alleadge for this that the books of Scripture like the Sun shew themselves to be such to him who hath the spirit But I would ask at such why the Rev. St. James Epistle the second of St. Peter and two of St. John did not shew themselves to be Scripture to Luther that spiritual man and the Protestants very first Apostle in the work of reformation in the end you say Let any judge whither it be safest that the revealed will of God be your rule and determiner or the dictats of self contradicting creatures Where you seem to rubbe on Catholicks But Sir this toucheth not them at all for they profess not to believe self-contradicting creatures but the unanimous consent of Councils and fathers or the Catholick Church known to be the only Church established by Christ and his Apostles and by the continued succession of Popes Bishops and Pastors the unity universality and gifts of miracles in all ages c. Which Christ hath called the ground and pillar of truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. and against which he assureth us the gates of hell shal not prevail Math. 16. 18. and which he hath commanded us to hear otherwise to be holden as heathens and publicans Math. 18. 17. so you see that the written word maketh the Church our judge which we should obey and that ye who make so much of the written word do not believe it when ye do not obey her And here I remarke that Protestant Ministers and preachers deceive the people in that they ground their faith on the written word only and Roman Catholicks say they on humane tradition and their Churches authority which being composed of men is subject to errour Whereas the contrar is true for Roman Catholicks believe nothing which the written word believing both the tradition of the Church and Apostles doth not expresly warrand As for the Church what is more expresly said then what I have cited both to prove that we are bound to hear her Mat. 18. 18. and hold her authority infallible Math. 16. 18 and the house of God which is the pillar and ground of truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. Neither doth it avail you to say this is not said of the Roman Church which is not the universal Church but a particular one a strumpet c. For we speak not of any particular Church when we say that the Church is infallible nor when we say the Roman the Catholick do we understand the particular Church at Rome But that Church which professeth constantly the Romans faith spread in saint Pauls time through all the world As we call yet the Roman Empire that which hath its seat in Vien of Austria Yea Protestants calling their own the reformed Church cannot say but we have one Church on earth which Christ commanded us to hear constantly And if the reformed Church be the true Church then she must have taken the place from that church which was deformed and had fallen into an errour and so deserved no more to be called the pillar and ground of truth or to be heard Moreover the very pillars of the Protestant Religion grant all the world to be in an errour before themselves and so against the express written Word must deny the infallibility of any Church whatever For Calv. Instit lib. 4. cap. 18. saith they made all the Kings and People of the earth drunk from the first to the last and Hospinian epist 41. saith Luthers separation was from all the world White in his defence chap. 37. saith Popery was a leprosie breeding so universally in the church that there was no visible company of men free from it Jewel in his Sermon on Luke 11. The whole world Princes and people were overwhelmed by ignorance and bound by oath to the Pope which if it be true that the Church in former ages did erre the reformed Church may erre that themselves do not deny Thence it followeth clearly that the Protestant Church is not the house of GOD called the pillar and ground of truth that she is not Christs Church against which the gates of hell shal not prevail that none are bound to hear her in matters of faith being subject to errour And so Protestants may well desire men to read the Scripture and believe what they found there but not urge any man to follow their doctrine but in so far as they find it conforme to Scripture which all Roman Catholicks protest they do not As for traditions are we not commanded to hold them in the clear written Word 2. Thess 2. 15. Hold the traditions which ye have learned whither by word or our epistle Protestants read documents but documents by word and traditions are the same thing on which place Chrysost saith It is evident that the Apostle did not deliver all things by writ but many things by word which are worthy of credit as wel as the other That is Christs word as well as his writ therefore we call them divine and Apostolical traditions Aug. lib. 5. de Trinit cap. 23. speaking of rebaptization The Apostle saith he commanded nothing of it but that customâ— which is believed to proceed from the Apostle is opposed against Cyprian in it as many things are which the whole Church holdeth and therefore are believed to be commanded by the Apostles though not written Aâ—d in the first age saint Dennis chap. 1. speaking of the Ecclesiastick hierarchy saith These our chief captains of Priestly function did deliver to us the chiefest and supersubstantial points partly in written partly in unwritten