"G. My Lord, the Sacraments are the Signs or "Seals of our Faith, as Circumcifion was call'd Rom. . II. but not the Faith itself; and therefore are not put into the Summary of our Faith, » pag. 17.

" 4. V.

L. Sr, you have made a wonderful Discovery in telling me, that the Sacraments are not the Faith itself. But tho they be not the Faith itself (which is a Theological Virtue, and the Act of it an inward Affent of the Mind) are they not the Objects of Christian Faith as well as the Signs or Seals of it? Is there nothing reveal'd concerning Baptifm or the Lord's Supper, which we are bound to believe? This would be pleafing Doctrine to Quakers: but I prefume no Chritian Divine will relish it.

» G. They are generally neceffary, as our Cate» chifm Words it: that is, to be reverently ufed, » when they may be had: but they are not absolu. tely neceffary. So that if our Circumstances or » Places where we live be fuch, as not to afford us » the Opportunity of Receiving the Sacraments we » should be damn'd for Want of them. I think » none will fay this. They are Mean's of God's Ap»pointment; therefore to be ufed when we can have » them. We are tied to this. But God, is not tied » to thofe Means, to which he ties us. He can save » us without them. Even of those five, which you » have more than we, you cannot fay they are fo » much as generally neceffary to Salvation: because » none can partake of them all. For your Sacrament » of Orders excludes all the Laity, and that of Marriage the Clergy. pag. 18.

L. I perceive, Sr, you are difpofed to be upon the Ramble. For fuppofing all you have said to be Strictly true (whereas it is liable to feveral Exceptions) what Connection has it with the Matter un

der debate? Our Difpute was, whether the Sacraments be not properly the Objects of Faith, tho they be not mention'd in the Creed? But instead of keeping to the Point in Question, you have made an Harangue to prove that the Use of them is not ab. folutely necessary to Salvation. Suppofe it be not, what then? Is there therefore nothing to be believed of them? The Truth of the Matter is, you know not well what you are bound to believe, what not. For where there are no Principles, or thofe very Principles are a Seed of Divifion, there can be no Steddinefs or Uniformity in Faith. And this is the Reason, why there are so many Sects and Divifions amongst you, all spawn'd from the Reformation.

G.

M

J. 14.

Of Sects, and Divifions.

Y Lord, not fo many with us as with « you. pag. 18. «

L. Stoutly faid, Sr; and I promise to be of your Opinion, when you can make out thefe three Things. 1. That Scripture interpreted by private Judgment is our Rule of Faith. 2. That we agree with you in your Latitudinarian Notion of the Church's Unity confifting in the bare Belief of common Christianity; and : 3dly, that we call Prefbyterians, Puritans, Independents, Anabaptifts, Quakers, &c. or any feparate Communion our Catholick Brethren as you call moft of them your Proteftant Brethren. Nay the very fundamental Principle of the Reformation as fuch, obliges you to call even those your Brethren, who are immediately gone out from you, and broke off from your Com amunion. Because they have all broke off from you upon the very fame Principles, on which you ground

ded your Separation from the Church of Rome. For, as you accufed her of Superftition, fo they repay you in your own Coin. And as you appeal'd from your Mother Church to Scriptures interpreted by your own darling private Judgment, fo they attack you with the very fame Weapon. And therefore you are anfwerable for all the Sects, that ever have divided, or ever will divide themselves from you.

» G. If a Church be anfwerable for all that break off from her, then you have all the Sects , you » have named to reckon for, and us too, which is one more. And if you are not anfwerable for thofe, that broke off from you, neither are we » answerable for those, that broke off from us, ≫ pag. 19.

