necessary to Salvation at least the Scripture is clear and pla…n. For to be sure if in any thing the Scripture be plain, it is in those Things that are most necessary to be believed and known; and therefore if it be obscure in these Things, we may reasonably presume it is plain in nothing: But that it is in many Things plain and easy to be understood, is evident from its own Testimony: For thus of the Mosaick Law it is expresly affirmed by Moses, This Commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off, Deut. 30. 11. Where Moses speaks not only of the Ten Commandments, which consisting for the most part of Laws of Nature, are upon that Account more easy to be understood; but of all the Commandments of Moses in general, whether Ceremonial, Iudicial, or Natural. For so, v. 16. This Commandment, we find, contains as well the Statutes and Judgments, as the Commandments of the Law, all which must take in the whole Mosaick Institution. And accordingly, Ps. 119. 105. David calls this Word of God, a lamp unto his feet, and a light unto his path; which how could it be if it did not burn clear enough to guide and direct him? and if it did, then to be sure it burnt clear enough to direct him in those Things wherein it was most necessary for him to be directed. Again in the 19th Ps. 7, 8. we are told, that the Testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple; and that the Commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightning the eyes. But how can any Law make the simple, wise, or enlighten the Eyes of Men, unless it be so plainly and clearly delivered as that the simple may be capable of apprehending, and the Eyes of Men of discerning the Sense of it? I know it is objected by Bellarmin, that these Words do only imply that this Law indeed being understood, doth enlighten Mens Eyes, and direct their Practice; but by no means that it is plain and easy to be understood. But this is a meer Cavil; for it's plain that it is by understanding the Law, that the simple are made wise, and the Eyes of Men enlightned. If therefore this Law be so obscure in its self as that it cannot make it self understood by all that sincerely enquire into it, how is it possible that it should make them wise, or enlighten the Eyes of their Minds? But it's plain that the Intent of those Passages of David was to excite, and encourage Men to study and observe the Law: But what though the Law makes the simple, wise, when they understand it? what Encouragement is this for the simple to study it, if it be so obscure that they cannot understand it? And since they must understand it before they can observe it, what Encouragement doth this Consideration give them to observe it that it will make them wise when they understand it, if it be not plain enough for them to understand it? But then that forecited Passage of Moses doth in express Words contradict this Cavil of Bellarmin; for he tells the People that the Commandment he gave them was not hidden from them; whereas if it had been so obscurely delivered to them by Moses, that upon their sincere and diligent Enquiry they could not understand it, it is certain that it had been still hidden from them how wise soever it might make them when they did understand it: And to say that such a Proposition will make me wise when I do understand it, is no Argument at all that it is not hidden from me if it be so obscurely expressed as that upon my sincere Enquiry I am not capable of understanding it. But that the Old Testament at least in all necessary Matters was plain enough even to common Capacities, is evident from the frequent Appeals our Saviour makes to it in his Contests with the Common People of the Iews. Thus in the Text he bids them, Search the Scriptures, for they are they which testify of me; and in other Places, What saith the Scripture? and doth not the Scripture say so and so? Now how impertinent would it have been for our Saviour thus to appeal to it at the Tribunal of the People, if he thought it so obscure that the People were not capable of understanding it? How trifling would it be for a Man to appeal to Suarez's Metaphysicks in a Controversy with a Plow-man, or to refer him to Euclid's Elements for the determining the Bounds and Measures of a Field?
