CHAP. I. Of the discommodities and occasions of these Discords, together with the Re­medies briefly declared.

WHAT Cicero the Oratour said once of the Discords betwixt famous men, Orat. de harusp. respons. that may we now truely say of the Dissentions betwixt severall Chur­ches; that they usually end, either in the destruction of them all, or in the injuri­ous domineering of the Conquerours o­ver the party subdued. Now though it is to be hoped, that there is none amongst the Reformed Churches, which affe­cteth a sole, and absolute Command o­ver the rest; Yet is it much to be feared, [Page 2]least all, by these dayly, and deadly con­tentions (which God forbid) hasten their own overthrow. Whose present condition the godly bemoane, and by the miseries fallen on some, guesse the dangers hanging over all, unlesse they schooled with their calamities, at last begin to be wise, and heartily study the advancing of Peace.

For whilst this strife groweth hot a­mongst Brethren, they afford their ene­mies constant matter of rejoycing, and insulting over all Churches, and not only of rejoycing, and insulting, but also arme them with infinite opportunities to hurt, and oppresse them. Nor do they order the matter well for their own people, which will have even the unlearned to be distracted about such endlesse Con­troversies, which perchance the Learned are never able to determine. If Schollers only were to enter the Lists, and to com­bat with Schollers, the danger were lesse; but it is too plaine, that Christians of all sorts and sides, are summoned to the fight, whose minds are no sooner en­tangled in these needlesse controversies, but they are cal'd away from the most ne­cessary [Page 3]duties of charity, and fruits of new obedience. Moreover these dissentions be­twixt the Reformed Churches, hinder the more moderate Papists (which begin to open their eyes at the light of the Go­spell) from joyning with us, whilst they observe, that we cannot, or (which is worse) will not joyne among our selves. Lastly, they scarce seem to acknowledge, that the Gospel, is the power of God un­to salvation to every one that beleeveth, who because of these controversies lately started, make a separation from other Re­formed Churches, as if there were no hope of the Salvation of all those Chri­stians, which have not attained an ex­act knowledge of these Controverted points.

For my part, I conceive it no great difference, whether we place unwritten Traditions in joint commission with the holy Scriptures, or whether we enforce our Controversies on all Churches to be knowne and beleeved, under the same necessity of Salvation, with the solid, and manifest doctrin of the Gospel. We ought therfore to beware, lest whilst the Pastors of the Reformed Churches on both sides, [Page 4]command theirs to depart from the Tents of those wicked men, Num. 16.26. as infucted with he­resie, the Romish Wolves break in upon both, and drag both Sheep and Shep­heards to their Dens. Indeed if Divines could calmly debate these disputes with brotherly minds, some good (or lesse e­vill at least) would redound to the Church. But seeing that experience for so many yeares hath approved, that this can scarce, if at all, be done; better were these disputes buried in silence, than that the discussing of them should teare, and mangle so many Churches into peeces. For the Christian Church may now take up the old complaint of Hila­ry, Dum prop­ter haec al­ter alteri Anathema esse coepit, nemo [...]e [...]e Christi est. Whilst for these things each accoun­ted other occursed, searce any were of Christ. Seeing these and worse grie­vances arising from the discords of the Reformed, are obvious to every ones eyes: Let us enquire, what first might cause these bitter and hurtfull strifes, be­twixt Learned, Wise, and Godly men; what since did daily increase them, what now doth perswade them to entaile these Controversies, as hereditary on their Posterity.

The nature of supernaturall know­ledge and heavenly things, gave the cause, or occasion rather to these our con­tentions. For as it is easie for minds in­lightned, and sanctified to embrace with Obedience to the Faith, all things need­full to be knowne to Salvation, which are plainly delivered in the holy Scri­ptures concerning God and Christ, and all things to be beleeved, and practised; so to desire to dive deeper into the My­steries of Faith than is fitting, and thence to draw consequences by the help of our Reason, and to annexe them to the fun­damentall Articles, is a matter of difficul­ty, and danger, and the necessary occasi­on of contentions. For 'tis impossible but that the wits of men, must often differ, and sometimes erre in those things which are collected by the mediation of humane understanding. Meane time there is none but dotes on the darlings of his own Braines, as beautifull, and en­titles them to be borne of the Bowels of the Scripture; hating the reasonings, and inferences of others, as deformed, and springing from the puddles of Rea­son corrupted. Thus whilst men [Page 6]desire to see more in the Mysteries of Faith, than is clearely showne in the Glasse of Gods Word, rather the heat of their dissentions, than light of their knowledge is increased.

It would apply some plaister to this soare, if the Divines of both sides would remember, that although all the Articles of the Catholique Faith are plaine, and perspicuous, (as written in Gods Word with capitall Letters, so that he that run­neth may read them) yet what thence is extracted by the chymistry of mans un­derstanding, are divers, and of different kinds, most of them so obscure, that they escape the eyes of the most sharpe sighted Divines. We must therefore confidently leane with all our weight on what the Scriptures have decided; but not lay so much stresse on the conse­quences of our own deduction. Luth. Tom. 1. in Disp. pag. 413. R. & C. Facessant Dialectici, ubi credendum est Piscatoribus. Nam in Mysteriis fidei majestas materiae in Angustias ratio­nis seusyllogismorum includi non potest. Lu­ther said well out of Ambrose, Away with Logicians, where wee must beleeve Fishermen. For in the mysteries of Faith [Page 7]the majesty of the matter will not bee pent within the narrow roome of Reason, nor come under the roof of Syllogismes; wher­fore the same Luther wisely admonish­eth us, that in matters surmounting the capacity of humane Reason, we beware of Etymologies, Analogies, Consequen­ces and Examples.

Also the imperfection of humane knowledge (chiefly when puffed up with a false opinion that it is perfect in us) affords a necessary occasion of endlesse contentions. Wee all only know in part, and in part apprehend Divine matters: Wherefore wee ought to conceive that we may as well as others be deceived in that part, which we know not, wherein we apprehend not. If wee were perfect, Good Men could not fall out with good Men, but those may, which as yet are not perfect, yea they cannot but fall out, except they continually remember this their imperfection. That therefore these discords may be avoyded, al ought always to remember the Apostles admonition: Rom. 12.3. Not to think of themselves more highly than they ought to thinke, but to thinke so­berly. To which this is to be added, [Page 8]quietly to beare with them who are of a different opinion from us, praying dayly to God, that he would be pleased to re­veale unto us his truth, as yet not fully knowne. But in the meane time, whereto we have already attained, Phil. 3.16 let us w [...]lke by the same rule, and be well affected each to others. That these things are most true and profitable we cannot deny, which being granted, why then neverthelesse are these controversies dayly increased? Why do these wounds grow more and more raw, and bleed a fresh? If one may speak the plaine truth, there is in all mor­tall men an inordinate love of themselvs, and of their own inventions, and pleasing conceits, & this fault causeth that we see not at all the falshood of those opinions we have once entertained, nor vouchsafe admittance to the truth which is shewed unto us by others. August. contra Ju­lianum, l. 1. Periit si­quidem ju­dicium post­quam res transi [...] in affectum; & nostram qualem [...]unque, quia nostra jam facta est, praevalere volumus sententiam. For judgement peri­sheth, when the matter is passed into the af­fections, and wee desire that our opinion whatsoever it bee, because now it is made ours, may prevaile. For where this Selfe-love [Page 9]doth rule, Divines (whatsoever they pretend) will study more to tune the Scriptures to their opinion, than their o­pinions to the Scripture, and by head and shoulders drag the Fundamentall Arti­cles of the Christian Faith, to the suppor­ting of their doctrines not Fundamental. If any could find a cure for this Epidemi­call disease, we should presently see many controversies, and all contentions (at least the bitter and hostile ones) pacified and laid a sleep. But (what is to be bemoand) those Divines, which are too much drawn away with Selfe-love, are by the breath of popular applause, and desire of vaine-glory driven farther than they themselves at first intended, or thought it ever possible. For men troubled with this evill, will trouble all things, humane, and Divine, rather than they will con­fesse themselves deceived, or weary of the fight, or overcome by their Adversa­ries. Yea, except they may conquer, and carry the adverse party captive before their Triumphant Chariot, they are de­termined continually to clash the Pro­testant Churches together with deadly discords. I am not ignorant that all pre­tend [Page 10]the desire of truth, and Gods Glo­ry, but that too many continue these contentions for the love of vaine-glory, would I might deny it, and at the same time speak truth. Surely 'tis scarce to be beleeved, that those who must needs know what dammage States, Churches, and Mens soules (bought with Christs pretious bloud) receive from these dis­sentions betwixt Protestants, can in the midst of these contentions have their eyes only fastned on the glory of God. Wherefore let the hot disputants on ei­ther side examine their owne Consci­ences, whether they perpetuate these Controversies and Discords of the Churches, that God may lose no ho­nour, or rather that there be not wan­ting an apt and lasting matter to their own vaine-glory. Other occasions, and causes of these dissentions, we have no leasure to recite; but of one wee must more largely dilate, which hath made these Controversies as it were he­reditary, and will make them everlasting, except God pitying the Protestant Churches, put new minds into the Pa­stors thereof. For this opinion hath pos­sessed [Page 11]the minds of many pious and lear­ned Divines, that the matters contro­verted betwixt Protestants are of such moment, that such as are found erroneous therein, are thereby convicted, to shake, yea to overturne the very Foundations of the Catholique Faith, and mans Sal­vation. Hence whilst both partyes are fully perswaded that the truth stands on their side, they must also perswade them­selves, that their Adversaries lay at, and loosen the Foundations of the Christian Faith. Ionah 4.9 What therefore Jonah once said unto God, that he did well to be angry, even unto death for his Gourd, which was cut down, these men use to say, that they do well to contend to death with their Protestant enemies, for overthrow­ing (as they conceive) the foundations of mans Salvation. No wonder then if pi­ous men seasoned with this Opinion, de­test such men so farre, as to entertaine no peace, or brotherly Communion with them. Seeing therefore this is justly counted the principall cause of this long dissention, let us a while withdraw the eyes of our mind from received opinions, and with [Page 12]peaceable affections enquire concerning the Foundation, and what is Funda­mentall.

CHAP. II. Of the signification of these words Foun­dation and Fundamentall, which often offer themselves in this discourse.

HE that will not erre in the know­ledge of things themselves, must begin from the expounding of words. In Cratylo. [...]. For rightly Plato, Whosoever knowes the Names, will also know the Things. Foundation therefore is a metaphoricall terme borowed from builders, and sig­nifies the whole ground-work of the building placed in the bottom which upholds the structure, and which being taken away, the edifice tumbles downe and is shattered into pieces.

Forasmuch therefore as the Church is called the City of God, Psal. 122. & 47. the House of the Lord, it must have some Foundation; on [Page 13]which whilst it leanes, and relyes, it re­maineth safe and sound; from which if it giveth off and starteth aside, it pre­sently perisheth, and is brought to no­thing. It is plaine therefore, that whilst we speake of the Church founded by God, that hath the name and nature of a Foundation, by which all the parts ther­of are supported, and from which they borrow both their strength and safety. And as in some great Aedifice, the seve­rall parts have not all the same strength, & beauty, yea some somtimes, may seem somewhat more inclined to fall, which as yet stand, and stick to the foundation: So in this far stretched building, which we call the House, and Church of God; there is great difference of particular Churches. For some are fairer and firmer than the rest, because better and neerer joyned to the Foundation, o­thers, somewhat ruinous, and shaken, because not so well fastened to the foun­dation, yet all, which are not as yet plucked off from the foundation, are su­stained by the strength, and benefit thereof, and are continued to the firmer, and fairer parts of the building.

Hence it is plaine, when we speak of the Churches, what a kind of thing that is, which challengeth to it self the name of a Foundation. Let us see now, retai­ning still the former Metaphor, what manner of things they be which we use to call Fundamentall, for this is the word that hath made so much work for our Divines, and hindered them in the ad­vancing of the whole businesse of the pacification.

But first of all, here we must observe, that a materiall Edifice, built of Wood and Stone, is founded nothing like unto a Spirituall Building, whose structure consists of Living Trees, and Stones, that is, of Men enjoying the use of their Reason and Will. For in this Quick and Lively Building, nothing either hath due conjoyning with, or receiveth any strength from the Foundation, except it be coupled thereunto by the Act of the Reason, and Knowledge, and by the Act of the wil cleave fast to it, & obey it. Those things therfore are truly counted and called Fundamentall, which being known, Christians may have a saving conjunction with their Foundation, [Page 15]which they cannot have, if the same things be not known, or not beleeved. In like manner if we consider the Will, those ought to be called practicall Fun­damentals, by the observation, and doing whereof, we may remaine joyned to our Foundation, but may not if we dispise, or neglect them. And let the Knowledge of Christians be never so imperfect, yet if they know and beleeve these Fundamen­tals, they shall not be parted from the Foundation, for the defects of their Un­derstanding. Let the righteousnes of Chri­stians be never so imperfect, yet if they do these practicall Fundamentals, they shall not be separated from the Foundation, for the defects of their good will. It being therefore a matter of such moment with God himself, to be joynted and joyned to our Foundation, that to all such, life, and eternal Salvation is promised, let us be ve­ry wary, how rashly we cut off, either particular Churches, or private Men, from this Conjunction, and by the same verdict cast them from all hope of life and happinesse.

But because besides these Metaphori­call words of Foundation and Fundamen­tall, [Page 16]sometimes other termes are used ha­ving the same force, and intimating also the same dependancy of the Church on another, of them also briefly. What therefore is called the Foundation of the Church, when it is compared to a Build­ing; when it is likened to a Man, is ter­med the Head; when resembled to a Tree, stiled the Root. It is called an Head, because it maintaineth the mem­bers united unto it, ceasing not to con­vey spirituall strength, and life into them. In the same sense, it is named a Root, be­cause it spouteth a vitall Sap into all the Boughs and Sprigs ingrafted in it. As therefore those are counted Fundamental Doctrines, which are sufficiently effe­ctuall, and absolutely necessary to joyne Christians to their Foundation; so may they also be called Capit [...] or Radicall Articles, which being known and be­leeved by any Members of the Mysticall Body, they may be united to their Quickning Head, and any of the Branches may rely upon that Roote of theirs, which conveyeth Life unto them, and stick fast to the same.

Moreover, as every thing is not sitly [Page 17]called the Foundation, which is usefully imployed about the building, but only that, which is so underlaid beneath the building, that without it, it cannot be supported; but may stand strongly, if coupled and conjoyned with it: So all Doctrines profitable for the furthering of edification are not properly termed Fundamentall, but only those which are so necessary to be known, that without them, there is no coupling of the build­ing to the Foundation, with them a sa­ving conjunction may be had, though somethings be wanting, which are re­quisite to the perfecting of the Know­ledge of a Christian.

Lastly, 2 Tim. 3.16. let us acknowledge with the Apostle, all Scripture to be profitable for Doctrine, for Reproofe, for Correction, for Instruction of all Christians in Righteousnesse, Godlinesse and Truth; but we do not call all propositions foun­ded in Scripture Fundamentall Doctrins, because the nature of the thing, and the propriety of the Metaphor doth forbid it. The folly of Tanner in a like case was laughed at by all, when in Conference at Ratisbone he feircely maintainedt, hat [Page 18]whatsoever is affirmed in the Scripture is an Article of the Christian Faith, as for example, that Tobiah had a Dog.

But least we should stay longer than it is meet, in handling the bare significa­tion of words, be this setled and resol­ved on, that the names of Foundation and Fundamentall, agree only to those things, which in reference to what is founded on them, are of absolute neces­sity and power to bring unto Salvation.

I find amongst Divines in this Sense, a three­fold acception of Foundation.

• 1. Personall Foundation of the Church, and this only one, properly so called.
• 2. Ministeriall Foundations of Churches, so termed, but not in the same Propriety of Language.
• 3. Doctrinall Foundations, ju­stly so called, as deserving that honorable stile, not by the Opinion of a few Di­vines, but the constant Judg­ment of the Catholique Church.

All the difference betwixt the Re­formed [Page 19]Churches is about the two la­ter: yet can it not easily be composed, Chap. 3 except we discourse of all three. So much of thenotion and use of the words: we come now to handle them severally in order.

CHAP. III. Of the only Personall Foundation of the Church, Christ Jesus God and Man, Mediator betwixt God and Men, and of the true conjunction with him.

THE most wise God, and most loving towards mankind, was pleased to found a Church, which should endure for ever, and prevaile against the Gates of Hell. Now such a Church could not be, except it stood on a solid and eternall Foundation, which might not be forced by any strength, or foundred by Engines. God therefore, thought fit to lay no o­ther Foundation than Jesus Christ, the eternall Son, of an eternal Father, whom he sent into the World, that every one which beleeveth on him, might not dye, but [Page 20]have everlasting life. The prophets and Apostles witnesse with a joynt consent, Him alone to be the Personall Foundati­on of the Church. Psal. 118.22. Esay. 28.16. Act. 4.11, 12. 1 Cor. 3.11. Hence David cal­leth Him the corner Stone: Esaiah ter­meth Him a tryed Stone, Precious, and placed in the foundation of Zion. This is the Stone, set at nought by the Builders, which is become the Head of the Corner, neither is there Salvation in any other. O­ther foundation can no man lay, than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Now what hath been said of this one only Foundation, ought also to be under­stood of the one only Head, Husband, Root of the Church, and also of all o­ther Metaphorical Titles, which import the same dignity of Christ, & the Chur­ches same dependancy on him. For Christ God and man, is the only quick­ning and saving Head of the Church, from whom the whole Body is fitly joyned together and compacted: Eph. 4.15 16. Ioh. 3.29. Hos. 2.20. Fph. 5.26. He is the only Bridegrom of the Church who hath the Bride, and hath espoused her to himself, that he might Eternally preserve, that is, that he may sanctifie her in this World, and present her glorious in that which is [Page 21]to come. Lastly, he is the heavenly root of the Church, Col. 2.7. in whom whosoever are roo­ted, spring up towards Heaven and shall continually flourish in Heaven.

