the sense of the Councels by which you understand what Doctrines are Catholick and what Expositions of Scripture are true and what are false then I demand Fourthly How do you believe with a Divine Faith that what this private Priest teacheth is according to the Infallible Doctrine of the Church since he is a Man and may err and so teach his own private Opinion for the Infallible Doctrine of the Church Fifthly Whether you may not be more subject to mis-understand the Scriptures either by the errour of the Priest in Preaching or the frailty of your understanding in hearing then others are in the reading of the Holy Scriptures And if so why should you say the Scriptures are no guide because they may be mis-interpreted For shame forbear to blame the use of a thing because of the abuse of it What if some are to blame in that they have wrested the Scriptures to serve their own interests Are not you more to blame to wound these men through the sides of the Scripture What if as one well observes That some are blind and miss their way and others are drunk and stagger out of it Must we all conspire to wish the Sun out of the Firmament that we might follow a Will with a Wisp And yet this is your kind of reasoning that because some are perverse and froward and others are full of darkness prejudice and corrupt affections by which they cannot perfectly and infallibly judge of every truth that is contained in the Scripture therefore they must throw away the blessed word of God from being their rule and guide You proceed in p. 18. and tell us That the third Reason which you thought was forcible was that those who are thus far for sole Scripture do not say that one or any particular number of the Books of Scripture but all Scriptures written by inspiration of God do being joyned together make up this Rule and Judge Hence you say you concluded that if any of these Books were lost this Rule was not perfect Now that many of these Books were lost you say you proved from those that remain Num. 21.14 The Book of the Wars of the Lord and this you say is lost It is said of Solomon 1 King 4.3 2. that he spoke 3000 Proverbs and his Songs were 1000 and 5 You conceive you say that upon a just reckoning some of these will be wanting We finde named 2 Chron. 9.29 The Book of Nathan the Prophet the Prophesie of Ahijah and the Visions of Iddo these you say are lost as also those named 1 Chron. 29.29 The Book of Samuel the Book of Nathan the Book of Goda and it is clear from Mat. 27.9 That part of Jeremy is lost So also from Mat. 2.23 Where it was foretold that Christ should be called a Nazaren and 1 Cor. 5.9 Tells us that the Epistle which our Canon calls St. Pauls First Epistle was not truly his first for there he sayeth I wrote to you in an Epistle not to keep company with Fornicatours St. Paul also wrote an Epistle from Laodicea and yet you say you do not finde this Epistle In Answer hereunto I cannot but take notice that you say you THOUGHT this Answer was forcible but where was your Mother that she did not inable you to say you were SURE it was forcible But let us see wherein this force lyeth you say Protestants do not believe a certain number of Books to be their guide but all the Scriptures written by Inspiration from God make up this Rule and Guide and many of these Books are lost therefore this Rule is not perfect I Answer First That the Law of the Lord is perfect and every word of God is pure and therefore there can be no imperfections in the word of God but Secondly How doth it appear that any of those Books which you say were lost had a Divine Image and Superscription upon them or that they that did write them weâ—e inspired by the Holy Ghost in the writing of those particular Books For it is very possible that they wrote many things upon particular occasions as Hezekiah wrote to Ephraim and that sometimes their writings were of no more inspiration from Heaven then Davids Letters were that he sent to Joab by Uriah or then Peters practise for which Paul withstood him to the face But Thirdly What Infallible reason have you to prove that these sayings recited out of these Scriptures may not refer to the Books of Samuel and the Kings which we have extant rather then to any Books that are lost Fourthly How do you know that those writings however the Pen-men were inspired were intended by God for the perpetual use of his Church in all Ages Fifthly How do you Infallibly know that all the Canons or your Church even of those which you say are necessary to Salvation are preserved and that some very material things are not lost Sixthly If you say there is none lost then whether you do not make God in his wise providence more carefull to preserve intire and unmaimed the Canons of your Councels then he hath been to preserve the Writings of his Holy Prophets and Apostles And if you suppose any of the Decrees of your Councels hath been lost or maimed then how do you know Infallibly whether some that are lost are not as material as those you have Thus the edge of your sword is turned against your self But Seventhly If any of the Books of the Old Testament were lost that were by God intended for the perpetual use of that Church to whom his Oracles were committed how then can you say that the Church of the Old Testament was infallible since she failed in that trust that was committed to her viz. the keeping of the Scripture And if this was not a failing in her in that she lost part of the Scriptures then she had not failed if she had lost all and then it followeth that the Scriptures are so far from being a sole Guide that they are no guide at all for if they are a guide and a directer in any sense or if they are of any divine use then it must be an errour either of ignorance or wilfullnesse to suffer them to be lost or maimed Eighthly Whereas you say that the Epistle of St. Paul which your Canon calls the first to the Corinthians was not TRULY his first I Answer then your Canon doth falsely call it the first and then how shall we believe when your Canons are true You had best tell your Mother she lyes as soon as you can speak and then shew a reason for it by telling her That St. Paul saith he writ to the Corinthians an Epistle before Ergo there is an Epistle before that which your Canon calls the first But Chrysostome understands it of the words going before wherein he had charged them to deliver the incestious person to Satan and to purge out the old leaven And that you may see how little cause you have
