Protestant Writers spoken of who have done this but nothing as either borrowed from them or as laid out by himself is brought in Many passages of the Fathers are misapplyed Many Cavils Criminations and Calumnies are objected Many strong words as Logomachies Vertigo's and Needle-headed Nicities with Prophecies from Poets are used a great part of Erasmus Chilias spent in Proverbs Much paper blotted but what concluded I shall not here interpose my judgment as Mr. Menzeis publishes his victory as Trumpet in the Triumph himself leaving to each one to read and judge of the papers adding only of him what was said of a Prolix and tedious Orator who on little matter spent much time in many flourishes of words and frequent Digressions Nullum vidi qui magis operosè nihil diceret Multa sed non multum Magni passus sed extra viam Seneca That is I have seen none take greater pains to say nothing he sayes many things but not much he walks at a great pace but out of the way For me as I mind not here actum agere so neither do I presume to add any thing to what Mr. Dempster has said in his way of Disputing which I acknowledge both the shortest and best to make Mr. Menzeis prove his Grounds but he ever declining this and urging we should shew in them any weakness or defect this I here undertake for Mr. Menzeis further conviction and happily some Protestants conversion by the goodness and mercy of God My design being to prove positively the falshood and nullity as well of his great Principle of no Infallible visible Judg as of both his Grounds and that very succinctly in a few Sections without Digressing in the least or medling with what hath been said SECT III. Wherein Mr. Menzeis great Principle That there is no Infallible visible Judge of Controversie in the true Church is Positively refuted as the main Ground of all Divisions Schisms and Heresies and contrary to the Scriptures Fathers and Reason AS all Rebellion in Kingdoms and Common-wealths has its rise from contempt of the lawful Authority of Princes and Magistrates upon the specious pretence of abuse of Power against the Laws of the Kingdom and Liberties of the Subjects So all Heresies in the Church begin with appeals from the Pastors of the Church the only Judges establisht by Christ to his Written Word which is to all Christians as their Law Book LEX REX cry out Rebels with their Calipha Buchanan LEX JUDEX or nolo verba quae non sunt scripta Answers the Heretick with an Arian in the Councel of Nice They will believe what they read and not what they hear though the Apostle teach us that Faith comes of hearing and the reason is because with Mr. Menzeis they acknowledge none speaking in matters of Faith and Religion Infallible No Infallible Visible Judge This is indeed that great Principle Protestants did broach to themselves in the beginning of Reformation and at their very first leaping out from the Church they would admit of no Infallible visible Judge stand to no Sentence or Decree of Church Councils Fathers Now this Principle being supposed by them to be solid and an unquestionable truth nothing can follow thereon but what is true Ex vero nil nisi verum and consequently any private Protestant reading Scripture with a sincere intention may yea ought to adhere to what he thinks to be in Scripture should all the Protestant Church with all her Assemblies Synods Preachers be of a contrary mind Upon this Luther and Calvin leave the Catholick Roman Church and all visible Congregations in the Christian World at that time because sayes Chamiers Ep. 49. though Mr. Menzeis deny it was so Then Apostacy averted the whole body from Christ. They made all the Kings and people drunk from the first to the last says Calvin Inst l. 4. c. 18. and Whitaker Cont. 4. q. 5. c. 3. No Religion but the Papistical had place in the Church Duditius apud Bezam Ep. 1. sayes more if that be true which the Fathers have professed with mutual consent it is altogether on the Papists side Upon this same Principle innumerable other Sects and Sectaries have left again Protestants and the Protestant Church upon this and this only Principle every particular man reading Scripture and taking it as he thinks both words and sense clear is made his own Judge and so as many heads almost as many sentences and diverse Opinions in Religion some thinking Scripture clear for this some for that Sect some admitting or rejecting whole Books of Scripture at their pleasure Yea some and that too too many seeing most clear Scripture tossed and wrested by contrary Sects suspend their Judgment renounce their Faith and quit all Religion not knowing with what party to side Others in fine who think themselves deeper wits as they are more speculative and searching brains having run through all can be said to ascertain any point of Faith save only the Divine Oracle in the Church have turned Scepticks in Religion grounding themselves on meer probability Which Seed of Infidelity sayes the Author of a Treatise Intituled Faith vindicated from possibility of Falshood Sowen when the Infallible Authority of the Church as the rule of Faith was renounced dared first appear publickly above ground in the Writings of Mr. Chillingworth and the L. Falkland dressed up in a plausible Rhetorick and set out under a yet more pleasant Title to Protestants as being against Popery was most graciously received by many Yea when it appeared in Mr. Tilletson his Eloquent and Famous Sermon did begin to get credit as an Evangelical truth and all this upon the foresaid great principle Upon it the holy work of Reformation by private men opposing the Law and Gospel to the judicial Sentence and Decrees of the whole Catholick Church Upon it the glorious work of the Covenant by some factious Zelots against Prince and Pastors in the Protestant Church Upon it Preachers and Pulpits clash at randome Sects and Sectaries multiply the Christian world is put in confusion with endless Jars and Debates in Religion And all this because there is no Infallible Judge of Controversie to give Sentence in favour of any one party silencing all others In a word for that according to Protestants God hath given us a Law without a Judg however inconsistent this may seem with Order Providence and wisdom This one Principle I say once more with the great St. Augustine Serm. 14. de verbis Ap. Ruines the very Grounds of Religion In aliis quaestionibus non diligenter digestis non plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate firmatis ferendus est disputator errans ibi ferendus error non tamen progredi debet ut fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliatur According to the same St. Augustine ib. whosoever run their heads were they never so great with Mr. Menzeis against this Inexpugnable wall of the Church Authority are crusht Hoc habet Authoritas matris Eccelsiae
Ep. 37.64 A Sentence inspired by the Holy Ghost S. Epiphanius haeres 77. A Decision not to be questioned S. Athanasius Ep. ad Episc Afric The Word of God which endureth for ever S. Basil Ep. 10. The Touch-stone to discern Hereticks Vincensius Lyrinensis in his Book against Heresies c. 4. says all who will not be accounted Hereticks must conform themselves to the Decrees of Oecumenical or General Councils S. Augustine Ep. 162. Calls them the last Sentence can be expected in matters of Faith S. Gregory the great l. 1. Ep. 24. Reverences the first four General Councils as the four Evangills And Constantine the great the first Christian Emperour Ep. ad eccle Alex. as witness Sozomenus l. 1. c. 24. and Socrates l. 1. c. 6. holds the Decrees of the Council of Nice against Arius a Divine Sentence flowing from the mouths of so many and great Bishops inspired by the Holy Ghost Wherefore S. Augustine de bapt contra donat l. 1. c. 7. concludes That no doubt ought to be made of what is by full Decree establisht in a Council Neither is Mr. Menzeis Objection from him of any force for when he speaks l. 2. de bapt c. 3. of mending Councils by Councils upon further experience his words are Cum aliquo rerum experimento aperitur quod clausum est cognoscitur quod latebat clearly shewing he means not any Decision of Faith can be mended which no experience can learn us but Divine Revelation alone can teach Thus to shun prolixity in Citations do not all the Fathers who were ever present at Councils Subscribe their Canons and Decrees annexing Anathemas and Excommunications against all who oppose them in the least I hear Mr. Menzeis Reply to all this first but where is that Infallible Church the Scriptures and Fathers speak of Answer That is not here the question but that there is one which is contradictory to his great Principle That there is no Infallible visible Judge Only I add the Protestant Church cannot be this they speak of she not being Infallible as themselves confess and consequently cannot be the Church and House of God which the Apostle calls the Ground and Pillar of Truth Secondly How many Questions may be moved touching the lawfulness of Councils now the Fathers speak not of the Council of Trent but only of lawful ones Answer a contentious spirit will question any thing but St. Augustine above cited tells you of what is by full Decree establisht in a Council no doubt or question ought to be made Whatever Protestants object against the Council of Trent did not the Arians against the Nicene Council Nolo verba quae non sunt Scripta that is I will believe nothing but the written Word which is but the eccho repeating now what was at first cryed out then Thirdly God has obliged no man to hear Church or Council against his express and clear Word Answer This is true but is not the Church the most faithful Depositary of Gods Word best Judge of what is clear and best Interpreter of what is Obscure For no Scripture says St. Peter Is of private Interpretation and doth not Christ in his written Word most clearly and expresly command us to hear his Church if we will not be holden as Publicans and Heathens Fourthly No Council can be general where all are not called and sit with a decisive voice Answer Should even Hereticks be called to and have in Councils their decisive voices What agreement could this make in Points controverted why not Socinians Anabaptists Quakers as well as Protestants should Presbyterians sit with Bishops Prelaticks in Protestant Assemblies what a pitiful shift is this If so let the Covenant be renewed Bishops again thrust out and Mr. Menzeis set high for yielding obedience to them only through compulsion and fear of loosing his place Fifthly The Church her self when fallen in errour cannot be Judge being Criminal and Impeached of most hainous crimes she cannot be both Party and Judge Answer This Objection is all Utopian and Chymerical if we hear the Scripture and Fathers assuring us she cannot err But giving and not granting she did who then her Judge When Subjects rise against their Soveraign Citizens against their Magistrates Children against their Parents leave they to be their Judges because arraigned by them Even Hereticks must submit to the Sentence and Censures of the Church when they fall at variance with her though they turn Unnatural she cannot become a Stepmother to them Sixthly Infallibility in judging is proper to God Answer yes none but God has it Essentially and by Nature but none I hope will deny he may make the Pastors of his Church as well Infallible in teaching points of Faith as his Prophets and Evangelists in penning the Scripture Books or at least as any Protestant in reading and understanding them Seventhly The Church of Rome is but a particular Church Answer we take it not so when we say the Catholick Roman Church but for all Churches in Communion with the Roman as all Countries under the Roman Emperour are called the Roman Empire and all people under the Law of Moses the Jewish Church though that name taken strictly belonged to the Tribe of Juda because the chief City appertained to that Tribe where the High Bishop resided So the Universal Church is called the Roman Catholick Church by reason of St. Peter and his Successors her high Bishops residing there whence Rome is the Centre of Ecclesiastical Communion infusing unity in the whole dispersed body as the Form of Universality or Catholickship Wherefore St. Cyprian Ep. ad Cornel. Calls her Ecclesiam principalem unde unitas Sacerdotalis exorta est That is the Principal and chief Church the Source and Centre of Unity amongst the Priests of all other Churches and consequently the people Eighthly But whereon Grounded this Infallible Authority of the Church Answer On the clear places of Scripture and Fathers above cited It is the Ground and Pillar of truth therefore cannot err It hath the promise of Gods Spirit to lead it into all truth therefore cannot err It is said to be built on the Rock against which the gates of Hell shall not prevail therefore cannot err Christ hath placed in it Apostles Doctors Pastors and Bishops to the consummation and perfection of the whole body that we be not carried away with every blast of new Doctrines therefore it cannot err It is the House the Spouse the Mystick body of Christ his Lot Kingdom and Inheritance in this world therefore cannot err On the Authority of the Church the Fathers have received the Originals Translations and Sense of Scripture Books yea some chief Points of Faith not mentioned in Scripture as persons in the Trinity Sacraments in the Church keeping holy the Sunday c. therefore cannot err Christ has commanded and that under pain of Damnation to hear the Church in matters of Faith and Religion therefore it cannot err All are obliged to live in
