names in scripture, and that all circumstances, even of the minutest events, which concern religion, are necessary to be known? Certainly the design of religion is not to exercise the wit and understandings of men, nor to burden and overwhelm their memories with so vast a number of all sorts of truths; but to implant in their minds the fear and love of God, and excite them to certain duties. Those truths, therefore, that tend most to this end, are certainly of the greatest importance; and they, that have little or no tendency hereunto, are undoubtedly of less moment, and so by no means to be accounted necessary.

Again, they who say all truths of religion are fundamental, and necessary to be known in order to obtain salvation, must either be tormented with endless doubts and perplexities, or imagine themselves to be infallible, so as certainly to know all truths without exception, and be sure, that they do not err in the least point. And what man in his wits can possibly pretend to this? Finally, he who says all truths of religion are fundamental, and all errors damnable, ought to prove it; but the thing will admit of no sort of proof; nay, on the contrary, the goodness and wisdom of God do most directly oppose such an assertion. Since, therefore, it cannot be affirmed on the one hand, that no truths are fundamental, nor on the other, that all are so; hence it follows that a difference must be made between

truths that are fundamental, and truths that are not fundamental.

2. This is also evident from scripture. For it cannot be denied but the Apostle* does make a plain distinction between the foundation, and things built upon the foundation, and proceeds to show, that things built upon the foundation are of two sorts; some of them are good and profitable to men; these he calls gold, silver, precious stones. Others are useless, and really hurtful, such as vain and idle disputes, rash and hasty conclusions, and ceremonies that lead to superstition; which he calls wood, hay, and stubble. The former will stand and abide the fiery trial, that is, the judgment of God; but the latter shall be burnt up; yet the authors or promoters of such things may be saved themselves, though so as by fire, that is, not without difficulty.

In like manner, the Apostle distinguishes between things wherein christians agree, and according to which they ought to walk, and things wherein good men may differ without any prejudice to piety or mutual love. "Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded;" namely, with regard to what he had before laid down concerning the privileges and ceremonies of the law. "And if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you. Nevertheless, whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us * 1 Cor. iii. 10, 11, 12.

mind the same thing ;"* or be affected in the same manner, and preserve peace and union among ourselves. And accordingly the Apostles, in many places of scripture, teach us, that some things are of so great moment, that he who errs in them, and departs from the doctrine of Christ, is not only to be sharply rebuked, but to be removed from the communion of the church. And these important points are signified to us by various appellations in scripture; they are called, the foundation; the principles of the doctrine of Christ; the first principles of the oracles of God; wholesome doctrines; the form of sound words; the word of truth; the doctrine which is according to godliness. And so, on the contrary, in other places, we are told, that there are some things in which persons who do err, ought nevertheless to be borne with as brethren; of which we shall speak more hereafter.

Neither is this distinction of the points of religion a new thing, or a notion peculiar to us; but has been allowed in all ages, and by divines of all parties. The Jews undoubtedly had their fundamental truths, as appears from the writings of their rabbies. Moses Maimonides, the most learned of them, entitles the first book of his treatise, called, The Strong Hand, thus; Of the Foundations of the Law; and

* Phil. iii. 15, 16.

† Gal. i. 8. 1 Tim. vi. 3, 4, 5. 2 John, 10.

Rom. xiv. and xv.

So

begins it with these words; "The Foundation of Foundations, and the Pillar of Wisdom, is to know that there is one First Being, which gave being to all others."

And among the ancient Fathers of the Church, nothing was more common than to use those words, the principles, the elements, the necessary things, to signify the primary and fundamental doctrines of the Gospel. This is what Tertullian means, by "the rule of faith, the only immoveable and unchangeable rule, which it is sufficient for a man to know, though he knows no more."* And from these primary articles, wherein "the foundation of all catholic doctrine did consist, they distinguished the lesser questions of the divine law," concerning which, persons might have different sentiments, without destroying the unity of faith. And Justin Martyr, Irenæus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Austin, and others, give testimonies concerning this matter, which would be too tedious to recite.

Hence also creeds and confessions of faith, and then catechisms took their rise; which contained the first principles of religion, such as it was thought proper for catechumens, or beginners, to profess their belief of. And in the first ages, these things were short and plain; but afterwards, through the dissensions that arose in the church, they were exceedingly multiplied and enlarged; insomuch, that Hilary * De Virginibus velan. cap. 1.

+ Vincentius Lirinensis.

complained, that confessions were framed at every one's pleasure.

The papists do carefully distinguish questions which are of the faith, from questions which are not of the faith; and pretend that the power of determining the former lies in their church; and therefore that she may increase or diminish the number of articles of faith at pleasure. And besides an implicit faith, by which persons are bound to believe whatever the church believes, they say that some things are also to be believed explicitly; and, accordingly, dispute among themselves about these articles of faith, which are to be believed explicitly, some making them more, some fewer; but others say that the number of them cannot be determined. All which things do plainly show, that though they do not use the same terms as we do, yet they do not reject or condemn the common distinction, of fundamentals and things not fundamental.

This distinction is so obvious among protestant divines of different parties, and has been so generally received among them, that it would be needless to mention any. Therefore, without any further confirmation of this famous distinction, let us see what are the marks or criterions by which we may be able to distinguish fundamentals, from things which are not fundamental. And we shall first of all separate the false marks, and then offer some rules which appear to us more just.