Project Canterbury

William Law's

Defence of Church Principles:

edited by

J. O. NASH, M.A., AND CHARLES GORE, M.A.
Of the Pusey House, Oxford

LONDON
GRIFFITH FARRAN & CO.
NEWBERY HOUSE, 39 CHARING CROSS ROAD

[6]

SUMMARY OF CONTENTS.

LETTER I.

PAGE

INTRODUCTION: The Bishop of Bangor’s views dangerous to the Constitution of
the Church as a regular Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

§I. "The favour of God equally follows every equal degree of sincerity" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Ans. Their sincerity against Christ is as pleasing to God as sincerity for Him.

§II. "Vain words of regular and uninterrupted successions". . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Ans. 1. This is disloyal to the Church of England.
Ans. 2. Unless Christ appointed a ministry, all things are common, anyone may officiate.
Ans. 3. If Christ did send ministers, with authority to send others, this authority can only pass by regular succession.

§III. "Vain words of nullity and validity of God’s ordinances". . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Ans. This is to encourage divisions and to declare there is no need of uniting.

§IV. Of authority in the kingdom of Christ . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

"As to the affairs of conscience and eternal salvation, Christ hath left no visible human authority behind Him."

Ans. 1. The Bishop’s arguments conclude not only against absolute but against all degrees of authority.
Ans. 2. Church authority though it is not absolute yet is a real authority.

§V. ‘The exclusion of the Papists from the throne was not on account of their religion as such, but of its fatal effects’. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 71

Ans. This distinction is prodigious deep.

§VI. Of Prayer as "a calm and undisturbed address to God". . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

Ans. Calmness may simply mean indifference.

[38]

LETTER II.

INTRODUCTION: The Bishop ridicules "the trifles and niceties of authoritative benedictions, absolutions, excommunications."
"You cannot expect the grace of God from any hands but His own without affronting Him" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 80

§I. Of authoritative Benediction in

1. Confirmation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

2. Ordinance of Clergy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

3. Consecration in the Lord’s Supper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

The Bishop’s doctrine condemns the Apostles, their successors, the Church of England, and himself.

§II. Scripture evidence for a human ministry shows that it has always been God’s ordinary method to dispense His blessings and judgments by the hands of men. At the same time, He has given the clergy no arbitrary powers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 90

§III. Objection ‘that the clergy are subject to the common frailties of mankind’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

Ans. It is to God’s glory that the treasure is in earthen vessels. If natural frailty incapacitate for being a channel of grace,
then the sacraments and all positive Christian institutions fall. But if inanimate things can convey grace, much more can men.

§IV. Ecclesiastical character is sacred because derived from the Holy Ghost. It was He who consecrated the Saviour, and
instituted the order of clergy. The Sacraments and the Scriptures stand only by the same authority; therefore we could as
well make new sacraments, or a new Bible, as a new priesthood. The order of the clergy is of as necessary obligation as the
sacraments, and as unalterable as the Holy Scriptures . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

§V. Priestly benediction is authoritative and effectual, not by natural powers of men but by commission from God. It operates
not to the injury of the laity but for their benefit . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

The Deist Tindal, like the Bishop, would preserve order, yet denies any particular order. But order cannot be
enforced on these principles.

§VI. Of Absolution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . 111

Obj. (a.) ‘Authoritative absolution must be infallible; but as men are not infallible they cannot absolve.’
Ans. 1. Authoritative absolution need not be infallible.
[39] Ans. 2. The Christian religion and the sacraments are not infallible in their effects, yet are authoritative.
Obj. (b.) ‘Not all Apostolic powers have descended to ministers in all ages, therefore power of absolution need not.’
Ans. The clergy have not claimed all Apostolic powers but have always claimed this one.
Obj. (c.) ‘It is blasphemy to claim to bless or not bless absolutely, for it supposes God has put a set of men above Himself.’
Ans. 1. None ever claimed to bless or withhold blessing absolutely. The clergy are utterly and continually dependent
on God for all effectiveness.
Ans. 2. The sacraments are necessary to salvation, yet they do not dethrone God, nor do they benefit except conditionally.
Ans. 3. Mistaken or unjust use of absolution is visited not on the people but on the clergy.

