no Church before him therefore it can be no true Church at all To which we answer that this cause is no cause For though Luther had no being before Luther yet none can deny but that he was when he was though he could not be before he was So there may be a true Church after Luther though there was none for some ages before him as since Columbus his time there have been Christians in America though there were none for many Ages before for it does not follow that nothing but a Church can possibly get a Church nor that the present being of a true Church depends necessarily upon the perpetuity of a Church in all Ages for though I cannot deny the Churches perpetuity yet that 's not here necessary to our difference but that a false Church by Gods providence over ruling it may preserve a means of confuting their own Heresies and so reduce men to truth and raise a true Church I mean the integrity of the word of God with men Thus the Jewes preserve means to make men Christians and Papists preserve means to make men Protestants and the Protestants false Church as the Romans call it preserves men Papists nor does it appear that the perpetuity of the Church is the truth of the Papists Church for they speak as if they were the onely Christians in the World before Luther when the whole World knowes that this is but talk and that there were other Christians besides the Papists that might have perpetuated the Church though there had not been then one Papist in being for sure there was a Catholick Church before the Roman one Next the Papist say to hold that the visible Church is not perpetual is a Heresie so that Luthers Reformation being but particular and not universal nor but of late date it can have nothing to do with the visible and perpetual Church which the Protestants answer thus To say the visible Church is not perpetual is properly a Heresie but the Papists cannot deny but that the Apostles who preach'd the Gospel in the beginning did believe the Church universal though their preaching at the beginning was not so So Luther also might well believe the universal Church though his Reformation was but particular the Church in the Apostles time being universal de jure of right but not de facto in fact Nor did Luther and his followers as the Papist are pleased to mis-cal many Protestants forsake the whole Church but the corruptions of it in renouncing some of their corrupt practices and this the Protestants say they did without Schism because they had cause to do it and no man can have cause to be a Schismatick because he is onely one who leaves the Church without a cause for 't is not onely seperation but a causeless seperation from the Church that is Schismatical and I think t' will not be amiss before I go any farther to distinguish the difference between Heresie and Schism Heresie is anobstinate defence of any error against any necessary Article of the Christian Faith Schism is a causeless separation of one part of the Church from another Now we Protestants say still that we never forsook the whole Church or the external Communion of it but onely that part of it which is corrupted and is to be fear'd will still continue so viz. The Papist Church and forsook not but onely reformed an other part which part they themselves were and sure the Papists will not say the Protestants forsook themselves nor their own Communion and therefore the Papists argument must be a very weak in urging that the Protestants joyned themselves to no other part of the Church therefore they must separate from the whole Church which the Protestants say is a false conclusion in as much as they themselves were part of it and still continue so and therefore the Protestants could no more separate from the whole then from themselves So that by the Rule of Reason if Protestants be Schismaticks because they differ from one part of the visible Church by the same reason the Protestants may say that the Roman Church is in a manner made up of Schismaticks for the Jesuits are Schismaticks from the Dominicans and the Dominicans from the Jesuits and the Jesuits from the Canonists the Fransciscans from the Dominicans and the Dominicans from the Fransciscans for all these as the World knowes differ in point of Doctrine and betwixt them there is an irreconcileable contradiction and therefore one part must be in error And if the Papists will but stand to justifie what they declare as truth that every error against a revealed truth is a Heresie they holding for certain as a revealed truth the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary then consequently the Dominicans that hold and declare it an error in Doctrine must necessarily hold a Heresie Now it may be a fault to be in error because it many times proceeds from a fault but sure Protestants forsaking error it cannot be a sin unless to be in error be a vertue so hardly do Papists deal with us Protestants as they will either damn us in making us follow their false opinions or else brand us as Schismaticks for leaving them And yet the rational sort of Papists can hardly deny but the Protestant Religion must be a safer Religion than theirs in worshipping Pictures in Invocating Saints and Angels in denying the Lay-men the Communion in both kinds as was commanded by our blessed Saviour in celebrating their Church Service in an unknown Tongue which was condemned by St. Paul in adoring the Sacrament and in all these a rational Papist cannot deny but he is on the more dangerous side as to the committing of sin and the Protestant in the more secure way as to the avoiding it For in all these things if Protestants say true the Papists do that which is impious but on the other side if the Papists were in the right yet the Protestants might be secure enough too for their fault would be onely this that they should onely not do some things which the Papists themselves confess is not altogether necessary to be done And truly the Protestants are so charitably civil as only to say of Papists as St. Austine did of the Donatists That Catholicks approved the Doctrine of the Donatists but abhorred their Heresie of Rebaptization So Protestants approve the Fundamental and necessary Truths which the Papists retain by which many good souls among them may be saved but abhor the many superstitions they use in their Religion And supposing these errours of the Popish Church were in themselves not damnable to them that believe as they profess yet for us Protestants to profess what we do not believe and esteem those as Divine Truths which we believe not to be either Divine or true would be doubtless damnable as to us for 't is certain Two men may do the same thing and it may be sinful to one and not to the other as suppose a
