far equal that as Mahomet driues all to his belief by the sword the cause is natural so the Church drawes all to it by wit policy and humane learning and this means is altogether as natural Now if you say those first Conuersions were truely effects of grace and wrought by Gods special assistance This sequele is Clear The like made in after ages by the Church far more numerous as difficult and wholly as glorious proceed from the same fountain of Goodnes God's Diuine grace and special Assistance And note I speak here of real Conuersions wrought in Belieuers vpon solid motiues the Church shewes you millions of them not of hypocritical changes pretended hypocritical Conuersions not Valuable for God and Religion when worldly interest has à hand in them These are as soon distringuished by their false lustre as à comet from the sun they last not long but fall like blasing starrs We meddle not with them Thus much of à short digression which makes way to an other querie and 't is as followeth CHAP. V. VVhether all called Christians Belieue intirely Christ's sacred Doctrin And whether meanes be afforded to arriue to the knowledge of true Christian Religion 1. THese questions largely handled in the other Treatise are soon resolued vpon certain Principles I say therfore first All called Christians belieue not truely and intirely Christ Sacred Doctrin and proue it If Hymenaeus and Alexander Timoth. 1. c. 1. 20. once true Belieuers made shipwrack of their Faith if the Arians Monothelits Pelagians Donatists and such known Hereticks named Christians haue fallen also and lost true belief of Christian verities sufficiently proposed This sequel is euident All of them though named Christians haue not Faith intirely good nor indeed any Diuine Faith at all See the other Treatise Disc 3. c. 3. n. 4. 2. I say 2. All and euery one may with ordinary diligence come to the knowledge of the true Christian Religion I proue the Assertion Diuine Faith without which we cannot possibly Means sufficient to know true Religion please God is determinatly necessary to saluation and consequently the Religion where true Faith is taught is also necessary Therefore both these after Ordinary diligence vsed may be known vnlesse we wil say that God first makes such things necessary to saluation and then remoues them so far out of sight that none can know by prudent ordinary diligence what these necessary things are I say necessary to saluation not to dispute with Melchior Canus and others of the necessity of faith to the first iustification of à Sinner This difficulty we waue and Argue 2. God as we now suppose with all Christians yea with Iewes and Turks also is the Author of true Religion which he reuealed to the world for no other end but mans happines and eternal saluation therfore if he desires all to be saued by true Religion which is the final end therof He cannot vnles his Prouidence fail but afford meanes to know where it is professed otherwise which ill beseem's an infinite wisdom he would set vs all on work to gain Heauen by the belief of true Religion and withall leaue vs so in darknes that we cannot with all prudent industry come to the knowledge of it which is to say He will haue vs know the end of Religion and yet conceal the meanes leading to the knowledge of it 3. Again I argue 3. God who obliges not to impossibilities laies à strait command on all to belieue true Religion and not to assent to any fals sect therfore it may be known and clearly distinguished at least from the errours of infidels Iewes and Turks Known I say but how Not by its internal light immediatly for no Religion euer yet was its own self-euidence ex terminis or prudently got admittance because the Professors of it Cryed it vp as true Therfore the credibility of true Religion which must be True Religion is not its own selfe euidence laid open to Reason by force of Conuincing motiues is made as well discernable from Heresy destructiue of saluation as from Turcism or Iudaism yea and may be no lesse clearly discouered by its proper signes and lustre than à true Miracle for example that of S. Peter from Simon Magus Sorcery This cannot be denyed vnles God as I now sayd either command's impossibilities viz to find that out which cannot be found or licenceth vs to embrace any Religion called Christian whether good or bad true or fals it imports not because the best if it can be found is no more but à meer Probability or like vncertain opinions in Philosophy which may be reiected or followed according to euery priuate fancy This execrable Doctrin of the indifference to any Religion learned in the Diuels school is now à daies much in the mouths of many and I fear too deeply rooted in the hearts Nor à thing indifferent of some later Sectaries But of this more here after In the mean time you may conclude If true Religion be in the world it s made discernable not only from Iudaism but Heresy likewise and if it haue this discernibility it can be known if known it induceth an obligation to be belieued with Diuine Faith if it grounds certain Faith Subiectiuely taken in him that belieues it is no Opinion and considered Obiectiuely it implies the highest certainty Imaginable setled on God's Reuelation as is largly proued in the other Treatise Disc 1. c. 5. n. 6. 7. CHAP. VI. Of our Sectaries errour in their search after true Religion As also of Mr. Stillingfleets inconsequent way of Arguing 1. ONe errour common to all condemned Hereticks is in the first place to find out true Religion by the book of holy Scripture alone A most improbable way as the ancient Tertullian learnedly obserues lib de Praescrip cap. 9. 15. but chiefly cap 19. at those words often cited Ergo non ad Scriptuâ—as prouocandum c. The reasons of my Assertion well pondered are most conuincing 1. The Sectary laies hold of à book which he sayes teaches truth and yet knowes not in his Principles nor shall euer know infallibly whether the book he own 's contain's the Doctrin of true Religion or ought to be valued as Gods assured word which is to say in other terms He learn's infallible truths of à Master before he hath infallible certainty of this Masters teaching truth infallibly That the Sectary wants infallible assurance of his book is euident for he saith no word of God written or vnwritten no infallible Tradition no infallible authority on earth ascertain's him of the Scriptures Diuinity So Mr Stillingfleet in seueral places chiefly part 1. c. 6. Pag 170. Therfore he can haue no in fallible Assurance of the Doctrin contained in Sectaries haue not infallible assurance of their Bible Scripture and consequently no Diuine Faith grounded on that Doctrin as I shall shew hereafter How euer grant him an indubitable assurance in à general way of some
vniuersal Tradition for the books of Scripture if Tradition be drawn from the voice of all called Christians whether Catholicks or Hereticks then there is for the very primary Articles of true Catholick Faith A Trinity for example the Incarnation the necessity of Tradition more and Lesse vniuersal Grace Original sin c. Yes most assuredly for innumerable Sectaries admitted Scripture and yet denyed these essential Articles therefore as their Denial made the consent and tradition of all called Christians less vniuersal for such Doctrins so their admitting Scripture with others heightned that Tradition or made it more general Say now Sr. Had those Hereticks argued as you do how little would they haue gained If we should once see you proue à Trinity Or Original sin c. by as vniuersal à Tradition as that is whereby Scriptures are receiued we would acquiese but this is not possible for both you and wee admit Scripture and consequently make that tradition more vniuersal yet we deny your primary Doctrins and therefore all tradition is not so ample for your Doctrins as for the books of Scripture Here is your vnreasonable reasoning Mr. Stilling You know well Hereticks who owned Scripture with vs denied à Sacrifice of Mass An vnreasonable way of aryuing Inuocation of Saints and other Catholick Articles and you 'l haue vs to take à tradition from these men to vphold the Doctrins they denyed Iust as if an Arian should bid me proue à Trinity from all Tradition euen of his Church when he admit's Scripture and denies à Trinity If you reply you vrge vs not to bring in the tradition of all known Aduersaries of the Catholick Church for these now named Articles but only the vniuersal Tradition of the Catholick Church in all ages we haue already answerd that 's best known by the present Churches Testimony no other proof can parallel it And thus much of the Authenticalnesse of our Vulgar Edition free from all material Corruption A further difficulty may yet be moued concerning lesser faults and the preferring it before all other Latin Copies CHAP. VIII How necessary it was to haue one lection of Scripture in the Church A word of the Sixtine and Clementine Bibles Of Mr Stillinfleets mistakes and inconsequences concerning them Obiections answered 1. NOte first It was very meete to haue among so much confusion and various sections of Latin Copies one certain approued and set forth by the mother Church to the end her Children might be vnius labij of one tongue and speak one language in their reading preaching and publick expounding One lection of scripture necessary Holy Scripture Note 2. Though the Council of Trent sess 4. declares this Edition of the Vulgar to be Authentick and preferr's it before all other latin Editions Quae circumferuntur which are now abroad it doth not thereby detract any thing from the credit and authority of the ancient Hebrew and Greek Copies whereof Authors dispute whether they be pure or no whilst the Church is silent and defin's nothing Neither doth the Council reiect the Version of the Septuagint or that ancient Latin Copy called Itala read in the Church before S. Hierom as Vnauthentick in any material point for this Argument is conuincing to the contrary As it is madnes to say Christs Church had not true Scripture since S. Hieroms time so is it à desperate improbability The Church had in all ages true Scripture to assert She wanted that in the ages before S. Hierom which is to say The Church had euer authentick Scripture Moreouer shall we think yee iudge that God whose Prouidence neuer failed suffered his own spouse to be beguiled with false Scripture for 15. ages and that now towards the end of the world he will prouide vs of à purer book by the hands and help of à few scattered Sectaries 2. Note 3. Translations may be faulty three wayes chiefly 1. More ambiguity and darknes may lye in à translated word than in the Original and this fault if any is remediless because the latin or à Vulgar language reacheth not alwais to the full Energy and signification of an Hebrew or Greek expression wherof you haue some examples in that learned Preface to the English Rhems Testament anno 1600. 2. Corruptions How Transtations may be faulty may creep into à Version by the inaduertancy or ignorance of the Translator who is neither supposed prophet nor infallible and thus Authors say that S. Hierom though prodigiously learned was not euery way infallibly secured from lesser errours yet this Prouidence God hath for the good of his Church that he will nor permit any considerable deprauation to remain in all Copies If therefore one be faulty all cannot be thought so and the faults of one by carefully comparing it with many and à diligent inspection into other Copies may be corrected See Greg. de Valent lib. 8. Analy C. 5. puncto 4. 3 dly Lesser deprauations often enter à version through the mistakes of Printers Librarians c. Of these you had many in the Vulgar Latin before the correction of the Sixtine and Clementine Bibles and they are scarse auoidable chiefly after seueral reimpressions as we daily see in other books Thus much premised 3. Listen à little to Mr Stilling strange inconsequences and groundles exceptions against the Corrections of Sixtus and Clement He saith the one Bible differs from the other as Of Mr Stilling 〈◊〉 gâ—â—und 〈◊〉 exceptions appears by those who haue taken the pains to Compare them in some thousands of places A great number indeed But the first question will bee whether these Pain-takers ought to be belieued vpon their bare word without further examination This Sr. you suppose which cannot well pass before the particulars come to the test and bear the censure of your Aduersaries wholly as learned as you haue any But say on Are these supposed differences any more but like the racings of the skin or do they giue any mortal wound to the Vital part of Scripture If you only assert the first you may not only Cauil at your English Bibles but also at all the latin translations vsed in the Church both before and after S. Hieroms time for they haue some verbal differences which you may call petty and inconsiderable faults Now if you assert that the Sixtine and Clementine Bibles are Materially corrupted in points of Faith and manners or to vse your phrase Vitally wounded what is become I beseech you of that peculiar hand of Prouidence you own in preseruing the authentick Copies of religion safe to our dayes Or which much imports you to answer by what other more authentick Copy can you without endles disputes and vncertainties correct the Vulgar This one particular will giue you work enough before you come to à certain decision of the difficulty In à word because I think many know not too well all that concern's these two Editions of the Sixtine and Clementine Bibles I
more easily to the knowledge and belief of the reuealed truth in this Mystery may Sectaries glosses haue place all are cast into à labyrinth of seeking without hope of finding what God will haue vs to belieue In à word the plain truth is thus 9. Sectaries will haue vs to dispute of Religion but on such Terms as shall be sure neuer to end one difficulty That is they will haue vs to reason about matters of highest consequence and with it destroy the best ground of all reasoning I say therefore If Religion were to be proued by Scripture only add to Scripture the authorities of Fathers when euery one makes that sense of scripture orthodox which he conceiues to be so Religion ere this day had been long since destroyed For the Arian would haue his sense passe for truth The Pelagian his The Monothelite his The Protestant his All these different senses admitted destroy the very Essentials of Christian Religion And for this reason I would fain learn of any knowing man What that owned Principle is whereby the Sectary proues the sense he giues of Scripture to be more certainly à reuealed Truth than that glosse is which either Arian or Pelagian forceth out of the very book which Protestants read I assert boldly they are all alike Guesses and meer fancies guide A iust parallel between Arians and Protestants them and nothing els The Arians sense is not clear no more is the Protestants The Arian has no vniuersal Tradition for his sense no more hath the Protestant The Arian has no vniuersal consent of Fathers no more has the Protestant The Arian has no Church euer reputed Orthodox which owned his sense no more hath the Protestant Now if the Protestant recurr to the Primitiue Church The Arian will go higher to the very Apostles preaching and auouch that his sense was taught by those first Masters of the Gospel I say it once more they are all alike there is no difference between them The Arians gloss is as good as the Protestants and the Protestants wholly as bad as the Arians 10. Hence I say 2. The Protestant cannot aduance any thing like à proof in behalf of his own new opinions and he is as farr from Principles when he opposes Catholick Doctrin You haue the reason giuen already No proof less sure than the true sense of Scripture taught and deliuered by à Church confessedly orthodox No proof less firm than that Churche's authority and her receiued Tradition can indubitably ascertain any of Christ's Sacred Doctrin But it is euident Protestants want such proofs when they either plead for their own opinions or impugn Catholik Protestants Condemned by their own writings Doctrin And to make good what I say I appeal to their own writings and ask euery iudicious Reader whether he euer yet heard Protestant whilst he asserts no Transubstantiation for example No Sacrifice of the Mass no Inuocation of Saints say plainly and positiuely vpon à solid ground Such an ancient Church reputed Orthodox confessedly denied Transubstantiation Inuocation of saints the Sacrifice of the Altar c Such à passage of Scripture sensed and interpreted by that Orthodox Church or general consent of Fathers agreeing with known Scripture and Church Doctrin decried these In what manner Sectaries handle controuersies Catholick Tenets as we Sectaries do now Has euer Protestant I say gone thus plainly to work No God knowes I 'le highly extoll the man that shall offer at it What then is their strain of writing All à long à meer cheat They either argue negatiuely We find not forsooth Such Doctrins in antiquity which is false and though true t' is to no purpose Or they cite you two or three ambiguous Testimonies of the Fathers gloss and sense them as they please and then cry victory Thus Mr Stilâ—ingfleet proceed's as you shall see presently I say No such matâ—er An ambiguous Testimony of à Father glossed or sensed by â—ou is wholly insufficient to ground faith vpon or to assert abâ—lutely This is Christs Doctrin without an ancient Orthodox Church which indubitably maintaine'd the Position and that â—nse you would draw from à Father And mark well what I say â—or we shall afterwards end all controuersies by it In the mean â—me who is there so far from reason that can perswade himselfe â—t I or any ought to reiect what my Church teaches because à Sectary offer 's to draw some few Fathers to à new sense which no Orthodox Church euer heard of When all know or should know that no priuate mans opinion no doubtful Text much lesse Sectaries glosses added to an ambiguous sentence can assure me what Christ's Doctrin is which as I said euer stand's firm vpon vndubitable Principles or à Belieuer ought not to own it as Doctrin truely reuealed 11. But before I press this point further and shew vpon what certain Principle the Catholick relies when the Scriptures sense the like is of the Fathers is debated I must needs entertain you à little because it much auail's to my present purpose with à few known Authorities of Fathers which either conuince our Catholick Doctrin of Christs real Presence in the Eucharist or we may boldly say no truth was euer established by those great lights of the Church I say only à few for it is not my intent to collect half of what is vsually quoted by Catholick Authors my chief What is chiefly intended in Citing the Fathers ayme being thus much at present to make this truth manifest That as long as Sectaries iarr with vs about the sense of Fathers and only deliuer opinatiuely their contrary Sentiments so long they do no more but without fruit beat the aire and dispatch no work Recourse therefore must be had to à clearer Principle whereof we shall afterward treat at large Now as I promised one Authority is to be examined Theoderets Testimony alleged aboue Contains most Catholick Doctrin 12. Whilst I was in hand with this Chapter à Gentleman â— our Nation pleased to tell me of à late little book called to hâ— remembtance The Rule of Faith wherein one passage of Theoderâ— is much vrged and thought vnanswerable After some Discourse I shewed him my notes in the other Treatise Disc 4. C. 7. n. â— wherevnto He replied modestly Surely Theoderet saies morâ— who either must suppose the very inward substance of bread â— changed at all or his Conference with the Eutichian Heretick becomes What Sectaries would force from this authority forcelesse and this the little book presseth most Sr said I. It seem's very strange that your late book bring 's again to light such stale obiections long since answered by one to say nothing of many others of our own Nation the learned Brereley Please to read with me Theoderet's own words first and Brereley afterward We turned to Theoderet Paris Print 1642. Tom. 4. Dialog 2. called Inconfusus Dialogus and began with the pag. 84. Next I produced Brereley of the Liturgie
it If no Councils nor Tradition support it It has no Principled Doctrin If no Principled Doctrin No Moral certainty If no Moral certainty for meer groundles Glosses cannot giue Any against all the Powerful Motiues of our Church there is no Probability in it If no Probability The whole Reformation must be reduced to fancy only There we found it And there leaue it 11. Now if any except against our casting off Protestancy from the meanest degree of Probability induced to Iudge otherwise vpon this ground That many learned men defend it I haue Answered aboue Meer Probability is insufficient to support Christian Truths Here I both answer and Ask. 2. where were the many learned Defenders of this new Faith when one Luther stood vp alone against the whole Christian world And first broached his Protestancy If at that time there was no Authority nor reason for the Nouelty Process of time hath gained it neither Look then into its Rise or First beginning you 'l find it vnsound at the bottom yea vtterly improbable vpon this certain Principle That the Singular Doctrin of one disgusted Rebel against à whole Church and Thousands more pious and learned then Himselfe can merit no Belief but deserues what it has to be Anathematized 12. We must yet insist à little vpon this Point And lay forth the Vanity of our Aduersaries pretence to Probability which done you shall see controuersies are ended Sectaries May say Protestancy improbable If their own Authority makes not Protestancy Morally certain it cannot but raise it to à high degree of Probability We deny this And shall presently Ask why their Authority more aduanceth this Religion to Probability than the meer Authority of Arians bring 's Arianism to Probability At present we do not only oppose the voice and vote of the Roman Catholick Church against this Plea But the Authority also of Graecians Abyssins and all other called Christians who with one vnanimous Consent decry Protestancy as improbable Compare therefore votes with votes Authority with Authority There is no Parallel For for one that defend's it you haue hundreds yea Thousands that Contradict the Nouelty Thus much is indisputably Euident if we precisely Consider Authority as it were in Abstracto or oppose the Votes of dissenting Parties against it But here is not all We must goe further And distinguish well between à bare Authority and a rational grounded Authority For this is an vndeniable Truth Reasonable Principles euer precede or are presupposed when Religion is pleaded for To the consequent Authority of those whether many or few that Teach or Profess it Hence all say If the first conuerted Iewes to Christianity Had not had most weighty Inducements proposed to reason before they deserted Iudaism and belieued in Christ The change had been most imprudent Nay all had been obliged as is proued in the 4. Chapter To hold on in that Profession still without Alteration So necessary it is to haue rational grounds laid firm in the Foundation of Religion before the Professors allow it either Moral certainty or so much as Probability Thus much premised 13. We draw Sectaries from all Self-Voting or further pleading by their own Authority And force them in this Contest if Sectaries drawn off their own Selfe voting Protestancy be defensible not to say but to proue by Principles distinct from their own bare votes These two Propositions 1. That God who is Truth it self And once laid his Truths the foundation of the Roman Catholick Church permitted that faithful Oracle to become Traiterous to teach Idolatry to tell the world loud Lies for à thousand yeares together And that all this happened when there was no other Orthodox Church on earth to vnbeguile Those poor deluded Christians The second Proposition to be proued is That these Millions of souls learned and vnlearned who firmly belieued this Church And dyed happily in it were All mad All Idolaters All besotted and seduced What the Sectary is to Prou◠by Fooleries And which is à Paradox aboue Expression That à knot of late vnknown Nouellists pretending to Reformation dare now attempt to teach men more learned than Themselues To make these supposed mad wise The Idolatrous Orthodox the besotted Reasonable The Seduced right in Faith again And that this was and is yet done vpon à meer proofles Supposition that we are mad and besotted which stand's on no Principles And for that reason is contradicted by the vast number of most knowing Catholicks And the whole Multitude of Christians Besides 14. When these two Propositions are made probable vpon good Principles Wee shall listen to our Sectaries Authority But if they fumble herein Only talk and proue nothing Wee reiect their vngrounded Authority And say The more votes they multiply without Proofs the less weight they haue You shall yet see how weightles Their Authority is might we here insist longer vpon one Matter of fact which ends all Controuersies In à word All know the great Controuersy between Protestants and Catholicks comes to this Whether they or we teach The difficulty proposed between Catholicks and Protestants Apostolical Doctrin Whether they or we lay forth the genuine sense of holy Scripture Neither Party saw or heard the Apostles Preach Neither pretend's now to Enthusiasms or priuate Reuelations concerning that Doctrin The whole cause therefore is to be tried and decided by Witnesses of foregoing Ages such Testimonies and Tradition must clear this Matter of fact A pretence to Scripture only without precedent lawful Pastors without Doctors without Witnesses teaching that sense and Doctrin which the one or other Party stand's for is here both vseles and impertinent If then The Protestant makes his Doctrin Apostolical His sense of Scripture Orthodox The Catholick replies Be pleased to giue in your last Euidence produce your Witnesses your Pastors And Doctors Four Ages since That taught as you teach And sensed Scripture as you sense it My Church add's the Catholick euidently demonstrates à continued succession of Her Pastors that taught as I belieue as shall be proued hereafter And shewes as clearly à Succesion of the same Doctrin and Faith with these Pastors Her Antiquity is vndoubted and her pleading Possession in preseruing the true Sense of Scripture and Apostolical Doctrin is as great as any King on earth can shew for the Possession of the Crown he weares Now saith the Catholick Wee examin your pedegree of Pastors and Doctors And after some few Ascents by à The first plead by Principles the others not Retrogradation come at last to the year 1517. There we find and most euidently à Luther or Caluin To be the first men in the world that professed Protestanism that interpreted Scripture as you interpret or owned your Religion With these late Runagates you must stop No man on earth can aduance or bring your Genealogy further Therefore to speak in the words of the Ancient Optatus Meliuitan Lib. 2. Contra Parmen At that time you were sons
without Progenitors successors without à Pedegree New Teachers without commâ—ssion Protestants indeed but without Principles 15. Hence I argue and it is à demonstration against Sectaries If neither Church nor Councils nor Pastors nor Doctors nor any Orthodox Christians in forgoing Ages euer owned or so much as heard of Protestancy before one vnfortunate Fatherles Luther broached it If no Antiquity so much as once mentioned one Professor of that Religion if no Tradition handed to Luther the new Faith he taught all which is without dispute manifest Protestancy most enidently is vpon this very account both an Vnwitnessed and an Vnprincipled Religion And not only improbable but in the highest degree improbable But no Authority can release an vnprincipled Nouelty from its own intrinsick miserable and â—ssâ—ntial state of improbability Therefore our Sectaries votes of no weight at all cannot make it probable And thus Controuersies are ended because an improbable Religion And for this reason improbable because vnprincipled is not defensible 16. To add more to this Discourse I Ask whether one Arius opposing the whole Church represented in the Nicene Council Protestancy as improbable as Arianism defended probable Doctrin or no You will answer No. Very good Yet he quoted Scripture and might one insist vpon the exteriour letter or sound of words more plain and express in the behalf of his Heresy than all the Protestants on earth can produce Fathers plain and Expresss for their Nouelty of Protestanism I would say Neither Theoderet nor any other Father speak's half so clearly to the Doctrin of No Transubstantiation No Sacrifice of the Mass c. As these words to omit others My Father is greater then I may the exteriour letter regulate here seemingly express an inequality between the Father and the Son Now if the seeming clear sound of Scripture made not Arius his Doctrin probable against the Church Then much less can the more obscure Testimonies of some Fathers make the Doctrin of Protestants probable against the Church Now. And if we speak of followers that Arius gained in his time There is no comparison He had more than euer England had Protestants in it 17. One may yet reply The Nicene Fathers cited plain Scripture against Arius Very true And so do Catholicks against Protestants For Christs Sacred words This is my body are as significantly plain against Protestanism as any Text those Fathers then vrged or yet can be vrged against Arianism The Arians not Conuinced by Scripture only But this you see did not the deed nor was then the last conuiction And why Here is the reason Because as Protestants now wilfully Gloss this plain Passage of Scripture and many others So the Arians then wilfully Glossed all those Scriptures alleged by the Nicene Fathers And yet hold on in that strain to our very dayes as you may read in Crellius and Volkâ—lius Yet more As the Arian Party then only Glossed but without the help of any antecedent Church Doctrin known to the world or vniuersal Tradition to settle their Glosses on So our Protestants now do the very same There is no disparity betwixt them They Gloss 't is true but giue vs Churchles Glosses Finally as those Fathers at that time did not only reiect the Arians Glosses but established also their own Definitions vpon Scripture How Conuicted interpreted by the known deliuered Doctrin of the then present and the more Ancient Church for they represented both And thus ended that Controuersy So we Catholicks proceed against Protestants And bring all debates to the like last period The Church or nothing must end them Without recourse had to the known and owned Doctrin both of this present and precedent faithful Oracle They and we may interpret Scripture long enough They may Cauil And we may hold on in our Answers to the end of an other Age without hope of ending so much as one Controuersy But of This enough is said already CHAP. XX. A word to one or two Obiections It is further proued That Controuersies are ended with Protestants who haue no Essence of Religion but false opinions only 1. SEctaries may obiect first We Suppose all this while But proue not The Orthodox world to haue hitherto maintained the Doctrin now taught by the Roman Catholick Church concerning Transubstantiation Inuocation of Saints c. Therefore our Discourse seem's vngrounded I answer 1. The Reply is not to the Purpose in this place whilst we only press Sectaries to giue in Proofs for their Contrary Positions This wee say They Cannot doe Now if wee bee as farr of From Proofes or Cannot ground our Tenets vpon vndubitable Principles Controuersies are ended without more Adoe Because The first Obiection answered both of vs if the Supposition hold's haue no Articles of Religion to Propugn But weak opinions which whether true or false import not Saluation Nay the Truth of them could it be known is scarse worth any mans Knowledge I Answer 2. Our Proofs to say no more now Stand firm vpon Church Authority once at least owned Orthodox on our Councils and ancient Tradition neuer yet repealed nor excepted against But by Hereticks only May it please our Aduersaries to come Closely to the Point and plead in behalf of their Tenets by the Authority of any like or better Church than ours is We haue done and must yeild But this they know is impossible And therefore neither will nor can Answer our Discourse If they say our Church where its contrary to Protestancy has erred Vrge them to proue the Assertion by any Principle either equal to or stronger than our Church Authority is And you will haue them driuen again to their Glosses or to some few gleanings of Fathers In à word to no Principles 2. They may obiect 2. We haue took much pains to proue Nothing against Protestancy For we know some late Professors namely Doctor Bramhal and Mr Stillingfleet stifly maintain A second Obiection Proposed these Negatiues of No Transubstantiation No Sacrifice of the Mass No Inuocation of Saints c. To be only pious Opinions or inferiour Truths Neither reuealed by God nor Essential to Protestant Religion Therefore whilst we vrge them to ground such Negatiues vpon plain Scripture vpon the Authority of an Orthodox Church Councils Tradition c. They tell vs we meddle not at all with the Essentials of Protestancy But only dispute against Opinions And Contrary to iustice force them to proue meer opinions by Scripture Church c. wich is more then we can press vpon them or doe our selues For haue not wee Catholicks many Opinions in Schools which none pretend to ground vpon so strong Principles as we settle our Articles of Faith on Yes most assuredly Opinions then and Articles of Faith cannot but be very differently Principled And thus Point's at à distinâ—tion between Faith and Opinion the Protestant discourses in the present Matters Here saith He is the only difference That Catholicks lay Claim to more Articles
but à Protestant opinion To assert 3. That the Ancient Church was right in faith And the present Church not or That She hath imposed meer Opinions to be belieued by Christians in place of Articles of Faith is à flat Calumny an improbable opinion which neuer yet was nor can be grounded vpon any rational Principle And can these opinions think ye which all Catholicks reiect pass for the grounded Essence of Protestancy They must or it has no Essence at all And mark well As they proceed with vs here so they doe in all other Controuersies They tell vs not only the Creeds but Scriptures much more contain all things necessary to Saluation That 's only their Opinion They tell Particular Proofe Thereof vs Their Belief now and that of the Primitiue Christians for the first Three or Four Centuries is one and the same It is their Opinion meerly And demonstratiuely vntrue They tell vs They own à Church before Luther but to say where or when it was distinct from the Roman Catholick or as They Imagin much larger than the Roman is only an Opinion and most improbable In à word They are euery where so narrowly confined That whether they build or destroy Impugn our Religion or offer to establish their own They neuer get out of the reach of Their own tottering improbable Opinions 8. And because I find this strain runs through Mr Stillingfleets whole Book He cannot surely be iustly offended if for my better Satisfaction concerning his Rational Account I require his rational Answer to one Question which I hold very reasonable Thus I propose it You Sir defend à Religion called Protestancy You allow it some essential Doctrin distinct from Popery and all condemned Hereticks Your Title supposeth this Doctrin well grounded The grounds of Protestant Religion Answer I befeech you giue me first without fumbling that Doctrin peculiar to Protestancy which essentially makes it à Religion Giue vs the Specifical difference of it if 't haue any And A question proposed to Sectaries Next Ground this Doctrin be it what you will vpon the vndubitable Authority of some known Orthodox Church Orthodox Councils or vniuersal Tradition but Fob vs not off with your vnproued Opinions Tell vs no more of belieuing Creeds only The Scripture only the Four first general Councils only without more these Onelies we except against Yet doe you only thus much as I now require T' is easily done if your cause be good And I will recall what euer I haue written against you And craue pardon for my rashnesse But the Catholick knowes well because Heresy can haue no grounded Doctrin This task is impossible I am now to shew the Protestant the impossibility of it also 9. Imagin one who belieues the Creeds as the Sectary pretend's to doe yet so That interiourly And from his very heart He abiures and slights all those Negatiue Articles called the opinions of Protestants I speak not here of his exteriour demeanour nor Countenance his dissembling i' ft be so My Question is this Whether such à man haue internal essential sufficient faith to make him à true belieuing Protestant He hold's himself one vpon this conuincing Reason That he firmly belieues what euer the Professors of that Religion maintain Sectaries must make meer Opinions their Articles of Faith as both essential and sufficient to Saluation Besides He knowes well No obligation lies on him to belieue by Faith the Negatiue Articles of Protestants neither can he because God has not reuealed them Such à man therefore hath compleatly essential Faith enough and is à true belieuing Protestant or if he be not yet got so high or haue not the Protestant Faith compleatly necessary and sufficient to saue him He must help it out by belieuing some one or other Protestant Opinion And Consequently the Belief of Opinions must either constitute him essentially à Protestant Or He will neuer be one yet this is most vntrue for God obliges none to belieue vnreuealed Opinions as Articles of Faith 10. We must goe yet further Suppose this man belieues the Creeds The Roman Catholick Church and euery particular Doctrin She teaches iust so as the best Catholick Belieues And whereas before He only slighted the opinions of Protestants now in place of them he firmly adheres to the Contrary Catholick Positions viz. To The Popes Supremacy Transubstantiation An vnbloody Sacrifice Praying to Saints worhiping of Images And in à word to all that the Church obliges me to belieue The difficulty farther vrged This man in heart is certainly Catholick I Ask whether he is yet à true belieuing Protestant In our Sectaries Principles Hee is For first he belieues his Creeds or Doctrin Common to all Christians And there is the Essence of their sauing Faith O but all is spoiled by belieuing the Church And what euer Doctrin She teaches Why so I beseech you why should this spoile all if in Conscience the man Iudges Her Articles to be reuealed Truths A Catholick you say may be saued Though he belieues thus much Therefore there is no reason to damn this man vpon any Account of his want of Faith For the Faith of His Creeds saues him And the beliefe of our Catholick Articles ruin's not that Faith Ergo. Again You must say His abiuring your Negatiue Opinions doth not Vnprotestant Him if he belieues the Creeds why then should the firm adhering to our contrary Positiue Catholick Articles which you call opinions make him less Protestant You may reply If He hold's them only as opinions He is still Protestant But we now suppose He belieues all as Articles of Faith Very good This then followes ineuitably Not to belieue them as Articles of Faith besides Owning the Creeds essentially makes him Protestant Ergo This also followes To belieue some one Negatiue or more then the Creeds Formally express Add to them the common Doctrin of all Christians The four General Councils c. is essentially necessary to Constitute him Protestant Now This very More which is nothing but à Sectarian Opinion essentially enters in to make him Protestant or Hee shall neuer bee one Thus much I intended to proue and I hold it proued demonstratiuely 11. You haue what I would say plainly laid forth in this vnanswerable Dilemma He who iudges all the Negatiue Articles of A dilemma Protestants false And belieues the Contrary Positiues taught by our Catholick Church As reuealed Truths is yet Protestant or not If not the belief of some thing els Truth or vntruth is essentially requisite to make him Protestant But the belief of That be it what you will now superadded to Constitute him à Belieuing Protestant is no Truth reuealed by God But only à Protestant Opinion without which he wants the Essence of that Religion Ergo most euidently the Belief of Opinions essentially constitutes him à belieuing Protestant Consequently some Doctrin which God has not reuealed makes him Protestant And the belief of his Creeds is not Faith
ouerthrow any Doctrin of our Church Alas what this Oracle positiuely defin's is à stronger Principle than twenty dubious Authorities of Fathers if any such were in appearance contrary It followes 2. That the Roman Catholick Church must of necessity be either owned Orthodox in all She teaches or cannot be belieued in any thing 8. Wherefore I say à great word If this Church hath deceiued the world in teaching à Purgatory for example neither we nor Sectaries can certainly belieue that Christ was here on earth or Redeemed vs. For Ask why belieue wee this great Mystery If you Answer Scripture reueal's it you are Questioned again How One Errour in the Church Destroyes all Faith know you that Scripture is Gods word which Ex terminis euidences not it self You must Answer Vniuersal Tradition and all the Churches in the world haue owned the Book for Gods word Very good But The Church hitherto supposed most Orthodox among so many Heretical Societies and Her Tradition likewise haue actually deceiued all For She is now Imagined to haue taught the false Doctrins of Purgatory Transubstantiation c. Therefore you cannot belieue Her or any Tradition for erring in one point of Faith She is not belieuable in any This principle stand's firm Much less can you trust to the Doctrin or Tradition of known Heretical Churches whether Arians Pelagians or others For all these haue erred and most grosly Therefore you haue no certainty of the verities contained in Scripture nor can you belieue this one Prime Article Christ dyed for vs by Diuine Faith 9. Let therefore the Sectary labour all that 's possible to contract the fundamentals of Faith into the shortest room Imaginable let him mince them almost to nothing let this one Article Iesus is the Christ be Faith enough for all I say if the Roman Catholick Church speaking in the name of God as She pretends to speak hath taught but one false Article and obliged Christians to belieue it vnder pain of damnation Purgatory for example none can now vpon any Motiue known to the world firmly belieue That Iesus is the Christ So pernicious is one known errour of the Church that it ruins's all belief of other Articles nor can such à Church be more trusted in any thing She speaks than Scripture relied on were it false in that Article Iesus is the Christ 10. The reason à Priori is All Faith is at last reduced or finally resolued into Gods Diuine Reuelation whether he speaks by this or that Instrument by this or that Oracle imports nothing The Vltimate reason of the Assertion The difference of the Oracle he speaks by diuersifies not faith which alwaies tend's to one Center and rests on one sure Ground Gods Veracity If he speaks by à Prophet that 's his Oracle If by an Apostle he is made an Oracle If by the exteriour words of Scripture they are Oracles if by the Church She is his Oracle Now further Suppose any of these assumed Oracles speaking in the name of God declare à false Doctrin to Christians the Falsity Vltimatly redound's to God who own 's them as Oracles yet by them teaches the world Falsities It fall's out here As if à Prince should send à Legate to à State who speak's in his name and cheat the whole State by his Embassy would not all deseruedly vpon the Supposition more impute the Cheat to the Prince than to the Legate that speaks in his name The parity is exact and proues if either Scripture Prophet Apostle or Church speaking in the name of God deliuers false Doctrin God himself deceiues vs and therefore Rich. de S. Vict. Said well in this sense also Si error est quem credimus c. If we belieue an errour T' is you Great God who haue deceiued vs But if God can once deceiue either immediatly By Himselfe or mediatly by his Oracle The whole Systeme of Christian Faith is desstroyed What I say would bee true Although He should make à solemn protestation of Speaking Truth For euen then he cannot oblige me to belieue because he may deceiue in that very Protestation and deliuer à falsity if the supposition hold 11. Here then is the final Conclusion As subiectiue Faith in à Belieuer is Indiuisible That is it is either wholly good or wolly naught None can haue à piece of Faith without the whole vertue an Could the Church propose one false Article She can bee belieued in nothing Arian cannot belieue Christ to be à Redeemer if He denies the Trinity So if one Matter of Faith proposed by the Church be really Contrary to what She defines None can belieue any thing She teaches For the meer Possibility of deceiuing Christians in one Article impossibilitates the Belief of all She proposeth And this proues the Church absolutly infallible not in some points only but in all and euery Doctrin whereof you haue more in the 15 16 and 17 Chapters following 12. Some may reply I suppose all this while the Church made so stedfastly God's Oracle as not to err in any Doctrin She proposes which is Petitio Principy or à begging of the Question Contra. And Ye Gentlemen whilst you impeach Her of Errour Suppose Her Instrumentum diuulsum an Oracle tom as it were from Gods Sspecial Assistance iust as if I shoâ—ld Suppose the words of Scripture separated from the Spirit of truth You suppose Her à fair spouse yet make Her à harlot when and as Often as you please You acknowledge some Church or other find that out where you can to teach Truth yet you like petulant Schollers will forsooth be so wise as to tell her where she misseth in Her Lesson and correct Her for it And you haue done it to the purpose For you haue destroied Her Monasteries rob'd Her Altars prophaned Her Temples abused Her Children banished some and hang'd vp other Are not these fine God deceiues if the Church câ—n Err. Doings Contra. 2. I suppose nothing but what is manifest that Christ euer had à Church on earth once more find it where you can and that God speaks to Christians by this Oracle which he will be with to the end of the world And against which Hell gates shall neuer preuail Now I say if this Church which God not I makes his own Oracle and promises to teach Truth by it can deceiue but in one Matter of Faith God himself deceiues vs And this Church ceaseth Eo ipâ—o to be Catholick yea and God to be the Eternal Truth For it Matters nothing if he can deceiue whether he do it by Scripture or the Church Solue this Argument if you can 13. You may say 2. The whole ground of this Discourse à Fallacy and comes only to thus much If à man once tell à lie he must be thought à lyar in all he speaks So it is The Church speaks an vntruth in some things Ergo it doth so or may do so in all seemes no good consequence Contra.
