both Heathens Jews and all Infidels ought to joyn themselves L. Since then the Catholick Church signifies the whole society of Christian people where ever scattered over the face of the earth it hence appears that they who assert the Church of Rome to be this Catholick Church do thereby declare that there are no true Christians in the world but the Papists as we use to call them which seems to me very strange Doctrine But yet may not a particular Church be in some sense stiled Catholick T. Yes pâ—operly enough as it is a part of the Catholick Church holding the same faith with it and not schismatically dividing from it And thus of old the Church of Rome might be stiled Catholick and so might the Church of Ephesus of Antioch or any other place to distinguish them from Hereticks and Schismaticks that made factions and parties in their several Churches and separated from their own lawful Bishops and Pastors L. Are not those Christian Churches which are commonly callâ—d Reformed Churches parts of the Catholick Church T. Yes they are the best and soundest parts of it L. But why are they called Protestant and Reformed T. Not to trouble you with the first particular occasion of the name Protestant they are now generally stiled so because they protest against the errors and corruptions of the Roman Church and have Reformed themselves from the same according to the primitive pattern laid down in holy Scripture So that when you hear tell of the Protestant Religion or Reformed Religion you are not to understand thereby any new Religion distinct from Christianity but only the old Christian Religion in its native simplicity and purity separate from all Popish additions Nor do we say as I have told you that the Church was lost and now lately found out but this we say that it was greatly corrupted especially in these Western parts of the world over which the Bishops of Rome had by ill arts usurped an authority From which Usurpation our Rulers most justly and regularly delivered themselves and afterwards with great care and consideration reformed our Church from those corruptions which were chiefly introduced and supported by that authority L. But they of that Church use to tell us and so does my Author here that all who are not of their communion are Sectaries to whom by no means do agree the marks of the true Church which yet they say are all of them evidently to be found in theirs T. Nothing more common than for adversaries to give one another very ill names and that shall serve for half a confutation amongst ignorant people But names alter not the nature of things And as zealously as they of Rome do affect the name of Catholicks I doubt not but upon search they will be found as notorious Sectaries as any in Christendom whilst many of those whom they brand with that infamous title will appear to be true Catholick Christians if there now be or ever were any such in the world And in order to the proof of this pray let me hear what are those marks of the true Church L. They are said to be chiefly four that it is One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church and this say they cannot be said of any Protestant Church and therefore not of our Church of England which is by them reckoned among Sectaries T. By these marks let us be tried Only take notice that no one particular Church can be stiled the Catholick Church as if a part was the whole But I say the Church of England which we are now chiefly concern'd to vindicate is a true and sound part of this One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church and all the marks of a true Church do much more clearly and fully agree to it than to the Church of Rome But let me hear what they object to the contrary L. First they say it is not One that is it is not united because there are so many divisions in it Some will be Protestants some Presbyterians others Independents Anabaptists Quakers c. Nor can they be one whilst they acknowledg not one Head to determine controversies Whilst on the other hand the Papists pretend that they have this one Head one Faith the same Sacraments and so are all of one Religion and therefore having so much unity are to be own'd by this mark for the true Church c. T. In answer to this consider 1 That it cannot with any pretence of reason or Scripture be made the mark of a true Church that there shall be no divisions in it For were there not some to be found in the best and purest Churches immediately planted by the Apostles themselves As particularly in the Church of Corinth for which they are severely reproved 1 Cor. 1. 10 11 c. 2 Much less doth it become those of the Church of Rome to accuse others of divisions who have more and greater amongst themselves than can be found I believe in any other Church in Christendom They talk of one Head but sometimes they have had two or three Popes at once and that for several years together They are divided in points fundamental to their own Church as whether the Pope be above a General Council or the Council above the Pope Nor are they any more agreed where the Infallibility of which they boast so much is seated than about the Supremacy whether it be in the Pope or in a General Council or in both together Yea some say 't is neither in one or the other nor in both united as considered apart from the rest but in the whole body of the faithful as by them Religion is convey'd from one generation to another And are they not much better for an Infallible Judg of controversies whilst they are not yet agreed who he is and where this Infallibility is to be found In a multitude of other points are they divided as learned Writers of our Church have shewn at large and with great probability have some asserted that they hardly agree universally amongst themselves in any Doctrines but those wherein they agree with us 3 But again were they never so well united amongst themselves yet is this but the agreement of a Sect with it self and is far from proving them to be therefore the Catholick Church or any sound part of it As if suppose all the Quâ—kers were perfectly agreed together in all opinions and imagin their number was as great as the Papists are they therefore to be reckoned the Catholick Church because forsooth they are One amongst themselves Surely no since by their errors and their schism they divide themselves from all other Christians Thus whilst Papists are united in owning the Pope to be Christs Vicar on earth and the supreme visible Head over the whole Christian Church they do hereby only make a sect or faction let their number be never so great And by this means as well as many other ill opinions and practices which are imposed on the
Bishop to succeed him and so hath the succession continued to this day and therefore sure they must needs be an Apostolical Church T. In answer to this I shall wave the dispute whether indeed St. Peter was ever Bishop of Rome or no and shall pass by all that may be said of the frequent Schisms which have happen'd amongst them by their having sometimes two or three Popes at once and that for many years together nor shall I tell of the fine tricks and politick intrigues of the Cardinals at the Election of a Pope nor of those vile arts which are frequently used by such as aspire to that dignity all which tends very much to abate their honour and shews how unlike they are to the Apostles whose Successors they boast themselves to be But waving these things let me only desire you to consider how little force there is in this argument to prove their Church to be now Apostolical that once there was an Apostle Bishop of it except there still continue with them the same truth of Doctrine and purity of worship which the Apostles did at first teach and establish For let us grant that St. Peter and St. Paul with other holy men planted a Church at Rome yet is it not possible that here as well as at Ephesus might afterward arise men who should teach perverse things as we find it exprest Act. 20. 30. and thereby corrupt the Doctrine of the Gospel Was it not thus in many other Churches And may it not be so at Rome too yea most certainly we know it is so For though we grant that Church to have remain'd for a considerable time pure and uncorrupted yet for many ages by-past to this very day there have been such Doctrines and practices currently received and established in that Church as the Apostles never taught to them nor to any others And with respect to these I say they deserve not the title of an Apostolical Church meerly because an Apostle at first planted it and presided over it The Papists themselves will not now allow this title to any of the Greek Churches which were planted by the Apostles because they look upon them as erroneous and schismatical and certainly they themselves have as little reason to challenge it as any of their neighbours being at least as grosly degenerated as any though they may have more prosperity and greater numbers of people adhering to them It is not then so much the sitting in the same Chair as teaching the same Doctrines with the Apostles that makes a Bishop to be a true Successor of them Wherefore those Churches which were planted by holy men after the Apostles were dead and gone if they receive the same Doctrine and retain the same worship and Sacraments which the Apostles did these may most justly be accounted Apostolical Churches sound members of the One Holy Catholick Apostolick Church of Christ. L. I think there is great reason so to account them but it seems very unreasonable that any one Church should stile it self the Apostolick Church so as to exclude all others from that title especially so unsound a Church as that of Rome which is at this day so very unlike to what it was in the times of the Apostles T. It is indeed every whit as unreasonable as to arrogate to themselves alone the name of Catholick which we discoursed of before Nay let us suppose that the Bishops of Rome to this very day followed the example of the Apostles preached the same Doctrine led the same good lives and used the same holy worship and discipline so that their Church indeed deserved to be own'd as Apostolical yet what in reason could be infer'd from hence more than this viz. that the people in their own Diocess should be subject to them and that all other sister Churches ought to give them due respect and maintain such communion with them as those at a distance are capable of But it does not in the least follow that the Bishop of Rome is Christs Vicar upon Earth and their Church the only Catholick and Apostolick Church so that none must have this title but those who inslave themselves to the Pope L. You have said enough to convince me how very absurd it is for the Church of Rome to stile her self the Catholick Apostolick Church as if there were no other Christians in the world but Papists yet pray tell me may not the Church of Rome be reckoned a part of the Catholick Church T. At the best it is but a small part as I have before told you and also a very unsound part Yea I will not doubt to add that take the Church of Rome even in the largest sense as comprehending all those that submit to the Pope as Head of the whole Church under Christ they may justly be reckoned a Schismatical party dividing themselves from the rest of the Catholick Church setting up a false Head and Governour and appointing unlawful terms of communion And though in this respect the Masters and leaders of the faction are in the greatest guilt yet the people who are seduced are also more or less guilty according to the capacity they are in of geting better information But yet notwithstanding this schism they are in and notwithstanding the many errors and abuses that are amongst them whilst they profess the Christian Religion and own their Baptism they may be allow'd the name of Christians such as belong to the visible Church of Christ. And how uncharitable soever they are to us I hope there are many good Christians amongst them who do heartily believe the Gospel and live in obedience to it according to their knowledg and who on that account may be stiled true members of the Catholick Church as all honest true hearted Christians are notwithstanding those errors and faults they may be guilty of which do not utterly violate their Baptismal Covenant nor destroy that faith and holiness by which we are united to Christ the Head and so are living members of his body the Church But still I say this title belongs not to them as they are Papists embracing the peculiar tenents of their own Church but as they are Christians holding the essential Articles of the Christian Faith together with our own and all other Churches For as to Popery it is really a disease a corruption of the Christian Religion Yet as a diseased man may have his vitals so sound that even the Plague or Leprosie may not kill him so may there be some amongst the Papists in whom the great and common truths of Religion may be so deeply implanted and so faithfully retained and improved that the disease of Popery may not prove mortal Whilst they hold the foundation Jesus Christ and his Gospel though the hay and stubble which they build upon it shall be burnt yet may they through the mercy of God in Christ be saved so as by fire that is with great difficulty 1 Cor. 3. 11 12 c. And
to draw them into a submission and therefore especially do they account the Greeks to be Hereticks and Schismaticks though I know they lay some other things to their charge But besides the Greek Church there are multitudes of other Christians in several parts of the world who submit not to the Bishop of Rome So that this boast of their vast numbers in comparison of others is as false as it is weak For according to the computation of many learned men if all the Christians in the world were divided into four parts those who belong to the Romish Church where ever they are scattered would not make one quarter of them With what face then can they pretend that they alone are the whole Catholick Church As if there were no Christians in the world but themselves all the rest being Hereticks or Infidels or what they please to call them L. But they say these Churches are not Protestants T. Whether that name be proper to them or not it 's enough that they joyn with us in the most substantial points against the Papists As to the name of Protestants I before told you we do commonly understand by it those who have reformed themselves from the errors of the Romish Church and have cast off her authority which before she unjustly usurped over them And in this sense there are a great many large and flourishing Churches of them in these Western parts of the world besides numerous Plantations in the East and West-Indies especially in the latter where many of the Native Heathens have been converted by them But as to the Greeks and those other Churches who never were enslaved to the Bishop of Rome though the name of Protestant may not so fitly belong to them yet do they agree with us in utterly disowning the Supremacy of that Bishop which is the very fundamental Doctrine of the Romish Church by which especially they are distinguished from those of all other communions As to other points wherein the Romanists and the Reformed differ in some of them the Greeks agree with us in others with them But that which is most material to my purpose is this that all these Churches do hold the same essential Articles of Christian Doctrine with us They receive the same holy Scriptures and the same ancient Creeds in which our faith is contain'd but then they reject many of those additions which in latter times have been made by pretended General Councils of the Roman Church Particularly I say they deny the Supremacy and Infallibility of that Church the chief of their new Doctrines By this therefore judg whose faith is most Catholick or Universal whilst many of their fundamental Articles as they esteem them are rejected by all Christian Churches besides themselves who are not a fourth part of Christendom whereas all the Articles of our Faith are embraced by all these Churches yea even by the Church of Rome it self for as I have often said the sum of our Faith and Religion is in the Apostles Creed and this hath been received by the whole Catholick Church in all times and places and the Roman Church also retains it though she has added new Articles to it But if she has any good pretence to the title of being part of the Catholick Church it must be upon account of her receiving and professing this same Christian Faith which we together with the whole Church of Christ do hold and not on account of those new Articles she has added which are so generally disown'd both by us and all other Christians in the world except their own party and which were utterly unknown to the Catholick Church for many ages after our Saviour Judge then I say whose faith is most Catholick theirs or ours L. I confess there seems little difficulty in the case but yet I have heard them oft object that ours is for the most part a Negative Religion made up of Negative Articles as that the Pope is not Head of the Church that there is no Purgatory no Transubstantiation c. Now they say we find no such Negative Doctrines in the Catholick Church of old and therefore we do herein differ from it T. To this the answer is exceeding easie that we hereby only reject those corrupt additions which the Romish Church hath made to the ancient Catholick Faith And their obtruding these falshoods on the world gave occasion for such Negative Articles as those you mention which we now look upon as very necessary to shew that we keep close to the ancient Rule of Faith delivered by Christ and his Apostles which Faith we keep entire and do express it most positively and plainly as we have it in the Creed But the Novelties which the Romish Church hath added to this we do utterly deny and reject As for instance when the Bishops of that Church many hundred years after our Saviour make a new claim of an Universal Jurisdiction over all Christian Churches we think it most just and necessary to disown all such his Supremacy as being no where taught in the Gospel nor mention'd in the Creed nor own'd by the Primitive Church The same we declare concerning their other Doctrines of Purgatory and Transubstantiation that we believe them nor So we also teach that there ought to be no worship of Images no Invocation of Saints or Angels c. and all this for the same reason because no where injoyn'd by our Saviour or his Apostles nor establish'd in any of the four first General Councils which we readily embrace but rather the contrary to these is either expressly taught or plainly enough insinuated And if the Church of Rome shall still go on to coin new Articles we shall as occasion is offered still be as ready to reject them declaring them to be no part of our Faith And by this means we do best manifest our conformity to the Catholick Church in all ages contenting our selves with that Faith which she hath ever profest and transmitted to posterity And here it is a most ridiculous thing for them to bid us shew where the Church of old held such Negative Articles as we now do since these were not like to be heard of before the errors that occasion'd them were introduced As when the Judaizing Christians taught the necessity of keeping Moses Law then the Apostles denied it and establish'd the contrary Now suppose this error had not been broach'd till some hundred years after had it not been sufficient for the Christians then to say that the Apostles never taught it who revealed the whole Counsel of God and therefore certainly it could be no part of their faith And so say we of the Doctrines before mention'd the Popes Supremacy the worship of the Blessed Virgin and the like if these had been so necessary as Papists hold we should hear of them in our Saviours Sermons or in some of the Epistles written by the Apostles to several Churches or sure we should meet with them in the writings
of the most ancient Fathers or in the Decrees of the first Councils but since we find no such thing we may firmly conclude them to be no essential Articles of the Christian Faith As if now that party in the Roman Church which asserts the freedom of the Blessed Virgin from Original sin should so far prevail as to get a Council like that packt up at Trent to establish this new opinion as an Article of Faith would it not be enough for us to reply that this is no where to be found in Scripture or in the Creed and therefore whether true or false yet certainly is no article of faith And thus we shew our selves to be of the same faith with the Catholick Church of old whilst we embrace the very same Articles which she did and what more is obtruded upon us as part of the faith we do constantly reject it either as false or as unnecessary Though as to all or most of the points which we thus reject you will find sufficient evidence against them in holy Scripture as I shall afterward shew L. But they commonly say that they have only established these new Doctrines in opposition to new Heresies with which the Church in former times was not troubled and therefore did not so fully and expresly determine against them as they now have done yet they pretend that these their new Articles were plainly implied and contain'd under some head or other of ancient Doctrine T. All this is most false and frivolous since if these new coin'd Articles of theirs had been true there was the same reason why they should have been taught anciently as well as now and occasion enough was frequently offered To instance in one for all If Saint Peter was indeed to have been made supreme Governour of the Christian Church and the Bishops of Rome after him would not our Saviour have told his Apostles so when they were contending who should be greatest And after this in the Primitive times when there were often hot contentions amongst Bishops and Churches would they not all have appeal'd to the Pope for the decision of their controversies and have yielded submission to his sentence if this had been the current Doctrine of the Church that he was their Supreme Governour and Infallible Judg But alas we find no such matter And consider further that when Heresies arose the ancient Fathers who wrote against them plainly shew'd how they contradicted the Holy Scripture and the common Doctrine contain'd in the Creed as explain'd by those who went before them Thus when the Arrians denied the Divinity of our Saviour the Orthodox both proved it by Scripture and urged that Article of the Creed that Jesus is the Son of God which they shew'd was still interpreted of his partaking of a Divine nature as was afterward therefore more fully exprest in the Nicene Creed But now where can Papists shew Scripture in proof of their Novelties Or in what Article of the Creed will they prove them to be virtually contain'd and shew that the Article was so understood by those Ancients who have written Comments on the Creed How will they by this method make out that the Pope is Christs Vicar on Earth not surely because Christ is the Son of God Or what because there is mention made of the Catholick Church must that be meant only of the Roman Church so that none must belong to it but those who yield subjection to the Pope But what ancient Writer did ever thus explain this or the other Article And to what Articles I beseech you must we reduce those other peculiar Doctrines of theirs Transubstantiation Purgatory c. with the rest of their gross Errors and Innovations These therefore do we most justly reject as being corrupt additions to the ancient Christian Faith the common Faith of Gods Holy Catholick Church which we retain firm and entire without adding or diminishing CHAP. IV. Of the fourth Mark of the true Church that it is Apostolick L. BY your last discourse I am fully satisfied how little reason Papists have to assume and engross to themselves the title of Catholicks and that our Church of England is a true and sound part of the Catholick Church And at the same time I do also perceive that the last mark of a true Church doth as properly belong to it viz. that it is Apostolick T. This is indeed so very plain from what hath been said under the former head that I reckon there is little need to spend much time in speaking particularly to it For as I have often inculcated our Church receives all those Doctrines which we are certain were taught by the Apostles that faith which was delivered by them to the Churches which they planted as it is to be found at large in their writings and which is summ'd up in that which we call the Apostles Creed as being the Summary of their Doctrine All the Articles of this Creed we do stedfastly embrace and profess and that in the plain sense of the words according to the commonly received interpretation of the Church of Christ in the first and purest ages And thus our Doctrine is Apostolical so also is our Government our Worship and Administration of the holy Sacraments and therefore our Church doth most justly deserve the title of an Apostolical Church For according to the precepts and example of the Apostles we worship the true God in the name of his Son Jesus our only Mediator and that in a language understood by the people We baptize with water In the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost And in the Lords-Supper do give both Bread and Wine to the people according to our Saviours own institution In a word we preach the very same Faith the same holiness and righteousness of life which the Apostles did But on the other hand it 's most certain that as to the chief points wherein the Church of Rome and we differ the Apostles never delivered those Doctrines nor enjoyn'd those practices which are obtruded upon us by that corrupt Church They never taught that the Bishop of Rome is the supreme and infallible Head of the Church They never taught us to pray to Angels or Saints no not to the Blessed Virgin her self nor to make Prayers for the Dead that they might be delivered out of Purgatory nor to take away the Cup from the Laity nor to worship the consecrated Host to adore Images or to make any use of them in Religious service These things with many others now used in the Church of Rome were never taught or practised by the Holy Apostles and therefore so far that Church is not Apostolical L. I do verily believe it deserves not that name with respect to those Doctrines and practices wherein it differs from us But I hear them often making great boasts that theirs must certainly be an Apostolical Church because an Apostle himself was once their Bishop even St. Peter and he ordained another
