A Dialogue, Dialogue (1 of 3)
Laudensium Apostasia; OR The Canterburians Apostasie from the Doctrine Received in the Church of ENGLAND.
Pacificus.
HAving found my self inclined to the work of the Ministry, and being by my Parents thereunto designed, and having also put my hand to that Plough, I dare not (notwithstanding the high affronts and base indignities that are daily offered to Preachers) look back, lest I should render my self unworthy of the Kingdom of Heaven: yet as oft as I think upon that pungent Interrogation, Who is sufficient for these things? I cannot choose but tremble in sense of my own weakness, and humbly implore the assistance of Divine Grace, that I may be enabled to stir up the gift that is in me, and so shew my self a skilful workman that need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of God; and do therefore most gladly take all opportunities of discoursing with those who may be any way helpful to me in improving my parts; and I account it no small happiness that I have met with you Mr. Laudensis, whom common fame hath voyced to be very able, and whom I must in charity presume to be very willing to further me in my studies.
Laudensis.
I am glad to find that you are not of the number of those who account themselves sufficiently qualined for the work of the Ministry, assoon as they have got a good measure of impudence, and four or five Sermon Note-books; and shall according to the best of my skill give you some directions; the which if you will use, your five talents may gain five other talents: My first counsel is, That you would not address the course of your studies to modern Epitomizers; balk if you be wise the ordinary and accustomed by-paths of Bastingius his Catechism, &c. and betake your self to Scripture, the Rule of Faith interpreted by Antiquity, the best Expositor of Faith, and Applyer of that Rule: for I hold it a point of discretion, to draw water as neer as a man can to the Well-head, and to spare labour in vain in running further off to Cisterns and Lakes. I alway went to enquire, when doubt was, of the dayes of old as God himself directed me, and hitherto I have not repented me of it. I have not found any Canon, Order, Act, Direction in the Church of England against it; for it I have found many. I never held it wisdom, to tire my self with haling and tugging up against the stream, when with ease enough I might, and with better discretion should secundo flumine navigare: we know, the further the current is, the more muddy, troubled, and at length brackish the water is, App. p. 11. 12.
Pacif.
I hugely like your advice to study the Fathers, and should have far worse thoughts of the Lutherans, Calvinists, and our English Puritans, than as yet I have, if they did so exceedingly undervalue the authority of the Antient Doctors, as Canus, Lessius, Possevinus, Becanus, Grotius, Mountague charge them to do: But the truth is, none have more aviled the Fathers than the Remonstrants, and Papists: that in the account of the former they stand for little more than cyphers; these speeches of theirs, Apol. cap. 2. Vanum est, quia purior & impurior antiquitas non nisi inanes voces sunt. Puritatem & impuritatem quis que pro arbitrio suo, & prout usu venit aestimat. & in Dedic. f. 3. Quare nec pro dignitate, &c. Vt Declarationem Remonstrantium non tam erroris convincerent, quam similitudinis cum iis quos errasse olim antiquitas, & nunc communis credit opinio. Hoc eorum est qui cum causae suae diffidant, adversarios suos speciosis autoritatibus, &c. with many others scattered up and down their Apology and Answer to the Professors of Leyden, do sufficiently evince. How little the same men do reverence Synods and Assemblies, I leave to any to judge, who will but be at pains to read what Vedelius hath collected out of them, Arcan. Remon. l. 2. c 6. As for the Papists, they do mostly speak loud in the mendation of the Fathers; but if one examine their mind to the bottom, he shall find they call none Father but their Pope; for they say his determination is to be followed, though contrary to the judgement of all the Fathers. Suarez. in 3. com. 1. qu. 2. Art. 2. Disp. 42. Sect. 1. Desinitio Pontificis omnino vera est: Etsi dictis omnium sanctorum esset contraria, illis esset praeferenda. It is one thing to interpret the Law as a Doctor, another thing as a Judge: of the one is required learning, of the other authority; the opinion of the Doctors is to be followed according to reason, but the Judges opinion is to be followed of necessity. St. Augustine and the Fathers in their Expositions, supplyed the places of Doctors, which we may follow as we see cause; the Pope and Council supply the places of Judges, with a Commission from God, and therefore they must be observed and followed of necessity. To the Pope and his Cardinals, or Bell de ver. Dei lib. 3. cap. 10.others imployed by him, they allow a liberty of correcting the Fathers, and expunging out of them such passages as suit not to the mysterie of iniquity working in that Romish Synagogue. If a Father in any thing dissent from the Pope, and be forbidden to be read, the reading of a Father is not forbidden; for in that case he is not Pater, but Vitricus. Grot. de jure & more prohib. libros malos lib. 2. c. 10. Yea we are told, that when the Church reviews the writings of her sons, and where need requires, corrects them, she doth a work of mercy. cap. 2. of the same Book. Voetius tells us out of the Summa Bullarii seu Constitut. Pontif. p. 256. of a Constitution of Sixtus 5. appointing the Fathers (pretending them to be in many places to be corrupted) to be put forth in more correct Editions, but with this condition; S: graviores dubitationes & difficultates in veterum codicum autoritate, librorum correctione & emendatione inciderint, rebus prius in congregatione examinatis ad nos referant ut in lectionuns varietate id quod Orthodoxae veritati maxime consonum erit, ex speciali Dei privilegio huic sanctae sedi concesso, statuamus.
Laud.
I am a little jealous that some body hath done me no good office; for me thinks your former implyeth, that you look upon me as Arminian or Popish; but be it known to you, That I disclaim all aspersion of Popery, and am further from it than any Puritan in the Kingdom. I am indeed well acquainted with such imputation as Popish, and I know not what, the ordinary language of our precise Professors against any man that is not as themselves More furioso Calvinista; and having had this measure often meted out to me, from their very great zeal and very no charity, I contemn their malice; (a Scold cannot any better be charmed than by contempt;) As for Arminius, if he in Tenents agreeth unto Scripture plain and express: if he hath agreeing unto his Opinions the Practice, Tradition, and Consent of the Antient Church, I imbrace his opinions; let his person, or private ends, if he had any, alone: I nor have, nor will have confarreation therewith. If Calvin, so far in account and estimation before Arminius, dissenteth from Antiquity and the Universal ancient Church, I follow him not. No private man, or peculiar spirit ever did, or ever shall tyrannize upon my belief. I yeeld only to God and the Church. App. p. 4, 5, 12.
Pacif.
Your flings at Puritans, Precise Professors, Furious Calvinists, might well have been spared; so might your Apologie for your self as to Popery and Arminianism, with which my discourse did not in the least charge you: I could easily quote you sentences out of Sacred and Prophane Writers, concerning such as make defences before they are impleaded; but being resolved not to exasperate, I forbear any thing of that nature, and humbly take leave a little further to explain my self, lest I should be mistaken in what before I said.
