If now I say also that Hercules is not God and Bacchus is not God and Venus Mars Mercury Pallas Neptune Pluto Ceres c. are not Gods is this a new Religion or an addition to the former If the Baptismal Covenant be the Essentials of my Religion and the Creed Lords Prayer and Decalogue the Explication of it and if the Scripture be my Entire Religion and if the Papists will come and add a multitude of new Articles and Corruptions my rejecting of those additions is no more an alteration of my Religion than the sweeping of my house or the washing of my hands is an alteration of them So that notwithstanding all that you have said my Religion is nothing but the Law of Nature and Scripture and my rejecting of Popery is no otherwise my Religion than my freedom from the Leprosie c. is my humanity P. Observe I pray you that It is no part of your Religion to be against Popery R. Observe I pray you that Popery is against my Religion that is against much of the Christian Religion and therefore my Religion is against Popery But I will not quarrell with you about words When God hath Revealed to us his Will and the Papists add their corrupting inventions Gods Revealed Will is my Religion your Corrupting additions are contrary to it Call my rejecting such Corruptions and additions by the name of my Religion Reductively as Nihil is objectum Intellectus Malum Voluntatis and as non-agere is part of obedience or Call it no part of my Religion in the primary notion but a Rejecting of its contraries so we understand each other I care not The truth is the Rejecting of some of your errors directly contradicting the Scripture it self may be called part of our Religion as the Negation of the Contrary is included in the sense of an Affirmative But your remoter additions are contrary to our Religion but not so directly For instance when the Scripture saith There is bread after Consecration and you say There is no bread My Religion containeth the Assertion that There is bread And so includeth a contradiction to your Negative that saith There is none Now to say that it is none of my Religion to deny your Negative who say There is no bread would import that It is none of my Religion which affirmeth that there is bread Contradictions cannot both be true Properly that word that saith There is bread is my Religion But this word contradicteth you that say There is none But in another instance my Religion saith that The Righteous shall go into life everlasting and the rest to everlasting punishment and tells us of a Heaven and Hell only hereafter And you tell us of Limbus Patrum Infantum and of Purgatory The Scripture enableth us by consequence to confute this but if it did not it were enough for me to say It is none of my Religion because not Revealed by God in Nature or Scripture And as it is your Addition so to deny it is not directly and properly my Religion it self but the Defence and Vse of my Religion God tells us in Scripture that He created Heaven and Earth If one should assert as from God that God created ten thousand Heavens and ten thousand Earths this is a faith of his own invention or addition and it is enough for me to say I have no such faith because God revealeth no such thing So thaâ— still the Scripture is the Protestants Religion as your Polydor Virgil truly describeth them and others confess P. All this is meer delusion For It is not the words but the sense that is your Religion as you will confess And if your Articles or Confessions contain a false sense or your Books or Sermons shew that you falsly expound the Scripture your Religion is then false R. Such Confusion may cheat a heedless hearer But any one that will take heed may quickly perceive that you here fraudulently play with the ambiguity of the word Religion and quite turn to another question For you now speak of subjective Religion that is of the Acts and habits of the person whereas we are disputing only of objective Religion which is Gods Revelation and our Rule If I understand any Texts of Scripture amiss my faith is so far defective in my selfs But Gods Word which is my Rule is never the more imperfect I pray you consider how justly you have spoken 1. Is a mans Act of faith Gods Word or Revelation 2. What need you dispute of the Protestants Religion if we have as many Religions as persons For it is as certain that we have as many degrees of our understanding many Texts of Scripture 3. Would not this prove also as many Religions as persons among your selves Is it not most certain that no two Papists in the world have just the same sense or conceptions of the Scriptures and Councils in each particular The Law of God is my only Religion objectively as how disputed of If I mistake any essential part of it so as to deny it I am personally a Heretick If I mistake any Integral part I so far err from the Rule of my Religion or faith But I still profess that I take Gods Word or Law only for my sure unchangeable Rule or objective Religion and I am daily learning to understand it better and as soon as I see my error I will reform it and blame my self and not my Rule And I think you will say the same of your Rule and of your personal errors P. This shall not serve your turn For every Law must have its promulgation And if it be not manifested to you that Scripture is Gods Law and sufficient it cannot be your Rule I ask you therefore Qu. 1. Is it the Scripture in the Original or in the Translations which you say is your Religion Law or Rule R. I told you our Divine Rule consisteth of Words and Meaning It is only the Originals which are our Rule or Religion as to the very words that is Only the Original words were of that Divine Inspiration But every Translation is so far Gods Word in sense as it expresseth truly the sense of the original words P. Qu. 2. I pray you what then is the Religion of all the unlearned Protestants who know not a word of the Originals They may see now that you have stript them of all Divine Religion R. Their Religion is the same objectively with that of the most learned as delivered from God but it is not equally learned and understood by them Gods Word in the Original Tongues is given them as the Rule of Faith and Worship and Teachers are appointed to help them to understand it When these Teachers have Translated it to them they have the same sense though not the same words for their Religion And to know the Words is not so necessary to salvation as to know the sense or sentence though by other words For the words are but means to
truly believed that Christ was the Messiah They erred that thought it lawful to eat things offered to Idols and yet they erred not in believing in Christ No two men in the world its like have the same degree of personal faith and knowledge as I oft said before But if our professed object of faith that is Gods word were false in one thing we could not be sure that it were true in any thing Yet here I told you before 1. That a man may be much surer that one part of Scripture is Gods word than another because some Copies are doubtful in the diverse Readings of some particular words or sentences and which of them that so differ is Gods word we oft know not But so much as we are sure is the word of God we are sure is true So if the Authority of some few books was once doubted of as 2 Pet. Jam. Jud. Heb. c. and yet be by any it followeth not that they doubt of the truth of any which they know to be the word of God 2. Or if any do hold that the Penmen might be left to their natural fallibility in some by historical circumstances or words it would not follow that one Article of the Gospel or Christian faith is doubtful which is plainly as the Kernel of it delivered in all the Scripture and also by infallible Universal Tradition by it self in the Sacrament Creed Lords Prayer and Decalogue And our case also much differeth from the Papists in this For We profess that our objective faith Gods word is Infallible and we are Infallible so far as we believe it But we confess that we are lyable to misunderstand some parts of it and so far are fallible as being imperfect But the Papists say that their Pope and Councils and Universal Practicers are personally Infallible so as not to be lyable to any misunderstanding of any Article of faith say some or Article of Catholick faith say others And so they make their own Act of Believing to be Commensurate and equally certain with Gods word of faith and therefore they allow you to question them in all if they err in one as pretending to a gift of never erring in any D. But is it not a great reason to incline us to them rather than to you when They only pretend to Infallibility and You confess that you are all fallible in your Belief R. This is to be the subject of our next Conference and therefore not now to be anticipated only I shall tell you that It is a meer noise of ambiguous words to deceive the heedless that cannot