is this no more than what we find said of the rest of the Apostles Ephes. 2. 20. where Christians are said to be built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Christ himself being the chief corner-stone that is plainly that these Christians were establisht in the belief of that Doctrine which had been more obscurely revealed by the Prophets and of which the Apostles were the chief Preachers being the founders of the Christian Church having received their authority from Jesus Christ the Supreme Ruler and only Head of this his Church To the same purpose you may see Rev. 21. 14. where the twelve Apostles are expresly called twelve foundations So that as St. Peter made his confession in the name of the rest in like manner what was said to him belongs to the rest also which is most plain from Ioh. 20. 23. where the power of the Keys is given to them all that their just sentence delivered on Earth shall be ratified in Heaven and the same doubtless belongs to all their Successors the Bishops and Pastors of the Church whilst they proceed according to the rules of the Gospel L. If the former Text be not sufficient they have another ready to produce for the same purpose viz. Ioh. 21. 15 16 17. where Saint Peter is commanded by our Blessed Saviour to feed his lambs and sheep that is they say to rule over all Christians every where both small and great high and low T. They may say what they please but the Text is very far from saying or intimating any such thing With such corrupt glosses they may force any Text to serve their turn as from those words of our Saviour to St. Peter Luk. 22. 32. I have pray'd for thee that thy faith fail not that he should not utterly fall away from Christ notwithstanding his denial of him hence they would collect that St. Peter had a promise of Infallibility and this too must belong to the Pope in all ages as his Successor But as to the Text you last named would any honest impartial Reader ever imagin that because St. Peter is so earnestly charged as the rest of the Apostles in other places are to be very diligent in Preaching the Gospel in gathering and feeding the flock of Christ that he is thereby made Ruler over the Christian world and the Bishops of Rome after him invested in the same power and jurisdiction whilst there is not a syllable said of any such power nor any mention of Successors Or if these had been concern'd yet is there any intimation given that those at Rome should have this priviledg rather than the Bishops of Antioch where they will grant St. Peter to have been Bishop long before he was at Rome L. These things I confess will very hardly be drawn from that Text. T. So little countenance doth either that or any other Text give to their pretences that it would seem more reasonable and modest for them to wave all talk of Scripture in this case and depend barely upon tradition with which they use to make much noise and yet this if truly searched into will do them little service as I may after shew At present let it suffice to add that these Texts they quote were not understood in that sense they put upon them either by St. Peter himself or the rest of the Apostles no nor by the Christian Church for many hundred years after Whatever precedency St. Peter might have by way of honour yet do we no where find him claiming any power over his Brethren the Apostles nor does he once mention any such matter in either of his Epistles but stiles himself as the rest did a Servant and Apostle of Jesus Christ. And when he speaks to the Elders or Bishops of the Church he does not command them as the Supreme Ruler of all Bishops but with great meekness exhorts them as a brother stiling himself an Elder 1 Pet. 5. 1. and his exhortation to them is at the third vers that they should not carry themselves as Lords over Gods heritage not proudly affect any undue superiority over them but make themselves examples to the flock that so they might receive their reward from the Lord Jesus whom he stiles the chief Shepherd never adding that under Christ he himself was to be reckoned chief Shepherd here upon Earth And if it should be lookt upon as only a piece of modesty in St. Peter a vertue which his pretended Successors have had little share of that he would say nothing of his own great power let it be further considered that as no such power was given him by our blessed Saviour when there was a contention amongst the Apostles who should be greatest so neither was it ever ascribed to him by any Apostle either before Christs death or after it There is no appearance of it in that assembly of the Apostles and Elders Act. 15. 6. when St. Paul writes to the Romans he says nothing of this great priviledg belonging to that See And when he writes to the Corinthians and reproves them for their factions and sidings whilst some were for Cephas others for Apollos c. by which Cephas it's plain must be meant St. Peter yet he says not a word on this so fair an occasion to enjoyn their preferring Cephas before all others but exhorts them to peace and quietness in their subjection to Christ and his Ministers without being puft up for one against another yea writing to the Galatians he tells them that upon a just occasion he withstood Saint Peter to the face saying nothing by way of Salvo to his supreme jurisdiction To conclude no where do we read in all the New Testament of any other Head of the whole Church but Jesus Christ himself as he is expresly stiled Col. 1. 18. Ephes. 1. 22. and in many other places Nor would I have named any but that I remember I once met with an ignorant Papist who quoting 1 Cor. 12. 21. The head cannot say to the feet I have no need of you would thence prove that Christ could not be the Head of the Church because he may say he has no need of us as if because that place was not meant of him no other was But it 's no great wonder to hear a Papist arguing so weakly out of Scripture in which they are so little conversant L. And no greater wonder is it that they have so little regard for that which does them so little service and particularly I perceive they have no help from it for the confirming this great article of the Popes Supremacy But though the Holy Scripture does so little befriend their cause yet I have often heard them brag much of Councils and Fathers how these do all with one consent acknowledg and assert this his Supremacy which though I am not able to disprove yet I am very backward to take it on their bare word because I find such ill dealing in their quotation of Scripture and
from the corruptions of Popery the Blessed Fruits whereof we do at this day enjoy and hope we shall still continue so to do through the same Divine Grace and favour which first bestowed this mercy upon us though most unworthy of the same But leave we this shadow of an Argument and pass to his third L. Pray do so T. It is this That Church is only to be heard which â—â—s all the marks of a true Church but the Roman Câ—urch has them and no other therefore she only is to be â—â—ard These marks as he goes on are Antiquity Miracles Holiness of Life and Doctrine Universality Uâ—â—ty Succession of Bishops from the Apostles these he calls Infallible Marks of the true Church which belong to none but that of Rome L. These marks of the Church or most of them I do well remember you spoke largely to in the beginning of our â—â—st conference and from what you have there said I 〈◊〉 furnished with a sufficient Answer to this Argument viz. that the Church of Rome as it is now corrupted with â—hose Doctrines wherein Popery consists such as the Popes Supremacy and Infallibility Purgatory Transubstantiation c. it cannot truly plead these marks he lays down For these Popish Doctrines are not of the same Antiquity with pure Christianity there never were any true Miracles wrought to confirm them they are not Holy in themselves nor do tend to promote Holiness of Life but rather the contrary they are not nor ever were Universally received by all Christian Churches nor is there much Unity amongst themselves in their explication of them though if there were this signifies nothing as being but the Unity of a Sect within it self and though their Bishops may live in the same City that the Apostles once did yet they did not receive these Doctrines from the Apostles but have introduced them since some at one time some at another and therefore in respect of Doctrine they are not the Apostles Successors nor are to be hearkned to as such T. What you alledge is most undeniably true And let me further add that suppose the Church of Rome were now as pure in its Doctrine and Worship as in the very days of the Apostles it was so that these marks did really belong to it yet this is no good Argument that we must all therefore be of the Church of Rome if ever we hope to be saved since many other Churches might plead the same even all that received the Christian Religion in the same purity and simplicity whose Members therefore might have as good grounds to hope for Salvation But when we further consider how that Church has degenerated from its Primitive purity beside that it has no dominion over us there is still much less reason that we should for the embracing of her Communion desert our own Church of England which is a most sound part of the Catholick Church as any this day in Christendom To her agree all the marks of a true Church as I have formerly shewn She hath these mention'd by this Author Antiquity c. For the Doctrines of our Church are as old as the times of our Saviour and his Apostles This is that true Christian Doctrine which was confirmed by all those Miracles which are recorded in the New-Testament These Doctrines are all Holy as well as True and have a natural tendency to make men Holy and Good These are Universally received by all Christian Churches that now are or ever were in the World being the very same you find summ'd up in the Apostles Creed Thus are we at Unity with the truly Catholick Church and thus whilst our Ministers Preach the very same Doctrines use the same Worship and Sacraments which the Apostles did they are in that respect truly their Successors Yea beside this those Bishops of our Church whom God made use of for the Reformation of it did receive their Orders from those who were of the Church of Rome so that if their Ordination be valid so is ours if they have a succession from the Apostles so have we To say nothing of what is commonly related in History that some of the Apostles or Apostolical men sent by them first planted Christianity in these parts from which time it was never utterly rooted out But I think I need add nothing more on this Head having already said so much in another place L. No Sir but rather proceed to the fourth Argument T. It is this That Church is to be heard which takes the narrow way that leads to Life Matt. 7. but the Roman Church takes it and therefore she is to be heard And this he proves because she takes as he says not only the way of Gods commands but also the narrow way of Christs Counsels What say you to this L. Even the same in effect that you lately said upon the former Argument viz. that supposing it to be true that the Church of Rome does take this narrow way yet it is not she alone that takes it and therefore there is no necessity that I should renounce all other Churches for Communion with her I am sure there is no reason why I should on this account forsake our own Church wherein the precepts of Christ are most plainly taught and strictly urged upon the people and in the very same way to Heaven are we dayly exhorted to walk in which our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles have led us by their Example as well as Doctrine even the way of Piety Righteousness and serious Holiness T. Your Answer is solid and true L. But I have yet somewhat more to say against his Argument and do directly deny that their Church takes the same way to Salvation in all things which our Saviour hath proposed in his Gospel For whatever he talks of their following not only his Commands but his Counsels yet sure I am that their Church requires many things to be believed and done in order to Salvation which our Blessed Saviour never commanded counsel'd or taught and therefore in these things they do not take the way of the Gospel but one of their own devising For in the Gospel we no where find that a Man cannot be saved except he acknowledge the Popes Supremacy believe Transubstantiation worship Images c. These things I think are directly contrary to the Doctrines and Precepts of the Gospel and yet these with many more of like nature are required in the Roman Church with all strictness imaginable in doing of which she takes not the way of the Gospel nor therefore in this ought she to be heard T. Most certainly she ought not But you have all the reason in the World to remain fixed in Communion with your own Church which requires nothing to be believed or practised as of necessity to Salvation but what is revealed in the Holy Scriptures Herein following the direction which our Saviour gave to his Apostles and in them to their Successors Matt. 28. ult that they should
either by Apostasie Heresie or Schism 1 Apostasie is a renouncing not only the Faith of Christ but the very name and title to Christianity No man will say that ever the Church of Rome fell thus 2 Heresie is an adhesion to some private or singular opinion or error in Faith contrary to the general approved Doctrine of the Church If the Church of Rome did ever adhere to any singular or new opinion disagreeable to the common received Doctrine of the Christian world I pray you satisfie me to these particulars 1. By what General Council was she condemn'd 2. Or which of the Fathers wrote against her 3. Or by what authority was she otherwise reproved for it seems to me a thing very incongruous that so great a Church should be condemn'd by every one that has a mind to condemn her 3 Schism is a departure or a division from the unity of the Church whereby that bond and communion held with some former Church is broken and dissolved If ever the Church of Rome divided it self by schism from any other body of faithful Christians brake communion or went forth from the society of any Elder Church I pray satisfie me to these particulars whose company did she leave From whom did she go forth Where was the true Church which she did forsake For it appears a little strange to me that a Church should be accounted Schismatical when there cannot be assign'd another Church different from her which from age to age hath continued visible from which she departed Hence he infers That the Church of Rome is the only true Church that leads to an eternity of bliss T. This indeed they commonly boast of as an unanswerable demonstration which they often scatter abroad in papers for the deluding of silly people Now though I see nothing in it but what has already been answered again and again yet for your fuller satisfaction Consider 1 suppose that we should grant his whole argument and every word in it to be true yet will it do little service to their cause nor will by any means yield that inference he would draw from it viz. that the Church of Rome is the only true Church and therefore to her communion we must betake our selves leaving the Church of England if ever we hope for salvation For pray what if we shou'd grant which yet he will never be able to prove that the Church of Rome is at this day as true and sound and flourishing a Church as we own it once to have been and should yield that it never fell by Apostasie Heresie or Schism what follows hence I beseech you What that she is the only true Church and the whole Catholick Church No by no means but only that she ought to be look'd upon as a sound part of the Catholick Church and therefore that her members viz. the Christians of that Diocess ought to live in strict fellowship with her and all other neighbouring Churches ought to give her due respect in maintaining such communion with her as sister-Churches are capable of holding one with another But it does not I say in the least follow that she is the supreme Mistress and Governess of all other Churches and therefore that all Christians in the world must render subjection to her and her Bishop otherwise they are to be look'd upon as no members of the Catholick Church nor at present in a capacity of salvation For such a supreme Mistress as this she never was when in her best and purest state nor therefore ought she to be esteemed so at this day neither do we of this Church owe obedience to her nor ought we to leave our own Church for her sake or at her command L. I cannot see how his argument proves us at all obliged thereto nor consequently how it reaches his purpose T. That it does not will still appear plainer if instead of Rome you name any other ancient Church suppose that of Ierusalem which was once very glorious and flourishing and deserved above all others to be stiled a Mother-Church now suppose that at this day it remain'd as sound and good as ever it was and to use his language that it never fell by Apostasie Heresie or Schism pray would it hence follow that all other Churches and particularly this of England must therefore yield subjection to the Church of Ierusalem That our Bishops must pay homage to the Bishop of that Church owning their dependance upon him and living in obedience to him And if they should refuse to do thus must our people therefore forsake their own Bishops and Clergy and withdraw from the Churches where they officiate and entertain Bishops or Priests that are sent over to us from Ierusalem and run into corners with them for the worship of God Surely there is not the least reason for any of this and not a whit more is there for our being thus subject to the Bishop of Rome or for our receiving and joyning with the Priests which are sent over to us by his authority There never was nor is now any reason why we should be thus enslaved to the Romish Church For in the very days of the Apostles and some hundred years after when that Church was in its best and purest state we of the Church of England rendred no such obedience to it own'd no such dependance upon it Neither indeed did the Bishops of that Church then claim any such power and Supremacy over us and other foreign Churches Wherefore as our ancestors the British Christians did not subject themselves to the Bishop of Rome nor ever thought such a subjection necessary to their salvation no more have we reason to do Whatever power or precedency the Bishops of Rome might afterwards have in these Western parts either by favour of the Emperor or by consent of the Bishops amongst themselves or most of all by their own daily encroachments by the meer advantage of their Seat without either law or reason this I say nothing at all concerns us at this day since all his power here is utterly abrogated and taken away by just and lawful authority in a most mature and deliberate manner as you before heard And I then told you how in Henry the Eighth's time before our happy Reformation it was generally own'd and declared by the Popish Clergy themselves that the Bishop of Rome had no more authority over us in England than the Bishop of Ierusalem Antioch or any other foreign Bishop And long before that our Laws limited and restrain'd the Popes power as it seem'd good to our Rulers And so do Popish Princes themselves at this day suffering him to have no more power or priviledg amongst them than themselves think fit Since then the Church of Rome in the very days of its primitive purity and glory had no power over us in this Church no more hath it at this day nor ought to have though it were still as pure and good as at first it was
Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead and Indulgences p. 65 CHAP. VII Of Transubstantiation p. 75 CHAP. VIII Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mass. p. 102 CHAP. IX Of having Prayers in an unknown Tongue p. 105 CHAP. X. Concerning Confession of Sins to the Priest in order to his forgiveness of them p. 109 CHAP. XI Of Invocation of Saints p. 119 CHAP. XII Of the Worship of Images p. 129 CHAP. XIII Of Praying by Beads p. 142 CHAP. XIV Of Distinction of Meats p. 148 CHAP. XV. Of withholding the Scriptures from the Common-People p. 152 PART II. CHAP. I. COntaining an Answer to some Arguments against Protestants p. 167 CHAP. II. A Resolution of some Doubts and Questions proposed to Protestants 190 CHAP. III. An Answer to some Propositions said to be unanswerable by Protestants p. 200 CHAP. IV. An Answer to a pretended Demonstration That the Roman Church is the True Catholick Church p. 225 CHAP. V. Of the number of Sacraments with some other things briefly discust and the conclusion of the whole p. 239 A DIALOGUE BETWIXT TWO PROTESTANTS In Answer to a Popish Catechism CALLED A Short Catechism against all Sectaries PART I. A DIALOGUE BETWIXT A Teacher and a Learner CHAP. I. Concerning the true Church and the marks of it and first of its Unity Learner SIR I live in a place where there are many of those who call themselves Roman Catholicks and though I care not much for disputing with them for I seldom find any thing comes of it but anger and ill words yet I cannot always avoid it For some of them are my near Relations and they sometimes put Books into my hands and sometimes bring their Priest along with them to convince me and are still earnestly urging me to change my Religion and to forsake the Church of England telling me plainly that no Salvation is to be had out of the Church of Rome Teacher That I know is their common Doctrine but it is so very unreasonable and so horridly uncharitable that this alone were enough to keep a man from becoming a Papist since if he thorowly embrace their principles he must condemn all but those of their own way And believe it they had need to consider well how they can hope for mercy themselves who pass so severe a sentence upon others But thanks be to God whatever they talk of St. Peters Keys they are not hereafter to be our Judges nor are salvation and damnation at their disposing That God who will judg both us and them according to his own Gospel will one day justifie and acquit thousands whom they have condemned And therefore never be daunted by their insolent language and heavy censures The very same you may sometimes hear from Quakers and others of the vilest Sects For still the less reason the more wrath and considence that by bold and threatning talk they may fright people into their way when they want good Arguments to perswade them L. I believe it is so yet I 'le confess to you I am sometimes a little puzled with some of their subtle discourses and therefore I would desire you to furnish me with plain answers to the chief of those arguments which they commonly insist on These I think I can pretty well remember having heard them so often but to help my memory I have brought with me a little Book wherein they are contained and from thence shall propose them T. I shall readily give you my assistance herein Let me hear then how do they use to assault you L. Those I have met with do commonly begin with telling me as I find it here also in some of the first pages of this their book That there is but one Lâ—rd and one Faith one Religion and one Church wherein a man can be saved as there was but one Ark of Noah wherein he and his family were preserved T. We easily grant that there is one true Religion even that which Christ hath revealed and is therefore called the Christian Religion and there is one Catholick Church viz. the whole body of Christian people who embrace this Religion But there are many particular Churches which hold this same Faith as of old the Church of Ierusalem of Antioch c. so now of England of Scotland c. What then can they infer hence to their purpose L. That as Turks and Jews cannot be saved so no more can Hereticks T. It still beseems us to be more careful for the saving of our own souls than hasty in condemning of others Wherefore let us leave the condition of such who never heard the Gospel nor had any opportunity of hearing it to the wise and just Judg of all the Earth who will do right to all As for Hereticks they are such as deny some essential part of the Christian Faith and therefore properly speaking are not Christians But what 's all this to us L. They say that we of the Church of England are Hereticks out of the Catholick Church and therefore cannot be saved T. Say it they commonly do but are never able to prove it since we believe the whole Religion of our blessed Saviour contained in the holy Scriptures We receive the ancient Creeds of the Church wherein is contained the summ of this Religion How then are we Hereticks L. Because we are not of the Roman Church which is the congregation of those who own the Bishop of Rome to be Christs Vicar and the visible Head of his Church upon earth which congregation they say is the Catholick Church and the only true way to salvation and they who are not of this communion are Hereticks and Sectaries T. This is the current Popish Doctrine but had it been the opinion of the Primitive Church in the Apostles days or soon after surely they would have given some such a definition as this of the Catholick Church or at least have call'd it the Roman Catholick Church as Papists now do but it s neither so called in the Creed nor this Article so explained by any Christian Writer in those days or long after L. Who then are to be reckoned as members of the Catholick Church T. Even all good Christians through the whole world that do sincerely believe and obey the Gospel of our blessed Saviour These are the true members of his Church and all who profess to do so are the outward visible members of this Catholick Church And in this sense we acknowledg with your Author that Christ hath always had a visible Church on Earth and will be with it to the end of the world nor shâ—â—â— the Gates of Hell be able to prevail against it Nor do we say as he charges us that the whole Church has been lost or put out but particular Churches in this place or that as at Ierusalem at Rome or any otherwhere may fall into great decay and at length into utter ruin Yet still Christ will have a Church upon earth still there will be men professing Christianity to whom
