with naked persecuted truth in our Church as the Marques of Galeacia Mr. Smeton c. yea sundry have gone to Rome been converted by taking a distaste at their worship and way Fourthly Our run awayes runagads have to mourn before the Lord for their Apostacie seeing they cannot deny that the Ordinances in our Church have been by the Lords blessing instrumental to beget children to God This they must graunt unless they will say that all the reformed Church is unconverted which they have no confidence to averre Now how gross is it to spit in the face of her who did bear and foster them which I wish the Lord may lay to the consciences of such revolters But not to insist further I desire you in the fear of God to pause and consider well whether you are going to heaven or hell and by what rule you walk If the will of man or the revealed will of God have the power of your consciences or whether it be safer to take the scriptures way in which the Prophets and Apostles walked to heaven or the way of your own traditions and vaine inventions He who walketh according to the scripture rule peace and mercy shall be upon him and upon the Israell of God Reply In your last answer you say our Papists Reply pelf and policie is greater then yours both which I grant but glories in neither Yet if Ministers augmentations hold on they will shortly equal our pelf but not our Christian policit in employing it so well our glorious and goodly edifices of Churches Hospitals Monasteries dispersing and distributing their rents to pious uses But the thrusting down of Churches Hospitals Monasteries dispersing and dissipating their rents testifie your want of policy blind avarice mad passion Secondly You say we give indulgencies for looseness as if in Catholick times there had been greater looseness then since the Reformation Whereas the keeping of Lent and Fasting dayes were abolished Pennance and satisfaction for sin taken away Celibacie in Church men thought a crime Laicks allowed after divorcement to marry all good works thought impossible the Commandments thought impossible to be keeped and that men sin of necessity in their best actions which as it excuseth all wickedness and sin so it giveth way to all looseness and prophainness Thirdly You say many quit Rome in the integrity of their heart such as the Marquess of Galeacia and closed on their peril with naked truth in your Church To which I answer that all Hereticks and Schismaticks have quit Rome not in the integritie of their heart but in the blindness of their mind and that with their own peril eternal damnation closing with a very naked faith and Religion not well cloathed with the least colour of truth but not with naked faith or belief which Catholicks confidently and constantly assert what ever you say to the contrar And it is no where else to be found for they know there is but one faith and one GOD and one true Church Consequentlie united in the same faith in all which points as she was established by Christ and his Apostles hath continued since their time visible in her Pastours and People in all Ages holy and incorrupted in her Doctrine religious in her Sacraments and ceremonies powerful and glorious in her wonders and miracles conversion of Infidels in the which the holy Fathers have lived and all true Martyrs have died Which only all new upstarts and Sects do persecute and oppose as Protestants at this day under the pretence of Reformation and upon the same ground of wresting Scripture against the common consent of the Church and Fathers with them For as all divisions in Christianity have been from the Roman Catholick Church so all have turned both their armes and pennes chiefly against her but in vain she is builded on a rock against which the gates of hell shal not prevail against her And so who return from you to her are neither run-awayes nor run-agads as you call them but like the forlorn child or lost sheep return'd Whose example undoubtedly many more would follow if they would consider Faith without unity amongst Protestants a Church without a Head a Body without united Members a Law without a Judge a Temple without an Altar Religion without Sacrifice Divine service without Religious ceremonies Sacraments which do not sanctifie Doctrine without infallibility Belief without a ground Preachers without a call Commandments impossible to be keeped Exhortation to what is not in our power Reprobation without workes Reward without Merits Sin punished where there is no Free-will Scripture received or rejected upon the catalogue of the Jewes GODS word patched up by men Reformation without authority New-lights against old received veâ—iâ—ins the Privat-spirit against the whole Church single mens opinions against the unanimous consent of the Fathers in a word wavering Pastours unsetled Government unstable Faith In the post-script there be a parallel patched about our Reformations which being composed of the gall of bitterness without verity or reason deserveth no answer but that which Hezekiah commanded Is 36. 21. Duply You graunt that ye are rich and politick this is true there is much prophain Prote ∣ stants Duply 1 policie where Jesuited equivocation is mantained But tell me if this be like the Godly sinceritie and Gospell simplicitie which was the old Apostolick way and ground of their rejoicing 2. Cor. 1. 