Church yield any obedience or perform any acceptable worship unto God but what was founded on and regulated by his Word given unto them antecedently unto their obedience and worship to be the sole foundation and Rule of it That you have no concernment in what is or may be truly spoken of the Church we shall afterwards shew but it is not for the interest of Truth that wee should suffer you without controul to impose such absurd notions on the minds of men especially when you pretend to direct them unto a Settlement in Religion Alike true is it that the Church gives Authority unto the Scripture Every true Church indeed gives witness or Testimony unto it and it is its Duty so to do it holds it forth declares and manifests it so that it may be considered and taken notice of by all which is one main End of the Institution of the Church in this world But the Church no more gives Authority to the Scripture than it gives Authority to God himself He requires of men the discharge of that Duty which he hath assigned unto them but stands not in need of their suffrage to confirm his Authority It was not so indeed with the Idols of old of whom Tertullian said rightly Si Deus homini non placuerit Deus non erit The reputation of their Deity depended on the Testimony of men as you say that of Christ's doth on the Authority of the Pope But I shall not farther insist upon the disprovement of this vanity having shewed already that the Scripture hath all its Authority both in its self and in reference unto us from Him whose Word it is and wee have also made is appear that your Assertions to the contrary are meet for nothing but to open a door unto all Irreligiousness Prophaneness and Atheism so that there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing sound or savoury nothing which an heart carefull to preserve its Loyalty unto God will not nauseate at nothing not suited to oppugn the fundamentals of Christian Religion in this your Position This ground well fixed you tell us 11. That the Church is infallible or cannot erre in what she teacheth to be believed And we ask you what Church you mean and how far you intend that it is infallible The only known Church which was then in the world was in the Wilderness when Moses was in the mount Was it infallible when it made the golden Calf and danced about it proclaiming a feast unto Jebovah before the Calf was the same Church afterward Infallible in the dayes of the Judges when it worshipped Baalim and Aftaroth or in the dayes of Jeroboam when it sacrificed before the Calves at Dan and Bethel or in the other branch of it in the dayes of Ahaz when the High-Priest set up an Altar in the Temple for the King to offer Sacrifice unto the gods of Damascus or in the dayes of Jehoiakiâ— and Zedekiah when the High-Priest with the rest of the Priests imprisoned and would have slain Jeremiah for preaching the word of God or when they preferred the worship of the Queen of Heaven before that of the God of Abraham Or was it infallible when the High-Priest with the whole Councel or Saâ—edrim of the Church judicially condemned as far as in them lay their own Messias and rejected the Gospel that was preached unto them You must inform us what other Church was them in the world or you will quickly perceive how ungrounded your generall Maxim is of the Churches absolute infallibility As farre indeed as it attends unto the Infallible Rule given unto it it is so but not one jot farther Moreover we desire to know What Church you mean in your Assertion or rather what is it that you mean by the Church Do you intend the Mystical Church or the whole number of Gods Elect in all Ages or in any Age militant on the Earth which principally is the Church of God Ephes. 5. 26 Or do you intend the whole diffused body of the Disciples of Christ in the world separated to God by Baptism and the Profession of saving truth which is the Church Catholick visible Or do you mean any particular Church as the Roman or constantinopolitan the French Dutch or English Church If you intend the first of These or the Church in the first sense we acknowledge that it is thus far infallible that no true member of it shall ever totally and finally renounce lose or forsake that faith without which they cannot please God and be saved This the Scripture teacheth this Austin confirmeth in an bundred places If you intend the Church in the second sense we grant that also so far unerring and infallible as that there ever was and ever shall be in the world a number of men making Profession of the saving Truth of the Gospel and yielding professed subjection unto our Lord Jesus Christ according unto it wherein consists his visible Kingdome in this world that never was that never can be utterly overthrown If you speak of a Church in the last sense then we tell you That no such Church is by virtue of any Promise of our Lord Jesus Christ freed from erring yea so farre as to deny the fundamentals of Christianity and thereby to lose the very being of a Church Whilst it continues a Church it cannot erre fundamentally because such Errours destroy the very being of a Church but those who were once a Church by their failing in the Truth may cease to be so any longer And a Church as such may so fail though every Person in it do not so for the individual members of it that are so also of the Mysticall Church shall be preserved in its Apostasie And so the Mysticall Church and the Catholick Church of Professors may