This Personall prerogative is so pro­perly invested in Christ God and man, that it can agree to no other. Heb. 2.11 Not to Angels, because they want that confor­mity of Nature, which ought to be be­twixt the Foundation and things founded in it, the Head and the Mem­bers joyned unto it, the Husband and Wife coupled to him in lawfull mar­riage. Not to a bare man, because no mortall, by reason of the corruption and weaknesse of humane Nature can possi­bly performe the office of a Foundation, Head, Spouse, in upholding, quickening, and preserving of the Church. Not to God himselfe considered alone in the dreadfull nature of his Divine Majestie. For though we acknowledge God the founder of the Church, we still want a Foundation, to which we need not feare to approach, draw neare, to come, and as it were to glue our selves. But the Maje­sty of God considered in it selfe, is not only a light not to be approached unto, but [Page 22]also is a consuming fire, and what mortall man can dwell with a devouring fire? Heb. 12.29. Isa. 33.14. We cannot therefore have in, or under Hea­ven, any other personall Foundation, by the Mediation whereof, we may be re­conciled and united to God, save only the Word, Ioh. 1.14. Made Man, full of Grace and Truth.

But to what purpose is this dispute a­bout a matter so plaine, and granted of all Protestants? Namely, that it may hence appeare, that other Churches nei­ther may, nor ought to renounce bro­therly Communion with those particu­lar Churches, which retaine a saving conjunction with this Foundation. We wonder not that the Papists, who be­sides Christ himself make another perso­nall Foundation, another Head, another Husband of the Church, cut and cast off all Churches, though firmely and fastly sticking to Christ, which cleave not to the Pope of Rome, as to their Foundation, Head & Husband. Nor care we for their false clamours, whereby they think to affright the Churches of Christ.

If ye be founded upon the Rock of Rome ye be living and pretious stones, if not, only [Page 23]spongy and hollow ones. If ye acknowledge the Pope of Rome Head of the Churches, ye are the true and living members of the holy Catholique Church; if otherwise, ye are dead and rotten carkasses of Churches. Lastly if ye imbrace the Pope for your Husband, ye are chast and true-borne Churches; if otherwise, ye are adulterous and to be accursed to the pit of Hell, So the Romanists. We can patiently take these taunts and wrongs from their hands, who dreame that our Churches are rent from the true Foundation, be­cause they refuse to joyne with a false. But verily if any Protestant Church, which dares not deny, but that another is built on Christ, should dare notwith­standing to cut the same off, as a rotten member, and cast it off from all brother­ly Communion; this were to offer an affront to Christ himselfe, and to do an injury to the Brethren, both of us and Christ.

That therefore we may know, with what Churches it is meet for us to re­taine Brotherly Communion, we ought to know what Churches are to be ac­counted to have and to hold true and sa­ving [Page 24]Union with this their Foundation; We deny not, but that amongst the Churches which cleave to this only Foundation, some may be fastened firmer and nearer than others, amongst the Churches quickened by this Head and Root; some may draw more plentifull sense and sap than others: but we ought not, because of the severall degrees of Knowledge and Grace, to separate our selves from Brotherly Communion with those whom we may, and ought to hope, as yet to remaine conjoyned with their saving Foundation.

As touching single Persons, God alone who searcheth the Heart, can know who have an inward, spirituall and lively con­junction with this saving Foundation. But concerning whole Churches, (so far as it is lawfull for men to know and judge) whether or no they be savingly coupled to the Foundation, it may be judged and determined by the works, which can and use dayly to be exercised by them. For those Churches, wherin those Acts are performed, whereby men may be united to Christ, remaine in him, and by him be brought to eternall life, [Page 25]none can affirme, or will imagine that such are estranged or pluckt asunder, from this the only Foundation of mans Salvation.

That we may now begin from In­fants. In all Reformed Churches, Ba­ptisme is administred in the Name of the most holy Trinity, by benefit wher­of such are grafted into Christ, and right­ly coupled to this their Foundation. For as for these Infants who cannot by any Act of their own, apply themselves to the Foundation, the holy Spirit vouch­safeth by the Laver of Regeneration, to frame, & apply the Foundation to them. But of those who are capable of Reason, and can use the Freedome of their own will, 'tis expected and required from them, that they bring divers Acts, both of their Understanding, and Will to the making and keeping of their due Union with Christ. Amongst which these foure are accounted the Principall, to which all others may easily bee redu­ced.

First, on the part of the Understand­ing, there is required an Act of knowing all those things concerning God, and [Page 26]Christ, without which no saving Union can be established betwixt us, and Christ, nor free Reconciliation betwixt us, and God the Father. To which purpose those words of our Saviour seem to tend, This is eternall Life, that they might know thee the only true God, Ioh. 17.3. and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. If there be any Congregations of men, which as yet have not attained to this measure of sa­ving Knowledge, we confesse such to be alienated from the life of God, Ephe. 4.18. & 2.12 13. through the Ignorance that is in them, and that because of the blindnesse of their hearts, as we are taught by the Apostle. But there is none of the Protestant Churches blinded with such dark Ignorance, but that the Chri­stians therein may know God and Christ so far as is sufficient to Salvation, if they assent to the Truth Preached amongst them.

Secondly, besides this speculative Knowledge of God and Christ, there is also required an Act of beleeving, that is, Practically with Assurance to rely on Christ being knowne. We grant there­fore, that those Churches, or Compa­nies of men, met in one body of a Con­gregation, [Page 27]however they may put on, and pretend the Name of Christian, yet to have no entercourse, nor society with Christ the Foundation, amongst whom, Christ is not so preached, nor acknow­ledged, that men may rely on him with a lively and justifying Faith. Such are those, which dissolve the Hypostaticall Union of two Natures in Christ the Mediatour, without which we can nei­ther have nor hope for a saving conjun­ction with Christ, and God the Father. But in all the Reformed Churches, Christ, God and Man, is so Preached, that there is no doubt to be made, but number­lesse soules embrace him, with a true, live­ly, and justifying Faith. They are therfore, and do remaine conjoyned to this Foun­dation, under that very formall conce­ption, wherein Christ the Foundation of mans Salvation may bee conjoyned to men, to conferre Grace, and Life up­on them.

Thirdly, on the part of the Will, it is required of all that would not be parted from this their Foundation, that they practise a dayly exercise of Repentance, without which it must needes come to [Page 28]passe that our dayly sins must divide, and separate us from God and Christ, to our eternall destruction. On the other side, where this constant practice of Repen­tance comes betwixt, we remaine foun­ded in Christ, reconciled to God, and or­dained to happinesse. Wherefore in what Church soever the Gospell is so preached, and the Foundation of mans Salvation is so setled and established, that it is to be hoped that Christians taught by it, and living in it, by beleeving, and repenting, may obtaine forgivenesse of their sins and everlasting life: we ought to pronounce, and conceive of that Church, that it is truly conjoyned, and remaines firmly coupled to Christ, the Author, Fountaine, and Foundation of Grace and Salvation.

Fourthly, besides this Practice of Repentance, that this our conjunction with the foundation may be the more sure and evident, the unfeigned desire, and endeavour of Obedience, and a new Life, flowing from Faith and Love of Christ, is required. If the Act of Obey­ing be wanting, there wants the Act of Beleeving, and Loving, there wants all [Page 29]hope of conjoyning such with Christ. For what Christ said, Ioh. 14.15 If you love mee keep my Commandements, was all one as if he had said, If you be conjoyned to me, keep my Commandements: Gal. 6.15. and 5.6. Be­cause, In Christ neither Circumcision a­vaileth any thing, nor Ʋncircumcision, but Faith which worketh by Love. What Churches then soever of the Protestants stand in this condition, that men in them are enlightned to know God, and Christ, are furthered to beleeve in him, are tur­ned away from their sins by the Act of Repentance, are made subject to God and his Commandements, by the act of Loving and Obeying him: No doubt is to be made, but that these Churches re­maine firmely fastned to their saving Foundation. Therefore this saving and undoubted Union of them with Christ, ought to bring a Tye and a Band of no meane Consequence, to the binding of the Affections of all Reformed Churches together.

CHAP. IV. Chap. 4 Of certaine Foundations, which use to be called Ministeriall, and of their Office and Power.

ALTHOUGH We acknowledge our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the only personall Foundation of his Church, yet do we not deny, but that the name Foundation, is in a different sense ascribed to others. To whom, in what respect, this high Title is given, and what Power and Command they have, who are thus intitled, it must be af­terwards enquired into.

The name therefore of Foundation is sometimes lent to others, but then always in a lessened and restrained acception. For they are called Foundations in no o­ther right, than because the personall Foundation is layd by their Ministery, through the preaching of the Gospell, and by the continuation of that preaching always kept in the Church.

Amongst these Ministeriall Founda­tions the Prophets and Apostles possesse [Page 31]the prime place. Hence the wall of the Heavenly Jerusalem is said to have twelve Foundations, Rev. 21.14. and in them the names of the twelve Apostles of the Lambe. Also Christians are said to be built upon the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets. Eph. 2.20. In this sense Peter and Paul and all the Apostles were Ministeriall Foundations, because all they as wise Master-builders bestowed their excellent paines in laying that only Foundation, of which we spake before. Wherefore when the Prophets, and Apostles are adorned with this hono­rable Title, it is rather to be referred to their saving Doctrin concerning Christ, than to their own particular Persons. The power of these was far greater than that of their succeeding Ministers, be­cause they were so enlightned, and go­verned by the holy Spirit, that they could not at all erre, either in Preaching, or Writing. Therefore we acknowledge their Doctrine, as the Doctrine of God and Christ, certaine, infallible, and whol­ly Divine, with Tertullian, that saith, There is no Divine Word but of God alone. In that his booke of the Soule. Which Word was thundred both by the Prophets, by the Apostles, by Christ him­selfe.

But the Papists to these Ministeriall Foundations, endeavour to joyne ano­ther, in words calling it a Second, and subservient, but in very deed making it a Principall, and plainly Divine one. This honour the Jesuites thinke fit to be con­ferred on the Pope alone, whom they so appoint to be the Second Foundation of the Catholike Church, that in the meane time they maintaine him to be the only Foundation of the Church next unto Christ. But there is no need to speake much of this fading foundation, and pal­sy-shaking head; the Scriptures being silent of any such sole Ministeriall foun­dation, as the Papists do faine. Besides all Protestant Churches long since have cast this filthy Idoll of a secondary head and foundation with others of the like nature to the Moles and Bats, as fit for so blind companions. We owne no power placed in this secondary founda­tion of the Papists, to subject the Faith of Christians unto it, counting those lit­tle better than mad, when they write and maintaine, Bell [...] prae­f [...]t. in lib. d [...] Rom. Po [...]. That the power and infal­libility of the Pope of Rome, is the summe of Christian Religion, and his judgment is [Page 33]to bee accounted the square and Rule of Faith.

But leaving the Pope of Rome, lets come to the Catholique Church, which on a farre better title might challenge to her selfe the name of Ministeriall Foundation, because the Faith of every one may seeme in some sort to rely up­on her. For in this even to the end of the World that Doctrine shall bee kept and preached, to which those Christi­ans which afford beliefe and obedience, are rightly joyned to their foundation, and in it shall obtaine eternall Life. To this purpose that of Paul to Timothy, is often alleadged, where he calleth the Church, the Pillar and Ground of Truth. 1 Tim. 3 15. Neither may we doubt, but that in this Holy Catholique Church, (which wee beleeve in the Creed) the truth of the Gospell ever hath and ever will be pre­served, so farre forth, as it shall suffice for the Salvation of those that beleeve it. Therefore to know what hath been beleeved, received, and published of all Christian Churches, always and every where, is to know all those things which are sufficient for the obtaining [Page 34]of Salvation in Christ, the Foundation thereof. But this Catholique Church scattered over all the world, is presen­ted, rather to our mind, than outward senses. Wherefore when we desire to heare the voyce of the Catholique Church, wee are forced to fly to the Church, which they call Representa­tive; that is to say, to a Generall Coun­cell. Of which Representative Image of the Catholique Church, and of the Ministeriall power therof we will brief­ly discourse.

That this Representative Church did excellently discharge the Office of a Ministeriall Foundation in Oecumeni­call Synods, is witnessed by those foure Councils of Nice, Constantinople, Ephe­sus and Chalcedon: In which the Divi­nity of Christ, against Arius, of the holy Ghost, against Macedonius, the Union of two Natures in Christ, against Nesto­rius, the distinction of two Natures, a­gainst Eutyches, were declared, defen­ded, and established. In these and the like Councils, those Doctrines of the Christian Faith, which were there in common handled and discussed, because [Page 35]therein all that professed Christianity, were represented, are therefore with great reverence to bee received. For it ever belongeth to the Office and lawfull power of this Representative Church, to divide and distinguish Fun­damentall Doctrines of the Christian Faith, from those which were not fun­damentall, provided alwayes that they passed not the bounds set by the Apo­stles and Primitive Church, to multiply or diminish the Number of these Fun­damentals. 2a. 2ae Qu. 1. Art. 7. Resp. ad 4. For it is credible (what A­quinas observed) that the Apostles and others which were nearer to Christ, had a fuller Knowledge of the mysteries of the Faith, than we that are further off, which Cajetan in the same place confesseth to be most true. For how­ever that the Apostles, and the Fathers of the Primitive Church, were not much given to controversall Divinity, and disputing about Questions, yet were they of all most skilfull, in saving, ne­cessary, and Fundamentall Divinity.

Moreover, after this Representative Church had once published her resolu­tion founded in Gods Word, of Funda­mentall [Page 36]Articles, which were simply necessary to the Salvation of Christians, the care and charge also lay upon her to defend, fence and fortifie those Articles, against all fraud, and force of Heretiques. For it is the wont of Heretiques, to un­dermine the very Foundation of Chri­stian Religion, whilst they retaine the words, but deny the matter of the Ar­ticles. Thus the Arians, in words con­fessed Christ to be the Son of God, but they hatcht a Monster in their hearts, when they would not acknowledge him to be coessentiall to the Father. Hee is but mocked with a Title, to whom the thing signified by that Title is de­nyed.

It was lawfull therefore for the Re­presentative Church (that is for the ge­nerall Councell) for the better declaring of the true meaning of an Article, to frame and fit a new (but apt) terme, and to compell Christians to confesse Christs Divinity under this forme of words, Christ is Coessentiall with God the Fa­ther. For to be God, and to be the Son of God, though not in sound, in sense are the same as to be coessentiall with God.

Lastly, we do not straiten and confine the power of an Oecumenicall Synod, or representative Church, only to the de­claring and defending of Fundamentall Articles, such whereof an explicite and cleare unfolded Faith must be had to Sal­vation; but wee confesse the same also doth extend to any true doctrines, and profitable for the edification of mens Soules. Yea we conceive this definitive sentence of the Church to bee so armed with the sharp edged sword of Excom­munication, that they may be separated from the outward Communion of the Catholique Church, which dare stub­bornly oppose their private opinions a­gainst her determinations. Notwith­standing if that wherein they do erre, be not of the Fundamentall, and absolutely necessary Doctrins, we ought not to de­spaire, but that some who justly are cut off from the outward Communiō of the Church, (God in his mercy pardoning their errors, arising from the weaknesse of their Understanding) may still retain an Inward and saving Communion with Jesus Christ, their Foundation. For the outward Excommunication, is not a cer­taine, [Page 38]or infallible signe of the inward Ex­communication, Tom. 1 an disp. pag. 374. as rightly Luther.

What we have said of the Power of a Generall Councill, we desire should also be understood of any lawfull and free Councill, rightly representing the Ca­tholique Church; not of those Councils which are meere Vassals to the Pope of Rome, and represent the Catholique Church in the same manner as an Ape doth a Man.

But because it is altogether impossible to call the Catholique Church into a Councill representing the whole body, by reason of the Popes Tyranny, and o­ther hinderances; let us come to ex­plaine what power particular Churches have in this matter.

If therefore the name of Ministeriall Foundation doth agree to the Represen­tative Church, or Generall Councill; for the Ministeriall power it hath in pu­blishing, explaining, and defending that Doctrine which joyneth Christians to their saving foundation, it agreeth also in its kind, and degree to every particular Church, suppose the English, French, Dutch, and others, which take their de­nomination [Page 39]from divers Countries. For what the Catholike Church assembled in a Council, may, and ought to do towards the founding of all Christians in the sa­ving Truth of the Gospell; that every Particular and Provinciall Church may and ought to do to those that are un­der it.

From this Office, the Church of E­phesus, wherof Timothy was President, is called the pillar and ground of Truth, be­cause it is the duty of every Church to defend and maintaine the Truth (prea­ched by the Apostles to the World) commending, and explaining the same to the people, and to unsheath, and draw the Sword of Ecclesiasticall cen­sures against forgers and Heretiques.

