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
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
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
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
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
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
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
up where they could a most cruel and bloody Inquisition for the destroying of those whom they call Hereticks even all that will not submit to their tyranny By slaughters in the open field and publick Massacres by burning at the Stake or murdering in Prison have they cut off thousands if not millions of innocent and good Christians Judge then whether are these men acted by the Spirit of Christ yea or no L. I think not since he tells us that he came into the world to save mens lives and not to destroy them T. To this let me add that whilst they keep up the name of Christianity and so may be said to sit in the Temple of God they have for their own ends most grosly corrupted this holy Religion ordering all their Doctrines and practices so as may conduce most not to the good of souls but to encrease the wealth and honour of the Pope and his Clergy Multitudes of whom especially those of higher rank have lived in pomp and pride yea wallowed in all riot and luxury and by the bad examples they give by the loose Doctrines they teach and the large Indulgences they grant upon easie terms they have done much to promote and encourage wickedness amongst the people Judg then I say whether is all this pride and ambition this sensuality and impurity this bloodiness and cruelty falshood and violence which is the very natural genius and spirit of Popery properly so called whether is it agreeable to the temper and design of Christianity L. I rather think it directly contrary thereto T. So far therefore it may justly be stiled Antichristian Yet herein do not mistake me as if I was so uncharitable as to censure all Papists to be such proud cruel vicious persons No far be it from me I hope there are many honest souls among them both of Clergy and Laity who as I have before said do according to their knowledg serve God in the simplicity of their hearts But this I assert that consider Popery as a thing distinct from Christianity the chief Doctrine of it being that of the Popes Supremacy it hath been and at this day is carried on by such ways as I have named even by force and fraud by plots and treasons by war and bloodshed And the governing part among them who are chief factors for this design the Court and Conclave of Rome with all their busie active instruments up and down the world are led and acted by such an Antichristian or Unchristian spirit as I have before described Most plainly do they prefer their own cause and party far above Christianity the greatness and glory of the Pope and his Clergy before the honour and interest of our blessed Saviour and the salvation of precious souls Insomuch that with these Grandees Religion is little more than a bare name and serves meerly for a cloak and pretence under the disguise whereof they can more effectually pursue their own carnal ends And for the obtaining of these they have so strangely altered it that by the use they make of it and the colours they give it a man would be apt to think that the great design of our Saviours coming into the world was not so much to redeem and save mankind as to advance his pretended Vicar the Pope and to make him the greatest and most absolute Monarch in the whole world Whereas in truth nothing can be more contrary to the life and temper of our Saviour and to the whole tenour of his Holy Religion than such an ambitious lordly spirit proudly affecting dominion and honour and the great things of this present world On this account then you may perceive how justly the Pope and his adherents who make it their chief business to promote this his Temporal greatness to the infinite prejudice of Christs true Religion may justly be stiled an Antichristian faction And if after all this it shall be found that there are Prophecies in the Revelation and other places of Scripture which foretell that such a great Apostasie there shall be from the purity and simplicity of Religion and that both as to time and place and many other circumstances agreeing to the Church of Rome as by many of our Learned Writers with great reason is asserted this will go very far toward a demonstration that the Pope with his Faction is indeed the Antichrist foretold in holy Scripture L. However that be it seems most evident that Popery is a Doctrine very different from true Christianity and in many things directly contrary to it and is carried on by courses no less contrary to the example and precepts of our Blessed Saviour T. And by this means I hope you do still more and more perceive that a man may be a sincere good Christian without embracing of Popery and particularly this foundation article of the Popes Supremacy On which having been so long let us proceed to somewhat else CHAP. VI. Of Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead and Indulgences L. THE next points which my Author mentions are Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead which he puts both together T. Not without cause for the latter depends on the former as they have now ordered their Prayers though neither of them upon holy Scripture as I doubt not but to manifest but tell me first what says he of Purgatory L. He says that the Apostle informs us in 1 Cor. 3. that there is a fire in the other world in which some slight faults of good people must be