Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n authority_n church_n great_a 2,167 5 3.1621 3 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A71330 A preservative against popery. [Parts 1-2.] being some plain directions to unlearned Protestants, how to dispute with Romish priests, the first part / by Will. Sherlock ... Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707. 1688 (1688) Wing S3326; Wing S3342; ESTC R14776 130,980 192

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

Sir for I rely on the Authority of Scripture which is as infallible as your Church Conv. But you rely on your own Reason for the Authority of Scripture and those particular Doctrines you draw from it Prot. And you rely on your own Reason and Judgment for the Infallibility of your Church and consequently of all the Doctrines of it and therefore your infallible Faith is as much resolved into your own fallible Judgment as the Protestant Faith is so that the difference between us is not that your Faith is infallible and ours fallible for they are both alike call it what you will fallible or infallible but the Dispute is whether your Reason and Judgment or ours be best and therefore if you think your Reason better than ours you did well to change but if you changed your Church hoping to grow more infallible by it you were miserably mistaken and may return to us again for we have more rational Certainty than you have and you have no more infallible Certainty than we You think you are reasonably assured that your Church is infallible and then you take up your Religion upon trust from your Church without and many times against Sence and Reason according as it happens so that you have onely a general assurance of the Infallibility of your Church and that no greater than Protestants pretend to in other cases viz. the certainty of Reason and Argument but have not so much as a rational assurance of the truth of your particular Doctrines that if you be mistaken about the Infallibility of your Church you must be miserably mistaken about every thing else which you have no other evidence for But now we are in general assured that the Scriptures are the Word of God and in particular are assured that the Faith which we profess is agreeable to Scripture or expresly contained in it and does not contradict either Sence or Reason nor any other Principle of Knowledge So that we have as much assurance of every Article of our Faith as you have of the Infallibility of your Church and therefore have at least double and trible the assurance that you have But if you know the Reasons of your Conversion I desire to know of you What made you think that you wanted Certainty in the Church of England Conv. Because with you every man is left to his own private Reason and Judgment the effects of which are very visible in that infinite variety of Sects among you which shews what an uncertain thing your Reason is that so few judge alike of the power and validity of the same Reasons Prot. And were you not sensible at the same time that you were left to your own Reason and Judgment when you turned Papist Are you not sensible that men do as little agree about your Reasons for Infallibility as they do about any Protestant Reasons Do not I know the Reasons alledged by you for the Infallibility of your Church as well as you do And do we not still differ about them And is not this as much an Argument of the uncertainty of those Reasons which make you a Papist that they cannot make me a Papist as the dissent of Protestants in other matters is of the uncertainty of their Reasons Could you indeed be infallibly assured of the Infallibility of your Church I grant you would have the advantage of us but while you found your belief of Infallibility upon such an uncertain Principle as you think Reason is if certainty had been your onely aim you might as well have continued in the Church of England as have gone over to Rome This abundantly shews what a ridiculous thing it is for a Protestant to be disputed out of his Church and Religion upon a pretence of more infallible certainty in the Church of Rome Were they indeed inspired with an infallible assurance that the Church of Rome is Infallible there might be some pretence for this but an Infallibility which has no better foundation than mens private Reason and private Judgment is no Infallibility but has all the same uncertainties which they charge on the Protestant Faith and a great deal more because it is not founded upon such great and certain Reasons The plain truth is men may be taught from their Infancy to believe the Church Infallible and when they are grown up may take it without examination for a first and self-evident Principle and think this an infallible Faith but men who understand the difference between the evidence of Reason and Infallibility can never found an infallible Faith on Reason nor think that a man who is reasoned into the belief of the Infallibility of the Church is more infallible in his Faith than a Protestant is And such a man will see no reason to quit the Church of England for the sake of an infallible Faith for though they had an infallible Guide yet Reason cannot give them an infallible assurance of it but can rise no higher at most than a Protestant certainty 2. It is impossible also by Reason to prove that men must not use their own Reason and Judgment in matters of Religion If any man should attempt to perswade you of this ask him Why then he goes about to dispute with you about Religion whether men can dispute without using their own Reason and Judgment whether they can be convinced without it whether his offering to dispute with you against the use of your Reason does not prove him ridiculous and absurd For if