God did reveal such Doctrine as theirs either by his Word or Spirit For we receive now no Immediate Revelations as the Prophets and Apostles did in old times nor have we Evidentiam in attestante as the Divines call it that is any Evidence that it is God who speaks points of faith being only propounded to us by men who either put the Scriptures in our hands to read or teach us by word of mouth The Protestants great Principle let 's own no man or Church as an Infallible Judge yea M. Menzeis in his sixth paper offers upon this to turn Papist if the Infallible assistance of the Propounder can be proved necessary but never clears what other way we can be Infallibly assured that all which the Protestants do teach was revealed by God Unless it be in his third paper where speaking of the True and Genuine Sense of Scripture he tells us we may have it as from a Jurist the Explication of a Municipal Law or from a Mathematitian a demonstration of Euclides But what a weak Answer is this Do any receive Demonstrations on Authority as Points of Faith Or is the assent I give to the Law so explained by a Jurist Infallible If Christ himself had not shown his Divinity by his Works and Wonders he grants the Jews had committed no sin in refusing to belive him The Apostles Credentials were their Miracles both did thus evidence the Infallible assistance they had of Gods Spirit to the World and shall any man trust M. Menzeis boldly asserting there is no necessity of any was it not for this the power of Miracles was left in the Church as the marks of her assistance and seals of her Doctrine with other Motives of credibility Notwithstanding Protestants with M. Menzeis will propound to us the Catalogue of Canonical Scripture Books assure us of the uncorrupt Copies and Letter enforce upon our Consciences the sense they give whil'st so confidently obtruding all this they neither dare or do say nor can evidence by any external mark or sign they have the particular assistance of Gods Spirit As if all this were clear in it self with Mathematical Demonstrations But doth Scripture in our Bibles show it self better to be the Word of God now then when Christ was speaking in person Then an external Evidence God did speak by his Son is acknowledged as necessary by him and now shall any man reasonably say there is no necessity of any when he speaks by his servants and Church however this prove efficacious and strong for M. Menzeis conversion it would seem to me more then sufficient for his or any mans conviction Fourthly to claim to Scripture yet so as they can no wise evidence they take it aright is common to Protestants with all Hereticks so no peculiar Ground When Sectaries clash with Sectaries is not all their babling out of Scripture You shall see says Vincentius Lyrinensis c. 35. Hereticks so abound with Scripture as they fly through all the Volumes of the holy Law through Moses the Books of Kings the Psalmes and Prophets c. read the works of Paulus Sam satenus Priscillian Eunomius c. you shall not find ae page which is not Coloured and painted out with the sentences of Old and New Testament Nestorius to support his Heresie gloried as Gennadius reporteth in his Catalogue in the evidence of threescore Testimonies which he produced as the Covenant in three hundred whereof scarce three any wise to the purpose The Valentinians Marcionists Arians will submit to none but Scripture as St. Augustine witnesseth of Maximinus the Arian Bishop in his first Bok against him Neither doth it avail M. Menzeis to say Scriptures are clear in terminis or made clear by conferring of places or show themselves clearly to a well disposed mind First for that though a place of Scripture be clear in it self yet when divers Sects take it diversly a man may justly suspect his own judgment seeing so many of a contrary mind So that it wanteth not difficulty to determine always what is absolutely clear there being many clear places as would seem not to be taken in the clear and obvious sense as the passages Hereticks did most build on will presently shew As when Marcion despiseth Moses and the Prophets upon Christs own clear words in S. John the 10. How many soever have come before me are Thieves and Robbers The Manichees affirmed Christ to be the Sun upon a like Scripture in St. John the 8. I am the light of the world The Waldenses taught no man could be put to death no not by the lawful Authority of a Judge upon clear Scripture again Exod. 20. Thou shalt not kill c. The Devil citeth clear Scripture to Christ and the Jews against his death we have heard in the Law the Messias abideth for ever Moreover many seeming Contradictions in Scripture you shall find in Becan and others one might think clear And many things are believed even by Protestants which be not in Scripture at all as Persons in the Trinity Sacraments in the Church and the Command of keeping holy the Sunday the Scripture neither naming persons or telling what a person is defining Sacraments as M. Menzeis doth or setting down their number abrogating the keeping of the Sabbath or having for the Sunday any command Many places of Scripture again are flatly against Protestants and clear for us as for the Real Presence This is my Body this is my Blood S. Matth. 26. For Justification not by Faith only but also good works Ye see then how that by works a man is justified and not by Faith only S. James 2.24 For Traditions from the Apostles besides the written Word Therefore brethren stand fast and hold the Traditions which ye have been taught whether by Word or our Epistle 2 Thes 2.13 And such like places cited in most Books of Controversie for all Controverted Tenets Protestants never being able to bring any one clear place of Scripture against any of our Tenets not evidently mistaken or confessedly corrupted as when they make S. Paul say a man is justified by faith only Luther above cited granting he has put in the word only which Saint Paul hath not or Thou shalt not make to thy self any Graven Image in place of Idol as is clearly the word Pesel in the Hebrew Text. Secondly as to conferring of places and explaining the more obscure by these which are clear did not Arius boast of this against the Fathers of the Council of Nice proving the unity in Nature of the Father and Son out of these words in S. John the 10. I and my Father are one No says the Arian this place as obscure to us and passing the reach of Humane capacity must be explained by this other more clear in St. John 17. where Christ prayes his Apostles May be one with him as he and his Father are one that is in will and affection and surely the second place is clearer to us and
are twenty several Opinions concerning Justification all drawn from the Scriptures by the men only of the Augustan confession There are sixteen several Opinions concerning Original sin and as many Definitions of the Sacraments as there are Sects of men that disagree about them Lastly He concludes Num. 8. since those ordinary means of Expounding Scripture as searching the Originals Conference of places Parity of Reason and Analogy of Faith are all dubious uncertain and very fallible He that is the wisest and by consequence the likelyest to Expound truest in all probability of Reason will be very far from confidence because every one of these and many more are like so many degrees of Improbability and uncertainty all depressing our certainty of finding out truth in such Mysteries and amidst so many Difficulties Remark well all this discourse from so great a Protestant Doctor finding no certainty of the true sense of Scripture by all the means of Interpretation and reflect with all a little in how hard a condition Protestants stand admitting no Infallible visible Judge in Controversy but boldly undertaking to decide all that which is controverted by sole Scripture Explained by such fallible means and yet more fallible men It is but a Labyrinth of windings and turnings to pass from Scripture as clear in words to conferring of places and deducing consequences after Prayer used and diligent search made with a well disposed mind then to the inward motion or the private Spirit against which the Prophets and Apostles so generally exclaim Ezekiel in his 13. Chapter wo be to the foolish Prophets who follow their own Spirit S. Peter in his 2 Epistle Chap. 1. No Prophecy of Scripture is of Private Interpretation Neither is the question here what is inwardly required in every private man to believe Scripture but what is the external visible and infallible Rule of Faith for that is out of all doubt with us Faith is a supernatural and infused virtue to which the pious motion in the will is no less requisite then the Supernatural light in the understanding to assent to what is revealed by God But seeing neither this light nor pious motions as they are supernatural and incline only to believe a revealed truth do manifest themselves to be such Therefore many thousands even well disposed persons and who seek God in the sincerity of their hearts oftentimes perswade themselves till they be better instructed they believe such a thing as a revealed truth by God which is a condemned Error by him And this none can deny who will not maliciously condemn a world of zealous Ignorants yea some even most learned and holy Fathers who with St. Cyprian in the Point of Rebaptization have believed an Error for a revealed Truth before it was clearly decided by the Church However whether it be this or something else M. Menzeis calls a well disposed mind others the Spirit or the private spirit the Spirit of the Righteous man and so forth I say it cannot be either with the holy Scripture or alone the Rule of Faith and Judg of Controversie 1. Because none without some Particular help can be Infallibly assured of this Interiour Motion Affection or Spirit whether it be Natural or Supernatural from God or the Devil the Spirit of Darknes or Light now no man as M. Field confesseth L. 4. C. 7. Proveth any thing is or may be doubted of by that which is as much to be doubted of as it self 2. We are counselled in the 2 Epistle of St. John Ch. 4. Not to believe every Spirit but to try the Spirits if they be of God But if the Spirits must be brought to the Touchstone of Trial if they must be judged and approved by some other well known and undoubted Authority they are not the sole Rule and Supreme Judg of Faith and Controversy Because this Spirit is secret and hidden our Faith publick and evidently credible this Spirit particular our Faith Catholick or Universal this Spirit the gift of every particular man our Faith subject to no private censure Wherefore M. Hooker Eccl. Pol. L. 1. Sect. 14. and Whitaker against Stapleton C. 2. C. 4. Ingeniously grant that the outward Letter of Scripture sealed with the inward and private Spirit is not a sufficient Warrant for every particular man to receive or reject Scripture Books but that the publick Authority of Gods Church is necessarily required Whence I say further with S. Augustine l. Contr. Ep fund c. 5. That Authority which we obey and believe testifying the Books of the holy Ghospel the same must we believe witnessing this to be the sence of the Ghospel that is not the private Spirit but the same Authority of the Church Thirdly This private Spirit is so far from being the Judge of controversy upon any pretence of adhering to Scripture either as clear in it self or explained by it that instead of compounding debates and keeping unity the chief Office of this Judg it is the very Root of Dissention and Fountain of Heresies and Schisms for as by experience we see it to be different in divers persons so as the Bell to fools it speaketh as they fancy it inclines as they are affected it points out the Object according to the Colour which is in the eye It is like a false light which makes the Aspect of best and fairest Figures vary It is often a blind zeal or a prejudicate Opinion which hinders to see what is clear in Scripture as S. Augustine l. 3. de Doctr. C. 10. well Remarks If the Prejudice saith he of any Erroneous Opinion preoccupate the mind whatsoever the Scripture hath to the contrary men take it to be a Figurative Speech So that it furnisheth to every Sectary reading Scripture his own Spectacles in conferring places his own Rule of proportions His private Weights to ponder Reasons his particular Forge to coine Opinions his secret Touch-stone to try Doctrines his own Reed to measure the Temple Sanctuary and Altar Makes him his own high Priest Pastor and Judg setting up within himself a Supreme Judicatory giving ever sentence in his favour and censuring all the world beside So that none standing to this Rule can be compelled to the unity of the Church and yet none can be accounted Hereticks as the learned Suares l. 1. de defi fid C. 11. most judiciously remarketh if we take Scripture as men read who think themselves well disposed or Expounded by it self according to the Dictamen of the private Spirit for ground for who can swarve from Scripture as clear according to his particular Judgment and Spirit which he even esteemeth to be the Spirit of God Scripture therefore cannot be Judge of Controversie as M. Menzeis will have it 1. By reason the sentence of this Judg must breed a certain and Infallible assurance of all that can come in doubt which Scripture cannot do It being infallible indeed in it self but not to us who may doubt if such a Book be Canonical such