purged away before they can attain Heaven T. But if you read the place you 'l find no such matter There 's not a word said of fire in another world or that mens faults are done away by fire Only the Apostle is there speaking of those who add their own fancies and false Doctrines to the Truths of Christianity which Doctrines of theirs shall in due time be strictly examined and upon a narrow search shall be discovered and rejected even as the fire consumes hay and stubble And if the men that preached these Doctrines shall be found to hold the foundation so as to be preserved from destruction yet will they escape with great difficulty as a man that 's saved out of the fire And indeed this Text doth most aptly represent to us the condition of the Romish Church for whilst they retain the foundation of Christian Religion they do build thereupon hay and stubble many false and corrupt Doctrines as an excellent Writer of our Church in a Sermon upon this Text gives a full account in a little room And amongst others he reckons this of Purgatory of which with a pleasant sharpness he there says that though they have got to themselves gold and silver by this Doctrine and that of Indulgences which depends upon it yet is it as errant hay and stubble as the rest that is vain and false For neither this nor any other Text speaks a word concerning souls being held in Purgatory flames and that
it were almost endless to name them Yet the more to confirm you against it if need be let me mention a few of those many As for instance according to this opinion our Saviours body would be in ten thousand places at one viz. where ever the Consecrated host as they call it is At Rome and at Paris in the East-Indies and the West and in thousands of Churches where it 's reserved And in one place Christs body would rest upon the Altar in another it might be carrying toward a sick man It would be in one Priests box and in anothers hand in this mans mouth and in that mans stomach and all this one and the same body still Yea thus it must have been ever since the first institution of this Sacrament above sixteen hundred years ago Millions of men in the several ages and places of the world would all have eaten this self same body a thousand times over and yet still it remains whole and untouched the very same that it was from the beginning neither multiplied nor divided neither encreased nor diminished Again by this Doctrine every wafer and every part of the wafer is the whole body and a thousand wafers are only that one Yea what is more prodigious if any thing can be so according to this opinion our Blessed Saviour when he was present with his Apostles alive and well did then give himself into their hands to be eaten by them So that he was in their mouths and bellies at the same time that he was sitting amongst them and yet never shewed the least sign nor felt the least effect of any such change upon him And yet after all this same Body was next day offered up and his Blood poured out on the Cross. It deserves also to be considered how the breaking of Christ's natural Body and eating and swallowing it is consistent with its being still alive as surely they will grant it is Yea how this same Body should be at God's right hand shining in honour and glory and yet at the same time be set upon the Altar or carried in a Box yea eaten by Mice or by Worms and Flies But no questions must be asked no doubts or scruples raised all must be swallowed with an implicite Faith and they think to solve all well enough with crying nothing is impossible with God which any Man may as well pretend to justifie the grossest falshoods and absurdities in the World Though truly I think none can be imagined greater than what this opinion stands justly charged with That so mighty a change should be made in the very natural substance of the Bread and yet that there is no manner of appearance of it but still here is the same colour tast smell and all other accidents or qualities of Bread after Consecration as before And notwithstanding all this we must believe that there is no substance of Bread to which these accidents belong but the substance of Flesh without any accidents at all What strange prodigious fancies are these And what a scandal is it to our Religion what a mighty hindrance to the belief of it when such an unreasonable opinion shall be proposed as an Article of Faith And be made of equal necessity to be believed with the great Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation though it has no manner of support from the Holy Scripture as I have before shewn L. I confess if a Man thought he could not be a Christian without receiving this Opinion it would be a strong temptation to Infidelity and go nigh to make him reject our whole Religion T. Doubtless it would and I fear it has often produced this effect Woe be to them by whom the offence cometh Yea further it will appear that on some other accounts this Doctrine directly tends to promote Infidelity whilst as many Learned Writers have observed it does in a great measure evacuate and overthrow the main proofs of the Truth of Christianity For one great Argument our Saviour made use of was the Miracles which he wrought The works which I do saith he bear witness of me If you believe not me believe me for the works sake Now to make this Argument of any force it must be supposed that their Senses did not deceive them but what they saw and heard was really true For if our Senses are not to be relied on in judging of their own proper Objects at a due distance how could the people tell but that all these Miracles were meer cheats and delusions