bring so many that have sense and reason to believe it But I shall pass by their adoring this Sacrament their praying to Saints and a multitude of their superstitious observances never used in the primitive Church and shall onely desire you Madam to observe in general that the Papists follow the Gospel just as they read Hebrew that 's backward for God plainly commands that all should search the Scripture And our Blessed Saviour ordered the Sacrament to be administred in both kinds 1 Cor. 11. Chap. 28. v. And St. Paul forbids publick prayers in an unknown Language but that which is most for Edification 1 Cor. 14 c. 15 16. v. But these plain positive commands do not hinder the Church of Rome from declaring that unlearned men shall not read and search the Scriptures but if we believe St. Paul before the Pope we may read in the 17. of the Acts 11. v. how he commended the Noble Bereans for searching the Scriputes and therefore if searching the Scriptures had not been not onely lawful but a commendable act certainly St. Paul would never have commended them for so doing So that the Popish Clergy forbids the reading the Scriptures under a pretence that their Laity might not truly understand them Next the Church of Rome allows onely their Clergy except free Princes for they are excepters of persons though God is not to receive the Communion but in one kind though our Saviour commands that all drink of the Cup and the Papists cannot deny but that the Communion was taken in both kinds in all Christian Churches for above a Thousand years after Christ And Lastly for the poor vulgar sort they shall onely hear their publick prayers in an unknown Tongue viz. Latine which a Tenth part of them do not understand and therefore how that can be most for Edification let the Papists tell if they can I am sure we cannot nor do we believe they can without the help of another Transubstantiation-Miracle and make an unknown Language to most to be chang'd at the same time into a common known Language to all And now Madam I shall humbly desire you to consider in general that though the Papists do out-noise us as shallow rivers do still the the deepest with the high and mighty Rodomontades of their Churches infallibilitie yet such high Rants without true proof are but like School-boyes paper-Kites which soar high and loftie but have nothing else worth taking notice of They will have the confidence to tell you that their Popish Church is the Roman Catholick and onely true Christian Church in the whole world But the Protestants Answer to this their boasting is that all the Christian Churches in the whole world besides the Popish Churches though more in number than they declare quite contrary They will ask you where your Protestant Church was before Luther which was wittily answered by one where the Papist Church never was in the Bible The Papists do divert themselves very much at our stiling our King Head of the Church as we do for their doing so for we esteem our King Head onely in his own Dominions without the Popes title of infallible and sure 't is more rational that those of a Kingdom should allow their King to be Head of the Church in his own Kingdoms than that a few Cardinals should make the Head of the Church over all Kingdoms And for all their Jeasting I am sure we can shew in sober earnest Scripture-presidents for Kings being Heads of Churches in their own Dominions which is more than the papists can shew for their Pope or his Churches infallibilitie for sure they cannot object against it as new Doctrine though Doctrine that 's new is their greatest Trade that the Kings of Judah and the first Christian Emperors were Heads of the Jewish Churches and in their own Dominions And Solomon tells us That a Divine Sentence is in the lips of the King and his mouth transgresseth not in Judgement which I am sure Popes have not witness Liberius and Solomon gives the reason because the Heart of the King is in the Hand of the Lord. If the Papists will pretend so much Scripture for their Pope I shall onely answer 'T is more than ever Protestants read or the Apostles writ The Papists will tell you with a great deal of confidence that though we say the Bible is the Religion of Protestants yet there is no Protestant Religion or Church mentioned in the whole Creed which are the Articles of the Christian Faith and they will tell you that their Church is the Catholick Church and to believe the Catholick Church was an Article of the Christian Faith from the very infancie of the Church in the beginning of the Apostles time Now let the Papists tell us if they bring this as an Argument against the Protestant Religion in the Bible or not if not what cause have they to name it or what need have we to answer it but if it be one we make this reply That the Roman Church is no more named in the Apostles Creed than the Protestant Church is fâ—r the Apostles Creed was made before the Roman Church was a Church and this I am sure they cannot deny so that since the Catholick Church was then in being and the Roman Church not in being it must necessarily follow that the Roman Church cannot be the Catholick Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed and consequently is not the Mother-Church as the Papists would have her to be thus the Papists have so overcharg'd this Argument to shoot at us as it recoils and flyes in their own faces And of kin to this is their grand Battering piece of all which so thunders in the ears of all Papists and makes the Popes power so absolute and the poor credulous Papist so obedient and that is the power given by our Saviour to St. Peter in the 16th of St. Matthew beginning the 18th verse Thou art Peter and on this Rock I will build my Church and give thee the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and whomsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whomsoever thou shalt loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven and these words the Papists understand literally that St. Peter's person is the Rock that Christ builds his Church on which cannot possibly be by the verses just following for there when our Saviour tells his Disciples of his going to Jerusalem where he must suffer many things and be killed and raised again the Third day Peter took him and began to rebuke him be it far from thee Lord this shall not be unto thee But our Saviour turned and said unto Peter Get thee behind me Satan thou art an offence to me for thou savourest not the things that be of God but those that be of men By which words 'tis most clear and evident that our Saviour did not mean Peters person could be the Rock of the Christian Church for if Peter's person had been that
