Prove all things.

HEre there are two things to be spoken to by way of explication: First, What it is to try. Secondly, What it is that we are to try.

For the first, By proving or trying here is not meant that we should experimentally be of all opinions; many such seekers instead of finding truth, have lost themselves in a maze of errour, and an inextricable labyrinth of perplexi­tie. 'Tis [...], not [...]. Nor is it meant that we should all judices agere in foro externo sit and determine controversies, binding up all others to acquiesce in our de­cisions: but, as it concerns all Christians (quà tales), to prove or try is an act of judgement to be exercised by eve­ry [Page 4] one within the private court of his own conscience in order to his own particular embracing or rejecting of any doctrine offered to his faith. Which act is no further obli­gatory to any other man, than the grounds thereof being made known shall merit his assent.

But secondly, what are we here to understand by [...], all things; must we examine all things? surely then we shall have work enough. If we must alwayes be examining, what will become of all holy living? I answer, a man may live by rule, as well as build by rule. But further, Though we must try all things here meant, yet is it not meant that we should be alwayes trying of them. But I con­ceive the [...] in the text is not to be taken in the utmost extent of its possible latitude.

Truth fears no fair triall; her face is not painted, and therefore the fairer for the washing; & she is justified of her children, yet is she sometimes condemned by strangers that know her not; and her face may possibly get a scratch in the scuffle, and herself prove (though perhaps more fair, yet) in the mean while lesse fruitfull; and therefore desires not to live alwayes under dispute. And indeed some truths seem by their own nature to be exempt from, triall; there must be some basis to move upon, and that must be immoveable; [...]; some first rule, and how shall that be tried? some first principles, and how shall they be proved? He that will learn must first believe, and doubtlesse there are primò­credita in Divinity as well as primò-cognita in Philosophy;& the mind assents to the one by a prima sides; as it doth to the other by the habit called intelligentia. Such there must needs be to give a solid basis to discourse, and had they prius to prove them by, they were not prima. These have usually been acknowledged by all for that native evi­dence that shines in them, bringing letters credentiall writ in [Page 5] their very faces; yet I know not how of late some out of the abundance of their leisure or curiositie have been pleased to question them. We lately digged for fundamentall laws till we had like to have pulled the house down about our ears; and some have digged for principles in philoso­phy till they have quite lost them in the rubbish; certainly the man was either very idle or very melancholick when he began to suspect he might be deceived in thinking he had a being (which yet was impossible), and came to Cogi­to ergò sum. But, that which is worse yet, have we not some who call in question the very fundamentals of religi­on also? they are but bad builders, who, as the Apostle speaks, are alwayes laying the foundation; when then shall we think that they will set on the roof and bring the build­ing to perfection who are alwayes digging of it up? I shall say no more; but I had thought the truth of the scriptures had been out of gun-shot, and that God might have been believed upon his own word. If once it appeare to us to be the word of God, we are not to call in question the truth or equity of it. Let us not spend our time in calling those truths into question, whereof we have already enter­tained a firm and well-grounded belief, but presse for­wards toward those things which remain, and practise what we have believed. The blowing of this wind makes the tree take deeper root, (and it is well if it doth alwayes so) but yet in the mean while it oftimes blowes down the fruit. But what is it then that we must try? try the spirits, saith S. John 1. 4. 1. and try prophesyings mentioned here in the verse before my text; the sense and meaning is one and the same of both, try all doctrines that are offered to you by any man whatsoever, how great, how learned soever he be, receive them not upon his [...], but bring them first unto the beam, unto the touch-stone: whence arises the proposition to be spoken to.

[Page 6] That it is the duty of all Christians to examine the do­ctrine which they heare,Doctr.before they fully entertain it as a prin­ciple of faith and life: a truth of very great importance, but because there hath been already so much written, I shall need now to speak the lesse, and shall content my self with two arguments onely for confirmation of it, the one from Scripture, the other from Reason, and be brief in both.

The first argument I shall take from Scripture which doth expressely both command and commend this duty to us: it commands it Mark 4. 24. [...],Reas. 1. have an eye to your hearing, take heed what you heare: as also in the 1. epist. of John chap. 4. vers. 1. Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they be of God: it commends the practise of this duty in the Bereans Acts 17. 11. where 'tis said of them that they were [...] more nobly-spirited than those of Thessalonica, for that they searched the Scriptures dayly whether those things were so as the Apostles preached, notwithstanding they were assisted by an infallible spirit. It was not any slownesse in them to believe which made them examine, but an holy prudence; for, so the words are. They received the word with all readinesse of mind, and searched the scriptures daily whether those things were so; they received them readily and yet searched, making no more hast then good speed.

But Bellarmine thinks to take off the edge of this place of Scripture by this distinction.Object. The Bereans were but be­ginners and had not yet entertained the faith, and therefore might examine: but such as are already Christians and believe the Churche's infallibility are bound to believe the doctrine it proposeth, without examination.

I answer,Answ. first by way of concession, that as many as be­lieve the Churches infallibility, are bound consequently to believe whatever she propounds, as farre as an errour can [Page 7] bind them. But secondly, If all be beginners but those that believe that, truly for our parts We Protestants do professe our selves to be Bereans, and therefore I hope he will give Us leave to examine their doctrine in the balance of the Sanctuary, and so we have and found it light. And third­ly, is Bellarmine sure the Bereans were not believers when they searched? since they received the word with all readinesse of mind, (and then 'tis added) and searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so. But fourthly, If they were not, I wonder how men before they beleive should be bet­ter able to judge than afterwards; and how they should come to loose that power and priviledge by beleiving.