search out the meaning of them 1. We not only Pretend but Profess and prove that our Christian Religion is altogether Infallible For which end I have written divers Treatises my self 2. And we profess that all the mystical Church of Christ that is all sincere Christians do truly and Infallibly believe all that is Essential to Christianity and as much of the Integrals as they can know 3. And we profess that the Catholick Church-Visible that is All professors of Christianity in the world do profess all these Essentials of Christianity and are Infallible in this profession But we hold withall that there is no particular Church or Bishop no Synod or Council that is so Infallible but that 1. They that hold to the Essentials may misunderstand and err about some Integrals 2. And those persons have no Certainty that they shall not err by Heresie or Apostacy from the Essentials themselves So that the Church is Infallible because it is essentiated by believing an Infallible Word which who ever believeth not ceaseth to be of the Church not Gods Word infallible because the Church or any number of men believe it or say Its true For Truth is before Knowledge and Faith As Aristotle was a Philosopher because he understood and taught the doctrine of real Philosophy and not that doctrine called Physicks or Philosophy because that Aristotle knew or taught it But alas What work shall I shew you when I come to open their bewildring uncertainties D. But to deal freely with you methinks their way of measuring out the Necessaries in Faith and Religion according to mens various parts and opportunities seemeth to me more satisfactory than yours who fix upon certain points as the Baptismal Covenant as Essentials For there is great diversity of mens Capacities R. This cometh from confounding several Questions as if they were all one 1. It is one Question What is the Christian Religion 2. ☞ It is another Question Whether the Christian Religion be absolutely necessary to the salvation of all those to whom it was never competently revealed 3. And it is another Question Whether more than the Essentials of Christian Religion be not necessary to the salvation of many who have opportunity to know more Alas what work doth Confusion make in the world To the first It is evident that as Mahometanism is a thing which may be defined so much more may Christianity Who that writeth of the several Religions of the world Ethnick Jewish Mahometan and Christian do not take them to be distinguishable and discernable Especially when Christ hath summed up Christianity into a Covenant and given it us in express words and affixed a flat promise of salvation to the true Covenanters and the Church hath ever called our Baptism our Christening Is Christianity Nothing If Something Why may it not be defined and differenced from all false Religions And if so It hath its Essential Constitutive parts All this is plain to Children that will see 2. And then as to the second question it concerneth not our Controversie at all It is but Whether any Infidels may be saved Or any that are no Christians And if it could be proved that any are saved that are no Christians do you thereby prove that they are Christians or members of the Christian Church or that Christianity is not a Religion which may be defined 3. And as to the third question We are on all sides agreed in it That they that have more than the naked Essentials of Christianity revealed to them aptly are bound to believe more Yea it is hardly conceiveable that any one should know and believe the Essentials only and no more It is not Essential to the Christian Covenant or Christianity to know that the Name of Christs Mother was Mary or that Pontius Pilate was the man that condemned him And if an Ignorant man thought that his continuance in the Grave was four dayes I do not think that this would damn his soul to Hell Much less the not believing that Mary dyed a Virgin And yet it is not like that any man should come to the Essentials of Christianity by any such way as should acquaint him with no one of these or any point besides the said Essentials And yet it is certain for all this that he that truly receiveth the Essentials and is true to the Baptismal Covenant shall be
it me with such evidence as may make it indeed my own The Lord Unite us by Truth Love and Humility Amen Septemb. 1. 1673. Richard Baxter THE CONTENTS PART I. WHat is the Protestants Religion and what the Papists pag. 1. Chap. 1. The occasion of the Conference with an humbling consideration to staggerers ibid. Chap. 2. The Conditions of the Conference p. 6. Chap. 3. What is the Religion of the Protestants Of the name Protestant The Augustane and other Confessions The thirty nine Articles The Essentials of Christianity to be distinguished from the Integrals and Accidentals p. 9. Chap. 4. What is the Papists Religion out of Veron Davenport c. p. 25. PART II. Fourteen Principles in which the Papists and Protestants seem agreed by which the Protestant Religion is by the Papists confessed and maintained to be all true p. 40. PART III. Twenty five Charges against Popery enumerated to be all in order proved as Reasons why no one that hath Religion or Sense and Reason should turn Papist p. 61. PART IV. The first Charge made good viz. against Transubstantiation In which Popery is fully proved to be the shame of Humane Nature contrary to SENSE REASON SCRIPTVRE and TRADITION or the Judgement of the antient and the present Church devised by Satan to expose Christianity to the Scorn of Infidels p. 75. Chap. 1. The first Reason to prove that there is Bread after the Consecration from the certainty of the Intellects Perception by the means of sense ibid. Twenty Reasons against the denying of common senses p. 77. Chap. 2. The Papists Answers to all this confuted p. 88. Chap. 3. The second Argument against Transubstantiation from the contradictions of it p. 96. Chap. 4. The third Argument from the certain falshood of their multitudes of feigned Miracles in Transubstantiation Thirty one Miracles in it enumerated with Twenty aggravations of those Miracles p. 99. Chap. 5. The Minor proved viz. That these Miracles are false or feigned p. 110. Chap. 6. Arg. 4. Transubstantiation contrary to the express Word of God p. 117. Chap. 7. Arg. 5. All these Miracles are proofless yea the Scripture abundantly directeth us otherwise to expound This is my Body p. 123. Chap. 8. Arg. 6. Transubstantiation nullifieth the Sacrament p. 128. Chap. 9. The Novelty of Transubstantiation as contrary to the faith of the antient Christians And the singularity contrary to the Judgement and Tradition of most of the Christian world p. 132. Chap. 10. The second part of the Controversie That it is not Christs very flesh and blood into which the Bread and Wine is turned p. 146. Chap. 11. The Conclusion The Scandal of our difference removed Whether the falshood of one Article prove the Papists foundation false Whether it do so by the Protestants Whether Papists have any more Infallibility than others The necessity of discerning the Essentials of Christianity The distinction of Explicite and Implicite faith considered How come so many Princes Nobles Learned men and whole Nations to be Papists All Christians besides Papists are of one Church though of many opinions How come so many among us at home of late inclinable to Popery What hope of Concord with the Papists How to help them off their Councils Snares in the point of Transubstantiation Of their denying the Cup to the Laity p. 152. Reader I Hope the Printers Errata are not many and I am discouraged from gathering them because I see men had rather err themselves and calumniate the Author than take notice of them So hath Mr. Danvers done by me in a Book against Infant Baptism where as an Introduction to abundance of mistakes in History he abuseth his Reader by several scraps of a Book of mine so curtail'd as to be insufficient to signifie the sense And among them feigneth me to write Chr. Direct p. 3. pag. 885. l. 13. to Institute Sacraments as that which man may do instead of Nor to Institute Sacraments and so maketh his credulous flock to believe that I assert that very thing which I write against Though the place was markt with a Star in the Errata and the Reader desired specially to Correct it But such dealing is now grown so common with such men that we must bear it as the effect of their disease PART I. What is the Protestants Religion and what the Papists CHAP. I. The occasion of the Conference D. SIR I am come to crave your help in a matter of great importance to me I was bred a Protestant but the Discourses of some Roman Catholicks have brought me into great doubts whether I have not been all this while deceived And though I cannot dispute the case my self with you I desire you to dispute it in my hearing with a Catholick Priest whom I shall bring to you R. With all