Charity Mistaken demanded. His demand was, (and it was most reasonable,) that you would once give us a list of all fundamentals, the denial whereof destroys salvation; whereas the denial of other points not fundamental may stand with salvation, although both these kinds of points be equally proposed as revealed by God. For if they be not equally proposed, the difference will arise from diversity of the proposal, and not of the matter fundamental or not fundamental. This catalogue only can shew how far protestants may disagree without breach of unity in faith; and upon this many other matters depend according to the ground of protestants. But you will never adventure to publish such a catalogue. I say more; you cannot assign any one point so great or fundamental, that the denial thereof will make a man a heretic, if it be not sufficiently propounded as a Divine truth. Nor can

you assign any one point so small, that it can without heresy be rejected, if once it be sufficiently represented as revealed by God.

66

"

2. Nay, this your instance in the Creed is not only impertinent, but directly against you. For all points in the Creed are not of their own nature fundamental, as I shewed before; and yet it is damnable to deny any one point contained in the Creed. So that it is clear, that to make an error damnable it is not necessary that the matter be of itself fundamental. 3. Moreover, you cannot ground any certainty upon the Creed itself, unless first you presuppose that the authority of the church is universally infallible, and consequently that it is damnable to oppose her declarations, whether they concern matters great or small, contained or not contained in the Creed. This is clear; because we must receive the Creed itself upon a Cap. iii. n. 3.

6

the credit of the church, without which we could not know that there was any such thing as that which we call the Apostles' Creed. And yet the arguments whereby you endeavour to prove that the Creed contains all fundamental points are grounded upon supposition, that the Creed was made either by the apostles themselves or by the church of their times from them:' which thing we could not certainly know, if the succeeding and still continued church may err in her traditions; neither can we be assured, whether all fundamental articles which you say were, out of the scriptures, summed and contracted into the Apostles' Creed,' were faithfully summed and contracted, and not one pretermitted, altered, or mistaken, unless we undoubtedly know that the apostles composed the Creed; and that they intended to contract all fundamental points of faith into it; or at least that the church of their times' (for it seemeth you doubt whether indeed it were composed by the apostles themselves) did understand the apostles aright; and that 'the church of their times' did intend that the Creed should contain all fundamental points. For if the church may err in points not fundamental, may she not also err in the particulars which I have specified ? Can you shew it to be a fundamental point of faith, that the apostles intended to comprise all points of faith necessary to salvation in the Creed? Yourself say no more than that it is very probable;' which is far from reaching to a fundamental point of faith. Your probability is grounded upon the judgment of antiquity, and even of the Roman doctors,' as you say in the same place. But if the catholic church may err, what certainty can you expect from antiquity or doctors? Scripture is your total rule of faith.

6

Cite

therefore some text of scripture to prove that the apostles, or 'the church of their times,' composed the Creed, and composed it with a purpose that it should contain all fundamental points of faith: which being impossible to be done, you must for the Creed itself rely upon the infallibility of the church.

66

4. Moreover, the Creed consisteth not so much in the words, as in their sense and meaning. All such as pretend to the name of Christians recite the Creed, and yet many have erred fundamentally, as well against the articles of the Creed, as other points of faith. It is then very frivolous to say, the Creed contains all fundamental points; without specifying both in what sense the articles of the Creed be true, and also in what true sense they be fundamental. For both these tasks you are to perform, who teach that all truth is not fundamental: and you do but delude the ignorant when you say, that the Creed, taken in a catholic sensed,' comprehendeth all points fundamental; because with you all catholic sense' is not fundamental; for so it were necessary to salvation that all Christians should know the whole scripture, wherein every least point hath a catholic sense. Or if by 'catholic sense' you understand that sense which is so universally to be known and believed by all, that whosoever fails therein cannot be saved, you trifle, and say no more than this; all points of the Creed, in a sense necessary to salvation, are necessary to salvation:' or, 'all points fundamental are fundamental.' 'After this manner it were an easy thing to make many true prognostications, by saying, it will certainly rain when it raineth. You say the Creed was opened and explained in some parts' in the Creeds of Nice, &c.

d Page 216.

6

e

e Page 216.

But how shall we understand the other parts,' not explained in those Creeds?

5. "For what article in the Creed is more fundamental, or may seem more clear, than that wherein we believe Jesus Christ to be the Mediator, Redeemer, and Saviour of mankind, and the founder and foundation of a catholic church, expressed in the Creed? And yet about this article how many different doctrines are there, not only of old heretics, as Arius, Nestorius, Eutyches, &c., but also of protestants, partly against catholics, and partly against one another? For the said main article of Christ's being the only Saviour of the world, &c., according to different senses of disagreeing sects, doth involve these and many other such questions that faith in Jesus Christ doth justify alone that sacraments have no efficiency in justification—that baptism doth not avail infants for salvation, unless they have an act of faith-that there is no sacerdotal absolution from sins-that good works proceeding from God's grace are not meritorious—that there can be no satisfaction for the temporal punishment due to sin, after the guilt or offence is pardoned— no purgatory-no prayers for the dead-no sacrifice of the mass-no invocation-no mediation or intercession of saints-no inherent justice-no supreme pastoryea, no bishop by Divine ordinance—no real presenceno transubstantiation; with divers others. And why? because, forsooth, these doctrines derogate from the titles of Mediator, Redeemer, Advocate, Foundation, &c. ; yea, and are against the truth of our Saviour's human nature, if we believe divers protestants writing against transubstantiation. Let then any judicious man consider, whether Dr. Potter or others do really satisfy, when they send men to the Creed for a perfect catalogue, to distinguish points fundamental from

If he will

those which they say are not fundamental. speak indeed to some purpose, let him say, This article is understood in this sense, and in this sense it is fundamental; that other is to be understood in such a meaning; yet according to that meaning it is not so fundamental but that men may disagree, and deny it without damnation. But it were no policy for any protestant to deal so plainly.

6. "But to what end should we use many arguments? Even yourself are forced to limit your own doctrine, and come to say, that the Creed is a perfect catalogue of fundamental points, 'taken as it was further opened and explained in some parts (by occasion of emergent heresies) in the other catholic Creeds of Nice, Constantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon, and Athanasius.' But this explication or restriction overthroweth your assertion. For as the Apostles' Creed was not to us a sufficient catalogue till it was explained by the first council, nor then till it was declared by another, &c., so now also, as new heresies may arise, it will need particular explanation against such emergent errors; and so it is not yet, nor ever will be, of itself alone, a particular catalogue, sufficient to distinguish betwixt fundamental and not fundamental points.

6

7. "I come to the second part, That the Creed doth not contain all main and principal points of faith:' and to the end we may not strive about things either granted by us both, or nothing concerning the point in question, I must premise these observations:

8. "First, that it cannot be denied but that the Creed is most full and complete, to that purpose for which the holy apostles, inspired by God, meant that it should serve, and in that manner as they did intend