the only way to Heaven and that Spirit which he hath promised and gives in the Gospel ministry is the means appointed to teach and establish us in that way with certainty If I depart I will send him unto â—…on and when he is come he shall convince the world of sin because they believe not in me They shall be all taught of God all shall know me c. In whom after that ye believed ye were sealed with that holy spirit of promise Eph. 1.15 And now you instead of reviling such Christians as humbly own their having received the anointing or troubling your self and others with that monstrous notion of an universal infallible governing Church should examine your self whether you have been so convinced taught and sealed by that spirit through hearing the word of truth the Gospel of your salvation received ye the spirit by the hearing of Faith Gal. 3.2 Pag. 33. Secondly It is impossible for any one of these parties meaning Independents Presbyterians Anabaptists Fifth-monarchy men Quakers which I must now crave leave to call Sects with reason to censure or condemn any of the others although never so different from themselves even in points by them esteemed fundamental since each of them have their uncontroulable Plea for themselves that their faith is in every respect conformable to what they understand to be the true sense and meaning of the Scriptures which they agree to be the sole and only Rule and Judge Nay which of these parties can deny the others the Title of Protestants or convince them of Heresie Since to be a Protestant no more is required or if it be I would gladly know what it is than to admit the Scriptures interpreted according to their best understanding and Conscience to be the sole and only rule of Faith and Judge of Controversies Is not he that professeth and followeth this principle allowed by all to be a perfect good Protestant though never so much differing in Faith from others who make the same profession The Quakers because your Allies in the grand point of justification and an uncharitable sentencing of all save their own Sect shall for me stand or fall to their own Master but for the rest that you mention I say that you suppose what you cannot prove scilicet that they differ in points that be or are esteemed by them to be fundamental Do they not all own the Creed called the Apostles and all conclude that therein be contained all the fundamental points at least Nay do they not all own the doctrinal part of the 39 Articles insomuch that you who would seem to revere the Doctrine established by Law dare not say they be Hereticks but are fain to crave leave to call them Sects Secondly It 's true they all agree the Scripture to be the sole and only Rule and yet mean the Scripture taken in the sense intended by God not as privately interpreted by any of them nor is their faith or present perswasion according to their grounds or pleadings uncontroulable sith what they hold in a supposed conformity with or understand to be the true sense and meaning of any Text is humbly submitted unto what can be made out with greater evidence more nearly to accord with or be the very sense and meaning intended by the Holy Ghost Apollos was ready to yield to Aquila and Priscilla Acts 18.26 and they to you or any else that shall expound unto them the way of God more perfectly But Thirdly It matters not much whether these parties can or cannot deny to one another the title of Protestant so they see ground for and do allow to one another the name of Christian Protestant is no more to us than Papist to you though yet you seem not well to know either who or what is meant by Protestant And therefore shall Mr. Baxter at your desire instruct you A Protestant is a Christian that holdeth to the Holy Scripture as the sufficient Rule of Faith and Holy living and protesteth against Popery Or if this like you not take your own definition with some little amendment A Protestant is a Christian that professeth with S. Augustin in those things which are laid down plainly in the Scriptures all those things are found which appertain to faith and direction of life and further admitteth of the Scripture where needing interpretation as interpreted according to his best understanding and Conscience that he has or in the use of lawful means may have for the intire Rule of what he as such ought to hold and practise And yet suppose all that and only that required to the Being of a Protestant which you insert The parties you tell of may at that account convince of Heresie such amongst them as shall appear to be guilty of it may they not use means by opening alledging and reasoning out of the Scripture according to Act. 17.2 3. better to inform and reclaim such a one May they not do as the Lay gentleman did with you and you now in writing this Epistle do with your old Brethren or may they not mind him as Christ did the Sadduces ye err not knowing the Scriptures Matt. 22.19 and make such a like challenge as Augustin did to Maximinius August contra Maxim l. 3. c. 14. But now neither ought I to produce the Nicene Council nor thou that of Ariminum as going about to prejudge neither am I detained by the Authority of this nor thou of that set thing with thing cause with cause reason with reason by authorities oâ— Scriptures not proper to either but common witnesses to us both and iâ— after apparent conviction or stopping of the mouth by Scripture Testimony that man will not relinquish but persist groundlesly to maintain his grosly erroneous Tenet it is an evident sign that he does not indeed admit