content with this to govern Volunteers The other is by Commands that shall be seconded with force And this is proper to the Magistrate But if they will be deluded to give up their Crowns and Scepters to the Pope let them stand as the objects of the compassion of Spectators Much more then I have here given you I had prepared of the Testimony of Antiquity against them But here is more then they are able solidly to answer and I was afraid of over-whelming the capacity of ordinary Readers I understand not the French Tongue but by the Testimony of Learned men that understand them and especially by the help of a Noble friend that hath vouchsafed to translate some part of them for my use I am imboldened to a confidence that the two famous Confutations of the great Perron will stand to the perpetual shame of Popery which none of them will be ever able to Reply to without as great a dishonour to their Cause as will follow their not daring to Reply I mean Blondell's Book De Primatu in Ecclesia which overwhelms them utterly with the witness of Antiquity Pet. Molinaeus de Novitate Papismi which I hope his Reverend Son of his name may live to help us to in English But if any of the Romanists that dare not meddle with those Champions nor dash themselves upon those Pillars shall yet vouchsafe an Answer to this smaller work I do hereby assure him that if he wil do it soberly in the fear of God in a way of close and solid Arguing he will perform a task that will be very acceptable to me But niblers snarlers cavillers and senseless praters I shall contemn Richard Baxter The Contents CHap. 1. Popery no way to Unity page 1. Chap. 2. Directions for them that will deal with a Papist p. 5. Chap. 3. Argum. 1. Against Popery by which every honest godly man is secured from them p. 9. Chap. 4. The second Argument p. 16. Chap. 5. Argum. 3. That deposing Kings that will not exterminate us and absolving Subjects from their Allegiance and giving their Dominions to others is an Article of the Papists Faith p. 17 18. Chap. 6. Argum. 4. The Church of Rome unholy in its Essentials p. 21 22 c. Chap. 7. Argum. 5. The Papists of more then One Church yet each part pretending to be the Catholick Church p. 26. Chap. 8. Argum. 6. The Church of Rome hath discontinued p. 31. Chap. 9. Argum. 7. From sense securing all men from Popery that will believe their eyes or any of their or others senses T 's frivolous answer refelled p. 34. Chap. 10. Detect 1. Prove them but guilty of one Error in Faith and all Popery is confuted p. 38. Chap. 11. Detect 2. A Doctrine so contrary to Scripture and it self cannot be free from Error p. 39. Chap. 12. Detect 3. Agree on the way of proof before you dispute Papists will take neither Sense Reason Scripture nor the Tradition or Judgement of the greater part of the Church for judge or proof p. 41. Chap. 13. Detect 4. Understand what they mean when they call to you for a Judge of Controversies How far a Judge is necessary and who p. 43. Chap. 14. Detect 5. They pretend that in their way there is an End of Controversies but in ours there is none Detected p. 46. Chap. 15. Detect 6. Their boast of Unity and reproaching us with Divisions Detected p. 52. Chap. 16. Detect 7. Their confounding the Essentials and Integrals of Christianity Detected p. 63. Chap. 17. Detect 8. Their extolling the judgement of the Catholick Church Detected It is against them p. 71. Chap. 18. Detect 9. Some of their deluding Ambiguities Detected 1. In the word Church 2. In the word Pope 3. A General Council Bring them to Define what they mean by these and you break them p. 73. Chap. 19. Detect 10. Their Confounding 1. An humane Ordinance and a Divine 2. Meere Primacy with Soveraignty 3. An alterable Order with an unalterable Essential Detected p. 81. Chap. 20. Detect 11. The vanity of their pretending Tradition detected p. 86. How far we are for Tradition p. 87. Tradition confoundeth Popery p. 98. Chap. 21. Detect 12. Their pretence that the Greeks and all other Churches were once under the Pope Detected p. 102. Chap. 22. Detect 13. Their plea that the Church of Rome is a True Church and therefore we are Schismaticks for separating from it Detected p. 103. Chap. 23. Detect 14. Their pretending to fixed Unity and settledness and that we are at uncertainty incoherent and changelings Detected p. 107. Chap. 24. Detect 15. Their plea that our Church and Religion is new and theirs old and their calling for a Catalogue and proof of the Succession of our Church before Luther Detected and our Church made known to them p. 115. And vindicated from Turbervile's exceptions Proved fully that persons differing in points of Faith are Christians and of the same Church p. 125 127 c. And that the Abassines Armenians Copties Greeks c. are of the same Church with us proved T 's proof of their Succession confuted to p. 141. Chap. 25. Detect 16. Their jumbling all our differences together and then making lesser or common differences to be the Protestant Religion Detected p. 141. Thirty two points of Popery named which they are challenged to prove a Succession of with my promise to receive what is so proved T 's Arguments for the Succession of their Doctrine confuted to p. 155. Papists have those in their Church that differ in point of Faith p. 155. No such difference between us and the most of the Christian world as can prove us not of the same Catholick Church proved against H. T. in the instances 1. Of Invocation of Saints p. 157. 2. Praying for the dead p. 160. 3. Veneration or Adoration of Images Cross and Reliques p. 162. 4. Transubstantiation 5. Satisfaction and Purgatory 6. Of Fasts Free-will c. Chap. 26. Detect 17. Their false interpretation of the sayings of Ancients from whence they would extort a proof of their Soveraignty Detected in eight instances p. 169. Chap. 27. Detect 18. Their corrupting Councils and Fathers and citing such Detected p. 176. Chap. 28. Detect 19. Their perswading the people that we are all Lyars that nothing we say and write may be regarded p. 182. Chap. 29. Detect 20. Their feigned Miracles 184. The story of the Boy of Bilson p. 185. Chap. 30. Detect 21. Their Impudent slanders The horrid Lyes against Luther and Calvin insisted on by the Marquess of Worcester and their common Writers fully detected p. 189. Chap. 31. Detect 22. Their quarrels at our Translations of Scripture p. 200. Chap. 32. Detect 23. Their design to make the Ministers odious to the people Their riches and ours compared p. 201. Chap. 33. Detect 24. Their cavils against our Ministry Ordination and Succession confuted p. 205. Chap. 34. Detect 25. Their pretence of the Holiness of their Church
which is most sufficient and most cleare in it self but for us This we all yield The second way is necessary to sciences diminutely and insufficiently delivered by their authors for their supplement so Aristotle is supplemented by Albertus Magnus c. The third way specially if it be not excessive is tolerable to the well being though it be not necessary The fourth way assertively is to be rejected as Poyson Thus are the authorities to be understood that forbid to add to or diminish from the Scripture Deut. 12 32. Well! by this time you may see that when such doctrine as this for Scripture sufficiency and perfection as the Rule of faith and life admitting no addition as necessary but explication nor any other as tolerable but moderate ampliation which indeed is the same I say when this doctrine past so lately in a Popish General Council you may see that the very Doctrine of Traditions equaled with Scripture or being another word of God necessary to faith and salvation containing what is wanting in Scripture is but lately sprung up in the world And sure the Traditions themselves be not old then when the conceit of them came but lately into the world 4. Well I have done the three first parts of this task but the chief is yet behind which is to shew 1 How little the Papists get by their Argument from Tradition 2. And how â—uch they lose by it even all their cause 1. Two things they very much plead Tradition for the one is their private doctrines and practices in which they disagree from other Christians and here they lose their labour with the judicious 1. Because they give us no sufficient proof that their Tradition is Apostolical 2. Because the dissent of other Churches sheweth that it is not universal with other Reasons before mentioned 2. The other Cause which they plead Tradition for is the Doctrine of Christianity it self And this they do in design to lead men to the Church of Rome as if we must be no Christians unless we are Christians upon the credit of the Pope and his Subjects And here I offer to their Consideration these two things to shew them the vanity of their arguing 1. We do not strive against you in producing any Tradition or Testimony of Antiquity for the Scripture or for Scripture Doctrine we make as much advantage of such just Tradition as you What do such men as White Vane Cressy c. think of when they argue so eagerly for the advantage of Tradition to prove the Scripture and Christian faith Is this any thing against us Nothing at all We accept our Religion from both the hands of Providence that bring it us Scripture and Tradition we abhor the contempt which these partial Disputers cast upon Scripture but we are not therefore so partial our selves as to refuse any collateral or subordinate help for our faith The more Testimonies the better The best of us have need of all the advantages for our faith that we can get When they have extolled the Certainty of Tradition to the highest we gladly joyn with them and accept of any certain Tradition of the mind of God And I advise all that would prove themselves wise defenders of the faith to take heed of rejecting Arguments from Providences or any necessary Testimony of man especially concerning matter of fact or of rejecting true Church History because the Papists over value it under the name of Tradition left such prove guilty of the like partiality and injuriousness to the truth as the Papists are And whereas the Papists imagine that this must lead us to their Church for Tradition I answer that in my next observation which is 2. We go beyond the Papists in arguing for just Tradition of the Christian faith and we make far greater advantage of it then they can do For 1. They argue but from Authoritative Decision by the Pope under the name of Church-Tradition excepting the French party whereas we argue from true History and certain Antiquity and prove what we say Where note 1. That their Tradition is indeed no Tradition for if it must be taken upon the credit of a man as supposed Infallible by supernatural if not miraculous endowment this is not Tradition but Prophesie And if they prove the man to be such a man it s all one to the Church whether he say that This was the Apostles doctrine or This I deliver my self to you from God For if he were so qualified he had the power and credit of a prophet or Apostle himself And therefore they must prove the Pope to be a Prophet before their kind of Tradition can get credit and when they have done that there is no need of it this their honest Dr. Holden was ware of upon which he hath so handsomely canvassed them 2. Note also that such as Dr. Holden Cressy Vane White and other of the French way that plead for Tradition mean a quite other thing then the Jesuited