12. If ye exceed us in sumptuous buildings which politickly you mistake for the policie mentioned by me though your pelf be greater then ours we want not Hospitalls Bridges Temples according to our abilitie But what is that to the doctrine which is according to Godliness The Turks exceed you as farre that way as ye doe us And the Temple of Diana at Ephesus exceeded you and them also Secondly You deny that Poperie fostereth prophanness but it is too apparent and Duply 2. how can it be otherwise If indulgencies bought and sold like an horse in a market tend not ex natura operis in it self to make men loose and prophane let any sober man judge For thus may they reason shall I quite my lusts for a little money I know what will do the bussines and put me in favour with God Why should I pluck out my right eye and cut off my right hand when a little time in puâ—gatorie will do the turne and a soulemasse which I can have for the Legacie of a summe of money will free me thence But we with the scripture forbid men to deceive themselves for they who do such things shall not it herit the kingdom of heaven So with us nothing less will satisfie then Gospell repentance and the least ground of hope is not granted to those hereafter who turne not away hore from their iniquities How can this be denyed seeing your latest Casuists such as Escobar Busenbaius and Diana the Sicilian have purposly devised latitudes for rendring prophane men secure about Duells Sodomy and other acts of
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
uncleanness which would make chaste ears to â—ingle And that men who in hainously are not bound to repent imediatly as it is fully proved by Reverend Learned Mr. MENZIES in his Papismus Lucifugus pag. 158. to 169. And when it is defended that minus probabile may be chosen although it have no ground in scripture contrar to more probable grounds and the stream of Doctors doth not this open a door to make the may of Christianity broad whereas the scripture calleth it strait and narrow Thus ye gaine proselites And it is observable that manâ— loose livers in the land who are adversarieâ— to the power and puritie of Religion hate to be reformed do encline to Popery And to me it is not minus probabile that it is only upon this account We are not against fasting chastity mortification Nor do we say that men sin not willingly or that good workes are impossible yea we hold them necessar to salvation Only we deny that faln man can be justified by the workes of the law otherwise we needed not a Saviour not a Gospell-remedy It is your ordinar way to mistate questions and then intend a skirmish which is easie work this is a sinfull and shallow evasion Thirdly You fall out with bauling expressions which rational men cannot value much and scoâ—fe at these worthies who did take their lives in their hands and closed with persecuted truth neither for gaine nor for honor but for conscience sake Was not this a commendable duty If self denyall be not a chief ingredient in Christian performances I know not the Gospell You assert that it was blindness not integrity I averse it was integrity and not blindness Who art thou that judgest another mans servant remember thou shalt be judged You talk much concerning the authority and unity which is amongst you but some who were at Rome and have come not long ago from you to us againe tell what sort of integritie puritie and chastitie is amongst you So it is no wonder albeit many tongues and pennâ— be employed to pull down that whorish Babell which ye call Zion Fourthly You imply that none can be saved but such as are subject to the Pope Therefore our run-awayes must nor be apostats with you for they are Prodigals returned and lost sheep found When I pray you went they from you to us Were they not baptized in our Church and partakers of all ordinances with us till of late Then I pose you and them again whither ye damn all who are not Popish and judge them unconverted If they be Hereticks in your sense this must follow Yet you have nor the confidence to speak it directly And sure I am Scripture requireth not subjection to the Pope as an article of the Creed If without this â— man cannot be saved albeit he believe and live like the Gospel the Apostle Paul was no chosen Vessel which is contrar to Scripture there was no Pope in his dayes nor long after that Your Church hath been visible by bell book and candle fire faggot pomp policie Your Pastours are more for the fleece then the flock Ye are superstitiouâ— by addition substractioÌ„ multiplication without any warrand Your Ceremonies are partly Paganish partly Jewish and for the most Schismatick so not religious nor venerable Your miracles woÌ„ders are such that it is good for you to have them wrought in America and told in Europe Like are ye to him who cometh with lies and wonderâ— 2. Thess 2. 9. Your conscience can witness what Leger-demain is in these And it is our way to try miracles by the Scripture I wish Infidels were converted to the Christian faith and not to a faction By the Scripture noâ— by fopperies and military Compulsators Stephen the Apostles and some primitive Fathers were Martyrs but they died not in the Romish Faith as it is now mantained And how can your Church be called Catholick which is a particular one wherein be many dissenters It is not strange to us albeit ye indulge them who runne away and Apostatize from us but it is strange why they have done so and what hath sascinated them to burst all bonds and swallow on a sudden the whole bulk of Popery It requireth an Ostrich stomach to digest such iron Where in did Gospel-truths Gospel-worship or their mother and nurse weary them testifie against her if they can Fifthly You say we have Faith without unity then you grant us faith and our unity in fundamentals is more then your own A Church without a head We acknowledge no Pope head of our Church Christ is our head and the visible Government of the Church is Aristocratical not Monarchical the mystical Members of his Body are united in him so we are not a body without united members Neither want we a Judge in controversal matters It is known that many points of Christianity cannot be judged by râ—en because the Kingdom of Grace is within us and consisteth not in meat or drink but righteousness peace and joy in the holy Ghost Rom. 14. 