But least every particular Church should advance her power and authori­ty, even to match, and equall it with the Catholike Church in a Generall Council, we must marke and observe, first, that the particular Doctours of particular Chur­ches met in a Synod, only represent their own, and n [...]t forraigne Churches; and therefore to have no power of prescrib­ing to others, what they must beleeve, [Page 40]or refuse; much lesse to cut them off from the Brotherly Communion which they hold with the Catholique Church, who either out of conscience, or igno­rance cannot assent to their Decrees and Determinations. For an Equall hath no power over him, which is his Equall. Herein the moderation of Cyprian is commended, who held communion with those Churches, whom he concei­ved to live in a grievous errour. The African Churches are commended, Apud. Au­gust. de Bapt. cont. Donat. lib. 2. cap. ult. Idem super gestis cum Emerit. Serm. for their not condemning of any, nor remo­ving them from the right of communi­on, but continuing in fellowship with those Churches, which were of a diffe­rent opinion, and would not rest and re­ly on their judgement. For no particu­lar Church ought so far to tender her own honor, as thereby to envy, preju­dice, or dammage the unity of other Churches.

Secondly, we must observe, that par­ticular Churches (for instance, those of Saxony and Switzerland) may and ought to commend the Summe of the Doctrin of the Gospell, which they professe, to such as are subject to their Ministery, [Page 41]which abridgement of Doctrine, com­piled and digested into Articles, we use to call the Confession of the Churches, or Articles of Religion. But a speciall care must be had, that in the framing of these Articles, we insert not into them, any thing that is subtile, superfluous, and litigious. For it is not the part of wise Doctors, to stuffe those things, which should further Peace, and the Edification of Soules, with that which may trouble the Learned, help the Unlearned little or nothing to Salvation. For what is this else, than to minister to the Learned matter of striffe, and to thrust on the unlearned, Wind for Milk, and Stones for Bread.

We ought also to have some respect of neighbouring Churches, in these our Confessions, which wee set forth, and nor to affect in our Articles, to expose to the view of all that, whence occasion of wrangling may bee given to our neigh­bour Protestant Churches, and matter of rejoycing afforded to the Papists. These inconveniencies might easily bee avoyded, if it would once enter into the hearts of Divines, to sever hard and ob­scure [Page 42]Controversies, from the publike Confessions of the Church, and confine them to private exercises in the Schooles. For whilst we place and proclaime our Controversies in the light, Mat. 10.27. and as it were on the house top, of our publique Confes­sions, wee shew abroad the nakednesse of the Reformed Churches, which it was farre better, going backward with our faces, wee should desire to co­ver.

Lastly, when these Confessions are or­dered in this manner, it is lawfull and usefull for every particular Church, to ex­ercise that Jurisdiction over their owne people, which in no case, they ought or can usurpe over the subjects of another Church. For if their own oppose the received Doctrine of their Church, esta­blished by publique consent, they may (both for the errors they scatter, and for the disturbance they cause in the Church) put them aside from the Com­munion of their Church, so long till they leave off to infect others, and trouble the Church with their errours. But as soon as they repent of their er­rors, they are to be received againe into [Page 43]the Bosome of their Mother. Thus may they deale with their own. But when they are to meddle with Churches, not at all subordinate unto them, they may hold Divine concord, and keepe Gods Peace with those, which think and teach o­therwise than themselves, as we may see it in Cyprian. Epist. 72. ad Stepha­num, & 73 ad Julia­num.

It will not be from the matter, after this our discourse of Particular Churches, to adde something concerning some fa­mous and eminent Doctors in the same. For private Doctors, are also in their di­stance, to be accounted Ministeriall foun­dations, who in the maintaining, expoun­ding; defending; preaching, or wri­ting the Truth of the Gospell, have im­ployed their commendable paines. And here amongst the principall Doctours of the Reformed Churches, wee reckon those Worthyes, Luther and Philip Me­lancthon, not fearing to joyne unto them Bucer, Calvine, Martyr, and others; whom we need not to name. But of all these, though exellent Divines of our Age, we ought so to esteeme, as accoun­ting them Stars, but not Deities in our Churches, nor do we reverence them, as [Page 44]the Prophets, and Apostles inspired by God, but value them, as godly Men, wor­thily learned, and raised up by God for the generall good of the Church, with­all confessing them to bee but ordinary Ministers, and subject to their mi­stakes.

Besides, we must beware that we do not suffer the Churches themselves, to be sirnamed by Epithets from these famous Men. Lactan. In­stit. lib. 4. cap. 30. For to put off the Name of Christ, and to put on, and weare humane and out­ward names, is far from Christians, and most times is the fuell of endlesse dissention. That therefore of Nazianzens ought wonderfully to please all prudent and pi­ous Christians. Orat. 30. I reverence Peter, yet will I not be called a Petrian; I honour Paul, yet will I not be called a Paulian. If pri­vate Christians can not take this in good part, how much lesse is it fitting to nick­name a whole Church from a single man?

Last of all, I may adde this concerning private Doctors. It is a most in jurious thing, that a whole Church should be in­dited guilty of the errors of that Doctor, whatsoever hee bee, which hath or doth [Page 45]use his Ministery therein, unlesse it doth appeare, that that Church by their publique assent doth approve and main­tain his errors. But where is there one of an hundred amongst common Chri­stians, who so searches the books of their Doctors, that he giveth his consent to all their Opinions? Yea, where is there one amongst those Doctours themselves, which doth not from his whole heart abhorre such errors, when his adversaries charge him with them? Lastly, where is there one to be found amongst the Lear­ned in any Church, who hath so sworne to defend the words of Luther, or Cal­vin, or any other writer, but that he thinks it lawfull to depart from them, where they depart from the Truth? Now seeing it is manifest these things are so, if these which wee call Ministeriall Fundamen­tals, sometime in some things do shake, or stagger, we must not pin their Personall errors upon the whole Church. Apud Luth. Tom. 1. disp. de Author. Ec­cles. pag. 439. B. For the Church properly so called, doth not allow whatsoever ill Doctours mingled in the Church do allow, as rightly Melancthon, to which we adde, neither every thing which good Doctors have taught ill.

CHAP. CHAP. 5. V. Of the Doctrinall Foundations of the Christian Faith in Generall, and how farre they are to bee beleeved under the necessity of Salvation.

THE Doctrine of the Holy Scripture contained in the Books of the Pro­phets, Evangelists, and Apostles, is that Foundation, on which alone the Faith of Christians may safely rely, because of the most certaine authority of God re­vealing it. Nor must we give eare to the Papists when they object: Augustin. Confes. lib. 6. cap. 5. Irenaeus. li. 3 cap. 1. Whence know you those Books to have been given to man­kind by the Spirit of the most true God? If God as yet hath not perswaded me in this point, he hath not as yet perswaded me that I am a Christian: For the will of God hath commended the Scriptures unto us, to be the Foundation and Pillar of our Faith. If the Romanists will give no credence, neither to Augustine nor Irenaeus, they ought notwithstanding undoubtedly to beleeve Peter, 2 Pet. 1.19 20, 21. who calleth the voyce of the Scriptures, a voyee more sure than that [Page 47]which came down from Heaven, and not brought by the will of man, but holy men of God spake it, as they were moved by the holy Ghost. Therefore the holy Scri­pture so propoundeth the foundations of our Faith, and fastens the Rule of our Doctrine, that the Faith of Christians only trusteth and reposeth it selfe on those Revelations, which are contained in the canonicall Books. I will say no­thing against that fantastick imaginary Doctrinall foundation, which the Papists trislingly defēd, to be in a word not writ­ten, and couched in the privy cabinet of the Popes breast, because I conceive so profane and grosse an error, in a matter of so great moment, amongst wel instructed Christians is not worthy of a confutation. He that seeks for the Doctrine of Salva­tion, and Eternall Life out of the Scri­ptures, shall find it no sooner than if hee looked for the Tree of Knowledge and Life out of Paradise.

But although wee straitly maintain that no fundamentall Doctrine of Faith, is to bee sought for out of the Bookes of the Old and New Testament; yet wee do not defend that all things contained [Page 48]in these books are fundamentall points, so necessary to be known and beleeved, that if any of these be unknown, or denyed of any, we should presently adjudge them to have falne off from the foundation of Salvation. Many things in the Books of both Testaments are Historicall, some things are dogmaticall, which are truly affirmed, and profitably placed there, and yet are accounted not to come into the Number of Fundamentall points. Num­berlesse things there are, which by true & firme consequence may be deduced out of the Scriptures, and yet mount not up to this high pitch of honour. Therefore those things only are to be set apart, and owned for Fundamentals, without the plaine, and explicite Knowledge where­of, none can be saved; & in which, as well Negative infidelity, not at all to know them, as positive infidelity, to refuse to be­leeve them doth condemn. Now such are all those things without w ^ch we can nei­ther savingly beleeve in Christ, nor right­ly call upon God in Christ, and worship him to the obtaining of eternall Life; In a word, without which Christians can neither have pious affections towards God, nor exercise the Religious Acts of [Page 49]Faith, Hope, and Charity, being absolutly necessary to Salvation.

These two things beene yeelded, and granted, that our Faith is to trust on the Scriptures alone, and that all, & every one of those things which may be seen in the large prospect of the Scriptures, are not to bee ranked with Fundamentals; this is to be added in the third place, that our Faith is so subject, and tyed to the whole word of God, that every one is bound to embrace every Truth which hee sees re­vealed in the holy Scriptures, or duly de­rived from them. For although, out of the nature or matter of a Proposition we are not bound and obliged to beleeve, and know it, under the perill of losse of E­ternall Life: Yet notwithstanding be­cause of the authority of the revealer, so oft as it shall appeare unto us, that such a proposition is revealed in Scripture, we are bound not to refuse it. For whatso­ever he should pretend on the contrary, who at his pleasure shall trample on a proposition which he understands to bee founded on the Scripture; he is to be ac­counted one that gives not that beleefe which he ought to any proposition. For [Page 50]Instance sake: That Christ is God and Man, is a plaine Fundamentall Ar­ticle, which if not at all beleeved, we can neither beleeve in Christ himselfe, nor so worship God, as to be restored into his favour, and admitted into his Kingdom: But many things are expresly mentioned in Scripture of this Christ himselfe In­carnated, which are not Fundamentall; also many things may bee deduced from this Fundamentall Article, Christ is God and Man, which are not to be reckoned as Fundamentals. If notwithstanding they be perceived, and understood to bee placed in, or duly deduced from the Scri­ptures, hee contemnes God speaking in the Scriptures, who beleeves not such Propositions. But as often as it shall happen, not out of the perversnesse of the Will, but weaknesse of the Judgement, that he, being deceived with an Imagi­nation, Aug lib 4. ad Vinc. Vict. cap. ult. that Truth and Piety are on his side, shall affirme or deny any thing re­pugnant to the Scriptures, even in those his Tenets, which thorough his Igno­rance are not Catholique, his heart and mind notwithstanding is Catholique, because it is prepared for amendment on [Page 51]better information. Of such therefore we may rightly say, Heb. 5.14 Rom. 14.1 that they have their Senses not so well exercised in heavenly matters, that they are weak and children in Faith, that they are not to be taken a­long with us to doubtfull Disputes, but we cannot truly call them, forraigners e­stranged from Christ, Apostates from the Faith, & such as are to be separated from Brotherly Communion with the Godly.

However therefore let it be taken for granted, that the Romish Prelats do not deny any Fundamentall point, truly and properly so called: hence notwithstand­ing it appeares, that they both hurt the Unity of the Catholique Faith, and hin­der the Union of the Catholike Church. For what Church soever, shall patch their own uncertain opinions to the fun­damentall Articles of the Christian Faith must needs mishape and deforme the body of the Catholique Faith, by joy­ning to it so many members, both useles and monstruous. But as for those which use the same, and inforce them on other Churches to be beleeved, under the ne­cessity of Salvation, it manifestly ap­peares, that they alone are guilty of the [Page 52]rents in the Catholique Church. Here­in the pride of the Romish Church, swels so big, that it leaves no room to re­ceive the Truth: but I hope that all Pro­testant Churches, will at length consent in this, to renew the Brotherly Com­munion betwixt them, and not to thrust their private opinions on others. That attempt of the Papists, to shut out all from the Catholique Church, and eter­nall Salvation, which in all things give not their assent to the Creed of Trent, ever seemed to me so desperate and foule, that all the water of the Ocean powred upon Rome, can not wash away the staintherof.

Wee desire that all which wee have spoken be understood, of casting them off from Brotherly Communion, who either out of obstinacy or ignorance, contradict the Scriptures, in any Principle of Ca­tholique Faith, which not at all being known, we can neither have Union with Christ, nor Adoption by him into the Son of God; which, not at all being beleeved, we can neither rightly perform Gods worship, nor from him obtaine E­ternall Salvation. Such things are nei­ther denied, nor unknown of any, which [Page 53]challenge to themselves the name of Christians, save only those, 2 Cor. 4.3, 4. in whom the God of this world hath blinded their mind, lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ should shine unto them.

Moreover, neither are the things which we have said so to be taken, as if thereby leave and liberty were given to Christian people, to set up their rest in fundamentals, and to go no further in searching the Scriptures, as if it were lawfull to sleight any Doctrine, which we confesse not to be fundamentall. 2 Tim. 3.16. Yea all Scripture given by Inspiration of God, is prositable for Doctrine, for reproofe, for correction, for instruction in righteousnes. We must therefore endeavour, Col. 3.16 that the Word of God may dwell in us plentifully in all wisdome, that we go on to perfection, and not always make our abode only in Fundamentals. In the words of Saint Augustine, wee thus call upon all Chri­stians: Epist. 222. Let every one of you gaine to him­selfe as much Knowledge of Faith as he can; greater if he desires more, lesse if lesse, yet so that he gives not off from his journey, till he attaine unto perfection.

Last of all, I would not have these [Page 54]things which are spoken in generall of the doctrinall foundations of the Chri­stian Faith to be so understood, as if this care and duty did not lye upon Doctors, and Pastors to instruct their people in e­very Doctrine of the Scripture, wherby they may bee furthered, and edifyed in Faith and Piety: but that principally they urge and inculcate these Fundamentals, as of principall moment to Salvation. This was the judgement of Luther in his Preface to the greater Catechisme, where he willingly confesseth himselfe to be a Scholar of the Catechisme. Tom. 5. p. 645. Surely great is the unhappinesse of Christian people, where by reason of the noyse, and over much heat of controversies, they have scarce leave or leasure to heare, or thinke of the Fundamentall, and saving Doctrin of the Scriptures, and not at all to doe those deeds most necessarily required by Gods Commandements.

Now as concerning forreigne Chur­ches, I deny not, but that other Churches may, and ought to confute their errors, although they contradict not the Foun­dations of the Christian Faith. Nazian. orat. in S. Epiph. But let their Errours be confuted, and not the [Page 55]Parties erring be traduced, let the matter be handled by Arguments, not by Out­cries, by Reasons, not by Railing; nor let them contend about Words, when the di­vers sound of Syllables may be brought to Spell, and make up the same Sense. To shut up all in a word, we must so dispute of all Points not Fundamentall with the Doctours of other Churches, that wee keep and preserve our own people safe and sound from their Errours, and not that wee may render the others odious, branding them for obstinate Heretiques. Seeing it is easie to call any man an He­retique, but not so easie to comprise in a certaine regular Definition what makes an Heretique: Yea (if we beleeve Au­gustine) it is a matter of very great diffi­culty,

CHAP. VI. Chap. 6 Of the notes and markes whereby we may know that any Point is not Funda­mentall.

WEE have showne already that Fundamentall points have this character plainly printed upon them, that without the knowledge of them, neither Salvation of Christians, nor the Worship of God can consist. Now let us adde some other signes and tokens, out of which we may safely set down, that any point is not Fundamentall, although some urge, and enforce it for Funda­mentall, and they especially, who have long laboured, and sweat soundly in the maintaining of it.

First therefore, that is not Fundamen­tall, which was never clearely revealed from the beginning, by the Prophets, and Apostles inspired from Heaven, to Chri­stian people, and to Christian Churches, founded by them through the whole World. For they had not been pure from the bloud of them all, if they had [Page 57]shunned to declare all the Counsell of God to all; so far forth as it was necessary to the procuring the Salvation of all by Faith in Christ Jesus. And the saving Truth in such necessary, and fundamen­tall things was so revealed by the Apo­stles, that all might behold it. Mark. 16.15. Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospell to e­very creature: Rom. 1.16 For it is the power of God unto Salvation to every one that beleeveth. We preach Christ, Col. 1.28. warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdome, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus. What therefore in the time of the Apostles was not declared to all, that cannot in our Age begin to bee Funda­mentall. Yea, neither the Papists them­selves dare deny this, although they ar­rogate to the Pope of Rome, and Ro­mish Church more power, than is meet, over the Articles of the Christian Faith, For Canus set all those things apart from the Doctrines of the Catholique Faith, Lib. 4. cap. ult. pag. 145.146. which were not univorsally preached by the Apostles. How much more then, ought they to be severed from the Fun­damentals? Lib. 12.6.10. p. 391. The same Author alloweth that some propositions may bee called [Page 58] Truths of the Christian Doctrine, which he thinks not worthy to be called Truths of the Catholique Faith. For this name he counts peculiarly to belong to those Do­ctrines which so nearly concerne the Faith, that by removing them Faith it selfe is taken away. Lib. i. quest. 17. p. 148. And Corduba to the same purpose saith, It is no Catholique Truth, nor is the contrary opinion Heresie, unlesse such a Truth be revealed, and ge­nerally propounded to all, to be necessarily beleeved. Last of all, Bellarmine himselfe grants us, Lib 4. de Verbo Dei, cap. 11. That those things, which are ab­solutely necessary for all to Salvation, were preached unto all by the Apostles themselves. Let this therefore bee the first signe, of a Doctrine not Fundamen­tall, that it hath not beene delivered by the Apostles to all, publiquely, generally and plainely.