Besides these there are many other Scriptures, which do ex consequenti not onely permit, but also require to try the doctrines before we entertain them: as Matth. 24. 4. where our Saviour bids See that no man seduce you: and the Apostle Paul in Ephes. 5. 6. Let no man deceive you with vain words: and 2 Thessal. 2. 3. Let no man deceive you by any means. To what purpose are all these monitory cautions, if we may not try; nay, do they not implicitly require and command us to try and examine the doctrines, whoever they be that bring them? S. Paul is bold in Gal. 1. 8, 9. Though we or an Angel from heaven should preach any other Gospel, let him be [...]. And that you may see that this expression proceeded neither from rashnesse nor passion, but a most advised and well resolved deliberation, he repeats the words in the verse following: As we said before, so say I now again; If any preach any other Gospel unto you than that you have received, let him be accursed. Whence I observe these two things to my present purpose; first, that there must be an examen, else how could they know it was another Go­spel, and so reject it? and secondly, that the hearers as such, and not teachers were to be the judges, unlesse wee'l say they were bound to curse themselves.

[Page 8]But the truth in hand may be further evidenced to us by reason thus: Because we must neither embrace all doctrines,Reas. 2. nor reject all, nor take some such as come next, no nor the truth it self upon slight grounds; therefore we must exa­mine.

1. We must not reject all; for, so we shall be sure to re­ject the truth; and besides, we do ow so much reverence to the name of God, as not rashly to reject without examen, any doctrine that hath but an appearance of any just pre­tence unto it.

2. Nor may we embrace all promiscuously; for, so we shall be sure to be in the wrong; and I see not how possibly the soul can at the same time assent unto contradictions, and yet such there are found among opinions.

3. Nor in the third place may we take up a certain num­ber of opinions as they come next to hand, as they are of­fered to us by the place where we live, or the next comer by: for, so there will be great danger of falling into errour, and truth is of more concernment to us, than that we should adventure it upon the hazard of such a contingency.

4. Nor lastly may we entertain truth it self (if we should happen on it) on so slight grounds; if we take no better hold of it, we shall never be able to hold it fast: If we build up­on such a sandie foundation, how do we think to stand, when the winds and waves of temptation and persecution shall arise? It remains therefore that we must examine, that so we may both refuse the evil, and also hold fast that which is good. And for the further quickning of us unto this duty, I shall propound onely two considerations, and very briefly.

First, Consid. 1. Let us seriously consider what great danger there is in being deceived; our souls ate at the stake; no lesse than the everlasting good of our souls is concerned in it: for, er­rour [Page 9] in understanding begets errour in life and practise, and the Scripture tells us of damnable heresies; and what ever some may think of speculative errours, yet surely as they proceed from that maim in the understanding which is the effect of original sinne, and as they are cherished and a­betted by corruption in the will, they are sinns and make us guilty. For the actions of the understanding as well as of the other faculties are [...], under the law of God, and the will shall answer at God's tribunal for not putting the understanding to school to Scripture, as well as for not bridling the passions, and not governing the outward man. Since then there is such danger in errour as you have heard, had we not need be carefull? had we not need examine? especially considering,

What danger there is of being deceived,Consid 2. which is the se­cond consideration. For, first, the best are subject to errour themselves, and so may (though unwittingly and unwil­lingly) be means of seducing others, who do not examine; and then their godlinesse and learning, which were wont to keep them from errours, will become arguments to draw others into them. But then secondly, how many false pro­phets, deceivers, and seducers are there in the world! who make it their designe and purpose to deceive. MANY shall come in my name (faith our Saviour, Matth. 24.5.) and shall deceive many: and Many false prophets ARE gone out into the world, 1 John 4. 1. and, that which makes them the more dangerous, they are indefatigably industrious in their way, compassing the earth (with their master), and compassing sea and land to make a proselyte. Which they do the more easily effect by reason of the craft and subtilty which they use. We have it exprest emphatically in Ephes. 4. 14. Be no more children tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the slight of men, and cunning craftinesse, [Page 10] whereby they lie in wait to deceive. Our Saviour hath fore­told us that they should come as wolves in sheeps-clothing, and the Apostle [...] and [...] and again, With all power, and signes, and lying wonders, and with all deceivablenesse of unrighteousnesse, 2 Thessal. 2. 9, 10. All which places do loudly bespeak our earnest care to look to our selves, and to examine doctrines before we embrace them, lest unawares we entertain doctrines of devils in stead of the truths of God.

By this little that hath been said I hope it does appeare that it is our duty to examine. But two things there be which are necessarily requifire to the right performance of it as we ought. An infallible rule, and a faculty rightly pre­pared; the one by which, the other with which we are to judge.

1.1. Requisite, A faculty. There must be a faculty, or a soul rightly prepared: and that must be

1.1. Reasona­ble. A reasonable soul; this is the subject of faith and all our other graces, and is the principium quod of all the acti­ons that flow from them. Faith is a rational grace, although it do not alwayes act discursively, (E.g. in its assent to the primò credita, which is to a testimony, not for a testimony)no more than the understanding does by discourse induce it self to an assent unto first notions.