17. Who will say that the hidden man in the heart can be cognosced by any external living judge on earth The spiritual man â—udgeth all things but he himself is judged of no man 1. Cor. 2. 15. The written word is the rule of this and other such cases For other matters we have Councils and Church Ruleâ—s appointed by the supream Judge who are bound to discern according to Scripture and all are appointed to obey them in the Lord so we have not a Law without a Judge The golden Altur is our Altar we have sacrifices of Prayer and Praises and one living sacrifice is better then many carcases that is reasonable service Rom. 12. 1. Then we have order and decencie and such positives as set forth the worship in a Gospel way without pâ—mpous observation therefore we lack not an Altar Sacrifices and Ceremonies in such manner as Gospel-work under the New Testament requireth Our Sacraments are instruments to seal and sanctifie our rule is infallible for it is Scripture the grounds of our faith are such as will not make us ashamed for we have his revealed will and word for it Therefore it is a calumny to say we have Sacraments which do not sanctifie Doctrine without infallibility and Belief without a ground If our Preachers had runne unsent the Lord had not sealed their Ministrie with such success Ier. 23. 32. It may be spoken without vanity to the praise of free-grace that there be many real sincere serious solid Christians in BRITTAIN Blessed be the Lord we go not without our CoÌ„verts who can speak with any adversary in the gate And they will and do bless our Ministry upon the brink of eternity which hath been the power of GOD to their Salvation So our Ministry is not without a call we say not that any divine command is in it self impossible to be keeped but that fallen man through his own fault is imperfect in obedience
directly answered by me whither on man or many should be judge of controversies To this he saith I dare not answer because I will not grant the power either to the high Bishop or general council nevertheless he findeth this to have been the constant practise of the Church both in the Old and New Testament established by the express word of God and received by the Fathers in all ages for in the Old Testament from Deut. 17. from 8. to 13. we read that GOD did command the people in matters of controversie to go to the Priests Levits and judge who should be in those days appointed by him for that end saying and thou shalt do according to the sense of the law which they shal teach thee and according to the judgement which they shal tell thee Remark he saith not according to the sense of the law which thou shalt read but which they shal teach thee not taken according to the privat judgement and spirit but according to the judgmeÌ„t which they shal tel thee where God promiseth out of their mouth judicii veritateÌ„ truth and verity in judgement or as you turn it sentence of judgement See for this also 2. Chr. 19. 8. where Jehosophat established what was first instituted Viz. a council of Levits Priests and chief fathers of Israel to judge not only between brethren and brethren blood and blood but also betwixt law and coÌ„mandments statutes and judgements Not leaving law and commandments to the peoples privat reading and interpretation as you do in your rule of faith In the 11. verse he concludeth thus Amaziah is over you in all matters of the Lord where it is evident that the council and chief Priest is established judge of controversie and not the written Word as every one readeth and expoundeth In the New Testament again you have this practise clearly set down Acts. 15. Where Paul and Barnabas though Apostles themselves go up to Jerusalem about the question of circumcising the Gentiles converted to the faith And there was holden the first council in which this is decided not out of Scripture but by the authority of the Council it self It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us said they having the assured promise of the assistance of the Holy Ghost as the Church hath at all time Wherefore after the Apostles councils have decided with the same authority and upon the same infallible ground of the Holy Ghosts assistance promised to the Church Many controversies are acknowledged by Protestants for points of faith without express passage of Scripture Marcion teaching that Baptism should be conferred more then once and Donatists that Baptism conferred by Hereticks should be reiterated as invalid are condemned in the council holden at Rome under Melchiadâ—s Pope in the year 313. now what passage of Scripture I pray you is for this Sâ—bellius putting one person only in the God-head is câ—ndemned in the council of Alexandria under Pope Cornelius in the year 319. but scripture maketh no mention of persons Nestorius putting two persons in Christ is condemned in the Generall Council holden at Ephesus under Pope Caelestin the year 434. Yet neither doth the Scripture speak of thâ—â— The Monotheliâ—s giving to Christ one will in two Natures are condemned in the third general Câ—uncil holden at Constantinople under Pope Agathon the year 679. albeit there be no formal scripture for this So you see it belongeth both in the Old and New Testament to the high Priest and general Council to decide controversie either by Scripture if there be any passage clear for that point or without Scripture by Apostolick tradition conserved in the Church which scripture it self warranteth 2. Thess 2. 