1. I make not consent of Fathers, but Scripture the Rule of my Faith.
2. Nor do I account the Fathers fit to be appealed to, in some Controversies now a foot in Christendom. 1. Because there are some Heresies newly sprung up, of which they took no notice in their writings, yea in the favour of which they may seem to speak, being engaged against such as were in the contrary extream. That none should be pressed with the judgements of Fathers in matters that were not throughly discussed till after they were dead and gone, hear not me, but St. August. de Praed. Sanct. cap. 14. Quid igitur opus est, ut corum secrutemur opuscula, qui priusquam ista haeresis oriretur, non habuerunt necessitatem in hac difficili ad solvendum questione versari, quod procul dubio facerent, si respondere talibus cogerentur, unde factum est, ut de gratiâ Dei quid sentirent, breviter quibus dam Scriptorum suorum locis & transeuntes attingerent; immorarentur vero in iis quae adversus alios inimicos Ecclesiae Disputabant. To the like purpose writeth he in his Euarration on the 54. Psal. Nunquid enim perfecte de Trinitate tractatum est antequ an eblatrarent Arriani? nunquid perfecte de poenitentiâ tractatum est antequam obsisterent Novatiani? sic non perfecte de Baptismate tractatus est, antequam contradicerent foris positi rebaptizatores: nec de ipsâ Christi unitate enucleate dicta sunt quae dicta sunt, nisi posteaquam separatio illa urgene cepit fratres informos, ut jam illi qui noverant haec tractare at que dissolvere, ne perirent infirmi sollicitati quaestionibus impiorum, sermonibus suis & disputationibus obscura legis in publicum deducerent: yea the very Appealer, p. 131. hath these words, That the Fathers (those before Augustine) being to deal against Fatal Necessity, urged by Paynims, Philosophers in those dayes; as also against the execrable impiety of the Manichees, extended the power of Free-will unto the uttermost, and set it upon the tenters; especially having then no cause to fear any enemie at home, unto the contrary, ante mota certamina Pelagiana: there being yet no Pelagians sprung up in the world, enemies to Grace, advancers of Nature and Natural Power, beyond degree of Power and of possibility: Yea p. 129, 130. He professeth plainly, that in, and concerning this point of Free-will, those Fathers did so far out-lavish, and speak so inlargedly, that the very Jesuites, post mota certamina Pelagiana, fore fear of seeming to Pelagianize, dare not say so much as they have said. 2. The Fathers of Prime Antiquity did either write nothing at all, or but very little; and what of theirs is come to our hands, is so interpolated, that it is extreamly difficult to find out their meaning; yea, the Editions are so various, that I know not which to prefer. e. g. If I follow Vedelius his Edition of Ignatius, I could not but think the Father to be of the opinion, that the making of any one a true Christian is a work not of moral suasion, but of strength and power; for these are his words according to him, foreign yet should I quote this passage in the controversie about free-will, I should be told, that the words do not run so in some other Editions, and so occasion much strife of words.
Laud.
You must expect nothing from the Geneva Printers, but deceits and impostures; nor hath that importune Vedelius brought any thing to fill his Pages with, but impudence and singular ignorance. Montacutius, Apparat. 1. p. 19.
Pacif.
I'm not ignorant that such a severe censure is passed upon Vedelius and his Edition; but he hath answered for hinself in his Preface to his Tract De Deo Synagogae: And Bishop Vsher, who hath taken more pains about Ignatius, then that bilious writer, speaks honorably of the Geneva Edition; yea, Dr. Hammond prefers it to the very edition of Isaac Vossius, judged the most perfect and incorrupt, in one particular; but this is a diversion.
3. I say thirdly, That I frequently see just occasion to prefer the expositions of Scripture made by our later Writers, before those which are given by the Ancient Doctors; this is acknowledged even by Romanists; Stella in Luc. c. 10. Bishop Fisher in his confutation of the Lutheran Artic. Art. 18. We scarce find any setting themselves to making of Homilies or Commentaries, till about the third Century; and many of those who have commented on Scripture, were so ignorant either of Hebrew, or Greek, or both, that they have fallen into fad mistakes, as no Scholar conversant in their Writings can deny.
4. I have much wondred, and do still wonder how it comes to pass, that the Systems and Models of Divinity, or Catechisms composed some by our own, some by Transmarine Divines, are so exceedingly decryed; for I am sure heretofore they were recommended to Tutors to read to their Pupils, as good means to keep them Orthodox, which appears by a Decree of Convocation made Anno Domini 1579. which I shall take the boldness to recite verbatim, because it shews what Authors were then in credit, and may possibly provoke the present University to revive the long neglected, but very necessary work of catechiting and examining young Students, not only privately within the Colledg walls, but also publickly in the Schools; Thus runs the decree extant, Libro senioris procuratoris B. fol. 35. A.
Decretum Convocationis Anno Domini 1579. Jan. 27. ad extirpandam haeresin quamcunque &, ad informandam juventuntem in verâ pietate.
Vetus statutum contra Haereticos & perverse de Christianâ fide sentientes renovandum & in usum revocandum duximus, additâ hac explanatione.
Ad extirpandam Haeresin quamcunque & ad informandam in verâ pietate juventutem Libros, hosce legendos censemus & statuimus, viz. Catechismum Alexandri Nowelli majorem, Lat. aut Graec. Vel Catechismum Johannis Calvin. Lat. Gr. aut Hebr. vel Elementa Christianae Religionis Andreae Hyperii: Vel Catechesin Heidelbergensem, pro captu auditorum & arbitrio legentium.
2. His adiungi possunt Henrici Bullingeri Catechismus pro adultis, & Institutiones Calvini, vel Apologia Ecclesiae Anglicanae, vel articuli Religionis in Synodo Londinensi Latine conscripti, & autoritate regia editi cum explicatione locorum Communium & testimoniis è sacra scriptura aut interdum è patribus desumptis. Ad primam lectionem Juniores, ad secundam provectiores omnes nullo gradu insignitos astringi volumus.
3. Catechismos omnes sanae huic doctrinae contrarios, aliosque libros superstitiosos & Papisticos legi & haberi penitus interdicimus.
4. Hanc legendi & interpretandi provinciam demandamus privatim Tutoribus, publice alicui Catechistae in singulis Collegiis & Aulis per praefectos assignando.
5. Quo Decretum hoc diligenter & inviolate observetur, examen habeatur domi per Catechistam aut etiam Praefectos, in Academiâ singulis anni terminis per Procancelarium adhibitis praeleetoribus sacrae Theologiae qui à studiosis convocatis profectus rationem exigant.
6. Si quis discentium aut docentium negligentior ant alioqui culpabilis deprehendatur, judicio praefectorum, aut si opus sit, Procancellarii corrigatur & puniatur.
I would fain know how it came to pass that there's no mention of this Decree in our new Statutes, if our late Grandees did not steere a course quite contrary to our old Protestant Divines? Nor do I know any ground that the Articles of our Church, and Calvins Institutions, which this Decree joyned together, should now with so much Zeal be put asunder.
Laud.