beseech you Why did God impart truth and infallible truth to the world The end was not to improue his own knowledge being euer Omniscient It was not that the Angels and blessed in Heauen should belieue for Faith ceaseth in that happy State All there se intuitiuely what they once belieued The end therefore The Proof is taken from the End of Diuine Reuelation why God reuealed true and Infallible Doctrin was That we yet Pilgrims on earth walking by Faith should yeild Assent to it and belieue all as both true and infallible But this is impossible if the Church which immediatly Proposes the Doctrin can clash with Scripture or with Gods Reuelation and peruert his Verities Therefore She must be acknowledged both true and infallible in euery Doctrin She teaches 3. If any reply It seem's sufficient that the Church teaches Truth though She neither proposes nor teaches it so infallibly but that some times She may swerue from it He destroyes again Christian Religion Be pleased to obserue my reason If the Diuine reuelation is to be assâ—nted â—o infallibly infallibility of reuealed Doctrin be lost as it were in the way between God and vs If the Reuelation appear not as it is in it selfe infallible when we assent to it by Faith That is if it be not infallibly conueyed and applyed to all by an vnerring Proponent as it subsists in its first cause infinitly infallible Faith perishes we are cast vpon pure Vncertainties and may iustly doubt whether such à Doctrin separated from that other Perfection of infallibility be really true or no To se this clearly laid forth Please to make one reflection with me 4. May not either Iew or Gentil well inclined to Christian Religion rationally propose this Question to the Protestants or to any Has God reuealed any Doctrin which is only true God's reuealed Doctrin is no less infallible then true and not infallible You will Answer No because the same infinite verity which support's truth is powerful enough to vphold also its infallibility Say on I beseech you Can you who pretend to teach truth the worst of Heretiques haue done so Ascertain me also that you teach and propose Gods infallible Truths infallâ—blâ— Proue your Selues such Doctors and none will euer Question further the Truth of what you teach For if you once make this clear that you teach the infallible Doctrin which God has reuealed the truth inseparably connexed with infallibility is no more disputable but manifestly Credible But if you turn me off with à fair Story of teaching truth and Ascertain me not of your teaching it infallibly euery rational man will most iustly doubt of your teaching Truth And here is the reason à Priort 5. Euery Doctrin which is taught as à Verity founded vpon God the first Verâ—ty is no less Infallible than true Therefore who euer Ascertains me of the one must ioyntly ascertain me of the other Or if he will diuorce truth from that perfection of Infallibility There is no parting Infallibility from truth he giues me no more but at most the half of that Doctrin which God reueal's Nay I learn not so much from him seing God own 's no true Doctrin men can teach natural truths which is not as eminently infallible as true Now further If I be fob'd off with no man knowes what halfes of Diuine Doctrin That is if the Proponent parts truth from its infallibility and no Authority in Heauen or earth licences any to Separate what God has ioyned together I only learn the faint Sentiments when We belieue God's reuealed Doctrin or weak Opinions of fallible Teachers founded vpon fancy which God disclaim's And which is euer to be noted man by nature fallible can do no more but only propose them as meer humane or doubtfull Vncertainties But à humane doubtful Proposition though true beget's as is said aboue no certain faith in any Therefore who euer will not vtterly ruin the very life and Essence of Christian Religion must absolutely assent both to the truth and Infallibâ—lity of Religion and consequently acknowledge an Infallible Oracle which teaches and One Church only Infallible proposes Infallible Verities Infallibly But this is only the Roman Catholick Church as is said aboue for no other Society of men laies claim to teach Gods infallible truths infallibly 6. To solue all Obiections against this Discourse it will much auaile to be well grounded in this sure Principle Viz. A certain Principle It is one thing to teach truth and another to teach Diuine and infallible truth Man by natural reason can teach truth yet is insufficient to teach Diuine reuealed and infallible Truth this must come from à higher Power either from Diuine Assistance or Supernatural Wherevpon our Answers to Sectaries Illumination If therefore the Protestant Should demand Why we cannot belieue his Doctrin euen when he only Proposes those general Verities which all Christians admit He neuer offers to Obtrude vpon you his inferiour Tenents peculiar to Protestants Answer They are truths indeed and infallible truths but not proued so because he Vnassisted teaches them If he Ask again vpon what foundation do we Catholicks lay the truth and infallibility of that Doctrin we belieue and teach Answer are grounded Vpon this firm Ground that Scripture interpreted by an Assisted Oracle the Chruch which cannot beguile any Proposes all we learn as true and infallible Doctrin 7. If he reply 3. Protestants abstract from the Churches Interpretation and hold Scripture plain enough in all fundamental Doctrin necessary to Saluation Answer He err's not knowing the depth of Scripture which is so dark and vnintelligible in the abstruse Mysteries of faith that vnless certain Tradition and the Sense of the vniuersal Church cast light vpon it or impart greater clarity to the bare letter The wisest of men Scripture is obscure will be puzled in what they read or at most guess doubtfully at its meaning And therefore may easily swerue from truth To se what I say proued 8. Imagain only that twenty learned Philosophers or more who neuer heard of Church Tradition or of her Generael re 〈◊〉 Doctrin had our Bible drop't down from Heauen with Assurance that it contain's Gods infallible truths prouided all they read be rightly vnderstood but not otherwise Suppose The most learned Philosophers ignorant of Tradition and Church Doctrin 2. They peruse that one Sentence in S. Iohns Gospel Iâ— the beginning was the Word and that Wâ—rd was with God Thâ— same was in the beginning â—irâ— God c. Suppose 3. They also confer the Sentence with all other Passages in Holy Writ relating to this Mystery Could these Philosophers think ye by the force of their natural discourse only acquire exactly the infallible truth of the Incarnation iust so as the Church now teaches and belieues No. Euery Particle would put Cannot Vnderstand it them vpon à further Scrutiny What is signified Saith one by this In
Euangelists 6. Whoeuer read's these and the like Authorities cannot but Say the Voice of the Church as it Proceeds from that Oracle is the Voice of God And therefore Diuine certain and infallible Or contrarywise must grant it 's only Humane fallible and may â—r Speake so And it followes first that if the whole Church should err in the most essential Points of Faith God would not be yet Said to deceiue any because his increated Authority Speak's not by it nor is engaged to rescue this his own Spoufe from errour It followes 2. If any one denied either Purgatory or Transubstantiation explicitly defined by the Church and not so clearly expressed in Scripture He would not be guilty of Heresy though he peruersly refused to belieue these Articles precisely vpon this account That the Church Defines them The Inference is Reason also proues the Assertion clear for in doing so He denies not Gods Reuelation because the Churches Definitions no Diuine Testimony are in à lower ranck and much inferiour to all that God has spoken It followes 3. We belieue the Churches Definitions by à very different infused Habit from that whereby we Assent to the Truths reuealed in Scripture and to find such à supernatural and Infallible Habit distinct from Faith when we Assent to the Churches Definitions seem's to me à new learning vnknown to Antiquity 7. Thus much and more well considered which might be Said in behalfe of Christ's glorious Oracle And this one Principle added which all Catholicks grant viz. That the Church and Scripture Speak alwaies the same truths and can neuer be at Variance 8. Why may we not in this present State resolue Diuine Faith into the first Verity Speaking by the Scripture or Infallible Faith may be resolued into Scripture and the Church together Tradition and by his own Oracle the Church also For example We belieue the Sacred Trinity the Incarnation Original Sin c. because God reuealed them in Scripture or first conueyed them by Apostolical Tradition But these Verities which the Apostles and Euangelists long since made Credible are now remote from vs without the Churches reflâ—x Testimony whereby God ascertain's all in this State that both Scripture is Diuine The reason and that his Church speak's the very same Verities in Scripture And consequently we Assent to euery particular vpon à Twofold Motiue or rather vpon this one Formal Obiect ioyntly and indiuisibly Scripture and the Church make but one ioynt indiuisible Motiue taken because Scripture and the Church Assert's them Neither is there the least Difficulty in ioyning one reflex Testimony with another former or anciently deliuered whereof we haue examples in Holy Writ For we all belieue God made à Couenant with Abraham of multiplying his Seed because Eternal Truth said so some Ages before Moses Again we belieue that Verity because the reflex Testimony of Moses reiterat's the same Verity anciently spoken to Abraham Gen. 17. 4. An instance Other Instances of the same nature you haue aboue and more are found in Holy Writ 9. Thus much supposed It 's Methinks easy to Say if all be not de Nomine how the Churches Testimony may in one Sense be called the Formal Obiect of Faith and not in another Consider it as Diuine infallible and God's own Voice proceeding from no humane Authority but from the First Verity speaking by How the Church yeild's to Scripture this Oracle it well merit 's the name of à Formal Obiect Compare it again with the Primary Reuelation which it only compleat's in order to vs and consequently presupposes more Ancient more excellent and all things considered more worthy it must yeild to Scripture And may be called an intrinsecal condition whilst it Declares what anciently was Reuealed 10. Now if any Ask wherein the Excellence and Dignity of Scripture consists when you compare it with the Churches Definitions Diuines answer 1. Euery word and reason in Holy writ is de Fide but not so in the Churches Definitions where the Sense only of the Definitiue sentence has weight as comming from the Holy Ghost's Assistance 2. The Church The excellence and dignity of Scripture has her limits and Defines nothing but what was long since reuealed or necessarily connexed with the ancient Doctrin And vpon this account the Hagiogrophers are deseruedly called our first great Teachers who made first euery Truth they wrote à matter of Faith 3. When she Church Defines or interpret's Compared with the Church Gods word All is done for Scripture and look'd vpon as the end of Her labours But what is performed for another yeild's in worth and weight to that other it is done for as S. Austin obserues Lib. de Magist c. 9. Whoeuer desires more of this Subiect may read Bellar. Lib. 1. de verbo Dei C. 15. and Serrarius in Proleg 6. 7. 9. 12. 11. To solue other difficulties proposed by Sectaries please to Note first This Primary Act of Faith All are called into the Communion of one infallible Church whereby God teaches the true way to Saluation is grounded immediatly vpon the Authority One Primary act of Faith is grounded on Church Authority of this Oracle manifested by her Marks and Supernatural Signes Although yet the Book of Scripture be not admitted as God's word Notwithstanding when it is once owned as Diuine vpon Church Authority I can belieue this Oracles Infallibility with another Act of Faith grounded on Scripture How Scripture also terminates that Faith yet if we make à search into the vltimate Principle or final Resoluent of that very Belief We must as is said aboue come at last to Church Authority whereby Assurance is giuen that such à truth is Scripture 12. Note 2. This General truth supposed of the Church being immediatly Crediblâ— or known by her Motiues as an Oracle which teaches the right way to Saluation it therefore followes not that euery other particular Verity for example the â—â—pes Supremacy the Infallibility of Councils c. can in like manner be first and immediatly Credible or belieued explicitly when I Assent to that General Truth For it is enough that such Particulars be consequently or afterward assented to vpon the Diuine Reuelation in Scripture and the Churches own Proposition as is already declared 13. The Reason is because the Marks and Motiues manifest in the Church immediatly induce to belieue that She is How other particular Truths are belieued afterward God's Oracle constituted by Prouidence to guide all in the way of Truth But how or in what manner this Duty is complyed with must be learned by the Practise and Doctrin of the same Church by Scripture and Tradition also Now that it is most Connatural to know first in à General way The Churches Infallibility before we descend to belieue euery Doctrin She teaches in Particular you may well conceiue by the Instance giuen aboue of the blessed Apostles who first acknowledged Christ our Lord
All skilful and well spirited Protestants might without any Tradition know it to be God's word This double resolution Supposed 12. Yet more Our Aduersaries maintain à twofold Resolution of Faith First into the Books of Scripture and these Books fallible Tradition without any Diuine light seen as yet Conueyes to vs For Tradition as they say is not Diuine 2. â—to the internal light of the Doctrin contained in the Books And into this light of Doctrin they Resolue their Faith not â—to Tradition 13. Now here you shall haue an vnanswerable Dilemma The Tradition which only Conueyes the Books as Contradistinct from the internal Doctrin makes that very Diuine Doctrin to sparkle we Argue against Sectaries more than it would sparkle without Tradition Or not If â—ot The light the Splendor the internal Lustre of that Doctrin Considered as Doctrin is and must be independent of Tradition and Shine as I now said by it Selfe as à Diamond doth though the Books were found in the Streets Contrarywise if the Tradition of the Books Augments in the least or makes the internal Doctrin there contained to appear more Diuine than it would appear without Tradition That very Tradition must be à ioint Motiue wherevpon we belieue the Diuinity of Scripture I proue it demonstratiuely That â—hich laies before the intellectual Eye of à Belieuer the Lustre light and Sparkling of the internal Doctrin contained in Scripture is the true cause or à Partial Motiue at least The force of the Argument why He belieues that Doctrin Tradition doth this Ergo it is à Partial Motiue why he belieues the Doctrin Or if it â—ail's not at all to discouer that Lustre of the Doctrin the pretious Diamond of Scripture may be well discouered and known without Tradition I would willingly hear what our Adâ—ersaries can reply to this very plain and as I think no triuial Obiection without reminding vs of their killing flies 14. To Say more in this place is needles hauing proued in the other Treatise that the Maiesty and sparkling of Scripture what the true Maiesty of Scripture is lies not in the exteriour Syntax or in any outward Connexion of words common to other pious Books But Contrarywise in the Special Assistance wherewith God directed the Hagiographers to write as also in his own Diuine Volition which Seal'd and approued all that 's Writ as Verities issuing from no other fountain but from Truth it selfe Herein consist's the Dignity worth and Maiesty of Holy Scripture 15. Now because that Diuine Assistance and God's internal Volition whereby Scripture is approued as most sacred are no Obiects of sense It necessarily followes that none can discouer The true Excellence not discouerable by our exteriour Sonses the true Excellence of that Holy Book by any Inspection though most diligently made into the Syntax or outward words of it only Hence I said Had. S. Iohn not at all recorded that truth in his Gospel The word is made flesh buâ— some other without Diuine Assistance had left the Verity written in Velume The words and Truth also would haue been the very same now and then yet very different in their value if Considered as Proceeding from the Spirit of truth in the one case and from no Diuine Assistance in the other 16. By this its plain that the Maiesty of Scripture lies not in any expression of outward words Howeuer admit gratis it did doth that Majesty think yee help any to vnderstand its Though the Maâ—esty of Scripture lay in the words true Sense in Matters controuerted Euidently no. For manifest experience teaches that whole Multitudes of dissenting Christians both read and Reuerence the same bare letter Yea and haue the same Majesty of words laid open to their view yet so notoriously oppose one another and in Points most fundamental concerning the genuin Sense thereof that plain contradictions That would not auail to vnderstand the Sense are forced out of this sacred Book after their Reading But enough of this is said aboue And much more you haue of Mr Stillingfleets strange way of Resoiuing the Protestants faith in the other Treatise Discourse 1. C. 9. Where you may see that Protestancy is neuer medled with nor brought to any better Resolution by him than Arianism or à worser Heresy Yet I Say he took the right Course for in real Truth Protestants haue no Faith to resolue which truth will better appear in the following Chapter where we examin whether true Religion Can be found out by Reason CHAP. XIV The Mistakes of some Sectaries in this Controuersy It s necessary to distinguish between true Reason and fallacious Reasoning Priuate Reason liable to Errour Principles presupposed to the Decision of this Question Reason easily finds out true Religion by à rational Euidence preuious to Faith 1. SOme who endeauour to make à Friendly Agreement The Attempt of some Sectaries between Reason and Religion wholly omit to discusse the mainest point of all which concern's Christianity And T' is in à word to tell vs whether amongst those innumerable Religions now swarming in the world whereof certainly many are false and Only is true men by the force of prudent who Omit the main Business concerning Religion Reason can come to the Knowledge of the true One. This is the Vnum necâ—ssarium worth our knowledge indeed For what auailes it to hear of an Agreement between Reason and Religion if I cannot by the light of Reason find out that Religionwhich God hath established It would be but à comfortles Word should One Say Sir There is à rich Inheritance in the world belonging to you but neither you nor I nor any other after all diligence vsed can tell you where or what it is 2. This and it is à grand Omission may be well grounded The ground of their Omission on another errour these Authors Maintain who first make à Religion according to their own Phansy and then offer to Shew the Reasonableness of it Wheras All iustly expect to haue at least in à General way some Hint of that full Doctrin which Christian Religion comprises before we Cry it vp as reasonable or yeild our Assent to it Thus much neither is nor can be done by any Sectary And mark how we are left dissatisfyed 3. After some general Duties pointed at which belong to Their Distinction of Fundamentals and others improbable natural Religion we hear of à Distinction between the Fundamentals of Faith and Others Then we are told that All the Fundamentals are contained in the Apostles Creed And that if we go beyond the Creed for the Essentials of Faith none can Say where we shall stop Answ Sr you are told in this Treatise where the stop is to be made And there also you will find this late Inuented Distinction of Fundamentals and no Fundamentals cast away as vnsound Doctrin All I will Say at present is that you build vpon Sand you make à meer fancied Supposition
the Moral Body of Christians and Consequently that Opposition was à thing as notoriously known as loudly noised some Centuries since as it is Notoriously known and noised that our Sectaries haue now espied those false Doctrins VVe vrge them to bring to light that publick known Opposition of their Imagined Church against the Roman Catholick Society fancied à Changling And what haue we Deep silence from some and from such as dare speak false Suppositions for Proofs vnworthy Calumnies for an Answer Please to se this Argument fully handled Disc 2. C. 6. Time was the world knowes well when our Aduersaries auouched they could prove their Protestancy and refute our Catholick Doctrin by plain and express-express-Scripture we come to the true Trial in this Treatise and in lieu of God's word find their Books full fraught with meer far-fetcht Glosses Not one Passage I boldly assert and put Sectaries to the Proof fauours this Protestancy as it is distinguished from Popery and the known Heresies of former Ages Now that nothing from Scripture can be alleged Contrary to our Catholick Doctrin is manifest vpon this one Principle which none shall overthrow VVhat Scripture faithfully interpreted teaches in these weighty matters of Religion some Orthodox Church delivered in foregoing Ages For example If Scripture deny Adoration to Christ in the Blessed Sacrament or Transubstantiation an Orthodox Church which cannot clash with the verities of God's word in some Age or other maintained these Protestant Tenets and published them to Christians But no Orthodox Church euer sided with Sectaries or taught such Doctrins Therefore their pretence to Scripture against our Catholick Tenets is friuolous and implies no more but à false supposition for à Proof And this strain of turning bare Suppositions into proofs which never go beyond the strength of their own vnproued Assertions so vniuersally trancends all their Polemicks that I stand astonished to se men who will be accounted learned wholly busied in doing Nothing Reflect I beseech you à little They haue been told and I remind them of it again in this Treatise that whoeuer makes the Roman Church Idolatrous or Erroneous must hold the supposed Idolatry and errour so remediles an Euil that none on earth can redress either because all the Proofs or Principles whereby the Reformation should be made will euidently appear less ponderous to Euince this Church guilty of errour then Her sole Authority is to perswade the Contrary viz. That she neuer erred VVherefore Sectaries Confessedly fallible men desperatly adventure to reform vs and cannot but spoile all they go about to mend whilst they Euidence not whilst they plead not by the Authority of an Antient Orthodox Church which taught that very Protestancy they teach now and decryed these Supposed Popish errours as loudly as they decry them But to do thus much is impossible as manifestly appears by their own writings For tell me I beseech you whoever yet heard Protestant in all those weak skirmishes made against Catholick Religion Say plainly and prove it Such à Church reputed Orthodox fiue or Six Ages since taught as we teach sensed Scriptures as we sense them Christians then vniuersally belieued no Real Presence No sacrifice of the Masse c. Has euer Protestant I say gon thus groundedly to work No Most euidently No. I shall highly extoll the man that will dare to proceed so ingenuously but find none engaged in this right way of Arguing It s true some who leap over the heads of all their more Immediate Ancestors between Luther and the three or four first Centuries tell vs those Primitiue Christians were good Protestants like them Ill luck Say I that Protestancy had not to be intailed vpon some Successors in following Ages for most certainly since those dayes the world neuer saw Protestant before Luther In à word the Assertion is à loud vntruth an vnworthy begging of Question and besides implies à fancied supposition for à Proof To show this we reduce these ranging Spirits to a lesser compass and oblige them to name but one Protestant neerer their shameful Reuolt from our Catholick Society Here they stand grauelled as mute as fishes and are highly angry because we touch them where they are most weak This want of à Church to ground Protestancy vpon makes their Polemicks to be as they appear rambling faint shallow and so dissatisfactory that great patience is requisite to peruse them VVonder nothing they can do no better Rebells they are against an antient Church and their handling Controuersies may well be compared with the proceeding of Rebells in à Common wealth who curiously mark and diligently attend to what euer may seem welcome to your ignorant seduced and disgusted Multitudes That be it what you will is fomented that 's laid forth and inculcated It is no newes to tell you that our Ministers in England now for à long time haue had à number of seduced People bread in their own rebellious bosomes and brought vp in à spirit of Schism who God knowes haue heard little but of the Idolatry of the Superstitions and wickednes of some Professed Catholicks O say these Incendiaries we will nourish this Popular humour with food suitable to its palate we will write Books of this Popish Idolatry we haue tongues and can poyson with delight we will lay forth in folio what we conceiue of the Roman Superstitiâ—ns and the wickednes of Popes VVe know well to Cauil and how to ensnare the vulgar on vvhom we depend when our Cauils are once out though neither reducible to Principles nor subiect to the Censure of any Iudge for we own none let them shift for themselves Our only care is to talk on though we prove nothing And chiefly to be vvary in one particular It is never to mention any thing of à Church which taught Protestancy before Luther meddle vvith that Mischiuous difficulty vve are vndon for really vve have no such Church This in à word and much vvorse is Protestancy as is amply declared in the following Treatise vvhere you also haue the distinctiue Cognisances of Christ's true Church the Rule of Faith and the Properties of à Rule explained vvithall an easy vvay vvhereby to put an end to these vnfortunate Controversies You haue moreover the Infallibility of the Roman Catholick Church asserted Faith resolued into its true Principles Mr Stillingfleets grosser Errours discouered The Reasonableness of Catholick Religion laid forth to euery rational man And to omit other Questions all cannot be hinted at in the narrow compasse of à Preface you haue this great Truth proved viz. That if the Roman Catholick Church hath taught but one false Article and obliged all Christians to belieue it vnder pain of damnation there neither is at this day nor was before Luther any true faith in the world VVherefore Sectaries who haue made it their chiefe busines to impeach our Church of Idolatry and Heresy and the louder they cryed the more they thought to destroy vs haue done their vtmost to ruin all the
indubitable Principles appliable to the Belieuers reason If therefore à Want be found of such proofs and doubts arise whether Christ's Doctrin be taught or no None can by doubtful or ambiguous Proofs of true Religion easy and Conuincing Principles only absolutly say This is Christs Doctrin and Consequently the proofs of true Religion answer to the weightines of the matter that is they are clear conuincing and exclude à possibility of reasonable doubting Thus much supposed 2. I say first who euer endeauour's to shew by arguments what Tenents of Religion now held amongst Christians are pure and Orthodox when the matter is of Controuersy and cannot The sectaries proofs as dark as his Doctrin bring his proofs to à Clearer Principle then the particular assertion is which should be proued argues improbably The Protestant in all the discussed matters of Religion doth so that is he neuer goes beyond the strength of his own weak assertion but eludes all by talk wholly as dark and weightles as the very Assertion is which should be proued therefore he Argues improbably 3. To proue the Minor proposition wherein the difficulty lies Take à veiw of all our Protestant Tenents as they differ from Catholick Doctrin or Constitute this new reformed Religion and ask what Protestant dare appear and venture to proue That Faith only iustifies The like I say of his other negatiue Articles Of no real Presence of no Inuocation of Saints of no Sacrifice of the Mass c. I absolutly affirm He cannot make one of these Articles good by any vndoubted Principle or establish any of them by à proof which is clearer than that dark article is which should be proued One reason is These Doctrins opposite to the Latin and Greek Church also are not euidently known as truths by the light of One reason of our Assertion nature or by any receiued Principle grounded on Reuelation No ancient Church reputed Orthodox held them 7. hundred years agone and Consequently no vniuersal tradition is for them The only difficulty is whether Holy Scripture or the Fathers generally patronize such Doctrins And to fauour Sectaries all that 's possible we will here moue no doubt of the letter of their Bible but withall assure them it will be impossible to draw such new learning out of that Book and the impossibility will be thus manifested As long as these men cannot proue their new Doctrin to be transmitted to them from as good and assured authority as their book of Scripture is transmitted but vpon less sure grounds or less assured tradition so long their doctrin is naught and stands vnprincipled But this is so as we shall see presently And you may by the way note here the difference between the Catholick The difference beween the proofs of Catholiks and Protestants and Protestant The first proues euery particular Tenet of his Faith by as sure à Principle as he proues his Bible to be Diuine the Church assures him of both but the Sectary euer fall's short in this and cannot giue you so strong à proof for his particular Doctrin as he doth for the very letter of his book which he supposes teaches that Doctrin 4. But let vs come to the point which chiefly vrgeth and take one particular Controuersy we cannot insist on all and ask the Protestant How he proues that the real presence of Christs sacred body as Catholicks assert is not expressed in the literal sense of those words This is my body His negatiue assertion most euidently is not there in plain terms We therefore vrge him to make it good by à proof that 's clear or more conuincing than his own dark and yet vnproued Negatiue is And is he not obliged think yee to produce à strong proof indeed when he hath so many powerful Aduersaries to contrast with 1. The clear words of Christ now alleged 2. A long Catalogue of most ancient Fathers vsually cited by Authors opposite to him 3. The Authority of the Greek and Latin Church for both Churches mantain the real substantial presEnce to this day 4. The express Doctrin of general Councils which define our Doctrin positiuely and The grounds of our Catholick Tenets condemn the figuratiue presence of Sectaries 5. Euident Miracles wrought in confirmation of the Mystery related by authors of most indubitable credit These are no slight grounds of our Doctrin Let vs see by what strong receiued Principle the Sectary endeauour's to weaken them or which is immediatly to my purpose proues his new negatiue Position Has he the express letter of Scripture for his Negatiue Christ is not substantially present in the Eucharist Not one word in the whole Bible is like it much contrary Doth the sense of Scripture after all places are compared together fauour him No. What euer sense he drawes from thence seemingly to his purpose will be as obscure and remote from the nature of à proof or any known Principle as his own improbable position is and therefore most vnfit to perswade it Has he as vniuersal Tradition or the vnanimous consent of Fathers for his negatiue or for that sense he would force out of Scripture as he and we haue for the letter of the Text now cited Nothing at all And to show you how iustly I propose this question call to mind what Mr The Sectary answers not to any Stilling exact's of his Aduersary Part. 1. c. 7. P. 216. If I should saith he once see you proue the infallibility of your Church the Popes supremacy Inuocation of Saints c. by as vnquestionable and vniuersal tradition as that is whereby we receiue the Scriptures I would extoll you for the only person that euer did any thing considerable on your side Thus he speakes after this precaution giuen Think not to fob vs off with the Tradition of your Church in stead of the Catholik with the ambiguous Testimonies of two or three Fathers instead of the vniuersal consent of the Church since the Apostles times Your own words Mr Stilling shall here condemn you The Question is whether your Negatiue Christ is not really present in the Eucharist as Catholiks affirm be Orthodox Doctrin We exact as rigid à proof from you as you demand of vs but fob vs not off with your own talk Tradition you haue none nor with the ambiguous Testimonies of two or three Fathers but giue vs the vniuersal consent of the Church since the Apostles time as What we iustly require of Sectaries clear for your negatiue as you demand of vs for the articles now mentioned Or if this be too much giue vs but only the indubitable sentiment of any Church reputed Orthodox four or fiue hundred years past for this your sense and assertion and I will applaud you as à most singular person But this you shall doe when you haue turned all faith out of the world that is neuer I say therefore you haue no more but the ambiguous Testimonies of two or three
clear words of à Father and when the Glosser has no vndubitable Principle distinct from his gloss wheron to settle his Doctrin as he has not in our present Controuersy Obserue well The Fathers say What wee see is not bread but Christs very body The Sectary interpret's That wee see is not common bread indeed but Christs body Figuratiuely or Sacramentally The Fathers say it is not figuratiuely only but really his body So Theophilact Answered and the reason giuen and S. Iohn Damascen cited aboue Had the Sectary who interpret's thus an vndoubted Reuelation for his Gloss deliuered by any Oracle of Truth Scripture Traditions or Orthodox Church there would be good reason to giue him hearing But when we euidently see that the best and only proof of his Doctrin is no more but the very gloss he makes without Further Principles we iustly except against him and hold such glosses improbable 14. Now all is contrary with the Catholick who neuer interpret's any Authority but when t' is dubious and if it be so it neither help 's the Sectary nor hurts the Catholick and therefore ought In reason to be cast aside as either impertinent or as weak and forcelesse in all disputes of Controuersies The fundamental Christ's Doctrin not proued by glosses or any ambiguous Testimony Reason already hinted at is The true Doctrin of Christ is not proued by Glosses or any doubtful Testimony but stand's most firm vpon known and indubitable Principles or if in order to Christians it want's such supports it cannot pass for Christ's Doctrin An ambiguous Testimony therefore which seemingly opposes this true Doctrin Certainly Principled is most impertinently alleged against any Tenet of our known and owned Catholick Faith 15. Vpon this one sole ground now clearly laid forth I confidently Affirm all Controuersies in Religion might be easily ended would Sectaries please to lay Preiudice aside and follow manifest reason I 'le shew you how Write down first the two contrary Tenents of Catholicks and Protestants Christ is really and substantially present in the Eucharist Christ is not really and substantially present Next examin well the Principles wheron these Contrary Doctrins rely or are supposed to rely The Catholick vrgeth first Christ's plain words 2. The Authority of his Church and saith his Churches Doctrin is the very same that Christ words literally taken express 3. He ponder's the clear Testimonies of The Catholick Principles Fathers and discourses thus When I find the most significant expressions of Fathers consonant to our Sauiour's plain words and to the owned Doctrin of my Church I must assuredly rest on these as indubitable grounds or Confess that There neither is or was euer any Principle for the soundest Article of Christian Faith Examin next the Sectaries Principles Has He any words in Scripture as clear as mine or to this sense This is not my body b◠à Sign only of it Euidently No. Has he any Church esteemed Orthodox by the Christian world which without Controuersy taught this Doctrin of à sign only three or 4. ages since Name Sectaries haue none such such à Church He will speak's to the purpose Has he Fathers so numerous so express and clear for his Signe and figure only as the few Testimonies now alleged are in behalf of Catholick Doctrin If he haue let him please to produce them I 'le doe no more but lay my Testimonies by them and if after the perusal or à iust Parallel made of both All the world iudges not those I quote to be most conuincing may the literal sense stand and his both dark and ambiguous I will vndergoe any Censure You haue heard how loud and express the Testimonies briefly hinted at and innumerable more are for our Catholick Verity I challenge Mr Stilling to Confront them with others as openly significant for his opinion I verily think he will neuer goe about to doe what is desired but fob vs off with killing flies and no man knowes what 16. In the interim I Argue I am either obliged to renounce An Argument drawn from our Catholick Principles the obuious sence of these Authorities which I see euidently Consonant to the words of Scripture and to the Doctrin of my Church or by force of these Proofs am still to belieue as I doe Grant this second I stand on secure ground But if I am obliged to renounce the obuious sense of Christs words my Church Doctrin and the expressions of these Fathers c. Our Aduersaries are bound if à spark of Charity liues in their Hearts to plead by stronger Principles which may settle me in an absolute Renuntiation of my Doctrin and withdraw me from the supposed errour I liue in Is not this iustice and Charity think ye And is not the Compliance most easy For if their Doctrin be Christ's Doctrin and mine not Theirs stand's as I now told you vpon clear and indubitable Principles And Principles of that nature are easily laid forth to euery ordinary vnderstanding Now I subsume But it is euident the Sectary hath no such conuincing Principles which can oblige me to renounce the plain literal sense of Christs words and the Fathers already cited And this I proue What euer Principle obliges me to renounce or to deny the plain literal sense of such words must giue assurance that those expressions literally Why none can remoue me from our Catholick Tenet vnderstood are dangerous and apt to induce Christans into gross errour for if literally taken they do no mischief or be not apt to induce into dangerous errour why should I Deny their obuious sense because Ptotestants will haue me do so But there is no Principle so much as meanly probable whereby these expressions are proued false or inductiue into dangerous Errour for were this really so some Church or Author of Credit would long sincé haue noted their ouer much vehemency in sayng more then was true concerning this Mystery which none euer yet did Therefore I may still and without Reproof hold where I am and adhere to their literal Doctrin which my Church teaches 17. Some may teply Sectaries vrge vs not so crudely to reiect the Fathers Testimonies as only to moderate or rectify their sense by the help of our Modern mens glosses which is à blamles proceeding for we do so with Gelafius and other Authors when they seemingly make against our Doctrin and Protestants do no more Answ Protestants do more for their interpretations euer imply à peremptory and absolute denial of that very literal sense which the Father words express For example S. Cyril saith Catech. Mystag 4. He that changed water into wine by his sole will hath also A reply of sectaries answered changed wine into blood The expression inuolues à parity and implies thus much That as water was really changed into wine at Cana in Galilee so wine was really and substantially changed into Christs blood Sectaries as peremptorily deny this real and substantial change of wine
into blood as if one should now deny the Real and substantial change of that water into wine Consequently they renounce both the parity and open sense of the words And which is euer to be noted wilfully do so when they haue nothing like à sure Principle distinct from their gloss to ground their denial on Contrariwise the Catholick in this debate denies no express sense of any Fathers Testimony but only makes Inquiry into the Signification of words which are confessedly dubious Take here one instance Gelasius saith The substance or nature of bread and wine cease not to be First I make no account of this Gelasius Author of the book De duobus naturis Christi Contra Eutich He was not that holy Pope so called but rather Gelasins Cizicenus as Bellarmine notes de Scriptoribus Eccl Howeuer these two particles substance and nature may ex placito indifferently signify either the inward substance or outward Massinesse of bread and wine for natural qualities which flow from an Essence haue or often sustain as was noted aboue the name of that Essence they come from Now the Catholick renounceth no obuious sense but only contends that Nature and substance may signify as is most Of Gelasius How much his authority is worth vsual the outward corpulent forms of bread and wine which cease not to be And he giues this signification to these two words because Scripture Church and the Fathers wheron his Doctrin irrefragably depends forceth him to it And he doth well when it cannot be proued by any probable Principle that Gelasius relates to the inward substance of bread and wine Thus much may be said if that authority were worth any thing Read I beseech you Brereley In his Lyturgy of the Masse cited aboue pag 259. you shall find there this Authority most exactly examined and that in very truth this Gelasius who euer he was speaking against the Eutichians as Theoderet did vndeniably defends our Catholick Doctrin of the Real presence and Transubstantiation also Open the book and read you will be satisfyed I cannot dwell longer on these long since defeated Obiections 18. There is yet an other Reply Sectaries may say we suppose all this while Scripture and Fathers clear for our Catholick Doctrin The Supposition is denied because they quote t' is true not many but some Fathers and Scripture also to countenance their new opinion By the way here is occasion again to reflect on what is often noted viz. We quote Scripture and Fathers and they explicate all They cite also and we do the like and if nothing but à Return of explications thus pass from one to the other we are as much iarring as we were before without hope of ending Controuersies this way Now my Answer to the first part of the Obiection is We Catholicks suppose nothing but only The answer to an other reply take the very words of Scripture and Fathers in à literal sense and say their expressions are exactly conformable to the Doctrin of the Roman Catholick Church which was neuer censured by any Orthodox society of Christians Vpon these Principles therefore Scripture Church and Fathers we stand immoueable To that which followes I Answer Sectaries haue not one syllable of Scripture in fauour of their Nouelty and to omit à rehearsal of those triuial Arguments drawn from certain passages where they conceiue the Sacrament is called bread the fruit of the vine c. I conuince my Assertion by the positiue ground abready established which none shall ouerthrow If this be the true sense of Scripture when An Argument which Sectaries Cannot solue it speaks of the Blessed Sacrament Christ who is aboue in heauen is not really present on the Altar but in his sign only Or that the bread after Consecration is really what it was before natural bread only deputed to à holy vse If this I say be the true sense of Gods word Christs Orthodox Church expresly deliuered it to Christians as the true meaning of the Holy Ghost some few ages before Luthers Reuolt for then their was an Orthodox Church on earth But no Orthodox Church then taught so or sensed Scripture as Sectaries do now Therefore vnless that Church was ignorant and knew not the meaning of Scripture or Malicious and concealed it from Christians our Sectaries sense is not Scripture To confirm this Reason All know that the Roman Catholick Church then as well as now absolutly renounced the sense which Sectaries force out of Scripture and for that cause was not say they Orthodox in this particular Doctrin but no other Church confessedly Orthodox taught it at that time Therefore it was not thought the Scriptures true meaning All I would say is briefly laid forth thus 19. The true Church of Christs euer deliuers the true sense of Scripture at least in weighty and fundamental Matters so much Protestants grant But No true Church deliuered this their sense three or four ages before Luthers reuolt Ergo it was not the true meaning of the Holy Ghost but à whimsy lately inuented This Argument I hold demonstratiue You will perhaps ask What is that these men can pretend to hauing neither Scripture nor Orthodox Church to rely on I 'le tell you in à word They allege How Sectaries endeauour te solue it first two or three weak and ambiguous Sentences of Fathers which the Catholick admit's not in the sense of Nouellists yet according to the clear plain and obuious signification of words as is now declared and He prudently giues this signification to ambiguous words because the Doctrin he owns stand's firm vpon other indubitable Principles Scripture Church and Fathers The Sectary euidently wants such Principles and therefore vapors as well as he can with à few most weak and vnconcluding Authorities The next thing relyed on is much worse and purely nothing but fancy He reads Scripture and those euident Testimonies of Fathers as manifest for our Church Doctrin as it is clear that the Church teaches it and these forsooth he endeauours to obscure by à number of his own improbable glosses without the least shadow of any distinct Principle which giues so much as à Colour to his fancied interpretations You shall see this truth most manifestly proued in the ensuing Chapter CHAP. XIII Mr Stillingfleet grosly abuseth the Fathers that assert the Real Presence His vnprincipled glosses are not only dubious and therefore worth nothing but moreouer highly improbable 1. THough I am very loath to spend time on trifles and as vnwilling to catch flies as Mr Stilling is to kill them T' is his own phrase yet I must do so in some measure or permit à number of foule improbabilities to pass vnexamined which are laid forth in à pretended Rational account of Protestancy I shall only entertain you with à few of the Grosser sort wauing many of lesser moment and I doe thus much to defend à Christian Verity which my very Soul Adores For I am well assured If our
vpon no surer grounds then meer doubtful And vncertain Glosses are added to Scripture and the Fathers which An assertion clearly laid forth seem contrary to his Doctrin most euidently stand's vnprincipl'd proceed's weakly and proues nothing But the Protestant makes his weak and doubtful Glosses charged on such Authorities as are produced for our Catholick Tenets the sole Support the only Proof of his contrary Doctrin Therefore He proceeds vnreasonably and proues nothing You shall see this euidenced in the present Matter now briefly hinted at of the Infallibility of the Roman Catholick Church Mr Stilling Asserts She is fallible I ask how He proues the Assertion What By express Scripture vniuersal Tradition the vnanimous Consent of Fathers the Definitions of any ancient Church or Council These are excellent Principles Could He settle How Sectaries proceed to weaken it his opinion vpon all or vpon any one of them we haue done and must yeild But he proceed's strangely and I must needs tell you How The man hopes to weaken our proofs drawn from the Fathers in behalfe of the Churches infallibility And thereby to establish his Position She is fallible I demand how can our Proofs be weakned His Answer must be for he has no other I will so tamper with these your alleged Texts that at last I 'le make them proue nothing for your Churches Infallibility And consequently I may hold my Contrary Position of her Fallibility very well established The inference is worth nothing but let it pass I Ask. 3. What is it he will tamper withall or how can he make null those manifest Texts which clearly lye open to euery eye east on the Fathers And euince as we shall see hereafter that the Church is infallible Mr Stillinfleets strain through his whole book For Facta loquuntur return's the best Answer My Guesses saith he And Glosses laid on the Fathers when seemingly contrary to Protestant Doctrin Shall make them speak another language no way fauouring the Churches infallibility 2. Here we come to the point And demand in the last place Whether these Glosses are so clearly their Own Selfe-Euidence that by their very light they lay à Truth before an vnderstanding Their Gloâ—ses no selfe Euidence not to be contradicted For example Whether S. Cyprian in the Passage now cited gaue only as Mr Stilling saith à tast of his old office of à Rhetorician And spake not dogmatically Is this I say an vndeniable Truth Most euidently no. For stretch it to the furthest it can be no more but à most doubtful and vncertain Gloss I say t' is highly improbable Now be pleased to reflect The Assertion concerning the Churches fallibility is no Self-euidenced Truth nor clear Ex terminis no more is our contrary Doctrin of the Churches infallibility To giue it Therefore proof and weight these Glosses are cast vpon the Fathers who seemingly at least fauour infallibility But these very Glosses which should do that seruice are as vneuident as vncertain And doubtful as the very Doctrin is They should enlighten and lend proof too Ergo they aduance not at all the Doctrin concerning the Churches fallibility For proofs which are as vncertain as the very Doctrin is which should be proued can neuer raise that to à greater measure of certainty than it had before such proofs were thought of Please to mark what I say The Doctrin of the Churches fallibility here supposed by Sectaries is vncertain and for that reason lies in it's Vneuidence vntil solid Proofs clear it or expel both the vneuidence and vncertainty But these Glosses when they appear are as vneuident and vncertain as the Doctrin is Therefore they cannot raise the Doctrin to any higher degree of certainty than to meer vneuidence and vncertainty I would haue this noted For it is à ground whereby I shal show hereafter Protestancy to be à most improbable Religion And Therefore will deliuer it once more in these plainer Terms If the Sectary has no surer Principle whereon to found his yet vneuidenced opinion of the Churches fallibility then Doubtful Glosses laid on Scripture The force of our Argument more significantly expressed and Fathers as euidently he has not And These Glosses which should proue that Doctrin be as deuoid of strength as remote from Principles as vncertain or doubtful as that very yet vneuidenced Doctrin is It followes clearly That both the Doctrin and the Glosses fall to nothing but only subsist by fancy which is à real Truth From all now said I inferr that whoeuer interpret's must haue his Doctrin firmly grounded vpon certain Principles distinct from his own interpretations as the Catholick euer hath or nothing is proued 3. Mr Stilling may reply His intention whilst he interpret's these Fathers is not to proue immediatly his own Opinion of the Churches fallibility but only to show our alleged Testimonies come not home or want force to proue Her infallible Now to shew our proofs forceles in order to what we hold is not to make good his contrary Assertion For these two things are very different Our Aduersaries reply refuted To make null our proofs And to establish his own Doctrin Answ I grant they are different But neither is nor can be done Not the first Because these Glosses are no Sâ—lf-euident prouing That the Fathers sense is rightly hit on And Principles distinct from these Glosses whereby it may be shown what Doctrin the Fathers deliuered in this particular Mr Stilling hath not any so much as meanly probable To the second I Answer If He offer 's not to proue his Tenet of the Churches fallibility by the little strength these glosses haue I auouch it boldly All further Probations fail him and for that reason he is either forced to make vse of such poor stuff to proue withall or must sit down silent And grant his Tenet cannot be proued He may perhaps tell vs our Church has erred de facto Ergo it is fallible And here is his Principle I Answer it s no Principle to me but an Heresy And as Asserted by him 't is as much yea more doubtful than all his glosses are laid together He may reply 3. His Glosses may at least be thought probable I vtterly deny that And here is my ground Solely considered they euidence not their own probability But need further proof and probable Principles to rely on But such proofs are wanting to found Probability vpon Therefore these glosses are supposed only not proued probable Had Mr Stilling plain Scripture any Orthodox Church or Fathers clear for the Doctrin maintained by him He might well talk of the strength Of his Glosses but to make Glosses probable The Sectaries Glosses not so much as Probable when no probable ground supports the Doctrin for Whose sake he Glosses is not only lost labour but share 's much of Non-sense Again Were these Glosses probable which I shall neuer grant our Answers to them are at least as probable And what gain 's
your Glosses To point at his Church and Councils which taught Protestancy to an Orthodox Church The world was neuer without one Say therefore in Gods name where or when was such an Orthodox Christian Society in Being that positiuely taught no Transubstantiation No sacrifice of the Mass No inuocation of Saints c Where or when were your Councils which positiuely defined these Doctrins c You may Answer and truely You haue indeed neither Church nor Councils Nor Tradition Express for these your Negatiues Very right Therefore I wrong you not in saying your whole Cause subsist's vpon Coniectures cauils And Glosses Because now you cast your selues into an Impossibility of pleading by any better Principles than meer guesses are Thus much supposed Say I beseech you What auail's it if when an Authority is plain for Popery that you can by à nimble gloss darken it Or if obscure You haue A Fiat lux at hand and can charm it into so much Clarity as may suffice to dazle the eyes of à vulgar Reader What Satisfaction haue I here or what gain you by this Proceeding when you know we haue more witnesses ready to attest yea to dye for our Catholick Verities than you haue hairs on your head or Glosses in your book What gain you to your cause could you missinterpret all the Fathers that euer wrote when you without the warrant of any Orthodox Society haue yet à whole learned Church Her Councils and Tradition against you And all the store of Ammunition left you to attaque this great Oracle of Truth is very small no more God knowes but à without them no satisfaction is giuen flash of lightning borrowed from the Ignis fatuus of your far-fetcht Glosses Gloss on Cauil on coniecture on to the worlds end As long as no known or Owned Principle distinct from Glosses and coniectures Support's them You only beat the aire or to vse à pretty late phrase amongst you lapwing-like Pew most when furthest from the nest I mean you are most fierce to end Controuersies when you are furthest off from Principles which only can end them 8. Thus then you should proceed had not God and Truth silenced you I E. S. B. D. declare to you honest Papists That in the Sixth or seauenth age after Christ His true Orthodox Church positiuely taught no Transubstantiation Such à Council either in former or later Ages expresly defined so Then and before also Church Tradition was vniuersally for my Doctrin And thus much I can make good to the learnedest Romanist among you Wonder not Therefore when you quote your Iustins your Cyprians your Chrisostoms seemingly contrary to my Church Doctrin That I interpret all I am forced to doe so or against conscience must desert my old Mother Church Her Councils How Sectaries ought to plead and Tradition likewise From which You haue too licentiously swerued to side with your Iustins and I know not who els Could the Sectary plead after this manner His Glosses would haue force But he neuer meddles with the First main Business That is neuer ground 's his Doctrin vpon any thing like à satisfactory Principle But as if He minded to tire Ones patience run's on headlong with Glosses When he has no Principled Doctrin to Gloss for Iust as if One should tell his neighbour Sir you lye And this I auerr to your face Though I want where withall to proue my Saying true In all these Controuersies Sectaries are so pertly vnciuil as to giue the Lie to à whole Church And what supports the Boldnes Haue they any other Church more Orthodox Councils more learned Tradition more vniuersal to proue we lye than our Church our Tradition And Councils are which say we speak truth Nothing at all like them We here challenge them to speak to the cause and controuersies are ended What then remain's to plead with Plain Scripture Not à word Fathers plain Not one O yes Tertullian is drawn in to help at à dead lift so is Theoderet And one or two more Very true But he is à glossed Tertullian à glossed Theoderet c. Separate then these Glosses from the Fathers genuin Doctrin giue them the Sectary to manage you see him in open field compleatly armed ready to encounter Church Councils Tradition And all the other Principles of the Catholick world Are not Glosses think Glosses strangely powerful with Sectaries ye strong and prodigiously powerful which haue not only force to plead against à whole Church But more ouer to implead her of palpable errour This Church is supposed to haue changed Her ancient Doctrin And Sectaries will reform it not by recurring to any other more Orthodox Society of Christians But by meer guesses and Glosses That is The Fallible Glosses and gueses of men confessedly fallible must reform à Church which hold's Her selfe infallible And proues it also 9. Thus it is Christian Reader I speak plainly And can defend my Assertion Besides meer begging the Question in all Disputes besides Cauils And weak coniectures The Sectary hath no more left him to oppose our Catholick Tenets but meer vnprincipled Glosses I neither word it nor wrong Protestants in saying thus much Peruse if you please their writings chiefly Mr Stillingfleets Account you will find when the Churches Infallibility or Transubstantiation c. Happen to be handled That Glosses laid on the Authorities vsually quoted for Catholick Doctrin euer take vp the most room And which is worse yea pitiful in à Rational Defender of Protestancy You shall neuer find through this whole Book waue Cauils coniectures and Glosses one sound Principle laid plainly forth nor so much as hinted at in behalf of any Protestant Article What think ye Shall Yet Most weak and feeble Christians who would fain haue à Church to liue in see the old House of God pulled down by vnhandy Glossers before They haue à better built vp And well setled on good Foundations Pulled down What say I Alas our Glossers haue not strengh to vntile it much less force to demolish that long slanding Fortress Yet Glosses chiefly And t' is à sad thought for the Sectary support his vndefensible Schism made in the desperate quarrel against that Church which gaue his Ancestors Baptism These only there is no more must plead in behalf of his inhuman and barbarous Reformation These finally must answer before an Impartial Iudge at that great day of Doom for all his merciless cruelty practised vpon the deceased and some yet liuing Catholicks Sad thoughts I say they are to goe to bed with to rise with to banquet with which like Ghosts will haunt him to his dying day And lay Torment at his restles hart in his greatest iollities And more in the houre of death 10. After all you see the Conclusion and an end put to Controuersies The Conclusion against Sectaries If no Orthodox Church vphold's this Protestancy or any article of it which is euident No Councils nor Tradition can support
must become Papists or wee turn Arians and Protestants Or finally be forced to deny plain Scripture A most conuincing Argument 9. The difficulty therefore is not and Sectaries seldom touchit whether Scripture be true were the sense known or out of Controuersy but what that true sense is which lies in obscurity and cannot be known without à certain Interpreter Here is the only Question debated between vs and Sectaries One may The only difficulty concerning Scripture Reply It is no good obiection to say learned men differ about the sense of Scripture Ergo it is not sufficiently plain because à great wit may wrest the plainest words God euer spake to à sinister sense Contra. 1. But who knowes when two learned Parties contest in this Matter which of them is the sinister Wrester Contra 2. When à whole Society of men as the Arians were and Protestants are now Tamper with à Text which touches an essential point of Faith And dissent from others as learned as Themselues about the meaning The sense cannot be supposed more clear for the one than the other without an other Rule certain and Definitiue Pray you say Is the sense of those words My Father is greater than I indisputably clear for the Arian Or the sense of Christs words This is my Body without controuersy clear for the Protestants Doctrin concerning the Sacrament when à whole learned Church opposeth both Euidently No. Therefore Sectaries must acknowledge an Obscurity in Scripture our Nouellists must grant that Scripture is not only obscure in these two places But more That à Iudge is necessary to ascertain all of its true meaning as well in these as in à hundred other Passages Again if Scripture want this clarity it cannot be its own Self-euidence much less conuince an obdurate Aduersary Nay I say though it were clear and the sense thereof agreed on by all called Christians yet both Iewes and Gentils scorn the Diuinity of the book And say if 't be of Diuine inspiration That must be proued by à certain Rule extrinsecal to Scripture Therefore it is not immediatly credible by it self or for it self Lastly were Scripture plain in it self yet And this vtterly ruin's Sectaries The certain Doctrin of it can neuer be applyed indubitably to any vnderstanding For our Nouellists say because all Teachers of Christian Doctrin are fallible none can make an infallible Application of it to any or teaeh that Doctrin infallibly which is in it self infallible See more hereof in the other Treatise Disc 1. C. 2. and C. 4. N. S. CHAP. II. The Rule of Faith assigned The Properties of à Rule VVhat is meant by the Church Ancient Fathers Assert that the Church is easily found out Her marks more clear than Her Essential Doctrin 1. THe true Church of Christ in this present State manifestly demonstrable by signal Marks and Motiues is the only plain certain Self-euident Rule of Faith apt to conuince the most obdurate Vnbelieuer It is immediatly credible and the Doctrin of it certainly applyed to à Seeker after truth These Assertions stand firm vpon 3. Principles 2. 1. Christ Iesus has prouided Christians of à clear and easy Rule otherwise All are left in darknes and know not what or how to belieue 3. 2. Nothing assigned by Sectaries Bee it Scripture solely or what els Imaginable Carries so much as à weak probability of being à Rule so plain easy and satisfactory as the true Church is 4. 3. All the properties of à Rule exactly agree to the Church of Christ and to Her only 1. The Rule of Faith is plain Christs Church is the Rule of Faith so is Church Doctrin and much more plain than Scripture I mean we easily vnderstand what the Church teaches though the Doctrin in it self be difficult 2. A Rule is its own Self-euidence so the Church is taken with the Marks and Motiues whereby She is demonstrated 3. A Rule is apt to conuince the most obstinate Aduersaries Christs Church has euidently don so witness the innumerable Conuersions wrought by Her vpon Iewes Gentils and most obdurate Hereticks 4. A Rule must be certain and certainly applyed to Belieuers what Christs true Church teaches is so for She is Gods own Oracle as shall be proued hereafter and teaches her Children infallibly The Truth of these particulars will be more fully laid forth in the sequele of this Discourse In the mean while two things are to be cleared The first what we vnderstand by the Church of Christ 2. How and by what means She may be known Thus much done we shall easily find out those Christians who are Members of this happy Society or essentially constitute that visible moral Body called the Holy Catholick Church What is meant by the Church 5. Concerning the first We speak plainly and vnderstand by the Church à visible Society of true Belieuers vnited in one profession of Christian Faith and the communication of Sacraments vnder the Conduct and Gouerment of Christ's lawful Commissioned Pastors I say no more yet hoping no Sectary can iustly quarrel with the Notion of à Church expressed in such general Terms And therefore waue at present that other worn-out controuersy agitated by Protestants viz. Whether the Predestinate only make vp the true Church or great Sinners also may be included That is not at all to our purpose now when we only seek after à Society of Christians vnited in the true Faith of Jesus Christ who owne à due submission to lawful Commissioned Pastors whether those who teach or are taught be Saints or sinners concerns them t' is true but not our present Question Of such Belieuers there cannot be two or more Churches but one only And to auoid all confusion or the mingling of different Questions together we here moue no doubt concerning the Head The meaning of the question proposed or chief Authority of this Church but immediattly Ask whether there is now and has euer been since Christs time à visible diffused Society of Christians who haue faithfully belieued the Orthodox Doctrin of Christ and vpon that Account well merit to be called the Professors of the true Catholick Church Of this Vniuersal spread Society our Sauiour spake most clearly or of none Hell gates Can not preuail against it The Spirit of Truth abides with it to the end of the world c. I think no Sectary will deny such à Church 6. The only difficulty now is to find out this Orthodox and large diffused Body of Christians vnited in one true Faith and the sincere Worship of God And nothing is more consonant to reason more express in Holy Writ or more clearly asserted by the ancient Fathers than that the true Church laies forth Her own euidence or clear Discernibility whereby She is distinguished from all Heretical Sects That is She lies manifestly open to all eyes and Cannot but bee most easily known She is à Ciâ—â—y built vpon à mountain The light of the world A
Tabernacle placed iâ— the sun Ipsa est Ecclesia saith S. Austin Epist 166. In sole posita The Church is placed in the sun Hoc est in manifestatione omnibus noâ—a vsque ad terminos terrae That is She is known by Her own apparent and manifest Euidence all the whole world ouer And because no one Father touches this point with greater Energy than S. Austin Hear yet more Tract 1. m. 1. Ioan Possumus digito c. S. Austins Iudgement concerning The Churches Euidence we can point at the Church and demonstrate it with à finger and They are blind who see it not Lib. 2. contra Crescon Cap. 36. Extat Ecclesia The Church is in Being apparently clear and conspicuous to all Again Lib 2. Contra Petil C. 32. Neminem latet verae Ecclesia The Church of Christ lies hid to none And Lib Contra crescon C. 63. The Church so clearly presents it self to all sort of men euen to Infidels that it stopp's the mouths of Pagans c. See also this great Doctor pondering those words of the. 30. Psalm Qui videbant me foras fugerunt c. Obscurius faith Hee dixerunt Prophetae de Christo quam de Ecclesiâ c. The Prophets haue spoken more darkly of Christ than of the Church And I think this was done because they saw in spirit that men would make Parties against the Church and not contend so much concerning Christ ready to contend about the Church Christ almost euery where was preached by the Prophets in some hidden or couered Mystery Ecclesia apertè but the Church was pointed at so clearly that all might see it and those also who were to bee against it I waue other Authorities for t' is tedious to proue à Manifest Truth or here to transcribe plainer Testimonies relating to this subiect Thus much premised 7. I say first Though Church Doctrin be more clearly expressed by the Church chiefly in all Matters of Controuersy than in Scripture For example you know the Church deliuers the An Assertion concerning Church Doctrin Consubstantiallity of the eternal Son with greater clarity than Scripture expresseth that Truth Yet no man can proue to reason this clearer Doctrin to be immediatly true vpon this sole ground Mark my precise words that the Church teaches it My meaning is The Church yet not manifested to bee God's Oracle by marks extrinsecal to its Doctrin leaues Reason so in suspence that it Cannot say This is the Oracle which teaches Truth or that the Doctrin of this not yet euidenced Society is Diuine and Orthodox The Assertion is so amply proued aboue that it is needles to press the Arguments further in this place All I say now is that we discourse in like manner of Scripture and Church Doctrin precisely considered as Essential Doctrin not yet made Credible by The Doctrin of Scripture or The Church not Proued true by Saying its true signes and Motiues As therefore the Verities of Scripture are not known to be Diuine Ex terminis because I read them in that Holy book But must haue them proued Diuine vpon à certain Principle distinct from Scripture So the Verities of the Church are not known Ex terminis to be certain before I proue the Church by Clear Motiues to be the Oracle of Truth whereby God speaks to Christians what I Assert is euident in Christ our Lord and his Apostles when they first began to preach For neither Iew nor Gentil belieued that Sacred Doctrin vpon their bare preaching Nay It scandalized the one and seemed à foolery to the other But when they saw it confirmed by Euident Signes and Wonders by eminent Sanctity of life by vndeniable Miracles and other Signal marks which the Author of Religion laid open to Reason Both Iewes and Gentils were gained moued to belieue by Such Inducements no less prudent than forceably perswasiue 8. The reason of all à Priori giuen aboue euinces thus much None can indubitably and immediatly own the Doctrin of either Church or Scripture as true and Orthodox but by one of these two means Either the light of natural Reason discouers that Truth Or it must be known by Faith Reason alone too weak to comprehend the Sublime Mysteries reuealed in Holy writ or taught by the Church boggles at all And left to it self reiects The reason of our Assertion at least the harder Mysteries as is manifest in both Iewes and Gentils Now to know them by obscure Faith is wholly impossible vnless one haue sufficient Assurance before hand grounded on other prudent extrinsecal Principles That both Scripture and the Church teach Diuine and certain Doctrin To know thus much the Rational man must discourse And in this present state of things first find out the Church by her Marks and Signes visible to all If reason complies not with this duty the Faith we draw from thence is no Faith but à precipitous foolish Credulity For who can prudently assent to the high Mysteries of Christianity vnlesse Reason first see it is prudent to do so This is what the Apostle deliuer's in few but most pithy words Scio cui credidi certus sum That is I first know why I am to belieue by Reason and then stedfastly belieue without further reasoning But enough of this in the Chapter cited aboue 9. The. 2. Proposition If the Doctrin of Christ's Church precisely considered according to its Essence bee not ex exterminis manifestly true or proues not immediatly that the Church is Orthodox vpon Her own meer saying that She teaches Truth It is euident She must be proued Gods Oracle by Motiues extrinsecal to Her Doctrin Now these Motiues purely considered as Inducements to belieue are not Articles of Faith but sensible reasonable and of such weight that they powerfully incline euery The Church first proued Orthodox by rational Motiues well disposed vnderstanding to this rational assent As God anciently spake by Moses by Christ and his Apostles So he now also speak's by his own true Church And lead's men vnder her safe Conduct to Saluation 10. The ground of my Assertion is no less euident than the very Position it selfe First Christ himself neuer proued his Doctrin true by meerly saying it was so but confirmed it by signes and wonders which made it immediatly credible as is sayd already So also did his Apostles And so doth the true Church to this day 2. Vnless Christians haue those prudent Inducements preuiously applied to reason before they belieue the Holy Catholick Church The wise prouidence of God must be supposed so neglectiue as not to let men know after à prudent and diligent search which or where his true Church is Though Scripture Compares it to à glorious Sun most visible to all And the Fathers say they are blind that see it not 3. All those Millions of Christians who belieued the true Church who liued and dyed happily in it innumerable shed their blood for the verities of it were not
