rule of Faith may be written If the Papists cannot see this plain Conclusion they had best desire more light to be added to the Sun. The Papists pretend their Church to be the infallible teacher of all Divine Truths and an infallible Interpreter of all obscurities in the Faith But the Papists will I hope give us leave to admire how they can pretend to Teach them in all places without writing them down that is certainly beyond the reach of their power to do as well as our belief that 't is to be done And for the Papists saying there must be a living authority beside the Scripture or else controversies cannot be ended Protestants answer Necessary controversies are and may be decided and if they be not 't is not the defect of the rule in Scripture but the default of men so that if necessary controversies be ended 't is no matter if the unnecessary be not for doubtless if God had required it he would also have provided some means to effect it but sure it does not stand with any reason it should be the Pope because he cannot be a Judge being a party indeed in civil controversies a Judge without being a party may end them but in controversies of Religion a Judge of necessity must be a concerned party and I am sure the Pope to us iâ— the chief and most concerned party being really concerned as much as his Popedom is worth Now we Protestants make the Papists this plain answer that the means of agreeing differences must necessarily be either by the appointment of God or men men sure it cannot be for then rational wise Protestants may do as well as Papists for let the Papists shew us if they can where God hath appointed that the Pope alone or any confirm'd by the Pope or that Society of Christians which adhere to him shall be the infallible Judge of Controversies we desire the Papists if they can to let us see any of those assertions plainly set down in Scripture as in all reason a thing of this nature ought to be or at least delivered with a full consent of Fathers nay let them so much as shew us where 't is in plain terms taught by any one Father in Four hundred years after our blessed Saviour Christ and if the Papists cannot do this as we believe they cannot where I pray is their either Scripture or Reason that the Pope or his Councils should obtrude themselves as Judges over us Protestants Next we would desire to know from the Papists whether they do certainly know or not the sense of those Scriptures by which they are led to the knowledge of their Church for if they do not how come they to know their Church is infallible but if they do then sure they ought to give us leave to have the same means and ability to know other plain places in Scripture which they have to know theirs for if all Scriptures be obscure how come they to know the sense of those places but if some place of it be plain why pray may not Protestants understand them as well as Papists The Papists say That the Scriptures are in themselves true and infallible yet without the direction of the Church we have no certain means to know which Translations be faithful and Canonical or what is the true meaning of Scriptures and this is the common Argument and general Belief of all Papists To which the Protestants answer That yet all these things must first be known before we can know the directions of their Church to be infallible for the Papists cannot pretend any other proof of it but only some Texts of Canonical Scripture truly interpreted therefore either they must be mistaken in thinking there is no other means to know these things but their Churches infallible direction or else we must be excluded from all means of knowing her directions to be infallible for the proof must be surer than the thing to be proved or 't is no proof And upon better consideration I am confident the Papists dare not deny but that 't is most certain Faith hath been given by other means than the Church for sure they will not say that Adam received Faith by the Church nor Abraham nor Job who received Faith by Revelation and also the Holy Apostles who received Faith by the Miracles and Preaching of our Blessed Saviour So that you see and they cannot deny but their general Doctrine is contradictory And to make it yet plainer I desire to know of the Papists if they should meet with a man that believed neither Scripture Church nor God but declares he is both ready and willing to believe them all if the Papist can shew him sufficient grounds to build his Faith upon will the Papist tell such a man there are no certain grounds how he may be converted to their Church or there are if the Papists say there are none they make Religion an uncertain thing but if they say there are then they must necessarily either argue woman-like that their Church is infallible because it is infallible or else shew there are other certain grounds besides saying the Church is infallible to prove its Infallibility The Papists demand of the Protestants If they believe the Apostles wrote all the Scriptures for if they did not how come