But if they had sufficient assurance that they were truly wrought because they saw them with their own eyes and thereupon had sufficient ground to believe that Religion to be true which was confirmed by them then have we as good reason to believe Transubstantiation to be most false since our Senses do as fully assure us that it is so And hence we are very certain that this could be none of the Doctrines which our Saviour taught because there would have been a direct contradiction betwixt the Doctrine it self and the Argument made use of to prove it for whilst he appeals to his Miracles he supposes that Men may trust their Senses in the discerning of proper Objects whereas according to this Doctrine no trust is to be given to them Moreover we know that our Saviours Resurrection was the great confirmation of his Doctrine and did demonstrate him to be the Son of God the promised Messiah Now how should it be known that the same Jesus who was Crucified was indeed risen from the dead but by their sight of him and converse with him Thus we read what full satisfaction it pleased our Saviour to give to St. Thomas in this respect permitting him to put his Fingers into the print of the Nails and to thrust his hand into his side and by this means all his doubts were removed Now the same ground that St. Thomas had to believe that the Body which was wounded and hung dead on the Cross was after raised again the very same have we to believe that the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament are not turned into the natural substance of Christ's Body and Blood even the full evidence of our Senses Whereas if St. Thomas and the rest of the Apostles at the institution of this Holy Sacrament a little before Christs Death had found their Senses to be so grosly deceived as Papists would perswade us I know not how they could well have trusted them so soon after his Resurrection as we find they did If then the Apostles had good reason to believe the Resurrection of Christ to be true so have we to rest assured that this Doctrine of Transubstantiation is most false Yea let me add if we are sure that these words This is my body are in the Gospel then so sure we may be that they cannot be taken in that gross sense which Papists put upon them for as we know them to be there because there we see them and
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
Case since several Writers of their own Church do freely grant that if this Doctrine of Transubstantiation be not true then they may justly be charged with as gross Idolatry as ever was practised in the World And most certainly this Doctrine is not true if any regard may be had to God's Holy Word to clear Reason to our own Senses or to the most Ancient Christian Writers and what they would have more I cannot tell L. I am perfectly satisfied with your Discourse on this point and shall therefore proceed to some other particular T. It 's high time you should and I shall take care to be briefer in the rest only I was willing to insist the longer on this because they reckon it so weighty and important a Doctrine of their Church for the denial of which they look upon us as damnable Hereticks and when they have had power in their hands have treated us accordingly even with all that bloody rage and cruelty which the Idolatrous Heathens of old used toward the Primitive Christians Hereby also you may be convinced how utterly unlawful it is to hold Communion with the Church of Rome which is guilty of Idolatry in this her worship of the Host and imposes the same upon all that joyn with her and therefore what great Reason there was for the Reformation at the first and for our refusal to this day to pollute our Souls by a compliance with such abominations which for ought I can see is as utterly unlawful even though a Man lived in the Dominions of a Popish Prince as it was for the three Children to fall down and worship the Golden Image at Nebuchadnezzar's command And as chearfully might any good Christian venture upon the fiercest flames in this Cause as they did in theirs resting assured if not of a deliverance yet of the Crown and Glory of Martyrs which is a Thousand times better And to conclude when by this instance you are so plainly convinced what a gross and palpable errour is expresly taught and stifly maintained by the Roman Church and as a judgment upon them they seem fallen into it for a discovery of their falshood you may thence easily inferr what opinion is to be had of the Infallibility of that Church and so will be better prepared for the receiving a discovery of any other of their Errors as it shall happen to be made to you To which purpose let us now proceed CHAP. VIII Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mass. L. THE next point mentioned in my Author is that of the Mass which he says little about but that it is the unbloody Sacrifice which Christ offered at his last Supper and which he commanded his Apostles to offer for the commemoration of his death T. This belongs to what we have just now been so largely discoursing of Only you are to take notice that the common Doctrine among them is that at the Mass as they call it or at the Sacrament of the Lords Supper there is a true Sacrifice offered which is propitiatory both for the quick and the dead viz. such as are in Purgatory that is tends to procure the pardon of their Sins and freedom from punishment And this they call an unbloody Sacrifice to distinguish it from that which our Blessed Saviour offered on the Cross when he sned his Blood for us Though how it can be unbloody whilst the natural Substance of Blood is there according to their principles is not easie to understand nor how that can be fitly called a commemoration of his death which they say is a Sacrifice of Christ who is there corporally present But in the mean time this notion of a Sacrifice if taken strictly and properly is a meer fiction not having the least countenance from Holy Scripture where we read only that Christ offered up himself a Sacrifice for us on the Cross but not a word of his doing it the night before when he instituted the Holy Communion nor of his being dayly offered up by the Priest to make atonement for sins Nay we expresly read Heb. 9. 