2.2. Enlighte­ned. This soul or faculty must be enlightened, and assisted by the holy Spirit, else it cannot apprehend aright spiritual things. The natural man perceives not the things of the sprit, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned, 1 Cor. 2. 14. Not but that a natural man may apprehend and assent unto divers truths recorded in the Scriptures, but not with a saving kind of apprehension and assent, nor as they are [...], the things of the Spirit; so they are not known but in a spiritual manner, and by the assistance [Page 11] of the same Spirit. Which assistance consists in the infusi­on of an habit of spiritual wisdome and understanding, and the Spirit's gracious excitation of it, and concourse with it, whereby the eyes of a believer's mind being enlightened, he is enabled in some measure to discern and apprehend the truths and will of God, objectively revealed and pro­pounded to him by the same Spirit in the Scriptures.

This is that donum intellectûs and illumination, which is bestowed upon every believer at his first conversion, though in a lesser measure both of evidence and object than after­wards: for, it grows and increases according to the propor­tion of faith which God hath dealt to every man, and ex­tends itself as large as a divine faith does, from which it is inseparable. Now because all believers have sooner or la­ter a divine faith of all things necessary for them so to be believed, and some of more, accordingly is this donum in­tellectûs dispensed; all have some, more or lesse, none all, but onely Christ, to whom alone the Spirit was given with­out measure, and of whose fulnesse we all receive grace for grace. And as it is of the same extent, so is it of the same original with a divine faith, wrapt in the same womb, and nursed by the same breasts; it's both attained and kept by the self same means, prayer, hearing of the word, reading and meditating on it. This the Papists are not willing to allow unto private believets, yet Aquinas is cleare in the point;2 [...].2 [...]. q.8. art. 4. Nullus habens gratiam caret dono intellectûs, quod nunquam se subtrahit sanctis circa ea qua sunt necessaria ad salutem. A very cleare and full testimony: So that I shall forbear to adde any more.

3.3. sanctifi­ed. That the soul may be rightly fitted for to judge, it must be sanctified.

First, It must have a reverence of the divine Majesty and of his word; then will it not so boldly go about with [Page 12] Socinus and our modern circulatours to bassle Scripture, just as a Sophister would deal with a peice of Aristotle; Then shall we not profanely abuse it by I know not what kind of mystical, & cabalistical interpretations. Is this to reverence the word of God? would any man take it well at our hands to have his words so played withall, so screwed and wrested from their simple and most apparent sense and meaning?

Secondly, the soul must be humble. Such the Lord him­self hath undertaken to teach, they shall be [...], but [...] he resists the proud, while he gives grace to the humble; grace and glory and no good thing will he withhold from those that fear him, psal. 25. 14. and 84. 11. A proud man is a bad scholar, he will confide in himself, rather then in God; he is fond of his own opini­ons, and will not yield unto the truth, being stubborn and disobedient in will and affections; but if any one be humble and obedient, if any one will do God's will, he shall know the doctrine whether it be of God. There is great need of hu­mility also upon this account, that those who have the gift in a lesser measure, be not presumptuous so as to wade be­yond their depth. Which Saint Paul thought a seasonable caution in the matter in hand: Rom. 12.3. Be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. For I say through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the mea­sure of faith: the words are emphaticall. [...] not out of an overween­ing opinion of self-sufficiency to enterprise things beyond their strength, but to think soberly according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith, for, according to that is the measure of this gift, as you heard before. I [Page 13] might adde also in the third place, that the soul must be in­dued with a sincere love of the truth, that it must obey the truth, and mortifie its own corruptions: but of these more conveniently afterwards.

Thus much may suffice for the first thing required that we may judge aright, a faculty rightly prepared.

2.2. Requisite A Rule. The second is the Rule according to which we must judge, by which we must examine all doctrines, and ac­cording to their agreeing or disagreeing with it, either en­tertain or reject them.

This rule must be (1.) in it self infallible, (2.) in re­spect of us clear and known, (3.) in respect of the doctrines to be tryed it must be adequate. These are agreed upon as necessary properties of a rule of divine faith.

Now such a rule are not

First, 1 Not, Reason the maxims of naturall reason. For, (1.) they are farre from being infallible, many of them being but the product of humane discourse and fallible observation, and therefore some of them false, if they be extended beyond the sphere of Philosophy, for whose meridian onely they were calculated at the first. I do not think there is any truth in Philosophy which contradicts any truth in Divinity; yet am I sure that many sayings are true in Philosophy, which are false in Divinity. For, maxims and general rules being but collections observed from particulars, if the survey be short, ad nimis pauca respiciens, not taking in all particulars, the verdict or maxime must needs be defective, and the ge­neral rule be liable to exceptions. So that a rule may be true in Philosophy as to all those particulars included within the object of Philosophy, but false if stretched to take in the things of Divinitie: as an observation concerning men may be true of men in France or Italy, but false if applyed to those in England, who were never attended to in the raising. [Page 14] (2.) As these maxims are not infallible; so neither are they adequate to the things to be believed, and therefore cannot make a fit rule of divine faith. For there are many divine truths which are nothing at all of kind to any peice of na­turall knowledge, neither flowing from these maxims, nor being reducible to them. (3.) It is not possible for any of those maxims to be the foundation of any divine faith at all; for, all assent that is wrought in the soul by them is but either science or opinion; both which arise from the evi­dence of the thing, whereas faith assents unto an article without any such respect, but meerly for the sake of a testi­mony; and if the faith be divine, such also is the testimony which produceth it.

