very proper occasion to mention St. Peter's Authority if he had any such as they boast of as you may see 1 Eph. Chap. 1. Now this I say that every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas or Peter and I of Christ Is Christ divided or was Paul Crucified for you c. Those People certainly knew nothing of St. Peter's Supremacy nor St. Paul neither otherwise he would hardly have omitted to tell them of such an Infallible Cure for their Divisions In the Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians we have many Arguments against St. Peter's pretended Supremacy St. Paul tells us there that he had no Superior that he had his Authority from none but Christ Ch. 1.17 He compares himself with St. Peter and says that the Ministry of the Vncircumcision was committed to him as the Ministry of the Circumcision was unto Peter Ch. 2. v. 7. He mentions St. Peter as of the same Authority with James and John when James Cephas and John who seemed to be Pillars Verse the 9th And a little further he tells us how he openly withstood Peter to the Face because he was to be blamed All these things might be urged at large but I content my self only tomention them But from all together I think I may well conclude that this Promise of our Saviour did not intend St. Peter any Power over the rest of the Apostles and consequently not any to his Successors if he had any over the Bishops of the Christian Church who are Successors of the Apostles in general tho' we do not deny but St. Peter had a Power over the whole Church but only as the rest of the Apostles had whose Care and consequently Authority was not consined to particular Churches as it was thought fit in order to the better Government of the Church that the Authority of Bishops should be since but was left at large and unconfin'd as to any certain limits either of Person or Places But suppose it should be granted that St. Peter had such Power as they affirm he had yet there is not one Word in Scripture about a Successor or about the vast Privileges of the Church of Rome in this Point And in truth there is as little evidence in the History of the Church for many Ages of this pretended Authority of the Bishop of Rome as there is in the Scriptures Rome was at the time of the Planting the Christian Religion a vast City and the Head of a very great Empire This must of it self give the Bishop of it a great influence in the Affairs of the Church which was almost all within the Roman Empire this made all sort of Communication with him easy by means of the mighty refort that was made from all Parts to the tal City and Greatness of his See did in course of Time bring great Riches to it and if we add to this that it was honoured by the Preaching and Martyrdom of two great Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul we see plain Reasons why the Bishops of Rome were likely to make a great Figure in the Church but as for real Authority such as is now pretended there do not appear any footsteps of it for several Ages As for Speculative Opinions We may not perhaps have so certain an account of them so long after unless of those which by some accident or other came to be Disputed But Government is a Practical thing and there happens every day Occasion to exercise it especially the Government of the whole Church and if the Pope had been from the beginning what he pretends to be and what he now makes himself his Power could have been no more a matter of Controversy than it could be made a Controversy whether there were any Christian Church for the same History that clears the one must at the same time clear the other The Old Body of History of the Christian Church is that of Eusebius which contains an account of the Affairs of it for above 300 Years now if the Pope were Monarch of the Church for those 300 Years we can no more miss to see it in that History than we can read any History of England for such a Number of Years and be uncertain whether we had here any King or no for so long a time No History hardly can be conceived so faulty or imperfect as to leave such a Matter a Secret or uncertain And yet I would Challenge any indifferent Person to read that History over and to shew me but any one thing in it from which it can be probably inferred that the Bishop of Rome was the Governour of the whole Church whereas were it truly so there must have been something of it in almost every Page Because all the business of the Church must in a manner roul upon him He must be the Person appeal'd to in almost all Difficulties we must have found his decrees in all the great Affaires that passed His Decretal Epistles must have been interspersed up and down in the whole Work his Authority must have put an end to all Schisms and Heresies or at least their Rebellion against him must have been reckoned as one great part of their Crime In a word as I said before the thing must have appeared as plain as that there was any King in England for these last 300 Years Next to that History the most likely place to find his Authority if he had any is in the Works of St. Cyprian which contain more of the Ancient Discipline and Government of the Church than is to be found in any