Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
authority_n add_v church_n scripture_n 2,229 5 6.0132 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A36614 A defence of the papers written by the late king of blessed memory, and Duchess of York, against the answer made to them Dryden, John, 1631-1700. 1686 (1686) Wing D2261; ESTC R22072 76,147 138

There are 6 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

How and by what Authority did we separate from that Church If the Power of Interpreting Scripture be in every Mans Brain what need have we of a Church or Church-men To what purpose then did our Saviour after He had given his Apostles Power to bind and loose in Heaven and Earth add to it That He would be with them even to the end of the World These Words were not spoken Parabolically or by way of Figure Christ was then ascending into his Glory and left his Power with his Church even to the end of the World All this the Answerer leaves out what relates to the Churches Authority and every Mans following his own Iudgment having he says been answered already I wish he had told us where For tho' I remember some Speech of Persons who separate from the Church and of their Pretences I cannot call one Word to mind of the Authority by which they separated If this be the Answer he means he compliments His Majesty's Papers For to insist upon it is to consess he has none He said too and that too often to be forgotten That every Man is to judge for himself tho' not for others What need then of a Church or Church men says His Majesty when every body is provided without them It seems he thinks they are indeed needless but had no mind to say so He takes the matter of Appeals more to heart in which he takes occasion to proceed from these words What Country can subsist in peace or quiet where there is not a Supreme Iudge from whence there can be no Appeal From whence the natural Consequence he says appears to be That every National Church ought to have the Supreme Power within it self In the Comparison here made a National to the Whole Church is as a Shire to a Kingdom And a very natural and very consistent Consequence it is That every Sheriff should be a King But how come Appeals to a Forreign Iurisdiction to tend to the Peace and Quiet of a Church He would peradventure if one should press him be hard enough put to it to make Sense of his Forreign Jurisdiction in our Case For how can any thing be Forreign but by not belonging to that Aggregate whether Civil or Spiritual in respect whereof they are said to be Forreigners Forreign I think comes from Foris and signifies out So that unless the ultimate Jurisdiction of the Church be out of the Church it seems as hard to understand how it can be Forreign to any part of the Church as how a Native of any part of England can be a Forreigner in England The several Nations which make the Church are Forreigners to one another in respect of the several Temporal Bodies which they compose too but Fellow-Citizens All in respect of the Ecclesiastical But let this pass and the Answerer if he please inform us how the Appeals of which we talk can be made but to what he calls Forreign Jurisdiction The King aim'd at an end of Differences in Religion and as he thought every one ought believe as the Catholic Church believes which Christ has here on Earth calls their Agreement in Faith a Decision and knowing or searching what it is an Appeal As no Particular can be the Catholic Church let him make it intelligible who can how the Faith of a Church compos'd of many Nations can be known without knowing the Faith of the Nations which compose it that is of those Churches which he calls Forreign It is therefore so far from hard to comprehend how Appeals to Forreigners tend to the Peace and Quiet of a National Church that when that Peace is disturbed by Dissentions in Matters of Religion it is absolutely impossible to resettle it without them We says the King in the Period before which the Answerer I know not why puts after have had these hundred years past the sad Effects of denying to the Church that Power in Matters Spiritual without an Appeal And our Ancestors says the Answerer for many hundred years last past found the intollerable Inconveniences of an Appeal to Forreign Iurisdiction Which after he has a little dilated by reckoning up the Particulars he tauntingly adds But these were slight things in comparison to what we have felt these hundred years for want of it This Taunt is unexpected and by his good favour might have been spared for more Reasons than one For what Do's he in earnest think that the Incoveniences he has thought of and may think of hereafter hold comparison with the Inconvenience of Heresie Are not all temporal Concerns let them be what they will slight things in respect of the eternal Ruine of so many as Heresie has swallow'd up in Perdition Will he compare the gain of the whole World to the loss