be continued though all particular Churches should fail So that no Person the Church in no sense is absolutely freed in this world from the danger of all errours that is the condition wee shall attain in Heaven here where we know butin part wee are incapable of it The Church of the Elect and every member of it shall eventually be preserved by the power of the Holy Ghost from any such errour as would utterly destroy their Communion with Christ in Grace here or prâ—vent their fruition of him in Glory hereafter or as the Apostle speaks they shall assuredly be kept by the Power of God through faith unto salvation The Generall Church of Visible Professors shall be alwayes so farre preserved in the world as that there shall never want some in some place or other of it that shall profess all needfull saving Truths of the Gospel in the belief whereof and obedience whereunto a man may be saved But for Particular Churches as such they have no security but what lyes in their diligent attendance unto that Infallible Rule which will preserve them from all hutfull Errours if through their own default they neglect not to keep close unto it And your
the Church then the present Church is made up of the same numerical members that it was constituted of in the days of his flesh What change you suppose in the Church the body the same you suppose and assert in the head thereof And as that change excludes those former members from being present members so this excludes the former Head from being the present Head Of old the Head of the Church was the humane nature of Christ delegate under God now that is removed and another person in the same nature is so delegated unto the same office Now this is not an Head under Christ but in distinction from him in the same place wherein he was and so exclusive of him which must needs be Antichrist one pretending to be in his room and place to his exclusion that is one set up against him And thus also what you seek to avoid doth inevitably follow upon your discourse namely that you would have the Church for the preservation of its oneness and sameness to have the same head she had which is not the same unless you will say that the Pope is Christ these are the Principles that you proceed upon First you tell us that the humane nature of Christ delegate under God was the visible Head of the Church Secondly That this nature is now removed from us and ceaseth so to be that is not only to be visible but the visible Head of the Church and is no more so then the present Church is made up of the same individual members as it was in the dayes of his flesh which as you well observe it is not Thirdly That a nature of the same kind in another Person is now delegate under God to the same office of a Visible Head with that power of external Government which Christ had whilest he was that head And is it not plain from hence that you exclude the Lord Christ from being that head of his Church which he was in former dayes and substituting another in his room and place you at once depose him and assign another head unto the Church and that in your attempt to prove that her head must still be the same or she cannot be so Farther the humane nature of Christ was personally united unto the Son of God and if that Head which you now fancy the Church to have be not so united it is not the same Head that that was and so whilest you seek to establish not indeed a sameness in the Head of the Church but a likeness in several Heads of it as to visibility you evidently assert a change in the nature of that Head of the Church which we enquire after In a word Christ and the Pope are not the same and therefore if it be necessary to maintain that the Church hath the same Head that she had to assert that in the room of Christ she hath the Pope you prove that she hath the same head that she had because she hath one that is not the same she had and so qui habet aures audiat 4. You vainly imagine the whole Catholick Church any otherwise visible then with the eyes of faith and understanding It was never so no not when Christ conversed with it in the earth no not if you should suppose only his blessed Mother his twelve Apostles and some few more only to belong unto it For though all the members of it might be seen and that at once by the bodily eyes of men as might also the humane nature of him who was the head of it yet as he was Head of the Church and in that his whole Person wherein he was so and is so he was never visible unto any for no man hath seen God at any time And therefore you substituting an Head in his room who in his whole person is visible seeing he was not so do change the Head of the Church as to its visibility also for one that is in his whole person visible and another that is not so are not alike visible wherein you would principally place the identity of the Church 5. Let us see whether your Logick be any better then your Divinity The best Argument that can be formed out of your discourse is this If the Church hath not an head visibly present with her as she had when Christ in his humane nature was on the earth she is not the same that she was but according to their Principles she hath not an head now so visibly present with her therefore she is not the same according unto them I desire to know how you prove your inference It is built on this supposition that the sameness of the Church depends upon the visibility of its Head and not on the sameness of the Head its self which is a fond conceit and contrary to express Scripture Ephes. 