you must not use your Reason why does he appeal to your Reason And whether you should not be as ridiculous and absurd as he if by his Reasons and Arguments you should be perswaded to condemn the use of Reason in Religion Which would be in the same act to do what you condemn to use your Reason when you condemn it If you must not use your Reason and private Judgment then you must not by any Reasons be perswaded to condemn the use of Reason for to condemn is an act of Judgment which you must not use in matters of Religion So that this is a point which no man can dispute against and which no man can be convinced of by disputing without the reproach of self-contradiction This is an honourable way of silencing these troublesome and clamorous Disputants to let them see that their Principles will not allow of Disputing and that some of their Fundamental Doctrines which they impose upon the World are a direct contradiction to all Disputes for the very admitting of a Dispute confutes them and the meanest man may quickly say more in this Cause than their greatest Disputants can answer CHAP. II. Concerning the several Topicks of Dispute SECT I. Concerning Arguments from Reason 2. THe next Direction relates to the Topicks from which they Dispute which are either Reason Scripture or the Authority of the ancient Fathers and Writers of the Christian Church for the infallible Authority of Popes or General Councils is the thing
say is the Protestant Heresie and the foundation of Protestant uncertainty if they once open this gap to Hereticks into the Church there is great danger that more will run out at it than will come in and it is well if the Church itself staies behind for what becomes of the Church of Rome if all their glorious Cant of the Infallibility of Church and Popes and General Councils be at last resolved into a private Spirit while these men go about to Dispute Hereticks into their Church they unavoidably give up the Cause of the Church and of Infallibility which is the way to Dispute a great many good Catholicks out of it who are kept there only by the power of a blind and implicite Faith. Here then let our Protestant fix his foot and not stir an inch till they disown Infallibility and confess that every man can and must judge for himself in matters of Religion according to the proofs that are offered to him For will a wise man Dispute with one who he knows banters him all the while who appeals to his private judgment as all men do who dispute with one another and at the same time cries down this private Spirit as the cause of Schisms and Heresies and Blasphemies and every thing that is evil no man of any spirit but will scorn to dispute with one who intends only to put a trick on him and to out wit him if he can and in truth it is no more to endeavour to dispute a man into Popery when the Fundamental Principle of Popery is that we must not Reason and Dispute but believe that we must take our Faith upon the Authority of the Church without asking any questions about it There are two or three things which may be answered to this 1. That though Disputing be not a proper way for Papists to take yet it is the only way that can be taken with Protestants who are all for Disputing and will believe nothing without a Reason and therefore Protestants ought not to blame Papists for Disputing unless they would be good Catholicks without it Now in answer to this I have something to say to Papists and something to Protestants 1. As for the Papists what necessity soever they be in of Disputing I desire to know with what face they can reproach Protestants with adhering to their own private judgments when they themselves are such zealous Disputants which is an Appeal to every private mans judgment if ever they make any Converts they must be beholden to mens private judgments for it for I think men cannot change their Opinions without exercising a private judgment about it and I suppose when they dispute with men to make them Papists they intend to convert them by their own private judgments Now what difference is there between mens using their private judgments to turn Papists or to turn Protestants one indeed may be false and the other true but private judgment is private judgment still and if it be so great a fault for men to use their own private judgments it is as great a fault in a Papist as it is in a Protestant So that at least as to Converts the Church of Rome has no advantage in this particular over Protestant Churches some by the exercise of their own Reason and judgment go over to the Church of Rome and some to the Church of England some are disputed into Popery and some into Protestantism and therefore for the sake of their beloved Converts and their beloved Disputations they ought to be more favourable to a private Spirit The truth is by Disputing with Hereticks they give up their Cause and confess that in all Disputes of Religion there lies an Appeal to every mans private Judgment and Conscience and should they lose this point by their Disputing all the Converts they make cannot recompence such a loss 2. As for Protestants though they have no other way to satisfie themselves or to convince others but by Reason and Discourse yet this is no reason why they should Dispute with those men who disown the judgment of Reason as a private Spirit For why should I Dispute with any man who uses such Arguments to convince me as he himself does not think a sufficient Reason of Faith Ask then one of these Disputers who alledges Scripture Reason and Antiquity to prove any Doctrines of the Romish Faith Do you Sir believe Transubstantiation the Worship of Images the Invocation of Saints Purgatory Mass for the Dead upon the bare Authority of these Scriptures and