my dissent from the definition of the Council of _Nice_, I must first have sufficient reason proposed to me to believe, (and so remain self-condemned and Heretical in disbelieving it) this point; _viz._ That the Church, or her Council, hath power to define matters of Faith in such manner, as to require my assent thereto. Which so long as I find no sufficient reason to believe, I suppose I am freed (without obstinacy or Heresie, or being therein self-condemned,) from yielding assent to any particular matter of Faith, which the Church defines. And, had I sufficient reason proposed to me for believing this point, yet so long as I am not actually convinced thereof, I become only guilty of a fault of _ignorance_, not _obstinacy_, or _autocatacrisie_, or _Heresie_; for, if I am self-condemned, or guilty of obstinacy in disbelieving the foresaid points, [76]_Then I become so, either by the Church's definition of this point, or without it. By reason of the Church's definition of this it cannot be; for this very power of defining is the thing in question, and therefore cannot be cleared to me by the Church's defining it_[77]: and thus, _That thing is proposed to me in the definition to be believed, which must be supposed to be believed by me already, before such proposal or definition, or else the definition is not necessary to be believed_. [78]Nor _without_, or _before_ such definition, can I have an _autocatacrisie_; because this autocatacrisie, you say with Dr. _Hammond_, ariseth from my disobedience to the Church. _Prot._ Methinks, you make the same plea for your self in this matter, as if one, that is questioned for not obeying the _divine precepts_, or not believing the divine Revelations delivered in _Scripture_, should think to excuse himself by this answer; that indeed he doth not believe the _Scripture_ to be _God's Word_; and therefore he conceives, that he cannot reasonably be required to believe that which is contained therein. And, as such a person hath as much reason (though this, not from the Scripture, yet from Apostolical Tradition) to believe that Scripture is Gods Word, as to believe what is written in it; so have you, though not from the _Nicene_ Council defining it, yet from Scripture and Tradition manifesting it, as much reason to believe its authority of defining, as what is defined. It's true indeed; that had you not sufficient proposal, or sufficient reason to know this your duty of _Assent_ to this definition of the Council of _Nice_, you were faultless in it; but herein lies your danger, that from finding a _non actual conviction_ of the truth, within, (hindred there by I know not what supine negligence, or strong self-conceit, _&c._) you gather a _non-sufficient proposal_, without. § 27.