§VII. The commission to the Apostles to remit or retain sins . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120

Obj. (a.) ‘They might possibly understand by this the power of laying hands on the sick.’
Ans. "Whomsoever ye shall heal on earth I will heal in heaven," which is absurd.
Obj. (b.) ‘If the Apostles absolved particular persons it was by infallible communication of God’s will.
But they did not absolve.’
Ans. They absolved in baptism, and there is no reason to suppose infallibly.

§VIII. Remission of sins in our Lord’s case . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

Obj. (a.) ‘He meant a power of miraculously releasing man from his afflictions.’
Ans. His words are express: ‘The son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins." His kingdom was founded for
the remission of sins.
Obj. (b.) ‘His expression was, "Thy sins are forgiven thee;" thus acknowledging that God alone forgiveth sin.’
Ans. 1. The expression does not forbid that it was Christ who forgave.
Ans. 2. Christ claims also other prerogatives peculiar to God.
Ans. 3. The Apostles ascribe to Christ the attributes of God.
Ans. 4. But the Bishop here declares against the divinity of Christ.

[40]

§IX. ‘If Church communion were necessary, conscientious men who cannot accept it are out of God’s favour; but if
they joined against their conscience, they would be equally out of His favour; which is absurd’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 136

Ans. Conscience may be erroneous. Such men must follow their conscience and be left to God’s uncovenanted mercies. But Church communion, as well as Christian truth in general, do not cease to be binding because some do not believe in it.

§X. His Lordship’s nine propositions, which make it impossible to convert any Quaker, Socinian, or Jew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 142

§XI. The obligation to Church communion and the powers of the ministry no more infringe the rights of the laity than do the
claims of the Ten Commandments, the Sacraments, or the Scriptures . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

POSTSCRIPT.

Doctrine of the Apostolic succession. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 148

§I. ‘That the uninterrupted succession of the clergy is not mentioned in Scripture as necessary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

Ans. Neither is the Bible expressly mentioned in Scripture as the permanent rule of faith, nor the Sacraments expressly
declared to be generally necessary and perpetual means of grace, nor any government at all as essential. But these truths
and the doctrine of the order of clergy also, with its three degrees and constant succession, may be gathered from
Scripture and confirmed by the universal practice. of the Church in all ages.

§ II. ‘The Episcopal order of clergy is only an apostolic practice but not all apostolic practices bind us’ . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156

Ans. 1. Not all apostolic practices are necessary; yet some may be. Which these are we distinguish by the nature of
the things, by the tenor of Scripture, and by the testimony of antiquity.
Ans. 2. The divine right of Episcopacy is not founded merely on apostolic practice. A positive Christian institution,
such as the priesthood, can only be continued by the method God appointed. Apostolic practice tells that Episcopacy
is the divine method, but the obligation is God’s command.

§III. ‘That this uninterrupted succession is so uncertain that we could not be sure we are in the Church’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 161

Ans. 1. It rests on historical evidence, as do the canon of Scripture and Christianity itself, and is never known
to have been broken.
[41] Ans. 2. A break is morally impossible owing to the belief in all ages of the Church that only Episcopal ordination is valid.
Ans. 3. The Bishop allows the succession to have been preserved in the Church of Rome.

§IV. ‘That it is a Popish doctrine, and gives Papists an advantage over us’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165

Ans. There is the same degree of Popery in asserting the necessity of Christianity and a right faith.

§V. Additional remarks upon the Bishop’s doctrine of ‘Sincerity’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

LETTER III.

INTRODUCTION. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168

CHAPTER I. OF THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH.