Fathers you have produced for them If these Doctrines were not Defined by the Church should you think these Arguments sufficient to prove them or could you suppose the Church had Defined the contrary should you think the Arguments good still In short can any Reason any Authority of Scripture or Fathers be any Foundation for a Divine Faith but onely the Authority of the Church He that says they can is no Papist and he that says they cannot confesses that he uses such Arguments as he himself does not build his Faith upon If you will believe them you may but though you do you are no sound Believer without resolving your Faith solely into the Authority of the Church And I think he must love Disputing well who will Dispute with such men as these and those must have a good degree of assurance who will be troublesome with their Disputes after such a discovery The end of Disputing I suppose is either toconvince or to be convinced but should you Answer and baffle all such a man's Arguments if he be modest it may be he may blush a little but is not to be moved for his Faith after all is not built upon these Arguments but upon Church-Authority and it is to no purpose for you to suffer your self to be convinced by these Arguments for it will not make you a good Catholick without resolving your Faith wholly into the Authority of the Church It is certainly a very surprizing thing for a Protestant to be disputed into Popery for as soon as he is converted he must renounce the very means of his Conversion He must use his own Judgment to turn Papist and as soon as he is turned he must renounce his own Judgment and confess it to be of no Authority Now though it may be such a private Judgment as leads a man to Popery may as well deserve to be renounced as any yet it is an odd kind of contradiction to renounce our own private Reason and Judgment and yet to own our Conversion methinks such men should renounce their Conversion too at the same time they renounce their Reason for if their Conversion be good it is a sign their Judgment was so but if their Judgment be not fit to be trusted methinks this should make them question their Conversion And therefore they should either maintain the Reputation of their Judgment and Conversion together and then they cannot be good Catholicks
Bondage But is this all that these words Thou shalt have no other Gods before me signifies The Worship of God indeed is supposed in them but the express words of the Law are not for the Worship of the Lord Jehovah but against the Worship of any other Gods before him or besides him But according to our new Expositor this is no part of the Law though according to the express words it is the principal if not the whole meaning of it If this Argument be good viz. That Idolatry is nothing else but the Worship of other Beings besides the Lord Jehovah as Supreme Gods then other Gods in this Commandment must signifie other Supreme Gods and then the Commandment runs thus Thou shalt have no other supreme Gods before me Now this is a very absurd sence because it supposes that men may Believe and Worship more Supreme Gods than one for if there can be but one Supreme God and by Gods in the Commandment be meant Supreme Gods then it is absurd to forbid any man to have other Supreme Gods because no man can acknowledge two Supremes It should have been Thou shalt not have any other God besides me not Gods For though it had been possible for them to have acknowledged some other God to be Supreme and rejected the Lord Jehovah from being Supreme yet they could not have other Supreme Gods. But it is evident that God here forbids the Worship of a Plurality of Gods of other Gods and therefore they could not all be Supreme Gods. But suppose it had been any other God in the single number yet to understand this of a Supream God is very absurd because there is no other supream God but the Lord Jehovah and those who worship but one Supream God worship him and none else For a supream God is not to be pointed at is not to be distinguished by his Person or Features as one man is distinguished from another indeed a Prince may properly say to his Subjects You shall own none but me for your King because they know his Person and can distinguish him from all other men But the Jews never saw God nor any likeness or similitude of him they were not acquainted with his Person nor could they distinguish him from other Gods by any personal Characters they knew him only by his Notion and Character of the Supream Being who made the World and all things in it and brought them by a mighty hand out of the Land of AEgypt Now does it not found very strange that the Supream God who is known only by this Character that he is Supream the great Creator and Soveraign Lord of the World should make a Law that we should worship no other Supream God but himself when it is absolutely impossible that he who worships a Supream and Soveraign God should worship any other God but himself because he alone is the Supream God and therefore those who worship the Supream God under this Notion as Supream worship him and no other Being So that if we will make sense of it the meaning of the first Commandment is plainly this Thou shalt not give Divine Honours to any other Beings as to inferiour Gods as the Idolatrous Practice of the World now is which worships a great many things for Gods but thou shalt worship only one Supream and Soveraign Being the maker and Soveraign Lord of the World which is I my self the Lord Jehovah who brought thee out of the Land of AEgypt out of the House of Bondage When the Supream God commands us to worship himself the meaning must be that we pay our Worship and Adorations to a Supream Being considered as Supream and he who worships such