minu◠probi Bell. Prafat cannot but force them to acknowledge that he is liable to Errour but in his Politicall or which is all one his Ecclesiasticall capacity as he is the pretended Head of the Church and vested with all those Immunities and Priviledges which his Favourers suppose to be due unto the Universall Bishop 2. By the Church of Rome I mean not the diffused and scattered Body of the Papists but according to their own Sense how Absurd and Insignificant soever the Bishops and Doctours of their Church assembled together in a Councell where they may be supposed to meet with the greatest Advantage and Opportunity for the Disquisition and Search of Truth 3. By Infallible I mean to have a certain fixed and unerring Judgement in Religious matters which things alone do properly belong to the determination and cognizance of a Church as it is a Church And in this sense of the Question thus explained in as great a Latitude as any Papist can possibly understand it in I deny the Pope whether considered as apart from or conjoyned with as a part of a Councell to be Infallible For the proof of which Assertion though I might find out great variety of Arguments from the express and direct contradictions which have been among the Popes themselves some reversing that which others have ratified and others establishing that which their Predecessors under the severest Penalties have forbid Yet since the proper and direct way of Arguing lyes in shewing the weakness and insufficiency of those Arguments which are brought in defence of the Popes Infallibility that is the Method which I purpose altogether to insist on For since this great and so much admired Diana of the Papists is no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. a thing to be discerned by its own Light and to be credited meerly for it self as the testimony of the Spirit is when it bears witness unto the truth of Scripture and besides it being generally denied by all the Protestants who make the Errours of the Church of Rome the ground of their separation from them hence it cannot be expected that we should tamely give up out Assent to believe this Infallibility unless there be some evident and concluding Reasons to enforce it from us If therefore it shall appear that whatever Bellarmine and when I mention him I mean the strength of the whole Popish Party hath said is altogether impertinent and unconcluding indeed nothing else but a plain begging the thing in Question my Deduction from thence will be Infallible viz. that we have as yet no Reason to believe the Popes Infallibility To clear up this the best way will be to take a short view of those Arguments which Bellarmine alleadgeth in his Books De Pontifice Romano and they are briefly these three 1. Some Texts of Scripture in the New Testament 2. Some Analogicall Inferences out of the Old 3. Some Absurdities and Inconveniences which would follow in the Church of God should we not allow the Pope and Church of Rome to be Infallible 1. The Texts of Scripture which Bellarmine and all Writers since him do urge to prove the Popes Infallibility by are these three Mat. 16.18 19. Luk. 22.31 32. Job 21.15 17. From which they draw these three Conclusions 1. That in those fore-mentioned places our Saviour did confer upon Peter some speciall Priviledges above and beyond the rest of the Apostles and they were 1. Supremacy in Matthew 2. Infallibility in Luke 3. Universall Episcopacy in John 2. They Assume that whatever was bestowed upon Peter was not confined unto his Person but was promised likewise unto his Successours since what was granted unto Peter was given for the good of the Church and therefore ought not to die with him 3. They take for granted that the Pope was Peter's Successour both in the Bishoprick of Rome and also in all his other Priviledges and for the last they alleadge nothing but the credit of that which they call Apostolicall Tradition Whether or no these Deductions are cleare in the Texts or violently haled and wrested from them with so much impudent and shamelesse Sophistry as a wise and disinteressed Person would blush to be guilty of will best appeare by examining the places themselves and if when they are put upon the Racke they can be forced to confesse so much as Bellarmine and the Popes Parasites conclude from them I shall then consent to dethrone Scripture from its plainnesse and Perspicuity but till then I must take leave to thinke that that Church doth very wisely which makes Ignorance and Implicite Faith the Mother of Devotion for nothing lesse then an over-awed and Religious stupidity would make any man submit unto such Impossible and farre fetched interpretations 1. The place in Mat. 16.18 19. runs thus And Jesus answered and said unto him i. e. to Peter Blessed art thou Simon Barjona for flesh and bloud hath not revealed this to thee but my Father which is in Heaven And I say also unto thee that thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it And I will give unto thee