Rock meant sure our Saviour would never have removed it behind him and it would be not onely irrational but impious to believe that Christ would build his Church on Satan for so he calls St. Peter's person and 't were as unreasonable to believe that the Rock of Christs Church could be an offence to him as St. Peter's person was and as improbable again as all this that Christs Church the Foundation of all Christianity should savour not of the things that be of God but those that are of men as Peter's person did Therefore if you will but please to read the words of our Saviour carefully you shall find they are most plain for verse 13th When Jesus came into the Coast of Caesarea He ask'd his Disciples Whom do men say that I am and they said Some say that thou art John the Baptist some Elias and others Jeremias or one of the Prophets but whom say ye that I am and Simon Peter answered and said Thou art Christ the Son of the Living God And I say also unto thee that thou art Peter and vpon this Rock not this person I will build my Church that is upon this Rock of Faith that I am Christ the Son of the Living God I build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it Now this must necessarily relate to his faith not his person for the gates of Hell that 's the power of evil did prevail against Peter's person or he had not deny'd and forsworn his Lord and Master again and again and been afterwards proved blame-worthy by St. Paul to his face and indeed as blame-worthy as any of his Disciples so that 't is most plain that Christs words of making him the Rock of the Christian Church related not to his person but his faith of Christs being the Son of the Living God And for the other part whereas the Papists believe a particular favour and power given by our Saviour to S Peter of the Keys of Heaven that was given as much to the Eleven Disciples as to him as you may read in the 18th of St. Matthew in the 20th of St. John's Gospel and the 23 24. verses As my Father hath sent me even so send I you and when he had said this he breathed on them and saith unto them Receive ye the Holy Ghost whose soever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whosesoever sins ye retain they are retained So that you see this power is general to the Disciples and not in particular to St. Peter more than to any of the rest as the Papists mis-believe The Papists have many such Questions which I am sure Madam you have neither the patience to read nor I the time to write but those that are most material of them you will find I have here presented you truly answer'd by pure Scripture clear reasons plain arguments and all in few words fit for the weakest memory or smallest pocket to carry about them for true reason doth not consist in large Volumes long Gowns or gray Beards for many live to One and Twenty without attaining to years of discretion the degrees of Age being not still the measures of wisedom for the world will never be without old Fools and young Philosophers And truly Madam for my part I cannot so much as think of the Papists Religion without wonder that so many rational men of them should rather fasten their faith of salvation on the pretended infallibility of their Church which is deny'd by most Christians than on the Holy Scriptures which is granted by all to be the Will and Word of God and the very Foundation of their Churches Foundation as containing in it all things necessary to our salvation And we Protestants have at least this satisfaction and advantage that not onely the Papists but all sorts of Christians that are in the circumference of the whole world meet and joyn with us in this centre of Faith that the Scriptures contain all things necessary to our salvation which being a general granted Truth I confess I admire how any Papist can make the least scruple which is the safest Heavenly Guide the Pope or the Gospel If there be any rational man so extravagant as to put them in the same ballance and to commit a rape upon his reason I shall onely desire him to consider this plain Question If â—he were to go a Journey in an unknown way would he not think it more rational and safe to follow a certain true Guide that all the Christians in the world declare is certainly able and ready to shew him the right way than to follow a pretended Guide which the greatest part of the Christians in the world assures him will lead him out of it And this being the real difference between the Papist and Protestant in Gross concerning the Heavenly Guide the Bible and the Pope I think I need now say no more because so many have already said so much and I am sure enough to satisfie any except such who will believe a crooked Rule is better to draw a straight line by than a right one And now Madam I shall onely beg so much of your patience as to let me tell you that the plot and Heads of this following discourse I have Extracted out of the worthy Chilingworth Before I begin the discourse it self I know in writing a play to have Rank'd the plot in the Front of it and to make the whole design of the Prologue to be the Key to uncipher the plot of the play though anciently in use had been now not onely out of fashion but beside reason For the design of plays aiming chiefly to please the senses they ought to be compounded and mixt with hopes and fears certainties and uncertainties Expectations and deâ—ays of the event of the plot which being all so interwoven together creates the agreeableness of the play for when once the whole plot is discovered the pleasure of the play is ended like Hare-Hunting the sport lies not in presently taking the Hare but in following him in all his Rings and Doubles and those that love plays and such Huntings resemble jealous men who eagerly pursue what they apprehend to overtake or as old age which we all pray to attain but fear to approach But now I come to soar my discourse to a much higher pitch a more Elevated Subject and to treat of the most noble part of man the Soul and of true Religion the onely way to Heavenly felicity for without Holiness no man shall see the Lord We must therefore now Madam change the Scene of sense for a spiritual one and climb where earthly nature can never follow us to the pure and high Region of Heaven which will inform us that the earlier discovering our plot of attaining Heaven will but better the play and the more speed the better success for the joyes of Heaven are everlasting and admits of no increase or diminution not â—ike the