Private Opinions heretofore, especially if countenanced by some eminent Name, were looked on as the publick resolution of the Anglican Church, and the poor Church condemned for teaching those Opinions which by the Artifice of some men had been fastned on her. Dr. Crackanthorp when he was commanded to make answer to the Archbishop of Spalato his Consilium redeundi, chose rather to defend those Lutheri & Calvini dogmata, which had been charged upon this Church in the Bishops Pamphlet, then to assert this Church to her genuine Doctrine. They that went otherwise to work, were like to speed no better in it, or be otherwise requited for their honest Zeal, then to be presently exposed to the publick envy, and made the common subject of reproach and danger: So that I must needs look upon it as a bold attempt, as the times then were, in Bishop Mountague of Norwich, in his answer to the Popish Gagger, and the two Appellants to lay the Saddle on the right Horse, to sever or discriminate the opinions of particular men from the received and authorized Doctrines of the Church of England; to leave the one to be maintained by their private fautors, and only to defend and maintain the other. And certainly had he not been a man of a mighty Spirit, and one that could easily contemn the cryes and clamours which were raised against him for so doing, he could not but have sunk remedilesly under the burden of disgrace and the fears of ruine, which that performance drew upon him. To such an absolute Authority were the Writings and Names of some men advanced by their diligent followers, that not to yield obedience to their ipse dixits, was a crime unpardonable. It is true, King James observed the inconvenience and prescribed a remedy, sending instructions to the Universities, bearing date, Jan. 18. 1616. wherein it was directed among other things, That young Students in Divinity should be excited to study such Books as were most agreeable in Doctrine and Discipline to the Church of England, and to bestow their time in Fathers and Councils, Schoolmen, Histories and Controversies, and not to insist too long on Compendiums and Abbreviations, making them the ground of their studie. And I conceive, That from that time forwards the names and reputations of some leading men of the foraign Churches, which till then did carry all before them, did begin to lessen: Divines growing every day more willing to free themselves from that servitude & vassalage, to which the authority of those names had enslaved their judgements: But so, that no man had the courage to make such a general assault against the late received opinions, as Bishop Mountague, though many when the ice was broken, followed gladly after him. Dr. Heylin Preface to Theologia Veterum.
Pacif.
You have given me a large account how, as you conceive Calvin, Bullinger, &c. came to decrease but such as is no way satisfactory: for 1. It is gratis dictum, that the reading of Fathers, Councils, &c. will make any one abate his esteem of any Orthodox Cystem. 2. It is no way probable that King James should by his instructions in An. 1616. design the hindering of the Calvinian Doctrines, who appeared so very zealous, An. 1618. against the Tenets of Arminius, who did contradict Calvin in those points which of all others held by him are most liable to exception. 3. Nor is it any way probable that if any Calvinistical or Lutheran Dogmata had been super-induced to the Articles of our Church, which had the least seeming contrariety to them, that none should be either acute enough to discern such superseminations or couragious enough to pull up such tares, but only Richard Mountague, B. D. Had he only learned to deny himself? had the spirit of courage and resolution departed from all the English Clergy and rested upon him alone? Sure I am that Dr. Forbes of Edenburgh leaveth this Mr. Mountague under this censure, that he too much complyed with Calvinism in the point of justification, Propter puritanorum undi que strepentium clamores, nescio quomodo refugerit ad distinctionem, Forbes. de Justif. lib. 2. c. 5. 4. 'Tis scarce credible, if Mr. Mountague had only separated chaffe from the wheat and distinguished only the received Doctrines of the Church from some busie Puritans private Opinions, that he should have been so severely censured for his Book by the Parliament, and confuted by some Divines of great note and learning and as conformable as himself, particularly by his Reverend and much Reverenced Diocesan. And Archbishop Abbot, in his Narrative, which we may find exemplyfied in Mr. Rush. Collections, from p 438. to 462. assirmeth, that he thrice complained of Mr. Mountagues Arminian Book, but he was held up against him by the prevalence of the Duke of Buckingham, who magnified him as a well-deserving man; that the whole Narrative, if he that will read shall have a key put into his hand to unlock several misteries of our Church declining and a character of the men who were most busie to advance the Remonstrant opinions.
Laud.
The Doctrine of Praedestination is the root of Puritanism, and Puritanism the root of all rebellious and disobedient untractableness in Parliaments, and of all schism and sauciness in the Countrey, nay in the Church it self: this hath made many thousands of our people, and too great a part of our Gentry Laytons in their hearts. Last Parliament they left their Word, Religion and the Cause of Religion, and begun to use the name of Church, and our Articles of the Church of England, and wounded our Church at the very heart with her own name. Dr. Brooks his Letter to the Archbishop, extant in Can. Doome, p. 167. there were then some who were tantum non in Episcopatu Puritani; they saw their holy cause would not succeed by opposition, therefore they came up and seemed to close with the Church of England in her Discipline, to use the Cross and wear the Clothes; but for her Doctrine they wave it, preach against it, teach contrary to what they had subscribed, that so through foraign Doctrine, being infused secretly, and instilled cunningly, and pretended craftily to be the Churches, at length they might wind in with foraign Discipline also, and so fill'd Christendem with Popes in every Parish for the Church, and with Popular Democracies and Democratical Anarchies in State. App. p. 111. el. 43, 44.
Pacif.
The wrathful expressions you are continually using against the Puritans do not work the righteousness of God; and they are the more to be disliked, because it is sufficiently known that Puritans have been as conscientious as any that ever lived in our Church.
Laud.
Puritanism had indeed a form of godliness, but See worse language than this in the writings of Dr. Heylin and Mr. Tho. P.denyed the power; and for any thing I can discern, is as dangerous as Popery, the only difference being, Popery is for Tyrannie, Puritanism for Anarchy; Popery is original of Superstition, Puritanism the high way to profaneness; both alike enemies unto piety, Ap. p. 320, 321.
Pacif.
Puritanism the way to profaness! How came it then to pass, that there was so little of profaneness in Puritans, so much of it in those who gloried in their Anti-Puritanism? but I leave this to be decided by the Judge of quick and dead, who shall render to all according to what they have done in the flesh. How is it that of late years you have learned to call all Puritans, who will not say a confederacy with you in your Popish and Arminian Errors, which have been so generally reputed contrary to the Doctrine of our Church?
Laud.
What you call Error, that seems to me to be Truth; and because the doubts hung in the Church of England, unto the Publick Doctrine of the Church of England do I appeal, contained in those two authorized, and by all subscribed Books of the Articles and Divine Services of the Church, let that which is against them on Gods Name be branded with Error, and as Error be ignominiously spunged out, App. p. 9.
Pacif.
What ever is against the Word of God, or contrary to any opinion which hath been maintained in the Catholick Church, by all, in all places, at all times, I am content should be called an error; but you know I hope, that no Church of Particular Denomination is Infallible, and therefore I shall not grant that whatever is against the Tendries of the Church of England is erroneous; for I know that our first Reformers and the Composers of our publick Records of Doctrine did place the Nature of Faith in Assurance, or a perswasion that our sins are actually pardoned, which you will grant to be a mistake, but a mistake that was scarce seen by any till of late, except Mr. John Fox, who indeed placed the Nature of Faith in Recumbence; nevertheless, in those matters wherein you and I differ, I am very willing to be tryed by the Articles and Lyturgy; but then I premise this, that I take the Homilies to be part of our Churches Lyturgy; for the Rubrique in the Communion Office speaks affirmative enough, After the Creed shall follow one of the Homilies; and the Preface to the first Book of Homilies commandeth all Parsons, Vicars, Curates, &c. every Sunday and Holyday in the year, &c. after the Gospel and Creed, in such order and place as is appointed in the Book of Common-Prayer, to read one of the said Homilies. Evidently implying (as Mr. Lestrange notes) they were no more to be omitted then any other part of the Service, but where the Rubrique gives a toleration.
Laud.
I willingly admit the Homilies, as containing certain godly and wholesome exhortations to move the people to honor and worship Almighty God; but not as the publick Dogmatical resolutions confirmed by the Church of England; the 33. Article giveth them to contain godly and wholesom Doctrine and necessary for these times, which they may do, though they have not Dogmatical Positions, or Doctrine to be propagated and subscribed in all and every point, as the Books of Articles and of Common-Prayer have. They may seem to speak somewhat too hardly, and stretch some sayings beyond the use and practice of the Church of England both then and now: and yet what they speak, may receive a fair, or at least a tolerable construction and mitigation well enough. App. 260.