in Religion amongst our selves by proposing Articles of peace suppressing disputes about obscure and unnecessary matters and by determining of things indifferent in the worship of God according to the general rules of Scripture which principles being heartily embraced and honestly practised will procure as much peace and union in every Church as can be expected in this state of imperfection And by this means thanks be to God there is more true Christian unity to be found in our Church than amongst Papists themselves notwithstanding their Infallible Judg Pope or Council or they know not well who And what appearance of union there is amongst them is to be ascribed rather to the peoples ignorance than to the Popes knowledg yea to the Inquisition much rather than to his Infallibility L. I am well satisfied in this matter But before I proceed to the next mark pray tell me what is that unity which is required in a particular Church to make it lawful for a man to hold communion with it T. Plainly it is this that it be in union with the Catholick Church by holding the same faith which it has always held and using the same worship in all things substantial which it has always used And thus doth the Church of England whilst it owns the Holy Scripture as the Rule of Faith and receives the ancient Creeds wherein this Faith is briefly comprized which Scripture and Creeds have been generally received by the Catholick Church in former ages as well as this And in our Church is established the solemn Worship of the true God in the name of Jesus Christ and here the holy Sacraments are administred according to this rule of Holy Scripture and after the pattern of the Catholick Church in all ages from which the Church of Rome is most grossly degenerated as you may anon be more fully informed L. But does not the Church of Rome receive the Holy Scriptures and the ancient Creeds that we have and worship the true God in the name of Iesus Christ T. Yes they do so and thereby they do plainly approve of and confirm what we hold But then they have made additions of their own to this Faith and have brought many corruptions into this worship and thereby have occasion'd one of the greatest schisms that ever happened in the Church and are themselves the Schismaticks because they make unlawful terms of communion and exclude those who comply not with these terms So far as they are One with the Catholick Church we are One with them So far as they retain that Faith and Worship which has ever been approved of in the Church since the days of Christ and his Apostles we are ready to joyn in communion with them but the errors and corruptions which in latter times have been added and imposed these we utterly reject In these we must dissent from them that it may appear we are one with the ancient Catholick Church which never own'd many of those things which they now impose and we renounce as I shall after shew But let us proceed if you please to the other marks CHAP. II. Of the second mark of the true Church viz. Holiness L. THE next mark of the true Church is that it 's Holy which they say agrees to their Church not to ours Their Doctrine they pretend is holy not ours in their Church are multitudes of holy persons to be found whole Orders of them but out of it they say there is no true holiness no holy people nay nor can be T. It is a matter to be sadly lamented by all good men that among Christians of what profession or Church soever there is no more true piety and holiness to be found and that generally they are more zealous for promoting their own party and private opinions than holiness and righteousness without which we cannot be saved let the Church we are of be never so true and our opinions never so sound and orthodox But in this respect I do verily think there is no Church in the world more guilty than the Church of Rome nor any that less deserves to be stiled an Holy Church For proof of this I intend not to insist on that general loosness and impiety which abounds in Popish Countries and no where perhaps more than in Italy and Rome it self the Seat of his Holiness as they stile the Pope and yet a very sink of all sensuality and profaneness But that which I would have you chiefly to consider is this that several of those Doctrines of their Church which are properly stiled Popish and in which they differ from us do manifestly tend to the prejudice and hindrance of an holy life and do rather serve for an encouragement to sin and wickedness As for instance whilst they abuse the people with idle stories of Purgatory where they may make satisfaction for their sins and where they shall sometimes find much ease and at last be delivered out by the prayers that are said for them by Priests after their death to whom good store of money must be left for that end How does this tend to harden men in their sins and to prevent their timely reformation whilst the hope of a Purgatory takes off the fear of Hell Thus also they teach that Attrition that is being sorry for their sins for fear of punishment will procure their pardon if they make confession and are absolved by a Priest And at most easie rates do they grant Absolutions and Indulgences which must needs make men much more careless of their lives more bold to venture upon wickedness for which they have a pardon so ready at hand But besides these and other hurtful opinions we may plainly discern that in the several branches of Religion their gross corruptions have done much to destroy all true piety and goodness For instance instead of a serious spiritual affectionate worship of God which might help to conform the souls of men to the holiness of that God whom they worship they have invented a world of useless ridiculous Ceremonies which turn it into a kind of bodily exercise that little profits the soul. They have publick prayers in an unknown Tongue where it s enough for the people to be present though they scarce understand a word and what benefit can this afford to their minds Here also contrary to Gods express command they have brought in the worship of Images the Invocation of Saints and Angels especially of the Blessed Virgin as also the adoration of the Host that is of the consecrated Bread in their Mass all which are horrid impieties And even a great part of their private Devotions consists in saying over their Pater Nosters and Ave Maries so many times by rote of which they keep count by a sett of Beads And is this a due worship of God in spirit and truth with affection and reverence such as our Blessed Saviour enjoyns and as the very nature of God requires from all reasonable creatures Moreover as
Prayers and Sacraments are framed and ordered according to the rules of it and all most evidently tend to the producing of that holiness which the Gospel most strictly requires being a Doctrine according to godliness as the Apostle stiles it And through Gods blessing on his own Ordinances and the endeavours of his faithful Ministers there are great numbers amongst us who do live truly religious Christian holy lives as many I am apt to think as are to be found in any Christian Church throughout the world of the same largeness with ours As to the wickedness of others which we justly lament as good men in all ages have sadly lamented the same this is the fault of particular persons and not to be charged upon the Church which owns no Doctrines that promote wickedness much less does she require of her members the embracing and professing of any such false and mischievous Doctrines nor does she impose upon them any thing which God has forbidden nor restrain them from any duty which he has commanded This therefore may sufficiently shew the Holiness of our Church to be such as that we may lawfully hold communion with it yea and are bound so to do since there is nothing sinful required of us in order thereto but here we may be as pious and holy as in any Church whatever and I think have as great helps and encouragements thereto L. My Author grants that there are some in our Church who appear modest and charitable and so there are among the Heathens but he says its all but outward appearance since we have no true Religion as he pretends and therefore can have no true virtue T. How utterly groundless and unjust is this charge whilst as hath been said before we do most firmly believe in Jesus Christ the Son of God and from this our belief in him and his holy Gospel do our works proceed and out of true love to God and to our brother Judg then whether they who have that faith in Christ which works by love are to be reckoned amongst Heathens and Infidels Or rather are not they destitute both of Christian charity and common modesty and ingenuity who talk at this absurd and most malicious rate L. Indeed I see not how they can excuse themselves herein but yet I hear them boasting often what numbers of Saints and Martyrs they have had in their Church both in former and latter ages and will allow no Saints in any other Church but theirs T. As to Saints of latter ages they keep up the names and tell fine stories of some of whom its much doubted whether they ever had a being in the world But which is far worse there are some whom they cry up for Saints and Martyrs who died as Rebels and Traytors against their Prince in a blind furious zeal for their great Master the Pope Such was their Thomas à Becket formerly and Garnet lately with others of the like stamp But as to the true Saints of former ages though some of them might live in the same places in which they of the Romish Church now do yet are they not to be accounted members of that Church according to its present constitution since they were utter strangers to those falshoods and superstitions which are now establish'd amongst them only they embraced that same pure plain Christian Religion which is at this day profest with us and are therefore rather to be reckoned of our Church than theirs L. This is plain enough but what say you to the great numbers of Religious people still amongst them viz. those of their several Orders in their Monasteries and Nunneries that live single lives being retired from the world that they may wholly give up themselves to Gods service for they talk much of these when they boast of the holiness of their Church T. For my part I hope there are some amongst them who deserve the name of Religious and where there is one truly so I wish there were an hundred Yea I would to God that both with them and all other Churches every man who is called a Christian may walk worthy of his holy profession I have no desire to make any party of men worse than indeed they are nor any delight in representing how bad they be or are commonly censured at least And therefore I shall say nothing of all that filthiness and lewdness which in former times their Monks and Nuns have been severely accused of by some of their own Church for I care not for raking in such a channel Nor shall I take notice how much they are degenerated from the first institution of a Monastick life in which men were wont to be very diligent and industrious in some honest and useful employment But yet that you may not be abused by fair shows and specious pretences I would not have you think that men and women are ever the more holy and religious for leaving their families and callings and shutting up themselves in Cloisters there to repeat over so many Creeds and Pater-Nosters in a day For there is no encouragement given in the Gospel for our entring into such a lazy retired course of life Nor is it at all like to the life of our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles neither do they hereby bring that honour to God nor that good to the world which by a more free and active life they might do So that I doubt not but that in thousands of pious well ordered families there is more true devotion yea more purity and chastity than in most of these their Religious Houses as they call them But beside all this there is one thing I would have you seriously to consider that though I grant there may be and I hope are some Papists truly religious whether in their Cloisters or out of them yet it is not as they are Papists but as they are Christians of the same faith with us who are reformed from their errors So that whatever holiness is amongst them it makes nothing for the honour of Popery that is of those Doctrines wherein they differ from us but of Christianity in its purity and simplicity as it is profest amongst us To speak yet plainer if need be any of them that are truly good become so through the grace of God by their firm and effectual belief of the Christian Religion viz. that Jesus Christ is the Son of God that he died for our sins and rose again for our justification that he will come to judge the quick and the dead and will sentence the wicked to everlasting punishment and receive the righteous to life eternal Such as these are the great truths of our Religion which being heartily believed and seriously considered do by Gods blessing thoroughly change mens hearts and lives and make them truly pious and good But no body becomes so by his believing that the Bishop of Rome is Christs Vicar and has power over all the Princes on earth that their Church is
infallible and the Mistress of all other Churches that there is a Purgatory with the rest of those Doctrines which they embrace and we reject Nay these opinions with their consequences rather tend to make men much worse than otherwise they would have been Some of them make them more loose and careless in the leading of their lives and some make them most cruel and uncharitable to such as differ from them yea render them many times disobedient to their rulers and furious disturbers of the peace by Plots and Treasons and Rebellions for the advancing of their cause True Christianity puts men upon no such courses but these are the natural effects of Popery as has often been verified by sad experience L. I understand you well and am fully perswaded that we in our Church do embrace all those Christian Doctrines that tend to the promoting of good life and do retain none that are an hindrance to it But what say you to their objections against Calvin and Luther who as my Author says were very wicked men and strange stories he tells of them out of Bolsec and other Writers of their Church T. To this I answer that it sufficiently appears how bad their cause is which must be maintain'd by the most odious lies and forgeries For there are no Books in the world less to be credited than those which their Monks and Priests have written in praise of those they have Canonized for Saints and in dispraise of such as they have damned for Hereticks making the former somewhat more than Angels and the latter worse than Devils But as to Calvin and Luther some of the more ingenuous even of their own Church have given a fairer character of them than their lying Bolsec and such Authors And had they but been as zealous for Popery as they were against it no doubt but they had past amongst them for great Saints with all their faults But in the mean time were they really as bad as they falsely accuse them to be yet are we little or nothing concerned herein since they were not the Reformers of our Church Nor yet if they had is it the goodness of this or that person which we are obliged to defend but the truth of our Doctrine and the lawfulness and necessity of our Reformation Thus they make a great out-cry against Henry the Eighth what a bad man he was and what ill designs he had in throwing off the Popes Supremacy which was the most he did toward the Reformation but let his designs be what they would the thing it self was justifiable and good VVhat if a bad Emperor upon carnal designs should have supprest Heathenism and promoted Christianity as Constantine himself was accused by some is this any dishonour to the Christian Religion But little cause have Papists of all men to talk of ill instruments whilst they may remember from what a Trayterous Murderer and Usurper the Pope first received the title of Universal Bishop for which he had been long quarrelling with the Bishop of Constantinople And however they slander Calvin and Luther we might with much more reason and truth object what kind of creatures multitudes of their Popes have been whom they own as Heads of their Church even such monsters of men for all manner of impiety filthiness and cruelty as the world hath scarce ever heard of the like And this we have from those of their own Church who have written their Lives and their greatest Champions such as Bellarmine and Baronius cannot deny it L. But it s further objected against Calvin and Luther and the first Reformers that they never wrought miracles to shew they had a commission from God T. Our first Reformers never pretended to bring in any new Religion only they cast out Popish Innovations which had corrupted and defaced it and for this they needed no extraordinary commission from heaven nor any miracles to warrant the same For they preached no other but the same old Religion which was taught by Christ and his Apostles and was abundantly confirmed by the miracles which they wrought long ago And with us the Reformation was begun and carried on in a just and regular manner by our Rulers in Church and State who had full authority to make the same even as the Kings and High-Priests of old had to reform any abuses and corruptions which at any time were crept into the Iewish Church And as these needed no new commission from Heaven no new miracles to authorize them to rectifie disorders and reform the Church according to the rules of Moses's Law no more did our Reformers need them for the removing of those errors and superstitions which had by degrees been brought in contrary to our Saviours Gospel L. I see no reason indeed why miracles should be expected from them who only cast out new inventions and keep fast to the old Christian Religion which hath already been confirmed by so many and great miracles But yet my Author says that in their Church they have had miracles wrought in all ages such as curing the blind and deaf raising the dead and casting out of Devils which he accounts to make mightily for the honour of their Saints and of the Church to which they belong T. In the Primitive times indeed such miracles were wrought for proving of the Christian Doctrine that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and all that he taught most certainly true and this Doctrine so confirmed is the Religion which we at this day do openly profess in our Church But then I utterly deny that ever such miracles were wrought to prove the truth of Popish Doctrins properly so called as of Transubstantiation Pargatory Invocation of Saints c. for these were never taught by Christ or his Apostles and therefore could not receive confirmation from the miracles of their working As to any that are pretended to be done in the Church of Rome for the attesting of these they are meer cheats and forgeries or lying wonders agreeable to the nature of those false Doctrines which they are designed to confirm And though your Author talks of healing the sick raising the dead c. I can hear of no such thing done by any of them amongst us whatever they may pretend to in Popish Countries where it s an easie matter for cunning Priests to impose upon credulous people But were indeed any such miracles wrought for the proof of Popish Doctrines one would think they should be done amongst those they call Hereticks who stand in need of such arguments for their conviction rather than amongst their own people who need them not Great Stories they often tell of their casting out of Devils and for this knack are their Priests mightily magnified by their deluded followers and prefer'd before the Ministers of our Church who pretend to no such matter But that this is a gross cheat seems plain enough from hence that what their Priests pretend to in this kind for all that ever I could
Romish Church But for the Papist the happy man that has had the good luck to hit into this true Church they have so many tricks and quirks to secure him in his life at his death and after it that let his faults be what they will it s very strange if he miss of Heaven at least after he has taken Purgatory in his way if he was very poor for rich men may easily escape that too or get soon out of it if they 'l follow the Priests directions Such fine devices they have to give men a lift to Heaven without putting them to the trouble of walking in that narrow way of serious holiness which alone leads thither So that I cannot but say and without any prejudice or partiality I speak it notwithstanding all that noise and talk of holiness in the Church of Rome nothing but Holy Mother Church Holy Father the Pope Holy Altars Holy Images Holy Water Holy Crosses Beads Agnus Dei's Reliques and a thousand holy trinkets more yet I think there is as little true holiness of life and conversation to be found amongst them as in any Church of the world Yea we shall often find that when those of that way are told of the holy Lives of many Protestants or are themselves exhorted to strictness and piety of life as that wherein true Religion chiefly consists they will be ready presently to make a puff at it as if this was of no value in comparison of being of the true Church of the infallible Catholick Church as they fondly call their own Sect as if being in a good Church would secure a bad man when we are so plainly taught that without holiness no man shall see God let him be of what Church he will Wherefore to conclude this remember that since in the Church of England the holy Gospel is most purely taught and the holy Sacraments duly administred according to our Saviours own institution and the members of it are neither required to profess any falshood or practise any evil in order to their communion with it but on the contrary are most strictly enjoyned to be holy in all their conversation and do here enjoy all manner of helps and advantages thereto therefore I say this is such an Holy Church as that you may and ought to hold communion with it Proceed we now to the following Marks of the true Church CHAP. III. Of the third mark of the true Church that it's Catholick L. THE next mark he lays down of the true Church is that its Catholick And here they make great boasting and triumphing for they say none else call themselves Catholicks but they nor as they pretend have any reason so to do since they tell of vast numbers belonging to their Church in all places of the world far and near and how they convert Heathens whilst Protestants they say are but a little handful here and there in corners amongst a multitude of Catholicks T. As to what they call themselves it matters little for be sure they 'l give themselves good words Neither is it true that none but they lay claim to that name for we of this Church do esteem our selves true Catholick Christians as professing the ancient Catholick faith of Christ and so do frequently stile both our selves and our Doctrine and with good reason as I doubt not to demonstrate As to their great numbers compared to other Christians suppose what they alledge were true as it is most false yet is this no sufficient argument of their being true Catholicks for that 's to be judged by the truth of their Doctrines and not by the number of Professors For if we should at this rate go to the Poll and judg of truth by most votes then might the Mahometans carry it from Christians And heretofore the number of the Arrians was said to be greater than of the Orthodox But that 's to be accounted a true part of the Catholick Church which professes the Catholick faith even the same Christian Religion which all good Christians in all ages former as well as latter and of all Nations have ever constantly profest And by this rule you will find that the Church of England is a most true and sound part of the Catholick Church as professing this same Christian faith contain'd in the Gospel and summ'd up in the Apostles Creed Here you may remember what I have before told you that it is most vain and unreasonable for any one particular Church to stile her self the whole Catholick Church as if there were no Christians in the world but themselves And yet in this sense doth the Church of Rome stile her self Catholick the absurdity of which I have before shewed And there needs nothing more to manifest it than this single consideration that there are thousands and millions of Christians in several parts of the world who neither now do nor ever did own the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome which is the great fundamental article of their faith to pass by all others at present and yet all these whilst they embrace the whole Christian Doctrine taught in the holy Scriptures are to be lookt on as true Catholick Christians though they do not believe the Bishop of Rome to be Christs Vicar upon earth invested with Supremacy over all Christian Churches for this is a Doctrine which our Saviour never taught his Disciples Now without owning this false Doctrine a man cannot be of the Church of Rome according to the Decrees of their Popes and Councils and yet without this I say a man may receive the whole Christian Religion as it was delivered by Christ and his Apostles and therefore he may be a true Catholick Christian though he be not of the Romish Church nor yields subjection to it L. This seems to me very plain and clear T. But it will appear yet more plain if you consider what is a most certain truth that there can be no manner of good evidence given that the Church of Christ for some hundred years after our blessed Saviours time did ever receive this Doctrine of the Popes Supremacy or his Infallibility Nay our learned men assert that there is not so much as any one Christian Writer for at least three hundred years after that time some say four or five that did ever so much as teach any such strange Doctrine as this How then I beseech you can the owning of it now be necessary to make a man a Catholick when the whole Catholick Church for some ages after its first Plantation was a meer stranger to it L. I think there is no appearance of reason for it T. To this add that the whole Greek which was much larger than the Romish before it was over-run by the Turks ever disown'd these same new opinions of the Popes Supremacy and Infallibility with many others of the same stamp neither do they generally embrace them to this day though sometimes the Romanists have used all manner of arts and devices
their case seems most pitiable who through the disadvantage of their education want due means of instruction and what allowances our gracious God will make on that and the like accounts is fittest for us to leave to his own infinite wisdom Only let us be careful to regulate our own practices by the plain rule of Gods holy Word which through his favour we so plentifully enjoy L. What you say shall teach me more charity to those of them that are sincere than they will allow to us But I do still more and more perceive how little reason there is for my entring into communion with that Church in which there is so great hazard of Salvation even no more than for my venturing into a Pest-house full of infected persons because it 's possible some of them may have so much strength of nature as to overcome that dangerous distemper T. The case is much the same CHAP. V. Of some particular points in difference betwixt us and the Church of Rome and first of the Popes Supremacy L. HAving now received so full satisfaction in this first great point concerning the true Catholick Church what it is and who are the members of it and being upon good grounds firmly perswaded that the Church of England is a very sound part of this Catholick Church in whose communion therefore by Gods grace I hope to live and die I would in the next place gladly hear you discourse of some of those particular points wherein chiefly the difference lyes betwixt us and the Church of Rome For they alledg many plansible reasons and sometimes quote Scripture for those opinions of theirs which we reject as Popery and therefore I would gladly be furnisht with solid and good answers to these their Allegations T. Most readily shall I afford you my assistance herein Only let me premise that suppose in this or that particular opinion you should fancy their Church had the truth on her side yea though it really was so yet is this no sufficient reason why you should go over to their communion since from what has been said you may discern that their Church has no manner of jurisdiction over ours which we shall presently make more plain and you cannot lawfully desert your own Church meerly because you apprehend there is some error commonly received in it whilst you have liberty to hold communion with it without owning and professing that error And though for my own part I declare I do not know so much as any one material point of difference wherein the Church of Rome has the truth on her side yet this I speak with respect to those who in some particular cases may be of another mind and afterward may have occasion to make use of it accordingly But now proceed to those several points wherein you desire satisfaction L. I will so and shall herein follow the method in which I find them laid down in this little Book to which I have hitherto had recourse And the first thing here mention'd is concerning one Pope in the Church viz. the Bishop of Rome who is they say to be own'd as the visible Head and Governour of the whole Church under Christ. T. This is indeed the most fundamental point of the Romish faith by which chiefly they stand distinguisht from all other Churches and as such I have often upon occasion mention'd it already and have told you that there is not a word of it in the Apostles Creed which is the summ of the Christian Faith nor yet in the Holy Scriptures whence that Creed was taken which may be sufficient prejudice against it but pray what do they alledg in proof of it L. Both this my Author and others commonly plead that as there is one Emperour in an Empire one King in a Kingdom one Master in a family so there should be one Pope in the Church T. I think they should rather infer the quite contrary that as there is a Master in every Family a King in every Kingdom c. so in every Diocess there should be a Bishop and in every Nation a Primate or chief Bishop or else a Synod of Bishops from whom there should lye no appeal to any foreign Bishop whatsoever It would indeed have look'd a little more like an argument for their purpose if they could have said that as there is one Emperor over all the Kings and Kingdoms of the world so there ought to be one Pope over all Bishops and Churches But as it appears impossible for one man to govern the whole world so neither is it much easier for one Bishop to govern all the Christians in the world especially if all Nations should embrace Christianity as every good man desires they should But to let pass their little similies and idle fancies do you think if it had been a matter of such necessity to salvation as Papists say it is to own the Pope as Christs Vicar and visible Head of the Catholick Church do you think I say that our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles would not have told us of it and have given strict command to all Christians to obey him and to seek to his Infallible judgment in all doubts and controversies and submit to his authority for the composing of all differences whereas we now find not one syllable to this purpose either in the Gospel or Epistles but Christians are exhorted to obey their own Rulers both Sacred and Civil and to take the Doctrine delivered by our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles as the Infallible Rule of their faith and manners and no other Head of the Church do we read of but our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to whom all power is given in Heaven and Earth as he himself tells us Matt. 28. 18. But he no where tells us that he hath transfer'd all this power to any mortal man nor setled any person as his Vicar and Deputy-Governour of all the Christian world L. Yes they say Christ gave this priviledg to Saint Peter stiling him the Rock on which he would build his Church and giving him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Matt. 16 18 19. and from Saint Peter they would have this power to be derived to his Successors the Bishops of Rome T. This is the Text which they commonly bring for their purpose but with how little reason may appear at the very first sight whilst neither is here confer'd upon St. Peter any such power as to be Ruler over all the Christian Church nor the least mention made of any priviledge whatever to be convey'd from him to his Successors at Rome or any other where As to the Rock here spoken of many of the Ancients understand by it the Doctrine which St. Peter had now profest that great fundamental article of the Christian Faith that Iesus was the Christ the Son of the living God But let us suppose it to be meant of his person as he was to be a Preacher of this Doctrine yet