my heart But let me first ask you a few Questions Quest 1. Did you ever understand what the Protestants Religion is D. I take it to be the 39 Articles Liturgie and Government of the Church of England R. No wonder if you be easily drawn to doubt of that Religion which you no better understand Can you hold it and not know what it is Quest 2. Do you know what it is to be a Christian D. It is to believe in Christ and to Love and obey Him Our Baptism is our Christening R. Very true And in your Baptism you are Dedicated and Vowed to God the Father Son and Holy Ghost renouncing the Lusts of the Flesh the World and the Devil Quest 3. And have you been a true Christian and lived according to this Vow Have you obeyed God more than the desires of your flesh Have you preferred the Kingdom of Heaven before all the pleasures honours and riches of this world Have you sincerely submitted to the healing saving Doctrine Law and example of Christ and to the sanctifying motions of his Holy Spirit And have you lived soberly righteously and Godlily in the world and made it your care and business to deny your self and mortifie all fleshly inordinate desires as it is the care of sensual men to gratifie them D. I have had my faults as all men have but I hope none can say but I have lived honestly towards all And if I have been faulty in drinking sports or gaming it hath been to no ones injury but my own R. I ask you not whether you are a sinner For so are all men But whether you are a truly Penitent Converted sinner and whether yet you are true to your Baptismal Vow and Covenant Can your Conscience say that you Love and Trust and obey God and your Redeemer before all the world and that you love not Pleasure Riches and Honour more than God and Holiness and Heaven and that it is more of the care and business of your life to Know and Love and serve God better and to make sure of your salvation than to please your flesh or prosper in the world In a word Do you heartily and in
You hear his conditions you shall hear my answer 1. The Case which you told me you were in doubt of and desired satisfaction in was Which is the True and Safe Religion This he refuseth to Dispute Pretending that we cannot dispute of our whole Religion at once But did you never hear him give any Reasons against our Religion If he have Why can he not do it now I expect not all in a word but let him give them one by one and say his worst I am sure I can give you many against theirs And we will after debate them particularly as largely as you please 2. If Writing be it that you desire for your satisfaction I ask you whether you have read all or the fourth part of what is written against Popery already Have you read Dr. Challoner of the Catholick Church Dr. White Dr. Field Dr. Downame of Antichrist Chillingworth Dr. Abbot Dr. Willet Bishop Vsher Bishop Morton Dr. Stillingfleet and an hundred more Why should I expect that you should read what I shall write if you will not read what 's written already 3. Can you stay so long unresolved without injury to your soul till he and I have done writing You cannot but know that from Sheets we must proceed to the writing of Volumes in answering each other as others have done And this is like to be many years work for men that have other business And how know you that we shall all Live so long 4. Are you able when it cometh to tedious Volumes to examine them and find who is in the right Or will you not rather take him to conquer who hath the last word And it 's like that will be the longest liver 5. And as to a strict syllogistical form do you understand that best I avoid it not but shall consent to use it as far as you understand it Do you know all the Logical forms of arguing all Moods and Figures and all the fallacies Or do you not perceive that you have broken your promise with me and brought a friend of darkness who cometh purposely to hide the truth D. I must needs profess that the Question which I would have debated is Which is the True and Safe Religion And that it is not tedious writings nor long delayes but present conference which must satisfie me And that it is plain Scripture and Reason that must satisfie me who understand not Logick I pray let me hear your own Conditions which you think more just R. The Conditions which the nature of the Cause directeth us to are these I. That we first truly state the question to be disputed For we cannot dispute till we are agreed of what That is 1. That we agree what we mean by our Religion and 2. That I tell you what is the Religion of Protestants which I undertake to defend And that he tell us what is the Religion of the Romanists which must be compared with it II. That our Conference consist of these several parts 1. That premising the principles in which we are agreed I tell you the Reasons why you should not be a Papist 2. That he tell you the Reasons why you should turn Papist or what he hath against Our Religion 3. That then we come to dispute these Reasons distinctly where I will prove my charges against them and he shall prove his charges against us one by one III. And that in all our disputes we shall consent 1. Not to interrupt each other in speech but if the length seem to overmatch the hearers memory we will take brief Notes to help our memories as we go and crave the recitation of what shall be forgotten For the strength of Truth lyeth so much in the connexion of its parts that when it is mangled into scraps by uncivil interruptions it is deformed and debilitated and cannot be well understood 2. That we bind our selves by solemn promise to speak nothing which we unfeignedly judge not to be truth nor any thing designedly to hide or resist the truth which we discern These terms are so just and necessary that I will avoid him as a fraudulent wrangler who will deny them For I come not to scold nor to try who hath the strongest Lungs the nimblest Tongue or the lowdest voice or the greatest confidence or fiercest passion but to try who hath the truth and which is the true way to Heaven For the servant of the Lord must not strive especially about words and barren notions for that doth but tend to increase ungodliness D. Your Method is so reasonable and so suited to my own necessity that I must profess no other can so much tend to my satisfaction And therefore I hope it will not be refused Here after long opposition the P. at last agreeth to these terms CHAP. III. What is the Religion of the Protestants R. I. THe word Religion is sometimes taken Objectively And so I mean by it The objects of Religious Belief Love and Practice which are 1. The Things themselves which are the principal objects called by Logicians The Incomplex terms 2. The organical object or the Revelation of these Things containing 1. The Words or other Signs 2. The sense or notions signified For instance Matth. 17.5 This is my Beloved son in whom I am well pleased Here 1. The Real Incomplex object is Christ Himself the beloved Son of God and God the Fathers well-pleasedness in him 2. The signal part of the organical object or Revelation is the Words themselves as spoken then and written now 3. The signified notions are the Meaning of the words and are the chief part of the organical object that is the Divine Revelation The word Religion is of larger extent in its sense than Faith For it containeth all that Revelation which God hath made Necessary to salvation which is twofold 1. That which is to inform the understanding with necessary knowledge and faith 2. That which is necessary to a Holy Will and a Holy Life to the Love of God and man and to well doing which are Precepts Promises and Threatnings II. The word Religion is oft taken also subjectively as they speak For the Acts and habits of Love and Obedience Now I suppose we are agreed that it is not Religion in this last sense that we are to dispute of which is as divers as persons are But it is that which we call Objective Religion even the Organical part directly And if by all this D. understandeth us not in plainer words our Question is Of the True Divine Revelation viz. Which is the True Rule of Faith Will and Practice that which is held to be such by the Protestants or that which is held to be such by the Papists P. I grant you that this is the state of the Question R. I here declare to you then What is the Religion of the Protestants IT IS THE LIGHT and LAW OF GOD CONCERNING HOLY KNOWLEDGE and BELIEF HOLY WILL and PRACTICE CONTAINED IN NATURE and THE