institutions Epiph. Haeres 61. is of the same minde we must hold traditions saith he for the Scripture hâ—th not all things and Tertullian de praescrip grounds his faith on the authority of the Church and what tradition I believe saith he I received from the present Church the present Church from the primitive that from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ Here I hope you see you must either admit traditions as necessar in themselves and infallible in their authority or else disclaim both Scripture and Fathers All that Protestants can say either against the authority of the Church in general Councils or Apostolick traditions delivered by her is that all her decisions and traditions flow from men and so are not infallible But I answer neither were the Prophets Apostles Evangelists who penned the Scripture but men yet I hope their writtings are not fallible or subject to errour Because they were inspired directly and assisted by the Spirit of God The Fathers of the Church have to this day that promise verified to them Math. 28. 20. which was made as well to their successours as to themselves As for that some Protestante speak of an invisible Church composed of the Elect it is but a shift to delude the ignorant for as it is a Maxime of law Idem est non esse non apparere i. e. it is the same not to be and not to appear to be in the matter of any
but Aristocratical Under the New Testament the Lord appointed no visible Monarch on earth to be an officer in his church for our last appeal in dubious cases is regulated by that well known Scripture Matth. 18. 17. If he will See Bish Laud. againstâ— Fisher not hear the church let him be to thee as a publican Now it is absurd to say that this should be the sense of it tell the Pope for in no language the word Church can signifie a visible Monarch Secondly The council of Jerusalem maketh not for this for not only proceed they upon Scripture grounds but although they were infallible men yet none of them took the Papal way and the government was not Monarchical It seemed good to the holy Ghost and us Thirdly Church power is Ministerial Matth. 20. 25. 26. 2. Cor. 1. 24. 1. Pet. 5. 3. but Monarchy is Magisterial therefore it agreeth not with church power And when Papists reason for the power of the church and mention councils the argument may be thus propounded church officers councils have been appointed to rule and order the affairs of the house of God Ergo they may do what they will and who can say unto them what dost thou I deny the consequence Ergo the Pope is one of these officers it is absolutly refused And this is summa totalis of the prolix answer to the fourth question which may be taken away with a word Ergo if the word make not for them theâ— they may betake themselves to their own traditions and rule by them That is denyed also by us And suppose they should give the Law to their own Vassals will it therefore follow that they empire it over the whole Christian-church And seeing all churches are bound to a rule can any be infallible which have need of a rule When you make the Pope your church do ye not build your faith on him Is this like the foundation Eph. 2. 20. What is this but to make your faith humane And is it not absurd to say that Alexander the siâ—â—h Pope Iohn 22. in the cathedra were infallible as the Prophets and Apostles in dyting Scripture they cannot blush who speak so Fifthly As for the fifth particular viz. That place of Augustin cont ep fund cap. 5. I would not have believed the Scripture Pro. An. 5 unless the authority of the church had moved me Our Divines have answered fully long ago so it is a threed bare argument for he speaketh not there concerning the formal reason why Scripture is believed but concerning the mean and motive by which intrants are brought at first to the knowledge of the Scripture I mean the consused knowledge of the Scripture as when a man delivereth a letter he may tell from whom it is but the faith of it is from the subscription So here then by the church he understandeth not the church or Pope of Rome but the Primitive-church of the faithful which did hear see Christ and his Apostles So saith Durand †Dur lib. dist 24. qu. 1. he had to do with the Manichees who would make him believe their Gospel No saith he the testimony of those who did see with their eyes hear with their ears and handle the word of life is to be preferred to your assertion and this is a motive which made me at first quite Manichism and close with the Gospel of Christ so speaketh Melchior Canus lib. 2. de loc cap. 8. therefore it maketh nothing for the imperious supremacie of the Pope or Church in matters of faith fot there is a difference between coÌ„muma motivafidei and formalis ratio credendi See learned and perspicuous Dr. Barron against Turnebul Tract 4. pag. 188. Who hath unanswerably demonstrated this truth and so interpreteth these words of Augustin The testimony of the church is a principle inductive and a motive to new intrants to read hear and consider the holy Scriptures and it produceth only an humane faith the inward testimony of the holy Spirit is the principle effective of divine faith and the Scriptures themselves are the formal reason and terminative principle whereinto divine faith is resolved as a building upon its foundation Eph. 2. 