Italian Papist meanes and while they plead for universal Tradition they come nearer to the Protestants then to their Brethren if they did not contradict themselves when they have done by making meer Romish Tradition to be universal 3. Note also that when Papists speak of Tradition confusedly they give us just reason to call them to Define their Tradition and tell us what they mean by it before we dispute with them upon an ambiguous word seeing they are so divided among themselves that one party understands one thing by it and another another thing which we must not suffer these juglers to jumble together and confound 2. Another advantage in which we go beyond the Papists for Tradition is that as we argue not from the meer pretended supernatural Infallibility or Authority of any as they do but from rational Evidence of true Antiquity so we argue not from a sect or party as they do but from the Universal Church As far as the whole Church of Christ is of larger extent and greater credit then the Popish party so far is our Tradition more Credible then theirs And that is especially in three things 1. The Papists are fewer by far then the rest of the Christians in the world And the testimony of many yea of all is more then of a part 2. The Papists above other parties have espoused an interest that leads them to pretend and corrupt Tradition and bend all things to that interest of their own that they may Lord it over all the world But the whole Church can have no such Interest and Partiality 3. And the Papists are but one side and he that will judge rightly must hear the other sides speak too But the Tradition that we make use of is from all sides concurring yea Papists themselves in many points Yea our Tradition reacheth further then the Universal Church for we take in all rational Evidence even of Jews Heathens and Hereticks and Persecutors that bear witness to the matters of fact
among all the Pastors and Churches in your Dominion All that fear God are Agreed in the main and they have a special Love to one another and these are good preparatives to their fuller reconcilement I know that there is no such distance in their principles but that they may in blessed Concord carry on the work of God Our poor people need this that are offended at our smallest distances All our strength united is too little to bear down the oppositions of Hell and Earth that we must daily encounter in our work Your help may do much to procure our Concord of which I shall presume to say more to you in another address 6. Lastly we beseech you that Toleration may be limited by Execution as well as by Law And therefore that as the Approved Ministers must have an Instrument of Approbation and must be responsible before the Commissioners of ejection for any thing that forfeiteth it so the Tolerated may be tryed according to your Laws of Toleration and may have an Instrument for their Toleration before they have Liberty publikely to propagate their Opinions to others and that they may be as responsible before the Commissioners for ejection as we And that publikely nor privately Papists nor Infidels nor any that deny the essentials of the faith may not be suffered to seduce the people If any think that this is desired by us because we fear the power of truth or would deprive them of any just freedom of debate I provoke them solidly to answer what is here said in the following Dispute and we disswade not your Highness if you were in any doubt which we do not imagine of the truth of the Christian or Reformed Doctrine to invite us to an equal Disputation and try whether we shall not open the shame of Infidelity and Popery the two great evils that threaten this land at any time But if you are resolved of the wickedness of both these wayes we have reason to expect that you suffer not the poyson to be administred to your people Give not leave to every seducer to do his worst to damn mens souls When you will not tolerate every Traytor to draw your Armies or people into Rebellion nor to every wicked man to solicite others to whoredom murder theft or deceit And verily if men have leave to preach against the Scripture Churches Ministry Ordinances yea and against the life to come under the name of Seekers Quakers or such other Sects we had far rather that they had leave to pull off their vizor and do it openly in the name of Papists For as Papists they will disown abundance of the abominations which as Seekers c. they propagate on design And as plain dealing in Religion is better then jugling so we had rather that open quiet Papists were tolerated then these jugling deceivers They that pretend to know the Jesuites and Fryars do profess that they are more common in Princes Councils and Families and in the houses if not the closets of Noble men Commanders and persons of publick trust or service then we that live and mean simply do imagine And who would have thought that had not know it that they had so insinuated into the several sects among us and that they were so industrious in their work as the Newcastle Scottish Jew was to be circumcised or become Jew and then rebaptized c. and all to decieve Judge I beseech you by these three Reasons how far their seduction is to be tolerated 1. That they preach Treason against Princes and States I have shewed undenyably is part and a principal part of their Religion 2. Their doctrine corrupteth almost all Morality What need we fuller clearer proof then the Jansenian hath given us in his Mysterie of Jesuitism and much more may be added Morton hath long ago produced enough to tell us what to expect from such men Apolog. Part. 1. l. 2. c. 13. As from Tollet himself l. 4. de instruct sacerd c. 9. Quantum ad intentionem dilectionis non tenemur sub praecepto Deum plus omnibus diligere Stapleton l. 6. de justif c. 10. Valent. l. de Votis c. 3. Hoc praeceptum diligendi Deum ex tota mente doctrinale est non obligatorium See here a precept and the greatest precept even to Love God above all is not Obligatory A strange precept And p. 322. he reciteth the words of Tollet ibid. l. 4. c. 21. 22. teaching Equivocation upon oath before a Magistrate and so maintaining perjury And p 327. he citeth the same Author maintaining that Murder and Blasphemy in a passion and not deliberate is no mortal sin unless in one that is used to Blaspheme And p. 329. how Bellarm. Costerus Valentia maintain that Fornication in a Priest is better or a smaller sin then to marry The like he shews of their doctrine of Theft False witness c. p. 332 333 c. This from him 3. But above all their other mischiefs the Propagating of Infidelity by them is the greatest Which they do in two wayes 1. Under the Vizard of Infidels and Seekers they plead against Scripture and Christianity in design to loosen men from all Religion and perswade them that they must needs be Infidels or Papists Veron and his followers have given them full Directions to manage this design And while with debauched Consciences they thus perswade men to be Infidels in jest they have made abundance such in good sadness so that upon my knowledge there are many such swarm among us that sometime seemed pious persons that plead against Christianity it self 2. And no wonder when some of the leading Papists do seem to be Christians in jest and Infidels in good sadness themselves I shall instance now but in their Champion Tho. White who in his Euclid Metaphys Stoech K. pr. 16. maintaineth that in a manner or almost all incorporated souls shall be saved by the world as the Instrument or else the world were substantially evil and the souls that fail of Blessedness non sint sufficientes ad partem considerabilem totius multitudinis constituendam He that believeth this cannot believe Christ nor well perswade men to believe in Christ This happy news to the Pagans and Mahometans might somewhat affright the Christians being the fewest lest they should be that inconsiderable number but that he that talks of the damnation of so few its like by his Arguments believeth it of none The same he asserts in his Treatise of the middle state of souls Rat. 5. p. 41. And Rat. 10. he disputeth against Vindictive Justice as a thing not becoming God and p. 88. denyeth that sinners injure God forsooth because he suffereth it willingly Pag. 95 Translat he saith that souls are exempt from all such pains as may be caused by any outward agent And pag. 111. That God Governeth not the world as a Monarch but as an Engineer And pag. 134. he saith the punishment of sin whether external or internal
Well and what 's that to the question O Sir is it not the holy truth of God that you are about and should you thus abuse it and the souls of men you knew the question is Whether sense and the intellect thereby be infallible in judging Bread to be Bread when we see feel and eat it Had you never a word to say to this to perswade men that they have eyes and see not and hands and feel not or that the world knoweth not certainly what they seem to know by seeing and feeling I pray you hereafter deal by us as fairly as Bellarmine did and yet we will thank you for nothing who quite gave away the Roman cause by granting and pleading that sense is infallible in Positives and therefore we may thence say This is a Body because I see it and so this is Bread or wine because I see feel and taste it but not in Negatives and therefore we cannot say this is not a Body because I see it not I pray you give over talking of the Pope or Church or Religion or Men if you are uncertain of substances which are suppose but per accidentia the Objects of your sense And take nothing ill that I write of you till you are more certain that you see it and know what you see 3. But you 'l say Sense and Reason must here vail bonnet to faith Answ In the Negative case let it be granted and any case where faith can be faith But if sense and the Intellect therewith be fallible in Positives so that we cannot know Bread when we see and eat it faith cannot be faith then What talk you of faith if you credit not the soundest senses of all the men in the world when sense and reason are presupposed to faith How know you that faith here contradicteth sense You 'l say because the Church or Scripture saith This is my Body and that there is no Bread But how know you that there is any such thing in Scripture or that the Church so holdeth you think you have read or heard it But how know you that your sense deceived you not He that cannot know Bread when he seeth and eateth it is unlikely to know letters and their meaning when he seeth them See more of my answer to such Objections in a Book entitled The Safe Religion p. 241. to 248. The simplest Reader that hath honesty and charity is secured against Popery by the first Argument which he may make good to his own soul against all the Jesuites on earth And he that is unable to proceed on that account may by the evidence of this last Argument confute any Papist living if he be a man of sense and reason And having brought all our controversie so low that sense it self may be the judge I shall go no further in Argument as thinking it vain to use any reason with that man that will not believe his own eye-sight nor the sight and feeling and taste of all the world besides CHAP. X. I Come now to the next and principal part of my task which is to open to you their Deceits and give you Directions for the discovery and confutation