26 27 28. that he only once offered up himself and is now gone to appear in the presence of God for us but there 's nothing said of his being offered up to God by others We do indeed freely grant that in this Holy Sacrament we make a solemn commemoration of that Sacrifice which Christ offered up and so may be said to represent to the Father what his Son hath suffered on our behalf that he may graciously incline to bestow on us those Blessings which were so dearly purchased for us And we do in some sort Feast upon this Sacrifice by our eating and drinking of these holy Elements Here also we do make a Sacrifice or an Oblation of our selves both Souls and Bodies unto God as is exprest in our Liturgy in the Prayer after Receiving and here lastly we do offer up our Thanksgivings and Praises as also our Silver and Gold in Charity and Almsgivings which are the Christian Sacrifices still to be used under the Gospel and with which we read God is well pleased Heb. 13. 16. And in some of these senses are we to understand the Ancients when they speak of a Sacrifice or Oblation made to God at the Holy Table Especially if we consider that the Custom amongst them was as Learned Men inform us for the richer sort to bring good store of provision to this Table which they presented as their Oblation or Christian Sacrifice And out of these was taken the Bread and Wine which were Consecrated and made use of in the Holy Communion and the rest was either spent in their Love-feasts or went to the Poor and to the Clergy L. As there seems little reason to stile the Lords-Supper a Sacrifice save in the sense you have explained it so there seems yet less why they should call it a Sacrifice for the dead as well as the living T. Indeed there is no Reason at all for it nor so much as any colour from Scripture But this depends upon their dream of Purgatory of which we have already spoken an Opinion I told you very gainful to the Church on many accounts and particularly this custom of having Masses for the dead though it yields no profit to the dead themselves yet it brings in much to the living I mean to the Priests who receive great store of Money for these their Masses which is sometimes left by the deceased person himself and sometimes given by his Friends on his behalf this being generally looked upon in their Church as a work of extraordinary Charity and you may be sure warmly enough urged by the Priests and earnestly pleaded for from the very same principle that made the Silver smiths so zealous for Diana even because their Trade and Gain depended upon her honour Act. 19. 27. But whatever there may be of seeming Charity to a dead Friend or of real profit to the living Priest in this device most
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
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
bound in the execution of this their Office to do what belongs to it for the rectifying of mens errors and reforming them from all evil and corrupt practices whether in the worship of God or in their common conversation And thus did those holy and learned men both Bishops and others behave themselves who were the blessed instruments of reforming the Church of England from Popery For the carrying on of which good work God inclined the hearts of our Kings to employ their power for the assistance and encouragement of the Clergy who were engaged in it And herein they did no other than what Hezekiah Iosiah and other pious Kings amongst the Iews did in reforming the Iewish Church And as they needed no new commission from Heaven then for the reformation they wrought having the Law of God to be their rule and warrant no more did our Kings and Bishops whilst they had the Gospel to be theirs according to which they proceeded by degrees Thus in the first place King Henry the Eighth abolished the Popes Supremacy that great fundamental falshood of Popery whilst he retain'd in a manner all other points of it But with great courage and justice he delivered his Kingdom from that yoke of bondage under which the Nation had long groaned even from the Usurpation of the Roman Bishop declaring that he had no manner of power or jurisdiction in his Majesties Dominions but that the King himself next under God and his Christ is Head of this Church that is the Supreme Moderator and Governour over all persons and in all causes as well Ecclesiastical as Civil in these his Realms Wherefore the King with the advice and assistance of his Bishops and Clergy may as lawfully take care for the Reformation of the Church according to the Word of God within his own Dominions as the Kings of Israel or Iudah might do in theirs Yea he is obliged to do it and no foreign power Prince or Prelate hath any the least right to hinder and controul him herein not the Bishop of Rome any more than he of Ierusalem or Antioch And thus far the generality of the Popish Clergy both the Bishops and the Universities concurr'd with the King even such men as Bonner and Gardiner The Popes power being thus broken and abolished