Auricular confession on the 5. Ch. of James seven Sacraments in his Postscript on the first Ep. and 1. Ch. to the Corinths Wherefore Melancton Ep. ad Micon thus censures him I have read Wickliff and found in him many Errors he never held nor understood Justice of Faith which is the Protestants main Fundamental With the same confidence M. Menzeis calls the Waldenses Protestants who held the Real Presence that the Apostles were but Lay-men that all Magistrates fall from their Dignity by mortal sin that it is not lawful to swear in any case c. as witnesseth Illyricus in Catal. Wald. Confess Bohem. c. And with these the Grecians upon a private Letter sent as he pretends by a Patriarch to the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury though all who ever conversed with Grecians know they say daily Mass hold Transubstantiation seven Sacraments Prayer to the Saints and for the dead c. as all may see in the censure of the Oriental or Grecian Church and deny the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son and consequently make no distinction betwixt these two Persons in the Godhead But it is enough to M. Menzeis it seems that they disown the Pope to be called Protestants and so Turks and Tartars may come in with them Whence I leave to judg how constant a Protestant M. Menzeis is owning such Doctors and Doctrine and what Credit again he deserves after so many clear Testimonies and that even of learned Protestants and the very writings of the persons in question convincing him of most notorious falshood and Errour The most antient and holy Fathers as S. Ireneus Tertullian Philastrius S. Epiphanius S. Augustine Theodoret S. John Damascen and others who have written a Catalogue of Heresies did not certainly distinguish Fundamentals and Integrals amongst Divine Truths sufficiently propounded as Protestants do when they condemned many lesser things as Heresies and consequently damnable Errours then what they think to have no repugnancy with Fundamentals and essentials in the Doctrine of the true Church as in the Pelagians Novatians Donatists Monothelits who all embraced the Trinity Incarnation Passion of Christ c. S. Epiphanius Heres 75. and S. Augustine l. de heres C. 33. condemn the Arians for denying the Fasts commanded by the Church the first remarking they were accustomed to eat flesh on Fridays and in the Lent yea chiefly in the holy Week wherein Christ died S. Hierome in his 2. book against Jovinian condemneth him for saying Fastings and all other Exercises of good works were not meritorious S. Augustine in his Book of Heresies c. 54. condemns the Eunomians for teaching no sin could hurt a man if so he had but only Faith S. Epiphanius haeres 64. all who denied free will S. Hierome Vigilantius in his Book against him for affirming the Relicks of the Saints ought not to be reverenced the same S. Hierome against Jovinian with S. Augustine in his Book of Heresies C. 82. condemn him for holding Wedlock equal in dignity and merit to virginity S. Augustine again l. Contr. Julian C. 2. the Pelagians for teaching the Children of the Faithful Parents did not need Baptism but were born holy and in his 1. Book 2. C. and last against Maximus the Arians for not receiving Traditions Now let M. Menzeis choose either to acknowledge all these and many such like condemned Heresies by the Fathers to be no Fundamentals and consequently that many other things then these which Protestants call Fundamentals are necessary to be believed under the danger of incurring Heresie and Eâ—ternal damnation or owning them as such let him confess Protestants Err even in Fundamentals with them seeing all here condemned is Protestant Doctrine borrowed from those more ancient Hereticks and condemned by the Fathers even then 4. As to that he says all Fundamentals are clear in Scripture and that according to S. Chrysostome S. Augustine S. Irenaeus S. Thomas of Aquine and Sixtus Senensis holding what ever is obscure in one place to be clear in some other I answer very easily with a manifold distinction 1. To such eminent Doctors of the Church as he cites most Scriptures are clear I grant to all indifferently I deny 2. To such as take the places of Scripture commanding us to hear the Church and hold fast the Traditions of the Apostles conserved in her as two main Fundamentals for clearing all the rest I grant to others I deny 3. With Vincentius Lyrinensis c. 2. to such as level the Line of Prophetical and Apostolical interpretation to the square of the Ecclesiastical and Catholick sense I grant to others I deny 4. With Doctor Field a Protestant in his 4. Book C. 14. to such as be first setled in those things which the Apostles presupposed in their delivery of Scriptures I grant to others I deny Neither are these my Distinctions any wise to shift the Argument which maketh nothing either against us or for him But to clear the Fathers words in the very genuine sense they speak them See S. Chrysostome his meaning in his 14. Hom. on S. John S. Augustines contra Cresconium C. 33. where he says if any one fear to be deceived in this question through its obscurity let him ask Councel of the Church which the holy Scriptures do demonsrate without any ambiguity That of S. Irenaeus in his 2. Book Ch. 47. and more expresly in his 1. Book Ch. 49. S. Thomas his words That what ever is necessary to be believed under the Spiritual Sense that some where is manifestly declared by the Letter as they do not specifie to whom this manifest declaration is made so we grant it to the Church and her Doctors for to her all things are known says St. Irenaeus in which is perfect Faith as to the Apostles it was given by our Saviour Christ to know the Mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven 5. But I would ask M. Menzeis did ever any of these Fathers receive the Scriptures as the undoubted Word of God otherwise then on the Churches Authority S. Augustine saying I would not believe the Scriptures if the Authority of the Church did not move me to it is no less clear for this then Scripture it self in Fundamentals Or did ever any of them fancy to himself a place of Scripture as clear for any thing the whole Church standing in a contrary Judgment For this is the only Point we debate with Protestants and clearly prove both by the Scriptures and Fathers against them 6. However Scripture be clear in Fundamentals in the sense I have given that is particularly and in as many words or generally and as commanding us to hear the Church yet surely it doth not set down all that is Fundamental in express terms if we trust the Fathers whom M. Menzeis appeals to as holding Scripture clear in Fundamentals or can all be so evidently deduced from scripture but by the Authority of the Church that Hereticks be silenced and Unity preserved in Faith S. Chrysostome on
as the Word of God upon the sole Authority of the Church As M. Whitaker against Stapleton p. 1. c. 11. I deny not but the Churches Tradition is the Argument whereby to convince what Books are Canonical and what not M. Fulk in his Answer to a Counterfeit Catholick The Church hath judgment to discern the Word of God from the Writings of Men. M. Covel in his defence of Hooker Doubtless it is a tolerable Opinion of the Church of Rome to affirm that the Scriptures are holy in themselves but so esteemed of us for the Authority of the Church And M. Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Policy we all know that the first outward Motive leading men so to esteem of Scripture is the Authority of the Church And as these own her Authority in Propounding the Scripture Books so other Protestants in resolving all Doubts and deciding all Debates as Bancroft Lord Archbishop of Canterbury in his Sermon on the 8. of February 1588. God says he hath bound himself to his Church of purpose that men by her direction might in matters of doubt be relieved he speakes of the Representative Church which onely directeth Master Field in the Epistle to his Treatise of the Church Seeing the Controversies of Religion are grown in number so many and in Nature so Intricate that few have time and leasure fewer strength of understanding to examine them what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to search out which among all the Societies of men in the World is that blessed company of holy ones that houshold of Faith that Spouse of Christ and Church of the living God the Pillar and Ground of Truth that so they may imbrace her Communion follow her Doctrine and rest in her judgement Here again the Representative Church both Judging and Teaching M. Hooker in the Preface of his Books of Ecclesiastical Policy We are right sure of this that Nature Scripture and Experience have taught the World to seek for the ending of Contentions by submitting it self to some judicial and definitive sentence whereunto neither part that contendeth may under any pretence refuse to submit And what is this but a General Council M. Bilson in his perpetual Government is clear for it To have no Judge sayes he for the ending of Ecclesiastical Contentions were the utter subversion of all peace Synods are surest means to decide doubts Sr. Edwin Sands in his Relation of the Religion used in the West parts of the World The Protestants are as severed and scattered Troops each drawing a diverse way without any means to take up their Controversies c. No ordinary way to Assemble a General Council of their part which is the only hope remaining ever to aswage their Contentions 3. Reason evinceth it The true Church is the School of infallible and Divine Truths then she must have infallible Masters and Propounders A fallible Church is most properly named by a Learned Writer a Spiritual cheat it may well be called the Ground of Opinion Doubt and Despair but not of Infallible and Divine Faith If the Sheep hearing the voice of their Pastors and following them be misled who shall be their sure Guide And if all the Fathers and Doctors of the Church together assembled may mistake either the uncorrupted Letter or true sense of Scripture who I pray you can assure himself he takes it aright No infallibility in matteâ—â— of Faith and Religion is left upon Earth 〈◊〉 the high Bishop and chief Pastors of the Church unanimously Teaching and Propounding cannot err It were more then madness any man should say the contrary and yet hold himself infallibly secure of what he believes Would a Protestant be but once at the pains to speak to an Infidel for his conversion to the true Church calling all her Pastors even assembled in a Council fallible I should willingly hear what he could so much as say in general for Protestancy yea or for the Christian Religion No doubt he