Secondly, that is no Fundamentall Point, which was never admitted and held for such in the Primitive Church, succeeding the Apostles, and ne­ver recommended to all, by generall con­sent of the Catholique Church. For if any will maintaine, that the Catholique Church did ever refuse, or was ignorant [Page 59]of any Fundamentall Doctrine, he must by the same reason maintaine, that the whole Church was severed from her Foundation, which no man, well in his wits, will ever suffer to enter into his Thoughts. It was well observed by the right Reverend Arch-bishop of Ar­mach, a man of singular Piety, and stored with the commendation for Learning in all kinds. That if at this day, wee should put by the points, wherein Christians dif­fer one from another, and gather into one body the rest of the Articles wherein they generally agree: Vsher Ser­mon be­fore the King, pag. 43. (which worship Christ God and Man, and acknowledge him for their Saviour) We should find that in those propositions, which without all Controver­sie are Ʋniversally received in the Chri­stian World, so much truth is contained, as being joyned with holy Obedience, may be sufficient to bring a man unto everlasting, Salvation. Which plainely evinceth that these things alone of the common Faith, are those, which rightly are cal­led Fundamentall: but as for those points, which we so dearely prise, and for love of them clash the Protestant Churches together, because of the right [Page 60]of neare alliance which they have with the Fundamentals, they may sometimes be ranked amongst true and profitable Doctrines, but may not be accounted ab­solutely necessary, or Fundamentall.

Thirdly, it is not a Fundamentall ma­xime of the Christian Religion, which is so handled or propounded, that to con­ceive the truth thereof, and to appre­hend it with Faith, we stand in need of the Wit, and cunning of Logicians, and of the abstracted and abstruse speculation of Metaphysitians. Nazian. Orat. 21. For nothing were more unjust, than the Christian Faith, if it should only sit and belong to those, who are Learned and Skilfull in these Arts. Nothing is more usuall amongst Learned Men, than in their minds and conceits, to abstract the manner of things, from the things themselves; nothing more com­mon, than to propound the same single numericall thing, to be considered under severall formall differences, and to reare and raise these touring speculations, on the plaine Doctrines of the Christian Faith. If any such matter were Funda­mentall, or necessary to be knowne to Salvation; there were no hope of the [Page 61]Salvation of all unlearned People. But we defend with Augustine, Epist. 3.22. that the Faith of the holy Church is apprehended, not by the Reason of Disputation, but the Piety of beleeving, otherwise none but the Philosophers, should obtaine blessed happi­nesse. Yea, we say with the Apostle, 1 Cor. 1.20, 27. Where is the Wise, where is the Scribe, where is the Disputer of this World? &c. But God hath chosen the foolish things of the World, to confound the Wise. As if he had said, Where art thou O Learned man, and skilfull in lofty speculations? Art thou alone meet to receive the Do­ctrine of Life? Yea, every one of the plaine countrey People is more fit than thy selfe, and thou altogether unfit, if thou thinkest that in these things, thou mayst rely on thy own Art, and witty apprehension, for the way of Salvation is not only a holy way, but also so plaine and direct, that the foolish cannot wander in it: Isa. 35.8. So be it, they stick to the Word in the sim­plicity of their hearts. On the place. As Lu­ther well affirmeth. Therefore, sa­ving and Fundamentall Doctrines, are not to be sought for, in the dark clouds of speculation, but in the plaine proposi­tions [Page 62]of the holy Scriptures, to the con­ceiving whereof, there is more need and use of Faith, than Art; of an obedient Heart, than of a subtile and piercing Wit.

Fourthly, as all points justly challen­ging to themselves the Title of Funda­mentall, are plaine and naked, for the manner of their Expression; so ought they to be few, and so framed, that they do not swell to an infinite number, yea, that they grow not into so great a bulk, burthensome to bee portable in the memory of Gods little ones. Hence Aquinas cals them the First things to be beleeved, 2a. 2ae Qu. 2. de Fide. cap. 2. and speciall Articles of the Faith. William Paris termes them the Fundatories of Religion. Others stile them Radicall Truths. But although these first, Fundatory, and Radicall Doctrines of the Christian Religion, may beget, and bring forth a great, un­certaine, and numerous of-spring of Consequence [...] arising from, and fol­lowing after [...]m; yet it beares no pro­portion with reason, that they in them­selves, should [...] many, or uncer­taine. When therefore wee behold, [Page 63]that to these First credibles of the Di­vine Essence, and Attributes of the In­comprehensible Trinity, of the Hypo­statical Union of two Natures in Christ, of the Cómunication of his Properties, and almost of every Object of Know­ledge in Divinity, there is annexed so great a traine of severall points, as thick Volumes are not able to containe them, it is most certainely sure that the grea­test part of them is not Fundamentall. All Christians ought to heare the Coun­sell of Learned Nazianzen, Orat. de Modest. observ. in D sp. Contemplate (saith he) on Divine things, but stay stil in the Termes. Speake the Phrases and Language of the Spirit, and if it be pos­sible, nothing else. Do not thou curiou­sly pry, thorow those narrow rifts into the Nature of the Father, the Essence of the only begotten Sonne, the Glory of the Holy Ghost, and one God in three Per­sons. Ʋse the words accustomed, the reason of them belongs to those that are Wiser to inquire. Let it satisfie thee that thou hast the Foundation, and let alone to Ar­tificers to build thereupon. Would to God only Artificers would build upon them; would to God they would not [Page 64]mingle their many, and almost infinite superstructures, with the few, and plaine Fundamentals, to bee embraced with equall affections, and to bee re­ceived with honour alike. If they en­deavour thus to do; yet it becomes all pious and prudent Christians to discerne and make a difference betwixt those first, and few things to bee beleeved, immediately revealed by Christ, and his Apostles, and those numberlesse deductions of Divines, which they, ac­cording to their severall minds and o­pinions, seeke to thrust, and crowd into the same roome with Funda­mentals.

Fiftly, it is no Fundamentall point, which though furbished and attired in new termes, is not the same in effect, with the Doctrine expressed in the words of the Holy Scripture. For if the addition of our new coyned words, importeth any thing more than what is in the Scripture, this new accession may bee allowed for a consequent of the Fundamentall Doctrine, but it cannot with this new peece bee urged for a di­rect, downeright Fundamentall Do­ctrine. [Page 65]But if the new word, or the addition therein, for matter of the Sense of the Proposition, brings no new thing at all, but so that under­standing the Termes, the effect of both appeares to be the same, then wee ac­knowledge both to bee Fundamentall. For the disserence of the expression, al­ters not the nature of a Fundamentall Doctrine, where the essence and meaning of the Proposition, remaines the same. What wee have said some­what obscurely, we will make plaine by an example.

Christ is God, and the Sonne of God.

This is a Fundamentall Point, and so also is this,

Christ is coessentiall with God, his e­ternall Father.

For although in the latter, there is a new Terme, yet it addes no new thing, nor affirmes any thing, which will cause the cumberance of a toilesome de­duction, to extract it out of the former; but whosoever understandeth the termes of both, presently understands, that they agree so well, as in sense they are [Page 66]the same. For no man of sound sense can have a conceit of diverse Gods in the same Essence, or substance. But if the Doctrine or Proposition, deck't in forraign Termes and new language, can­not bee annexed to a plaine and cleare Fundamentall Article, without a busie and artificiall deducing of it, it ought not to bee inserted into the Catalogue of Fundamentals. Indeed those which perceive the force of the Consequence, or Deduction, are bound to afford beliefe to such Consectaries. But they, to whom it doth not sufficiently appeare, that such a Proposition followeth from any Fundamentall point, they are not bound to embrace it for a tried Truth, much lesse for such a Doctrine, without which no hope is left to obtaine Salva­tion. To conclude in a word, As of­ten as it is inquired, whether any Do­ctrine bee Fundamentall or no; let us not give heed to the clamours of Di­sputants, But have recourse to those Notes, which now wee have reckoned up. If the Doctrines they presse on us, bee not clearely recommended by the Apostles themselves to the Catholique [Page 67]Church, in the first preaching of the Gospell, if in succeeding Ages they were not Universally received, if they bee not suited to the capacity of simple Christians, but only fitted to the braines of Philosophers, and Logicians, if they bee too many, and not comprised with­in certaine bounds: Lastly, if expres­sed in such formes of Speech, that they cannot bee reduced to an equivalent sense, with a cleare and of all confessed Fundamentall Article, sometimes they may bee Truthes, but they can never be [...] counted Fundamentals.

CHAP. Chap. 7 VII. Of the Summe of Fundamentall points, contained in the Creed, and Comman­dements, so farre as wee ought to Be­leeve, or Practise.

MANY of the Papists, and somme of ours, when we maintaine that the difference betwixt the Reformed Chur­ches, is not about Fundamentals, present­ly require of us, to bring in a Bill, and set forth an acurate Catalogue of Fun­damentals; so that we may say, so many Fundamentals there be of the Christian Faith, neither more nor lesse. We easily answer the Papists, that it were presum­ption in Protestants, who confesse them­selves subject to errour, to undertake so hard a Taske: let Papists rather addresse themselves to the Pope of Rome, who alone can speake Oracles, and is said to have all Laws, Humane and Divine, lockt up in the Closet of his Brest.

But if any of our men shall earnestly maintaine, that unlesse this first be done, no Brotherly love, can be renewed be­twixt [Page 69]the Protestant Churches, let him try, (which is somewhat more easie) if he can but only reduce the Propositions in Controversie, which he desires should be Fundamentall, to a certain and stinted number. If he shrinkes to do this, let him not blame the backwardnesse of o­thers in the same matter. Although it be not hard to show the reasons, why the Fundamentall Points, can scarce, or not at all, to be brought to a set number. First of al, that which hinders is this, that according to the diverse conceits of di­verse men, the formes of Propositions are altered, and one Divine breaks that into two, which another makes up into one Proposition. Hence of necessity must arise an uncertainty of their number. Which wee see to have happened in the very Articles of the Creed, Aqu [...]n. 2. 2. quaest. 1. a [...]an co [...]p. which Di­vines commonly count to be twelve, and yet some reckon them up fourteen. What shall I say? that as yet, Divines are not well agreed amongst themselves, of the very distinction, of a Fundamentall point. Some restraine this name to those Doctrines alone, which with an expresse Faith, are to be beleeved of all Christians [Page 70]to the obtaining of Salvation and eternal life by Christ, and this I professe to bee mine opinion. Yet are there some most learned and famous Divines, which terme all Propositions Fundamental Do­ctrines, which they themselves by good, and strong Consequence, inferre out of the former Fundamentals, although few or none bee found in their neighbouring Churches, who plainely perceive the Truth of these Consequences. Many things deterre me from being of this o­pinion, but this most especially, that this would bee a necessary and everlasting cause, of an unnecessary and everlasting Rent betwixt the Churches of Christ. Lastly, there never were, nor will bee wanting some, who will require that it may bee reckoned amongst the Funda­mentals, whatsoever themselves unlear­nedly and erroneously dreame, that they have digged and drawn out of the Word of God. And these for the most part are those hatefull and troublesome Brawlers, who presently give out the Alarum, that the Foundations of Religion are pluckt up from the very roots, if any dare shake their imaginary Fundamentals. Whilst [Page 71]the very nature and definition of a Fun­damentall Doctrine flotes in this man­ner, it is no more impossible to count the waves of the Sea, than it is percisely to define the set, and certaine number of Fundamentall Doctrines, ebbing and flowing according to mens severall opi­nions.

But least I might seeme wholly to wave and decline the marking out of Fundamentall Doctrines, I will shew plainely what was the opinion both of Ancient and Moderne Divines in this matter, by publique producing of their testimonies.

As touching things to be beleeved, all Foundations of the Christian Faith, are comprised in the Apostles Creed, nei­ther shall he, who from his heart profes­seth that he affordeth beliefe to all, and every thing therein contained, be defici­ent in any thing (so farre as concernes things to be beleeved) to the partaking of Salvation in Christ, and retaining of Communion with the brethren of Christ. Now let us see how honourably the ancient Fathers did both thinke and speake of this Creed.

Irenaeus saith, That the Church disper­sed thorow the whole World received this Faith from the Apostles, Lib. 1. cap. 2, 3. and carefully kept it, so that by consent in this Faith, they as it were dwell all in one house, and have one heart. And hee sheweth that this Faith, doth suffice for the Ʋnity of all Churches together amongst themselves, as the Dutch, Spanish, French, Easterne, Egyptian, Lybian, in a word all Christian Churches. Irreforma­b [...]em, lib. de Virgin. velan. Tertullian calleth this Creed, the one Rule of Faith, sole, immoveable, and which need not, or may not be altered, or reformed. Hilary tyred with the con­tentions of the Arians, takes breath with this speech: Ad Conslat. August. It is most safe for us to retaine the first and sole Evangelicall Faith, Confessed and Ʋnderstood in our Baptism.

Augustine cals this Creed the com­prehension and Perfection of our Faith▪ Tom. 10. de temp Serm. 2. Dom [...]. in Ramis pal­mar. pag. 849. & Serm. 131. adding with all, that it is plaine, short, and full; so that the plainenesse doth provide and take order to helpe the homelinesse of simple Auditours: The shortnesse easeth the memory, and the fulnesse compriseth all Doctrine. In another place he cals it the certain rule of Faith, by which Beleevers [Page 73]may hold the Catholique Truth, and by which they may convince all hereticall wic­kednesse. Russinus saith, Exposit. in the Creed. that this Creed may also be called the Triall, or Touch­stone; if we meet a man we doubt of, do but examine him by this Creed, and he will pre­sently discover himselfe, whether he be a foe or a Friend. Lastly, Serm of the Creed. Maximus Tauri­nensis writes, that the Apostles did deliver the mystery of Faith to the Church of God, that because there was to be diversity of Beleevers under the one name of Christ, the privy signet of the Creed should distin­guish the Faithfull from the Ʋnbelee­vers.

Come we now to see, what was the Schoolmens Judgement of this Creed, Alexander of Hales brings this reason, why the Creed was composed, Parte. 3. quae [...]. 69. m [...]mb 2. That it might be the Instruction of the Faithfull, in one Ʋnderstanding and Confession of the Truth, and Devotion of Religion, in which the nature of Man is to obtaine blessednes. Somewhat after, To instruct in the Faith, was the cause of making the Apostles Creed, for to this purpose was it composed, that the Faithfull might be taught in one Faith, to beleeve all things necessary to [Page 74]Salvation. Aquinas determines, that as touching these first believables, 2.2. quaest. 2. art. 5. in corp. whith are the Articles of the Faith, every one is bound explicitely to beleeve them; but as concerning other believables, he is bound only implicitely to beleeve them, and in the Preparation of his mind, that is, having his Heart in readinesse to imbrace them, when it shall appeare to him, that they are con­tained in the Doctrin of the Faith. Bona­venture saith, Sent. l. 3. dist. 25 qu. 1. in conclu. resp [...]ad 2. When it is demanded, whe­ther the Doctrin of the Faith be sufficient­ly contained in the Apostles Creed, we may answer, that if we speak of the Doctrin of Faith, in respect to those things, which therein are most principall and proper, they are sufficiently contained in the Creed. Neither is there any thing to be beleeved, which may not be reduced to the Articles contained in the Creed, as the principles and stable foundations. I passe other Schoole­men, because it is their generall judge­ment, that the plaine and unfolded be­liefe of the Apostles Creed, is enough for Common Christians, for the attain­ing of Salvation; though a greater mea­sure of Knowledge bee required from men of greater Learning. Whence the [Page 75]Master of the Sentences, after hee had concluded, Sent. lib 3. dist. 25. That in the time of Grace all things ought to be beleeved, which are con­tained in the Creeds; afterwards hee ad­deth, that it is one thing to know only what a Man ought to beleeve, to obtaine eternall lift, and another to know how the same may be maintained, and defended against wicked men opposing it, which Knowledge many Faithfull men cannot skill of, and yet they excell most in Faith it selfe.

Nor doe the modern Papists, differ herein from the Schoolmen. Let the Fathers of Trent speake. Ses [...]ion. 3. The Apostles Creed is that Principle, in which all that professe the Faith of Christ do necessarily agree, and it is that firme and only foundation, against which the gates of Hell shall never prevaile. And in the very Catechism of the Council of Trent, this Creed is called, Pag. 14. The short forme of the Christian Faith, and Hope, the summe and foundation of Truth, first, and necessarily to be beleeved of all. Canifius affirmes, That the words in the Creed tend to this purpose, that we may have the true Know­ledge of God and Heavenly things, which is necessary to every man towards the lead­ing [Page 76]of a godly and happy life, comprised, in briefe abridgement. James Baius cals it the rule of the Christian faith, prescribed to all Beleevers, because by this common Profession of the faith, those of the same houshold, and brethren, are distinguished from their Enemies.

Out of which testimonies we gather, that it was the generall opinion of Di­vines, that all Fundamentall Doctrines of the Christian Faith, necessary with the necessity of the meanes to the Salvation of men, were comprehended in the Creed, so that none shall perish, for meer ignorance of God and Christ, who give an explicite Faith to these things. Yet we say not, that besides these few Fun­damentals, Christians should make no account of all other Doctrines, which are placed in the Holy Scriptures. Yea all Pastors and Doctors are bound by the ne­cessity of the Precept, to further the perfe­cting of the Saints, and edifying of the Body of Christ, Eph. 4.11, 12. till we all come into the unity of the Faith, and of the Knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect Man. The people themselves also are bound, where ability and opportunity is afforded them, to [Page 77]grow unto the riches of the full assurance of Ʋnderstanding, Col. 2.2. to the acknowledgement of the Mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ. But neither Doctours of Particular Churches, nor Christians li­ving in them, are bound to break off the band of Brotherly Communion with other Churches, which embrace this Summe of the Christian Faith in that sense, wherein the Catholique Church, always received it, and professe them­selves enemies to all Heresies that over­throw the same.