divertisements of Stage-playes or Hunting or any earthly delights which cannot last but for a season and decay in our very injoying them and must soon leave us or we them but Heavenly thoughts the more and longer we practice them the better we shall like them Heavenly joyes so far exceeding all we can here leave as they are all we can ever aspire to have this we all know but few of us practice and we all love God but few love to keep his Commandments I shall therefore now Madam tell you as the Prologue to my insuing discourse that the grand Plot and whole design of it moves chiefly on these two hinges first in confirming you that the foundation of the Protestant Religion is built on God's holy Word the Scriptures which we Protestants esteem to be a perfect Rule of Faith and guide to our actions and the true Touch-stone to try all matters by that relate to the good of our Souls as certainly containing in it all things necessary to our salvation The second thing I chiefly design to prove is that neither the Pope or the Popish Church are infallible and these two shall make up the principal stories in the little Model of this small building The pretended infallibility of the Church of Rome is the grand perswasive Argument and lure to invite men to it and the strongest commanding Garrison in all the Popes power and all other Arguments and Perswasions are but like the small open Villages about this Garrison which must be servants to them that are masters of it and if a Papist can be but once convinc'd that neither the Pope nor the Popish Church are infallible they will soon be brought to reason and our remaining differences will not be very considerable I shall therefore onely lightly discourse on them and shall no further trouble you Madam then briefly to answer them in my own defence I meet them or as they follow me and shall onely do as the Wolf do's when pursued snap and bite in his own defence against all opposers without altering his pace or changing his Road I shall neither meddle with the Papists but as I meet them in the way or towards making of my way to my two designed points which are as I said before to prove the Scripture to be a perfect Rule of Faith and guide to our actions and to answer as I go the Papists main Arguments and objections against it Next that 't is against all Scripture and reason that either the Pope or the Popish Church should be infallible which is the main design of this discourse and if I can by God's assistance make but the Papists believe reason when against their own Church I doubt not but by this little Pigmie discourse as very dwarfish as 't is not onely to hinder many tottering Protestants from turning Papists but to bring some stubborn Papists to turn Protestants or at least not to have such an infallible good opinion of their Church and so damnable a bad one of ours And now Madam 't is requisite that this my discourse should be ended as soon as your Patience therefore all that I shall add either to the excusing my self or justifying Mr. Chilingworth is that thus far of this discourse being my own writing I confess deserves onely my Apology and scarce your perusal but the following discourse being extracted out of Mr. Chillingworth deserves your reading but needs not any Apology And because I find the word Protestant is so badly and over-largely interpreted I shall first acquaint you that we are not to understand by the word Protestant the Doctrine of Luther or Calvin or Geneva or onely the Articles of the Church of England but that wherein they all agree with perfect Harmony that the Bible is a perfect Rule of our Faith and guide to our Actions and this after having made the most diligent and impartial search of the true way to Eternal happiness I fully believe and that we can never find any convincing satisfaction but on this Rock of Gods word the Bible which I conceive to be the onely true Religion of Protestants If the Pope were indeed what he unjustly sayes he is the Papists unreasonably believe him to be an infallible guide then there needed no Bible but if the Bible be then there needs no Pope for if I were to go a journey and had a guide that could not err what need I be taught the way and having such a guide what need I apply my self to another So that in a word let us inform our selves the best we can and consider as much as we please the more consideration we take the more confirmation we shall find that there is no other foundation for a considering Christian to build an assured dependency on than the Scriptures for I am fully assur'd that God do's not and therefore man ought not to require of any man more than this to believe the Scripture to be the word of God to use our best indeavours to find the true sense of it and to live to our utmost according to it This I am sure in reason we ought to believe a wiser choice Then if I should guide my self by the Roman Churches authority and infallibility when really they have nothing of certainty but their uncertainty witness Pope against Pope Councils against Councils some of their Fathers against others and rather then fail some against themselves new Traditions inrolled and old ones Cashiered in a word one Church against another and if that be not enough the Church of one age against the Church of another Whereas the Scripture being true and unalterable and containing all things necessary to our Salvation I am secure that by believing nothing else I shall believe no falshood in matter of Faith if I mistake the true sense of Scripture and so fall into error yet I am secured from any dangerous error because whilst I am truly indeavouring to find the true ground of Scripture I cannot but hold my error without obstinacy and be ready to forsake it when a more probable and true sense shall appear unto me and then being assur'd that all necessary truths are plainly set down in Scripture I am certain by believing the Scripture to believe all necessary truth and he that do's so if his life be answerable to his Faith how is it possible he should fail of Salvation And though the Roman Church pretend to be a perfect guide of Faith and teacher of all Divine Truths yet sure that Title might much better and more justly be given to the Scriptures as their Teacher and Master The Roman Church brags how ancient their Church is but doubtless they cannot deny but the Scripture is more ancient if they will but allow the Mother to be older than the Child The Papists say their Church is a means of keeping Christians at unity so are also the Scriptures to those that believe them in unity of belief in matters necessary The