a Supream Being worships the true God whom we can distinguish from false Gods only by this Character that he is Supream And when this Supream Being forbids us to worship any other Gods it must signifie that we must worship nothing which is not Supream not that we must not believe that which is not Supream to be the Supream God which would be ridiculous Nonsence to command them not to own that Being for the Supream God which they know not to be Supream But it may be said that the Heathens did worship some Beings who were not the Supream God as Supream as this Author tells us they did the Sun though no body told him so that I know of for Macrobius whom he cites in this Cause does not say that they worshipped the Sun as Supream God though he says that most of the Gods they worshipped did signifie the Sun But suppose the Sun were the chief Object of their Worship and look'd on as the greatest and most principal God this does not prove that they worshipped it as the Supream God for these are two very different things to be worshipped as the chief God which such a People have and to be worshipped under the Notion of Absolutely Supream Some Pagan Idolaters might worship a Creature as their chief and greatest Deity and might call it their great their greatest God because it is the greatest God they have their King and Prince of Gods as Mr. Selden tells us they called the Sun as being the chief Planet who directed and governed the Influences of the rest not as the Maker of the World as this Author asserts But those who direct their Worship to a Supream and Soveraign Being considered as absolutely Supream infinite in all Perfections the Maker and Governour of the whole World can under this Notion worship no other but the Lord Jehovah because there is no other Supream God but he Which shews that the first Commandment is so far from forbidding the Worship of other Supream Gods besides the Lord Jehovah that to make sense of it these other Gods must be expounded not of Supream but inferiour Deities and it is so far from being the Notion of Idolatry to worship other Supream Beings besides the Lord Jehovah that it is Nonsence to suppose it The true Notion of Idolatry in the first Commandment is to worship some Inferiour Beings together with the Supream God It is a grosser sort of Idolatry when men wholly neglect the Worship of the Supream God and worship some Creature for their greatest and chiefest God and it is worse still when men worship bad Spirits than when they worship good Spirits together with the Supream God but it is evident this Law condemns the Worship of any Inferiour Beings though we do also worship the Supream God. I shall give but one Instance more of this nature and that is the second Commandment which in such express words forbids the Worship of all Images of what kind or nature soever Now whatever Reasons men may imagine there are for the Worship of Images they can be of no force against an express Law And if these words be not express Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven image c. I despair of ever seeing an express Law For had God intended
where the Scripture fails they fly to unwritten Traditions which they make of equal authority with the Scriptures themselves which they would never do were they not convinced that the Scriptures are not so plain on their side as to satisfie any man who has not already given himself up to the Church of Rome with an implicite Faith. And therefore before you enter into any debate about the sence of any particular Texts of Scripture and their way of proving their particular Doctrines from Scripture ask them two Questions without a plain Answer to which it is to no purpose to dispute with them out of Scripture Ask 1. Whether they will allow the Holy Scriptures to be a complete and perfect Rule of Faith that no Christian ought to receive any Doctrine for an Article of Faith which cannot be proved from Scripture This to be sure they must not allow unless they will reject the Council of Trent which gives as venerable an Authority to Tradition as to Scripture it self Since then they have two Rules Scripture and Tradition when they pretend to dispute from Scripture it is reasonable to know of them whether they will stand to Scripture and reject such a Doctrine if it cannot be plainly proved out of Scripture For if they will not stand to this they give up their Cause and there is no need to dispute with them For why should I dispute with any man from Scripture who will not stand to the determination of Scripture We Protestants indeed do own the Authority of Scripture and what we see plainly proved out of Scripture we must abide by which is reason enough for us to examine the Scripture-proofs which are produced by our Adversaries But it is sufficient to make them blush if they had any modesty to pretend to prove their Doctrines from Scripture when they themselves do not believe them meerly upon the Authority of Scripture and dare not put their Cause upon that issue which gives a just suspicion that they are conscious to themselves that their Scripture-proofs are not good and should make Protestants very careful how they are imposed on by them To dispute upon such Principles as are not owned on both sides can establish nothing tho' it may blunder and confound an Adversary it is onely a tryal of Wit where the subtilest Disputant will have the Victory and it is not worth the while for any man to dispute upon these terms This is not to reject the Authority of Scriptures because the Papists reject it which no Protestant can or will do but it is an effectual way for men who are not skilled in Disputations to deliver themselves from the troublesome Importunities of Popish Priests when learned men