even of a single Soul For the rest 't is strange a Man should toss a Word so long and never mind what it means The King us'd the Word Appeal with respect to the Allegory in which he speaks The Answerer will needs understand it in the Law-sense and talks all the while of another matter For the Impoverishment the Obstruction of Justice and what else he mentions are Consequences all of Legal Trials betwixt Plaintiff and Defendant according to the Methods of Courts In which where-ever those Courts be Princes can and when they see fit do preserve their own Prerogatives from diminution and their Subjects from Oppression without shocking their Religion There is nothing of all this in the Appeals of which the King speaks no feeing of Lawyers nor need to travel from home Who will but step to St. Iames's and see what they do and hear what they say has appeal'd as much as the King desir'd he should To his Conclusion That it is a very self-denying Humour for those to be most sensible of the want of Appeals who would really suffer the most by them I shall say no more than that it is very unreasonable because no body dreams of such Appeals as he understands and I wish that no body may think worse of it and of him and other Folks for it Can there be any Iustice done says the next Paragraph where the Offenders are their own Iudges and equal Interpreters of the Law with those that are appointed to administer Iustice He cross interrogates and asks Whether there be any likelihood Iustice should be better done in another Country by another Authority and proceeding by such Rules which in the last resort are but the arbitrary Will of a Stranger I have already observ'd That another Country and another Authority is un● ntelligible where all are Countrymen and arbitrary Rules are altogether as unintelligible where the Law is ● ixt and known At present I pray him to tell us how he answers the Question Can Iustice be done Or which is the same Is there a Judge without Appeal signifies he knows Can Controversies be ended And he knows the Answer is They can or They cannot And yet he will
Anger and Malice and Indignation For Disputes alas continue not because Truth is not visible but because Men will not submit their Sence to Grace but strain it in stead of ending Disputes to keep them up and render invisible the most visible things in the World In our present Case if His Majesty in stead of as visible had said the Church is more visible than Scripture He would have had a very great Man to take His part For which do's the Answerer think is the more visible of the two the thing which is seen or that by which it is seen And he knows who said I would not believe the Gospel unless the Authority of the Catholic Church had moved me And this is in truth the Case of every Body But evidently S. Augustin's Eyes as good as they were did not see the Scripture but by the Catholic that is the Roman Catholic Church For that the Answerer knows was the Catholic Church with which he communicated Then he gives a Reason why Disputing would cease viz. Because none who dare believe what they see can call Scriptures being in Print in question which by making nothing visible which can be called in question makes it not visible that Scripture is in Print For he knows the far greatest part of Mankind all Infidels and Mahumetans do actually call Scripture in question at this day he knows many Christians have questioned divers Parts of it heretofore and He himself still questions some as visibly in Print as any of the rest But to question whether the Book in Print be Scripture is manifestly to question whether Scripture be in Print And so in one breath he says it is in the next it is not visible that Scripture is in Print But we will not fall out about Matters which import not But goes he on what if the Church whose Authority it is said they must submit to will not allow them to believe what they see Why then that Church if he take Believing strictly agrees with all Mankind For as every body knows that Faith is of things not seen none can allow we properly believe 〈◊〉 we see But if he take the Word largely I know of no Church which allows not People to believe all they see I do indeed know of one which would be glad People would not believe they see what they see not nor by thier Senses can see An Eye may see the Colour of a thing and an Ear hear the Sound it makes c. but what this coloured or sounding thing is often needs more than the Senses to discover For the What of a thing is not the Object of any Sense How then says he can this be a sufficient Reason to persuade them to believe the Church because it is as visible as that the Scripture is in Print I am sorry that to know our Duty is not with him sufficient reason to do it We all know by the Evangelist that Christ left Commission to teach all Nations and by the Apostle that there are Pastors and Doctors appointed to build us up into the Vnity of