leaue them without excuse to silence them for euer Here is an vn answerable Dilemma Either the marks now kinted at are admitted or reiected Suppose them owned as clear cognisances of the true Church or of Her Orthodox Doctrin we most justly urge Protestants to proue what I know will neuer be made probable Viz. To shew That they had à Church three or four Ages since inuested in the signes and marks now mentioned On the other side if which is usual such marks be slighted as unmeet to manifest the true Church it must bee granted They haue no euidenced Church and Consequently no true Doctrin with it Hence I Argue Who euer belieues in an uneuidenced Church destitue of all Signes and marks of truth belieues in no true Church The Protestant belieues in such an vneuidenced Church Therefore he belieues in no Church But he who belieues in no Church belieues à Doctrin more than improbable or absolutely false And this is fancy or worse than fancy 3. What answer think ye do Sectaries return to this Argument They return no probable Answer A strange one indeed They tell vs the only Mark of the Church lies not in any external Notes but appear's in the written word of God and the Purity of Scripture So Alstedius Lib. de notis Ecclesia C. 29. Whitaker Contro 2. 9. 5. C 17. and Mr Stillingfleet here and there seem's well pleased with the fancy Contra. 1. The Church had her Marks besore Scripture was written what euer sensible Signes Then distinguished that holy Society from all heretical Conuenticles makes it yet known to the world and Still as clearly point's it out For the writing of Scripture nothing at all obscured the exteriour lustre of those Signes or prudent Motiues Contra. 2. A Mark which makes an obscure thing known is euer more clear and sensible than that is which is marked by it The Church Say Sectaries The Church more clearly manifested than Scripture is obscure and must be first known by Diuine Scripture But this very Diuinity of Scripture is more obscure than the Church For it is not its own Self-euidence nor known ex terminis to be Diuine Therefore vnless this Diuinity be made manifest by an other light it cannot giue to all the first notice of the Church which appeares More clearly to sense and reason by its own Signes than Scripture doth 4. Hence it followes 1. That Scripture which should first mark out the Church cannot do it being more obfcure than the thing marked by it It followes 2. That the Church thus marked is its own Self-euidence not Farther demonstrable to Reason Who euer therefore depriues the Church of her external Motiues or takes from her the glory of Miracles of Antiquity Conuersions c. Shall long grope in the dark before Hee find's either Church or Scripture You will say Scripture known by the vniuersal Tradition of Christians may well mark out and first discouer the true Church Tradition being à thing most known and Sensible to all Contra. This very Tradition either supposes à Church signalized with other Of what weight pleading Tradition is rational Motiues or excludes them And imports no more but the bare Consent of Christians that accept of Scripture as Gods Diuine word Grant the first we haue all that 's wished Plead only by the Second or tell à Heathen who may be gained to belieue the Church That all Christians vniuersally own Scripture as Diuine and mention nothing of Miracles or other Motiues manifest in the Church He will soon reply The Chineses haue also vniuersal Tradition or à general consent of à People largely diffused for their Bible The Turks haue it for their Alcoran yet such à Tradition alone is no Mark of God's word or the true Church Why then should it be à mark to Christians if no more be said 5. And the Heathen easily makes his Plea good by this conuincing Reason à Priori Before this vniuersal Tradition was before you so many Christians agreed in the Belief of your Bible the Doctrin Thereof was made credible vpon other Motiues These Motiues are not now extinguished or of lesser account because you haue agreed on the Scriptures Diuinity Nay they The Heathēs exceptions against Tradition only must be presupposed to haue been before you agreed For this Agreement is not the cause of the Bibles credibility but an effect of the same That is Therefore so many Christians haue agreed by à vniuersal Consent that Scripture is Gods word because it was made credible to Reason Antecedently to an Agreement so vniuersal But the ground of this Agreement was no other but the Authority of the Orthodox Church gloriously euidenced by the Lustre of her Signes and Motiues c. This Principle alone vtterly ruins Mr Stillingfleets Resolution of Faith as shall be made clear in an other place 6. Again saith the Heathen you Protestants discours not probably you iust proceed as one doth who laies Colours before à blind man and bid's him iudge of them You say that both I and Iewes are blind and cannot discouer the light which lies in the Scriptures Diuinity If this be so how can you imagin that I may find out the true Church by the light of Scripture though admitted vpon Tradition which I can no more look on than an owle on the Sun at Noon-day Neither will it help you at all if you Say Scripture interpreted both Mark 's and manifest's the true Church For I must first know that Scripture is Diuine before I giue credit to any Interpreter And though I were ascertained of that Diuinity yet I am still to seek whether your Interpretation or the Arians be better and this I cannot know without à sure Rule extrinsick to Scripture And all fallible Interpretation Yet the Heathen hath not done but pinches the Protestant shrewdly Admit saith he that Scripture Mark 's out the Church and giues vs the first Euidence of it when it tells vs. The Church is à Citty built vpon à Mountain and founded on à Rock That all Nations shall flock to it That Christ will be with it to the end of the world That it euer had and will haue Pastors Visible He clearly conuinces Sectaries and audible till we all meet in one Vnity of Faith That it is the Pillar and ground of Truth c. Can you my good Protestants show me such à Church belonging to you three or four Ages since when you had not one single man in the world professing your Protestant Religion Where was then your Protestant Citty visible on à Mountain What Rock stood it on in those daies when it was not in being What Nations what Iewes what Gentils did it then conuert to your Nouelties How was Christ then with it and taught it all Truth when there was no such Church to learn his Doctrin Giue me à Catologue of your Visible Pastors at that time or tell me how your Church was then à Pillar
an Oracle of truth whilst all it teaches now is fallible and may be false 7. Hence I argue What Scripture saith is true Scripture here speaks of à Church founded by Christ of an Ancient Visible An Argument drawn from what is now said Society of Her perpetual Pastors without interruption of à Church conuerting Nations c. Therefore it speak's Truth and points at à sure Oracle marked with the notes we plead for who euer then admit's Scripture must ioyntly own these Marks and Signatures of the true Church But yee Sectaries admit Scripture and haue no such Marked Church with Antiquity continuance of Pastors c. Ergo you are not members of the true Church which must necessarily be found in some other Society of Christians 8. Here by the way we must preuent à triuial Obiection For some less knowing Aduersary may reply Wee destroy our own Ground and now proue the Marks of the Church by Scripture whereas we suppose the Scripture first proued to be of Diuine Inspiration because the Church manifested by her Marks and Motiues saith so 9. I Answer we proue the Marks of the Church and the Form of her essential Doctrin also by Scripture But how Vpon à Supposition that the Book be first proued Diuine by Church Authority Thus much done it is an excellent Principle But not Primum indemonstrabile it s own Self-Euidence Or first indemonstrable Principle This Truth is clear For no man goes about to conuert à Iew by alleging Passages out of the new Testament or to draw à Heathen to Christianity by any thing written either in the old or new Scripture As therefore that Scripture not the first in demonstrable Principle man would not be well in his wits who hopes to conuert à Protestant by meerly alleging the Definitions of the Council of Trent which he slights so he would be as sensles did he hope to conuert à Heathen by Scripture only as much vnderualued by him as the present Definitions of the Church are by Protestants Hence you see how Scripture is à Principle against Sectaries who admit it and reiect an infallible Church By Scripture we Argue and conuince them of errour might the words Thereof bear their proper sense without fancied Glosses Yet if we make à right Analysis it is not the first indemonstrable Principle but Per Modum suppositionis only that is it must be either supposed or proued Diuine 10. I say yet more Though both the Iew and Heathen owned Scripture as it truly is à Book indited by the Holy Ghost Though it were so there yet remains à difficulty not to bee solued yet they haue but made one step as it were towards Christianity For when such men look well about them and find Scripture differently sensed by so many iarring Heads as haue it in their hands by Arians Socinians Quakers Protestants c. Catholicks dissent from them all where can I beseech you these half Christians whether Iewes or Heathens securely rest With whom can they rationally vnite Themselues whose sense must they belieue and own as the vndoubted meaning of the Holy Ghost To doe any thing prudently in so weighty à Matter is impossible Vnless they first come to the knowledge of Christs true Church which as well Ascertain's them of the Scriptures sense in all Controuerted points of Faith as it doth of the Book 's Diuinity Now further It is not possible to know the true sense of Scripture but by the Church it is not possible to know the Church but by her Marks the essential Doctrin Thereof no more mark 's it self as true than Scripture Doctrin denotes its own Diuinity The Sectary therefore that rob's the Church of her Marks and the external Glory of Miracles Conuersions Perpetuity c. is guilty of three hainous crimes at once 11. First he makes the Conuersion of à Iew to Christianity Sectaries make the Conuersion of Iewes impossible most impossible I 'le show you how The Iew Admit's of the old Testament and drawes from euery passage which speak's of Christ and the Church à Sense quite different from that which Christians own The Protestant admit's both the Old and New Scripture And as we may Suppose is at à hot dispute with à Iew concerning Christian Religion First saith the Iew Lay Sir your New Testament aside which is no Principle with me Because it neither euidences it Self immediatly to be Gods word nor can you proue it Diuine vpon any sure ground extrinsecal to the Book Therefore we must Argue by à Principle common to vs both The old Testament only You read There I read also You know the Original language so do I You compare Text with Text I doe the like You Gloss and I Gloss against you Yet after all is done you draw one sense out of this very Scripture and would proue Christ to be the true Messias I draw from thence an other quite Contrary And say He is not My demand is whether Christ The Assertion proued whom you Adore hath prouided men of better means Than your Glosses and mine are whereby we may certainly know what the sense of this Scripture is If he haue done so it can be nothing but à Church manifested by Supernatural Signes and miracles for God now teaches none by Angels or Enthusiasms if the guidance of à Church be wanting we are all left in darkness And know not what Sense to make of Scripture and this ill beseems the Goodnes of à Sauiour who as you say came to enlighten the world and teach all truth which is not done For he leaues Reason in Darkness and Teaches not where his true Church is It may well be the Protestant will except against his Aduersaries Glosses but He is soon silenced for Saith the Iew you good man when you treat with Papists interpret Scripture as you please and why may not I proceed so with you And vse the like liberty 12. The second crime committed by the Protestant who depriues the Church of Her external Signes is that he Eclipses that great light of the world which as Origen saith shines to all And make it as Obscure as some Protestants make their Church inuisible before Luther What I say is certain For no man can find the Church by reason when all rational Motiues are What Sectaries are guilty of taken from it And held impertinent to illustrate that great moral Body Hence you see the third sin of Sectaries relating to Scripture This Book also loseth all credit with Christians because it Euidenceth not its own Diuinity nor can any Signalised Church tell vs it is Diuine or certainly declare the true sense thereof to either learned or vnlearned 13. My last argument against the Protestant is no Topick nor bare Probability but à plain Demonstration The Title saith This reformed man has no Christian Doctrin made credible to The last conuincing Argument Reason whilst he belieues as Protestant To proue the Assertion Three
belieued S. Iohns Testimony or that our Sauiour Spake those words Here is our solution God long since said the dead shall rise but this Ancient Reuelation being remote from vs if solely considered cannot moue vs to belieue the truth vnless an Infallible Oracle Ascertain vs that God once spake it iust as S. Iohn assures all that Christ said I am the Messias Ask now â—hy Mr Stillingfleet belieues that our Sauiour vttered those â—ords He will Answer God speaking by S. Iohn an Infallible An Application of the Instance clear in Scripture Oracle Affirms it So I say God speaking by the Church an Infallible Oracle affirm's the Resurrection of the dead O but independently of Church Authority we know the resurrection is reuealed in Scripture Contrariwise we know nothing of our Sauiours words but from S. Iohns Testimony Answ we know indeed the Resurrection is asserted in à Book called Scripture But that the Assertion is Diuine or vttered by Eternal Truth we haue no more Infallible certainty without the Churches Testimony Then if any vulgar Samaritan without Diuine Assistance had said Christ spake those words I am the Messias 23. By what is now briefly touched you se first That as our Sauiours own words and S. Iohns reflex Testimony vpon them concurr Indiuisibly to the Faith of these Aduersaries So the reuealed Verity of the Resurrection in Scripture And the The ancient Reuelation and the Churches reflex Testimony Churches reflex Testimony which infallibly Ascertains vs that it is reuealed may well indiuisibly concurr as one compleat Motiue to our faith whereof more hereafter I say indiuisibly And therefore this Faith vltimatly resolued relies not first vpon Scripture only as our Aduersary conceiues without any relation to the Church and then rest's vpon the Churches Concurr indiuisibly to Faith Testimony as vpon à distinct Formal Obiect but by one simple Tendency it pitches on both together 24. You se 2. It s hard to Say what Mr Stillingfleet would haue when he tells vs. This Principle The Church is infallible must be more credible then the Resurrection of the Dead If We clearly distinguisâ— what our Aduersary Confound's he mean's the Churches Testimony is to vs in this present State the more known and nearest Motiue wherevpon the Faith of that Article is grounded we easily Assent But if he think 's we must first Assent to Scripture which asserts the Resurrection and own that as Diuine or the only Motiue of Faith without all Church Authority attesting it to be Diuine He err's not knowing our Doctrin For we Say no Scripture can be infallible An improper Speech assented to as Diuine independently of the Churches Testimony Again those words More Credible are improper if applyed to the Formal Obiect of Faith For the Formal Obiect terminates Belief the Credibility whereof goes before and is grounded on the preuious Motiues inducing to belieue VVhether we Square Circles in our Resolution of Faith The other mentioned Points in the Title of the Chapter discussed Vpon what ground those Articles called the fundamentals of Faith are belieued in the Opinion of Sectaries 25. In many following Pages we haue little but that the Churches Infallible Testimony must be called the Formal Obiect of Faith whereof something is said aboue And you shall haue more hereafter 26. P. 149. He thinks we Argue like men squaring Circles when on the one side we make Scripture obscure yet on the other giue it light enough to proue the Churches infallibility And then he talk's of an Apocalyptical key hanging at the Churches Scripture Proued Diuine Conuinces the Churches Infallibility girdle able to vnlock all the Secrets in it To the first I haue Answered Thus much Supposed that Scripture is proued Diuine we haue so great light from the seueral Passages thereof to conuince the Churches Infallibility that no glosses of Sectaries shall euer obscure them To the Ieer of the Clauis Apocalyptica I Answer Some one or other must vnlock those high secrets when t' is euident innumerable Heretiques by à wrong key wrest Gods word to most pernicious Senses The Question is whether you Sr or the Church must rurn the key 27. Page 152. After thanks giuen for our Coleworts so often serued â—y Those mute Persons the good Motiues of credibility He is Brisque Ieâ—rs and empty words and in earnest resolute to solue our Argument Asking before hand Whether it be not enâ—ugh to be in à Circle our selues but must â—eed's bring the Apostles into it also Reflect I beseech you We said aboue that the Apostles induced by the Signal works and Miracles of our Sauiour Assented to his sacred Doctrin as most infallible In like manner The Primitiue Christians induced by the works and Miracles of the Apostles belieued them to be infallible The force of our Argument Oracles Therefore we also in this present State hauing Motiues and Miracles of the same weight and Euidence in the Roman Catholick Church Belieue with à firm Assent of Faith that She is God's Oracle and her Doctrin most infallible The short Answer to all this saith Mr Stillingfleet is That the ground why the Christians did Assent to the Apostles Doctrin as true was because God Wholly waued gaue sufficient Euidence that their Testimony was infallible in such things where such infallibility was requisite Pray Consider well whether this be not à gliding or rather à plain running away from the Difficulty We haue vrged all this while the Parity between the Churches Motiues and those of the Apostles We haue proued and yet plead That the Euidence is à like in both The Churches most manifest Signes are The blind se The lame walk The dead rise Diuels are dispossesed c. And these termed by you vnsauory Coleworts and mute good Things were the Apostles Signs also Are not you therefore obliged in all law of Disputation What all law of Disputing requireâ— either to proue and vpon sound Principles indeed That we falsly appropriate such Motiues and Miracles to the Church Or if you cannot disparage so illustrious an Euidence to shew à fault in this Inference The Church is known as well by her Signs to be an infallible Oracle 28. Now mark how we are put off with half an Answer God â—y you gaue sufficient Euidence that the Apostles Testimony was infallible None doubt's it But Say on what want do you find of the very like Euidence in the Church Her Miracles are as manifest Her Conuersions as Numerous and more Her fame as renowned Her name as Catholick finally might we vse your scornful language Her Motiues no mute Persons speak Nothing like an Answer giuen aloud and Her Colewarts are euery whit as good as those were the Apostles serued vp To this you Answer not à word but first tell vs with your Aduersary that the Apostles confirmed their Doctrin with Signs that followed by which Signes all their Heares were bound to aknowledge them for
infallible Oracles And it is very true But we proue the like Signs accompanied and followed the Church in all Ages therefore her Hearers are also bound to acknowledge Her an infallible Oracle also In this place you should haue spoken to the Cause and Shewed Why or vpon what Account those first Signs were so powerful to Proue the Apostles infallible And these latter of the Church lesse pregnant to proue Her infallible This and t' is the main Point you wisely waue For it is vnanswerable and most frigidly tell vs The main point pressed again P. 153. You must be excused as to what followes viz. That those same Motiues moued the Primitiue Christians and vs in our respectiue Times to belieue the Church And why not dear Sr Giue vs the Disparity and we haue done but you cannot If therefore it which cannot be Answered be à bold Attempt to deny the Euidence of the Church we plead for which S. Austin Epist 166. compares with the Sun manifest to all vsque ad terminos ad terrae To the last bounds of the earth it is impossible to weaken the force of our Inference when we Say The Church is proued by her Motiues an infallible Oracle You next Terme this Expression The formal Obiect of faith à Coccysm whereby it appear's how little you are versed in School-Diuinity 29. It seem's in the Page now cited your Aduersary vrges this Argument Ad hominem If à Church be acknowledged An Argument vrged ad hominem infallible in Fundamentals The last reason why you belieue it infallible must rest vpon this Principle That the present Church doth Infallibly witness so much by her Tradition To this you return à most dissatisfactory Answer in these words VVhen you Ask â—s Protestants why we belieue such an Article to be fundamental As fâ—r an Instance Christ will giue Eternal life to them that belieue him The Sectaries Answer â—e Answer not because the Church which is infallible in fundamentals Delieuers it to be so For that were to Answer Idem per Idem But we â—peal to that Common Reason which is in Mankind whether if the Doctrin of Christ be true This can be any other than à fundamental Article of it it being that without which the whole Design of Christian Religion comes to nothing 30. Good Reader ioyn here two things together Mr Stillingfleet believes and Mark the word such an Article to be Fundamental not vpon Scripture or Church Authority for neither makes the Distinction between fundamentals and not fundamentals highly dissatisfactory and why And again before he has proued by any infallible Authority that such à Distinction in his Sense ought to be made He brings in the common Reason of mankind to Iudge in à matter which Catholicks Say is de Subiecto non supponente not capable of Iudicature Because there are no Things in being as he call's fundamentals distinguisable from others of à lower Rank Moreouer And take notice of this He belieues such an Article to be à truth because God reueal's it and belieues it to be à Fundamental Faith stand's not vpon two disserent Motiue Diuine and humane Truth vpon this Motiue that Common reason hold's it so Doth not therefore this one act of Faith rely vpon two heterogeneal Formal Obiect As Faith it is built vpon God's Veraâ—ity as Fundamental Faith it stand's tottering vpon mans fallible reason 31. What followes is as bad or worse It is sufficient Say you That the Church doth deliuer from the Consent of vniuersal Tradition the infallible Rule of Faith which to be sure contain's all things Fundamental in it though She neuer meddles with the deciding what Points are fundamental and what not Pray you Sr Answer Who shall dare to meddle with those fundamentals were they Supposable in Worse Doctrin yet your sense if the Church doth not What must your priuate Iudgement or mine decide here Quo iure by what law or Authority whilst Scripture saies nothing and you will not permit the Church to meddle in the Business were there any such thing to be meddled with Therefore you leaue all to mens priuate Opinions to make what they please fundamental and exclude from Fundamentals euery thing which likes them not And here is your fumbling way of Belieuing no man knows what whilst Their broken kind of Faith the Church tells you that euery thing She Proposes as an Article of faith is Fundamental This impregnable Principle we establish in Lieu of your loose Faith and broken way of Arguing also Lastly you are out in the main Supposition that Scripture only is the Rule of faith But hereof enough is said in the first Discourse 32. The next Thing I meet with worth any Notice is P. 158. Wherevnto we also ioyn his 170. Page It seem's D. Lawd before Mr Stillingfleet wrote his Account was vrged to giue à The main Point concerning Scripture and its sense examined satisfactory Reply to the Question VVhy or vpon what ground Protestants belieue the Books of Scripture to be the VVord of God Scripture alone Sayes not which Books are Canonical much lesse declares their Sense in matters controuerted Sectaries reiect the Churches Infallible Authority And say She is not to tell vs which Books are Scripture or what their sense is though admitted as God's word Is it not very reasonable think ye to A reasonable Demand demand vpon what Ground these men stand when either they belieue Scripture to be the word of God or giue an Assent to the particular doctrins contained in the book For clearing these difficulties you shall haue Mr Stillingfleets own word's P. 170. 33. This Question Saith he how we know Scripture to be Scripture may import tvvo things First how we know that all those books contain God's word in them Or secondly how we know the The substance of Mr Stillingfleets Answer Doctrin Contained in these Books to be Diuine If you then ask me whether it be necessary that I belieue with such à Faith as is built vpon Diuine Testimony that these Books called Scripture contain the Principles of the Iewish and Christian Religion in them which we call God's word I do and shall deny it viz. That This belief is built on any Diuine Testimony and my reason is because I haue sufficient ground for such an Assent without any Diuine Testimony But if you ask me â—â— what ground I belieue the Doctrin to be Diuine which is contained in those books I then Answer affirmatiuely on à Diuine Testimony because God hath giuen abundant Euidence that this Doctrin was of Diuine Reuelation 34. Here are two Assertions The first is That the Books of Scripture contain God's word in them And this cannot belieued vpon any Diuine Testimony Thus much granted It followes ineuitably Though one should pertinaciously reiect the whole Drewes an ill Consequence after it Canon of the old and new Testament or absolutely affirm These Bookt
Infallible then those first Masters of Christianity were Wherefore Mr Stillingfleet is constrained whether he will or no if he giues in any thing like Euidence to make vse of these good mute things the Motiues of Credibility which he scornfully call's Coleworts too often serued vp or shall neuer proue that God once said The Diuine word is made flesh Which is to Say He must first euidence à Church before he Proues those words Diuine 40. It may be replyed His Euidence for the whole Book of Scripture and euery particular sentence in it is taken from the fallible Tradition of all called Christians and others also no Christians I Say fallible For he owns none Diuine or Infallible Tallible Tradition no sufficient Euidence Contra. 1. The Scripture was acknowledged Diuine before men agreed so vniuersally that it was Diuine Tradition therefore which is rather an Effect of our Christian Beliefe concerning Scripture then à proof of it presupposes some other more clear foregoing Euidence whereby the Book was anciently owned as Diuine This we enquire after and very reasonably because the Chineses haue à vniuersal Tradition for their Bible and the Turks for their Alcoran one also general yet such à humane fallible and weak Tradition proues not those Books to be Diuine Contra. 2. And here is an An Argument ad hominem Argument ad Hominem If Mr Stillingfleet belieues the Testimonies of Scripture Infallible vpon fallible Tradition which may be false he makes his Conclusion concerning the belief of euery Passage in Holy Writ far more sure then the Premises are which lead in the Conclusion And this Doctrin he reiect's aboue as improbable Contra. 3. He has neither vniuersal Sectaries haue no vniuersal fallible tradition for their Seripture Tradition for the Protestants Canon of Scripture disowned by more then half of the Christian world much lesse for its true Sense wherein dissenting Christians so much vary that none of them all can Say vpon humane or fallible Tradition what the true meaning of the Holy Ghost is and consequently this very Tradition as also Mr Stillingfleets double Resolution of Faith into the Books of Scripture and into the Doctrin or Sense come iust to nothing 41. Page 158. He Argues the whole Church consist's of men subiect to errour That is All the Parts are liable to mistake Ergo the whole Church cannot possibly be infallible A faslacious Obiection Solued in and of it selfe Answ Lay open these couered Terms In and Of it selfe The Argument loses force I Say therefore Men meerly considered as nature has made them fallible in order to belieue Supernaturally haue In and Of themselues no immunity from errour yet taken vnder another Notion as they constitute à Church they are infallible That is There was is and will euer be à Church Teaching and à Church Taught Infallible So that all shall neuer err in Faith You may easily reioyn This or that man these or those Multitudes may wilfully abandon Christ's Doctrin Too true God knows And if so They are no more members of the Church but Heretiques or Infidels Again If you run Some may err All the Church cannot ouer the rest of Christians remaining Orthodox whether Pastors or People and Say these may also fall from Faith I Answer Some may All cannot because God has promised euer to preserue à Church in Being I mean faithful Teachers and faithful Belieuers to the end of the world And must not Sectaries acknowledge thus much who hold à Church infallible in Fundamentals which vpon that account cannot wholly err 42. Mr Stillingfleet Answer 's Though the Authority of the whole Church be not Diuine yet she cannot err in Fundamentals because she is tyed to the vse of means Say Good Sir who tyes Her to this infa 〈…〉 ble vse of Mean's if the whole Moral Body and euery Member of it be fallible Grant that God by his special Assistance ties Her fast She is for that reason infallible and must Vse the means Take from Her diuine Assistance and Say She is only guided by the erring Conceptions of fallible men She may easily swerue from the Means and reuolt from Christ And thus the fallacy is cleared You The fallacy discouerid Sr Suppose the Infallibility must be taken from the right vse of means whercas the contrary is true Viz. Therefore Sâ—e rightly vses the means because She is antecedently preserued infallible by Diuine Assistance You suppose again that all the Parts of this They rightly vse the Means because antecedently made Infallible Assisted Church are fallible And we Say no For as long as they continue members of it So long as the Pastors lawfully commissioned teach in Christ's name and the faithful belieue their infallible Doctrin There will be euer such à Church on earth So long they are all infallible If any fall from Faith whether few or many These eo ipso cease to be Members of this Mystical Body yet the Church fail's not for the failing of some infer's not à possible Failure in all The want of this Distinction caused your errour 43. And thus hauing remoued such weak difficulties out of the way thought great ones in that 5th chapter which to an Difficulties remoued we proceed to the Resolution an vnwary Reader may seem to Obstruct the Catholick Resolution of Faith We will in the following Discourse first Premise some Principles much auailing to conceiue the easiest Resolution and next declare where the chiefest difficulty lies which Mr Stillingf has not done and finally endeauour to solue it without the least danger of any vicious Circle Afterward we shall proue that Protestants haue no Faith at all to resolue CHAP. VII Necessary Principles premised to the Resolution of Faith God can Speak in à Language proper to Himselfe His external language is twofold VVhen God speaks not immediatly He must be heard by his Oracle VVhat the exact Resolution of Faith implyes 1. THe first Principle God who is an Infinite verity and speak's not to stones can by à Diuine Language proper to himselfe so make his interiour mind and sincere God's proper language meaning known to rational creatures that all vpon hearing His voyce may without hesitation indubitably Say Thus God Iudges this be Speak's which granted All are obliged both readily and firmly to yeild assent to so great à Maiesty for his own Authority Known to all The reason hereof is clear If God can speak to Mortals and for this end that he be vnderstood there arises an obligation in euery one to belieue him without fear or doubt Or in case it be impossible after all humane industry vsed to learn what he speak's none can absolutely belieue him 2. A. 2. Principle Then and not otherwise this external Language is certainly known to come from God when it is spoken in his name and so fairely appear's by its own Signatures Lustre and Wonders to proceed from him That all must confess
The Roman Catholick Church denies them to be truths in the Sectaries sense But vpon this Account Chiefly that it is impossible to Show where or in what passage of Holy Writ God euer sayd plainly Scripture Contain's All things necessary to saluation Or that such Doctrins as are plainty expressed there without more Comprehend Matter enough to Saluation This cannot passe for an indubitable Principle whilst euident Experience tell 's vs That VVhat Sectaries â—ccount clear Veritios Others do noâ— such Verities as Sectaries hold clear and indisputable are yet to this day Controuerted and not esteemed clear by many who goe vnder the name of Christians Obserue well 4. What Verity can be more clear then the Incarnation of the Eternal word Yet Arians deny it What more clear then the real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist Yet the Caluinists reiect it Therefore when we Come to Examin which Verities are clearly expressed in Scripture and which not we are thrown into à Labyrinth whilst no other Iudge is made vse of but the bare words of Scripture manifestly peruerted when Opposit to the Interpretation of à Vniuersal Church 5. But here is my least Exception We will Contrary to truth grant gratis That Scripture Contain's all things necessarily to Saluation Withall that the plain Doctrin thereof is matter enough Sectaries clearly conuinced by their own Principles for Beliefe The Sectary yet gain's Nothing vnless He descend's to the Particular Tenets of Protestants Mark my words And truly Assert's These and these Doctrins are plainly set down in Scripture These and these Doctrins I am as Protestant Obliged to belieue vnder pain of Damnation and no more Thus much I say ought to be done which is vtterly Impossible And the Reason is Either those Doctrins layd claim to will not be plain express Scripture Or if plain and express they cease eo ipso to be the particular Tenents of Protestants The last reason of all rest's vpon à Truth already proued and T' is That Protestants haue no Essence of Religion and therefore haue no Faith to resolue 6. In passing you may Ask. What Say we to such Protestants as make the Negatiues now mentioned Articles of their Faith These we dispatch in à word and vrge them to proue their Negatiues by Scripture which is impossible But what is to be done if they Pretend to belieue the Catholick Doctrins the Trinity the Incarnation or any other reuealed Mystery vpon God's diuine Testimony 7. Here we must distinguish between Protestants and Protestants Two sorts of Protestants refuted The older sort belieue the Scriptures Diuinity attesting the Incarnation For example by virtue of à secret and hidden Diuine Spirit of God working in their hearts this being the only light or means whereby that Diuinity is laid open to their intellectual The Priuate Spirited men plainly in à Circle Eyes These ineuitably fall into à Circle for they proue Scripture to be of Diuine inspiration because the Spirit tell 's them so And again they belieue this interiour light or Spirit to be from God moned thereunto by the very light or letter of Scripture not known at all to be Diuine but by this hidden Spirit which is as much vnknown as Scripture without their light But because the recourse to the Priuate Spirit in the Resolution of Faith is amply refuted by euery Polemick Author And now much vnderualued by our latter Sectaries I 'll only briefly Propose one Argument against all that Patronize it 8. Either this Spirit is Scripture or really distinct from A Conuincing Argument against the Priuate Spirit Scripture Grant the first Scripture no Selfe euidence is yet belieued for it Selfe only and so no more is Said but that Scripture is belieued because t' is Scripture without all further Probation If secondly you distinguish this Spirit or light from Scripture it followes that the Diuinity of Gods word is Assented To and belieued Vpon à Motiue which is not Gods word For this supposed Light of the Spirit not at all contained in Scripture is no reuealed word of God and consequently Scripture is belieued for That which is no Scripture 9. The newer Sectaries with whom Mr Stillingfleet Sides suppose à fallible Tradition as à Preparatiue to receiue the meer Books of Scripture which once owned vpon the account Other resolue Faith into the internal Euidence of Scripture of Tradition The Resolution of their Faith is made into the Diuine Light which Shines in the very Doctrin of God's word That is into the rational Euidence thereof So Mr. Stilling P. 226. And P. 222. Discourses thus Though Tradition doth not open our Eyes to see this light yet it present's the Obiect to vs to be seen and that in an vnquestionable manner To giue his Doctrin Tradition Say these Conueyes the Book more Lustre he set's it forth with the sparkling of à Diamond Nay not à man Saith he very probably belieue that à Diamond is sent hiâ— foom à friend vpon the Testimony of à Messenger who brings it and yet be firmly perswaded of it by discerning the Sparklings of it He He would Say Tradition resembles the Messenger that hand 's Scripture to vs but the very innate Splendor and Sparkling of its Doctrin is that which Faith must be finally resolued into without regard had to Tradition 10. This way of resoluing Faith differ's from the Former that it makes the pure Verity of Gods word considered Obiectiuely in it Selfe the last Resoluent or the only Formal Obiect of belieuing How these men differ from the Formar whereas the more aged Protestants superadd to that an internal vital act called the Priuate Spirit or an infused instrinct of Grace whereby the Scripture is clearly discerned to be Diuine and into this Instinct as à Medium Cognitum or the only means to see by which both discouer's the Scriptures Diuinity and it's sense they resolue their Faith This way being already reiected 11. We now Argue against Mr Stillingfleet and Say first The similitude of à Messenger deliuering the Diamond is nothing The Similitude of à Diamond Proofles to the Purpose For were that Diamond found in the streets à skilful Ieweller And who more skilful then Protestants when they read Scripture would soon know its worth by his Art and presently tell you whether the sparkling were Counterfeit or no. Can the Sectary as easily discouer the Diuinity in Scripture by its innate Light and Splendor Speak plainly If The Disparity plain between the Diamond and Scripture he can Tradition no more conduces to its Sparkling then if à Boy first put the Book into our hands or were found by chance in the Highway For as the Diamond Sparkles by it selfe without dependance of the hand which giues it so the Scripture must do if it haue that splendor in it whether Conueyed by Tradition or not Nay if another Scripture were now drop't down from Heauen were the Parity of the Diamond worth any thing
your Proof in Calling That à Reasonable Religion which the greatest Part of Christians reiects as both false and Improbable 4. What Scripture I beseech you what Orthodox Church Why improbable what receiued Authority Nay what Reason euer yet made à few owned Verities and the fewer the better of Christian Religion The whole the full and only Essentials of it If this once passe for sound Learning I se not why à Turk that Own 's one God and Christ our Lord as à Very great Prophet May not as well account those two Articles the Essentials of Christianity as our Sectaries do their Few Fundamentals For if we once begin to Diuide Christs sacred Doctrin Nothing lesse and more valuable in Christ's Doctrin into different Shreds More and Iesse Valuable Say I beseech you where shall we stop in the Diuision And thus your own Question is retorted 5. You tell vs indeed you take some few Fundamentals to be Religion and can proue so much Reasonable I Answer The ground of our Assertion you Mislake For no halfe Pieces of Religion can be proued reasonable without the whole entirely taken and Assented to Here is the Ground of my Assertion and it is amply Proued in this Treatise Either All that Doctrin which Christ our Lord taught And the Church euer since deliuered as Faith is Fundamental Or Nothing at all can be Fundamental 6. Other Flawes I find in this Gentlemans Discourse but haue not time to pursue halfe of them Here is One and of main Importance also He neuer rightly distinguisheth between that Obiect wherevpon Reason rest's And the Obiect of Faith Considered in it self Reason euer precedes Faith A want of Distinguishing between the Obiect of Beason and Faith and is grounded vpon those rational Motiues which Induce to Belieue Faith precisely Considered as Faith relies vpon à quite Different Obiect God's pure Reuelation and Cannot Discourse For the Reasons giuen aboue not here to be repeated Only know thus Much in passing That the wrong done by this Author to the Learned Perron Veron and Others hath its Origen from this Ouersight of not distinguishing between the Obiect of Reason and Faith These Saith He loudly declaim against Reason All know it very well I Answer they declaim Perron and Others Causlesly blamed against Reasoning or Arguing in the very intrinsick Act or Tendency of Faith For Fides non quaerit cur aut quomodo is most true and So you and the whole world must do if you Belieue They declaim against Reason or all rational Discourse built vpon Manifest Motiues Inductiue to Faith is à Calumny and most vntrue 7. Another Mistake The Diuine Authority of Scripture is to be proued by Reason and only by it Yet more The great Argument Another errour for the truth of Scripture is the Testimony of the Spirit in the Miracles wrought by Christ and his Apostles Sr I thought ye all pretended to belieue the great Miracles of Christ and of his Apostles by Diuine Faith founded vpon God's Reuelation in Scripture This granted the rational ground why you belieue such Miracles Cannot be your very Act of belieuing them But must be extrinsecal both to your Faith and its Immediate Obiect also What I Say is Manifest For Questioned by à Iew vpon what rational ground I say rational you belieue the Incarnation or any Miracle in Scripture you will not answer the reason of our belieuing is your Beliefe but must fall vpon prudent Motiues extrinsecal to Faith Otherwise you Confound again the Obiect of Faith with that of Reason 8. You Say moreouer Though Reason Cannot of it Selfe immediatly proue the truths of pure Reuelation Concerning the Trinity for example or the Incarnation Yet it Demonstrates the Diuine Authority of the Testimony that declares them And that way Viz. by demonstrating the Testimony proues euen these Articles Euidence of the Diuine Testimony infer's euidence in the thing attested This Certainly is à Mistake First because great Diuines teach That if the Diuine Testimony be demonstrated Or euidently proued to exist The Verity attested by it is also euidently known Therefore who euer has euidence of this Truth God that Cannot err Reueals the Trinity must euidently infer The Trinity is And So Faith would be euident both in respect of its Formal Obiect and Material also But here lies not my greatest exception 9. I say in à word There is no Principle in Nature or Grace which has force to demonstrate and mark my word That No Principle giues Euidence of the Diuine Testimony God euer said The Mystery of the Trinity Exist s. And first the Doctrin in Scripture no Selfe-Euidence demonstrates not its own Verities The Beliefe of Orthodox Christians terminated vpon the Diuine Testimony is Faith and vnder that Notion obscure Infallible Tradition you own not and Though you did it would Lay no Euidence of the Diuine Testimony before Reason Nothing then remain's if you seek for Rational Euidence but that you recurr to the known Motiues of Credibility which Induce to belieue Now Sr These Motiues demonstrate not the Truth of the Diuine Testimony Euidence of Credibility and Euidence of truth But only make it euidently Ctedible And here by the way I must needs reflect vpon another Mistake You seem not to distinguish between Credibility and Truth Nor between Truth and Infallible Truth A thing may be Credible which is false◠Are to be distinguished As if three or four of good reputation for ought I know Should Conspire to inform me of the death of à Friend in England who yet liues The Relation to me would be prudently Credible yet false Truth implyes à Conformity with its Obiect and Cannot be false Infallible truth in the present matter of Faith requires moreouer the Influence of Supernatural Principles whereby the Act of Faith is determined to rest vpon its own Obiect the First Verity All these Particulars are largely explain'd in this Treatise 10. Thus much briefly noted Though more might be said we Shall Examin by the help of Good Principles How far Reason can proceed in Matters of Faith And whether by prudent reason all may Come to know where true Religion is taught and professed 11. Cardinal de Richelieu Traitte pour Conuertir ceux c. Lib. 1. C. 11. well obserues with the best Philosophers That when à Verity stand's sure vpon one clear rational and indubitable Principle its needless though sometimes not amiss to bring in more Proofs For frustra fit per plura c. One solid Ground is equivalent to many 12. I am you se engaged to answer the Question proposed All debates concerning Religion may be decided by Reason Viz. How far reason is to meddle in matters of Religion And Say in à word All debates in this most weightly Affaire may be decided and easily by Reason only But to clear the Assertion from Mistake we are first To distinguish between à nicknamed or miscalled Reason
Churches on earth and proue themselues thereby both Faithles and Churchles But enough for à Preface Open and read Approue or condemn as reason shall guide you In case you Condemn please to say VVhy and shew me where I erre in Principles Pardon the faults of the Printer which are many he is à stranger to our Language except against mine boldly if you find any but do it with Charity and still for this I must inculcate again and again Remember Principles Farewel AN ADVERTISEMENT FOR Mr STILLINGFLEET Sr. PLain dealing is the best you shall haue it in this short Advertisement from à friendly Aduersary no Enemy I assure you who desires to do you good against your will If I be rightly informed Both you and some others find your selves dissatisfied vpon this score that your Rational Account as t is called comprehending the Grounds of Protestant Religion remain's yet vntouch't or not answered Before I reply to these complaints I shall take the boldnes to request one fauour at your hands you will much oblige me by it which is to point out that Chapter or Paragraph through your whole Book wherein the hidden treasure of these Protestant Grounds lie and to giue me in à few lines one or two of them plainly set down in halfe à Sheet of paper I speak of Grounds for Protestancy as it is your peculiar Religion distinct from Popery and all known Condemned Hereties Fob me not off I beseech you with any general talk Tell me not I must seek better and shall find For Sr I assure you though I haue made à diligent Search after your Grounds they are yet so far remoued from my sight that I cannot find one Wherefore because you are more Conuersant in your own writings then others and Plus vident oculi quam oculus I beg to be enlightned by you If you fail to do this the world will iudge as I do that you haue abused the Reader with à Title wherevnto nothing in your voluminous Book answer's I mean you haue no more touched vpon Grounds for Protestancy as Protestancy and mark my words then for Arianism or any other false Religion In the perusal of your Book I se what beguiled you You Sr thought to throw that little dirt wherewith some haue furnished you in our faces was enough to make your bad cause Specious and to prop vp your Protestancy as if forsooth to Cavil at vs were to establish your Novelties Know good Sr that both Arians and all other gone Heretiques were as fierce in their Cauils against the Church as you are but did they therefore either ground or establish their false Doctrins contrary to Gods Truths It is à gross errour to think so For as it is one thing foolishly to brandish à Sword and another fitly to vse à Buckler so it is à quite different busines slightly to impugn Catholick Religion and another to defend Protestancy Tht first you haue attempted like your old Heretiques and with as ill success But the second which is to maintain Protestancy or to settle that vpon solid Grounds neither is nor was nor euer shall be done by any wherefore I tell you in this Treatise read it if you please This Protestancy is wholly vngrounded God never revealed one Article of it as Protestancy nor did ever antient or modern Orthodox Church teach so much as one of your Particular Tenets And for this reason I say it s falsly called the reformed Religion hauing neither Essence nor the Properties of Religion belonging to it Now for as much as Concern's your Clamours because you think your Book neglected or not yet Answered First give me leave to tell you it is a great Vanity to rise to so high à conceipt of your selfe or of your Book as if you were the only Defender of your Faith and à greater to publish it to the world what think you Cannot Protestancy be impugned without taking you or your work in hand It s little wisdom to iudge so A Souldier good Sir who intend's to inuade an enemy takes no directions from him how to enter his Country much less busies his thoughts about remouing euery straw or euery little block that lies in his way but marches on as he thinks best to compass his Design To ouerthrow your Protestancy is our Design and you most vnreasonably prescribe what we are to do That is we must either attaque your Fort and meddle with your Account or you think nothing is done Why so I beseech you Grant which is not true that those who haue written since your Account saw light passed by it without much notice they might well do so looking on it as à Block not worth remouing vnless as I say you will haue them to obey your Commands and assault what Outwork you please It is Sr your Cause we more mind then your Account 2. Why do you or some body for you not only shamefully stopp all the Presses in so much that scarse a sheet of paper can appear in publick But moreover why haue you when all liberty is granted to scrible and print what you please omitted to Answer those Bookes which directly impugn your Doctrin That excellent Guide of Controuersies is the One and Protestancy without Principles the other And you haue done this with much vncivil scornful Language with a meer forced Pish from the teeth outward at the end of a Preface as if forsooth you would be thought to Say You Could Answer but vvill not vvbereas the naked truth is at least wise men Iudge so you would Answer but Cannot Sr believe me it would have been much to the purpose and far more satisfactory to your Protestant Brethren had you when you saw your Protestancy to speak moderatly well shaken in those two Books replyed to some particulars and shewed where either the Principles were false or their Discourses failed But you Cowardly quitted the field sate down silent busying your selfe with reprinting a few Sermons whereof the world had no need at all And this t' is thought was done to cloak your Lazines your ignorance or both because you could not Answer yet we are called on to quarrel with you whilst you like a Priuiledged Person exempt your selfe from medling with vs. That is we must speak and you say nothing But Sr let vs come neerer the point and tell you truth Whatever you account substantial in your Book hath been answered by your two scorned Aduersaries and if any thing be yet wanting it is amply supplyed in this Treatise To conceiue what I would proue please to Note There are two wayes in answering a Booke The one is to follow an Author step after step by examining severally each piece of the VVhole The other is to Consider the Principles wherevpon the VVhole relyes shewing them either false in themselues or not connex't with those Conclusions which should follow from them Destroy Principles you destroy all Thus the Motion of à Watch may be spoiled two
thoughts before they pass your pen. Haue alwaies this one reflexion in mind It s easy to Cauil easy to talk much but most laborious to make sure what you say by sound Principles And Principles your Aduersaries euer haue an Eye to Had you complyed with this Aduice the greatest part of your Account if not all might well have been spared Never rely on the vain prayses of your vulgar Readers all is not gold that glisters in their Eyes nor do they alwayes speak as they think For as much as concern's your selfe shew sr rather the strength of à Father in louing your works then the weaknes of à fond Mother that hugg's her Brats though most deformed I am told you imagin it à great Acchieuement and your selfe the conquerour in hauing gain'd onc priuate man T. C. to follow your triumphant Chariot Abuse not your Iudgement there is no such matter for in good sober earnest by what I haue perused in T. C. his book rather seem's to be an answer to yours then yours to his Abstain hereafter from opprobrious Language lest you meet with some ruffing Adversary that will pay you in your own Coyn. Please to vse your Buckler better in behalfe of Protestancy and tell me when your Negatiue Articles are thrown away as not reuealed what essential Truth remain's vvithin the Compasse of Protestancy reuealed by Almighty God and necessary to Saluation If you think it the wisest Course not to take notice of what is proposed against you in this Treatise vouchsafe to clear your selfe of the Contradictions charged vpon you And because I find you much intangled in your Resolution of Faith and haue laid your mistakes open to publick view when the Spirit of answering fall's vpon you again Answer I beseech you to the difficulties Obiected in the third Discourse But aboue all Answer to God with à hearty repentance for the wrong you haue done his Church and own me Sr Your friendly Adversary THE CHAPTERS IN ORDER THE RVLE OF FAITH Wherein the infallibility of the Roman Catholick Religion is established against Atheists Heathens Iewes Turks and all Sectaries CHAP. I. VVhether true Religion be in the world The Affirmatiue proued Against Atheists Atheism euidently Shewd'improbable 1 CHAP. II. Reason reiects all sects or Religions not Christian VVhether Gentilism Iudaism or Turkcism bee erroneous and improbable 13 CHAP. III. Christianity as it stands in opposition to Iewes Turcks Infidels and Heretickes is the only true Religion 21 CHAP. IV. Whether Christian Religion since its first Propagation hath not been in like manner preserued pure and further spread by Diuine Prouidence aboue the Power of Nature 25 CHAP. V. VVhether all called Christians Belieue intirely Christ's sacred Doctrin And whether meanes be afforded to arriue to the knowledge of true Christian Religion 29 CHAP. VI. Of our Sectaries errour in their search after true Religion As also of Mr Stillingfleets inconsequent way of Arguing 32 CHAP. VII More of this subiect Doubts concerning the seueral editions of scripture None extant more pure then the Vulgar Latin Abstract from Church Authority there is no Certainty of the best Edition Sectaries Comparing the Present Copies with the more ancient giues no assurance A word with Mr Stillingfleet 42 CHAP. VIII How necessary it was to haue one lection of Scripture in the Church A word of the Sixtine and Clementine Bibles Of Mr Stillingfleets mistakes and inconsequences concerning them Obiections answered 55 CHAP. IX Proofs demonstrating that Protestants haue not so much certainty of Scripture as excludes à possibility of reasonable doubting A word of Mr Stillingfleets weak discourse with à Heathen 67 A Discourse between à Heathen and à Christian 71 CHAP. X. The first and easiest way to find out true Religion is not by Scripture only though all Christians had moral certainty of the right Canon and sense also which is to say the meer owning Christs Doctrin is insufficient to proue it to all sort of People 80 CHAP. XI The Protestant takes away the only means to know true Religion by His proofs whether He defend's Protestancy or impugn's Catholick Doctrin are vnreducible to Principles and neuer goe beyond the weaknes of his own vnproued Assertion Meer glosses support all He saith which is euidenced by à brief handling one Controuersy touching the B. Sacrament Theodoret wrong'd by Sectaries cleared His Doctrin is most Catholick 85 Theoderets Testimony alleged aboue Contains most Catholick Doctrin 94 CHAP. XII A Digressian concerning the Real Presence The Fathers plainly assert it Sectaries glosses friuolous The agreement of the Church and Fathers make à Doctrin indubitable The Catholick's certain Principle A word with Mr Stillingfleet 102 CHAP. XIII Mr Stillingfleet grosly abuseth the Fathers that assert the Real Presence His vnprincipled glosses are not only dubions and therefore worth nothing but moreouer highly improbable 119 CHAP. XIV It is further proued that neither Scripture alone nor any other Principle distinct from an Vnerring Church can with certainty decide Controuersies in Matters of Religion or Regulate Christian Faith 138 CHAP. XV. The other mentioned Principles aboue are insufficient to decide controuersies Or to Regulate faith 152 CHAP. XVI One word more of Mr Stillingfleets Glosses and his vnexcusable abuse of other Fathers 159 CHAP. XVII VVhy the Glosses of Sectaries are impertinent and weightles Mr Stillingfleet misinterprets other Fathers Of his vnskilful Speculation concerning Idolatry charged on Catholicks CHAP. XVIII The Protestant after all his Glosses can not ascertain any of true Religion He would make Controuersies an endles work 180 CHAP. XIX The last designe of Sectaries Glosses discouered They end nothing The clear way to end Controuersies of Religion A distinction between Authority and Principl'd Authority Of the improbability of Protestancy 192 CHAP. XX. A word to one or two Obiections It is further proued That Controuersies are ended with Protestants who haue no Essence of Religion but false opinions only 205 CHAP. XXI Protestants granting Saluation to Catholicks by à clear Inference drawn from their Concession end Controuersies of Religion VVhat force their concession hath VVhy they granted so much The Argument is clearly proposed Mr Stillingfleet return's no probable Answer A full discouery of his fallacies 217 THE SECOND DISCOVRSE OF The Church and Rule of Faith CHAP. I. Necessary Principles premised relating to the Controuersy now in hand concerning the true Church And Rule of Faith 241 CHAP. II. The Rule of Faith assigned The properties of à Rule VVhat is meant by the Church Ancient Fathers Assert that the Church is easily found out Her marks more clear than Her Essential Doctrin 248 CHAP. III. The Protestant has neither Church euidented by Marks of Truth nor true Doctrin made credible to reason His whole Faith is built vpon Fancy 256 CHAP. IV. The one and only true Church of Christ was is and shall euer be the Holy Apostolical and Catholick Roman Church Her Antiquity and Constant Perseuerance in the Ancient primitiue Doctrin without Alteration
it is 3. When the world lay as it were in à dead sleep of sin and ignorance thoughtlesse God knowes of casting so much as à thought towards Heauen or of louing any good but what sense and corrupted nature liked of A new Doctrin sad to sense and mighty difficult to reason was heard of Blessed are the poor in spirit Humility scarse heard of before was then cryed vp for à great virtue wrongs were to be forgiuen lawes obeyed iustice obserued c. But was sensuallity only thus Crossed in its propensions No. A load of high Misteries besides was laid on Reason also which seemed to rack and torture it God one in essence and three distinct persons God an Infant born of à virgin A Lord Iesus true God and man after à wearisome life Scourged by impious hands and finally Crucified such with much more was the strange Doctrin of Christianity How euer and here is the Miracle or prodigious work it got ground spread it self far and neer and though contrary to sensuallity and aboue Reason yet millions of souls so firmly belieued it though austere and hard that innumerable haue dyed for it Now if this be not à wonder or à prodigious work aboue the force of nature we may well conclude with S. Austin lib. 22. de Ciuit. c. 5. This to be the greatest Miracle of all that God conuerted the world without Miracles 4. The. 2. consideration yet encreaseth the wonder of this admirable work We know great effects require proportionable causes of like strength and virtue A weak child lift's not vp à weighty burden nor can à mean handful of naked men defeat à puisant Army Ponder well the Propagation of Christs Gospel and the Conuersions of Nations to Christian Faith visible to our eyes the work is without dispute great noble and glorious But say by what cause by what instruments or Ministers did God effect it Did he send Angels from Heauen to preach a Trinity à Crucified Sauiour c. or force Christians to à belief of those Mysteries by strength of arms No. Rex noster Pacificus Our Diuine Iesus is the God of peace Non in Commotione Dominus No tumultuous spirit brought in his Doctrin Caluins tragical proceedings in the late begotten Heresy was not heard of when Christ our Lord and his Disciples preached the Gospel Some perhaps will say that Gods great intention when he first laid the foundation of Religion was to destroy Idolatry and to establish à Ty what instruments the Gospel was dilated new law against Iudaism and therfore proceeded as the world vsually doth in weighty matters He surely made choise of most expert Aduocates of the wisest Philosophers of the profoundest Iudges and most eloquent Orators on earth and by these pleaded for Christianity 'T is an errour all was contrary Our euer glorius God did his own work by twelue poor Fishermen ignoble ignorant friendlesse and destitute of all that the world makes account of yea and he shewed this power more by these weak Instruments and their successors in after ages than he did before whilst he liued with them to manifest that the work was his Principally and theirs instrumentally This Doctrin is so fully deliuered by the great Apostle of the Gentils that we need not S. Chrisostoms Eloquent Discours on the subiect in his sermon Christ is God To illustrate it further though that also merits à serious reflection I will destroy saith S. Paul 1. Cor. 1. 19. The wisdom of the wise and reiect the prudence of the prudent c. Hath not God made the wisdom of the world foolish for because in the wisdom of God the world did not by wisdom know God it pleased God by the foolishnes of Preaching to saue them that belieue c. For that which is foolish to God is wiser then men and that which is the infirm of God is stronger then men See your vocation Bretheren that not many wise according to the flesh not many mighty not many noble but the foolish things of the world God hath chosen that he may confound the wise and the weak things of the world that he may confound the strong and the base things of the world and the contemptible God hath chosen and those things which are not that he might destroie those things which are that no flesh may glory in his sight Which is to say humane power had no hand in this glorious work and therfore it is as manifestly aboue the force of nature as if Christ Iesus had sent 12. little Children to conuert the world for 't is no lesse à miracle to see so great à work done by 12. poor fishermen then by 12. young Children 5. 3. Consider the number and quality of souls gained to our Christian belief and ask whether they were à few only or of so flexible à temper as to credit any thing vpon hearsay You will answer they were not few Witnesse the conuersion of whole nations and if we Consider nature no lesse obstinate than numerous Incredulum illud genus humanum saith Arnobius lib. 1. Contra Gentes Mankind most stubborn and incredulous contrary to its former liberty and education submitted to the yoke of Christ which truth The number gained in numerable as this Author obserues were it not as euident as day light would haue been thought impossible Perhaps you 'l say though many they were yet simple and ignorant and therfore easily wrought on No. A Learned Dyonisius à Clemens Romanus and innumerable other great capacities called on came in to the Church such choise ones God cooperating with his weak instruments were drawn out of errour and darknesse to the light of the Gospel Now if you ask in the last place by what means these conuersions were made The Gospel answers Mark 16. 17. By signes and manifest wonders from Heauen Going into the world preach the Gospel to all creatures c. and them who belieue these signes shall follow In my name they shall cast out Diuels speak with tongues as the Apostles did in the feast of Pentecost They went forth saith the Text preached euery where our Lord working with them and confirming the word with signes which followed Signes therfore and Miracles works of Diuine virtue without violent hands or humane industry cast down Idols outed Iudaism and induced Aliens from Christ to belieue his sacred Gospel These Arguments as I now said so forceably euidence à power aboue nature in the establishing of Christianity that if we had no other Proofs for the Existence of God these alone without dispute Conuince most sufficiently the being of à Numen aboue vs who has demonstrated his prouidence in laying the foundation of Christian Religion so firmly CHAP. IV. VVhether Christian Religion since its first Propagation hath not been in like manner preserued pure and further spread by Diuine Prouidence aboue the power of Nature 1. I Answer Affirmitiuely and say that the Augmentation or further growth of Christian
books of Scripture hee hath not yet so much as moral certainty of that precise Canon he receiues excluding other books which he denies as Scripture For no Orthodox Church no vniuersal Tradition no consent of Fathers no definition of any Council approues his Canon or explodes those books reiected by him therfore the sectaries Canon wherof there is so Much doubt can giue no moral assurance of Gods reuealed verities vnles it were without dispute à liquid truth that their Canon only is Gods word which cannot be supposed whilst so learned and numerous à multitude of Christians oppose it as defectiue and imperfect Yet more Suppose he giues you the exact number of Canonical books hee gain's nothing because the very Doctrin of these books is no more but à Translation and therefore vnlesse the Translator or Printer haue faithfully complyed with their duty and preserued the books in their ancient purity no Protestant can assure himself or any that what we now read is without change or corruption pure in the very necessary points of Faith If you say you compare them with the ancient Original Copies of the Hebrew and Greek I answer the very best Originals men can light on now are no more but meer Transcriptions and consequently may haue been corrupted by the Transcriber The best Originals now extant are only transcriptions the Printer or Librarian Therefore the Sectary hath no Moral certainty of the bare letter in Scripture if he cannot shew vs the hand writing or Autograph's of the Prophets and Apostles wherof there is no danger because he neuer saw any Hence I argue He who hath not infallible certainty of the very letter of Scripture want's infallible certainty of the Doctrin contained in Scripture but the Protestant hath no infallible certainty of the letter of Scripture Therefore he want's infallible certainty of the Doctrin contained in Scripture for no certainty of the letter no An argument against sectaries certainty of the Doctrin drawn from thence But if he has not certainty of the Doctrin he can haue no infallible faith grounded on it Therefore Scripture alone is an unmeet means to teach him what either true Faith or Religion is 2. Mr. Stillingfleet to solve this vnanswerable Argument Part. 1. c. 6. p. 196. saies we beg the Question when we require an infallible Testimony for our belieuing the Canon of scripture yet grants such à certainty as excludes all possibility of reasonable doubting and Chap. 7. p. 211. declares himself further thus Giue me leaue to make this supposition that God might not haue giuen this supernatural Assistance to your Church which you pretend makes it infallible whether men through the vniuersal consent of persons of the Christian Church in all ages might not haue been vndoubtedly certain that the Scripture we haue was the same deliuered by the Apostles I answer if you take leaue to make that supposition licence me to tell you you haue not that certainty of Scripture which Diuine Faith both supposeth and requires And here is one reason to omit others insisted on here after Deny this infallible assurance of the books of Scripture you haue no greater certainty that God endited those words we now read than you haue assurance that Aristotle wrote his Topicks or Caesar his Commentaries And dare you or any say that we receiue Mr. Stilling answer dissatisfactory our Bible vpon no surer ground Or can you Imagin if Christians accept these books vpon à Testimony lesse then vndubitable it may not be suspected that à thousand gross errours haue entred the Copies by the negligence or inaduertency of such as transcribed them Belieue it Were Aristotles Topicks matter of Diuine Faith none would dy after the fallible conueyance of them to our age vpon this perswasion that nothing substantially first writ by that Author hath been changed or altered Since and the same I assert of the Bible vnlesse you say that the words of Scripture were writ in some celestial and incorruptible Matter yet to be read by all or grant which is truth that as God by special Prouidence caused them to be writ pure so also he yet preserues them without blemish and now witnesseth the truth by the Testimony of his infallible Church wherof more largely hereafter At present I will only answer your difficulty about that fallible certainty which you affirm excludes all possibility of reasonable doubting and say first The vniuersal consent of persons of the Christian Church in all ages neuer approued the intire Canon of your Scripture for not only the present Roman Catholick Church but the ancient councils also receiued books which you reiect This truth is so manifest that it need 's no further proof therefore your Canon want's the approbation of the whole Christian world and consequently you haue not so high à certainty of Scripture as excludes all possibility of reasonable doubting I answer 2. And it is à demonstration against Protestants who say the whole Christian world for à thousand years at least erred in Doctrin contrary to the verities of Holy Scriptures for if we goe up from Luther to the 4 th or 5 th age after Christ you 'l find none but condemned erring Hereticks and Roman Catholiks no lesse actually guilty say Sectaries of these professed errours Of praying to Sainâ—s of an vnbloody Sacrifice of the the A further Argument taken from the papists supposed errours real presence c. Thus much supposed I both answer and Argue against you If the whole Christian world was for that vast time so strangely infatuated as to mantain errours contrary to Scripture when the true Doctrin therof no lesse concerned their eternal Saluation then the true letter it cannot possibly be supposed vpon any weak Probability much lesse on such à certainty as excludes all reasonable doubt that these besotted Christians preserued the letter of Scripture pure and intire whose errours are now imagined most gross against the Doctrin contained in God's word Obserue my reason It is much more easy to conceiue if all held corrupted Doctrin that the very letter of Scrtpture was by negligence or ignorance of these Corrupters of Doctrin also corrupted then to imagin the records preserued pure and Millions of Christians to read them and after the reading grosly to mistake Gods verities registred in that book And here I must mind M. Stillingfleet of his proofless and inconsequent way in Arguing 3. You Sr. say first The whole erring multitudes of Christians before Luther preserued Scripture pure yet forsooth these silly men taught one Doctrin after an other contrary to Scripture They perused the book interpreted it yea preached it to their own confusion and condemnation You say 2. It is not possible that Mr. stillingfleets arguments retorted these writings could be extorted out of mens hands by fraud or violence vnder their eyes or suffered to be lost by negligence Yet you make it not only possible but grant the Doctrin therof to haue
is not like the Turks Alcoran stuffed with fooleries but as I am informed some who liued long there and knew the language well say it contain's most excellent moral precepts tending to the preseruation of iustice and à Ciuil life The Iew denies the new Testament The Arian and others the sense of our Scripture How therefore can Scripture alone proue efficacious to conuert these aliens from Christ or be supposed à fit means obliging all to belieue when yet they know not without more light what they are to belieue or why An other way therefore must be found out whereof more afterward In the mean while 9. I truely stand astonished when I consider how pittifully Mr stillingfleet return's no probable Answer Mr Stilling endeauours to soule this most conuincing Argument Read him who will Part. 1. Chap. 6. from page 175. to P. 179. and he shall find him tediously running on but ner'e à whit more forward in his iourney where he ends then at the beginning T is all à long à pure Petitio principij and worse The Question moued is How the Protestant can conuert à Heathen or proue infallibly that the Bible is Gods word Mr Stilling Answers his Lord Primate vndertakes not this task in the first place nor offer 's to Conuince à Heathen that the Bible must be infallibly belieued to be Gods word No but first the excellency and reasonablenes of Christian Religion Considered in it self is to be proued by shewing that the precepts of it are iust the promises such as may induce any reasonable man to the practise of those precepts that the whole Doctrin is very wisely contriued that nothing is vain and impertinent in it that those things which seem most hard to belieue in this Doctrin are not such things â—s might haue been spared out of it as though God did intend only to puzzle mens reason with them And thus he goes on in his draught or Idea of Christianity and so proues the Truth of Christianity by telling à Heathen What it is or what it teaches The Heathen most iustly except's against These proofs so may à Christian too if no more be said and professes all this talk hitherto besides à meer begging the Question seem's to him à pure cheat and fallacy You proceed strangely saith the Heathen for what is à supposed He makes à meer supposition his Proof verity amongst you Christians you turn into à proof against me that denies your supposition You labour to take my difficulties away by proposing to me those very things which cause them Mark well .. You first make the excellency and reasonableness of Christian Religion in it selfe à fit medium to proue Scripture Gods infallible word wheras that supposed reasonableness of your Religion is as dark and obscure to me who am no Christian as the infallibility of your Bibles Doctrin Therefore you proue one vnknown thing by an other wholly as much vnknown I deny both your Bible and reasonableness of your Religion proue the one or both or you speak not one word to the purpose 10. You suppose 2. à Principle which neither Catholick nor protestant euer yet owned viz. That that which you call Christian Religion is known ex terminis to be true by à meer declaration of its Doctrin wheras no Doctrin euen the most Primitiue was euer made discernable from errour by à bare saying it was true without Euidence of Credibility laid forth to reason before beliefe some precedent Euidence of its credibility laid forth to reason And therefore you are told in the other Treatise against Mr Poole â— 21. That if Christ and his Apostles had appeared in the world and only preach't the high Mysteries of our Faith or spoken as you do of the excellence and reasonablenes of its precepts or promises without further euidence they would haue no more drawn Iewes or Gentils to their Doctrin then twelue little Children could now draw vs to the belief of many other verities not yet reuealed had God inspired them to teach without miracles or any other supernatural wonders My reason is As the Bible euidences not it self to be Diuine scripture so the intrinsecal reasonableness of Christianity is no first euidence to it selfe both therefore must bee proued by Clearer Principles Belieue it Had Christ and his Apostles only insisted vpon the reasonableness of Christianity the very Iewes would haue silenced them alleging greater preuious euidence for their Religion shewed by Moses and the Prophets 3. Saith the Heathen because you dare not meddle with the motiues of Credibility which you Scornfully call à Grand Salad too often serued vp by Papists you speak at random when you giue me no other satisfaction to my difficulties than by telling me they are worth nothing You Affirm 4. Nothing is impertinent in Christian Religion I answer The belief of à Trinity of God made an Infant Your whole story of à Serpent tempting Eue and of Sampson Mr. stilling proofs found weightless with your Mysterious book of Apocalyps seem to my humane vnderstanding not only impertinent but improbable You tell me 5. of Christian Religion agreeing with those books you call the Bible That is you would say the Christian Doctrin of the Bible agrees with the book which is idem per idem and therefore highty dissatisfactory vnless you proue both the Bible and Doctrin by further Arguments You say 6. The Heathen ought to belieue some thing besides that he hath heard or seen vpon the report of honest men He answers he doth so farr as those reports moue him to assent and therefore denies not the matter of fact that there was once such à person in the world as Christ but because you say all this Testimony is no more but moral and may be false the Heathens belief goes no higher Iust so the Turks belieue there was such à man as Mahomet the Chineses such à man as Confusius but what get we by iudging there were such persons as these in the world Doth it here vpon follow all they taught Nothing yet proued was true or infallible Doctrin No such matter You say 7. The Heathen must belieue that Christ dyed rose again wrought many miracles and sent his Apostles to preach his Doctrin c. He answers these being Articles of your faith registred in Scripture you Sr either vrge him to belieue them as you ought to doe certainly and infallibly and this you cannot exact for you belieue them because they are in Scripture and yet you haue not proued to the Heathen so much as probably that Scripture is of Diuine inspiration Therefore you suppose what he denies and pittifully beg the Question 11. Or. 2. You will haue him yeild an assent to them vpon the humane testimony of many Christians which you say is fallible and may be false and that auail's nothing for thus the Turks belieue the Alcoran the Chineses their bible vpon the Testimony of innumerable witnesses You say 8.