And as from what hath been said, 'tis apparent that the Scriptures of the Old Testament were at least in all Necessaries plain and clear to the Iews; so it is no less evident that the Scripture of the New Testament are so to Christians, since it gives the same Testimony to it self of its own Clearness, as the Old Testament doth. For thus, 2 Cor. 4. 2, 3, 4. the Apostle tells us, that they did not handle the Word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the Truth, commending themselves to Mens Consciences in the sight of God. But if our Gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost; in whom the God of this World hath blinded the Minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ, who is the Image of God, should shine unto them. Supposing then that they wrote with the same Plainness and Clearness with which they spake, (which there is no shadow of Reason to doubt of) then from these Words it is evident; First, That they did neither in their Preaching nor Writings affect to discourse dubiously or obscurely, but that their great Design was so to manifest and make known the Truth as that by their Plainness and Simplicity they might recommend themselves to the Consciences of all that heard or read them: Secondly, That in Fact they had in their Sermons and Writings so clearly taught the Gospel, that if after all it remained hidden or obscure to any, it was only to such as were lost and irrecoverable. Thirdly, That that which render'd the Gospel which they had taught and written, hidden or obscure to such, was not the Obscurity either of the Matter which they taught, or of their Manner of teaching it, but their own worldly Affections which blinded their Eyes, and hinder'd them from seeing that which in it self was illustriously visible. Which is an unanswerable Evidence of the Clearness and Plainness of the Scriptures of the New Testament in all necessary Things; for if they are clear to all but such as wilfully shut their Eyes against them, they are as clear as they need be to honest and teachable Minds; for there is nothing can be clear enough to such, as are not willing to understand. And accordingly the Gospel, which the Apostle calls the Grace of God which bringeth Salvation, is said to have appeared, or shone forth, to all Men; teaching us, that denying Vngodliness and worldly Lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present World, Tit. 2. 11. Now if the Gospel did shine forth unto all Men, it must be in the Sermons and Discourses of those that had preached it to the World; and if they so preached it as that it shone forth to all Men, they must necessarily have preached it very plainly and clearly: Either therefore it was wrote as it was preached, or it was not; if it was not, it was not wrote truly and sincerely; if it was, it was wrote very plainly, so as to make it appear and shine forth to all that read it. 'Tis true, there are some Things obscure both in the Old Scriptures and New; but then these are such Things as are no Parts of the Necessaries and Essentials of Religion; such Things as Men may be safely ignorant of, or be mistaken about, without any Hazard of their eternal Life. For all that the fore-cited Testimonies prove is only this, that that true Religion by which God governs the Faith and Manners of Men, is so far forth as it is necessary to be believed and practised, plainly and clearly revealed to them in the Holy Scriptures. But besides this, all Men agree there are a great many other Things revealed in Holy Scripture, which, because they are not necessary for all Men to understand, are many of them not so plainly revealed as that all Men may understand them. But since the Scripture was written to teach and instruct Men, to be sure it teaches them most plainly that which is most necessary for them to know; and therefore since there are some Things plainly taught in Scripture, as is evident to any one that reads it, to be sure among these Things are contained all that is necessary for Men to know and understand.
2. From the avowed Design of writing the Scripture it is also evident that in all Things necessary it is plain and clear. For thus concerning the Old Testament, St. Paul tells us that whatsoever things were writtenafore time, were written for our learning; that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope, Rom. 15. 4. And if they were written for our Learning and Instruction, to be sure they were so written as to teach and instruct us, that is, plainly and clearly, especially as to those Things wherein we have most need to be instructed. And then as for the New Testament, St. Luke tells his Theophilus, that the Reason of his writing his Gospel was that he might know the certainty of those Things that were surely believed among Christians, and wherein he himself had been instructed; And if it were to assertain us of the Principles of Chrstianity that he wrote his Gospel, certainly he would take care to write it after such a Manner as that those that read it might understand it, otherwise he must run counter to his own Design. Thus also St. Iohn saith, that he wrote his Gospel that Men might believe that Iesus is the Christ the Son of God; but how could his Gospel induce Men to believe This, unless it be so written as that Men may understand it? And so also for his Epistles he tells us, that he wrote them that they that believed in Iesus might know that they have eternal Life, and