When you say you made this search according to the uttermost of your understanding how do you infallibly know that your understanding was not depraved and that you were not given over to an injudicious mind Fourthly Did you not pretend to have used the same means to find out the true Church when you turned an Independent as you did when you did turn Papist Lastly If so how are you more able to Answer the Turk or Jew now then you were when your Catholick Friend began to discourse with you In the latter end of p. 8. and the beginning of the 9. You say that You gathered from Heb. 1â— 6 Mark 16.16 Eph. 4.5 2 Cor. 10.45 Heb 10.13 From all which scriptures where God requires Faith you say you thought it did naturally follow that there must be some means appointed by God by which we may know this true faith from all false Opinions or else you say p. 10. that prophesie would be ineffectual Esay 35. Say to them that are of a fearfull heart Be strang fear not hebold your God will come and save you Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened and the eares of the deaf shall be unstopped c. There shall be one high way and a way and it shall be called the holy way the way faring men though fools shall not erre therein Now since God hath appointed such a way Your great difficulty you say is to finde out the Rule and the Judge since one party proposeth the spirit to be his guide a Second proposeth Reason to be his Rule A Third proposeth Scriptures The Fourth assigneth the Holy Catholick Church c. You answer to the First and say That the spirit bearing witness with our spirts or in plain terms the private spirit is not that judge Your reason is because any one whether he be Jew Pagan or Christian if he have but confidence enough may pretend to the Spirit But since you say the great difficulty is to finde out the Rule I would gladly know how this difficulty shall be infallibly resolved For if the private spirit within me must not resolve me nor my reason must not be my Rule nor the Scriptures my Guide then I have no light left me to shew me the Church but the Church Thus they deal like thieves put out all other lights that should discover them but their own dark lanthorn But if you shall say that you prove the Church by Miracles How shall I be satisfied that those Miracles are not delusions Since as many pretend to the spirit that have it not So many pretend to miracles that have them not Then we must have faith to believe those miracles are true and if they are true they are no otherwise true but by the spirit of God Then it is the same absurdity to believe miracles by the spirits testimony as it is to believe the Scriptures by the spirits testimony But this also implies a contradiction for if I must finde the Church by the light of the spirit perswading me that she doth those miracles by the power of God then â—ave you contradicted your self by saying The spirit is not the guide But further may not a man as well say that he believes he hath the spirit by the spirit and that he believes the Scriptures by the Scriptures as you say you believe the Church by the Church I am sure the last is the greatest absurdity and may not a Turk say the same for his way that he believers Mahomet by Mahomet and the Alcoran by the Alcoran as you believe the Church by the Church Now if you shall say you believe the Church by the Scripture then the question will be how you know them to be the Word of God If you say because the Church teaches they are so then you run round like a horse in a Mill proving the Church by the Scripture and the Scripture by the Church You give another Reason why the spirit witnessing within us is not the guide appointed by God because by this none that ever pretended to it did reconcile differences Pray let charity begin at home if your Church be so infallible why do not you decide the differences that are between the Jesuites and the Dominicans hath not as endless controversies arisen among you Hath not as many Errours and Schismes sprung from you as from any People professing Christianity And would not your divisions be greater if the power of the Sword did not prevail more then your pretended Infallibility And whereas you say St. John prescribeth a Rule to know the Spirit of Truth from the Spirit of Errour 1 Joh. 4. We are of God he that knoweth God heareth us and he that is not of God heareth not us Hereby we know the Spirit of Truth from the Spirit of Errour Now what is this to your purpose unless you would still beg the question That your Church and her Doctors are intended in those words WE and US But what if it be proved that you do not hear the Apostles Then it follows by the Text and your own Argument that you have the Spirit of Errour Now the Apostle taught that a Man should examine himself and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup but you deny the cup to the common people is this hearing the Apostles The Apostle allows the Bishops to be Husbands of