20. To conclude this answer We judge that the pure Gospel Church is and should be the pronouncer of divine sentence from the Scripture that the authority of Councils should be inrerposed for making men willing and obedient to the divine law so should the Magistrat concurre in his station for that effect But the church of Rome is not pure nor like that which once it was in the Apostle Paul his time and at no time could she be called the Universal church far less now Albeit then her faith was spoken of throughout all the world Is this a good argument the faith of the Church of Brittain is mentioned throughout all the reformed churches of Transylvania Hungaria Polland Germany Bohaemia Flanders France and Helveâ—ia therefore it is the Universal-church no we claim no more but to be a Sister church to these in the confession of faith according to the Scriptures †Alb. Pighius lib. 6. Eccl. hierarc cap. 3. and all together make up the Universal-church And any one of these is preferable to the church at Rome as it is now corrupted and apostatized Will ye hear Albertus Pighius Quis unquam per Romanam Ecclesiam intellexit universalem who ever did by the Roman Church understand the Church universal Why do ye then speak so and ambitiously empire it over all the world Question fifth Seeing no Scripture is of Pa. Qu. 5 privat interpretation 2. Pet. 1. 20. should privat men take upon them to interpret the same Answer The sense of that text is no scripture Pro. An. is the indytment of a privat spirit but proceedeth from the holy Ghost for it followeth holy men of GOD spake as they were moved by the holie Ghost and it came not of old by the will of men Therefore it is no ways to be thought that privat men should be barred from searching the Scripture seeing Christ Jesus commanded the contrar Io. 5. 39. This was spoken to a whole multitude of persecuting Jews The word is the sword of the spirit Eph. 6. 17. should any privat man be disarmed amongst his foes And blessed is he whither privat or publict who meditateth in the law of the Lord day and night Ps 1. Reply In your fifth answer you grant with the Apostle that no prophecie of the Scripture Pa. Rep. is of any privat interpretation so should you grant also that the Scriptures cannot be rightly expounded of every privat spirit and fancie of the vulgar Reader but by the same spirit wherewith they were writren which resolveth in the Church And I am very confident no learned or wise Protestant will allow any privat man to expound scripture against the common consent of the whole Catholick Church wherein they were immediatly before But you insist that it is
the unlawfulness of it nor all the Rhetorick of Muretus can wipe off For as an excellent Poet saith on that subject Maribus ore oculis atque auribus undique ano Et pene erumpit qui tuus iste cruor Non tuus iste cruor sanctorum at caede cruorem Quâ—m ferus hausisti non poteras coquere Eighteenthly Ye call your selves the Universal Church which was never attributed § 18. Inst. to the Church of Rome in the Apostle Paul his time notwithstanding that then their faith was spoken of through all the world Rom. 1. 8. Beside ye are but a particular Church at best not so numerous as we and the Greek Church are with whom we joyn in one Confession except about the manner of the ProcessioÌ„ of the Holy Ghost As witnesseth their Confession set forth in the name of the Greek Church by Cyrillus Patriarch of CoÌ„stantinople and printed Anno 1633. which booke can easily be produced Whereas ye bragge of Unity ye are great Schismaticks renting the universall Church and taking the tittle from them to your selves Ye are miserably divided within as appeareth from the strong factions of the Councill of Trent and these hot skirmishes amongst Jesuâ—ts Dominicans and Jansenists lasting to this day Moreover the scripture calleth Rome Bâ—bylon the scarlet whore according to your own Interpreters upon Rev. 17. 18. which Babylon is to be destroyed Reply You accuse us for calling our selves the Universal Church and yet would willingly Papists Reply take that title to your selves if the common practâ—se in all Ages to your shame and discreâ—it did not oppose it None acknowledging your Church under this title but all generâ—lly ours But I have heretofore told you why the Roman Church is called the Catholick as being the Mother Church constantly since the Apostles times which hath a power of head-ship and jurisdiction over all the rest holding communion with her through out the world Then you say we are but a particular Church not so numerous as ye and the Grecians with whom ye joyn in one Confession of Faith except about the manner of the procession of the Holy Ghost Which it seemeth you hold but as a trissle although it maketh no distinction betwixt the second and the third Person of the Trinity for where there is no Procession and relative opposition in the Trinitie there is no distinction say Divines after Iohn Damascene yet notwithstanding ye joine with this in the confession of faith albeit they plainly disclaim them in the censure of the Orientall Church where chap. 7. 12. 13. 