of them that by the help of these you may see the Truth Detect 1. Remember this ground which they have given you that If you prove them guilty but of any one Error in points of belief determined by their Church you thereby disprove the whole body of Popery as such For you pull up the foundation which they build on and the Authority into which they resolve their faith They will grant you that if they are deceived by the Church in one thing they have no Certainty of any thing upon the Churches credit So that if you read Pauls discourse against Praying in an unknown tongue or the many precepts for our reading and meditating in the Law of God or the like and can but perceive that the Popish Latine service or their forbidding men to read the Scripture c. are contrary hereto or if you find out but any one of their Errors you cannot be a Papist if you understand their Profession But it is not so with us for though we know that the Scripture and all that is in it is of infallible Truth and that every true Christian while such is infallible in the Essentials of Christianity for else he were no Christian yet we profess that we know but in part and that our own Writings and Confessions may possibly in some things be besides the sense of Scripture and there being much more propounded in Scripture to our faith then what is of absolute necessity to salvation we may possibly after our studying and praying mistake in some things that are not of the Essence but the Integrity of Christianity and are necessary to the Melius esse the strength or comfort though not to the being of a Christian So that every Error in their faith destroyes their grounds and so their new Religion but so doth not every Error of ours Or to speak more distinctly let us distinguish between the Fides quae qua their Objective faith and our Subjective faith 1. Their Objective Faith hath Errors in it but ours hath none by their own confession For theirs is all the Decrees of their Popes and Councils and ours is only the Holy Scripture which they confess to be infallible Our own writings do but shew how we understand the Scriptures and so whether our subjective faith be right or not 2. We confess that it is not only possible but probable that we are mistaken in some lower points about the meaning of the Scriptures and yet our foundation is still sure But they have in a sort confounded their Subiective and Objective faith and one believes it on that account because others do believe it and so one age or part do but seek for the Object of their faith in the Actual faith of the other Yea 3. They conclude that every point which is of faith that is that 's determined by the Church to be so is of such necessity to salvation that no man can be saved that denyeth it or that doth not believe it if sufficiently proposed But we are assured that though all that is in Scripture be most true yet through misunderstanding some points there proposed to our faith may possibly be denyed and disputed against by a true believer and yet his salvation not be overthrown by it The Papists cry out against us for distinguishing between the Fundamentals or essentials of Religion and the Integrals but we know it to be necessary CHAP. XI Detect 2. WHEN you have brought the matter thus far and see that if they have one errour in faith their whole cause is lost then consider Whether it be Possible for that Doctrine which is so contrary to Scripture and to it self to be free from all Error 1. How contrary it is to Scripture 1. To forbid the reading of Scripture in a known
tongue 2. And their Publick Praying in an unknown language 3. And their administring the Lords Supper to the People by the halves denying them the Wine and giving them the bread only 4 And their affirming men to be perfect without sin in this life 5. And their calling some sins venial which deserve a pardon and yet are truly no sins 6. And their absolute forbidding their Priests to marry 7. And saying that there is no Bread and Wine left after the Consecration with abundance the like the very reading of the texts may satisfie you As for the first see Deut. 6. 7 8 9. Deut. 11. 18 19 20. Isa 34. 16. Psal 1. 2. Neh. 8. Jos 8. 34 35. Mat. 12. 3 5. 19. 4. 21. 16. 22. 31. Mark 12. 10 26. Acts 8. 28. 13. 27. 15. 21. 1 Thes 5. 27. Col. 4. 16. Deut 31. 11. Eph. 3. 4. Mat. 24. 15. Rev. 1. 3. 2 Tim. 3. 16. John 5 39. Act. 17. 2 11. 18 28. Rom. 15. 4. 2 Tim. 3. 15. Isa 8. 16 20. 42. 4. Rom. 7. 1. James 1. 25. Hos 8. 12. For the second read 1 Cor. 14. For the third see Mat. 26 27 28. 1 Cor. 11. 25 26 27 28. 1 Cor. 10. 16. For the fourth see Eccles 7. 20. James 3. 2. 1 John 1. 8. Phil. 3. 12. Luke 11. 4. For the fifth see Deut. 12 32. Gal. 3. 10. 1 John 3. 4. For the sixth see 1 Tim. 3. 2 4 5 11 12. Tit. 1. 6. 1 Tim. 43. 1 Cor. 9. 5. For the seventh see 1 Cor. 10. 16. 1 Cor. 11. 23 26 27 28. Act. 2. 42. Act. 20. 7. 11. 2. And that they are contrary to themselves appeareth 1. In that as I said before not only several persons but several Countries go several wayes the French are of one way and the Italians of another even in the Fundamentals of their Faith which all the rest is resolved into 2. Their Popes have ordinarily been contrary to one another in their Decrees which made Platina say Following Popes do still either infringe or wholly abrogate the Decrees of the former Popes And Erasmns saith that Pope John 22. and Pope Nicolas are contrary one to another in their whole Decrees and that in things that seem to belong to matter of faith Had we no instances but of Sergius and Formosus and their following partakers it were enough And Celestines case puts Bellarmine to silly shifts 3. That their Councils contradict each other I have formerly manifested They confess that the Arrians have had many Councils as General as most ever the Orthodox had and if it be only the want of the Popes approbation that nullifieth their authority then let them tell us no more of Councils and of all the Church but say plainly that is but one man that they mean But even their approved Councils have been contrary As the sixth Council at Constantinople approved by Pope Adrian is now confessed to have many errors The Council of Neocasarea confirmed by Pope Leo 4. and by the Nicen Council as saith the Council of Florence Ses 7. condemned second marriages contrary to Scripture and the present Church The Council at the Laterane under Leo the tenth determines that the Pope is above a General Council and the Councils of Constance and Basil determine that the General Council is above the Pope and that this is de fide and its heresie to deny it CHAP. XII Detect 3. IF you enter into Dispute with any Papist enquire first what he will take for sufficient Proof and what common Principles you are agreed on by which the rest must be decided For men that agree in nothing at all are not capable of a dispute For the Principles in which they are agreed are those that the rest must be reduced to And when you have made this enquiry you shall find that the Popish way of Disputing is to forbid you to Dispute unless you will first yield the cause to them as beyond dispute and that they are not agreed with the rest of the world in any common principles to which the differences may be reduced for tryal and so that there is no sort of Proof that they will admit of as sufficient For if there be any ground of Proof at all it must be 1. From the senses 2. Or from Reason 3. Or from Scripture 4. Or from the Church but they will stand to none of all these 1. Begin at the bottom of all and know of them whether they will take that for a Valid Proof which is fetcht from sense even from the soundest senses of all men in the world supposing a convenient object and Medium If they will not take this for Proof how can you dispute with them Or what Proof can be admitted if this be not admitted We have this advantage in dealing even with those Heathen that have blotted out much of the Law of nature it self that yet they will yield to an Argument from sense But if they would yield to the Validity of this proof then they give away their cause seeing sense telleth us that it is bread which we see and feel and eat after the Consecration They know this and therefore they must disown and deny this sort of proof 2. But will they then admit of Proofs from Reason No that cannot be if proof from sense be not admitted For Reason receiveth its object by means or occasion of the senses and must needs be deceived if it be deceived And Reason hath not a principle that it holds faster then that sense is to be credited that this is white or black which my own eyes and the eyes of all other men do see to be so and so that this is bread which we all see and feel and taste to be so And therefore the Papists tell us that Reason must stoop to faith that is they will not stand to Reason when it contradicteth the doctrine of their sect It seems they are in some parts of their Religion unreasonable But I would know whether they have any Reason to be unreasonable If they have then why might not our Reason be valid as well as their Reason which they bring against Reason by which they contradict themselves For if Reason be vain why Reason they to prove its Vanity or invalidity But if they have no Reason against Reason let them confess it and offer us none and then their disputes will do no harm We easily yield that we have Reason to believe Gods Revelations about those things which we had no Reason to believe if they were not Revealed And that many of those Revelations are above Reason so far as that Reason cannot discern the truth of the thing without them yea it would rather judge the things improbable But yet Revelations are received by Reason and inform Reason and not destroy it nor do they so contradict Sense or Reason as to make that credible which Sense and Reason have sufficient ground to judge