that they may believe, or continue to believe, on the Name of the Son of God: And if this were his End, to be sure he would take care to write so as that they might understand; otherwise how could they know by his Writing that they had eternal Life, or be moved thereby to continue to believe on the name of Jesus? For there is nothing can create in Men either Knowledge or Faith, but what they understand. Seeing therefore the great End of Writing the Scripture was to instruct the World in the great Things of Religion, either we must say that both the Writers of the Scripture, and the Holy Ghost that inspired them were defective in Skill, or in Care so to write as to obtain this End; or that their Writings are an effectual Means to obtain it, which it is impossible for them to be, unless they are plain and clear as to the great Things of Religion. In short every wise Agent pursues his End by the most proper and effectual Means; and I would fain know whether to write plainly or obscurely be the most proper Means to instruct Men by Writing; if to write plainly, then either the Apostles wrote so, or they were not wise Agents, since to instruct was the great End of their Writing. The most natural Way of conveying to Mens Minds the Notices of Things is by Words either spoken or written, and seeing whatsoever can be spoken in plain and intelligible Words may be written in the same Words, there can be no doubt but those Words will be as intelligible when they are written, as when they are spoken; for why should the same Words be more obscure when conveyed to us by our Eyes, than when conveyed to us by our Ears? Seeing then the Sense of Scripture may be as plainly conveyed by Words written as by Words spoken, and seeing that even those who deny the Plainness of Scripture do yet allow that the Sense of it may be plainly conveyed by Words spoken, or which is the same thing, Oral Tradition; if the Scripture be not plain it can be resolved into no other Reason but this that God would not have it so; for there is no Doubt but he could have spoken as plainly as Men, and have written as plainly as he spoke; and therefore if he hath not done so, it was because he would not; but to say that he would not write those Things plainly which he thought necessary for all Men to know, and which he wrote on purpose that all Men might know, is to say that he would, and would not at the same time; or that he wrote them on purpose that Men might know them, and yet that he wrote so as that they might not know them.
3. From the frequent Commands God lays upon us to read the Scripture it is also evident, that in all necessary Things it is plain and clear. That God doth not only allow, but will and require us to read the Scripture, I shall shew at large hereafter, when I come to treat of searching the Scripture. Supposing therefore at present the Thing to be true, I would fain know to what Purpose should God require us to read the Scripture, if in those things which are necessary for Men to know and believe, it be not plain and intelligible. Doth God require us to read it, for the sake of reading it, or for the sake of understanding it? If the former, reading any other Book might as well have answered God's End as reading the Scripture; because reading is reading whatsoever it be that we read; if the later, then either the Scripture is plain and intelligible as to all those Things which he requires us to understand, or he requires us to read it in vain. For to what Purpose should we read that we may understand, if that which we are to read be not plain enough to be understood by us? As for Instance; the Bereans, Acts 17. 11. are highly commended for searching the Scriptures daily; now I would fain know was this a Virtue in them, or was it not? If not, why are they commended for it; if it were, it was certainly their Duty. What was the Intendment of it; was it only that they might be expert Readers? Why are they so commended for reading the Scriptures above any other Book, seeing that reading any other Book would have done as well for that Purpose as reading the Scriptures? But the Text it self tells us that the Intendment of their reading the Scripture was that they might know whether those things were so or no which St. Paul had preached to them; but how should they know this by reading the Scripture, if the Scripture which they read were not plain enough to be understood by them? Again St. Paul gives this as a great Commendation of his Son Timothy, that from a Child he had known the Holy Scriptures; whence by the Way we may learn that it is not so great a Reproach to our Church as the Romanists intend it, for that we permit Women and Children, Tinkers and Cobblers to read the Scripture. But I pray, what was the Meaning of Timothy's knowing the Holy Scripture from a Child? Was it that he knew the Words of it only, or the Sense of it also? If the former, a Parrot may be taught as much as Timothy had learned, and consequently deserve as high a Commendation as he; if the later, then it seems the Scripture is plain enough for a well-disposed Child to know the Sense of it so far forth at least as it is necessary to be known, and this is as much as we desire. If therefore God requires us to read the Scripture, as Timothy did, to the End that we may know and understand it as he did, then either we may understand the Sense of it by reading it, or else God requires us to read it in vain.
