AN

ANSWER to OBJECTIONS

AGAINST

Impartial Liberty.

T

HE Controverfy about Church Power, and Chriftian Liberty, is of the greateft Confequence to the Proteftant Religion in the World. It muft ftand and fall with the Iffue of this Debate. Popery has no other Foundation than the Abfolute Power of the Church; nor has the Proteftant Religion any o ther, than Impartial Liberty, in fearching the Scriptures. It's a good Omen however to the Caufe of Liberty, to fee what Defenders it' has on the One Side, and what fort of Oppofers on the Other. May every Cause I value, be ever fo defended, and fo oppofed! One would think the famous Difpute between Michael and the Devil, were fought over again in the Perfons of Men; there is fo much of the railing Accufation on the One Side, and fo much of the Angel Temper on the Other. Tannerus, Valentia, and Bellarmine, and other Advocates for the Tyranny of Mother Church, wrote with

A 2

with fome Confiftency: They understood their Cause, and made the best on't; but the Prefent Patrons of English Popery, are neither underftood by Themfelves nor any Body else: unlefs a Man can underftand Abfolute Power of the Church, confiftent with the Liberty of Private Judgment; and that the Church has a Right in it Self to be abfolutely obeyed, upon Conditions and Limitations: And that there is an indifpenfable Ob ligation upon the Subjects of Chrift, to an abfolute Obedience to the meer Authority of the Church, in Jome Inftances; which indifpenfable Obligation is difpenfed with, it feems, in fome other Inftances. Now when I meet with the Conditions upon which the Abfolute is founded, and the Difpenfation-Inftances of an Indifpenfable Authority, I immediately fay with my felf, Lord grant that I may have to do with fuch as Bellarmine, &c. or any that know what they would be at! I defpair of coming at the State of the Controverfy from fuch Writers as thefe, who manage indeed as if they had an abfolute Authority to talk Nonfence with due Limitations and Restrictions.

I have a Correfpondent, that has ftated his Pretenfions for the Abfolute Power of the Church, or his Objections against the Liberty of Private Judgment, in a Manner that fhews his Meaning; without fhuffling backward and forward, faying and unfaying; to whom I am to return an Anfwer in the following Letter.

SIR,

I

SIR,

Have always thought it an Effential of the Proteftant Doctrine, that when a Chriftian has used the beft Means in his Power to examine and find out the Truth, he has a Right to the Liberty of judging for himself, and that this belongs to every individual Chriftian; who for the certain Information of his own Judgment, and the full Satisfaction of his. Confcience, may, and ought to try by the Word of God, not only the Doctrines of Particular Paftors, but the Decrees of Councils; and fo far as he finds them agreeable to the Word of God, to receive them; and fo far as they are otherwise, to reject them.

You have many Objections against this Doctrine, and fo have a great many of the Clergy; who having got up by this very DoArine into the Benefices of the Popish Clergy, are for pulling up the Ladder after them. Your firft Objection is in thefe Terms.

This Private Judgment has been the Caufe of all Errors, Herefies and Schifms; has led People into thofe Sects and Divifions which Men would not be in Danger of, if obliged to adhere to the Publick and Eftablished Faith.

Sir, You should have taken your Rise a little higher, and have told us, that it is Thinking that is in the Fault. Thinking is the Caufe of Judging, Judging the Caufe of Error, and Herefy, and Schifm, Ergo, away with Thinking; and the rather, because where Men will but Implicitly adhere to the Publick and Established Faith, there is no need for thinking at all; for they who judge for me have thought for me already; and what need I think for my felf, when I must not judge for my felf?

You

You fhould have told me, what this fame Herefy and Schifm are; or elfe, I fhall fall to thinking about them for my felf. I fhall think Schifm to be, not the differing from any others in Opinion; nor Separation from them, if it were only for my Convenience; but the uncharitable Quarrelling with them upon that Difference, and cenfuring them for it. In fhort, the Ravishing away from a Chriftian his Liberty of Private Judgment, has, in my Mind, a great deal of Schifmatical in it. Schifms and Divifions do not arise from different Opinions, but from fuch clashing Tempers and Interests in Men, as won't allow of fuch differences; and befides, where there is a pretended Oneness and Agreement in Opinions, yet we fee the most fcandalous Quarrels, Schifms and Factions.

Herefy is a word of ambiguous Sence. You know, how it changes with the Climate. In Italy it is to deny Tranfubftantiation; in England, it varies with the Company a Man goes into. With Doctor Hickes and his Church, the Revolution Church is Heretical. You now fee the three great Impediments that hinder us (says the Doctor) from joining with the Revolution-Church of England, Schifm, Herefy, and unrighteous Devotions. We charge that Communion with bea ing like the Church of Rome, corrupt in its Doarine, Worship, and Miniftry *. I am very much inclined to think, that to affert the abfolute Power of the Church is Herefy; not only because it is contrary to the Articles of the Church of England, which disclaims fuch Power; but becaufe it feems to me to come

* Dr. Hickes's Colle&. of Papers, p. 313.

within

within the best Account of Herefy I have met with, viz. That by Herefy we are to underftand, fuch Error which is Destructive of true Religion, and of the Souls of Men; neither of which has been fo effectually done, as where this Power has moft prevailed; where Religion is destroyed for the Good of the Church, and the People perish for lack of Knowledge, in a moft obedient manner.

Thofe Errors, which you, Sir, would call Heresy, may be run into by a Publick Judgment and Authority, as well as a Private. Whether we look to Synods or National Councils, Confiftories, or Convocations; it is easy to produce Inftances of the greatest and worst Errors that have prevail'd in these. 'Tis plain to every ones Understanding, that if every single Perfon in thefe Colle&ive Bodies be liable to Error, the whole Body may be so too; for, the greatest Number of Fallibles can no more make one Infallibility, than the greatest Number of Finites can make one Infinite. Religion it may be has been, and is corrupted by those in Authority, as well as by Private Perfons; ay, and I won't fcruple to add, is as likely to be fo. This Objection then will hold against publick as well as private Judgment. Take away the Liberty of Private, and the Danger is infinitely greater. A private Judgment can infect none that are not willing to take it, or fed into it by Conviction; but a Publick Impofition fpreads far and wide, carries along with it vast Numbers; nay, muft carry all along with it. Such Herefies by this Means will be much more effectually propagated to fucceeding Generations: For where will thefe Confcience-Drivers allow a Man to stop and judge for him

felf?