other Old Author especially if we add further that a great part of his Works is only Letters to or from Bishops of Rome We could not but see in such a number of Letters whether he wrote to his Sovereign or not we should see it in the Titles which he gives him in his Style in the deference which he pays him In short the whole would some how or other shew that it was his Superior he was writing to but now the contrary to this is true He never speaks to him or of him in his Letters to other People but by the Name of Brother he freely Censures him and his Opinions just as he would do by any other Man and with as little deference or respect and he finally differed from him in a Matter of great consequence that of Re-baptizing Hereticks and called Councils of the Clergy and raised a great Party against him in it and yet was never that I have heard of charged either with Rebellion or Schism or Heresy upon that account but is to this day reputed a Saint in Heaven To conclude this Matter The whole Discipline of the Ancient Universal Church plainly shews that the Government of it was an Aristocracy especially that strict Account that Bishops were to give to their Fellow Bishops up and down the World of their Ordination and their Faith and other Matters in
Opinion of the Mercy of God to invincible Ignorance be true this is Comfort to us supposing we are mistaken as it is to you supposing you are so and on the other side if your Damning Doctrine be true this is as dangerous to you as it is to us It lies therefore upon you even from the Opinion of your own Divines to be very impartial in examining the Grounds of your Religion tho' indeed our Obligation to search after Truth does not arise chiefly from the danger of being mistaken but from that desire that every good Man should have to please God and to serve him as well as he can and the want of this desire has more danger and malignity in it than a great many mistakes in Matters of meer Belief To be only concerned to avoid those Errors that may Damn us is the same undutiful Temper toward God as it would be in a Son to have no concern to please his Father but only so far as that he may not be dis-inherited Many Errors that may not be fatal to Ignorant People may yet be very dishonourable to God bring a great Scandal to our Holy Religion and do a great deal of mischief in the World and these are things which a good Christian would have a great care of tho' at the same time he might hope that God would pardon him should he ignorantly fall into them This I hope may be sufficient to convince you that you ought to examine well the Grounds you go upon in your Religion I shall now endeavour to shew you some of the Errors which we charge upon your Church and the Reasons why we Renounced them and why we think it your Duty to do so too As to the particulars I shall chiefly confine my self to those which the present Act mentions those to be renounced in the Test and in the Oath of Supremacy But before I proceed to them I would speak a little to that which is the great ground and support of all your other Errors the Infallibility of your Church which if I can shew you to be a meer pretence without any Warrant or Authority from Jesus Christ you will then more easily hearken to what can be said in the other Matters It cannot be expected that I should handle these Controversies in their full extent in the short compass which it 's fit this present Address should have but if you find what is said here to have weight in it and that it gives you just cause of doubting I hope you will be so kind to your selves as to come to some of our Divines who may inform you more fully or to read some of those Books which have at large examined these Matters About the Infalibility of the Church of Rome Infallibility is the thing in the World which a good Christian should have the least prejudice against for tho' I do now believe since I see plainly that God has appointed no Infalliable Judge that it is best all things considered that there should be none Yet I must confess were I to judge of things by my own Reason without any regard to what God has done I should be apt to think such a Judge would be a great Blessing to the World I could not but be very glad to find an Infallible way to end Disputes among Christians but Christianity has now been in the World near 1700 Years and I do not know any Age in which there have not been great Contests and Disputes except some few that were so stupidly Ignorant that Men hardly knew any thing of Religion and then no wonder if there were not many Disputes from whence I cannot but conclude that either it is the Will of God for wise Reasons that Controversies should not be ended or that an Infallible Judge cannot end them or that there has all this while been no Infallible Judge But to consider this Matter more methodically I have these Two I think strong Reasons which make me conclude there is no such Judge I. That you your selves are not agreed who he is And II. That the Reasons commonly brought to prove that there is or ought to be such a one do if well weighed rather prove against it 1. That you your selves are not agreed who he is and this is a