And yet the Socinians make reason the rule of their faith. Quod absurdum est rationi, debet esse falsum, saith one; others more modest or more subtile will seem to grant that reason ought to believe what God sayes, be it never so contrary to their apprehensions; but then when the question is put whe­ther God say such a thing or no, here they will deny it if it agree not with their maxims. Thus what they give with the one hand they take away again with the other; they passe it in the head, but stop it in the house; decline the volie but take the rebound, which comes all to one at last.

But how little reason there is for so doing, especially in hac foece Romali, in this Apostate and fallen condition of humane nature, the alone sense of our own infirmities and weaknesses may sufficiently convince.

O but yet Right Reason! Ay, where is it? many make account they have it, and that in those very things wherein yet they contradict one another. Some think Aristotle did but bid his scholer go look; when he made the judgement of a wiseman the rule of vertues mediocritie; many pre­tend to be wise, and many more think themselves such, [Page 15] but it's seldome that either prove so. So that indeed a man may sooner find vertue than a wise-man, especially consi­dering that he had need to be one himself to know one when he meets him. All reason then is not right, nor have all men right reason, that think they have it; reason it self then stands in need of a rule to be tryed by. Reason is then right when it is true, and then only true when it judgeth according to the truth of things themselves; now things to be believed are contained in Scripture, let us carry our rea­son thith'er, and trie it by them. For, as Amesius very well. Ratio quaedicitur recta, si absoluta rectitudo spectetur, non ali­bi nobis est quarenda quàm ubi existit, id est, in Scripturis; neque differt (quatenus spectat bonum & aequum) à vo­luntate Dei ad nostrae vita directionem revelatâ. Mcdullae lib. 2. cap. 2.

So then, although the maxims of natural reason may be of singular use in Divinity, if rightly limited by the Scriptures, yet are they not fit to be canon, they are both too short and too weak to make a rule of divine faith of.

Secondly, 2. Antiquity. nor is Antiquity such a rule as is required. An­tiquity barely considered is no good mark, much lesse rule of truth. The Romanists in giving marks of the true Church do as Painters, who draw the Virgine Mary by their own Mistresses; they do not choose the Church by her marks, but indeavour to make their marks by their Church: In like manner here, they do not square their do­ctrine by the true rule, but strive to find out a rule that will fit their doctrine, and yet herein too they are oft times much to seek.

They cry up Antiquity very much, bidding us ask for the old way; for multitude of dayes shall teach us wisdome; and make account they have praised themselves all this [Page 16] while; but no such matter, unlesse we should look at anti­quity and nothing else: but then I know who may vie with them, the devil was a lier from the beginning. For our parts we professe we do very much reverence antiquiry, but it must be then in conjunction with truth; we cannot admire old errours; but as Solomon speaks of the hoary head, Prov. 16. 31. The hoary head is a crown of glory, if it be found in the way of righteousnesse. We shall alwayes rise up before a reverend hoary-headed truth; but we must have something else besides its gray hairs to know it by, lest in stead of truth we salute her mask, and worship a cloud in stead of a god­desse. And as for the Papists, for all their boasting so much of the antiquity of their doctrine, we can easily shew them who brought in this doctrine, and that doctrine into their Church; this ceremony and that ceremony, this corrupti­on and that corruption. We need no microscope to see how patcht their coat is, of how different a thread and spin­ning, so that it could never hang together, but that the new would rend the old in sunder, the strong the rotten, were it not for that same Catholick plaister of infallibility. But while we make the Scriptures to be our rule, our doctrine is ancienter than much of theirs pretends to be.

Thirdly, 3. Councels and Fathers. not the writings of the Ancient Fathers, nor Ca­nons of Councels, neither of these are fit to be made the rule of a divine faith. We do attribute much unto the judgements of those ancient Fathers, those primitive Saints and Worthies, whether exprest in their private writings, or signified in lawfull Councels.

When the Councels were such as they ought to be, con­sisting of holy, able, and learned Pastours of the Church, we look upon them as bright constellations, whose light was the greater because of their conjunction. They had not onely donum intellectûs, and that in a great measure too [Page 17] as they were single Christians; but also donum interpretatio­nis, as they were Pastours of the Church: and while they conferred together, seeking God, they were in the use of the best means to find out truth, and under a promise also, but not of infallibility; and therefore although we cannot make them the rule of our faith, yet ought we not rashly to reject them when they are offered to us; nor to slight their judge­ments, as if they were nothing worth, but seriously to exa­mine their reasons and grounds on which they went.

We honour the Fathers as men whom God's providence raised up and indued with gifts to quell the growing here­sies of their times; and doubtlesse if they were more lookt into, they would furnish us with tried weapons, armour ap­proved to subdue the self-same heresies risen again among us in these our dayes, and prove as successefull as that stra­tagem of the Scythians was, who put their rebel-slaves to flight, by but shewing them the rods where with they had been wont to whip them But though we honour the Fa­thers, yet we dare not worship them, we may not believe in them, nor make their writings the rule of our faith. This is that which themselves did never desire, but forbid and abhorre the thought of; they seem to say to us, Stand up; for, we also were but men subject to like infirmities with you; [...]. Worship God, believe in him. I doubt not but they that mended many faults in their own writings, left some behind, and I wish others had not added more. We admit them as witnesses, but not as a rule, since they also were but fallible.