4. 3 4 5 6 7. and not capable of the least countenance from Reason It may be you will say that though your Argument do not conclude that on our supposition the Church is not the same absolutely as it was yet it doth that it is not the same as to visibility Whereunto I answer 1. That there is no necessity that the Church should be alwayes the same as to visibility or alwayes visible in the same manner or alwayes equally visible as to all concernments of it 2. You mistake the whole nature of the visibility of the Church supposing it to consist in its being seen with the bodily eyes of men whereas it is only an affection of its publick profession of the Truth whereunto it s being seen in part or in whole by the eyes of any or all men doth no way belong 3. That the Church as I said before was indeed never absolutely visible in its Head and members He who was the Head of it being never in his whole person visible unto the the eyes of men and he is yet as he was of old visible to the eyes of faith whereby we see him that is invisible So that to be visible to the bodily eyes of men in its head and members was never a property of the Church much less such an one as that thereon its sameness in all Ages should depend 6. You fail also in supposing that the numerical sameness of the Church as a body depends absolutely on the sameness of its members For whilest in succession it hath all things the same that concur unto its Constitution order and existence it may be still the same body corporate though it consist not of the same individual persons or bodies natural As the Kingdom of England is the same Kingdom that it was two hundred years ago though there be not now one person living that then it was made up of For though the matter be the same only specifically yet the form being the same numerically that denominates the body to be so But that I may the better represent unto you the proper genius and design of your Discourse I shall
briefly mind you of the principles which you oppose in it and seek to evert by it as also of those which you intend to compass your purpose by Of the first sort are these 1. That the Lord Christ God and Man in one person is and ever continuâ—s to be the only absolute Monarchical Head of his own Church I suppose it needless for me to confirm this Principle by Testimonies of Scripture which it being a matter of pure Revelation is the only way of confirmation that it is capable of That he is the Head of his Church is so frequently averred that every one who hath but read the New Testament will assent unto it upon the bare repetition of the words with the same faith whereby he assents unto the writing its self whatever it be and we shall afterwards see that the notion of an Head is absolutely exclusive of competition in the matter denoted by it An Head properly is singly and absolutely so and therefore the substitution of another head unto the Châ—rch in the room of Christ or with him is perfectly exclusive of him from being so 2. That Christ as God-man in his whole person was never visible to the fleshly eyes of men and whereas as such he was Head of the Church as the Head of the Church he was never absolutely visible His humane nature was seen of old which was but something of him as he was and is the Head of the Church otherwise then by faith no man hath seen him at any time and it changeth the condition of the Church to suppose that now it hath a Head who being a meer man is in his whole person visible so far as a man may be seen 3. That the visibility of the Church consisteth in its publick profession of the Truth and not in its being objected to the bodily eyes of men It is a thing that faith may believe it is a thing that Reason may take notice of consider and comprehend the eyes of the body being of no use in this matter When a Church professeth the Truth it is the ground and pillar of it a City on a hill that is visible though no man see it yea though no man observe or contemplate on any thing about it It s own Profession not other mens observation constitutes it visible Nor is there any thing more required to a Churches visibility but its Profession of the Truth unto which all the outward advantages which it hath or may have of appearing conspicuously or gloriously to the consideration of men are purely accidental which may be separated from it without any prejudice unto its visibility 4. That the sameness of the Church in all Ages doth not depend on its sameness in respect of degrees of visibility That the Church be the same that it was is required that it profess the same Truth it did whereby it becomes absolutely visible but the degrees of this visibility as to conspicuousness and notoriety depending on things accidental unto the being and consequently visibility of Church do no way affect as unto any change Now from hence it follows 1. That the presence or absence of the Humane nature of Christ with or from his Church on earth doth not belong unto the visibility of it so that the absence of it doth no way inferr a necessity of substituting another visible head in his stead Nor was the presence of his humane Nature with his Church any way necessary to the visibility of it his conversation on the earth being wholly for other ends and purposes 2. That the presence or absence of the humane nature of Christ not varying his headship which under both considerations is still the same