of Scriptures interpreted according to his best understanding and conscience to be the Rule but obstinately adheres to the perverse wilful reasonings of his own fleshly mind is not a Protestant according to the tenor of your own description but one that is or ought to be rejected by them And although I know well enough you have other means for condemning and killing such you please to call Hereticks yet am I to learn what better means you have whereby to convince them of Heresie or discern who they be A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition reject knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth being condemned of himself Tit. 3.10 11. However you might have done well to have distinguished betwixt a Protestant and a perfect good Protestant He that professeth to follow this one principle so diametrically opposite to the fundamentals of Popery may perhaps be admitted by all or most for a Protestant yet if he differ in points of faith tradited by the four first General Councils and commonly received by Christians or to be of a vicious life he is not at least ought not to be owned by
as they should ever offer to rebel Non licet Christianis c. says Bellarmine it is not lawful for Christians to tolerate a King that is an Heretick if he indeavour â—o draw his Subjects into Heresie And if you would know how Christian Papists in England and some parts of Germany can be excused from neglect of duty Dominicus Bannes will â—ell you because that generally they have not power to make such Wars against Princes and great dangers are â—mminent over them however an Apology might easily be framed out of Bellarmine in the place fore-quoted quod si Christiani olim non deposuerunt Neronem Dioclesianum Julianum Apostatam Valentem Arianum similes fuit quia deerant vires temporales Christianis If Christians in former times did not depose Nero Dioclesian Julian the Apostate and Valens the Arian and such like it was because temporal forces were wanting unto Christians nor may it with any colour of Justice be pleaded that Bellarmine Bannes Mariana Suarez c. be but private Doctors unless it be firstly made appear that the Roman Church might and has legally reversed the foresaid Lateran Decree and anathematised the persons and opinions of these and such like as Heretical however Captain Robert carries it throughout like a man that is indeed an Heretick for while a Protestant he did act as a rebellious Traytor and now being turn'd Papist will needs profess himself a Loyal Subject both in their several times apparently against his own principles The sixth reason against the Scriptures being a Rule examined THe sixth reason I meet with was whatsoever is a sole and sufficient rule Pag. 42. must be plain and clear in all necessary points at least which relate unto faith or the Means by which salvation is to be had which the Scripture is not and above all things it must not contradict it self which the Scripture seems to do To prove this I shall give some few instances which I think can never be infringed The man comes here home to the point waves his impertinent sophistical jumbling in of Judge and Guide and most industriously indeavours to prove from the Scriptures deficiency and obscurity that it is not the sole sufficient Rule nor is it any marvel that we find him now so serious and earnest for if this argument fail all his other seven Antiscriptural reasons come to nothing with it for though Presbyterians Independents Anabaptists c. should disagree in matters of Faith raise different senses to serve their several interests cannot all of them understand and some of them do desperately wrest several places to their own destruction the Scripture supposed plain and clear in all necessary points the fault and folly is their own The Scripture all this notwithstanding may and does still remain as it was a sole sufficient Rule or if some Books be lost all Copies corrupted and several Texts mistranslated yet what 's this to the purpose while we can and shall evince that the Books we at present have are so intire the Copies so pure and the Translations so true that all points necessary at least be therein plain and clear nor will it avail to tell us of the Primitive Christians consulting with the Apostles and that it is all one to judge by our own reason and by a Law to be interpreted by our own reason For we might suppose the Apostles with all their Authority now in being go and consult with them or in their absence with the Pastors of the several Churches as the great Moderators of all controversies and yet the Scriptures if plain and clear still remain a sole sufficient Rule according to which the controversies might and ought to be decided Nor need we in this case be troubled with interpreting of Scriptures according to our own reason sith 't is supposed and shall be proved that the Scripture is so clear in all necessary points that it needs no interpretation though yet you may take notice by the way that to judge by our own reason as the only rule is not the same with judging by a Law to be interpreted by our own reason as one special means your Argument would perhaps strike at that but this is all that in any case we practise and so do because Christ bids us search the Scriptures and the Apostle adds judge ye what I say comparing spiritual things with spiritual however sith the faith or means by which salvation is to be had is a believing on Christ the foundation as hath been said not a believing of just so many as you or others are pleased to call fundamental