Now as we have set downe the Apo­stles Creed, for the briefe of Fundamen­tals pertaining to the saving Mysteries of Faith, so wee acknowledge the Deca­logue as the Symbole and Summe of all things to be done, as touching duties due to the worship of God, and offices of Charity which wee owe to our Neigh­bour. For wee may fitly enough call Fundamentall Doctrines, not only those Mysteries of Faith, whose explained Knowledge is altogether necessary to the Salvation of Christians: but also those Doctates of the Divine Law, which if we know not at all, we cannot wor­ship [Page 78]God as we ought to the obtaining of Salvation. In this sense we terme the Decalogue the Summe of things to bee done, even as wee styled the other (of which we have spoken before) the Sum of things to be beleeved. For the meere speculative Knowledge of the Divine Mysteries, without the practicall know­ledge of the Divine Mandats, can bring none to blessednesse.

Therefore, Luth. Tom. 1. in disp. p. 406. Philip. pag. 436. the teaching of Gods Law in Churches, is plainly necessary, and al­together to be retained, without which Christ cannot be retained. For to this Law not only our corporall life, but also our spirituall life ought to bee subjected. Now those things which are propoun­ded in this Law of God are so fundamen­tall, that they cannot be broken without the guilt of death, nor opposed and de­nyed without the staine of Heresie.

The Fundamentals of the Creed aime at this end, that we may know God and Christ to eternall Life, as either hath re­vealed himselfe: The Fundamentals of the Decalogue drive at this; That wee may worship both as they have com­manded themselves to be worshipped. [Page 79]If any overthrow the Fundamentals of Gods worship, he is shut out from Salva­tion, as much as if hee had overturned the Mysteries of Faith. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God? Be not deceived, Aquin. quaest. disp. de superb. art. 4. neither fornica­tors, nor Idolaters, nor Adulterers, &c. As if the Apostle had said, It is no lesse damnable to erre in these morall, than in speculative principles. For the corru­ption of ones opinion, about those things which pertaine to manners, may make an Heretique, no lesse than about those things which pertaine to Faith, if it be in any Universall Principle of Gods Law. Hee that beleeves he may worship many Gods, or adore the true God in an Image made with hands, that is of the opinion that theft or fornication are things law­full, grates upon a Fundamentall Do­ctrine, and runs into a deadly, and dan­gerous Heresie. For the practicall di­ctate, which is included in every man­date of the Law is a Fundamentall truth, and ought equally to bee beleeved as an Article of the Creed, in speculative things. If any man therefore should beleeve, or teach that our Parents are [Page 80]not to be honoured, or any thing else a­gainst a Commandement of God, al­though he reverenceth his Parents with due honour, or keepes that Comman­dement himselfe, yet should hee bee an Hetetique, and justly to bee accused for overturning a Foundation of Faith. Let the Church of Rome, therefore looke to it, which boasteth that the Founda­tions of the Christian Faith hitherto have been preserved chiefly by her care, whether or no she hath not grosly, and damnably erred in the Fundamentals of the Decalogue; to say nothing of her o­ther errors.

Now if any will adde unto the Fun­damentall Doctrines of the Creed and Commandements, the Doctrine also of the Sacraments clearely revealed in the Gospell, I am not against it: provided on this condition, that as they shall not all passe for fundamentals, which Divines endeavour to build upon the funda­mentall Articles of the Creed, but that those only bee counted fundamentall, which are necessary for all to know and beleeve to Salvation: So also in the matter of the Sacraments, every thing [Page 81]shall not presently bee a Fundamentall, which may bee disputed about the Sa­craments, or gathered by the occasion of the Words which Christ spake; but whatsoever Christ hath so set down, and established, that it is absolutely necessary to the receiving of Grace and Salvation in the use of the Sacraments. As con­cerning the Sacrament of Baptisme, it is a Fundamentall Doctrine, that Christi­ans must be Baptized in the Name of the most Holy Trinity, that they may bee grafted into Christ. Now they that be­leeve, and doe this, retaine the Funda­mentall doctrine of Baptisme, although it may happen that the same men may in their minds conceive some false opinions of Baptisme, or mingle some vaine and uselesse rites in the Administration there­of. So in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, this is a Fundamentall Doctrine, That it must bee celebrated in bread and wine; that therein the memory of Christs Passion is ever to be renewed; that Christians in that Sacrament have not only an empty, 1 Cor. 10.6. or shadowy repre­sentation of Christ crucified, but do truly, really, and savingly partake of the body of [Page 82]Christ. Hee that beleeves all things soundly, and sufficiently, embraceth the Fundamentall Doctrine of this Sacra­ment, to the sucking of Grace out of it; Although those difficult questions tos­sed and tumbled betwixt Divines, about the manner of the Presence and eating of Christ, never came into his head, much lesse did he give his consent to one side, or other.

To this threefold kind of Fundamen­tals; Whereof the first is seen in the Creed: The second, in the Comman­dements: The third, in the Sacraments of Baptisme, and the Lords Supper: We may adde a fourth, contained in the Lords Prayer. For seeing, invocation or Prayer is a duty belonging to the worship of God, absolutely necessary for the obtaining of Grace, and Salva­tion, it must needs have certaine funda­mentals, which being unknowne, or slighted, it becomes of no moment, but is effectuall if they be retained and ob­served. This is a fundamentall point: God alone is to be invoked by Religious Prayer, he is to be called upon through his Son our Mediator, trusting on whom [Page 83]we call him Our Father: He is to bee Prayed unto for all good things wee want; but chiefly for Grace, Pardon, and Glory, which we most stand in need of. Lastly, he is to bee prayed unto in Faith, Charity, and a good Conscience. He that contradicts these things is a slat Heretique, and perverts the fundamen­tals in the duty of Prayer.

That these foure things, which wee have touched are alone to be accounted Fundamentals of the Christian Religi­on, seemes to me plainly to appeare out of the practice of the Apostles themselvs and Primitive Church, well known un­to all. For they have judged no parti­cular Church to have cast away the Fun­damentall points of saving Faith, or to have fallen off from the Communion of the Catholique Church, who holily pro­fesse the faith in the Creed, and obedi­ence to the Commandements, who ad­ministred the Sacraments according to Christs Institution, and called upon God in the Name of Christ. For they con­ceived them to deserve an admonition for their errors of lighter moment, but would therefore cut off no particular [Page 84]Churches, Chap. 8 called by the Name of Christ, from the body of the Catholique Church.

CHAP. VIII. That Brotherly Communion is to be kept betwixt the Protestant Churches, is pro­ved by Reasons drawne from the Com­munion which they have in Jesus Christ, the only Personall Founda­tion.

FORASMUCH as this one thing is the greatest hinderance of setling agree­ment betwixt Protestant Churches, that some learned and godly men conceive that such a Brotherly agreement and Communion is altogether unlawfull, we to our ability shall endeavour to shew, that this Communion of particular Churches amongst themselves, is not only lawfull, but acceptable to God, and necessary to themselves. For the pro­ving whereof, long since wee have laid our foundations, in those things, which [Page 85]were largely discussed, concerning the personall Foundation and the foundati­ons Ministeriall, and Doctrinall.

This one thing remaines, that we call our Reasons, which are scattered and dispersed thorough this whole discourse, to come in to their colours, that they may present themselves at one view. We will begin (as it is fit) from those Rea­sons, which flow from the considerati­on of that one foundation Jesus Christ, our Saviour, to whom all dostick, and from whome all Good, Temporall, Spi­rituall, and Eternall, is derived to all Re­formed Churches.

With those Churches it is fitting to retaine Brotherly Communion, Reason. 1 which we will not deny but that they retaine Conjunction and Communion with Christ, the Head and Foundation of the holy Catholique Church: Yea, except we will yeeld and confesse our selves to bee estranged from the body of Christ, we cannot but be their Brethren, who are esteemed to hold brotherly Com­munion with Christ our elder Brother. For the band of holy Brotherhood be­twixt the Churches themselves, cannot [Page 86]be broken at mens pleasures, except they be also broken betwixt them and Christ, who is the head of all Churches. If the Saxon count the Helvetian or Helvetian the Saxon Churches, so alienated, and torne asunder from Christ, by their er­rors, that they are neither founded in Christ, nor by Christ the Elder Brother, taken into the brotherly society of fel­low-members, then they may pretend some reason, why they renounce com­munion with them. But if in no wise they dare affirme this, wee cannot have just cause to disclaime Brotherly Com­munion with those, whom Christ him­selfe blusheth not to owne, and call his Brethren. August. E­pist. 162. It was the peevish froward­nesse of the Donatists, neither to receive from other Churches any letters impor­ting a Communion, nor to acknowledge any right of Brotherhood with them. But in the meane time what did the Or­thodox Churches? Out of Augustine wee may learne it, in whome wee read, That the Donatists angry for this thing, Contra Do­nat. post. Coll. cap. 35 were notwithstanding by the Orthodox ac­knowledged for Brethren. The same also appeares out of Optatus Milevitanus, [Page 87]who thought, That the name of Brother­hood was not to be denied unto them, Yea, De schism. Donat. lib. 1. in initio, lib 4. in initio. thought it an impious act to suppresse, or conceale the name of Brethren. Either therefore it must be justified, that some Protestant Churches have lost their con­junction with Christ the Foundation of the Church, and forfeited their Bro­therly Communion with Christ their Elder Brother, or else we must not de­part from Brotherly Society with them.

In the second place wee argue from most certain Signes and Markes, 2. Reason. whence we may and ought to be perswaded, that this or that Church, is conjoyned to Christ the corner stone; for from the same notes we may conclude, that other Churches are bound and obliged, not to separate themselves from the same. They therefore which want not the know­ledge of God and Christ, necessary to eternall life, who have true Faith, true Repentance, and true Endeavour after a New life, and holy obedience, to such we ought to grant, that they enjoy a sa­ving conjunction with Christ their foun­dation. But none (for ought I know) as [Page 88]yet is found, which hath given this bloo­dy Sentence, That in this or that Prote­stant Church there is not so much know­ledge of God, and Christ, as sufficeth to Salvation; That there is not in it, the ordinary Justification of Christians by Faith; That there is not the earnest ex­ercise of Repentance, and endeavour af­ter New Life. But if all these things agree to all Protestant Churches, it is manifest that they remaine conjoyned with their Head and Foundation; not lesse manifest, that they have inward Brotherly Communion and ought to have outward with all the members of Christ, Rom. 12.5 For we being many are one body with Christ, and every one, one anothers members. From the connexion with this foundation depends and followes of ne­cessity the connection and communion, betwixt severall Churches and private single persons, 1 Cor. 12.12. Eph. 4.16. except were account no credit to be given to the Apostle.

Of every single man, Reason. 3 and much more of every single Church, we must presume well, till the contrary doth apeare. Ther­fore the Churches of Saxony are bound to presume, that those of Swizerland do [Page 89]adhere to Christ their foundation, till they can prove it to bee otherwise, by some evident, or at least wiseprobable reason: Now they are so far from being able to prove their Separation from Christ, that most evident Reasons and of Proofe against any doubt, present them­selves to the eyes and hearts of all, that they are savingly united with Christ, Eph. 4.5, 6. who hold this One Lord, one Faith, one Baptisme? Who duely worship, one God and Father of all, who is above all? Either these things ought to suffice, that Chur­ches bee carefull to keepe betwixt them, the unity of the Spirit, in the bond of Peace, Eph. 4.3. or Paul the Apostle knew not, what might availe to the soddering of this uni­ty together.

If any object, that the Churches of Switzerland are not sound in the point of the presence of Christs body in the Eu­charist, in the manner of the eating of it, in the Communication of Christs pro­perties, and in many other heads of Knowledge in Divinity; I would aske of him but this one thing (for here is no place to dispute of these matters) whe­ther hee conceives these errours to be of [Page 90]such moment, that they pluck up the er­ring Church from its foundation, so that they suffer it not to have the same Lord, the same Faith, the same Baptisme, the same God and Father, of whom the A­postle speaketh? If hee dare not affirme this, the Churches may object to those, who deny to entertaine Brotherly Communion with them, De Schis­mat. Donat: lib. 4. in initio. that of Optatus Milevitanus, You will not keep and hold peace with us, that is with your Brethren, whom one Mother Church bred in the same bowels of the Sacraments, whom God the Father in the same manner received to be his adopted sons. But if any shall stil pro­ceed to distract, and rend asunder those Churches, which are conjoyned in this personall foundation, we conceive those words of Isayah fit to be objected against him, Destroy them not, for a blessing is in them. Esay. 65.8

We may draw a strong argument from the practice of the Apostles, Reason. 4 to be used a­gainst those who think the Brotherly Communion betwixt Churches may be dissolved, for the errours of particular persons. For the Apostles did never so much as offer this, they never divided a­sunder [Page 91]or clasht together whole Chur­ches, which did stick to Christ the foun­dation of mans salvation, taking advan­tage of the occasion or pretence of their errors whatsoever. It is well known that there were divers errours brought into the Churches of Corinth and Galatia, it is well knowne that they were maintai­ned of great men and of great account; and yet Paul never went about to per­swade the purer and sounder Churches of the Ephesians, Philippians and Collossians, not to retaine Brotherly Communion with those Churches more impure. 1 Cor. 1.2. Gal. 1.3. & 5, 11. & 6, 18. Yea morover he acknowledgeth those Chur­ches which are full of errors and troubles for the Sanctified Churches of Christ, nor disdaineth he to grace and honour those that erred and were deceived with the name of Brethren. Indeed it is never lawfull for us, to approve and allow those errours which are scattered in other Churches, but it is ever lawfull for us, to professe Brotherly communion with the Congregations of particular Churches, whilst they professe and retaine saving u­nion with Christ the Foundation of the Catholique Church. Even as the good [Page 92]ought not otherwise to be separated from the evill in the Catolique Church, Aug. de Fide, ad Pet. Diaco. cap. 43. than by the difference of their works; So Churches which are sound in any point, ought not to be separated from those which are erroneous save only by their dis-agreeing from their errors. Tom. 4. de fide & ope. To desire by the gulfe of wicked Schismes, to part the good from the bad, is rather the rashnesse of men, which be mad, than the strictnesse of those, which are dili­gent, saith Augustin. Now we say, It savours more of rashnesse, than care of the truth, by wicked Schismes, to desire to part the not erring Churches, from those which be erronious. Piety commands us to depart from those heretiques, who o­verturne the very Foundation, because this is necessary. But Charity forbids us, by unjust dissentions to start asunder from those erring Churches, who stick to the foundation, because this is Schismaticall.

Betwixt particular Churches all those offices should be performed, Reason. 5 which tend to the mutuall edification, and nothing to the destruction of the body of Christ. I confesse it partaines to edification, for us to shew wandring Churches their er­rors; but I maintaine it tends to their [Page 93]destruction, that those Churches which we confesse remaine conjoyned to the very foundation, wee should disjoyne them for any errors they defend. For it was never heard spoken, that one Church brought backe another into the way of truth, or joyned it closer to Christ by raylings, revilings, cursings, and renoun­cing of Brotherly Communion. The counsels must be more mild, and plaisters more lenitive, which must be applied to the healing of an erroneous, and setling of a shaken Church. As for these intenti­ons and decrees of separation and break­ing off Communion, they have not only hither to been vaine and uselesse, but also mischievous, and much more forcible to the disturbing, than building up of the Churches. If therefore any Church be not as yet pluckt asunder from its Foun­dation, it belongs to the neighbouring Churches to restore such a one in the Spi­rit of meeknesse, Gal. 6.1. and not with hostile cru­clty to cut them off and cast them a­way.

They who are founded in the same Christ, Reas 6 and rooted to the partaking of E­ternall life, ought to be founded and roo­ted [Page 94]in mutuall Charity: but no Prote­stant will deny, but that the Protestant Churches are founded in the same Christ our Lord and Saviour: It ought there­fore to be well weighed and considered, whether the office and nature of Charity it selfe, doth not wholy detest this, to make an endlesse Schisme, and rent be­twixt Churches, for some diversity of o­pinions. It was Augustine's judgement, that Christian Charity could not be kept, Contr. lit. Petiliani, li. 2. c. 77. & contra. Do­nat. 1.15. c. & ibid. cap. 12. except in the unity of the Church, and that those who persist in discord belong to the lot and portion of Ismael. For who will say that there is not brotherly ha­tred in a Schisme, when there is no other Originall and obstinate persisting in a Schisme but brotherly hatred? Most sure it is that the proper duties of Chari­ty cannot appeare, and shew themselves in these differences of the Protestant Churches. I appeale to the Apostle himselfe for my witnesse, Rom. 12.9, 10, 11, Ioh. 13.35 1 Ioh. 3.14. 1 Cor. 13.1, 2. &c. 1 Cor. 13.5, 6, 7, &c. If we grant those Churches which wee conceive somewhat to erre in the Faith, yet to be sanctified and preserved in Christ, the foundation of the Church, our Faith [Page 95]though something the sounder, Chap. 9 will lit­tle availe us, August. de Bapt. contr. Denat. lib. 1 cap. 8. if our Charity be wanting towards all the Saints: For, saving Faith cannot bee, unlesse conjoyned with Charity or Brotherly love, as the Scriptures, every where doe witnesse. For what shall a mans sound Faith profit him, where the soundnesse of his Charity is baned with the deadly wound of Schisme.

CHAP. IX. That Brotherly Communion betwixt the Protestant Churches, is not to be broken off, for their divers opinions about que­stions in Controversy, is proved by Ar­guments, drawn from the want of law­full power in Ministers to cause such a breach or dissolution.