mighty prejudice in a thing of this Consequence certainly that which it appointed by God to end all Controversies ought to be a thing out of Controversy it self There ought to be a plain Commission a plain Designation of the Person or Persons that Christians might know where to repair in their Difficulties But is this Matter plain Can you assign us any Man or number of Men that have I won't say such a Commission but that in fact only have ever since the Apostles Days been repaired to by Christians and looked upon as their Judge and their Determinations thought to be Infallible If you can I for my part shall very thankfully submit and own the Authority But let us see what the People of your own Church say about it You are sure that you have Infallibility but you don't know where it is Some say it is in the Pope as Head of the Church and Vicar of Jesus Christ others say it is in a General Council but these differs Some say they are Infallible if Confirmed by the Pope others that their Determinations do not need his Confirmation But besides these there are others that say it is they don't know how in the diffusive Body of the Church Now pray Gentlemen does this sound like the Voice of Truth or a Method appointed by God to end all Controversies In Matters of smaller moment we allow Men to abound in their own Sense and to differ from one another at least we cannot conclude they are all in the wrong because they differ but in this we may and ought because if there were any such thing as Infallibility in the Church and that designed to be the Guide of all Christians it could not be a Secret or matter of Controversie where it was lodged we should see the plain Appointment of God or at least we should see in the History of the Church to whom Christians had appeal'd in all Ages And for the Christian Church to be at uncertainty where to go for so long a time to end their Disputes is the same sort of Absurdity that it would be in a Nation for 1700 Years together not to know where to go for Justice But this Absurdity will appear the greater if we consider besides this that tho' the Church of Rome be united together in a strong Bond of External Government and Polity yet in truth and reality this Difference about the Guide of their Faith makes them different Churches and of different Religions For a different Guide and Judge if he be esteem'd Infallible must make a different Rule of Faith because his Determinations must be part of the Rule of Faith and a different Rule of Faith must
Transubstantiation For I would ask Supposing a Man should Consecrate with the Words of St. Luke This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood would that change the Wine not to say the Cup into the very Blood of Christ Certainly it would not do it by force of those Words for they intimate no such thing and it is not unlikely but those were the very Words our Saviour spake for not only St. Luke uses them but St. Paul and that upon a solemn occasion when it concerned him much to give a true Representation of this Sacrament as you may see 1 Cor. Chap. 11. The occasion of his mentioning the Institution of this Sacrament was very great Irreverence which some were guilty of in receiving of it indeed such as it was almost impossible for them to be guilty of had they believed what the Church of Rome now believes about it it was therefore very necessary that the Apostle should speak clearly and plainly out in this matter and we see he does solemnly usher in what he says with the Authority of Christ For I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto you in c. And then he repeats the Words as St. Luke does and not only so but calls the other part of the Sacrament Bread near Ten times in that Chapter 4. The Last Argument I shall make use of upon this Head is this That the Doctrine of the Church of Rome upon another account does not agree with the Words of our Blessed Saviour The Opinion of that Church is That under each Species as they call it whole Christ is contained Body Blood Soul and Divinity so that both are but just the very same Thing in nothing different but in outward appearance which only deceives our Senses And it is upon this Opinion chiefly that they ground the denyal of the Cup to the People because say they should they have the Cup they would have no more but just the very same thing they had in the other Kind And supposing their Opinion true the Argument may for any thing I know have some force in it but then they ought not to deny us leave to Argue the other way That that Opinion must needs be false which makes our Saviour guilty of a great Absurdity in appointing Two Kinds but both really the same thing and one of them perfectly unnecessary But that which I would chiefly take notice of is That this Doctrine of theirs contradicts the Words of our Saviour for what they make but One Thing he plainly makes Two and calls them by Two different Names The one he calls his Body the other he calls his Blood which supposes them to be Two different Things as plain as Words can express them They say indeed That in the Glorified Body of Christ the Body and Blood cannot be separated and therefore were the Words to be