15. Hold fast the traditions which ye have learned either by word or our epistle but it seemeth you care not who be condemned or by whom if you take away all power on earth to condemne your selves Every Protestant will be condemned by none but Scripture and yet will make none judge of the Canon Version and sense of Scripture but himself All your answer is that we grant the Promulgation of the law to the pure Gospel Church but you shew not what is this pure Gospel Church neither can you infallibly prove the purity of the Gospel it self or that there is a Gospel or the true sense of the Gospel but by the Catholick Church her authority Hear Aug. contta Ep. fund cap. 5. Where he saith I my self would not have believed the Gospel were it not that the authority of the Church moved me to it Now the Catholick Church is that whose faith is spread through all the world in the Apostle Paul his time which maketh her to be justlie called the Catholick Roman Church and whose faith hath been in all ages since Christ which all the records of the Protestant writters witness of the Roman Church wherein the succession of Popes Bishops Councils is made conspicuous to all who have written Chronology or Church history in every age none whereof make mention of your Church or of men professing your tenets before Luther and Calvin from whom ye dissent in many things Answer first This is a prolix reply the Pro. Du. 1 substance of which might have been taken up in seven or eight lines As it is spacious so it is an impertinent rapsodie and like a beggers cloak clouted here and there with divers parcells without any method or cohesion It seemeth to have been taken out of some Index and cast in here to fill the page For the answer was That the promulgation of the law is not denyed to the pure Gospell-Church which is not the Roman-Church for it is impure Is not this a direct answer You prove that there hath been a Ministerial-Church in the old and new Testament which we doe not deny but this is the point did they so pronounce sentence and decide Controversies that all discretive judgement was taken from people or called they themselves infallible whether they had scripture warrand or not Or wil the promise of presence to the Apostles Prophets and penners of Scripture in measure and duration agree to any Church Officers now on Earth Or should promises made to the Universal-Church agree to any particular Church such as Rome Or will promises made to the collective body of the Church agree to the representative unless these be proved you fight with your own shadow For we are much for the authority of Christs Church and think that her judgment of old and late should sway privat men unless they can prove by scripture or sound reason that she erreth We are much for the authority of all lawful Councils and we give them all reverence in regard of the authority of their constitution but if they depart from the scriptures we owe them not active obedience Well speaketh our learned Camero tom 1. tract de infallibilitate ecclesiae So oft as any thing is decreed by a Council or assembly of men appointed by lawfull autharity
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
Of 150. Bishops in the first Council of Constantinople anno 381. Where the Bishop of Constantinople is decreed to be the chief next the Bishop of Rome Thirdly Of 200. Bishops in the first council of Ephesus anno 431. where in the third action it is defined that saint Peter was the head and prince of the Apostles and that the power of binding and loosing is granted to him who in his successours liveth and exerciseth judgement unto this very day Fourthly Of 600. Bishops in the Chalcedon council in the year 451. where in the third action also Pope Leo is called universal Bishop Patriarch of old Rome and sentence is pronounced against Dioscorus in the name of Leo and sunt Peter to acknowledge Leo Peters successour The Fathers in particular I do not cite for their citations in this would make a volumn Only I engage that of a 100. there be 90. clear for this And not one against it Is not Popish faith resolved into a lie say you viz. the infallibility of Pope or Council You should have said Pope and Council putting tâ—em together as the head and chief members which represent the whole body of the Church As the Parliament doth the whole Kingdome and then if you doubt of their infallibility you deny the express words of Scripture which calleth the Church the ground and pillar of truth 1. Tim. 3. and which assureth us that the gates of hell shal not prevail against her Math. 16. 18. Yea you take away all possible means to know infalliblie what is true Scripture what is the true sense thereof which is to make us doubt of all and leave us no sufficient ground to believe undoubtedlie any thing You take away Christs promise to be with the Church to the end of the world Matth. 28. 20. Yea you take away an Article out of the Creed I believe in the holy Catholick Church and leaving men either to the dead letter of Scripture which killeth many or the privat spirit which deceiveth more or natural reason which can be a motive of faith to none you cast loose all Religion every one reâ—ecting or receiving Scripture as he pleaseth Expounding Scripture as he pleaseth and following in both no infallible rule or guide but his own opinion fancie imaginatioÌ„ In the fourth part you say that all the positives of the reformed Religion were mantained in the primitive Church the first 300. years But if this were true it would be made good no otherwise but by the Fathers writtings in the first three ages after Christ Now if they had all your positive tenets why do your learnedest writters openly disclaime them as I have shewed formerly Why saith Luther your Apostle lib. deserv arbitrio cap. 2. the authority of the Fathers is not to be reguarded and in his Collâ—q cap. de patribus In the writtings of Hierom there is not aword of true faith of Chrysostom I make no account Basil is of no worth he is wholly a Monk Cyprian is a weak Divine But I must not insist on this because you may in some measure deny the greatest parts of controverted points betwixt you and us to be positive tenets Albeit there be none of them but justly may be called so For you not only deny for example the real presence invocation of Saints