Paeif.
I am glad to hear you acknowledge that the Homilies do contein certain godly and wholesom exhortations, which if all had thought, we had not been pestered with a vain discourse pretended to be made by a Lady in defence of Auxiliary Beauty or Artificial handsomeness, the which are so expresly condemned by the Homily against excess in Apparel. But I am sorry to find you saying that the Homilies are not the avowed Doctrine of the Church, for the Preface tells us, they were set forth for the expelling of erroneous and poisonous Doctrines; and more fully the Orders of K. James, The Homiles are set forth by authority in the Church of England, not only for a help of nonpreaching, but withall, as it were a pattern for preaching-ministers. I have read among the Romanists, that there is fides temporum, a Faith that followeth the Times. It is no marvel (saith Cusanus) though the practise of the Church expound the Scripture at one time one way and at another time another way; for the understanding or sence of the Scripture runneth with the practise, and that sense so agreeing with the practise is the quickning Spirit; and therefore the Scriptures follow the Church, but contrariwise the Church followeth not the Scriptures. ad Bohem. Epist. 7. But God forbid our Church should have any Doctrines good and wholesome for some times and not for others.
Laud.
If there be any difference betwixt us about the sense and meaning of any Clause or Period in Articles, Lyturgy, Homilies, how shall that difference be decided?
Pacif.
It is scarce to be supposed that our Church in her publick Records of Doctrine should use any so great obscurity as that we should if we are unprejudiced need an Interpreter; but if there be any need of an Interpreter, who fitter then such Martyrs as had an hand in composing of the Articles in King Edw. the 6th. his Time, or elselived then, and were well acquainted with the mind and judgment of the Composers, and such Divines as lived and were famous in the beginning of Q Eliz. when the Articles were confirmed; and let me tell you, it will be a strong presumption, that a Doctrine is contrary to the Church, if it be contrary to the professed tenents of all, or most of those eminent Divines, by whose help she did at first recover her self out of Popish darkness.
Laud.
How little our old Martyrs did favour the Calvinians in the five points, appears plainly by a Book entituled, An Historical Narration, composed by one who was famous in K. Edw. dayes, and Q. Eli. and a voluntary exile for Religion, in the raign of Q. Mary.
Partif.
Are you not ashamed to call him a famous Divine, who created such disturbances in the raign of Q. Eliz. and K. Ed. whose Book is put into the Catalogue of Popish Pamphlets by Dr. Fulke in his answer to Bristow; of the reprinting of which A. Laud was so much ashamed, that at his tryal he durst not own it, but averred that he had put his Chaplain out of his place, for putting such a cheat on the world; I might rather infer that the English Martyrs were no favourers of Arminianisme, because in the late A. Bishops Time, the Professor of Mathematicks in Gresham was troubled for but permitting an Almanack in which some Popish canonized Saints names were expunged, and the names of some of our own English Martyrs that were Saints indeed put in their room; and because by Dr. Bray, Pochlintons Altare Christianum was licenced, in which how bitter a passage is used against our old Martyrs and Confessors, may be seen in the Recantation imposed upon that Doctor.
Laud.
It may be, the passage might refer to John Wickliffe, and such as he, and if so, I know no reason why it should be recanted; for though he held many points against those of Rome, yet had his Field more Tares then Wheat, his Books more Heterodoxies then sound Catholick Doctrines; for they who have consulted the Works of Thomas Waldensis, or the Historia Wicklesiana, writ by Harpssield, will tell us that Wickliffe among many other errors maintained these that follow. 1. That the Sacrament of the Altar is nothing else but a piece of bread. 2. That Priest have no more authority to minister Sacraments then Lay-men have. 3. That all things ought to be common. 4. That it is as lawfulito christen a Child in a Tub of Water at home, or in a Ditch by the way, as in a Fontstone in the Church. 5. That it is as lawful at all times to confess unto a Lay-man, as to a Priest. 6. That it is not necessary or profitable to have any Church or Chappel to pray in, or to do any divine Service in. 7. That buryings in Churchyards be unprofitable and vain. 8. That Holy-dayes ordained and instituted by the Church are not to be observed and kept in reverence, in as much as all dayes are alike. 9. That it is sufficient to believe, though a man do no good works. 10. That no humane Laws or Constitutions do oblige a Christian; and finally, That God never gave grace or knowledg to a great Person, or rich man, and that they in no wise follow the same. Dr. Heyl. Cert. Epist. p. 151.
Pacif.
Whether these things are collected out of Wald. and Harpssield, I neither know nor have leisure now to examine. I find the same things charged, and charged in the very same words, upon those who indeavoured reformation in King H. the 8th. his dayes about Anno. 1536. as may be seen in Mr. Tho. Fuller's History, lib. 5. p. 209. 210. 211. I believe those were then slandered, and so I think is Wick. if Wald. and Harps. have charged all those things upon him; for the proof of this, let what Dr. James hath collected in his Wick. Conformity be consulted, for that industrious Scholar hath made it appear out of the Writings of Dr. Wickly, that he held no community of goods, but what all good Christians hold by a Christian Charity; not as touching the right Title and possession, as the Anabaptists now and a certain bald Priest in his time did hold: And so far was he from holding, that good Faith alone would save a man without good Works, that he is charged by Walden to have held the Doctrine of merits, though very falsly, as appears by many passages in his Commentaries upon the Psalms. He held vocal confession to a Priest, not to be necessary in case a man were truly contrite and sorrowful for his sin, with full purpose of amendment unless the party offending do find himself very much grieved, in which case he counselleth him to repair unto a Priest that hath cunning and good living. But let us joyn issue on the terms formerly propounded; What think you of the Church of Rome?
Laud.
It may be you account it a piece of Popery to call the Church of Rome a true Church.
Pacif.
I account it no Popery to call the Church of Rome a true Church, for it was so esteemed by Dr. John Reynolds, Chamier, Junius, Gisbertus Voetius, Ludovicus Capellus, and his fellow Professor Amyraldus, all very learned men and far enough from doting either upon Ceremonies or Prelacy; indeed they will much disadvantage themselves in dealing with the Papist about the visibility of the Church, who shall affirm that Rome is not a true Church; but you know the Pope is made by Romanists to be the Church. The Pope ought to tell it to the Church, that is, to himself (saith Bellarmine;) Do you judg this Pope to be the Antichrist?
Laud.
Some Protestant Divines at home and abroad I grant, have thought so, wrote so, disputed so; in good zeal, no doubt against that insolent and insufferable and outragious Tyranny and Pride of the Bishops of Rome, and their infinite enormities in the Church, and out of that affection have been too violently forward, out of conjectures and probabilities to pronounce, the Pope is that Man of Sin and Son of Perdition. The Synod of Gapp in France made it a Point of their belief and concluded it peremptorily to be so; but who can find it to be the Doctrine of the Church of England! what Synod resolved it? Convocation assented to it? what Parliament, Law, Proclamation or Edict did ever command it to be professed, or have imposed penalty upon repugnants, of non-consentients unto it? Ap. p. 143. There is no such Doctrine concerning Antichrist in the Book of Articles, or in any other publick Monument or Record of the Church of England, but the contrary rather; and this appeareth by a prayer at the end of the 2d. Homily for Whitsunday, viz. That by the mighty power of the H.G. the comfortable Doctrine of Christ may be truly preached, truly received and truly followed in all places, to the beating down of sin, Death the Pope, the Devil, and all the Kingdome of Antichrist. Dr. Pet. Heylin. Res. Pet. p. 133.