21. they hold Transubstantiation seven Sacraments an unbloody sacrifice prayers to the saints and for the dead whatever you alleadge of that confession of faith printed only in the last year But however this sheweth the Protestants weaknes and wavering faith that they claim the Grecians and Lutherians albeit both do openly disclaim them Neither do you prove better our division amongst our selves seing all the parties in the Council of Trent subscrived the Canons thereof nor doth the hot skirmishes betwixt Jesuits and Dominicans in school questions hinder their Unity in all the tenets of the Catholick Church both being willing to subscribe them with their blood as amongst Jesuits many do to this day As for Jansenists we altogether disowne them and to make you more numerous if ye please are well content that in many things you call them yours I am content also Rome be called the scarlet whore Rev. 17. 18. viz. Rome under Pagan Empeâ—ours But was not the Church of Rome then in her greatest integrity and virginity under the Apostleâ— St. Peter and Paul who praising her faith as spoken of through the world both declare her Universality and speak of her preheminence Duply I had reason to challenge your usurpation Prote ∣ stants Duply of the Catholick title for your own Pighius Eccl. hierarch lib. 6. cap. 3. saith Quis unquam per Romanam Ecclesiam intellexis universalem He thinketh it absurd and repugnant and so it is As for the Grecians I can presently produce their Confession †See it set down after the Preface Printed not the last year but 30. years ago and upward wherein they disclaim seven Sacraments the unbloody service of the Masse prayers to Saints or for the Dead Purgatory Transubstantiation c. And Dr. Rivet in his 3. Tom. pag. 1257. setteth down at length how the Jesuits by money and moyen of the French Ambassadour accused the same Cyrillus of treason before the grand Segniour and said that he favoured the King of great BRITTAIN by which accusation he was for a time thrust out of charge and forced to flee anno 1627. but afterwards by the good providence of GOD restored the Greek Church would owne no other Patriarch during his absence and how sore he was persecuted thereafter see Hornbeck in his Summa Contro As for the Jansenists you gift us with them calling them ours So Augustin and the Dominicans are ours also in this so your unity and universality â—s not so much as you pretend You grant also that the scarlet whore Rev. 17. and Babylon is Rome but under the Heathen Emperour and not as it is now under the Pope Your own Ribera refuteth you fully in this for he saith †So saith Sixtus Senensis and Baronius also that it must be meaned of Apostat Rome in the time of Antichrist because she is called an adulteress the mother of harlots but there can be no adultery where Marriage was not once Secondly The people of GOD are required to leave her lest they partake of her plagues But they were never incorporated with Pagan Rome as Christians for they had no communion with Pagan Idols Ergo if your Church be the Mother of Fornications and less numerous then these who hold the Scripture for the rule in no sense can ye be called the Catholick Church Ninthteenthly Ye make the Pope Christs § 19. Inst. Vicâ—r on Earth Peters successour the head of the Church an infallible man a Demi-God Whereas all the Apostles were equal in power and dignity Matth. 20. 26. And Cyprian lib. 3. de unitate Ecclesiae saith hoc idem Petrus quod reliqui Apostoli pareâ— consortio dignitate Peter was one with the rest of the Apostles in dignity and fellowship Ambros de Sp. S. lib. 2. cap. ult Nec Paulus est inferior Petro. see August ad Hieron epist 97. and Hierom ad Evagr and Cyprian epist ad Quintum 71. Prophets and Apostles were not infallible except in penning the Scripture Did not Moses speak unadvisedly Psalm 106. 33. the Prophet Elisha professeth that the case of the Shunamit was hid from him 2. Kings 4. 27. Nathan gave forth a verdict to day and made a retractation to morrow 2. Sam. 7. Peter controuled the Heavenly vision and knew not what to do Acts 10. 17. And shal your sinful Popes then be infallible who will believe it Is it not then
lamentable that ye resolve your faith into humane testimony yea into that which is a very lie the Popes infallibility Were it not safer to make Scripture your ground then to build upon this sandie foundation and so river your selves incurably into errour Reply You runne out upon the Popes titles till in the end you make him a Demi-God Papist Reply imputing this as that by way of calumny to us Whereas all the Apostles were equal in power and dignity say you Matth. 20. 26. Where brist only forbiddeth spiritual Superiours to exercise that power with pride and tyrrany as did the Princes of the Gentiles but with humility and meekness as himself did Yet he there expresseth a greater and a lesser a superiour and inferiour amongst them as he saith more clearly in Luke 22. 