the supposition of another Head is perfectly destructive of the whole Headship of Christ there being no vacancy possible to be imagined for that supply but by the removal of Christ out of his place For he being the Head of his Church as God and man in his whole person invisible and the visibility of the Church consisting solely in its own profession of the Truth the absence of his humane nature from the earth neither changeth his own Headship nor prejudiceth the Churches visibility so that either the one or the other of them should induce a necessity of the supply of another Head Consider now what it is that you oppose unto these things You tell us â— That Christ was the Head of the Church in his humane nature delegated by and under Gâ—d to that purpâ—se You mean he was so absolutely and as man exclusively to his divine nature This your whole Discourse with the Inferences that you draw from this supposition abundantly manifests If you can make this good you may conclude what you please I know no man that hath any great cause to oppose himself unto you for you have taken away the very foundation of the being and 〈◊〉 of the Church in your supposition 2. You inform us That Christ by his Ascension into heaven ceased to be that Head that he was so that of necessity another must be substituted in his place and room and this we must think to be the Pope He is I confess absent from his Church here on earth as to his bodily appearance amongst us which as it was not necessary as to his Headship so he promised to supply the inconvenience which 〈◊〉 Disciples apprehended would ensue thereupon so that they should have great cause to rejoyce at it as that wherein their great advantage would lye John 16. 7. That this should be by giving us a Pope at Rome in his stead he hath no way intimated And unto those who know what your Pope is and what he hath done in the world you will hardly make it evident that the great advantage which the Lord Christ promised unto his Disciples upon his absence is made good unto them by his Supervisorship 3. You would have the visibility of the Church depend on the visibility of its Head as also its sameness in all ages And no one you are secure who is now visible pretends to be the Head of the Church but the Pope alone and therefore of necessity he it must be But Sir if the Lord Jesus Christ had had no other nature then that wherein he was visible to the eyes of men he could never have been a meet Head for a Church dispersed throughout the whole world nor have been able to discharge the Duty annexed by God unto that office And if so I hope you will not take it amiss if on that supposition I deem your Pope of whom millions of Christians know nothing but by uncertain rumors nor he of then to be very unmeet for the discharge of it And for the visibility of the Church I have before declared wherein it doth consist Upon the whole matter you do not only come short of proving the Indentity and Oneness of the Church to depend upon one visible Bishop as its Monarchical Head but also the
over the flocks but Ministers of their faith By these are the flocks of Christ governed as by shepherds appointed by him the great Bishop and Shepherd of their souls according to the Rules by him prescribed for the rule of the one and obedience of the other But if by governed by another man you mean absolutely supreamly at his will and pleasure then we deny that any Disciple of Christ is in the things of God so to be governed by any man and affirm that to assert it is to cast down Jesus Christ from his Throne But you say if he be not immediate head unto all but Ministers head the people and Christ heads the Ministers this in effect is nothing but to make every Minister a Bishop Why do you not plainly say what it is more then manifest you would have All this while you heed no more the Laws of the Land then constitutions of the Gospel Answ. I have told you how Christ is the immediate Head unto all and yet how he hath appointed others to preside in his Churches under him and that this should infer an equality in all that are by him appointed to that work is most senseless to imagine nor did I in the least intimate any such thing but only that therefore there was no need of any one supream head of the whole Catholick Church nor any place or room left for such an one without the deposition of Christ himself Because the King is the only supream Head of all his people doth it therefore follow that if he appoint Constables to rule in every parish with that allotment of power which by his Laws he gives unto them and Justices of Peace to rule over them in an whole County that therefore every Constable in effect is a Justice of Peace or that there is a sameness in their office Christ is the head of every man that is in the Church be he Bishop or Minister or private man and when the Ministers are said to head the people or the Bishops to head them the expression is improper an inferiour Ministerial subordinate rule being expressed by the name of that which is supream and absolute or they head them not absolutely but in some respect only as every one of them dischargeth the Authority over and towards them wherewith he is intrusted This assertion of Christs sole absolute Headship and denial of any Monarchical state in the Church Catholick but what ariseth from thence doth not as every child may see concern the difference that is about the superiority of Bishops to Ministers or Presbyters For