Pacif.
There's scarce any opinion more generally received and owned by Divines that wish well to our reformation then this, that the Pope is the Antichrist; but I'le not contend by their testimonies, but by passages which I have excerpted out of the Homilies. Tom. 1. p. 17. edit. 1623. Justification is not the office of man, but of God, or man cannot make himself righteous by his own works, neither in part, nor in whole, for that were the greatest arrogance and presumption of man that Antichrist could set up against God, p. 38. Honour be to God who did put light in the heart of his true faithful Minister of most famous memory, K. H. 8th. and gave him the knowledg of his word and an earnest affection to seek his Glory, and to put away all such superstitious and Pharisaical Sects by Antichrist invented, p. 70. For our Saviour Christ and St. Peter teach most earnestly obedience to Kings, but the Bishop of Rome teacheth that they are under him, are free from all burdens and charges of the Common-wealth, and obedience toward their Prince, most clearly against Christs Doctrine and St. Peters. He ought therefore rather to be called, Antichrist and the successor, &c. See more of the like nature and purport collected by Dr. Bernard. See also the Prayer made for the Fifth of November.
Laud.
If a Controversie were referred by the Church, or an Heresie to be corrected in the Church, which touched the case of the Catholick Church, it could not be put over more fitly to any one man by the Church representative in a Council, then unto the Pope, first Bishop of Christendom, of greatest, not of absolute power among Bishops. Answ. to Gagg p. 29.
Pacif.
Never did the Church of England call the Pope first Bishop of Christendom; nay, she censures him for his bold usurpation of such a title, Part. 2. Hom. p. 214, 215. And he that thinks the Pope to be the fittest to refer a controversie, he must bring us to such a Pope as I think did never sit in the See of Rome. But it may be you and I have not the same thoughts of the dangerousness of Popery.
Laud.
It is a hard case that we shall think all Papists and Anabaptists and Sacramentaries to be fools and wicked persons; certainly among all these Sects there are very many wise men and good men as well as erring; and although some zeals are so hot, and their eyes so inflamed with their ardors, that they do not think their adversaries look like other men, yet certainly we find by the results of their discourses, that they are men that speak and make Syllogisms, and use Reason, and read Scripture; and although they do no more understand all of it then we do, yet they endeavour to understand as much as concerns them, even all they can, even all that concerns repentance from dead works and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. Dr. Taylor, Epist. Dedic. to Liberty of Pro. p. 9, 10.
Pacif.
A little charity will serve a man to think there are wise men and good men among Sacramentaries, and Anabaptists; but I do not like your joyning together of Papists, Anabaptists, Sacramentaries: nor do I think that the learned Papists (such are all they that can speak and make Syllogisms) do endeavour to understand as much as concerns them, or all that they can; for an easie endeavour will inform them, That their Church hath been and is mistaken in many points of great concernment; and if she hath been mistaken she is not infallible.
Laud.
We have no other help in the midst of our distractions and dis unions, but all of us to be united in that common term, which as it does constitute the Church in its being such, so it is the medium of the Communion of the Saints, and that is the Creed of the Apostles, and in all other things an honest endeavour to find out what truths we can, and a charitable and mutual permission to others that disagree from us and our opinions. Ibid. p. 33.
Pacif.
I like it well that the Apostles Creed should be had in reverence, but sure there are Articles necessary to salvation that are not foreign contained in that Symbole.
Laud.
None of those who hold the Creed entire can perish for want of necessary Faith; neither are we obliged to make our Articles more particular and minute then the Creed; for since the Apostles, and indeed our Blessed Lord himself, promised Heaven to them who believed him to be the Christ that was to come into the world, and that he who believes in him, should be partaker of the Resurrection and Life Eternal, he will be as good as his word; yet because this Article was very general, and a Complexion rather then a Proposition, the Apostles and others our Fathers in Christ did make it more explicite; and though they have said no more then what lay entire and ready formed in the bosome of the great Article, yet they made their extracts to great purpose and absolute sufficiency, and therefore there needs no more deductions or remoter consequences from the great Article than the Creed of the Apostles. Liber. Prop. p. 12.
Pacif.
In this you must allow me to differ from you, and so do all that wish well to the reformed Protestant Religion; the secinians such a wretched sort of men that Grotius (before Crellius had tampered with him) counted not worth the name of Hereticks, would fain be called and received as Christians, because they receive and embrace the Apostles Creed. Vid. Jonam. Schlict. apud. Hora. Sosci. confut. p. 255, 256. and yet they deny the Divinity of Jesus Christ, they deny his satisfaction to Divine Justice for the sins of his people; they deny the Holy Ghost to be a Person, or else they make him to be but a finite created Person. Hear Smalius contra. Frantz. Disp. 119. De Ecclesiâ p. 280. Apage istam puerilem tractandi homines pios & cordatos rationem. In Symbolo ait, docenter tres personae Trinitatis. In quonam? Si aliud ostendat quam Apostolicum, quod vocant, tanquam humanum Commentum ridebo illud & respuam; si Apostolicum nego in eo doceri tres Trinitatis Personas. Docetur quidam in eo, patrem esse, & Filium & Spiritum Sanctum, & in eos (ut hoc concedam) credendum etium esse. Sed Filium Personam esse Trinitatis, Spiritum vero Sunctum Personam esse simpliciter, nec verbis nec sensu ibi exprimitur. He that will obviate many Heretical abominations now abroad in the world by any words in the Creed, not drawing consequences from them, shall but loose his labor.
Laud.
In the first three hundred years there was no sign of persecuting any man for his opinion, though at that time there were very horrid opinions commenced, and such which were exemplary and parallel enough to determine this question; for they were then assaulted by new Sects which destroyed the common principles of Nature, of Christianity, of Innocence and publick Society; and they who used all the means, Christian and Spiritual for their disimprovement and conviction, thought not of using corporal force, otherwise then by blaming such proceedings; and therefore I do not only urge their not doing it as an argument of the unlawfulness of such proceeding, but their defying it and speaking against such practises, as unreasonable and destructive of Christianity; for so Tertullian is express ad Scap. Humani juris & naturalis potestatis, unicui que quod putaverit colere, sed nec Religionis est cogere Religionem, quae suscipi debet sponte non vi. Epis. Dedic. p 19.
Pacif.
'Tis strange that it should be destructive of Christianity to use corporal force against the broachers of Tenents which destroy the common principles of Nature, of Christianity, of Innocence and publick Society; all understanding men will grant with Lactantius, Instit. lib. 5. c. 14. That Religion cannot be compelled, nor can justice, mercy, or love to our neighbours be complelled; all such good dispositions or habits must be perswaded by the Word, and wrought by the Spirit. Christians ought not to compel Jews to be of their Religion, but the Sword is a means to punish acts of false worship in those that are under the Christian Magistrate, and profess Christian Religion, in so far as these acts come out to the eyes of men, and are destructive to the souls of those in a Christian Society: But if you will not allow the Magistrate to punish the blaspheming seducing Heretick with death, yet you will allow him to discourage any false Teacher.