taken in such a sense as to consider them separated they would contain a great Absurdity so that wherever the one is the other by concomitancy must be there too But who told them that the Glorified Body of Christ is in the Sacrament The Words of the Institution intimate no such thing but speak of his Body given and his Blood shed which certainly was separate from his Body But however this is arguing from Reason against the Words and is just the very same thing which they condemn as Heretical in us And if this be once allowed they must throw off the whole Doctrine for we can shew them Ten times as many Absurdities in the Doctrine of Transustantiation as they can in supposing the Body and Blood of Christ to subsist separately In short either we must stick to the very Words of our Blessed Saviour or we must not if we must their Opinion must be false which makes what our Saviour calls Two Things to be but One if we must not stick to the very Words but interpret them according to right Reason and other Places of Scripture they then give up their Cause To conclude this Head What Reason can there be imagined why our Saviour should in a solemn manner at different Times and under different Names give the very same thing call the one his Body and the other his Blood when according to the Nature of the Thing he might as well have inverted the Names and have called that his Blood which he calls his Body and so on the other side There cannot I believe be any Reason thought of but only this That the one Kind the Bread was very proper to represent the breaking of his Body the other the Wine to represent the shedding of his Blood which is the very thing that we would have for then there is a sufficient Reason for these Names without any Bodily Presence at all I have been the longer in considering the Sense of the Scripture in this Matter because your Writers commonly boast more of the Scripture being for you in this Case than in any other Controversies betwixt us And I think I have proved more than I need have done in proving that the Sense your Church puts upon the Words of our Saviour cannot be the true Sense of them It being sufficient in a Matter of this Nature which is loaded with so many Absurdities to have shewed that they did fairly admit of another Interpretation But having so fully Confuted this Doctrine out of the Scriptures I am now more at liberty to shew you the gross Absurdities and the monstrous Contradictions that are involved in it tho' in truth it is so full fraught with Contradictions that it 's a hard matter to know where to begin I shall therefore content my self just to repeat some of them which are ready Collected to my hand by a Great Divine of our own Chilligworth p. 165. That there should be Accidents without a Subject that is That there should be length and nothing long breadth and nothing broad thickness and nothing thick whiteness and nothing white roundness and nothing round weight and nothing heavy sweetness and nothing sweet moisture and nothing moist fluidness and nothing flowing many actions and no agent many passions and no patient that is that there should be a long broad thick white round heavy sweet moist flowing active passive nothing That Bread should be turned into the Substance of Christ and yet not any thing of that Bread become any thing of Christ neither the Matter nor the Form nor the Accidents of Bread be made either the Matter or the Form or the Accidents of Christ That Bread should be turned into nothing and at the same time with the same Action be turned into Christ and yet that Christ should not be nothing That the same thing at the same time should have it's just dimensions and just distance of it's Parts one from another and at the same time should not have it but all its Parts together in the felf-same Point That the Body of Christ which is much greater should
where accuse the Arians of Idolatry for Worshipping of Jesus Christ for this very Reason because they owned him not to be God or at least not the Supreme God from whence it plainly appears that they had the same Notions in this Case that we now have That Men may be guilty of Idolatry in giving Divine Worship to what they believe is not God Thirdly The Apostle calls Covetousness Idolatry which tho' it be a figurative Expression yet however denotes to us the thing for which I am now pleading The Covetous Man does not look upon his Money to be his God or intend to give it any of that Worship he thinks due to God I believe no Covetous Man in the World can be justly charged with either of these but because he places his Heart and his Affections upon it which ought to be given to none but God because his Money is the thing in which he puts his trust and his confidence therefore it is that he is said to make an Idol of it and to be guilty of Idolatry And so it is as to the Worshipping of Saints tho' their Worshippers know very well that they are not Gods yet because they give them the Worship of God that outward Adoration and inward Reverence hope trust and dependance which are due only to God they do by that make them Idols and are justly chargeable with Idolatry I now proceed to the Second Point To shew