notwithstanding this there are degrees in the Ministry of the Church and several orders of men are engaged therein and whatever there are there might have been more had it seemed to our good Lord Christ to appoint them And whatever order of men may be supposed to be instituted by him in his Church he must be supposed to be the Head of them all and they are all to serve him in the Duties and Offices that they have to discharge towards the Church and one another This headship of Christ is the thing that you are to oppose and its exclusiveness to the substitution of an absolute Head over the whole Catholick Church in his place because of his bodily absence from the earth But this you cast out of sight and instead thereof fall upon the equality of Bishops and Ministers which no way ensues thereon Both Bishops and Presbyters agreeing well enough in the Truth we assert and plead for This you say is contrary to the Gospel and the Law of the Land What is I pray that Christ is the only absolute Head of the Catholick Church No but that Bishops and Ministers are in effect all one But what is that to your purpose will it advantage your Cause what way ever that problem be determined Was any occasion offered you to discourse upon that Question Nay you perceive well enough your self that this is nothing at all to your design and therefore in your following discourse you double and sophisticate making it evident that either you understand not your self what you say or that you would not have others understand you or that you confound all things with a design to deceive for when you come to speak of the Gospel you attempt to prove the appointment of one supream Pastor to the whole Catholick Church and by the Law of the Land the Superiority of Bishops over Ministers as though these things were the same or had any relation one to another whereas we have shewed the former in your sense to be destuctive to the latter Truth never put any man upon such subter fuges and I hope the difficulties that you find your self perplexed withall may direct you at length to find that there is a deceit in your right hand But let us hear your own words As for the Gospel the Lord who had been visible Governour and Pastor of his flock on earth when he was now to depart hence as all the Apostles expected one to be chosen to succeed him in his care so did he notwithstanding his own invisible presence and providence over his flock publickly appoint one And when he taught them that he who was greatest among them should be as the least he did not deny but suppose one greater and taught in one and the same breath both that he was over them and for what he was over them namely to feed not to tyrannize not to domineer and hurt but to direct comfort and conduct his flock in all humility and tenderness as a servant of all their spiritual necessities and if a Bishâ—p be otherwise affected it is the fault of his Person not his place And what is it that you would prove hereby is it that Bishops are above Ministers which in the words immediately foregoing you asserted and in those next ensuing confirm from the Law of the Land is there any tendency in your Discourse towards any such purpose Nay do not your self know that what you seek to insinuate namely the instiâ—ution of one supream Pastor of the whole Catholick Church one of the Apostles to be above and ruler over all the rest of the Apostles and the whole Church besides is perfectly destructive of the Hierarchy of Bishops in England as established by Law and also at once casting down the main if not only foundation that they plead for their station and order from the Gospel For all Prelate Protestants as you call them assert an equality in all the Apostles and a superiority in them to the 70. Disciples whence by a parity of reason they conclude unto he superiority of Bishops over Ministers to be continued in the Church And are you not a fair Advocate for your Cause and well meet for the reproving of others for not consenting unto them But waving that which you little câ—re for and are not at all concerned in let us see how you prove that which we know you
the order you mention exclude that which you would introduce Or would you prove that Bishops by the Law of this Land have a jurisdiction superior unto Ministers who ever went about to deny it or what will the remembrance of it advance your pretensionâ— And yet neither is this fairly expressed by you For as no Protestants assert the King to be in his power and office interposed between Christ and Bishops or Ministers as to their ministerial office which is purely spiritual so the power of supream Jurisdiction which they ascribe unto him is not as you falsly insinuate granted unto him by the Laws of King Edward and Queen Elizabeth but is an inseparable Priviledge of his imperial Crown exercised by his Royal Predecessours and asserted by them against the inâ—rusions and usurpations of the Pope of Rome only diclared by those and other Laws But I perceive you have another design in hand You are entring upon a discourse wherein you compare your selves not only with Presbyterians and Independents but Prelate Protestants also in what you ascribe unto Kings in Ecclesiastical affairs preferring your selves before and above them all What just cause you have so to do we shall afterwards consider Your Confidence in it at first view presents its selâ— unto us â— on whereas there was not in the Animadversions any occasion of it