Papists say their Church is Catholick cetainly the Scripture is more Catholick for all true Christians in the universal world do now and ever did believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God so much at least as to contain all things necessary to salvation whereas the Papists say They onely are the true Church and all other Christians though more than they give them the lye for saying so By following the Scriptures I follow that whereby the Papists prove their Churches Infallibility for were it not for Scripture what pretence could the Papists have for it or what true Notion could they receive of it so that by so doing the Papists must plainly confess That they themselves are surer of the Truth of Scripture than of their Churches Authority for we must be surer of the proof than of the thing proved or else 't is no proof so that following Scripture I follow that which must be true if the Papists Church be true for their Church allows it's truth whereas if I follow the Roman Church I must follow that which though the Scripture be true may be false nay more must be false if the Scripture be true because the Scripture is against it Following the Papists Church I must be a servant to my Saviour and a subject to my King onely at the pleasure of the Pope and renounce my Allegiance when the Popes will is to declare him an Heretick nay I must believe vertue vice and vice vertue if he pleases for he both makes and unmakes Scripture as he thinks convenient witness the Apocrypha which hath not past for Canonical but of late years in the Papists Church who interpret Scripture according to their Doctrine but will not judge their Doctrine according to Scripture for none like to weigh light Money in true scales In short the Pope adds and lessens and interprets Divine Laws as he pleases and they must stand for Laws and be obeyed as such so that in effect he rules his people by his own Laws and his own Laws by his own Lawyers his Clergy who dare not speak nor uphold them other than just such as the Pope would have them and indeed Cardinal Richelieu gave the reason why more hold the Pope above the Councils than the Councils above the Pope because the Pope gave Archbishopricks and Bishopricks but the Councils had none to give and though the Papists say his Holiness cannot err yet let not the Papists forget what God sayes in the Scripture if not onely the Pope but if an Angel from Heaven shall preach any thing against the Gospel of Christ let him be accursed In following the Scripture we have God's express command and no colour of any prohibition but to believe the Popish Church infallible we have no Scripture-command at all much less an express one Following the Popish Church we must believe many things not onely above reason but against reason witness Transubstantiation whereas following the Scripture we shall believe many miseries but no impossibilities many things above our reason but nothing against it Nay we need not believe any thing which reason will not convince us we ought to believe for reason will convince any sober Christian that the Scripture is the Word of God and there 's no reason can be greater than this that God says it therefore it must be true In a word we Protestants believe that all things necessary to our salvation are evidently contain'd in Scripture and what is not there evidently contained cannot be necessary to be believed and our reason is just and clear because nothing can challenge our 〈◊〉 as to salvation but what hath descended to us from our Blessed Saviour Christ Jesus by original and universal Tradition now nothing but Scripture hath thus descended to us therefore nothing but Scripture can challenge our Belief Now the grand difference between the Papists and us concerning the Scripture is this We hold the Scripture to be the onely perfect Rule whereby to judge of Controversies The Papists say That they acknowledge the Scriptures to be a perfect Rule onely they deny that it excluded unwritten Tradition which in effect is this they say 'T is as perfect a Rule as a Writing can be onely they deny it to be as perfect a Rule as a Writing may be either they must revoke their acknowledgment or retract their contradiction of it for both cannot possibly stand together for if they will but stand to what they have granted that Scripture is as perfect a Rule of Faith as a Writing can be they must then grant it so compleat as it needs no addition and so evident that it needs no interpretation for both these properties are requisite to a perfect Rule and that a writing is capable of both these properties and perfections is most plain for he that denies it must say that something may be spoken which cannot be written for if such a compleat evident rule of Faith may be delivered by word of mouth as the Papists pretend may and is and whatsoever is delivered by word of mouth may also be written then such a compleat and evident rule of Faith may also be written for the Argument is most plain whatsoever may be spoken may be written a perfect rule of Faith has been spoken therefore a perfect rule of Faith may be written If the Papists cannot see this plain conclusion they had best desire more light to be added to the Sun The Papist pretend their Church to be the infallible Teacher of all Divine Truths and an infallible interpreter of all obscurities in the Faith but the Papists will I hope give us leave to admire how they can pretend to Teach them in all places without writing them down that is certainly beyond the reach of their power to do as well as our belief that 't is to be done And for the Papists saying there must be a living authority beside the Scripture or else controversies cannot be ended Protestants answer necessary controversies are and may be decided and if they be not 't is not the defect of the rule in Scripture but the default of men so that if necessary controversies be ended 't is no matter if the unnecessary be not for doubtless if God had required it he would also have provided some means to effect it but sure it does not stand with any reason it should be the Pope because he cannot be a Judge being a partie indeed in civil controversies a Judge without being a partie may end them but in controversies of Religion a Judge of necessity must be a concerned partie and I am sure the Pope to us is the chief and most concerned partie being really concerned as much as his Popedom is worth Now we Protestants make the Papists this plain answer that the means of agreeing differences must necessarily be either by the appointment of God or men men sure it cannot be for then rational wise Protestants may doe as well as Papists for let the