4. And lastly; From the Obligation we lie under upon Pain of Damnation to believe and receive those Necessaries to Salvation contained in Scripture, it is also evident that as to all those Necessaries it is plain and clear. That we are obliged to believe under Pain of Damnation all that the Scripture proposes as necessary to our Salvation, is agreed on all hands; but how can Men be justly obliged to believe such Things as are obscure, and doubtful, and uncertain, and of which they can have no certain Knowledge? Either the Necessaries to Salvation must be plainly and clearly expres'd in Scripture, or we have not sufficient Reason to believe them; and to say God will damn us for not believing those Things which he hath not given us sufficient Reason to believe, is to charge him with the most outragious Oppression and Injustice. But we are told that though God hath not clearly revealed to us in Scripture those Things which he hath obliged us to believe upon Pain of Damnation, yet he hath left us sufficient Reason to believe them; for he hath left us to the Conduct of an infallible Church, that is to say, of the present Church of Rome in all Ages, whom he hath authorized to explain and define to us all Things that are necessary to be believed, which we are to receive upon her Authority, and not upon the Scriptures; so that if we firmly believe what She defines and proposes to us, we are sure to believe all Things that are necessary to be believed. Now in Answer to this Objection, which indeed is the great Foundation that the Faith of those of the present Church of Rome relies on, I desire these Things may be seriously considered.
1. That before we can reasonably rely upon the Authority of the present Church of Rome in defining and proposing to us the Articles of our Faith, there are sundry Things that we must believe upon the Authority of Scripture.
2. That these Things which we must believe from Scripture before we can rely upon the Authority of that Church, are at least as obscurely revealed in Scripture as any other Article of our Christian Faith.
3. That after all these Things, upon our relying on that Church's Authority, we are left to the same or greater Uncertainties than upon our relying upon the Authority of Scripture.
4. That in relying upon the Authority of Scripture we are left to no other Uncertainties than just what is necessary to render our Faith vertuous and rewardable; whereas by relying upon the Authority of that Church, supposing it to be a certain Ground, as it is pretended, our Faith would have little or nothing of Virtue in it.
1. That before we can reasonably rely upon the Authority of that Church in defining and proposing to us the Articles of our Faith, there are sundry Things that we must believe upon the Authority of Scripture. As for Instance; we must in the first Place believe that there is a Church, or Society of Christians separated from the World, or incorporated by a peculiar Divine Charter. Now whether there be such a Church or no is a Question that must be resolved by the Scripture, and not by the Church; because to believe that there is a Church because the Church saith there is a Church, is to take that for granted which is the Thing in Question. Secondly, We must believe that this Church hath Authority to define and propose to us the Articles of our Faith, which must also for the same Reason be believed on the Authority of the Scripture, and not of the Church. For to believe that there is a Church that hath Authority to propose to us the Articles of our Faith, is to believe that there is a Church which we are obliged to believe; and how can I believe this upon the Church's Authority, unless I can believe it before I do believe it? Thirdly, Before we can rely upon this Church's Authority in defining and proposing to us the Articles of our Faith, we must believe that this Church is infallible; for if she be not infallible, how is it consistent with the Truth of God to oblige us to believe Her, seeing in so doing he must oblige us whensoever She errs to believe her Errors? but that She is infallible is not to be believed upon her own Authority; for then her infallible Authority must be the Reason of our Belief that She is infallible, that is, we must believe her infallible, because we believe her infallible. Seeing then we cannot believe it on her own Authority, if we believe it at all, it must be upon the Authority of Scripture. Fourthly, Before we can rely upon the Church of Rome's Authority to define to us the Articles of our Faith, we must believe the Church of Rome to be this infallible Church: But seeing this is no self-evident Principle, we must have some other Evidence besides her self to induce us to believe it; and what else can that be but Scripture? We are told indeed by some of her greatest Divines, that there are certain Marks and Notes of a true Church peculiar to the Church of Rome, by which we are obliged to believe Her the true Church; such as Antiquity, Vniversality, Holiness of Doctrine, &c. But seeing