we to call and believe them Apostolical and not the Writings of those that writ them To which we answer Though all the Scriptures were not written by the Apostles themselves yet they were all confirm'd by them and tho a Clerk writes a Statute and the King Lords and Commons confirm it in Parliament I believe they would esteem it very improper to call it the Statute of such a Clerk tho writ by him but an Act of Parliament because it was confirm'd by all their censents and becomes their Act not the Clerks The Papists desire us to tell them in what Language the Scriptures remained incorrupted and we desire them to satisfie us whether it be necessary to know it or not necessary if it be not I hope we may do well without it but if it be necessary we desire first that they will please to tell us what became of their Church for One thousand five hundred Years together all which time they must confess they had no certainty of Scripture till the time that Pope Clement the 8th set forth their approved Edition of the vulgar Translation and none sure can have the confidence to deny but that there was great variety of Copies currant in divers parts of their Church and read so which Copies might be false in some things but more than one sort of them could not possibly be true in all things And Pope Sixtus Quintus his Bible differ'd from Pope Clement his Bible in a multitude of places which makes us desire to be satisfied of the Papists whether before Pope Sixtus Quintus his time their Church had any defined Canon of Scriptures or not for if they had not
him as Universal Bishop over the whole Catholick Church but his not doing so argued he esteemed him Bishop only of one Church And further St. Cyprian all know did resolutely oppose a Decree of the Roman Bishop and all that adhered â—…o him in that one point of Rebaptizing which the Popish Church at that time delivered as a necessary Tradition and Excommunicated the Bishops of Capadocia Galatia and all that were against that Tradition and would not so much as allow them lodging or entertainment in Rome Now since the Papists affirm that not to Rebaptize those whom Hereticks had Baptized to be a damnable Heresie 'T is well worth asking the Papists when this begun to be so for if they say from the beginning it was so then they must maintain a contradiction for then was St. Cypriaâ—… a Professor of damnable Heresie and yet the Papists esteeâ—… him a Saint and Martyr And on the other side if 't were not so from the beginning then did the Pope wrongfully Excommunicate those other Churches of Cappadocia and Galatia without sufficienâ—… ground of Excommunication and separation which by theiâ—… own Tenents is Schismatical So let them chuse which sidâ—… they please the Pope was in an error And tho Victor Bishop of Rome obtruded the Roman Tradition touching the time of Easter upon the Asian Biships under the pain of Excommunication and Damnation yet we read that Irenaeus and all the other Western Bishops though they did agree with the Bishop of Rome in his Observation of Easter yet they did sharply reprehenâ—… his Excommunicating the Asian Bishops for their disagreeing with him which most plainly argues that the Western Bishops thought that not a sufficient ground of Excommunication which the Bishop of Rome did and therefore it must necessarily follow they did not esteem the Roman Bishop infallible nor the separation from the Church of Rome an Heresie And this I am sure is true and undeniable reason The Popish Story tells us That Optatus Bishop of Rome upbraided the Donatists as Schismaticks because they held no Communion with the Church of Rome by adding afterwards that they were Schismaticks for they held no Communion with the Seven Churches of Asia which occasions this Question of the Papists Whether a separation from these seven Apostolick Churches was a mark of Heresie or not If they say it was not how comes it that the Pope's Authority is a stronger Argument for the Popish Church than the Asian Authority for the Asian Churches And if the Papists say a separation from those seven Asian Churches was a mark of Heresie then they must confesâ—… their Church was for many years Heretical as separating many years from the Asian Churches And Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus and Metropolitan of Asia despised the Pope's Vniversal Supremacy and Authority and kept contrary to the Pope Easter-day the Fourteenth of March. And indeed tho the Papists do so much quote the authority of the Fathers yet I find they as little befriend their Churches Infallibility as the Asian Bishops themselves have done for tho the Papists say St. Hierome conceived it nenessary to conform in matters of Faith to the Church of Rome yet before the Papists brag of that let them answer us this How came it then to pass that St. Hierome chose to believe the Epistle to the Hebrews Canonical upon the authority of the Eastern Church and to reject it from the Canon of the Roman Churches Authority And how comes it also that he