TRUE CANONICAL SCRIPTURES Here note 1. That our Religion hath its Essential parts And its Integral parts and Accidentals I. The Essentials of our Religion are contained in the Baptismal Covenant which is expounded in the CREED the LORDS PRAYER and the DECALOGUE as delivered and expounded by Christ and the Law of Nature II. Our Entire Religion in the Essentials Integrals and needful Accidentals is contained wholly in the Law of Nature and the Canonical Scriptures The Essentials are delivered down to us two wayes 1. In Scripture with the rest 2. By the sure tradition of the Vniversality of Christians in actual Baptizings and the daily profession of Christianity This is all the Protestants Religion If you fasten any other on us we deny it we own no other And none know What is my Religion that is What I take for the Rule of my holy Faith Love and Life so well as my self P. This is meer craft you will make that only which is past controversie among us to be Your Religion that so your Religion may be past controversie too R. It is such Craft as containeth that naked truth which we trust all our own salvation on I say that I have no other Religion And if you know better than I disprove me P. I disprove you three wayes I. Because the Name Protestant signifieth no such Religion but somewhat else lately taken up II. Because the Angustane Confession the thirty nine Articles and such like are by your selves called The Articles of your Religion III. Because all your Writings declare that besides these you hold all those controverted points which are contrary to that which you call Popery R. I pray you mark D. that he would perswade you that he knoweth my Religion better than I do my self What if I should pretend the like as to his Religion Were I to be believed P. No but if you have an odd Religion of your own that proveth it not to be the Protestant Religion R. Remember D. that I come not hither to perswade you to any other Religion than this which I have mentioned Let him talk as long as he will what is other mens opinions I perswade you to nothing but this to take Gods Law of Nature and the Scripture for your Religion Either this is Right or Wrong If Right fix here and I have done If Wrong let that be disputed But yet I open to you all his three deceits I. The name Protestant doth not signifie our Religion but our Protesting against the Papists corruptions and additions I have no Religion but Christianity I am a Christian and that signifieth all my Religion I am a Catholick Christian that is of the Common Christian Faith and Church and not of any heretical dividing Sect And I am a Reformed Protestant Christian because I renounce Popery Therefore I rather say The Protestants than the Protestant Religion As if I were among Lepers If I say I am no Leper that signifieth not my Essence But if I say I am a Man and I am not a Leper I speak my Nature and my freedom from that disease So if I say I am a Christian Protestant I mean only that I am a Christian and no Papist or renouncing Popery as by the word Catholick I renounce all Sects and Schisms I tell you This is my meaning when I say I am a Protestant and can you tell my meaning better than my self II. And as to what he saith of the thirty nine Articles and other Church Confessions I answer None of these are our Religion in the sense now in question that is They are not taken by us to be the Divine revealed-Revealed-Rule of our Faith Love and Life which is our Religion now disputed of And that this is so I prove to you past all question For 1. Else should we have as many Religions as we have Church Confessions and should alter our Religion as oft as we alter our Confessions and our Religion should be as New as those Confessions All which the Protestants abhor 2. All those very Confessions themselves do assert that Gods Word is our only Religion and all mens Writings and Decrees are lyable to mistakes To pass by all the rest these are the words of our sixth Article Holy Scripture containeth all things Necessary to salvation so that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an Article of faith or be thought Requisite or necessary to salvation What would you have more plain and full And in the Book of Ordination it is askt Are you perswaded that the Holy Scriptures contain sufficiently all doctrine required of necessity for eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ And are you determined out of the said Scriptures to instruct the people committed to your charge and to teach Nothing as required of necessity to eternal salvation but that which you shall be perswaded may be concluded and proved by the Scripture Is not this plain P. Why then do you call the thirty nine Articles the Articles of your Religion And what is their use And why are all required to subscribe them R. 1. Their Use is to signifie how the Conjunct Pastors who use them do understand the Holy Scriptures in those points And that partly for the satisfaction of all forreign Churches who may hear us accused of Heresie or Error and partly to be a hedge to the Doctrine of young Preachers to keep them from vending mistakes in the Churches and also to try the soundness of their understandings 2. The Confessions and Articles and Catechisms are our Religion as the Writings of Perron Bellarmine Suarez c. or many of these agreeing are the Roman Religion They are not the Divine Revelation and Rule of faith and practice to us But they are the expression of our own conceptions of the sense of several chief matters in that Rule or Revelation So that they are the Expression of our faith or Religion taken subjectively for acts and habits and not our objective Rule it self Our Sermons and Prayers are our Religion in this sense that is The Expression of our own Religious Conceptions And so are your Sermons and your Writings also to you But if this were our Rule of Faith and Life and so our Divine Objective Religion then we should be of as many Religions as we are several persons For every one hath his several Expressions And every new Sermon or Book or Prayer would be a new part of Religion And so with you also So that this doubt is past all doubt Our Confessions are but the expressions of our personal belief and not our Rule of Faith III. And as to your third pretence that we have other Articles as opposite to Popery I answer Our Religion as a Rule of Faith and Worship is one thing And our Rejecting all Corruptions and Additions is another E. g. My Religion is that our God is only the true God
The words could not come down to us without some to deliver them We have the Bible by Tradition and we have practical Tradition of Baptism and the Creed by it self and that in many languages where we are sure we have all the necessary sence But do you remember that this is Vniversal Tradition and not meer Roman Tradition such as is certain by moral Evidence even the consent of all that are yet of cross opinions and Interests as to matter of fact Historical Evidence and not the pretended certainty of a Pope and his favourites phanatically claiming a spirit of Infallibility But I am not now disputing with you I am only telling you that the Protestant Religion is nothing but Christianity and the Scriptures And all our Confessions are our Religion besides Consent but as our Sermons and Treatises are which vary as they are various expressions of mens various subjective faith while Gods word varyeth not P. If the Bible be your Religion then the Ceremonial Law of Moses is your Religion For that is part of the Bible R. You study what to say against another and never think how it concerneth your selves 1. Is not the Bible at least Part of your Religion You dare not deny it And is the Ceremonial Law of Moses therefore your Religion 2. I told you that as a perfect man hath hair and nails which are but Accidents so the Bible hath more than the Integrals of our Religion 3. The Ceremonies of Moses in that sense as now they are delivered to us in the Bible are parts or appurtenances of our Religion That is the historical narrative of those Abrogated Laws which now bind us not as Laws but tell us as the Prophesies what was heretofore and how Christ was fore-typified and what intimations of Gods will we may gather from the history And the abrogated Laws are no otherwise delivered to us and so we must use them P. If the ten Commandments be your Religion you must keep the Jewish seventh day Sabbath so that neither there can you fix R. The same answer will serve 1. The ten Commandments are no otherwise part of our Religion thâ—n they are of yours 2. They are a Law to us as delivered and expounded by Christ and in Nature and the seventh day is an abrogated part of Moses Law P. If the Creed be your Religion you must take the Article of Christs descent into Hell to be necessary to salvation R. 1. Is the Creed no part of your Religion As you answer so may we 2. I did not tell you that the Creed had no more than the Essentials I told you that all the Essence of Christianity is in the Baptismal Covenant And he that understandeth that understandeth it all And that the Creed the Lords Prayer and the Christian Decalogue are the exposition of it But the Exposition may have somewhat more than the Essentials 3. The Creed was not written first in English nor Latine And Christs descent to Hades