in other cases T. Good reason you have to be so wary since the boast they make of antiquity being on their side is notoriously vain and false and in nothing more palpably than in the present case about the Popes Universal Supremacy For in none of the ancient Councils is any such priviledge given him any more than in holy Scripture which Councils our Church most readily embraces especially the four first Yea the direct contrary is decreed in the very first and most famous General Council that of Nice For therein it was determined as to the Jurisdiction of Bishops that ancient customs should be retain'd and that such eminent Bishops as of Alexandria and Antioch should have the same priviledges in their Precincts that the Bishop of Rome had in his By which decree they within their several limits were made as absolute as he and were not in the least subject to his power nor responsible to him for their proceedings And not to trouble you with many instances in the next age after this there was a great Council in Carthage where St. Austin himself was present in which it was expresly decreed that there should be no appeals to any foreign Bishop after matters had been determined amongst themselves This indeed gave offence to the Pope that then was who pretended that this power of receiving appeals was granted him by the Council of Nice To which the African Bishops answered they had never heard any such matter but would send purposely to Nice it self or some other neighboring Bishops to make enquiry they did so and found all to be meer fraud and forgery Such wicked arts did they of Rome use from the beginning for the justifying and promoting their proud Usurpations Something of a precedency we grant there was very anciently allow'd to the Bishop of Rome which had nothing in it of jurisdiction and power over the rest of his brethren but only was an honour granted him chiefly on account of Rome's being the Seat of the Emperour Hereupon he had many advantages above other Bishops and was capable of doing them good Offices at Court and on that account frequent application was made to him by such as needed his assistance and very often in point of meer prudence matters were brought to him from other Churches and referred to his arbitration Hither also many of the Eastern Bishops were forced to fly for refuge and succour when opprest by the Arrians By these and such like means especially by the Emperour's removal more and more into the East the Bishop of Rome strangely encreased in honour and power and at length in pride and insolence So that in succeeding times as a secular spirit of ambition and covetousness began to infect the greatest Churchmen there were most vehement contests betwixt the Bishops of Rome and of Constantinople for the preheminence For in one General Council it had been determined that because the Emperour had his residence at Constantinople the Bishop of that City should have the same priviledges which the Bishop of Rome had formerly enjoy'd for the same reason And one of the Bishops of Constantinople at length took upon him to stile himself Universal Bishop thereby say learned men claiming rather honour than any jurisdiction over his brethren Yet Gregory then Bishop of Rome was so incensed at it that he positively declared that whoever should assume such a proud title was a certain forerunner of Antichrist This was about six hundred years after our Saviour And not long after it Boniface the third Bishop of Rome by means of the wicked Phocas who had murdered his Master Mauricius and was chosen Emperour in his stead got his Church to be stiled the Supreme of all other Churches though with much ado as their own Historian expresses it But this Supremacy the body of the Greek Church utterly refused to acknowledg and so does to this day though they of Rome have several times used all manner of arts and tricks to draw them into a compliance still persisting in the same methods of fraud and violence for the confirming and securing their arrogant usurpations which at first they made use of to introduce them L. But they say it 's necessary to the unity of the Church that there should be one Supreme Head and Governour T. Very true and so I have told you there is namely the Lord Jesus Christ the only Head of the Catholick Church the Unity whereof consists in the subjection of the members to this same Head by their belief of the same Doctrine and obedience to the same holy Laws and by living in mutual love and charity and Christian communion one with another And herein most plainly doth the Apostle place the unity of the Christian Church Ephes. 4. that they have one Lord one Faith c. but not in their having one chief Ruler under Christ here on Earth whether Pope or Council only they are bound to live in obedience to their own Princes and Bishops in the respective Dominions and Churches where they reside L. They say that Christ alone is the invisible Head but the Pope is the visible Head of the Church T. This is a distinction we no where meet with in holy Scripture and therefore do justly reject it as the fond imagination of their own brain coin'd only to serve a turn But instead of detaining you with any further discourse on this subject I shall refer you to the Learned Dr. Barrow's excellent Treatise which handles it at large if you have leisure to peruse it wherein this pretence of the Popes Supremacy is so shamefully exposed and so fully confuted as cannot but give abundant satisfaction to any intelligent and impartial Reader And this is done with such strength of reason and such full proof from all antiquity that I am apt to think there will scarce be found any of the Champions for the Romish cause as bold men as they be so hardy and impudent as to attempt the returning any answer to that his most solid and impregnable Discourse L. Yet it 's wonder if they do not for they seem most zealous in contending for this above all other Doctrines T. And will you blame them since if this be disown'd the whole fabrick of Popery falls to the ground For if the Pope be not Head of the Church then all Princes in their own Dominions will be found to be Supreme Moderators and Governours in all causes and over all persons as well Ecclesiastical as Civil which is our meaning when we stile the King Head of our Church and then what reformation they with their Clergy have made according to the Holy Scriptures will appear justifiable Yea then these Princes may confer all manner of Church-preferments in their own Kingdoms without asking the Popes leave or expecting his confirmation and all Ecclesiastical causes may be determined without any appeals to Rome And if the King of England may do this in his Dominions as most certainly he may then
they may be eased there or released thence by the Masses that are said for them or by the alms that were either left by themselves or are given by their friends on their behalf L. But he attempts to prove both a Purgatory and praying for the Dead from 2 Mac. 12. where it 's said to be an holy and healthful cogitation to pray for the Dead that they may be freed from their sins that is says he from venial sins for of mortal no pardon can hereafter be obtain'd T. To let pass his distinction of venial and mortal sins is he not think you reduced to miserable straits when he is forced to run to the Apocrypha for a Text to a Book which was never own'd for Canonical by the Iewish Church no nor by the Christian Church in St. Ierome's time which was about four hundred years after our Saviour Neither yet will this Text serve their turn for if you look into the place you will find that when Iudas went to bury those that were slain he found under their coats things consecrated to Idols whereupon both he and the rest that were with him betook themselves to earnest prayer for the pardon of this great sin which prayer might respect the living rather than the dead that God would not punish the rest of the people for this their crime And for the very same reason might he send money to Ierusalem to offer a sin-offering as is after related And though another gloss is put upon it in the History as if all this were done for the dead yet may this be the Historians own opinion or perhaps rather his that abridged the History for Chap. 2. 23. he tells you that he abridged five Books of Iason and at the end begs pardon for what he may have done amiss which is not like the stile of an inspired Writer But what if Iudas's design was indeed such as the Historian relates Is his example a sufficient warrant for us when we have no rule for it in the Word of God Nay nor yet after all will this Text justifie their Doctrine of Purgatory since here 's nothing said of any pains they were in at present only he might hope to procure mercy for them at the Resurrection L. But pray was not this sin of Idolatry a mortal one for which according to their own Doctrine sinners go to Hell and not to Purgatory therefore by their principles this practice of Judas cannot be allow'd T. Very true but for this Bellarmine has a shift at hand that Iudas in charity hoped they might repent just when they were at the point of death and therefore in that hope offered those Sacrifices But I wonder how he came to know Judas's thoughts so well and 't is hard to imagine what time they should have for repentance who were slain in the battel Has your Author no better proof out of Scripture for his opinion than this comes to L. He names no more Texts but these T. And truly he might as well have named none at all Others do insist on some other places but to as little purpose which I shall not now take notice of since I suppose he took these for the strongest and you see what little strength there is in them L. I hear them speak much of the custom of the ancients in praying for the dead T. But herein they are guilty of great sophistry and foul dealing for the prayers anciently used were nothing like those that are now in the Romish Church nor do they in the least prove the ancient Christians belief of a Purgatory For they in their prayers made a commenmoration of the most eminently pious and holy persons even of Prophets Apostles and Martyrs as an honour to their memory blessing and praising God for them in some sort as we do in our Church at the end of the Prayer for the Church militant where we bless God for all his Saints and servants departed this life in his faith and fear c. Besides this they prayed for their joyful Resurrection and the consummation of their happiness which was in effect no more than to pray for the coming of Christ when all believers shall be advanced to the height of glory And not unlike this is an expression in our Liturgy in the Office for Burial where we pray That God would accomplish the number of his Elect and hasten his Kingdom that we with all those who are departed in the true faith of his holy name may have our perfect consummation and bliss both in body and soul in his eternal glory And yet it 's well known how far our Church is from acknowledging a Purgatory neither therefore from any such expressions used in their prayers can it rationally be concluded that the Church anciently own'd this opinion Of this you may find a full account in A. B. Usher's answer to the Jesuits Challenge But if among some of the Ancients there may be found expressions that go somewhat farther than what I have named yet for many ages there was nothing like to the present practice of the Church of Rome Neither doth it beseem us in such cases to be governed by any other authority than what is Divine Now we certainly know there is not one place of Scripture either in the Old Testament or the New where we have any command given us to offer up prayers for the dead nor any promise made that if we do so it shall any thing avail or help them Our Lord has taught us nothing of this in his most comprehensive form Nor do we find one example of it recorded in all the Bible How dare we then in so weighty a matter make such addresses to God when we have no manner of encouragement or allowance so to do wherefore for this very reason amongst others a man cannot lawfully joyn with the Romish Church in her prayers L. Since there is nothing from Scripture or the best antiquity to justifie this practice what is it that Papists most relye upon in this case T. Even upon pretended revelations and a company of ridiculous Monkish stories of Souls appearing after their decease begging help from their friends that they might be delivered out of the pains of Purgatory But whatever tales they tell in their fabulous Legends we that read the holy Scriptures can find nothing there of any such place or pains The wicked go into ever lasting punishment and the righteous into life eternal but not a word said of a Purgatory for either of these or of a middle state for some middle sort of men that are neither to be ranked amongst the wicked nor the righteous L. But is there not a middle state for souls commonly acknowledged by Protestant Divines T. This much I think they generally acknowledg that the souls of good men being separate from the body are not suddenly advanced to the utmost height of happiness nor will be till the Resurrection and great Judgment-day neither it 's
read them so do we as plainly see that after Consecration the Bread and Wine still remain in their natural substances and therefore are made the Body and Blood of Christ in a spiritual and mystical sense according to the most common acceptance of such Phrases that relate to Sacraments as was before shewn L. You need add nothing more to clear this matter nor can I imagine what reply they can make except they shall say that we must not in this case trust our senses but exercise of our Faith T. This indeed they do say but with no manner of reason For though God requires the Exercise of our Faith in Believing what he hath revealed though our senses cannot reach to or discern it yet we never read in the whole Book of Scripture that ever he requires men to believe any thing directly contrary to the evidence of their Senses to believe it was dark as midnight when they saw the Sun shining at Noon-day to believe the same Man to lye dead in his Grave whom they saw alive walking before them For at this rate all our Saviours Miracles had been wrought in vain if men must not believe their own eyes as we use to say For we must consider that Almighty God hath so framed our Nature that we are to be directed and guided by our Senses in those matters that properly belong to them Nor can we I think in this present state have more clear and full assurance of any thing than what our Senses when sound and perfect convey to us And therefore I have said our Saviour took this way to give assurance of the truth of his Gospel and of his Resurrection by that satisfaction he gave to the very Senses of Men. Thus St. Iohn when he would give the clearest and fullest evidence of the truth of Christian Doctrine he tells us That which we have heard which we have seen with our eyes which our hands have handled declare we unto you 1 Joh. 1. 1 2 3. Now all this may assure us that those words This is my body are not to be taken in such a sense as would engage us to the belief of Transubstantiation Nay the Word of God it self assures us that they are not since in this Word as I have shewn from many places the Holy Bread in the Sacrament is called Bread after Consecration and therefore are we so to believe it and are to look upon it as his Body Spiritually and Sacramentally and so neither one Text contradicts another nor will our Faith contradict our Senses L. This is easie and intelligible and neither offers violence to the Word of God nor to the Reason of our own Minds T. Yet further let me add if the Senses of all Men throughout the whole world are thus deceived as they must be if Transubstantiation be true then is all certainty of any thing whatever in a manner utterly destroyed How can I tell that I tread upon the Earth that I see the Heavens over my head or the Sun shining in the Firmament In these and all other things which I think that I see or hear my Senses may be imposed upon as well as in the present Case And how then can I be sure that any Revelation was ever made from God to Man Or how could any Man be sure of it though a Voice came to him from Heaven or a Vision appeared to him All this may be but idle fancy and delusion his Hearing and his Sight are not to be trusted Yea let this opinion be admitted and how can we be certain of the truth of that which God hath in his Word revealed For if he deceive me one way why not another The same Holy and True God who hath revealed his Will in Holy Scriptures hath also made another sort of Revelation in the works of Nature He hath given me Senses of Seeing Hearing c. and hath proposed Objects agreeable thereto Now if I believe him to be so Holy and Good that he will not deceive me in his Word why may I not from the same Goodness argue that he will not deceive me in his Works But if he should do it in the latter why may he not in the former also L. They may say this is a particular Case and therefore though our Senses may herein be mistaken yet we have no reason to suspect them at other times T. A particular Case it is indeed and such as nothing like it can be instanced in nor yet any good reason assigned why our Senses may not at any other time be deceived as well as in this matter But strangest of all it is that we have no warning given us in Scripture not to trust our Senses in this particular Case though in all others we may Nor do we find any thing said to take off the prejudice that might arise in mens minds against so strange a Doctrine We hear of no Objections made of old against it by the Enemies of Christianity nor of any Answers given to silence or prevent such Objections Nay on the contrary as I have said when the Capernaites mistook our Saviour's meaning he let them know that his Discourse was to be understood in a spiritual sense Ioh. 6. 63. Thus certainly the Apostles understood it as also those Words This is my body else surely we should have heard of their doubts and objections at least they would have made some further enquiry about the sense and meaning of them Else how comes it to pass that we never find the least mention of this same Doctrine in any of the Apostles Sermons or in the Epistles written to any of the Churches Nay though there was so fair an occasion offered to St. Paul when he discourses about the Lords-Supper 1 Cor. 11. where he tells them that what he had received of the Lord he delivered to them but he is there so far from explaining or asserting the Doctrine of Transubstantiation that he teaches the direct contrary in calling it Bread over and over after Consecration L. Yet I have heard some arguing for it from those words of his that he who eats and drinks unworthily is guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ Vers. 27. Now say they how could this be so hainous a sin if the natural Body and Blood of Christ were not present in the Sacrament T. For that let the Apostles own words decide it for he there tells us that he who eats this Bread and drinks this Cup unworthily is thus guilty So that it is Bread which is eaten and consequently Wine which is drunk by the Receiver But to do this unworthily and irreverently rushing upon it as a common meal not duly considering the great importance and design of this Holy Sacrament as it is a commemoration of Christ's death and a Spiritual Feast upon his Body and Blood this must needs be an hainous Sin being an affront to Christ himself and a profanation of his Sacred Ordinance This is meant by
their not discerning the Lords body vers 29. And to receive these Holy Elements without reverence thankfulness and true devotion was to be guilty of dishonouring the Body and Blood of Christ which were here represented and exhibited to Believers But all this while we have no reason hence to fancy that the natural substance of Christ's Body and Blood are present in the Sacrament Had the Apostle thought of any such thing surely he would have exprest himself in another manner and have said somewhat to explain so Mysterious a Doctrine And had he and his Brethren taught the same as the Church of Rome now does surely the unbelieving Iews or Gentiles would have poured forth their Objections against it whereas we hear not a word of that nature neither in the Apostles Days or the next Ages after In all the Apologies that the first Christian Writers set forth in defence of our Religion we find nothing said in vindication of any such Opinion as this whilst they give large Answers to many other Objections for which there was nothing like so good a pretence Nor do we read of any controversy amongst Christians themselves about this matter for many Ages whereas in latter times since this Opinion was first broached there have been many Volumes written for and against it L. But they pretend that this was the Ancient Opinion of the Fathers and first Christians T. Pretend it they do but as in other points of Controversy betwixt them and us so here it is a very vain and false pretence For we read nothing of it in the old Creeds or the Canons of General Councils or in the genuine works of any Father for many hundred years after our Saviour L. Yet they alledge that the Fathers commonly stile the Holy Elements the Body and Blood of Christ and will frequently quote places to that purpose T. No doubt but they may easily do that though without any advantage to their Cause since its plain enough in what sense those expressions are to be understood from other places of the same Fathers For they themselves do sometimes tell us that Christ's Words of eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood are to be taken Spiritually that in the Communion there is a commemoration of his Death and a representation of his Body and Blood yea sometimes they expresly call the Bread and Wine the Figures thereof Now these and such like sayings cannot possibly be reconciled with the Popish opinion of Transubstantiation Therefore when they speak of Christ's Body and Blood in the Sacrament we may most reasonably understand them in the very same sense that I have told you our Church frequently uses the like expressions So do our Writers very commonly in their Books of devotion and in practical discourses on the Communion speak at the same rate whilst they intend nothing more but that these Holy Elements are made Christ's Body and Blood Mystically and Spiritually But how far this opinion of Transubstantiation is from being an Ancient Doctrine of the Christian Church hath been made sufficiently evident amongst many others by the Learned Bishop Cozens who in his History of it gives us an account about what time it was first publickly taught what opposition was then made to it by sundry Learned men of that Age and how long it was before it could be established by any Council even amongst Papists themselves or could obtain to be the general avowed Doctrine of their Church Nay to this very day their chief Writers are strangely divided in the accounts they give of it setting their Wits upon the rack to explain and defend it some this way and some that having so very little help from Holy Scripture in the Case as some of them are so ingenuous as to acknowledg L. Methinks its strange that they should with so much eagerness maintain and with so much violence impose a Doctrine which to me seems impossible to be understood or firmly believed T. Strange it is and very unreasonable but yet some account may be given of it for beside that natural pride which inclines men to defend the opinion which they have once espoused especially a Church which boasts of Infallibility besides this I say we may consider how mightily the admitting of this opinion makes for the Honour of the Priest who can thus with four words speaking work one of the most wonderful Miracles that ever was known in the World indeed such a one as can neither be seen felt nor understood But the people who can be perswaded to believe it must needs have a mighty veneration for the Priest that works it and be almost ready to make a god of him who can so easily make a god for them by turning the Bread into the very person of our Saviour his Divinity and Humanity whom therefore they worship and adore as God though after that they eat him L. This may seem indeed to make for the Honour of the Priest that he can work such wonders but surely it makes little for the honour either of Priest or people to be guilty of such false and absurd opinions and of such corrupt practices which are the natural consequence of them For are they not guilty of Idolatry in Worshipping the Bread as God though I know they say there is no Bread there after Consecration pray let me know your judgement because I find my Author endeavouring to vindicate their Church from this heavy censure T. I do not see how they can possibly excuse themselves from this charge if the Bread still remains Bread in its natural substance as we may most certainly conclude it does from what hath been alledged both from Scripture Reason and our Senses Wherefore whilst they worship that for God which is not God giving to the creature what is due alone to the Creator they may justly be reckoned guilty of Idolatry L. But will it not serve to excuse them that they worship that which they take to be God and therefore do design and direct their Worship to God and not to the Bread which they believe not to be there after Consecration though they see it before them T. What allowances it may please our good God to make for the ignorance and mistakes of honest well-meaning men I still say it doth not beseem us to determine But as to the thing it self for my own part I cannot see how this pretence will any more excuse a Papist from Idolatry than it would excuse an Heathen for his Worship of the Sun that he did verily believe the Sun to be God or that God did in some extraordinary manner dwell in the Sun the substance of it being turned into God whilst only the accidents of Light and Heat and the like do still remain Nay one would think the Heathen in some respect more excusable of the two since the Sun looks much liker a God than does a Wafer or bit of Bread But ' there is no great need of disputing against them in this