None can question whether the Doctrin be Diuine when the Person who declared it to the world was so Diuine and extraordinary à Person holy in his conuersation wrought vnparalled miracles rose from death to life conuersed with his Disciples and gaue euidence of their fidelity by laying down The question Still begged their liues to attest the Truth c. Contra. 1. Replies the Heathen Here is again the same Petitio principii for either you belieue these particulars because Scripture record's them and then you suppose Scripture to be true and Diuine which he denies or because fallible men report them you own no infallible tradition and this aduances not your cause at all for the Turks and those of China talk as much of their Mahomet and Confusius vpon fallible and perhaps false reports also for yet the Heathen knowes not what Religion is true And next wonders why you speak of miracles of power ouer euil spirits of men laying down their liues c. when you Sectaries either deny or slight all the miracles euidently done in the Catholick Church as also the power She manifest's in casting out Diuels c. And if we mention Martyrs Catholicks haue more who layd down their liues in defense of the Doctrin of this one Church than suffered for Christ whilst the Apostles preach't to the world You hint some thing at miracles like one half affraid to meddle with such Motiues and say these wonders proue the truth of Apostolical Doctrin Pray you Sr Answer When you plead by miracles Doe you only allow those which Scripture relates or others By what miracles Sectaries plead also known by History and humane Authority If you rely on the first you suppose what now is in Question Viz. That Scripture is infallible and of Diuine inspiration If you own miracles registred in Ecclesiastical history and the liues of Saints you haue as I now said of Martyrs à greater number wrought in the Roman Catholick Church in the ages after Christ than were done whilst he and his Apostles liued Slight such à Cloud of witnesses as attest these later wonders and speak no more as you doe of any certainty grounded vpon the report of honest men Own them vpon humane authority as morally indubitable and you proue by virtue of these Miracles that the Doctrin of the Catholick Church is still Apostolical and Orthodox 12. Now here by the way I must lay open your fallacy A dilemma which forceth Sectaries to à vicious Circle when you recurr to miracles recounted in Scripture only and reiect others wrought by the Church Thus I argue Either you suppose and belieue the Doctrin of Scripture to be Diuine because you find the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles recorded there and propose these as the first Motiue and inducement of your belieuing Scripture or independently of Scripture Miracles you proue the Doctrin to be Diuine yea and the very miracles recounted there to be indited by the Holy Ghost If you belieue the Diuinity of Scripture induced therevnto by Miracles related in that Holy book you aduance nothing for all you say is that you proue Scripture Diuine because it recounts these wonders which are as obscure to à Heathen as the Diuinity or the sacred Doctrin of Scripture is Therefore you make à most vicious Circle for you proue the Diuinity of Scripture by Miracles internal to the book and the Miracles themselues not otherwise known by the Diuinity of Scripture Now if you say you know the Scriptures Diuinity antecedently or before you recurr to Miracles related there Scripture-Miracles are vseles to your purpose for if the supposition stand They are yet no more but obiects of Faith and therefore cannot serue you as motiues and inducements to belieue that very Diuinity which is now supposed known aliunde and most sufficiently without them 13. One may ask if God had neuer done any other Miracles but such as Scripture relates whether these are not sufficient to work belief in all The Heathen answers negatiuely and makes them insufficient because Scripture is not proued Miracles related in Scripture Conuince not à Heathen Diuine by them And all may answer so if Scripture be not otherwise first proued Diuine before we haue recourse to miracles internal to the book Howeuer admit gratis they were sufficient the most you can inferr is That the Primitiue Church which shewed them was Orthodox but whether any other Church yet preserues the same pure Doctrin may bee well questioned by à Heathen And here in passing you may note à singular Prouidence of God who age after age has illustrated his Church with most manifest and vndoubted miracles whereof more largely hereafter Disc 2. C. 8. 14. You say lastly That which God chiefly requires from à Heathen is the belief of the Truth and Diuinity of his Doctrin He answers he is ready to do so when you proue the Doctrin to be Diuinely inspired and infallible But hitherto you handle things so faintly that though the matter you treat be excellent in it self yet your proofs most disatisfactory come not home to conuince it Your mishap is iust like that of an ill lawyer who has à good cause in hand but knowes not how to handle it Your whole Method is vnmethodical your proofs prooflesse your iumbling most intolerable In à word you giue no rational A Good Cause ill handled by Mr Stillingfleet account of the reasonableness of the Truth of the Diuinity or of the infallibility of Christs Doctrin Therefore saith the Heathen I 'le suspend my iudgement till I meet with à more knowing Aduersary who I hope will not proue Truth by simply saying he speaks it but Conuince it vpon vndeniable Principles 15. But our Heathen hath not yet done with Mr Stilling for he saith plainly Though all the proofs hitherto hinted at might pass or were supposed valid yet there is not one word spoken to the purpose in behalf of Protestancy If you wonder at the bold Assertion ponder well his reason You Mr Stilling haue treated all this while of the excellency and reasonablenes of Christian Religion considered no man knowes how Pray you lurk not in such General terms but tell me particularly what Christian Religion is thus good excellent and reasonable If good and excellent it must be now found in the world Is it Arianism Pelagianism Donatism Quakerism These sects profess Christianity Are they all excellent and reasonable Affirm it openly if you dare Perhaps you will say no. Is it Popery By no means For may your word be taken it mantains false Our Aduersary Cannot say which à mong so many Religions is excellent and reasonable and erroneous Doctrin and that 's neither excellent nor reasonable Is it Protestancy Yes surely This is the excellent and reasonable Religion And is it possible Can you perswade your self without further proof than your own prooflesse word that the perfect draught or Idea of Christianity lies so fair
in the new Nothing of à few iarring Protestants which all other Christians in the world decry as false and improbable Can you think that à foul-mouthed Fryar as euer liued and à Nunn sacrilegiously coupled together layd the first foundation of this excellent and reasonable Christian Religion Speak out and tell vs what you iudge or hereafter leaue of to vent such improbable Paradoxes I speak of à Religion now extant in the world or known 4. hundred years agone to preuent your wonted subterfuge of running vp to the Primitiue Church à most vnreasonable plea when you cannot say probably what that Church taught but only by the Tradition of the present which you most causlesly and vnworthily reiect But hereof wee haue said enough in the other Treatise Perhaps you 'l reply You defend that Church which hold's Doctrin agreable to Scripture I marry Sir but where shall we find it out Amongst you They own on vn known Church Protestants think yee when you know not probably the sense of scripture in one only controuerted Text much less so fully as excludes à possibility of doubting nor shall you euer know whilst you own à sense Contrary to the Roman Catholick Church as is already proued CHAP. X. The first and easiest way to find out true Religion is not by Scripture only though all Christians had moral certainty of the right Canon and sense also which is to say the meer owning Christs Doctrin is insufficient to proue it to all sort of People 1. THe Assertion may seem strange had we not an euident proof at hand and t' is thus The Iewes Turks and Pagans although all Christians now and euer agreed in some chief verities concerning Christian Religion as that Iesus is our Redeemer reiect the Doctrin as fals and foolish 1. Cor. 1. u. 23. We preach Christ Crucified à scandal to the Iewes and à foolery to the Gentils Whereby you may well learn how enormously Mr Stillingfleet erred aboue when he told vs that the meer excellency and reasonableness of Christian Religion carries with it its own proof Our Assertion is contrary and grounded vpon this The proof of our Assertion opposite to Mr. stillingfleet Principle The Mysteries of Christian Doctrin considered in themselues transcend all humane Capacity and as the Apostle saith scandalize weak reason Therefore the Mysteries meerly laid forth to à Iew or Gentile are no conuiction because they are aboue the reason of the very best Belieuers Now if you say they ought first to be belieued by faith without any preuious inducement This is the worst of fooleries for none of the Primitiue Christians so much as belieued Christ or admitted Apostolical Doctrin without rendring first some satisfactory reason distinct from their faith why they reiected the ancient Sinagogue and assented to that then new preach't learning Some preuious light therefore distinct from these abstruse Mysteries which God laies before the eye of humane reason induceth all whether Iewes or Gentils to the true belief of Christianity and Consequently the meer supposed verity of the Doctrin only dark in it self is no absolute mark or first self euident Principle The rerity of Christ's Doctrin no selfe Euidence whereby we are immediatly moued to belieue such high secrets Pray you tell me should any one goe amongst some vnciuilised People who either haue heard nothing or very little of Christ and only relate the story of his sacred Birth in à poor stable of his obscure life from the 12 th year of his age till he began to preach c. Would such Barbarians think yee assent to these strange things either by the force of humane reason or Diuine Faith without further proof or motiue to make all good No certainly Yet all is true and very true yea and most reasonable but the verity alone is insufficient to perswade any that 't is true 2. From this short discourse whereof more in the second part these vndeniable inferences follow 1. That Sectaries assert they know not what when they make the true Preaching of the Gospel and right vse of Sacraments to be marks of the true Church For the true Church be it where you will hath euer its marks antecedently supposed to the true preaching of the word which marks first manifest that mystical body at least in à general way as I shall presently declare and thus known by à natural euidence she proposeth the Mysteries we belieue Here The Church is known by her marks before we belieue is the reason à priori of my Assertion That which is the first obiect of our Faith cannot be the first obiect of our knowledge the Mysteries of our belief layd forth by the preaching of Gods word are the first obiects of Faith for these we belieue and as belieued they are obscure therefore they cannot be the first obiects of knowledge if we speak strictly of knowledge or marks preuiously inducing reason to belieue Whence it is that reason hath its euidence or prudent inducements laid forth vpon other extrinsical Principles before we belieue Belief therefore whether you take it for the obiect assented to or the act wee assent by being as I said obscure can be no mark to it self or to the true Church we belieue in for à mark is euer more known than that obiect is whereof it is à mark or which is pointed at 3. Some perhaps will say The Church is vsually defined An Assembly of those who profess the true Doctrin of Christ therefore An Obiection true Doctrin most essential to the Church must necessarily be known before we know the total essence of the Church Ergo true Doctrin or the preaching of the word is à mark whereby we first find out the Church and consequently the Church marked with euident clear motiues is no inducement to belieue true Doctrin The Argument is an euident fallacy First because the Illiterate and simple Christians belieue in the Church and haue faith sufficient to saluation though they neuer arriue to an explicit Briefly solued belief of euery particular Doctrin taught by it 2. They either explicitly belieue all these particular Doctrins by Faith and this is impossible because all of them were neuer proposed explicitly or know them ex terminis to be Diuine Truths by humane reason when they are proposed and this is most vntrue For who can say that this truth Christ is God and consubstantial with his Father is à verity more known ex terminis by humane reason than the contrary errour of the Arians is You see therefore the obiection is forceles For as one who reades Aristotle or Plato knowes what is said or the substance of the Doctrin by the sense of their words yet remains ignorant whether it be true or fals without further reasoning and inspection so à Gentil that reads our Christian Doctrin in the bible may know much of its sense or what is said yet he must both discourse and reason well before
The iudgement of Credibility not attained by examining the Mysteries of Faith he come to this setled iudgement All I read not euidently true ex terminis is yet indubitably so Now this iudgement is not first got by examining the particular verities which Scripture or the Church teaches No. There is à farr easier way whereby reason after à further discourse concludes that either God hath cheated the world by the Miracles the sanctity The blood shedding of Martyrs and all those conuersions wrought by the Church or we must grant That what the Church teaches is true And this general iudgement arising immediatly from à due Ponderation of the motiues of Faith which is Science disposeth an vnderstanding to belieue this great Truth God speaks his eternal verities by that Church be it yet where you will which Christ Iesus founded And in this sense we say à general Notion or knowledge of the Church manifested by supernatural signes is vsually necessary to the belief of euery particular Doctrin deliuered by it and consequently particular Doctrins can be no first mark or sign of this Oracle Thus much is here briefly hinted at to solue the obiection Hereafter the whole Analysis shall be most particularly discussed in its due place 4. A. 2. inference True Religion is first found by its marks The true Church is known before we can know the books of scripture and cognisances before the pure and incorrupt books of Scripture can be owned as Diuine We come therefore to à knowledge of these incorrupt books by the help of that Christian Society where true Religion is taught and cannot first know where true Religion is by the books of scripture only I say First know For without all doubt when incorrupt Scripture together with the sense is once admitted vpon the authority of Christs Church we argue and forceably as the Fathers anciently did against Sectaries by Scripture But all such arguments presuppose the Books proued Diuine and sacred The reason of the inference is These Books only contain à simple narration of our Christian verities which both Iewes and Gentils slight therefore though we cry neuer so loud Scripture is Diuine and written by the Holy Ghost we effect nothing with these Aliens from Christ vnless we first conuince the truth by proofs distinct from Scripture it self And as little is No disputing by Scripture only without the Canon and sense be agreed on done if Christians of à different belief dispute by Scripture when neither the Canon nor the sense is agreed on For example Marcion produceth his Bible The Arian his and his sense A third à Scripture without S. Iames Epistle or that to the Hebrewes Our Sectaries Crowd in with their book whilst others as learned reiect their Canon and much more that sense they force from it in à hundred passages What is to be done in this Confusion Must wee admit of Marcions Bible or submit to our Sectaries Canon and new sense also No certainly it Cannot be expected Perhaps they will say we are to dispute the question and rigidly examin who hath the true Canon and sense of Scripture They or wee This ends the difference Very good But say on I beseech you And first giue vs à sure Principle à doubtful one in so weighty à matter help 's little which may bear vp the controuersy and at last end it for vnless this principle be agreed on the result of our dispute will be nothing but à fruitles wrangling O the Fathers and Antiquity well pondered cannot but decide the debate I answer may we iudge by the effect the assertion is most vntrue The ancient Fathers peruerted by sectaries end not Controuersies For haue not we and Sectaries now read and pondered the Fathers and Antiquity for one whole age what can be alleged on both sides as well for the Canon as the sense hath been said and after all are we not still as much at variance as farr off from ending the controuersy as when we began it Say Now but vpon à solid Principle who is in fault The Sectary thinks wee vnderstand not the Fathers and we are sure he abuseth them with farr fetch 't glosses He saith their words are clear for his sence and we profess the Contrary Hitherto we come to nothing like à Principle The Controuersy therefore driuen on no further but to the sectaries bare Yea and our No hangs yet in the ayre wholly vndecided The reason is Though the Fathers words be neuer so plain for our Catholick verities yet after the Sectary hath laid his glosses vpon them they are most vnworthily made by him as doubtful and à matter of as great contest as the very sense of Scripture is which both of vs would haue cleared by the Fathers testimony That is There is as much adoe may Sectaries glosses haue place to vnderstand what à Father teaches concerning the sense of scripture as to vnderstand Scripture it self before we haue recourse to the Fathers To recurre therefore to their interpretation in Controuerted matters whilst Sectaries as much darken that by their glosses as they obscure the Scripture we dispute about is The matter in Dispute no meet Principle to end it euidently à most vnfit way to end any Controuersy vnless that which is the very matter of Dispute between vs can be supposed à meet and sufficient means to end it which is impossible Now if the sectary blames vs because we reiect that sense he drawes from either Scripture or the Fathers and he also reiect ours what haue we but wrangling Both parties hitherto only word it and stand chafing at one an other without Principles God therefore hath prouided vs à surer and easier way to end debates about Religion whereof more in the sequele Chapters CHAP. XI The Protestant takes away the only means to know true Religion by His proofs whether He defend's Protestancy or impugn's Catholick Doctrin are vnreducible to Principles and neuer goe beyond the weaknes of his own vnproued Assertion Meer glosses support all He saith which is euidenced by à brief handling one Controuersy touching the B. Sacrament Theodoret wrong'd by Sectaries cleared His Doctrin is most Catholick 1. NOte first If God as I said aboue once established true Religion among Christians He made it so discernable from all false sects that it may be found out by prudent reason Omni literaturâ notius saith Tertull. lib. 1. de Testimonio animae It s more known then any other learning For to say on the one side That an infinite wisdom hath planted true Religion in the world which shall not perish and on the other to assert it cannot be proued or found out is first to cast à blemish on Prouidence and next to free all from the obligation of embracing it because none can be obliged to embrace that which cannot be known by reason or rational arguments Note 2. The Doctrin of Christ which essentially constitutes true Religion stand's most firm vpon
of the Fathers which Sectaries Cannot answer now alleged Therefore if we be in errour the wit of man cannot vnbeguile vs vpon rational proofs and Principles And here I vrge Mr Silling to bring to light his contrary Principles as full and significant that is Scripture as clear Fathers as clear Tradition as clear the Iudgement of some owned Orthodox Church as clear and vndoubted for the opinion he hold's as we now allege in the defense of our Catholick verity Belieue it if he suppose as he certainly doth the Church to haue erred so grosly for à thousand years The Fathers to haue beguiled the world with their mistaken and most improper expressions on this subiect when they meant no such thing He ought to fasten vpon sound Principles indeed before we yeild and must not think to ouerthrow What sectaries are obliged to our Doctrin or foile vs with à few gleanings pick't here and there out of antiquity set forth with à hundred false and fancied glosses Volumes may be filled with such slight stuff which comes no neerer to Principles than improbability to Euidence Will you hear in passing one of his improbabilities If à man saith he P. 567. may be bound to belieue that to be false which sense iudges to be true he means which weak reason vpon the discouery of sense iudges true for our outward senses make no iudgement What assurance can be had of any Miracles wrought to confirm the Christian Doctrin A word to our Aduersaries strange demand Or what assurance had the Apostles of Christs resurrection if their sight might be deceiued about its proper obiect c I am astonished to read this and answer briefly Christ's Resurrection the like I say of Miracles was most vndoubted vpon the discouery which sense and reason made in the presence of such obiects because no contrary Principle so much as weakly stood against that euidence and therefore reason could no more doubt of what was obiected to sense then I now doubt of writing these lines But all is contrary in the present Mystery For here the vnanswerable words of Scripture the Authority of my Church the Clear Testimonies of Fathers the voice and vote of Christianity force submissions on me to belieue the Diuine Reuelation which is either certainly known vpon these grounds or we boldly say no Christian verity was euer yet known vpon any sure Principle What if sectaries deny Church authority and explicate the Fathers 10. Perhaps Mr Stilling may roundly grant that the Greek and Latin Church erred in this Doctrin of the real presence for many ages and consequently that innumerable learned Doctors haue not only been besotted them selues but moreouer haue basely drawn millions of Christians into à damnable heresy of belieuing that to be Christs body which really is not Howeuer he will honour the Fathers so far as to afford them the fauour of his glosses Contra 1. If the Church and all Christians erred so vast à time in professing this Doctrin Mr Stilling is obliged to name some Churh reputed Orthodox 3. or 4. hundred years past for then there was à true Church in the world which held his opinion or as expresly denyed the real Presence as our Church both then and now mantains it and this will cost him more pains than to writ an other Account of Protestancy for I am sure there was neuer any such Church on earth Contra. 2. If He interpret's the The Church and Fathers speak alike of this Mystery Fathers He may as well interpret our Church Doctrin and make all belieue that we Catholicks hold not yet the real presence Obserue the same language in all That wich in seen is not bread though it seem's so to the tast But the body of Christ Our sense may be deceiued Gods word cannot deceiue vs. The bread indeed â— made the flesh of Christ and the wine his blood c. Thus the Fathers deliuer their sense and it is the Churches language also If therefore Mr Stilling can so gloss these words of the Fathers as to make them speak Protestancy or not to deliuer our Catholick Doctrin I should not wonder if in the next book set forth he aduentures to draw the very Definitions of the Council of Trent to his Protestant opinion of no real presence If he did so I am sure his attempt would proue as vnsuccesful in the one case â— in the other 11. Well But permit him to interpret the Fathers and to fall foule as he is wont to do vpon our supposed Church errours what is the vtmost that followes Thus much only Meer talk without Principles For I ask vpon what Principle may I or any know that his glosses which striue to dead the very obuious sense of the Fathers plain words implie not altogether as little satisfaction as little assurance as the very Doctrin doth which he would defend by it If so and so it is most euidently as his Doctrin before his glosses was improbable to the rest of Christians so his interpretations goe no higher but are euery whit as improbable 12. I must therefore tell Mr Stilling that vnless his explanation Sectaries glosses vnprincipled worth Nothing of Scripture and Fathers rely on à certain Principle distiâ—ct from and extrinsick to his glosses they are worth nothing For what auail's it me to read his glosses when no receiued Principle vp hold's them but fancy Reflect à little I read in Scripture This is my body My Church tell 's me the literal sense is true The Fathers as you haue heard and the Tradition of two Churcheâ— confirm this sense Now comes Mr Stillingfleet and first reiect's my Churches authority then begins to strain the Fathers Testimonies with his glosses Stay Sr say I. I except against your glosses and iustly ask whether they are true or Counterfeit Coynâ— If true they stand vpon Principles now briefly hinted at Proue this and I 'le reuerence your glosses but if you fail and fail you must your Doctrin and glosses are both alike Counterfeit and thoughts of fancy only 13. Hee may reply When Protestants cite the Fathers against the Real presence For example That of S. Austin or Theoderet mentioned aboue we Catholicks explicate them and now which seem's foul play we except against his Glosses For If we interpret An Obiection why may not Hee doe so also A word only in passing conformable to what is noted aboue If to decide this one Controuersy of Christ's Real Presence recourse be had to the Fathers and the two aduerse Parties do no more but load such Testimonies as are alleged with their priuate interpretations the Dispute will neuer be ended Because priuate glosses leaue the two Dissenters as much at iarrs as they were before God therefore as I haue often said affords an easier means to know his reuealed Truths Now my Answer to the obiection is The Catholick then only blames the Protestant's wilful interpretation when it sham fully out-faces the
true signification in this place giuen 22. Ab omni specie mala abstinete vos The sense is Abstain not only from inward malice but and here mark the opposition from all Shew or semblance of euil And when S. Cyril saith Orat 4. Mystag vnder the Type or species of bread is giuen the body of our Lord he euidently distinguisheth the Form or shape of bread from its substance And so S. Cyprian doth in the words alleged Corporalis Substantiae retinens Speciem retaining the exteriour shape or form of à Corporeal substance and mote plainly thus The bread being changed not in its outward Form and semblance but in it's inward nature and substance by the Omnipotency of the word is made flesh 8. Mr Stilling again page 570. in his Answer to S. Cyprian This common bread is changed into flesh and blood saith we Protestants do not deny à Sacramental change of the bread into the flesh and blood of Christ but only that substantial change which ye Papists assert Pray you Sr tell me what is the Terminus à quo and the Terminus ad quem of this your mysterious change You acknowledg some thing Protestants cannot say what is changed into Christ's body changed into the flesh and blood of Christ Is the substance of bread the terminus à quo or that which is changed into the flesh No t' is too plain Popery Is bread made à Sacrament or à Sign of Christ's body changed into the flesh of Christs Euidently no for neither the Sacrament nor that which you call à Sign of Christ's body is changed into flesh Note well the Emphasis of your own words of something changed into the flesh of Christ and say on Gods name what it is You may reply you speak only of à Mystical and Sacramental change That 's not to the purpose now the Emphasis of your words point at something created or increated changed into the flesh and blood of Christ tell vs plainly what that is or in good earnest your expression fal's too short of any intelligible sense 9. In case you run on trifling with your Mystical and Sacramental change only made vpon the accidents or substance of bread the Author now cited positiuely asserts more viz. Panis non effigie sed naturâ mutatus The bread which our Lord gaue to his Disciples being changed not in Outward form and appearance but in its inward nature and substance by the Omnipotency of the word is made flesh where 't is plain your extrinsecal sacramental change passing only vpon the accidents of bread or on the substance S Cyprian reiects the Protestants extrinsecâ—l Change which you say remains is excluded and à Real Conuersion of the inward substance of bread is positiuely asserted by S. Cyprian You Answer Some great Criticks haue assured you that the place is corrupted and that the ancient Manuscripts read otherwise Non effigie nec naturâ mutatus neither changed in outward form nor substance You see to what desperate shifts these men are driuen T is wonderful they cite not some great Criticks for à Contrary lection of Christs words Hoc non est corpâ— meum This is not my body Well I say first if those nameless and vnknown Criticks err and the Author speak sense as we now read without the Critiscism Non effigie sed naturâ mutatus not changed in outward form but in its nature Transubstantiation is asserted and your contrary Doctrin is condemned I say 2. This Criticism is improbable and not only turn 's the words out of sense into pure Nonsense but moreouer implies an impossibility I 'le shew you how The Criticism will haue vs read thus Panâ— iste quem Dominus Discipulis porrigebat non effigie nec naturâ mutatâ— Omnipotentiâ verbi factus est Caro. This bread which our Lord gaue to his Disciples being changed neither in its outward form nor inward substance is by the Omnipotency of the word made flesh Obserue well This bread remaining bread in outward shew and inward A Criticism exploded substance is made the flesh of the Son of God An vtter impossibility For no more can bread remaining bread in shape and substance be made flesh factus est caro than Lots wife remaining what She was flesh and blood in outward form and inward substance be made à pillar of salt The Omnipotent power of God cannot change one substance remaining what it is into an other T' is true Luther said Christs body was really present with bread but neuer thought of making bread remaining bread to be that other substance of Christs body 10. Mr Stillingfleet tell 's vs more P. 572. that Substance and nature with the Fathers and we confess it are not alwayes taken properly but sometimes more largely for Accidents Why therefore may not these words Sed natura mutatus in S. Cyprians Context bear that improper sense I Answer and ask first Why may they not also be taken properly When they clearly deliuer à Doctrin conformable to à whole learned Church and your contrary forced gloss hath no Principle to stand on but fancy Had you any ancient Orthodox Church vniuersal Tradition or the plain consent of Fathers for what you assert you might speak more boldly and I would then say S. Cyprians words are false but without such helps to torture à Text as you do to turn good sense into nonsense and this without proof or Principle is more then intolerable Now here reflect à little on what hath been often noted You say the words are improper and render your sense I say they are proper and significantly speak what the Church teaches Pray Answer By what Principle shall you and I come to à decision of this one difficulty Hitherto if nothing be added we haue no more but our two contrary iarring opinions And are not Controuersies may this strain hold made an endles work To add more I Answer 2. If this Author speak sense Not changed in its outward form but in nature Your gloss is Nonsense Obserue well He speakes of The reason why we reiect it bread held in à Priests hand and saith first This bread is not changed in its outward form or Accidents Then he put 's his Aduersatiue Sed. but it is changed in nature and substance If therefore Nature here signifies as you would haue it the outward form or accidents of bread you must read the words thus Bread is not changed in its nature and Substance yet it is changed in nature and substance which is non-sense I proue it Nature and substance with you import the exteriour form or Accidents of bread bread is not changed in this exteriour nature and substance saith the Author yet you say it is changed in this very nature and substance Yet more S. Cyprian asserts à change in one thing not in an other I ask what is changed and what is not changed If the exteriour Accidents of bread as contra distinguished from the Sectaries cannot say what
Answ what need of this when Protestants say there is no great difference between vs in Fundamentals But suppose this done which yet cannot be done whilst Sectaries remain in their wonted Labyrinth concerning Fundamentals what light haue we from these Fathers to try controuersies now in Agitation when they grant that Popery is made vp of the Fathers Errours The final sentence is past the iust Censure already giuen The Fathers were as we are now plain Papists I easily grant all 4. Shall I yet say more concerning the trial of Protestants Opinions or the supposed errours of Catholicks by Fathers and tell you Sectaries haue no Gusto to it at all And because it mainly import's first to discouer their want of Euidence and next their fallacious proceeding in this particular I will briefly do both and remit all here noted to the prudent Censure of euery Iudicious Reader Thus it is There is not one controuersy now Protestants neuer offer to plead by à General Consent of Fathers disputed in which our Protestants do so much as offer to plead by à General Consent of Fathers and Mr Stillingf likes not to be fob'd off with Two or three Testimonies Read their writings of the Real presence of Prayers for the Dead Inuocation of Saints of à Sacrifice vpon the Altar of the infallibility of the Church and tell me after you haue perused all How many Fathers you find clear and express for Protestancy A sight of four or fiue would help much But hereof there is no danger for you haue not one clear and expres I say more not one so much as probable against the Infallibility of the Roman Catholick Church Against praying for the Dead c. And therefore wonder not that Mr Stilling Part. 3. C. 6. P. 641. where he treat's of Purgatory talk's much of the Fathers Fancies and Imaginations And of an itching Curiosity some haue to know more concerning the future state of souls than God has reuealed But after all produceth not one Testimony either clear or probable against our Catholick Doctrin 5. Do you desire to see more of this want in behalf of Protestancy And how little there is to countenance the Nouelty Turn again to Mr Stillinf Part. 2. C. 1. P. 293. Where you find à Title threatning ruin to vs all The Roman Church not the Catholick Church Say I beseech you who would not haue expected after such à clap of Thunder à whole Torrent of Fathers to haue followed for his purpose But in lieu of these Imptij words giuen in lieue of â—athers what haue we Marry He tell 's vs First His Bishop makes à great deal of difference between The Church And A Church and some difference also between à True Church and à right Church next he fall's foul on his Aduersary for his not well considering what the Primate had said Lastly to pass by à few ieers he speak's much of the Vniuersal spreading of the Churches Doctrin and Vnity thereof which is due to the Roman Catholick Church only But after his long Discourse and the rapping Title with it you haue neither sentence nor syllable of any Father which so much as meanly insinuates That that ancient Moral body as it comprehend's all Christians vnited in one Belief is not the only True and Orthodox Church in the world Yet herâ— had been à most fit place to haue pleaded by plain express Authorities I mean such as directly proue the Roman not to be the Catholick Church Belieue it were there any such in the Fathers Volumes Mr Stilling to make his margents glorious would haue brought them to light with à witness But of this main point he is vtterly silent because he had nothing to say And therefore wisely Slip's aside to other By-Matters and leaues his Title to shift for it self 6. Hence you may well conclude that our Sectaries are driuen into strange Straits when we vrge them to proue their Protestancy Of the straites sectaries are Cast into We first call them to plain Scripture for à Final decision in this particular but wanting where with all they fit vs right with à return of Antiscriptural glosses We press them again to name any orthodox Church which fiue or Six ages since professed their Nouelties Not à word is Answered We make Inquiry after Councils held by Protestants before Luther for the Protestant Religion Silence deep Silence not one is found Mention only Oral Tradition they storm at you because they know Protestancy has none We appeal to the authority of the most ancient Fathers you see how we are serued with words and empty Titles Nothing is or can be alleged clear Nothing expres Nothing probable Finally to leaue them without all excuse We call them again to an account and Ask whether they will haue their cause tryed and iudged by their own Doctors Luther Caluin Zuinglius and the like No satisfaction is found here Luther condemn's Caluin more violently than the Prelatick Party in England doth the Quakers and Send 's the Associates Protestants irreconciably Contradict Protestants of Caluin to Hell for denying the Real presence of Christs body in the Sacrament And Caluin is as fierce against Luther in this particular And thus all Sectaries haue opposed one another from the very beginning of this woful Reformation Some plead for our Catholick Doctrin Others are contrary as you may read at large almost in euery Page of the Protestants Apology We therefore know not what these Nouellists would or can belieue whilst these endles differences about Belief thus turn their heads and make them to belieue iust nothing but what euery fancy pleaseth What à Religion haue we here View well it 's exteriour you haue only Horrour and confusion to look on Altars pulled down Cloisters demolished Bious places prophaned Stately Churches turned into sluttish barns by à barbarous Reformation Enter into the Interiour or cast à serious thought on that which should essentially constitute Religion you find this Protestancy à meer new Nothing as Scripture Neither Interiour nor exteriour valuable in protestancy lesse as Churchles without Tradition without the consent of Fathers or any Christian Principle to vphold it yea and this vtterly ruin's all without any Agreement in Doctrin amongst themselues May we not Therefore iustly deplore the sad condition of Thousands now within our once most Catholick England to see à Thing which stand's on no Principles but fancy most earnestly stood for by men of excellent natural parts and these English too whose Progenitors the world knowes it fully as wise as They were all Roman Catholicks But what will ye Good Reuenues A merry life à hansom wife and Self Interest will haue it so And thus much of the want of clear Authorities in behalf of Protestants 7. We are now to speak à word of their fallacious or rather open iniurious Proceeding with the Fathers And to make good what I am about to Say you may please to reflect vpon the
Notes in the other Treatise Chiefly Disc 4. C. 2. n. 23. 24. Where you are told That the great work of Protestants is not so much to proue Their own Religion as to spend time in cauilling at ours And by superficial Glosses to driue sense out of the Fathers most significant Doctrin and then to tell the world they are not for Popery And thus may their glosses haue place no Religion neither their 's not ours can be proued by the Fathers This most vnworthy Sectaries proceed vnworthily with the Fathers Procedure with these great Lights of the Church lenghthens Protestants books And makes Mr Stillingfleets Account to swell into the bulk you see Might I here by the way speak my thoughts concerning it I verily belieue there was neuer Book set forth which lesse deserued it's Title than this He call's it A Rational Account of the grounds of Protestant Religion yet if any one after à diligent perusal of the whole Work can show me but one Article of Protestancy proued by plain Scripture by à General consent of Fathers by any ancient Church Doctrin or vniuersal Tradition I do at this present engage to euince by my Answer That he is grosly mistaken The fairest Occasion Mr Stillingfleet had to speak home for Protestancy was Part. 1. C. 7. Where he treat's of their way of resoluing Faith yet euen here he fall's so vtterly from the Cause that he saies no more for Protestancy than Arianism See the other Treatise Disc 1. C. 9. You will ask perhaps wherein then lies the Substance of his book I Answer in two things chiefly First in à tedious wordy quarrel Two impertinences Constitute the subslanet of Mr Stilling Account with Catholick Religion His flurting at it is endlesse 2. In à gross Abuse of the Fathers by his intolerable Glosses Of neither shall he giue à rational Account to God at the day of Iudgement To proue what is here hinted at Read I beseech you the following Chapter which I place here on set purpose to lead in à further discourse concerning the Glosses of Sectaries Withall to lay forth their emptiness and fraud And finally to show whither these Vnprincipled life-less Whimseys tend at last Thus much performed you shall see Protestancy appear like it self à meer Nothing CHAP. XVI One word more of Mr Stillingfleets Glosses and his vnexusable abuse of other Fathers 1. THough much is said of this subiect already yet because here is Occasion again I shall briefly point at two or three of Mr Stillingfleet's notorious Abuses To prosecute all or the half he has would make this Treatise as big as his volume We begin with that known Passage of S. Hierome Epist 57. Ad Damasum where the Saint saith The Church is built vpon S. Peters See and whosoeuer is out of the Communion of that Church whereof Pope Damasus was then head is Prophane an Alien and belongs to Antichrist c. This in brief is the Substance of S. Hieroms Doctrin Mr Stilling Part 2. C. 1. P. 311. Imputes not plainly these Expressions to heat or flattery although S. Hierome abused Saith he it look's the more suspicious because at that time S. Hierome had à great picque against the Eastern Bishops And then tell 's vs to no purpose what occasioned the Quarrel Reflect good Reader Is this hansom to make à Saint and most profound Doctor to Speak in so weighty à Matter against Truth and his own conscience moued therunto by flattery and no man knowes what Imagined Picques Suppose he earnestly stood for Truth against those Bishops must He Therefore be thought either to flatter or to deny truth now when he writ's to à Pope his lawful Superiour Vpon what Principle doth this vngrounded calumny Stand Pray you Answer 2. After some Parergons not worth the mentioning Mr Stilling Saies When S. Hierome Pronounces those Aliens and Prophane who are out of the Communion of the Church it either belongs not to the particular Church of Rome or if it doth it makes not to our purpose What mean these words The particular Church of Rome The sole Diocess of that Citty No. S. Hierome speak's of the Church built vpon S. Peter or of all Churches vnited in Faith with that See where Damasus then sate which only excluding Aliens That is all heretical Societies make vp the true Vniuersal Orthodox Church as shall be demonstrated hereafter Well saith Mr Stilling Suppose I grant that S. Hierome spake of the particular Church of Rome he means or t' is Nonsense of all Churches of the same Faith with the Roman yet this comes not home to the purpose vnless we Catholicks proue our Church to be as Orthodox now as She was in those Primitiue times We proue Good Sr. Proue you on God's name to Mr Stilling demand impertinent whom prouing belong's That this Church is less Orthodox now than formerly Who euer stand's in à known old path as we Doe ought not to proue he stand's there Olim possideo prior possider is his proof but one that start's aside and takes to à new way as you haue done should tell vs why he left the other high Road wherein his Ancestors walked No prince proues his Right and Title to à Rebel but if any be so vngracious as to rebel that man must show why he did so or suffer for it But of this subiect so much is said in the other Treatise that I hold it vnanswerable More shall be added in its due place In the mean while you see à pretty way of arguing which run's vpon an idle Supposition viz. That the Roman Church is altered from it self since S. Hieroms time The improbable Supposition is first to be proued before the Argument haue any force till then we may lawfully iudge that S. Hierom's Testimony concludes against this Aduersary Pray tell me If I vpon à bare Supposition should assert that Mr Stilling is no good Diuine and thence infer he is His false supposition not proued vnfit to write Controuersies might he not most iustly be angry and well deny my Assertion because the Supposition whereon the Assertion stand's is not proued No more say is t' is proued in the present Matter viz. That our Church Doctrin is altered from it self since the primitiue times Proue that vpon sound Principles and you will doe more then Euer Protestant did hitherto 3. Hence all Mr Stilling following talk of Paralogisms fall's to nothing It is he saith our perpetual Paralogism when the Fathers are cited in praise of the Church of Rome although sometimes their Rhetorick swell'd too high in their Encomiasticks They are his words That we will needs haue these praises to be vnderstood as well of that Church in our present age as in the Fathers time when it better deserued them And he add's As though it were not possible for à Church to be eminent for purity of Doctrin in one age and to decline from it in another Answer All this is
worse than à Paralogism or any captious way of reasoning for it tend's to non-sense vnless the main Supposition be proued to wit That the Roman Apostolical Catholick Church once certainly pure in Doctrin has or Can decline from her Purity in afrer ages Mr Stilling knowes well that Catholicks who hold their Church infallible make the receding from its Purity à thing impossible How sensles then is it in this place where that Question of Infallibility is not handled first to suppose our Church fallen off from its old Doctrin and then to tell vs the Fathers Encomiums haue Still that 's Supposed which should be Proued nothing to do with it in this present state I argue thus and Mr Stilling P. 314. seem's to approue it Vpon the Supposition that the Roman Catholick Church has not swerued nor can swerue from it's first pure Doctrin The Fathers Elogiums are in this age as due to it as in any other But the Supposition must stand firmly built as you shall see hereafter vpon sure grounds and Principles But contrariwise this way of arguing is Non-sense I 'le suppose vpon no grounds the Roman Catholick Church to haue erred and then I 'le do an open iniustice and deny it the due Commendations giuen by the Fathers It is iust as if one should say I 'le suppose à man hitherto reputed honest to be à thief and then I 'le deny him iustice and hang him vp 4. I say vpon no Grounds And to proue my Assertion ask With what Church then visible in the world were Christians obliged to Communicate when all see S. Hierome will haue them to Communicate with some Church Mr Stilling Answers with the Catholick Church Very Good I Ask again whether the Roman Church and all other Churches vnited in Faith with it were rightly called the true Catholick Church Grant this you yeild the cause And Confess that Christians were then obliged to be in vnion with the Roman Catholick Church Contrariwise if you deny that to haue been then the true Church you are cast vpon No other Church Catholick but the Roman endless difficulties and here is one which cannot be solued Vpon the denial you Sr are obliged to denote or name an other Catholick Church distinct from the Roman more pure in Doctrin at that time than She was And that not only the Romans but all others were Aliens and Prophane who eate not the lambe or communicated not in faith with your new found fancied Church in the aire I say fancied for to point at such à Church on earth is as impossible as to proue known condemned Hereticks to be good Catholicks whereof see more in the other Treatise Disc 3. c. 1. 5. Mr Stilling to shift off the difficuIty will perhaps say When S. Hierome wrote This The Roman Church was truly Orthodox and that He accounted all Aliens and Prophane who communicated not with it Most true Doctrin But see what followes Be pleased to fall lower to the third or fourth Age after S. Hierome There was then I hope à Catholick Church in the world wherwith Christians Communicated in Faith but most euidently there was not any Tâ—en reputed Orthodox if we exclude the Roman from being so For all other Societies nameable In the ages after S. Hierome no Church Orthodox but the Roman though called Christians were professed Hereticks With these no man was obliged to communicate Therefore all were either bound to Communicate with the Roman Catholick Church or with no Church at all Hence I infer that the Fathers Elogium's giuen to the Roman Catholick Church were euer most iustly due not once only during the Primitiue times but now also and in all Ages Withall I assert That Mr Stilling denying this Truth speak's his own fancy without proof or the least appearance of any probable Principle And he will be as wholly vnprincipled if I first suppose as I may if my Creed be true That there is now at this very houre à true Catholick Church on earth and should next demand where that Church is in whose vnion I must liue and dye Will He pitch think ye vpon an vnion with the Arians Graecians Abyssins Anabaptists Protestants or Quakers Light where he pleaseth he can only vent his fancy without Proof or Principle Now cast as it were this fancy into à ballance with those most weighty significant Testimonies of ancient Fathers who positiuely press for communion with the Roman Catholick Church and you will see à strange vneauen Parallel conceited whimsyes And strong reasonable Arguments laid together Yet wonder nothing for weak fancy is the strongest Aduersary Catholick Religion hath S. Cyprians Testimony proposed 6. You haue yet an other Authority grosly misvsed by Mr Stilling Page 315. And t' is à known Passage of S. Cyprian in his 55. Epistle to Cornelius where he complain's of certain factious Schismaticks who dared to sail to the chair of S. Peter and the Principal Church from whence Priestly vnity had its Origen and carry letters from Prophane and Schismatical persons Nec cogitare eos esse Remons c. not thinking them to be the Romans whose Faith the Apostle commended ad quos perfidiae haebere non possit accessum to whom falshood vntruth vnfaithfulnes cannot haue Access Thus S. Cyprian And I put much force in those words Eos esse Romanos Those who then liued to be the Romans prophetically commended by the Apostle which words taken in an obuious sense argue that true Faith should neuer part from the See of Rome But Mr Stilling conceal's this force and translates Not considering that the Romans c. No less energy lies in the other following words To whom vnfaithfulnes can haue no Access which seem to exclude à possibility of falshood from the Roman Church 7. Now listen à little to four strange Glosses laid vpon this one Text. Three of them are the Bishops and one Mr Stilling Vain Glosses Laid vpon The Testimony laies claim to The Bishops saies first Perfidia can hardly stand here for errour in Faith And why not my Lord He Answers It properly signifies malicious falshood in matter of Trust or in fact against the Discipline And gouerment of the Church And I say it as properly signifies Vnfaithfulnes or Vntruth And therefore excludes errour in Faith from the Romans yea it must haue this sense here because it s opposed to the Faith of the Romans so much commended by the Apostle which was true Christian Faith Perfidia therefore fignifies the quite contrary that is errour in Faith But grant the sense to be as the Bishop glosseth it excludes at least from the Romans to whom S. Cyprian wrote à Possibility of doing any thing against the Discipline and Gouerment of the Church or of being maliciously false in Matter of Trust If this be so much more are they secured by virtue of these words Ad quos persidia non possit habere accessum from à possibility of erring in Faith for
ignorant what euer Adoration followes vpon them is only à material Offence without the Formal sin as is now declared Wherefore I verily think you Sr vnderstand not your selfe too well when you first suppose the Ratio formalis of prayer or Adoration the same in the Catholick and Heathen And then tell vs we are not to enquire whether the Apprehension be true or false but what the nature of that act of Religion is which is consequent vpon such an apprehension 12. Sr in case of inuincible ignorance it little import's to inquire after the Truth or Falshood of the Apprehension for neither the one nor other because out of the reach of one erring inuincibly has influence into any act of Religion Aand therefore there can be no irreligious worship or formal sin grounded vpon such à iudgement if that Supposition stand All then which ought to be searched into though omitted by you is How or in what manner these misled iudgements tend vnto their Obiect If blameably because vincible they are sinful if inuincible and not in mans power to mend They cannot hurt any In all other cases except this one of inuincible ignorance you must enquire whether the Apprehension or iudgement be true or false Suppose then it be vincibly and culpably false it is apt to beget false worship And should be laid aside Suppose it true It only saies thus much Dead Augustus was à wise and gallant Commander Here is all that can be truely apprehended of him But this iudgement as it find's no What is to be inquired excellence in that dead Prince deseruing prayer or religious Veneration so it cannot incline the will to exhibit any religious duty to him 13. And here we come to enlighten you à little because you say You see not but that kind of worship which was giuen by the Heathens to their Daemons was as defensible vpon the same grounds as the Inuocation of Saints is now Can you Sr Speak in earnest What Now in this present state when mens iudgements are cleared of errour and inuincible ignorance can you find no difference The difference is most palpable For that Deity is not in being The Saint really is in Heauen The Heathen adores his Daemon misled by à false improbable Opinion and Therefore commit's Idolatry The Catholick worship's à Saint assured of the Truth by à iudgement most certain And therefore what He adores is worthy Adoration vnless you can Vnsaint those who are in Heauen or proue they deserue no Reuerence The diffrence between 〈…〉 e and fâ—â—se worship in hat happy State Finally the Heathens iudgement because vnâ—easonable and against the light of nature if it own 's à Deity in Caesar is culpably sinful and ought to be laid down The Catholicks Iudgement point blank contrary ought not to be put away Now Sir if you say All the Heathens worship of their Daemons or inferiour Gods arose from inuincible ignorance of their Excellence which is more then you can proue or probably maintain Here is yet the difference between them and Catholicks that These are neither formal nor material false worshipers The Heathens were at least materially so 14. What followes in Mr Stilling is not like his speculation any choise Matter but vulgar only refuted again and again As. 1. That the Rites of Canonizing Saints Answer to the Rites of the ancient Emperours Apothâ—osis 2. The Formal reason of Idolatry lay in offring vp those deuotions to that which was not God which only belong's to an Infinite Being Let the Expression passe Catholicks I am sure offer vp no such deuotions to Saints as they Adoration very different doe to God knowing well to distinguish by the internal Acts of their Will between the Supreme Excellence and all other power inferiour to That 3. Saith Mr Stilling it is not possible to conceiue any Act which doth more express our sence of an Infinite Excellence And the Profession of our subiection to it than Inuocation doth Pitiful He should haue said then such à particular Inuocation doth tending to an Infinit Maâ—esty For we inuoke and call vpon men now liuing to Assist vs with their Prayers And likewise Address our selues to the Saints in Heauen Yet no man can gather from such deuotions any thing like an acknowledgement of an Infinite Excellence in men now liuing or the Saints in Heauen But enough of these weightles Arguments to touch them is to refute them And thus much of this And the other former Digressions Now we are to à prosecute further Two necessary points CHAP. XVIII The Protestant after all his Glosses can not ascertain any of true Religion He would make Controuersies an endles work 1. YOu haue been ofen told aboue that Sectaries would fain make controuersies à long work I must now giue you the vltimate reason Thereof And withal proue it impossible to know in these mens Principles what is à Christian Truth and what not Their Glosses and impropable way of Arguing laies all which can be said in darknes and obscurity 2. To proceed clearly I suppose first that Christian Truths as reuealed or Contained in Christs Doctrin are infallible and Principles supposed stand firm vpon infallible Reuelation I may here also suppose 2. That either we Catholicks or our Protestant Aduersaries euen in such Tenets as we differ Belieue and profess Christian Truths For example Transubstantiation or no Transubstantiation is à Christian truth The Infallibility of the Roman Catholick Church or Her fallibility is à Christian Truth for they are Contradictories held by Christians Therefore the one or other must be owned true if maintained as Christian Doctrin I suppose 3. That neither part of these Contradictions Transubstantiation or no Transubstantiation in like manner we discourse of all other opposite Doctrins are held their own Self-euidence or manifestly true Ex terminis like the first Principles in nature If Therefore assented to as Christian Truths by the one contrary Party or the other They must be proued by sure Principles extrinsecal to the Doctrin which each Party embraceth 3. Now you shall see What work Sectaries make in these Disputable Matters And how nothing can be certainly known by Them or owned as à Christian verity I would say It An Assertion Proued Can neither be proued in their Principles That to deny Transubstantiation let this one instance serue for all is à Truth or that to hold Transubstantiation is an Errour Here is my reason When Principles whereon solid proofs should subsist are not Proofs must of necessity fail But in those Controuerted Matters Sectaries haue no Principles at all to Argue by Therefore proofs must fail The Minor is euidenced thus All imaginable Principles whereon Proofs can stand in this contest must either be infallible or at least morally certain Meer Probability want's strength to vphold à Christian Truth But the Sectary cannot proue by any either infallible or Moral certain Principle that his Tenet is à Christian Truth And
any firm Belief or to ground so much Moral certainty of à Christian Truth as excludes à possibility of doubting 10. You will Ask what then is there which may raise these two Aduersaries from that low degree of meer Opining to à higher degree of certainty I shall fully Answer the Question in the next Discourse Here I say in à word No Principle can do this But one only which the Sectary want's And the Catholick has to rely on which is the Tradition the Voice and open declared Iudgement of Christs Catholick Church here on earth This faithful Oracle raises vs from the supposed State of our guessing Probably to the highest degree of not only Moral but also of Infallible certainty Though now we press not that against our Aduersaries The Sectary Therefore who disdain's to learn of this Oracle what Christian Truths are shall neuer come to his Moral certainty though the Supposition already made of Authorities equal stood in vigour Iudge then I beseech you How desperate his Cause is now How remote from all such certainty De facto whether he impugn's our Doctrin or plead's for his own opinions when he hath nothing to rely on but only à few dark and dubious Passages of some ancient Fathers 11. I say dubious Passages for in Truth if so much they are no more And Therefore though we haue hitherto supposed Authorities euenly laid on both sides To Show that nothing What the Sectary can Plead help 's the Sectary out of his labyrinth yet now I must tell the Story as t' is All he has in this world to plead comes only to à few misinterpreted Authorities And with such poor Gleanings Churchless man as He is he thinks to Out-braue à whole Church To decry Tradition to vnsense the Fathers to rob vs of our right And finally to throw vs out of the Possession of those ancient Christian Truths which both we and our Ancestors haue professed age after age without Alteration What think ye Haue à few rack't and tortured Sentences Add to them as many Cauils as many Criticisms as you please force enough to do such wonders Can these gleanings misinterpreted as you haue seen better inform vs of the ancient Primitiue Truths than the General voice or vniuersal consent of à whole Church now in being It is improbable Grant therefore which I do On what Principle the Catholick Stand's not That we know not too well the sense of one Theoderet or of à Tertullian c. The Catholick cleares his Doctrin And drawes it from surer Principles viz. From the voice and open declared Iudgement of his Church And most deseruedly look's on the Sectaries attempt as highly improbable who will needs know what Doctrin we are to hold now or was anciently held amongst Christians by à Fathers Testimony when the very sense is supposed doubtful And lies in obscurity That is He will know more than can be known He will force light out of darkness And deriâ—â— the moral certainty of his Doctrin from meer doubtful Principles which is impossible And thus these men proceed in all other Controuersies though Conscious that à whole ample Church decries their Doctrin as false And the open abuse of Fathers also O saith the Sectary I little regard what the Church decries Ansâ— And much less do I regard what you cry against it When the whole strength of your Clamours vltimatly resolued comes to no more but to fancied Glosses laid vpon ambiguous Authorities What in God's name would you be at What can you pretend The Church opposed to Sectaries Clamours or intend Shall clamours Think ye and your few clouded Testimonies force me to leaue my ancient Faith when I euidently know That the Church I liue in call's louder on me and more rationally command's me to Belieue as I doe This audible known voice of Christ's Church dull's your clamours infinitly Outweigh's your Glosses your guesses And the doubtful Sentiment of any priuate Father 12. The Sectary may reply I haue now supposed without Proof the Fathers abused by him whereas if the Supposition hold's it s only doubtful whether it be so or no. Answ Thus much is only supposed doubtful That neither of vs can learn by words precisely obscure what Doctrin to embrace or what to reiect Before à surer Oracle speak's and decide the Controuersy Catholicks say this Oracle is the Church The Protestant who has no Church to recurr to stand's trifling with his obscure Passages hoping at last to make something of nothing to hammer out of dark sentences the Clear Moral certainty of his new Doctrin Though contrary to the whole Church And thus He abuseth both Fathers and reason also Because as I said iust now A doubtful Principle yeilds not so much certainty If He say 3. His quoted Authorities are sufficiently clear to ground the Moral certainty of his Doctrin against the Church it is à desperate improbable Speech For Moral certainty which should pass as an vncontradicted truth most euidently loseth that force when à whole Church manifestly contradict's it But hereof enough is Said in the other Treatise Disc 1. C. 6. n. 3. 13. You will ask perhaps What is to be done if we meet with à Father so clear and express against Church-Doctrin that he cannot possibly be brought to à Catholick sense I Answer A doubt proposed and solued Suppose thus much which I think was neuer yet heard of in any Contest betwixt the Protestant and Catholick I 'le absolutly deny the Authority and adhere to Church-Doctrin For as the whole body is greater than à part so the iudgement of à whole Church is the stronger Principle here and ought in reason to regulate and bear sway before the sentiment of any priuate man who by weaknes or inaduertancy may slip aside into Errour I say through weaknes or incogitancy for if he obstinately oppose the Church He is no Father in that But an Heretick 14. Whoeuer reflects well on what is noted already will see I hope How neer we are to an End of disputes with Protestants if the Contest arise from the Authority of Fathers Here is the Ground of what I am to Say All the Authorities which can What Authorities can be quoted be quoted in Points now Controuerted are either plain or esteemed plain for Catholick Doctrin both by the learned of our Church and Sectaries also As is amply proued aboue Or Contrariwise are at most supposed doubtful I Assert it boldly the Sectary has not one plain Testimony for him in this debated Matter of Transubstantiation And if one or two were granted plain that 's nothing to contrast with à whole Church and innumerable other Fathers 15. Hence I Discourse In case Authorities be Clear for Catholick Doctrin the Sectary opposes vs improbably if he seek to establish his Nouelties vpon à Principle which plainly teaches what we teach And quite ruin's his contrary Opinions If the Authority be doubtful I haue said enough already