one Wife but you forbid that they should have any at all The Apostles would not have Prayers said in a Language that the People understood not but you command it Christ and the Apostles commanded a diligent reading and searching of the Scriptures but you forbid it and yet you are the only Men that must be heard though you teach contrary to Scripture You go on and say That Reason must not be our Judge because it must submit to the Judge as a Subject c. I pray what was your Judge who resolved the question which you say had so much difficulty in it viz. who should direct you whether any Church was Infallible or no or where that Church was to be found Did your reason guide you in this search or no If it did not I do not wonder you made no better choise but you say Reason is not your Rule because it was to submit as a Vassall to that Rule and Judge But Sir Though the Church of Rome which you call your Judge do exercise such a Lordship over the reasons of Men I am sure you have given no reason why it should be so You say Reason is apt to mistake and therefore we ought not to be governed by it But Sir what if I say the Pope is apt to mistake and therefore I ought not to be governed by him I am sure if that be made to appear in the judgment of Reason then Reason will guide me to decline following such a blind Guide As for example Liberius that was Pope about the year 350 fell into Arianism and subscribed to
the unjust excommunicating Athanasius Again The Council of Constance deposed Pope John 23. where it was proved that he held there was no eternal life nor Immortality of the soul nor Resurrection of the dead Pray Sir let Reason judge whether I may follow such a Catholick Guide You add a third Reason to prove that Reason is not judge in matters of Faith for then say you it would follow that it is possible to please God for Reason would teach us how to please him May not a man from the same Premises infer that your Church is not the Judge because then it would follow that it is possible to please God without Faith because the Church would teach us how to please him But you will say the Church doth teach us to please God by Faith I say it is well if she do But what is this to the purpose she did not teach us to please God by Faith before it was required and made known to us that God would be so pleased In like manner Reason will direct a man to do the same when he is informed God requireth such a duty But must not the Scripture nor my private Spirit nor my Reason judge I pray then tell me how I shall be the better for all you have written for if my Reason must not judge of the fallibility and infallibility of your Arguments then you had as good have told your late Brethren thus My Bâ—â—â—tren I see that there is a great difference and contention among us whether the Roman Church be infallible or not This Controversie cannot be judged by a private Spirit for that may sail nor by Reason because mens Reasons are uncertain and subject to variation neither are the Scriptures an infallible Judge of Controversies therefore they cannot judge of this Let me therefore advise you of a way to decide this question First Agree that the Roman Church is infallible and then your contention whether the Roman Church be infallible will soon be ended An excellent advice because you say all other ways to judge and decide controversies are fallable You now come in the third place to enquire whether the Scripture be sufficient to teach us the true Faith c. You say You found this highly contended for and several reasons urged for it First The words of our Saviour John 5.39 Search the Scriptures for in them you think to have eternal life and they are they which testifie of me To this Text you say you found several answers given which were satisfactory I That it doth not appear whether this in the Original be the Im perative or the Indicative Mood St. Cyril you say with whom Beza agrees takes it in the Indicative Mood What a strange Mood are you in then to give an Answer to a Text which you say you were satisfied withal And in the same breath you say it doth not appear whether it be the Imperative or the Indicative Mood Do you think infallibility had any assinity with this Answer Nay you further say that they are so farr from being a Command to all to road and search the Scriptures that they RATHER SEEM a Reprehension to all that shall frame that Conceit of them But how can this sense of that Text be Catholick when in stead of an infallible Exposition you tell us it RATHER SEEMS to be so then otherwise But what if I should tell you that those words Search the Scriptures rather seem a Command then a Reprehension I should rather seem to be infallible then you You say If it be the Indicative Mood the sense will run thus You do search the Scriptures and so it seems to be a Reprehension But this is a sense contrary to Chryfostome Hom. 39. in Joan. Christ sayes he sends us to the testimony of the Scriptures then it cannot be that he should reprehend them And the Colledge of Rhems translating the Text as we do give this Interpretation of it He viz. Christ reprehendeth the Jews not for reading but that reading dayly the Scriptures and acknowledging that in them they should find life that yet they viewed them so superficially that they could not find therein him to be Christ their King Lord Life and Saviour And in the Marginal Note upon this Text they say that neither Jews nor Hereticks find the truth because they search not the Scriptures deeply but read superficially See Rhemish Annot. upon John 5. Now see how you contradict your selves you say the Scriptures are so far from being a Command to all to read and search that they rather seem to be a reprehension to all