The Christian Life 2, Collection of discourses · 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 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 teſtfy of Chriſt to the unbelieving Jews, but only thoſe of Moſes and the Prephets, 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 ye have eternal life; that is, in them yet 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 Jewiſh 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 adbering 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, 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 Jews had it alſo: And therefore the Reaſon which our Saviour here urges to oblige the Jews to ſearch the Scriptures of the Old Teſtament; [for in them ye think 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 us 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 infpired 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, Joh. 5.20. ſo he had made known to them all things that he had heard of his Father, Job. 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, Job. 14.26. and that by the ſame Spirit he would guide them into all Truth, Job. 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. James calls the ingrafted Word, which is able to ſave our Souls, Jam. 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 World 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 Thing 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 Biſhops 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. Mathew 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 Christianity, 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 Jeſus 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. John teſtifies of his Goſpel, Chap. 20. 31. Theſe things are written, that ye might believe that Jeſus 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. John 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 Councel 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 Tertullian 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 recive 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 witten, neither think upon, nor enquire after. Thus alſo St. Auſtin, Quicquid inde audieritisè Scriptura ſacra, 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 Coriſtianity 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 or 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 received 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 plain. 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 reaſonable 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, Judicial, 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. v. 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 Jews. 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 Jews; 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 ſpeak, (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 hindred them from ſeeing that which in its 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 Ʋngodlineſs 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 written afore 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 aſcertain us of the Principles of Chriſtianity 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. John ſaith, that he wrote his Goſpel that Men might believe that Jeſus 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 Jeſus 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 rquire 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 Coblers 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, 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 Scriture 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 expreſs'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 the Scripture we are left to no other Uncertainities than juſt what is neceſſary to render our Faith virtuous 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 Reaſons 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, Ʋniverſality, 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 Authority, 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 Queſtion; 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 believe 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 another? 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 then 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 infallbile? 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 Chapter of St. John'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 Judgment, and the World to come are at leaſt as plainly expreſt as the preſent Church fo 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 Dependance 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 expreſs'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 Writing 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 World of God, muſt be all infallbile. 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 otehrs 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 believe 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 whilfully pervert it to a contrary Meaning? And if the Church deliver here Senſe to me by Writing, as She hath done in the written Decreesof 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 ready 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 expreſs'd 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 contray 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 notorious 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 not 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 Genreal 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 ariving 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 uneceſſary 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 infallbile 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 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 is 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 eithre 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 virtuous 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 cannot be virtuous 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 be believe wrong, this is virtuous and remwardable.
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.