the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven Which place they thus interpret 1. By the Rock upon which Christ saith he will build his Church is meant the Person of Peter and the Churche's being built upon him signifies say they that the care and government of it was committed to him and thus they understand likewise his Having of the Keyes 2. By the power of Binding and Loosing they understand the power of commanding and punishing of making and repealing Laws with all such things as belong to a Soveraign and Legislative Power 3. They tell us that whatever Peter had here was likewise granted to the Pope who is his Successour and therefore he being the Rock and the Foundation of the Church cannot be tossed about with every wind of Doctrine and therefore is Infallible But I answer 1. Upon supposition that Peter here was constituted as they call him Head and Prince of the Apostles yet how would this Personall Priviledge any more belong to the Bishop of Rome if he were Peter's Successour than what our Saviour elsewhere saith to Peter Why didst thou doubt O thou of little faith doth note the Pope's uncertainty and instability in Believing Or Mat. 14.31 what our Saviour presently after speaks Get thee behind me Satan doth signifie that every Pope is an Incarnate Devil or to take the mildest Interpretation an Adversary to Christ and to the good of mankind For what Reason can be assigned why the Pope may not as well succeed in Peter's Personall Defects as into his Priviledges since the Scripture is utterly silent either that he had or that he was to have a Successour in either But 2. I deny the Supposition upon
their present peaceableness may justly be attributed meerly to their want of strength which Bellarmine is not ashamed to say was the sole cause why the Primitive Christians were coment to suffer without Resistance from which Position what can follow but that it concerns the wisdome and policy of every State to keep those under whom as to tempor all Subjection it cannot confide in But could our Papists in England give sufficient evidence of their hearty disowning such an irreligious Tenet yet there is another thing practised by them which makes it highly questionable whether a Kingdome professing Christianity ought to tolerate them in and that is their Worship of Images which is a sinne so contrary to the express letter of the divine Law and so repugnant to the common sense and reason of all sober men that God punished it severely even in the Heathen Caldeans Jer. 50.38 as well as in his own people the Jews But bating these two indefensible Crimes rather than Errours their other opinions of Merit Purgatory Transubstantiation c. may for ought I see be charitably born with since in themselves they create no prejudice to the publick Peace which even Christian Magistrates so far as they are Magistrates ought principally if not solely to provide for If any think that such Indulgence like warm Aire will ripen these monstrous Births too fast and prove the ready way to encrease Popery they are utterly ignorant either how that Religion first began or by what Arts it is still upheld For till the world was asleepe in sensuality and blinded with Ignorance the Enemy could not sow these Tares and had they not afterwards maintained by force what they gained by fraud those Tares could never have prospered into so large an Harvest In opposition therefore to that conspiracy of Ignorance and Malice which goes to compound the Roman Religion I shall not scruple to say that if his Majesty whom God I doubt not hath designed for some such great and generous worke as now I mention be pleased still to continue to countenance the free Preaching and Reading of the Scripture and to disalow the imposing of any thing which either is contrary to or besides it It will then be as impossible for Popery to prevail as for dust to resist the Wind or for Airy Clouds to Eclipse the Sun The Errors of Popery for want of Divine Warrant have in them such a Fundamentall and Inherent weaknesse that unlesse they are upheld by a Coercive power they will sinke and fall of themselves as thinne and emty vapours if they have but roome enough in the Aire will disperse themselves without the help of any wind to scatter them To endeavour therefore the weakning of Popery by any thing which looks like Persecution doth indeed give it strength and Reputation as if it had reason on its side and therefore stood in need of force to suppresse it And besides it onely fills the Church with Hypocrites insteed of Converts who by mingling with and masking themselves under the Name of Protestants doe what they can secretly to dispirit and undermine our Religion the power of which they never felt since they were onely frighted to the Embracing of it But perhaps I need not plead so zealously for the not persecuting of Popery when too many of our unwary Gentry begin already to be taken with the outward Pompe of it and some that yet professe themselves to be of our Church and those of good Note too are not afraid