NONE can be ignorant, but that at the first, the very Doctors and Ministers of the Chur­ches were the chiefe, yea the sole Authours of this Separation, which we so desire [Page 96]may be taken away. For it is not to be doubted, but they alone are the hinderance, why the Reformed Chur­ches, though by wofull experience, they have found the numberlesse dis­commodities of this long lasting dis­sention, yet they will not amongst themselves renew the Charter of their Brotherly Communion. For if it see­med good to their Doctors, to give each to other the right hands of bro­therly fellowship, in this selfe same houre we should see the Churches mu­tually embracing one another. There­fore let us see whether they have done, or now doe rightly, who either have perswaded, that the bands of Brotherly Communion betwixt the Protestant Churches should be broken, or earnest­ly maintaine, that for the present they ought not to be renewed againe. We are of the contrary opinion, being induced thereunto by these Argu­ments.

It is not in the power of the Mini­sters of any particular Church, Reas. 1 to se­parate, or cut off another particular Church, from the brotherly Commu­nion, [Page 97]which it hath with the Catho­lique; therefore neither from that which it hath with any part of the Ca­tholique Church, and by the same rea­son, not from the brotherly Communi­on which it ought to have with it selfe, unlesse she will confesse her selfe to be no part of the Catholique Church. The truth of the Antecedent seems therefore plaine to me, because all just and lawfull seperation of every mem­ber from its body Catholique, ought to leane, and rely on the authority of the Catholique Church: for one member hath not this judiciary power over another. It is a known Rule of Lawyers, A sentence given by him that is not his Judge, is voyd in Law: But par­ticular Churches are not the Judges of private persons living in forreign chur­ches; how much lesse then over the Churches themselves? If therefore any Church should pronounce another to be disjoynted from the Communion with the Catholique, Her sentence were to be sleighted, and contemned, as of a Judge that presumed to make laws out of the bounds of his owne Juris­diction. [Page 98]But perchance, they who ea­sily grant the Antecedent of our Ar­gument, will yet doubt of the Con­sequent, and set downe, that one part of the Catholique Church may cast off another part thereof (that is, one parti­cular Church, may separate another particular Church) from Brotherly Communion with her selfe, by the power of her own private sentence and authority. I deny, that any particu­lar Church, hath any lawfull power to dissolve Christian Brotherhood with any other, except so farre forth as the separation rely on the Authority of the Catholique Church, which one claspes and containes within her em­braces the Churches of all Nations. Now this separation relyes on this au­thority, so often as it is made for those points which are so established by the judgement of the Catholique Church, that they are to bee counted shut out from the cōmunion of faithfull Christi­ans, who are known to oppose or deny them. Trusting on this authority, we justly deny brotherly Communion to those Churches, which falsely, and [Page 99]equivocally are entitled with the name of Christ, who with joy and jeering, hisse out the Divinity of Christ; Who carpe at the mystery of the Trinity, which is to be adored, or with sacri­legious boldnesse overthrow any foun­dation of the Christian Faith; For all these things have been passed for things judged on, and that by the well known and famous authority of the Apostolike and Catholike Church. But this sepa­ration is not made rightly, nor accor­ding to the custome of the Catholike Church, as often as one particular Church, shall deny Brotherly Commu­nion to another, for dissenting from them in questions newly risen, and never determined on one side or other, by the authority of the Catholike Church, as points of the Catholike Faith. For no Church can at its own pleasure breake off the Band of Brotherly Com­munion, by which all the members of the Catholike Church are coupled together, with any particular Church, but that with the selfe same Deed, shee divides her selfe from the body of the Catholike Church, in which those [Page 100]members can have no being, which have lost their due joynting and Union with their fellow members. We will conclude this argument with the Testi­mony of Augustine, who every where teacheth, Tom. 3. de side ad Petr. Diac. cap. 43. that this Separation of the good from the evill, being within the Catholike Church is unlawfull, and they which en­deavour, to pluck other members from the joynting of the body; doe rather separate themselves from the Ʋnity of Christ. Tom. 4. de side & oper. cap. 4 & 5. Last­ly, it nothing hurteth, or hindereth those that are good, that they abide still in Ʋnity and participation of the Sacraments with those, whose Deeds they disallow, Neither with those, whose opinions they cannot approve. For, if we will beleeve the same Augustine, they cannot be excused of unlawfull presumption, who too much loving their own judgement, ar­rive at such an height of boldnesse, as to cut off Communion with others. Tom. 7. de Bant. contra Don. For they neither ought, nor can be cut off from communion with particular Churches, which remaine conjoyned with the Catholike Church.

Particular Churches ought not in our age, Reas. 2 to challenge that to them­selves, [Page 101]which none ever durst to do in the time of the Apostles; The Ministers of the Churches ought not to urge that, which the Apostles themselves durst ne­ver perswade to be done: But that one particular Church should renounce all Brotherly communion with another, is a thing altogether unheard off, & who­ly swerving from the prudence, and pra­ctice of the Apostles. Amongst the seven Churches, to which S. John wrote; Revel. 2.3. It is plaine there were some infected with errours: from which others were free, Yet those Churches which were the pu­rer, did entertain Christian & brotherly Communion with those which were more impure; & the Apostle perswaded each of them to amend their own faults and errours, but gave counsell to none on the pretence of vices, & errors to start a sunder from other. For as in the natu­rall body, the parts which are well in health and strength, endeavour to cure, not to cut off those that are sick and weake: so in the Mysticall body of the Catholike Church, if any be more pure, and sound than others, they are bound (as much as lyes in their power) [Page 102]to heale the vices, and errors of others' and not to deny Brotherly Communi­on to whole Churches. Hither it may be added, that this denying of Brother­ly Communion, may seem to have the kind, & force of an Excommunication; which censure is not to be drawn, and used of the Ministers of the Church, for every fault, or for every Error, no not upon a single person, subject to their Ministery; Decret. 6. de sent. Exc. but much lesse on the whole bo­dy of a Church, which in no wise is sub­ordinate unto them. For as the Lawes forbid to Excommunicate a Society, or Corporation, because it may happen, that then those that are inocent may be entangled in that censure: so right and religion forbids to exclude whol Chur­ches from the Communion of the faith­full, because this cannot be done with­out an injury, & contempt to many, that be innocent. If any should determine, that communion should have been de­nied to the whole Church of Israel, be­cause of their worshipping of Baal, be­sides that be should exercise an act go­ing beyond the bounds of his Ministe­riall power, he should have offered an [Page 103]high wrong, and injury to those seven thousand men, who never bowed knee to Baal. If any should say, that this denying of Brotherly Communion, which we disswade from, is not the Excommunication of an whole commonalty, such as the Laws respect, and take notice of; I confesse there is some difference betwixt these two; yet I deny it to be of so great moment, that it should make that lawfull in the one case, which is not lawfull in the other. Indeed Excommunication, properly so called, is the act of a law­full Judge, which passeth and layeth hold on those, which are subject unto him, and bindeth them, though a­gainst their own wils: But this renoun­cing of brotherly communion, where­of we speake, is an act of one judging only of persons, not at all subject unto him, and declaring them unworthy of all brotherly Communion, and there­fore driving, and repelling them from the same, although they desire it. By what name so ever any please to call, this repulse of other Churches from brotherly communion, it doth them [Page 104]a great wrong and disgrace; for it ad­judges them unworthy of the honour of Brotherhood, which Christ our elder Brother, disdaines not to bestow upon them. Ministers therefore of Churches ought not so much as to thinke, of shut­ting out whole Churches from the communion with them, and theirs: It would be enough, to cast off single per­sons, desiring fellowship with them, then at last, when it shall appeare, that they are stained with so hainous sinnes, or wrapped in so mischievous errours, as that by good right, they may and ought to be driven and banished from the communion with all the Faithfull.

The Ministers of particular Chur­ches, Reas. 3(put case of Saxony or Switzer­land) ought not to deale harder with ther Christian Brethren of other Churches, in granting or refusing com­munion with them, than they deale with their owne. For the Christian Brotherhood, which is betwixt the members of Christ, is not altered ac­cording to the variety of Places or Na­tions. But we call not our owne to a strick account, what they conceive of [Page 150]the Articles in controversie, and to what Doctors they stick therein, but esteem it sufficient, to the right of com­munion, if together with us they hold and professe the Fundamentall Do­ctines of Christianity, comprised in the Catechisme, and adhere unto Christ. Wee should use the same moderation, and equall dealing towards forraigne Churches, especially to the very body of Churches, which for the most part, is made up of simple and unskilfull Christians, for whom it is not needfull, that they should have any intercourse with controversall D [...]vinity. There­fore those Protestant Churches seem not to doe well, which detest any fel­lowship, with others, and professe an open division and Separation, for some difference in opinions, about hard que­stions, of which they cannot know cer­tainly, or inquire, what the people in forraigne Churches therein doe hold and maintaine. But this we may know surely out of their Doctors writings, that those grosse errours, wherewith those, which are called Lutherans charge the Calvinists; and those, which are [Page 106]called Calvinists, charge the Lutherans, are at this day defended, neither by learned or unlearned, but rejected and damned of both. Therefore the cause of this Separation, which some esteem necessary, hitherto appeares neither necessary, nor just enough.

The Doctors of any Church cannot bring in such a Separation, Reas. 4 which shall restraine the Unity of the Church of Christ, and Christian brotherhood to the side of Luther or Calvin, as at this day the Papists straiten the same to the part of the Pope of Rome. For Christs inheritance is limited with the same boundes, wherewith the Brotherhood of Christians is limitted, and is crow­ded into the same straits, whereinto we thrust this brotherly fellowship. If therefore we acknowledge no Ecclesi­asticall communion, and Christian brotherhood with those Churches, which think otherwise than our selves, it is manifest, that we call home, and confine the Church of Christs, which consisteth of numberlesse Churches, only to our own side. For if any Pro­testant Church professe it selfe, that [Page 107]it neither can, nor will have brotherly Communion with the Church of Saxo­ny, or Switzerland, by reason of some diversity of opinion, I demand of them, with what Churches then, can or will it hold communion. Not with the Roman, not with the Greeke Church; for it dissenteth from them in more controversies, and of greater moment; not with any other in any place, for none can be instanced in, from which she hath not some matter of dissenting, for difference in Doctrine. Therefore at last, the matter will come to this passe, that they which thinke them­selves to have no brotherly communi­on, save onely with their partners in opinions, must say, Christs that Church hath perished out of the whole world besides, and only remains in those Chur­ches which are of their own party. But this is the very self same thing, which the Catholike Church ever disalowed in the Donatists, and which Augustine, and Optatus Milevitanus doe de­monstrate to bee repugnant to most manifest places of Scripture. For the foresaid Augustine, thus urgeth [Page 108]it. That Christ hath lost his Inheritance, if the Christian Communion be tied to one place or Countrey: Aug. Epist. 150, & 161. and Epist. 162, 163, 164. & Tom. 7. de unitate, Ec. cap. 13. & 16. and he saith, it is an unwise part to goe about to condemne the Communion of the whole world. He shew­eth moreover, That for the good of Ʋni­tie, we must beare with some things wee approve not at all; and that the knowne bad, prejudice not the Good in the Church, if either they want power to forbid, and drive them from the Communion; or if some reason hinder, for the preserving of Peace. In a word, he avoucheth, That the Donatists, who would acknowledge no Brethren besides those on their owne part, did erect an altar of sacrilegious dissensi­on, against the whole world. Thus farre Augustine. Also Optatus fights fiercely against this manner of restraining Bro­therly Communion; He saith, Lib. 1. in mitio. That the Donatists were owned of the Orthodox for Brethren. He saith that Lib. 2. prope ab initio. They, by this their restrained Brotherhood, suffer not the Son of God to possesse the Inheritance pro­mised unto him by his Father; but doe place the Church where they please, and where they please not, there again do banish it out. He saith, Lib. 3. init. That the very name of Bro­therhood, [Page 109]however odious to the Donatists, is notwithstanding necessary for the Ortho­dox to use towards the Donatists them­selves. He saith, Lib. 6. That those follow Gods Will, and Commandements, who loving Peace, hold Communion with the Church, in the whole world. Lastly he saith, Lib. 7. That this Separation of some Brethren from others, which the Donatists defend, was displeasing to God. To finish our fourth Reason, although I perswade my selfe, that there is none of the Protestant Churches, which abhor from Brother­ly Communion with others, with as high a straine of Pride, and malignitie of minde, wherewith the Donatists de­tested communion with others, yet I ingenuously professe, that I understand not how they can cleere and winde themselves off, who retaine not Bro­therly Communion with other Chur­ches, but endeavor to confine the Pri­viledges of Christian Brotherhood onely within the bounds of their owne Churches.

No particular Church, Reas. 5 holds it self bound to break off, and renounce brotherhood with another Church, for [Page 110]the vices of men living therein, though known, dispersed, and reigning. See­ing we all know, Gluttony reignes in one place, Drunkennesse in another, Lust in a third; and these nationall vi­ces, are no lesse known to us, than their Opinions: If therefore for these hay­nous offences in life, which reigne in many, we take not occasion to dissolve our tye of brotherhood with whole Churches, neither ought we to doe it, for the errors of the Understanding, which are of lesse guilt in the sight of God, and often stretch not to the whole Body of Christian people. 1 Cor. 5.11 2 Thes. 3.6. If wee will make use of the Apostle for our Counsellour, wee should depart from the company of other Christians rather for their wickednesse, than for their ig­norance, yet for neither injoyneth he Churches to separate from Churches, but only private persons to withdraw from the company of private persons. Yea, it is unlawfull for the Heresie of few or many Doctors, ruling in parti­cular Churches, to cast off any whole Christian Church, and separate it from Brotherly Communion with us. [Page 111] A man that is an Heretick, after the first and second admonition, reject: Titus 3.10. knowing that he that is such, is subverted, and sin­neth, being condemned of himself, saith the Apostle. It is lawfull to exclude a single man from the communion of o­ther Christians, for a damnable Here­sie, See Aug. Epist. 162, & tom. 6. de util. cred. cap. 1. wherein he is condemned by his owne judgement, or convicted of ob­stinacie: but it is not lawfull, for an er­rour into which he is trained in, by the deceit and subtiltie of others, and which he defendeth not, with any wil­full stomack, but only being deceived with an imagination, and conceit of Truth and Pietie. But no Protestant Church can seperate or banish any o­ther whole Protestant Church (for example, the English or French) from Brotherly Communion with it, either for faults in life, or errrors in Doctrine. The reason is at hand; Because it can­not be proved, that that whole Church hath fallen into a damnable heresie; be­cause the obstinacy of a whole Church in an error whatsoever, can neither be demonstrated to forraign churches, nor ought to be presumed of them; Lastly, [Page 112]because wee have no command from God, nor Admonition from the Apo­stles, to breake the bond of Brother­hood betwixt whole Churches. If any here should aske, why the Doctors of the Churches, who never perswaded their People to disjoynt themselves from the Brotherly Communion with other Churches, for the grosse, and en­ormous vices every where reigning amongst Christians, should so vehe­mently perswade, that this must be done, because of the Errors they con­ceive them to be fallen into; Let him receive this answere; That this com­meth thence to passe, because we more affect the praise of knowledge, than of holinesse, and take it in worse part from them who oppose our Dictates, which are doubtfull, than from them that break and violate the plaine and o­pen Commandements of God. If the matter were otherwise, we might ea­sily perceive, that it was no more law­full to breake off Brotherhood, which is betwixt particular Churches for their errours in Doctrine, than for the sinnes of Life, which we behold ge­nerally [Page 113]and openly to reigne amongst them. Chap. 10 Therefore wee must beware of the errours of others: but in no case must separate from those Christian Churches wherein they are predomi­nant, whether they belong to life, or to doctrine; because for the doing of such an Act, there is no lawfull power in the Ministers of any particular Church.

CHAP. X. That Brotherly Communion is not to he broken betwixt the Protestants, is showne by the nature, and quality of those points whereunto they contend.

THis, as it seems to me, must be premised in the first place, That the Bands of Brotherly Cōmunion ought not to bee dissolved betwixt Christian Churches, for all discords of Opinions; but only for the opposing or denying of Fundamentall doctrines. For it [Page 114]seems to be confessed amongst all Pro­testants, that this separation is not to be made for every straw of Erroneous opinions. For hence it is, that when they desire to maintain, that this Joyn­ting of Churches was concluded on good ground, together herewith they alwayes commenc'd this suite; That they have made a discession, or depar­ted from some Foundation of the Ca­tholique Faith: For unlesse this ap­peare to be done, not of this, or that Doctor in the Church, but of the Church it self, as it is considered under the respect of a Body compacted, or conjoyned together, it ought not to a­vaile to the parting of one Protestant Church from another.

But in this place, it will not be un­seasonable to advise in a few words, that the actuall exercise of outward Communion with some particular Church (conceive the Roman) may be hindered and broken off, and yet by no default of ours; as often as it shall de­mand and require that we should ap­prove, or exercise any Idolatrous Acts in the publike service of God, or should [Page 115]command, or compell us to acknow­ledge, or receive any doctrines repug­nant to Scriptures, or Godly mens con­sciences. Yet in the meane time, that Church which is counted no whit sound, or Orthodox, is to be esteemed a visible Church of Christ, and to be ranked amongst the particular Chri­stian Churches. Yea, as much as lies in us, wee are to afford to the same all offices of brotherly Charity; although our Actuall, and outward Communi­on with the same, be neither suffered of them, nor may be retained of us, be­cause of the false doctrine, and su­perstitious worships prevailing in the same.

Now out of those things which we before have disputed concerning the difference of Fundamentall points, from those which are not Fundamen­tall, we will endeavour to shew, that those things are not Fundamentall, a­bout which hitherto there hath been such strife, with so great heate of mens minds, betwixt Protestants.