Faith and prevent our being Circumvented by Errour And whatever he do's I take it to be my Duty to learn of those who are appointed and have Commission from Christ to teach when 't is visible who they are His following conceit of using and renouncing our Senses and indeed all hitherto said might have very well been spar'd For there is nothing yet which relates to our Business If he thinks Kings and their Writings are not above Sporting the Matter I am sure is The substance of what he says when he thinks to pass in earnest is 1. That a Part is not the Whole and the Roman he takes to be only a part of the Catholic Church 2. That Roman Catholic is an Expression found neither in the Creeds nor Office of Baptism even at present 3. That the Roman do's not her self believe she is the Catholic Church of the Creeds because she admits the validity of Baptism administred out of her Communion And lastly That there may be different Communions of Christians which may still continue parts of the Catholic Church for instance the Holy Bishops and Martyrs who he says were Excommunicated heretofore in Asia and Afric and the Eastern Christians at this Day For his first Riddle of a Part and Whole we may thank his Inadvertence The Paper do's not say that the Roman is the Catholic Church but that the Roman Catholic is the one Church of Christ. As Roman alone may signify the Diocess under the immediate Government of the Bishop of Rome which never did nor can more pretend to be the Catholic Church than the Church of Laodicea or Ephesus or any other particular Church the Paper by joyning Catholic to it shews it speaks of her and all joyn'd in Communion with her and all who believe as her Communion believes whether they be joyn'd in External Communion or no. For it is apparent by his Majesties talking all along of matters of Faith and no where of any thing else that he minded nothing but Faith and considered the Church with respect only to Faith Now I beseech him is this Roman Catholic ever the less visibly the one Church of Christ because a Part is not a Whole Of what will he make that Whole but of all the Parts And do's not Catholic signify all the Parts Or is it the less Catholic is any part taken out because the particular Roman is put in By the way because He often mentions the Roman Church without adding Catholic let me here to avoid Repetitions declare once for all That I shall understand him of the Roman Catholic wherever the Circumstances of the place determine not the Sense to the particular Church of Rome For he means not I suppose to talk of one Church while His Majesty talks of another Upon the Second Head he asks If those who made the Creeds for our direction had intended the Roman Catholic Church why was it not so expressed He might have answered himself For he knows as well as I that the Reason was because Language always changes with Times As there were no such Dreams of the Roman Church when the Creeds were made as now it had been a very superfluous and a very unaccountable piece of Care to have said Roman in a Word by it self which was already said by the Word Catholic and so by all the World understood Now there are who will have her some a corrupt Part of the Catholic Church some none at all who have a mind to let People know they take her for a Part and a sound and the principal Part and yet would save Words have light on a thrifty way of saying all in short by Roman-Catholic He says besides That this Limitation as he calls it of the Sense of Christ's Catholic Church to the Roman was never put to Persons to be Baptiz'd in any Age of the Church And That he finds
would have any Man shew me says the King where the Power of deciding Matters of Faith is given to every particular Man He distinguishes and says The Power of Deciding so as to oblige others is not given to every particular Man the Power of Deciding so as to satisfie the particular Decider is Denial is a fair Answer and this seems to deny what His Majesty says and yet in truth says nothing to it Deciding of particular Men being our own Iudges following our own Fancy or private Spirit believing as we please and the like Expressions signifie all the same And the King as Men use to do who mind Sense more than Words and have Language at will takes now one now another as they come in His way As it could not scape an ● ye less piercing than His that he judges every jot as much who believes upon the Authority of the Church as he who believes upon his own Fancy of Scripture and that every Assent is a Judgment and so the Assent of Faith as well as the rest it cannot be imagin'd that He would have Men not judge at all But He meant as all the World means by those Phrases that they should not judge unreasonably For as they are blamed who will be their own Judges and no body blames another for doing well and Judging is of it self a good thing an Exercise of a Faculty planted in us by God there is nothing to