As he thinks many à Flaw many à Mistake much iumbling much disorder in the Narration of his Circumstances Reflect well good Reader Doe you not see here à strange Confusion When after the vtmost done by these two Aduersaries You haue two quite different Doctrins raised from the same Authorities of Scripture and Fathers And that after the recourse of both to History You haue two as different Stories told you as Yea and No. In like manner after Their long discourses You haue two contradictory Conclusions drawn out And laid before your eyes to read Vpon what Principle if no more be Said can the yet perplexed Reader come to so much certainty of our Christian Truths as is necessary to Saluation By what means shall He know whether of these Two relates the truer Story Glosses or discourses better O He must peruse Ecclesiastical History Scripture also And the Volumes of Fathers And then iudge Pitiful More than half the world want's means to doe this And He who is able to comply with that laborious Task must at last trust to his own Iudgement Howeuer giue me one who will conform Himselfe to what he Reads and not draw all to à preiudicated Iudgement That man will find out Catholick Religion 4. Be it how you will The Catholick has à better And far more easy Principle to rely on in so weighty à Matter whereof The Catholicks Principle far more easy and plain we shall Treat largely in the next Discourse The Sectary has no other Ground to set footing on But his own priuate Fancy And here is the true Reason why he loues à life to stand dallying with you vpon Authority and History Goe no further He is sure to haue some Reply at hand For it is easy to trifle à long time whilst you only giue him this Authority And that Parcel of History to quarrel with The one as we haue seen He wrest's to what Sense he pleases On the other He can put so fair à Varnish by concealing some Circumstances and iumbling others together That the eyes of à vulgar Reader are easily dazled In the mean time He warily waues And is well content to doe so The last sound Principles which only can end Controuersies Wherefore Methinks one cannot fit the Sectaries Humour better than to attaque him with Authorities And next leaue the Glossing them to his fancy To recurr to Antiquity And permit him to put an other face on the whole Story Thanks be to God the Catholick Writers of our own Nation to say nothing of others who handle Matters most profoundly And in real truth haue already brought these debates to à Period giue no such Aduantage to Sectaries But relying What Sectaries would be at on sound Principles as learnedly reiect these Glosses as our new men wilfully make them without Principles Yet this is Truth As nouellists can do no more But Gloss without Principles So as I said now They are well enough content if the Catholick will doe something like them And only interpret or discourse vpon Authorities And this I call the less or not the last plain way of Ending debates Goe no further they think Themselues safe For example Read S. Austin in the place now cited I would not belieue the Gospel c. Ponder His whole Context attend to his learned Discourse Mark well how He both disputes and proues That he would not belieue the Gospel as Gods Diuine Word but vpon This solid ground That the Authority of the Church then when he wrote moued him to belieue so Descend yet to other particulars taken from his most Connexed way of Arguing Allege all plainly against the Sectary which hath been done and most landably again and again by Catholick Authors Yet after all you see Mr Stillingfleet begins new Quarrels as fiercely as if nothing had been said And if one should vnrauel what he hath wouen in his three pages would not â—e think ye to prolong these vnfortunate Strifes possibly find something to except against you And must not you to vnbeguile the Reader once more reply And except against all his new Exceptions How long may controuersies not yet brought to the last plain Principles run on without ending A shorter way Therefore must be thought of And thus it is 5. Take only that Positiue Doctrin which the Protestant plainly makes his own dogmatical Assertion when he either Adds his The clearest way of ending controuersies new Gloss to an obscure Authority or cast's one clear for Catholick Religion into darknes If you will haue Scripture Quote that Passage of the Apostle The Church is the Pillar and ground of Faith This is my body or what els you like best If Fathers Cite S. Cyril of Hierusalem S. Iustin Martyr or any other quoted aboue in defense of the Real Conuersion of bread into Christs Sacred Body This done First consider well what Church speak's most Conformably to the obuious Sense of these Authorities 2. Distinguish exactly between the Sectaries Gloss which contain's his Doctrin And the plain words of that Authority which he Interpret's Withall Ponder how little these two look like one another How little their Gloss. This is à Sign of my Body hath to doe with our Sauiours clear Expression This is my body 3. Stay not too long vpon the Energy of à Testimony Though plain in your behalf nor weigh ouer much the Circumstances wherein it was spoken For though both be well done yet This fitt's the Sectaries Humour Who waits for such By-Matters And in his Answers as I haue often obserued To shift off what mainly vrgeth will giue you work enough with his Suppositions his May-bâ—â—s And endles Windingâ— What is then to be done when he supposes his coniectures or Glosses to be true Doctrin This way I am sure is very solid 6. Propose with all moderation These following Questions Haue you Sir any Orthodox Church euer since Christianity began The Sectary is vrged I am sure you haue no express Scripture which without dispute as plainly deliuered the Doctrin contained in your Gloss as you now plainly Teach it Haue you any Orthodox Council which without Exception as Clearly defined it as you now Assert it Haue you any Tradition which by à continued Succession Age after age conueyed vnto you the Tenets you pretend to find in some few Fathers And now publish to the world as Christian Truths If you ground your Glosses or Doctrin on such excellent Principles we Catholicks are certainly in Errour And ought to conform to your reformed Gospel But if you fail and fail you must to doe thus much if you only giue vs empty Glosses without further Proofs we look on them as slight things cast off by the Orthodox world as both vnprincipled and vnpatronized Therefore Scriptureless as they are Churchless as they are they fall of Themselues to nothing And bring vtter ruin to your new Machin of Protestancy 7. I doe you no wrong when I draw you off
enough to make him one These Inferences seem euident if not I petition Mr Stillingfleet to discouer where the fallacy lies 12. Now on the other side if such à man as belieues his Prouing what is intended against Sectaries Creeds the Roman Catholick Church And all the Articles She teaches iust as I belieue them be notwithstanding essentially Protestant still He is both Protestant and Catholick together Catholick He is whilst He Assents to all without Reserue which the Roman Church teaches And he is also Protestant for He belieues his Creeds And what euer our new men require as essential to their Religion Wherefore vnless The not-belieuing their Negatiues or his submiss yeilding to our Positiue Contrary Doctrins destroy that essential Faith of his Creeds which is impossible He is in these Principles both at once Catholique and Protestant 13. And thus you see How Our new men end Controuersies For now in their Principles There is no more quarrel about Religion The whole contest being purely brought to this whether Party Opines more securely iust as the Thomists and Scotists worthy learned Catholicks dispute whether Schoole teaches the better Opinions Though if the Supposition stand it will be difficult to find out disputable Opinions between vs. what our Aduersary iâ— obliged to 14. Be it how you will Mr Stillingfleet must of necessity change his Tittle The grounds of Protestant Religion For now Protestancy with him consists with Popery or rather is Popery And Popery If we speak of Religion is consistent with Protestancy The Essence and grounds of the one and the other cannot but be the same if which is euer to be noted Protestancy as Protestancy hath not one true essential Article of Orthodox Faith peculiar to it selfe For hauing none The Abettors of it must either bee Catholicks or Profess no Religion 15. And here by the way you may note the difference between vs. As the Catholick own 's all which the Church defines to be de Fide And necessary to Saluation So contrariwise the Protestant own 's nothing within the compass of His Articles to be de Fide or in like manner necessary For both He and I may boldly renounce what euer he hold's as Protestant without danger of loseing our Souls And hence it is that Opinions only and false ones too essentially constitute this whole Religion I speak here of Articles proper to Protestancy For to belieue the Creeds the four General Councils to Assert that the Sacraments giue grace to the worthy Receiuer that Faith and repentance are necessary or what els can be thought of as Matter of Diuine Faith All I say and euery one Constitute the essence of Catholick Religion and are known Doctrins of the Roman Orthodox Church in so much that the Protestant has no proper Special or peculiar Tenet of Religion left him at all which is true to propugn And for this reason He is obliged hereafter Iure humano Diuino to write no more Controuersies of Religion wanting Matter to write of And no less obligation lies on him to leaue off all further quarrelling in behalf of his improbable Opinions I would willingly see this plain discourse answered 16. Some perhaps not penetrating the force of it may A weak reply answered Reply The old strife is now on foot again For as we call the particular Tenets of Protestants Opinions and improbable also So they in like manner say All that the Catholick Church maintains aboue the Common Doctrin of Christians or the Articles of the Creeds c are only Church-Opinions as improbable as Theirs The Doctrin of Transubstantiation seem's as improbable to them as No-Transubstantiation to vs. Inuocation of Saints more improbable than not to trouble Those blessed Spirits with our Prayers c. Answ The reply setled vpon no Foundation is more than simple For either these men Cauil because we call their Negatiue Articles Opinions or Term them improbable Opinions Sectaries themselues call them Opinions that 's vnexceptionably plain Though they know well that the Church neuer speak's so meanly of her contrary Positiue Doctrins The only difficulty remaining is whether they are improbable or no And this stands most clearly euidenced already vpon an vndeniable Principle viz. That when Luther first broached them They were opposite to the whole Orthodox world And for that cause were then as improbable and Heteroclite as one Rebels vote is against à whole Kingdome or as Arianism was against the Vniuersal Church Now since that time they haue gained no more Probability than Arianism And so the old Improbability still clings to them And for this reason the Sectary is to find out à Catholick Church which defended his Negatiues or any one specifical Tenet of Protestancy as Ancient or reputed as Orthodox as our Church then was or is now Thus much done we will allow more to his Opinions than Probability But to doe it is Impossible 17. Thus the first part of the Obiection aboue is solued who are to proue the Protestants Negatiues To That is added of our pressing Sectaries to proue their Negatiues by plain Scripture I answer we iustly exact so much proof of Mr Rogers and his Complices the greater part of Protestants I think who hold them Articles of Faith These are to produce their Scriptures And only vrge Doctor Bramhal and Mr Stillingfleet that call them inferiour truths or pious Opinions to settle these Negatiues or any Tenet of pure Protestancy vpon so much as any thing like à Probable Principle And here we expect their last Propositio quâ—escens for Probability But this cannot be giuen whilst we know The true Church of Christ decries them as improbable and Heretical errours 18. It is very true and that 's next obiected Catholicks haue opinions in schools differently Principled from Articles of Faith but t' is nothing to the purpose when the diffecence betwixt these and our Sectaries Tenents is that Catholick opinions if How Catholick Opinions differ Protestancy probable are euer reduced to probable grounds our Sectaries opinions contrary to the voice and iudgement of à whole Church can haue no such foundation And for this cause we iustly impugn them not as False Opinions only but as Heresies Now to the last Plea of Sectaries making fewer Articles of Faith than the Church doth The Answer is easy It belongs not to them God knowes wholly vnknown to the world one Age past To giue vs now à right measure of Faith The attempt is no less vain than prodigiously bold But Say on How will they Abbreuiate By what Rule By what law By their improbable opinions Here is all Well therefore may they Lament these vnlucky Opinions which haue ruined many à poor Soul and giuen infinit Scandal to the Christian world Vae homini illi per quem Scandalum venit CHAP. XXI Protestants granting Saluation to Catholicks by à clear inference drawn from their Concession end Controuersies of Religion VVhat force their concession hath VVhy they
impossibile 9. Hence Mr. Stillingfleets pretty Put off of Sauing Some and The Religion which saues Some can saue all not All is most inconsequent Doctrin For clear the Religion from all actual essential Errour it can as well Saue all as some And if it be tainted with any essential Errour The whole Religion is naught And can save none But of this more in the next Discourse Chap. 5. 6. where I shall proue that Catholick Religion is eithér intierly Good totally Orthodox or worth nothing And consequently if vpon à supposed impossibility There were but one essential errour in it which I through invincible ignorance know not yet Assent to That invincible ignorance would T is true excuse me from Sin But it cannot free the Religion from being false and forged in it self 10. What followes in the Objection of our narrow escaping damnation in Catholick Religion as men doe with infinet danger in Shipwrack is no more but Mr. Stillingfleets own improbable Assertion not worth refuting And His reason is far worse Protestants Our Adversaries improbable Assertion forsooth vndertake to make it euident There can be no danger if they obserue the Principles of Protestants To make it evident What à vast ouerlashing is this Sir make your Assertion only Morally certain Nay but so much as meanly probable And May I haue the honour to Answer yo will soon disclaim Euidence In the mean while I look vpon it as à meer Vanity worth nothing And so is all the rest in your next page 612. Where you bid vs iudge whether it be wisdom in such à point as saluation is to forsake à Church in which the ground of Saluation is firm to follow à Church in which it is but possible one may be saued but very probably he may doe worse All this is worse than your own improbable Hic glorious bragging Opinion You here Suppose without Proof that the ground of Saluation is firm in your Protestancy And therefore shamfully begg the question in euery word you speak Yet thus you go on 11. His Lordship still asserts the Protestants way to be only the Safe way to Saluation and that in the Church of Rome there is only à limited possibility of it Answ Enough is said already of the Possibility Here you begg the question again you run away with half à Principle And only tell vs what his Lordship Asserts What security haue I from his Assertion There is yet more of this stuff Protestants confesse there is Saluation possible to be attained in the Romam Church but they say with all that the errours of that Church are so many and some so great as weaken the foundation that it is very hard to goe that way to Heauen especially His begging the question to them that haue had the truth manifested Here is nothing but words We only hear what Protestants prooflesly Thinke and Say What am I wiser for that These false Suppositions This His false suppositions manifest begging the Question fall of Themselues without further refutation 12. Were it worth the while I might Ask whether these supposed errours so far weaken the foundation of Catholick Religion that Saluation cannot be had in it His Lordship Answers I grant saluation to Romanists But not as they are Romanists but as They are â—hristians And belieue their Creed c. Pitiful Speak plainly Will The Belief of Roman Catholick Religion damn them or no If it Damn's them The Belief of their Creed's cannot saue them Vnless you both damn and saue them at once Contrarywise if the Belief of the Creeds saues them Roman Religion cannot Damn them for now vpon the Supposition it destroies not that sauing Faith of the Creeds But stands well with it here And therefore cannot damn any hereafter What followes is yet worse if worse can be You Sr Say Page 613. His Lordship dares not deny à possibility of Saluation for the Roman Cathelick but he is far from Asserting it of those who either know the corruptions of that Church and yet continue in them or of such who wilfully neglect the means whereby they may be conuinced 13. Here is first à false Supposition for à Proof Of known Corruptions And à pure begging the question besides Here is 2. The half Principle of his Lordships bare saying laid hold on without more which inferr's no Conclusion But only thus much That my Lord spake and perhaps not what he thought Or if Hee did so wee Catholicks are not of so easy Faith as to belieue him Here is 3. A pretty piece of Non-sense in those words Nothing but Confusion in the Replies of Sectaries But he is far from Asserting it of those who know the Corruptions of that Church c. As if forsooth one truely Catholick could know and own any Corruptions in his Church And yet remain Catholick These two things are inconsistent To remain Catholick And to iudge this Church corrupted in any point of Doctrin Such men My Lord may list among his Protestant Belieuers In à word His Proposition is de Subiecto non supponente And so is also what crowd's in next Of Those who neglect the means afforded by Protestants sufficiently Proposed c. Here is again the false Supposition not proued wee neuer yet heard of any such means nor shall here after I am sure your Rational Account afford's none 14. You add presently à desperate word And t' is That his Lordship Speakes of such Catholicks whose meer ignorance excuseth when the Fundamentals are held c. Ergo you and your Lord damn all Sectaries send to Hall innumerable Learned men the learned of our Church That intierly belieued the Catholick Faith for à Thousand years and vpward You Damn our Bâ—des our Bernards our Dominicks our Brunoes not to be listed amongst the Ignorant You Damn more ouer all the learned Catholicks who haue liued since your Heresy began in Italy Germany Spain France and in other parts of the world Bethink your self well whether this can pass for either Catholick or Charitable Doctrin And neuer more raile at vs vpon the account That we Condemâ— you For for one we comdemn you damn Thousands Comparâ— the ignorant amongst you late beginners with the ignorant oâ— our Church Past and present The learned amongst you with thâ— learned of our Church confessedly Popish for à Thousand year and vpward There is no parallel in the number If then yoâ— damn many why may not we condemn the late risen fewer Multitudes among'st you wilfully diuorced from the Mother Church Again we damn not your Persons No. One Supreme Iudge Catholicks damn none but Condemn Heresy only is to Pronounce the final Sentence vpon vs all But we condemn your Heresy And say as You ought to speak of the Arians Pelagians Macedonian's c. and all such known Renegados That you haue no better Faith than these Look you to the Consequence 15. Your next Demand is When we grant Ã
Set once more pen paper and proue vs guilty of damnable Errour and you 'l damn so many that very few of your Protestants will be left in à state of Saluation I 'le make the Assertion good hereafter In the interim you Tell vs Wee palpably beg the Question whilst we suppose the whole Church is on our side and against you which is à notorious falshood Sr words are but wind I shall by the Grace of God Euidence this Truth so notoriously in the next Discourse that you if reason may haue place must confess Catholicks are the only Orthodox Church And Consequently grant that Controuersies are ended between vs. THE SECOND DISCOVRSE OF The Church and Rule of Faith HEre wee come to handle à main Matter in Controuersies And first Euidence the true Church by Her Marks and Glorious Miracles The Roman Catholick Church is proued the only Orthodox Society of Christians and Rule of Faith also VVee Euince Her absolute Infallibility and shew by Reason That if She hath taught but one false Doctrin and obliged Christians to belieue it there is now no true Faith in the world CHAP. I. Necessary Principles premised relating to the Controuersy now in hand concerning the true Church And Rule of Faith 1. THE first Principle God whose eternal designe is to bring man to true Faith in this short pilgrimage and after to endles Happines afford's means to acquire both And hath as Principles presupposed well laid open the means whereby true Faith may be attained As made our final End known 2. The second Principle Those want the means leading to the last happy End who are Aliens from the true Church of Christ or Separated from that Catholick Society The Assertion is so plainly deliuered not only by most Ancient Fathers But by the more learned Sectaries also That it is needless to produce many Testimonies S. Cyprian Lib. de unitate Ecclesiae Saith Quisquis ab Ecclesia separatus est c. Who euer is separated from the Church is ioyned to an Adulteress And diuorced from all the Promisses of the Church He comes not to the reward which Christ has promised who leaues the Church of Christ He is an Alien Prophane an Enemy and cannot haue God for his Father who hath not the Church for his Mother S. Austin lib. 4. de Symb. C. 13. Speaks fully this sense Citing those last words of Cyprian And Lib. 4. de Baptis C. 17. Saith Out of the Church there is no Saluation Yet more Epist 152. Whoeuer is or shall be separated from The Fathers Testimonies preduced this Catholick Church although he thinks himself to liue most laudably For this one wickednes alone that he is disioyned from the vnity of Christ shall haue no life Sed ira Dei manet super eum But the wrath of God remains vpon him S. Fulgentius Lib. de fide ad Petrum C. 39. Hold this most certain and no way doubt of it That an Heretick or Schismatick baptized in the name of the Father of the Son and Holy Ghost if he be not in Vnion with the Catholick Church Although he giues neuer so great Alms And shed his blood for Christ yet he cannot be saued I waue other excellent Authorities known to euery one versed in the Fathers And need not to take more pains when Protestants themselues own the Doctrin The Ark was à type of the Church saith Perkins in Symb. Colum with me 785. extra quam omnes interibant out of which Ark All dyed and all are damned who are out of the Church Again In Caput 9. ad Sectaries Consent Galat. Those who are not members of the visible Church are not members of the Catholick Church Humfred Ad Ration 3. Campiani We condemn all who are not aggregated to the visible Church of God Finally Caluin the Master of Sectaries Lib. 4. Institu C. 1. 4. makes it absolutly necessary to be in vnion with Christs visible Church 3. The ground of this Truth is so solidly laid down in Scripture that none can contradict it For here the Church is called the Kingdom the Body the Inheritance of Christ purchased at à dear The Ground of our Catholick Truth rare the effusion of his sacred blood A Citty built vpon à Mountain The House the Temple of God the Hierusalem the Pillar and firmament of Faith c. Whereby it appears That whoeuer is out of this Kingdom out of this Citty out of this house and Temple of God whoeuer is not à member of this Mystical body or shares not in this purchased Inheritance or in à word out of the true Church be it where you will I yet define nothing is in à damnable condition A sad thought for all Sectaries because it is certain that Christ has not composed his Church of such Members as rightly belieue the reuealed Doctrin taught by the true Church and of such as oppose it Vnity and Diuision in Vnity and Diuision in Faith haue no place in the true Church points of Faith ase inconsistent in the same Orthodox Church and destroy the essential forme of it which is one Faith Now if our Aduersaries talk of à vnity in Fundamentals they are not only euidently conuinced of Errour in the other Treatise But vpon this very Account become Separaters from the Church and without Principles Assert that which neither Church nor Scripture teaches Who euer hold's not the Catholick faith entire shall Perish eternally saith S. Athanasius in his Creed but an entire Belief excludes all distinction between fundamentals and others as is manifest I little value some Protestants Glosses made vpon this Text for Glosses with me are weightles when they stand vnprincipled 4. The 3. Principle What the true Church of Christ teaches concerning the sense of Scripture That 's the sense intended by the Holy Ghost and Consequently most true The reason is Truth cannot be contrary to truth The Church and Scripture neuer Clash But alwaies speak one and the same verity This Sectaries must grant who define the Church to be an Assembly of men professing the pure Word of God Therefore it cannot deceiue or teach an Errour contrary to that pure word Or if it doth so it ceaseth eo ipso to be God's Oracle And the true Church of Christ 5. If these men still go on trifling with their wonted distinction of Fundamentals and not Fundamentals And allow à Perfect vnity of Doctrin between the Church and Scripture in The Distinction between Fundamentals and others friuolous things absolutly necessary to Saluation but not in others This is to define and not to define to build and destroy to teach and cheat in one breath For à definition which makes known the nature of à Thing must stand in its open sense without restraint and exactly agree to the thing defined Mark now Christs true Church is the Thing defined and the Definition charged with endless restrictiue Terms is drawn to Non-sense fot it tells vs the Church
à People mad nor besotted vpon this Account because As the Primitiue Christians more induced to belieue so are wee They proceeded iust as the Primitiue Christians did that alwaies belieued vpon Rational Motiues These Motiues then first enlightned the reason of the most ancient Christians And reason afterward preuented by grace submitted to all the Church teaches But much more of this hereafter because of greatest Consequence though it seem's Sectaries haue little regard to the Euidence of Christianity Drawn from rational Motiues 11. The. 3. Proposition The Marks of Christs Church manifest to all are more sensible and clear than the essential Doctrin is marked by them They are peculiar to the true Church only and distinguish Her from all Heretical Communities Finally taken all together and not by Piece-meal conuince this truth That God speaks to Christians by this Church Euery part of the Proposition proues it self First à Mark is more clear and sensible than the thing marked by it For who euer had seen our Blessed Sauiour walking here on earth and obserued his holy life whoeuer had heard his sacred words and seen his Miracles would haue said his Sanctity words and Miracles were more clear and euident to all than his Doctrin was of being God and man Therefore the first Christians belieued that great Mystery induced by euident works and wonders 2. These Marks are peculiar and proper to the true Church only You haue the reason hereof in the other Treatise Disc 1. C. 8. 1â—3 The force of prudent Motiues Because it is not possible if à true Church be now on earth that God can permit à false Society to equalize it much less to surpass it in the lustre of such Motiues as forcibly perswade to discern between That and all heretical Communities For were this done Falshood would be made as credible to reason as truth And God would be guilty of Arguing less efficaciously in behalf of his own Church against Iewes Gentils and obstinate Hereticks 12. Obserue well the Strength of this Argument I say in à word If an Arian could truly Assert I haue as many forceable Motiues And marks of truth belonging to my followers and Doctrin As the now supposed true Church of Christ can shew for it self could he say with truth I will euidence the like Antiquity the like Perpetuity the like lawful Mission of my Pastors the like vnity in Faith the like conuersions of Heathens wrought in and by my Church The like succession of Bishops preaching my Doctrin from Christs time to this day The like sanctity the like miracles as any Church on earth can demonstrate They distinguish the true Church from false Communities Could an Arian I say or Iew either speak all this with truth no Orthodox Christian could argue the one or other of Falshood in Doctrin For grant thus much These very men might much better handle and interpret Scripture than Protestants do vtterly destitute of all such Marks The Iew if the false supposition stand would draw the old Testament to his sense and so would the Arian the new And who could reproue them could they shew you à Church bearing these signes of diuine Authority Hence Sectaries that only Gloss Scripture and neuer had any thing like an euidenced Church which taught the Doctrin they now maintain and so earnestly Gloss for are most reproueable And vainly attempt to draw any prudent man to à belief of their Nouelties 13. By all you see how important it is to haue à Christian Society clearly marked and distinguished from false Communities with euident Signes and rational Motiues before we recurr to Scripture All faith depends on this greater Euidence laid forth to reason as Shall be demonstrated towards the end of this Discourse 14. I would haue euery one seriously to reflect on what is now said and once more to know That Christs Church like à glorious Sun euidenceth Her selfe by the Lustre of signal Marks though her essential Doctrin belieued by obscure Faith appear's not Euident Find me then out à Church euer in being since Christs time vnited in one Faith glorious in Miracles and conuersions of Heathens wherein Bishops and Pastors lawfully sent haue preached Christs Doctrin age after age Giue me à Church which was neuer censured or taxed of Errour by any Society of known Orthodox Christians She and She only is Christ's true Spouse All other late risen Assemblies are Conuenticles of Satan And these Marks do not only distinguish Her from all One only Church Shewes these Marks such Conuenticles as is now noted but Collectiuely taken conuince this Truth That God speak's to Christians by this Oracle whereof you haue more in the following Chapters 15. In the Interim we must enter vpon à further difficulty and next enquire which among so many Congregations as now are and haue been in the world is the only manifested true Spouse of Christ For all as I said aboue make not one Church vnless Christ hath composed this mystical Body of such members as rightly belieue and of others that iniuriously oppose his sacred Doctrin Now because the chief controuersy is between the Protestant and Catholick The first pretend's to à Church which teaches Christs Doctrin The Catholick vtterly denies the Pretence and pleads for his Own Oracle euidenced by prudent Motiues This I say being the Contest we are in the first place to vnchurch the Protestant and then proue by vndeniable Arguments where and with whom the true Church of Christ is CHAP. III. The Protestant has neither Church euidenced by Marks of Truth nor true Doctrin made credible to reason His whole Faith is built vpon Fancy 1. THe Marks of the Church as is now said are so clear to reason that they make the Oracle manifest to all sort of people to the learned and vnlearned to Iewes to Infidels and much more to Hereticks who pretend to belieue in Christ All of them are alike concerned and obliged to make à search after the true Church and when t' is found to belieue it 2. Now to find it out I Ask whether our English Protestants with these we chiefly dispute like well of the marks Questions Proposed to Sectaries already hinted at or will reiect them I propose my doubt with all candor Will they dare to say That their Church as it deliuers Protestants Doctrin or as it is now reformed in England was euer since Christ time In Being and visible to the world Can they produce à Succession of Bishops or Pastors that taught Protestancy Age after Age without intermission Can they show what Conuersions these Protestant Pastors wrought vpon Heathens to their faith fiue or six Centuries since Can they produce indubitable Miracles done by such Pastors Most euidently No. Therefore our later Protestants reiect these and the other like Motiues as slight and impertinent to euidence their Church which yet say they teaches Christs Doctrin and Wilily do so because they haue none of them Well To
Church of Christ the only Rule of Faith which decides all Controuersies Concerning Religion CHAP. IV. The one and only true Church of Christ was is and shall euer be the Holy Apostolical and Catbolick Roman Church Her Antiquity and Constant Perseuerance in the Ancient primitiue Doctrin without Alteration proues The Assertion 1. IT is hard to illustrate à manifest Truth because what euer reasons are brought to light for it surpass not much the Euidence of the thing you would make clear Who euer goes about to proue by Arguments that the Sun is the most luminous Body in the Heauens will haue much to do because that 's euidents to our senses and so is the true Church of Christ saith S. Austin digito demonstrari potest She can be pointed at with your finger Origen adds Hom. 33. in Matth. She is like à sun casting her beams from one part of the world to the other Howeuer because we now treat with men who either see not or pretend not to see I will giue them all the Euidence gathered from demonstratiue Signes which à heart can wish for 2. I say first before we come to more conuincing Arguments Antiquity is à certain Note of Christ Church The reason is As God was before the Diuel and Truth before falshood So the Orthodox Church whether you take it from Adam or Antiquity denotes the true Church from the first preaching of Christian Doctrin was before all Sects and Heresies The Roman Catholick Church only which Christ founded and is so much extolled by the Apostle has this Precedency It was when the Arians were not we know their first Rise it was when the Pelagians were not we know their Beginning it was when rhe Donatists were not their Origen is as well known as that of Protestants which first peeped out with one unfortunate Luther something aboue an age since Might not then the Roman Catholick Church more ancient than all these Sectaries haue most justly questioned each of them at their first appearance as the learned Tertullian Lib de Prescrip did those of His time Qui estis vos who are you new men Vnde quando venistis From whence came you Vbi tam diu latuistis Where haue ye been hid so long No body yet saw you or heard of you I waue the Testimonies of other Fathers chiefly of S. Austin and S. Hierome though none presses this Argument drawn from Antiquity with greater efficacy than Optatus Meliuitan Lib 2. contra Parmeâ—an They are known to euery one But this Mark must not goe alone 3. I say 2. Antiquity and à neuer interrupted Continuance The Church once true neuer Changed her Doctrin of the same Visible Society Age after Age and the same Doctrin vpheld without change or Alteration clearly euidences Christs Church This Scripture strongly Asserts Osee 2. where the Church is said to be espoused to Christ in Sempiternum for euer Math 16. Hell gates shall neuer preuail against it Math. 28. Christ will be with it to the end of the world vpon which Passage S. Hierome speaks most clearly Qui vsque ad consummationeâ— sae 〈…〉 c. He who promised to be with his own Disciples to the end â—f Authority â—nd the world both showes that these blessed men shall euer liue in their successors And that he will not depart from the true Belieuers Videtur sicut luna c. They are words of S. Ambrose lib 4. Hexam The Church may be seen like the moon eclipsed but neuer perisheâ— She may be clouded and ouer cast with darknes but cannot fail The reason is If Christs Church could fail not only all memory Reason proue the Assertion of his sacred Passion with the other Mysteries of our Faith but the whole Scripture also would for that time of her supposed Deficiency haue been no obiects of Belief None could then haue said with truth I belieue the Holy Catholick Church or haue had Access to it because it was not then in Being Now further As the Church cannot fail so She cannot Alter from her self or change Christs Doctrin For if She did so She were no more Orthodox Christ could not own Her for his Spouse Ponder S. Austins Discourse on this subiect in Psal 101. Existâ—â—t qui dicunt c. There are some who say This is not the Church of all nations which once was No. That 's gone and thus they Speak saith the Saint because they are not of the true Church O impudentem S. Austins Iudgement vocem illa non est quia tu in illa non es O impudent speech it is not the same Church it was because thou art not in it Vide ne tu ideo non Sis. look to thy self least thou be not for the Church will be although thou were not in the world Then he decries this Doctrin of the Churches failure as most abominable detestable and pernicious And in Psalm 60. positiuely Asserts the permanency of it to the end of the world 4. Hence I argue But the Roman Catholick Church only hath euer continued in being without interruption and neuer The probation vrged changed or Altered the Doctrin which She first learned of Christ Protestancy which began one only Age since most euidently wants this continuance and euery year put 's on à new countenance Therefore the Roman Catholick Church and not that of Protestants is the Spouse of Christ That the Roman Catholick Church stood permanently in being euer since Christ is as demonstrable as that Protestants were not before Luther The Visible perpetual Succession of our Popes of our Bishops of our Pastors and of our Catholick People in all ages is an irrefragable Proof Neither do Sectaries much cauil at this Personal Succession or the exteriour Permanency of our Church for What Sectaries obiect that 's euident But here is their Plea This Church say they once Orthodox changed from her selfe forged new Articles of faith Contrary to the primitiue Doctrin Herein lies the great Charge Now if I demonstrate that the Roman Catholick Church once confessedly Orthodox hath euer since been Visible in the world and neuer swerued from the pure Primitiue Doctrin in after Ages She is certainly the Church of Christ still without Alteration You will Ask how can this be euinced 5. Some may think 't is best done by Paralleling our present known Church Doctrin with that of the Primitiue Times Very good But by what means shall we come to à right Parallel One may Say Make A diligent Inspection into the Records and Writings of those worthy Fathers who liued in the first Ages And all is done I Answer This Rule precisely considered help 's nothing For what if those Fathers neuer medled with most of the Controuersies now agitated between vs and Sectaries And t' is no wonder at all if they did not For may not à new Sort of Hereticks rise vp to morrow whose Errours neuer entred into the thoughts either of the
Fathers or of any man now liuing Again What if most of those ancient Writings be lost many certainly are we are at à Stand. But finally what if doubts arise concerning the sense of those few preserued copies yet extant can Sectaries Glosses or ours either determin what 's right Orthodox Doctrin by them No. Therefore By what means one may come to the primitiue Doctrin as I said aboue no man can come to à full exact and satisfactory knowledge of the Primitiue Truths but by the voice and Tradition of the present Church Reiect this voice of the present Church we are cast into darkness we may dispute long but end nothing Now because it lies not in my way to Treat of that excellent Rule of Tradition learnedly handled by others I 'le giue you three Conuincing reasons And proue my Assertion viz. That the Roman vniuersal Church once Orthodox neuer changed the Primitiue Doctrin To show this Two certain Principles are to be reflected on 6. First God had alwaies an Orthodox Church on earth founded by Christ which was and is pure without mixture at least of notorious damnable Errours and which neuer taught An Argument prouing the Roman Catholick Church stil pure in Doctrin Christians any shameful false Doctrin for had it done so in any Age it had then ceased Eo ipso to be Christ's pure Church The 2. Principle Protestants confess and t' is à certain truth that the Roman Catholick Church continued Orthodox without Notable errour for the first three or four Centuries 7. Hence I argue If this Church once pure abandoned Christ's Doctrin in after Ages or forged new Articles of faith contrary to the Primitiue verities that Change was Notorious shameful and damnable as we shall see presently But it is not possible that She euer made such à shameful Notorious change And here is my Reason Had She done so Christ in that Age when this supposed Alteration began would haue had no Orthodox Church on earth free from gross and culpable Errour and Consequently his own pure Church would wholly haue been abolished 8. You will Ask how I proue this I Answer most euidently Begin if you please from the third Age when the Roman Church was pure And descend to Luthers dayes you will find all the known Societies of men called Christians to haue been either Orthodox Belieuers Or grosly erring in Faith yea plain condemned Hereticks And so reckoned of by Protestants Such were the Arians Nestorians Pelagians Monothelits Donatists c. And all others nameable excepting Roman Catholicks But those gross erring men euidently taught not Christs pure One reason vrged Doctrin without notable Errour much less constituted either à Part or the whole Orthodox Church which Christ established in truth Therefore if the Roman Catholick Church went to wrack also if She erred notoriously with these known erring Societies the Orthodoxism and Purity of the whole Church ceased to be in the world And this is impossible 9. Here in à word is all I would say Christ had euer à Church Entierly pure on earth for he founded one pure which should alwaies continue in that integrity laid in Her very foundation But no errour was laid in the foundations of the Roman Catholick Church once Confessedly pure therefore no notorious Errour stained it in after Ages Or if any such errour fouled that once fair Spouse of Christ this Sequele is euident There was at that time no pure Church in Being vnless our Nouellists please and perhaps they may do so in time to make Arians Donatists and such à rabble of men more Orthodox Christians than their own Progenitors were and all the Roman Catholicks are now the whole world ouer 10. You see I insist vpon notorious Errours And do so on set Why wee insist vpon Notorious errours purpose to preuent à Reply of some newer Sectaries who say the Church of Rome hath indeed Her Errours But not fundamental or destructiue of Saluation And will you know the reason of this trifling Here it is If they say She was not Orthodox in fundamentals there was no true Church in being for à thousand years before Luther and this no Christian dare Assert And if they make her Orthodox in euery Article She taught both Heresy and Schism fall's shamefully vpon Protestants Who dare not grant they abandonned à Church Entierly pure and blamless when they left it Hence à middle way was wisely or rather most simply thought of Our Church forsooth must be what Protestants please partly true viz. in à few Fundamentals and partly false in other Matters of less concern which these men elected by God were to reform and tell exactly what was amiss or how far it hath erred c. And therefore name themselues the Reformed Church Well Let this whimsy pass largely refuted in the other Treatise and in passing take notice of à pitifull Church indeed which Christ had by these mens own Confession ten whole ages before Luther It was à meer deformed Monster made vp of Linzy wolzy stuff of tawny Colours of something and nothing in à word of Truth and Falshood But here is not all 11. I am to proue much more if Protestants Principles stand firm viz. That neither we nor they had any Orthodox Church in fundamentals before Luther and Consequently no true Church was in being for ten whole Ages Now most euidently Sectaries had nothing like à Church for they were not in the world And it is as euident if their Charge hold good against our Church it had bin much better neuer to haue appeared than to see it turned into so many vgly shapes into such an vnfashioned Monster as these new men make it In à word this ancient Catholick Society if Sectaries say right and Mark euer the Supposition erred notoriouslly in the very fundamentals of Faith and Faith totally ruined in Sectaries Principles neither belieued in Christ nor Creed and therefore there was no Orthodox Church before Luther nor yet is to this day If I euidence not this vpon the supposition now made neuer Credit me here after To doe it please to obserue that by à fundamental Errour in Faith I vnderstand à Doctrin which if falsly taught contrary to Christs verities is as damnable to those who teach it as the Arians errours are at this day damnable to Arians Hence I Argue 12. What euer Society of men forges new Articles of Faith contrary to the Primitiue Doctrin or tell 's the world à loud lye that God reuealed such things as he neuer reuealed but vtterly The Assertion manifestly proued disowns and yet execrat's And more ouer obliges all Christians after à sufficient proposal to belieue such falsities vpon Diuine Reuelation and this vnder pain of damnation doth open iniury to Gods Infinite verity Assert's that which Eternal Truth neuer taught And therefore sins damnably or err's in the fundamentals of Faith But Protestants say the Roman Catholick Church long before Luther did so
our Church hath erred but in one only Matter of Christian belief She is Traiterous disloyal to Christ and can be belieued in nothing To proue The Church is traiterous if false in one Article the Assertion Suppose an Embassadour sent to à forraign state with this deep Charge that he vtter nothing in his Princes name but so much only as he is commissioned to speak Suppose again the man declares some few truths to the state as his Lord commanded But withall forges twenty other vntruths on his own head and stifly affirm's his order is to deliuer all he saith in his Masters name Would not such à man think ye be à Traitour vpon à double account First because he exceed's the bounds of his Commission and deliuers that he had no order for But chiefly because he speaks vast falsities wholly Contrary to his iudgement who sent him 2. The Application in easy The first Teachers of the Gospel were legates sent from God to à great State the whole world For in omnem terram exâ—uit sonus eorum They taught euery where and well for some short time our Christian Verities as the Prince who sent them Commanded But their Successors the Pastors and Doctors of the Roman Catholick Church in after Ages had Say Sectaries the ill luck to miscarry to turn Traitours for besides à few fundamental Truths vpheld no man knowes how They did not only exceed their commission in deliuering Doctrin to all Nations which Christ their Master neuer allowed of but more ouer forged of their own heads twenty vntruths Purgatory Praying to Saints Transubslantiation c. And spake all in their Princes name Said also they had Commission from Christ to teach so This fact if the Charge be true is Treasonable they iniured Christ And consequently not Orthodox and his Verities and betrayed their trust But à Church so perfidious cannot be Orthodox Therefore if Sectaries do not Calumniate Christ had no Orthodox Church in the world before Luther which I intended to proue and Consequently Protestants are yet no true Church at all 3. I say moreouer If the Roman Catholick Church hath taught false Doctrin but in one onely Matter of Christian belief She can be belieued in nothing yea I may rationally suspect her false in all She teaches Iust so it is If the book of Scripture deliuer's one Doctrin false which Christians now belieue I cannot credit it in any thing The reason is One and the same Motiue of my belief duely and equally applied euer moues to an equal Assent or to None at all For example I belieue Christ dyed for vs because Gods word saies so Here is the Motiue of my Assent I belieue also that he ascended into Heauen because the same word of God speaks it here is the same Motiue Imagin now by à supposed impossibility that this latter Article A Church false in one Article merits no beliefe is Gods word but false I cannot belieue our Sauiours Death vpon the Motiue of God's word For if this word be false and once deceiue it may as easily be false and deceiue me twice And there is no possible means to quit me of my errour Because whoeuer endeauours to do that is of less Authority than God's word which is now supposed to deceiue me If therefore the First Verity can reueal an vntruth none can belieue either man or Angel speaking of the high Mysteries of our Faith and Consequently All must still remain in Errour 4. Apply this Discourse to the Roman Catholick Church which pretend's at least I say no more yet to be Gods Oracle and to speak in His name She speaking in his name assures me that Infants are to be Baptized I belieue Her vpon her word She also tells me there is à Purgatory but we must now suppose with Sectaries it is à great vntruth if so I cannot possibly belieue Her in the other Doctrin of Infant Baptism For if she deceiues me once She may well do it again and which is to be noted There is no means left vnder Heauen to vnbeguile me or to draw me out of my supposed Errour for who euer attempts to do that is of less Authority than my Church which is supposed to teach to err in Her teaching and stifly to maintain the Errour Scripture cannot help here vnless it be clear vpon an indubitable Principle that the sense of it and Doctrin of my Church can differ in points of Faith which must be proued and not Supposed If Fathers be alleaged Seemingly contrary to this known Doctrin my duty is to explicate them and rather to draw the Fathers to what the Church teaches than to renounce Her Authority and adhere to the dubious and yet vnknown Sense of any Father 5. Now here is à short consideration For Sectaries I said whoeuer supposeth the Roman Catholick Church to haue erred A Reflection for Sectaries must ioyntly own it so remediless an Euil that all the men on earth cannot help or remoue the supposed errour from this Church The reason is All the Proofs and Principles setting plain Scripture aside whereof there is no danger which may be thought pertinent to impeach Her of errour will fall infinitly short and proue less ponderous less substantial to perswade that She has erred than her sole Vote and own Authority whilst she anathematizes the falshood is to perswade the contrary Viz. That She neuer erred Hence Sectaries confessedly fallible men who Sectaries Attempt desperate and why may easily spoil all they goe about to mend aduenture desperatly to reform the Church when the very Principles they should reform by were there any such in being are incomparably of less weight strength and force than the Authority of this Church is which saith She cannot erre Howeuer She must be reformed and here is the wonder before they know whether She has erred or haue the least assurance of their own half accomplish't reformation Who then see 's not euery attempt made against our Church this way to bee as really it is à folly an vnaduiced Enterprise no less impossible than in the highest manner improbable Mark what à task lies on them 6. First they are to proue She has erred which was neuer yet done 2. To giue in Principles whereby they will reform 3. To VVhat they are to proue Shew themselues well setled in à perfect Reformation 4. To euince that all those innumerable learned men of our Church from the Fourth to the present Age haue been stupidly blind bereaued of iudgement and besotted with Errour 5. Wheras other Christians both more aged and most learned espyed none of these Errours They are to proue that God made choise of such vncommissioned men to perform à work so long neglected by the Orthodox world But of these particulars enough is said in the other Treatise 7. Hence two things follow First that Sectaries only lose time when by alleging à few dark Testimonies of the Fathers they offer to
If an Embassadour once be found in an Vntruth when he speaks in his Princes name I think few Monarchs or States will no more belieue him in like occasions Than giue credit to one conuicted The disparity betweâ—n à priuate man erring and the Church of periuery when He swear's vnless what he swear's bee proued true independently of his Oath But let this pass The disparity between à priuate man and the Church is most notorious The First considered as one single and priuate hath no Commission to speak in Gods name or to teach the whole Christian world what is or what is not Christ's Doctrin The Orthodox Church is impowred to do this or to teach nothing if then She err's but once the Errour makes Her infamous redound's to the Dammage of all Christians seduced by Her yea and to God himselfe as is now declared Hence I say the Church cannot teach truth by halfes as Sectaries would haue Her or now Hit right now miss She cannot be Orthodox in à few main Matters called Fundamental and erroneous in others No. She is either Gods Vice-gerent in all She deliuer's as points of Faith or in nothing She must when she pretend's to speak in Gods name truly do so or She cannot speak nor pretend to speak but must be silent This Verity is further laid forth in the Chapters now cited where we treat of the Churches Infallibility 14. In the mean while if any Should Obiect The Church vainly pretend's to be so far an Oracle of Truth as not to impose on us false Doctrin And then demand from whence She had this Whether our whole Discourse tend's Priuiledge of Infallibility I Answer Whoeuer trifles with such obiections in this place to be solued hereafter little vnderstand's the force of our Arguments Mark I beseech you It is now à supposed Principle Sectaries will haue it so that the Roman Catholick Church hath forged new Articles and imposed the beliefe of them on Christians which God neuer Reuealed Grant thus much She iniures God sin's damnably And therefore is no Orthodox Church But if She neither now be Orthodox nor was so ten Ages before Luther There was not then nor is yet any true Christian Church in the world And consequently Protestants â—aue no Church The more erring Therefore they make the Roman Catholick Church the more are they Churcâ—lesse This is what I Press and express at present and would willingly haue my Argument solued 15. There is yet an other Obiection scarse worth the paper you shall haue it such an one as it is Protestants talk much of A weightless Obiection Papists Blindnes And to free the Roman Church from damnable sin or formal Fundamental Errours may perhaps say She hath indeed erred before Luther and still is Idolatrous But may be excused vpon the Account of inuincible Ignorance Answ What 's this Do we hear talk of inuincible ignorance in à whole learned Church Pray where shall we find knowledge if ignorance haue place here Such ignorance may perhaps be in some particular men But to Tax à whole Church with it is not only to make so many Councils so many profound Doctors as haue taught the world worse than Idiots for à thousand years but it is to iniure Christ to tell Him he has indeed established à Church yet mark'd it so obscurely remoued it so far out of the Sight of Christians that the most learned of all could not discouer the Truths it taught for ten long Ages though all Antiquity Assures vs that Christ's Church is one of the most manifest things in the world Again Suppose our Church were blind and inculpably ignorant who for Gods sake must open Her eyes now and vnbeguile Her Touching vpon the Ignorance of Catholicks Solued Must à few late scattered Sectaries Doe the wonder that are to look to their own vincible ignorance And therefore if learned Sin vpon that account damnably 3. If our Church may be excused vpon the score of ignorance excuse also the Arians less learned the Pelagians the Donatists c. And say there were neuer any formal sinful Hereticks in the world yea Iewes and Turks may thus be acquitted of formal Sin and Errour likewise But aboue all free I beseech you our Sectaries from further pains-taking as also from the least hope of amending Matters were there any thing amiss for you may well rest assured if ignorance hath cast this learned Church into such an Abysse of Errour it is not to be expected that the far weaker knowledge of Protestants can draw Her out of it I wonder men of Modesty dare offer to impute ignorance to the Roman Catholick Church And presume to teach more learned then Themselues CHAP. VI. Other Euidences of the Roman Churches Perseuerance in the Primitiue Faith without change or Alteration VVhether wickednes of life necessarily induceth Errour into the Church The Donatists and Protestants Argue And Err alike 1. I Argue 2. God had euer à true Church preserued free from Errour for so many Thousand years as passed between A second Argument Adam and Christ It stood all that vast time inuincible against Heresy and was neuer stained with false Doctrin The Truth is indubitably owned by Christ our Lord who came not to change so much as one iota of Doctrin taught by the Prophets but only to perfect it by reuealing other Verities not explicitly known before Now Mark à strange Paradox auouched by Sectaries They say boldly That our Christian Catholick Roman Church which certainly God Himselfe established And enriched with his own Verities only continued Orthodox for Three or Four Ages and then O dismal time left off to be what it was lost Christs reuealed Truths became the whore of Babylon Apostated from it Selfe and cheated the world into false Doctrin What saies the prudent Reader Is it Possible that the Ancient Church of Drawn from à most improbable Assertion of Sectaries the Patriarchs and Prophets stood without change or blemish for 4. or 5. Thousand years and Christ's own Spouse became smutched and vgly within the compass of three or 4. Ages Is it Probable that the lesser light of the Synagogue lasted so long And the Glorious sun of Christ's own Church appeared dark and Eclipsed soon after The world had Cast an Eye vpon Her And this to encrease the wonder happened then Sectaries must say when euidently There was no other true Church on earth vnless you will take in Arians Pelagians c and such open Hereticks to make vp à Catholick Society most vnfit all know to teach Christs Orthodox Doctrin I wish Protestants would well ponder the force of this one reason And return an Answer 2. My last Argument is à Demonstration against Sectaries who say There was alwayes an Orthodox visible Church since Christs time For this Article of our Creed was euer professedly true in all Ages I belieue the Holy Catholick Church They say again There was à time when our Roman Catholick
neuer censured Church be Supposed guilty after the whole world held her blamless and has iudged well of Her condemnations pas't vpon Hereticks Compare I say the Authority of the Church time out of mind proued Innocent with the Authority of Hereticks known most guilty There can be no Parallel may we precisely respect Authority Wherefore if the Opposition of Hereticks hath any force Their charge against the Church must stand vpon Strong proofs and sound Principles distinct from Their own voting Her Delinquent These Principles we seek for in all our Disputes with Protestants yet hitherto neuer heard of Any and belieue it Wee hold their own Authority of no greater weight than that of Arians or of any other condemned Hereticks 8. Others quite driuen off all ground of rational Arguing will needs fasten Errours vpon our Church because forsooth in such an Age the 9 th For example after Christ or There about some Popes were less good and People much debauched An other simple Plea Then most likely was the Nick of time Say these to bring in Transubstantiation the Popes Supremacy and what other Errour you will Answ A most pitiful Plea not worth the paper it blot's I shall not so much refute it for it merit 's not the labour As Shew how it destroyes the Belief of all Christian Religion 9. Pray you consider Christianity in the greatest Latitude Imaginable Call Arians Donatists Protestants And Catholicks also Christians Grant which is true that there haue been very wicked men amongst these different Professors I say if this Argument haue weight Some few Popes and many People were not good for one Age chiefly Ergo debauchery in manners more then probably brought in false Doctrins vnder the Notion of Christian Truths A Iew or Gentil may Argue as well and infer that Viciousness of life hath destroyed all Truth among Christians if euer They had any For why should lewdness haue less force to Subuert all Truth taught by the Church of Rome than some only It hath say Sectaries brought in much Errour Therefore saith the Iew it may as well haue corrupted all Christ Doctrin 10. To reinforce this Argument I told you aboue if the Church of Rome had but once proposed one Article to be belieued by Diuine Faith which is false She is not to be reiected and proued unreasonable credited in any thing If you Reply it is euident That though false in many Tenets She yet taught some Articles true As that Christ is our Redeemer The Iew Answers and so do I too She Taught and teaches so still but that This is Truth if debauchery of life bee ineuitably connexed with false Doctrin shall neuer be made Probable For this Church is either entierly sound in Doctrin or Entirely deluded One may Say Scripture is euidently plain for some Primary Articles of Christian belief Answ The Iew scorn's the Reply and maintain's this Truth as I also do If it be once proued that the Church of Rome imposed on the Christian world Falshood in place of Truth Transubstantiation The Sacrifice on the Altar c. She may as easily haue corrupted the whole Bible and made that Book false in à hundred important Passages whereof enough is said in the other Treatise No true Church Therefore no Probability of true Scripture 11. Let vs now proceed to others called Christians the most known Arch-hereticks you will haue the same Conclusion Arius for example à stubborn proud Fellow had many Associates like Himself yea and certainly taught some Doctrins false Therefore Saith the Iew All He deliuered was false also The Diuel learned Luther to broach His new Gospel and the mans enormous Viciousness is known to the world by as credible Authors as Platina or Nico de Clemangijs who make Popes and People so impious Therefore all that Luther taught cannot but bee vpon the Argument proposed most iustly excepted against An other Simple Argument reiected as pernicious Doctrin For gross Errours like à Torrent follow Deprauation in manners Caluins Pride Deceipt and Cousenage to say nothing of that hidious Sin for which he was branded are vpon Record And all know what Rebellion what tragical Doings ensued vpon the wicked mans Apostasy Who then can harbour so much as à good thought of any Doctrin He taught euen that Christ dyed for vs Hence saith the Iew if Wickednes of life and Errours in Doctrin be such inseparable Companions And all Sects or Religions nameable haue had Professors wicked Farewel Christianity yea and Christ Himself also For if the Impiety of some lead's Erroneous Doctrins into à whole Moral Body that one crying Sin of Iudas might more easily haue corrupted the First Apostolical Colledge smal in Number Than the incomparable lesse defects of Popes depraue the great Moral Body of the Church O but Christ secured the other Apostles from Errour Answ So he doth his Church And the Iew will as soon belieue the one as the other who Argues thus 12. Christianity was neuer without Sin Ergo neuer without Errour if the Argumâ—nt haue force When Therefore these new men Say Wickedness of life Compared with the losse of Faith Gods Prouidence seem's equally concerned to preserue the Church from things equally Pernicious But viciousnes of life is as pernicious to Christianity and as destructâ—ue to the End of it as Errours in Doctrin They know not what they Say The Argument is euery way defectiue 13. First it s vtterly False that Wickednes is so pernicious as Errours against Christian Doctrin For Errours destroies Faith the ground of Saluation and immedeatly opposeth Gods Infinite Veracity Wickednes in Manners destroies Grace and other Supernatural virtues yet leaues the Foundation vnshaken Again By what law do these men Suppose that God preserued not his Church Holy in those dayes Doth it follow because some were wicked that She lost all Sanctity Will they Say if the English Church had euer Sanctity in it All vanished into Smoak in the late dissentions and deplorable Tumults There were neuer such Doings at Rome in the worst of daies as England then Shewed to the world O but there were then many Holy and Godly men that suffered Be it so at present I loue not to recriminate For one of yours Holy we had Thousands in that Particular Abuse can not unhallow the Church Age you except against the whole world ouer in England Germany Spain France Denmark c. most humble pious virtuous and profoundly learned What do you think that à few Abuses in Italy not half so bad as you make them can Vnhallow an ample Church Yet here lies the Strength of your weak Argument The iniquity of some chiefly of Popes and Prelates ruins not sanctity only But moreouer induceth Errour into the whole Moral Body of Christ You iust proceed as if One should atattempt to proue that à goodly Building which yet visibly stands fair to the Eye and firm on Sure foundations is all shattered and pulled down