that know them to be of Divine Revelation we easily grant you that But that is not because the Things themselves are simply necessary to Salvation but because a Belief of Gods veracity and the Truth of all that he Revealeth in general is of necessity and he that Believeth that God is True verax cannot chuse but believe all to be True which he knows God revealeth He that thinketh God to be a Lyar in one word doth not believe his veracity and so hath no Divine faith at all And therefore you need not fear lest any one should be guilty of not believing that which they know is the word of God but those that take God to be a Lyar and that is those that take him not to be God and so are Atheists But still the thing of Absolute necessity is but first to believe in General that God is true in all his word secondly and to believe the truth of the essential points of Christianity in particular embracing the Good propounded in them Now its true that secondarily all known Truths are of necessity to be believed because else our General belief of Gods veracity is not sincere But yet we must say that antecedently even to that person these superadded truths were not of Necessity to his Salvation to be believed because they were not of such Necessity to be Known and if they had not been known you would say your selves there had not been such Necessity of Believing them But if you go further and say that all that were obliged to know them or that had opportunity or the Revelation if the truth and yet did not and thereupon deny them culpably are in a state of death I deny that and shall prove it false It s true that a wilfull refusing the Light because men love darkness rather then light is a certain sign of a graceless wretch But every culpable ignorance and unbelief is not Damning ignorance or unbelief 1. Otherwise no man should be saved For no man is void of culpable ignorance and consequently of culpable unbelief Had we never been wanting in the use of means there 's no man but might have known more then he doth Is there any one of you that dare refuse to ask God forgiveness of your ignorance unbelief or the negligence that is the culpable cause of them or that dare say you need no pardon of them 2. If you plead for venial sin how can you deny a venial unbelief upon venial ignorance But then I pray you learn more wit and piety 1. then to say that your venial unbelief or sin is no sin save as Analogically so called or 2. then to say it deserves a pardon or deserves not everlasting punishment But if you will call it venial because being consistent with the true Love of God and habitual Holiness and saving faith the Law of Grace doth pardon it and not condemn men for it thus we would agree with you that there is veniall sin but then you must yield us that there is venial unbelief 3. And we easily prove all this from the Law of God It is the nature of the preceptive part to constitute Duty only and the violation of that is sin But it is the sanction the promise and threatning that Determines of the Reward and Penalty Now it is only the old Law of works that makes the Threatening as large as the prohibition condemning man for every sin but so doth not the Law of Grace The precept still commandeth Perfect obedience and so makes it a duty but the promise maketh not perfect obedience the condition of Salvation but Faith Repentance and sincere Obedience though imperfect The Law of Nature still makes everlasting Death due to every sin But it is such a Due as hath a Remedy at hand provided and offered in the Gospel and is actually remedyed to all true believers So that as it is not every sin that will damn us though damnation be due to it because we have a present Remedy so it is not every culpable ignorance or unbelief that will damn us though it deserve damnation because the Gospel doth not only not damn us for it but pardons it by acquitting us from the condemnation of the Law All this may teach you not only to mend your abominable doctrine about Mortal and veniall sin but also to discern the reason why a man may deny some points of faith that are not of the essence of Christianity and yet not be damned for it because the Law of Grace doth not condemn him for it though he be culpable because the Law of Grace may command further then it peremptorily condemneth in case of disobedience It is the Promise that makes faith the Condition of Life though it be the Precept that makes it a duty Now it saveth not as a performed Duty directly because the precept gives not the Reward but as a performed Condition And therefore unbelief condemneth not effectually as a meer sin directly but as such a sin as is the violation or non-performance of that condition But it is not a belief of every thing that is preceptively de fide which is made the condition of life CHAP. XVII Detect 8. ANother of their Juglings is to extoll the judgement of the Catholick Church as that which must be the ground of faith and the decider of all Controversies And to this end they plead against the sufficiency of Scripture and bend all the force of their arguings and designs as if all their hope lay in this point and as if it were a granted thing that the day is theirs and we are lost if the Catholick Church be admitted to be the Judge Hence it is that they cry out against private faith and opinions and call men to the faith of the Church and perswade the poor people that the Church is for them and we are but branches broken off Well we are content to deal with them at their own weapon and at that one in which they put their trust For our parts we know that the true Catholick Church nor any member of it in sensu Composito cannot err in any of the Essentials of Christianity for then it would cease to be the Church But we have too much reason to Judge that it is not free from error in lesser things But yet for all that in the main cause between the Papists and us we refuse not their judgement Nay we turn this Canon against the Canoneers and easily prove that the Papists cause is utterly lost if the Catholick Church be Judge But is it the Ancient Church or the present Church that must decide the cause Well! It shall be which you will For the most Ancient Church in the Apostles dayes we are altogether of its belief and stand to its decision in all things and if you prove we mistake them in any thing we shall gladly receive instruction and be reclaimed To them we appeal for our Essentials and Integrals And for some
when they had no being since the death of the Apostles 6. And also that we are able to prove the death and burial of many things that have gone long under the name of Traditions 7. And when we find so lame an account from your selves of the true Apostolical Traditions You are so confounded between your Ecclesiasticall Decrees and Traditions and your Apostolical Traditions that we despair of learning from you to know one from the other and of seeing under the hand of his Holiness and a General Council a Catalogue of the true Apostolical Traditions And sure it seems to us scarce fair dealing that in one thousand and five hundered years time if indeed there have been Popes so long the Church could never have an enumeration and description of these Traditions with the proofs of them Had you told us which are Apostolick Traditions but as fully and plainly as the Scriptures which you accuse of insufficiency and obscurity do deliver us their part you had discharged your pretended trust 8. And it is in our eyes an abominable impiety for you to equal your Traditions with the holy Scripture till you have enumerated and proved them And it makes us the more to suspect your Traditions when we perceive that they or their Patrons have such an enmity to the Holy Scriptures that they cannot be rightly defended without casting some reproach upon the Scriptures But this we do not much wonder at for it is no new thing with the applauders of Tradition We find the eighth General Council at Constantinople Can. 3. decreeing that the Image of Christ be adored with equal Honour with the Holy Scripture But whether that be an Apostolical Tradition we doubt 9. And if General Councils themselves and that of your own should be for the sufficiency of Scripture what then is become of all your Traditions Search your own Binnius page 299. whether it past not as sound doctrine at the Council of Basil in Ragusii Orat. Sup. 6. that faith and all things necessary to salvation both matters of belief and matters of practice are founded in the literal sense of Scripture and only from that may argumentation be taken for the proving of those things that are matters of faith or necessary to salvation and not from those passages that are spoken by allegory or other spiritual sence Sup. 7. The Holy Scripture in the literal sense soundly and well understood is the infallible and most sufficient Rule of faith Is not here enough against all other Traditional Articles of faith A plain man would think so Yea but Binnius noteth that he meaneth that explicitely or implicitely it is so Well! I confess the best of you are slippery enough but let us grant this for indeed he so explaineth himself afterward yet that 's nothing for Tradition He there maintaineth that Scripture is the Rule of faith not part of the Rule For saith he when the intellect hapneth to err as in hereticks its necessary that there be some Rule by the deviation or conformity to which the intellect may perceive that it doth or doth not err Else it would be still in doubt and fluctuate it appeareth that no humane science is the Rule of faith It remaineth therefore that the Holy Scripture is this Rule of faith This is the Rule John 20. where be saith these things are written that you might believe that Jesus is the son of God and believing might have life in his name And 2 Pet. 2. You have a more sure word of prophecy to which ye do well that ye attend as to a light c. And Rom. 15. Whatsoever things were written were written for our learning c. And its plain that the foresaid authorities are of holy Scripture and speak of the holy Scripture c. The second part also is plain because if the holy Scripture were not a sufficient Rule of faith it would follow that the Holy Ghost had insufficiently delivered it who is the author of it which is by no means to be thought of God whose works are all perfect Moreover if the Holy Scripture were wanting in any things that are necessary to salvation then those things that are wanting might lawfully and deservedly be superadded from some thing else aliunde or if any thing were superfluous be diminished But this is forbidden Rev. 22. From whence its plain that in Scripture there is nothing defective and nothing superfluous which is agreeable to its author the Holy Ghost to whose Omnipotency it agreeeth that nothing deminutely to his Wisdom that nothing superfluously and to his Goodness that in a congruous order he provide for the Necessity of our salvation Prov. 30. 5 6. The word of God is a fiery buckler to them that hope in him Add thou not to his words lest be reprove thee and thou be found a lyar How like you all this in a Popish General Council and in an Oration against the Sacrament in both kinds Well! but perhaps the distinction unsaith all again No such matter you shall hear it truly recited He proceeds thus But for the further declaration of this Rule as to that part it must be known that the sufficiency of any doctrine is necessarily to be understood two wayes one way Explicitely another way Implicitely And this is true in every Doctrine or science because no doctrine was ever so sufficiently delivered that all the Conclusions contained in its principles were delivered and expressed explicitely and in the proper terms and so it is in our purpose because there is nothing that any way or in any manner N.B. pertaineth to faith and salvation which is not most sufficiently contained in the holy Scripture explicitely or implicitely Hence saith Austin every truth is contained in the Scriptures latent or patent as in other sciences Speculative or Moral and Civil the Conclusions and determinations are contained in their principles c. and the deduction is by way of inference or determination This is the plain Protestant Doctrine There is nothing any way necessary to faith or salvation but what is contained in the Scriptures either expresly or as the Conclusion in the premises Good still we desire no more Let holy Reason then discern the Conclusion in the premises and let us not be sent for it to the Authority of Rome nay sent for some thing else that is no Conclusion deducible from any Scripture principles we grant Tradition or Church practices are very useful for our better understanding of some Scriptures But what is this to another Traditional word of God Prove your Traditions but by inference from Scripture and we will receive them Yet let us hear this Orator further clearing his mind Adding to a Doctrine may be understood four wayes 1. By way of explication or declaration 2. By way of supply 3. By way of ampliation 4. By way of destruction or contrary The first way is necessary in every science and doctrine and specially in Holy Scripture not for it self
