From Reformation to Reformation

Marks , by which we are able to distinguish true Religion from false, so that we might be certain of the truth of our Religion, and at the same time persuade others of the true Religion, are supplied by our AUTHOR, § XVIII, XIX: even indeed, 1. Marks more General , by which the Christian Religion is discerned as true, in contrast with false Cults, to which Infidels adhere, § XVIII: 2. Marks more Specific , by which the genuineness of the Reformed Religion is able to appear

But Defection from the true Religion, whether unto Infidelity, or unto Heresy, is called Apostasy . In either case Apostasy verily obtains, and indeed emphatically in Defection unto Infidelity, when we not only depart from the true doctrine of Religion in one or another head, but together with the heads of Religion we deny its principia, and do not desire to be numbered with the professors of the Christian Religion: in our age defection unto Heresy is wont especially to be un

4. But every Error is not excluded from the true Religion, although it moves away from the doctrine and practice of true Religion: and so, if with JEROME on Galatians 5:20, page 195, you call him Heretic , who understands the Scripture differently than the sense of the Holy Spirit demands, by whom it was written, although he withdraw not from the Church:” there will be hardly anyone, who shall not find himself contaminated in one or the other thing with Heresy, since we le

3. Schism , which more directly indicates the broken Union of the Church, while Heresy denotes its abandoned faith. And, while Heresy has regard to diversity of opinions, Schism denotes dissension whether of hearts and affections, or of rites not necessary; sometimes with some sort of external communion continuing, but with the same commonly ceasing: Quæstione Euangelica XI, § 2, in operibus Augustini , tome 3, part 2, column 202, “It is wont to be asked how Schismatics

Thomas Hobbes Concerning Heresy Hobbes contends in the worst fashion, that no error pertains to the same; but that all private opinion, whether it be erroneous or not, obstinately defended against the laws of the State, is Heresy: but that it is impossible for any opinion to be heretical that the laws of the state appoint or permit to be taught publicly: that, on the other hand, the Christian Religion in the time of the pagan Emperors was a heresy: see COCQUIUS’ Anatomen Hob

When the Apostle prescribes to Titus to avoid , to reject , to repudiate a heretical man of this sort, Titus 3:10, see below Chapter XXXIII, § 21, he adds this reason for this his commandment in verse 11, εἰδὼς ὅτι ἐξέστραπται ὁ τοιοῦτος, καὶ ἁμαρτάνει, ὢν αὐτοκατάκριτος, knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself . In which a twofold, New Testament ἅπαξ λεγόμενον, hapax legomenon , occurs, namely, the verb ἐκστρέφειν, to subvert , a

2. Heresy , which words is Greek in origin from αἱρέω and αἱρέομαι, especially in the sense of choosing , and of apprehending anything with the embrace of the will. In the common and neutral sense it denotes an opinion, belief, doctrine, to which many men are addicted, or even a society of men, as the multifaceted Heresy of the ancient Philosophers was known: TERTULLIAN, de Resurrectione , chapter XI, page 331, “Among the Philosophers you have those that maintain that this

To True Religion is opposed, 1. Infidelity , in which case the name of Christian is not granted. For, although Infidelity might extend itself much further, and have a place even among those that with the mouth profess the Word of faith and also dwell in the external communion of the Church; indeed, in some measure even in the very faithful, complaining of their ὀλιγοπιστίᾳ, little faith , [1] and asking that the Lord might help their ἀπιστίᾳ/ unbelief , Mark 9:24; [2] Luk

In general, Impiety and Superstition are Opposed to Religion. And indeed, Impiety , as our AUTHOR holds, is opposed in Defect; which one may also call Profanity , and which obtains when a sinner, with due reverence for God shaken off, is unto such thoughts, words, and deed, by which the honor due to His consummate Perfection is trampled upon: Impious Men of this sort are mentioned by Job , Job 21:14, 15, the Psalmist, Psalm 94:3-7, etc. This Impiety was prevailing in the ol

But our AUTHOR does not suffer those inane boastings of our Adversaries concerning all the Fundamentals acknowledged by them, because they perhaps receive the Apostles’ Creed and the Decalogue. Thus Schlichtingius in his præfatione Symboli Apostolici , which he published in the name of the Polish Churches, as he says, which profess one God and His Only-Begotten Son Jesus Christ with the Holy Spirit: “That the Symbol called Apostolic is most ancient, and contains that simplest