that shall frame that conceit of them And your Rhemish Commentators say that they are reprehended because they did not search deep enough for if they had they might have found Jesus to have been their Christ their King Lord Life and Saviour And how can the said Annotators give that as a reason why the â—ews and Hereticks did not find the Truth because they did not search the Scriptures deep enough If either of these two opinions of your be true 1 That men are reprehended for searching the Scriptures 2 That the Scriptures are not an infallible guide to direct us to find the Truth if the whole Colledge have translated and interpreted truly then surely you and many of your Authors speak falsly But if you shall say the Scriptures may direct Jews and Hereticks to the truth because they direct them to the Church which is the Pillar of Truth then it follows 1 That both Jews and Hereticks ought to search the Scriptures deeply to find out the true Church 2 It must rest upon their private judgments of discretion to determine within themselves whether the Romanists or the Protestants be that true Church after they have made this deep and diligent search 3 It follows that the Scripture is an infallible guide being deeply and diligently searched and that the reason why both Jews and Hereticks err is not the fallibleness of the Scriptures but want of diligent and deep search which being used they might have found Christ to have been their King Lord Life and Saviour they might have found the Truth and the Church and consequently all things necessary to Eternal life You come in the 14 pag. to give a second reason why the words search the Scriptures cannot extend to prove the conclusion because you say if they were uuderstood in the Imperative Mood which cannot infallibly be proved because they cannot be profitable to work Faith in them that cannot read which you say are the greatest part of Mankind You say it cannot infallibly be proved that those words search the Scripture are in the Imperative Mood but have you that pretend to Infallibility proved that they are in the Indicative Mood What a madness is this that you should exact infallible Interpretations from those that do profess fallibility and not perform an infallible Interpretation when you pretend to be guided by a Church that is infallible But
our guide but it was because you did not make a deep diligent search into them which is the reason as your Rhemists say Hereticks never find the Truth But why do you beguile your unwary Reader with this word viz. That the Scriptures are not a SOLE Guide thereby to let him think that you allow them in some sense to be a guide when indeed your following Arguments do manifestly declare that you would not have them to be any guide at all Your first Reason why the Scriptures are not a Guide is because they do not answer the end viz. the reconciling differences for those who pretend most to consult the Scriptures do most of all disagree in matters of faith and interpreting the Scriptures To this I answer First May not a Heathen or a Jew alledge the same Argument against Christianity it self and say that the Christian Religion is no safe way to happiness because of the differences that are among the Professors of it 2 May it not be said that the Apostles themselves were no certain Guides because they had divisions and contentions among them and that they had appears by the testimony of St. Paul himself Rom 16.17 Mark them that cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine c. And the same Apostle tells the Corinthians 1 Cor. 3.3 and 1 Cor. 11.19 That there was among them envyings strife and contention some holding of Paul and some of Apollo some of Cephas Nay he further tells them there must be Heresies among you that they that are approved might be made manifest 3 May it not as well be said of the Church of the Jews which you say were infallible that they were no Guide or at least no certain Guide because there were differences and contentions among them as there was between the Pharisees Sadduces and Essavaus it is said that the Sadduces denied the Resurrection Angels and Spirit as you say the Scriptures are no Guide to true faith because men differ and and disagree in matters of Faith But 4 May you not as well say that Christ is not the Saviour of the World and that he came not into the World to the end that the World might be saved because it doth not appear that all shall be saved as say the Scriptures are no Guide to end Controversies because all Controversies are not ended 5 May you not as well infer that the grace of God doth not teach men to deny ungodliness because some turn the grace of God into wantonness as say the Scriptures are no sure Guide to faith and salvation because many wrest them to their own destruction 6 May you not as well say that the Primitive Church were no infallible Guide to true faith because they had disagreements and contentions among them as the strife between the Eastern and Western Churches about the keeping of Easter and they excommunicating one another And the Question of Re-baptizing bred the like differences between the Bishops of Rome and the Western Bishops of one Party and Cyprian Dionysius and Firmilianus with most of the Eastern Bishops of the other Party Euseb Hist lib. 5. c. 21. lib. 7. c. 3. Cyp. Ep. 74 75. Soc. lib. 6. c. 17. Soc. lib. 6. c. 21. I say may not one more truly infer these were no Guides because they had dissentions and divisions among them as you may say the Scriptures are not a Guide because of the differences that are amongst Protestants 7 And lastly May I not infer as well from the like Premises because there is and hath been differences among the now-pretended Catholicks