say Antiquity erred no less than we do now And therefore Caluin professeth he followes none of the Fathers but S. Austin Though when He pleases he is too bold with the Saint and scornfully reiect's his Authority also See Bellar de notis ecclesiae lib 4. What Sectaries Nouelties are Cap. 9. I might also show that our Sectaries Nouelties for the greatest part are nothing els but à List of old long since dispersed and condemned Heresies now brought to light again and knit together in one bundle to poison the world withall They haue renewed the Heresy oâ— the Donatists who taught that the Church of God had perished throughout the world except in some few obscure Corners They renew the Heresy of the Arians teaching it vnlawful to offer Sacrifice for the dead They renew the Heresy of the Eunomians saying that by Faith only man may obtain life Euerlasting You haue with These men the Heresy of the Iconomachians in breaking down the Images of Christ our Lord and His Saints reuiued again Of the Berengarians denying the true Body and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ really present in the Eucharist as likewise of the Vigilantians that slighted the Inuocation of Saints denying Honour due to the Relicks of holy Martyrs But I need not to insist vpon these and many more reuiued Heresies they are things Vulgarly known to all largely laid forth in the writings of our Catholick Authors Se Bellar now Cited CHAP. VII Manifest and most vndeniable Miracles peculiar to the Romani Catholick Church only prone Her Orthodox withall show that She still retain's the Primitiue Doctrin 1. BY this word Miracle or Miracles I vnderstand à supernatural work done by Almighty God aboue the power and force of Nature For there is no doubt but that God who What is meant by Miracles created Nature has within his boundles Omnipotency Supereminent effects of Grace which far surpass the little Might of all Creatures made by him These are finite The Author of them infinite And can do more 2. 2. This Principle is certain God hath wrought innumerable Miracles not only to Testify He can do more then Nature Why Miracles are wrought but with this express Designe also that by the Manifestation of such wonders All may come to the knowledge of those Oracles whereby He speaks and Reueals most sublime Mysteries far aboue the reach of our weak Reason Now whether these Oracles be Prophets Church or Apostles seems one and the same thing If they be equally Manifested by miraculous Effects and speak in his name who Assumes them to teach the world 3. I say manifâ—sted Oracles by Signes And say it for this End That all may reflect vpon the depth of Diuine wisdom which may on the one side Seem too rigorous in obliging vs to belieue most Difficult Mysteries neither seen by Eye nor heard by eare They facilitate Faith Were it not That on the other side the burden is lessened and our Faith much facilitated by the Euidence of most prudent and conuincing Motiues For t' is à great Truth Non sine testimoniâ— reliquit Semetipsum benefaciens de Caelo His Goodnes so fauorably condescend's to our weaknes that though he remoues not Vneuidence and Obscurity from the Mysteries belieued Yet he makes them all so euidently Credible to prudent Reason Benefaciens de Caelo by the Lustre of Signes and Wonders That the man who belieues not after à Sight had of such glorious Marks stand's guilty before Gods Tribunal of damnable Sin 4. The third Principle Miracles eminently great in number and quality for example the raising of the dead to life Chiefly when wrought by Persons of Singular virtue to Confirm our Christian Faith are from God and euident Signes leading to the knowledge of true Religion None can doubt of the Assertion seing Christ our Mord. Matt. 11. When Questioned whether He was the true Messias proued the Affirmatiue by his Signal Miracles The blind see the lame walk Lepers are Cleansed And lead to the knowledge of true Religion the deaf hear the dead rise again c. Which is to say in other Terms These wonders speak in my behalfe and plainly Testify that I am the Messias For only to say I am à Prophet sent from God without prouing the Truth to Reason by Signes and wonders Conuinces nothing Induces none to Belieue Therefore Iohn 10. Christ remitted the vnbelieuing Iewes not to the Euidence of his Doctrin for really no Doctrin of Mysteries aboue Reason though most true is or can be its own Self-euidence But to his manifest Miracles The Works which I do in the Our Sauiour pleaded by His Miracles name of my Father These giue Testimony of me Again If you wâ—st not belieue me belieue my works Blessed S. Paul might haue Long preached the Sublime Doctrin of Christ and without Fruit vnless Miracles had confirmed it which he call's the Signes of his They were Signes of Pauls apostleship Apostleship 2. Cor. 12. And How long think ye would Nabuchodonozer haue remained in his Idolatry vnless He had beheld that prodigious Wonder wrought by God vpon the three Israelites in the fiery Fournace Daniel 3. But when he saw them walk in the flames nothing hurt He cryed out Blessed be the God of Sydrack Misack and Abdenago who hath sent his Angel c. Miracles therefore are powerful Inducements to Beliefe which Truth might be yet more largely demonstrated by the Wonders of Moses of Elias of the Prophets and Apostles But these I waue and briefly take notice of our Sauiours sacred words Iohn 15. If I had not come and spoken to them they should not haue finned but now they haue no excuse of their sin c. And to show that Speaking only was no sufficient Conuiction The Text add's If I had not done among them works which no other man hath don they should not haue sinned but now they haue seen and hate me and my Father c. 5. Three things follow from hence First That eminent Miracles of their own Nature are Marks of Christ's Doctrin and true Religion 2. That Our Sauiour most iustly condemned Why the Iewes were taxed of Incredulity the Iewes of infidelity not so much for reiecting his word or Preaching as for not belieuing after they had seen it confirmed by Wonder 's from Heauen For t' is Said plainly Had they not seen they had not sinned A Doctrin Therefore attested by Miraculous signes and wonders renders the Vnbelieuer guilty of Infidelity Consider it alone deuested of such Marks what haue we High Mysteries preached But without Proofs antecedently laid forth to Reason Truths taught but yet vnknown whether so or otherwise In à word we haue the Decrees of à great Monarch obliging all to submission but without his Seal or Signature 6. And Hence it is that our blessed Lord impowred those first great Masters of the Gospel Matt. 10. not only to teach his Sacred Verities but to teach
7. To end this point between S. Austin and the Donatist as also between Catholicks and Protestants I say all Controuersies are fully tried and happily ended by Scripture only But how Not because any can pretend to find euery Tenet of Faith clearly set down in so many express Terms of holy Writ For the Protestant How Scripture decides all Controuersies pretend's not to so much in behalf of his Doctrin But thus the Orthodox discourses with S. Austin Scripture euidently points at the Church of IESVS Christ known by Her Marks and manifest Signes by Her Antiquity Her large Spread ouer the whole world by the Succession of Her Pastors and Doctors Miracles and the like Signal Motiues Thus much once clearly laid forth in the written Word that Holy Book remit's him to the Church Clearly marked commend's Her faith S. Austin and command's him to hear and learn what euer She teaches 8. Whence it is that our profound Doctor Disputing the Case whether the Baptized by Hereticks were to be rebaptized laboured not to decide the Question by any express words in holy Scripture wholly silent in this particular But contrarywise teaches that the Church which is diffused all ouer and no Party of Donatists shut vp in à corner of Afrique was to giue Sentence herein For She is that great Oracle which Scripture commend's Read Lib. 2. de Bapt. C. 4. And de Vnit Eccles. C. 22. Thus briefly you see the true difference between the Protestant and Catholick The first has not à word of Scripture for his Tenets much less any Orthodox euidenced Church The Catholick relies on à Church spread the whole world ouer known by The Catholicks stronge hold Miracles Conuersions c. And Scripture command's him firmly to belieue what euer She Proposes as Faith Qui vos audit me audit Whoeuer hears the Church hears Christ And in this Sense Scripture manifesting Gods own Oracle which cannot but propose truth end 's all Controuersies 9. A 4 th Obiection Iulian the Apostata as S. Gregory Nazian Orat. 1. in Iulian And Theoder Lib 3. Histo C. 3. attest droue away Diuels with the Sign of the Cross Therefore wicked men can doe Miracles And why may not Almighty God A fourth Obiection solued for Reasons best known to his infinite wisdom do strange wonders and permit an Arian to Say All are wrought to Confirm his false Doctrin Contra. Both Parts of the Obiection equally impugn the Primitiue Miracles of Christ and the Apostles To the first I answer An Heretick may work à Miracle to proue Catholick Doctrin but neuer to make his own False Opinion probable The Reason is God who is Truth and Goodnes it self can no more deceiue by his ovvn VVorks than by his ovvn VVords Sicut humana consuetudo saith S. Austin Epist 49. verbis Diuina potentia etiam factis loquitur As man speak's by words so God speak's by his works But the Works or Wonders now Spoken of because supernatural proceed from God And as is God can no more deceiue by his ovvn Works then by by Words supposed deceiue Therefore it ill beseem's an Infinit Truth and Goodnes to do them Vpon this Ground I say likewise Diuine Prouidence will neuer permit his own glorious Works Seals and Signes of Truth to be abused by wicked men But of this particular I intend to speak more largely hereafter 10. Wee now Come to Mr. Stillingfleets Cauils you haue some of them Part. 1. C. 5. p. 134. And 135. Where he doth not Mr Stillingfleets Cauils answered so much impugne Miracles as would haue them done by such Persons as he likes well of Popes for example that pretend to infallibility And if which is easy we produce many wrought by Holy Popes His next Querie perhaps may be Why all all of them are not Miraculous men alike In à word I like not to search into the depth of Gods secret Counsel And therefore briefly discourse of persons fauoured with such Graces as S. Austin doth of different Places Tom. 2. Epist 137 to his Clergy and people at Hippo where he proposeth this Question Quare in alijs locus haec miracula fiant non in alijs Why are Miracles done in some places and not in others VVe haue known some wrought at Millan â—n Africa though full of Saints Bodies not so He return's this wise Answer grounded on the Apostles wotds 1. Cor. 12. Non omnes Sancti c. All saints haue not the Gift of curing diseases all discern not spirits ita nec in omnibus memorijs Sanctorum c. So God And first why God works Miracles by some and not by others who divides his Graces according to his own best will doth not these wonders at the Memory of euery Saint And who dare enter into his secret Counsel or ask why he doth so Why raised he three dead men by S. Dominick and not one we know of by S. Austin Dividit propria unicuique prout vult He is Lord and distributes his own fauours as he pleaseth And thus we Answer Mr. Stillingfleet who next Saith some thing of Miracles done in Corners What can the man mean Are all the wonders wrought at Loreto Compostella Sichem and other places seen to innumerable and All vpon certain record to be callid Corner Miracles Be pleased to hear worse yet 11. Page 135. Think not saith Mr. Stillingfleet VVe are of such easy faith that the pretended growing out of à leg in Spain or any of your famous Miracles wrought by your Priests in Italie will persvvade vs Mr Stillingfleets vnjust exceptions against the Miracle wrought at Zaragosa to believe your Church infallible Again after his Talk of Diuels doing no feats when Opposers are by He utters this scornful language It is an easâ— thing for à Stump to grow à leg in its passage from Spain hither For fama crescit eundo And in despite of Truth cast's out too much bitter venom to obscure à Glorious work of God wrought by the Intercession of our Blessed Lady vpon à young man at Caesar Augusta or Zaragosa in Spain where you haue her miraculous Statua Set on à Marble Pillar And for that reason is called Neustra Sennora del Pilari It is one of the most euident and clearest Miracles vvhich I belieue hath been done in the memory of any man now liuing I haue the whole Printed Relation by me both Latin and Dutch vvritten by Peter Neurat Doctor of Phisick and dedicated to his Excellence Don Francisco Marquis of Caretto and Grana Embassador Extraordinary from the Emperour to His Catholick Maiesty The Substance whereof is thus 12. Ego ab Caesaraugusta Venio c. I come from Zaragosa and bring tydings of à Miracle not heard of in any age A young man had his leg cut of and buried which was Miraculously restored again by the Intercession of the most Sacred virgin My Lord I here present you with à Gift it is not mine but our
they haue forsaken And thus much Mr. Thorndicke seem's to Assert though I know not very well what he mean's by the Româ—â— Catholick Church He Adds more P. 127. We They in England are in the State of Schism in spite of our teeth Though we are â—â— clear our selues of the crime of schism vpon the Terms setled S â— no Terms excogitable shall clear you from that crime or euer bring you to Settlement But à perfect Revnion with the ancient and present church of Rome Whereof enough is said both in this And the other Treatise 9. To speak in this place of the Churches Sanctity whether we consider the Purity of Doctrin or the Eminent Holynes of innumerable professing her Faith would require volumes I say in à word neither Heathen nor Sectary though cauils are raised Sanctity Eminent in the Roman Catholick Church against the Orthodoxism of our Doctrin could yet iustly tax it of too much liberty giuen to Christians We contrary to the inclination of nature fast when Sectaries feast we humbly confess our Sins to à Priest they shake of that obligation Our Church forbid's Marriage to the clergy allowed to Ministers We in spiritual Affaires submit to one Supreme Head of the Church They acknowledge no submission to any in points of Belief but to their own Fancy We are vnited together in one Ancient Catholick Faith and execrate all Divisions They are endlesly deuided in their Nouelties We set à high value vpon the pious laudable works of iust men They esteem all as sordid and sinful We say God inforceth no man to Sin they as Caluin confesses make him both Author and cause of it I might yet instance in à hundred other particulars But t' is needles The whole world see 's that Catholicks strengthned by the Grace of God contrary to their interest and natural Propensions euen for conscience sake Profess and practise more Austerity Pray more diligently fast Not so with Sectaries oftner obserue the lawes of the Church more exactly And finally doe greater works of Charity than Sectaries either think necessary or hold Themselues obliged to by virtue of their Religion I say by vertue of their Religion which binds to nothing but only to Believe though no man knowes what and consequently giues so much liberty in other matters that it makes the Professors thereof Libertins Most vniustly therefore doe our new men call Protestancy the reformed Religion vnless by an Antiphrasis or contrary way of speaking when God knowes it reforms nothing but contrariwise allowes more then enough relaxation to Corrupted nature Whence I infer A thing so Indulgent as Protestancy miscalled à Reformed Religion Protestancy is cannot be from God who will haue us to curb Sensuallity and vpon that account the Professors of it seem very vnfit to reforme the Doctrin of the Church were any thing amiss whilst they leaue manners so notoriously Vnreformed releasing all from the burthen of such Duties as Christians haue practised from the Beginning 10. Be pleased to reflect à little We haue thanks be to God in the Roman Catholick Church many Holy Religious Orders as Benedictans Dominicans Franciscans c. All had their The truth declared by two Instances seueral Founders most eminent in Sanctity and neuer medled with mending Church Doctrin knowing well that was sound and orthodox But contrariwise endeauored to better the world by their Prayers Preaching incessant labours and virtuous Example Suppose now any of these had called their Order à reformed Religion and brought Christians by that Reformation to greater Liberty to more Sensuality than was practised before Their Prayers and Preaching Would not all most deseruedly haue accounted their Labours mispent and worth nothing Suppose again that any one would begin to Institute à Religious Family with these or the like Iniunctions All of them may Marry prouided they keep Coniugal Chastity All may fast but when the humour takes them All may profess Pouerty but experience nothing of the hardship All may obey but in greater matters only not in others freely left to their choise Would not such à Founder vainly pretend to Reformation that laies no more Christian Duties on any Would not euery man look on him as One that peruerts Religion and laugh at his folly This is the case in our Protestants mending matters Therefore I say once more the Reformation is not from God but à humane and very sensual Inuention Enough is noted already both here and in the other Treatise of the Efficacy of our Catholick Doctrin Conuersion of Nations à great Miracle Demonstrable to our Eyes and Senses in the Conuersions of Nations to Christ Maximum Miraculum Saith S Thomas 1. Con. Gent. C. 6. It is the greatest of Miracles and à manifest Testimony that God Assisteth this Church to doe such wonders We pass now to consider some Truths grounded on the Doctrin already deliuered 11. One is and it giues comfort to euery Soul that our Lord IESUS Christ though Absent from vs liues yet as it were Visibly shewes himself Manifestly Acts still Miraculously in the Mystical Body of our Catholick Church and the seueral Members Thereof His Power appeares in Her Miracles Christ our Lord works yet in and with the Church His Wisdom in the learned the certainty of His Doctrin in the Churches Infallibility The Antiquity of his Truths in Her long continuance His Mercy appeares in the Charitable His Obedience in the Perfect Religious His Pouerty in thousands who haue left all for his loue His Submission in the humble his wearisom labours in the painful Missioners His Retirement in Her the Ermits His Patience in the mortified His Purity in Virgins the Efficacy of his Diuine word last mentioned in the Efficacy of the Churches preaching His Holy life appeares in Her Sanctity and finally his Sacred death in innumerable glorious Martyrs Frame then à right Idea of our Blessed Lord we behold The Church expresses our Sauiours perfections his admirable Perfections Shining in the Church And contemplating the Church we see to our vnspeakable Solace Christ Iesus as it were yet liuing working in it and by it 12. A second truth As Things in Nature are not first known by that we call Their interiour Essence but by outward Marks Qualities and Effects whereby we easily distinguish one from an other à Lyon for example from an Elephant but doe not so easily saith Aristotle distinguish their different essences known to few Just so we Discours at present and say the true Church is first euidenced by her Marks Signes and Motiues Miracles Antiquity Conuersions c. which being obiects of sense lie open to euery eye and Collectiuely taken make as I said aboue this beautiful Spouse as discernable from Heretical Societies as one Creature is from another by its outward Form and known Proprieties I do not Assert that The Church first known by Her Marks the Motiues lead to à Scientifical knowledge of the Churches Essential Doctrin
and the ground opening swallowed vp his carkasse Nestorius wicked worm-eaten tongue brought the wretch to à miserable end And Iohn Caluin consumed with vermine Seuerly Punished dispairing dyed like an other Herode or Antiochus I need not Here relate any thing of Luthers sudden death after his merry supper Read Bellarmin Lib. 4. de notis Ecclesiae C. 17. where you haue these and other more fearful Examples of Gods Seuerity 11. Finally must we say that our Lord Iesus is proued no Impostor vpon these reasons That no false Prophet since the Creation purchased the like vniuersal Fame None euer had so vniuersal an Applause or the like Tribute of praise paid Him It it true That euer since Christianity began the powerful hand of Prouidence hath not only rescued our Holy Iesus from all Reproach iustly merited but moreouer by signal Effects of indignation made his Enemies contemptible The renown of the Roman Catholick Church Nothing can be more manifest You may then boldly Conclude in like manner The Roman Catholick Church is as demonstratiuely proued no Cheat but an Oracle of truth vpon the same grounds Her vniuersal visible Extent the continued Succession of Her Pastors the Conuersions and Miracles wrought by Her inuite all with à loud Venite Adoremus incite all not only to behold and Praise this magnificent Building but also to Adore the Founder of it For if it be true as was said aboue that the visible works in nature point at God the only Author of them Caeli enarrant glorâ—am ejus The Heauens declare his Glory It is also clear that these visible Effects of grace Miracles Conuersions obuious to euery Eye set forth the glory of the Roman Catholick Church Now how deseruedly she hath gained this Renown let the world judge 12. Wisdom saith Salomon built Herself à house Prouerb 9. where Pillars stand firm à Table is plentifully furnished Victims are immolated c. The whole Passage S. Cyprian Lib. 2. Epist 3. Applyes to the great Sacrifice of the Altar offered vp vnder the Forms of bread and wine I waue the Application and vrge only an How gained euident truth And T is that Our Church built vpon Christ the Corner-Stone vpon those stronge Pillars the Apostles hath stood firm sixteen Ages and here is Her Glory For if Glory witness S. Ambrose be nothing els but Clara cum laude notitia A clear knowledge with Fame and Renown The long Continuance and ample extent of this Church could we say no more hath justly purchased Her à large Renown the whole world ouer Now mark where the contempt lies which is à base Esteem of à thing vnworthy value All know the Arians built Heretiques despicable the Pelagians built the Donatists and other Hereticks built but their vnsteedy disordered Houses soon fell down and came to nothing What saies Reason when Ruins are compared with this long standing Edifice 13. Next cast à serious thought vpon the Inhabitants of this house of God You will find all vnited in one Faith adoring one Iesus Christ louing one Mother his spouse looking on one last End Their hope and Happines And if through frailty differences doe arise abating charity our Aduantage is far aboue all other Societies in the world Wee haue à supreme Pastor God be euer blessed that can command and like à Other aduantages in the Church Father exhort to peace in Abrams language Ne sint quâ—so jâ—rgiâ— c. Iarrs must not be in the house of God Fratres enim s 〈…〉 For we are all Children of one louing Mother Here is the Churches Glory Wheras on the Contrary side nothing but Discord and that remediless the known euil of Lucifers pride And in the highest points of Faith inseparably hant's the rambling Fancy of such as haue wilfully diuorced themselues from this one vnited Society And Here is matter enough of Contempt and Compassion also 14. In the last place consider well the vast multitudes who are and haue been Domesticks in this house of God In the very Entrance we meet those Candidati aternitatis as Tertullian speaks Nouices of Eternity the newly admitted by the Sacrament of Baptism and no Society of Christians can show the like number Here we haue Cherubins admirable in Knowledge The Inhabitants of the house of God numbertles Doctors I mean profoundly learned Seraphins inflamed with Diuine loue that rest in the height of Contemplation Here we find Penitent Souls bewailing their sins innumerable Martyrs shedding their blood for Christ numberless laborious Missioners trauelling far and neer to propagate His sacred Gospel Here finally we haue for t is long to recount all Abrahams glorious multiplyed Starrs Gen. 15. 5. Kings and Queens whole kingdoms and Nations professing the Faith of this one Church The Gentils walk by Her light and Princes in the brightnes of Her rising Lift vp thy eyes and see saith holy Isaias All these assembled together And if you Ask what the duty was and yet is of so many conuened Multitudes The Royal Prophet that long since forsaw in Spirit à continual Oblation offered vp Answers Psal 9. 1. In templo ejus omnes dicent gloriam All in this Temple and sacred House shall incessantly render praise and glory to God the Author of So noble à Structure Therfore Psalm 86. 2. He rightly Concludes Gloriosa dicta sunt de te O Civitas Dei. Glorious things are spoken of thee O Citty of God Thou begans't In Hierusalem wa' st afterward extended to all Nations becams't permanent and because permanent Glorious Thus that whole Psalme speaking mystically of Christs Holy Church These are Truth 's not only proued as you se by Scripture but also euident and this I vrge to our eyes and senses Now next consider those scattered dissipated and iarring Multitudes of Heathens Iewes and Hereticks And let reason if à spark of it liue in any iudge whether this be not euident without Dispute Viz. That as no Prophet euer came neer to Christ our Lord in glory and A Parallâ—l of Christ and His Church renown So no Society of men since the world stood was or is comparable to our glorious Roman Catholick Church All other besides this happy vnited moral Body appear as they are abiect and contemptible 15. And thus we Euidence Christ our Lord and his Church to à prudent Heathen not first by making the intrinsick Reasonableness of the essential Doctrin the main Proof of its verity as Mr. Stilling simply Argues aboue Disc 1. C. 9. For it is truely ridiculous to draw the Pagan to belieue à Doctrin as reasonable and Diuine whilst yet he knowes not vpon any rational Inducement whether it be from God or no But this way takes effectually When you lead him on by à clear light extrinsecal to the Doctrin when you set before his Eyes such Marks Signes and wonders as cannot but proceed from God Miracles Conuersions c. When you Shew him How strangely the Doctrin of Christ
and his Church though sublime and difficult was miraculously Spread the whole world ouer when you Demonstrate how manifestly Diuine prouidence hath Age after Age Honoured Christ and his Church and seuerely Chastised the professed Enemies of both When finally you make it manifest that there is no Vnion no Form no fashion of Religion in any Society now on earth but in How the Heathen is Conuinced the Roman Catholick Church only Then the Heathen if reasonable and desirous to learn Truth must confess that God speaks Truth by this one Catholick Oracle only Or there is no such thing as à reuealed Verity taught in the world 16. Out of what is said already I infer first If that Maxim of Philosophy he vndoubted Frustra sit per plura c. It is needles to multiply many proofs in behalf of à Verity when one most clearly conuinceth it This Argument alone drawn from the glorious Marks of our Catholick Church which cannot but proceed from God proues Her his own faithful Oracle With these Signes we haue the thing signified These in à General way settle in euery reasonable vnderstanding this fundamental Truth God speak's to the world by his euidenced Church I say in à General way For as the visible works in nature proue this General Truth Ipse fecit nos c. A mighty power made vs we made The efficacy of Church Motiues not our Selues though as yet none comes thereby to an explicit knowledge of many Perfections in God So the Marks and Motiues manifest in the Church conuince this General Truth also That the same Power which made Nature giues being to these the same Power which preserues nature preserues these glorious Signes for our instruction And Consequently it followes That as the visible world is proued Gods own work so this visible glorious marked Church is proued his own Oracle Though yet neither the Heathen nor any knowes euery particular Doctrin which God teaches by the Church In like manner great Diuines assert that Christs own Disciples owned first our blessed Lord as the true Messias and à great Prophet Ioan. 1. 41. Inuenimus Messiam We haue found the Messias before they learned the other high Mysteries of his being the natural Son of God the second Person of the Blessed Trinity the Redeemer of Israel c. see Suares 3. Part. Tom. 2. Dispu 31. Sest 4. 17. A second Inference The General Truth now spoken of well established God teaches the world by à Church Signed with Supernatural wonders All further disputes cease concerning the particular Doctrins She teaches though sublime and aboue the reach of our weak Capacities For none whether Heathen Iew or Heretick can boggle at à Doctrin which God reueal's How reason discourses vpon these Euident Motiues But God saith prudent Reason reueal's such and such Truths The Incarnation of the Diuine word the Trinity Original sin c. by à Church which most pressing Motiues euince to be His own Oracle Therefore it is my duty to Submit and belieue euery Doctrin She proposes 18. The Ground hereof seem's clear For as there can be no endles Progress or going on in Infinitum in the intrinsecal formal Obiect of Faith because Faith at last rest's vpon one sure Principle An infinite Verity So we can haue no endles Process in the extrinsick Lights and Motiues whereby we are induced to fix à firm Belief vpon that one sure Principle Therefore in what euer Society of men Reason finds these Motiues it rest's without further Enquiry after stronger which cannot be found But most euidently reason finds them in one only Oracle the Roman Catholick Church as is now proued and prudently resteth there as vpon lights which immediatly manifest the Church Scripture not so immediatly Credible as the Church and make Her Doctrin euidently credible Scripture t' is true is the obiect of Faith but not so immediatly credible as the Church for independently of Scripture I can belieue the Church as the first Christians did before the Book was written but men generally in this present State cannot belieue Scripture without the Churches Testimony As is already and shall hereafter be proued more at large 19. A third Inference Who euer pretend's to à Doctrin reuealed in Scripture and hold's it of Faith has either à Church which teaches it euidenced by the Marks of our Lord Iesus Christ or He publisheth à falshood Which is to say in other Terms If the euidenced Church of Christ positiuely own 's not or reiects such à Doctrin that Doctrin Eo ipso is spurious forged and not de Fide Hence it is that when our Blessed Lord Commissoned the Disciples to Preach his sacred Verities Math. 28. 19. Goe and teach all Nations Hee sent them abroad with the Characters Marks and Ensigns of his own Preaching Mark 16. 2. Our Lord working with all and confirming the word with Signs that followed And here by the way I can neuer sufficiently admire the open folly of Sectaries that wholly Churchless A lawful Mission required to teach our Christian truths will yet needs perswade vs into new opinions vpon their own bare word That they teach truth It is impossible Nay I say more Although which is false they should speak Truth they ought not Churchless as they are to be listned vnto For suppose one should present himself as an Embassadour from à Prince to à forreign State but without Credentials or Authentick letters iustifying his Embassage no State can or will admit him though he speaks truth He must not only do so but show his Authentick Commission that he speaks truth deliuered by the Princes own order or he is sent back vnreceiued in the quality of an Embassadour In like manner I say No more can any one essentially vncommissioned pretend to teach Christs Doctrin whilst he is not sent to teach by Christs own euidenced Oracle than this vncommissioned An Instance Legate to speak in his Princes name Many à man knowes the law well and is fit enough to pronounce à iust Sentence yet sitt's not on the Bench nor giues it because he is not Authorised to do so And thus we discours of all Hereticks no members of the euidenced Church though as I said they deliuer truth by chance they yet deserue not the hearing wanting power and Authority to teach it 20. S. Cyprian Epist. 2. Speak's very pertinently to our present purpose Quod vero ad Nauatiani personam pertinent c. For as much as concerns Nouatians Person I would dear Brother haue you know in the first place we are not to be curious concerning what he saies when he teaches out of the Church S. Cyprian Confirm's the Doctrin Quisquis ille est qualiscunque est Christianus non est qui in Christi Ecclesiâ non est Whoeuer or of what condition soeuer he be is no Christian that is not in the Church of Christ And hence S. Austin in his frequent Disputes with the Donatists
our Lord was the true Messias and one sent from God by the Wonders he wrought though they little yet vnderstood the depth of those Mysteries he deliuered and obliged all to belieue Thus much Premised 17. I Proue that the Roman Catholick Church is God's only Oracle And first Her exteriour Marks and signs giue in as clear euidence of Her being the only Diuine Oracle as the wonders which the Apostles wrought euidenced them to be Diuine Oracles With this lustre we haue à Church most visible and discernable from all vnorthodox Communities None can Parallel Her in known Miracles in Antiquity Perpetuity Conuersions c. 2. This Church hath taught the world euer since The Churches clear Euidence Christianity began and no Orthodox Society but She only is nameable which deliuered the Sincere Doctrin of Christ For hint at any they are manifestly proued condemned Hereticks 3. She was neuer censured in any Age of errour by so much as one confessed sound Christian Nay I say more and haue proued it aboue She is so infallible that if she erred but in one Article She then ceased to be Gods Oracle 4. This Church showes the Mission of Her Pastors and deriues Her Comission to teach the world from God and our Lord Iesus Christ 18. The first Mission concerning the teaching of the new Testament Originally came from Almighty God that sent his only Son our Sauiour to preach Iohn 14. 24. The word you haue heard is not mine but his that sent me the Fathers Luke 4. 14. He sent me to Euangelize to the poor Now Christ our Lord sent the other Apostles Mark 16. 15. Going into the whole world preach the Gospel to all creatures These first Masters had their Successors lawfully commissioned they sent others age after age in so much that the Mission of Orthodox Pastors legally authorized to administer Sacraments and to preach Gods word neuer yet failed in the Roman Catholick Church since Christ's being vpon earth nor shall fail hereafter to the worlds end 19. These Truths well weighed And after many serious thoughts found as they are vndeniable Prudent reason account's all that can be obiected against our euidenced Church worse than folly And here is the ground à Priori of the folly These Aduersaries Sectaries mistake the right way of arguing that Oppose vs quite mistake the right way of Arguing were there any For whereas they should first find out Gods great Oracle which teaches truth and obiect that against vs They wholly waue this matter of highest Importance And so far as weak Reason can work draw Arguments from the dark Mysteries of Faith One finds difficulty in the Trinity and reiect's it Another in the Doctrin of Transubstantiation and hold's it impossible That is weak reason as much set's vp its own light against God as if one should offer to extinguish the Sun beams by the dim light of à candle 20. Obserue I beseech you à strange Procedure We euidence à Church we proue Her Gods Oracle by the Characters Signes and Marks manifestly laid open to all mens eyes we say this manifested Oracle which has drawn Millions of souls to the Catholick belief cannot beguile vs. Our Aduersaries one the other side Say notwithstanding this reasonable Euidence God speaks not by Her Because the Mysteries are hard and aboue Reason whereas indeed the quite Contrary should be inferred They plead most simply viz. Because they are mysterious God speaks by so euidenced an Oracle And here is the Reason of my Inference 21. Had the abstruse Mysteries taught by the Church been à humane Inuention only and not from God the supposed Inuentor of them who euer he was had been worse then mad to Propose so many to our shallow Reason He should rather haue followed the strain of all other Hereticks and with the Arians denyed à Trinity with Protestants cast of Transubstantiation The reason of their weak pleading But this you see is not done The Church speak's truth plainly because She knowes there is an other light à stronger Euidence which lessens facilitates and conquer's these seeming Difficulties If therefore there be euidence enough of Credibility for this one Proposition God speaks to all by this known Oracle Reason pleads no more but yeilds to one that cannot erre 22. It may perhaps appear Strange if One consider with what plain Simplicity the Holy Euangelists wrote the Gospel of Iesus Christ where they seem to furnish the Iewes with Arguments against our Sauiour They declared how He was contemned reproached Scourged haled from Tribunal to Tribunal and finally Crucified Here the Aduersaries of Christ Exclaim and Ask what 's more Difficult Could God possibly Say they The Candor of the Euangelists writing our Sauiours life permit his only son to be thus abused when 't is writ Maledictus qui pendit in ligno Cursed is the man that hang's on à Cross The Euangelists feared not the Obiection but related the Story as it was Nor did they to gain their great Master applause Couer or dissemble his Sufferings as Policy might haue done had humane Wisdom only made the Book No. They proceeded candidly And why all this Sincerity think ye The Answer is easy They knew well that the Victory which our Sauiour gained after all these sufferings The Renown he purchased vpon the Cross the Miracles he then and formerly had wrought were so forceable Euidences of his being the true Messias that no contrary Humiliation euen to death it self could obscure that greater light and rational euidence of Truth Therefore whole Multitudes beholding the wonders at his sacred Passion after the Centurion had cryed out This man indeed was iust returned knocking ther brests Luke 23. 48. And in his life time said Quid facimus What do we doe This Christ works so many wonders That if we dismiss him All will belieue in him Arguments drawn from what is said Reflections made vpon the premised Doctrin Christ and His Church preuaile against Incredulity 23. Hence I Argue If the euident Light of our Sauiours glorious Miracles was sufficient to vanquish Incredulity and to work à Belief in all of his truely being the Son of God notwithstanding the difficulty of the Mystery It followes clearly that the vndeniable Euidence of the Roman Catholick Church already laid forth is as fully sufficient to vanquish the Incredulity of Heathens Iewes and Hereticks And to work this Perswasion in all notwithstanding the high Mysteries proposed that She is Gods Oracle For here is my Principle and most vndoubted That as the Verity of Christian Religion is to be learned from that known Oracle which bear's Christ's Ensigns without disputing the Sublimity of the Doctrin so the falsity of à Doctrin is proued Not by the difficulty thereof but is clearly gathered from the Nullity of an vneuidenced Church which teaches it An vneuidenced Church therefore is no warrant of true Doctrin 24. And here you haue briefly the fundamental Reason why no Heretick
done which will neuer be I am confident His Extract or what is required of Mr Thorndick Draught would appear so imperfect and mishapen à Business in the iudgement of Catholicks and Protestants also That as the one Party cannot but look on it with disdain so the other would reiect it as vnworthy Acceptance 22. Besides would it not seem à new wonder to Strangers abroad Yea and as ridiculous as wonderful were rhey told that after so much labour spent about reforming Religion in England we haue yet at present à thoughtful Gentleman there that 's very busy in Setting forth the last and best Edition of Protestancy Reformed which perhaps may proue worse than any other gon before Naught it must needs be for this Reason That the means he would reform by has no Proportion with the designed End For by A New◠Reformer of Religion in these old dayes of the world the light of à few dead Manuscripts written 14. or 15. Ages Since He offer 's now to amend all the Churches in the world though the very sense of these Writings which must be the Rule of his Reformation is neither well known to Himselfe nor yet agreed on by those dissenting Churches he would reform What think ye Were this sense yet to be learned the want whereof causes endles Errours among Sectaries would not common Prudence rather take it from à liuing Oracle which has taught the world time out of mind than from à late Nouellist that Professes himself fallible and Therefore may most easily Misinterpret would appear ridiculous to all the best Records This liuing Oracle at least promises infallibility Which Shall be proued presently And therefore is à Surer Principle to rely on Then The Fathers Sentences long Since Written whilst Sectaries make Their sense and true meaning à Matter of Contest 23. Yet one word more and I end Mr Thorndick will Reform the present Roman Church Corrupted by the Primitiue supposed pure for the first 4. or 5. Ages I must needs demand first whether that Primitiue Church the Rule of his Reformation Questions proposed to our Aduersary was infallible and pure in those pretended fundamentals only necessary to Saluation though not in other Doctrins of lesser Moment Or. 2. Whether She because fallible as much needed Reformation in smaller Matters not called fundamental as this present Church is supposed to need Or. 3. Whether She was so entirely pure in euery doctrin little and great that She could not be brought to more Purity or be better Reformed Grant the first viz. That the Primitiue Church was vnerrable and pure in fundamentals only not in others The present Roman Church is as good as She was For our Aduersary own 's Her à true Church wherein Saluation may be had and thus far She needs no reforming Grant 2. that both these Churches because fallible might erre and perhaps haue erred in lesser Matters not named fundamental The Primitiue can be no Rule of Reformation to the present Church because that Primitiue is alike err 〈…〉 alike reformable And for ought men know as much out of the way of truth in Non-fundamentals as the present Church is Therefore I said aboue if the blind cannot lead the blind à Church wanting Reformation cannot reform another sick of the same malady 24. If finally it be Said the Primitiue Church was so infallible so pure euery way both in great and little Matters that She could not be more reformed in the first 5. Centuries for example We haue à Church once entirely pure And then vrge our Herein Satisfaction is most required Aduersary not barely to say it But to proue vpon indubitable Principles Scriptures Fathers or the General Consent of Christians that She continued not wholly as pure in the sixt seuenth or eight Age and so downward to our dayes as She was before To shew à Deficiency in this Church once confessedly true in after Ages will be more than an Herculian labour when it is demonstratiuely euidenced aboue That nothing but à Church equally as Ancient as Vniuersal and glorious in Miracles as the Roman is can probably impeach Her of the least Corruption Mr Thorndicks Mistake is that he makes as Sectaries vsually do à false Supposition his Proof He supposes A supposition made à Proof our Church corrupted in Doctrin and then will amend it according to his fancy by the Primitiue whereas he knowes or ought to know that we Catholicks deny His Supposition and say both are vnerrable and withall Assert that no Authority on earth can better inform vs of the Primitiue Doctrin than the present Roman Church which hath successiuely handed it to vs Age after Age. Howeuer to take away all ambiguity and further Dispute in this Matter you haue next three following Chapters which I hope will giue Satisfaction to the rational Reader More shall be added hereafter CHAP. XIV VVhether there be à Church of one Denomination infallible not only in Matters miscalled Fundamental but in all and euery Doctrin She Proposes and Obliges Christians to belieue as Faith 1. AS the Answer to the Question aym's at à clear and easy way of ending Controuersies Concerning Religion So the following Discourse tend's to settle one great truth in the minds of euery one viz. That both the Ancient and present Roman Catholick Church is not only infallible But that the what we intend to proue Aduersaries of Her infallibility destroy the very Essence of Christian Religion And deseruedly merit vpon that Account The name of Schismaticks and Heretiques also 2. To make good what 's now Asserted à few Postulata or Principles must be premised One is That Church which Promises and proues Herselfe infallible in Doctrin doth not only Vpon these following Principles facilitate but giues also absolute Security to Faith For such à Church Participat's most and comes neerest to that first Diuine Apostolical Spirit which confessedly was infallible 3. A. ◠Principle Whereas nothing hath or ought to haue à stronger Influence ouer the minds of men than Religion So nothing can discountenance it more than à stedfast Perswasion of its Fallibility and Consequently of it 's easily being False This Perswasion Cut's of all Christian Assurance and driues men to so cold an Indifference of embracing this or that Religion That it much import's not which to take to any or none 4. A. 3. Principle The means or influence whereby Christ preserues his Church infallible needs not to be explicated by any Supernatural quality personally inhering in the Teaching Representatiue or intrinsecally eleuating the conuened Prelates to à State of Infallibility for t' is enough that the safe Conduct of Almighty God who is alwaies vigilant and Assists by his exteriour Protection so secures the Church from errour that She neither What the Churches Infallibility requires can be misled when She teaches nor mislead others Yet I deny not but that an interiour Motion of Grace may be yea and often
is in the hearts of such as are Assembled together in God's name and Assisted to define infallibly Diuine Faith T is true actually elicited euen after the permanent Habit infused requires à Supernatural Motion of Grace But hereof we speak not at present 5. A. 4. Principle When it is enquired Whether the Church Distusiue be infallible the Querie is not whether the Motiues inducing to distinguish that Oracle from others Demonstratiuely and with all Metaphysical certitude euidence likewise Gods Reuelation relating to the Mysteries Belieued For this might lead vs to enquire whether Faith be euident in Attestante That is so Vnexceptionably manifest that all may clearly Infer from the Reuelation clearly known That the Mysteries belieued are euidently true We now meddle not with that Difficulty though great Diuines patronize the Affirmatiue But only Ask Whether the Doctrin of Christ's Church be so infallibly Certain that it cannot be False or deceiue any Catholicks The Question Stated own à triple infallibility necessary to Faith The first proper to God's Reuelation no Protestant denies that The second belongs to the Church either Diffusiue or Representatiue in General Councils whereby we learn and that infallibly those Truths which God reueals The third infallible Assurance necessary to Faith all Orthodox Christians haue that belieue the A threefold Infallibility Mysteries reuealed vpon the Diuine Testimony Proposed by Christ's Church 6. A. 5. Principle If what is most vndoubted Diuine Faith essentially relies vpon Gods infallible Verity speaking by one or more men sent to Teach who proue their Mission and Demonstrate the Credibility of the Doctrin deliuered it necessarily followes That that first infallible Verity beget's in euery true Belieuer no less perfect Faith Than what is most certain and infallible Wherefore as it is the indispensable Duty of euery belieuing Christian to acquiese in and rest vpon God's infallible Mans Duty grounded on Christ's Promise Veracity So it is an indispensable Promise That we haue Christ present with à Church which teaches all Truth And therefore cannot but Propose the Obiect of Faith infallibly The firm Promise irreuokably issued from Power and Goodnes it selfe Matt. 28. 20. I am with you alwayes to the end of the world Iohn 14. 16. I will Ask the Father and he will giue you an other Comforter the Spirit of truth to remain with you for euer Hell gates cannot preuail against the Church Thus much premised 7. The Difficulty now agitated is Whether the Roman Catholick Church and Her approued General Councils be so secured from Errour That She cannot swerue from that first Support of Truth I mean God's infinit Veracity But must when She teaches Teach that exactly which God hath reuealed and will haue after à sufficient Proposal Vniuersally belieued Sectaries say She may Yea actually has swerued from God's Reuelation and in great Matters too though not perhaps in the What Protestants assert Primary Fundamentals as they are Called or in Fundamentals Simply necessary to Saluation And they were forced to this wicked Doctrin vpon three naughty Motiues 8. First to giue Scope or rather to inuite Libertins to hold or deny so much of Christian Religion as pleaseth their fancy And do we not see the liberty effectually laid hold on in England amongst Phanaticks and such giddy People All this giddines And why came first from the reformed or rather the deformed Nouelty of Protestancy They do it 2. to make Controuersies Endles For deny the Churches Infallibility Cauils go on Grant Her infallible Disputes are ended 3. This is done to quit themselues of an Infamy iustly laid vpon them of being both Schismaticks and Heretiques at once which shall neuer be claw'd of do what they can For these vnsound reasons or pestilent The Catholick Assertion Motiues rather The Church forsooth must needs be fallible Catholicks on the other side maintain the contrary And say there is à Church so Infallible that She cannot err in any thing She teaches as Faith And thus much God willing shall be euinced in the following Discourse But to do it exactly I am briefly to lay open to all that haue eyes The Abiect the Desperate and Desolate condition of à fallible Church You haue here my first Proposition 9. A fallible Church is essentially Constituted in à State of publick A fallible Church is in à State of rebellion Rebellion and Hostility with it Self Wages war against Infidels without hope of conuincing or conquering any And therefore cannot be Christ's Orthodox Church To declare further what I would say know first That Sectaries own à Catholick Church much larger than the Roman Catholick And make Themselues Part of it Conceiue now which though very hard is yet possible that the Representatiue of this great Moral Body meet 's in à General Council and discusses the Question now in hand Viz. Whether there be à Church of one Denomination Preserued infallible by Diuine Assistance Part of the Representatiue and these are Protestants Oppose the total Infallibility of euery Church Part Catholicks I mean Say one Church is infallible and that is the Roman The Difficulty proposed can be decided or not If not This great Representatiue meet 's to no purpose but only to make more No means to vnite it Strife in the world If it can be decided God has prouided means whereby the truth of so weighty à Matter may be known But there is no such means left vnless some one Church or other or all together be owned infallible Therefore an endles Hostility goes on in this supposed Representatiue 10. That all means fail may Sectaries Votes haue place is indisputably Euident You shall see it clearly The Catholick Party Appeales to Scripture alleges these and other like Passages Without some One Church be Infallible He who hear's you hears me and from thence infer's Who euer hear's the Church hear's Christ an Infallible Teacher The Church is the Pillar and ground of Faith and hence concludes She is infallible The Spirit of Truth shall remain with the Church for euer Pastors and Doctors are appointed by Prouidence to preserue the faithful from wauering in Faith and all erroneous Circumuention Hell gates cannot preuail against the Chutch c. What can be more The Scripture Significant if plain words haue sense for the Infallibility of some One Church Yet all these and many other Testimonies so shrink to nothing may Sectaries Glosses stand in force That no man can say what God speak's in these Scriptures or know the Truth now debated Viz. Whether any Church be infallible or not This means failing of its End which ought to compose our Strife Hostility is as vigorous as when the Dispute began for yet we know nothing certainly 11. Passe from Scripture to Fathers We haue there most pregnant Expressions The Church cannot be adulterated Cypria◠And Fathers Speak significantly the Churches Infallibility de Vnit Eccle VVhat She once receiued from Christ
She euer holdâ— Idem Epist. ad Corne. She is à pure Virgin in Faith and cannot be deceiued or seduced nor ouercome with any Violence being vpheld by Her Virginal integrity Fulgent Epist ad Probum Cap. 5. Her Faâ—â— is inuincible euen to the Powers of Hell Euseb Caesar Praepar E 〈…〉 g. â—ib 1. C. 3. If any fear to be deceiued by the obscurity of à Question let him Consult that Church concerning it which the Scripture Demonstrat's without any ambiguity S. Austin lib. Contra Crescon C. 33. What think ye Is not the Churches Immunity from Errour clearly established No say Sectaries For though we cannot confront these Passages of Scripture and Fathers with others as significant for our Plea of Fallibility Yet we do and must deny Their plain Sense We do and must say The Roman Church has been adulterated otherwise we are Schismatic'ks We must Sectaries deny all or must own themselues Schismatiks say that though once pure She lost what she had receiued And therefore is now no Virgin but à Harlot VVe must Say Her Faith is Vincible That it is not safe to consult Her in dubious Matters for She can return no better Answer than what is fallible and may be false Thus Sectaries 12. Hence it followes first That our great supposed Representatiue made vp of Protestants Catholicks and all other called Christians stand 's without redress in an open Rebellion in à publick Hostility with it Self And consequently taken in its whole Latitude is not Christ's Church Because the Church of Christ is essentially founded in Vnity This supposed Representatiue torn as you see in pieces with intestine Diuisions is not one And therefore most desolate For Omne regnum diuisum in se desolabitur And here by the way I take leaue to tell Sectaries T' is but Folly to talk as They doe of à Catholick Church wider than the Roman Or of à lawful Representatiue possibly to be conuened in Vnity out of the Body of all named Christians For as such à Church considered Two Mistakes of Sestaries in the largest Extent which stands diuided in Faith is not Orthodox So such an assembled Council made vp of so many iarring Belieuers considered vnder that notion of Hostility and Rebellion can be no legitimate Council The reason is Christ neuer owned à Church professing more Faiths than one nor lawful Councils consisting of other Members than Orthodox Christians You will then say Hereticks are not to What Hereticks haue to doe in Councils â—e admitted into Councils lawfully called I Answer they are admitted but how Freely to dispute not to Teach to propose difficulties but not to Regulate Faith to acquiese in the Churches Definitions but not to define remaining Hereticks 13. You see 2. That à Church fallible in Her Definitions concerning Faith vainly attempt's to reclaim Infidels and Hereticks from their Errours Wherefore the Nicene Fathers Condemnation of Arius might haue been iustly excepted against and pleaded reuersable vpon this ground That what they defined because fallible might be as far from Truth as the very Errours they Censured and defined against Nay I say more If that Council was then fallible it lies yet at the mercy not only of Arians but of all Christians at this day to admit or reiect the Nicene Censure or rather if Prudence haue place to suspend Strange sequels if the Church be fallible their Iudgements and say no man knowes what to belieue Into such darkness vpon such Hazard and indifferency Christians are cast if God's Church or that Council could err One instance may giue you some light 14. Imagin à Heathen at that time when Arianism seemed prosperous and carried much vogue in the East well inclined to embrace Christian Religion VVithall Suppose the man firmly setled in this Iudgement That Catholick Religion much resembling Arianism was so fallible that both the one and other might be false Say I beseech you How indifferent would this Iudgement haue made the Heathen to either Religion Nay would it not had interest swayed neuer so little haue drawn him more to Arianism Yes most assuredly For thus he might haue discoursed and prudently VVhat they call Catholick Religion How the Heathâ—n discourses and Arianism are much alike both fallible both may be false My Interest now when Arianism flourishes carries me thither T' is true I meet there with fallible Doctrin which may be false God knowes how things are but the mischief is I can find no better amongst Catholicks nor in any other Society of Christians Now if all I can learn be no better but fallible and perhaps false Doctrin too I may as well learn that from the Arians as from Catholicks or rather ought to suspect all Christian Religion of Errour because none of that Profession And Concludes against à fallible Religion can assure me infallibly what God has Said But such Doctors saith the Heathen who may as easily teach me to iniure an Infinit Verity and ascribe that to God he neuer reuealed as lead me to acquiesce in his reuealed truths were any such truths in being deserue no Credit Therefore I neither can nor will belieue any thing 15. Before we make à further Step to one or two Propositions which decide this Controuersy à few difficulties are to be cleared against the precedent Discourse One is Hostility ceases in the ample Council now mentioned would all which is easy Agree in one Truth That Christs Church is infallible in Fundamentals only or fundamentals simply necessary to Saluation Answ This is to say If that were done which neuer was nor can be done à Reunion followes Alas it is not yet agreed on by all nor euer will be vnless some quit their Errours One obiection answered which and where Christs true Church is It is not yet nor can be agreed on How many or few these fundamentals are For though Catholicks and Protestants Vnite in à belief of the Trinity and call that à Fundamental Article The Arians stand out and Hostility ceases not but encreases by the Sectaries Means oppose both The means then here thought of is so far from establishing Vnion that it increases Diuision And so it will euer fall out whilst à Church of one Denomination is not acknowledged infallible in euery Doctrin She teaches and obliges Christians to belieue vnder pain of Damnation Se more hereof aboue Chap. 5. n. 5. 16. A. 2. Obiection Dissentions in Councils witness those at Basil and Florence or the Access of Hereticks cannot lessen their Power or Anull their Definitions Therefore our Plea taken from the Hostility in à most ample Council Euinces nothing Answ I grant the Antecedent and say Though Heretiques and dissenting Christians meet together yea Though some too busily aduance opinions dissonant to truth and Orthodox Doctrin Yet God's gracious and watchful Prouidence which drawes good out of Euil And often conuert's War into Peace will with all Assurance effect that such Ã
publick Dissention Answ These men certainly neuer say their Creed I belieue the holy Catholick Church that is in mind interiourly I giue Assent to all the Catholick Church teaches Now if this Doctrin stand They may well not yeild Assent at all to any Doctrin the Church teaches but like Hypocrits may outwardly be fair Catholicks and inwardly foul Hereticks And this is to Profess one thing and belieue another Christ is ashamed of them Luke 9. 26. and so is the Apostle also Rom. 1. 16. VVho blushed not to preach as he belieued And to belieue as he preached But enough hereof is said in the other Treatise CHAP. XV. Diuine Faith in this present State of things necessarily requir's à Church infallible The Reason hereof The Church neither Defin's nor can Define by Humane Authority only Her Definitions more than morally certain are Infallible Sectaries Recourse to Moral certainty in Matters of Faith à most frigid Plea Their Fallacy is discouered Obiections Answered 1. ONe Principle established aboue N. 6. Proues the first part of my Assertion Diuine Faith which is à firm Assent to what euer God speak's So vltimatly rest's vpon his Infallible Veracity One Principle premised That if à true Belieuer yeild Assent to him as He speaks and because He speaks All the power in Heauen cannot Separate Infallibility from that Belief Herein consist's the Perfection of all Diuine Faith That without sweruing it tend's vpon a Verity Infallible and without Hesitancy hold's that infallibly true which the infallible Verity Reueal's A lesser Perfection than this is not Faith And à greater the Apostles had not if we precisely respect The perfection of Faith the Motiue of their Assent Hence all must Distinguish à twofold Infallibility One intrinsick and infinit proper to Gods Verity The Other answerable to à creatures Capacity finit t' is true yet Infallible and such the Apostles Faith was 2. Thus much Supposed not easily gainsaid by Sectaries the infallibility of one Church which we say is the Roman Catholick Stand's firm And here is the Reason As Faith relies vpon an infallible Verity that reueal's Truth So it also rest's vpon an infallible Oracle which without danger of Errour Applies and Proposes that very Truth yet obscure to Belieuers For it little auail's to haue à Verity infallibly Reuealed if à fallible Oracle which may both Miss and Mislead be our best One ground of the Churches Insallibility and only Guide or Proponent The Church therefore which Saith Indubitably I Propose what God Reueals must be infallible answerable to the Infallibility of Diuine Reuelation Ruin the One or Other Infallibility Faith can be no more but an vncertain Assent And consequently no Faith at all 3. To Reinforce this Reason Please only to cast à serious The reason reinforced Thought vpon such as haue been iustly reputed Hereticks and vpon their Procedure The Arians after the reading Scripture denyed the high Godhead in Christ His Eternal Consubstantiality also to the Father And erred The Pelagians reiecting Original Sin swerued likewise from the Verities of Christian Religion so did the Monothelits that impiously bereaued Christ of his two Sacred Wills Diuine and Humane The true Church All know condemned and yet condemns these Tenets as Heretical Right say modern Sectaries And it was well done Very Good If well done herevpon ensues another troubleson Question and it is Whether that true Church whilst She condemned these Errours and defined the contrary Truths proceeded Doubtfully Probably vpon Moral Certainty only or Spake as Gods Oracle ought If the Church defines doubtful to speak Infallibly If She Defined doubtfully it is yet also doubtful whether Christ be the high God and Consubstantial to his Father Vnless Scripture now supposed God's word in express Terms clear the doubt and raise the Doctrin to absolute Certainty which most euidently is not done 4. The whole Contest then is VVhether the Church or Arians Interpret Scripture better For the Obiect of my Assent when I belieue the eternal VVord Consubstantial being not Express Scripture but an Interpretation only it followes if the Interpretation which the Church giues be supposed doubtful She wrong 's the Arians and all other Christians whilst She obliges them to belieue the Mystery otherwise than only Sub dubio or doubfully which is not to belieue at all Again If the Churches She wrongs both Arians and All Christians Definition get à Step higher to à degree of Probability and no more The Arians Opinion for ought we know yet may be as tenable as the Contrary Doctrin now supposed Orthodox And Consequently the real Consubstantiality of the Son to his Father is no more any Obiect of Faith but meerly à disputable Matter like this or that Opinion in Schools earnestly tossed to and fro But neuer ended Doubts therefore And meer probabilities reiected too weightles for Church Definitions 5. We are next to look à little into one only Refuge left The Sectaries Plea of Moral Certainty examined Sectaries called Moral Certainty T' is à dark cloud they are lately got into our Endeauour shall be to dissipate it They may say When the Church condemned Arianism the like is of any other Heresy and defined the Eternal Word Consubstantial The Definition much aboue Probability though not absolutely Infallible was yet so morally Certain that no man can but most vnreasonably doubt of its Verity In passing I may without Offence take notice of Sectaries Inconsequences and Ask if Moral Certainty be at least had from Church Definitions when She interpret's Scripture though the Doctrin be not formally expressed There Why are not Her Definitions euery whit as Morally certain against Luther and Caluin though what She Defin's be not in express Terms Gods word I would also as willingly learn why Protestant Doctrin is not esteemed ouer all the world so Morally certain as thefe Ancient Catholick Definitions are But let these Queries not easily Answered pass We come to the main difficulty and demand 6. Whether this Positiue Doctrin Christ is the Highest God and Consubstantial to his Father be à Fundamental Article of Christian Faith finally resoluable into the Diuine Reuelation And admitted A question Proposed to Sectaries as most Fundamental by Protestants I verily perswade my self they will Say it is If not This followes ineuitably that there is no fundamental Article in our Christian faith Vpon the supposed Concession I Argue But If the Church be fallible this Positiue Doctrin Christ is Consubstantial is no Article of Faith because it cannot be resolued into an infinite Verity infallibly Reuealing Truth Therefore it is only à Moral humane Perswasion at most which may be false 7. The Proof of the Minor will best appear if we Ask why Sectaries belieue that positiue Doctrin They cannot Answer Scripture expresly Teaches it For most euidently that 's not so Will they say the Mystery may by good Discourse be deduced The true Answer proues Faith Certain from