that the Worship which the Church of Rome gives to the Blessed Virgin and other Saints by the Invocation practised among them is Divine Worship such as ought to be given to none but God We are not concern'd at present to enquire into the Doctrine of the Church of Rome but into the Practice that being the thing particularly Censur'd in the Test-Act tho' indeed the Practice of any Church is the best Exposition of Her Doctrine The Council of Trent leaves this Matter in general Terms determines that we must seek the help and aid of the Saints Opem Auxiliumque Sess 25. but does not fix the measures of it However since it does not Censure what was then the Common Practice of that Church we may take it for granted that the meaning of the Council was that we must seek their aid and help in the Methods which were then in use for if they disapproved of what was then commonly Practised it concerned them much to speak out as to set their own People right and to keep them out of dangerous Practices so also to vindicate the Honour of their Church which was then openly charged with Idolatry upon account of those Practices We agree with the Church of Rome in this That we ought to have a great honour and respect for the Saints of God That we ought to love their Memory to endeavour to imitate the good Examples they have left us and to bless God for the Benefits he has bestowed upon the Church by their means And above other Saints we ought to have a great esteem and value for the Blessed Virgin who had the Honour to be the Mother of our Lord and by that to be so nearly concerned in the greatest Blessing that ever was bestowed upon the World But we differ from that Church in this That they Adore the Saints and Pray to them and that not as one Friend would desire another to Pray for him but with all the solemn Ceremonies and Circumstances of Prayer and with the very same with which they pray to God they do it in their Churches Kneeling and with their Eyes lift up to Heaven and with all the signs of Devotion which can be shewed not only from one Creature to another but from a Creature to its Creator They make Vows to them burn Incense to their Images dedicate themselves to their Service make Offerings to them and the like They pray to them directly to bestow Blessings upon them Thus in the Office of the Blessed Virgin She is not only called the Gate of Heaven but she is intreated to loose the bonds of the Gvilty to give light to the Blind and to drive away our Evils and to shew her self to be a Mother They pray to her therein for Purity of Life and a safe Conduct to Heaven She is commonly called the Queen of Heaven the Mother of Mercy and which is most Shameful of all The Psalms of David Composed for the Honour of God and which contain the highest strains of Devotion which a Creature can give to God are by a Saint of that Church Bonaventura turned to the Honour of the Virgin by putting her Name where the Name of God is put by David And this was neither Censured by the Council of Trent nor has been by any Pope that I can hear of to this Day but on the contrary the Author of it has been Canonized and the Book is in Common use which perhaps is one of the blackest pieces of Idolatry that ever was in the VVorld And tho' a Church must not always bear the Guilt of what is publish'd by private Persons in her Communion tho' it do pass without Censure Yet considering how careful that Church has been in many Matters of much less moment especially where her own Authority is concerned and how solicitous they are to keep Books that make against them out of the Hands of their People it looks at least like espousing the Blasphemies and Idolatrous Prayers and Praises of it to let this Book go so freely about without Censure and to incourage it so far as to make the Author of it a Saint These and many other Instances might be given of the Worship they give to the Blessed Virgin and tho' they are somewhat more modest with relation to other Saints yet what I have taken notice of already may sufficiently shew that they give them the VVorship which God has appropriated to himself I would only therefore mention further that in many Instances they pray to them to bestow those Blessings which only God can give such as to open the Gates of Heaven to unty the bonds of their Iniquity to heal their spiritual Maladies and many other of the same Nature of which I shall give them Examples at large if required or if I find it necessary to confirm any thing that I have now said I now proceed to take notice of some of those Reasons we have to prove that this Invocation is part of that Worship which God has appropriated to himself and which consequently cannot be given to any Creature without the Crime of Idolatry 1. I desire it may be considered that the Scripture does every where speak of Prayer as applied to God and to none else and that without the least intimation of any such Distinctions as are made use of in the Church of Rome VVe have in the Old Testament the History of the Church of God for near 4000 Years and in all that time there is not the least instance or intimation of