Those points onely are to be owned for Fundamentall, Reas. 1 which being over­thrown, [Page 116]or not at all beleeved, no con­gregation of men can worship God so, as to obtaine from him Pardon, Grace, and Glory: But no point controver­ted is of this nature: Therefore not Fundamentall. None will call our Major Proposition into question, be­cause it is cleere, that those who start asunder from the very foundations of saving Faith, are not capable of those benefits which are promised to the Faithfull alone. As touching the Minor; If any dare affirme, that no hope of pardon, Grace, or Glory doth shine to them, who are otherwise min­ded, than the rest in these controverted Doctrines, him I conceive to sin more against charity, than any of the Prote­stant Churches sin against verity. Yea I dare adde this, if any converse, or per­sisteth in this errour alone, he more shakes the foundation of the Prote­stant Truth, than those, whom he rashly chargeth to have violated the foundati­on, for other errours whatsoever, in controversall Divinity.

Those Points, Reas. 2 whereabout Prote­stants contend were neither Preached [Page 117]to the whole world by the Apostles, as all those things were, which were ab­solutely necessary to be known and be­lieved to the salvation of Christians, nei­ther were they, for such recommended by the succeeding Churches universal­ly to Christian People, whatsoever therefore divers Churches diversly de­termined concerning the Truth of these opinion, yet ought they all to agree in this, That they ought not to be reckoned, with the fundamental articles of the Christian Faith. If any man can cast, and contrive any head of controverted divinity betwixt Protestant Churches, into a short, and no whit doubted of Proposition, and truly affirme there­of; This Proposition was maintained by the Apostles, was received of the Ʋniver­sall Church amongst the Articles of Ca­tholike, and saving Faith, I yeeld up the bucklers, and grant the cause, I will call it a Fundamentall Doctrine, and I will pronounce those Churches, which reject it to have fallen off from the Foundation, and I will adjudge them unworthy of Brotherly commu­nion with other Churches. But if no [Page 118]Protestant can doe this; none ought to call that a fundamentall Doctrine, which himselfe defends; or to challenge the Divines of other Churches, being of another opinion, of overthrowing the Foundation, much lesse for this cause to deny the Rites of brotherly communion to whole Churches.

The affirming of Fundamentall Do­ctrines is so cleerly set down in the holy Scriptures, Reas. 3 that none of the unlearned, much lesse of the learned can fall into the contrary damned opinions, except they bee very negligent in learning the Catholike Faith; or such as will not learne the Faith it selfe, which is mani­fest in the Scriptures; which is truly observed of Augustine. De Agone Christi, 6.28 But it is plaine to all, that in these Doctrines, where­about Protestant Churches dissent, that, at the least on the one side num­berlesse Christians are deceived, and they men godly, pious, and most desi­rous of the Truth, yea many Divines of the first ranke, being versed and ex­ercised in reading, and meditating of the Scriptures through the whole course of their life. Neither let any [Page 119]here object against me, that the modern Anti-Trinitarians daily doe search the Scriptures, and yet neverthelesse persist in the obstinate deniall of a Funda­mentall Article; for they are not only negligent in learning the Catholike Faith, and drawing it out of holy Scriptures, but also they are wilfully contemptuous in opposing the Catho­like Faith, and furiously bold in re­calling the manifest Doctrine of the Scripture, to the account of their doa­ting and giddy Reasons, subject to an erroneous Ʋertigo; therefore to them agrees, that of the Apostle, 2 Thes. 2.11 For this cause, God shall send them strong delusion, &c. But none can passe the same sentence upon those Christians which adhere, either to the Saxon, or Helvetian Churches: None therefore ought to set downe, that those Do­ctrines are Fundamentall, or necessa­to be known to Salvation, in which it is probable, that now this side, now that side is deceived, but impossible that both should be in the right, as often as they contradict one another.

It is no Fundamentall point which Reas. 4 [Page 120]cannot otherwise bee extracted or de­duced out of the Scriptures, than by the hard, and long pathes of contro­versies, alwayes untraceable to simple Christians, sometimes scarce, some­times not at all evident, even to the learned themselves. Such are all those things which are in controversie, be­twixt Protestant Churches: whose con­nexion with the Foundations of the Ca­tholike Faith, the Disputants on both sides, say they see plainly necessary; but the Adversaries on both sides cry it down, that they see no connexion at all: but plaine people ignorant of the art of Logick, oftentimes give a blinde assent to their Doctors, being them­selves in the meane time altogether un­certaine of the strength of such conse­quences. Things that in this manner, are by their Doctors extracted, and pro­pounded to Christians, may sometimes be true, but can never be fundamētall, that is, absolutely necessary for every Christian to be known and beleeved for the obtaining of eternall life. For even as they may enjoy the light and benefit of the Sun, who cannot perceive the [Page 121]Mathematicall demonstrations of the bignesse, and motions thereof, so those may enjoy the light, and benefit of fun­damentall Doctrines, to Salvation, who cannot behold the Theologicall infe­rences, and deductions drawn out of them. Therefore they are not Funda­mentalls, but things rightly deduced in some mens Judgements, from the Fundamentalls, which are so much ur­ged to be beleeved from the Divines which strive amongst themselves.

It is not the part of wise Divines, Reas. 5 so to swell, and increase the number of Fundamentall points, that all Christi­ans, as well learned, as unlearned, should be wholly uncertaine, and igno­rant, what, and of what kinde those be which are adjudged properly to be­long to the Foundation of Religion, & Catholike Faith. But if we should let the matter run on so long, till all the controverted Problemes betwixt Pro­testants bee counted Fundamentall, long since they have grown to too nu­merous, hereafter they may grow to an almost numberlesse multitude. For this solemne course and practice is ob­served [Page 122]of many, that what they them­selves have added to any Fundamen­tall Axiom, as over weight, and what they beleeve to be a consequence of the same, this they presently require of all, to be counted in the number of Funda­mentalls. If we grant to any particu­lar Churches, or to their Doctors, this power of creating and multiplying Fundamentalls; all hope is past of the certainty of the Catholike Faith, all hope is gone of the Brotherly commu­nion of the Catholike Church. The mad error of the Church of Rome may confirme the Truth of our opinion, who by stuffing a medley of uncertain opinions into the Creed of Trent, by the same deed, did both shake the im­moveable certainty of the Catholike Faith, and the Union of the Catho­like Chuch, so much desired of all; we ought not therefore to mingle contro­versies lately born betwixt us, with the foundations of Catholike Faith, which are few, and published by the prea­ching of the Apostles, through the Christian world, and received by the joynt consent of Christians.

In the last place, that these things whereabout we contend, Reas. 6 were never counted in the number of Fundamen­talls, plainly appeares out of the very Augustane confession penned by Ph. Me­lancthon, and approved, and commen­ded by Luther. It is not likely, that the Authors of so solemne a confession, would have omitted any Fundamen­tall Doctrine of the Christian Faith without the knowledge and beleife, whereof, Salvation could not be attain­ed by Christ Jesus. But in this confes­sion, none of those points doe appeare, about which so fierce a strife, hath been been maintained betwixt the Helvetian and Saxon Churches. In the third Articles of the Union of the two Na­tures in Christ: in the tenth Article of the presence of the Body and Bloud of Christ in the Lords Supper, they have established nothing, which is not ap­proved by the consent of all the Prote­stants. And if we should run over the rest of the Articles, we shall finde very few things, after the last correction, of which there is any dissenting be­twixt the Protestant Churches, nothing [Page 124]of so great moment that it should bring in a Schisme into the Church; But grant some things to be in this confessi­on to which other Churches cannot af­ford their consent; it sufficeth to the retaining of Peace, that they consent in all things necessary to be known for the Salvation of Christians. For the confessions of particular Churches are not streitned to fundamentals alone, but sometimes are extended to the de­claring of their judgement of all heads of Divinity, as they conceive it expe­dient for the Aedification of their peo­ple, in Truth, and Piety. Therefore their errour is not to be born with; who, what ever they finde in their con­fessions, will have it counted so funda­mentall, that they feare not to ranke those forreign Churches, which in all, and every thing, will not admit the same to be the Rule of saving Faith, a­mong damned Hereticks, overthrow­ers of the Foundation; in a word, a­mongst wicked men, estranged from the holy brotherhood of good Christians. Nothing could be done or thought of more injurious. For if we weigh the [Page 125]confessions, or disputes of all Refor­med Churches, and place on one side those things, wherein they exactly a­gree, and set on the other side, those things which are in controversie; wee shall perceive that the former, out of the very Nature and Quality of the points themselves belong to the foun­dations of Faith, and Piety; the later, either to the no wise necessary specula­tions of subtile braines, or (if they have any soliditie in them) to the true infe­rences of the more skilfull Divines, out of well grounded Propositions: But those things, which in this manner are built upon the foundation, are not to be made equall with the fundamen­talls themselves; nor are they to bee accounted to erre in fundamentalls, which swarve somewhat herein, from the right line of Truth.

CHAP. XI. Chap. 11 That there is no Controversie betwixt Pro­testants about Fundamentalls, is shewn by instancing in three particular que­stions, which are conceived before all other of greatest moment to the dis­joynting of Churches.

BEFORE wee enter into this dispute, wee must premise this firme, and unmove­able rule; That Chri­stian Churches are not to be disjoynted, which agree in all things necessary to be known, or done to the Salvation of Christian men. For no Authority lyes in one particular Church, to make enquiry into others, or office to compell other particular Churches, to the rule of their owne confessions; or power to dissolve the [Page 127]bands of brotherly Unity, betwixt their owne and other Churches what­soever, which consent in the same common Faith, that is, in fundamen­talls, and the saving Articles of the Christian Religion. Let us see there­fore, whether the Protestants agree so farre forth, and let us take example only from those three controversies; Of the Presence of the Body and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist; Of the Com­munication of Properties in the person of Christ, God and man; Of Divine e­lection, and preterition, according to the good pleasure of the Divine will. For if in these questions, by occasion whereof, mighty surges and billows of contention have been blown up be­twixt the Saxon and Helvetian Chur­ches, so much bee confessed on both sides, as is necessary to know to Salva­tion; All the rest may be left indiffe­rent in the middle, or to be disputed of betwixt learned men, with peaceable mindes, the brotherly Communion betweene Churches being no whit broken or torne a pieces.

Wee will begin from that, which [Page 128]gave beginning to all the rest, namely from the Presence of the Body of Christ in the Lords Supper, and the eating of the same.

First of all, nothing can be concei­ved fundamentall, which is not by joint consent, admitted by, or received on both sides. This is Fundamentall, That the Body and Bloud of Christ, are so truly present, in the Administration of the Sacrament, that Communicants may partake of them so, as to draw life from thence, and they may justly be condemned, who so receive Bread and Wine, as that withall they receive not the Flesh and Bloud of Christ to the Salvation of their Soules. Hospin ad annum 1544. p. 191 Of this there is no dissention. For Bucer grants, That the Body of the Lord in the Eucharist is truly present, and par­taken off. An annum 1540. p. 178 Calvin saith, Wee all confesse with one mouth, that we when we receive the Sacrament by Faith, according to the Lords institution, In Cons. Mompelg. p. 66. are made truly partakers of the Substance of the Body of Christ; Beza saith, we deny not the Body of Christ to be truly present, to bee truly given, and received. I passe by the rest, because no Protestant Church can be named, which [Page 129]professeth not with the Eucharist, the true Presence of the Body and Bloud of Christ, although it acknowledgeth the very manner of the Presence to be Su­pernaturall, and plainly divine; And sets down, that the same doth consist not in any Physicall touch or contact, but in a lively influence, and mysticall Union, and that most reall and neer. It is a Fundamentall point, That the Bread and Wine were the means ordained by Christ, by which those which duely eat this bread being consecrated, and drinke this wine, eat the lively Flesh of Christ, and drinke his saving blood to the Salvati­on of their soules. The agreement of all Protestants in this point, is so well known, we need not take paines to prove it; It is a Fundamentall, That Bread and Wine are present in the Supper, and are eaten, and drunke in a locall, natu­rall, sensible manner; but that Christs Flesh and Bloud are present, and partaken of in a Divine admirable manner, and not to be searched out. So James Andrewes, Col. Momp. p. 17. 18. Concerning the manner, wee can only say this; That it is Supernaturall, and im­comprehensible to humane reason; and [Page 130]therefore there is no disputing thereof. A lit­tle after; Pag. 25. in not is marg. The manner is heavenly, super­naturall, insomuch as it is wholly spiritu­all. And as the Church is a mysticall body with Christ, so also this receiving is done in a Mysterie: In the Conference lately had at Lipsigh, the Saxons did grant, That the manner of the receiving, which they defended to be done by vertue of the Elements, was notwithstanding hea­venly, supernaturall, and knowne to God alone. None is ignorant, that Calvin, Bucer, and all the rest were in the same opinion, Col. Mom­pelg. p. 66. Beza saith expresly, The man­ner of the Receiving, is a Mystery to be be­leeved, which exceedeth the capacity of mans wit, and understanding. Hitherto the Doctors and Churches well agree amongst themselves.

Secondly, nothing can be conceived contrary to the Fundamentall doctrine of this Sacrament, which is not rejected, and damn'd of all Protestant Chur­ches: they are point blanck against all erroenous doctrines of the bare repre­sentation of the Body and Blood of Christ, parted from the true and reall exhibiting of him, of the prodigious [Page 131]Transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, the Accidents only remaining safe without a Subject; Of the Locall and naturall presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Lords Supper; Of the Locall Consubstantiation, Co­existency, or Inexistency of the Body and blood of Christ, with the earthly Elements, or in the same. These, and if there be any other, which oppose, or fight against the very nature of a Sa­crament, and the truth of the Body of Christ, are condemned by the common assent, not only of the Helvetian, but Lutheran Churches. Col. Mom­pel. p. 16. Let James An­drewes speake for all the rest; Wee doe not determine a Physicall or Locall pre­sence of the Body and blood of Christ, in the holy Supper. These words Substantially, pag. 183. Corporally, Really, Orally, signifie nothing else to us, but the true presence, and eating of the Body and Blood of Christ. We reject all Physicall Consubstantiation, whe­ther it be visible, or invisible, and only teach such a Conjunction as is Sacramentall. The same was the opinion of the Sax­ons in the conference at Lipsigh, to [Page 132]which these of Brandenburg and Hess­land did subscribe.

Thirdly, nothing remaineth unde­cided in this Controversie, which can be called a Fundamentall point, or for which the Brotherly Communion of Churches cannot be established. For that word Orally, which is used of the Saxons, and is disallowed of other Churches, is so used of these, that they bring in no Fundamentall errour, and is so rejected of those, that they over­throw no fundamentall Doctrine. For they that defend the Orall eating, as well of the Body of Christ, as of the bread, notwithstanding denie such a Presence of the Body of Christ, as is Locall to mens mouthes, without which an Orall eating cannot properly be performed. For that body cannot be eaten with the mouth, betwixt which and mens mouthes there is gran­ted a great distance of place; That cannot be eaten with the mouth of the Body, which is so present to the place of the mouth, that it is not locally pre­sent to the mouth. When therefore they allow of such a distance, and give [Page 133]such a Location to the Body of Christ, it is plaine, that they passe and trans­ferre the Orall eating, which is truly, and properly affirmed of the bread a­lone, by a new, and figurative manner of speech, to the Flesh of Christ local­ly remaining in the Heavens, and not locally present to the mouthes of men. Moreover, when they remove from this Orall eating, all champing and chewing of the body of Christ, the letting down of the thing chewed into the stomack, the increasing and nourishing of the body of man by this flesh thus chewed, it is evident, however they thinke fit to retaine this forme of speech, yet they meane nothing by this Orall eat­ing, that is joyned with the Caper­naites, rending of the Flesh of Christ with their teeth, or agreeable with the signification of the words, as they sound to mens eares in the Latine. They only seeme to desire to affirme this; That this Orall eating, which truly, properly, usually, and immedi­ately, is affirmed of the eating of the Bread, may, by the force of the conse­crated bread comming between, by a [Page 134]new, unusuall, mysticall, and plainly heavenly signification of Orall eating, be fitted, and applyed to the Flesh of Christ. Now as touching those who on the other side contend, That the eating of the Flesh of Christ, is not to be called an Orall eating, but rather a Mentall, Spirituall, or Personall; be­cause the Person eating the bread with his mouth, with his minde toge­ther eates the true and lively flesh of Christ: Yet they denie not, but that the visible bread is the Instrument, or means appointed by Christ, which the person useth to the cating of the Invi­sible bread; but they thinke, that the eating of that thing is properly called Orall, which may be done by the Teeth, and instruments in the mouth: but that the eating of that thing cannot be called Orall, which is neither locally present to the mouth neither, if it were present, could it be subject to any Act of mans mouth, because of the Glori­ous, and impassible nature which it hath. Betwixt these Opinions, I see some contrariety about the propriety of words, and phrase of speech, but of [Page 135]the maine, and of the Truth of the Ca­tholique Faith, either none at all, or at least so little, that notwithstanding, there may be place for the establishing of Brotherly Communion betwixt the Churches. This of the first Controver­sie; we passe to the Second.

CHAP. XII. Some Objections, wherewith some Learned Divines have been moved to breake off the Communion betwixt Protestant Churches, are answered.

TRuly it is to be bemoan­ed, That some so far abhorre from the Bro­therly Communion of Protestants betwixt themselves, that they charge this very thing as a fault upon peaceable Divines, that they will not suffer, that these Controversies which are handled betwixt Learned men, ought to break off the Bands of holy Brotherhood betwixt the Churches themselves. But let us weigh what Reasons they chiefly rely on, who con­tend, that this disjoynting of Chur­ches is absolutely necessary.