The Church of Rome ha's boasted so long of the Fa­thers, till at length they grow almost weary of it. At first they had like to have put the Centuriatours out of counte­nance; but afterwards Bishop Jewell was so bold as to chal­lenge them, in a Sermon at Paul's Crosse, (afterward print­ed) [Page 18] and to offer that if they could produce any one ancient Father, General Councel, or example of the Primitive Church for the first six hundred yeares, that sided with them against us in any one of 27 articles by him named, and in controversie between us, he would subscribe to them. This challenge Dr. Humfryes thought was more than he needed to have made; yet having made it he made it good against Harding, and yet died a Protestant: and this was no more than we all promise, sayes learned Dr. Whita­kar against Campian's fifth reason. So that the Jesuite need­ed not to have arrogated to the Church of Rome that pri­viledge of the Jews, Whose are the Fathers: and Malone might have spared his scurrilous title-page against the Re­verend and learned Primate; Though you have ten thousand USHERS, yet have ye not many FATHERS. We boast not of ten thousand, but are glad that we have one worth ten thousand of their Popish-Fathers, and as many head-masters of their schools to boot. But we hope we have the Fathers with us, and I am sure we honour them more than they, and yet make them not the rule of our faith neither. They honour them not as Fathers, but as Lords and Masters; as Peter Cotton was wont to call him, My Lord St. Austin.

Let them therefore be the vassals, if they please, while we are the true and genuine sonnes of those ancient Fathers. And yet some of the Papists (to say the truth) cared not overmuch for the judgement of the Fathers, when it made against them. Cardinal Cajetan will not fear to go against the generall torrent of all the ancient Doctours Praefat. in Pentat.; for which Canus indeed blames him, but then Andradius takes his part: and I am sure what Cajetan said, was no other than [Page 19] what was put in practise by Maldonate, Jansenius, and di­vers others.

Fourthly, 4. Church. Nor is the judgement or testimony of the Church a sufficient rule of divine faith. The Papists cry up the Church, as much as the Jews of old did the Temple: but by the Church they mean their own; which, by that time the Jesuites have done with it, is nothing else but the Pope. But wee'll keep their tearm the Church, whose testimony they say is infallible, and necessary to a divine faith of any one article in religion; and although de-Valentia and Canus would fain mince the matter, and make it onely necessary as a condition; yet that will not serve the Romanists turn, which Bellarmine and a-Sacro-bosco knew well enough, and therefore make the testimony of the Church necessary, as a medius terminus and Cause of assent in all divine faith; and so they must say or come over to us. Now infallibility as it is required to a rule of doctrine, is nothing else but the con­stant assistance of the holy Ghost, which the Papists re­quire a man to believe that their Church hath, before he can believe so much as that there is an holy Ghost: for, that's one article of faith, none of which (say they) can be believed without the infallible testimony of their Church. Wee'l leave the Jesuites to distinguish themselves out of this contradiction, if they can, and i'th' mean while let us examine their proofs.

They offer us Tradition for proof; but for them to go about to prove the Churche's infallibity from the tradition of the Church, is to beg the question. Let them first con­vince us that the Church is infallible as it gives the traditi­on, and then wee'l spare them any further pains to prove that it is infallible.

They often attempt to prove it to us by Scripture; by which very practise they do but condemn themselves: For, [Page 20] First, then it seems the Scriptures infallibility may be first known, before and without the believing of the Churches infallibility, quod minimè vellent: for, then the latter may be spared. And secondly, hereby once for all they appeal to mens private judgements, and that in a point on which their whole cause turns: and if they think the Scriptures so cleare for the Churche's infallibility that a private Christi­an may discern it, I do appeal to themselves, whether many other articles be not laid down more clearly in Scripture: we say all. Well, but it may be some will say the Churches infallibility is first known, before we know the Scriptures to be infallible. I say then, 1. let them prove it. 2. why do they go about to prove it by Scripture? 3. let them a­void the above-named contradiction.

Or if they'l be willing to draw stakes with us, and have neither the infallibility of the one, nor of the other to be first believed: Then first, let them never more quote Scri­pture for the Churche's infallibility. Secondly, let them not require us to prove the Scriptures by the testimony of the Church. Thirdly, they must give us leave to fetch all the articles of our faith immediately from the Scriptures without the midwifry of their Porphyry-chair: and then wee'l casily grant them (if it will do tnem any good) that there is no prius and posterius in the belief of the infallibi­lities of the Scriptures and of the Church, because there is no posterius, that of the Church being none at all.

Fifthly, 5. Teachers. nor are the words and doctrine of our teachers and ministers to be looked upon as an infallible rule of di­vine faith. A private Christian ought to be very obser­vant of his Pastour, (the Scripture every-where calls for it) he is to reverence him as his spirituall Father, to obey him as his governour, to follow him as his guide, yet no farther then he ha's the Scripture for his warrant; Be ye fol­lowers [Page 21] of me (saith the Apostle) as I am of Christ, 1 Cor. 11.1. The words of a godly and able pastour are of great au­thority, as of one that for his fidelity would not willingly for a world lead souls into errour; and for his ability hath a greater measure of the spirit of discerning, joyned with the advantages of acutenesse of parts, much study and reading, and long experience, & therefore must he be heard with reverence, & not rashly dísbelieved, nor his doctrine re­jected, unlesse upon examination we find it to be condemned by the Scriptures. Among humane authorities, such an ones testimony is of very great weight: but a divine faith will digge till it come to the rock of infallibility, before it build; which is not to be found save in that holy breath of the unchangeable Spirit, which is the Scriptures.