to plead for something more then its Toleration Mr Thorndike Just Weights and Measures Since by telling us in Print that the Pope is not Anti-christ that Papists are not Idolaters nay by affirming that All are Schismatickes who upon that score do refuse Communion with them They not onely blemish the Virtue and Piety of our first Reformers who all built upon that Foundation but likewise show how willing they are upon any Termes how wretched and unworthy soever to returne into Egypt and bring us to our Bricke and Bondage again If this be not the intent of some I cannot imagine what meanes the crying up of that great Diana of the Papists the Churches Authority and making that the sole Interpreter of Scripture The Preaching up of Lent Dr Gunning upon Mat. 9. the Lent Fast Eliz. 5. Mr Thorndike ut suprà and other Politicall Fish-dayes as Religious Fasts and of Apostolicall Institution quite contrary both to expresse Scripture and an Act of Parliament The insinuating that we may Lawfully pray for the Dead and likwise expect some benefit by their Prayers which in time may easily be improved to our Praying unto them These with some other Opinions of the like nature so farre degenerating from our Primitive Protestancy doe show that if the Age is willing to be deceived there are not wanting Learned men who are willing enough to deceive them The designe therefore of this small Treatise is not only to depose the Pope from his usurped Title of Infallibility but to keep all persons else whether Churches or Church Rulers from taking the Chaire and succeeding into his room For since our Lord Christ hath given every Believer Reason to judge with and a Rule to judge by since over and above he hath promised his spirit to all that ask it which serves to assist the one and to explain the other he hath thereby appointed every man in matters of Faith and Godlinesse to be a Judge for himself though not of another And he who useth those meanes which our Saviour hath left and seekes to him in them may Infallibly be assured that though in some things he may Erre as a man yet he shall never finally miscarry Whereas he that leanes upon a Church of what denomination soever cannot be sure that he shall not be deceived since any number of men are as fallible in their Judgement as one especially when they are all sworne as in the Papacy to uphold the Authority and to defend the dictates of one This consideration alone will I hope prevaile with all Impartiall and disinteressed persons to take the safest side and with David to chuse to fall into the hands of God whose word duely searched into never deceived any rather then to fall into the hands of men who being Blind themselves do first take care to Blind their Followers and then lead them into a Ditch Edward Bagshaw Drury-Lane Aprill 16. 1662. THE GREAT QUESTION ABOUT The Infallibility of the Pope AND Church of Rome Quest Whether there be any sufficient Ground from Scripture or Reason to believe the Pope and Church of Rome to be Infallible FOr the better understanding and clearer stating of this Great Question I will premise these three things 1. By the Pope I mean the Bishop of Rome not in his Personall capacity as he is a Man for so the prodigious and monstrous Lives of many of their Popes which are obvious in Story Multi Pontifices fuerunt
which all this Babel is built that our Saviour did confer any Preeminence of Power and Authority upon Peter above the rest of the Apostles because 1. These words Upon this Rock will I build my Church cannot without blasphemy be affirmed of the Person of Peter who himself was built upon the Rock Christ and was not the Foundation but only a Workman at the Building Indeed in the Figurative Description of New Jerusalem Rev. 21.14 which John makes in his Vision he compares it to a City which had twelve Foundations upon which were written the Names of the twelve Apostles Rev. 21. So that if the Papists will needs call Peter a Foundation I hope they will take in the rest of the Apostles to be sharers with him in that Title But since the whole Description in John City and all is only Figurative and Metaphoricall the Foundation there mentioned must be like the City i. e. so called not in a Reall but only Metaphoricall Acception For to speak properly as Paul doth No other Foundation can any man lay 1 Cor. 3.11 than what is already laid and that is Eph. 2. that Jesus is the Christ And therefore when we are said to be built upon the Foundation of the Prophets and Apostles the meaning is not that we are built upon their Persons but upon their Doctrine the summe of which is contained in Peter's confession upon which Rock our Saviour hath so built his Church that the Gates or Powers of Hell however they may rage and strive to ruine it yet they shall never be able finally to prevail against it but Christ will have a Church in some place or other unto the end of the world 2. If Peter was the Rock so as all Christians even the Apostles themselves were to depend upon his guidance what a wretched