Laud.
If men must be permitted in their opinions, and that Christians must not persecute Christians, I have also as much reason to reprove all those oblique Arts which are not direct persecutions of mens persons, but they are indirect proceedings, ungentle and unchristian, servants of faction and interest, provocations to zeal and animosity, and destructive of learning and ingenuity; and these are suppressing all the monuments of their adversaries, forcing them to recant, and burning their Books: all such Arts shew that we either distrust God for the maintenance of his Truth, or that we distrust the cause, or distrust our selves and our abilities, Epist. Ded. p. 34, 36.
Pacif.
The Arts you so condemn have been used in England both by the Secular and Ecclesiastical Authority; and therefore you who call your self an obedient son to both, do forget your self to censure such proceedings so severely; especially seeing such courses have been followed by none more then by the Brethren of your own perswasion and interest. But what makes you so very favourable to men who differ from us in matters not fundamental, as you call them? is it because the Scripture doth not plainly speak against them?
Laud.
God who disposeth of all things sweetly, and according to the nature and capacity of things and persons, hath made those only necessary, which he hath taken care should be sufficiently propounded to all persons of whom he required explicite belief, and therefore all the Articles of Faith are clearly and plainly set down in Scripture, no man can be ignorant of the foundation without his o vn apparent fault; and God hath done more, for many things which are only profitable, are also set down so plainly, that as Austin, Nemo inde haurire non possit, si modo ad hauriendum devote acpie accedat; but of such things there's no question commenced in Christendom. Liber. of Prop. p. 59.
Pacif.
Sir, you astonish me; Are there no questions commenced in Christendom about things necessary to be believed, nor yet of things that are hugely profitable? If not, it would be the best counsel could be given to Christian Magistrates to burn all Controversie Books; but sure, That our natures are corrupted with sin; that Christ made satisfaction to Divine Justice; that our good works are not meritorious; that the Holy Spirit proceedeth from the Father; that Sacraments and Ministry are to continue in the Church, are matters necessary, or at least very profitable to be believed. But whence ariseth the difficulty and uncertainty of Arguments drawn from Scripture, in questions that you call not simply necessary, not literally determined?
Laud.
There are so many thousands of copies that were writ by persons of several interests and perswasions, such different understandings and tempers, such distinct abilities and weaknesses, that it is no wonder there is so great variety of readings both in the Old Testament and in the New. This variety of reading is not of small consideration; for though it be demonstrably true, that all things necessary to faith and good manners are preserved from alteration and corruption, because they are of things necessary, yet in other things which God hath not obliged himself punctually to preserve in these things since variety of readingsis crept in, every reading takes away a degree of certainty from any proposition derivative from those places so read. And if some copies (especially if they be publick and notable) omit a verse or title, every argument from such a title or verse loseth much of its strength and reputation. Liber. of Proph. p. 61, 63, 64.
Pacif.
I am glad to find it acknowledged, that all things nenecessary to faith and good manners are preserved from alteration and corruption; but you are not ignorant, and your own examples prove it, that there is variety of readings in things necessary to faith and good manners, as well as in matters that are not of such necessity; but in such variety of readings, we are not left without that which may direct us what reading to prefe: Thus Austin hath answered Faust. who was wont when he had nothing else left that he could reply, to say, Libros N. Test. salsatos fuisse. Thus Simeon de Muis in his Assertio Hebraicae veriti. p. 31. Nemo tibi negat in quaedam exemplaria potuisse, ac posse quotidia mendas irrepere, &c. Dr. Edw. Kellet, no Puritan, in his Miscellanies of Divinity, denieth not but that some Copies are corrupted; but saith, that if in any one Point or Article we should affirm a corruption to be got into all Copies, it will be impossible to prove any part or word of the New Testament to be incorrupt. Lib. 2. c. 8.
Laud.
There are very many senses and designs of expounding Scripture; and when the Grammatical sense is found out, we are many times never the nearer, nor is it that which was intended; for there is in many Scriptures a double sense, a literal and spiritual (for the Scripture is a Book written without and within, Apoc. 5.) and both these senses are subdivided, for the literal sense is either natural or figurative, and the spiritual is sometimes Allegorical, sometimes Anagogical. Lib. Prop. p. 64.
Pacif.
You rather use the language of Ashdod then Canaan, whereas I count it a thing commendable rather to express our selves so as reformed Divines have been wont, then as the Popish, but I'le not quarrel at any thing which is capable of a good construction; yet let me have leave to say, 1. That the place, Apoc. 5. hath quite another sense then that to which you apply it. 2. That I understand not how this consideration, if admitted makes any thing to the proof of that for which you produce it, that there should be a toleration of all who own the Apostles Creed.
Laud.
There being such variety of senses in Scripture, and but few places so marked out as not to be capable of divers senses, if men will write Commentaries, as Herod made Orations foreign, what infallible foreign will be left whereby to judg of the certain Dogmatical resolute sense of such places which have been the matter of question? Lib. Proph. p. 65.
Pacif.
That if men will write Commentaries foreign, no certain foreign will be left, is beyond dispute; but it is as much beyond dispute, that if men will proceed with sobriety, not leaning on their own understanding, but humbly begging the Spirits illumination, they shall not want an infallible foreign to find out the certain Dogmatical sense of such places which have been the matter of question; nor is there any truth in that assertion, that there are but few places so marked out, as not to be capable of divers senses. I undertake to produce veny clear places of Scripture against the errors of Popery, Socinianism, &c.
Laud.
There are divers places of Scripture containing in them mysteries and questions of great concernment, and yet the fabrick and constitution is such, that there is no certain mark to determine whether the sense of them should be literal or figurative, nothing in the nature of the thing to determine the sense and meaning, but it must be got out as it can; and therefore it is unreasonable, that what is in it self ambiguous should be understood in its own prime sense and intention, under the pain of either a sin or Anathema: I instance in that place, Hoc est corpus meum, the words are plain and apt to be understood in a literal sense, which yet doth violence to reason; but if you expound these words figuratively, besides that you contest against a world of prejudices, you give your self the liberty, which if others should take, when they have either a reason or necessity so to do, they may perhaps turn all into Allegory, and so may evacuate any precept, and elude any Argument. Lib. Prop. p. 67, 68, 69.
Pacif.
Do these words become one who wisheth well to the Protestant reformation? Have our Martyrs alway understood those words, Hoe est corpus meum, in a figurative sense, and have they upon that account ventured the loss of life and all things that were dear unto them? and must the World now be told, that in such an interpretation they gave rhemselves the liberty, which if others should take, all Scripture would be turned into an Allegory? Irascor referens, and I pray you, how is it possible to quiet weak and tender consciences, if some places of Scripture do contain mysteries of great concernment, and yet there is no certain mark to determine whether the sense of them be figurative or literal? Is the merciful God wont to set his poor creatures on the rack? to bring them into labyrinths? to set down things which are apt to breed scruples in their minds, and to leave no certain rule by which they may determine in what sense the words in which such things are comprehended are to be taken? Absit, absit.
Laud.