the Definition And might he not haue Argued to the purpose Thus If no man can hold himself happy for being actually in Errour He cannot Certainly think himself out of the danger of an vnhappy State if he be exposed to the danger of Errour But the Moral certainty you defend thrust's you vpon the danger of being in Errour Therefore your Condition is none of the surest Nay it is as bad as mine For the worst that can befall my Doctrin which I pretend Scripture for is That it may one day proue false and so may yours too Good Fathers if in the least degree fallible 19. Hence You se first That the Definitions of Christs euidenced Church must either be owned infallible And then meer Moral certainty hath no place Or Hereticks may endlesly cauil at Her Doctrin and boldly say nothing is taught nothing can be belieued infallibly If you Reply Many cauil and except To except against the Churches Infallibility destroyes Faith against the Churches Infallibility I answer This is to say Exception is made against à Truth which either must stand vnshaken or Faith made no more but à tottering Opinion is destroyed And Mark in what à Distress poor Christians are who Ask. Domine quo ibimus Lord whither shall we goe to learn Eternal truth Protestants will needs draw vs from à Church hitherto held infallible And to afford à better prouision of Truth remit vs to Themselues who confessedly are fallible in all they Teach A Paradox beyond Expression The Church is supposed fallible The Sectaries Paradox and Protestants are really fallible Where then is our Security From whom shall we learn Truth From no body But more of this hereafter 20. You se 2. There is not one receiued Christian Principle so much as seemingly fauourable to Moral certainty only which may be fals or which forces That vpon the Churches Infâ—rences Definitions Whereas on the contrary Scripture Councils and Fathers Positiuely Averr Church Doctrin to be infallible You se 3. To pretend to true Faith or to true Religion diuorced from Infallibility Destroyes Both For although euery Truth be not infallible yet Truth and Infallibility inseparably meet in Faith Wherefore this Inference inuiolably hold's good My Catholick Faith is true Ergo it is infallible For Faith relies vpon And is vltimatly Resolued into God's infallible Veracity which with the Concurrenee of other Principles requisite Transfuses into it à Supereminent infallibility aboue all natural Certitude What euer makes Faith true makes it Infallible That Therefore which makes Faith true makes it also Infallible Now further to our present Purpose God as we here Suppose reuealed the Consubstantiallity of his Son Infallibly But the Mystery lies dark in Scripture The Church impowred to Propose exactly eternal reuealed Truths Answerable to Her Trust and the weightines of the matter speak's not like one faint hearted Forsooth Morally speaking Christ is the highest God The word is Consubstantial But Asserts it without all Peraduentures And strik's Arianism dead with one only Definition And thus Faith stand's firm vpon à double infallibility the One infinite and Essential to God's Verity The Other the infallible Proposition of an Assisted Church For as She Proposes the obscure Mysteries of Faith so we belieue Whereof more presently Other Obiections proposed by Sectaries Solued More of Moral certainty 21. One though enough broken already must appear again in our New mens Terms or nothing is done Thus they Discourse If Christian Doctrin be in so high à Degree Morally Certain As it is Certain that Caesar Pompey and Cicero were men once in Being None can reasonably doubt of the Doctrin And why may not Such an Assurance Content vs without our pretended Infallibility I read this in Mr Stillingfleet more then once And had I not seen it with my own Eyes I Should neuer Sectaries Mistaks concerning Moral certainty haue thought That One Professing Knowledge in Diuinity could haue erred so enormously To lay open the foule Mistake 22. All know the Certainty we haue of Caesars once being in the world was first grounded vpon à Visible clear Euidence for Innumerable saw the man heard him Speak whilst He liued on earth The Verity euer since conueyd down from Age to Age Continues still to our dayes And here is all the Moral Certainty men can haue of Caesar of Pompey or of any other so remote from vs. Please now to obserue As Caesar and Cicero were seen by many Eye-witnesses So Christ our Lord was both heard and seen by Innumerable when he Preached and suffered on the Cross The Euidence to those Spectators was Sensible and Physical To Iewes and Gentils now its Moral who vpon à Vniuersal report Say without boggling There was once à man in the world called Christ as they say There was once One Called Caesar But and here we Come to discouer Mr Stillingfleets Errour Do These Iewes and Gentils therefore To say Christ was vpon Moral certainly belieue in Christ or Assent to his Sacred Doctrin by Faith because they Iudge vpon Moral Certainty He was once on earth Is this Truth I say As it is grounded vpon à Common Report or Morally Certain the Obiect of Faith It is more then ridiculous is not to belieue in Christ For grant That All the Iewes in Europe at this Day may be well thought to Belieue in Christ because they haue Moral Certainty of his once Being in the world 23. To Belieue in Christ Therefore is not to Say such à man once had his Being he Preach'd and suffered for this lay open to Sense But implyes Much more viz. To Assert indubitably vpon Diuine Reuelation That the Man called Christ Iesus was truely the Highest God The only Messias The Redeemer of Mankind Consubstantial to his Eternal Father and finally to Assent to Euery Doctrin he taught These and the What is to belieue in Christ like Truths neither visible nor sensible like Caesar are Obiects of Diuine Faith far enough remoued from Physical and Moral Certainty And we firmly Assent to All not because they are seen with our Eyes or Scientifically known Or finally Conueyed vnto vs vpon the weak Support of Moral certainty But because God an Infinite Verity has reuealed them Here is our Ground Now This Reuelation being not euidently known by virtue of any Principle in Nature must be Belieued together with the Obscure Mysteries Attested by an Act of Diuine Faith 24. And Hence it followes That as no Obiect as seen or Faith is more then morally Certain Euidently known Can terminate Supernatural Faith So no Moral Certainty can be essential to it Or vphold it The vltimate Reason hereof is most Conuincing and Briefly thus What euer God reueal's as it is reuealed is Certain and Infallible Doctrin Wherefore He or those that take from this infallible reuealed Doctrin it s own intrinsecal Certainty And make it no More but Morally Certain wrong God the first Verity and iniure all
of that weak Declaration it appear's no other to me but As things are proposed so they are to all that belieue weak and fallible And none on earth can vnbeguile me or Propose it with greater certainty Because all are now Supposed fallible in their Teaching 8. One Instance may yet clear my meaning The Protestant reads Christs Sacred words Matt. 26. This is my Body And Proposes what he conceiues to be belieuable by Faith But An Instance doth it fallibly Imagin that the Roman Catholick Church also could Say no more for Her Doctrin or the Sense of those Words But as the Protestant doth so fallibly that all might be False it is clear That none whether Catholick or Protestant can haue Certainty of the Doctrin which Christ our Lord deliuered in that one short Sentence Why Both declare their fallible Sentiments only and Fallibly concerning the Sacrament So far their teaching reaches and not farther Therefore the Faith which should be had of the Mystery dwindles into nothing but into à fallible Opinion by virtue of that imperfect Teaching 9. Hence we learn that à Doctrin though infallible in Gods word without more Help makes no man though he be à Prodigy of wit an Infallible Teacher The reason is Infallibility Scripture alone makes no man infallible And why Proceed's not from Scripture easily misinterpreted but immediatly from Gods special Assistance And this Assistance which fixes an Assumed Oracle vpon Truth vnerrably no malice can wrest to falshood Now that the Book of Scripture as dayly Experience teaches is horridly peruerted to à Sinister sense needs no proof For all know what ruin Hereticks haue to the vttermost of their Power endeuoured to make of the chief Articles of our Christian Faith though they aknowledged Scripture to be God's Diuine Word There is scarce One which remain's Vnperuerted Some Deny the Necessity of Diuine Grace Others that great Mystery of the Incarnation Others an Equality in the Diuine Persons Others our Sauiours two Wills Diuine and Humane Thus the Pelagians the Antitrinitarians the Apollinarians and Monothelits taught and deceiued The world And when Scripture is Alleged in behalf of euery Orthodox Truth All you haue from them is à return of ouerthwart Glosses Grace must signify what the Pelagians please The VVord made Flesh How abused what the Antitrinitarians fancy and so of the rest Whence it is Euident that Scripture Alone without more light clears not sufficiently its own Truths For here you Se the most Primary Atticles disowned and Consequently Scripture abused by Priuate Spirits which therefore makes none infallibly certain of God's reuealed Doctrin 10. We Catholicks require à further Help One faithful Oracle to teach which in this contest about the Sense of Gods What Catholicks require besides the bare Letter of Scripture Word end 's all Strife and Saies both plainly and infallibly Thus and thus an Infinite Verity speaks in Scripture Yet Sectaries are offended with vs because we can assert without hesitancy VVe belieue infallibly what Truth it Selfe Reueal's infallibly Nay more They are angry with God for hauing done them the greatest fauour Imaginable For to put à Period to these endles A signal Mercy of God makes sectaries offended debates raised among Christians To teach all Infallibly by his own vnerring Oracle what may and ought to be belieued Infallibly is à signal Mercy for which due Thanks can neuer be rendred Disowne the Mercy we liue and shall liue in à Spirit of Contention to the worlds end 11. Now if you Ask why the Church after She has proposed the Sense and verity of Scripture more easily beget's infallible Faith in Her Children Than the bare letter of Gods word can doe without Her I Answer The facility Diuine assistance Supposed arises from the Clarity of Her teaching known to all Vniuersally whether Orthodox or others Whence it is that few of our Aduersaries scarce moue any doubt concerning the Sense of the Churches vniuersal receiued Doctrin for that 's plain but chiefly Question the Truth of it Whereas all is contrary in our contest with the forenamed Hereticks For there is no Dispute whether Scripture be true What is chiefly debated with Sectaries The debate only being what it Saith or what the Sense of Gods sacred word is Here we fight in darkness before the Church Speak's and Declares Her Sense And if She be diuinely Assisted to teach truth as is already and shall be more amply proued in the sequele Discourse that doubt also ceases and vanishes into nothing 12. In the mean while Some may Object 1. The greatest part of Christian Doctrin is now agreed on and Supposed by Catholicks and Protestanss both true and infallible what necessity then haue we of any other Oracle besides Scripture to teach infallibly Answ The Agreement is Null and the Supposition destroies it self if all that taught Christian Doctrin since the Apostles time teach it fallibly For How could any An Obiection Answered agree in this That such and such à Doctrin is both true and infallible when He or They yea all that teach may because fallible erre in their very teaching and call that infallible Doctrin without Assurance giuen of its Infallibility Do Therefore all own the Verities in Scripture infallible not infallible ex Terminis We must ioyntly own with that an Oracle which Proposes these Verities infallibly or can belieue nothing And by this you Se the Supposition destroies it Selfe For The Sectaries Supposition destroyes it selfe to Suppose à Doctrin infallible when none can Propose it answerably to its Merit as infallible or infallibly is as implicatory as to Suppose without Proof the Starrs in Heauen equal in number and from thence to Inferr they are to be iudged equal The Parity holds exactly 13. Obiect 2. Whoeuer though fallible Deliuers by chance Infallible Christian Doctrin Teaches the very sence that Christ taught Answ Very true But he giues no Assurance Aunother Errour of Sectaries That he doth so For à fallible Deliuery of à Truth as yet only Supposed not Proued infallible raises it no higher but to such à State of Vncertainty that one may iustly doubt whether it be Christ's infallible Doctrin or no. 14. Obiect 3. The fallible teaching of an infallible Verity may well conuey vnto à Hearer that which God has Reuealed For why may not an infallible Verity as Reuealed though fallibly Proposed haue influence vpon Faith and work in Belieuers à most firm Assent Answ It is vtterly vmpossible For à fallible teaching of an infallible Verity not yet Proposed as infallible by any neither Supposes the Truth Certain vpon other principles and this is euer to be noted nor makes it infallible It Supposes no Truth taught infalliby for Protestants Say None now can teach so All Doctors being fallible And most euidently Sectaries clearly conuinced it makes not that Verity infallible For the Verity as reuealed was antecedently Infallible before this fallible teaching
we will first begin with these last words If the Errour be not Euident or intolerable all are obliged to submit to the Council vntil some publick declaration c. Hence I Argue But there neither is nor euer was any Euidence of Errour produced against one of our Catholick Councils the Lateran Florentine or Tridentine for example there neither is nor euer was any Legal Declaration more against these than against the First most ancient and purest Councils in Gods Church Therefore Sectaries by their own Principle are obliged to Submit to the Lateran Florentine and Tridentine as well as to others That there has not been any Publick Legal Declaration made against them is manifest And here is my proof 32. The clamours and Calumnies of Arians Cast vpon the The Assertion proued Nicene Council were no Legal Declaration against That but most Vncanonical Ergo the clamours and calumnies of Protestants cast vpon the now named Representatiues are fully as Illegal and Vncanonical yea and more forceles if more can be to Declare Clamours no Proofs them Inualid And besides clamours we neuer yet had nor shall haue hereafter any Thing from Sectaries The true Reason is Go groundedly to work There is not one Imaginable Principle whereby the Nicene can be proued à more lawful Council then the great Council of Lateran was so much decryed by Nouellists And if 't were Possible as it is not to Ouerthrow the One by any solid proof the Other Eo ipso loses all Credit and Authority 33. Hence These and the like calumnies vented by Sectaries The Arians and Protestants Clamour and Calumniate alike iâ— Corners The Lateran and Tridentine were vnlawful Councils 〈…〉 ed by the Pope they had not freedom Their Votes ought to be 〈…〉 ted Surreptitious The Conuened were not men of vnquestionable Integrity Some few by fair Pretences brought ouer the greater number wanting Iudgement to side with their Designs c. Such corner-Calumnies I say and I read them in our Aduersaries As easily â—â—attered out by Arians against the Nicene Fathers can neuer pass for legal Declarations against Catholick Councils whilst euery Proposition want's proof and euery word its due Weight That iâ— what euer can be said to this Sense stand's Vnprincipled Therefore vnless all must be iust so as Sectaries will haue it Vnless fals Suppositions become conuincing Arguments and à pure begging the Question proue it Or be able to decide our Differences We haue Right to cry as loud They. Audiatur altera Pars. A Iudge is to decide all and not Clamours Let Catholicks be heard also And when they are heard and return their Answers before à lawful Iudge to euery particular these Calumnies will vanish or rather appear like Themselues Forged and far-fetch't Improbabilities Exclude à Iudge and à iust Sentence Sectaries are where they would be in the old Labyrinth of Quarrelling without Principles or giuing any hope of ending One Question in Controuersy 34. Now to implead our Councils of Errours and to pretend Sectaries neuer legally assembled Euidence for it is more than à desperate Attempt vnless as I say the Corner-votes of à few iarring dispersed Sectaries neuer legally Assembled haue Power to create à new kind of Euidence vnknown to the world Please to reflect à little It must Forsooth be Euident That the Doctrin of Transubstantiation or Praying to Saints are Errours whilst à whole vnited learned Church Opposes these vain Pretences and Defend's the Articles as Catholick Create à new Kind of Euidence Verities It was neuer yet heard that Sectaries Scattered here an there had Authority to impose such foule disgraceful Names of Euident Errours or Errours morally Certain vpon Doctrins so vniuersally receiued when as I say The most learned Body of Christians that euer was Vnuotes all they blow into the eares of others as meer Impertinences Euidence Good Reader and Moral certainty lose force and neuer yet stood in the Sight or presence of so strong an Opposition I will yet say more Though we abstract from Church Authority we Catholicks are able to maintain our Doctrin against Sectaries vpon Tradition the Authority of Fathers ancient Records c. But still we require A last Iudge to giue Sentence whether they or we abuse the Principles we plead by For certainly the one or other Party doth so But this Nouellists euer Decline and Sectaries decline both Iudge and final Sentence will haue vs to Dispute without either Iudge or indubitable Principles and so make as is now said all Controuersies endles which indeed is the only Thing they ayme at and I haue vndertaken to proue against them 35. Mr Stillingfleet P. 539. speak's so fully to my purpose that more cannot be desired from an Aduersary He Demands how it can be known when Errours in Councils or the Church are manifest or intolerable and when not And Answers thus We appeal to Scripture interpreted by the Concurrent Sense of the primitiue Church the common reason of mankind the consent of wise and learned men Supposing Scripture to be the Rule of Faith And à little after Our Aduersaries Doctrin If you Ask further Who shall be Iudge what à necessary Reason or Demonstration is His Lordship tell 's you plainly enough from Hooker It is such as being Proposed to any man and vnderstood the mind cannot chuse but inwardly assent to it Here you haue the Gentlemans last Principles And euery one when applyed to our present Matter is as much Controuerted between Catholicks and Protestants as the very Question now in Dispute Obserue well 36. The Question is whether the Lateran Florentine and Tridentiue Councils haue erred in their Definitions the like may be moued of all others Protestants say they haue erred Catholicks Lead's still â—n to dispute but to make no end of Controuersies Deny it Both Parties Appeal to Scripture interpreted by the Sense of the Primitiue Church So far as that Oracle learns vs. And if any Passage be found there seemingly fauorable to Sectaries Catholicks after the Contest of one whole Age haue been more ready to clear all Doubts To take of any thing like Imagined Errours Than Protestants were euer yet able to lay such foul Aspertions vpon either Church or Councils What then is to be done Must we eternally Dispute concerning that Sense and end nothing Must we Commence new Quarrels Sectaries who began the quarrel about Matters so often debated Must the old Actum agere come ouer and ouer again Sectaries like that Sport well but no Progress is made this way As yet we only skirmish in the dark Wherefore recourse at last is to be had to à lawful Iulge to some known Oracle or other in whose final Sentence all are to acquiese If any lawful Iudge or owned Oracle Primitiue or latter Condemn our Councils of Errour and we licence Sectaries Like well â—â— hear themselues talk without Principles to name either Prouided they make not
least When difficulties arise Exception I say therefore to proue what I sayd aboue If Church and Councils can err notoriously There is no means left on earth either to discouer the Errours or to amend them 7. The Assertion will be proued by sifting this one Point to the Bottom And Much light will be had if we leaue Generalities One Point Examined wherin Sectaries alwaies lurk and descend to particulars Or lay forth the nature of some imaginable Errours Call then These if any be horrid and intolerable 8. To teach there is no God no Christ no Redeemer no Saluation I Ask whether the Councils in Gods Church can err thus grosly The Nature of horrid Errours or are so secured by Diuine Assistance as not to Define such vast Absurdities If it be Answered They are so far at least preserued infallible I clearly Infer No man can exclude à total infallibility from Councils If it be Answered Possibly they may err in this Damnable manner I infer Again Ergo Possibly Councils Church and all Christians may vtterly desert Christ become Atheists Turks Iewes Diuels or what els you will that naught is Can this also be granted 9. One may reply it is indeed possible yet will neuer be Câ—ntra Who hinders the Mischief I beseech you if the Supposition may stand The Roman Catholick Church Say Sectaries is already Idolatrous and long since was Antichristian when some English Protestants made the Pope Antichrist The Church accused of intolerable Errours Why then may not Atheism Iudaism and Turcism infect likewise the Whole Moral Body of Christians and Destroy both Church and Councils Grant this Possible there can be no more talk of after-Councils correcting the former erroneous For the Church is now Destroyed Christ our Lord must please to appear again or send some great Prophet to establish à new Church more firm than the other was now ruined or we are lest desolate vtterly Churchles 10. I am verily perswaded our Aduersaries will think twice on 't before they once grant these horrid Consequences and therefore must needs make the Supposed Euident intolerable errours not altogether so abominable but less or of à lower rank yet euident and intolerable Remember that And what may these A question proposed to Sectaries be think ye I would fain know whether any such foul Doctrins have been euer taught de facto or because Councils are Supposed fallible whether they yet remain in à State of possibility and only may be Taught If it be Said they are not actual but only possible Or may be intolerable hereafter And Sectaries vpon that Account abandon the Roman Catholick Church Their Sin is now actual and more horrid than such Concerning these Supposed Errours Actual or Possible Errours are Because They desert à Church vpon supposed faults which only may be yet neuer were hitherto Now if for à meer Possibility of falsities neuer yet actually Discouered nor known The Roman Church is to be quitted Protestants ought to forsake Their own Religion For they are all liable to Errour Yea And may well hang vp the most Innocent man in the world vpon this score That he may be à thiefe Though as yet he neuer Stole any thing 11. The Errours therefore if we Discourse rationally hitherto pretended against vs are not in à meer State of Possibility None Condemned for Errours which Possibly may be But Actual Euident and intolerable We inquire after them And still proceed vpon this wretched Supposition that both Church and Council are fallible or haue erred When Enuy has done its Vtmost you only can get à List of these or the like Supposed Falshoods Praying to Saints The Real Presence Worshiping of Images Transubstantiation or some thing of this nature which Catholicks maintain Now truely it is more than extrauagant and I know not with what Conscience Sectaries do it to Decry these as Euident and intolerable Errours whilst à whole learned Church defends them as Truths 12. What Saith Mr Hooker Is the mind so forced that after à full Proposal it cannot chuse but inwardly Assent to All as euident Errours Toyes Trifles Millions as we now Sectaries in consequencies sayd own them as Apostolical Verities 2. If Euident and intolerable they strike at such Verities as Sectaries call the fundamentals of Faith And consequently the Roman Church which maintains them has been Vnorthodox in fundamentals for à thousand years and more Will this be granted Grant or deny here is an vnanswerable Dilemma They are fundamental Errours in our Sectaries sense destructive of Diuine Faith or not If not but only smaller matters Protestants Oblige themselues to forbear and to expect the Churches Good pleasure vntil some other Council meet 's and Reuerses what 's Amiss Their Clamours therefore against the Churches Doctrin now are vnauthorised and most illegal by their own Principles Nor haue they Power as is confessed to Reform themselues in lesser matters but only in things of à higher Concern Euident and intolerable 13. Now if they be of this nature and consequently fundamental A clear Inference against Sectaries Absurdities against Faith It followes that there was no Church right in fundamentals the whole world ouer for ten Ages before Luther Not the Roman if the Supposition hold's Nor any other Society of Christians for all those name whom you will were more deeply plunged into fundamental Errours 3. And T' is the chiefest thing I aime at If Church and Councils be owned fallible can err or haue erred Our Aduersaries Supposition of Errours Euident and intolerable is purely chimerical And therefore I said iust now None can know them as such and consequently no Power on earth can amend them I proue the Assertion 14. First they cannot be known as euident or manifest Intolerable Errours cannot be proued against the Church without Principles as clear as the Errours are Supposed to be which therefore must be so indisputable That the mind inwardly Assent's to them as Mr Hooker Saith A weaker light as Probability or à miscalled Moral Certainty beget's Euidence in none Now here we Vrge our Aduersaries to bring to Light but one or more clear Principles whereby it may manifestly appear that Transubstantiation or any other Catholick Doctrin is so manifest à Falshood That the mind conquered By any thing like à Principle and conuicted with the Euidence cannot chuse but decry it as intolerable Whither will these men run for Principles To Scripture it 's euidently abused by the one or other Party but who is in fault You will say That 's yet disputable therefore fâ—r of from Euidence Church and Councils supposed errable and erroneous cannot tell you nor giue in euidence against him or them that abuse Scripture Whither next To the Fathers All are fallible and their Sense â—n controuerted matters is made so intricate when you hear Them glossed by the Protestant and vnglossed by the Catholick that you would Swear they speak
antecedent Assent to this Proposition That what soeuer those Dort-men taught is true Doctrin before you own it as true Ascertain vs of thus much And you solue your own difficulty If this Instance please not make vse of another Your Ministers in England pretend to teach true Doctrin though not infallibly Say only vpon what antecedent Proposition the Truth of their Doctrin is assented to by all before it be belieued as true and we shall without labour Answer in behalf of our infallible Doctrin 16. In à word thus Catholicks plead This generall Proposition is to be assented to as both true and infallible Viz. All And clearly solued are obliged to Hear and Belieue the Pastors of God's Church when Lawsully Commissioned to teach in God's name and as the Orthodox Church teaches Here is the Thesis or the vniuersal receiued Proposition But these Pastors and Doctors when assembled in Council are still Pastors of the Church and lawfully commissioned to teach in God's name both true and infallible Doctrin Therefore they are to be heard and belieued in all and euery Definition proceeding from that Assembly lawfully conuened Here you haue the Hypothâ—sis as indubitably certain as the Thesis 17. A second Obiection you meet with in his Page 509. Another Obiection retorted and Solued What infallible Testimony haue you he means Catholicks for this that Councils are Infallible It is not enough for you to say That the Testimonies of Scripture you produce are an Infallible Testimony for it For that were to make the Scripture the sole Iudge of this great Controuersy which you deny to be the sole Iudge of any I first retort the Argument and Ask. What Testimony haue you Sectaries I do not say Infallible But so much as seemingly probable taken from Scripture whereby Councils the greatest Representatiues in God's Church are made fallible Not one can be alleged 18. Now my Answer briefly is Scripture once admitted for God's word which our Aduersaries will not reflect on manifestly The Catholick Principles for Infallibility conuinceth the Churches infallibility To those express and significant Passages of holy Writ known to euery one The Church is the pillar and ground of Truth you haue them already We add the iudgement of Fathers cited aboue The guide of Controuersies C. 3. P. 147. Produces more Besides Gods Church which we hold an Infallible Oracle interpret's Scripture to this sense and here are our aboundantly full Principles for Her Infallibility Come you Sr now closely to the point confront vs if you can with as many Passages of Scripture as many Testimonies of Fathers Or and this we alwayes vrge with the Authority of any Orthodox Church which fauours your contrary Tenet of Fallibility The Strife is ended But hereof there is no fear at all And thus you se how Scripture is the Iudge Sectaries haue none for their Tenet when once admitted as Diuine and faithfully interpreted not otherwise 19. A. 3. Obiection Page 509. The Decree or Definition of à Council receiues Infallibility from the Council before the A third weak obiection retorted Pope confirm's it or not If not The whole infallibility resides in the Pope and this some Say is not de Fide vniuersali If it arise from the Council before the Pope confirm's it for that act of confirmation followes the Definition the Council is infallible antecedently to the Popes Confirmation I first retort the Argument An Act of Parlament or à law made for all receiues its force from the Conuened Members before his Maiesty Confirm's it or not If not The whole Power of making such à Law resides in His Maiesty which some will say is not so If it arise ftom the Parlament before His Maiesty Confirm's it and that Confirmation followes the Act The Parlament is impowr'd to make such Lawes before His Royal. Assent Confirm's them Here is the very same Form of arguing though in à different matter and you se the weaknes of it 20. The true Answer to the Obiection is as followes Euery Doctrin definable may be considered two wayes first as it Proceed's from God the most supreme Verity and vnder that Notion it is both true and infallible in it self before the pope and Council Define it And note they can Define no other Doctrin And solued on earth but what God ratifies in Heauen 2. It may be considered as the Doctrin of the Representatiue Church infallibly Assisted to teach Diuine truths And vnder that Notion it is called Church Doctrin proceeding from the Head and Members of one mystical Body The Head therefore Separated or solely taken Defines not in Councils The Members diuided from the Head define not But one and the same Definition proceed's ioyntly from both Head and members vnited together The Instance already hinted at giues light enough If any reply The Definition when the Council proposed it was both true and infallible Doctrin I distinguish the Proposition It might be then Certain Euery Doctrin true in it selfe is not therefore Church Doctrin and infallible Doctrin in it self that 's true but as yet it is neither known or owned as such or called Church Doctrin It was then the whole Councils or Churches true and infallible Doctrin I deny it This is founded vpon both Pope and Council infallibly assisted as is now supposed and already proued 21. I find no more in Mr Stillingfleet worth any notice That which followes in his Page 510. ouerthrowes all councils Other Obiections waued as impertinent or proues nothing What certainty haue you Saith he that this or that Council proceeded lawfully That the Bishops were lawful Bishops That the Pope who confirm's them was à lawful Pope That some By-ends or Interest swayed not many That all conditions were exactly performed c. I Answer first and Ask. What certainty haue you of any illegal Bishops of vnlawful Popes of Interest Swaying all Here because you accuse we put you to the Proof I Answer 2. That Certainty which you or any has of no By ends in the four first general Councils of their lawful Bishops of no interest swayng c. The same we haue of all the approued Councils in Gods Church To insist further vpon such saint Obiections is only to lose time or might one retaliate in Mr Stillingfleets own language meerly to kill flies to run after them and make sport with them And thus much of the Churches Infallibility I mean the Roman Apostolical Catholick Church to whose Censure and infallible Iudgement I do most willingly submit my Selfe and euery particular in this Treatise THE THIRD DISCOVRSSE OF The Resolution of Faith THe subiect here hinted at is as all Shollers know very Speculatiue Terms according to my little Skill in the English Tongue often Fail to express what is necessary Wonder not therefore if now and then you meet with that which may seem Obscure to à Vulgar Reader My Endeauour Shall be to giue the Discourse so much Light as
strange Mr Stillingfleet saw not the Distinction The Faith therefore of those other Samaritans that belieued in Christ vpon the wonans word Vltimately relyed vpon our Sauiours own Authority who had conuersed with her And hence the Gospel Sayes Now we Belieue not for thy Saying for we our Selues haue heard and know that this man in very deed is the Sauiour of the world T' is true had this woman whom the Fathers Suppose perfectly conuerted to Christ been made an Infallible Oracle in all she deliuered The Samaritan woman proposed what She had heard as the Apostles were in their Teaching or the Church now is Her Testimony might well haue supported Faith but because thus much only can be euinced by Scripture that She â—ealously Proposed what She had heard of our Sauiour Her testimony alone might serue well as à natural Proposition to raise Belief in others though insufficient to ground in them that Supernatural Assent And her words had vpon this Account greater weight because She confirmed them with à Sign aboue the force of Nature This man has told me all I haue done I know some Authors are of opinion that this Samaritan called Photina first reduced to the Faith of Christ her Sisters and Children which done She went into Affrica and there Propagated the Christian Doctrin with great Successe till at last both She and her Different Opinions Concerning her Children were crowned with à glorious Martyrdom The only difficulty is whether She be the fame with that S. Photina whereof à memory is kept in the Roman Martyriloge the. 20. day of March some Greek Authors stand for the Affirmatiue Be it so or other wise it imports little to our present Purpose Who desires more of this Subiect may read the erudite Godefridus Henshenius Tom. 3. de Santis Martij die 20. immediatly after the life of S. Ioachim 11. Conformable to this Doctrin we Answer to these other forceles Instances and might say with some good Diuines That Other Instances Shew'd forceles all Immediate Propounders or Conueyers of Diuine Reuelation in such particular Cases need not to be Infallible For Faith as These Diuines Teach requires no more But first that the Obiect be truly reuealed and Proposed to one vpon prudent Motiues Suitable to the firm Assent Hee must elicite 2. That In Doctrin Commonly receiued by the light of such Motiues Hee be induced to fix Belief vpon the Diuine Reuelation although that full Euidence of Credibility which the Church Manifesteth and the more learned attain to be not yet acquired by him These Conditions presupposed Diuine Grace is euer ready to make that mans Faith most firm and supernatural And consequently an Obligation lies on him to belieue But from this Doctrin which is Common no such thing followes as Mr Stillingf would infer Viz. That the Churches infallibility Seem's vnnecessary to vphold infallible Faith for may not young Beginners growing more mature chiefly if solicited to abandon Their first Faith iustly demand to haue more full Satisfaction in all their doubts and so much Assurance concerning that they once assented to as not to be remoued from it vpon any false Motiues or fallacious Arguments though neuer so Specious Such cases Say these fall out euery day 12. But in this present State none can clear these doubts none can Assure any that his Faith is certainly true none can bring the most learned to à perfect acquiescency in Belief but an Infallible Church Therefore vpon this very Account The Churches Infallibility absolutely necessary Her infallibility is proued not only conuenient but absolutely Necessary And hence it is That Gods sacred Prouidence neuer failed since Christianity began to haue in readines Some one or other infallible known Oracle wherevpon faith might rest most Securely The Apostles had for their Master the best liuing Oracle Christ our Lord. The Primitiue Christians learned of the Apostles After them the Church perfectly founded did succeed as the only Oracle wherevnto euery one may take recourse for further Satisfaction when difficulties arise Though in some particular Cases as is now Said Her Motiues and glorious Miracles be not at the first laid forth most fully to euery simple Belieuer Ceteram turbam saith S. Austin contra Epist Fund C. 4. non intelligendi viuacitas sed credendi simplicitas salâ—am facit That is Candid Simplicity makes these more How young Beginners are drawn safe than curiously to search into the vltimate grounds of Belieuing The Reason is because fewer Motiues if yet prudent and Conuincing may well serue to induce Beginners seldom molested with Difficulties against Faith than will conuince Others more learned who often struggle to Captiuate their Vnderstanding when the high Mysteries of Christianity are Proposed 13. Moreouer many great Doctors maintain that in the Two Solutions more particular cases now mentioned God by his special Illumination Supplies the want of the exteriour Proposition when that 's deficient or less conuincing See Suarez Disp 4. de Fide sect 5. and this way also we easily solue Mr Stillingfleets difficulties Lastly it is noted in the other Treatise Disc 1. C. 2. n. 5. 6. And both receiued Doctrin That whoeuer is lawfully sent to teach the Christian doctrin and deliuers those Truths in the name of God and his Church if considered as à member conioyned with Christs infallible Oracle He may be Said to teach infallibly The Reasons you haue there giuen more largely 14. I am now to retort Mr Stillingfleets Instances vpon himself and show That though he walk's neuer so far abroad to view the seueral Plantations of Faith amongst either Brittans or Barbarians he must solue his own difficulties Thus I discourse We now Suppose All these Barbarians Conuerted to Christ These instances retorted to haue had true Faith and Consequently prudent Motiues to belieue before they firmly assented to the Diuine Reuelatlon We make Enquiry after these and Ask By what Inducements were such as yet knew not our Sauiour drawn to belieue in him Mr Stillingfleet return's the strangest Answer I euer heard What our Aduersary asserts For he seem's to make his Motiues inducing to Faith nothing but the rational Euidence of the truth of the Doctrin deliuered and Therefore grieuously complains P. 118. That we destroy the Obligation to Faith which ariseth from the rational Euidence of Christian Religion If this be not pure Fancy there was neuer any and my Reason is That Supposed rational Euidence is either the very same with the intrinsecal Verity of the Doctrin deleuered or à rational intellectual Light distinct from the Doctrin If it be the very same These truths simply Proposed Christ His rational Euidence of Christian Religion is God and man Adaem infected his posterity with Original Sin God is one Essence and three Persons are without more their own Self-euidences and consequently all the Miracles which Christ and his Apostles wrought to settle these and the like Verities
to induce it an Infallible Oracle to teach it and finally to rely on 20. Hence we easily Answer Mr Stillingfleets Question P. 118. What Saith he cannot men haue vnquestionable Assurance that there was such à Person as Christ in the world who dyed for vs if the present Church be not infallible Answ You might Sr haue proposed à wiser Question Know I beseech you That in the forenamed Proposition There was such à Man as Christ who liued in the world and An vnlearned Obiection answered dyed for vs Two things may be Considered First That the man called Christ dyed on à Cross And this Verity as we sayd aboue Once visible both Iewes and Gentils yet Assent to vpon Moral Certainty but therefore do not belieue in Christ The Reason is Manifest and it vtterly destroyes your Doctrin because that Common report or Moral Certainty is not God's infallible Reuelation which only can support Faith 21. The second thing to be considered is That the man called Christ dying for vs was the only Messias truly God the Redeemer of Mankind Here you haue the hidden Verities of Christian Religion the Certain Obiects of Faith Conueyed vnto vs by no Moral Assurance but solely vpon God's Infallible Reuelation whereof more presently 22. Page 119. He tell 's vs first We cannot say what or where that Church is which we suppose infallible Nor. 2. What is that Church is the proper Subiect of infallibility Nor. 3. What kind of Infallibility this is Nor. 4. How we can know when the Church Defin's infallibly Here is very slight Matter to work on To the first we Answer The Church which we do not barely Suppose The true Church denoted but haue already proued Infallible is that diffused Society of Christians vnited in one Faith vnder one Head which is most discernable from all Societies by the same euident Marks of truth that Christ and his Apostles manifested to the world To the. 2. We haue both Answered and retorted the Argument in the other Treatise where it is Said The Church may The subiect of Infallibility be considered First as it is Docens or Teaching And thus Her Representatiue moral Body the Pope I mean and Council assembled together for the Reasons alleged Chap. 17. is the proper Subiect of Infallibility Again if we consider the Church as it is Discens learning or taught All those diffused multitudes of Christians that are vnited in one belief and own due Submission to their lawful Pastors because they belieue as the Church Representatiue teaches may be rightly styled vpon the Account From whence Infallibility Proceâ—d's of their infallible Faith the proper Subiect of Infallibility And must not our Aduersaries who hold à Society of men infallible in Fundamentals solue this Difficulty and Declare in what Subiect that half Infallibility is lodged To the. 3. we haue Answered Chap. 16. This infallibility which proceed's from the Special Assistance of the Holy Ghost is of such à Nature That that Blessed Spirit will neuer permit the Church instructing to Define à falshood nor the instructed Vniuersally to fail in faith To the. 4. I Answer Then we know the Church Defin's infallibly when She obliges all vnder Anathema to belieue her Doctrin and when the Doctrin is so sufficiently proposed to her Subiects that it cannot be morally doubted of But enough of these Strengthles difficulties examined and solued à hundred times ouer May better be expected hereafter We shall se that in the following Chapter CHAP. IV. More of Mr Stillingfleets Errours Of that odd kind of Faith he seem's to maintain grounded on Moral Certainty VVhat Influence the Motiues of Credibility haue vpon Faith Other Parcels of his Doctrin Examined and refuted Obiections Solued 1. AFter Mr Stillingfleet had said All may haue vnquestionable Assurance of our Sauiours once being in the Mr Stillingfleets Doctrin world though the present Church were fallible He tells vs again that the Assurance of the matters of fact which are the foundations of Faith is necessary in order to the obligation to belieue And then add's I mean such an assurance as matters of fact are capable of for no higher can be required than the nature of the things will bear He goes on in his Ignorance Cannot we haue vnquestionable Assurance that there were such persons as Câ—sar and Pompey without some infallible Testimony If we may in such things VVhy not in other Matters of fact which infinitly more concern vs though the Church stamp not her Infallibility vpon them The man you see would say That these verities Christ dyed for vs is our only Redeemer truly God and man being Matters of fact and foundations of Faith are conueyed to vs vpon no higher certainty than Moral only For the nature of them iust like that Assurance we haue of à Caesar and Pompey bear 's no greater Hence he also tell 's vs. P. 206. that Moral certainty may be as great as Mathematical Explained by himselfe and Physical Supposing as little reason to doubt in moral things as to their Nature as in Mathematical and Physical as to theirs And afterward There can be no greater than this Moral Certainty of the main foundations of all Religion Reflect Christian Reader But The Doctrin is dangerous the Verities now mentioned Christ is our Redeemer The only Messias truly God and Man are the main foundations of Christian Religion And Conueyed to vs by moral certainty Therefore Mr Stillingfleet laies the whole weight of Christian Religion hitherto held infallibly true vpon à certainty which may be false By this confused and vndigested Discourse I hope all will perceiue what it is to write Controuersies with half an Insight into Difficulties 2. I proue it first both indigested and erroneous by this vndeniable Principle No Authority in Heauen or earth deliuered And Proued Most erroneous these Verities Christ is the true Messias Christ is God and Man vpon Moral Certainty only Ergo None can belieue them with so weak an Assent as is only Moral The Consequence is clear For if no Authority conueyed or deliuered the Verities as Morally A two fold Probation certain only And I Assent to them with à Belieue only Morally Certain my Assent is giuen to some Authority which hath no Being either in Heauen or earth Or Argue thus and you Conuince If all Authority Imaginable wherevpon Faith can depend Conueyed or deliuered these Verities both as Infallible Truths and infallibly And I Assent to the Doctrin with à Beliefe not infallible but only morally Certain I leaue by my fallible moral Assent the true Infallible teaching and Conueying Oracles of Christian Doctrin and belieue vpon à meer fancied Authority which was neuer impowred to Conuey God's Verities to any 3. Now that all Authority wherevpon Faith can depend deliuered the forementioned Verities Infallibly is Manifest All Teachers of Christian Doctrin conueyed it Infallibly God's Reuelation was and is infallible Christ our
Fifteen and I le tell you which it is the Churches glorious Miracles hath so silenced Sectaries that none of them all has hitherto attempted to return any better answer than this Bellarmine thou lies't He Saies 2. The only certain Note of the true Church is its agreement with the Primary foundation of it in the Doctrin whâ—ch was infallible and attested by miracles vndoubtedly Diuine This is à strange Note or Mark which cannot be distinguished from the thing Marked as the Motiues of Credibility manifestly sensible are distinguished from the Doctrin belieued 10. Answer therefore Good Sr is this Agreement with the Primitiue Doctrin it s owns Self Euidence as à Mark should be Or do all dissenting Parties accord thus far That anciently such That 's made à clear Mark â—as the Primitiue Doctrin but now is changed from it selfe into another new Learning Most euidently no. For the whole contest between the Church and Her Aduersaries may these be â—eard is whether of vs Professe the Primitiue Doctrin laid in the first foundation of Christianity This point then being yet disputable for so Sectaries will haue it it is meer folly to make it à Mark whereby to distinguish truth from falshood And there is which Sectaries must Say is yet disputable and obscure no clearing it from Improbability vnless you say Sectaries more â—iâ—e then the rest of the world can exactly tell vs who those Christians are that now agree with the Primitiue Doctrin and who dissent from it But others as wise as they want faith to belieue such bare Assertions without Proofs and Principles In à word there is no knowing what the Primitiue Doctrin was nor can any now haue infallible certainty of the Apostles Miracles without à Church actually in Being and Infallible 11. He saith 3. If our Doctrin be repugnant to what was Originally 〈…〉 ered by the Founder of the Christian Church our Society is not the Conditional Propositions here Proofless Christian Church Answ No more Sr is Yours if it be repugnant But To what purpose are these Iss and conditional Propositions when Proofs are expected from Accusers Proue you if you can but doe it vpon sound Principles that our Doctrin is repugnant to that which was Originally deliuered you are Conqueâ—our and we no more Catholicks but Sr à hundred more of your Volumes will neuer Euince this 12. He demands 4. whether we cannot conceiue à Church should A fallible Church cannot be Consonant to Christ's Doctrin be Consonant to the Doctrin of Christ without being infallible Answ No truly T' is impossible and here is the Reason because in à lesse space then one Age there would be as many Religions in such à Church as there are Townes or villages in it And perhaps more And is not this manifest in England where almost euery year we haue à new Religion coyned Therefore to Imagin à Society of men vnited rogether in the belief of Christ's infallible Doctrin without an infallible Oracle to teach is à meer Chimera O but euery Man in this fallible Society is bound to take care of his soul and to belieue the infallible Doctrin of Christ I Answer If to take care of his Soul necessarily implies the Belief of Christ's infallible Doctrin it is impossible to take that care because he can haue no infallible Assurance of Christs Doctrin without à Church which teaches it infallibly Hereof enough is said aboue 13. Page 134. He desires to haue such Miracles wrought as may conuince Infidels as to the point of the Churches infallibility Answ He has all he can desire The Blind se A Parallel of Miracles The Dumb speak the Deaf hear The Dead rise vp to life again were our Sauiours own Miracles and conuinced Infidels but these are our Churches likewise as is largely proued Disc 2. C. 8. What would the man haue more 14. Page 135. To his no little disgrace without any Proof at all he scornfully slights that euident and most known Miracle An Euident Miracle slighted wrought at Zaragosa in Spain But enough of this aboue Disc 2. C. 9. Here I can add hauing it from à right Honourable Person yet liuing who heard His Maiesty Charles the first Say in the presence of many others The cure of that young Man at Zaragosa was certain Some herevpon Proposing à further Question whether it could be thought à Miracle His Maiesty Answered be it as you will the thing was done The leg cut off and buried was certainly restored again 15. In the same Page he Questions whether the Motiues we produce belong only to our Church But grant Saith he they do belong its hard to find the connexion between them and Infallibility We haue Answered to the first No Society of men can shew the like Motiues and therefore vrge Mr Stillingfleet to produce his Euidence That is To proue they The Conneâ—ion between Miracles and Infallibility euinced belong to any other Society But to the Roman Catholick Church only The other point concerning the Connexion Nicodemus à Prince of the Iewes Iohn 3. V. 2. long since cleared Rabbi we know thou art come à Master or Teacher from God for no man can do these Signs which thou dos't vnless God be with him Was then our Sauiour proued by the works and the Miracles he did à Master sent from God to teach And did these Signs conuince reason that God was with him when he taught None can deny it Therefore none can doubt ' but that He was also proued infallible by Virtue of His wonders And consequently the connexion between them and infallibility hold's good But The true Inference the Church and here is our Inference Euidences the very like Signes aboue the force of nature therefore reason concludes that She also is proued Infallible Wherefore Mr Stillingfleet is either obliged to find à flaw in the consequence or to giue à Disparity between our Church-Motiues and those other Primitiue which he neuer goes about to do 16. I meet with nothing in His. 136. Page but loud vntruths Another Parergon to diuert the Reader concerning our Doctrin of Pennance as if we indulged sin here and yet gaue men hope of Heauen hereafter It is à Calumny euery one knowes we teach no such Doctrin and â—n this place à meer Parergon besides I therefore slight it and take notice of another straying out of the way P. 137. where he Speak's thus The Principles of any Conclusion must be â—f more credit then the Conclusion it self Therefore if the Articles â—f Faith The Trinity and Resurrection be the Conclusions And the Principles by which they are proued be only Ecclesiastical Tradition it â—ust needs follow That the Tradition of the Church is more infallible then the Articles of faith if the Faith we haue of those Articles should be finally resolued into the veracity of the Churches Testimony 17. This Difficulty not well digested either Proues nothing or makes euery Resolution
the truth is manifest The Heathens so notoriously transgressed the Law of nature that few and very No Motiues sound in any other Religion but the Catholick few obserued it During Moses Law the Church was but little yet the Peoples sins were great And if we compare the Learning Wisdom and Piety of the Iewes with the eminent Knowledge Virtue and Piety of those who profess the Catholick faith there is no Parallel Mention modern Sectaries diuorced from Christ and his Church what are they Men of yesterday truely Lawless in à word à very small disioynted company Their Critical learning appeares in their Writings and the virtue they haue is best known by their works Nothing hitherto of God's Language I mean no rational Motiues illustrate this Religion 10. Thus you se First How à Seeker after truth may by prudent Industry learn that the Doctrin contained in Scripture is Gods own Sacred and Diuine word But. 2. To be Assured hereof an Infallible Oracle euidenced by Supernatural Signes The last assurance giuen is to attest the Verity for so Prouidence has ordered That God's own most sublime and Diuine languaâ—e mâ—st be conueyed to vs by another more plain and easy The Motiues which illustrate the Church are this plain exteriour Language Induced by them we hear the Church speak And vpon her Testimony belieue that other sacred Language of God deliuered in Holy Writ 11. A. 4. Principle The Resolution of Faith is then exactly made when all the Causes or conditions wherevpon it depend's what the Resolution of Faith implies and when exactly made are plainly laid forth vntil we fall vpon the very last Cause or Motiue of our assent giuen to the Diuine Reuelation Briefly The final Cause of belieuing is that in this our short Exile we liue virtuously as Faith requires and after enioy eternal Happines The material Cause or Subiect of Faith is Man's vnderstanding The intrinsick Formal cause is no other but Faith it selfe which as truely makes à soul bâ—lieuing as vision receiued in the â—etina of the Eye denominat's it seing Thus far there is no great dispute nor much can be questioned concerning the resolution of the very Formal Act of Faith as distinguished from the Obiectiue which is made by à reflex Contemplation vpon it as it tend's in to all those causes and Conditions whereon that act depend's The only difficulty therefore remaining concern's the Formal extrinsecal Motiue which all Say is Gods Diuine Reuelation 12. Now one Question may be From whence haue we Catholicks greater assurance of our Doctrin or why Say we That that stand's firm vpon the Diuine Testimony and reiect the Arians and Protestants Doctrin as à Nouelty or not built vpon the same foundation whilst all of vs pretend to Scripture The Arians say Christ is not the highest God We assert the contrary Protestants teach the Church is fallible We the contrary In rhis Opposition of Iudgements who An easy difficulty can certainly Define what God has spoken To this and it is the least of difficulties we Answer God who cannot deceiue has giuen so many Diuine and manifest Signes in behalfe of the reuealed Doctrin which the Church teaches that none can Question the Truth vnless he will either Solued vpon this Principle That God cannot cheat the world say An infinite Wisdom cannot declare his own Interiour mind by clear exteriour Signs Or which is worse That he has established an Oracle and set it forth with strange Supernatural wonders only to make à fair Appearance though the final End be to cheat all that belieue it 13. Now here is the only Question Whether these Arians or Protestants haue any better euidenced Oracle by more or equal Signs and miracles which teaches their Tenets then the Roman Catholick Church is that Teaches ours Could such an Oracle be euidenced They might talk of the Assurance of their particular Doctrins but till this be shown which will neuer be silence must proue the best Answer CHAP. VIII The main Difficulty in the Resolution of Faith Proposed VVhat Connexion the Motiue haue with the Diuine Reuelation Of their weight and efficacy God's own Language not imitable by his Enemies Faith transcend's the certainty of all Motiues The main Disficulty solued Of our great Security in Belieuing God Though we haue not Euidence of the Diuine Testimony 1. THe real Difficulty in this matter which Mr Stillingfleet hitt's not on is so common to all Christians The Difficulty common to all that Sectaries are as much yea more obliged to solue it then the Catholicks Thus I propose it The last Resolution of faith is made into this Obiectiue Truth God has reâ—ealed the Incarnation the like is of any other Diuine Mystery None knowes Euidently the Mystery of the Trininity in it Selfe but the Reuelation appear's and must appear Obscure to him that belieues For T' is neither its own Selfe-Euidence nor can be euidently applied by any other Medium especially if the Motiues of credibility haue not infallible connexion with the Diuine Testimony Thus much supposed which none The ground of the difficulty can deny it followes that the intellectual Faculty when the Reuelation is obscurely proposed stand's as it were houering and cannot for as much as yet appear's be more inclined to assent infalliblâ— then to dissent 2. If you Say â—â—e Will after à full Sight of the Reuelations credibility can dâ—â—ermine the vnderstanding to assent suâ—er Omnia or Infallibly t' is Answered This seem's impossible First because the Motiues whereby the Obiect is made credible can settle in vs no other iudgement but This. God's Testimony and the thing attested by it are most prudently thought to exist or appear so highly credible that it is the greatest folly not to belieue But this Iudgement you se neither reaches to the Verity of the Reuelation in it selfe nor to the matter reuealed therefore Faith cannot as yet be elicited 3. Again The will cannot moue the vnderstanding to assent The will Seem's to help nothing in this particular to an obiect Sub ratione veri infallibilis vnder the Notion of an infallible Truth vnless manifest reason first conuinces the intellectual Power that it Exists and is infallible But all the reasons preceding Faith bring with them no such Conuiction for all are here supposed fallible Therefore if the vnderstanding yeild's an infallible Assent to that which is not rationally conuinced to be infallible it proceed's temerariously and doth more then it can do for it goes beyond the limits of Prudence saying This is infallibly so though it has no reason to iudge it infallible The force of what is now said will best appear in this Syllogism A Truth though really à truth Proposed The whole difficulty proposed in one Syllogism or represented as obscure cannot moue the vnderstanding to an infallible Assent but the Diuine Reuelation is proposed and represented as an obscure truth Ergo it cannot moue the