and tottering condition would the Church have been in when this Rock so soon after was shaken and almost removed out of his place For within some few minutes he is rebuked by our Saviour in no milder language than this Get thee behind me Satan The Story of his denying and that with Oaths his Master is too notorious to be palliated and too sad to be insisted on Even after our Saviours Resurrection when they pretend this promise of Infallibility was inseparably annexed to him Act. 10. we find him unresolved in that part of his Commission which concerned his preaching the Gospel unto the Gentiles and therefore had the assistance of a particular Visiton more fully to inform him of it and afterwards at Antioch we read that he was of so inconstant and unequall a carriage in that great point of Christian Liberty complying herein more than he ought Gal. 2. with the Jewish rigour and austerity that Paul was forced openly to reprove him for it and so prevent the contagion of his ill example So that if he who in the Court of Rome's stile is called Prince of the Apostles in matters of so great moment was thus subject to Errour and Fallibility I wonder with what face the Pope upon the account of being Peter's Suceessour can plead any exemption 3. These words I will give unto thee the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven do not denote any peculiar power that Peter had over the rest of the Apostles for then how came it to pass afterwards that there were so many and so fierce contentions amongst them Who should be greatest Which our Saviour at two severall times silences not by commanding them to obey Peter as their Chief but by utter prohibiting any desire of Soveraignty If they answer us as Bellarmine doth that the Apostles did not clearly understand that Peter was to be Supream Head till after our Saviour's Resurrection which by the way is nothing else but a bold playing with sacred Scripture Then I demand farther when there was a new Apostle to be chosen into the room of Judas why did not Peter by his sole Authority Act. 1. design him or at least when the multitude of Disciples for so we read that all of them were concerned in the choice had appointed two why did they not present them both unto Peter that he might choose one rather than suffer the matter to be decided by Lot sure had Peter had any paramount and extraordinary Power and withall a peculiar infallible spirit he could not have better exerted it than in that emergency For the Head of the Church in so concerning a business first to permit all the multitude to have a voice in choosing an Apostle for if our modern Arguments are good he might justly fear that they being for the greatest part unlearned would choose one like themselves and so prejudice the reputation of Apostolicall Authority and afterwards to leave the matter unto the uncertain casualty of a Lot whereas the choice seemed properly to belong to Peter's Jurisdiction this argues either that his Power or his care of the Church was very little of which last I hope the Papists do not doubt and therefore must needs deny the former For what is it else but to tempt God to have recourse unto casting of Lots when a way of choice more prudent and Infallible by referring the business to Peter's single Decision was opened for them But it seemes the Apostles understood nothing of Peter's Supremacy either then or afterwards when they went to choose Deacons which by all the Apostles Peter not being so much as particularly mentioned was committed to the Mulitude and after the choice Imposition of hands was performed not by Peter alone but as the Text expressely saies by all the Apostles Will they tell us that this was a thing below him Act. 6. and that it did not become Peter's Authority to interesse himself in a matter of so petty concernment This plea is taken from them because we read that the Twelve and among them sure Peter was one did not think it below them and besides it will appeare a strange kind of conceated and uselesse Authority which they ascribe to Peter which in maters neither of the greatest such as was the choice of an Apostle nor of the least moment such as was the choice of a Deacon would ever so particularly exert it self that we might once take notice of his Prerogative But what kind of Equality Peter stood in to the rest of the Apostles he shewed Act. 8. in submitting to be sent with John unto Samaria to finish that worke of the Gospell which Philip had begun there for sure our Saviours Argument is Infallible Joh 15. that He who is sent is not greater then he who sends him And it would have been a strange boldnesse I believe the Pope would call it by a worse name in his Cardinalls should the Apostles have thus presumed to send their Prince had he indeed been so constituted over them Yet further when there was a Question started about the use of Jewish Ceremonies and a Synod convened about