dissented from the Roman Church touching the Canon of the Old Testament Let the Papists take heed of losing their Fort by endeavouring to maintain their out-works And now to conclude this point and excuse the Papists mistake concerning their universal Bishop we read in Scripture of the Prophet Elias who thought there was none â—…eft beside himself in the whole Ringdom of Israel who had not revolted from God and yet God himself is pleased to assure us he was deceived And if a Prophet and one of the greatest err'd in his judgment touching his own time Country why may not the Papists subject to the same passions err in their opinion and judgment about the Popes being Vniversal Bishop when plain reason tells them as well as us that there were other Bishops as much Vniversal as the Pope I now come to examine this infallible Pope whether he cannot make his infallible Church more infallible than he has made himself and free the Popish Church from error tho he could not the Pope from Heresie Now towards the disproving the pretended Infallibility of the Roman Church I lay this as the foundation of my Discourse That the whole Roman Church can be no better than a Cengregation of Men whereof every particular not one excepted and consequently the generality is nothing but a collection of men and if every one be polluted as who dare say he is free from sin how can the whole but be defiled with error As reasonably may a man brag he is in perfect health and strength and yet at the same time confess he hath not one sound part about him And truly it very much creats my wonder but does not in the least satisfie my reason what the Papists can pretend by the Infallibility of their Church for if they will allow their Pope to be no better than St. Peter was their Church to bâ—… composed of no better men than the Holy Apostles were 〈…〉 shall desire no more and I am sure they can never provâ—… so much for they that pretend to it declare as great aâ—… ignorance as St. Peter did a sin in denying his Lord anâ—… Master and there are many other known circumstances which made St. Paul prove him blame-worthy to hiâ—… face And for the Apostles being in error we have not only the examples of the Apostles themselves who in the time of our Saviours Passion being scandalized lost their Faith in him and I believe the Papists will not say they could lose their faith in our blessed Saviour Christ without error and therefore our Saviour after his Resurrection upbraided them with their Incredulity and called Thomas incredulous for denying the Resurrection in the Twentieth oâ—… St. John. And further 't is most apparent that the very Apostleâ—… themselves even after the sending the Holy Ghost did through Inadvertency or Prejudice continue some time in an error contrary to a revealed Truth And if the Papists will not own to know this Truth they may be fully satisfied of it in the Story of the Acts of the Apostles where they may plainly read that notwithstanding our Saviours express warrant and injunction to the Apostles to go and preach to all Nations Yet notwithstanding till St. Peter was better informed by a Vision from Heaven and by the Conversion of Cornelius both St. Peter and the rest of the Church held it unlawful for them to go and Preach the Gospel to any but the Jews Now since we can prove that St. Peter did err
witnesâ—… Pope against Pope Councils against Councils some of their Fathers against others and rather then fail some against themselves new Traditions inrolled and old ones Cashiered in a word one Church against another and if â—…hat be not enough the Church of one Age against the Church of another whereas the Scripture being true and â—…nalterable and containing all things necessary to our Salvation I am secure that by believing nothing else I shall â—…elieve no falshood in matter of Faith and if I mistake the â—…rue sense of Scripture and so fall into error yet I am secured â—…rom any dangerous error because whilst I am truly endeaâ—…ouring to find the true ground of Scripture I cannot but â—…old my error without obstinacy and be ready to forsake â—…t when more probable and true sense shall appear unto me and then being assur'd that all necessary truths are plainly â—…et down in Scripture I am certain by believing the Scripture â—…o believe all necessary truth and he that does so if his life be â—…nswerable to his Faith how is it possible he should fail of Salvation And tho the Roman Church pretend to be a perfect guide of Faith and teacher of all Divine Truths yet sure that â—…itle might much better and more justly be given to the â—…cirptures as their Teacher and Master The Roman Church brags how ancient their Church is but doubtless they cannot deny but the Scripture is more ancient â—…f they will but allow the Mother to be older than the Child The Papists say their Church is a means of keeping Chriâ—…tians at unity so are also the Scriptures to those that be â—…ieve them in unity of belief in matters necessary The Papists say their Church is Catholick certainly