perfect Subiection with that merit and Obsequiousness which The reason hereof God requires of his rational Creatures who are to walk to heauen by an humble and dutiful Faith or shall neuer come thither 6. And here by the way we may iustly admire the Sauciness of some half Atheistical Spirits who find themselues puzzled in the search of the most obuious things in nature none of them can say how or by what one poore flies wing is knit together yet will forsooth haue God to giue Euidence of his own deep Secrets the greatest Mysteries of grace or Cannot belieue Experience teaches how prompt and ready euery good Subiect is to obey his Prince at the least beck signe or insinuation of his will Though the Intimation carries not with it strick euidence yet in this matter of mans Submission to God when both his glory and our eternal Welfare are Concerned innumerable stand houering and doubtful Questioning whether God requires firm The peruerness of Atheistical Spiricts Faith from them And why Because an Euidence suitable to their fancy seem's wanting 7. Humour once such à Curiosity or giue them à greater light of Euidence the next thing required will be that God interiourly teach all by Himselfe without Church Pastors Doctors or any And if this serues not the turn He must either please to open the Heauens at à call and once à year at least visibly instruct them or there is no drawing such Spirits Euidence of Credibility enough out of à state of Incredulity I Say contrary the Euidence of Credibility apparent in those manifest Signs and marks which illustrate true Christianity à great mercy of God he giues so much of it is abundantly sufficient to induce the most obdurate heart in the world to belieue with such an Assent as suites God's great Maiesty that is with à Faith most firm and Infallible Obserue an vndeniable Euidence 8. It is euident That euer since the first Plantation of Christianity The Appearâ—nce and Credibility of true Christianity there has been à Continued Succession of Pastors and Doctors who taught the Belief of one God and one Sauiour Iesus Christ with other Articles of the Catholick Faith It is Euident that innumerable Professors of this one belief haue been eminent in Learning wisdom Sanctity of life and Contempt of the world It is Euident that the Predictions of Prophets vttered whole Ages before our Sauiour preached agree only to one Christian Society known the whole world ouer The Vniuersal extent of this great Moral Body is euident Vnity in Doctrin Euident Admirable Conuersions wrought by this Church are euident Vndeniable and most glorious Miracles Euident The Courage the Constancy the profound Humility of Martyrs and finally their bloodsheding the last Testimony of loyalty Authors worthy of credit number them to eleuen Millions are Euident Here in few words you haue The Euidence indisputable before you no Romance no Furb no fraud but most clear and indisputable Euidence Now ponder first but seriously And Ask whether God after the sight of so many illustrions Marks Manifested to all could permit those Millions and Millions The impossibility of deception in this Euidence who loued truth and heartily sought to serue no other but the great God of truth To be deluded with meer Phansies and fooleries Were this possible might we not all charge plain Cousenage vpon an Infinite Goodnes and most iustly complain Si error est quem Credidimus c. If we belieue an errour it is you great Soueraign that has deceiued vs. 9. In the next place cast your thoughts and seriously also vpon all Sectaries pas't and present since Christianity began You will find and here likewise we plead by Euidence no Succession of Pastors lawfully sent to preach no Conuersions of Nations wrought by any No eminent Sanctity no Vniuersal Sectaries utterly destitute of all Euidence of Credibility extent of their Religion no Vnity in Doctrin and which vtterly ruin's their Cause nothing like à Miracle among them How then dare these Nouellists destitute of all outward appearances of Truth or any thing like Euidence goe about to make their Religion credible by meer toyes and trifles These I call trifles Here to snarle at à Pope there at abuses in the Church Now to fill Volumes with Criticisms now to patch together à few broken Sentences of the ancient Fathers That is in à word to be euerlastingly quarrelling and neuer to Propose Sectaries new way of Arguing so much as à probable Way how quarrel 's may be ended Can such trifles I Say and here in brief you haue the vtmost Sectaries can doe extinguish the light the Lustre and Euident Credibility of God's own manifested Oracle Let common reason Iudge in this case Now wee goe on in the Analysis 10. Hauing Said abready We belieue because God has This euidence explained the Analysis goes on Clearly reuealed the Incarnation the like is of any other Mystery and being impossibilitated if we stand within the formal Term's of Faith to allege any further intellectual Motiue of belieuing than this The last of all God has reuealed what I Assent to It necessarilly followes that euery other Question relating to the Formal obâ—ect of Faith ceases here But if it be demanded how the Vnderstanding dares rest most firmly on an Obiect not euidently seen wee passe from that Power without breaking off the Analysis to the Will and Say she can by her pious Affection command the intellectual Faculty to Captiuate it selfe in Obsequium fideâ— and belieue most vndoubtedly 11. Now if another Question ensue's How the Will can bring the Intellect to so much Obsequiousness The Answer The Power of the will Ouer the Vnderstanding Manifest impiety not to belieue is at hand It doth so because God has shewed by all those most prudent and manifest Signes already laid forth to Reason that He is the Author of the Doctrin we belieue In so much that it is not only the highest imprudence imaginable to disbelieue but Wickednes to do so in à matter of such Consequence I say Wickednes for after à full sight had of the rational Motiues inducing to Faith seing none can arriue to Euidence of the Mysteries One of these three wayes must be What reason forces vpon Euery one followed To belieue nothing To belieue meer Fooleries Or finally to belieue à Doctrin which God has distinguished by Euident Marks and Signatures from Heresy and falshood To belieue nothing either is or tend's to Atheism and that 's Wickedness To belieue Fooleries no wise man will hear of Therefore all are bound to belieue and if so Faith must bee Euidently prudent and rational I mean so manifested by supernatural Wonders that reason is proued vnreasonable in case it denies Assent Now I Subsume But these Supernatural Signes One only Society of Christians Euidences and it is no other but the Roman Catholick Church Therefore she only proposes Faith
those first great Masters vpheld the Primitiue Faith without any further ground or Process in Infinitum So his own Speaking Our resolution the same with that of the Primitiue Christians by this Oracle of the Church vphold's mine And I can go no further For the last formal Obiect of Faith has none latter That One word of Truth is enough to belieue vpon Again as those first pious Christians had any moued à doubt concerning their Inducements to Faith would haue answered The blind see The lame walk strange Miracles are wrought by ehese blessed men And therefore we both must in Prudence and will belieue that God speak's by them So I likewise bring to light the same Signal Motiues Euident in the Church and The Motiues alike Say I both must if prudence guides me and Will belieue that God speak's by this Oracle known as well by Her Miracles and supernatural Signatures as euer any Apostle was known 20. And thus you see first as I noted aboue How we passe from the Formal Obiect of Faith God's own Testimony proposed by the Church to the Prudent Inducements of belieuing wherevpon the Iudgement of Credibility not Faith it felfe is vltimatly Why we belieue And how vve proue by rational Motiues grounded Now these Inducements being laid forth to reason The Will command's an absolute Assent which rest's vpon God's word spoken by this Oracle You see 2. All danger of à vicious Circle auoyded in this way of resoluing Faith For when I belieue that God speak s by the Church I resolue not the Belief of that Truth into another antecedent Reuelation taken from Scripture yet wholly obscure and no way so immediatly Credible as the Church is for if I did so a Process in Infinitum would necessarily follow But I belieue that word of Truth for it selfe immediatly and rest there As the ancient Christians The word of truth belieued for it Selfe relyed vpon the very words spoken by the Apostles without recurring to any former or surer Reuelation If therefore those happy Belieuers made no vicious Circle in their Faith hauing no tâ—o Propositions prouing one another to make à Circle of We in our belief are altogether as free from that faulty Circular way in our Resolution It is true All of vs if The primitiue Motiues and ours the same Questioned about the Euidence of Credibility most bring to light Motiues inducing to Faith They theirs We ours both are à like significant both Supernatural as is already explained 21. You may gather 3. out of what is here and formerly noted how easy it is after à full Sight had of those signal The illustrious Signs apparent in the Church Motiues and they more set forth the Churches Glory than any Traine of attendants can illustrate the greatest Monarch That the first connatural Language which God speak's by the Church is this general Truth There only his Special Prouidence are God's own Voice Directs and gouâ—rn's where the illustrious Signes of his own Soueraignity manifest That he teaches by à Voice peculiar to Himselfe But these Signes most euidently are seen in one only Society of Christians the Roman Catholick Church Therefore he teaches by this One only Oracle And the necessary Lesson he will haue all to learn is That he has called all to one Communion what we learn by them of Faith in one Church Euidenced by Supernatural wonders This fundamental Verity we belieue And it is the first Act of faith we elicite Or that Primigenial Assent which connaturally arises from God's own voice deliuered to vs by this Oracle without depending on Scripture if we make à right Analysis This General truth once established and none can rationally contradict it We now proceed to solue à few Obiections CHAP. XI Sectaries Ohiections solued The fallible Agreement of all Concerning the Canon of Scripture no Proof at all No vniuersal Consent for the Sectaries Scripture or the Sense of it How the Church is both the Verity belieued and the Motiue why we believe Other Difficulties Examined 1. I Speak here of Sectaries Obiections knowing well some Diuines who make the Churches Proposition most infallible Sectaries Obiections only answered and herein all Catholicks agree yet hold it insufficient to be the last Principle Whereinto Faith is resolued For say these it is only à necessary Condition by virtue whereof the ancient Reuelation is infallibly applied to vs. In this Strife purely Theological and some what as I thinke de Nomine I shall not long busy my Selfe being chiefly to attend to what Sectaries do or can propose against our Doctrin 2. The first Obiection If the Catholick after à prudent Consideration had of the known Motiues already specified can belieue what euer the Church teaches and Consequently resolue why Sectaries cannot resolue their Faith into Scriptures his faith into the Authority of God speaking by that Oracle Why may not the Sectary as well vpon this one Iudgement viz. All acknowledge Scripture to bee God's word as easily belieue and resolue his faith into pure Scripture independently of Church Authority Answ Such à Beliefe and Resolution is impossible because as we said aboue none can in this As Catholicks Doe into the Church present State assent to this general Truth Scripture is God's word or belieue so much as any Verity in it if the Authority of an Infallible Church be reiected To the pretended ground taken from the Consent of all Christians owning Scripture for God's word I haue partly answered That consent alone induces not any to belieue one reuealed Article by an Infallible act of Faith if those whole Consenting multitudes be all supposed fallible First euery one knowes the multitudes of Turks agree thus far that their Alcoran is God's word yet such an agreement though very Vniuersal induces no wise man to belieue any Diuinity in the Book or to own its Doctrin as Diuine and sacred 2. And this reason hinted at aboue is more à Priori 3. The Agreement of all Christians is truely an effect of Faith or rather of the Obiects Credibility antecedently presupposed The agreement of all Concerning Scripture is an effect Credible vpon other grounds before men agreed so vniversally in that Christian truth For this Causal is good Therefore Christians agreed in that Truth because it was preuiously made Credible vpon other sound Motiues And not the contrary It is credible because all conspired in à Consent so vniuersal Wherefore if very many who now own Scripture to be Diuine should leaue off to iudge So and reiect the Book or any Part in it as fabulous That would not diminish its ancient Credibility And no more Not the Original Proof of the Scriptures Credibility Say I would the Addition of any new Consenters who now reiect it should they agree with vs highten one whit our Beliefe or make the Truth we Assent to more Credible than it was before And this proues That the Original
They destroy not eo ipso Probability in Arianism or in any other false Sect Therefore the Conuiction drawn from these Arguments must be so strong That one as is now noted may without Hesitancy The Strength of this Euidence boldly Say first Induced by the force of Euidence its manifest to reason that God has founded one only true Religion 2. Induced by the force of Euidence I'ts manifest This and none but this is the Religion He founded 3. Induced by the force of Euidence its manifest to reason that All other Sects called Religions are false And not only false but in the highest degree perniciously improbable 28. These Assertions Stand firm vpon this one Principle God Gouern's the world whereof no Christian doubt's He The works in nature speak Gods power and Wisdom giues Being to euery creature His Power and Wisdom are most discernable by these works in Nature And shall we haue no clear knowledge think ye of his Wisdom care and singular Prouidence drawn from the Noble works of Grace laid open to all Mens View and most manifest before our Eyes in that admirable Fabrick of true Christian Religion founded by him Shall the works in Nature speak plainly their Creator And the Admirable wonders of Grace be silent And shall the manifest works of Gâ—ace be silent of their Author The common Sense of all rational men disclaims the Paradox And must if induced by Reason acknowledge an Euidence in that Oracle whereby God vouchsafes to Speak But if à false Sect could either Surpasse in its Marks and Indications or so much as Equalize The true Religion That Specious Euidence leading to belieue would Cease and be so much Eclypsed that none could by the force of Reason Say This is the way that lead's to Heauen This is the Religion which God founded And consequently all might shake of the Obligation of belieuing seing none can belieue without à preuious Clear knowledge had of what He is bound to Assent to The Religion therefore I am obliged to liue and dye in must bee Clearly made discernable by its Marks from all false Spurious Sects or This obligation ceases whereof enough is said already CHAP. XV. From whence the Euidence hitherto mentioned Proceed's That Religion only is reasonable which Heauen declares reasonable The Declaration is euidently made in behalfe of the Roman Catholick Religion VVho is the misled reasoning Man Other Particulars handled The readiest way to Conuince Sectaries 1. IT remains now to Examin from whence the rational Euidence here pleaded for proceeds Methinks That receiued Maxim in Schools Qui dat Formam dat Consequentia God who founded Religion ad formam Help 's much to Answer pertinently For if the Cause that giues à Thing being giues it also what 's consequent or belongs to its Being And if all Vnanimously agree concerning the Cause and Author of true Religion This necessarily followes 2. The same God and infinite Goodnes that founded Religion laies also be fore vs the Euidence we Propugn But Layes forth its rational Euidence an Euidence proceeding from such an Author whose works are perfect and is annexed to the Religion which Wisdom it selfe giues Being to must needs bee clear and haue force to Conuince the most obdurate hearts May Prudence Sway and Passion be laid aside To explicate what is here said is to proue it All know that God who will haue vs walk to our last End by obscure Faith giues no Euidence of the Mysteries Considered in Themselues For none knowes the Trinity or that great work of the Incarnation by any Euident It is called the Euidence of Credibility On what it is grounded Principle clearly proposed to Reason Therefore the Euidence wee seek after must bee Extrinsick to the Mysteries belieued which Diuines rightly call the Euidence of Credibility and it is grounded vpon those visible supernatural works of Grace which an infinite Power only can produce And vpon this ground I Said The same God that found 's Religion laies before the Eye of reason its rational Euidence also 3. Hence I boldly Assert and T' is no less of singular comfort to all Faithful belieuers then of shame and Confusion to Heauens declaration Iewes and Heretiques That Religion only is reasonable and brings with it an Obligation of belieuing which Heauen it selfe declares reasonable That Religion only is reasonable which Euidently Supernatâ—ral Signs beares the Marks the Characters and Supernatural signatures of an Infinite Power and Wisdom That Religion only is reasonable which haâ— been approued by the publick Iudgement of the very best the most choise Publickly approued and learned who haue liued since the Creation of the world That Religion only is reasonable which by God's special Assistance hath wrought Admirable Conuersions Neuer Censured Strange Conuersions giues in Euidence of vndoubted Miracles preserueâ— vnity and was neuer yet Censured by any known Orthodox Christian That Religion finally is only reasonable which Assures euery one by à present Vniuersal Tradition of à Church diffused the whole world ouer VVhat God has Said what Christ hath taught and what Doctrin the Apostles preached Here is both Reason and in Tradition the Rule That giues Assurance of Faith with it Find me out then such à Faith such à Religion as euidences these Illustrious Marks the Cognisances and Signs of Heauen that 's only reasonable or none euer was or can be accounted Reasonable 4. We are now in the last place to Examin what Prophets what Teachers or finally what Church haue been Signalized with these strong pleading Testimonies with these Signs and Marks of Who or what Religion can shew these Masks and Signs Power and VVisdom The Iewish Church had them in some measure when Almighty God Exodus 9. 16. told Moses Posui te c. I haue placed thee my Seruant vt â—stendam in te fortitudinem meam to show my Power and Might And that by thee my name may be spoken of through the whole earth Certainly Christ our Lord manifested yet far greater Wonders Iohn 15. 24. If I had not done among them works which no other Man hath done c. Whilst the blessed Apostles preached none can doubt of their Miraculous Signs which Heauen Euidenced and God himselfe manifested by them Thus much supposed and no Sectary can Question the certainty of my Supposition 5. I will come neerer home And to lay Forth the Evidence of the Roman Catholick Church Speak this great truth None but She euer Since those Apostolical times hath had not only the like Vnity in Faith The like Supernatural Marks and The effects of power and wisdom wonders wrought in Her by an Infinite Power and Wisdom But also more Miracles greater Conuersions à greater number of Belieuers and Consequently à more Vniuersal consent of Hearts ioyned together in one Beliefe In à word as full an refulgent in the Marks of the Roman Catholick Church Euidence euery way
it No more can these men if you set aside A selfe-wilful Perswasion satisfy Reason why they belieue as they doe then the worst of Arians tell you why they belieue Arianism 20. It would bee ridiculous in this contest to bring in Scripture as à Rule of their Faith For first we here enquire not after the Obiect of their Belief But call for rational Motiues whereby they are induced to belieue Protestancy 2. We Say Though Scripture were in à General way owned Scripture here not pleadable The most immediate Rule and the Sense of it could bee known by the priuate Reason of some men in the world yet The Sectary gain's nothing vpon the Concession because He knowes not nor shall euer know vpon any sure Principle That his The Reason Reason hath the singular Priuiledge to hit right on the Scriptures true Sense whilst all His Aduersaries and they are very many openly oppose it as improbable 21. One may yet reply For as much as The Sectary Belieues which is not much For it lies in à few Fundamentals If the protestant abstract's from what Doctrin he likes not He has the same Euidence of Credibility as we Catholicks haue And so far ioyn's with vs in Beliefe In other Matters of Contest He neither Belieues nor Disbelieues but Abstract's from all Contra. 1. Thus the Arians and all Heretiques proceed who first chuse and lay claim to so many Tenets of Christian Doctrin as pleases Fancy and then tell vs They haue Reason to chuse to Diuide and separate from the rest We why may not the Arian do the like demand and here is the main Point what rational Euidence haue they to do so Who made Beggars For all they haue they took from the Church such bold Chusers Again if they prescind or abstract They are obliged to Design an No Church fauours this Doctrin euidenced Orthodox Church which abstracted like them and positiuely taught so much Doctrin is precisely necessary to Saluation And no more This is impossible O yes The Primitiue Church seem's to haue abstracted from many Doctrins now taught by the Roman Catholick Contra. Who tell 's you so Your lame Negatiue way of Arguing Wee read not of Purgatory nor of Transubstantiation c. Pitiful The euidenced Roman Catholick Church by Her Constant Tradition speak's of both and also positiuely auouches that all now taught was then Anciently deliuered Here is our Principle and wee Sectaries vrged to name the Orthodox Church which abstracted as they do now vrge Sectaries to oppose it by producing the Authority of another more ancient Church which Spake then as they speak now Or which abstracted from such Particular Doctrins as they would abstract from But this is Impossible Out of all I Conclude Sectaries haue no Euidence of Credibility for any Doctrin belieued by them and Consequently no true Faith at all but Opinions only and those false too Now we must solue two or three difficulties of another Nature 22. A. 6. Obiection Reason Assures the Catholick that God speak's by the Oracle of the Church Ergo his Another Obiection Faith is vltimatly resolued into Reason I Deny the Consequence For if wee make à right Analysis The Act of Faith is not yet in Being in that Sign or Priority of Nature when Prudence tell 's Him God speak's by the Church The nature of that Iudgement serues only to induce the vnderstanding to Faith or to fix it vpon an vnuariable state of Belieuing And Consequently must be resolued into its own clear Principles Preuiously penetrated before the Catholick belieues Faith followes and relies immediatly vpon its own Obiect which is God's Reuelation proposed by the Church or by Scripture infallibly interpreted Now 23. If you Obiect 7. It is my priuate Reason which The equiuccation discouered makes me to belieue the Church I Answer The Proposition is equiuocal For it may either signify what I call Reason independently of all known Obiectiue Euidence makes mee to belieue the Church And that Sense is very false Nay its impossible One sense false to hold euery internal Act not resoluable into Obiectiue Euidence in à matter of such Consequence Reasonable This as I said aboue Patronises the worst of Heresies and Atheism also 24. Or Contrarywise the Sense may be The Church The other true when the Iudgement is grounded on rational Euidence glorioussly marked by clear and Conuincing Motiues known and applyed by my formal Act of Reason makes it Reasonable and that 's most true Wherefore euery rational Iudgement in the â—resent matter must be fixed vpon rational prudent Motiues distinct from the Act we iudge by The Iudgement is no more but Conditio applicans à Condition whereby the Obiectiue â—uidence is laid hold on and set before an Vnderstanding The Ground hereof is clear For we know not by Obiects extrinsick to our Knowledge but by vital Acts which interuene between the Intellectual Power and Obiects Now if any Ask why may not this Iudgement mistake and erre I Answer first by Proposing the like Question Why might not the Iudgement of the Primitiue Christians when they saw or heard of the Apostles great Wonders haue also been à Mistake or Errour Solue Why this Iudgement cannot be erroneous the one you solue the other I Answer 2. The Iudgement cannot if it pitch vpon what really is the Obiectiue Euidence be Erroneous For no fundation of Errour as wee now Suppose Lies there Therefore none can be deriued from thence into any vnderstanding A pure fountain yeilds no pudled water 25. A. 8. Obiection Faith is an Act of à reasonable power and consequently Conformable to Reason Therefore Faith Considered two wayes Reason regulates Faith or is its immediate Rule Answ The Act of Faith may be Considered two wayes First as it is à prudent reasonable Submission to Gods Reuelation 2. As it s terminated vpon the Reuelation proposed by the Church or As prudent how it is resolued any other infallible euidenced Oracle Consider it vnder the First Notion of à prudent Submission it euer Implies or rather presupposeth the rational prudent Iudgement now mentioned And this Iudgement preuiously set fast vpon such Motiues The resolution otherwise if considered as it relies vpon the Diuine Testimony as conuerted the world may well be Said to denominate the Act of elicite Faith à rational Obsequiousness Yea and its extrinsecal Rule also as will appear to euery one that makes à right Analysis or brings Faith to its last Principles But consider again the very Act it Selfe or precisely as it tend's vpon the Diuine Reuelation proposed by an Infallible Oracle it reason 's not at all nor more proues or Scientifically knowes its Obiect as Faith Than Science as Science belieues This Proues that submissiuely Belieues Not can Faith which euer presupposes its Obiect and Rule proued to Reason Scientifically proue either without lossing what is Essential to it I mean Obscurity
to Principles before we know what these men belieue Yet most certainly we should first haue had some light concerning their Beliefe before we hear talk of its Principles We should know how many Articles the Professors of it maintain as necessary to saluation How many also they reiect as Heretical We should know what it is one may boldly renounce Particulars omitted as an Opinion proper to Protestants And what it is he must hold as Protestant or be damned All this I Say and more Should in the first place haue been fully explained to the end we may haue some hint of the Thing Principled before we are informed of its Principles The Proof of à Thesis euer presupposes the Thesis plainly set down You neuer heard of any Tenet publickly exposed in Schools to The pretended Faith of Protestants Cannot be known All may abiure that Faith without danger of Saluation the Examination of others But euery Opponent knowes what 's Asserted All here run's in à contrary Strain A Faith is spoken of reducible to Principles which is so remote from all humane vnderstanding that none shall or can euer tell me what iâ— is Or speak thus And you speak truth VVhat euer the Protestant maintain's as he is Protestant though called Faith may without danger of our Souls be boldly renounced by him by me and the whole world besides 5. The Conuincing Reason of what I now Assert is so groundedly laid forth in this present Treatise that no Sectary shall ouerthrow our Proofs Read I beseech you The. 1. They haue no Essence of Religion Disc C. 20. n. 7. and what followes you find there à Sect of men called Protestants but without the very Essence of Religion Read also the. 2. Discourse you haue there in seueral places the whole Faith of Protestants brought to à List of meer false Opinions or rather to flat Heresies Their Their Negatiues disowned Doctrin Common to all Insufficient negatiue Articles of not Praying to Saints Of no Transubstantiation are cashiered by them The Doctrin common to all called Christians without more is à plain Fourb unless they deny the sacred Mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation also with Arians Their Pretence to belieue so much of Catholick Doctrin as pleases their Fancies is not singular to them but common to others no Protestants 6. Now and it s euer to be noted we enquire after the singular Faith of Protestants as contradistinct from Popery And Where the main difficulty is And what Should be Answered all other known Heresies And desire That this Faith as it is Peculiar may be reduced to Principles I Say the Reduction is vtterly impossible and the Reason is best expressed in few words Their Faith is Phansy They haue nothing like Faith to found on Principles But to Se this proued You are once more wished to read the Discourses and Chapters already quoted for I will not take so much pains for the Doctor as meerly to blot Paper and repeat in this place what is there Conuinced Thus much Noted 7. Be pleased to hear two Propositions which come neerer to our present matter One is VVhateuer Faith the Sectary 〈◊〉 Claim to as peculiar to Protestancy be it what you will if Two Propositions contrary to the receiued Doctrin of the Roman Catholick Church is not reducible to Principles 8. Another Assertion All the Principles tediously made vse of by the Doctor we may Suppose him very conuersant in the best are wholly impertinent And haue no more to doe with the Faith of Protestants No more support that Nouelty then if one should tell you Abraham begot Isaac If I proue this you 'l Say the Doctor has ventured vpon à desperat Attempt If not I disgrace my selfe 9. To goe on and proue We must first well distinguish The Doctrin contained in these Principles between the Doctrin contained in these Principles supposed to vphold the Protestants Faith and the Application or Inferences drawn from it in order to that end The Doctrin is sometimes true sometimes false and often not well expressed dubious But the Application of it to Protestancy And this And the Application are to be distinguished most Concern's the Doctor when true is as remote from the purpose or no more Concern's the faith of Protestants then if one should Say God made the world I say when is true for if false or dubious it s wholly impertinent 10. Thus the Doctor begins and pity me that I trouble the Reader and my Selfe also with meer Parergons which relate The first Principle not at all to Protestancy First An entire Obedience to the will of God being agreed on to be the condition of Mans happines no other way is in it selfe necessary to that end than such whereby Man may know what the VVill of God is Answ This general Doctrin though true Support's no more the particular faith of Protestants be it what you will then the Faith of Arians or Pelagâ—ins For all these and Catholicks likewise may grant A meer parergon to the present Controuersy There is no other way necessary to happines than such whereby à Man may know what the will of God is yet must withall acknowledge the Inference the Reduction or Application to this or that particular Doctrin wherein these Parties dissent from one another wholly impertinent vnless more be Sayd For Example the worst of Heretiques hold with Catholicks There is no other way to be saued but by Christ Iesus our Redeemer But as the Arian neuer offers immediatly to draw from thence his Denyal of à Mysterious Trinity So the Catholick would be as far to seek should he aduenture without more to build the Infallibility The reason why it â—s impertinent of the Church or the Doctrin of Transubstantiation vpon that General owned Truth only The Reason is A Principle Common to all or more Considered as Common stand's firm giues light T' is true so sar as it reaches but cannot possibly extend it selfe to all the different Tenets Wherevpon Men fall when they vary and dissent among Themselues Here the Principle becomes vseless without more light or à new Supply of other Proofs which relate immediatly to euery particular Doctrin really true or pretended to be so 11. Thus you Se the Doctors errour whilst first he giues The Doctors errour you à Principle common to all And will next build the particular Faith of Protestants vpon it I Say this is impossible For à truth so General as is now noted giues no more Support or Light to Protestancy than to Arianism Had the Dr better explained these General words There is no other way than such whereby Man may know what the will of God is And then adioyned But Protestants in behalf of their new Faith Teach and Proue such and No application made of the general Principle such to be the only only wayes whereby Man may know the Will of God and Papists cannot
haue neither Inference nor Principle In very reallity neither true Consequence nor Consequentia No Inference because it s à meer Tautology or à bare repetition of what the Doctor had formerly asserted without Proof or Probability And Consequently far enough from the Nature of either Principle or Inference Had the Doctor brought in any thing like an Inference He Should haue Said Vpon such and such grounds already established It followes that these and what Should be proued these particular Doctrins of Protestants are true and immediatly deduced from this or that Principle But he totally abandon's the Protestants Faith and leaues his Fellow-sectaries as faithless as they were before he wrote these Principles The True Inference therefore or all that followes is that he hath lost his whole Labour 2. The. 2. Inference The Infallibility of that Society of men yet no Inference who call themselues the Catholick Church must be examined by the same Faculties in Man the same Rules of trial the same Motiues c. Answ Here is no Inference but the same thing repeated again which for the substance lies in his 6th Principle what Reason is to examin Now if we Speak of this Doctrin considered in it Selfe we easily grant that the rational faculties in men both may and ought to examin by the Light of prudent Motiues what Society of Christians is Infallible as also what Diuine Reuelation is made euidently Credible to Reason But herein à double Caution seem's necessary The first That Sectaries assume not to themselues the sole Faculty of examining and iudging but leaue to others à share of it also The second A twofold Caution to be obserued Prouiso is that Reason in this Search go not beyond its Bounds but pitch vpon that which is Reasons proper Obiect I mean vpon those Signatures of God's own Visible Wonders already explained These two Conditions obserued All is well Sectaries will soon Se their Errour 3. The. 3. Inference deduced out of no Principle falsly No want of Motiues and Miracles in the Church Supposes but proues not the want of Miracles and other conuincing Motiues in Roman Catholick Church It is largely refuted vpon seueral Occasions in euery one of these three Discourses 4. The fourth Inference From whence it comes I know not is thus The more absurd any Opinions are and repugnant to the first Principles of Sense and reason which any Church obtrudes vpon the Faith of men The greater reason men will haue to reiect the A Speech like that of Iewes and Arians Pretence of Infallibility in that Church as à grand imposture Answ Had à Iew who hold's it against Sense and Reason to belieue that God became an Infant Or had an Arian that denyes the Trinity because the Mystery seem's repugnant to his weak Reason Spoken after this manner None would haue much wondred But that à Doctor who pretend's to belieue these Fundamentals of Christian Religion Cannot find roome enough in his head for reason and Faith in euery particular the Church Teaches argues some little want both of the One and Other But say on what is it he boggles at O à Consecrated Wafer appear's to be bread and is not bread this is repugnant Sense beguiled to sense and reason Contra. Those two Angels that came to Lot Gen. 19. appeared to the Sodomits like mortal men but were not so Was not Reason here vpon the suggestion of Sense How rectifyed beguiled And are not both these faculties now rectifyed in vs by what we read in Holy Writ which ascertain's vs they were not men but Angels Thus it fall's out in the Mystery of the Blessed Sacrament Wherefore I Say Were it not that God Speaking by Scripture and the Church assures vs that what we se is not substantianly bread the whole world would guided by outward Appearances hold it bread as those wicked Citizens iudged Lots entertained Guests to be men and not Angels But when eternal Truth interposes his Authority and tell 's vs by his own Oracles what is here contained vnder the Forms of bread is God in this Mystery interposes his Auâ—hâ—rity and vnbeguils reason not bread but Christ's Sacred body Reason yeilds vpon this most prudent Ground It is the highest reason in the world to belieue God though by reason we know not how things are Here is our Principle not possibly to be reuersed vnless the Doctor proues his Contrary Doctrin by the Authority of another Scripture or some other Church more euidenced by Supernatural Wonders and Consequently more Orthodox than the Roman Catholick Church is You may read the First Discourse C. 12. n. 4. where its Proued that the immediate Obiect of Sense Ceases not to be in this Mystery 5. Wherefore I Infer that if the Doctor would haue the Infallibility of that Church reiected as à grand Imposture because A hint giued to Iewes and Arians to reiect the Scriptures Infallibility it obtrudes vpon vs Doctrins in his Opinion repugnant to Sense and reason He ought also by good Consequence to Inuite both Iewes and Arians to reiect the Infallibility of Scripture as à grand Imposture where it Speak's of the Incarnation and the Sacred Trinity for certainly these Mysteries are far more aboue all Mens weak Reason then this other of the Blessed Sacrament is 6. The Doctors 5th and 6th Inferences deserue no such names because they are not deducible from any Principles being Vntrue Assertions in place of Inferences only his own plain Assertions and most vntrue Say I beseech you From what Principles can He infer That to disown à Church which teaches Doctrin aboue the reach of weak Reason is not to Question the Veracity of God but to adhere to that in what he hath reuealed in Scripture How can this be done Whilst the whole No knowing what Scriptâ—re Speaks without an Infallible Church world see 's the holy Book of Scripture so variously Sensed by dissenting men called Christians that none can conclude vpon any clear Principle which sense is true which false without owing à Church Infallible I Say aboue the reach of weak reason But not repugnant as the Doctor supposes For no Catholick Verity can be repugnant to Euident reason though much aboue it In à word That Doctrin is repugnant to Reason from whence two Contradictions clearly follow now I vrge the Doctor to giue vs any thing like à Contradiction in the Mystery already What 's Contrary to Reason mentioned of the blessed Sacrament That Doctrin is aboue Reason which cannot be known by the ayde of natural Principles only And thus the Mystery of the Sacred Trinity of the Incarnation of Original sin and Transubstantiation also are so far remoued from our natural faculties that none but God only can discouer them by his Supernatural Reuelation The 6th Inference And What 's aboue it where the Doctor tell 's vs That the Church of Rome neither is the Catholick Church nor any sound
it is manifest and granted by Sectaries that the Roman Catholick Church once was confessedly Orthodox at least for the first three or four Centuries yet A third Question grounded on what Sectaries grant as our Aduerfaries assert failed afterward and brought in strange new Doctrins yea flat Idolatry We vrge the Doctor to satisfy Reason in this one particular viz. Why Protestants deal not as Candidly with vs as we do with them I would say We accuse them for deserting à Church wherein their Progenitors had liued for à thousand years and as à little Method lately published obserues excellently well Speak open and acknowledged Euidence We tell How plainly we deal with them them who began this new Mode of Reformation we exactly Point at the time of its first Rise we Shew how it was Propagated what Abetters it had and omit no Circumstance which may Conduce And how darkly they with vs to à plain discouery of the whole Nouelty Sectaries on the other side accuse the Church of heretical yea of Idolatrous Innouations and yet as the Method notes their charge is so obscure so vtterly vnknown that the very Accusers cannot say who first publish'd them Or where they began from what occasion they had their Origen who patronized them Or who opposed them 14. Please now to mark what my demand is in this place The Doctor and his Partizans suppose these and the like wicked Innouations of an vnbloodly Sacrifice of Adoring the Sacred Host what the Doctor is obliged to to haue been euidently brought into the Church Contrary to the Primitiue Doctrin For that publick act of Adoration came not in by night but was à thing notoriously known notoriously practized Is not therefore the Dr obliged either to tell vs plainly when where and how this visible worship first began That is to proue by Euidence what He supposes euidently innouated we accuse and giue in Euidence Or to giue à reason Why when Catholiks euidently proue the Sectaries reuolt from the Roman Church Protestants cannot vpon the like Euidence Proue that the Roman Church in latter Ages receded from any former Roman Church pure and Orthodox Obserue well the difference We accuse them of an actual Reuolt from our Church whether they had reason for it or no is not here disputed The ground wherevpon our Accusation relies is euident and notoriously known They accuse as boldly as we do But when their Proofs come to the Test all of them dwindle into lame guesses false Suppositions in à word into Sectaries accuse vpon guesses and false Suppositions à meer Nothing as will better appear in the next Chapter 15. Now here is à Point I would haue euery prudent Reader to reflect on for I hold it à manifest Conuiction of our Sectaries open Injustice If whoeuer accuses à whole Kingdome euer known loyal of Treason against the Soueraign Power in it ought A Point worthy Reflection to Produce no less then Euident Proofs in so weighty à Matter Much more ought he or they who impeach à whole ample Church of high Treason plead by Euidence or sit down Silent The The Loyalty of the Church euidenced Loyalty of this Church to the most Supreme Soueragn Christ Iesus is manifest She hath as is noted in the Other Treatise dilated his Empire defeated his Enemies perfidious Heathens gain'd him Friends and innumerable Seruants Her repute was neuer yet stained by any nor Fame blemished but only by Infidels Iewes or known Hereticks Now Start's vp à little late Knot of inconsiderable Sectaries who both Cauil and accuse boldly Of what poor Condition her Accusers are They impeach this Church of high Treason For She hath changed the true Doctrin of Christ and in place of it taught and yet teaches Plain Idolatry She is therefore à Rebel against that King whom She hath serued so long and most faithfully Here is à loud and euident Impeachment an abhominable Treason The impeachment loud and criminal laid to the charge of à Spouse most euidently Loyal But where are the Euident Proofs answerable to this euident Accusation against the already Loyal Euidenced Church There are But Proofs answer not none so much as Probable as shall be euinced in the following Chapter where I positiuely proue that Sectaries most iniuriously Calumniate the Church without Law without Authority or any rational Argument 16. If Doctor Stillingf Shall please to return à plain Answer to How the Doctor may gain applause what is here briefly proposed as also to the rest which followes Concerning â—his very point in the next Chapter he will certainly gain the applause of à singular great Doctor but if he Fob's vs off with his old Raillery of killing Flies of Small Grains Woolsacks and such like stuffe the world will iudge as to my knowledge many do already That He cannot Answer For thus they Discourse and Methinks reasonably Had he not found himselfe more then à little in the briars that is in plain language vnable to Answer such Arguments as are pressed vpon him by thole two Authors he Slights He would most indubitably before this day haue replyed to what is Obiected The Dr bewrayes his weaknes in wauing difficulties which vrge without mispending time in publishing à triuial thread-bare Cauil as is now done Concerning the Idolatry of the Roman Catholick Church which destroyes not only Catholick Religion but Protestancy also as is amply Proued in the 2. Disc C. 4th and 5.th In this wauing of difficulties and he is told aboue which they are he bewrayes too much weaknes 17. The fourth Demand is and it will giue the Doctor some trouble Suppose falsly the Roman Catholick Church to what Church Succeded in place of the Roman Supposed I dolatrous haue brought in that abominable Sin of Idolatry many Ages before Luther It is euident that when Luther and Protestants deserted Her She was far if Idolatrous from being the pure Spouse of Christ or any thing like an Orthodox Church in the very Fundamentals of Faith Herevpon à great doubt Occurr's which ought to be cleared It is What other Church neither Idolatrous nor notably erroneous succeded in the Place of this supposed Pestiferous erring Roman Society Such à Church distinct from the Roman free from Idolatry and gross Errour must be Pointed out and plainly named or it followes ineuitably that the world was then without à true Church 18. Perhaps the difficulty may yet be more significantly Proposed Christ's Promises made voyd if then there was no Orthodox Church in Being after this manner When Luther reuolted from the Roman Catholick Church infected as is now imagined with Idolatry and false Doctrin There was then another Church in the world pure and Orthodox Or not If not All our Sauiours Promises of being with the Church to the End of the world He made no Promise of being with an Idolatrous or any notorious erring Church are false Again All that the
Apostle writes Ephes. 14. 11. of the Continuance of Pastors and The Apostles words also and Doctors in the work of the Ministery for the edifying of Christ's Mystical body till we meete in one Vnity of Faith most Certainly he Spake not of any deluded or Idolatrous Pastors are likewise vtterly false Nay more that Article of our Creed The Creed falsifyed I belieue the Holy Catholick Church ceased to be true in those dismal dayes when the whole Roman Catholick Church made Idolatrous went to wrack and the res't of Christians if not Idolatrous were all Professed Heretiques 19. Contrarywise if there was at that time another Orthodox Church in Being when Luther Separated from the Roman Catholick What followes if then there was à true Church Society One of these two Consequences necessarily followes Viz. That Luther and his Associates the Protestants either made themselues Members of that Imagined pure Spotles and Orthodox Church Or founded à new One vpon their own Authority neuer before heard of in the Christian world Now further It is most impossible to nominate any such Christians as Luther and Protestants made à new Church Constituted à pure Orthodox Church distinct from the Roman Catholick Therefore Luther and Protestants haue by their own Authority made à new One neuer before known to the world 20. There is yet à third Inference which methinks pinches such Protestants as Say They and we make but one Church Orthodox in fundamentals How can this Doctrin stand if the The Church if Idolatrous err's in the fundamentals of Faith Roman Catholick Church teaches flat Idolatry For vpon this Supposition She err's grosly in that fundamental Point of Idolatry And consequently Protestants must either leaue her as horridly erroneous or maintain Idolatry with Her If it be replyed though thus tainted She yet teaches some few Truths and Sectaries can exactly tell vs which and how many they are They Sectaries improbable Supposition first argue vpon an improbable Supposition and secondly make the louely Spouse of Christ beautiful and vgly treacherous and loyal false and true together whereof enough is sayd in the former Discourses 21. The last question proposed is that the Doctor giue Satisfaction concerning the Mission of Protestants In à word we demand who sent them to teach as they doe that the Roman Catholic◠Church is fallible and Idolatrous That man hath no free will That the Body and blood of our Sauiour are not really in the blessed Sacrament with à number of other Nouelties Our demand A difficult Question Concerning the Mission of Sectaries is grounded vpon the Apostles words Rom. 10. 15. How Shall they preach vnless they be sent Say therefore who commissioned these men who countenanced them to preach such Doctrins Dare they tell vs that as their English Bishops receiued Orders from the Supposed Idolatrous Catholick Prelares So also they had Commission from them Idolatrous as they were to teach Idolatry They neuer had nor can haue Commission to teach Protestancy Grant this and they make their Mission not only ridiculous but null also and vtterly void of Credit Whither will they run next think ye Can they pretend to haue had their Mission from the Arians from the Hussits or Waldenses c No certainly For they teach not in all things as these Hereticks taught And besides neuer receiued Commission from them or The Assertion proued from any men called Christians to teach at all Therefore they are vnsent Preachers and consequently in the Apostles Iudgement ought no more to be heard than the Arians or Pelagians 22. Some Sectaries tell vs its needles to Question their A reply answered Mission whilst the Testimony of the Spirit assures them that they teach the true Doctrin of Iesus Christ. Here is first à Supposition for à Proof because The whole world excepting themselues deny what is now assumed of their teaching truth Howeuer admit gratis this false Supposition The meer speaking truth giues them no Commission to teach it For Children Vagabonds and Diuels also may Speak eternal truths yet are not therefore authorized to preach or made Christ's lawful authorized Ministers The Reason hereof seem's manifest To teach truth argues no Lawful Mission To preach truth is an effect of à lawful Mission and not the cause of it Wherefore this Causal or Inference is good I teach truth because I am lawfully Commissioned to teach it and exactly Comply with my Duty Not the Contrary I teach truth therefore I am Authoritiuely sent to teach it 23. By what is hitherto briefly noted you se in what The desperate condition of Sectaries case Sectaries are who first suppose à long interruption of Orthodox Pastors in the Roman Catholick Church and consequently neuer receiued Commission from them to teach and though which is true they continued Orthodox yet these Catholick Pastors neuer gaue them any Authority Again They No Church Orthodox or Heretical sent them to teach scorn to receiue their Commission from known Hereticks nor can they pretend it because being in most Essential points opposite to Protestants Such Hereticks could not impower them to teach Protestancy For these Reasons Sectaries are obliged to renounce all claim to that Mission which is called Ordinary because No Church No Society of Christians whether Orthodox or Heretical sent these Nouellists abroad to teach as they do their reformed Gospel 24. Now if with Luther they challenge to themselues à Calling Some with Luther plead à Mission Extraordinary and Mission extraordinary Not by men or from men but by the Reuelation of Christ Iesus Their Plea no less Proofles then Presumptuous is highly improbable vpon this ground that neuer any since the beginning of Christianity was sent as extraordinary by Almighty God to preach who made not his Doctrin Credible by manifest Supernatural wonders So Christ our Lord did and the Apostles also Others that followed in the after Ages laid forth the Miracles and signal Marks of the Church whereof they were Members and euinced by Signs the They haue neither extraordinary nor Ordinary Mission Authority of that Oracle which sent them But Sectaries who began with Luther to teach extraordinary Doctrin neither plead by extraordinary wonders hauing none to produce nor can so much as hint at any Church false or true which commissioned them to publish Protestancy Therefore they are vnlawful Ministers neuer sent to preach Christ's true Doctrin nor so much as their own false Nouelties of Protestanism CHAP. XIX The supposed grounds of our Protestants Reformation manifestly ouerthrown Protestancy no Religion but an improhable Nouelty The conclusion of this whole Treatise 1. I Say the Supposed Grounds for in very truth Protestancy What Sectaries pretend to hath not any real Ground to Stand on as is amply proued in the forecited Chapters Howeuer because Pretences are not wanting to such as Oppose God's verities and our Aduersaries seem to build the whole Machin of their
to make Faith certain which may well be called the last hearing of Gods Voice or his powerful Inuitation to belieue with full certitude and it consists in an interiour illustration of Grace imparted God's powerful inuitation to belieue to à soul whereby the Obiect of Faith with its credibility is represented another way more clearly then before yet so that no Mystery is seen euidently 5. Herevpon the VVill preuented with diuine Grace begin's to work by her Pious affection after that preuious iudgement The will preueated by grace Command's had of the Mysteries Credibility and the interiour Diuine illustration which is the last speaking of God to à Belieuer The Will therefore affectioned to the Happiness propounded moues the vnderstanding to elicite most certain Faith Super omnia The The intâ—llectual Faculty Obeyes and belieues Vnderstanding Obeyes and forthwith belieues by an infallible Assent the truth of the Mystery though not seen euidently 6. Hence you se This infallible Assent proceed's from à Twofold Voice of God First from the Motiues preuious to Faith whereby it s euidently credible that God speak's though the The Twofold voice of God Motiues were fallible But the last Voice of his Diuine illumination which represent's the Reuelation more indubitably than meer Motiues can doe takes all doubt away And we come to an absolute certitude in Faith vpon this interiour sacred language of God called by the Fathers Alta Doctrina à high learning Caelestis Doctrina The Language of heauen which opened Lydia's The last â— voice called high learning heart Act. 16. 14. And made her to attend to such things as S. Paule deliuered And might I here speak à word in passing I can auouch in all Christian Sincerity rhat treating with many reconciled to our Catholick Faith I haue heard some Ssy and it was à singular comfort to me that such Miracles so strange Conuersions as the Catholick Church has made Her long Continuance Maugre all attempts against Her The eminent Sanctity Giues certainty to Faith of innumerable who profess her faith appear to be Gods own glorious works But besides these outward lights which conuince much God Said these seem's to Speak to our very hearts and tell 's vs. Truth only is taught by this Oracle and vpon so clear conuiction we find our Selues obliged to belieue But as S. Austin profoundly obserues Lib. 1. de Praedest Sanct. Cap. 8. Valde remota est à sensibus carnis haee Schola in quâ Deus auditur docet The School where God is heard and teaches is very remote from flesh and blood 7. Answerable to what is here noted of God's interiour voice by Illumination the illuminated S. Austin lib. 11. Confess Cap. 3. S. Austin confirm's our Assertion speak's most significantly Where he desires to Hear and vnderstand How God in the beginning made Heauen and earth Scripsit hoc Moyses Scripsit aebijt c. Moses wrote this but he his gone from vs. Now he is not before me for if he were I would hold him fast c. And for your sake intreat him to lay open these things I would giue good eare to his words If he spake in Hebrew I could not vnderstand him but if Latin I should know what he Said But how should I know that he Speaks Truth And if I knew so much Truth inwardly teaches should I know it from him The Saint Answers Intus vtique mihi intus in Domicilio Cogitationis c. Inwardly where my most secret thoughts dwell Truth verily spoken not in Hebrew Greek Latin or Certainty arises from that interiour learning any other babarous Language without mouth or tongue without à rustling noise of words would tell use Moses speak's Truth Et ego statim certus And I presently made certain Mark wherevpon his last certitude is grounded would confidently Say to that blessed man You speak truth Thus S. Austin who in the 8. Chap. now cited call's this light à secret Grace giuen by God to take away the hardness of hearts in Matters of belief And his Doctrin Scripture Speak's fully this Sense is consonant to these and like Expressions of Holy Scripture 2. Cor. 4. 6. He hath shined in our hearts to the illumination of the knowledge of the Glory of God Esa 54. All shall be taught of God Matth. 16. Flesh and blood hath not reuealed it to thee but my Father which is in Heauen Iohn 1. 2. 27. His vnction teaches all things Iohn 6. 44. No man can come to me vnlesse the Father that sent me draw him Iohn 10. My sheep hear my Voice c. 8. From these and many other Passages The most ancient Fathers especially S. Austin and our Venerable Bede teach that none can Hear and Assent to the exteriour Proposition The Holy Fathers Inferences of the Diuine Mysteries vnless at the same time the light of Grace work 's interiourly and proposes all after another way more efficaciously Read S. Austin towards the end of this 8 th Chap. at those words Cum ergo Euangelium praedicatur c. Where he tell 's you when the Gospel is preached some belieue and others do not Those saith he who belieue when the Preachers outward words sound in their eares Intus à patre audiunt discunt interiourly hear Gods own Voice and learn what he teaches Others who belieue not Hear words Chiefly S. Austinâ— spoken by the Preacher but hear not that interiour Diuine Language and therefore learn nothing 9. Gant then first That the Motiues inducing to Faith were supposed fallible because perhaps we haue no reflex Euidence of their infallible Connexion with the Reuelation Grant also that the exteriour Proposition of Diuine Mysteries retain's Obscurity which is true yet this Secret this perswasiue illustration of Grace being as I said the last hearing of God's Voice The illustration of grace supplies the Inefficacy of Motiues can on the one Side supply the inefficacy of the Motiues And on the Other so accomplish the Mysteries exteriour Proposition that it brings faith to its full certitude Do then the Motiues Shine lesse clearly or leaue Some Capacities as it were in à wauering condition The illustration giues more light and And add's more Clarity driues doubt away Is the Divine Testimony meerly considered according to its outward proposal obscure The Illustration add's new clarity to it and makes Faith most certain yet still without Euidence Et ego statim certus And by virtue of this light I say confidently with S. Austin what I belieue is infallible true 10. To Illustrate yet more this necessary Point I speak to Catholicks Sectaries will not hear me Read the Angelical Doctor S. Thomas 2. 2. quest 2. a. 3. Where as his manner is He obiect 's It is dangerous to giue an assent to things when we know not whether that which is Proposed be true or false as it seem's to fall out in matters
of Faith Ad. 2. he Answers As man by his natural light Assent's to natural Principles so the virtuous The Angelical Doctors Doctrin man by the Habit of Faith rightly iudges of what belongs to that Virtue And therefore per lumen Fidei diuinitus infusum By the light of Faith diuinely infused he assents to the Mysteries S. Vincentius Ferrerius also in his Sermon vpon the sunday within the Octaue of the Epiphany pondering our Sauiours Answers to the Doctors Questions in the Temple speak's to our S. Vincenâ—ius words conformable purpose and very significantly Christs words Saith he veniebant ad Cor Doctorum cum lumine came to the hearts of those Doctors with light and they Said O verum dicit The Child speak's Truth Again Christus loquebatur Diuinâ virtute Christ spake with à Diuine virtue and all the Doctors vnderstanding him assented Pro certo verum dicit Most certainly he speaks truth Thus. S. Vincentius 11. The Principle whereon this Doctrin relies All must admit Viz. That an act of Faith is wrought in à Soul hy Faith à work of the Holy Ghost the operation of God's Spirit and therefore the Holy Ghost must not be excluded from that work which none can doe but He. Now what we Assert in this particular is that the infallible certainty of faith comes from this interiour Illumination as it more liuely set's forth the formal Obiect assented to or help 's to à clearer Proposal of the Diuine Mysteries 12. And thus in à word we haue the whole Progress of faith in this present State explained First à natural Proposition of the Mysteries precedes This beget's à natural apprehension of their Credibility After some consideration there may arise an imperfect Iudgement of Credibility But should the Wâ—ll offer as yet to incline the mind to Assent only vpon what appear's hitherto it could not moue to à Faith which is an Assent Super Omnia or most certain Therefore The whole Procedure of Faith briefly laid forth the illustration or powerful Inuitation of Grace by which as I said the Obiect appear's another way and more clearly is infused whereof the soul is Recipient The will now after other Preparatiues thus strengthn'd à new command's boldly the vnderstanding to Assent vpon the safest Principles imaginable Viz. Vpon God's infallible Reuelation accompanied with his own Diuine light which makes Faith to grow higher in certainty than all the Reason or knowledge in this life can arise to For as S. Thomas obserues Humane knowledge deriues its Certitude from Mans natural Reason which may Err but Faith has its infallibility Ex lumine Diuinae scientiae from the light of The efficacy of Diuine Light Gods diuine wisdom which cannot deceiue and therefore is most certain 13. Some may Oppose In this Discourse of the Diuine illustration we seem to fauour Heretiques who talk much of their light It is à strange Obiection Saith F. Granado Controu 1. de Fide Tract 1. D. 5. Whilst all acknowledge this Light All Catholicks Acknowledge this Light to be Gratia per Christum à Supernatural grace purchased by our Sauiour which raises vs aboue the force of natural Principles and moues to belieue most firmly And the Motiue is the Diuine Reuelation it Selfe inuested or appearing in God's own Diuine Illustration To what is pleaded in behalf of Hereticks I Answer Hereticks talk euery whit as much of their Faith Heretiques Claim to Faith and light makes neither Diuine as of their Light Do we therefore agree with them in faith because they Say theirs is as diuine as ours No certainly For the like sound of words implies neither the same reallity of things nor any agreement at all Why then should we fauour the light they pretend to which like their faith is à meer illusion and no more symbolizes with the Illustration of Catholicks then their faith doth with true Faith 14. I ground my Assertion on these three Principles S. Paul Saith first No man can belieue vnlesse hee Hear 's nor hear without à Preacher Therefore in this present state of things an exteriour Humane Proposition of the Diuine Reuelation necessarily precedes the true light of Faith and that light is The Pretended light of Hereticks Proued an illusion not giuen to belieue viâ ordinariâ vnlesse one authorized to Preach in God's name Proposes the Reuelation suitable to the natural way of hearing other Verities by our senses Imagination and humane vnderstanding Otherwise that would be possible which the Apostle makes impossible Viz. To hear and belieue without à Preacher Now further none can be à fit Minister to propound the Reuelation but he that makes his Proposition good by à Miracle or some supernatural wonder otherwise à meer Impostor may as well gain credit by Saying he speak's God's truths as the very best of the Apostles But no Protestant is able to doe thus much none of them all can say with truth God has reuealed my particular Doctrin First because none of them can propound their Doctrin as warranted by Supernatural Signs add Seal that very exteriour Proposition with à Miracle As euery Preacher in the Catholick Church can do Therefore the illustration he pleads for is meer Phansy and nothing els 15. Again and here is my second Principle grounded also vpon the Apostles words How shall they Preach vnlesse they be sent Which is to say He only is fit to Propose Gods Diuine Reuelation who proues himselfe commissioned to Preach by Supernatural Signes and indubitable Miracles For thus Christ our Lord sent by his eternal Father thus the Apostles sent by Christ and the Church euer since all shewing Wonders aboue the force of Nature proued their Mission withall euinced That God only impowred them to teach as they did Now here is the main point we vrge Could the Protestant 2. They haue no Commission to teach who certainly neuer yet wrought one indubitable Miracle to countenance his Doctrin giue in Euidence by some one or other Miraculous work That an Oracle sent him to reach He might speak more boldly But this being impossible The light he pretend's to is iust like his doctrin An Signis fatuus vain and void of all reallity 16. 3. Our latter Protestants seem to attribute no other certainty to the very act of Faith then what is moral and necessarily consequent to à humane fallible Ratiocination T' is much like to the Assent we elicit when we say Caesar or Pompey 3. Their Faith being only moral and fallible Cannot Proceed from the Holy Ghost haue been in the world If this Doctrin be defensible its impossible to declare how either Faith it selfe or the illustration preuious can proceed from the Holy Ghost For did the Spirit of God work with à Soul when it belieues The certainty of Faith would without all doubt goe beyond that assurance which is only humane moral and fallible Now wee Say quite contrary That Faith is an absolute