putting an Oath to all the Clergy of the Christian Church within your power to be true to the Pope and to obey him as the Vicar of Christ Who first taught men to swear that they would not interpret Scripture but according to the unanimous Consent of the Fathers Who was the first that brought in the doctrine or name of Transubstantiation and who first made it an Article of faith Who first made it a point of faith to believe that there are just seven Sacraments neither fewer nor more Did any before the Council of Trent swear men to receive and profess without doubting all things delivered by the Canons and Oecumenical Councils when at the same time they cast off themselves the Canons of many General Councils and so are generally and knowingly perjured as e. g. the twentieth Canon of Nice forementioned These and abundance more you know to be Novelties with you if wilfulness or gross ignorance bear not rule with you and without great impudence you cannot deny it Tell us now when these first came up and satisfie your selves One that was afterward your Pope Aeneas Sylvins Epist 288. saith that before the Council of Nice there was little respect had to the Church of Rome You see here the time mentioned when your foundation was not laid Your Learned Cardinal Nicol. Cusanus lib. de Concord Cathol c. 13. c. tells you how much your Pope hath gotten of late and plainly tells you that the Papacy is but of Positive right and that Priests are equall and that it is subjectional consent that gives the Pope and Bishops their Majority and that the distinction of Diocesses and that a Bishop be over Presbyters are of Positive right and that Christ gave no more to Peter than the rest and that if the Congregate Church should choose the Bishop of Trent for their President and Head he should be more properly Peters Successor then the Bishop of Rome Tell us now when the contrary doctrine first arose Gregory de valentia de leg usu Euchar. cap. 10. tells you that the Receiving the Sacrament in one kind began not by the decree of any Bishop but by the very use of the Churches and the consent of believers and tels you that it is unknown when that Custom first begun or got head but that it was General in the Latine Church not long before the late Council of Constance And may you not see in this how other points came in If Pope Zosimus had but had his will and the Fathers of the Carthage Council had not diligently discovered shamed and resisted his forgery the world had received a new Nicene Canon and we should never have known the Original of it It s a considerable Instance that Usher brings of using the Church service in a known tongue The Latine tongue was the Vulgar tongue when the Liturgy and Scripture was first written in it at Rome and far and neer it was understood by all The service was not changed as to the language but the language it self changed and so Scripture and Liturgy came to be in an unknown tongue And when did the Latine tongue cease to be understood by all Tell us what year or by whom the change was made saith Erasmus Decl. ad censur Paris tit 12. § 41. The Vulgar tongue was not taken from the people but the people departed from it 5. We are certain that your errors were not in the times of the Apostles nor long after and therefore we are sure that they are Innovations And if I find a man in a Dropsie or a Consumption I would not tell him that he is well and ought not to seek remedy unless he can tell when he began to be ill and what caused it You take us to be Heretical and yet you cannot tell us when our errors did first arise Will you tell us of Luther You know the Albigenses whom you murdered by hundreds and thousands were long before him Do you know when they begun Your Reinerius saith that some said they were from Silvesters dayes and some said since the Apostles but no other beginning do you know 6. But to conclude what need we any more then to find you owning the very doctrine and practise of Innovation When you maintain that you can make us new Articles of faith and new worship and new discipline and that the Pope can dispense with the Scriptures and such like what reason have we to believe that your Church abhorreth Novelty If you deny any of this I prove it Pope Leo the tenth among other of Luthers opinions reckoneth and opposeth this as Hereticall It is certain that it is not in the hand of the Church or Pope to make Articles of faith in Bulla cont Luth. The Council of Constance that took the supremacy justly from the Pope did unjustly take the Cup from the Laity in the Eucharist Licet in primitivâ Ecclesiâ hujusmodi Sacramentum reciperetur a fidelibus sub utraque specie i. e. Though in the primitive Church this Sacrament was received by Believers under both kinds The Council of Trent say Sess 21. cap. 1 2. that this power was alway in the Church that in dispensing the Sacraments saving the substance of them it might ordain or change things as it should judge most expedient to the profit of the receiver Vasquez To. 2. Disp 216. N. 60. saith Though we should grant that this was a precept of the Apostles nevertheless the Church and Pope might on just causes abrogate it For the Power of the Apostles was no greater then the power of the Church and Pope in bringing in Precepts These I cited in another Treatise against Popery page 365. Where also I added that of Pope Innocent Secundum plenitudinem potestatis c. By the fulness of our power we can dispense with the Law above Law And the Gloss that oft saith The Pope dispenseth against the Apostle against the Old Testament The Pope dispenseth with the Gospell interpreting it And Gregor de valent saying Tom. 4. disp 6. q. 8. Certainly some things in later times are more rightly constituted in the Church then they were in the beginning And of Cardinal Peron's saying lib. 2. Obs 3. cap. 3. pag. 674. against King James of the Authority of the Church to alter matters conteined in the Srripture and his instance of the form of Sacraments being alterable and the Lords command Drink ye all of it mutable and dispensable And Tolets Its certain that all things instituted by the Apostles were not of Divine right Andradius Defens Concil Trid. lib. 2. pag. 236. Hence it is plain that they do not err that say the Popes of Rome may sometime dispense with Laws made by Paul and the four first Councils And Bzovius The Roman Church using Apostolical power doth according to the Condition of times change all things for the better And yet will you not give us leave to take you for changers and Novelists But let us add
Religion as if they were so many Articles of our Faith or at least were the common doctrines of our Churches They will not give us leave to do so by them when yet we have much more reason for it For 1. They teach the People that they are bound to believe as their Teachers bid them and they reproach us for confessing that we are not in all points of Doctrine infallible And yet we still confess this fallibility and say in plain terms that we know but in part 2. Divers of their particular Doctors that we use to cite are such as the Pope hath Canonized for Saints and they tell us that in Canonizing he is infallible And therefore an Infallibly Canonized Saint must not be supposed to err in a point of faith 3. They boast so much of Unity and Concent among themselves that we may the better cite particular Doctors And yet we think our selves bound to stand to their own Law in this and to charge nothing on them as the faith of their Church but what their Church doth own and therefore while they refuse to stand to particular Doctors we will not urge them to it for its good reason that all men should be the Professors of their own belief But what reason is there then that we may not have the same measure from them which they expect We profess to take no man nor Council of men for the Lords of our faith but for the Helpers of our faith They tell us that they know not where to find our Religion We tell them it is entirely in the written word of God and that we know no other Infallible Rule because we know no other Divine Revelation supposing what in Nature is revealed They tell us that All Hereticks do pretend to Scripture and therefore this cannot be the Test of our Religion I answer that so all cavillers and defrauders and extortioners may pretend to the Law of the Land to undo poor men by quirks of wit or tire them with vexatious suits And yet it follows not that we must seek another Rule of Right and take the Law for insufficient And what if Hereticks pretend to Tradition to General Councils and the Decretals of the Popes as you know how frequently they do Will you yield therefore that these are an infufficient Rule or Test of your own Religion Open your eyes and judge as you would be judged But I will come to some of the particular Opinions which they charge us with And because I know not a more weighty renowned Champion of their cause then Cardinal Richleiu then Bishop of Lucion I shall take notice of his twelve great errors which he so vehemently chargeth on the Reformed Churches as contrary to the Scripture And sure I shall do much to make clean our Churches if I fully wipe off all the pretended blots of errour that so wise a man could charge upon them In his Defens contra script 4. Ministr Charenton cap. 2. pag. 12. c. he begins his enumeration thus 1. The Scripture saith Jam. 2. that a man is not Justified by Faith only but you say that he is Justified by Faith alone and by Faith only which is found in no place of Scripture and do you not then resist the Scriptures Answ 1. We believe both the words of Paul and James that a man is Justified by Faith without the Deeds of the Law and saved through Faith not of works lest any man should boast Rom. 3. 28. Ephes 2. 