use of Images that a man is justified by faith and works c. But ye positively believe that Christs Body and Blood is not reallie present in the Sacrament that to invocat the Saints is to give Gods worship to creatures that to make use of Images is idolatrie that a man is not justified by faith only Therefore I instance only two upon which all your visible reformation is grounded First That the whole visible Church may erre Secondly That we should believe nothing but what is in the written Word Now I have made it appear reflecting on your sixt answer that both these positive tenets are against the express wordes of Scripture and Fathers How then did the Church in the first 300. years hold all the positives and what you affirme As for your negatives and what you deny you grant they cannot be there because the controversies were not then stated But this is a bold and open calumnie for not one point is denyed by you but the Fathers in the first 300. years have clearlâ—e asserted And so the controversie betwixt you and us was sufficientlie stated even then You deny real presence and transubstantiation but in the second age Justin Martyr Apol. 2. ad Antonium saies as Jesus Christ incarnat had flesh and blood for our redemption so are we taught that the Eucharist is the flesh and blood of the same Jesus incarnat And in the third age Cyprian serm de coena Domini saith the bread which the Lord gave to his Disciples being changed not in shape but in nature by the omnipotencie of the Word is made flesh Secondlie Ye deny the sacrifice of the Masse asserted in the first age by St. Andrew in the book of his passion written by his Disciples I daily saith he sacrifice the immaculat Lamb to Almightie GOD who when he is truelie sacrificed and his flesh eaten remaineth intire and alive And in the third age by Origen hom 13. on Exod. Ye think your self guiltie and worthilie if any part of the consecrated Hoste be lost by your negligence Thirdlie Ye deny Purgatory asserted in the second age by Tertullian lib. de anima cap. 58 seeing we understand Matthews prison which the Apostle demonstrats to be places below and the least farthing is every smal fault delayed to be paied till the resurrection none will doubt but the soul will recompence something in places below And in the third Age It is one thing being cast into prison not to go out thence till he pay the uttermost farthing another presently to receive the reward of faith One thing to be affected with long pains for sins to be amended and have all sins purged with suffering sayeth Cyprian ep 52. ad Antonium Fourthly ye deny Prayer for the dead allowed in the first Age by S. Clemens ep 1. de sancto Petro where he saith Peter there taught to give almes and pray for the dead And in the same age by Tertul. lib. de cor militis we make yearly oblations for the dead Fifthly ye deny invocation of Saints and Angells recommended in the secong Age by S. Dennis Eccl. hierarch part 3. cap. 3. saying I constantly affirm with the divine scripture that the prayers of the saints are profitable for us in this life after this manner when a man is inflamed with a desire to invocat the saints and distrusting his own weakness betakes himself to any saint beseeching him to be the helper and petitioner to God for him he shall obtaine by that mean very great assistance And in the third Age Origen on the Lambent sayeth I le begin to fall on my knees and pray to all the saints to succour me
Christians seeme to be nothing inferiour to Pagans in adoration of their Idols they make them with as much vanity and adore them with as much devotion From Scripture reason antiquity the confession and concession of adverâ—arieâ— it is sure and clear that Papists commit gross Idolatrie from which all good Christians should flee and make their escape Fifthly Ye mulitat the Sacrament of the § 5. Inst Supper contrar to the institution of Jesus Christ Matth. 26. 27. by with-holding the Cup from the people yea contrar to the doctrine of the Apostle Paul which be received from the Lord 1. Cor. 11. 25. where all the Communicants for the most were common Professours And albâ—iâ— our Lord command this to be done till he come again without any substantial alteration yet acrilegiously hoc non obstante as saith your Council of Constance ye with-hold the Câ—p â—rom the people and give them only the Bread The answer given to this is as followeth that Papists Reply Protestants in denying real Presence against the express words of Scripture This is my Body this is my Blood which is shed for you not only mutilat the Sacrament but take it clear away You give sufficient occasion to other Haereticks to say that Christ was no otherwise in the Crib or the Cross then ye say that he is in the Sacrament Scripture not being more clear for the one then the other So that denying the real presence ye destroy and ruine in a manner the incarnation and very ground of Christianity But Catholicks neither take it away from any nor give it mutilat Seeing they profess to give Christs glorious and living Body which is not seperat from the Blood and who so receiveth the one receiveth the other It was instituted not only for a Sacrament but for a sacrifice and so I grant that both kynds is requisit on the Altar but it should nor be given to every one otherwise the very Disciples of the Apostles had not known how it should be given For St. Dennis lib. de Ecclesia he asserteth the communion of Saints under one kind and St. Cyprian de Lapsis affirmeth the same of the sick Yea when Christians in the Primitive Church in the time of persecution did carry it home they did eat it but under one kind as Tertullain telleth lib. ad Uxorem More Christ himself did give it under one kind Luke 24. verse 30. as learned Fathers expound And the Apostles Acts 2. 42. and Acts 20. 