II. " That whence and from whom we first received our religion, there and with them we must abide therein; to them we must re- pair for guidance ; and return to their rule and conduct, if we have departed from them."
I have showed already that there is no privity of interests between us and the Romanists in this matter. But suppose we had been originally instructed in Christianity by men sent from Rome to that purpose (for unless we suppose this for the present, our talk is at an end), I see not, as yet, the verity of this proposition. With the truth, wherever it be, or with whomsoever, it is most certainly our duty to abide. And if those from whom we first received our Christianity, ministerially, abide in the truth, we must abide with them ; not be- cause they, or their predecessors, were the instruments of our con-
22 ANIMADVERSIONS ON A TREATISE
version, but because tbey abide in the truth. Setting aside this consideration of truth, which is the bond of all union, and that which fixeth the centre, and limits the bounds of it, one people's or one church's abiding with another in any profession of religion, is a thing merely indifferent. When we have received the truth from any, the formal reason of our continuance with them in that union which our reception of the truth from them gives unto us, is their abiding in the truth, and no other. Suppose some persons, or some church or churches, do propagate Christianity to another, and, in progi'ess of time, themselves fall off from some of those traths which they, or their predecessors, had formerly delivered unto those instructed by them (if our author shall deny that such a supposition can well be made, because it never did nor can fall out, I shall remove his exception by scores of instances out of antiquity, needless in so evi- dent a matter to be here mentioned) — what in this case would be their duty who received the gospel from them? Must they abide with them, follow after them, and embrace the errors they are fallen into, because they first received the gospel from them? I trow not. It Avill be found their duty to abide in the truth, and not pin their faith upon the sleeves of them by whom ministerially it was at first communicated unto them. " But this case," you will say, " concerns not the Roman church and Protestants; for as these abide not in the truth, so they never did nor can depart from it." AVell, then, that we may not displease them at present, let us put the case so as I presume they will own it. Suppose men, or a church, intrusted by Christ authoritatively to preach the gospel, do propagate the faith unto others according to their duties; these, being converted by their means, do afterward, through the craft and subtlety of seducers, fall in sundry things from the truths they were instructed in, and wherein their instructors do constantly abide ("Yea," say our adversaries, " this is the true case indeed") — I ask then, in this case, What is, and ought to be, the formal motive to prevail with these persons to return to their former condition, from whence they were fallen? Either this, That they are departed from the truth, which they cannot do without peril to their souls, and whereunto, if they return not, they must perish ; or this. That it is their duty to return to them from whom they first received the doctrine of Christianity, because they so re- ceived it from them. St Paul, who surely had as much authority in these matters as either the pope or church of Rome can with any modesty lay claim unto, had to deal with very many in this case. Particularly, after he had preached the gospel to the Galatians, and converted them to the faith of Christ, there came in some false teachers and seducers amongst them, which drew them off' from the truth wherein they had been instructed, in divers important and
ENTITLED FIAT LUX. 23
some fundamental points of it. What course clotli the apostle pro- ceed in towards them? Doth he plead with them about their falling away from him that first converted them? or falling away from the truth whereunto they were converted? If any one will take the pains to turn to any chapter in that epistle, he may be satisfied as to this inquiry: it is their falling away from the gospel, from the truth they had received, from the doctrine, in particular, of faith and justification by the blood of Christ, that alone he blamed them for; yea, and makes doctrines so far the measure and rule of judging and censuring of persons, whether they preach the word first or last, that he pronounceth a redoubled anathema against any creature in heaven or earth, upon a supposition of their teaching any thing contrary unto it, chap. i. 8. He pleads not, " We preached first unto you, by us you were converted ; and therefore with us you must abide, from whom the faith came forth unto you:" but saith, " If we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel, let him be accursed." This was the way he chose to insist on; and it may not be judged unrea- sonable if we esteem it better than that of theirs, who, by false pre- tending to have been our old, would very fain be our new masters. But the mentioned maxim lets us know that the persons and churches that have received the faith from the Roman church, or by means thereof, should abide under the rule and conduct of it, and, if de- parted from it, return speedily to due obedience. I think it will be easily granted, that if we ought to abide under its rule and conduct, whithersoever it shall please to guide us, we ought quickly to return to our duty and task, if we should make any elopement from it. It is not meet that those that are born mules to bondage should ever alter their condition. Only, we must profess we know not the springs of that unhappy fate which should render us such animals. Unto what is here pretended I only ask. Whether this right of presidency and rule in the Roman church, over all persons and churches pretended of old to be converted by her means, do belong unto her by virtue of any general right, that those who convert others should for ever have the conduct of those converted by them, or by virtue of some special privilege granted to the church of Rome above others? If the first or general title be insisted on, it is most certain that a very small pittance of jurisdiction will be left unto the Roman see, in comparison of that vast empire which now it hath or layetli claim unto, knowing no bounds but those of the universal nature of things here below. For all men know that the gospel was preached in very many places of the world before its sound reached unto Rome, and in most parts of the then known world before any such planting of a church at Rome as might be the foundation of any authoritative mission of any fi'om thence for the conversion of others; and after