liberty from men, we should force them to become Hypocrites, and so profess outwardly what inwardly they disbelieve._----And see Dr. Stillingfleets Rational Account, p. 104. where, speaking of the obligation to the 39. Articles, he saith,----_That the Church of_ England, _excommunicates such as openly oppose her doctrin, supposing her fallible; the Roman Church excommunicates all, who will not believe whatever she defines to be infallibly true._----_That the Church of_ England _bindeth men to peace to her determinations, reserving to men the liberty of their judgments, on pain of excommunication if they violate that peace. For it is plain on the one side, where a Church pretends infallibility, the excommunication is directed against the persons for refusing to give internal assent to what she defines: But where a Church does not pretend to that, the excommunication respects wholly that overt Act, whereby the Church's peace is broken. And if a Church be bound to look to her own peace, no doubt she hath power to excommunicate such as openly violate the bonds of it; which is only an act of caution in a Church to preserve her self in unity; but where it is given out, that the Church is infallible, the excommunication must be so much the more unreasonable, because it is against those internal acts of the mind, over which the Church as such hath no direct power._----And p. 55. he quotes these words out of Bishop _Bramhall_[96] to the same sense,--_We do not suffer any man to reject the 39 Articles of the Church of_ England _at his pleasure; yet neither do we look upon them as essentials of saving faith, or legacies of Christ, and his Apostles; but, in a mean, as pious opinions fitted for the preservation of unity; neither do we oblige any man to believe them, but only not to contradict them. By which we see what vast difference there is, between those things which are required by the Church of_ England _in order to peace, and those which are imposed by the Church of_ Rome, _&c._ Lastly, thus Mr. _Chillingworth_[97] of the just authority of Councils and Synods (beyond which the Protestant Synods, or Convocations pretend not.)----_The Fathers of the Church_ (saith he) _in after times_ [_i. e._ after the Apostles] _might have just cause to declare their judgment, touching the sense of some general Articles of the Creed: but to oblige others to receive their declarations under pain of damnation, what warrant they had, I know not: He, that can shew, either that the Church of all ages was to have this Authority; or, that it continued in the Church for some ages, and then expired: He, that can shew either of these things let him; for my part I cannot. Yet I willingly confess the judgment of a Council, though not infallible, is yet so far directive, and obliging, that_ (without apparent reason to the contrary) _it may be sin to reject it, at least not to afford it an outward submission for publick peace sake._ [Thus