8 9. and also that a man is Justified by works and not by Faith only Jam. 2 Did not this Learned man know that we believe all the Bible why then should he charge us with denying that which we retain and publickly read in our Churches as the word of God Did he think that we set so much by Luthers or any mans writings as by the Bible 2. But if he can prove that we understand not these words aright he should have evinced it better then by the use of the words Faith alone For our Churches by Faith alone do profess openly to mean no more then Paul doth by Faith without works And can they find fault with Paul 3. Indeed we are not all agreed upon the fittest Notion of the interest of Faith and works in our Justification but our difference is more in words and notions then matter of which see my Disput of Justification 4. And. why do you not quarrel with your own Cardinal Contarenus de Justif and others of your own that joyn with us in the doctrine of Justification His second Accusation is The Scripture saith that we can Love God with all the heart you say that no man can Love God with all the heart which is no where read in Scripture and yet do you not resist the Scriptures Answ 1. Unprofitable Confusion we distinguish between Loving God with all the Heart as it signifieth the sincerity and predominant degree of Love and so every true Christian hath it and as it signifieth some extraordinary degree above this meer sincerity and so some eminent stronger Christians have it and as it signifieth the highest Degree which is our duty and which excludeth all sinful imperfection And thus we say that no man actually doth Love God perfectly in this life nor do we think he speaks like a Christian that dare say Lord I Love thee so much that I will not be beholden to thee to forgive the imperfection of my Love or to help me against any sinful imperfection of it Your own Followers whom you admire as the highest Lovers of God do oft lament the imperfections of their Love as M. de Renty for instance in his Life But now if the question be only of the posse and not the act we say that the Potentia naturalis is in all and the Potentia Moralis which is the Habit is in the sanctified but this Moral Power is not perfect it self that is of the highest degree and without any sinful imperfection though yet it hath the perfection of sincerity and in some the perfection of an eminent degree And will not this content you His third Accusation is The Scripture saith that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ with the adjunction of those words that signifie a true Body and Blood you say that it is not Christs Body and Blood but only a figure sign and testimony which the Scripture no where saith Answ 1. The Scripture saith not that it is his Body and Blood substantially or by Transubstantiation And we say not as you feign that it is not his Body and Blood but a figure c. For we say that it is his Body and Blood Sacramentally and Representatively as he that personateth a King on some just account is called a King and as in actions of Investiture and Delivery the delivering of a Key is the delivering of the House and the delivery of a twig and turf is the delivery of the Land and the deliverer
is the purest it is one of the most impure If for Antiquity it is founded as Papal upon Novelty If because it is the Richest their money perish with them that measure the Church and truth of Christ by the Riches and splendor of this world For my part I cannot help you out of this snare CHAP. XLI Detect 32. ANother of their juglings is By working upon the peoples natural affections and asking them Where they think all their fore-fathers are that dyed in the communion of the Roman Church Dare they think they are all damned Intimating that its cruelty to say their ancestors are in Hell and if they say they be in Heaven then there is but one way thither and therefore you must go the way that they went But a weak understanding may easily deal with this kind of Sophistry if it be not mastered by affection For 1. What if we grant that many of our fore-fathers that dyed Papists are in Heaven Doth it follow that we must therefore be Papists No because it was not by Popery that they came to Heaven but by Christianity What if many recover and live that eat not only Earth and Dirt but Hemlock or Spear-wort or other poysons must I therefore eat them Or doth it follow that there is no other way to health 2. Our fore-fathers were all saved that were holy justified persons and no others But among so many and great impediments as Popery cast in their way we have great reason to fear that far fewer of them were saved then are now among the Reformed Churches And must I needs go that difficult way to Heaven because that some of them get thither Must I needs travail a way that is commonly beset with thieves because some that go that way do scape them This is our case 3. If this were a good way of Reasoning then may all the Heathens Infidels Mahometans use it that have been educated in darkness And indeed it is the Argument which the barbarous Heathens use when the Gospel is preached to them What think you say they is become of our fathers If they were saved without the Gospel so may we The story of that Infidel Prince is common that being ready to go to the water to be baptized stept back and asked Where are all my Ancestors now And when he was told that they were in Hell and that the Christians go to heaven he told them then he would be no Christian for he would go where his Ancestors are 4. If this be good reasoning then we may use it much more then you For we would ask you where be all our fore fathers that are dead since the Reformation and where be all those that dyed between the Resurrection of Christ and the appearing of Popery or the prevailing of it in the world And where be all that die in the Eastern and Southern Churches that are no subjects of the Pope of Rome Have we not as little reason to think that all these millions of men are damned as to think so of our Popish Ancestors 5. Why should we be more foolish for our souls then for our bodies I would not be poor because my Ancestors were so Nor would I have the Stone or Gout because my Ancestors had them Nor will I say that they are no diseases for fear of dishonouring my Ancestors that had them And why then should I willfully lick up any Popish errors because my Ancestors by the disadvantage of the times and of their education were cast upon them 6. It is not our fore-fathers but God that we must follow It is he and not they that is the Lord of our faith and of our souls It will not excuse us in judgement for disobeying God to say that our fore-fathers led us the way Nor will it ease us in Hell to suffer with our fore-fathers Christ tells us Luke 16. of a Rich man that in Hell would have had his brethren warned lest they should follow him But these men would have us to follow our fore-fathers even in their sin against God Whereas the Scriptures constantly make it an aggravation of a peoples sin when they follow their fathers in it take not warning by their falls The Jewish Christians were redeemed from the vain conversation received by Tradition from their fathers 1 Pet. 1. 18. Stephen tells the Jews Act. 7. 51 52. As your Fathers did so do yet which of the Prophets have not your Fathers persecuted Christ condemneth the Jews for allowing the deeds of their fathers Luk. 11. 47 48. Mat. 23. 32. Nay God asketh wicked men where their fathers are with a clean contrary meaning to this question of the Papists Zach. 1. 4 5 6. Turn unto me saith the Lord of Hosts be not as your fathers unto whom the former Prophets have cryed Turn your fathers where are they and the Prophets do they live for ever Ezek. 20. 18 27 30. I said unto their children walk ye not in the Statutes of your Fathers neither observe their judgements nor defile your selves with their Idols I am the Lord your God walk in my Statutes 30. Say unto the house of Israel Thus saith the Lord God Are ye polluted after the manner of your fathers and commit ye whoredom after their abominations Jer. 44. 9. Have ye forgotten the wickedness of your fathers They are not humbled even to this day The 18. of Ezek. is almost all of this that the son that followeth his father in his sins shall die and he that takes warning and avoideth his fathers sins shall live A hundred more such texts there are 7. Our fore-fathers might be saved that sinned in the dark and yet we be damned if we will follow them in the Light or at least we shall be beaten with more stripes then they if both must perish They had not our means or liberty If they had seen and heard what we have done many of them would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes Shall we sin wilfully after the knowledge of the Truth because our fathers sinned ignorantly for want of information CHAP. XLII Detect 33. ANother of their frauds is By pretending to a Divine Institution and Natural excellency of a visible Monarchical Government of the Church And so they would derive it from Peter from Christ yea from Nature and God the Author of Nature All their writings take this as their strength I shall at this time tie my self to Boverius his Cheating Consultation de Ratione verae fidei c. ad Carolum Principem intended for the perverting of our late King then in Spain In his Part. 1. Reg. 6. he asserteth that besides Christ the invisible Head of the Church there is a necessity that we acknowledge another certain visible Head subrogate to Christ and instituted of him without which none can be a member of Christ or any way subsist alive Yet Cardinal Richlieu will not have the Pope called Another Head He begins his proof with a cheat
can he not Govern it without a Visible Monarch Why then did the world never hear of such a man Yea the whole world is the Kingdom of Christ himself though not in that special sort as his Church is For all Power in heaven and earth is given him Mat. 28. 18 19. and for that end he Dyed Rose and Revived that he might be Lord of the Dead and Living Rom. 14. 9. and he is made Head over all things to the Chruch Eph. 1. 22 23. And hath this Kingdom an Universal Visible Monarch Yes the Pope is the man Long hath he laid claim to it Princes you see whose hands your Crowns and Kingdoms are in Deceive not your selves they are the Popes For certainly they are all Christs and if he be to be believed he is the Vice-christ and so succeedeth him in the Monarchy of the world But then why doth not this simple Pope lay claim to the Empire of Indostan and Tartarie and China and Constantinople as well as of these smaller Kingdoms of Europe 2. And for the Metaphorical title of an Army I answer It sufficeth that it hath an Universal General in Heaven that can command it twice as well there as the Pope can on earth yea and is as Visible to the Antipodes yea to me as ever the Pope was All the world is Gods Army But I will not say that the Pope or any man is Generall of it save Christ nor will I call him The Lord of Hosts 3. And for the Sheepfold of Christ he ahth appointed particular Shepheards to watch for the several parts of the flock But if one man were to look to all the sheep in the world he would make such work as the Pope would do with the sheep of Christ If you tell us still that Christ is out of sight I answer He is even at hand he is coming he will not be long In the mean time it is the duty of every Pastor to feed the flock of God that is among them not as Lords over Gods Heritage as the Vice-christ would be and when the chief Shepheard doth appear we shall receive the Crown 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3 4. Peter never dreamed poor man that he was the chief Shepheard himself 4. For the Metaphor of a Family I answer That God can Govern all the Families in the world and when the Pope can do so then all the world shall acknowledge him the Master of the Family Till then we have learned that the whole Family of Heaven and Earth is named of God and of the Redeemer-God-and-Man but not of the Pope of Rome 5. And for the similitude of a Ship I answer One man can Govern a ship of the common size but a ship as big as all the world I think no man but Christ can govern And so confident am I in this opinion that I profess I will not be in that ship as big as the world which the Pope shall undertake to Govern if I do but know how to get out of it Pag. 146. He goes on to tell us that even the bruits have their Governours and instanceth in the Bees Answ I am not well acquainted with Irrational Governours or Governments but seriously it is no Article of my faith that one Bee can Govern all the Bees in the world Nor one Ape all the Apes in the world Let it suffice