is more needful to be believed than his descent to Hell as the word is commonly taken in English But to conclude remember 1. That I profess here to own and plead for no other Religion as we explained the word but Gods Law of Nature and Scripture 2. That I profess to perswade D. to no other And you cannot make me a Religion against my will CHAP. IV. What is the Papists Religion R. I Have plainly told you what my own and the Protestants Religion is viz. Nothing but Christianity contained Integrally in the holy Scriptures And the Essentials being the Baptismal Covenant explained in the Creed Lords prayer and Christian Decalogue are delivered to us both in the said Scriptures and by distinct Tradition which also hath brought down to us the Scripture it self Not a Tradition depending on the pretended Authority of the Roman Pope or party or on any other that shall pretend the like But that Historical Evidence of matter of fact which is surelier given us by all sorts of Christians taking in the Concord of many Hereticks Infidels and Enemies which evidence dependeth not on the credit of supernatural Revelation but on the natural credibility yea and certainty of such universal Circumstantiated Concordant testimony and is necessarily antecedent to the Belief of supernatural Revelations in the particulars as sight and hearing were in the auditors of Christ and the Apostles seeing these two Acts of Knowledge Whatever God saith is True and This God saith must necessarily go before our Belief or Trust that This is True because God saith it And so we run not in a circle and need not a supernatural faith for the founding of our first supernatural faith that is A first before the first Without fraud or obscurity this is our faith and Religion Now do you as honestly and plainly tell me What is Yours which D. must be perswaded to For I confess that I take it to be an unintelligible thing and despair that ever you give any man a certain notice what it is which may be truly called the Religion of your Roman-Catholick-Church P. I shall make you understand it if you are willing But 1. Note that Religion being a larger word than faith includeth also Practice or Manners we must give you a distinct account of each For they have not the same Causes Our Faith is Divine But our Manners or Practice must follow the Laws of the Church as well as the Immediate Laws of God These must not be confounded R. Man hath three faculties Intellective Volitive and Vitally Executive or Active Our Religion subjectively must be in all viz. The Sanctity of all by Holy Life Light and Love And therefore the Rule which is our objective Religion doth extend to all to Intellect Will and Practice And surely for All there is a Rule directly Divine given by Inspiration of the Holy Ghost or Christs own words and subordinate Rules by Christs Ministers which are directly Humane and no otherwise Divine than as God hath in General authorized them thereto Even as the Soveraign hath the only Vniversal Legislative power and Magistrates by Him are authorized to subordinate mandates and acts of Government And so we have a Divine Faith and Revelation and a subordinate Humane faith and Ministerial Revelation or Preaching We have Divine Perswasions and subordinate Perswasions of men We have Divine Laws yea and executions and we have Humane subordinate Laws and executions If you resolve to call the Humane Divine so far as they are indeed Authorized by God I will not quarrel about words But remember 1. That so you must do also on the same reasons by the Laws of Kings and the Commands of Parents who are as much authorized by God to their proper Government 2. And I hope you mean not to Confound these Humane Laws with Gods own Vniversal Laws nor humane faith with Divine faith And be it known to you It is the Divine Revelations and Laws as distinct from the Humane which we are
now calling our Religion and disputing of though this Religion teach us to obey Parents Pastors and Princes and that obedience may be consequentially and reductively called Religious if you please But if really your Religion be not Divine but Humane let us know it For by the word Religion we essentially mean that which is Divine P. Men were the speakers and writers of the Scriptures and so far they are humane as well as the Decrees of the present Church R. The Decalogue was witten by God and delivered by the Ministry of Angels Christ was owned by a Voice from Heaven And himself spake and did most recited by the four Evangelists And the Prophets and Apostles spake by the immediate Infallible Inspiration of the Holy Ghost So that the Holy Ghost is the Author of the Scriptures But the present Pastors of the Church instead of that Immediate Revelation from God by the Spirits Inspiration have but the ordinary help of the Spirit to understand those same Revelations and that proportioned to the measure of their diligence natural parts and helps of Art as the knowledge of Theologie is attained by other Students who are none of them perfect or free from error P. I will tell you what our Religion is It is Gods Word concerning things to be Believed and Done delivered partly in the Canonical Scriptures and partly by Oral Tradition and received by the Church and by it delivered to us The Trent Catech. Prefac q. 12. saith Omnis doctrinae ratio quae fidelibus tradenda sit verbo Dei continetur quod in Scripturam Traditionesque distributum est The Reason of every doctrine which is to be delivered to the faithful is contained in the Word of God which is distributed into the Scripture and Traditions Vide Concil Senonens in Bin. Decr. 5. p. 671. Concil Tridentini Sess 4. p. 802. Perspiciensque hanc Veritatem disciplinam contineri in libris sacris sine scripto Traditionibus quae ex ipsius Christi ore ab Apostolis acceptae ab ipsi Apostolis Spiritu sancto dictante quasi per manus traditae ad nos usque pervenerunt orthodoxorum patrum sententiam sequuta omnes libros tam Veteris quam Novi Testamenti nec non Traditiones ipsas tum ad fidem tum ad mores pertinentes tanquam vel ore tenus a Christo vel a Spiritu sancto dictaâ—as continua successione in Ecclesia Catholica conservatas pari pietatis affectu reverentia suscipit ac veneratur Bellarmin de Verbo Dei lib. 4. c. 2 3. sheweth the divers sorts of unwritten Traditions which are part of Gods Word some de side as the perpetual Virginity of Mary that there are but four Gospels c. and some of Manners as Crossing Fast-dayes c. Easter Whitsontide and other Festivals Veron de Reg. fid cap. 2. saith The total and only Rule of the Catholick faith to which all are obliged under pain of Heresie and Excommunication is Divine Revelation delivered to the Prophets and Apostles proposed by the Catholick Church in her General Councils or by her Universal practice to be believed as an Article of Catholick faith All that is of this nature is an Article or doctrine of faith And no other doctrine can be of faith if either the first Condition fail viz. Divine Revelation or the second which is a Proposal by the Universal Church p. 5. No doctrine grounded on Scripture diversly interpreted either by the antient Fathers or our Modern Doctors is an Article of faith For such a doctrine though it may be revealed yet the revelation is not ascertained to us nor proposed by the Church Nor any Proposition which can be proved only by consequence drawn from Scripture though the consequences were certain and evident and deduced from two propositions of Scripture Yet these doctrines are Certain when the premises are so Gratians decrees the Papal decrees contained in the body of the Canon Law none of them do constitute an Article of saith Nor that which is defined in Provincial Councils though the Pope preside in person for the second condition is alwayes wanting in this case and very often the first p. 11. I did not say that such definitions were not of faith but they are not of Catholick faith or which all as Catholicks are bound to hold as of faith and the contrary to which is heretical and removeth from the bosome of the Church p. 12 13. The Practice even of the Vniversal Church is no sufficient ground for an Article of Catholick faith by reason the object of faith is Truth and oft times the Church proceeds in matter of practice upon probable Opinions and this probability is sufficient to justifie the practice which the Church on just cause may change As e. g. as Vasquez teacheth the Church did antiently pray in the Mass for Infidels alive and Catechumens dead and the Sacrifice of the Mass was offered for them and yet he rather inclineth to the contrary that the Sacrifice of the Mass ought not to be offered but for the faithful living and dead by which Opinion the Church seemeth guided at present But Vasquez answers that the Church following a probable opinion did practise that which she did not declare to be of faith p. 15. So General