order to hold Communion with one another which as it is left off since the Pope's Authority came up so the use of it must have been inconsistent with it for it was taking the Judgment of Things and Persons into their own Hands which must not have belonged to them but to the Sovereign High Priest In a word their forging so many Decretal Epistles for the Bishops of Rome for so many Ages is a plain Argument that they have no true Evidences of the exercise of such Authority in the Ancient Church as is now pretended to Had such Authority been then exercised they needed not have been put to the forging Evidences of it we could not easily have miss'd of as many true Decretal Epistles as we have now forged ones something or other we must at least have heard of theirs upon all the Emergent Controversies and Difficulties that happen'd in the Church In short We must have known of the Authority of the Popes of those Ages by the same methods we know of the Authority of the then Emperors by their Actions by their Laws by their Rescripts by their Bulls and by the whole Course of their Government And therefore we must not judge of a thing of that Nature by some few accidental and general Expressions in Authors or by Compliments which the Bishops of so great a See could not easily miss of The last Argument I shall make use of is this That it is not easily to be believed that Jesus Christ has left such an Authority in his Church without leaving at least some Rules about it such as how and by whom the Person who is invested with it is to be Chosen how his Authority is to be executed and what are the bounds and limits of it or whether it has any bounds or no These are Matters of great consequence which have been the occasion of a great many Schisms and might have been or may still be the occasion of a great many more Besides that so vast an Office without any set limits is mighty apt to degenerate into Tyranny and to betray Men into great Exorbitancies to tempt them to leave the Simplicity of the Gospel to Usurp upon the Rights of other People and to affect at last a Secular Dominion instead of a Spiritual Office In fact the want of some such Rules to limit and confine his Authority has made great differences in the Church of Rome about this Matter Some say he has a plenitude of Power others say that he is confined to the Canons of the Church some say that he is above a General Council others deny it some say that he has the Supreme Authority over all the World not only in Spirituals but also in Temporals that he has a Power to Erect Kingdoms to give away Kingdoms to deprive Princes of their Dominions and to take away the Obligation of Subjects to their Allegiance others there are who either qualify this with distinctions or else quite deny it lastly some there are who say that he is Infallible that what he solemnly determines ought to be a Rule and Law to all Christians and to be taken as the Dictate of the Holy Ghost but many there are who deny this too besides all which thereare many Disputes about his Power of granting Indulgencies his dispensing with Oaths and Vows and with the Laws both of God and the Church These are Differences of great moment both with relation to Faith and Practice and may carry Men as different ways as Light and Darkness are different or as different as Truth is from the most monstrous Heresies in the World Thus if the Pope be not above a General Council he may carry those into a State of Schism and Disobedience who believe he is if he cannot dispense with Oaths and Laws and Vows he may carry those into great Sins who believe he can if he cannot Depose Princes he may carry those into Rebellion Perjury Murther and all sorts of Villanies who are led by him and if he be not Infallible as he pretends to be God knows whither he may carry those who follow him And so on the other side if he has all these Prerogatives they are in as much danger who say that he has not If Christ had thought fit to appoint a Head of his Church I cannot imagine but He would have given the Church some Rules about his Power and the Obedience that was due to him And I cannot but wonder how the same Church holds Persons that are of so contrary Opinions in Matters of this consequence Let us only consider that single Point of the Pope's Infallibility I have already shewed that those who do believe it must have a different Rule of Faith from those who do not because his Determinations must be part of the Rule of their Faith and consequently they must have a different Religion from those who do not believe it But that which I would insist upon at present is this That for a Person to affirm himself to be Infallible and to be appointed by God for the Supreme Guide and Conductor of the Faith of Christians so that whatsoever he shall solemnly determine must be believed true without examining I say for a Person to affirm this of himself supposing it be false is downright Heresy and that as gross and dangerous Heresy as almost any Man can fall into Now to illustrate this I would only propose one thing Suppose Henry VIII instead of those other Matters in which he differed from the Church of Rome had affirmed only this one Point That God had made him Infallible and appointed him to be the Guide of