points If the Scriptures be plain and clear as without peradventure they are in their testifying of him according to Joh. 5.40 they are plain and clear in what necessarily relates to Faith or the means by which Salvation is to be had according to John 20.31 and consequently what ever becomes of all the other whether necessary or unnecessary points may be a sole sufficient Rule according to the tendency of this your present discourse the seeming contradictions shall after your infringible instances come now to be discussed Pag. 42. That they are not plain and clear as aforesaid consider all Christians generally except some few do agree that the Sacraments of the Gospel are necessary in order to Salvation Now as to these the Scriptures are so far from being clear that they do not so much as denominate what a Sacrament is how many Christ ordained or whether there be any Sacrament or not First All Christians may agree that the Sacraments are necessary and yet they not be so for it 's Christs saying that they are not at all the Christians agreeing that can make them necessary Did not all Christians generally agree for six hundred years together that the Eucharist was necessary for Infants and yet now the Church concludeth otherwise But 2. it is here granted that some Christians deny the Sacraments of the Gospel to be necessary and if some may be Christians and yet deny the necessity of Sacraments it 's an argument sufficient that they are not necessary Nor indeed does the man assert that Sacraments be simply necessary but qualifies it with in order to Salvation and limits it to Sacraments of the Gospel perhaps he may think there be two ways whereby God brings his people to Salvation one ordinary with and the other extraordinary without Sacraments nor shall I say more of that but tell him that if Women and Male Children under the Law might much more the Catechumeni and Infants under the Gospel may be saved by grace without Sacraments to confer or convey it 3. Though it be not the Scripture mode to observe Logick rules in framing definitions nor always Arithmetical in making up of accounts Yet is the nature and end of these Ordinances we call Sacraments described in Scripture so far as is meet for us to know The number numbred Baptism and the Lords-supper said
Testimony And whereas he should have resolved his faith into the Sovereign Authority and verity of God himself speaking in Scriptures as the formal ground thereof and into the spirits inlightning inlivening Power as the efficient cause He resolves it wholly into an inward Testimony of the spirit of which for ought appears neither of the twain save by hear-say knew any thing at all However instead of the Spirits testimony the man might better have said in this case simply by the Spirit by the Spirit scilicet as that medium facultatis whereby we are enabled to see and believe scriptural verities to be Divine Albeit as Dr. Ames well observeth Medull l. 2. c. 5. there is a sufficient and certain representation proposed to us in the Scripture both of things that are to be believed and of that Reason upon which we ought to believe them See Rom. 16.26 Nor yet Fourthly Does he perceive the difference betwixt faith Dogmatical complex assenting to the truth of Divine propositions and that faith which we call salvifical incomplex fixing on adhering to and resting in Jesus Christ alone That may be various respect had to its object the same man knows such a proposition to be revealed to morrow which he knows not to day and consequently believe that to morrow which to day he does not This respect had to the object varies not It 's Jesus the same Yesterday to Day and for ever Though yet respect had to the subject like as the other it 's sometimes weaker or stronger confused or more distinct And hence men of different faiths incomplex cannot be saved for there is no other name under Heaven given c. Acts 4.12 other foundation can no man lay than that is laid which is Jesus Christ 1 Cor. 3.11 oneness of Faith as to this is commended and commanded Eph. 4.5 compared with Eph. 4.13 unto the unity of the Faith and knowledge of the Son of God He that believeth on the Son of God hath life Eternal and he that believeth not c. John 3.36 But men may be of different faiths complex believe diverse nay contrary propositions and yet through Grace obtain salvation Some build Gold Silver precious Stones some Wood Hay Stubble one believeth he may eat all things another who is weak eateth Herbs Rom. 14.2 Fifthly and Lastly the man seems not to know of any difference betwixt an acquired Habit and a Divine Gift the requisites to our getting of Science and Gods giving of Faith Science it 's true as Thomas determines cannot be had unless we first know the certainty of the Medium or Reason whereby the conclusion is demonstrated but it is impertinent to Faith as Estius well concludes by what means we believe the prime Verity that is by what means God useth to bestow on men the gift of Faith He may do it as well by the preaching of the meanest Minister as of the greatest Apostle for indeed neither the one nor the other is or needs to be what he supposes a foundation or Argument whereon to build but simply a medium or instrument whereby is begotten and brought forth that Faith which is of the operation of God Page 7. And therefore in vain does he dispute about the Primitive Christians believing either because the Apostles so taught or Simon Magus so affirmed for it was not because but by the Preaching whether of Paul or Apollos that they