the Pope that every particular Church be a Bee-hive and every Hive have its proper Governour Next he again tells Prince Charls that we should not deny that to the Church which we see is necessary to all humane Societies Answ Was this man in his wits Have all Societies or any Society an Universal Humane Governour Who is it that is the Universal Chancellor of all the Academics on Earth Who is it that is the Ruler of all the Colledges of Physitians in the world I know what Schoolmaster we have in our own School here but I never heard of an Universal Schoolmaster for all the world nor for all England who is the Universal Governour of all the Companies of Merchants in the world Or who is the Universal King In the Conclusion he gathers up all into seven reasons Why the Church should have a Vice-christ 1. That the militant Church might be like the triumphant who have one Invisible Head Answ 1. Christ is visible to the Church in Heaven 2. When you have proved that any meer man is Christ or Head in Heaven then we will grant that a meer man shall be Christ and Head on earth 3. Earth is not yet fit to be conformed to Heaven in its Government 4. Is it not the truest conformity that Heaven and Earth have one and the same Lord though visible to them and not to us yet ruling us by visible officers 5. But if this will not serve le ts have on earth a visible Government therefore let us have no Pope that is invisible to almost all the world but Pastors that are visible in their particular Churches The second Reason is That the militant Church differ not from it self but as each particular Church hath one Visible Head or Pastor so the whole should have Answ 1. Content if the Pope can shew as good a Commission for the whole and be as able to Govern the whole and will really be present with the whole and visible to them 2. Is the world unlike it self if all the world have not one King as every particular Kingdom hath Or one Schoolmaster as every particular School hath The third Reason is For preserving Unity Answ 1. And well it is done by you And what unity will you keep at the Antipodes Or in the vast dominions of Heathen and Mahometan Princes where Christians are dispersed but you come not neer them 2. We have a better unity already in One God One Christ One Spirit One Gospel One Baptism One Hope c. 3. The Mahometans have more unity then you The fourth Reason is To fulfill the doctrine of the Prophets and Christ Answ You should have better shewed such a doctrine before you had made use of it as a reason The fifth Reason is That the Christian Church may be like the Jewish Answ When the Christian universal Church is no bigger then the Jewish that one may Govern it as well we will hearken to you Let the Pope undertake no larger a Circuit The sixth Reason is That there may be some one Supream judge to punish Bishops and define matters of faith call Councils extinguish heresies and schisms Answ 1. One Christ is enough for the Catholick Church for all these uses I find the Articles of saith as well defined by Christ as by the Vice-christ I have searcht the writings both of Christ and the Vice-christ and in my poor judgement there is no comparison between them nor hath the Pope one jot mended the Scripture 2. And for Heresies and Schisms Christ hath extinguisht many but for ought I see the Pope rather increaseth them In
good sadness did God send John the twenty second alias the twenty third to extinguish Heresies with all those Abominations and all that Infidelity that was charged on him by a General Council And was John the thirteenth a Vice christ to extinguish Heresies by all that diabolical villany that he was deposed for by a Council 3. And for calling Councils they have learnt more wit since Constance and Basil have let them know what Councils mean to do by them Unless they can pack up forty or fifty or what if it were an hundred or two hundred as they did at Trent to say their lesson as it was brought to them from Rome and to call themselves a General Council for folks to laugh at them Is this all that we must have a Vice-Christ for How many General Councils did the Pope call for six hundred years after Christ Tell us without Lying and let us see why he was created The seventh Reason is That the Divine Institution of Christ and the plain Scripture about Peters Primacy may take place Answ 1. Where shall a man that hath eyes find your pretended institution The blind may sooner find it by the half 2. Primacy and Monarchy are not all one And Bellarmine can tell you that its one thing to be the first Apostle and another thing to be the Vice-christ to the Church Universal Peter was none such 3. No nor was he properly any more the Bishop of Rome then of many another place Antioch claims the inheritance by birth-right as Peters first supposed seat and Jerusalem before them both Well Reader thou seest now how Babel is built and what is the strongest stuff that the learned Spaniards had to assault Prince Charls with For verily I have not bawkt their strength And were it not for the loss of precious time to you and me I would quickly thus shew you the vanity of abundance more of their most applauded writings CHAP. XLIII Detect 34. ANother of their Devices is to take nothing as Evidence from Scripture but the Letters or express words They will not endure to hear of consequences no nor Synonimal expressions Bellarmine himself saith de verb. Dei lib. 3. cap. 3. Convenit inter nos adversarios ex solo literali sensu peti de bere argumenta efficacia nam eum sensum qui ex verbis immediate colligitur certum est sensum esse spiritus sancti But this may admit a fair interpretation It was Cardinal Peronius in his Reply against King James that is judged the deviser of this Deceit but Gonterius and Veronius the Jesuites have perfected it I shall say but little of it because it is already detected and refelled by Paul Ferrius 1618. and Isaaccus Chorinus 1623. and Nic. Vedelius 1628. at large Yea Vedelius shews cap. 6. p. 50. c. that it was hatcht in Germany by the Lutherans for the defending of Consubstantiation and from them borrowed by the Revolter Perron For our parts the cunning Sophisters shall find us very Reasonable with them in this point but if they be faln out with Reason it self there 's no way to please them but by turning bruits And we will not buy their favour at those rates Our judgement in this point I shall lay down distinctly though briefly as followeth 1. The Holy Scripture is the Doctrine Testament and Law of Christ And we shall add nothing to it nor take ought from it The use of it as a doctrine is to inform us of the will of God in the points there written The use of it as a Testament is to signifie to us the last will of our Lord concerning our duty and Salvation The use of it as a Law is to appoint us our Duty and Reward or Punishment and to be the Rule of our obedience and in a sort the Rule by which we shall be judged 2. All Laws are made to Reasonable creatures and suppose the use of Reason for the understanding them To use Reason about the Law is not to add to the Law 3. The subject must have this use of Reason to discern the sence of the Law that he may obey it And the judge must Rationally pass the sentence by it 4. This is the Application of the Law to the fact and person And though the fact and person be not in the Law yet the Application of the Law to the fact and person is no addition to it Otherwise to use any such thing would be to add to it 5. As the fact is distinct from the Law so must the sentence of the Judge be which results from both 6. To speak the same sence or thing in equipollent terms is not to add to the Law in matter or sence 7. Yet we maintain the Scripture sufficiency in suo genere in terms and sence So that we shall confess that equipollent words are only Holy Scripture as to sence but not as to the terms 8. But there is no Law but may many wayes be broken and no Doctrine but may be divers wayes opposed And therefore though we yield that nothing but the express words of God are the Scripture for terms and sence yet many thousand words may be against Scripture that be not there expresly forbidden in terms 9. The Law of Nature is Gods Law and the Light of Nature is his Revelation And therefore that which the Light of Nature seeth immediately in Nature or that which it seeth from Scripture and Nature compared together and soundly concludeth from these premises is truly a revelation from God 10. The Conclusion followeth the more debile of the Premises in point of evidence or certainty to us Where Scripture is the more debile there the conclusion is of Scripture faith but where the fact or Proposition from the Light of Nature is more debile there the conclusion is of Natural Evidence But in both of Divine discovery For there is no Truth and Light but from God the Father of Lights This is our judgement herein Now for the Papists you may see their folly thus 1. If nothing but the bare words of a Law may be heard in Tryals then all Laws in the world are void and vain For the subjects be not all named in them nor the fact-named And what then have witnesses and jurors and judges to do The Promise saith He that believeth shall be saved But it doth not say that Bellarmine or Veronius believeth Doth it follow that therefore they may make no use of it for the comforting of their souls in the hopes of Salvation The Threatning saith that he that believeth not is condemned But it saith not that such or such a man believeth not should they not therefore fear the threatning 2. By this trick they would condemn Christ himself also as adding to the Law in judgement He will say to them I was hungry and ye fed me not c. But where said the Scripture so that such or such a man fed not Christ It needs not Christ knows