should first speak of one true God then of Christ and Faith in him as necessary to salvation telling his Proselyte how out of his Goodness and Mercy towards us he had made himself Man and died upon the Cross for our sins Yet afterwards had risen again and by his Miracles showen both his Civinity and Power and by these strange Works and Wonders having established his Church he had delivered his Will and Doctrine to her in his Written Word called the Holy Scripture Upon this the Infidel no little astonished at such a Discourse surely should ask him some Ground for it and how he could be perswaded it were true Here I imagine the Bible is produced as the Word of God and sole ground of Faith But who assures me of this says the infidel It was attested by many Miracles which Christ and the Apostles did work who first preâ—â—hed it Answers the Protestant they were holy men chosen by our Saviour Christ for the conversion of the World they did Teach his Word Infallibly They did set it down in Writing confirmed it with Wonders and left it to the Church How long ago replies the Infidel Nigh 1700. years answers again the Protestant One Question more says the Infidel have you any infallible Witness in your Church or any Infallible External Motive that this is the same Word of God that was Preached by the Apostles and delivered by Christ or that in confirmation of it ever any Miracle was wrought The first needs none says the Protestant it is clear to all well disposed persons turn Protestant and you will Evidently see it to be the Word of God and the second is sufficiently attested in it Presently the Infidel having received further instruction in most Points of Protestancy and made more earnest to see how all that has been taught him is true desires he may have for a time the Bible and diligently perusing it finds some things in the Historical Books look like Fables many more in the Prophets he doth not understand many seeming contradictions betwixt the two Testaments many points he was taught by his Protestant Master not in Scripture at all yea many things clearly against it Of all which he asks his Master a diligent account And first whether at present there be no man or company of men can resolve him infallibly of all these doubts None concludes the Protestant but Scripture it self for since the Apostles there is in the Church no Judg no Propounder infallible If so Sir you conclude nothing with me says the Infidel but here I end with you for the Book you ground all you have said upon as if it were clear and infallible to me like the first Principles in our Philosophers Schools is so deeply obscure and highly above the reach of reason that without some powerful motive and inducement no reasonable man can believe it And since you grant it was at first propounded with infallible Motives which now have ceased It seems God would
his Prince and King I instance only that base and perfidious bewraying of Gods Word belying of the known truth and betraying of his Countrey and King in that most unchristian Sermon upon these words How long wilt thou mourn for Saul whom I have rejected Applying them to our most Gracious Soveraign which I should have been ashamed to relate if this notorious Impostor and most absurd abuser of Gods Word had not first in the Preface of a Sermon in Print and now again so often in this his Book most deceitfully and maliciously cryed out Papists could be no good Subjects as if their Tenets did tend to Rebellion whil'st all Loyal Protestants in the three Kingdoms both love and respect our Loyalty how ever they hate our Profession and look upon him with all his Covenanting Fry as a most fiery Incendiary of Rebellion Now Sir if such a man whom you most cry up for his Eloquence as if like another Samson his strength consisted in his hair be a Person fitted to give the Grounds of Religion defend the Protestant Faith or convert any one to his Belief for that with a Pharisaical countenance a Puritanical tone and a strong voice colouring some slight Learning and reading of Pamphlets with plagiary Phrases and Passages to stuff up a Book in Print and turn the Glass twice in his Sermons let any be judge As that Philosopher of old hearing himself praised by the rabble who commonly approve nothing but such stuff as is in themselves did presently make an examen of his actions I hope Protestants seeing their Religion Defended by such a Writer will more diligently enquire of its weakness which they can never better see then in his Papers where having undertaken to give the Grounds of the Protestant Religion the only Subject of this Dispute either by Word or Writ in them all has not as his Adversary well re-marks so much as ten lines to settle clear or defend them in the least but scraping together objections against Catholicks so often answered by them borrows some passages to no purpose at present and heaps up undervaluing words with such injurious scoldings railings and imprecations against an Old Grave Learned and Modest Man that after he hath called him an impudent Liar a Knave Rogue Sycophant Fool a dull and Lethargick-head a Neat-herd in Ignorance a Devil in Malice and what not He imprecates in fine out of his corrupt Bible changing the word Imperet with imâ—reâ—et the same curse Saint Michael did in their conflict to the Devil such is the Pride Passion and poison of his heart so contrary to the Spirit of God After this what may we expect of such a person if we hear the Wise mans saying In malevolam animam non introibit sapientia True Wisdom never enters into a wicked and malicious soul yet Sir to satisfie your loving and friendly desire I intend to examine more at length what Wit and Learning he shews and first in his two long Epistles Dedicatory and to the Reader which could receive no Answer from Mr. Dempster as appearing but a twelvemonth after his death After this God willing I wil positively refute which he so urges may be done First his great Principle of No Infallible visible Judge of Controversie and then both his Ruinous Grounds SECT I. Some brief Reflections on the Title of Mr. Menzei's Book and his two long Epistles Dedicatory and to the Reader HIs Title being in Latine Papismus Lucifugus according to that saying a strong Thief shall have a strange name must needs be explained and surely understood of that New Gospel Light in the Covenant for in it Mr. Menzeis was a bright Star of the first Magnitude or Fiery Comet himself of which Light a Prelatick Poet in answer to a Satyre upon the Consecration of a Bishop Writes thus Your Phoebus from the West did rise A light that did put out mens eyes Welcome Confusion This Light indeed Popery shuns as all other New Lights against old received Christian Verities but not that either of Scripture or Antiquity the onely true Light of the Christian World as flowing from Christ the Sâ—n of Justice and carried by so many holy Popes Bishops and Priests in Communion with them even unto the most remote corners of the Earth as the conversion of all Kings and Countries to the Christian Religion do testifie which Light Mr. Dempster no where declines but constantly holds out to make nothing for clearing the Grounds of the Protestant Religion except it be in shewing them both ruinous and false so that Mr. Menzeis here Offendit in Luce in limine that is stumbles both in the light and in the specious Title of his Book whereof the very first line is not to the purpose The Question being only of the Grounds of the Protestant Religion and not of Popery at all He begins with a great show of humility who am I the meanest of the thousands of Israel Answer Est qui se nequiter humiliat interiora ejus plena dolo Eccles 19. But let his late Bishop in the Church Principal in the Colledge and fellow Brethren in the Ministery bear witness of this when they have opposed him in the least Yea his own Jactancy through all his Papers and Book with his base revilings in every page and under-valuing of his Adversary It is those his humble thoughts of his own abilities makes him so boldly assert there was consultation used in the present Dispute Surprizal intended and a choice Champion pitched upon to Encounter with him as a Hector But the known truth is to all them who had a hand in the undertaking as they did witness in his presence at the Meeting that they had only yielded to his Importunity in desiring a Meeting and that they had taken him only who was next at hand for the time a man most able indeed for a civil Conference but most unable for a Clamorous Dispute as being of a very weak Constitution and of a totally confiscated health But all this Conference must be set out by him in a disguised Dress Mr. Dempster proclaimed an Ignorant Catholicks charged with Calumnies the better to Paint out his Victory and Triumph As in like case another Conference as he quotes by Dr. Prideaux and Dr. Featly of late whom he might have spared to name being as good at Calumniating Inventions as either of them and no doubt but he will be cited hereafter as they now who nevertheless most deceitfully relates both the occasion of the Conference and what passed in it The clamours of women he speaks of if any for it was a most modest person did speak was onely to suppress his clamours heard even at the Cross and witness to his face that he had passed from his engagement to them which was to give and defend the Grounds of the Protestant Religion as he had engaged under his hand and this his missive was the Paper Mr. Dempster kept open at the Meeting which
he would have generally supposed to have been the first exchanged Paper with him but it is particularly known to us Mr. Dempster had never then intended to write a line But Mr. Menzeis cautious and conscious to himself that it had been easie to reverse his Grounds and Involve him in inextricable difficulties as shall hereafter appear if he had answered directly by word refuses the performance of his promise or to speak for the Protestant Religion at all but will only Impugne some Opinions of Authours in the School which are neither fit for the Pulpit where he did first challenge them nor the capacity of common hearers and much less that which he chiefly insisted on any Point of our Faith The first is That men are not bound presently to repent when ever they have offended God under the danger of incurring a new sin Whereupon Mr. Menzeis frameth his Argument as if this were a Dicision of the Catholick Roman Church and then sayes he Mr. Dempster denied the Major whence he took witness that the Jesuit admitted the Minor a rare Inference and quick He passeth under silence the confirmation of the Major denied because disgraceful to him who though he did think it a point of Faith and that so unquestionable yet could never prove it by Scripture contenting himself with a weak comparison which he is ashamed to set down in his Book But however Doctors vary in prescribing a limited time wherein we should repent all hold the shortest delay both surest and best and publick Repentance is generally taught to be necessary for publick transgressions as publick Recantations for open Calumnies like to that of Mr. Menzies against his Soveraign How long wilt thou mourn for Saul c. His Penitential Sermon being as yet to make so well doth he presently repent Yea not only his Practice but Doctrine also if truly a Protestant is so far from presently repenting that Teaching mens best actions to be sinful he must either confess repentance at no time to be commanded or else blasphemously avouch God hath commanded us to sin Is it not a jearing of Gods Commands and a scoffing of men to affirm the Commandements to be impossible and yet urge that even affirmative ones should be hourly and instanly kept Forgetting two Maxims of the School Nemo tenetur ad impossibile and Praecepta affirmitativa obligant semper sed non pro semper In the second Argument he both argues and and answers to himself Mr. Dempster being silenced by his clamours concerning the intention of Priests in administring the Sacraments which if requisite he will have it to make all Faith uncertain But in vain there being greater assurance of their intention then that Ministers use aright the Elements and pronounce the words or that they teach not false Doctrine and set not out corrupt Bibles The assistance of Gods Spirit promised to his Church and his particular Providence in Governing and Ruling it assures us nothing necessary either to Faith or Salvation can be wanting in her No want of Intention can wrong them who are come to age they may supply by their own Intentions Desires