did believe We have not dominion over your Faith 2 Cor. 1.24 Who then is Paul or who is Apollos but Ministers by whom ye believed even as the Lord gave to every man 1 Cor. 3.5 The Captains inadvertency or imprudence is as evident First In that he never calls to mind that Priests and Jesuites pass usually under the Notion of Lay Gentlemen and great Folks Cousins Trusts Eve like to his own skill and never makes known either his doubts or the Gentlemans objections to any of the Protestant Ministers He borrows it 's true a certain deal of Popish Books The Question of Questions Novelty repressed Fiat Lux Infidelity unmasked or a confutation of a Book published by Mr. William Chillingworth but never inquires for Mr. William Chillingworth's own Book nor Dr. Hammonds answer to Infidelity Vnmasked in his vindication of the Lord Falkland He never sends to Dr. Owen for his animadversions on Fiat Lux nor adviseth with Mr. Baxter about Novelty supprest Had he consulted with these Ministers of ours and told us wherein they failed in the answering either these Books or the Lay Gentlemans Objections it might have been of some moment have startled perhaps some of the Nonconformists but to make a stirr and a story how mildly how profoundly the Lay Gentleman objected and then how extreamly troubled how strangely the Horse-Captain was gravelled argues nothing save the Gentlemans cunning craftiness and the Captains dastardly weakness the cause no more concerned than if they had never had meeting Secondly He never considered that the Gentleman was altogether for asking questions Robert never proposes any for if when the Captain was gravelled and could not certainly prove the truth of Christianity from his own Fanatick Principles he had put the Gentleman to it to have proved Christianity certainly true from the Popish a hundred to one but they had both proved Heathens the one being no more able to establish it by Miracles upon the infallibility of the Roman Church than the other by sense and feeling upon the Spirits Testimony the man now knows and finds this to be true enough and therefore in the conclusion doth he present us with six queries conjures his old Brethren to answer them and withal warily provides that they shall not ask him any question at all but first ascertain what they would establish for says he Page 85. Who knows not if a Man will give himself scope to be bold he may raise Arguments against the belief of the Trinity or any other Mystery of Faith that will puzzle learned Men to answer a piece of cunning and caution I could wish all our weaker sort of Protestants to take special notice of Thirdly The man unadvisedly all along confounds endeavours to fix and find in the same subject the Rule Judge and Guide of Faith whenas these three are in their respective Natures Uses Ends distinct and scarcely possible to be subjected in the same thing or person The Scripture may be a Rule certain and stable as Bellarmine and yet no Judge Reason may be a judge or rather that whereby every man is to judge for himself as Chillingworth and yet no Rule The spirit may be Guide to direct draw and lead us into all truth and yet neither rule nor judge The Church by her Ministry may be subservient to the spirit in leading helpful to us in finding out applying of and judging according to the Rule and yet the Church it self be neither Rule Judge nor Guide nor will now that grand Sophism the Spirit is not Reason is not the
apparent from the very writing of it in letters and the confession of our adversaries that each Text is to be understood literally Nor is that he calls figurative Literalis est duplex alius simplex alius figuratuâ— Bellar. ibid. any other than a species of the literal sense The mystical an uncertain remote intendment of the things and not the immediate argumentative meaning of the written Words or Text which we are now enquiring after Augustin 〈◊〉 Doctrina Christiana l. 2. c. 9. However 3. In iis quae aperte in Scripturis posita sunt inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem morésque vivendi In those things which are laid down plainly in the Scriptures all those things are found which appertain to Faith and Direction of Life Dark figurative Texts and mystical meaning of things may in some sense be useful yet it is not necessary in order to the knowing of the mind of God so far as is requisite for us to know that we should be able to unfold them Exponat si cui Deus concesserit As Cajetan of the Revelation And yet further 4. There is a difference betwixt being ignorant of such and such a Text and wresting or wilfully perverting it to a wrong sense This even in Scriptures not materially necessary to be known must of necessity be avoided It is Heretical it is Soul-destructive 2 Peter 3.19 that anent Texts holding out points commonly called Fundamental may consist with saving knowledge for it is the knowing the true mind meaning and will of God as to such a particular that is necessary and not just the knowing it by such and such a Text you may perhaps know it by one Text and I by another or you by oral practical tradition and I by writing Sixthly It is necessary to know that the very Copies and Translations of the Scriptures which we have and upon which we ground our selves are certainly true for if they are not we build upon uncertainties and consequently have no sure foundation for our Faith yet we cannot be assured nor have so much as any information as to this particular from the Scriptures First The Man does not deny either the being or possibility