Councils when they mention any thing in this manner by way of simple assertion and do not properly define For as Bellarmine affirms it is necessary that General Councils properly define the thing in question as a Decree which ought to be held as of Catholick faith Hence Bellarmine adds they are not properly Hereticks who hold the Pope not to be above all Councils though he say the last Laterane Council under Leo the tenth Ses 11. expresly and professedly teacheth that the Pope is above all Councils and rejects the contrary Decree of the Council of Basil because it is doubtful whether the Laterane Council defined that doctrine properly as a Decree to be believed with Catholick faith The same Bellarm. de Concil l. 2. c. 19. also requireth that the definition be made Conciliarly Pope Martin the fifth said he only confirmed those Decrees of faith which were made in the Council of Constance Conciliariter that is after the manner of other Councils the question being first diligently examined But its clear saith he that this Decree that a General Council hath immediate authority from Christ which all even the Pope are bound to obey was made without any examining p. 17. The object defined must be truly and properly an object of faith and a Decree ought to be on a thing universally proposed to the whole Church Vasquez holds It is not at all erroneous to affirm that a General Council may err in Precepts and in particular Judgements and p. 19. in framing Laws not necessary to salvation or making superfluous Laws Without all doubt a General Council may err in a question of fact which depends on testimony and
if you make Gods own ordinary Natural Revelations or significations to be false how will you be able to disprove the Infidel about the rest 3. And then note that our Case is yet lower and plainer than all this For if the very Being of the Creatures which is the Matter of these Signs be uncertain to us and all our senses and minds deceived about it then we have no place for enquiry Whether this Creature be any sign of the mind of God As if the hearing of all men was deceived that thought they heard that voice This is my Beloved Son or Pauls that thought he heard Christ speak to him Saul Saul c. or if their Eyes and Intellects were deceived that thought they saw Christ and his miracles or that think now that they read the Bible and indeed there be no such thing as a Bible no such words c. then there is no room to enquire what they signifie For nothing hath no signification Truth and Goodness are affections or modes of Being And if we cannot by all our sound senses know the Being of things we can much less know that they are True or Good Therefore all knowledge and all faith and all Religion is overthrown by your denyal of the truth of our Senses and Intellects perception of things sensible Reason IV. And by this means you are not capable of being disputed with nor any Controversie between you and any others in the world of being decided while you deny sense For then you agree not with mankind in any one common principle And they that agree in nothing can dispute of nothing For this is the first principle Est vel non est is first to be agreed on before we can dispute any farther of a substance What will you do to confute an adversary but drive him to deny a certain principle And can you drive him to deny a lower fundamental Principle than the Being of a substance perceived by sense yea by all the sound senses of all men in the world Reason V. Yea it is specially to be noted that our difference is not only about the species of a sensible substance but about the very substance it self in genere Whether all our senses perceive any substance at all or not Suppose the question were Whether it be water or not which all mens senses see in Rivers If a Papist would deny it to be water doubtless he denyed the agreeing judgement of all mens Intellect by sense But if he should also say It is no substance which we call water or earth This were to deny the first Principle and most fundamental perception in nature Now that this is your case is undenyable For 1. You profess that Christs Body and Blood are not sensible there That it is not the quantity shape number colour smell weight c. of Christs Body and Blood which we perceive and that these Accidents are not the Accidents of Christ 2. And you believe that the Bread and Wine is gone that is changed into the body and blood of Christ so that no part of their substance matter or form is left And you put no third substance under these Accidents in the stead So that you maintain that it is the quantity of nothing the figure of nothing the colour the weight the scituation the smell the number c. of nothing which all mens Intellects by sense perceive So that the Controversie is Whether it be any substance at all which by those accidents we perceive And when we see handle taste smell it you believe or say you believe that it is none neither Bread or Wine or any other Now if by sense we cannot be sure of the very Being of a substance we can be sure of nothing in the world Reason VI. Yea it is to be noted that though Brutes have no Intellects yet their Sense and Imagination herein wholly agreeth with the common perception of man A Dog or a Mouse will eat the bread as common bread and a Swine will drink the Wine as common Wine and therefore have the same perception of it as of common bread and wine And so their senses must be all deceived as well as mans And Brutes have as accurate perfect senses as men have and some much more And meer natural operations are more certain and constant as we see by the worlds experience than meer Reason and Argumentation Birds and Beasts are constant in their perceptions and course of action being not left to the power of Mutable free-will Reason VII You hereby quite overthrow your own foundation which is fetcht from the Concord of all your party which you call all the Church You think that a General Council could not agree to any thing aâ— an Article of faith if it were not such when it is buâ— the Major Vote that agree You say that Traditioâ— is Infallible because All the Church agreeth in iâ— when it is perhaps but your Sect which is a Minoâ— part But do you not overthrow all this when yoâ— profess that All the senses of all the sound men in thâ— world and all the simple perceptions of their Intellectâ— by sense do agree that there is substance yea dâ— specie Bread and Wine after the Consecration No onâ— mans perception by sense disagreed in this from thâ— institution of the Sacrament to this day that can be proved or the least probability of it given And iâ— this Concord be no proof much less is yours For 1. The Intellect in Reasoning is more fallible than iâ— its Immediate perception of things sensed or perceived by sense 2. Yours is but the Consent of some men but ours is the Consent of all mankind Yours among your selves hath oft in Councils a Minor part of dissenters who must be overvoted by the rest But our Case hath never one dissenting sense or perception Reason VIII By this denyal of sense you overthrow the foundations of Humane Converse How can men make any sure Contracts or perform any duty on a sure ground if the Concordant senses of all the world be false Parents cannot be sure which are their own Children nor Children which are their own Parents Husbands cannot certainly know their own Wives from their neighbours No Subjects can certainly know their own Prince No man can be sure whether he buy or sell receive money or pay it c. No man can be sure that there is a Pope or Priest or man in the world Reason IX You seem to me to Blaspheme God and to make him the greatest Deceiver of mankind even in his holy Worship Whereas God cannot lye It is impossible And the Devil is the Father of lyes And you make God to tell all the world as plainly as if words told them even by demonstration to their sight smell feeling taste that here is Bread and Wine when there is none yea that it is at least some substance which they perceive when it is none at all Reason X. You thus fain