and Acts of the love of God And for children whom Protestants will have to be saved by the faith of their Parents and not by Baptism Is it not more sure that publick persons in the Church want not a right Intention then that private men have true Faith The conferring of a Sacrament is not only Actio Hominis I hope but also Humana as the Divines speak What then if a Mad man in a frolick or a Comedian for a jeer as we read to have been done in derision of Christians should pour out water on any one and pronounce the words yea what if a Priest shewing a new Convert how he is to be Baptized should do the same Were these lawful and valid Baptisms where nothing save the Intention is wanting It is easie to cavil at the chief Heads of the Christian Religion but hard to say any thing solidly against them After this he comes to his Apologies First for so much writing on so little purpose Answer he should have said so little to the purpose there scarce being ten lines precisely to the purpose in all his Papers and Book Secondly That he was not so speedy in Answering as Mr. Dempster upon his Incombacy's and upon deliberating whether he should answer the emptiness of Mr. Dempsters Scriblings who antidated his Papers yet that he might guess with Apelles at his great hast by his foul work Answer his greatest Imcombacy's as I am informed are but to dite and declaim Bellarmines Objections or such like out of other Controversy Books And if it be an empty Question to ask the Grounds of his Religion Sure it must be an empty Religion and void of Grounds Neither did Mr. Dempster Antidate his Papers but did write back to him as currantly as any man could do a missive Letter never intending they should see the Press and finding very little solidity in his Answers He guesses at his great hast by his foul work but can shew nothing foul in it save onely when he resumes his filthy scoldings but we may easily guess at his little wit by his Foolish Work and Answers no where to the purpose His third Apology is for the Acrimony and bitterness of his expressions which he sayes had their rise from Mr. Dempsters Dunghil Eloquence Repetitions Praeteritions Calumnies Answer Mr. Menzies scoldings are the only Eloquence of the Dunghil most Learned men oftentimes be not very Eloquent in the Vulgar Tongue As to his Repetitions he is no good Disputant who passes from his medium before the Argument be answered For Preteritions all wise men pass what is not to the purpose as most of his papers and Book And as for Calumnies I leave to his papers to justifie his modesty however Mr. Menzies most injuriously Calumniate him In his Epistle to the Reader he continues his Apologies for Disputing Writing Printing granting one might have said more in a very few sheets for the satisfaction of a lover of Truth then he in all his Papers and this is most true Nay but he has been constrained to follow the anomalous motions of a tautologizing Jesuit Answer These two words set together sound well in a Pulpit but signifie nothing or little for how can his motion be anomalous or irregular who steers still to the same point constantly propounding the same thing Or how can he be said to Tautologize and use idle Repetitions who insists still in the same question till he get a full and satisfactory Answer as if a man come to require his money from a Debtor should hear from him many news of the late Wars and then asking again his money the Debtor should speak of our new League with many Forraign Princes But the Creditor still mindful of the main did reiterate the occasion of his coming and ask a new when he could expect his money were this
a tautologizing and vain repetition And in this sense I grant Mr. Dempster tautologizes and in no other But are not rather Mr. Menzies many Instances in this his Epistle against the Catholick Faith and so many times repeated in his Book both tautologies and anomalous motions as altogether false frivolous idle and impertinent to the present Question concerning the Grounds of the protestant Religion wherefore I reflect only on the last viz. That Popish Principles as improven by the Jesuited party are highly injurious to Princes Ergo The Protestant Religion hath solid grounds for this should be his Inference in all he sayes And this an arch Covenanter is not ashamed to write who so treasonably and publickly did preach against his lawful Soveraign but the love and esteem so many of the Greatest and Wisest Monarches in the Christian World have for Jesuits sufficiently vindicate them from all the Calumnies of such a disloyal person After this he sayes If he know his own genius well he takes no pleasure in altercations Answer He is then of a most austere Nature who so shuns all pleasure for it seems Mr. Menzeis lives in altercations as the Salamander in the fire all his Preachings and Writings being full of them He delights so to cavil that he lets not pass Mr. Dempsters Orthographick trespasses which should have been at most imputed to his Amanuensis or Scriviner But if Mr. Menzeis were as Orthodox as Orthographick all were well In his voyage to London to complement the Usurper he made himself Orthographick in the English Tongue but coming down an Independent he was far from an Orthodox mind yet thinks to keep up some reputation amongst Protestants by his Imputations on Jesuits No hope sayes he of prevailing with the Jesuited Faction whose Design as appears is to keep up a stated Schism in Christendom they hinder the conversion of Jews and Infidels Answer No Sir it is only the Hidra of Heresy and chiefly yours divided in so many heads keeps up Schism and Division from the Church and amongst themselves which Monster Jesuits strive to suppress they yea one of them called Saint Francis Xavier hath converted more Infidels to the Christian and Catholick Religion in ten years time then all the Protestants in the World for a hundred and fifty if all Records of History be more worthy of credit then you The conversion of Jews Infidels Hereticks as ever in old times so constantly now is a mark of the true Church to which Hereticks can no wise pretend whose business is to pervert Catholicks rather then to convert Infidels as Saint Hierome well remarks so that in all prudence this he should not have mentioned his younger brethren the Jansenists of whom he borrows most of his Objections against Jesuits speak not of this being no little ashamed when yearly the notable conversions of so many thousand Infidels only by Jesuits and other Priests in Communion with the Sea of Rome come out wherein neither they nor he have any hand Next amongst many controverted points obstructive to the peace and unity of the Catholick Church he sets down first the Churches Infallibility as if the true Church were not infallible both according to the Scripture and Fathers as I shall God willing hereafter prove at length or as if the Church being infallible peace and unity could not be had Secondly the Popes Universal Supremacy as obstructing Unity forgetting what St. Hierome sayes l. 1. in Jovin That even amongst the Apostels themselves one was made head that the occasion of Schism and Division might be taken away Ut capite constituto Schismatis tolleretur occasio Doth the Popes Supremacy in the whole Church hinder peace and unity more then my Lord Archbishops Primacy in the Kingdom Is not this a fling at Bishops in their Diocesses and the Primate in each Nation to say their Supremacy over inferiour Pastors is a let and stop to Peace and Unity in the Church So all Covenanting Ministers speak with him the Unity they aim at being nothing but a Monopoly to set themselves above Pope and Primate upon the ruines of both Church and State Are not these strong and witty Objections put in the Frontispiece of his Book as in the Van The rest I prosecute not they being the ordinary controverted Tenets betwixt Protestants and us answered in every Pamplet of Controversie but the last is too remarkable to let it pass Nay says he Is it not one of the first Queries wherewith Jesuites do assault our people how do you know Scripture to be the word of God As if they would have people rather turn Atheists then remain Protestants A very pretty Reply shews not this his Answer Jesuits and others have great reason to move the Question to which so great a Divine can not better reply Protestants call Scripture their ground of Faith but can evidence by no sufficient Motive of Credibility standing to their principles this Book they call Scripture is the true and Authentick Word of God should not Mr. Menzeis then have setled cleared and vindicated from all Objections and Cavils this his ground but that could have diverted him from Impugning the Romish Faith no it would have done more against it then all his Calumnies of Idolatry being more to the purpose yea ended to the Protestants great advantage all the present debate but all Mr. Menzeis can answer is to call the question Atheistical and a demand proper to Infidels as if good Christians might not ask for Instruction how they may prudently believe and firmly adhere to the grounds of their Religion and Faith In fine he says Many Romanists have called for Reformation Answer true and do as yet daily call for Reformation in Life and Manners but not in matters of belief none of them with Protestants presuming to correct Gods Word and reform the Doctrine of his Church or to censure their Pastors and all the Ancient Fathers with Pharisaical and Puritanical pride This way of calling for Reformation was proper to protestants at their first rise for reforming the Catholick Roman Church and again in the Covenant for the reforming their own They like Foxes indeed to use Mr. Menzeis comparison did raise such dust not to say worse with their tails and heads both that ever since the very air they breath is infected and their eyes so blinded that they cannot open them to see the manifest truth After all this fearing his Book may have a reply he desires all things then be noticed he hath said Answer No this his demand is most unreasonable that at the time one only question is in debate and that a main one concerning the Grounds of the Protestant Religion any thing else should be taken notice of till this be put to a closure On this all the Protestant Religion depends let their grounds be proved solid and we have done for by that we look not on his Digressions as Golden Apples to make us run out of our way in
consequently according to M. Menzeis Rule the Arian Heresie must prevail neither will he ever be able standing to his Rule to answer an Arian Cobler making this Objection as Learned Writers remark Eutyches conferring these two places The Word was made flesh in S. John 1. and the water was made Wine in S. John 2. fell in this detestable Blasphemy That the Humane Nature was changed into the Divine as the Water was converted into Wine And without all doubt again the second is the clearer place to us the first that two Natures should be united in one Person surpassing as the Divines teach even the Natural capacity of Angels Manicheus explains the same passage The Word was made flesh Figuratively and in show as Protestants This is my body and that by a clear place of S. Paul to the Phil. 2. v. 7. where it is said Christ took upon him the form of a servant and was made in the likeness of men Most clear words as would seem in favour of this Heresie and such that if Protestants could bring any with as great a show against the real presence all their Pulpits should sound with them till their hearers became deaf But there be none in all the Scripture so clear against the real presence I say as the words quoted have a seeming clearness against the real Incarnation of Christ the four Evangelists and S. Paul speaking in so express and formal words for the former that the Fathers with St. Chrysostome Hom. 6. have recourse to the words for the real presence as clearer to prove that giving in the Sacrament his body and blood he must have taken the Nature of Man Nestorius on the contrary will have these words of S. John the 2. Dissolve ye this Temple and in three dayes I shall raise it again to be taken Litterally and not Figuratively and upon this holds out a new Heresie that the Son of God did dwell only in his Holy Humanity as in a Temple Valentine and Apollinaris reading in S. John 3. no man hath ascended into heaven but he that descended from Heaven gain sayes the Mystery of Christs Incarnation and wil needs have his flesh to have descended from Heaven as his Manhood afterwards ascended thither And this Heretical Exposition