the fact without the Scripture The Scripture is sufficient to its own use to be Rule of Obedience and Judgement but it is not sufficient to every other use which it was never made for The Law said to Cain Thou shalt not murder But it said not to him Thou hast killed thy brother therefore thou shalt die It was the Judges part to deliver this 3. By this trick they would give a man leave to vent any Blasphemy or do any villany changing but the name But they shall find that the Law intended not bare words but by words to signifie things And if they do the things prohibited or hold the opinions condemned what ever names or words they cloath them with they shall feel the punishment 4. By this they would leave almost nothing provable by the Scripture seeing a Papist or Heretick may put the same into other terms and then call for the Proof of that For example they may ask where God commandeth or instituteth any one of the Sacraments in Scripture And when we tell them where Baptism and the Lords Supper were instituted they may reply that there is no mention of Sacraments and so turn real Controversies into verbal 5. Yea it seems by this they would make all Translations to be of little use And a man might lawfully sin in English because God for bad it only in Hebrew and Greek 6. If this be the way of it let us remember that they must in Reason stand to their own Rules Let them tell us then what Scripture saith that Peter was the Vicar of Christ or the Head of the Catholick Church or the Bishop of Rome or that the Pope is his Successor or that the Pope is the Vice-christ or Universal Bishop Where is there express Scripture for any of this Yea so much as Bellarmines Literal sense 7. And why do not these blind and partial men see that the same course also must be taken with their own Laws And that all their Decretals and Canons are insufficient according to these Rules It 's easie for any Heretick to form up his Error into other words then those condemned by Pope or Council And if you go again to the Pope and get him to condemn those new expressions the men in Mexico may use them long to the detriment of the souls of men before the damnatory sentence be brought to them And when it comes they can again word their Heresie anew The Jansenists in France shew how well the Popes decision of wordy Controversies is understood and doth avail But really if they will hold that no part of the Popes Laws oblige but in the literal sense or that none offend that violate not the Letter they will make a great alteration in their affairs And perphaps any of their subjects may Blaspheme the Pope himself in French Dutch Irish English Slavonian c. because he forbids it only in Latine For if Translations be not Gods Word then they are not the Popes word neither A pretty crochet for a Jesuite It is mendacium and not a Lye that the Pope forbids It is said that a Traytor or Murderer may be hang'd but it is not said that such or such a man shall be hang'd or that he was a traytor or murderer Their common instance is The Scripture no where calls it self the whole word of God nor no where tells us which be Canonical Books c. and yet these are Articles of Faith Answ 1. The Scripture doth call it self the Word of God and signifie its own sufficiency and several Books have particular testimonies to be Canonical 2. Though secondarily so far as Scripture affirmeth its own Divinity it be to be beleived yet Primarily that this is Gods Word and that these are the Books and that they are not corrupted and that they are all c. are points of knowledge antecedent in order of nature to Divine Belief of them There are two great Foundations antecedent to the Matter of Divine Faith The one is Gods veracity that God cannot lie The other is His Revelations that This is Gods Word The first is the Formal Object of Faith The second is a Necessary Medium between the formal object and the subject sine quo non without which there is no possibility of Believing The Material object called the Articles of Faith presuppose both these as points of Knowledge proved to us by their proper evidence And that this is All the Word of God is a meer Consequence from the actual Tradition of this much and no more To give you an undenyable illustration by instance Let us enquire which be the Administring Laws of this Common-wealth And we shall find that 1. The Authority of the Law-givers is none of them for that is in the Constitution before the Administration and it is the formale objectum of every Law which is more noble then the Material object 2. And the Promulgation of these Laws is not it self a Law but a necessary Medium sine quo non to the actual obligation of the Law 3. And that there is no other Laws but these is not a Law but a point known by the non-promulgation of more 4. And that all these Laws are the same that they pretend to be and that they are not changed or depraved since this is not a Law neither but a Truth to be proved by Common Reason from the Evidences that may be brought from Records Practise and abundance more So is it in our Case 1. That God is True and the Soveraign Rector is first a point to be known by evidence the one being the formal object of Faith and the other the formal object of obedience and easily proved by Natural Light before we come to Scripture 2. And that this is Gods Revelation or Promulgation of his Law is a point also first to be proved by Reason not before we see the Book or hear the Word but out of the Book or Doctrine it self propria luce together with the full Historical Evidence and many other reasons which in order of Nature lie before our Obligation fide divina to believe So that this is not Primarily an Article of Faith but somewhat higher as being the Necessary Medium of our believing 3. And that there is no other Law or Faith is not Primarily a Law or Article of Faith but a Truth proved by the Non-Revelation or Promulgation of any other to the world He that will prove us obliged to believe more must prove the valid Promulgation or Revelation of more 4. And that these Books are the same and not corrupted is not directly and primarily an Article of Faith but an Historical verity to be proved as abovesaid And yet secondarily Scripture is a witness to all or most of these and so they are de fide But of this I refer the Reader for fuller satisfaction to my Preface before my second Part of the Saints Rest And thus it is manifest that it is an unreasonable demand of
but of this one sect and the products of it 1. By this means our Councils Armies Churches have been divided or much broken 2. By this trick they have engaged the minds and tongues of many and their hands if they had power against the Ministry which is the enemy that standeth in their way 3. They have thus weakned us by the loss of our former adherents 4. They have found a Nursery or Seminary for their own Opinions which one half of the Anabaptists too greedily receive 5. By this they have prepared them for more and worse 6. By this means they get an Interest in our Armies or weakned our own 7. By this they have got Agents ready for mischievous designs as hath been lately too manifest 8. By this they have cast a reproach upon our Profession as if we had no unity or consistence but were vertiginous for want of the Roman pillar to rest upon 9. By this they have loosned and disaffected the common people to see so many minds and waies and hear so much contending and have loost them from their former stedfastness and made them ready for a new impression 10. Yea by this means they have the opportunity of Predicating their own pretended unity and hereby have drawn many to their Church of late All this have they got at this one game What then have they got by all the rest I shall next tell you of some of those Heresies or parties among us that are the Papists own Spawn or progeny Either they laid the Egg or hatched it or both And 1. It is most certain that Libertinism or Freedom for all Religions was spawned by the Jesuites who hate it in Spain and Italy but love it in England I have met with the masked Papists my self that have been very zealous and busie to promote this Liberty of Conscience as they deceitfully called it For by this means they may have Liberty for themselves and Liberty to break us in pieces by sects and also Liberty under the Vizor of a Sectary of any tolerated sort to oppose the Ministry and doctrine of truth 2. But the principal design that the Papists have upon our Religion at this day is managed under a sort of Juglers who all are confederate in the same grand principles and are busie at the same work and are agreed to carry it on in the dark and with wonderfull secrecy do conceal the principal part of their opinions but yet they use not all one vizor but take on them several shapes and names and some of them industriously avoid all names The principal of these Hiders are these following 1. The Vani whose game was first plaid openly in America in New England where God gave in his Testimony against them from Heaven upon their two Prophetesses Mrs. Hutchinson and Mrs. Dyer The later brought forth a Monster with the parts of Bird Beast Fish and Man which you may see described in Mr. Welds Narrative with the discovery the concomitants and Consequents The former brought forth many neer 30. monstrous births at once and was after slain by the Indians This providence should at least have awakened England to such a Godly Jealousie as to have better tryed the doctrines which God thus seemed to cast out before they had so greedily entertained them as in part of Lincolnshire Cambridgeshire and many other parts they have done At least it should have wakened the Parliament to a wise and Godly Jealousie of the Counsels and designs of him that was in New England the Master of the game and to have carefully searcht how much of his doctrine and design were from heaven and how much of them he brought with him from Italy or at least was begotten by the Progenitor of Monsters Such extraordinary providences are not to be despised They had a great Operation in New England among those wise and godly men that saw them or were neer them and knew the wayes of them that God thus testified against That which healed them should have warned us But God had a judgement for us and therefore we were left in blindness to overlook that Judgement that should have warned us They are now dispersed in Court City and Country and what God will suffer them and the Papists by them further to do time will discover 2. The next sort of Hiders are the Paracesians Weigelians and Behmenists who go the same way in the main with the former and are indeed the same party but think meet to take another name and fetch their vizor from Jacob Behmen of their life of Community and Chastity and Visible converse as they profess with Angels you may see somewhat in the Narrative of Dr. Pordidge of himself together with Mr. Fowlers of him The most clean and moderate piece of their doctrine that hath been lately published is Mr. Bromleyes way to the Sabbath of Rest or Treatise of Regeneration 3. Another sort of the Hiders are those called Seekers among whom I have reason to believe the Papists have not the least of their strength in England at this day They practise the lesson that Boverius in Apparat. ad Consultat taught Prince Charls long ago Primum est ut quoniam vera Religio tibi inquirenda est antequam ad eam investigandam accedas omnem prius Religionem apud te suspectam habeas lubeatque tamdiu à Protestantium fide ac Religione animum ac voluntatem suspendere quamdiu in veri inquisitione versaris We must suspect all Religion it seems and be first of no Religion if we will become Papists A fair begining We must then be unchristned and suspect Christ and Scripture that we may be espoused to the Pope And this is the Papists work by the Seekers to take us off from all or from our former Religion and blot out all the old impressions that we may be capable of new And if they can accomplish this they have us at a fair advantage For he that is not a stark Atheist or Infidel but believes that he hath a soul to save or lose must needs know the Necessity of seeking his Salvation in some Religion or other and therefore take him off from this and you must needs bring him to some other And he that could prevail to take him off his old Religion is likeliest to have so much interest in him as may also prevail to bring him to another And the Papist thinks that on the pretence of Unity Antiquity and Universality of which indeed they have but a delusory shew they can put as fair for him that is once indifferent as any other can Of these Seekers there are these Sub-divisions or Sects The first and most moderate do only profess themselves to be Seekers for the true Church and Ministry holding that such a Church and Ministry there is but they are at a loss to know which is it A likely thing it is indeed that men that take themselves for extraordinary wise should think there is existent