as I have already shewn that therefore their Church is no infallible Guide as you may say the men that consult Scriptures do not agree among themselves therefore the Scriptures are not the Guide Your second Reason followeth in the 17 pag. which is but the same in effect with the first therefore the former Answer may suffice onely you tell us a story of an Arian or as the Question of Questions hath it an Arian Cobler how that if you were to dispute with him about the Deity of Christ from Job 10.30 I and my Father are one by this Text you say you should think you had proved the Question But then you say your Arian would compare this Text with john 17.21 where Christ prayeth to his Father that his Disciples might be all one thing as thou Father are in me and I in thee But if you should urge the Arian further and tell him the Council of Nice gave the same Interpretation which you do you say the Arian would answer as the Protestants generally do that they have a worthy esteem of Councils as far as they agree with the Word of God but where they disagree in that he must contradict them all To which I Answer setting aside the contraversie between the Arians and Athanasians as not coming within the verge of our present question that if the Arian Cobler had been as Orthodox in all his other Opinions as he is in his opinion about the Holy Scriptures and Councels viz. to think reverently of Councels and agree with them as far as they agree with the World of Truth I say if this had been all this Arian Coblers Errour I should have judged him a better Christian then a Roman Shoo-maker or the Catholick Collier who could say no more for himself being tempted by the Devil at the point of death what his faith was Answered I believe and dye in the faith of Christs Church Being again demanded what the Faith of Christs Church was Answered The faith that I believe in See Apology Translated by Staplet p. 53. But you say That you can urge against an Arian the Authority of the Councel of Nice and their Interpretation of the Scripture by which they Infallibly decide the controversie And here you think you have a more certaine guide and ground of your Faith then others because they adhere to private spirits and private judgements up on the Scriptures whereas you adhere to general Councel To which I Answer First Doe you think that General Councels did speak and teach in more plainness of Speech and that they uttered words less subject to be wrested by wrong interpretations then the words of the Prophets and Apostles were who spake as they were inspired by the spirit of God Secondly How do you know that you have the true sense and meaning of the Councels determinations since their Decrees are as lyable if not more lyable to mis-interpretations then the Holy Scriptures The reason of this question is because you did not hear them your self and if you had heard them you might have mis-understood them but if you say you have read the Councels and so came to be informed I do further demand how you do believe by a Divine Faith that you do not mis-understand the Councels in what you read and so collect a false sense Thirdly If you shall say you have a Priest to teach you
and rule it must be meant of Authentical and Original Writings or of infallible Translations of them into several Languages c. say you In like manner I say if the Decrees of General Councils are infallible it must be understood of the Original and authentick writings wherein those Decrees are contained or of infallible Translations of them into several Languages since they were not given out in a Language that the Common people understand Now none will swear to use your own words pag. 20. that these are the Originals of the Decrees of those Councils some of them being more then a thousand years old Neither will any swear that the Translations of these Decrees agree with their Originals Ergo The Decrees and Determinations of Councils cannot be an unquestionable and infallible Guide to true faith Thus you make people believe that if they come to your Church they shall have every thing certain but I do demand if any should follow your advice how they shall be thus assured since your Church hath been so palpably negligent as to suffer whole Books to be lost and to suffer the Originals of those that remain to be corrupted and also to suffer infinite variety of reading to come into them by which you say It cannot be discerned infallibly which is the true reading and which is the false And whereas you say That we are so far from having St. Mathews Original that we know not what Language it was writ in or whether he who transtated it into Greek was an honest man or not I answer If your Church were as you pretend the sole Keeper of the Scriptures they are worthy to die as David said of Abner because they kept their Master no better Are they the Church to which no unfaithfulness can have access when they have lost the Original of St. Mathews Gospel These are worse then the unprofitable Servant for in the day of accompt though he did not improve his Talent yet he did not lose it but could say to his Master take that which is thine own But you that have been entrusted with the heavenly treasure of sacred Writings it seems cannot acquit your selves at this rate for you have lost the Original and cannot tell whether that Translation that you have was done by an honest Man or a Knave But further If this be true what becomes of that Text which you cite as the first-born of your strength Mat. 16.18 upon which you found your Churches infallibility for if one ask you how you prove the Church infallible you say by that Text Upon this Rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it But how do you prove