the Scripture is more Catholick for all true Christians in the universal world do now and ever did believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God so much at least as to contain all things necessary to salvation whereas the Papists say They only are the true Church and all other Christians tho more than they give them the lye for saying so By following the Scriptures I follow that whereby the Papists prove their Churches Infallibility For were it not for Scripture what pretence could the Papists have for it or what true Notion could they receive of it So that by so dong the Papists must plainly confess That they themselves are surer of the Truth of Scripture than of their Churches Authority for we must be surer of the proof than of the thing proved or else 't is no proof So that following Scripture I follow that which must be true if the Papists Church be true for their Church allows it's truth Whereas if I follow the Roman Church I must follow that which tho the Scripture be true may be false nay more must be false if the Scripture be true because the Scipture is against it Following the Papists Church I must be a servant to my Saviour and a subject to my King only at the pleasure of the Pope and renounce my Allegiance when the Popes will is to declare him an Heretick nay I must believe Vertue Vice and Vice Vertue if he pleases for he both makes and unmakes Scripture as he thinks convenient witness the Apocripha which hath not past for Canonical but of late years in the Papistâ—… Church who interpret Scripture according to their Doctrine but will not judge their Doctrine according to Scripture for none like to weigh light Mony in true scales In short the Pope adds and lessen and interprets Divine Laws as he pleases and they must stand for Laws and be obeyed as such so that in effect he rules his people by his own Laws and his own Laws by his own Lawyers his Clergy who dare not speak nor uphold them other than just such as the Pope would have them and indeed Cardinal Richelieu gave the reason why more hold the Pope above the Councils than the Councils above the Pope Because the Pope gave Archbishopricks and Bishopricks but the Councils had none to give And tho the Papists say his Holiness cannot err yet let not the Papists forget what God says in the Scripture if not only the Pope but if angel from Heaven shall preach any thing against the Gospel of Christ let him be accursed In following the Scripture we have God's express command and no colour of any prohibition but to believe the Papish Church infallible we have no Scripture-command at all much less an express one Following the Popish Church we must believe many things not only above reason but against reason witness Transubstantiation whereas following the Scripture we shall believe Many mysteries but no impossibilities many things above our reason but nothing against it Nay we need not believe any thing which reason will not convince us we ought to believe for reason will convince any sober Christian that the Scripture is the Word of God and there 's no reason can be greater than this That God says it therefore it must be true In a word we Protestants believe that all things necessary to our salvation are evidently contain'd in Scripture what is not there evidently contained cannot be necessary to be believed and our reason is just and clear Because nothing can challenge our Belief as to salvation but what hath descended to us from our Blessed Saviour Christ Jesus by original and universal Tradition Now nothing but Scripture hath thus descended to us therefore nothing but Scripture can challenge our Belief Now the grand difference between the Papists and us concerning the Scripture is this We hold the Scripture to be the only perfect rule whereby to judge of controversies The Papists say That they acknowledge the Scuriptures to be a perfect rule only they deny that it excludes unwritten Tradition which in effect is this they say 'T is as perfect a Rule as a Writing can be only they deny it to be as perfect a Rule as a Writing may be Either they must revoke their acknowledgment or retract their contradiction of it for both cannot possibly stand together For if they will but stand to what they have granted That Scripture is as perfect a Rule of Faith as a Writing can be they must then grant it so compleat as it needs no addition and so evident that it needs no interpretation for both these properties are requisite to a perfect Rule And that a writing is capable of both these properties and perfections is most plain for he that denies it must say that something may be spoken which cannot be written for if such a compleat evident rule of Faith may be delivered by word of mouth as the Papists pretend may is and whatsoever is delivered by word of mouth may also be written then such a compleat and evident rule of Faith may also be written For the Argument is most plain Whatsoever may be spoken may be written a perfect rule of Faith has been spoken therefore a perfect