administred unto you and your self confess that your whole discourse about it is besides your purpose pag. 66. yet waving almost every thing that was incumbent upon you to have insisted on if you would not plainly have appeared vadimonium deseruisse and to have given up your Fiat as indefensible you divert into a long harangue about it The Thesis you would by various florishes give countenance unto is this That Papists in their deference unto Kings even in Ecclesiastical matters and in their principles of their obedience unto them 〈◊〉 Protestants of all sorts That this is not to ouâ— present purpose your self cannot but see and acknowledge Hower your Discourse such as it is relating to one special head of Difference between us shall be a part considered by its self in our next Chapter CHAP. 16. The Power assigned by Papists and Protestants unto Kings in matters Ecclesiastical Their several Principles discussed and compared YOur Discourse on this head is not reducible by Logick its self unto any method or rules of Argument For it is in general 1. So loose Ambigucus and Metaphorically expressed 2. So Sophistical and inclusive 3. So inconsistent in sundry instances with the Principles and practices of your Church if you speak intelligibly 4. So false and untrue in many particulars that it is scarcely for these excellent qualifications to be paralleld with any thing either in your Fiat or your Epistola First It is loose and ambiguous 1. Not stating what you intend by the Head of the Church which you discourse about 2. Noâ— determining whither the King be such an head of Execution in matter of Religion as may use the Liberty of his own judgement as to what he puts in execution or whether he be not bound to execute your Popes Determinations on the penalty of the forfeiture of his Christianity which I doubt we shall find to be your opinion 3. Not declaring wherein the power which you assign unto him is founded whether in Gods immediate institution oâ— the Concession of the Pope whereon it should solely depend unto whom it is in all things to be made subservient Secondly Sophistical 1. In playing with the ambiguity of that expression Head of the Church and by the advantage thereof imposing on Protestants contradictions between their profession and practice as though in the one they acknowledged the King to be head of the Church and not in the other whereas there is a perfect consonancy between them in the sence wherein they understand that expression shrowding your own sence and opinion in the mean time under the same ambiguity 2. In supposing an absolute universal Head of the whole Catholick Church and then giving reasons why no King can be that Head when you know that the whole Question is whither there by any such head of the Catholick Church on earth or no. 3. In supposing the Principles and practises of the Primitive Church to have been the same with those of the present Roman and those of the present Roman to have been all known and allowed of old which begs all that is in Controversie between us and sundry other instances of the like nature may be observed in it Thirdly Inconsistent with the Principles and Practices of your own Church both 1. In what you ascribe unto Kings and 2. In your stating of the power and Jurisdiction of your Pope if the ambiguity of your words and expressions will allow us to conclude what you intend or aim at Fourthly False 1. In matter of fact as to what you relate of the obedience of your Church unto Kings 2. In the principles and Opinions which you impose on your Advertaries 3. In the declaration that you make of your own and 4. In many particular Assertions whose consideration will afterwards occur This is a business I could have been glad you had not necessitated me to the Consideraâ—ion of for it cannot be truly and distinctly handled 〈…〉 such reflections upon your Church and way as may without extraordinary indulgence redound unto your disadvantage Your have by your own voluntary choice called me to the discussion of those Principles which have created you much trouble in these Nations and put you oftentimes upon attempting their disquiet Now these are things which I desire not I am but a private man and am very well contented you should enjoy all that peace and liberty which you think not meet in other Nations where the Pâ—wer is at your disposal to grant unto them that dissent from you Lex talionis should be far from influencing the minds of Christians in this matter however the equity of it may at any time be pleaded or urged to relieve others in other places under bondage and persecution But I am sure if I judge your proceedings against other men dissenting from you in Conscience to be unjustifiable by the Scripture or Light of Nature or suffrage of the Antient Church as I do I have no reason to desire that they should be drawn into president against their selves in any place in the world And therefore Sir had you provided the best colour you could for your own Principles and palliated them to the 〈◊〉 so to hide them from the eyes of those who it may be are ready to seek their disturbance and trouble from an apprehension of the evil that may ensue upon them and had not set them up in comparison with the Principles of Protestants of all sorts and for the setting off your own with the better grace and luster untruly and individiously reported theirs to expose them unto those thoughts and that severity from supream powers which you seek