certainly it hath an apparent tendency to the ruine of precious Souls and is a mighty prejudice to Piety and Holiness of Life as hath formerly been cited For if men can once perswade themselves that after death there may be satisfaction made for the neglects and miscarriages of their Life what wonder if they are now careless and licentious And instead of working out their own salvation themselves with fear and trembling they will be apt to leave the trouble of that work to their Executors and to the Priests by their Masses and Prayers to do it for them But woe be to those miserable Souls who build their hopes on such ruinous foundations and woe be to those Teachers who betray them to ruine by such delusions thereby serving their own bellies rather than the Lord Iesus and the interest of Religion But let us be wise now in this our day to consider the things that belong to our peace before they be hid from our eyes Now by a speedy Repentance and thorow Reformation let us see to make our peace with God through Jesus Christ in this day of Grace and Patience but if we neglect this present season there remains hereafter no more Sacrifice for Sin but a certain fearful looking for of Divine vengeance which will be the portion of all wilfull neglecters and contemners of Grace and Mercy But let us go on with your Author CHAP. IX Of having Prayers in an unknown Tongue L. HE next goes about to vindicate their use of the Latine Tongue in the Mass and the rest of their Service T. And pray what can he alledge in vindication of their using this Language when the people understand it not L. Why first he says that the Priestly Garments and the ceremonies they use may serve to instruct them for he had before said how useful their ceremonies are for the exciting of devotion and then for further instruction they must go to Catechisms and Sermons T. They had need to be very ingenious people who can learn from Priests garments and dumb ceremonies what 's the meaning of Latin Prayers Nay their multitude of ceremonies are so far from instructing the ignorant people that rather they need much instruction to know the meaning of them And instead of exciting devotion they rather extinguish and suppress it by amusing their minds and pleasing their senses with a great deal of pomp and pageantry Whatever instructions their Priests may give at Catechisms and Sermons they are not like to make them understand prayers uttered in a strange language L. He further adds that simple ignorant people may easily be mistaken if these high mysteries were done in the vulgar tongue T. A wise method truly to keep people in ignorance for fear they should run into mistakes as if a man should blindfold a Travailer to prevent his missing the way But one would think they should here rather employ themselves in the Catechisms and Sermons they talk of to give the people due instruction for the preventing those mistakes they seem so much afraid of Though by the course they take with them in this and other instances it 's plain enough they are more afraid of the peoples getting too much knowledg And no wonder whilst its a common saying amongst them that Ignorance is the mother of Devotion and so truly it is of the devotion or rather the superstition of the Romish Church whereas the most clear and solid knowledg of the will and word of God is the mother of true Christian piety and devotion But has your Author no better reasons than these for this absurd practice L. Other reasons he has whether better or not do you judg He says it makes for the union of the Latin Church that Priests travailing into other Countries may say Mass where ever they come T. Very sollicitous they appear for the union of the Latin Church that is of their own party and in the mean time care little what divisions they make in the Christian Church for their own carnal ends But of mighty consequence is this project for union which your Author mentions For what need is there I beseech you that a Priest in a foreign Countrey should officiate there where they may have Priests of their own to do it And can there not be union enough betwixt foreign Churches and the Priests that belong to them in their profession of the same faith and owning the same worship except they speak the same language and use the very same words One would think they should rather consult for an union betwixt Priest and people that they might joyn together at the same time in the same prayers but this they regard not It 's enough it seems with them for the people to be spectators only even at publick prayers as well as at the Communion though they neither understand the one nor partake of the other For very usual it is with them for the Priests alone to take the Sacrament whilst the people stand by and look on a most corrupt custom and meer innovation contrary to the first institution and design of this holy Ordinance and to the practice of all antiquity And as that cannot properly be called a Communion where Priests and people do not communicate together so neither are those to be stiled common prayers in which they do not joyn in common Nor has your Author hitherto produced any thing like a reason for this custom of theirs L. And I doubt you 'l think his last argument as weak as any viz. that the holy Scriptures have been written in Latin Greek and Hebrew these three languages being written upon Christs Cross they are therefore called Sacred and it s permitted to these three Nations to use them at Mass. T. I confess I am utterly to seek for the force of this argument if it be fit to call it so whilst it argues just nothing to the purpose The holy Scriptures were written originally in Hebrew and Greek and have been translated not only into Latin but several other Languages for the benefit of those of several Nations who were converted to Christianity of which more hereafter and accordingly they had their worship also celebrated in the same languages which the people understood as our ancestors in this Kingdom had And this surely every mans own reason may tell him is most profitable and necessary in order to true devotion that they may understandingly and affectionately joyn with the Priest in the publick worship and service This you will find expresly delivered by the Apostle Paul himself in 1 Cor. 14. 16 c. where he disapproves the use of strange Tongues in the Church as not tending to edification for that he who understood them not could not say Amen to the Prayers or Praises uttered in those unknown Tongues As to those three Languages he mentions being written upon the Cross and therefore allow'd to be used in publick worship it is such an idle and insignificant fancy that
having of Idols that is of Idol-gods but not the worship of Images in honour of the true God T. At this rate they commonly talk but without any solid reason since the first Commandment forbids our having any false Gods or Idols but then the second Commandment most plainly forbids the making of Images for Religious worship yea though men should pretend that they thereby design to worship the true and living God for he is by no means pleased with such worship nor will accept of it but regards it as an affront and dishonour done to his Divine Majesty So that we may boldly say Had any Iew of old been found guilty of giving so much Religious worship to Images as the Papists generally do at this day though he should have made the very same pretences and excuses which they do yet would he have been judged guilty of that Idolatry which is forbidden in the second Commandment and accordingly would have been proceeded against by such Godly Rulers as were zealous for the true honour of God and the purity of his worship such as Hezekiah and others And to enlarge a little on this subject this as many learned men have shewn was plainly the case of the Israelites in their worship of the Golden Calf which Aaron made in Moses's absence Exod. 32. 4. For it 's very unreasonable to think that they took this Image it self for the God which brought them out of Egypt but rather they made it for a representation of him having probably learnt from the Idolatrous Egyptians to make Images of this fashion for Divine worship yea v. 5. it's expresly said they proclaim'd a Feast to the Lord designing therefore to worship the true God by this Image And of this nature was the Idolatry of Ieroboam who made Israel to sin of which we read 1 King 12. 28. for we find him not accused of drawing away the people from the worship of the true God but he set up the worship of Images contrary to Gods express command Now this was a different thing from the worship of Idol gods as of Baal and other Heathen Deities which we find some of the Kings of Israel accused of as Ahab particularly 1 King 16. 30 31 c. where it 's said of him That as if it had been a light thing to walk in the sins of Ieroboam he also went and served Baal and worshipped him Where you have plainly a distinction made betwixt the sin of Ieroboam and this of Ahab in serving Baal So we shall after find of Iehu who was employ'd to punish Ahab's house for this gross Idolatry and was himself so zealous against it that he slew a multitude of Baal's Priests broke down the Image and the house of Baal and thereupon is said to destroy Baal out of Israel yet was he notwithstanding all this guilty of continuing in Ieroboam's sin and went after the Golden Calves in Dan and Bethel as we read 2 King 10. 28 29. Now can it with any shew of reason be imagined that he should worship these Calves as Idol-gods in opposition to the true God who had himself at Gods command been so industrious for the rooting out that sort of Idolatry No surely but his crime was that he kept up an unlawful way of worshipping the true God by these Golden Calves which Ieroboam had set up contrary to the second Commandment which plainly forbids the giving of any Divine worship to Images And they who were guilty of this Image-worship were also accounted and called Idolaters as we find it asserted of the people that worshipped the Golden Calf which Aaron made 1 Cor. 10. 7. Neither be ye Idolaters as were some of them as it is written The people eat and drank and rose up to play which you find said of them at their Idolatrous Festival Exod. 32. 6. And their case seems the very same who were followers of Ieroboam So that it 's possible for men to be guilty of some sort of Idolatry even whilst they retain the worship of the true God and do not set up Idol-gods in opposition to him even by corrupting his worship with the use of Images which he has strictly forbidden Thus it sometimes was with the Iews of old and thus it seems to be at this day with the Papists And as such Image-worship was accounted Idolatry by the Prophets and holy men of old so it was by the Apostles and Primitive Christians who utterly abhorr'd the use of Images in the worship of God Yea to such miserable shifts are Learned men of the Church of Rome put for the vindicating of this practice that they are greatly divided amongst themselves and take several ways to do it each party charging the other with Idolatry in the way they take for some of them say that the Image is to be worship'd with the very same worship which is due to the object that it represents whether it be Latria Dulia c. according to the trifling distinction before mentioned for say they the Image and the object represented by it are as it were joyned together so that one and the same act of worship is given to both which passes through the Image to the object whereas to give any worship to the Image it self say these men would be Idolatry But others say there is an inferior sort of worship due to the Image it self on account of the relation it hath to the object which it represents and this only may be given to it but to give the same worship to the Image which belongs to the object they say is Idolatrous But I should soon puzzle and tire both you and my self should I go about to present you with all the fine and subtle distinctions which both parties use for their own vindication in this controversie talking of worship proper and improper direct and reductive real and relative by it self and by accident c. each accusing the other that they coin distinctions which themselves do not well understand and surely the same may justly be said of them all Much more may it be said of the common people who are this while in a very sad condition even in most evident danger of Idolatry and that in the judgment of these their own Learned men who are themselves intangled in such labyrinths and perplexities as they know not how to deliver themselves from L. Methinks it were much more safe and prudent for them all to follow the plain direction of Gods holy word not to worship or bow down to Images upon any pretence whatever T. This indeed is a safe course and the only way they can take to secure themselves and their people from falling into Idolatry through ignorance or mistake of which at least there is great danger by their own confession on all sides But so far are they from this that they endeavour to keep this second Commandment as much as they well can from the peoples knowledge both by their false glosses
need truly to have some variety to refresh them For sure they can neither have much delight nor much profit from a tedious repetition of the same words over and over at the same time especially whilst some of them understand not what they say and do also say some such things as would not much help their Devotion though they were understood L. He says there can be no better Prayers than the Pater-noster the Ave and the Creed T. As to the Ave and the Creed they are no Prayers at all the former being the Angels Salutation to the Blessed Virgin Luke 1. 28. and it is an absurd piece of superstition to turn it into a Prayer such as never any Christian was guilty of for many hundred years after that Salutation was first uttered The Creed contains a confession of our Faith and though the frequent repetition of it with serious reflections upon it may be of great use viz for the engaging of us to live according to our profession yet is it by no means a Prayer nor any thing like one The Pater-noster or the Lords-Prayer is indeed a most admirable form of Prayer which may not only serve as a pattern to direct us how to pray but is also most proper and fit to be frequently used as a Prayer and may very well be joyn'd with any other Prayers which we make to Almighty God But yet we must not think there is any devotion exprest or any advantage got by repeating it over so many times in an hour or a day as if there were some secret virtue and force in the bare rehearsal of the words whilst we little or nothing attend to the sense of them which is fitter for Mag-pies and Parrots than for reasonable creature from whom God expects a reasonable Service wherein their Hearts and Souls are to be employed as well as their Tongues But let us proceed CHAP. XIV Of Distinction of Meats L. MY Author next pleads for that distinction of Meats which is used in their Church there being some Meats which he says they forbid not at all times as those in 1 Tim. 4. 3. but for certain days to chastise the flesh and render it obedient to the spirit And so the Apostles themselves he adds did for some time forbid the eating of blood and strangled Beasts T. This prohibition of the Apostles makes nothing for his purpose since they are generally supposed to forbid the eating of blood and things strangled to avoid that offence which it would have given to the Iews which was a sufficient reason whilst it lasted But now in the Church of Rome they do without any reason at all that I can tell of severely forbid some sorts of Meat in Lent and at some other times when yet they allow other Meats every whit as pleasant as costly and luxurious And whether this be that which is condemned by the Apostle in that place to Timothy or not yet it is a very unreasonable imposition and tends to ensnare mens Consciences and make them fancy there is some Religion in using this sort of food rather than that Yet mistake me not what really tends to piety and mortification we do not in the least condemn no we commend and require it But the distinction of Meats made in the Church of Rome seems not to have any such tendency For with them a Man that shall eat plenty of Salmon Sturgeon or other such delicious Fish and drink rich Wines breaks not his Lent though it 's like the stricter sort take not this liberty but if he chance to eat a little of any course sort of Flesh or but the Broth it 's boil'd in or any sort of Milk-meats he is a transgressor As if there were not a flesh of Fish as well as of Birds and Beasts or as if there were any virtue in abstaining from one sort rather than another When we keep a true Fast we are that while to abstain from all sorts of Meat if we are able In a time of abstinence it beseems us to eat more sparingly and to use such a sort of diet as is most cheap and plain and tends least to please the Palate or pamper the Flesh that so we may be in a better temper for Religious Duties and may have more time for our Devotion more Money for the Poor and may both humble our Souls and afflict and tame our Bodies and govern our Appetites For all this there is good reason such fasting and abstinence administers to Religion But then whether in your times of abstinence you eat a little Flesh or a little Fish whether with your Fish you eat Butter or Oil whether you drink Milk or Small-Beer and the like seems not of the least consequence on any Religious account You are neither better nor worse for one or the other Here you may well say Meat commends us not to God That which enters into the mouth defiles not the man L. But to this he replies that the forbidden fruit which our first Parents tasted though not evil in it self yet the eating of it was displeasing to God T. And good reason since God himself had given an express command to the contrary L. And he urges that so God hath commanded us to obey our Superiors and therefore to eat what they forbid is evil as it is for Children to taste Sugar or Honey contrary to their Parents commands this he says is the wicked will which coming from the heart defiles the Man T. But all this does not in the least concern us since thanks be to God our Church lays no such burdensome and unprofitable commands upon us however the Pope and his Clergy like the Pharisees of old may load the poor people that are under their yoke Neither yet does any thing he alledges vindicate their Church in making such idle and useless Laws as these which have no manner of tendency to Religion or the good of Souls For what is it to my Souls health I beseech you whether I eat a piece of Salmon or the Leg of a Chicken Whether I take Oil or Butter for my Sawce Of what moment is this any more than whether I drink White-wine or Claret Beer or Ale In these things every Man is concerned chiefly to look to his own health and Masters of Families may take order for those under their charge and Children ought in such things to be ruled by their Parents since it properly belongs to Parents herein to give orders Magistrates also upon a Civil account may enact such Laws hereabouts as make for the publick good But for the Church or any Churchmen to make Laws about these matters is to arrogate to themselves a power which it does not appear that ever Christ gave them for it no way tends to edification but rather to entangle and perplex mens Consciences and to beget fond conceits that one sort of Meat is more holy than another which is a meer piece of Judaism and contrary to the
Apostles assertion Rom. 14. 17. These are such silly trifling injunctions as those of the Pharisees about washing their hands before Dinner and the like and may as justly be rejected without any thing of a wicked will or any contempt of that Authority which God hath set over us L. But does not our own Church lay the same commands upon its members viz. that they abstain from all sorts of Flesh in Lent and at some other times T. No where that I can tell of Our Church indeed appoints times of fasting and abstinence for such good ends as I have before mention'd and these times are to be observed in such manner with respect to our diet as that these ends may best be obtained but neither in any Rubrick Canon or Homily that ever I met with does our Church place any Religion in the bare distinction of Meats as to the kind of them I mean in abstaining from Flesh of Beasts or Birds rather than from the Flesh of Fishes from Butter rather than Oil from Milk and Eggs rather than Wine and Oysters about these things our Church gives no rule that I know of If at such times we use a very strict temperance somewhat more than ordinary and do thereby become more Humble and Charitable more Devout and Religious the Church is satisfied and her design answered and whether we eat a little Flesh or a little Fish she is not at all concerned As to the Laws of the Land about eating Fish rather than Flesh at certain times they were Enacted upon a Civil account not a Religious viz. for the encouragement of Fishing-trade and Navigation for the benefit of Sea-Towns and the like as is exprest in some of the Statutes themselves and most plainly taught in the Homily concerning Fasting But let us hear what yet remains CHAP. XV. Of withholding the Scriptures from the Common-People L. THere is only one thing more which he endeavours to vindicate from the exceptions made against it viz. the forbidding to have the Scriptures in the vulgar language so that the people cannot be admitted to read the same who would be glad as he expresses it to read and understand the last Will and Testament of their Father T. And what can he alledge for this their cruelty to the people so contrary both to Reason and to the very design of Writing the Holy Scriptures as well as to many express commands delivered in those Sacred Writings L. He first says it is not forbidden so the Bible be not corrupted by Sectaries and if the people ask leave of their Superiours to whom it belongs to judge whether they are capable of it T. If by the peoples asking leave he mean their obtaining it he may say very truly though very simply that then they are not forbidden viz. when they have got leave But in the mean time it 's very rare that the people do or dare ask this leave since it 's lookt upon as an ill sign of one inclining to heresie as they call it and to very few by their good will do they grant this liberty not commonly to any but such of whom they have all possible assurance that they are most firmly addicted to their party As to his talk of the Bibles being corrupted by Sectaries so far as it concerns our English Bibles as for others they are able to speak for themselves it is a most false and malicious reproach nor are they able to prove it as hath been sufficiently shewn by the Learned Writers of our Church who have vindicated this our Translation from the frivolous objections which some Romanists have made against it But besides that this is a vile slander it is also a meer pretence as they make use of it to defend their forbidding the people to read our English Bibles For why else do they not more generally permit them to read the Bible of their own Translation their Doway-Bible and Rhemish-Testament They dare not well trust their people even with these notwithstanding all their corrupt glosses in the Margent to make the Text speak in favour of their own opinions at least they give little or no encouragement to the reading of them For you shall seldom find them in the hands or houses of Papists amongst us And though they are forced to give somewhat more liberty to such as live in Protestant-Countries or where there are great numbers of Protestants as in France yet if you go but over into Spain or Italy where the Pope and his Clergy bear more sway there you shall hardly find in a whole Country one Bible in their own language in the hands of any of the people Yea if it should be found it might bring them into danger of the Inquisition and perhaps might cost them their lives Thus severe they were also in England at the beginning of the Reformation and most vehemently opposed the Translation of the Scriptures into English and did all they could to suppress them even sometimes burning the Bibles together with the Martyrs in Queen Maries days being wont to say this was the Book that made all the Hereticks And it was indeed the Book from whence they learned those Truths which Papists as falsely call heresie as the Pharisees did that Christian Doctrine which St. Paul preached L. There is little doubt but that common people of the Romish Church are generally kept from reading the Scripture since I find not that my Author himself does directly deny it nay he rather owns it whilst he goes on to plead that all good things are not good for all some abuse wine though it be good and among Sectaries who will read the Bible some understand it one way some another whence arise daily new heresies For there are many hard passages he adds which are ill understood by people that have little or no learning So St. Peter testifies 2 Pet. 3. and therefore as when there is dispute about any clause in a Will the Will is put into the hands of Proctors Lawyers and Iudges skill'd in the Law so in order to our being sufficiently informed of the Will of our Saviour Christ we must go to Sermons and Catechisms there to be instructed in publick or private as much as we will T. This is their common objection against the peoples reading the Scriptures that they are in danger of mistaking the sense of them and so may fall into errour or heresie But pray consider if this be a sufficient reason for their not reading them might it not have served as well to prevent the first writing of them especially in a language which the common people understood yet thus it was at the first for the Law was given to the Iews in their own language and in the same was the rest of the Old Testament written Thus also the New Testament was written in Greek a language then most generally understood in the world And the Apostles wrote their Epistles to the Churches in this same language which the