7. who then can challenge a necessity of takâ—ng both kinds What St. Paul did then was lawful But what Christ and his Apostles did was no less which sheweth that the Church way follow either of these examples for good reasons as she thinketh â—iâ— Answer Your mutilation of the Sacrament is so clear that I admire how you can deny Prote ∣ stants Duply it did not the Council of Constance establish it hoc non obstante i. e. notwithstanding the institution c. Your citations for proof are mismarshalled For first you cite St. Dennis Cyprian Tertullian and then Scripture which sheweth your respects for the word But I cannot follow your Method in this Therefore know that the place Luke 24. v. 30. maketh nothing for you You say Fathers interpret it so but tell us not who they are so their interpretation is no more but your word but to shew that there be no mention in that place of the Sacrament First There was no cup at all there at least none is mentioned How then can you make it a Sacrament seeing you say to us that both kinds are necessar to a sacrifice and the Sacrament of the Supper is such say you Reconcile your self with your self if you can Here there was no Sacrifice Ergo no Sacrament Secondly It is sure this was an ordinary meal honoured with Christ his presence And for proof of this read Jansenius on these words There be some saith he who would take an argument from this place that it is lawful under one kind to give or receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist which opinion is neither certain nor hath it any liklyhood of truth We are commanded to eat and drink at that table how we shal make eating eating and drinking too saith he can hardly be perceived That breaking of bread Acts. 2. 46. is interpreted to be eating their meat at home with gladness and singleness of heart Oecumenius Lyra Cajetan Carthusian say it is only meaned de communi victu non de Eucharistia So saith Lorinus also on the text Existimo hic de Eucharistia non esse sermonem sed de victu quotidiano vel convivio quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appellant So that place Acts 20. Lyra Carthusianus Cajetanus make it corporal refection only for they say the Disciples did conveen to eat with Paul before he went away and this is proved from the 11. v. But grant that place Acts 20. to be meaned of the Sacrament which is probably mantained by others it will no more follow that the Apostle did mutilat it there then that he preached without Prayer seeing the one is no more mentioned then the other Lorinus saith he could not make use of this text for Communion sub una specie against an adversary Your citation from St. Dennis maketh little for you For supposing his testimony to be â—eal the administration of it to Infants was contrary to the institution as well as under one kind We know Infants can drink before they can eat if any such thing was it is liker an administration to Infants then to discerning Christians It is true that they used to carry home the bread as you imply from Tertullian and Cyprian but did alwayes take the cup in praesentia But to put this out of doubt see Cassander Consult 22. Communion under one kind was not in the Church saith he till Aquinas his time anno 1265. And is it not against your light and reason then to argue so against the institution of Jesus Christ Our judgement about the presence of Christ in the Sacrament will be heard a none but it will be no ground for you to mutilat divine ordinances and clip treacherously the King of Saints his coin Sixthly Ye adde to the Sarament of Baptism § 6. Inst Matthew 3. 11. Here your Reply is that there is no command Papists Reply of Christ against it and if it be against Christs command because he hath not commanded it then it will follow that to call Baptism a Sacrament is against Christs command for neither hath he commanded this but by his Church which also commanded that Answer Here we have consitentem reum that 〈◊〉 Christ hath not commanded salt Prote ∣ stants Answer 〈◊〉 c. to be added in the administration of the Sacrament If it were a circumsâ—â—â—ce of the action the true Gospel Church 〈◊〉 command theâ—e But it is a material point of the work and by parity of reason ye may â—â—de â—â—lt spâ—â—tle oyle
For whosoever seperateth from the true Church which Scripture commandith us to hear leaveth it But ye were persecuted this I grant of your first Apostats Luther for sacriledge in marrying a Nunne vowed to GOD. Calvin for Sodomy burnt on the shoulder Knox for incest And so are all knaves persecuted by laws Should they then turne out-laws and rebels Duply In stead of refuting our Reformation Prote ∣ stants Duply and the reasons of our separation from Rome you fal on raising without any reason For Luther Calvin and Knox were excellent men of GOD as their lives and writtings testifie But if your Popes were such Platina hath done them wrong You may say as safely I am brunt on the shoulder and have committed incest there be no more warrand for the one then for the other And for lawful marriage I see not what divices of men could deny that to any called to it seeing the Lord granteth the liberty Stapleton a virulent adversary yet in this more for the truth then you are in his preface ad autidota Evangelica speaketh thus of Calvin Est interpres Scripturae diligens elegans suavis Comentarii ejus perutiles sunt He is far from calling him a knave Florimond Raymond de nat haeres lib. 7. cap. 10. speaketh thus Fatendum est Calvinuns fuisse ingenio admirando acuto promptissimo in imaginationibus suis in conceptionibus suis exornatissimo c. And for his vindication from these calumnies which you injuriously fixe upon him read your own Papyrius Mâ—ssonius Elog. par 2. pag. 431. where his life is set down and Bolsecus refuted who was the authour of these lies If faithful Historians can have any trust with you these three worthies whom you labour to blot were