Protestants do the same But we must desire the Papists to give us leave to tell them that they most grosly mistake if they say they agree in matters of Faith as for proof some of them hold it against Faith to take the Oath of Allegiance others 't is against Faith to refuse that Oath Some hold it of Faith that the Pope is head of the Church by Divine Law others the contrary some hold it of Faith that the blessed Virgin was free from actual sin others the contrary some that the Popes power over Princes in Temporalities is de fide others the contrary some that 't is universal Tradition that the Virgin Mary was conceived in actual sin others the contrary And how the Jesuites and Franciscans and other Orders differ to this day I am sure needs no memorandum and the best Jeast of all is the Papists have not so much as yet agreed in their very pretended means of agreement and yet have the confidence to pretend an Unity more than the Protestants sor some of them say the Pope with a Council may determine all Controversies others deny it Some hold That a general Council without a Pope may do so others deny this Others say Both in conjunction are infallible Determiners others deny this And some among the Papists hold The acceptation on of the Decrees of Councils by the Universal Church is the onely way to decide Controversies which others deny by denying their Church to be infallible and yet every part pretends to be part of the Church In a word can the Papists deny but that there has been Popes against Popes Councils against Councils Nay Councils confirmed by Popes against Popes confirmed by Councils And Lastly The Church of some Ages against the Church of other Ages and since every part of the Body is so out of order methinks they should not brag of so perfect a health as they do The Papists say and do but say it that their Doctrine is held Catholick and therefore they esteem it an insolent madness of us Protestants to dispute against the practice of the whole Church First That their Doctrine is Catholick we answer That the greatest number of Christians in the world deny it so that they cannot truly say we dispute against the practice of the whole Church And farther we say supposing we should in complement to them grant that their Church is Catholick and Universal yet we say That is no sufficient proof it came originally from the Apostles witness the Doctrine of the Milenaries and the necessity of the Eucharist for Infants which was generally taught by the Universal Church and believed as Apostolical Tradition but yet contradicted by the Universal Church afterwards This I am sure the Papists dare not deny so that we unavoidably cast the Papists upon this Rock that they must either conclude the Apostles were Fountains of contradictorie Doctrines or that the Universal Doctrine of the present Church is no sufficient proof that it came originally from the Apostles because from Church Universal of one time and the Church Universal of another time did differ Next for their saying 't is insolent madness to dispute against the practice of the whole Church First we are sure we can bring more Christian witnesses that deny they are the whole Church than they can bring to prove it but supposing we were as mad as they say we are and would have us to be to dispute against the whole practice of the Church yet I hope we may desire to know of the Papists if they can deny but that 't was the practice of the whole Church in St. Au'stine's time and esteemed then an Apostolical Tradition even by St. Au'stine himself that the Eucharist should be administred to Infants And then let them tell us Whether it be insolent madness to dispute against the practice of the whole Church or is it not if it be not why do they accuse us for it but if it be insolent madness how mad and insolent is the Papist Church not onely to dispute against this practice of the Universal Church of administring the Eucharist to Infants but utterly abolishing the practice of it So that the very worst the Papists can say of us allowing what they say to be true is that we but do what they themselves own already to have done And though the Papists are pleased to say that the Holy Scriptures and ancient Fathers assign separation from the visible Church as a mark of Heresie yet they cannot shew one plain Text of Scripture to confirm it And for the Papists braging of the Antiquity and universality of their Churches Doctrine though we allow it very ancient bating the primative times we answer first as to its Antiquity we desire to see what Antiquity they can shew for their giving the Communion but in one kind when they know that the Administring it in both kinds was the practice of the Church for a Thousand years after Christ what Antiquitie for the lawfulness and expediency of the Latine service for the present use of indulgences For the Popes power in Temporalities over Princes for the Picturing the Trinity For the lawfulness of worshipping Pictures and Images Fox their Beads For their whole worship of the blessed Virgin For their Oblations in the notion of Sacrifices to her and other Saints For their saying Pater Nosters and Creeds to the Honour of them and Ave Maries to the Virgin Mary For the infallibility of the Bishop or Church of Rome For their Doctrine of the blessed Virgins immunity from actual sin For the necessity of Auricular Confession For the necessity of the Priests intention to obtain benefit by any of their Sacraments And lastly for their licentious Doctrine in holding that though a man lives and dies without the practise of any Christian vertue and with the Habits of many damnable sins unmortified yet if at the last moment of his life he has any sorrow for his sins and joyn confession to it he shall certainly be saved This is a Doctrine may keep many souls out of Heaven but I doubt will scarce carry any one there So that the Papists Doctrine being ancient is nothing as long as 't is evident that they hold many dangerous errors as for instance the Milenaries and the Communicating Infants was more ancient than their Doctrine and 't is plain that antiquity unless it be absolute and primative is not a certain sign of true Doctrine And the very Apostles themselves assure us that in their dayes the mystery of Iniquity was working The Papists demand how comes it to pass that their Doctrine is so universal forgetting that weeds spread faster than good herbs And we ask them how the errors of the Milenaries and the Communicating Infants became so universal let them tell us this and we will tell them that for what is done in some may be done in others The Papists ask us where our Church was before Luther and tell us because t' was