common people did all understand So that by their arguing this was a defect of the Divine Wisdom to let the Scriptures come abroad at first in such a Tongue as the people were well acquainted with Yet more than this how frequently do we find in the Old Testament express commands given to the people to acquaint themselves with the Law and to instruct their children in it with all possible care and diligence as you may see Deut. 6. 6. and in many other places This was the commendation both of Timothy and his Parents that from a child he had known the holy Scriptures c. 2 Tim. 3. 15. Thus our Saviour bids the people Search the Scriptures Joh. 5. 39. This was the honour of the Bereans that they examined the Apostles Doctrine by the Scriptures Act. 17. 11. And this the Apostles still inculcated that the people should take heed to the Scriptures as to a light shining in a dark place Now all this is spoken of the Books of the Old Testament and surely there is every whit as much reason that we Christians should be as diligent in reading and studying the New Testament where we have the most heavenly Discourses of our Blessed Saviour with the History of his Life and Death and the Epistles written by his holy Apostles in all which we to this day are most nearly concerned even the meanest of the people as well as others and therefore they ought to have not only leave but all possible encouragement to be very conversant therein This we are sure was the judgment of the Christian Church of old for soon after the Apostles times these Holy Scriptures especially the Books of the New Testament were translated into the several Languages of those people who had embraced the Gospel by holy and learned men who were desirous to establish the Christian Religion amongst them And so we find in succeeding times the Christian Writers very earnestly recommending the Study of Scripture to the common people even to the women themselves and highly applauding those who did most exercise themselves herein The people then had Bibles in their hands and it was accounted an high crime to deliver them up to the Heathens that sought for them That Latin Translation of the Bible which is now in use amongst the Learned of the Church of Rome is a plain testimony against themselves for Latin was once the vulgar tongue of the people of Rome and the Countries about it and for their sakes the Bible was translated out of Hebrew and Greek into that language which was then in use And though some may mistake the sense of Scripture and as St. Peter speaks may wrest it to their own destruction yet is that no reason why it should be kept from common people nor does St. Peter say the least word to any such purpose he himself writing his Epistles to be read by them But rather he exhorts them to beware of being led away by the error of the wicked and to grow in grace and the knowledg of our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ 2 Pet. 3. 17 18. And surely there is no better way to encrease in the knowledg of Christ than by studying his own holy Gospel where we have a full account of him and of all that he did and suffered for our sakes and wherein are contain'd all the Doctrines and precepts of the Christian Religion If some men abuse wine it does not therefore follow that even these men themselves must be always kept from it if they may be reduced to sobriety and moderation in the use of it much less ought wine to be therefore generally forbidden to others of whom it is not known that they do or will abuse it Neither yet does the comparison hold for wine may in it self be hurtful to some mens bodies so that water may be fitter for them but if any man receive hurt from the Scriptures the fault is not in them but in himself who falls into error through his own ignorance or inconsiderateness And the best way to prevent or cure his error is not to forbid him the use of holy Scripture but instruct him how to use it aright perswade him chiefly to mind that which is plain and easie and to frame his belief and practice accordingly by which means he shall by the grace of God be enabled to know and do all that is necessary to Salvation As for other matters that are more difficult and less needful let him pass over them or stay till he find an Interpreter He that is thus humble and modest will be far from abusing Scripture to his hurt and he that is not so may as well mistake and abuse those Doctrines which he meets with in Sermons and Catechisms and therefore by that reason should be kept from them too Nay if this reason hold good that Scripture must be withheld from the people because they are in danger of perverting them to ill purposes then they should rather be kept from the learned than the ignorant for we shall find that commonly men of learning and knowledg have been the Authors of those Heresies which have at any time disturbed the Church whilst men of meaner capacities but of more piety and humility have by the benefit of the Holy Scriptures been preserved in the truth But are they indeed so careful of the people that out of pure kindness to their souls they will not trust them with these holy Books for fear they should abuse them to their hurt How comes it to pass then that instead of these they provide other Books for them in which there is a thousand times more danger I mean Images and Pictures which they call Lay-mens Books from whence they are rather like to learn Superstition and Idolatry than any thing which is good Thus even in a literal sense whilst their people need bread they put them off with stocks and stones To say nothing of those other Books which have heretofore been very common among them viz. their lying Legends composed by lazy Monks full of such ridiculous stories and gross falsehoods that they are now ashamed to have them seen amongst Protestants L. He compares the Scriptures to a Fathers Testament but surely it 's an odd way to make the Son understand his Father's Will by wresting it out of his hands and putting him off with other writings instead of it T. An odd way it is indeed and gives just cause to suspect those of ill design who make use of it For when the Son meets with any obscure clause in his Father's Will though he go to consult the Lawyer about it yet he still keeps the Will in his own hand or a true Copy of it But if the Lawyer should by violence take it from him and let him know no more of it than he sees good the poor man might well think himself very much wronged Especially if the Lawyer should proceed by virtue of this Will to encroach upon the
hands and may read them as much as they please And especially those two Books Ecclesiasticus and that of Wisdom are well worthy to be read again and again as containing most excellent moral rules for the direction and guidance of our lives Consider then what an impudent thing it is for Papists to accuse our Church for putting out these Books of Apocrypha which yet are in so much use amongst us whilst they themselves endeavour in some sort to make the whole Bible Apocryphal I mean by their hiding it so much from the common people putting away not only some but even all the Books of Holy Writ very much from their sight And some of their Authors do speak so meanly and contemptibly of these holy Books which do so little service to their cause that they seem not to have so much respect for them as we have for the Apocrypha it self So that they of all people have least reason to condemn others for slighting or rejecting the holy Scriptures and our Church hath as little reason to be condemned as any other in the whole world As to his other spiteful suggestions I leave it to your self or any other impartial person to judge whether I have said any thing against the Doctrine of their Church without giving good reason for it And I can assure you I have not in this whole Discourse said one word against my conscience neither would I have you envy or hate any mans person be he Papist or what he will whilst you abstain from their errors For though I do not believe the Popish fiction of Purgatory yet I do firmly believe there is a future Judgment and an Hell prepared for the wicked and ungodly particularly for lyers and slanderers and for such as hate their neighbours upon any pretence whatever And is this all that your Author has to say L. He adds nothing more in this Chapter but advice to those who are seduced as he calls it that they should beg light from God and weigh what he has said and seek more instruction from good and learned Catholicks meaning I suppose Popish Priests chiefly T. There 's little doubt of it Now to prevent your being seduced by those who call themselves Catholicks but are not truly so I shall wish you to follow his advice so far as it 's good Humbly beg of God to enlighten your mind with the knowledg of the truth and be ever careful to do the will of God so far as you know it that so you may be the better qualified for the assistance and direction of his good Spirit which delights in men of pure hearts and humble minds Moreover I advise you to weigh impartially what is said on both sides and then be true to your own judgment and conscience in following that which has the plainest and fullest evidence of its truth I would not have you out of pride and vanity thrust your self upon disputes but when you cannot well avoid the discourses of their Priests or Gentlemen if you happen to be at any time somewhat puzled with their arguments do not hastily conclude them to be unanswerable but consult with your Minister or such as may be best able to inform and satisfie you And you may do well to furnish your self with some of those Books that are written by our Divines in defence of the Church of England against the Papists But above all Books let me earnestly request you with great diligence to study and search the holy Scriptures for in them you shall find the true way to eternal life Read there our Blessed Saviours own most Heavenly Discourses who spake as never man spake and particularly read often his most admirable Sermon in the Mount where you have the summ of Christian Religion Read also the several Epistles of the Apostles with the rest of those Scared Writings as you have opportunity and then honestly and impartially compare the Doctrines of our Church and those of the Church of Rome which differ from ours with what is taught in these same holy Books and what you shall find to be most plainly agreeable thereto that own and embrace and evermore firmly adhere to L. The Council you give me is most fair and reasonable which hitherto I have endeavoured to follow and by Gods grace will continue so to do For I can truly say it my chief design is to please God and save my soul And I cannot imagin any surer way to attain this than by studying well the Word of God wherein he hath revealed his will and the way to eternal salvation And certainly God is so good and gracious that he will not fail to direct and guide those into the right way who with sincere and honest minds do above all things desire and endeavour to know his will that they may do it Yea I look upon it as an instance of his kindness and good providence that I so happily met with you from whom I have received such full satisfaction And as for the subtle arguments of Papists I hope by that assistance which you have already given me and yet further will do I shall in a-good measure be able to answer them In the following Chapter my Author produces several of these subtilties which he calls pregnant arguments against Sectaries and these I shall desire you to consider and give an answer to T. I am very willing to do it but that I may not tire you we 'l refer this to our next meeting L. I am well content only one favour I shall request that in the mean time you would please at your leisure to send me in writing the summ of what you have now discoursed that I may have the benefit of perusing it and fixing it better in my mind T. I shall readily grant your request and praying God to lead you into and settle you in the truth shall for this time bid you farewell L. Farewell Good Sir The Second Part. CHAP. I. Containing an Answer to some Arguments against Protestants T. WELL met Friend L. I am heartily glad Sir to meet you again so soon and do return you many thanks both for the pains you took in your late Conference with me and that you was pleased as I desired to send me the summ of it in writing which I have read over again and again to my fuller satisfaction T. I shall reckon my self very well recompenced for what pains I have taken if you reap any advantage thereby L. That I have done very much I thank God For upon the review of my Popish Author so far as we have proceeded I meet not there with any objection against our Religion nor with any argument for Popery but what I can easily answer Nay more than this since I was with you I have read over the last Chapter of his Book the consiâ—eration of which you defer'd till this our second meeting and truly I have not been much gravel'd with any thing in it but can
presses all men to endeavour after perfection in every grace and vertue and especially to be much in works of mercy and charity but yet she does not fright people with stories of Purgatory to bring in their wealth to the Church nor teach them that there is any great perfection in leaving their honest callings to run into a Monastery bringing their riches along with them thither She requires constant temperance and sobriety and sometimes imposes fasting and abstinence but then whether men eat a little flesh or fish oyl or butter she thinks it not a matter of the least moment but leaves all men to their own choice and prudence In a word she does not with the Pharisee teach for doctrines the commands of men but diligently inculcates the express commandments of Almighty God delivered to us in his holy Word And tho' she would not have us so foolish and proud as to think of meriting Heaven by our own good works yet she teaches that upon our patient continuance in well doing we shall through the mercies of God and the merits of Christ certainly obtain eternal life but upon no others terms does she encourage any man to hope for it And thus you see how our Church teaches us to take that same safe and narrow but sweet and pleasant way to salvation which is proposed to us in the Gospel L. I am fully perswaded she does so God grant me grace ever to walk in this holy way and then I shall not doubt of an happy end Pray proceed to his last argument T. I shall so and this it is That Church is not to be heard which has no solid reason for her keeping the Sabbath-day on the day she does keep it but no Church or Congregation of Sectaries has this and therefore none of them ought to be heard What say you to this L. I say that we of the Church of England whom he unjustly calls Sectaries have good reason for our keeping the Sabbath on that day we do keep it even as good reason as the Church of Rome it self has T. He goes on to prove the contrary thus No Church of Sectaries has Scripture for keeping the Sabbath-day on Sunday and no longer on Saturday as God commanded it and yet they reject tradition upon which ground the Roman Church keeps the Sunday in lieu of Saturday and therefore they have no solid reason for what they do c. L. I answer we have Scripture for keeping one day in seven viz. the fourth Commandment And we read that after our Saviours Resurrection the Apostles and Disciples commonly assembled together on the first day of the week which is called the Lords-day Revel 1. 10. And then we have tradition to assure us that this day was observed by the Christian Church ever since which tradition we may plead for our practice I trow as well as the Church of Rome T. Yes certainly we may for though we reject a great many ill things which they would thrust upon us for old traditions many of them being meer novelties of their own devising yet we do by no means reject such traditions as have sufficient evidence of their having been generally received by all Christian Churches from the very times of the Apostles down to our days and of this nature do learned men generally affirm the observation of the Lords-day to be And what you alledg from Scripture may very well serve to recommend to us so ancient and general a practice To all this besides the great equity and reasonableness of the thing in it self you may add the authority of those whom God hath set over us in Church and State all which being put together leaving the nice disputes that have been about this matter is a sufficient ground for our observation of the first day of the week as a Christian Sabbath a day of rest from our common employments devoted to the more solemn worship and service of God both in publick and private As solid reason therefore do we give for our practice herein as the Church of Rome it self can do or any other Church in the world And thus we have done with his five mighty arguments in which upon a little examination there appears nothing of strength or solidity He next musters up some weighty objections as he reckons them against those whom he calls Sectaries which he says ought to make them very much doubt whether they be secure in the way they are in And here according to his usual vain way of bragging he makes this large offer which yet he will never make good that all Priests Jesuits and Catholicks over all the world will turn to their way if they can but get from their Ministers a clear and satisfactory resolution of the following doubts L. It was cunningly done of him to call for a satisfactory resolution since though it be as clear as the light at noon-day yet they may still pretend that it is not satisfactory T. They may so though I question not but it will appear such to all that are impartial and judicious These doubts I shall propose to you in order and hear what you your self can say for the resolving of them L. I shall give in the best answers I am able and where I am at a loss shall still desire your help CHAP. II. A resolution of some doubts and questions proposed to Protestants T. FIrst he demands whether it can be clearly shewn that our Ministers were sent by Almighty God to preach and to reform the Roman Catholick Church or whether they are not some of the false Prophets who say The Lord saith when the Lord hath not sent them Ezek. 13. 6. L. There seems no great difficulty in resolving this doubt since our Ministers had lawful Ordination and thereby had authority to preach the Word of God And by the light of this word they discovered many errors and abuses in the Roman Church wherewith we were foully polluted and by Gods blessing and the assistance of lawful authority they were very instrumental in reforming us from the same Now whilst they proved their Doctrine by this Word of God they are not to be compared to those false Prophets who taught the people lyes and vanity as we have it Ezek. 13. 7 8. T. Your answer is sufficient and very clear For since our first Reformers did not publish a new Religion but rather restored the old by removing those corrupt additions that had been made to it they did not need any extraordinary commission from Heaven such as Moses had from God when he delivered the Law and as the Apostles had from Jesus Christ when they were first sent to preach the Gospel But it was sufficient that they were duly qualified by Gods Spirit for the work of the Ministry and were lawfully called to it by those who had authority in the Church to ordain them to that Office Such as these are truly said to be sent of God and are therefore
the Iewish Church by the solemn rite of Circumcision and since our Saviour hath no where given the least intimation that this priviledg should be taken from them I can see no reason why the children of Christian Parents may not be solemnly consecrated to God by Baptism and so admitted members of the Christian Church And to omit many other Texts which speak in favour of infants this without any wresting of the words may be fairly drawn from that commission given to the Apostles and their Successors Mat. 28. 19. Go ye therefore and teach or disciple all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost They were to make Disciples of whole Nations which surely comprehends both Parents and Children First the Parents were to be instructed in the Christian Faith and upon their profession of it to be baptized And then they themselves being devoted to God and entred into Covenant with him since Parents have power over their children to dispose of them for their good and to lay engagements on them for that end surely it was lawful for them to devote their children also to God and to enter them into Covenant with him by Baptism thereby laying a strict obligation upon them when they come to years of discretion to perform their part of this holy Covenant if ever they hope for any benefit by it the Parents also being bound to acquaint their children with their duty so soon as they are capable of learning it Thus when any one from among the heathens became a proselyte to the Iews when he himself was circumcised so were his children also Yea learned men tell us that it was also the custom to wash these proselytes in pure water and that very probably our Saviour was pleased to accommodate himself to this same usage of theirs in his instituting of Baptism for the more solemn admission of members into his Church Now as an excellent Writer argues suppose that our Blessed Saviour instead of the word Baptizing should have used that of circumcising and have said Go teach all Nations circumcising them in the name c. would not all men have been apt to think that the same priviledg which the Iews had of admitting their children into Covenant by Circumcision that Christian Parents also should have the like why then may not the same be reasonably argued from the words though Baptism be here named and not Circumcision Very probable it is that the Apostles thus understood it and that they practised accordingly when we read of their Baptizing such and such persons and their housholds as Act. 16. 15 33. amongst whom there might be some children for any thing that can be shewn to the contrary And certain we are that very early in the Christian Church insants were admitted to Baptism and thence hath it continued to this day to be the general custom of all Churches throughout the world And pray take good notice that though our Church allows nothing to be imposed upon our belief or practice as necessary to salvation but what is contain'd in Gods holy Word yet she hath great regard to antiquity to the customs of the truly Catholick Church and the current Doctrine of the Fathers and requires Ministers to have due respect thereto in their Exposition of Scripture And therefore without any contradiction to her self may very well admit the observation of such customs that having so much ground from Scripture are recommended also by the early and general practice of the Christian Church This I say she may very well do but is by no means thereby obliged to receive all the traditions and customs of the Roman Church for many of which nothing can be truly pleaded either from Scripture or antiquity but very much against them from both L. This is very plain and satisfactory Pray let us have his next question T. It is this Can you make it appear to me how your Sectaries can with reason and sufficient ground condemn all the Catholicks that were so many ages before Luther and Calvin for being no better than heathens and convince me that by adhering to you I shall be more secure of my salvation than if I joyn my self to them that have been held time out of mind in most parts of the world for the men that have the true and only saving Religion What answer give you to this L. First I know no body that does thus condemn all Catholicks before Luther and Calvin For as to those Christians in the first ages of the Church who truly deserve the name of Catholicks whether of the Roman Church or any other we are so far from condemning that we admire and applaud them we approve of their Doctrine contain'd in the ancient Creeds and do imbrace and profess it we honour their memory and endeavour to imitate their example But as those of the Roman Church in latter ages whom he means I suppose by his Catholicks though we do not say they are as bad as heathens yet we do truly say that they have very much corrupted Christian Religion by false Doctrines and Superstitious usages and therefore we think it a much safer way to salvation to adhere to the ancient certain truths of Christianity every where received and to worship God in that pure and holy manner which our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles both taught and used than to embrace those additions made by the Roman Church which are no parts of true and saving Religion nor have ever been so accounted by the generality of Christians And though our ancestors might have some excuse from the state of this Church in their days yet we their posterity should be utterly inexcusable if now that our Church has so justly reformed her self from Popish corruptions we should break off from her communion and go over to the Church of Rome that hates to be reformed This were to add the guilt of Schism to that of Superstition T. Your answer is very clear and full and may well enough serve for the solution of his fifth Query which is to the same purpose with the former viz. Can you make evident at least that in your little flock or in Luther and Calvin their guides more holiness and virtue was to be found than in the Catholicks And that it is this little flock of yours not the Catholicks that go the narrow way that leads to life L. To this may easily be answered as you have formerly instructed me that though Luther and Calvin were learned and good men who in their own times and places did much service for the Reformation of Religion yet they never had authority in our Church nor do we own them as our guides The blessed Iesus is the Author of our Religion and after him the holy Apostles were the teachers of it being no other than Christianity it self and consequently the true way to eternal happiness even that narrow way of truth and holiness which the whole flock of Christ
in all ages hath acknowledged and walked in But the Church of Rome which may well enough be stiled the Popes little flock hath peculiar Doctrines of its own which she hath added to the common truths of Christianity many of which Doctrines do apparently lead men to the broad way even to loosness of life and manners as hath been already shewn T. There needs nothing more be added to what you say and therefore I shall proceed to his sixth and last question viz. Can you shew me any miracles that ever were wrought in testionony of the truth of your Religion Or that all the miracles which Catholicks shew to have been done in confirmation of their Religion have been false or were wrought be Beelzebub any more than those which Christ did work in his life time L. I do well remember the answer that long since you gave to this the summ of which was that since our Religion is that same holy Christian Religion which was taught by our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles all those miracles which they anciently wrought in confirmation of their Doctrine do at this day confirm ours also which being the same with theirs needs no new miracles for that purpose For by those miracles of theirs besides other weighty arguments we are fully assured that Iesus Christ is the Son of God that he died for our sins and rose again from the dead with the rest of the Creed wherein is briefly comprized the summ of our Belief the chief articles of our Religion And when our first Reformers rejected those Popish errors which had been added to these ancient Christian Doctrines as they needed no extraordinary commission for this their reformation no more did they need any miracles to confirm their commission It was enough that they had authority from God from the Church and from their Prince to preach the truths of the Gospel and to reject all errors contrary thereto and to remove those abuses which in later times had crept into the Church But whilst they only preach'd that same Gospel which had been abundantly confirmed already by mighty signs and wonders they no more needed any new miracles than if such errors and abuses had never been brought in And as to those false Doctrines wherein Popery consists such as the Popes Supremacy Transubstantiation c. we do utterly deny that ever any true miracles were wrought in confirmation of them whatever fine tales their Monks may tell us in their Legends And for any to compare these their lying Legends so full of most ridiculous and prodigious stories with the account that is given of the miracles done by our Saviour and his followers in the New Testament is to be guilty of notorious impudence and blasphemy and plainly tends to promote infidelity and Atheism T. Your censure is very just and your answer solid and satisfactory as are the rest you have given By all which it appears that your Author had little cause to say that they who ask the resolution of these doubts from their Ministers if they have any light of reason will find how much they are deluded For blessed be God I hope many of our people are so well instructed that they will not be imposed upon nor much puzled with such captious Questions as these Especially whilst they seek to their Ministers for a resolution of their doubts by the grace of God they shall be secured from the delusions of Popish Emissaries who go about seeking whom they may deceive CHAP. III. An answer to some Propositions said to be unanswerable by Protestants T. IN the next place I find your Author at his Scholars request furnishing him with some unanswerable Propositions as he vainly stiles them against Protestants Of these he names eight taken as he says from Costerus the Jesuit who therewith if we may believe him put all the ablest Ministers of Germany and the Low-countries to their wits ends Which if it were so one would wonder that there were any Protestant Ministers or people left in those Countries and that they were not all long since driven out of their wits and their Religion into Popery But had they never used those terrible arguments of fire and sword Prisons and Inquisition no body would much fear their pregnant arguments difficult questions or unanswerable Propositions The two former we have already dispatched let us now survey the last in which I am apt to think we shall still find a tedious repetition of many the same things that we have already often heard which if it be so we shall more briefly pass over them L. Probably you will find it so However I think we shall sooner have finished if you please to give the answer your self to these his Propositions which I shall exactly recite to you T. That shall be as you will But I hope you are not moved with his formidable title of Unanswerable Propositions L. I have no reason I am sure if they be like his unanswerable Questions in which there proved little or no difficulty T. Their common way is to make up the want of good Reason with great words and loud noise producing only thin fallacies and empty sophistry whilst they talk big of Infallible Evidence and clear Demonstration But let us hear these dreadful Propositions I beseech you L. His first is this Never since the Apostles times till Luther began his new Doctrine in the year 1517 was any man found in the whole World who did in all things consent with either Lutherans Calvinists Anabaptists or other Sectaries opinions Nor shall ever any of the Sectaries prove the Apostles or Evangelists to have been of the Lutheran Calvinistical or any other new Sect. Whence follows that Luther and the rest have no Faith at all but only a new fancied invention which they adorn with the name of Faith and that they are the men of whom the Scripture in several places affirms that there will come in the latter times false Prophets T. As to Lutherans or Calvinists we own neither one name or other as has been often said nor are we concerned to vindicate any particular opinion of this Man or that though I reckon the Doctrine of both as to the substance of it to be sound and good at least so far as it agrees with that of our Church which only we are obliged to answer for and easily we may though he revile us also as Sectaries since it is no other than the same Christian Doctrine which is contain'd in the Gospel and summ'd up in the Creed and this let him confute if he can or attempt it if he dare And in this Doctrine we are sure both the Apostles of old with the Catholick Church in their Age and in all Ages since do fully consent with us Nor was it any new Doctrine that our Reformers brought in No but whilst they rejected Popish Novelties they retain'd those truths of Christianity which were as old as the first institution of Religion What