this made way for a more thorough Reformation of the Doctrin and worship from many soul errors and superstitions in the days of Edward the Sixth This was for a while interrupted in the reign of Queen Mary but was afterward restored and perfected by the authority of Queen Elizabeth of blessed memory soon after her entrance upon the Government And thus was the Reformation of our Church according to the rule of Gods holy Word most happily begun carried on and compleated in a peaceable orderly and deliberate manner by just and lawful authority even that of the whole Kingdom whether Ecclesiastical or Civil Of which you have an account at large in a late accurate and full History of our Reformation by a Learned hand an Abridgement whereof is done by the same Author in a little room if the History it self be too large for you Our first Reformers then were no Impostors or false Prophets but were indeed sent of God though in an ordinary way being rightly Ordained to the Ministry and duly qualified for that Sacred Office they were guided and directed by the plain Word of God own'd and succeeded by his Providence allow'd and encouraged by his Vicegerents our Kings and Queens and the Reformation at length peaceably and firmly established by the Laws of the Land L. This doubt I think is clearly enough resolved and to me very satisfactorily Pray what 's the next T. He asks whether it can be made good what Luther and Calvin with all Protestants and Presbyterians have so long boasted they could do viz. Reform convincingly any one of the silliest Roman Catholicks that is and to begin let them do it in the matter of the Real Presence L. I do not well understand what he means by this For I think there is no question to be made of it but Luther and Calvin though they were not the Reformers of our Church with other learned Protestants have convincingly reformed many that were Roman Catholicks and in the matter of the Real Presence as well as other points these Converts have been convinced of their error and brought to a sounder judgment agreeable to Scripture and reason T. I think indeed there is more difficulty in finding out the meaning of this question than in answering it though somewhat like it he had before He cannot surely mean that no people who once profest themselves Roman Catholicks as his phrase is have ever been convinced of the errors of the Roman Church so as to forsake the same for thus it hath been with some whole Nations and particularly our own For we grant that in these latter ages our people were generally infected with those errors though from the beginning it was not so And as to Luther and Calvin though they did great service for the Reforming of the Church in their own Countries yet neither they nor any Presbyterians were the chief instruments of that work among us but holy Bishops and many sound and orthodox Preachers ordain'd by them who taught the truth as it is in Jesus and sealed with their blood the truth of what they taught These men by their zealous Preaching their holy living and chearful dying after the example of the Apostles and other Martyrs in the Primitive times did by Gods blessing win over thousands to embrace the Doctrine of the Gospel in its native purity rejecting those Popish errors in which before they had been blindly train'd up Wherefore he might as well say that the Apostles never converted any from Heathenism to Christianity as that our Ministers have never reformed any from Popery What then can he mean I can scarce guess what except that they cannot reform a Papist whilst he still remains one which is as if we should say that the Apostles never converted any heathens because whilst they remain'd heathens they were not converted But I am not willing to think him so weak and silly and therefore till he speaks plainer shall trouble my self no more with this but proceed to his next question which runs thus Can you prove to me clearly out of the written word which you teach ought only to be follow'd as the guide to Heaven that the Sabbath-day is commanded by God to be kept on Sunday and that little children are to be baptized L. Part of this was mention'd before viz. that about keeping the Sabbath for which you shew'd there is enough from Scripture to warrant our practice besides the constant custom of the whole Christian Church ever since the Primitive times and I suppose the same may be said for the Baptism of Infants T. I judge it may and that upon very good grounds For we know that Children were admitted members of
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
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
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
their condition shall be let us leave to the just Judge of all men remembring the Apostles saying Not he who commendeth himself is approved but he whom the Lord commendeth How far the ill education and ignorance of any of them may serve to excuse or lessen their faults it becomes not us to determine But as to our selves we may safely assert that for us to go against the light of Gods Word and our own Consciences in professing their Errors and joyning in their corrupt Worship would be a piece of inexcusable and damnable wickedness Whereas on the other hand we may rest fully satisfied and assured that if we sincerely believe the Holy Gospel which is at this day purely and plainly taught in our Church and live in strict and stedfast obedience to the precepts of it which are dayly inculcated upon us we shall most certainly obtain that Eternal Salvation which in this Gospel is promised to all such obedient Believers Of this we are as sure