does it stand with reason that St. Paul speaking of the several degrees of men in the Church should omit giving St. Peter the highest if it had been his due but place him in the same rank and Equipage with the rest of the Apostles for St. Paul sayes God hath appointed not first St. Peter then the rest of the Apostles but first Apostles secondly Prophets now certainly if Apostles were all first that is all equal how could one be in greater power than the other But besides all this though we should grant against all these probabilities and many more that Optatus Bishop of Rome meant that St. Peter was head of the Apostles yet sure the Papists are still very farr from proving the Bishop of Rome was to be so at all much less by divine right successor to St. Peter in his headship and Authority For what incongruity is there if we say that Optatus might succeed St. Peter as his heir and successor in that part of his Government of that particular Church of Rome as sure he did even whilst St. Peter was living and yet that neither he nor any man was to succeed him in his Apostleship nor in the Government of the Church universal as though a Bishop should leave his Son heir to all he dyed possessed of I hope you will not conclude therefore he must necessarily succeed him in the Bishoprick he dyed seized of The Apostles were men all called and divinely inspired by the Holy Ghost which was the immediate gift of God and therefore could not be left as a Legacy by man for though it be in any mans power to leave his Estate yet 't is in no mans power to leave to his Son his acquir'd parts at his death 'T is further worth your observing and special notice that St. Peter himself and the rest of the Apostles by laying the foundation of the Church were to be themselves the foundation of it and are accordingly so called in Scripture And therefore as in a building 't is incongruous that foundations should succeed foundations so it may be in the Church that Apostles should succeed Apostles the Church being built upon Apostles and Prophets Nor indeed does the grand argument of the Papists for their Pope extend any further in Reallity then to the particular Sea of Rome for thus goes their main argument St. Peter was first Bishop of Rome and the Apostles did not then attribute to themselves each one his particular Chair understand in that City of Rome for in other place others had Chairs besides St. Peter and therefore sayes the Papist he is a Schismatick who against that one single Chair erects another understand still in the same place and this is the ground the Authority the Papists say the Pope has to be Successor to St. Peter and to exercise Authority over the Universal Church But sure the Protestants urge more rationally in arguing thus That St. Peter wrote Two Catholick Epistles in which he mentions his own departure and writes to preserve the Christians in the faith but yet in neither of these Two Epistles does he commend the Christians to the guidance and authority of his pretended Successor the Bishop of Rome which sure if St. Peter had intended he would never have forgot to have named it And since the Papists so reverence and adore the Popes power let us Protestants also admire his way and means of attaining this power for though the Papists say that assoon as he is made Pope he has his authority immediately from Christ yet at the very same time the Papists all know that he cannot be made Pope but by Authority and Election of the Cardinals so that I am sure by the very same reason any man that is chosen a Magistrate in any Town under the Pope's Territories may claim his Authority as immediately received from Christ as well as the Pope And further that the proving his being made Pope does not render him infallible I could give a hundred instances out of the History of Popes but that will not suit well with my designed brevity but let 's ask the Papist if Liberius Bishop of Rome after Two years Banishment did not by the sollicitation of Fortunatianus Bishop of Acquileia subscribe to Heresie and consequently could not be infallible And though the Papists rely so much on the Authority of the Fathers to support and justifie the infallibility of their Church yet upon true Examination we shall find they make no more for their Universal Bishop than St Peter's Two Catholick Epistles do And for their arguing out of St. Cyprian's 55 Epistles that sure makes rather against than for them for there St. Cyprian writes to Cornelius Bishop of Rome but writes not so much to him as of himself who was Bishop of Carthage against whom a Faction of Schismaticks had set up another Bishop Now though the Papists say reasonably that 't is a mark of the Universal Bishop that other Bishops should make their Addresses unto the Bishop of Rome yet sure 't were better Reasoning to conclude thus If the Bishop of Rome had been acknowledged Universal Bishop and his Authority and Supremacy had been believ'd and own'd sure St. Cyprian had not been satisfied with onely barely writing him his sad story for he did no more but doubtless would have made his complaint to him and desired and expected redress from him as Universal Bishop over the whole Catholick Church but his not doing so argued he esteemed him Bishop onely of one Church And further St. Cyprian all know did resolutely oppose a Decree of the Roman Bishop and all that adhered to him in that one point of Rebaptizing which the Popish Church at that time delivered as a necessary Tradition and Excommunicated the Bishop of Cappadocia Galatia and all that were against that Tradition and would not so much as allow them lodging or entertainment in Rome Now since the Papists affirm that not to re-baptize those whom Hereticks had baptized to be a damnable Heresie 'T is well worth asking the Papist when this begun to be so for if they say from the beginning it was so then they must maintain a contradiction for then was St. Cyprian a Professor of damnable Heresie and yet the Papists esteem him a Saint and Martyr And on the other side if 't were not so from the beginning then did the Pope wrongfully excommunicate those other Churches of Cappadocia and Galatia without sufficient ground of Excommunication and separation which by their own Tenents is schismatical so let them chuse which side they please the Pope was in an errour And though Victor Bishop of Rome obtruded the Roman Tradition touching the time of Easter upon the Asian Bishops under the pain of Excommunication and Damnation yet we read that Irenaeus and all the other Western Bishops though they did agree with the Bishop of Rome in his observation of Easter yet they did sharply reprehend his excommunicating the Asian Bishops for their