be blamed but the ill use of that Faculty by suffering Passion to 〈◊〉 it which should only be guided by Reason That Men 〈◊〉 mean thus by those Expressions we see by the 〈◊〉 to which they apply them He who being 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 or Conceit of 〈…〉 〈…〉 the Advice of his unpassionate and 〈…〉 or he who has no skill in Physic or 〈…〉 will commence and prosecute Suits 〈…〉 against the Advice of able Lawyers and Doctors is said to be his own Judge He is not who understanding Jewels or Pictures buys them at his own Rate tho' never so many of less 〈◊〉 than himself persuade him to the contrary 〈…〉 is said to be his Judge Now the King 〈◊〉 because Christ taught his Apostles and 〈◊〉 who with those that believ'd his Doctrine 〈…〉 Preaching and their Successors through 〈…〉 are called the Church that he could not 〈◊〉 reasonably who would pretend to find out that Doctrine by his own Wit or Study or any 〈◊〉 but by learning it of the Church which 〈…〉 at first from Christ and preserv'd it ever 〈◊〉 And this unreasonable Judgment made on their own Heads or Fancy against the Judgment of those whose Profession it is His several Expressions strike at The Answerer reflected not on the meaning of them but would persuade us That to say particular Men must be satisfied of the Reasons why they believe is an Answer to the Question Whether there be indeed any Reasons why they should believe besides the Authority of the Church To go forward Christ says his Ma●● sty left his Power to his Church even to forgive Sins in Heaven and left his Spirit with them which they exer●●●● d after his Resurruction He answers as if he were at 〈◊〉 purposes where then was the Roman 〈…〉 What has where was she to do 〈…〉 left to her 'T is a strange Qu● stion 〈◊〉 and he I believe the first who ever ask'd where a Church was before she was The Roman was a part of the Catholic as soon as she was a Church till then she was where all the Churches 〈◊〉 the World besides were except that of ● ierusalem and where the Church of ● ierusalem too was before Christ was born in the order of Providen●● But how can it be hence inferr'd that these Power● are now in the Church of Rome 〈◊〉 Roman Cath●●●● Church I suppose he means exclusive to all others unless it be made appear that it was Heir-General to all the Apostles As if there needed Logic to infer that Powers left for the Salvation of Mankind remain in being as long as there remains a Man●●●● to be saved or Powers left to the Church of Christ are in the Church of Christ and those excl● ded from the Powers who are not incl● ded ● n the Church or to make appear She is Heir-General to all the Apostles who as visibly as that the S● ripture is in Print is the One Chur● h 〈…〉 he could be content to be 〈…〉 Point but since his Majesty 〈…〉 purpose to do more than barely mention it I 〈◊〉 it not to mine to stray from the Papers I 〈◊〉 In the process of his Discourse he would 〈◊〉 the ordinary Power of the Keys out of the 〈◊〉 and shall with all my heart so he remove it not out of the Church For since it was with the 〈◊〉 given only to her I do not see what 〈…〉 Title there can be to it but 〈…〉 Her He is by his good favour 〈…〉 removing Miraculous Power out of the 〈…〉 God who slights not the Roman 〈…〉 so much as he continues 〈…〉 her And would he be content to 〈…〉 〈◊〉 on Miracles I would be content to undertake the Proof But alas I fear there needs a Miracle to make People willing that Differences of Religion should have any Issue He would have it question'd What part of the Promise of the Infallible Spirit was to expire with the Apostles what to be continued to the Church in all Ages And how f● r that Promise extends Strange Questions for Christians to dispute after they have been answer'd by Christ himself When Christ has extended the Assistance of that Spirit to All his Doctrine and All Time for us to ask which part of that Assistance shall cease or to 〈◊〉 is to ask Which is the Part of Christ's Promise which he will not perform Neither indeed are these Questions with his Distinction between Sin and Errour and subtle Speculations upon it for any thing but to bring in Deposing Doctrine a Com● on-place bang'd in every Book of late It is a Theme than which as much as it is 〈◊〉 upon I do not think a worse can be taken 〈◊〉 an Invective against Infallible Assistance pick a● d chuse through the whole Bundle When I con●●● er what has past and reflect there wanted neither Power nor Propension in Men and nevertheless that the Persuasions about Deposing were never settled as those in other Matters which displease the Answerer what he takes for an Argument against Infallible ●●●● tance I take for a strong Argument for it For 〈◊〉 else could be the Cause of that Effect but that 〈◊〉 Power even of willing Men was directed by an 〈◊〉 Assistance of the Divine Spirit He may 〈…〉 shew he pleases with the Errours of 〈◊〉 who will not reflect they never exercis'd the Power of Church-Guid●● upon 〈◊〉 Errours or in his Language so as to 〈…〉 which yet he knows very well no Council of 〈◊〉 he had in his eye ever did As the Church