of knowing That there be Copies and Translations certainly true only he asserts That we have not so much as any information as to this particular from the Scriptures which we might as hath been said easily grant and yet upon just Grounds maintain that the Scripture is a rule both plain and perfect howbeit In hac germani textuâ—s pervestigatione salis perspicuè inter omnes constat nullum argumentum esse certius ac firmius quam antiquorum probatorum codicum latinorum fidem c. in praefat we need not do it for in the pervestigation of the true genuine Text says Sixtus Quintus There was no Argument more firm and certain to be relyed on than the Faith of the antient Books Nor is there a better way says a great Rationalist for the ordinary sort whether of Papists or Protestants than to compare their and our Translations together and where there is no real difference there to be confident they are right where they differ there to be prudent in the choice of their Guide 2. There is a certainty Mathematical Moral and Spiritual Mathematical either touching Copies or Translations of Scripture is not now to be had Certainty Moral such as the nature of the thing will bear and as much as humane Testimony and industry can afford us we have Nor is the building thereupon a founding our Faith upon uncertainties but upon most strong probabilities such as especially in a matter of Fact and Skill it were extream imprudence and obstinacy not to rest satisfied withal Certainty Spiritual whether of Science or adherence beyond that which the best rational Evidence can give ground for is to be had and sometimes by but not from us you must by Prayer seek unto God for it every good Gift and every perfect Gift is from above And if God vouchsafe to give it you as to this particular touching the whole or part well if not for ought I know or you are able to evince you must be content to be without it However 3. You do ill to call the Scripture quà Scriptura as copied and translated the foundation of Faith and worse to conclude from its uncertainty as such that our Faith has no sure foundation For Scripture under that notion is not the Material much less either the Formal or Salvifical object of Faith nor any more save choicely instrumental in the producing thereof and I think we may safely affirm That an Instrument in it self fallible may be mainly subservient to the supreme Cause in bringing us both to believe Divine Truths because Divine and to acquiesce in him who is the Foundation indeed and Truth it self Jesus Christ Your English Priests are fallible yet instrumental sure by Preaching Translating Writing to bring persons certainly to believe those Proposals and to fix upon that Authority which is supposed in it self to be infallible How shall they believe in him on whom they have not heard And how shall they hear without a Preacher Rom. 10. Not how without an infallible Proposer But 4. I much admire the Man should hold it necessary to know c. sith it is evident that in Austin's time the Latin Translations of the Scripture were innumerable nor could any man have said this or that is certainly true The Septuagint said to be used by the Apostles is confessedly faulty and though some of the present Romanists may be arrived at that height of impudence as peremptorily to affirm yet none can rationally make it out that they know any one Translation that is perfect or Copy that is uncorrupt The Council of Trent indeed did decree That the Vulgar Translation should be received for Authentick but which she meant by Vulgar or what by Authentick no body can yet tell there was bellum Papale after about the Editions Sixtus against Clemens and Clemens against Sixtus Nor can their Doctors yet conclude whether it is better say the Translation is free from all errours or only such as relate to Faith and Manners Seventhly It is necessary that the many manifest controversies about the true sense of Scripture should be decided because where two contrary senses are imposed and urged and both affirmed to be the meaning of God and his Revelation one only can be true and he who refuseth that which is true shall be damned yet these controversies cannot be decided by Scripture 1. If it be necessary that the many manifest controversies about the true sense of Scripture should be decided sure your Supream Infallible Judge is far to blame that hath not yet decided them but suffers your own Doctors to controvert the sense of almost every Text of Scripture 2. We urge it 's true by Arguments but it is you alone that Magisterially impose your own meanings as Divine
any of them for a perfect good Protestant To elude these plain and evident Texts scilicet Deuter. 17.8 Matt. 23.2 3. c. brought to prove that the Church is the sole infallible Rule and Judge you were wont to say that they may have other interpretations and therefore this is not the truth it is a question whether any Texts of Holy Scriptures and consequently whether these Texts which speak so amply of the Church are to be understood of the Church militant and visible in this world or of the Church triumphant Ye are willing to agree that so long as the Church of Christ teacheth conformable to Scriptures she is infallible Whereas instead of thus saying doubting or agreeing we enquire First To what purpose should you urge us to believe the infallibility of the Church or any thing else upon Scripture grounds when you tell us aforehand that faith founded upon Scripture is not truly faith for though we should grant what you suppose scilicet that Christ and his