Sixthly therefore,But Scriptures the onely true adequate and infallible rule of divine faith is the holy Scripture: this is that [...], this is that balance of the sanctua­ry, wherein faith weighs and tries all mens doctrines before it entertain them.

That this was infallibly inspired by the Holy Ghost is granted on all sides, and that it may be known to be such may sufficiently appeare by what hath been already said. That it is and ought to be the rule of faith, might be fully and at large demonstrated; but since it hath already de­voured all the other pretended rules, as Aaron's rod did those of the Egyptian Sorcerers, and because I would not be prevented in that which lies before me, I shall content my self briefly to have pointed at an argument or two, and so passe on to what remains.

But first give me leave to premise onely thus much, that whereas some of our Divines make Scripture the judge, others the rule of controversies, I conceive by a little di­stinguishing both may be admitted, and that the Scripture [Page 22] is both Judge, and Sentence, the Law, Rule and Principle of faith. The holy Ghost in Scripture is the Judge. Every truth exprest in Scripture is a definitive Sentence when ever it se;lf is called in question, and in respect of truths deduci­ble from it it is a Law and Principle; in respect both of truths formally contained in it, and rightly deducible from it, it is, and may be truly called a Rule or canon of faith and life; a rule to try and examine doctrines by; and this I shall prove briefly in three words thus.

1. The Bereans are commended by the holy Ghost for making the Scripture the rule and trying doctrines by it, and that such doctrines as were delivered by the immediate assistence of the holy Spirit, as was said before.

2. The Scripture is the rule according to which men ought to preach, and therefore also ought their doctrine to be examined by it. To the Law and to the Testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no mor­ning-light in them, Isaiah 8. 20. and 1 Tim. 6. 3. These things teach and exhort, and if any man teach otherwise, [or any other thing [...]] and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godlinesse, he is proud knowing nothing, &c. [See also Deut. 13. v. 1, 2, 3.] and in the 12. Rom. 6. Let us prophesie according to the analogy or pro­portion of faith, by which is usually understood the doctrine contained in the Scriptures. But that is a remarkable place Gal. 1.8, 9. if we or an angel from heaven, if any man preach any other Gospel than what ye have received, let him be accursed.

3. The Scripture is the rule by which we must be judged at the last day, therefore ought it to be the rule of our faith and life here. Rom. 2. 16. God shall judge the secrets of men according to my gospel: and this we may be sure of [Page 23] that that must needs be suitable to God's will accepting and approving, which is agreable and according to the same will commanding and prescribing faith and duty to us, which is revealed in his word. But this truth having been so much insisted upon by our writers, and being so well known as it is, I forbear further inlargement on it at the present. The Scripture then is the onely rule of faith: And though some would admit of something else for a seconda­ry rule, for my part I see not how that can be admitted: for, if that same supposed secondary rule do exactly ac­cord with the Scripture, then is it not another, and so not a secondary rule: but if it swerve never so little from it, then is it false and erroneous, and not fit to be a rule at all: but take it at the best it is but regula regulanda, a rule that must be tried it self; and who will choose to measure with a Carpen­ters rule when he hath the standard by him?

The Scripture is the rule and the standard by which all doctrines may and must be tried, by arraigning them be­fore the tribunall of the Spirit in the Scriptures: but it will not be amisse to draw forth of Scripture a character or two to judge of doctrines by.

1.Mark 1. The first shall be that of Paul, but lately mentioned; good doctrine must be according to the analogy and pro­portion of faith. There is a [...], an [...], and a [...] spoken of in Scripture; a body of divine truth, as I may call it, between the parts and members whereof there is an exact harmo­ny, symmetry, and proportion: as therefore in the natu­ral body a member would become monstrous, should it exceed its due proportion to the other its fellow-members: so is it here. We must therefore carefully compare a do­ctrine concerning one article, with the truth concerning others, and (for instance) so speak of the unity of God's [Page 24] essence as not to impair the Trinity of persons; so treat of the justice of God, as not to let it devoure his mercy, and so to advance his mercy as not to violate his justice, since he is so said to be love, 1 John 4. 8. as that he is also called a consuming fire, Heb. 12. 29. Let a man study a single point alone with greatest accuratenesse, it will scarce have its just proportion till he doth compare it with the body; not­withstanding the best diligence of the artist, the wheels of a watch will need some filing when they come to be put to­gether.

2.Mark 2. A second character is that of S. John 1.4.3. Eve­ry spirit that consesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is not of God: of old whatsoever Prophet inticed the peo­ple unto idolatry, was a false Prophet for all his signes and wonders, and prediction of events, Deut. 13. 1, 2, 3. So whatsoever doctrine tends to draw us off from Christ is nought and to be rejected: and thus do not onely the Jews who deny that Christ is yet come: but the Socinian also, who denies him to be God, and so by consequence to have come in the flesh, in the Apostle's sense, and to have made any satisfaction for sinne, which was the end of his coming: and the Papists also while they undermine him in all his offices: and what do the Quakers but in effect deny Christ, when they make him to be nothing else but a Metaphor, and the Gospel a meer Allegory?