it Act. 15. why did not Peter then Preside as chiefe Why did he suffer the businesse to be disputed after he had declared his own Judgment Why doth James who spoke after him give him no more Honourable stile then plaine Simeon and seemes himself in saying My sentence is to give the whole solution of the Query as also the Forme of the Future Decree without taking any notice of Peter's decision Whence comes it that after a strict Debate the result was in the Councell It pleased the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church and the superscription of the Letter runs The Apostles and Elders and Brethren and the decree It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us without any mention of Peter at all whose Supremacy and Infallibility ought not to have been thus silently passed over that the Churches afterwards might know whether to to have recourse for satisfaction of their scruples How comes it to passe that we hear no Newes of Peter after but the story is continued wholy about Paul as if the Primacy had been transferred to him sure the Holy Penman who mentions so many of Paul's travells that were of farre lesse moment would not have omitted Peter's Journey to Rome his sitting Bishop there for eighteen yeares and fixing the Succession and Infallibility to boot upon that See had he understood any thing of it Afterwards when Paul meets Peter at Antioch Gal. 2. Why did he not vaile to him but Irreverently stand upon his Termes and Openly reprove him Lastly For Instances are infinite in this kind why doth that blessed Apostle Peter himself 1 Pet. 5. disclaime any such kind of Jurisdiction stiling himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Fellow-Elder and utterly forbiding any pretentions of Lordship and Soveraignty even over the Flocks they fed much more over their Fellow Ministers Certainly none of these things can consist with that grant which Bellarmine fondly supposeth was here made to Peter and therefore we may justly conclude that the words have another Interpretation which is plainly this Our Saviour asking his Disciples what men thought of him and whom they took him to be after he had heard the various opinions of others he continues to aske them theirs whereupon Peter in the name of the rest replies thou art the Christ the Son of God which being the Article that then was oppugned our Saviour pronounces him Blessed for it not as if other Believers were not equally blessed and did not obtain this Faith by Revelation too for so the Apostle Paul saith expressely 1 Cor. 12. that none can call Jesus Lord i. e. Christ but by the Holy Spirit but those words are spoken exclusively as to any outward meanes whereby he might attain that knowledge For that no lesse power than the Imediate action of the Spirit of God can make a man to Believe on Christ is not onely evident from the nature of the thing which exceeds all created ability but likewise from those perpetuall contradictions and doubtings which Beleivers themselves have before the Spirit of God hath explained and solved them The promise therefore which our Saviour makes to Peter of giving him the Keyes c. concerned all the Apostles since they were Believers and Disciples as well as he and so our Saviour enlarges it after his Resurrection in that generall Commission Whose sins soever you retain they are retained i. e. By your Preaching whom you doe declare to be under the power of sin if they Repent not and Believe the Gospell their sins are retained i. e. Bound and tied fast to them for God will never pardon such but others that embrace the Gospell are remitted i. e. loosed and absolved So that the result of all is this From this place cannot be inferred either 1. That Peter is that Rocke upon which Christ will build his Church but rather Christ himself confessed by Peter Or 2. That Peter here had any Preeminence of Power Authority and Infallibility above the rest of the Apostles he receiving this Promise onely as a Prolocutor of the Apostles in whose names he spoke and they being afterwards joyned all equally in the same Commission Much lesse can it be deduced 3. That the Pope who is not once mentioned was Peter's Sucessour or hath the least pretension to claime any thing from him unlesse it be his Errors and Fallibility 2. The second place of Scripture which is brought for the Patronage of Peters first and then of the Popes Infallibility is that which if they had searched the whole Scripture they could not have found one that doth more directly make against it The place is Luc. 22.31 32. Simon Simon behold Satan hath desired to have you that he may sift you as Wheat But I have prayed for thee that thy Faith faile not and when thou art converted strengthen thy Brethren Here though by a most miserable instance we find how fraile and fallible Peter was yet Bellarmine draws from hence two priviledges that were conferred upon Peter 1. That Peter might never fall from the Faith how much soever he was tempted of the Divell 2. That none of his Successors should ever teach any thing contrary to the truth The First of these I grant and acknowledge that it