There are some places of Scripture that have the self-same expressions, the same preceptive words, the same reason and account in all appearance, and yet either must be expounded to quite different senses, or else we must renounce the Communion, and the charities of a great part of Christendome. And yet there is absolutely nothing in the thing, or in its circumstances, or in its adjuncts that can determine it to different purposes. I instance in these great exclusive negatives for the necessity of both Sacraments, Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aquâ, &c. Nisi mandua caveritis carnem filii hominis, &c. Liber. Prophes. p. 69.
Pacif.
A prodigious assertion! must I renounce the Communion and Charities of a great part of Christendome, unless I will expound places of Scripture to a quite different sense, that have the self-same expressions, and that though there be absolutely nothing in the thing, or in its circumstances, or in its adjuncts, that can determine them to different purposes? if so, then farewell the Communions and Charities of Christendome; for to take such a course would be to do violence to my judgment, reason, and every thing by which I am denominated a man. As for the two places you instance in, the sense of them is quite mistaken by the Papists, as our reformed Divines undeniably prove; and me thinks the Romanists should easily yield they are mistaken, or else they must needs leave themselves under horrible doubts about their eternal salvation; for if they that dye unbaptised go to some part of Hell, and none are baptised but those whom the Priest had an intention of baptizing when he sprinkled them with, or dipped them in water, how many of them must lose the joys of Heaven on that account? And if those words are to be understood literally; Except ye eat the flesh, and drink the blood, &c. What will become of their Laity who are not permitted to drink of the consecrated Wine? their device of concomitantia will not sure make eating only to be eating and drinking. It is a good sport to a Scholar, who hath wear ed himself with other studies to observe how the Popish Writers are put to it to excuse their Church for not administring the Eucharist to Infants; and I cannot but wonder what moved the Papists to such a practice, seeing they give so much to the Sacrament, viz. to confer grace by the work done, and to fortifie the soul against Satan. But what think you of the fulness and perspicuity of the holy Scriptures?
Laud.
There are some points of good concernment, which if any man should question in an high manner, they would prove indeterminable by Scripture, or sufficient reason. Liber. Prop. p. 89.
Pacif.
Points of good concernment not determinable by Scriptures, nor yet by Reason! How contrary is this to what is quoted out of Chrysostom and Fulgentius, in the Homlly Exhorting to the reading of the holy Scripture? p. 2. Besides, such an assertion doth very much tend to discourage men from making enquiry into Truth; for if such points are not determinable by either Scripture or Reason, how shall they be determined? If by the Church, I say the Church in her determinations must be guided by Scripture and Reason, or else her members are not obliged to regard her determinations.
Laud.
I must negatively conclude, that all things necessary to the Salvation of all are not of themselves clear in the Scripture to all understandings; whereby I say not, that all such things are not contained in the Scriptures, as if some things necessary to the salvation of all were to be received by Tradition alone: Nor, that being in the Scriptures they are not clear and discernable to the understandings of those that are furnished with means requisite to discern the meaning of Scripture: But that which I stand upon, is, that it is not, nor ought to be a presumption, that this or that is not necessary to Salvation, because it is not clear in the Scriptures: which if it were admitted, whosoever were able to make such an argument against any Article of Faith, as all understandings interessed in salvation could not dissolve, should have gained this, that, though it may be true, yet it cannot be an Article of Faith. Principles of Christian Truth. p. 25.
Pacif.
It is beyond all dispute, that all things contained in Scripture are not clear to all understandings, there are some understandings to which nothing is clear: it is also past dispute, that they who understand Scriptures, must be first furnished with all means necessarily requisite for the understanding of Scriptures, and which is more, they must make use of those means, and pray to God for a blessing upon them; but this is said by Protestants against Papists, that God hath made nothing necessary for the Salvation of all men, Necessitate praecepti & medii, but such things as are so clearly laid down in the Word, that all who will make use of the abilities God hath vouchsafed, may find them out, and that men may safely conclude that is not a necessary Article of Religion which is not clear in some place or other of Scripture; clear I say, with such a clearness as may satisfie the conscience, though not with such as may satisfie curiosity.
Laud.
The holy Scriptures in the first time of the Christian Church were not communicated to all men all at once; for the Primitive Fathers wisely considered how extreamly perillous it might be to expose the whole Scripture unto ignorant mens use and judgement, or indeed abuse rather and want of judgement: surely more dangerous and pernicious it might prove unto mens souls, then to leave a whole Apothecaries shop open to a diseased person, who might as well choose and take deadly poyson to his destruction, as a Soveraign medicine to the recovery of his health. Had the souls of men been so carefully watched over by their Governors, and such portions of Scripture wisely and fatherly dispensed unto them, as might, with such holy reservedness, have met with mens proficiency, surely such prodigious Monsters had not been counterfeited out of the Word of God by the spirit of Opinion, as in these later dayes we have seen and lament to see. Dr. Gell. Preface to his Essay about the amendment of our English. Translation.
Pacif.
That by the free reading of the Holy Scriptures some very dangerous Opinions have been occasioned accidentally, is no question; but that therefore any part of the Scripture should be locked up in an unknown Tongue from the Vulgar, is no stronger an inference, then if one should argue, because some have burned their fingers and houses with candle and fire, therefore the free use of those creatures is not to be vouchsafed in a Common-wealth. And as I think the conclusion to be absurd; so I am sure, 'Tis quite contrary to the whole scope and design of the Homilies called an Information of them that take offence at certain places of Holy Scripture.
Laud.
The further we proceed in the survey of the Scripture, the Translation is the more faulty, as the Hagiographa more then the Historical Scripture, and the Prophets more then the Hagiographa, and the Apocrypha most of all, and generally the New-Testament more then the Old. Idem near the end of his Preface.
Pacif.
Such a censure might have been born from the pen of the Rhemish and Doway Divines; but who can bear it from one pretending to be an English Protestant? the Translation is Vsque ad invidiam aliarum gentium elaborata Translatio. It was sufficiently defended in the parts that you find most fault with, by Dr. Fulk and Cartwright, against the Cavils of the Rhemists, and may more easily be defended against the exceptions taken to it by you: But there is another thing that offends me in your former words, viz. That you seem to make the Apocrypha part of the Scripture, which word when it is taken absolutely and without addition, should suppose only for Canonical Scripture; aud I do the more doubt that you advance the Apocrypha higher then do our Reformed Divines, because I find you ascribing the Book of Wisdom to Solomon, p. 51. whereas that Book was sure written by one of a spirit far inferior to that which acted Solomon in his writings.
Laud.
Such is the boldness and ignorance of some, that they have left out of their impressions, the Apocryphal Scriptures, whereby they have gotten this whereof to glory, that they have done that which no wise or honest man hath done before them, (so far as I have yet known) or I hope, will adventure to do after them. Dr. Gell Pref.
Pacif.
To devest all those who had an hand in leaving the Apocrypha out of our English Bibles, of all wisdom and honesty, is very hard; for what if those Apocryphal writings be of some good use, yet there's nothing in them should make it necessary or expedient to bind them up with the Canon; why may they not be kept in a Volume by themselves? or indeed how can they be read by private Christians at all without apparent hazard and scandal, seeing some of them contain notorious lyes, some of them justifie such things as God Law and the Law of Nature too do condemn? But before we proceed any further, suffer me to know your mind about Reason and Councils.
Laud.