who can detect their Fallacies are out of the way Let them but ask them Whether all the peculiar Doctrines of the Church of Rome can be proved by plain Scripture-evidence If they say they can then they must reject the necessity of unwritten Traditions and acknowledge the Scripture to be a complete and perfect Rule of Faith. A point which I believe no understanding Priest will yeild If they say they cannot ask them With what confidence they pretend to prove that from Scripture which they confess is not in it Why they go about to impose upon you and to perswade you to believe that upon the Authority of Scripture which they themselves confess is not at least not plainly contained in Scripture 2. Ask such Disputants who alledge the Authority of Scripture to prove their Popish Doctrines How they themselves know what the sence of Scripture is and how you shall know it For it is a ridiculous undertaking to prove any thing by Scripture unless there be a certain way of finding out the sence of Scripture Now there can be but three ways of doing this either by an infallible Interpreter or by the unanimous consent of Primitive Fathers or by such Humane means as are used to find out the sence of other Books I. If they say we must learn the sence of Scripture from an infallible Interpreter Tell them this is not to dispute but to beg the Cause They are to prove from Scripture the Doctrines of the Church of Rome and to do this they would have us take the Church of Rome's Exposition of Scripture And then we had as good take her word for all without disputing But yet 1. They know that we reject the pretences of an infallible Interpreter We own no such infallible Judge of the sence of Scripture And therefore at least if they will dispute with us and prove their Doctrines by Scripture they must fetch their Proofs from the Scriptures themselves and not appeal to an infallible Interpreter whom we disown Which is like appealing to a Judge in Civil matters whom one of the contending Parties tlhinks incompetent and to whose Judgment they will not stand which is never likely to end any Controversie and yet they cannot quit an infallible Interpreter without granting that we may understand the Scriptures without such an Interpreter which is to give up the Cause of Infallibility 2. One principal Dispute between us and the Church of Rome is about this infallible Interpreter and they know that we will not own such an Interpreter unless they can prove from Scripture that there is such an one and who he is The inquiry then is How we shall learn from Scripture that there is such an infallible Interpreter that is who shall Expound those Scriptures to us which must prove that there is an infallible Interpreter if without an infallible Interpreter we cannot find out the true sence of Scripture how shall we know the true sence of Scripture before we know this infallible Interpreter For an Interpreter how infallible soever he be cannot interpret Scripture for us before we know him and if we must know this infallible Interpreter by Scripture we must at least understand these Scriptures which direct us to this infallible Interpreter without his assistance So that of necessity some Scriptures must be understood without an infallible Interpreter and therefore he is not necessary for the Interpretation of all Scripture And then I desire to know why other Scriptures may not be understood the same way by which we must find out the meaning of those Texts which direct us to an infallible Interpreter There are a hundred places of Scripture which our Adversaries must grant areas plain and easie to be understood as those And we believe it as easie a matter to find all the other Trent-Articles in Scripture as the Supremacy and Infallibility of the Bishop of Rome If ever there needed an infallible Interpreter of Scripture it is to prove such an infallible Interpreter from Scripture but upon this occasion he cannot be had and if we may make shift without him here we may as well spare him in all other cases 3. Suppose we were satisfied from Scripture that there is such an infallible Interpreter yet it were worth knowing
compassionate he must want Power to help us and that destroys the hope of Sinners as much as want of Compassion It must be want of Will or Power in him that he does not deliver us from Purgatory as well as Hell and if he want Power to deliver us from Purgatory for my part I should more question his Power to deliver from Hell for that is the harder of the two if his Bloud could not expiate for the Temporal punishment of Sin which the Merits of some Supererogating Saints or the Pope's Indulgence or the Priests Masses can redeem us from how could it make expiation for Eternal punishment If his Interest in the Court of Heaven will not do the less how can it do the great There is no Doctrine more irreconcileable with the perfect Love and Goodness of God and the Merits and Intercession of our Saviour which are the Fundamental Doctrines of the Gospel which is a Dispensation of Love and Grace than this of Purgatory and therefore we may safely conclude that this is no Gospel-Doctrine 2. Let us now examine the Doctrine of Invocation of Saints and Angels as our Mediators with God and see whether it does not disparage the Grace of the Gospel the Love of God and of our Mediator and Advocate Jesus Christ to penitent Sinners Now a very few words will decide this matter 1. With respect to God now can that man believe that God is so very gracious to Sinners for the sake of Christ who seeks to so many Advocates and Mediators to interceed for him with God. To imagine that we want any Mediator to God but only our High-Priest who mediates in Vertue of his Sacrifice is a reproach to the Divine Goodness