number after at Trent had spake the minds of all the Churches 2. You suppose all the members of a Council to be of one mind when as they determine by the Major Vote And oft times the difference is not above two or three and its possible one Voice may turn the scales And perhaps one or two or ten may be absent one day and present another and so the Cry of the Judgement of all the Bishops in the world may signifie no more but that two or three of the other side staid a little too long at dinner that day while the other party carryed it by their absence And I pray you where hath God promised that the faith of an hundred and one shall not fail when the faith of ninety nine of the same company may fail supposing the Council to be two hundred Or why are the one hundred and one the Bishops of all the world and not the ninety nine 3. Do you think we never read the History of the Council of Trent and before them of the Councils of Ariminum Ephes 2 yea Calcedon c. And yet must we suppose that men come thither all of one mind when they have such shameful Contentions Such cunning contrivances to get the majority of Votes Such awe and terror from the power of the Chief and such carnal dependances and respects to their several worldly interests Yea sometimes fighting it out unto blood as Dioscorus and Flavianus case doth shamefully evince 4. And must we suppose mens minds to be changed in their sleep when the awe or the oratory of other men change them Do we not know the Course of the Parliaments of England of later times How much a few men of more than ordinary parts and interest can do with the rest And how oft the major Vote hath gone against the sense of the far greater number of the House 5. And do we not know that ordinarily he that is sent to the Council from a Province is chosen as it pleaseth the Pope the King or the Archbishop or some in greatest power and rarely according to the free-will and sense of the greater part of the Clergy If five hundred to one of the Clergy of a Kingdom be of one mind and the Prince or chief men or powerfullest Prelates be of another they will send a Bishop thither of their own mind 6. Do you think we know not that all the Papists are not past the third or fourth part of the Christian world Why then should their sense be called the sense of all the Christian world 7. Do you think we know not how little reason you have to say that the Council at Laterane spake the sense of all the Church When the Decrees were but proposed by Pope Innocent and recited there without any due Synodical deliberation and some liked them and some disliked them as you may find in Math. Paris in K. John Nauclerus Gener. 41. ad an 1215. Godefridus ad an 1215. Platina in Vita Innoc. 3. And this one of your late false Scriblers in a Book for Toleration also saith Though the Disputers against Dr. Gunning and Dr. Pierson copiously and confidently justifie that Council and indeed with you it passeth for an Approved one 8. And were not your arguing as strong for the Council of Ephes 2. and that at Arim. and Sirmium and divers at Constantinople disallowed and those at Constance and Basil where were many times the number of the Council at Trent Did these Councils all go to bed of one mind and rise of another Or did they not know what their Fathers faith was Why then do you reprobate them and deny that which they decreed as of faith Is it not a shame to talk of the Bishops of all the world and Tradition from their Fathers when your meaning is but that All these may err and do oft err unless one man the Pope approve them But where sense is renounced we must not expect modesty P. But the antient Councils and Fathers are against you as is to be seen R. It is utterly false I will not abuse the Reader so as to carry him into a Wood and lose him among a multitude of old Books when he hath more satisfactory evidence enough at hand But I. As to all your Citations from true antiquity for your forged Authors and corrupted Testimonies we regard not they are answered by this one true observation that when old Writers sometimes say that after consecration it is No more bread and wine but the body and blood of Christ their whole Context plainly sheweth that they mean that it is no more MEER or Common Bread and Wine and usually they so speak Because forma denominat and it is the ultimate form that denominateth all antecedent forms being but the dispositio materiae As if the question be Whether a Shilling be Silver or Money Before the Coining it was but Silver but after it is no more Common Silver but Money Silver is but the matter and not the denominating form Is your Garment to be called Cloth or a Cloak Before the making it was but Cloth but now it is not meer Cloth but a Cloak The same I may say of the Kings Crown and Scepter or of any Relative Representative or Personating form that is added to any matter or man This is the plain meaning of the Antients II. And as to what they say against you I will now only give you a few brief instances 1. Justin Martyr in Dial. cum Tryph. saith The offering of Flower delivered to be offered for them that were cleansed of the Leprosie was a Type of the BREAD of the Eucharist which our Lord Jesus Christ commanded us to make in remembrance of his passion c. And more plainly Apolog. 2. indeed the first When the President hath given thanks and all the people acclaimed those that with us are called Deacons distribute to every one present BREAD and WINE and Water and bring them to those that are absent 2. Irenaeus saith lib. 4. c. 34. For as the Bread which is of the Earth receiving the divine invocation is not now Common Bread but the Eucharist consisting of two things the Terrene and the Celestial c. See more out of him in Albertinus at large 3. Tertullian cont Marcion l. 3. c. 19. Calling Bread his Body that hence you may understand that he gave to Bread the Figure of his body And before l. 1. He reprobated not Bread by which he Representeth his very Body And lib. 4. cap. 40. The Bread which he took and distributed to his Disciples he made his body saying This is my Body that is The figure of my body And what he would have Bread then signifie he sufficiently declared calling Bread his Body And it is a notable passage of Tertullians against the Academicks that questioned sense lib. de anim c. 17. What dost thou O procacious Academick Thou overthrowest the whole state of life Thou disturbest the whole
what a man may say is certain R. To this I have several things to say 1. Ordination doth not make men wise holy humble and self-denying but sets such men apart for the sacred office who seek it and have tolerable gifts of utterance And it is too ordinary for worldly minded men to make a worldly trade of the Priesthood meerly for ease and wealth and honour In which case do you not think that the Papists who have multitudes of rich benefices prelacies preferments and Church-power and worldly honour are liker to be drawn by worldly interest than such as I that am exceeding glad and thankful if I might but preach for nothing 2. Do you lay your faith and salvation upon plausible discourses and will you be of that mans faith whom you cannot confute Then you must be of every mans faith or indeed of no mans There are none of all these sects so hardly confuted as a Porphyry a Julian or such like Infidels who dispute against Christ and the truth of the Scriptures or such Sadducees as dispute against the Immortality of the soul Alas the tattle of Papists Pelagians Antinomians Separatists Quakers and all such supposing the truth of the souls Immortality and the Scriptures is easily resisted and confuted in comparison of their assaults who deny these our foundations And will you turn Sadducee Atheist or Infidel because you cannot confute their Sophistry I tell you if you knew how much harder it is to deal with one of these than with a Papist or any other Sectary you would shake the head to hear one man dispute for an universal Monarch and another dispute against a form of prayer and another whether it be lawful to Communicate with dissenters c. while so few of them all can defend their foundations even the souls Immortality and the Scriptures nor confute a subtle Infidel or Sadducee 3. What if we all agreed to say that there is no Bread in the Sacrament after Consecration Were it ever the truer for that Will you be deceived as oft as men can but agree to deceive you There is a far greater party Agreed against Jesus Christ even five parts of the World than that which is agreed for him Will you therefore be against Christ too There are more Agreed for Mahomet a gross upstart deceiver than are agreed for Christ And doth that make it certain that they are in the right 4. Will you deny all your senses and the senses of all the World as oft as you cannot answer him that denyeth them Upon these terms what end will there be of any Controversie or what evidence shall ever satisfie man Have Papists any surer and more satisfying evidence for you than sense I pray you tell me Did you ever meet with any of them that doubt of another life or of the Immortality of the soul D. Yes many a one I would we were all more certain than we are R. And what is it that such men would have to put them out of doubt D. They say that our talk of Prophets and supernatural revelation are all uncertainties and if they could see they would believe Could they see such Miracles as they read of Had they seen Lazarus raised or Christ risen from the dead c. Had they seen Angels or Devils or Spirits appearing Had they seen Heaven or Hell they would believe R. And are not you more obstinate than they if you will not believe that there is any Bread and Wine when you see feel smell and