they confirm by conferring the ensuing places in St. Paul to the Ephesians 4. He that descended the same is also he who ascended And in the first to the Corinths 15. The first man of Earth Earthly the second Man of Heaven Heavenly A thousand such Errors in the greatest Fundamentals of Christianity have Hereticks drawn out of the clear Fountains and Brooks of holy Writ by the deceivable and deceiving search of weighing places Why not Protestants with them they sail on the same Sea and deep of Scriptures with them they direct their course by the same Card of conferring clearer and obscurer places the same Rule they apply to all the crooked lines of their Errors and Deviations What can be answered to all this M. Menzeis Principle always standing No Infallible visible Judg but to have recourse with him to the well disposed mind wherefore Thirdly I say this doth not yet satisfie to the Question no not with all the means of Interpretation M. Menzeis doth bring it being as hidden Intricate Doubtful and Inscrutable who performs all these Conditions aright as to find out certainly and infallibly the true sense of Scripture without an Infallible Judge Yea supposing one uses them aright yet let us learn from no lesser Protestant then Doctor Jeremy Taylor what certainty of the true sense men can attain by them His words are so remarkable to my purpose in a Discourse of liberty in Prophesying Sect. 4. that here I even set them down at length First then says he Sometime the sense is drawn forth by the Context and Connexion of Parts It is well when it can be so But when there is two or three Antecedents and Subjects spoken of What Man or what Rule shall ascertain me that I make my Reference true by drawing the Relation to such an Antecedent to which I have a mind to apply it another hath not Secondly One other great pretence is the conference of places which is of so indefinite capacity that if there be ambiguity of words variety of sense alteration of Circumstances or difference of Style amongst Divine Writers then there is nothing which may be more abused by wilful people or may more easily deceive the unwary or that may more amuse the most diligent observer Thirdly Oftentimes Scriptures are pretended to be expounded by a proportion and Analogy of reason but it is with Reason as with mens tasts When a man speaks reason it is but reason he should be heard c yet because it must be reason that must judg of reason unless other mens understandings were of the same Air the same Constitution and ability they cannot be prescribed unto by another mans reason especially because such reasonings as usually are in Explication of particular places of Scripture depend upon minute Circumstances and Particularities in which it is so easy to be deceived and so hard to speak Reason regularly and always that it is the greater wonder if we be not deceived Fourthly Others pretend to Expound Scripture by Analogy of Faith This he says is but a Chimera a thing in the Clouds which varies like the right and left hand of a Pillar c. Fifthly Consulting of Originals is thought a great matter to Interpretation of Scriptures but this is to small purpose for indeed it will expound the Hebrew and the Greek and rectifie Translations But I know no man that says that the Scriptures in Hebrew and Greek are easy certain to be understood and that they are hard in Latine and English The difficulty is in the thing however it be expressed the least in the Language c. Then numb 6. he saith in general All these ways of Interpreting Scriptures which of themselves are good helps are made either by design or by our infirmities ways of Intricating and Involving Scriptures in greater difficulty because men do not learn their Doctrines from Scripture but come to the understanding of Scriptures with preconceptions and Idea's of Doctrines of their own and then no wonder Scripture look like Pictures wherein every man in the room thinks they look on him only and that wheresoever he stands or how often soever he changes his Station So that now what was intended for a remedy becomes the Promoter of our Disease and our Meat becomes the matter of sickness and the Mischief is the wit of man cannot find a remedy for it For there is no Rule no Limit no certain Principle by which all men may be guided to a certain and so Infallible Interpretation that he can with any Equity prescribe to others to believe his Interpretations in places of Controversie or ambiguity Osiander in his confutations of the Book which Melancton wrote against him observes there
a Copy conform to the Original such a Translation Authentick such a place clear such a sense genuine 2. The Judge of Controversie ought to give a clear sentence which the learned and unlearned may equally understand and as the Law sayes the Apostle is not for the just but the unjust so the Judg of Controversie is not only for the well disposed but more in some manner for others and especially the unlearned and unstable who according to St. Peter Wrest the Scriptures to their own damnation Yea the most learned amongst the Fathers as S. Basil and S. Gregory Nazianzen after much pains in the study of Scripture as testifieth Ruffinus l. 11. Hist C. 9. refuse to interpret them but according to the Rule and Uniform consent of their Fore-fathers not relying on all the means of Interpretation M. Menzeis prescribes and they had reason the Scripture being the Book S. John describeth to be clasped with seven Seals Apoc. 5. v. 16. which Ezekiel termeth the enrolled volume written within and without S. Ambrose Ep. 44. A Sea containing most profound Senses of Prophetical Riddles S. Augustine l. 2. de doctrina Christ C. 6. hard in the Stile Discourse Places as well as in the Subject and Matter which makes him cry out l. 12. Confess c. 14. O the wonderful depth of thy speeches O the wonderful depth S. Hierome Ep. 13. C. 4. Says the Text of Scripture has a Shell to be broken before that we can tast the sweetness of the Kernel and Vincentius Lyrinensis C. 2. That all take not holy Scripture by reason of its deepness in one and the same sense but some interpret one way some another so that there may seem to be picked out as many senses as men for Novatus doth Expound one way and Sabellius another otherwise Donatus otherwise Arius Eunomius Macedonius otherwise Photinus Apollinaris and other Hereticks with them therefore very necessary it is for the manifold turnings and by-wayes of Errors that the Line of Prophetical and Apostolical interpretation be levelled according to the Square of the Ecclesiastical and Catholick sense whereof Tertullian de Praescript gives this reason for that the sense adulterated is alike perillous as the Stile corrupted But what danger of this says M. Menzeis if Scripture be clear men cannot mistake if not wilfully blinded what is so Could not the Law-maker speak as clear as the Judg Answer we have seen there is nothing almost in Scripture but has been and so may be mistaken Therefore the necessity of a Judge however the Law speak clear has been acknowledged by the greatest men and best wits in the world Aristotle in the first Book of his Morals and fourth of his Politicks And Plato in his Republick prefers good Judges even to best Laws Judges have been ever establisht by the Laws in all Nations as by Scripture in the Church of God and the necessity of one to keep concord and unity is partly grounded on the nature of most clear Words and Sentences which may be taken according to the Letter or Sense Properly or Figuratively Morally or Mystically and so forth Partly on the diversity of Opinions men commonly judging as they are affected and diversly of one and the same thing as their understandings inclinations or interests leads them His Majesties Secretary of State may write no doubt as clear as the Lords of Council and Session speak yet his Letters are directed to them in most businesses of weight least others should take them otherwise then written or wrest them to their own ends even so is it of Scripture written by the Prophets and Evangelists and delivered to the Pastors and Doctors of the Church Whence Catholick Romans build their Belief upon Scripture not taken as they fancy but Explained by Apostolical Tradition conserved in the Church and the unanimous consent of the Fathers and if any doubt arise of both these on the General Definition and Decision of the present Catholick Church Protestants as M. Menzeis holds out ground their Faith on Scripture which they have corrected or rather corrupted as clear in it self or made clear by diligent reading and conferring of places with prayers and as they imagine a well disposed mind that is a Prejudicate Opinion that their own Tenets are right Now let any man judg which of these two is most conform to Scripture it self in both Testaments to the practice of the Church in all ages to the consent of Fathers above cited and Reason For first This the Protestant way would seem vain arrogant and presumptuous in so far as that a man who followeth it must be so confident of himself that if he fancy Scripture to be clear for such a Tenet were all the Christian World in a contrary judgment yea had all Christians been so from the time of the Apostles yet must he stand to his fancy grounded upon clear Scripture as he thinks So that no perswasion can remove him from it for that it is a point of his Faith but for a man to be so peremptorily resolute in the sense he hath found in Scripture by his private reading is very presumptuous I say for wherein can he ground prudently such a strong assent as is required in Divine Faith which ought to be above all can be said against it Shall it be on the clearness of the words conference of places on his skill in Tongues on his weighing the precedent and consequent places or on the assistance of the Spirit given to him If so is it not intollerable pride and presumption in any one man to think that no other was ever so clear sighted or quick witted to see and understand in Scripture what is clear no other in such a multitude of Doctors and Fathers so well versed in the Original Languages so circumspect to confer places so exact to weigh Circumstances so acute to draw Consequences in fine so well disposed to find the Truth so fervent in Prayer so particularly enlightned directed and assisted by the Spirit of God What is whymsical Phanatick and Foolish if this be not wherefore Doctor Field ashamed any should think this to be Protestant Doctrine says None of their Divines teach the Scriptures to be so clear that they may be certainly understood by reading and conferring of places For the Rule of Faith says he in his Appendix 2. p. p. 12. is Doctrine descending by Tradition from the Apostles according to which the Scriptures are to be Expounded And in his fourth Book C. 14. The Rule of Faith is the consenting judgment of them that went before us the Rule without which we cannot know the meaning of the things that are in Scriptures for who shall be able to understand them but he that is setled in these things which the Apostles presupposed in their delivery of Scripture Afterward in the 15. Chap. having said There is no question but there be many obscurities in Scripture And in the 18. Ch. having set down many senses of Scriptures in