all Christians Would this have made him a Heretick or wâ—…d it not There is no Question but they must say this would have made him and all his Followers so or if there be any worse Name by which they could call them for if he were in their Opinion a Heretick for pretending to be the Head only of the Church of England and that without Infallibility How much more must the other have made him so Now what is Heresy in one must be Heresy in every body supposing it equally false for Heresy is not made so by difference of Persons but by the Nature of Things All therefore that believe the Pope not to be Infallible must as much believe this Pretence to be Heresy in him and his followers as they would in the Case of Henry VIII for the Matter is the same in both and the Pretence supposed to be equally false in both but must be much more dangeroâ—… in the Pope because more People â—…e like to be seduced by him That Reason which makes those of the Roman Church who deny his Infallibility yet not speak or think so severely of it as they would do of the same Pretence in another Man is realy so far from excusing it that it aggravates the Matter and makes it worse and much more dangerous than it would be in any other They do not speak out because the Person who pretends to this Privilege has great Authority among them and is at the Head of their Church whereas this is the very thing which makes such a Pretence the more pernicious that he has great Authority even with the whole Body of that Church and has a very great Number of them who say That if he determines Vertue to be Vice and Vice to be Vertue and the same if he determines Infidelity to be Faith yet he must be followed God knows how many People such a one may carry with him into Heresies or Immoralities or even to Hell it self Perhaps they think that God will take care of his Church and will not suffer any thing of that kind to happen but sure they have little reason to expect such a miraculous care over them who encourage the Pope and his Followers in such a pestilent Heresy by living in Communion with him and owning him for the Head of their Church But besides how do they mean that God will take care of his Church when he has suffered a Person whom they own to be the Head of it to fall into such a dangerous Heresy Will God preserve him that he shall fall into no other Heresies How do they know that or how can they expect it If any thing puts a Man out of the care and protection of God certainly such a false pretence as that is most likely to do it And as for those who will stick by such a Person notwithstanding they see the falseness of his pretences they have reason to expect that God should give them over to strong delusions rather than take any extraordinary care of them while they are in such a way I have now done with what I at first proposed to speak to And I cannot but hope that I have said enough to give you just reason to comply with the Laws of your Country in these matters This I am sure of that I have not willingly misrepresented any thing or made use of any reasoning which did not first convince my self If in this short Address I have not answered all the difficulties in these matters or if you desire satisfaction in the other points of Controversy betwixt us and your Church I must renew my request to you that you would consult some of our Divines or read some of those Books which have been written upon the several Subjects which I am perswaded can hardly fail of Convincing you if they are read impartially As for my self if I find by the success of this that any thing I can do may help forward your Conversion I shall be very glad to take any further pains in it And in the mean time shall not fail to put up my Prayers to Almighty God on your behalf that he would be pleased to take away all Prejudice to open your Eyes and bring you to the knowledge of the Truth FINIS
of the Apostles as it does to him and that therefore whatever Power may be here promised to him over the Church there is none promised over the rest of the Apostles and that consequently his Successors can claim nothing from hence over the Successors of all the Apostles the other Bishops of the Christian Church But to consider this Matter more particularly we may take notice 1. That the rest of the Apostles did not apprehend that St. Peter had here any peculiar Power promised him above them for we find that not long after they were contending who should be the greatest by which it's plain they did not then apprehend that our Saviour had already determined the Matter And as for our Saviour himself he does not at all endeavour to put them right as it was of great consequence he should do supposing that he designed St. Peter for their Governour but he endeavours to teach them all humility and not to affect Power or Authority over one another And the same instance we have in the Case of Zebedee's Children when their Mother came to desire that the one might sit on his right hand and the other on his left in his Kingdom that is that they might be the Persons of chief Favour and Authority with him their Petition plainly implies that they knew nothing of St. Peter's Prerogatives and our