taste it and all men that have senses are of the same mind What is left to satisfie you if you give so little credit to the common sense of all the world D. But I oft think that the faith of all the Church is much surer than my sense or my private faith At least it is safest to venture in the common road and to speed as the Church speedeth which Christ died for and is his Spouse R. 1. But do you think that the opinion of the Papal faction who are not the third part of the Universal Church that is the Christian world is the faith of all the Church Why call you Opinion faith and a sect and faction All the Church 2. Indeed if all the Church did set their senses against mine I would rather believe them than my senses For I should think that I were in that point distracted or my senses by some disease perverted which I did not perceive I mean if it were in a case where they had the affirmative As if all England should witness that they saw it Light at Midnight I would think my eyes had some impediment which I knew not of if I saw none But this is not your case The Papists themselves do not set all their senses against yours much less the senses of all mankind They do not say that We and all men except the Protestants do see and feel and taste that There is no Bread and Wine But contrarily You have the senses of all the world and the saith of two or three parts of the Christian world against the Opinion of one Sect which Schismatically call themselves All the Church D. But suppose that they err in this one point they may for all that be in the right in all the rest Who is it that hath no error I must not for this one forsake them R. 1. I will stand to their own judgements in this Whether all their foundation and faith be not uncertain if any one Article of their faith prove false They are all that ever I knew agreed of the affirmative And will give you no thanks for such a defence 2. And if we come to that work I shall prove all the rest of their opinions before mentioned to be also false D. What then if I find but one point false in the Protestants Religion Must I therefore forsake it all as false R. 1. Still remember to distinguish between our Objective and our Subjective faith or if you understand not those words between Gods Revelation and Mans Belief of it or the Divine Rule and Matter of our faith and our faith it self And about our own Belief you must distinguish between a mans Profession of Belief and the Reality of his belief All true Protestants profess to take Gods word alone or his Revelation in Nature and Scripture for the whole Matter of their Divine Belief and Religion But who it is that sincerely believeth little do I know nor how much of this word any singular person understandeth and believeth I can give you no account of If personal faith were that which we dispute of I would be accountable for no mans but mine own In this sense There are as many Faiths and Religions as men For every man hath his Own Faith and Religion And if you know that a man erreth in one point it followeth not that he erreth in another They that believed that the Resurrection was past believed a falshood and yet
and his own General Councils The Kings of France Spain c. may easily prove that they have more power to cast out the Pope than he hath to cast out half Christs Sacrament And they may better forbid their own Subjects to obey a forreign Usurper than he can forbid all the world to obey Christ 7. And for all this the wit of man can hardly devise What Reason they have to do it What point of their Religion What Interest of their own did engage them to it Unless it be their Interest to shew that they are Above Christ and the Scripture I do not yet discern their reason 8. And yet they have with Resolution and obstinacy persisted herein divers hundreds of years and denyed the requests of Emperours Nobles and great part of several Kingdoms in this point This and the leaving out the second Commandment seem to be of purpose to shew that they are above the Maker of the Ten Commandments and of the Gospel How long Lord shall Tyranny oppress the Nations of the Earth and the Honour and Domination and Wills of Rebels prevail to tread down Truth and Godliness and keep the notice of thy salvation from the sinful miserable world whilest yet we daily pray by thy Command that Thy Name may be Hallowed Thy Kingdome come and Thy Will be done on Earth as it is done in Heaven Whether the Pope be the Antichrist meant in the Scripture by that name or not you see that my passing it by doth shew my cautelousness in resolving as Zanchy and others before me have done because I am confessedly so far unstudyed or ignorant of the sense of the Revelations and some other Scripture Prophecies as that I must leave such cases to such as Bishop Downame and others that have deeper insight into them Every man should be best at that which he hath most studyed But I must needs say that though I take it to be indispensible duty to keep up all due charity to all professed Christians such instances as these which I have here opened do utterly disable me from confuting that man who shall assert that this pretended Vicar of Christ and King or Monarch of the world and so King of Kings and Lord of Lords is an abominable Usurper and insolent Traytor against God and the true King and Head of the Universal Church How long will Princes and Prelates Learned and Unlearned be deluded by him or fear Power And when shall he be restrained from hindering Christs Gospel and the Peace and Concord of the Christian world FINIS Johns Nov. Repr p. 426. Protestants formally such have not enough to be brought to the unfeigned Love of God above all things and special Love to his servants and unfeigned willingness to obey him I deny you have any certain knowledge or feeling that you love God or his servants or willingness to obey c. Knot against Chillingworth Ch. 2. p. 122. In no one doctrine Protestants would seem more unanimously to agree than in this That all things necessary to salvation are contained evidently in Scripture which they hold as the only foundation of the whole structure of their Faith and Religion Note this Confession See Dr. Holden Analys fidei Li. 1. c. 3. Lett. 1. He that would know what stress we lay on Tradition as the Medium may see it fully in my Reasons of Christ Relig. And Dr. Holden is more for us than for the Papists Cap. 3. Q. Was it from the Church that the first Church received it Or was it not the same Divine Religion which the first Church whether Council or Practicers received without the Tradition of Council or Practicers If so this cannot be essential to Religion If the Apostles words were to be believed their proved Writings are to be believed And their Writings were proved theirs before a General Council or Universal Practice witnessed it Even by each Church and person that received any Epistle from any one of them So that if the Doctors will but differ in their Expositions the Scripture is no more the sure Word of God or to be believed by Catholick faith Of the Pope without a General Council Mark then that it may be de fide divina though not of Catholick necessity without the proposal of Council or universal practice Johns Nov. Rep. p. 19. of the explication of Terms Know you not that Divines are divided what are the points necessary to be believed explicitely necessitate medii Some and those the more antient hold that the explicite belief of God of the whole Trinity of Christ his Passion Resurrection c. are necessary necessitate medii Others among the recentiors that no more than the belief of the Deity and that he is the rewarder of our works is absesolutely necessary with that necessary to be explicitely believed He doth better interpret the distinction of Explicite and Implicite on another occasion in another sense Holden l. 1. c. 9. p. 169. Queret an teneatur quispiam aâ— internum Divinae fidei actum quem nec semper fortasse in eius potestate situm novimus Quamdiu sane arbitretur quispiam hujusmodi fidei actum lumini naturali rationi oppositum contrarium esse nequaquam poterit ad illum eliciendum astringi Aquin. p. 3. q. 75. a. 5. ad 3. Fides non est contra sensum sed est dâ— eo ad quod sensus non attingit But doth not sense say Here is Bread and Wine Vid. Aquin. 3. q. 82. a. 7. c. Vid. Aquin. 3. q. 69. a. 9. Vid. Aquin. 3. q. 82. a. 8. 2 Cor. 12.12 Rom. 15.19 Act. 14.3 15.12 Matth. 21.15 So they do by forbidding to eat Flesh in Lent And yet say they eat Christs flesh in Lent When Irenaeus cited by Occumenius Com. in 1 Peâ— c. 3. bringeth in Blandina proving to the Heathens that Christians did not eat flesh and drink blood in the Eucharist because that they use even to abstain for exercise sake from Lawful flesh See my More Reasons for the Christian Religion and the Lord Herbert de Veritate Apply this to Mr. Johnsons Rejoynder on this Point and you will see his Vanity