The Wisdom and Justice of God may require a Sacrifice and a High-Priest to make Attonement for Sin but Infinite Goodness needs not any Entreaties and meer Intercessions to move him A truly good man who knows a proper Object of his kindness needs not to be asked to do good The use of such Advocates and Mediators among men is either to recommend an unknown Person to the favour of the Prince or fairly to represent his cause to him which has been mis-represented by others or to procure favour for an undeserving person or among equal Competitors to procure some one to be preferred this is all the use of Intercession among men for a good and wise and just Prience will do what is wise and just and good not only without Intercessors but against all Intercessions to the contrary Now I suppose no man will say that God wants Mediators and Advocates upon any of these accounts for he knows every man understands perfectly his cause will never be perswaded by any Intercessions to shew kindness to unfit Objects that is to impenitent Sinners and his Goodness is so unconfined and so extensive to all that there can never be any competition for his Favour and therefore to multiply Advocates and Mediators to God must argue a great distrust of his Mercy and Goodness which a kind and good Prince would take very ill of us God indeed has commanded us to Pray for one another in this World as he has to pray for our selves but this is not by way of Interest and Merit as the Church of Rome pretends the Saints in Heaven pray for us but by humble Supplications which is very reconcileable with the goodness of God to make Prayer a necessary condition of granting Pardon and other Blessings we want but as the use of Prayer for our selves is not to move God meerly by our importunities to do good to us for we must pray in Faith that is with a humble assurance and confidence that God will hear us which includes a firm Belief of his readiness to grant what we pray for so neither are our Prayers for others to move God by our interest in him that is they are not the Intercessions of Favourites but of humble Supplicants There was great reason why God should make Prayer the condition of our receiving though he wants not our importunities to move him because there are a great many excellent Virtues exercised in Prayer such as great sorrow for Sin great humility of Mind faith in God's Promises the acts of Love and affiance and trust in God and a constant dependance on his Grace and Providence for all spiritual and temporal Blessings and there was great reason why he should command us to pray for others tho' he wants none of our Intercessions for them because it is a mutual exercise of Charity of Love to our Brethren and Forgiveness to our Enemies and is a mighty obligation to do all other acts of kindness for those who know it to be their Duty to pray for one another will think themselves bound to do good to one another also This becomes those who live and converse together in this World because it is a great instrument of Virtue and that is a reason why God should encourage the exercise of it by promising to hear our Prayers for each other But as far as meer goodness is concerned the Gospel represents God as so very good to Sinners that there is no need of any Intercessor for them For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life 3 John 16. This was an act of goodness antecedent to the Incarnation and Death of Christ and the highest act of goodness that God could manifest to the World and therefore secures us of God's love and goodness to Sinners without a Mediator and Advocate for that love which provided a Mediator for us was without one and proves that it was not for want of goodness or that he needed entreaties that he gave his Son to be our mediator And therefore hence S. Paul proves how ready God is to bestow all good things on us He that spared not his own Son but delivered him up for us all how shall he not with him also freely give us all things 8 Rom. 32. And our Saviour himself represents the goodness of God by the tenderness and compassion of an earthly Parent If ye then being evil that is less good than God is know how to give good things to your children how much more shall your heavenly Father give good things to them that ask him 7 Matth. 11. especially in the Parable of the Prodigal where our Saviour describes the goodness of God to Sinners by that passion and joy wherewith the Father received his returning Prodigal nay he assures his Disciples that there was no need of his own Intercession to incline God to be good and kind to them At that day ye shall ask in my name and I say not unto you that I will pray the Father for you for the Father himself loveth you because ye have loved me and believed that I came out from God 16 John 26 27. God is so infinitely good that he
the Souls in Purgatory and that is for the temporal punishment of sin for which the Sacrifice of the Cross is no Expiation and the Mass is in no other sence made a Sacrifice for the living than for the dead and therefore is not to expiate the eternal but the temporal punishments of sin as appears from hence that the saying Masses or hearing Masses or purchasing Masses is reckoned among those Penances men must do for the Expiation of their sins and yet they can by all they do only expiate for the temporal punishment of sin and therefore Masses for the living are only for the Expiation of those temporal punishments of sin for which the Sacrifice of the Cross made no Expiation And I shall be so civil at present as not to inquire how the Sacrifice of the Cross and the Sacrifice of the Mass which are the very same Sacrifice of the Natural Body and Bloud of Christ come to serve such very different