Saviour's Answer which you may see at large Mat. 20. implies as plainly that neither St. Peter nor any body else was to have such Power in the Church as the Bishops of Rome have since pretended to 2. I would observe that these Words of our Saviour to St. Peter do not actually invest him with any Power but are only a Promise to him and therefore the best way to see what was peculiar to him in it above the rest of the Apostles will be to see the fulfilling of the Promise and his being Actually invested in it That this is only a Promise appears from the Words themselves which run in the future tense I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven And I believe they of the Church of Rome will not deny this because they say that the Apostles were not Priests till our Saviour made them so in the Institution of the Lord's Supper Now if we consider the Actual Investiture into this Power there is nothing peculiar to Saint Peter Our Saviour gives them all their Power together in Words much of the same Nature with that Promise before to St. Peter Receive ye the Holy Ghost whose soever sins ye remit they are remitted and whose soever sins ye retain they are retained And as for the Expression Vpon this Rock I will build my Church there is much the same said of all the Apostles The Church is said to be built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the chief Corner-stone 3. The best way to see whether St. Peter had any such Supremacy will be to see whether he exercised any whether he did any Acts or Offices which belonged to so high a Power There must be constantly so many occasions for the exercise of that Power that if he had any such we could not miss of Instances of it The Times of the Apostles were indeed Times of greater Simplicity than these later Ages and therefore I do not expect they should shew me St. Peter Commanding after the manner of our Modern Popes But if they can shew me any one single Act of Authority over the rest of the Apostles if they can shew me St. Peter of himself making Laws and Orders for the good Government of the Church or so much as presiding in the College of the Apostles if they can shew me any Appeals made to him or Controversies ended by him or among so many Controversies as happened any advice to repair to him or command to obey him I shall not shut my Eyes against the discoveries But to consider this Matter a little more particularly As soon as our Blessed Saviour was Ascended there was an occasion given to exercise this Supremacy in chusing a new Apostle in the room of Judas Acts 1. But we see that the method taken was that the whole Multitude chose Two and then they cast Lots which of the Two should be the Apostle And so as to the choosing of Deacons Acts 7. the whole Multitude chose them and presented them not to Peter but to all the Apostles to be Ordained If we look a little further into the Acts of the Apostles to Ch. 8. We shall find the Apostles not sent by St. Peter up and down to their business as occasion required but St. John and him sent by them to Samaria which was not very mannerly nor very fit had they known him to be their Sovereign Acts 11. we find those of the Circumcision contending with him and forcing him to give an account of his Actions and that without any Ceremony or deference proper for one in so high a Place and we see he patiently submits to it without standing upon his Prerogative of being unaccountable without chiding them for their Insolence or any thing of that kind Acts 15. we find a solemn Meeting of the Apostles and Brethren at Jerusalem where St. Peter speaks indeed as any other Man might have done but does not preside or determine any thing The Appeal was to the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem not to him alone and if any thing in the whole Meeting was done Authoritatively by any single Person it was by St. James for he passes Sentence as you may see Verse 19. If we go to the Epistles we shall find as little evidence of his Authority as we have in the History of the Church in the Acts of the Apostles The first Epistle is that to the Romans not from St. Peter but from St. Paul where there is not the least notice taken either of St. Peter or of the great Prerogatives of that Church which one would think could hardly be avoided if St. Paul had known any thing of them nay he says some things which directly contradict their Pretences which you may see Chap. 11. He tells them there that he speaks to them who were Gentiles as being the Apostle of the Gentiles and if so St. Peter must not have had so near a relation to them because he was the Apostle of the Jews Then he proceeds to advise them to have a care of themselves lest they should fall away and be cut off as you may see ver 20 21. Be not high-minded but fear for if God spared not the natural Branches take heed lest he also spare not thee It 's plain that St. Paul at that time knew nothing of the great Privileges of that Church of its being the Mother and Mistris of all Churches of its being the Center of Church Vnity and of its being Infallibly secured from Error and Apostacy If we go on to the Epistle to the Corinthians we shall sind there a