means he then by saying that none of the Ancients consent with us in all things In every little oppinion it 's scarce likely there were or ever will be two men in the World that do exactly agree No such agreement I am sure is to be found amongst the Divines of the Roman Church But as sure it is that we agree with the Apostles and Ancient Churches in all things material and substantial in all points of Faith necessary to Salvation For we embrace the same Holy Scriptures and the same Creeds which they did What means he again by saying that the Apostles were not of the Lutheran or Calvinistical Sect What that they were not followers of Luther or Calvin They were not like indeed but it 's enough I hope if Luther and Calvin were followers of the Apostles Thus what if he should say that the Apostles were not of the Church of England Is it not sufficient that our Church embraces the same Faith which the Apostles planted in all places where they came Wherefore we may with great reason conclude contrary to his extravagant and most uncharitable inferences that we have the true Christian Faith in our Church and not any new-fangled invention c. If the Apostles Creed be a Summary of the true Faith I am sure we have it since we do most heartily embrace this Creed and those Holy Scriptures whence it 's taken and therefore we are none of those false Prophets foretold in Scripture For whilst we keep close to God's Word as the rule of our Faith we are safe enough from deserving any such charge But how will they of the Romish Church acquit themselves from it whilst they have brought in many devices of their own to which the Apostles and Primitive Christians were meer strangers and therefore cannot be said to consent with Papists therein Such are their Doctrines of Purgatory Transubstantiation c. Such are their customs of praying in an unknown Tongue having private Masses where the Priest only receives in their publick Assemblies their half-Communions giving only the Bread to the people when they do Communicate c. None of these things were anciently taught or used in the Church and some of them but lately established amongst themselves These therefore we may justly say are new-fangled inventions devised of their own Brain contrary to Holy Scriptures And they who broach and maintain them are in this respect false Teachers and probably some of those who are foretold in Scripture at least they and their false Doctrines are condemned by it and that 's enough for our purpose L. It is so indeed and enough have you said to weaken and refute this his first Proposition If the rest have no more strength they are far from deserving that great title he gives them I shall rehearse the next if you please T. Presently you shall only take notice from what hath been said how plain the Answer is to that captious Question of theirs Where was your Religion before Luther Where was it Even there whereever the Gospel was received whereever the Christian Doctrine was own'd for that is our Religion and nothing but that It was therefore in the Primitive Church that was planted by the Apostles and in the whole Catholick Church in all succeeding Ages Our Religion was both in the East and the West even in the Roman Church it self For we grant they still retain'd the Christian Faith they kept and do still keep the Apostles Creed though they have added several new Articles to it and that especially in their Council of Trent which appear'd not in the World quite so soon as Luther Now the truly Catholick Ancient Christian Faith we receive but their new-coin'd Articles we reject So that before the Reformation our Religion was in their Church as Gold in a heap of Dirt or as one long since exprest it as the pure Flower amongst the Bran or as Corn among Tares And by the Reformation we only wash'd away this Dirt sifted out the Bran and plucked up the Tares But the old Religion the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles remains pure and entire L. But say they where did the Apostles teach that there is no Purgatory no Transubstantiation c Yet thus the Protestants teach and therefore they consent not with the Apostles T. Yes certainly but they do for as I have formerly told you we therefore say there is no Purgatory c. because the Apostles say no such things which be sure they would have done had they been true since they are such weighty and material points as the Church of Rome now accounts them What the Apostles taught that we receive what they taught not we refuse as knowing they were faithful in delivering all that they received of the Lord. Judge then which of us consents most with the Apostles we who receive all their Doctrines but reject what they never taught of they who teach these new Doctrines which neither the Apostles nor any of their first followers ever delivered nor were they for some Hundred years after generally profest so much as in their own Church Yea these Novelties were never directly and formally established as Articles of Faith and made necessary for all men of their Communion to believe till in these latter Ages some of them as I take it not till the very Council of Trent not yet an Hundred and fifty years since which they call a General Council though packt up of Bishops of their own Sect and the major part the Popes own creatures who used all the foul arts imaginable to carry things according to his humour as is plainly to be seen in the History of that Council written by some of their own Church Now in respect of these Articles in which Popery chiefly consists we may with great reason retort the question and demand Where was your Religion before the Council of Trent And were the Apostles of the same opinion with these Trent Fathers Compare their Creeds together and it will easily appear Yea compare that of Trent with any other of the old Creeds such as the Nicene or Constantinopolitan and it will easily appear what additions they have made to the ancient Faith whereas our Church receives those very same Creeds without addition or diminution To conclude this though we readily grant their Popish Errors to have been before our Reformation from them for they could not be cast out before they were brought in yet the great truths of our Religion were taught and received in the Church some Ages before those Errors were ever heard of Our Religion then did not first appear in Luther's days when the Reformation was wrought but is as old as since the time of Christ and his Apostles being nothing else but pure Christianity resormed from the errors and abuses of Popery These things I have already oft mentioned but could not well avoid the repetition of them on occasion of this his first Proposition which by this time you see
is far enough from being unanswerable Now let us hear the second L. It cannot be proved that the Religion and Faith of the Holy Roman Catholick Church hath been any way changed in any Article that belongs to the Religion by any Pope Council or Catholick Bishop nor can any of them be produced that have changed it But it is rather proved that the very same Faith hath remain'd entire and inviolate from the times of the Apostles to this very day and by continual succession or from hand to hand as it were is come to our hands Whence is manifestly gathered that it is the very same Faith which the Apostles taught and therefore the same that they learned from Christ their Master in his School T. The Answer which I have just now given to his first Proposition doth wholly take off the force of this second also For pray consider we do not charge those of the Church of Rome with directly changing the Articles of the Christian Faith for we grant they still retain the Apostles Creed wherein that Faith is briefly comprized and the Holy Scriptures where it is more largely taught But our great charge against them is their adding to this old Faith new Articles of their own devising some of them utterly uncertain some notoriously false which yet they impose as of absolute necessity to be believed in order to Salvation even as much as the Apostles Creed it self And for the vindication of these Novelties they give very corrupt and false interpretations of the ancient Articles and of the holy Scriptures themselves such as the first Christian Writers never gave Thus for instance they would have the Catholick Church mentioned in the Creed to signifie the Roman Church and so to comprehend only those who acknowledg the Bishop of Rome to be Head of the Church and Christ's Vicar upon Earth whereas none of the Ancients did ever thus explain this Article So that by their corrupt glosses they do in some instances very much change the Doctrine whilst they retain the Words But as to these novel additions which they would thrust upon us we do utterly deny that they were ever taught by Christ or his Apostles nor consequently could be delivered down from them successively to this present Age. Nay our Learned Writers shew as to many of them the very time when they were introduced by what Degrees and what Arts it was done and with what difficulties and oppositions they met They name the very Pope who first obtain'd the Title of Supreme Bishop of the Universal Church they name the Council where Image-worship was first established and after that when Transubstantiation and the Popes Power of Deposing Princes were Decreed c. Though as our Writers commonly urge it is a most foolish and ridiculous thing when we demonstrate the Errors of their Church for them to say there are none because we cannot shew the precise time when they were first brought in As if when the Tares were plainly seen in the field the Servant should have denied there were any because no body could exactly tell when they were Sown it being done while the Master slept It 's enough that we can tell the time long after the Apostles when their erroneous Doctrines were not received in the Church and that proves them to be no part of the Ancient Faith of Christians which has been always and every where received in the Catholick Church Nay as to one most corrupt custom of their Church that of taking the Cup from the Laity when they first established it by a Decree viz. in the Council of Constance not three hundred years ago they themselves do there acknowledg that it was permitted in the Primitive Church yet it now seem'd fit to the Church of Rome for what reason you must not enquire to order the contrary to that primitive practice But to conclude That faith which indeed the Apostles learn'd in Christs School and from him taught to their followers and which from them hath been transmitted from one age to another down to this present time this we do most readily own and imbrace even that faith which is delivered in the holy Scriptures and comprized in the Creed and so far as they of Rome do acknowledg this faith we have no quarrel with them But the new Articles decreed by late Councils of their own by no means can we admit not a syllable of them being mention'd in the ancient Creeds nor can they be proved by the Holy Scriptures but many of them are directly contrary thereto as hath been already shewn and will yet further appear in my answer to his following argument to which you may proceed L. His third Proposition is That it cannot be shew'd that either the Ceremonies Sacraments or any Doctrine of their Church contains any thing contrary to holy Scripture but rather their learned Doctors clearly teach and demonstrate all the foresaid things to be plainly consonant to Holy Writ Such be these Words This is my Body and others Whence it follows that Lutherans Calvinists and other Sectaries have ungroundedly and without reason separated themselves from the Roman Church That also they who withdraw themselves from the Catholick Churches bosom can give no reason why they turn rather to the Lutherans than to the Calvinists Anabaptists or such other Hereticks T. That the Church of Rome hath brought in Customs contrary to the Holy Scripture is very evident from that instance I gave under the last Head viz. their taking away the Cup from the people at the Communion contrary to our Saviours own institution and practice who gave the Cup as well as the Bread to his Apostles requiring them all to drink of it and this not as Apostles meerly but as they were his Disciples And he enjoyn'd them to do this hereafter in remembrance of him and consequently to give both the Bread and the Wine to all Christians that should come to the Lords Table And so the Apostle Paul expresly requires Let a man examine himself every man that is whether of the Clergy or Laity and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that Cup. According to the Apostle then every Man that is bound to examine and prepare himself for this Holy Sacrament ought to drink of the Cup as well as eat of the Bread And thus it was generally used in the Primitive Church by their own confession as you have heard And yet in these latter ages out of I know not what pretended reverence for the Cup no body must partake of it ordinarily but the Priest that consecrates which is I say most expresly contrary to the Scripture But for their excuse they have devised forsooth a fine Doctrine of Concomitancy which if you will do them the small favour to grant that of Transubstantiation to be true they think well enough solves all For they tell you that the Blood so accompanies the Flesh that he who receives one partakes of the other also and
therefore whilst the people take the Flesh under the species of Bread this may very well serve without taking the Wine too But if this be a good reason Why then need the consecrating Priest take the Wine Or why need our Saviour have appointed both Bread and Wine to be made use of in this his Holy Supper Here then you have a plain instance of their practising contrary to the Scripture in so weighty a matter as the Administring the Holy Communion To this may be joyn'd their custom of private Masses or Communions if that be not a contradiction the Priest himself many times receiving alone and none of the people who are present partaking with him contrary to the first institution of this Holy Sacrament and to the very nature and design of it as it is a Communion and contrary also to the practice of the Primitive Church To these may a great many more easily be added of which we have formerly taken notice Such as having their Prayers in an unknown Tongue contrary to the Apostles direction 1 Cor. 14. Their Worshipping of Saints and Angels which is forbidden in all those places that command us to Worship God alone in the name of Jesus Christ our only Mediator and most expresly Col. 2. 18. Rev. 22. 9. Also their Worship of Images and of the Host contrary to the second Commandment And for an instance of their false Doctrines many of which we have often mentioned we need go no further than that palpable one of Transubstantiation which he mentions as agreeable to Scripture that says This is my body But how little these words make for his purpose we have before shewn and that their plain meaning is This is the Sacrament of my Body or the representation and commemoration of it and the way of conveying the benefits that come by it according to the constant use of the like expressions in the matter of Sacraments even as the Paschal Lamb is called the Passover of which it was only a solemn Memorial But that the natural substance of Bread and consequently of Wine remains after Consecration we have proved from the Apostle who again and again calls it so 1 Cor. 11. How then can he say that without ground we separate from the Romish Church Since if there were nothing else to be blamed this alone were sufficient reason to keep out of their Communion since in order to it they require our belief of a Doctrine most apparently false namely that of Transubstantiation and enjoyn a practice founded upon this Doctrine which is notoriously sinful viz. the Worship of the Consecrated Elements as if they were now turned into the substance of Christ's Body and Blood yea into whole Christ both as to his Divine and Humane Nature Now they themselves as you have heard do grant that if there was no such change made by Consecration this Worship would be idolatrous and therefore we being upon good grounds assured that no such change there is do utterly abhor the very thoughts of such Idolatrous worship and do believe our selves bound in Conscience to Almighty God to undergo a Thousand deaths rather than be guilty of it yea though we lived in Popish Countries But besides this we here in England owe no manner of obedience to the Bishop of Rome nor are under any obligation to forsake the Communion of our own Church for that of the Romish but should be guilty of that hainous sin of Schism by so doing as the Papists amongst us are at this day of which more in another place As to what he talks that they who go from their Church can give no reason why they should rather turn to Luther than to the Calvinists c. it concerns not us in the least who neither turn to the one or the other but continue in Communion with our own Church in which we were Baptized and live in obedience to our own Rulers in Church and State whom God hath set over us Nor do I discern by what reason he makes this silly inference nor yet for what purpose But let me hear his next Argument L. It cannot be proved that ever at any time were admitted any Priests that were not first duly consecrated by Bishops Wherefore we rightly infer that all Lutheran Ministers Calvinists or any other Sects not Consecrated according to the old custom of the Holy Church are for both from the name and reality of the Divine Priesthood and so that in their Cene or Supper as they call it they give but a meer piece of Bread as also that they have no power to Absolve from Sins but send away people as entangled and defiled with Sin as they were when they came to them T. As to this Argument we of the Church of England are nothing concerned in it since our Priests receive Ordination from Bishops and therefore have as full authority for the exercise of their Ministerial function as those of any Christian Church in the World Some other Reformed Churches also do embrace Episcopal Government As for such who want it we shall not enter into a dispute concerning the validity of their Orders But this I think we may safely assert that if the people be duly qualified for the Lord's Supper as St. Paul himself calls it 1 Cor. 11. 20. by a firm belief of the Gospel and sincere love and obedience to our Blessed Saviour they shall not want the benefits that are promised to worthy Communicants through any defect or irregularity in the Ordination of their Ministers And if they do truly repent of their sins and forsake them they shall for Christ's sake obtain forgiveness from God though never any Priest should give them Absolution But on the other hand our Writers have shewn that according to the common principle received in the Romish Church That the truth of Sacraments depends upon the intention of the Priest the people cannot be certain at any time that they have true Sacraments no nor whether he be a true Priest that Administers them But I shall trouble you with nothing more on this Argument L. There is no need since it reaches not our Church in the least I shall therefore proceed to the fifth which is this It cannot be found in the whole Holy Scripture that nothing is to be believed but what clearly and expresly is contained written in the same whence follows the ruine and overthrow of the ground-work on which Lutherans Calvinists and other Sectaries rely when they affirm that nothing is to be believed but what is expresly set down in Holy Writ T. I wonder who says so Every thing is to be believed that has sufficient evidence of its truth whether it be in Scripture or not But this we say and this I suppose he means to argue against that nothing is of necessity to be believed in order to Salvation but what is contain'd in Holy Scripture Which in effect is the same as to say that the Holy Scripture contains all necessary
articles of Faith so that no Church on Earth has any power to coin and impose new ones not revealed in the Scripture which I say acquaints us with all things needful to Salvation And this I am sure is plainly enough taught in the Scripture it self 2 Tim. 3. 15 16 17. The Holy Scriptures they then enjoy'd viz. the Writings of the Old-Testament are said to be able to make him wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Iesus being profitabâ—e to all things necessary thereto as you may there find it fully exprest So Joh. 20. 31. These things are written that you might believe that Iesus is Christ the Son of God and that believing you might have life through his name So that if we believe in Jesus Christ according to all that is written of him in the Gospel this Faith if it produce Obedience will certainly procure everlasting Life And indeed our own reason may well tell us that since the very design of the Holy Scripture is to reveal to us the whole Will of God in order to our Eternal happiness surely there is revealed in them all that is necessary to this end Can we imagine that those Holy Men who committed to Writing the Doctrine of our Blessed Saviour with an account of his Life and Death his Resurrection and Ascension c. that they would omit any thing which was necessary for us to know and believe in order to our Salvation when they wrote these things purposely that we might be saved Especially if we consider that they have given us a very large account of things much more than was of absolute necessity And in such abundance would they leave out things more necessary than those they have Recorded The necessary Articles of Faith are comprized in a little room and have generally been thought to be comprehended in the Apostles Creed This was the judgement of the Primitive Fathers and many Learned men of the Church of Rome have acknowledged as much Now the Articles of this Creed I hope are all contained in the Holy Scripture being there both largely exprest and frequently inculcated So that the ground-work of the Reformation remains firm and unshaken viz. that the Holy Scriptures contain all things necessary to Salvation and therefore those new Articles which the Roman Church hath invented besides yea contrary to these Scriptures ought by no means to be admitted L. The Doctrine of our Church concerning the Sufficiency of Holy Scripture seems very plain and the inference you make from it clear and natural But the Sixth Argument will give you occasion to discourse further on this Subject For my Author says it will be for confirmation of his former Proposition and thus it runs We would fain have Luther Calvin and other Sectaries shew where they find written that the Gospel according to St. Matthew is Holy Scripture rather than the Gospel of Nicodemus which seeing they cannot do and yet they believe too the Gospel of St. Matthew as to Holy Scripture they must needs confess that they believe some things which are not contain'd in Scripture T. His former Argument truly stands in much need of confirmation but is like to receive little from this which he brings to strengthen and enforce it Since if we grant him the whole of it I cannot see that it will do any service to his cause or any prejudice to ours For who ever denied but that we believe some yea many things which are not contain'd in Holy Scripture We believe there is such a Country as France and such a City in it as Paris though there be nothing of them in Scripture Or which is nearer to our purpose we believe there was such a Man in the World as Iulius Casar and that the Book which goes under his name called Casars Commentaries was indeed written by him This we believe on account of the current Tradition and constant opinion of the World from his time down to this present Age there being no ground to doubt of the truth of it since all circumstances concurr to render it credible Even thus to come to the Case in hand we believe the Gospel according to St. Matthew and the other Sacred Books to be Written by those persons whose names they bear in the Title as Authors of them because this hath been the constant judgement of the whole Church of God from the very Age wherein these Books were Written to this present time And on the other hand we have good reason to reject a Book pretended to be written by Nicodemus because none such was admitted by the Primitive Church which must needs have known of it if any such Book there had been For this reason it was never own'd as Canonical by the Catholick Church in any Age since nor therefore do we now receive it as such Where now I beseech you lies the strength of this his mighty Argument L. I confess I am so far from discerning the strength of it that I do not well understand what he aims at by it T. I 'le tell you then in a few words He would by his way of arguing force us to acknowledge that Holy Scripture does not contain all things necessary to Salvation but that there are some Traditions of the Church to be received with equal reverence and esteem as particularly that such and such Books are Canonical Scripture others not and that it is on account of the authority of the Church of Rome that these Traditions are to be received and therefore lastly they hence infer that all other Traditions which their Church proposes to us are by the same reason to be received without doubting or disputing This is their common way of arguing and this Author here and in other places insinuates the same But now to shew further how little of force or solid reason there is in this smooth and subtle talk pray consider with me seriously two or three things which I shall suggest to you L. I promise you my most diligent attention T. 1 Then we must ever carefully distinguish betwixt the tradition or delivery of the holy Scripture it self from one generation to another and those other traditions whether Doctrines or customes beside the holy Scripture which yet are by the Roman Church made of equal authority with it the former we own but not the latter For we most readily grant that there hath been a tradition of the holy Scripture as that which was written by such and such men inspired by the Holy Ghost from one age to another ever since the time of its first writing and so hath it been brought down to us in these days And those Books which the Primitive Church embraced as thus Sacred and Canonical and so delivered them to succeeding ages these do we embrace with all reverence and submission as the rule both of faith and manners containing the whole will of God in order to our salvation But then for this very reason do we utterly deny