L. No, Sr! I shall, convince you of your ᎷᎥᏝ . take. If either the Church of England, or any other Sect had broke off from us upon a Principle acknowledg'd by us, then we should be refponfable for their Separation. But fince we difown and deteft any fuch Principle, the Guilt of their Schifm lies at their own Doors, and cannot be charged upon the Church of Rome, But the Cafe is not fo with you. For you maintain a Principle, which cannot but produce Sects and Divifions. You make the Scriptures interpreted by private Judgment the Rule of your Faith: And pri vate Judgment is the fruitful Mother of Herefies and Schifms, And 'tis the true Reafon, why no Herefy ever came into the World without a Litter of Sects in the Belly of it. A rotten Dunghil is not fo fruitful in Breeding Vermin, as private Judgment interpreting Scriptures by its own Light is in Producing Sects. Yet by this Rule you guided yourselves in your Separation from the Church of Rome.

You have therefore fet the Pattern to Prefbyte vians, Puritans, Independents, Anabaptifts, Quakers

Free-thinkers, and other Sects, that have fwarm'd from you. They do but follow your Example: They are your faithful Difciples, and true Proteftant Bre thren in that very Principle, which divided them from you. So that you cannot blame their Separation from the Church of England without condemning your own Separation from the Church of Rome, and you are fully answerable both for their Schifm, and your own: Because it is the Fruit of a Tree of own Planting, and the natural Confequence of a Principle, you conftantly Maintain. But we have no fuch Principle, or Seed of Divifion in our Church, which makes us perfectly One among ourselves in all Articles of Faith.

your

G. So is every Church or Sect. That is, thofe « who agree among themselves, do agree. So that « this is no more a Mark of Unity, than every Di- «e vifion of Men can plead, and every Sect. pag. 19. L. Sr, nothing is more certain, than that they, who agree among themselves, do agree. But you will have fome Difficulty to convince me, that there can be the fame Harmony and Agreement in any Sect, or Body of Men, the very Foundation of whofe Religion is a Principle, or Seed of Divifion, as there is in a Church, which abhors that Principle. Can there be the fame Agreement among thofe, who are guided by their own private Judgment, as among thofe, who are bound to fubmit to the Authority of a Supreme Tribunal, from which there is no Appeal?

:

Your Miftake then lies here, viz. in Imagining that all the Members of any Sect of this or that Denomination agree in the fame System of Religion, which is morally impoffible. Because whoever makes privaty Judgment the Guide of his Faith, may change it with every Change of the Moon. Nay what feems Reason to day, may feem otherwife to Morrow: And

!

fo he will be incoherent not only with other Members of the fame Sect, but even with himself. Nay upon the fame Principle 'tis not impoffible, but a Sect of the fame external Denomination may be divided into as many Religions, as it has Families belonging to it, because their private Judgments may all differ, and they have no Principle of Unity to cement them: Whereas the Rule of Faith among Roman Catholicks (which is the Word of God, as interpreted by the Church, whofe 'Decrees all are bound to fubmit to) unites them all in the fame Belief; notwithstanding their prodigious Numbers, the Diverfity of their Interefts, Customs, and Languages; and tho they be the great Body of Chriftians, from which

all went forth.

» G. No, My Lord, not Half, nor ever were. The "Greek Church is an elder Church than yours: So » that you rather broke off from her by Setting up » your univerfal Supremacy; which she never own'd; » nor the many other numerous Churches of Afia, nor the Great, and once famous Churches of Afri» ca, nor the Empire of Russia of vaft Extent in Eu. » rope, once a Part of the Greek Church. These ne» ver own'd the Supremacy of Rome, and by far out» number all, that ever did own it, or were of her » Communion as fuch. And confidering how many » Nations and Kingdoms have broke off from her fince "the Reformation, her Communion is now reduced » to a small Part of the Christian Church in Compa » rifon of those that differ from her. pag. 19. 20.

L. Sr, there are but three material and notorious Falsehoods in what you have now faid: as I shall endeavour to convince you. 1. That the Church of Rome rather broke off from the Greek Church, than the Greek Church from the Church of Rome. 2. That neither the Greek Church, nor the other Churches