ends that when Christ was Sacrificed upon the Cross he expiated only for the eternal punishment of sin when Sacrificed in the Mass only for the temporal I need add nothing to prove that Humane Penances Satisfactions Merits Indulgencies are onely to expiate temporal punishment of sin because it is universally acknowledged Now if these temporal punishments be only in lieu of Holiness and Obedience which the Gospel requires to intitle us to the Expiation of Christ's Death upon the Cross as I have already shewn then it is evident to a demonstration that the Church of Rome has overthrown the Death and Sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross consider'd as an argument of a holy life by setting up the Sacrifice of the Mass Humane Penances Satisfactions Merits Indulgencies instead of the Gospel-terms of obedience and holiness of life 4. The Intercession of Christ for us at the right hand of God is another powerful motive to Holiness of Life It gives all the encouragement to true penitent Sinners that can be desired For if any man sin we have an advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the righteous who is also a propitiation for our sins But then Christ mediates only in vertue of his Bloud that is only upon the terms and conditions of the Covenant of Grace which was sealed by his Bloud that is he mediates and intercedes only for true penitent sinners which obliges us as we hope to be heard by God when we pray in the Name of Christ truly and heartily to repent of all our sins and to live a new life This the Church of Rome also seems very sensible of that Christ of his own accord will not intercede for impenitent and unreformed sinners that he who is the great Example and the great Preacher of Righteousness will not espouse the Cause of incorrigible sinners who are very desirous of pardon but hate to be reformed and therefore they seem to think it as hopeless a thing to go immediately to a holy Jesus as to appear before the Tribunal of a just and righteous God without a powerful Advocate For this reason they have found out a great many other Advocates and Mediators a great deal more pitiful and compassionate than Christ is who by their interest in him or their great favour with God may obtain that pardon which otherwise they could not hope for such as the Virgin Mary who is the Mother of Christ and therefore as they presume has as great interest in and authority over him as a Mother has over her Son besides those vast numbers of meritorious Saints whose Intercessions cannot but prevail for those sinners whose Cause they undertake And that this is the true reason of their Addresses to Saints and the Virgin Mary though they will not speak out is evident to any considering man For will they say that Christ who became man for us who suffered and died for us who was in all things tempted like as we are yet without sin who did and suffered all this on purpose that he might be a merciful and compassionate High Priest and might give us the highest assurance of his tenderness and compassion for us I say can they suspect that such a High Priest will not undertake to plead our Cause if we be such as according to the terms of the Gospel it is his Office to interceed for No Christian dare say this which is such a reproach to our common Saviour who hath bought us with his own Bloud and therefore no Christian who thinks himself within the reach and compass of Christ's Intercession can need or desire any other Advocate but those who are conscious to themselves of so much wickedness that they cannot hope the holy Jesus will intercede for them for their own sakes have reason to procure some other Favourites to intercede for them with their Intercessor and to countenance the matter they must recommend it to the practice of all Christians and more than so make it Heresie to deny it There is but one Argument I know of against this that any man should be so stupid as to think that the Intercession of the Virgin Mary or the most powerful Saints can prevail with our Saviour to do that which according to the Laws of his own Mediation they know he cannot and will not do and this I confess I cannot answer but yet so it is And thus the Intercession of Christ is made a very ineffectual Argument to make men good for though Christ will intercede for none but true Penitents the Church of Rome has a great many other Advocates that will or at least she perswades people that they will. 5. Another great Gospel-Motive to a holy life is the hope of Heaven and the fear of Hell. As for the hope of Heaven that is no otherwise a Motive to holiness of life but upon a supposition of the necessity of Holiness that without holiness no man shall see God but this you have already heard is overthrown by the Church of Rome and if men may go to Heaven without holiness I know no need of it for that purpose in this World. But Hell is a very terrible thing to be condemned to endless and eternal torments with the Devil and his Angels but then the Doctrine of Purgatory does mightily abate and take off this terror for though Purgatory be a terrible place too not cooler than Hell it self yet it is not eternal and men who are mightily in love with their sins will venture temporal punishments though somewhat of the longest to enjoy their present satisfactions especially considering how many easie ways there are for rich men to get out of Purgatory those who have money enough to buy Indulgences while they live and Masses for their Souls when they die need not lie long there if the Priests are not out in their reckoning and yet it is so easie a thing for a good Catholick to get into Purgatory especially if he take care frequently to confess himself and receive absolution or do