§1. Obj. ‘The Church or Kingdom of Christ means the universal invisible Church, which consists of the number of men dispersed or united who are truly subjects to Christ.’ Hoadly Ans. to Repres. of Convoc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172

Ans. This doctrine of the invisible Church contradicts (i.) Scripture ; (ii.) Article xix.; (iii.) Does not concern the question at issue.

(i.) Scripture: The Church on earth is a visible Kingdom, a Net, a Feast; containing good and bad.

§II. The Bishop asks ‘if his doctrine hurts the universal invisible Church, or the universal visible Church, or some particular visible Church’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 177

Ans. There is but one Church on earth, and that external and visible. An invisible Church would be in no danger.

§III. ‘This doctrine of the universal invisible Church is the only true account of the Church of Christ in the mouth of a Christian’ .. . . . . 181

Ans. This overthrows the visible Church, and contradicts our Saviour.

§IV. (ii.) Article xix.: The Bishop says ‘the article is speaking of the visible Church, he of the invisible one. Does membership in the invisible Church prevent membership in any visible one ?’. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183

Ans. To call the invisible Church the only true one is to depreciate the visible one. The question is not whether a man may join the visible Church, but whether he must.

[42]

§V. The Bishop’s invisible Church ‘is not concerned with the outward acts of which the article speaks’ . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187

Ans. 1. Then it is possible to be a Christian without open profession of Christianity, or observance of Christ’s
ordinances, or any kind of Church membership. This is flat against the Gospel.
Ans. 2. The so-called "invisible Church" really means not those who do not use external ordinances and do not
belong to any visible communion, but those who are inwardly what they profess outwardly. But Christianity
demands outward acts, and mere sincerity does not make a Church.

§VI. (iii.) But the doctrine of the invisible Church is a mere speculation, and has nothing whatever to do with the matter at
issue. The whole controversy is whether it be as safe to be in one external visible communion as in another. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 193

§VII ‘"My Kingdom is not of this world." These are the words in which our Lord declares the nature of His Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 198

Ans. These words do not say what the Kingdom is, but what it is not. They in no sense do away with the visible
Church and the duty of belonging to it; or do away with the threefold ministry and its divine authority.

CHAPTER II.—OF CHURCH AUTHORITY.

§I. Argument from the nature of authority . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 207

"If the decisions of any men can affect the state of Christ’s subjects with regard to the favour of God, then the
salvation of some Christians depends upon the sentence passed by others."—Hoadly, Ans. to Reprees.

Ans. This argument tells equally against the authority of parents, masters, and princes. But in none of these
cases does authority mean absolute authority.

§II. Argument from the nature of obedience. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212

‘If some men have power to determine the religion of others, all religions become equal as regards God’s favour,
for the subject members are not allowed to judge whether they are right or wrong.’

Ans. Here, too, the obedience owed is not unlimited or unconditional.

§III. The Bishop denies only an ‘authority in matters purely relating to conscience and eternal salvation, for the eternal
[43] salvation of some Christians cannot depend on the sentence of others’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215

Ans. All lawful authority affects our eternal salvation so far as disobedience to it is sin.

§IV. The Reformation. 1. "If there be a Church authority I beg to know how can the Reformation itself be justified?" . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 222

Ans. The Bishop himself has defended resistance to the abuse of a real authority.

§V. 2. ‘At the time of the Reformation there was an order claiming spiritual authority. To justify the Reformation is to prove
such claim to be false’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 225

Ans. To justify the Revolution is not to prove that the king had no lawful authority, but that he abused it.

§VI. 3. ‘But if Church authority exist now, the Church of Rome must have had it then, and it was unjustifiable to reject it’ . . . . .. . . . . . . . 229

Ans. To set aside a tyrannical authority is not to reject all authority.

§VII. 4. The Bishop implicitly admits that not all separation is schism, and that lawful separation does not justify all separations. . . .. . . 232

Note.—A Remarkable Evasion of the Bishop’s in relation to Church Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236

§ 1. The Committee of Convocation charge the Bishop with denying to the Church all authority to judge in the affairs of conscience.