no Doctrine can be holy that is not true, we must be satisfied that that Church is true before we can know that it is holy; so that before we can reasonably submit to her Athority, we must be very well assured that her Doctrine is true, and this we cannot be assured of by her Authority, because that as yet is the Matter in Qustion; and therefore we can be no otherwise assured of it, but only by the Authority of Scripture; and when we are assured beforehand by the Authority of Scripture that her Doctrines are true, her Authority comes too late to assure us. Seeing therefore it is evident that there are some, if not all the Articles of the Roman Faith that must be known and believed by us upon the Authority of Scripture before we can safely rely upon her Authority to define them to us, how can we be obliged to settle our Faith upon her Authority, when as before we can reasonably admit her Authority, we must believe several of the Articles of our Faith upon the Authority of Scripture? For I would fain know, are these Articles of Faith, or no? That there is a Church; that this Church hath Authority to define the Articles of our Faith, and that in so defining, this Church is infallible, and that this infallible Church is the Church of Rome? If they be, as they themselves own they are, then there are some Articles it seems that must be believed without the Church's Authority upon the single Authority of Scripture; and if some, why not all? why should not the Scripture be as sufficient to authorize us to believe the Rest as these, since its Authority is as great in one Text as in onother? Especially considering
2. That these Things which we must believe from Scripture before we can rely upon the Authority of the Church of Rome, are at least as obscurely revealed in Scripture as any other Article of our Christian Faith. The great Reason urged by the Romanists against our Relyance upon the Scripture for our Faith is the Obscurity of it; and if this be a good Reason it proves a great deal more than they would have it, viz. that we ought not to rely upon Scripture even for those Articles, without believing of which we can have no sufficient Ground to rely upon the Authority of their Church. For I would fain know, is it clear and plain from Scripture that the present Catholick Church of every Age hath Authority to define the Articles of Faith, and that in all its Definitions it is infallible? and that the present Church of Rome is this Catholick Church? If so; how come those Texts upon which those Articles are founded to be understood in a quite different Sense, not only by us, but by the greatest Part of the Primitive Fathers, as hath been abundantly proved by Protestant Writers? Supposing that we should be so blinded by our Partiality to our own Tenets as to misapprehend plain and clear Expressions of Scripture, it is very strange methinks that the Fathers who were never engaged in the Controversy, and so could not be biass'd either one way or t'other, should yet misapprehend them too. What is this but to say that let Men be never so indifferent, yet they may be easily mistaken in the Sense of very plain and clear Expressions; and if so, what signifies either Speaking or Writing? But to proceed to some Instances; will any modest Man in the World affirm that the Church of Rome's infallibility in defining Articles of Faith to all succeeding Generations is more plainly exprest in those Words of our Saviour, Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I build my Church, than the Divinity of our Saviour is in the Beginning of the first Chaper of St. Iohn's Gospel, where it is expresly affirmed that he is God, whereas in the other there is not the least mention either of the Church of Rome, or of Infallibility, or defining Articles of Faith? Why may we not then as well depend upon the one Text for the Article of our Saviour's Divinity, as upon the other for that of the Church of Rome's Infallibility? Again, are there not innumerable Texts of Scripture wherein the Articles of Remission of Sin, the Resurrection of the Dead, the last Iudgment, and the World to come are at least as plainly exprest as the present Church of Rome's Infallibility is in any of those Texts that are urged in the Defence of it? and therefore if we believe the later upon the Authority of Scripture, notwithstanding the pretended Obscurity of it, why may we not as well upon the same Authority believe all the former, since the former are at least as plainly exprest as the later? Either therefore the Scripture is plain enough to be relyed upon as to this Article of the Church of Rome's Infallibility, or it is not; if it be not, we have no Ground for our Dependence upon the Authority of her Definitions and Proposals; if it be, it's plain enough to be relyed upon in all other necessary Articles of Faith, since these are all as plainly at least expres'd in Scripture as that. For if we may not rely upon Scripture because it is not plain, then where it is equally plain, it is equally to be relyed on.