These Fundamental Articles ought not to be excessively multiplied, as is done by the Papists according to their own will , to whom whatever the Roman Church defines to be Fundamental is Fundamental, the contradiction of which is to them an Error in Necessary Articles : see the Walenburch Brothers , in Examination III Principalibus , page 144. Now, among the necessary heads Rome has for some time now held the supremacy of the Roman Pope, Purgatory, Iconolatry, the real Pres

The Scholastic Papists had already furnished an occasion for disputation concerning determining the Number of Fundamental Articles , not infrequently asking in their Commentaries upon the Master of Sentences, [1] How many Articles of Faith are there? Then, the Socinians furnished an occasion, when they restrict the necessary and Fundamental doctrine concerning God to Six obvious heads. Especially the more recent Papists, the Methodists , among whom the Walenburch Brothers

These Articles are able to be reduced to certain Heads, which it is immediately evident are to be reckoned among the Fundamentals by an application of the Criteria just now given. 1. To the Principium of believing, or the Scripture to be reckoned as θεοπνεύστῳ/ inspired . Although our AUTHOR with respect to the individual parts of Scripture, of which sort formerly certain were doubtful, as appeared in Chapter II, § 13, if be absent heretical depravity in the rejection of n

Concerning the Criteria , by which Necessary Articles are distinguished from the non-necessary, our AUTHOR here discourses Negatively and Positively. . Negatively, Articles are not to be esteemed Necessary, α. From the Universal Consent of all those professing the name Christian : nevertheless, this is maintained by Smalcius [1] in his contra Smiglecium , [2] Hobbes [3] in his book de Cive , Jean Le Clerc [4] in his dissertation de eligenda inter Christianos dissentiente

Worst of all, the same Papists wish to free themselves from all Proof, and to devolve upon us alone the Burden of Proof , as much in Negative as in Positive Articles, and in inquiring into both the Truth and Necessity of the same. Thus they say that the proof is incumbent upon us, from the Scriptures, and indeed αὐτολεξεὶ, in the very words , while they admit not our Consequences, as it was seen in Chapter I, § 29, that the Bread is not transubstantiated into the Body of

In sections 10 and 11, our AUTHOR assesses the new Method devised by the Papists in the last century of disputing with Protestants, the inventor of which, or certainly the primary embellisher, and after whom also it is called the Veronian Method , is thought to be Franciscus Veronius , a Jesuit, [1] with a Vain-glorious book published under this title: Methodus nova facilis et solida, hæresin ex fundamento destruendi, et refutandi Confessionem Gallicam, Augustanam, Saxonica

Concerning Fundamental Articles of the Faith , FREDERIC SPANHEIM the Younger most learnedly and solidly, as always, has spoken openly and at length in diverse Disputations , which are found in his Operibus , tome 3, part 2. Where he forewarns, Disputation I, columns 1289 and following , that the question concerning Fundamental Articles and their determination is difficult in the extreme, of which matter he renders several reasons: of which sort there are, α. General rea

The rule concerning not admitting anything before Clear and Distinct Perception, and concerning every true thing, which has been thus perceived , has a bad ring to it in Theology. This rule, understood concerning the very Theological Matters revealed in Scripture, is held both by the Socinians , see above, Chapter II, § 40; and by the Remonstrants , who, with the Most Illustrious HEIDANUS [1] attributing it to and complaining against Episcopius , [2] in Matters of faith

In order to acquire this Knowledge , according to our AUTHOR, sometimes Universal Doubt concerning all Religion and its principium is wrongly urged ; by which a man, not now an Infidel or Heretic, but by profession truly a Christian, having come of age, and zealous for Religion, on account of the many things admitted without sufficient scrutiny, ought once by a voluntary Suspension of Judgment to doubt, thus being actually inclined unto Christianity no more than unto Islam .

Against the Socinians and Remonstrants , our AUTHOR advises us to hold that Religion is not summed up in two Acts, in the Observance of Commandments and the Hope of the promises ; but that a third Act of the Knowledge of the things to be believed ought to be added. Thus, of course, Socinus , [1] de Auctoritate Scripturæ , chapter II, opera Socini , tome I, page 272 a : “I answer that those opinions, so many, and so diverse or even contrary, do not at all hinder that a