3.Mark 3. The third mark is our Saviours, own, Matth. 7.16. By their fruits ye shall know them: observe what the aims and designes are of those that promote them; judge not rash judgement, but observe the end, A meteor may sometimes seem to be in heaven under the immediate tuition of some reall starre, but let us watch the parallax, and we shall find it many thousand miles below. Some fowls there are that will hang hovering in the aire, as if it were indifferent [Page 25] to them whether ever they came to earth again or no: and yet if you observe them it is ten to one but you shall see them alighting in some puddle or other. The Eagle soares high, very high, when her designe is nothing but carton. It will therefore be our wisdome to observe carefully the tendencies of doctrines, and their fruits: if these be pro­fanenesse or confusion, the doctrines themselves cannot be from God; for, he is an holy God, and not the authour of con­fusion.

And thus much be spoken concerning the second requi­site to the proving of doctrines, to wit, the Rule, and so I have done with the duty it self.

But here the Romanist pulls me by the sleeve with an ob­jection or two, which must be satisfied.

obj. 1.Object. 1 And first he objects that this would be pride and arrogance to examine the doctrines of our superiours, as if private men knew more than they.

Answ. 1.Answ. It is no pride nor arrogance for us to endea­vour to see that with our own eyes, which our betters tell us they see with theirs, especially sith God himself requires it of us.

2. It is no whit unbecoming humility and Christian mo­desty to examine any mens doctrine, while we acknow­ledge their superiority in gifts, and reverence them ac­cordingly. They discern an hundred truths to my ten, yet some of ten may possibly be none of their hundred. I must not reject their doctrine without examen, out of reverence unto them: I may not trust to it as infallible out of reve­rence unto God: I must therefore examine it by that gol­den rule the Scriptures, which is no disparagement to them or to their doctrine: for, so ought they to preach, and so ought we to believe. If any man preach, let him preach as the oracles of God, and we must so heare and entertain the [Page 26] Gospel, not as the word of man, but as it is indeed the word of God able to save our souls, see 1 Thess. 2. 13.

obj. 2.Object. 2 O! but people are so ignorant they are not fit to judge.

Answ. Answ. Whose faults that? you keep them from the Scriptures, and the Scriptures from them, and then say with the Pharisees, This people who knowrth not the law are ac­cursed, John 7. 49. Well; but if they must not judge of the doctrine, what must they do to be resolved whether the Protestants or the Papists doctrine be to be followed? de Valentia tells them, they must adhere to that doctrine whose teachers have the most authority, but how shall they know that? why forsooth, by their multitude, sanctity, an­tiquity and miracles. Which is all one as if he had said: Be­cause thou art not book-learned thou art not fit to examine doctrines by Scripture; therefore take onely this course; travell over all the world, and count how many Papists there be, and then how many Protestants, and by the way enquire into their lives; then reade but over the histories of all ages, and see which were the most ancient: and lastly, take notice of the number of miracles that have been done (but let him believe none but those who saw them done) and then thou shalt know which doctrine is the truest; (at least if these marks fail him not)

Now I think I should set the poore man an easier task, if I should bid him reade, or get some other to reade the Scri­ptures to him, and there he should see what he might trust unto. The necessary points of faith are cleare enough laid down there for any ordinary apprehension: and such an one is as capable of the donum intellectûs (without which none can savingly understand) as a more learned man; and I am sure the Scripture is the best collyrium, which doth not onely cleare the sight, but also enlighten the eyes, and that of babes and simple ones.

[Page 27] obj. 3.Object.3 But thirdly they object. When you have done all, every private Christian will be fallible in his judgement; why then do ye refuse the Fathers, Councels, and the Church upon that account?

Answ. 1.Answ. I am speaking of an infallible Rule, not an in­fallible Judge: if the Faculty be fallible, the Rule at least had need be infallible. It is true, an house that is built on a rock may fall, if it be weakly built; but that which is built upon the sand cannot possibly stand: he that walks upon firm ground may stumble, and fall; (and rise again) but he that walks upon a quake mire must needs sink, and that irrecoverably, when the ground it self sinks under him.

2. But thus much I say for the believer's infallibi­lity. (1.) That while he keeps to the infallible rule he can­not erre. (2.) The spirit of God will infallibly guide eve­ry believer, so as that he shall not swerve from the rule in any thing necessary to salvation. (3.) Nor in any point whereof it works in him a divine faith; which is as good se­curity as is needfull, and a thousand times better than the Papists can give to any by believing in the Church.

So that these few rubs being removed out of the way, we may safely proceed to the practise of what the Apostle here exhorts us to, to prove all things.

Age verò, nè semper forum. But we must not be alwayes trying; triall is in order to holding fast and that not of all things, but of that which upon triall we find to be good. So the Apostle proceeds, hold fast that which is good.

Which is the second part of the text,1. Part of the text considered. containing in it the second duty incumbent upon every Christian, viz. holding fast of that which is good. Which I shall speak unto first relatively, and then absolutely.

First, 1 Relative­ly. relatively as it hath reference and regard unto the [Page 28] former duty. And so we may look upon these later words, either 1. as a caution, or 2. as a means, or 3. as the end of the foregoing duty of proving doctrines.