No Communion is to be retained with those Churches which embrace, Arg. 1 [Page 154]and with obstinacy defend corruptions of Doctrine, intrenching on the Glory, and repugnant to the Word of God; but the Lutherans thinke that this is done in many points by the Calvinists; and on the other side, the Calvinists complaine, that the same is done by the Lutherans: Therefore it is not lawfull for these Churches which are ill di­stinguished by the names of Luther and Calvin, to retaine Brotherly Commu­nion amongst themselves. The major Proposition they conceive well foun­ded in that most true Maxime, That all things which we doe, are to be re­ferred to the Glory of God. 1 Cor. 10.31. The mi­nor, they account themselves to have proved, by running over all these heads of Doctrine whereabout they contend; for the Divines on both sides doe presume, that their Opinions doe ever make to the illustration of Gods Glory, and that the contrary alwayes obscures it.

None denie, Answ. but that in all our acti­ons, we must level at the Glory of GOd, and it must also be confessed, that this is the nature of sin, and false Doctrine, [Page 155]that alwaies of it selfe it is of force to impaire the Glory of God in some part. But that to me seems weak and unfound, which both sides presume up­on, as on a thing to be granted, and not at all to be denyed, Namely, that it tendeth to the Glory of God, for us to renounce Brotherly cōmunion with those Churches, wherein Doctrines are defended in some manner, and de­gree crossing the glory of God. Those things which so shake the Glory of God, that they suffer not at all those which are erroneous in them, to have saving Communion with God, and Christ, neither doe they suffer Ortho­dox Christians to retaine Brotherly Communion with them. But those things which in some measure are re­pugnant to the truth of the Scriptures, and glory of God, but yet doe not de­stroy the said Communion, can in no wise afford to any particular Church just cause of departing and dividing it selfe from another: for this is the very selfe same fault, which the Ancients en­deavored to render odious to all, under the infamous name of Schisme. But that [Page 156]also may be added, that the Churches which are in the right, doe well enough discharge their dutyes, when they pro­vide and take care, that their owne People be not intangled in the errors of others, when they endeavor with all gentlenesse to reduce the wandring Churches into the way of Truth. But when they depart from the Communi­on, and Brotherly Unity of the Church, from which Christ hitherto hath not departed, they defend not, but grievously wound the glory of God and Christ, by this their separation. Lastly, when the far greater part of particular Churches, consists not of learned Doctors, but of simple people, it cannot truly be affirmed, that they understand the Errours propagated by the learned, much lesse that they stick to them, least of all that they stick to them with obstinacy and wilfulnesse. Therefore under pretence of these, the bands of Christian Brotherhood are not to be broken betwixt whole Churches. For Jerusalem is built as a city which is at unity in it self, and which wil take it in very ill part, that her parts [Page 157]are pluckt, and broken asunder on any colour whatsoever. We ascribe it therefore to be an act of Piety, that they are fearefull to sin against the Glory of God; but wee account it to be from want of wisedome, that they esteeme the division of the Protestant Chur­ches, as either a necessary, or fit, or law­full meanes to the advancing of the Glory of God.

Those Churches cannot entertaine Brotherly Communion betwixt them­selves, Arg. 2 Coll. Mem­pelg. p. 567. whose Doctors doe mutually ar­raigne one another, as guilty of horri­ble errors and the worst Heresies. But the Doctors of the Protestant Churches have done, and yet doe this in their writings. Therefore the brotherly communion betwixt the Churches can neither be retained nor renewed.

Whatsoever by angry adversaries, Ans. is branded with the name of Heresie, is not presently to bee recounted in the Catalogue of Heresies: for my part, I conceive that none can free or defend the Divines of these or those sides from all errors in their controversall Wri­tings. We therefore, who know well [Page 158]to mollifie the harsh speeches of our own Divines, with a fovourable inter­pretation, ought not any more to wrest the crooked opinions of our Adversa­ries, and to make foule and horrible Heresies, out of their errours whatso­ever. Hitherto it may be added (which all men skilled in controversies, know to be most true) that those foule Here­sies, which the Protestants charge one another with, for the most part are not expresly found in the writings of the Doctors themselves, nor are affirmed of them in very words, but are for­cibly racked, out of other words of theirs, by, I know not what, small threads of consequencies, whilest they themselves disclaim them, & curse such Heresies from their whole heart. But good men ought to deale fairely, and not to fasten Hereticall sense on other mens words, when the Writers them­selves, which are the best expounders of their own words, can, and use to re­duce them to a Catholike sense. More­over let it be taken for granted (which indeed is not to be granted) that these Doctors were convicted of those hor­rible [Page 159]errors, whereof they use to be ac­cused; namely, That they make God the author of sinne: That they make numberlesse men to bee created to de­struction, and damnation: That they make Christs Body and Bloud absent in the Lords Supper, and that others also are justly condemned, for bringing in a double Omnipotency into the Church, one created, and another increated, of the Capernaits rending, and mangling of the flesh of Christ, of Christs flesh immense & infinite; yet for these errors of the Doctors, were it lawfull for no man to breake off that Brotherly com­munion, which Christ Jesus our elder Brother will have preserved safe and sound, betwixt all parts of his Catho­like Church; which thing, we so much the more confidently affirme; because (whatsoever may be determined con­cerning the private Doctors) most sure it is, that all the foresaid errours, and others of the same kinde, were ever by the joynt consent of all learned, and unlearned, blackd, and branded with the note of Hereticall wickednesse in all Protestant Churches. Wherefore, what [Page 160]was anciently said of Augustine to the Donatists, which ill hated the brother­ly Unity of Churches, Epist. 50. If Caecilian hath sinned, Christ hath not therefore lost his in­heritance, that being a little altered, may be used of us; If Luther did erre, If Calvin did slip into an error, Christ therefore hath not lost his Unity; nor ought those Christian Chruches, wher­in Luther, or Calvin discharged the function of a Doctor, to lose their Brotherly Communion. Lastly, where­as all particular Churches are gathered together out of men subject to error, it is more than probable, that there is no Church to be found on the Earth, in which either those that teach others, or are taught by others are free from all error. If therefore any Prote­stant Church hath determined to have no brotherly communion with any, in which their famous Doctors have grie­vously erred, it may safely communi­cate which none under heaven, yea not it selfe, with it selfe. Therefore for the Errors of the Doctors, the Separa­tions of the Churches are not to bee made or allowed.

They that sit in the Chaire either Doctorall or pastorall, Arg. 3 discharge a pub­like office, and their Doctrines are to be accounted the Doctrines of the Churches wherein they live; especial­ly, when their writings are set forth in print, whereby they are made publike, and are approved with the expresse, at least with the silent suffrage, and consent of those Churches wherein they serve. When therefore the Do­ctors maintaine foule and damnable Heresies, the whole Church is presu­med to be guilty of the same, and there­fore brotherly Communion is to bee broken off no lesse with the Churches themselves, than with their Hereticall Doctors.

I answer; Ans. That the Protestant Do­ctors which on both sides accuse, and are accused of some horrible opinions published in their writing, were never convicted by their adversaries of so hor­rible a crime, by any publike, or legall judgement. Yea, none can be named of those foule Heresies, which they themselves, that are accused to main­taine them, have not confuted, and [Page 162]condemned in their writings. Let any that can produce any of those foule He­resies, which hee exclaimes to be pub­likely defended by Luther, or Calvin; by those they call Lutherans, or Calvi­nists, one may easily shew that they have been rejected and condemned of the same. John Gerard, a most learned man, and most famous in the Church of God, hath vindicated Luther from such accusations; Calvin whilst he lived, cleered himselfe, and since his death, many of ours have cleered him. There­fore the very foundation of this argu­ment shaketh: as for those things which are built upon it, they likewise doe totter every one of them. For, whoso­ever sits in the Doctorall Chaire, is not therefore to be presumed to teach no­thing besides the doctrine stamped with the Church marke, and as it were confirmed under their authentical seal: Neither if more writers should consent in the same error, is the consent of the whole Church presently involved. For by sending forth their bookes abroad into the world, they make them to be of common Right, that any may buy [Page 163]them, but not of publike authority; All may read them, but all ought not to approve, and beleeve every thing in them. That the matter is thus, 'tis plaine from hence; Because, the wri­tings of particular Doctors which have lived in the same Church, have not the same agreement which is pre­tended, chiefely in these questions, which are in the controversie: and if one Doctor let fall that, which may bend toward so me pernicious Heresie, it may easily be shewn, that the same was reproved and amended by some other.

Therefore with no colour of reason, are whole Churches convicted guilty of Heresie, and to be cut off from the Brotherly communion with others, for the errours of their private Doctors, whether falsly or truly objected against them; because the common consent of the whole Church doth not in the same appeare.

Those who would not have the Churches themselves, Arg. 4 to bee rent and torn asunder, because of the contro­versies bandied betwixt Protestants, [Page 164]they seem to be of this opinion, that every one may be saved in his own Re­ligion, and that a promiscuous multi­tude of erroneous people may bee re­ceived into the same Church Militant, and Triumphant: but this must not be granted.

If we will speak with the Scriptures, Answ. the name of one Religion is to be fitted and applyed not to difficult questions, but to the points of Christian Faith; preached to all, and received of all Christian Churches throughout the whole world. They therefore em­brace the true and one only Religion, which believe those things of God, of Christ, of the Church, of all other mat­ters, and doe them, which are necessary to be known & done, to the attaining to Salvation. Wee conceive not there­fore, that every one may be saved in his own Religion, which he feignes to himselfe; but believe that they may be saved in the Christian Religion, and be received into the same Church both Militant, and Triumphant, who so farre forth agree in the Do­ctrine of the Gospell, as it is re­quired [Page 165]that the Faith of Christians be saving to those that beleeve, and that the worship which they yeeld unto God, be gratefull and accepted of him in Christ. But they who thinke that the perfect consenting of Churches, is necessary to their meeting together in the Communion of one Church Mili­tant and Triumphant, can scarce free, and disengage themselves from their error, who conceived the Catholique Church to reside in one determinate party. They therefore, who in things either to be done or be beleeved, defend such points, with which the saving of Soules, and Spirituall worship of God cannot consist, they are truly said, to have made a defection from that which is the alone saving Religion: but they who retaining all fundamentals of faith and Gods worship, differ from others, and erre in some consequences, or Do­ctrines of lesse moment, professe no new or other Religion, but are con­victed not as yet to have attained, in that one onely Religion, to perfect knowledge. For such imperfection of knowledge, God excludes none from [Page 166]the Church Militant, neither ought we to doe it.

We ought not to retaine brotherly Communion with those, Arg. 5 whom it is an heinous sin to admit to the Lords Sup­per together with our selves: But it see­med unlawfull for the Lutherans in ta­king the Lords Supper to communicate with the Helvetian or French Churches. See the pres. to the con­fer. at Mom­pelg. For the holy Supper of the Lord, a­mongst other ends hath this use, that it should bee the note and badge of the Religion, which every one professeth. For they who communicate with any Church, in the receiving of this Sacra­ment, by this deed doe publikely pro­fesse that they embrace the doctrine of the same Church, and reject the con­trary, and separate themselves from others. We must therefore in no case sport and play with the receiving of the Lords Supper, nor therin dissemble any thing from which our heart doth abhorre; and therefore wee cannot communicate with those Churches, which embrace not our Confession. For by such communicating, we should seem to derogate from our Confession, [Page 167]and syncere Religion, and either to Pa­tronize, or surely closely to favour the errors of other Churches. It is more safe therefore to Imitate the Christian Emperours, who when the Arians did request to be received into Communi­on with the Orthodoxe, they would not grant it unto them, before they did approve the doctrine of the Ortho­doxe.

We make no strife about that which is affirmed in the first place. Answ. But as for the Assumption, namely, That it is unlawfull to admit any to the Lords Table, except them alone, who are rea­dy to subscribe to the Confession of one & the same particular Church; this seemes to me, ought not to be defen­ded. For the Principall use of the Lords Supper is to recount the death, and Pas­sion of Christ, which he suffered for the Salvation of men, and to receive eter­nall Life by the Partaking of his Flesh and Blood; It serveth also to witnesse and confirme the Union which Chri­stians ought to have betwixt them­selves, 1 Cor. 10.17. and with Christ Jesus their head. Lastly, we confesse, that this Sa­crament [Page 168](as also that other of Baptisme) is the note and badge of that Religion which wee professe. Aug. cont. [...]austum. 19.12. For men can be united together into no name of Religion, whether true or false, unlesse they be bound together in some fellowship of signer and visible Sacraments. But as Bap­tisme is indeed the badge of the Chri­stian Religion we professe, and not of the particular opinions and confessions which we embrace before others: so al­so must we conclude of the Lords Sup­per; For to the mutuall Communion of all Christians in the Eucharist, it is not required, that all who Communi­cate together, should agree in the same confession, either the English, or the French, or the Dutch; but that they agree in one Profession of the Christian and Catholik Faith. Let us leave these rigid and Tyrannicall domineerings to the Papists, who adjudge all to be sepa­rated from their Communion, which would not sweare unto the Confession of Trent. Cyprianus. Cornelius. The holy Fathers did not doe soe: but they kept the Lords peace with those Churches which were of diffe­rent opinions from themselves; removing [Page 169]none from the right Communion, be­cause he refused to consent to the pri­vate Judgement of another particular Church; for they acknowledged the Catholike Faith, received with an un­animous consent of the Catholike Church, to be the certaine, Aug. Ser. 181. and sole Rule of Faith, by which Beleevers retaine the Ca­tholike Ʋnity. But let him who can shew that Particular Churches ever u­surped this to themselves, that they did cut off others from the Brotherly Communion with themselues, for di­versitie of opinions in matters not as yet determined by the Judgement of the Catholike Church, Socrat. l. 5. c. 21. on one side or other. Ʋictor indeed attempted to doe this, and after him Stephen, Lib. 5. cap. 23. & lib. 7. cap. 4. both Bi­shops of Rome. But it is plaine out of Eusebius, that this Separation was foun­ded on no right, and therefore highly displeased the pious and Godly Fa­thers.

Therefore farre be it from us, that in the very Communion of the Lords Supper, we should as it were proclaime war against all other Churches, which will not make our particular Confes­sion [Page 170]their owne, or will not forsake their own, that they may embrace ours. If we conceive our Churches to be of the righter and truer opinion than o­ther Churches in certaine Questions, not as yet determined, wee have just cause not to Communicate with them in their errorss but thence have no cause at all to Communicate with them in the Sacraments. Forasmuch as no errour in which men may erre, preser­ving still the Faith whereby wee are Christians, gives us power to depart from other Churches, or to abhorre from holy and brotherly Communion with them. Vid. Aug. contra. Jul. Pelag. lib. 1. cap. 2. & de peccat. Orig. lib. 2. c. 23. Neither doe those Chri­stians play with the Sacraments, and incurre the guilt of dissembling, when they celebrate one Lords Supper with them, whom they know to differ from themselves in some heads of Doctrine in divinity. For the Sacrament of the Eucharists is not instituted of Christ to this end, that it should be a note or to­ken of perfect Knowledge in all which are fellow-partakers of the same: There­fore neither of perfect Agreement: which perfect Agreement it is altoge­ther [Page 171]impossible to finde in the imper­fect Knowledge of Christians. They therefore who use this moderation to­wards other Churches, that they re­ject them not from Communion with them; under pretence of difference in particular confessions, even themselves also enjoy the same benefit amongst o­thers. Neither in the mean time doe they derogate any thing from their owne confession, or favor, and Patro­nize a strange one; but they doe not at all challenge to themselves the po­wer of dividing of Churches, or dis­solving of Brotherly Union betwixt Christians, from that cause which nei­ther Christ nor the Apostles, nor the Primitive Church would ever have approved. Lastly, the Example fetch'd from the Arians, is altogether divers, and farre off from the matter in hand; for we willingly grant, that Brother­ly Communion is to be denyed to them, not onely of some one particular Church, but even of all, who durst de­nie the Eternall divinity of Christ; For this is to overturne the most solid foun­dation of Christian Faith, and mans [Page 172]Salvation. But far different is the Rea­son and nature of those Controversies which are disputed of in the Prote­stant Churches, and in which they dif­fer, and disagree amongst themselves; For in none of these can any truly say, That either the Foundation of mans salvation is overthrown, or the Autho­ritie of the Catholike Church contem­ned, or lastly, that any particular Church ever was for errors in such points separated, or to be separated from the Brotherly Communion of all Christians, by the Judgement and po­wer of the Catholike Church. But this seems to have no doubt at all in it, that one particular Church doth un­justly cut off any other from her Com­munion, when for the same opinions, according to the ancient discipline of the Catholike Church, and rules Ca­tholikely established, she was not to be cut and cast off from all other Chur­ches.

But through the love of Peace, and desire of renewing concord betwixt most famous Churches, I am carried much farther, than at first I propoun­ded [Page 173]to my selfe. I will now turne my Speech to God himself; whom I hum­bly beseech, that at last he would be pleased to binde up the differences of all the Protestant Churches, and to make them up into one, and that he would shew unto all, That it agrees with the nature of this One God, to be worshipped in Unity. Now I take my farewell of my most deare Brethren of the forrain Churches, with the Exhor­tation of most holy Augustine, If you will live of the Holy Spirit, hold Charity, love Verity, desire Ʋnity, that you may come to Eternity. To the God of heaven, who is the God of Peace; to Jesus Christ our Lord, who is the Prince of Peace; to the Holy Spirit, who is the Bond of Peace, be Glory, Honor, and Thankesgiving, for ever, and ever, Amen.