The Bishop answers that ‘he only denies to the Church the power to pass the final and irreversible sentence.’

§ 2. Similar evasion in saying that ‘by the Church he meant only the invisible Church.’

§ 3. The Bishop claims to be refuting some churchmen, also Roman Catholics, and lastly Dean Sherlock. His arguments must therefore be supposed to be directed against some position held by them.

CHAPTER III.—OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH AS IT RELATES
TO EXCOMMUNICATION.

The Bishop’s assertion that excommunication

1. ‘Is something which every Christian has a right to exercise’. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251

2. ‘Has no effect upon the person excommunicated so as to make his condition either better or worse before God’ . . . . . . . . . . 251

[44] 3. ‘Is merely the common right to avoid scandalous sinners.’

§I. Ans. 1. Power of excommunication is a power by Christ’s authority vested in particular persons. 2. It is a judicial power.
3. Christians therefore are bound to avoid the excommunicate, because by God’s authority they are turned out of His kingdom. . . . . . . 252

Ans. 1. It is a power confined to particular persons
(A.) From the nature of the thing.
(B.) From the account of its institution in Scripture.

(a) It is an authority which belongs to the Church and not to private Christians.
(b) It is not exercised by a majority but by special persons.

Ans. 2. It is a judicial power.

(c) It alters the condition of the excommunicated person.
(d) And has God’s express Promise of ratification.

Ans. 3. Excommunication is a divine positive punishment as truly as Baptism is a divine positive blessing, and
Christians are bound to avoid those under sentence.

Example of its exercise upon the incestuous Corinthian . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253

§II. The effects of Spiritual Punishments . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261

1. Primary and intended.

(a) To preserve the honour of God and of His Church.
(b) To reform offenders.
(c) To warn the Church in general.

2. Accidental effects in the other world. An increase of guilt.

(a) Through contempt of Christ’s tribunal.
(b) Through neglect of God’s most awakening call.

§III. The Bishop’s arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 266

1. "That the incestuous Corinthian incurred God’s displeasure solely on account of his behaviour; and his
excommunication did not add to God’s displeasure, nor would the want of it have diminished it."—Ans. to Rep.

Ans. This does not agree with Scripture.

2. ‘That if he had died impenitent, the sentence would have ,had no effect in the other world. It is not the censure
that makes the guilt.’

Ans. (a) This would be equally true, on the Bishop’s reasoning, of a sentence pronounced directly by God.
Ans. (b) Or of Christ’s sentence at the last day.
Ans. (c) Or of God’s temporal chastisements.
[45] Ans. (d) It would follow that the coming of Christ has not increased men’s responsibility.

3. That "supposing excommunication wrongly inflicted on Christian, he is equally in the favour of God."

Ans. (a) This does not alter the effect of a just sentence.
Ans. (b) The power of sacraments and of the Christian revelation are also conditional, yet are not therefore ineffectual.

§IV. Concluding observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279

1. The Bishop’s reasoning would make Baptism useless.

2. Would reduce the Ten Commandments to mere trifles.

3. Ans. to Obj. that the commandments and Church sentences are not
on the same level.

CHAPTER IV.—OF CHURCH AUTHORITY AS IT RELATES TO
EXTERNAL COMMUNION.

INTRODUCTION. What is the authority of the Church?. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286

"I know of no Church authority to oblige Christians to external communion, nor anything to determine them but their own consciences."—Ans. to Rep.

§I. It is assumed that we are called by the authority of God to embrace Christianity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289

1. But Christianity is a method of life, the profession of which involves external communion.
2. The authority to oblige us, other than our own consciences, lies in the common or essentially social nature of Christianity.
3. If there be no such obligation, then for the peace of the Church we ought to join with no one single body.
4. How comes there then to be such a sin as schism ?
5. If no obligation to be churchmen, then there is none to be baptised.
6. And no obligation to be communicants.