it from this Text if as you say the Original is lost and you cannot tell whether he that translated it into the Greek was an honest man or no You come now pag. 22. to a sixth Reason which is but the same in effect with the former viz. That whatsoever is a sufficient rule must be plain and clear in all necessary points the Scriptures you say are not plain and clear in all necessary points therefore c. This is the sum of your Argument and for this you give divers instances of things necessary to salvation that are not set down in Scripture The first is in pag. 22.23 That it is not set down in Scripture what a Sacrament is and how many there be or whether there be any or no To this I answer That you strive about words for it is not necessary to salvation to believe that those institutions should be called Sacraments which are usually so called and if it were then it would be necessary that we should know what and how many Institutions should be so denominated but it sufficeth that those Institutions which we call Sacraments are plainly set down in Scripture together with the persons who should observe them and the manner how they should be observed You come to a second thing necessary to be believed that is not in Scripture namely That all the Books of the Holy Scriptures be the word of God This say is not absolutely necessary to salvation for it may be possible for one to believe all the matter of the Bible to be the Truth of God and thereupon be saved who may yet doubt whether every one of the Pen-men did write by inspiration And again When it is said and believed that all the material Objects of Faith and those divine Verities which Christ revealed to his Apostles and they to the Churches are laid down in Scripture It is manifest that the Scriptures themselves are excepted they being not received as the material objects of our faith but as the means of conveying them unto us and if a man did believe the Doctrine of salvation contained in the Scripture it should not hinder his salvation though he knew not whether there was any Scripture or no Again Many of those whom you Canonize did not allow of some part of the Scriptures and many whole Churches differed about the Authority of some Books which Churches must all be damned if the believing those Books had been necessary to salvation You proceed and say in the third place That it is necessary to salvation to believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God but this you say is not plainly set down in Scripture I answer as before This belief cannot be necessary where the Scriptures are not proposed for God doth not require men to believe upon pain of Damnation when he hath not given means in order therunto But 2. Whoever shall consult the excellent precepts the glorious promises together with that great Spirit of Holiness and Self-denial that is contained in the Scriptures must needs say that they have the image and superscription of heaven upon them and from thence be as certainly perswaded that God was the Author of them as if it had been written with the beam of the Sun that so many Books are the Word of God nay and more certain because That one sentence might sooner have been expunged or defaced out of the Scriptures then that Spirit of Light and Truth which breaths in the faces and consciences of men from all the quarters of them Your other instances that follow are such as we have either taken notice of already or else they are such that are not necessary to salvation and therefore are impertinently alledged to weaken the guidance and conduct of the Scripture in order to that blessed end But since you are so able to lay stumbling blocks in the way of the Scriptures that thereby men might stumble and fall let me see if you are as able to remove some stumbling blocks that lieth in the way to your infallible Church First Is not the Sacrament of Pennance as your Church teacheth necessary to salvation But secondly How can you be infallible that this Sacrament is administred by a true Priest for if it were not done by a true Priest then
all things necessary to salvation but yet she may for all that erre and be mistaken in some profitable points and as a Man may be a man that hath some lameness and deformity of Body so may the Church be a true Church though it may be corrupt in Doctrine and Practise which it will hardly be freed from till the day in which she shall be presented to her husband a chast spouse without spot or wrinkle or any such thing You proceed and in p. 30. Assigne a fifth Argument That the Church of God was the Rule and Judge and the Infallible Guide when Christ and his Apostles was upon the Earth From whence you would infer that it is so still Sir I can very well own the Antecedent and deny the Consequence But you say There is no Reason why the Church should not be so still unless it be said that the Apostles were Infallible Guides till the Canon of the Scripture was finished and that then Infallibility ceased c. But then you say what will be the Consequence if that the Canon of the sequence if that the Canon of the Scripture which the Apostles finished be now uncompleated by the loss of those Epistles and Parcels of the Apostles Writings which you say you have proved to be lost I Answer It will not follow that we shall need your bind guide if what you say were true But Secondly It follows that your Church is fallible because she hath not faithfully kept those Epistles that she saith were committed to her trust as I have told you once and again Thirdly Whereas you say p. 31 If we had the whole Canon yet it were not sufficient to decide all Controversies now on foot in matters of Faith Sir this is but the same over and over for doth it follow that