a General Council as infallible in their Decrees Here either acknowledgeth the Records of the Ecclesiastick History and Writings of the Fathers as witnessing infallibly to us the Doctrine of these ages or else must grant he hath no infallible assurance that this his second ground of Faith is solid and Infallible There being no other way left us without particular Revelation to know what Doctrine the Church did teach and believe in the first three Ages save only the Writings of the Fathers and Tradition of the present Church which consequently M. Menzeis must either here own as Infallible or avouch he builds his Faith upon a sandy and fallible ground The first Reformers standing better to their own Principles then he and of much greater sincerity and learning grant plainly the Fathers of the Primitive Church to hold many things in opposition to them Luther L. de servo arbitr C. 2. and in his Table Conferences C. de patrib Eccl. The Authority of the Fathers is not to be regarded in the Writings of Hierome there is not a word of true Faith in Christ sound Religion Tertullian is very Superstitious I have holden Origen long since accursed of Chrysostome I make no account Basil is of no worth he is wholly a Monk I weigh not him a hair Cyprian is a weak Divine affirming there yet further that the Apology of Melancthon doth far excell all the Doctors of the Church yea even Augustine himself Calvin L. 3. Inst C. 5. It was a custome 1300. years ago that is in the second age to pray for the dead but all of that time says he I confess were carried away with Errour And in the fourth Book of his Institutions Chapter 9. he will stand to no Decision of Councils Fathers Bishops but try all by Scripture alone granting generally all the Western Churches to have defended Popery Resp ad Versipell p. 134. Melancthon on the first Cor. 3. speaks plain presently from the beginning of the Church the antient Fathers obscâ—â—ed the Doctrine of Justice by Faith encreased Ceremonies and devised new Worships In like manner Peter Martyr 1. devotis p. 477. that in the Church Errours did begin Immediately after the Apostles and therefore as long as we stand to Councils and Fathers we shall be alwayes in the same Errours Whitaker cont 2. q. 5. C. 7. it is true which Calvin and the Centurists have written that the antient Church did Err in many things as touching Limbo free Will merit of Works c. Chemnitius in Exam. conc trid pa. 200. most of the Fathers did not dispute but avouch that the souls of Martyrs heard the petitions of those who prayed to them they went to the Monuments of Martyrs and Invocated Martyrs by name D. Fulk in his confutation of Purgatory grants Tertullian Cyprian Hierome Augustine do witness that Sacrifice for the Dead is a Tradition of the Apostles yea in his retentive says Prayer for the dead prevailed within the first 300. years And in his Answer to a counterfeit Catholick That Pope Victor in the second Age did practise Supremacy in the Church The Centurists do reprehend Cyprian Origen Tertullian in the third Century and S. Gregory Nazianzen in the fourth for teaching Peters Primacy as they do also S. Cyprian in the third Century of Superstition for saying that the Priest at Mass holds the place of Christ and offers up Sacrifice to God the Father Sacerdotem Cyprianus inquit vice Christi fungi deo patri sacrificium offerre And generally confess the Fathers of the third Age do witness and that not in obscure terms invocation of Saints videas in doctorum hujus soeculi Scriptis non obscura vestigia invocationis Sanctorum They say further in the second Century S. Irenaeus admitteth free Will even in Spiritual actions and that S. Clement every where asserteth it so that the Doctors and Parstors of that Age were in this manner of blindness say they reckoning out in this number S. Cyprian Theophilus Tertullian Origen Clemens Alexandrinus Justine Irenaeus Athenagoras Tatianus c. As doth also Abraham Scultetus with them Yea Doctor Humphrey in his Jesuitisms pa. 2. and else where Eccl. C. 15. says it cannot be denyed but that S. Irenaeus S. Clement and other Fathers of the first and second age called Apostolicks for that they were Disciples of the Apostles or immediately followed them have in their Writings the Opinion of free Will and Merit of Works The Cenâ—ury Writers and Scultetus Tax for the same Clement of Alexandria S. Cyprian Justin Martyr c. In the third Century they say Origen made good Works the cause of Justification and in the 5. accuse S. Chrysostome for handling the Doctrine of Justification impurely as attributing Merit to Works M. Whitaker saith that not only Cyprian but almost all the most holy Fathers of that time were in that Errour as thinking so to pay the pain due to sin and to satisfie to Gods Justice in so far as Luther on the 4. ch to the Gallathians calls for this Hierome Ambrose Augustine and other Fathers Justice-workers of the old Papacy And M. Wotton in his defence of M. Perkins forbeareth not to censure for this very Point of Merit the undoubted and confessed Writings of Ignatius Disciple of S. John Chemnitius in his Examine par 4. p. 20. affirmeth the Antient Fathers Erred in making Pilgrimages to Relicks of Saints and Osiander with the Centurists Cent. 4. that S. Hierome did foolishly contend that the Relicks of Saints ought to be worshipped For owning Traditions Chemnitius in his Exam. Par. 1. p. 87.89.90 reproves Clement of Alexandria Origen Epiphanius Hierome Ambrose Basil Maximus Damacene and M. Whitaker de Sacr. Script S. Chrysostome as speaking inconsiderately when he admitteth them D. Reynolds in his Concla 1. p. 689. somewhat more moderate leaves the censuring of S. Epiphanius for this to the Church M. Whitgift in his defence against Cartwrights Reply grants Ignatius Disciple of the Apostles to have said of Hereticks They do not admit the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ which flesh suffered for our sins And M. Beacon in his Treatise the Relicks of Rome says the Mass was begotten conceived and born anon after the Apostles time if it be true what Historiographers write Calvin L. 1. Inst C. 4. confesseth in the Primative Church Confession Pennance and Absolution by the Priests and the Century Writers that in the times of S. Cyprian and Tertullian there was used private confession even of thoughts and lesser sins then so commanded as necessary Where any judicious Reader may evidently see how by chief Protestant Authours both the Primitive Church and the Fathers are censured for many Errours Yea and for the very same which are most objected against the Romish Church a most invincible Argument from the confession of our Adversaries That the Church and Fathers of the three first Ages did teach the self same Doctrine with the present Roman Church and
Substantial Points partly in written partly unwritten Institutions In the same Age S. Ignatius apud Euseb l. 3. Hist C. 36. doth exhort all to stick to the Traditions of the Apostles In the second Age S. Irenaeus L. 3. C. 4. what if the Apostles had left no Scriptures at all ought we not to follow the Order of Tradition which they have delivered unto those to whom they did commit their Churches and to which assent many Barbarous Nations who believe in Christ without Character or Ink. In the same Age Origen Hom. 5. in lib. num there are many things in Ecclesiastical Traditions which all ought to do and on the 6. Ch. to the Romans he sayes to baptize Infants is one In the third Age Tertullian de praescr teacheth Hereticks are to be confuted rather by Tradition then Scripture and L. de Cor. mil. speaking of the Ceremonies of Baptism the Sign of the Cross Sacrifice for the Dead c. he addeth of these and such like things if thou require a ground in Scripture thou shalt find none Tradition did begin them Custome has confirmed their Practice and Faith doth observe them In the same Age S. Cyprian l. 1. Ep. 12. says he that is Baptized ought to be anointed but of this Unction there is no mention in Scripture and in his second B. Ep. 3. he admonisheth Water should be mixed with Wine in the Chalice at Mass upon a like Tradition from the Apostles See in what I have cited heretofore how the Fathers have received the Scriptures upon Tradition and many most substantial Points with it and upon due consideration of all this let any one judg whether the Fathers of the first three Ages in these their most Authentick Writings I know do make a ground for Protestant or Catholick Doctrine speaking so plainly the chiefest most Substantial Points of our Faith were delivered partly in Written and partly in Unwritten Institutions exhorting us to stick to Traditions conserved in the Church which serve for conversion of Infidels conviction of Hereticks and generally ought to be kept by all 3. Protestants deny the unbloody Sacrifice of Christs body and blood offered up to God in the Mass Yet in the first Age the very Liturgies of the Apostles are extant and in that of S. James we offer unto thee O Lord the unbloody Sacrifice for our sins And S. Andrew in the Book of his Passion written by his Disciples sayes unto the Tyrant I sacrifice daily the Immaculate Lamb to Almighty God And in the same Age S. Clement Ep. 3. It is not lawful to celebrate Masses in other places but in these wherein the proper Bishop shall appoint these things the Apostles receieved from our Lord and delivered to you S. Ignatius Ep. ad Smyrnens It is not lawful without a Bishop to offer or Sacrifice or Celebrate Mass In the second Age S. Irenaeus l. 4. ad u. heres C. 32. calls the Body and Blood of Christ the Oblation of the New Testament which the Church having received from the Apostles offereth to God through the whole world And Tertullian l. de Veland virg it is not permitted that women should teach or speak in the Church nor Baptize nor Offer Origen hom 13. in Exod. you think your selves guilty and unworthy if any part of the Consecrated Host be lost through your negligence S. Hippolitus Orat. de Antichr bringeth in Christ speaking thus Come you Bishops and Priests who have daily offered my precious Body and Blood How clear are the following Fathers S. Epiphanius S. Chrysostome S. Athanasius S. Basil c. with S. Augustine for this as even in the third Age S. Cyprian Serm. de coena dom the Eucharist is a Holocaust to purge our sins and in his Epistle ad Cyrill he calls it a Sacrifice seven times 4. Protestants deny the Real Presence and Transubstantion But in the first age S. Ignatius in his Epistle ad Smyrnenses often cited by Eusebius Athanasius S. Jerome Theodoret and other antients speaking of the Saturnian Hereticks says They admit not of Eucharists and Oblations because they do not confess the Eucharist to be our Saviours flesh which suffered for our sins and in his Epistle to the Romans I do not delight in any corruptible food nor in the pleasures of this life I desire the bread of God the heavenly bread which is the flesh of Christ the Son of God S. Denis Areop l. de Eccl. Hierarch C. 3. O most Divine and holy Sacrament vouchsafe mercifully to open the Veils of those signifying Signs wherein thou hidest thy self and appear plainly unto us In the second Age S. Irenaeus l. 4. C. 34. disputing against the Hereticks who denyed Christ to be the Son of God asks how it shall be manifested unto them that bread upon which thanks are given is the body of our Lord and the Challice his Blood if they say he is not the Son of the Maker of the world S. Cyprian serm de coena dom The Bread which our Lord gave to his Disciples being changed not in shape but in nature by the Omnipotency of the word is made flesh In the third Age Origen We eat the bread offered by Prayer made a certain holy Body And again hom 5. in div loca Evang. When thou receivest the holy Food thou Eatest and Drinkest the Body and Blood of our Lord then the Lord entreth under thy roof c. In the same Age Tertullian l. 4. contra Marcion C. 40. The Bread taken and distributed to his Disciples he made his body What can be said more clearly then all this either for the Real Presence or Transubstantiation which is nothing but the change of the Bread in Christs Body here so plainly asserted Add to this for communion under one kind denyed by Protestants it is said to have been so given to Infants by S. Denis l. Eccl. Hierach C. ult to both Infants and sick by S. Cyprian serm de lapsis n. 10. and by Tertullian l. ad Uxorem to have been carried to private houses yea and over Sea by Eusebius l. 5. hest which could not be done but under one kind 5. Protestants deny purgatory and prayers for the dead But in the first Age S. Denis Eccl. Hierarch part 3. C. 7. says the Venerable Prelate approaching powereth forth his holy Prayer upon the dead by that Prayer he doth beseech the Divine clemency to forgive all the sins of the dead committed trhough humane Infirmities and to place him in light and in the Region of the living In the same Age S. Clement l. 8. Const C. 48. has a long Prayer accustomed to be said for the dead Again the same S. Clem. Ep. 1. de S. Petro tells us S. Peter taught them among other works of mercy to pray and give alms for the dead And in the Liturgy of S. James Apostle we have Prayers also for them Tertullian l. de Corona militis numbreth prayer for the dead amongst the Traditions of the Apostles