§II. In sum (a) The authority which obliges us to external communion is the same which obliges us to be Christians . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 301

(b) This may be called Church authority, because it arises from the very nature of the Church, and was in the Church before N. T. scriptures were written.
(c) The obligation is as absolute as the obligation to baptism.

[46]

§III. The Bishop might say his meaning is merely, he knows of no human authority to oblige to external communion: it is answered . . . 303

1. The phrase used is "no church authority."
2. Why did he not say he meant this, and declare the true authority ?
3. Further he said " I know not anything to determine."
4. The words, "not anything but their own consciences," exclude all positive laws, human and divine.

§IV. The Bishop may say lie denies only in authority that can oblige us to any particular external communion . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 307

Ans. The obligation to external communion with the Church of Christ in general, and the obligation to external
communion with any particular Church, is one and the same.

Propositions which follow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 307

1. The same authority which requires us to embrace Christianity requires us to enter the local branch of the Church.
2. This authority is of God, not by human (ie., civil) laws.
3. This authority of God may rightly be called Church authority.
4. It is not unjust that civil laws should confirm the law of God.
5. Yet the obligation to Church membership does not rest on civil law, and in case of conflict the divine law must
override all other.

CHAPTER V.—OF SINCERITY AND PRIVATE JUDGMENT.

§I. Obj. ‘That the choice of an external communion is thus resolved into
private judgment’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 315

Ans. In the acceptance of Christianity, and in every part of duty there is left a choice of judgment. But this does
not destroy the force of authority.

§II. The question is whether Christ instituted any particular method of external communion. But the Bishop holds that
"our title to God’s favour can only depend upon our real sincerity. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318

Ans. This doctrine of sincerity overthrows all the terms of salvation laid down in Scripture.

§ III. The Bishop’s assertion "that the Protestants were only justified through the persuasion of their own consciences". . . . . . . .. . . . . 322

[47] Ans. Those who leave a true religion and they who leave a false, through sincere persuasion, are
not equally justified.

1. Argument from the nature of Religion.
2. Argument from the nature of Sincerity.

1. Argument from the nature of Religion.

(a.) If things true and right are more acceptable to God than things false and wrong, then a
true religion and sincerity in it must be more acceptable than a false religion and sincerity in that.
(b.) But if sincerity in any religion entitles us to the same degrees of God’s favour, then no religion
is better than another.

The Bishop’s defence, "What I said about private persuasion relates to the justification of man
before God, not to the excellency of one religion over another."

Ans. To justify man before God is the only excellency of a religion.

2. Argument from the nature of Sincerity.

Persuasion is not the only thing which recommends to God, for it may be founded on a wrong motive.

Obj. ‘This would not be sincere persuasion.’

Ans. (a.) On the Bishop’s principles that man is sincere who thinks himself sincere.
Ans. (b.) A man may as easily be mistaken concerning his own sincerity as concerning true religion.

CHAPTER VI.—OF THE REFORMATION.

§I. ‘If there be a Church authority to oblige people to external communion, how can the Reformation be justified? For there
was a Church authority then, and the Reformers violated it’ . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332

Ans. What the Reformers broke were not the Divine laws obliging to Church communion, but human laws which bound us to Rome. These latter could only be obeyed by violating the laws of Christ. Therefore disobedience was necessary.

§ II. ‘But the Reformation was right, for men are their own judges as to Church communion’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334

[48] Ans. This is to reject all authority in religion, and Jews, Turks, and Infidels are equally justified. The Reformers
must stand or fail by reference to the instituted terms of Christ’s salvation.

The defence of the Church of England is that it maintains all those orders, institutions, and doctrines which
Christ has made necessary to salvation. And hence it is a true Church. And because it is a true Church, wilful
separation from it is the sin of schism.

§III. ‘The Reformers treated all excommunications as upon an equal foot and disregarded all alike’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339

Ans. It would be as good sense to say we disregard all the Christian faith and all the Bible, because we
differ from Rome concerning the Faith and the canon of Scripture.

return to Project Canterbury