was by virtue of this Prayer of our Saviours that Peter recovered his station again after so great a shaking but withall I adde that this was no peculiar Priviledge to Peter but in common to all the rest as is more cleare in Joh. 17. v. 9. and the Reason why Peter was particularly spoken to was because our Saviour foresaw he should more foully miscarry and therefore stood in need of this Cordiall to relieve him But the second is so little to be gathered from the Text viz that the Pope as Peter's Successor should never teach false Doctrine that it would be an extream vanity in me to go about to confute it Onely one fetch of Bellarmines is not to be omitted when we object that if this place be to be understood of Peter's Successors then it must presuppose that all the Popes who will needs intrude into that Title must first deny Christ and after that be converted before they can strengthen their Brethren or be confirmed in the Faith themselves To this Bellarmine replies that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not signifie Peters being turned from sin but his turning himself to the weak Brethren to discourse with them which is a piece of so merry Sophistry that it only serves to show the wretched boldnesse of Partiall and self-designing men when they make use of Scripture to shore up and to underprop their ill got greatnesse the plainest places then shall not escape their perverse and irregular fancies as this wherein there is a gracious Promise made of Peters Recovery and Conversion is made to signifie just nothing but the Impiety of those men who dare thus abuse it 3. The Third and last place which is urged in this Controverfie and
believe they were I must affirme that this Doctrine is so farre from being owned by any of them for many Centuries that we have upon Record many pregnant Instances which doe evince that they did not so much as Dreame of it To draw up which I shall select onely two or three famous Cases which Bellarmine is pleased to take no Notice of 1. Euseb l b. 5. c. 23 24 25. The first Instance shall be from that doughty dispute which was raised about the yeare 160. concerning the day when Easter was to be kept the Churches of Asia kept Easter-day precisely upon the 14th of March at which time the Jewes did solemnize their Passeover but the Westerne Churches after many meetings to settle this weighty Controversie did agree that the day of our Saviours Resurrection should be celebrated onely upon the Lords Day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Asian Bishops notwithstanding this Decree did persist in their former custome in which they were defended by Polycrates who alleaged that Philip the Evangelist John the Apostle and many others did transmit that Traditionall Observance to them Upon this Victor the Bishop of Rome in great heat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat lib. 6. saith my Author did take upon him to excommunicate all the Churches of Asia but being sharply writ against for it and stâ—ffely opposed in it he was forced to revoke his sentence Which story might afford us very many Observations as 1. That Superstition and Needlesse Observation of Dayes 2. That Imposition and Abridging of Christian Liberty in things Indifferent 3. That the Bishop of Rome's Usurpation and exceeding the Bounds of his proper Jurisdiction did begin to worke very early But I wave these and onely note that had the Churches of Afia then thought the Bishop of Rome to be Infallible they would not so peremptorily in so small a thing as the Retaining of an Old Custome have refused to submit unto his Judgment 2. My second Instance shall be from that Controversie which for many yeares was very eagerly managed viz. Whether such as had received Baptisme from Heretickes upon their Returne to the Church Cyprian Epis 92. Edit Fam. should be Baptized again or not Cyprian and all the African Bishops maintained the Necessiry of Re-baptizing and in their Letter to Stephen the Bishop of Rome after they had at large given the Reasons of their Opinion they conclude So much Dearest Brother have we enformed you of not doubting because of the Truth of your Religion but such things will please you which are both Religious and True But yet we know that some are very unwilling to lay down any Opinion which they have once tooke up but preserving that mutuall agreement which ought to be amongst Brethren they retain the Customes which they have once been used to In which matter we neither Force nor give a Law to any since in the ordering of the Church Prapositus every Governour hath absolute power of his own will as being to give unto God alone a Reason of his Actings From which passage written by Cyprian and all the Bishops of Africh who mer together in a Councell for that purpose it sufficiently appeares 1. That they did not understand any thing of the Bishop of Rome's Infallibility since they profess to retain their own Judgement without subscribing to his 2. That in the outward Regimen and Government of the