as faithful holy Ministers of the Gospel as lived in the Church for many hundred years formerly Your own writters blame your Popes and Clergie men but they were either Apostats or constant adversaries who blot Luther and Calvin It is told by your own that Pope Sixtus the fourth licenced the Cardinal of St. Lucie and his familie to use freely that sin not to be named in the three hot moneths of the year And Johannes a Câ—sa Arch Bishop of Beneventum legat to Pope Julius the third set forth a book in commendation of Sodomy there is more warrand for this report then for the Incest of Knox or Sodomy of Calvin Yet who will delight to â—ake in such pudles chaste eares should abhore such speaches Michael the Arch-Angel brought not in time of dispute a railing accusation against the Devil but you spare not to accuse the brethren who are now dead in the Lord falsely Is this the right way to promove the truth Absit But lies being your refuge I leave you to the GOD of truth for answer and shal only take notice that you leave all the four grounds of our seperation from Rome unrepealed and intire So by your silence it appeareth we had reason to leave you for ye Papists hate to be reformed †This your own Espencaeus regrateth on chap. 1. to Titus Question 10. What call had your Reformers Papists qu. 10 to go about such a worke Answer They were Ministers lawfully ordained the Bishops of England and Doctors Prote ∣ stants Answer of Germany c. For Calvin he was thrust forth by Farrel and Virer and ordained by laying on of the hands of the Presbytry according to the rule 1. Tim. 4. 14. So was our Knox Wishhart Willock c. They were like Scribes fitted for the kingdom of God and furnished with things new and old And being Officers in an army where they did clearly see the captain of salvation injured did lift up their voices like trumpets and shew the people their transgressions which was the duty of their office according to their oath Reply Ye take your first Ministerial ordination Papists Reply from the Bishops of England Doctors of Germany and hands of the Presbytry where by Bishops if you understand Catholick Bishops remaining such you must understand they neither could nor would give any power to preach against the Catholick Church No Bishop having power to destruction but to edification of the Church As also you must understand the Catholick Church was yet in her integrity having lawful Bishops whom ye should have constantly followed If Bishops turned Protestants I ask from whom had they their power but from the Catholick Church which no doubt had suspended them in the exercise of their Episcopal function for their disobedience and separation from her As for the Doctors of Germany they might well make Luther a Doctor but not a lawful Pastor or new Apostle nor could there be a Presbytrie of pure reformed Ministers to consecrat Calvin he being the first Reformer himself For by the word Presbyter ye understand an Elder in the New Testament and so by the word Presbytrie you must understand a convention of Elders in the Session which is the first place indeed for a Sodomist called for setting him on a pillar rather tâ—en in the Pulpit But true it is ye had no ordination in the beginning but every one did preach at his own hand pretending the goodness of their doctrine did give them sufficient power and call as all other Sectaries do commonly in the beginning Prote ∣ stants Duply Duply There was a necessity of Reformation pleaded for by many under the Papall tyrrannie This was denyed and school questions made articles of faith which caused some officers of the house first write against them and preach down such prophane errours as Indulgencies c. Now I ask if the case and exigence be such whether might not a Popish pastor by vertue of his ordination judge himself bound in duty to decrie the sins of the time and endeavour reformation aâ— Savanorola did especially seeing every ordained man is a pastor of the Catholick Church this is power for edification not for destruction Admit the Bishops of England did continue Papall it was their duty to purifie the worship throw down Idols c if they were Reformed then the more fit were they for reforming others When Athanasius separated from the Arrians ceased he to be a Bishop or was he holden to be silent in his apology to the Emperour he pleadeth for the contrare Had not the Doctors of Germany power to preach against Indulgencies and were they not Presbyters also You bewray your ignorance concerning Calvin he was not the first reformer Farrel Viret and others were before him who thrust him out into the worke of the Lord. You have as little skill of Presbytry by taking a Session for it But it seemeth your mistake hath been studied to vent your malice against Calvin If ye were as free of superstition and Idolatrie as he was of Sodomy the offerings of the Lord would not be so injured nor his Name polluted Question eleventh Ye want uninterrupted succession which the primitive Church Papists qu. 11 claimed still