All Controversies are reducible to two heads, Goodness, or Truth; so that the question is, Whether right reason can infallibly judge what is good or bad, true or false; for a thing to be morally good (for Metaphysical Goodness is all one with Truth) depends by sure connexion from that Eternal Justice which is primarily in God. Now this being one of the attributes of God which are called communicable; it is truly affirmed, That that Justice which is in God, is the very same in substance communicated to men, though in a lower degree. Reason of Christian Religion, p. 24
Pacif.
As it is seems a Paradox to me, that Metaphysical Goodness is all one with Truth (Goodness and Truth being by all that I have met with, made distinct affections of Ens) so it is to me also, at least propositio male sonans, that the Justice which is in God, is the very same in substance communicated to men, though in a lower degree: for the Justice which is in God, is the same with his Infinite Essence, so is not the finite justice in the creature the same with his finite essence, but really distinct from it. Now that thing which is substantially just, and that whose justice is but an accident, seem to differ more than gradually: But I pray you proceed, and it may be I shall be better able to find out your mind.
Laud.
For a thing to be true, i. e. to have a being either potential or actual, depends partly on Gods power, partly on his will; in respect of its potential being, it depends on his power; in respect of its actual, on his will. Now Gods power, though it may in some sense be said communicable to the creature, because all ability in the creature is a gleam of infinite ability in God, yet is not this so communicated as his Justice or Goodness was said to be; for goodness in the creature is a kind of image truly resembling the goodness in God, and that a kind of natural image, as is the face in the glass; not a voluntary one, which hath its being from the variable will of the Artificer. But power in the creature, is not thus a natural image of Gods power, but as reflection of a thing, which voluntarily and variously casts its beams: Voluntarily, I say, because the dispensing of his power, either in manner or measure, is a free act of his will; and variously, because he doth it, first unequally, and secondly not so to any, but that he can (and sometimes doth) withdraw or suspend it, when it is bestowed, so that I cannot say, that as that which is just in God to be done, is just to be done by the creature; so what is possible to be done by God, is possible to be done by the creature; the reason of the not communicating of Gods power to the creature as well as his justice, may be this because it conduced not to the end of the creatures creation, as the other did: for though God intended to make a creature truly good and just, yet he did not truly powerful. Reas. Christ. Relig p. 25.
Pacif.
Here are sundry things which I cannot digest 1 I do not see, but that the creature is truly powerful as well as truly just or good; if that power which is in the creature be true power, then it denominates the creature truly powerful. 2 Nor secondly, Do I see but that goodness is as the reflection of a thing which voluntarily and variously casts its beams, as well as power; for doth not God communicate his goodness unequally as well as his power? 3. I dare not say, that what is just in God to be done, is just to to be done by the creature; To let a creature starve, whom it was in my power to relieve, it would not be just in me, but it is just in God, he being not so bound to the creature as I am. And 4. I must from all conclude, that as the reason of the creature apprehends many things to be impossible, which yet are possible; so it may also apprehend sundry things not to be just which yet are just; as the Stulta Dei sunt credenda, so the Impia Dei sunt facienda; that which our reason counts folly, is to be believed; that which it counts wicked, to be done.
Laud.
The Church Representative cannot err in points of Faith, Gagg. p. 48. The Decision of the Catholick Church we receive as the dictate of the Holy Spirit. Gagg. p. 19.
Pacif.
This had need to be well and warily understood, or else it will contradict the 21. Article. General Councils, when they be gathered together (for as much as they are an Assembly of men, whereof all be not governed by the Word and Spirit of God) they may err, and sometimes have erred even in things pertaining to God; wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to Salvation, have neither strength nor authority, unless they may be declared that they be taken out of the Holy Scriptures.
Laud.
Many things appertain unto God, which are not of necessity to salvation, both in practice and speculation: in these haply General Councils have erred, in the other none can. Appeal. p. 124.
Pacif.
This doth not satisfie. Those words (things ordained of them as necessary to salvation, have neither strength nor authority, unless) do suppose that it is not impossible for a General Council to determine those points to be necessary to salvation which are not; and if so, why not also those not to be necessary which are? Besides, the reason assigned is, because they are an assembly of men, whereof all are not governed by the Spirit and Word of God. Now I would argue thus; May a General Council consist of men not guided by the Spirit, or may it not? If you say it may not, I ask, what assurance have you that there shall never be an Assembly made up of such men? If you say it may, why then I ask, why such may not as well err in Fundamentals as in Non-Fundamentals? Do you think an elect person may not err fundamentally? I wish you did; but I know you do not: If one single elect person may err, why may not an Assembly, or the major part of an Assembly consisting of such? But let us now proceed to the consideration of the several estates of mankind.
Laud.
That Adam was made mortal in his nature, is infinitely certain, and proved by his very eating and drinking, his sleep and recreation, by ingestion and egestion, by breathing and generating his like, which immortal substances never do; and by the very tree of life, which had not been needful, if he should have had no need of it to repair his decaying strength and health. D. J. T. Fur. Explic. of Orig. sin. p. 453. Death came not in by any new sentence or change of nature, for man was created mortal, and if Adam had not sinned, he should have been immortal by grace; i. e. by the use of the Tree of Life. To die is a punishment to some, to others not; it was a punishment to all that sinned before Moses and since; upon the first it fell as a consequent of Gods anger upon Adam; upon the later it fell as a consequent of that anger which was threatned in Moses Law; but to those who sinned not at all, as Infants and Ideots, it was meerly a condition of their nature, and no more a punishment then to be a child is. Unum Necess. p. 371, 372.
Pacif.
This is such Divinity as I should never have expected to hear from any but a Socinian; for though in a sense Adam might be said before his fall to be mortal, in regard he was compounded of matter, the princeiple and root of corruption; yet that power of corruption was so remote, and God gave him such an excellent temper of body, that the remote power could never be brought into a proxime and immediate disposition, much less into actual death; that death could enter any other way then by sin, or that ever any one dyed without some respect to sin, is so strange, that none who reads the Scripture without prejudice, can bear it, or count it worth confuting.
Laud.
We cannot guess at what degree of knowledge Adam had before the fall; certainly if he had had so great a knowledge, it is not likely he would so cheaply have sold himself and all his hopes out of a greedy appetite to get some knowledge. Unum Necess. p. 372.
Pacif.
That man though now become like to the beasts that perish, was at first made for knowledge little inferior to the Angels, is easily proved: his being tempted through a desire to get more knowledge, doth not argue him to have been created with little knowledge, but with much; for who more desirous to gain knowledge than they who have a great deal already.
Laud.
If man had not before the fall had a rebellious appetite and an inclination to forbidden things, by what could he have been tempted, and how could it have come to pass that he should sin? Unum Necessar. 373. An evil there is upon us, and that is concupiscence, this also is natural; but it was actual before the fall, it was in Adam and tempted him. p. 374.
Pacif.
To say there was a rebellious appetite in man before the fall, or an inclination to forbidden things, is too bold a reflection on the most holy and wise Creator of man; nor can there a Protestant be instanced in, that hath so spoken, except we call the Remonstrants Protestants, who make the rebellion of the sensitive appetite to the rational to arise from the very constitution of man, insomuch that one of them is not afraid to say, that it was in Christ himself because a man: Nothing is more easie to conceive then that these inclinations, though divers, yet are not contrary, unless it be where sin hath made an ataxy: The Angels did fall, though there was in them no sensitive appetite at all; and therefore sure it is not impossible that the creature should fall, though there be no rebellion in the inferior appetite to the superior. But it may be you and I agree not about the nature and effects of Original sin.