because all Controversies are not decided that therefore the Scripture is not sufficient to decide them Surely then it follows your Church is not sufficient to decide all Controversies because the Controversie between the Jesuites and the Dominicans and the Franciscans and the Dominicans are not yet decided But Lastly You may as well say that the Grace of God doth not sufficiently teach Men to deny ungodliness and worldly last because the world lyes in wickedness as say the Scriptures are not sufficient to decide Controversies In Faith because Controversies in Faith are not decided This is your Romish Reasoning You come to your last Reason in pag. 32. and tell us Tell none of those difficulties that were proposed to prove the Scripture not to be the Rule are capable of being objected against the Church This Argument I have already Answered by shewing that the same and greater absurdities are objected against your Church But however I will Examine your First Reason since I have not yet met with it and that is Because the Church you say is capable of answering those ends for which it is proposed in that all that submit to it are of one Faith I Answer Then the Church of England may be this True Church for all that submit to her are of one Faith and if any are not it is because they submit not Your other Reasons have fallen under consideration in the Answering of your Arguments about the invalidity of the Scripture to which I refer the Reader You proceed to Answer an Objections pag. 32. which you say is made by those of the separation viz. that these Texts which you have urged are to be understood by the Church Triumphant and not of the Church Militant in the World And after you have set up this pupper of your own as you phrase it or man of straw you spend your 33 34 and 35 Pages to fight against it and therefore I shall do nothing to part the fray because that supposed notion is no friend of mine therefore I shall leave you to struggle with it as well as you can Having taken it for granted that there must be an infallible Church you come in the last place pag. 36. to resolve which is this Church and this you say is the Roman Church the summ of your Argument is this God hath appointed some Church upon Earth to be our Infallible Judge Ergo the Roman Church must needs be this Infallible Church because no Church differing from it that is none but the Roman Church can be this Infallible Church I Answer That this in effect is a Womans Reason to say that you are Infallible because you are Infallible for you say The Roman Church must needs be so because none but the Roman Church can be so No marvel you tell us Reason must not be our Judge for fear it should condemn such un-manlike Arguing But you add further pag. 37. That the Church which is appointed by God to be this Infallible Judge must needs have this condition that she own her Infallibility To which I Answer That then there was no True Church the first 300 years because that there was none that ever owned Infallibility in your sense unless it were the Church of Laodicea who like Rome said she was rich and increased in goods and had need of nothing whereas she was poor and miserable blind and naked So that the whole Argument is made up of presumption for you presume some Church is Infallible and then you presume your Church must needs be so because no other Church own themselves to be Infallible but you must needs give us a better Reason or else while we make any use of Reason we shall not believe it to be so for what if any Church should have the confidence to call themselves Infallible then your Argument would fall to the ground and the Question would then be to be decided either by the Word or by the Sword which of the two were truly Infallible Having Answered your Arguments I shall propose a few Questions to considerations wherewithall I shall conclude Whereas you say There must be an Infallible Church on Earth to judge of all differences and that this Church consists of a Pope reciding in and defining with a general Council in which it is represented by its Pastours out of all Nations I querie first How was the Church guided for the first 300 years in all which time there was no such general Council Secondly In what time and place was the Church ever so universally represented by her Pastours out of all Nations if not then how could she be Infallible being not so represented Thirdly If the Church be no otherwise Infallible but by general Councils as aforesaid then how can we be guided when there is no General Councils as at this day Fourthly If you say we may be guided by those Canons and Decrees which they made in their respective Sessions Then I demand how I shall rightly understand that those Laws and Canons are truly Translated and Interpreted since they were given out in a Language that I understand not Fifthly If you shall say I may know them from the