as appeareth from Aug. contra Cresconium lâ—b 2. cap. 3. and ep 48. This was one of the weapons whereby they did bâ—at the Donatists Answer The ground of separation of the Donatists was the personall vices of men Prote ∣ stants Answer not the doctrine professed in the Church For in that they agreed with the universall Church as is clear from the above mentioned ep Now we did not separat from Rome because their Popes whom they take for a patron have been Atheists Hereticks denyers of the soules immortalitie Whore mongers c. as their own writters confess in the lives of Silvester 2. Alexander 6. Iohn 22. and many moe but because ye apostatized from the Apostles doctrine and corrupted the worship miserably so these testimonies concern not us Secondly If interrupted succession make void the Ministry ye Papists have none at Ans 2. all For ye often had Anti-Popes and the Councill at Pisa deposed two Popes at once as Hereticks departing from the faith The Councill of Constance deposed Iohn 23. for denying the immortality of the soul and the resurrection Behold then your succession and the infallibility of your Popes Eugenius the fourth was deposed by the Council of Basil and all the following Popes were his successours albeit the Council judged Faelix the fifth to be Pope Yea further this place hath vaiked for many years together so that a line of immediat successours cannot be drawn by your selves Thirdly We have a lawful Ministry as Ans 3. powerful as the world affordeth honoured by the blessing of the Lord by begetting souls to himself and many can from their experience say that it hath been the power of GOD to their salvation how then can you challenge our Ministry Is not this near of kine to that old Anti-Christian question proponed to our Master by what authority dost thou these things And if personal succession had such weight as you say the Priesthood under the law had been at a great loss For the line of it was interrupted oftner then once before the coming of Christ yet he commendeth submission and obedience to them so long as they did sit in Moses chair and no further Matth. 23. 1. So that in Ministers it is the Doctrine and not the Genealogy of persons that is so much regarded Reply In your eleventh Answer you grant personal vices are not a sufficient ground Papists Reply of sepaâ—ation from the Church and say that Protestants did only separat themselves from the worship miserablie polluted and because the Roman Church had Apostatized from the Apostolick Doctrine But Sir let me ask you when the Catholick Roman Church which before your Reformation at least was a true Church Apostatized And who was a competent judge to declare her Apostacie and give you leave to separat Was â—t Scripture as according to your first rule you must say Then I ask if two or three under pretence of a Reformation may adhere to what they think to be in Scripture against the judgement of the whole Church at that time Which â—ssuredly all must grant who teach that the true Church may erre and so give the same libertie to all Sectaries which they take so boldly to themselves But albeit you say your separation was not from our personal vyces yet you impute in the by going heresie denying of the souls immortalitie whoredom to two or three of our Popes Silvester the second Alexander the sixth John the twenty two How justly we shal presently see But however this were true it could no more wrong the Popes authority in his Canonical decrees then Davids adultery or Solomons Idolatrie in penning Scripture Neither is it a great wonder that amongst 240. Popes there have been two or three evil Since even amongst twelve Apostles there was one Judas Nor do Catholicks canonize all their Popes although for these three whom ye name wicked they have 33. most famous Martyrs and Saints What ever they teach as privat doctors as it mâ—keth no law in the Church so it cannot derogat in the least to their decision and doctrine as Popes But to answer for these three what Martinus Polemius and the Magdeburgh say against Silvester the second as a Magician is known by all the learned to be meer fables imputed to him for his eminent knowledge and learning in the Mathematicks which made the ninth Age wherein he lived to call him a Magician because of its gross ignorance Alexander the sixth is also blamed for lewdness by no impartial writter And what Calvin saith lib. 4. instir against John 22. is known to be errour and lies speaking of him as Pope whatever was his opinion as a privat Doctor of the soul before the day of judgement which he disclaimed to be his at his death professing and protesting that he had never any belief but that of the Catholick Church saith John Williams lib. 11. hist cap. 19. But Hereticks speak of Popes as Rebels of Kings discontented subjects of Ministers of state and criminals of their lawful judges which no wise man will much regard Then to shew that we have not an uninterrupted succession you speak first of Anti-Popes as if they did interrupt the succession of Popes more then Usurpers the succession of Kings Secondly Of Popes deposed by Councils but you cannot instance that any lawful Pope was deposed by any general Council what ever Thirdly You say the See of Rome hath vaiked for many years To which I answer as Kings die not so neither Popes as it doth not interrupt the succession of Elective Kings that after the death of one there be long debate before the Election of another the royal power then residing in the Electours so neither interrupteth it the succession of Popes and their Election You speak nothing of your own succession because ye have none You bragge much of a powerful Ministrie but shews no call you had to the Ministrie from GOD nor his Church so we had good reason to challenge it albeit you call this an Anti-Christian question to ask at new upstarts who pretend to reforme the Church who gave you a call because the Jews had such a question to Christ But Christ John 15. 24. saith if he had not shewed himself to be the Son of GOD by his words and works which none else could do no man had been obliedged to belive him Yet ye will have us to believe you are lawful Ministers without succession or a call and that Luther and Calvin were extraordinarily sealed for Reformation without the least sign mark or miracle shewing that they were sent for that end So that in Ministers you conclude it is the Doctrine more then the Genealogie of persons which is so much regarded As if preaching of true doctrine were sufficiant to make a man a Minister without any ordination or call the Scripture expresseth another thing saying how shal they preach except they be sent And as to seek true successsion of Bishops and Pastours in