3. That when we come to rely upon this Church's Authority, we are exposed to far greater Uncertainties than while we relied upon the Authority of Scripture. For in the first place, we are of all sides agreed that the Scripture is infallible, and that such and such Writings are Parts of Scripture; and therefore are absolutely secure that if we follow the true Sense of it, it cannot mislead us. But the much greater Part of Christians deny that the Church of Rome is infallible; even the Church of Rome it self owns the Authority we rely on to be infallible, but all Christians all the World over, besides those of her own Communion, disallow hers to be so; and to forsake our Dependence upon an Infallibility which all own, to rely upon an Infallibility which but few in Comparison admit, is certainly a very dangerous Venture. And then Secondly, As for the Infallibility of Scripture we are certain where to find it; viz. in every Text, and in every Proposition therein contained, which being all the Word of God, must be all infallible. But as for the Infallibility of the Roman Church, as they have handled the Matter, it is almost as difficult to find as to prove it; some cry, lo it is here; and some, lo it is there; some place it in the Pope only, others in the Pope and his College of Cardinals; some in the Pope presiding in a General Council, others in a General Council whether the Pope preside in it, or no. So that in this Church, it seems, there is Infallibility somewhere, but what are we the better for it if we know not where to find it? If we go to the Pope for it; there have been two or three Popes at once that have decreed against one another; and therefore one or t'other of them to be sure were mistaken. How then shall we know which is the true infallible one? And when I have found the true Pope, others tell me I am not yet arrived at the Seat of Infallibility until I have found him in his College of Cardinals; and when I have found him here I am still to seek, seeing I find the same Pope (Eugenius the Fourth for Instance) decreeing one Thing in his College of Cardinals, and the quite contrary in a general Council; and therefore I am sure he could not be infallible in both. Therefore others send me to the Pope in a General Council; but when I come thither, I find my self at a Loss again; because I meet with several Instances of one Pope's defining one Thing in one General Council, and another Pope, the quite contrary in another; and therefore in one or t'other Council I am sure, the one or t'other Pope was mistaken. And as for General Councils themselves there are sundry of them which are owned by some, and rejected by others of the principal Doctors of the Roman Communion. And even when Councils are legally assembled, there are so many nice Disputes among them, what it is that makes them General, and when it is that they act Conciliariter as they call it, that is, so as to render their Decrees perpetually and universally obliging; that though we were resolved to build our Faith upon the Authority of this Church, yet if we will use that Caution in believing that we ought to do in a Matter of so great Moment, we should find our selves involved in greater Uncertainties concerning these Things than we are concerning the Sense even of the most difficult Places of Scripture. But then Thirdly, When we are pass'd over all these Difficulties we are still at as great a Loss to understand what is the Sense of the Church to be believed by us, as what is the Sense of Scripture. For the Church hath no other way to deliver her Sense to us but either by Oral Tradition, that is, by Word of Mouth; or by Writing; If She deliver her Sense to me by Oral Tradition, how can I know what that is who never heard Her speak either in its diffused Body, or in a General Council, or in any other Representative; unless it be that of my own Parish-Priest perhaps, who for all I know may be Ignorant or Heretical, and so either not understand himself the Church's Oral Tradition, or wilfully pervert it to a contrary Meaning? And if the Church deliver her Sense to me by Writing, as She hath done in the written Decrees of her General Councils, must I read over all her Decrees? How should I do that who understand not so much as the Languages in which they are written? Or suppose they were Translated, how shall I know that they are faithfully render'd any more than I do that the Scripture is so? But suppose I were certain of this, and should thereupon proceed to read them, alass, I find in them a great many difficult and dubious Expressions, yea, and at least seeming Contradictions to each other; how then can I be more certain of the true Sense of these Writings than of the Sense of the Writings of Scripture? But you will say, the Church hath digested her Sense of all her Articles of Faith into a plain Creed and Catechism, viz. that of the Council of Trent, whereby the plainest Reader may without any laborious Enquiries be readily instructed what he ought to believe. This I confess is something; but as for those Articles of Faith wherein We and the Church of Rome are agreed, we find them as plainly expressed in Scripture as in that Creed and Catechism; and therefore we