to turn round a mans Hat and to strike him on the Face but the advantage is the greater in a lusty Blow But the Handle by which our Answerer would have the Reformation taken is not by the Causes and Effects the Means and Management and indeed the whole Series of History these are nothing to concern his present Enquiry though they rais'd such Scruples in the Duchess and will do in any other conscientious Reader he will have the Reformation consider'd his own way that is in the Political part of it and the Ecclesiastical Now the Political part if you observe him he gives for gone at the first dash It was grounded he says on such Maxims as are common to Statesmen at all Times and in all Churches who labour to turn all Revolutions and Changes to their own Advantage That is 't is common for Statesmen to be Atheists at the bottom To be seemingly of that Religion which is most for their Interest To crush and ruine that from which they have no future prospect of Advantage and to joyn with its most inveterate Enemies without consideration of their King's Interest and this was the Case of the Duke of Somerset All which together amounts to this That 't is no matter by what Means a Reformation be compass'd by what Instruments it be brought to pass or with what Design though all these be never so ungodly 't is enough if the Reformation it self be made by the Legislative Power of the Land The matter of Fact then is given up only 't is fac'd with Recriminations That Alexander the Sixth for example was as wicked a Pope as King Henry was a King As if any Catholic deny'd that God Almighty for Causes best known to his Divine Wisdom has not sometimes permitted impious Men to sit in that supream Seat and even to intrude into it by unlawful Means That Alexander the Sixth was one of the worst of Men I freely grant which is more then I can in Conscience say of Henry the Eighth who had great and Kingly Vertues mingled with his Vices That the Duke of Somerset rais'd his Estate out of Church Lands our Author excuses no other ways than by retorting that Popes are accustom'd to do the like in consideration of their Nephews whom they would greaten But though 't is a wicked thing for a Pope to mispend the Church Revenues on his Relations 't is to be consider'd he is a Secular Prince and may as lawfully give out of his Temporal Incomes what he pleases to his Favourite as another Prince to his But as our Author charges this Miscarriage home upon some late Popes of the former and the present Age so I hope he will exempt his present Holiness from that Note No Common Father of God's Church from St. Peter even to him having ever been more bountiful in expending his Revenues for the Defence of Christendom or less interessed in respect of his Relations whom he has neither greatn'd nor so much as suffer'd to enter into the least Administration of the Government But after all what have these Examples to do with this Ladies Conversion Why our Author pretends that these bad Popes and their ill Proceedings ought as reasonably to have hindred the Duchess from entring into the Catholic Church as the like Proceedings under Henry the Eighth Edward the Sixth and Queen Elizabeth might move her Highness to leave the Protestant The Subject in hand was the Pretended Reformation The Duchess observ'd the scandalous and abominable Effects of it that an inordinate Lust was one principal Cause of the Separation that the Reformation it self was begun by worldly Interests in the Duke of Somerset and carried on by the Ambition of Queen Elizabeth Have the Examples produc'd by our Author on the contrary side any thing to do with a Reformation Suppose in the first place that she had never read nor heard any of those things concerning Pope Alexander or the advancing of Nephews by profusion of the Church-Treasure the first is very possible and she might interpret candidly the latter But make the worst of it on the one side there was only a Male-administration of a settled Government from which no State either Spiritual or Temporal can always be exempt on the other side here is a total Subversion of the Old Church in England and the setting up a New a changing of receiv'd Doctrines and the Direction of God's Holy Spirit pretended for the Change so that she might reasonably judge that the Holy Ghost had little to do with the Practices of ill Popes without thinking the worse of the Establish'd Faith but she could never see a new one erected on the Foundations of Lust Sacrilege and Usurpation without great Scruples whether the Spirit of God were assisting in those Councils As for his Method of Enquiry Whether there was not a sufficient Cause for the Reformation in the Church Whether the Church of England had not sufficient Authority to reform it self and Whether