you say that if they were understood in the Imperative Mood they cannot work Faith in those that cannot read But then it seems they may work Faith in them that can read because as the Rhemists say they can shew both Jews and Hereticks the Truth if they search deeply and diligently But secondly How can general Councilsshew the Truth and beget Faith since if they are infallible every body cannot read their Decrees and Canons If you say they understand those Decrees and Canons by the general Consent of those that can read then by the same means may a man that cannot read the Scripture be guided by them 3 You say that by those words search the Scripture cannot be understood that the Scriptures should be our Judge and guide because then they would have excluded Christ and after him his Apostles from being the infallible means by which true Faith was to be taught to the World But how doth this follow since you say the Church under the Old Testament was a Judge and an infallible guide But did their being an infallible guide till Christ exclude Christ from being a guide and did Christs being a guide when he was on the Earth exclude the Holy Ghost from being a guide when he left the Earth In like manner it followeth not because the Scriptures of the Old Testament for of them Christ speaks in the place under debate were a guide to instruct men into the knowledge of the Messiah that they should exclude Him His Spirit or Apostles from being Guides But further it followeth by the same parity of Reason that if the Scriptures of the Old Testament could not be an infallible guide because then they would have excluded Christ and after him his Apostles from being infallible guides I say it follows by the same reason that if Christ and his Apostles were infallible Guides and Judges in matters of Faith that then they have excluded the Church of Rome from being that infallible Guide and Judge which she pretends her self to be and thus you have sharpned a Knife to cut your Mothers throat You pretend pag. 14. and say that the second Reason that is urged for sole Scripture being a guide is 2 Tim 3.15 From a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make thee wise to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus All Scripture is given by Inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction in righteousness that the man of God may be perfect throughly furnished to all good works This Text you say proves not what is intended viz. that the Scripture alone was the way the rule and means appointed by God to judge and decide all doubts c. your Reasons pag. 15. are First That though They might be profitable to such a man as Timothy who had faith already yet they could no way be profitable nor useful to one that had not faith or did not believe them to be the Word of God for Faith comes by hearing not by reading To which I answer First If the Scriptures are not a Guide to them that believe not why do the Rhemists say that the reason why Jews and Hereticks do not finde Christ to be their King Lord Life and Saviour is because they did not search the Scriptures deeply Surely you will not say that Jews and Hereticks are Believers and you say they are no guide to Unbelievers why then do the Rhemists say Christ reprehended them for not fearching the Scriptures deeply To what purpose then are Jews and Hereticks blamed for not searching the Scriptures deeply if the Scriptures had been as you say no way profitable to them but further you say they are not profitable to them that do not believe them to be the word of God Suppose this were granted which cannot be proved doth it not follow that your Roman Church by the same reason is no way profitable no way a Judge nor an infallible Guide to any that do not believe her to be so and by the same reason an Atheist may say All gods providences are no monitors to him All his judgements are no examples to him because cause he doth not believe there is a God Is not this as good Logick as to say the Scriptures are no way profitable to them that do not believe them to be the Word of God You proceed to give another reason why this Scripture 2 Tim. 3.15 is not a proof for what is pretended because then if the Scriptures more solely sufficient which Timothy knew from a child they being but the Scriptures of the Old â—estamâ—nt it would follow that Christ and the Now Testament and the Sacraments and the Apostles are at least not necessary I answer if by the Scriptures sole sufficiency you mean that they are sufficient to bring men to salvation without Faith Repentance and Obedience then this is a Puppit of your own as you Phrase it for where is there any Protestant of that mind therefore you do but bark against the Moon But we say they are solely sufficient to direct us to those ways by which we may obtain salvation But then say you What needed Christ and the Apostles and the New Testament if the Scriptures Timothy had learned which were those of the Old Testament were sufficient But then I answer as before if Christ and the Apostles were solely sufficient what need is there of your Pope and Council So that by this Argument you either make Christ and his Apostles not solely sufficient or if they were then what need this waste of a General Council But you may say that a General Council was to direct people in succeeding Ages So were the Scriptures much rather for whatever was written aforetime was written for our Learning upon whom the ends of the World are come In the last place you say pag. 15. The word All Scripture must either signifie every Scripture as the Original word 〈◊〉 ought to be rendred or All Scriptures that ever were or All Scriptures that were when this Text was written or All that we now have If it be to be understood of every Scripture or any Scripture then you say it doth prove too much because then all the Scriptures save one Book are useless Though what hath been said doth sufficiently answer this innumeration and therefore I might be excused from answering any farther yet because you intimate a farther proof of what you now urge I shall therefore when I meet with it give a further Answer You come in the 16 page to tell your Reader That you met with no Arguments for the sole sufficiency of Scripture among those that were usually urged and therefore you resolved to see what could be said against this common General opinion of all who oppose the Church of Rome why the Scriptures could not be this Rule and Judge You say you have not met with any Arguments to prove the sole sufficiency of Scripture to be