as that God is true for Heaven and Earth shall sooner fail than one tittle of his Holy Word on which we depend L. Whilst we depend on this Word certainly we shall never be deceived or disappointed But methinks it 's very bold Language and little better than Blasphemy with which my Author concludes his Book when he says that his Roman Catholicks may at the hour of death with confidence use those words of an Ancient Writer O Lord if it be Error which we have believed we are deceived by thee for thou hast confirmed these things to us by such signs and prodigies as could not be done but by thee with more to that purpose T. This can only with truth be spoken concerning the Christian Religion to which God bare witness by mighty Signs and Wonders But to apply it to the false Doctrines of Popery is indeed no better than Blasphemy For neither our Saviour or his Apostles ever taught these Doctrines nor did God ever work a Miracle for the confirming of them L. Surely it would argue more modesty to suspect the weakness of their own judgment and better to examine their Cause rather than to charge God himself with deceiving them if they are deceived T. Very true but you know the Proverb None so bold as those that are blind otherwise certainly they have reason enough to suspect that Cause to be very weak which is supported by no better Arguments than these which your Author hath produced who yet no doubt hath given us the best he could devise of his own head or meet with in their Writers CHAP. V. Of the number of Sacraments with some other things briefly discust and the conclusion of the whole L. SIR I am now come to the end of my little Book and ought therefore to put an end to the trouble I have given you yet before we part will you please to satisfy me in one thing of which I find no mention in my Author T. I shall willingly when I hear what it is L. 'T is concerning the number of Sacraments for Papists charge it as a great defect upon our Church that we have but two whilst they say they have seven T. How little reason there is for this Charge will soon appear if you consider that as to four of these five which the Papists pretend to have more than we though we give them not the name of Sacraments yet we have the things themselves And as to the fifth there is not the least reason that we should receive or they retain it For your fuller satisfaction I shall name them to you and in a few words make good what I have said L. Pray will you please to do it and I shall trouble you with no more questions hereafter T. To the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lords Supper which both we and they receive they do further add Confirmation Holy Orders Marriage Penance and extreme Unction Now as to the name of Sacrament it 's a vain thing to dispute about words till we are agreed of the sense and meaning of them For if by Sacrament they mean any sacred rite or usage that may signify some grace or some good duty or by way of allusion may serve to some good purpose in Religion then instead of Seven they may perhaps reckon Seventeen Sacraments or many more And in this large and looser sense the Ancients commonly made use of the word giving the name of Sacrament to many things relating to Religion which are any way mystical or significant yea frequently they call our Religion it self a Sacrament or Mystery And if they of the Church of Rome will use the word in this large sense and so stile the several things now mentioned Sacraments let them enjoy their liberty I think it 's not worth contending about Only let them not say that we despise the things themselves because we think it not so fit to give them this name For by a Sacrament we understand as it 's exprest in our Church-Catechism an outward sign of an inward spiritual grace given unto us ordained by Christ as a means whereby we receive the same Grace and a pledge to assure us thereof Now in this sense we say that only Baptism and the Lords-Supper are properly to be called Sacraments being ordained by Christ's express command as a way and means for the bestowing of his Grace upon all that duly partake of them These are as it were the Seals of the Covenant of Grace as Divines use to stile them which all Christians if they have opportunity are obliged to make use of For hereby we do in a solemn manner profess our selves to be Christ's Disciples and engage our selves to walk in all holy obedience to his Laws and so make a Covenant with him and upon our sincerity herein we receive Grace from God to enable us for our duty and have an assurance of his favour and of all the blessings that flow from it in and through Jesus Christ. Thus hath our Lord plainly ordain'd that all who believe in him should be Baptized with Water in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost for the profession of our faith in him and for the receiving the remission of our Sins with spiritual Regeneration Thus did he institute the holy Communion commanding all Christians to celebrate the same in remembrance of him for a commemoration of his death till his second coming and hereby we partake of the Body and Blood of Christ for the refreshing and strengthning of our Souls Plainly then you see how these two Sacraments were ordained by Christ himself for the use of all Christians to be as it were the badges of their profession that hereby they might solemnly testify their consent to the Covenant of Grace and at the same time may receive the blessings of this Covenant But now this cannot be said of those other things which the Papists call Sacraments how useful soever any of them may be in other respects For though