that there are any other traditions of equal necessity to salvation which are not contain'd in these holy Scriptures 2 Note well that though the Church of God hath been a most faithful preserver of these holy Scriptures and hath carefully transmitted them from one generation to another yet it is not the Church which gives authority to the Scriptures as if she by any power in her could make that to be the word of God which is not so or unmake that which is indeed so No but the Church received for the word of God that which was delivered by holy men inspired by the Holy Ghost who gave full evidence of this their inspiration both by the nature of that Doctrine which they delivered and by the mighty miracles which God enabled them to work for the attesting the truth of this Doctrine both preached and written Now the Church which was in being in the first ages when these holy men committed their Doctrine to writing was a most competent witness of their writing those Books which go under their names and accordingly received them as the Sacred writings of such persons divinely inspired and so convey'd them to the next generation Thus the Iewish Church received the Books of Moses and the Prophets and thus the Primitive Christian Church received the writings of the Evangelists and the Apostles as also the Books of the Old Testament both upon the tradition of the Iewish Church and also upon the authority of our Blessed Saviour who own'd and approved of the same And thus the Books both of the Old Testament and the New have ever since by the good Providence of God been preserved in the Christian Church and handed down from one generation to another and so shall be we need not question to the end of the world And this same tradition of the Church whereby these holy Books are distinguished from all others and carefully delivered by the former age to the next following this we give all just regard to and do freely grant that this is of singular use for our information what Books belong to the Canon of Scripture what not and by this tradition we learn that this Book was written by this man under whose name it goes and another by that as for instance this by St. Matthew that by St. Mark c. But whilst the Church thus bears testimony to the Scripture to which testimony we give all due regard she does not I say give authority to it For there is a vast difference betwixt these two It 's the Kings hand and seal which gives authority to a writing containing suppose a grant of this or that priviledg but some credible persons his Secretaries or others who were witnesses to his signing or sealing of that writing may give testimony to it and so procure it to be own'd as authentick Thus the holy Scriptures which are recommended to us by the testimony of the Church derive their authority from God only who hath set to his seal that they are true as I have said both by the miracles that were wrought to confirm the Doctrine contained in them by the holiness of that Doctrine and many other circumstances relating thereto 3 Yet again take notice when I say we give such regard to the testimony of the Church I do not hereby mean the Roman Church as distinct from all others no by no means but the truly Catholick even the whole Christian Church whether of the East or West the North or South For this hath been the constant tradition of the whole Church in all ages ever since the Apostles that these Books were written by men divinely inspired and were given to be the rule of our faith and manners If some doubt was for a while made concerning a Book or two yet when these doubts were removed they were received into the Canon with the rest And this hath been the opinion not only of the Catholick Church but of most Hereticks and Schisinaticks also whose testimony here may be of great force whilst they could not but own the authority of Scripture even though they were confuted by it Yea to this I may add the acknowledgment of Heathens themselves or of Iews who lived in those times that the Books which go under the names of St. Matthew St. Paul c. were indeed written by them Thus we have a general current tradition not only of the Roman but of all other Churches in the world that such and such Books belong to the Canon of Scripture and this is commonly granted by Hereticks and Schismaticks themselves And even Heathens and Infidels who wrote against the Christian Religion have own'd these Books to be written by those persons whose names they bear who were eminent in that age for the propagating of our holy Religion So that we have a much more famous and uncontroulable tradition for it than that the Books which are said to be written by Tully Virgil c. are indeed their works which I think no body makes any doubt of Lastly from what hath been said you may infer that though we give just regard to this current tradition of the Universal Church by which these holy Books are convey'd to us as Canonical Scripture yet it does not in the least follow that we are therefore obliged to embrace all those Doctrines and practices of the Roman Church which she would impose upon us under the venerable name of Traditions of the Catholick Church whilst they are for the most part only the private opinions and usages of their own Church many of them of very late date and expresly contrary to the judgment and practice of the Christian Church in the first and purest ages of it as well as to the holy Scripture it self So that there is no more reason for our embracing these traditions of the Romish Church than there was for our Saviour and his Apostles to receive all the traditions of the Iewish Church by many of which they had made void the Commandments of God After all then Tradition rightly understood makes nothing against but apparently for us For if there be any other Tradition as universal as this of the Books of Holy Scripture our Church readily embraces it as before has been exprest And we will own that the summ of our Faith is brought down by Tradition viz. in the very form of baptizing in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and more largely in the Apostles Creed wherein this form is explain'd We grant also that at first the Christian Faith was thus planted by the Preaching of the Gospel before the Books of the New Testament were written But now this our Faith is most plainly and fully contained in these Sacred Books whereas the additional Doctrines of the Romish Church are no more brought down by Universal Tradition than they are contain'd in the Holy Scripture which we assert to be the only sure and perfect rule of Faith and manners and upon all accounts much
more fit to be so than bare tradition which they of the Church of Rome so vainly boast of But for your further satisfaction in this point I shall refer you to a most solid and rational discourse concerning the Rule of Faith done by a Reverend Divine of our Church and shall now hasten to what remains L. His seventh Argument is this It cannot be shewn that for these 1500 years there hath been any Catholick who held that the Pope of Rome was Antichrist or that did revile and rail at the holy Sacrifice of the Mass or lastly that did blame Invocation of Saints the usual praying for the Dead and such like works of piety belonging to Faith and Religion which the whole world hath laudably practised and reverenced for 1500 years Wherefore it is most evident that Lutherans Calvinists c. do most wickedly when they dare revile such things T. These points have all of them been sufficiently discust already I have told you how one of their Popes did assert him to be the forerunner of Antichrist who should assume the title of Universal Bishop which his Successors have now a long time done whilst they claim a Supremacy over the Universal Church But which is more material I have she-wn how contrary the Doctrines and practices wherein Popery consists are to the nature and design of true Christianity and therefore may well enough be stiled Antichristian I have shewn that there is not properly a Sacrifice in the Communion but a commemoration of Christs Sacrifice only once offered and have also manifested that there is neither Scripture Reason nor good Antiquity to be pleaded on behalf of that Invocation of Saints and praying for the Dead which are now used in the Church of Rome As for railing and reviling I would not be guilty of it 'T is enough to disprove their errors and renounce them to shew the falshood and mischiefs of them and this I hope is not to be accounted railing In a word whatever he pretends no Christian Writers for four or five hundred years after our Saviour did assert the Bishop of Rome to be Christs Vicar on Earth and under him supreme Governour of the whole Christian Church Nor did they teach or practise such Invocation of Saints and praying for the Dead as are now in use amongst Papists And upon this account our Church hath with great reason and religion reformed her self from these and the like corrupt innovations L. Doubtless she has so and the weakness of his Arguments do the more assure me of it His last is nothing else but a repetition of what he has often said viz. That the first Authors of Christian faith in Germany Spain England c. have acknowledged and brought in no other faith nor have our forefathers received any other Faith than the Holy Catholick Roman which self-same we have received from our forefathers and have hitherto conserved Whence he concludes that Sectaries his common name for all Protestants have invented new opinions of their own and presented them to the people as a certain rule of Faith and the pure word of God and that consequently they are liable to the curse denounced against those who preach a new Gospel nor can ever hope to please God and attain eternal happiness being destitute of the right faith whereupon he advises his Scholar considering the nearness of death and the eternity of Hell torments to prefer the salvation of his Soul before all sublunary things T. So far his advice is good but 't is a wonder that any man who pretends to have a regard to his own or others souls and believe there is an Hell provided for such as make and love a lye dare be guilty of such notorious forgeries and calumnies as are contain'd in this his charge against Protestants as if they had proposed some new opinion of their own devising for a rule of Faith whilst it 's well known that we make the holy Word of God to be the only certain rule of it And even he himself a little before accused us for saying that nothing is to be believed but what is contained in Gods Word that is nothing as necessary to salvation as I have before granted and proved This he calls the ground-work of the Reformation and we do not deny it And that same Christian Faith which is contain'd in these holy Scriptures at large and briefly summ'd up in the Creed is that same Faith which the first planters of Christian Religion taught and established in our own and other Countries and this self-same do we retain to this day If then the Apostles Creed or the Nicene Creed as we commonly call it be a new invention so is our faith but if these contain an Abridgement of the truly ancient Catholick Faith then his charging us with new inventions is a most false and malicious slander so far are we from it that a great reason why we reject their Doctrines of the Supremacy and Infallibility of their Pope or Church with the rest of their Errors is because these are new inventions of their own and no part of the ancient Faith Wherefore instead of pronouncing the heavy sentence of damnation upon others which is true Popish charity it behoves them well to consider how they can exempt themselves from the curse threatned to those who preach another Gospel than the Apostles did which in some sort they do whilst they impose the Traditions of their Church of which the Apostles never spoke a syllable as of equal certainty and authority with the Holy Scriptures themselves But I am tired with his Arguments which still lead me so oft to repeat the same things Though I shall not repent it if it any way tend to give you more satisfaction L. I thank God I am well satisfied with your discourse and am now fully convinced that there is small strength in these his Arguments which he pretends to be such pregnant and unanswerable things But after all there remains something which he calls an evident demonstration that the Roman Catholick Church hath been and still is the true Church which I shall desire you to take into examination T. Yes very willingly and I doubt not but we shall soon find how little it deserves the name of a demonstration Though if it be possible for him to produce any thing that has an appearance of truth and reason sure he will now do it in the last place that it may leave the greater impression upon his Reader Let us hear then what he says CHAP. IV. An Answer to a pretended Demonstration That the Roman Church is the true Catholick Church L. THIS Demonstration which he so much boasts of is taken he says from one Dr. Baily who it seems revolted from our Church to that of Rome and thus it runs It will not be denied but that the Church of Rome was once a most excellent flourishing Mother-Church This Church could not cease to be such but she must fall
from it This also is the practice of the Romish Church whilst she requires men to profess their belief of that which by God's Word they know to be most false and to practise that which from the same word they are assured is unlawful and abominable By all this it appears then that the Church of Rome whilst she cries out against all others as Schismaticks is her self most Schismatical in that she sets up her self above all other Churches and will hold Communion with none but those who enslave themselves to her draws away people from their own Pastours and imposes unlawful terms of Communion upon all her Members Now by this means she hath departed from the way of the Ancient Catholick Church which never allow'd any such Usurpation but strictly forbade it in the Canons of the most Ancient most general and orthodox Councils By this means she broke off from the Eastern Church which would not submit to this her Usurpation And by this means she made it necessary for the Western Churches to withdraw from her that they might not be defiled with her Errors and Corruptions and to reform themselves so far as they had been defiled and most unjust it is in her to refuse Communion with them on account of their Reformation Yea by this means lastly she hath in some sort departed from her self I mean from that integrity and purity of Faith and Worship which once was in the Church of Rome and did for some Ages continue in it But by degrees she did more and more degenerate till at length she became so polluted that it was altogether unlawful and unsafe to retain Communion with her lest partaking in her Sins we should also partake in the Plagues that were due to them The gradual Apostasie of their Church is so evident that few of their own most famous Historians have the impudence to deny it Even Baronius himself as well as many others makes heavy complaints of that corrupt state it was faln into about Nine hundred or a thousand years after our Saviour when he confesses that impudent Strumpets had got such an interest in Rome that Church preferments were disposed of at their pleasure yea the Popedom it self So that he says our Lord seem'd to be a sleep in the Ship which was in danger of being overwhelmed with waves with much more to the same purpose And what sort of creatures were then made Popes appears full plain by the History of their Lives written by their own Followers Many of them such Monsters of men for all manner of villany and lewdness that they seem to exceed the very worst of the Heathen Emperors And can we think it impossible or unlikely for these men to fall into error and superstition who wallowed in all vice and wickedness Can their Infallibility be secured when their virtue is lost Will the Spirit of Truth whom the wicked World cannot receive dwell in such impure defiled minds No certainly this Blessed Spirit is only promised to those who love our Saviour and keep his Commandments Some of these Popes are accused not only of the most bruitish sensuality but of Blasphemy Infidelity and even Atheism it self And what a Clergy was the Church like to be filled with when the very Heads of it were thus corrupt And alas what a sad influence was this like to have on the minds and manners of the people How like would their state be to that of the Jewish Church Isa 1. 4 5 6. The head sick and the heart faint from the soal of the foot even to the head no soundness in it but wounds and bruises and putrifying sores Or as in Ier. 5. last The Prophets prophesy falsly the Priests bear rule by their means and the people love to have it so No wonder then if whilst the Watchmen slept the enemy came and sowed Tares Plainly it 's no wonder in such times of ignorance and profaneness that manifold errors and abuses both in Doctrine and Worship should creep into the Church especially such as made for the interest and reputation of the Clergy who having little of sanctity and true worth left they take other methods to recommend themselves to the people and having an ignorant credulous people to deal with their chief business was to gratify their fond superstitious humour and to advance themselves in their esteem And most of those things in difference betwixt us and the Church of Rome do plainly serve to this purpose either to promote the wealth and honour of the Clergy or to please the senses and amuse the fancies of a carnal superstitious people to keep them in ignorance and indulge them in their sins rather than to bring them to sound knowledge and true repentance and godliness as the instances oft before given do plainly shew You see then into what a corrupt state the Church of Rome hath degenerated in these latter Ages and therefore how great Reason there was to Reform our Church from Popish corruptions and how little reason you have to desert this well-reformed Church whereof by God's Mercy you are a Member to run over to Rome which abhors all thoughts of a Reformation Nay you would have no reason to betake your self thither though that Church was at this day as pure and orthodox as when it was first planted by the Apostles L. So little reason do I see for my going over to the Romish Church that had I till now lived in communion with it I durst not for a world continue any longer therein And by what you have said I plainly find that this Evident Demonstration my Author so boasts of is a piece of as meer sophistry as any other of his Pregnant Arguments and Unanswerable Propositions of which he has mustered up a great number to little purpose And whilst there is no more strength in his Reasons I give little need to his censures how bitter soever For he uses much what the same harsh and uncharitable language in the conclusion of his Book that he did at the beginning That no Salvation is to be had out of the Church of Rome that if we will not have her for our Mother we must not expect to have God for our Father quoting St. Austin for it T. But without all Reason whilst he applies to their particular Church what is said of the Catholick Church of Christ. But nothing more common in their mouths than the Roman Catholick Church as if there were no true Christians or Catholicks in the World but those of their own party which how unreasonable as well as uncharitable it is we have before seen L. Certainly it is both in a very high degree whilst he dare boldly doom all men to damnation except his Roman Catholicks whom he looks upon as the only favourites of God and heirs of Heaven For he says they cannot be in the least danger of missing the inheritance of God's Children in the next Life if they have lived as they believed T. What
we call them not Sacraments yet we do not in the least deny whatever of goodness or usefulness is to be found in them but do our selves I say embrace them and make use of them all but one to such good ends and purposes as they serve for which will easily appear by a brief survey of them First As to Confirmation you may see in what esteem it is in our Church by the Office appointed for it in the Liturgy where it is expresly ordered that those who are come to years of discretion and well instructed in the Principles of Religion so that they are capable of taking upon themselves the vow that was made for them in Baptism that they should openly before the Bishop and the Congregation make profession of their Faith and ratify and confirm their Baptismal Vow whereupon the Bishop lays his hands upon them according to the most ancient usage in blessing and praying for a person and begs of God to strengthen and increase in them the Graces of his holy Spirit that they may continue for ever in his Service And this practice of Confirmation many of our Divines who have written about it do highly commend as a very Iaudable useful and ancient constitution and which if the Rules of our Church about it were more duly observed mightily tends to the promoting of knowledge and godliness even much more than as it is practised in the Church of Rome where it 's administred to Infants not long after Baptism whereas it seems plainly designed in our Church for those who are of a competent Age that they may take their Baptismal Vow upon themselves which if they do seriously and understandingly it must needs make the deeper impression on their minds more firmly oblige them to the observance of it and better qualify them for the assistance of God's Grace and render them more fit for the Holy Communion where again they solemnly renew the same Vow Yet all this while we do not reckon Confirmation to be a Sacrament in the sense our Church uses that word nor do we equal it with Baptism and the Lords-Supper since we find no such express institution of it by our Saviour in the Gospel nor such promises of Grace made upon the use of it Nor therefore does our Church think that the want of it will be any hindrance to the Salvation of baptized Infants who dye before they are confirmed As for Holy Orders there is much less reason to give the name of Sacrament to them since they belong to only one sort of men who are thereby devoted not to Christianity that was done at Baptism but to the work of the Ministry In the mean time no body sure can be ignorant of the practice of our Church in this matter how careful she is in conferring holy Orders on all those whom she admits to minister in holy things And with what gravity and solemnity this Office is performed may be seen in those publick forms that are appointed in our Liturgy for the ordaining of Bishops Priests and Deacons As for Marriage though we grant that in it is signified the Mystical Union betwixt Christ and his Church yet do we not call it a Sacrament nor see any reason so to do considering the definition of a Sacrament given before But yet we believe it to be an honourable state instituted by God in the time of Man's innocency yea with the Apostle we judge it to be honourable in all men Priests as well as others St. Peter himself having been a Married Man Whilst the Church of Rome forbids her Clergy to Marry thereby seeming to have no great esteem for it She extols a single life more highly above it than there seems good reason for and reckons them a more holy sort of persons than others who abstain from Marriage whilst yet they call it a Sacrament it 's well if they be not more unholy But I hasten to that of Penance Here indeed we do not with the Church of Rome exact from men a particular confession of all their private faults nor send them on long Pilgrimages to this or that Saint nor make them go so far barefoot or barehead nor oblige them to give themselves so many lashes or to say over so many Pater-nosters and Ave-maries but rather we press upon them the great duty of Repentance and Reformation without which they cannot be pardoned that they should confess their sins to God with shame and sorrow speedily and thorowly forsaking the same In some Cases also there is a publick Penance enjoyn'd by the discipline of the Church that notorious offenders should openly acknowledge their crimes beg pardon of God and the Congregation profess their sorrow and purposes of amendment requesting the prayers of Minister and People on their behalf But this while we see no Reason to give the name of Sacrament to mens expressing their repentance As to any bodily austerities that may tend to the mortification of sin or to a sort of holy Revenge on our selves for it our Church gives no particular precept about them but leaves every man to his own discretion as the Gospel has done but she most earnestly calls them to break off their sins by righteousness and their iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor and very useful it is for them to advise oft with their spiritual Guide You see then as to these four which Papists call Sacraments that our Church cannot in the least be charged with any defect for not having the things themselves for we both use them all and give them due esteem though we do not think the title of Sacraments in our sense of the word properly to belong to them As for the last thing mention'd that of Extreme Unction which is an anointing of â—ying persons with Oil consecrated for that purpose we are so far from accounting it a Sacrament that we do not at all use it in our Church nor see any reason why we should That which Papists chiefly alledge for it is from St. Iames Chap. 5. 14 15. Is any man sick among you let him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray over him anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord and the prayer of faith shall save the sick and the Lord shall raise him up Now it seems most probable that this custom was to last but during the time of miraculous Cures in which sometimes Oil was made use of as Mark 6. 13. though some think there might be a medicinal virtue in the Oil it self But however it be it affords not a sufficient ground for what is now practised in the Church of Rome For in those times you see it was intended for the health of the body whereas the anointing amongst Papists is pretended to be for the benefit of their Souls and is commonly used when they perceive no hopes of recovery which is a meer device of their own there being no command of God for it nor any