the Proceedings of the Reformation were not justifiable by the Rules of Scripture and the Ancient Church I may safely joyn Issue with him upon all three Points and conclude in the Negative That there was no sufficient Cause to reform the Church in Matters of Faith because there neither were nor can be any such Errours embrac'd and own'd by it The Church of England has no Authority of Reforming her self because the Doctrine of Christ cannot be reformed nor a National Synod lawfully make any Definitions in Matters of Faith contrary to the Judgment of the Church Universal of the present Age shewn in her Public Liturgies that Judgment being equivalent to that of a General Council of the present Age. And for the third Point The Proceedings of the Reformation were not justifiable by the Rule of Scripture according to the right Interpretation of it by the Fathers and Councils which are the true Judges of it nor consequently by the Rules of the Ancient Church But Calvin's Excuse must be your last Refuge Nos discessionem a toto mundo facere coacti sumus We are compell'd to forsake the Communion or to separate from all the Churches of the World These says our Author She confesses were but Scruples According to his mannerly way of arguing with the King I might ask him These what Do's he mean these Scruples were but Scruples For the Word these begins a Paragraph But I am asham'd of playing the Pedant as he has done I suppose he means these Passages of Heylyn only rais'd some Scruples in her which occasion'd her to examine the Points in difference by the Holy Scripture And now says he she was in the right way for Satisfaction provided she made use of the best Helps and Means for understanding it and took in the Assistance of her Spiritual Guides That she did take in those Guides is manifest by her own Papers though both of them the more the Pity did but help to mislead her into the Enemies Country But
cannot be Part of a Division to presume His account too of the breach betwixt the East and the West is I think very wide of the mark He would have the Popes Supremacy bear the blame of all which if my Memory fail me not was not so much as made a Pretence till near Two hundred Years after the Schism began nor any where more acknowledged than in Greece nor by any body more than by him who began the Schism When I read the Story I apprehended the cause of that breach was National Feuds heightned into violent hatred by several Accidents which chopt unluckily in and the malitious Ambition of Men who found their private Accounts in the Public Calamity Indeed I think they denied the Popes Supremacy at last as all who will continue in Schism at long run must because to acknowledge and not regard it is self condemnation Otherwise their Quarrel was to the Latin Church or perhaps more truly Nation not the Supremacy of which they speak so inconstantly that I am persuaded it would break no squares even now if they could be brought on any terms to agree with Men whom they hate I would be more diligent in this Matter if it concern'd our Question But as they are parts of His Majesties Roman Catholic Church if they believe as she do's and are not if they do not and it is equal whether they do or no I leave them to Gods Mercy and return from straying thus far into our Road again This Principle being remov'd which ought he says be taken for granted since it can never be prov'd By the way he do's not sure mean this for a bob to the King as if he took his Principle viz. That the Church is as visible as Scripture for granted because he knew not how to prove it Whether the Person to whom he directed his Paper were satisfy'd before hand of this Point by their former Discourses or needed no Arguments to see a visible thing or however it were the Answerer may perceive by the Paper that his Majesty thought it not to his purpose to press the Visibility of the Church but only submission to it and means not I suppose to tell the King he knew not his own Design or how to pursue it His part is to answer what is said and not instruct the King what should have been said He must therefore mean that it ought to be taken for granted that he has remov'd that Principle which is just Lend me your Hand Neighbour to remove my Block I cannot stir it my self Alas it is very visible he has done nothing towards removing it But he is in the right to play sure Who have a flaw in their Title do well to get a Grant By his saying it can never be prov'd he has I guess a mind to tempt somebody to prove over again what has been prov'd a hundred and a hundred times already But as much as his positiveness tempts me to be doing and as easie as I think it to be done I beg his Pardon at present Parrying is my business not Thrusting now Whatever he mean I do not think that what he concludes would follow even tho' the Principle which he dislikes were removed The Principle is That the Roman Catholic is the One Church