Church every Bishop hath equall Power and ought not Authoritatively to prescribe and impose Laws upon another Ibid. Ep. 73. As the same Cyprian in another Letter These things saith he according to my weak Ability have I writ not Imposing upon or Pre-judging any as if it was not lawfull for every Bishop to do as he thinks fit since he hath free Power of his own Will And afterwards when Stephen had declared his Judgement that he would have none baptized again whatever Herefie they came from but that the ancient Custome should be preserved whereby such Converts were admitted into Church Communion meerly by laying on of Hands Ibid. Ep. 74. Inter catera vel superba vel ad rem non pertinentia vel sibi ipsi contraria quae improvidè atque imperitè scripsit Cyprian in stead of yeelding to his Determination doth taxe his Letter of Pride Folly and Impertinence and in Answer to those words of his wherein Stephen commanded that nothing should be varied from the accustomed Tradition Whence saith he was that Tradition Did it descend from the Authority of our Lord and his Gospel Did it come from the Commands and Epistles of the Apostles For God testifies in his Commands both to Joshua and others that those things only should be done which were written And our Lord Christ when he sent his Apostles into the World commands them to Baptize and to Teach all Nations that they might observe and do all things which he had Commanded If therefore any such Custome meaning that of Stephen's be contained either in the Gospels or in the Epistles and Acts of the Apostles then let sach an Holy and Divine Tradition be observed But what Obstinacy what Presumption is it to prefer Humane Tradition before a Divine Appointment What Folly is it not to consider that God is angry as often as Humane Tradition doth lessen and discountenance Divine Precepts as he testifies by the Prophet Isay And our Saviour likewise in his Gospel rebuking and chiding the Pharisees Ye reject the Commands of God that ye may keep your own Tradition Of which words the Apostle Paul being mindfull he likewise adviseth and instructeth us saying If any man teach otherwise and reste not in the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and in his Doctrine he is puffed up knowing nothing from such turn aside Neither ought Custome which hath privily crept in amongst some to hinder Truth from prevailing For Custome without Truth Consuetudo sine veritate vetustas Erroris est is nothing else but the Antiquity of Errour And it ariseth only from Pride and Presumption that one is apt to defend his own Practices how False and erroneous soever rather than consent to that which is True and Right in another For which reason the Apostle Paul writing to Timothy Docibilem Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adviseth a Bishop not to be Contentious but Meek and Apt to Teach But he is Apt to Teach who is Gentle and endued with Patience to Learn for a Bishop ought not only to Teach but to Learn since he Teacheth best who continually grows and profits by Learning Which the Apostle Paul likewise declares when he admonisheth That if any thing be revealed to another which sits by the First should hold his Peace Religious and sincere Minds are alwayes prepared to lay aside Errour and to search for Truth for if we return unto the Head and Originall of Divine Tradition Hamane Errour ceaseth and when the Reason of the Heavenly Appointments is once throughly discerned whatever
Saviour saith should be ratified in Heaven For saith he where two or three not Bishops but Believers are gathered together in my Name there I will be in the midst of them i. e. When any Number of Believers how small soever though but two or three are met for those Holy Ends of Discipline and in those Ways which I by my Commands have warranted I will be with them to Assist and to Guide their Councels and to Execute their Sentence Chap. 49. Accordingly we find in Tertullian's Apology that in all Christian Meetings upon the Lords-day together with Prayer and Preaching there was likewise Censura Divina i. e. the Sentence of Excommunication pronounced against all refractory and stubborn Sinners according to this our Saviours Institution If any object that if Christ will be with two or three then in all probabily he will be with a Councell of many Hundreds much more I answer No doubt he will if they meet in his Name i. e. according to his Command and Institution for it is not the Assembly though of never so many Thousands but the End and Manner of Assembling which hath the Promise of Assistance And when I can see such a Councell which professeth solely to follow Scripture according to that sense which not the fancy of men whether Fathers or Councells but the Spirit of God enlightning their understandings doth give unto it I shall then with all Reverence embrace their Decrees For I know that such a Councell cannot Erre because they will Command nothing but what is already commanded by God which every true Christian ought to obey without