as bad as none at all and yet after all this is it possible for a Philosophical or contemplative man nay for any man that has reason or common sense after all these suppositions to believe that none among these holy Writers of the New Testament should remember ad rei memoriam To set down plainly this most necessary Doctrine not so much as once that we were to believe the Roman Church infallible Again that none of the Evangelists should so much as once name this Popish necessary point of Faith if they had esteem'd it necessary for us to believe it when St. Paul says He kept not back any thing that was profitable for us and sure the Papists cannot deny but what is necessary to salvation must be very profitable And St Luke also plainly tells Christians his intent was to write all things necessary And sure it stands also with reason that when St. Paul wrote to the Remans he would have congratulated this their extraordinary priviledge if he had believ'd it belong'd to them And though the Romans bring it as a great Argument for them that St. Paul tells them Their Faith is spoken all the world over Yet pray let them moderate those thoughts with this consideration that St. Paul said the very same thing to the Thessalonians and let them further consider this that if the Roman Faith had been the Rule of Faith for all the world for ever as the Papists hold sure St. Paul would have forborne to put the Romans in fear of an impossibility for though raillery is much in Fashion now sure 't was not then that they also nay the whole Church of the Gentiles if they did not lock to their standing might fall into infidelity as the Jews had done 1 Eph. 11. And methinks it also stands with great reason that the Apostles writing so often of Hereticks and Antichrist should have given the Christian world this as Papists pretend onely sure Preservative from them to be guided by the infallible Church of Rome and not to separate from it upon the pain of damnation Methinks also St. Peter St. James and St. Jude in their Catholick Epistles would not have forgot giving Christians this Catholick direction of following the Roman Church and St. John in stead of saying He that believes that Jesus is the Christ and born of God might have said He that adheres to the Doctrine of the Roman Church and lives according to it is a good Christian and by this mark you shall know him In a word can there be any thing more irrational than to believe that none of these holy men who were so desirous of mens salvation should so much as once remember to write that we were to obey the Roman Church but leave it to be collected from uncertain principles and by more uncertain consequences So that upon the whole I cannot without much wonder look on the Pope's confidence and the Papists credulity in esteeming the Pope or his Councils to be an infallible Guide sure either they never read what they ought to believe or else they will not believe what they read though it be never so known a Truth and worthy of belief for if they did they could never believe the infallibility of the Popish Church for indeed if they would read the Popish story or as I may well call it the Civil Wars of the Popes you shall find as I said before Pope against Pope Councils against Councils some Fathers against others nay some against themselves new Traditions brought in and old ones turn'd out one Church against another nay the Church of one Age against the Church of another In a word the Papists say their Church is infallible and all other Christians besides themselves though more in number than they absolutely deny it and yet we must for all that believe the Popish Church infallible And to speak the plain Truth and in a word to unravel the real cause of the Grandeur of the Church of Rome above all other Churches is onely this Rome was the Imperial Town of the Empire and its Greatness was given by men and not God and when afterwards Constantinople was the Imperial City they Decreed that the Church of Constantinople should have equal Priviledges and Dignities with that of Rome And now to end this Discourse I desire you will please to consider this Conclusion which is that after all that the Papists have said be it never so much and mighty to shew the infallibility of their Church I am verily perswaded they cannot shew more if so much out of the Scriptures for their Church as the simallest society of Christians met together in prayer can for themselves that when two or three are met together in my name I will be amongst then sayes the Lord. And now I have just done this small discourse and the Sun is just upon finishing this dayes visit I can very readily follow that holy advice of not letting it go down in my anger which I thank God I have to none living and therefore am in so much Charity with the Papists as to wish that neither they nor Protestants might wast their pretious time in meer speculative controversies about words and ceremonies which of themselves will never carry us to Heaven but that we may spend our time like wise Christians in the wayes and fear of God which is the onely beginning of wisedom and not consume it in studying and maintaining of Disputes and factions but if we must still differ let Protestants and Papists differ in opinions but as Aristotle and Cicero did who though they were of differing Judgments touching the natures of Souls yet both of them agreed in the main that all men had Souls and souls of the same nature And as Phisitians though they dispute whether the Brain or the Heart be the principle part of man yet that all men have Brains and Heart they sufficiently agree in So though Protestants esteem one part of the Church doctrine and Papists set a higher value on another part yet the Soul of the Church may be in both of them and though the Papists account that a necessary truth which the Protestants account neither necessary nor perhaps true yet in truth truly necessary they both agree viz. The Apostles Creed and that Faith Hope and Charity are necessary to Salvation And lastly though Papists hold they may be justified by their works and Protestants hold none can be justified barely by them in regard of the imperfections of their works yet on the other side we so much agree with the Papists as to esteem none can be justified without them for without Repentance and Charity none can be good they being both like Health to our bodies the want of which is sufficient to disturb all other pleasures Therefore when we read St. Pauls Treatise of justification by Faith without the works of the Law Let us at the same time read what he writes to the Corinthians concerning the absolute necessity of that Excellent vertue of Charity and they will reconcile one another and I wish that we were all so reconciled in the unity of the Spirit and in the bond of peace And that you Madam may be the sooner reconcil'd to me for this tediousness I shall now make a conclusion which after such an overgrown letter must needs be the best complement that can be made by Madam yours c. London the 24. of Feb. 1673