which Christ has here upon Earth and the Conclusion is That we must unavoidably enter into the Ocean of particular Disputes Why so I pray him Why will not another Catholic Church serve turn If he will needs have it granted that the Roman Catholic is not the One Church of Christ 't is but shewing us the other Catholic which is Roman or not Roman imports not But believing the Doctrine of Christ imports as much as Salvation is worth and the Commission which Christ gave to teach it the World is now in force and shall be as long as there is a World Let him but direct us to the Men who have it in this Age that we who live in this Age may learn it of them let him but tell us which is the One not Roman Catholic Church which Christ has here upon Earth and it will do our business every jot as well as the Roman Catholic and as much save us from being plunged into the Ocean of particular Disputes Otherwise to tell us the Roman Catholic is not that Church and not tell us which is is as much as to tell us that Christ has none upon Earth For evidently She or some other must be that Church if there be any at all But let him not send us to a Church whereof the several Parts agree not in one Faith Besides that we should never understand how such a Church let it be never so Universal could be One and make account Christ taught One determinate Doctrine not the 1 and the No both it would be otherwise useless For if This Part teach one Faith and the Next another we should not know which to believe and in all likelihood believe neither But he knows no Reason any can have to be so afraid of the Ocean of particular Disputes since we have so sure a Compass as the Holy Scripture to direct our Passage I am sure there can be no Reason to venture to Sea when we are already safe in our Port The Holy Scripture assures us that the Church is the Foundation and Pillar of Truth and Truth is plainly the Port to which his Compass should direct us But pray what Compass can be sure where the Needle is not suffer'd freely to play Wrangling is Iron to this Needle and turns it to all Points It will indeed direct the humble and docile and the sincere who first know that no Prophecy of Scripture is of private interpretation and we see it will by the Third Paper But it is not for the bold and self-conceited Disputers If any will be contentious we have no such custom nor the Church of God is what the Scripture it self says to them To contend with them at Scripture Tertullian tells us is good for nothing but to turn the Brain or the Stomach and that we ought not to try it this way because the Issue will be uncertain or but little certain or none Alas this Gentleman with the security he promises errs all this while not knowing the Scriptures nor so much as the End for which they were made He would do well to remember what St. Austin says to him in Words directed to another If you will not have me believe Catholics you are quite out to think to draw me to you by Scripture because it was for their sakes that I believed Scripture You would indeed if you could evidently prove your Doctrine by Scripture invalidate the Authority of Catholics who bid me not believe you And when you have done neither shall I believe the Scripture which I had believed upon their Credit and so what you alledge out of it will be of no force with me If you find it
against his Conscience in changing who had declar'd That he would not have chang'd in case he had been bred a Catholic And the Reason he gives is made of the same yielding Metal viz. That he had his Baptism in the Protestant Church for that Argument in it self is of no weight since the Right Reverend well knew that the Baptism even of Heretics is good so that if he had been Christn'd in the Lutheran the Abyssine or the Russian Church he must for that reason have continu'd in it But he timerously pleads his fear of giving Scandal which is as I said no Justification of himself no Dissuasive to Her but only a mean interessed Apology for his not changing As for his intimating That all things necessary to Salvation were to be had in the Church of England let any reasonable Man be Judge whether he could possibly have said less in defence of himself for continuing in it For this only shew'd that he thought Salvation was to be had in both Churches as even this Author himself is forc'd to confess afterwards in these words The utmost that can be made of this is That a certain Bishop of our Church who in the mean time has prov'd himself an uncertain one held both Churches so far Parts of the Catholic Church that there was no necessity of going from one Church to another That which he calls the utmost we can make of it is in truth the least which the Bishop's Words will naturally bear and I may safely put the Cause upon this Issue Whether such a Discourse might not reasonably add more to the desire she had to be a Catholic Let us hear now what he has to answer and I will