26. he that is amongst you greatest let him be as the lesser and he who is chief as he who would serve them You cite Cyprian saying the Apostles were equal in dignity but suppresing the following words that Christ disposed the order of unity beginning with Peter whom in his epist ad Julianum he calleth both head and root of his Church All that followeth is that Moses spoke unadvisedly the Propher Elisha was ignorant of some things the Prophet Nathan made a retractation and St. Peter controuled the Heavenly vision To shew the Prophets and Apostles were not infallible save in penning the Scripture and so that the Pope is not such This is but a vain rapsodie to colour your own unsetled belief and contradiction in doctrine but nothing against us For suppose they had erred in these things that concerned not their doctrine all that you can inferre by comparison is that the Pope may erre in the like But as in penning the word of GOD they were infallible were they not also in preaching of it Or is not the high Bishop in all Councils as in the representative Church infallible in subscribing approving and confirming her decrees If the same decrees of the Council be infallible So that when you deny the Pope as head with the Bishops in general Councils as chief men to be infallible you deny the infallibility of the Church which I have sufficiently shewed reflecting on your sixth Answer Duply You labour to prove imparity amongst Prote ∣ stants Duply the Apostles from Luke 22. 26. and would have us to believe that the Papal Monarchy is there which is like the consequence of Mr. Vaux in his Catechism proving Image worship from the second Command For it is clear from verse 30. that albeit Kingly government was in the state yet it should not be so in the Church And that tyrranie is not the only thing forbidden here appeareth from this that somewhat is interdicted to Church-men which is granted to others but tyrrany is licensed to none Compare Matth. 20. 25. with Luke 22. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the one place is expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the other Then it is not only inhibited here Beside the 20. Matth. which you call unclear is most clear he that will be greatest seeking to exalt himself shal be least for he shal be abased And be who is called greatest in Luke 22. is opposed to the youngest the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the verse So by this opposition the greatest is the eldest or the greatest in gifts who should be humble self-denyed Ministers as if they were not so priviledged See 1. Peter 5. 3. To the place of Cyprian cited ye answer nothing Only you alleage that I suppress what followeth in stead of the citation you take your self to another place ad Julianum where he caâ—leth Peter first in order and this we do not deny But what will that make for his visible Monarchy For sure I am dic Ecclesiae Matth. 18. will resure that to the worldâ— end This is confirmed by Cyprians own practise for saith he Cyprian epist. 6. ad Clerum de cura Paup Ab initio Episcopatus mei nihil statui agere sine consensis cleri plebis See Cyprian epist 52. al Antonium and there you will perceive that your Pope is not like Cornelius of whom he speaketh for he was chosen Clericorum omnium testimonio plebis qui adfuit suffragio The faithful Martyr was much for peace unity and order and being infested with the Novatians he saith inde sunt nata schismata quod sacerdoti DEI non obtemperatur and telleth that by way of regrate But when he writteth to Cornelius he calleth him frater and no more Where then was your Popedom But ye equal your Pope to the Prophets and Apostles who penned the Scripture which is an odious comparison not worthy of an answer But forgetting your self you say the Pope in the Council then it is not the Pope alone of whose Monarchy we are here speaking and ridiculously you subjoyn if the Council be infallible what language is this The Pope is infallible in subscribing the decree of a counsel if the Council be infallible I say neither of them is infallible so your faith is resolved into a lie You would seem to hang the Popes infallibilitie on the sentence of a council if it be so the Pope sealing their decrees is infallible accidentally and relatively not in himself Others hang the infallibility of the Council on the Pope so a fallible council may consequently be infallible and if he ratifie the sentence of a Session it is all one with an Oecumenick-council All these crotcheâ—s are the pillars of your faith which are worm-eaten proppes to which I have spoken formerly in answer to your mentioned reflection 20. Ye make Christ as many Bodies aâ— their be administrations of the Supper § 20 Inst. by that your Transubstantiation Whereas Scripture giveth him but one natural Body which the Heaven must contain till the restitution of all things Act. 3. 21. And we believe in our Creed that he ascended to Heaven from thence he will come to judge quick and dead Ye break not the Bread contrar to the Scripture 1. Cor. 10. 16. Yea ye deny that Bread is there after the consecration contrar both to sense and reason And whereas Christ entered within the Vail not that he should offer himself often An unbloody sacrifice expiatory of sin under the Gospel is contrar to Scripture Heb. 9. 22. Heb. 9. 25. And by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified Heb. 10. 14. Ye make as many bodily offerings of Jesus Christ both for dead and living as there be Masses Reply You have many false accusations Papists Reply as formerly but no witness or warrand It is to be altogether ignorant of our terms to say that we give Jesus Christ as many Bodies as there be administrations of the Sacrament of the Supper For as we teach one and the same Body is given in every one of our administrations So we believe that he ascended to Heaven that the Heaven containeth