which we now oppose, be true, it will hardly leave any thing at all that is fundamental.

5. Some limit the foundation of religion within such narrow bounds, that they allow nothing to be a fundamental, but to obey the divine precepts, and to trust in the promises of the Gospel; which is another mark that we reject. We own, indeed, that obedience is the end, and therefore a principal part of religion; for as Christ told his disciples, "if ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them ;" and St. Paul testifies, that "the end of the commandment is charity;" and St. James, "Pure religion and undefiled, is to visit the fatherless and widows, and to keep one's self unspotted from the world."* But if we would speak accurately, we cannot say, that the whole essence of religion does consist in obedience, and trust in God, and in nothing else; for there must be some truths known by the light of nature, and others revealed by God, upon which our obedience and trust must be founded; which do therefore make part of the foundation, according as St. Paul teaches us in the forecited place. "He that cometh to God, must believe that he is," &c.+ And Christ, "This is life eternal, to know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.‡

6. Some will have the Apostles' Creed, as it is commonly called, to be the standard and measure of

* John. xiii. 17. 1 Tim. i. 5. James i. 27.

fundamentals; and we do not deny but this hypothesis comes the nearest to truth, of which more hereafter; yet for some reasons we cannot entirely acquiesce in this opinion. For, First, it is agreed among learned men, that this creed was not composed by the Apostles, but long after their time, and that the copies of it differed in some articles; there is, therefore, no reason why so much authority should be given to a human composure, though ever so ancient and venerable, as that the terms of salvation should be thought to depend upon it.* Secondly, neither

* Ambrose was the first, who is known to have attributed this Creed to the Apostles about four hundred years after Christ; and Ruffinus not much later ascribes to it the same origin. Leo Magnus, Jerom, John Cassian, and many other writers of celebrity at that period, gave credit to Ambrose and Ruffinus, and spoke of the Creed as the work of the Apostles. It even became a popular notion, that every Apostle contributed a part; and in a sermon ascribed to Austin, the Creed is divided into twelve articles, and each article is assigned to its particular author.

But these accounts have long been known to be fabulous; and although some articles of the Creed were early in use, no evidence remains of any part having been the work of the Apostles, or that it was considered as such before the commencement of the fifth century. This Creed underwent many variations from in to time, and in different churches it was usually clothed with a different dress. There was the Grecian Creed used by Irenæus, the Creeds of Carthage quoted by Tertullian, that of Aquileia mentioned by Ruffinus, that of Ravenna, and that of Turin explained by Maximus, and many others scattered through the ancient writings. Each of these was called the Apostles' Creed, although they differed essentially among themselves. Ruffinus states, that the Descent into Hell was neither in the

does every thing inserted into this Creed seem to be of so great importance, that a man cannot be saved without the knowledge thereof. Thus, if a person should be ignorant of what is there said of Christ's descent into hell, of the name of Pontius Pilate, and some other things, which were put in, in opposition to some errors that are now out of date, it cannot be thought that his salvation would be hazarded hereby. Thirdly, on the other hand, there are some things no less necessary to be known than to be done, which yet are wanting in this Creed, namely, those principles of religion, which direct and inform our practice. Therefore, passing by these and such like criterions, which are not founded upon sufficient reason, we shall endeavour to produce some rules, which seem to be better grounded, and may more safely be depended upon.

Roman nor Oriental Creeds; and bishops Burnet and Pearson affirm, that this clause was not inserted till the fifth century. Nor was the Communion of Saints found in any copy of the Creed till about the same period; and the clause, Life Everlasting, was omitted in many copies while it was contained in others. The Holy Church was first mentioned as an article of the Creed by Tertullian in the third century. It was not till after the time of Tertullian that this article was enlarged by inserting the word Catholic.

These are some of the more prominent changes in the Creed, after it became a symbol in general use among the churches. Many others of minor importance might be enumerated, but these are enough to prove its uncertain origin, and that it can have no authority in settling the articles of Christian faith. See King's History of the Apostles' Creed, Chap. ii, and v.-Pearson on the Creed, Vol. i. p. 341; Vol. ii. p. 287.

ED

CHAP. IV.

Principles by which we may be able to distinguish Fundamental Articles.

1. OUR first principle is this; That we are not under a necessary obligation to know, or believe any truth, but what is clearly revealed unto us, and for the belief of which, God hath indued us with necessary abilities. This is a principle of the most undoubted truth; for who can conceive, that a most righteous God, who has the tenderest concern for his creatures, should require them to believe any thing, which he has not revealed to them, and that clearly too, or which they are under a natural incapacity of believing? It is reported indeed of Caligula, among other horrible cruelties, that he ordered his laws to be writ in such small characters, and to be hung up at so great a distance, that it was almost, if not altogether impossible to read them; and this he contrived on purpose, that a greater number of offenders might fall into his hands. But far be it from us, to ascribe such a cruel and injurious way of proceeding to the best and most righteous Being.

From this principle we may draw an inference which is of very considerable weight, namely, That fundamental articles are not the same to all men, but differ according to the different degrees of revelation, and according to the different capacities and circum

stances of men. The reason is plain; for since God has made very different revelations of himself, and has given very different capacities to men, and has placed them in stations and circumstances that most widely differ; it is therefore impossible that all men should be obliged to the same measure of knowledge, or the same standard of faith.

2. Our second principle is this, That he alone, who is Lord of life and death, that is, God, has power to determine what is necessary to be believed in order to obtain salvation, and what error shall certainly exclude men from it. This also is a very plain principle, and none who seriously considers it, can call it into question; for who, I pray, has the least pretensions to settle the terms of life and death, but that "only Lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy ?"* From whence the Apostle makes this demand, "Who art thou that judgest another?"† But since God has made known his will two ways, by the light of nature, and by revelation, nothing therefore ought to be reckoned a fundamental, but what God has determined to be so, one of these two ways.

And the light of nature discovers but very few things in this matter; little more than what the Apostle takes notice of as a thing sufficiently known thereby, That "he that cometh to God, must believe + Compare Rom. xiv. 10.

* James iv. 12.