have Reason to believe that if those Articles wherein we disagree had ever been intended for Articles of Faith, they would have been as plainly express'd there as these; but 'tis no wonder we should not find them plainly express'd there, when we cannot find them express'd there at all. But do we not find that the Scriptures even in the plainest Expressions of Articles of Faith have yet been perverted by Hereticks, into a contrary Meaning? And what then? Are not the Words of Councils as liable to be perverted into a contrary Meaning as the Words of Scripture? For do not the Roman Doctors differ as much about the Sense of their Councils, as we do about the Sense of our Scriptures? Yea and have we not a notorius Instance of it at this very Day? For what can be more contrary than Belarmine's Exposition of the Trent Faith, and the Bishop of Condom's? And yet both allowed by the Pope, who by the Authority of that Council is made sole Arbitrator of the Sense of it. But then Fourthly and lastly, As to the Sense of Scripture our Reliance on the Authority of that Church leaves us at as great an Uncertainty as it found us. For where the Scripture designs to speak plainly, as it doth in all Things necessary to salvation, the Church cannot speak plainer; and therefore there we may understand the Scripture as well without the Church as with it; but where it doth not speak plainly, the Church of Rome hath left us no infallible Commentary whereby to understand it; so that where the Scripture is plain She hath not made it plainer, and where it is obscure She hath left it as obscure as ever: So that after all the Noise that is made of Infallibility her Doctors are fain to apply themselves to the same Methods of Understanding Scripture, that is, to consult the Sense of Antiquity, and compare Text with Text, and the like that we fallible Protestants do; and when they have done all, are as lyable to be mistaken as we. Nay they themselves confess that even General Councils themselves may be mistaken in their Applications of Scripture; that is, that they may misapply them to wrong Purposes, which they cannot do without mistaking the Sense of them, of which there are a great many notorious Instances in the second Council of Nice; which to prove it the Duty of Christians to worship Images, urges God's taking Clay, and making Man after his own Image; and likewise that of Esay, There shall be a Sign and Testimony to the Lord in the Land of Egypt; and also those Passages of David, Confession and Beauty is before him. Lord I have loved the beauty of thy House. O Lord my Face hath sought for thee. O Lord I will seek after thy Countenance. O Lord, the light of thy Countenance is sealed over us. And from that Passage, As we have seen, so have we heard, they argue that there must be Images to look on; and because it is said, God is marvellous in his Saints, they conclude that the Church must be deck'd with Pictures: And from No man lighteth a Candle and putteth it under a bushel, they wisely infer that Images must be set upon the Altar; All which are as remote from their Sense as the first Verse of the first Chapter of Genesis. What greater Certainty have they with their Infallibility than we without it? We can know as well the Sense of plain Texts of Scripture, as of plain Texts of Councils, or Creeds, or Catechisms; and we can as easily pervert the Sense of the one as of the other: And as for those that are not plain, even General Councils you see for all their Infallibility may be mistaken about them as well as we. So that when all comes to all, by forsaking the infallible Authority of Scripture to rely upon the infallible Authority of that Church, we are so far from arriving at a greater Certainty of Faith that we are involved in greater Uncertainties than ever. But then,
4. And lastly, in relying upon the Authority of Scripture we are left to no other Uncertainties than just what are necessary to render our Faith vertuous and rewardable; whereas by relying upon the Authority of the Church of Rome (supposing it were as sure a Ground of Faith as it is pretended) our Faith would have little or nothing of Virtue in it. It is pretended (though falsly you see) that that Church's Authority is so sure a Ground of Faith, that while a Man depends upon it he cannot be mistaken in any necessary Article of Faith; which in Reality amounts to no more than this, That while a Man believes as that Church believes, which infallibly believes all that is necessary to Salvation, he infallibly believes all that is necessary to Salvation; and it is equally true, that while a Man believes as the Scripture teaches, which infallibly teaches all that is necessary to Salvation, he infallibly believes all that is necessary to Salvation; that is, both are equally false. For no Man can infallibly believe either the Church or Scripture, because Infallibility exceeds the Capacity of humane Nature; no Man can so believe either but that he may be mistaken, and if he may be mistaken, its possible he may not believe all that is necessary to Salvation, whether he grounds his Faith upon the Church or the Scripture. But because this Church pretends so to secure my Faith while I depend upon her