the Sanction of any other Authority But such a Councell as this I am hopelesse of ever seeing under the Papecy since all their meetings for some hundreds of Yeares have been designed not to search but to smother Scripture and to Emprison that Light which if looked into would detect and manifest their Errors So that they come together not in Christs but in the Pope's name or rather in the name of that God of the world who is Prince of the Power of Darknesse and whose Kingdome is founded and upheld by the Artifice and cunning of their Teachers and by the Ignorance and Implicite Faith of their Hearers Fallere Falli To deceive and to be deceived is the best Motto which can be set upon all the Church-doores in the Papall Territories but Heaven is a place of Light and the True Church is full of Knowledge because 〈◊〉 are all taught of God not to obey or to Believe in 〈◊〉 but in him alone 2. That Promise of our Saviour I will send the Spirit John 14. c. 16. which shall lead you into all Truth was spoken Personally to the Apostles And those words Act. 15. It seemeth good to the Holy Spirit and to Us were spoken by them after the accomplishment of that Promise so that without great presumption they cannot be wrested to any other nor such wresting without great vanity be confuted since barely to deny ungrounded suppositions is a sufficient Confutation If any aske me since neither the Pope nor a Councell is Infallible as having no peculiar Promise for that purpose then how shall the Church determine Controversies or How shall Heresies be suppressed I answer that if the word of God is clear and the Heresie be Notorious than every Particular Church hath Power within it self to excommunicate all obstinate Heretickes But where the Scripture is either Dubious or Silent Phil. 3.15 there charitably to beare with dissenters and to wait till God shall reveale it to them is the best way to winne them And this was the onely method which the primitive Christians did take for three hundred yeares together to preserve and maintaine the Truth of our Religion Having no Communion with such as hold manifest and destructive Errors and in things of lesser moment Forbearing one another in Love These will at last be found to be the safe wayes of God whereas to pretend to Infallibility in determining or to practise Tyranny in Imposing these are onely the wayes of Ambitious and self-seeking men found out not so much to promote Truth which stands not in need of such Arts as to Augment a party which makes all Articles of Faith to be meerly like the Civill Lawes of a Land where most Voices doe carry the Cause Such a kind of Universality as this True Piety never had and therefore we need not be sorry that Popery doth make its boast of it And thus I have with as much Brevity and Plainnesse as the subject would beare enquired into the Grounds whereupon the Popes Infallibility is said to be grounded and after the most Impartiall search can pronounce of them all Mene Tekell that being weighed in the Balance of the Sanctuary they are found too light Neither have I diverted my self in confuting their worship of Images their Blasphemous Figment of Transsubstantiation their mingling of works in Justification their Invocation of Angells Col. 2.19 which the Apostle saith is not to hold the Head i. e. to Erre fundamentally Their forbidding of Marriage and commanding to abstain from meats Which he who prophesied of them 1 Tim. 4.1 calls the Doctrine of Devils I have omitted likwise their Furious and Bloody Tenets of Persecuting and Killing all who doe not worship the Image of that Beast which they have erected Rev. 13.15 for these things how plainely soever the Scripture speakes against them will not much concerne them to answer as long as they are fenced about with the Doctrine of Infallibility whereby they are privileged to put what sense upon Scripture they please but if the Christian Reader finds that conceit to be clearly disproved then I hope he will make use of the other Arguments to satisfie himself that we have but too much reason to suspect the Pope to be that Antichrist that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Lawlesse one who sits in the Temple of God and declares that he is God For in the Church which is the Temple or House of God for any man to make Lawes which doe oblige the Conscience For a sinfull man to stile himself the Head and Bridegroome of the Church and above all to affirme that he is Infallible this is nothing else but to say that he is God and therein to fulfill the most clear Prediction that can be concerning The Man of sin whose way of Rising was to be by the Deceiveablenesse of Unrighteousnesse and his Dominion to be Established by Miracles and Lying Wonders Which no Church in the world doth more confidently boast of than the Roman And therefore till her unhappy and much mistaken Followers have cleared that She is not Antichristian we have little reason to believe that She is a True Church much lesse to think that She is Infallible FINIS