Apostles did urge the Jews with Scriptures meerly because of their incredulity yet did they never tell them as you do us Faith founded upon Scripture will avail you nothing It is not that Divine Faith which God calls for at your hands Or if you yet say that it is warrantable to believe the Church is infallible upon your urging why not to believe Christ to be the Messias or any other point of Christian Doctrine upon our Ministers alledging of Scripture for it But Secondly Be these Texts plain and evident or not If not why do you say they are And if they be these very Texts are a Rule such as you seek for whereby to judge of this Controversie and consequently the Church is not the only Rule whereby Controversies are to be judged But Thirdly The Quaerendum here is not whether we can shew with any assurance that these Texts are capable of other interpretations but whether you can demonstrate like as the Apostle used to do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 17.3 18. these your own interpretations to be certainly true do it when you do it by some infallible medium and we shall be ready to believe what you say But if you bring no proofs and no other you have brought as yet save your own private reasonings Instead of believing the truth of your interpretations we shall make bold to ask you as you do your self what difference is there betwixt judging by your own reason and judging by a Law to be interpreted by your own reason This is to make the Scripture not Gods word but the word of every private man Though yet Fourthly Had you not made a little bold with your own reason and quite contrary both to sense and honesty omitted verse the eight be-between blood and blood between Plea and Plea and put down c. instead of the eleventh verse ubi satis apte sanctus Moyses Controversias exortas in Populo Dei ex Lege Domini judicandas docet Bellar. de verbo Dei lib. 1. cap. 2. according to the sentence of the Law which they shall teach thee it would have been evident from Deut. 17. That the Controversies there spoken of were limited to matters of strife betwixt party and party like those Mat. 18.17 and the Judge in sentencing to the Rule of the Law called Moses Chair Matt. 23.2 And consequently the first Scripture you cite which should be the measure of the rest partly makes nothing for in part makes directly against your main conclusion Isaiah 35.8 hath been already Isaiah 2.4 Mat. 28.20 John 16.12 will be hereafter spoken to Isaiah 43.3.17 Isaiah 26.2.1 and Mat. 16.9 confirm what we contend for viz the whole Church of Gods Elect consisting of lively stones to be firmly built upon that living stone that Rock Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 2.4 5. And that the Royal seed the Children of God shall be all taught and led by the Spirit of God according to Rom. 8.14 John 6.45 1 John 2 27. John 14.16 relates only to such as are called out of the world love him and keep his commandements as it is evident from verses 15. and 17. concerns neither the Pope nor his Cardinals unless he or they be first proved the spiritual man intended 1 Cor. 2.15 and if Ephes 4.11 we may be allowed to leave out the Apostles Prophets Evangelists and read he will give instead of he gave which must be done ere that Text can have any shew of pertinency it will respect all and singular Pastors and Teachers that be the gifts of Christ For the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministry for the edifying of the body of Christ Till we all come to an unity not of opinion form or points of Faith as you use to word it but into the unity of the faith and knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ That we henceforth be no more children tossed to and fro from confidence in one device to a dependency upon another and carried about with every empty wind of Doctrine by the slight of men and cunning craftiness whereby they lie in wait to deceive But speaking the truth in love may grow up to him in all things which is the head even Christ from whom without mention or mediation of any other head the whole body fitly joyned together and compacted by that which every joynt supplyeth according to the effectual working of every part maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of it self in love vers 12 13 14 15 16. Nor is the last with which you flourish of any more moment for never to take notice that by Church cannot there be meant Roman or General Council There is a Pillar for holding out Edicts as well as a Pillar for holding up houses there is a ground wherein men set Trees sow Seed as well as a ground whereon they erect buildings and recumb The Church may be a Pillar to hold out the truth and yet not a Pillar for you to rely on for all doctrins that be true The Church may be that chosen ground in which the Mystery of Godliness Christ the truth is set and sown and yet no common ground given for you to found your faith upon Tares may spring up together with the good Seed Truth held out and yet errour attend it However the word in the Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifies a Seat and you know well how to let Moses Chair alone and rely on him supposed to sit therein And now Sir do you not stand astonished at your own impudence in thus imposing upon the Nonconformists they do not they need not limit these Texts to the Church triumphant but tell you further First That it will be hard for you to prove from Scripture that the Church of God in this world the Church you speak of Pag. 62. which Christ redeemed with his blood is a