reply briefly because I have taken away the Strength of his Argument already First He says in effect That the Bishops Authority and Example ought to have prevail'd with her on the one side more than his Concessions on the other I reply Not his Authority because he spoke more for the Church of Rome than against it Nor his Example for he gave her no encouragement to follow it by saying That if he had been bred a Catholic he would not have chang'd His Example of Praying daily for the Dead shew'd his Opinion at the bottom but his not publicly owning that he did so has prov'd him little better than a Black Bishop who was enter'd privately into the White ones Walk Our Author asks in the second place Why any Person should forsake the Communion of the Protestant Church wherein the Bishop affirm'd were all things necessary to Salvation And I enquire How she could be bound to believe him since Confession and Prayers for the Dead are wanting in it one of which he had before acknowledg'd to be commanded of God the other to be one of the ancient things in Christianity Thirdly He urges That the Bishop had told her it was an ill thing to leave the Church of England And I reply That the Answerer has falsified his Words The Bishop only thought it very ill to give that Scandal as to leave the Church wherein he was Baptiz'd First he spoke of himself only not of her Mark that Fallacy And then he said not It was ill to leave the Church but very ill to give that Scandal as to leave the Church relating again to his own particular Fourthly He says 'T is evident that the Bishops Concessions could have no influence upon her tho' she positively says those Discourses in which were those Concessions did but add more to the desire she had to be a Catholic This is full upon the Vizor but the Dead are to take all things patiently Well! How if he can convince her of Falsity from her own Words Why then he will carry his Argument as well as his Good Manners to the height and how broad soever the Word may be which he has slily given her yet he will tell you That Freedom ought to be permitted him as sustaining the Honour of the Church of England His Argument is this She declares afterwards That she would not have chang'd if she had thought it possible otherwise to have saved her Soul But the Bishop had told her That all things necessary for Salvation were in the English Church Therefore the Bishop contributed nothing to her Change So the Miter be safe in its Reputation no matter what becomes of the Ducal Coronet Now I can be very well content that the Bishop should have no part in the Honour of her Conversion for 't is plain that he desir'd it not and why should he do good against his will I wish my Author would have furnish'd me with an Argument to have brought him wholly off but I will bring him on his way as far as by the help of the Answerer's Scarf I can fairly drag him I say therefore That tho' her Highness chang'd not her Belief upon the Concessions of the Bishop yet his Concessions were an occasion of her farther Scruples in order to her Change For she says they added to the desire she had to be a Catholic The Bishop did indeed tell her That all things necessary to Salvation were in the English Church but tell me Sir I beseech you was that all he told her By your favour you have left out the better half of what he said for he told her also That if he had been bred a Catholic he would not have chang'd And she had reason to believe what he said to the advantage of a Church of which he was no Member as being sure he would say no more than scanty Truth And he acknowledges into the Bargain That Confession was commanded of God and that Praying for the Dead was one of the ancient things in Christianity What a shameful way of arguing is this to make a general Negative Conclusion from half the Premises Or in other Words to maintain that the Bishops Concessions could have no influence upon her because they had not the greatest influence And you in a manner confess it before you were aware in the close of your Argument where you say There must therefore have been some more secret Reason which increas'd her desire to be a Catholic after these Discourses Now some more secret Reason do's not hinder the Bishops Concessions from being one nay it argues that they were one of the Reasons though not the most prevalent because there was one more secret You have now contradicted your self so plainly that you have wholly justified the Duchess and the broad Word without naming it is fairly brought back to your own door After this our Answerer do's but piddle and play at small Game as if her Highness might possibly take encouragement from the Bishop's calling the Church of Rome the Catholic Religion But she was too much in earnest to lay hold upon a Word Neither is more advantage to be taken from his calling the Church of Rome the Catholic Religion than we receive disadvantage from the playing upon