and speaks thus l. de anima C. 58. Seeing we understand that prison which the Gospel demonstrates to be places below and the last farthing we interpret every small fault there to be punished by the delay of the Resurrection no man will doubt but that the soul doth recompence something in the places below Ibid. we make yearly Oblations says he for the dead Origen hom 6. in Exod. he that is saved is saved by fire so that if a man have something mixed with Lead that the fire doth purge and resolve that all may become pure Gold S. Cyprian l. 4. Ep. 2. It is one thing to be purged a long time for sins by Torment and cleansed by a long fire and another thing to purge all sins by patience and sufferings What fire is more clear then S. Augustine and others be with S. Cyprian and Origen here for a purging fire I know Protestants Expound that place of S. Paul 1 Cor. 3. v. 13 14. of the fire of Tribulation in this life but not so S. Augustine in Ps 37. where citing the words of the Apostle he shall be safe yet so as by fire says and because it is said he shall be safe that fire is contemned yet that fire shall be more grievous then what ever a man can suffer in this life and then entring in a most fervent Prayer continues Purge me O Lord in this life that I need not that mending fire 6. Protestants deny Invocation and honouring of Saints But in the first Age S. Denis eccl Hierarch C. 7. says I constantly affirm with the Divine Scripture that the Prayers of the Saints are very profitable for us in this life when a man is inflamed with a desire to imitate the Saints and distrusting his own weakness he betakes himself to any Saint beseeching him to be his helper and petitioner to God for him he shall obtain by that means very great assistance In the same Age S. Clement l. Apost Constit 5. We command you that the Martyrs be in all honor among you even as James the Bishop and Stephen our fellow Deacon have been amongst us for God has made them blessed and holy men have honoured them In the second Age S. Cornelius Ep. 1. exhorteth to beseech God and our Lord Jesus Christ that his holy Apostles making Intercession for you he would purge you from your sins And Justin Martyr Apol. 2. We worship and adore both God the Father and his Son c. as also the company of his followers and the good Angels and we worship them both by words and deeds and in truth even as we our selves have been taught and instructed In the third Age S. Cyprian l. 4. Ep. 9. The sufferings and days of Martyrs we celebrate with a yearly remembracne And Origen in Lament I will begin to fall down on my knees and pray to all his Saints to succour me who dare not ask God for the exceeding greatness of my sins O Saints of my God with tears I beseech you to fall down before his mercy for me a wretch 7. Protestants deny the use of the sign of the Cross and Images But in the first Age S. Denis l. 2. Eccl. Hierarch c. 2. The sign of the Cross is so much honoured that it is often used both in baptism and other Sacraments In the same Age S. Martial Ep. ad Burdegal Remember the Cross of our Lord keep it in your mind speak often of it have it in the Sign for it is your invincible Armour against Satan Tertullian l. de Coron milit c. 3. In every thing we do we sign our forehead with the sign of the Cross of which practice Tradition is the defender Custome the conserver and Faith the observer And in his time he sayes l. 2. de pudicit The Image of Christ bearing a Lamb was graven on the Chalices used in Churches And how famous is the memory of many more Images in the first three Ages as that of our Saviour sent to Abgarus Prince of Edessa of which see Evagrius l. 4. c. 26. Mataphrastes in the life of Constantine S. John Damascon in his book of Images That which the woman cured of a Flux set up in brass at Caesaraea Philippi as witness Eusebius in his 7. Book Ch. 14. So Zomenus l. 5. c. 20. and Damascene again Ibid. a third made by Nicodemus which being afterward taken by the Jews and in mockery crucified was honored by God with many Miracles as is related by S. Athanasius or some other most antient Author of the Book Intituled of the Passion of our Lords Image Besides these Theodorus Lect. l. 1. Collectan maketh mention of one of our blessed Lady drawn by S Luke Eusebius relateth that he did see many antient Images of Christ placed betwixt S. Peter and S. Paul as much witnesseth S. Augustine l. 1. De cons Evan. c. 10. Damasus in the life of S. Silvester writeth that Constantine in the place where he was Baptized Erected Silver Images of our Saviour and S. John Baptist as also others in the Church of S. John Lateran which the first Christian Emperour had never done nor S. Silvester permitted if the practice of the Church from the Apostles had not been such 8. Protestants deny Free will after the fall of Adam but in the first Age S. Clement l. 3. recognit Asketh how doth God judge every man by his deeds according to truth if he have not in his power to do what is commanded if this be held all things are frustrate in vain shall the study be of following better things In the same Age S. Ignatius Ep. ad Magn. If any man do wickedly he is a man of the Devil not made so by Nature but by his own free will In the second Age S. Justin Martyr in Apol. Unless mankind can both fly foul and undecent things and follow fair and good things of his own free will it is without all cause and blame of theirs howsoever things be done S. Irenaeus l. 4. c. 72. not only in works but even in Faith hath Almighty God reserved liberty of will to Man saying be it to thee according to thy Faith In the third Age S. Cyprian in Deut. l. 3. ad Quirin c. 52. The freedome of believing or not believing is placed in the will In the same Age Origen hom 12. in Num. O Israel what doth thy Lord God require of thee let them be ashamed of these words who deny free will in man how should God require of man unless man had in his power what to offer to God requiring 9. Protestants deny merit of Works But in the first Age S. Ignatius Ep. ad Rom. says Give me leave to become the food of beasts that by that means I might merit and win God In the second Justin Martyr Apol. 2. We think that men who by works have shewed themselves worthy c. shall by their Merits live and Reign with him In the third S. Cyprian l.
ye 〈◊〉 prove that to be infallibly Gods Word which was preached by the Apostles this they did sufficiently themselves Neither that the Doctrine of Authentick Scripture is infallibly true that was also done before there was a Protestant in the world but coming from those Generals which make all the Answers of your best Writers we desire ye shew by some infallible sign that your Bible is Gods pure Word and your Glosses on it conform to the Sense and Letter To reply Scripture doth evidence it self by its innate light to be Gods Word so that all may sufficiently know it by this and all be obliged to believe it is refuted by Christ himself presently telling us his own hearers had not sinned in not receiving it as such if he had given no External Evidence of his infallibility in propounding for as I have remarked above Scripture hath no greater Efficacy Evidence or Light in our Books then in our blessed Saviours own mouth Neither will the Majesty of the Stile or the purity of the Doctrine do it both these being as great in the the Books of Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus which Protestants reject as in the Ecclesiastes and Canticles which they receive Besides that the first of these two is imaginary as to the Letter there being less Majesty in the Letter of Scripture then in the Philosophers and Orators Writings as is conâ—essed by Paul And the second is in question chiefly in Protestant Bibles which do not agree with any Original or Copy that before Luther can be found if we trust their own Authours whom I have quoted Lastly If all Councils all the Fathers all the Pastors of the Church be fallible then let Protestants bring nothing but Scripture against us for we will receive nothing but upon infallible Authority and all their Volumes of Controversie shall not come to one line Yea further could they bring Scripture for what they teach as they will never be able to do yet without an infallible Propounder and Judg well might we dispute but conclude nothing wrangle but agree in nothing to the Worlds end For as sole Scripture without an infallible Church propounding and Explaining it so a naked Church without infallible Marks and a Doctrine without infallible Motives prove nothing Secondly I say the true Church is this infallible propounder on whose Authority we must rely For proof of this It is to be observed that in holy Scripture there be three Foundations or Grounds of Faith mentioned by the Apostle S. Paul The 1. Is our blessed Saviour Christ 1 Cor. 3.11 Another Foundation no man can lay then that is laid which is Jesus Christ The 2. Is the Apostles and Prophets Ephes 2.29 Built upon the Foundation of Apostles and Prophets The 3. The Church 1 Tim. 3. The house of God which is the Church of the living God the Pillar and Ground of Truth From which clear places of Scripture I remark 1. The Foundation of Faith is ever a Living Visible and Speaking Ground to wit Christ the Apostles Prophets and Church the dead Letter of Scripture being no where called this Ground 2. That these three Grounds of Faith both in the Old and New Law properly speaking make but one according to the same Apostle for another Foundation no man can lay sayes he beside Christ JESUS So that the Prophets Apostles and Church must not be thought different Foundations from Christ all their Vertue in upholding Faith and Veracity in propounding Faith Whence they are called the Foundation and Ground of it coming from the particular assistance of his Spirit Strengthening Inspiring and Directing them Hence also is their infallibility for the Foundation of Christ stands sure says the Apostle 2 Tim. 2.19 And consequently is altogether infallible 3. That the Church here called a Ground which supporteth our Faith is not to be said the only diffusive body of all true Believers but more the Representative Church in her chief Pastors as the Prophets and Apostles in old Wherefore some few Catholick Authors so often objected as holding the Canons and Decrees of Councils only infallible when they are generally received by the whole Church in my opinion are highly mistaken and surely to be understood if any in Express terms speaks so of Councils not wholly Oecumenical or not Lawfully convocated and knownly approved by the Pope or whereof some rational doubt may be made in things essentially required in which cases I grant the general belief of the Church could best warrant the infallibility of their Decrees Otherwise a few particular persons might cope with General Councels as Luther and his Adherents at first Vendicating to himself the Negative voice as if he had been high Bishop in the whole Church which were to take away all possible means of preserving Unity in Faith yea to foment all Schisms and Divisions every one pretending the whole Church holds no such Doctrine whil'st he who is a Member dissents So that such Doctors if they should allow no obligation in receiving the Decrees of the Representative Church to the which they do and must submit even this their Sentence could neither be thought Catholicks or rational men But however some few speak or think God did promise us an infallible Church Isa 2. V. 2 3. Wherein he should teach us his ways and judge amongst the Nations himself not personally for he never went out of Jewry but by her Pastors He has establish'd this infallible Church in St. Matth. 16. V. 19. Upon the Rock Christ hath commanded us to hear her in St. Matth. 18. V. 17. And the persons we should hear in this Church as well as the end wherefore we would hear them and rest upon their Authority is clearly set down in these words 4. Ephes 11. He gave some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and Teachers for perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministry till we all come in the Union of Faith that we henceforth be no more children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of Doctrine c. From all which places of Scripture it is Demonstratively manifest that as the true Church is infallible and we bound to hear her yea and to rely upon her Authority as the Pillar and Ground of our Faith so is it most evidently clear that as she speaketh only to us infallibly by the voice of her Pastors and teachers united it is them we should hear seeing God in her not personally as I have said but by them both Judgeth and Teacheth as the infallible Propounders of his Divine Truths with the Prophets and Apostles in old and the infallible Judges of our Controversies and Debates 2. The same is proven from the unanimous consent of the Fathers quoted at length in my third Section for the infallibility both of the Church and Councils And may be confirmed even by the confession of many Rational and Moderate Protestants who receive the Scripture and consequently all and every Point contained in it