Authority as that I cannot be mistaken, for this very Reason I cannot depend upon it, because I am sure of this, that God never designed for me any such Means of Believing as should render my Faith infallible. For to what End should he require me to take so much Pains and Care to secure my Faith from Errors, if he hath furnished me with any certain Means of being infallible? It would be but applying that Means whatever it is, and my Danger would be immediately over; and then I need trouble my Head no further, being now so secured as that I cannot be mistaken; after which it would be very impertinent methinks for God to trouble me with those unnecessary Injunctions of trying all Things, and holding fast to that which is good; of searching the Scriptures, and trying the Spirits whether they be of God; and taking heed whilst I stand lest I fall. What need a Man be at the Expence of all this Labour and Caution, whose Faith is already secured? Seeing therefore God requires these Things at our Hands, it is a plain Case that he never intended us any Method how to be infallible in believing; and therefore since the Church of Rome's Authority is pretended to be such a Method, for that Reason it ought to be rejected. It's plain that God intended that our Faith should be a Grace and a Virtue, and consequently that it should be an Act of our Wills as well as of our Understandings, which supposes the Evidence of it not to be irresistible; for what Virtue is it to believe that the Sun shines when it glares full in our Eyes? Since therefore our Faith must be a free and voluntary Assent upon such Motives as are sufficient to satisfy an honest Mind, but not to compel either an obstinate Infidel or self-deceived Hypocrite; God did not think fit so to secure our Faith as to leave it impossible for us to err damnably; And, indeed if he had, it would have been no Virtue in us to believe savingly; for what Virtue is it for a Man to do that which it is impossible for him not to do? It is sufficient that we cannot err damnably in our Faith without some damnable Fault in our Wills; but if we either refuse to enquire into this Revelation for what is necessary for us to believe, or will only enquire into it with a Mind that is byass'd with wicked and sinful Prejudices, or will not submit our Understandings to it upon the clearest Conviction, there is no doubt but we may be ignorant, and we may be deceived in Things of the greatest Moment, and it is but just and fit that we should: And if notwithstanding these Faults we could not err, for God's sake what Virtue would it be to be Orthodox? But if with honest, humble, and teachable Minds we will diligently enquire into divine Revelation, we shall there find all the Necessaries to Salvation so clearly and plainly proposed to us, that 'twill be morally impossible for us either to be ignorant of, or deceived about them. So that by relying on Scripture you see we are exposed to no other Uncertainties than just what are necessary to render our Faith a Virtue; and God doth as much require that our Faith should be vertuous as that it should be Orthodox; that it should be the Act of an honest, humble, diligent, and teachable Mind, as that it should be extended to all Things necessary to Salvation. Now our Faith may be Orthodox without an infallible Certainty, but it canot be vertuous and rewardable with it. To what purpose then do the Romanists talk of an infallible certainty in Believing? Is it reasonable to expect more certainty than God ever intended to give? He hath given as much as is necessary for honest Minds and no more, and whether Knaves and Hypocrites believe right or wrong is of no great Concernment. If therefore our Faith be liable to no other Uncertainty than just what is necessary to try our Honesty, that is much better for us in Respect of the Virtue of our Faith than an infallible Certainty. Supposing therefore that the Church of Rome were as infallible as it pretends, it is certain that the Scripture is as infallible as that; but whether we relie upon one or t'other we are fallible still. And could that Church render us as infallibly certain as it pretends, it would thereby preserve indeed the Orthodoxy of our Faith, but then at the same Time it would destroy the Virtue of it: For to believe right when we cannot believe wrong is fatal and necessary; but to believe right when through our own Default we may believe wrong, this is virtuous and rewardable.
By what hath been said therefore, I think it is sufficiently evident, that it is upon the Scripture we are to relie, and not upon the Church, especially upon the Roman Church, for all Things necessary to Salvation; and therefore since we are obliged to believe these Things upon Pain of Eternal Damnation, it necessarily follows that they must be plain and clear, and Scripture; otherwise we could not be justly so obliged to believe them. And thus I have shewn at large, that the Scripture is the great Rule of our Faith and Manners, and that as such, it is both full and clear, as containing in it all Things necessary to Salvation, and proposing them so plainly and clearly, as that upon an honest and diligent Enquiry all Men may find and discover them.