First, As a caution let us consider them as a caution, and then they in­timate thus much unto us; That we must so try and prove all things, as i'th' mean while not to let go that which is good. They that fish with a golden hook, had need hold fast the line, and look to the ground they stand upon. We must have a firm basis and centre to trust unto, or else the motion can neither be sure nor regular. If once we loose our anchor, no wonder if we be [...], carried about by every blast of temptation from without; and if we cast our ballast over-board, we must needs be [...], tost up and down by the wave of every doubt, and so become the sport and scorn of every wind and wave. And I could heartily wish that some of late had not sailed so farre upon new discoveries, till they have lost their compasse, and so made shipwrack of faith and conscience both together. But if we desire to be successefull in our enterprize of try­ing and proving doctrirnes, we must be sure to hold fast all tried and approved principles: and

1. Such as are unquestionable or out of question; we must not go to call them into question; this were for us to be alwayes laying the foundation, so should we never build; to be alwayes learning, but never coming to the knowledge of the truth, weak and unstable souls. When truths are once tried and approved, we must then study arguments for them, answer difficulties brought against them, and con­tend earnestly for the faith which was once delivered unto the Saints.

2. We may examine an article of faith without doubr­ing of the truth of it. But suppose it should be called into question by others, yea, and doubted of also by our selves, [Page 29] yet must we not presently for every doubt let go our faith, nor quit it for every argument that's brought against it, though we cannot answer it. A man may have strong de­monstrations for a truth, yet not be able to vindicate it from all objections, whence scruples will arise; but they may and must be overcome by believing and attending to the de­monstrations and evidence for the truth, though we be not able to acquit our selves of those difficulties, which the de­vil's sophistry, and our own infidelity may suggest. We must not disclaim a truth because it is by some called in que­stion; much lesse ingenuously do they deal by truth, who therefore disclaim it, that so they may call it into que­stion themselves. We may not disbelieve a truth and scrape it out of our souls, that so the soul may become rasa tabula, unbiassed and perfectly indifferent either to receive a truth, or to reject it; as our new methodists would have us do. That there is a God is an article of faith, and a first notion in­graved upon the heart of man by nature. Should I now go and not onely forbeare my assent unto it, but also ima­gine the contrary to counter-poise the soul's naturall [...] and inclination? blot out that [...], to try if I can write it better? What were this else but to lay faith to stake, and throw the die for it; to part with principles that we may try conclusions; to deny the truth that we may recover it a­gain by syllogismes; to cast a jewell into the sea, to see whe­ther we can dive and fetch it up again; with the Mounte­bank to wound for experiment; and become Atheists that we may convert our selves by reason; to tempt God to leave us, and to tempt the devil to destroy us. For my part, I professe, I see not how this can be put in practise withot being guilty of sinne and blasphemy. Let us therefore hold fast the truth by a stedfast faith, while we are examining do­ctrines, and by holinesse of life also: for the devil's great [Page 30] gains these late times have been, that while men are taken up with disputes about truths in question, they have too much neglected the practise of those that were indubitable.

Secondly, A means. we may look upon this latter duty as a means to help to the better performance of the former; if we hold fast the truth which we already have, we shall the more suc­cessefully prove the doctrines, and find out the truth; he that's faithfull in a little, ha's the promise of being ruler o­ver much; he that yields obedience unto truth, shall know more of it: if any man will do the will of God, he shall know the doctrine whether it be of God or no, John 7. 17. whereas on the contrary, a corrupt heart will breed a cor­rupt judgement, and either hinder the entertainment of truth at the first, or else procure the ejectment of it after­wards out of the soul: but more of this hereafter.

Thirdly, An end. we might also look upon these later words as the end of the foregoing duty: let this be your aim and de­signe in proving all things, to wit, that you may hold fast that which is good. Have recourse unto the Scriptures that you may know what is good, have recourse unto Scriptures that you may believe it: for, haec scripta sunt ut credatis, the ensuring of our faith was the end of the writing of the Scriptures. This then condemns Scepticisme, and the Academicks [...]. Again, prove all things that you may practise that which is good, not that you may enter­tain your selves with jejune and idle speculations; the end and fruit and perfection of knowledge is practise: know­ledge is a precious talent, which is given unto us not to be hidden in a napkin, but that we should [...], trade or work with it. Unlesse the fruits of good living do grow up­on the tree of knowledge, it will never become to us a tree of life. I shall leave others to dispute where Paradise was situate, but our Saviour ha's placed happinesse between [Page 31] those two,2. Abso­lutely. the tree of life, and the tree of knowledge. John 13. 17. If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them. The more we know God, the more we love him, and the more we love him, still the more do we desire to know of him: so is it here, the end of the knowledge of truth is that we may practise it, and practise is a means of knowing more, as the water comes from the ocean to the fountains, and returns to it again by the rivers. Col. 1.9, 10. We de­sire that ye may be filled with the knowledge of his will, in all wisdome and spirituall understanding, that ye might walk wor­thy of the Lord in all well-pleasing, (there's the first:) being fruitfull in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God, (there's the second). Let it be our care therefore, bre­thren, so to try all things as not to let go our hold of the things that are good; and hold fast that which is good, that we may the better prove all things: and let this be the end of all our proofs and of all our trialls, that having found out that which is good, we may believe and practse accor­dingly. Thus have I done with the words in their relative consideration: I come now to speak to them absolutely and in themselves.