hoâ—ny or milk â—o the Sacrament of the Supper Neither is it reason to â—rgue from tâ—e name to the thing Wâ— call it Baptiâ—m with the Scripture And seeing his implyeth washing with water â—â— is grâ—â—â— superstition to do this without a warrand which hath â—o relation to washing 〈◊〉 would have mâ— râ—semblance with that then salt The name Sacrament is acknowledge I not to be a Scripture word But what Logick is thâ—â— The seals of the Covenant are named Sacraments by the Church Ergo we may adde materials to the work without a warrand The practise of the Baptist objected by me seemeth unanswerable for you fail by it as by a rock which is not candid dealing Yet it is your ordinar manner to pass with silence material arguments Seventhly Ye adde to the Bible humane § 7. Inst traditions which ye equalize and in a sort preferre to it This is point blank contrar to the Word Deut. 4. 2. Rev. 22. 18. If any man adde to these things GOD shal adde to him the plagues written in this book so ye have â—o fear a plague in due time Reply These are open calumnies made Papists Reply to deceive the people in Pulpits as I have shewed reflecting on your sixt answer And prove againe summarily by this Syllogism what is expresly contained in Scripture is not contrar to it But this is expresly commanded 2. Thess 2. 1. Hold fast the traditions which ye have received Neither are your citations of Deut. or Rev. to any purpose For when it is said there If any man shal adde to these things GOD shal adde to him the plagues written in the book Of necessity it must be understood of these books only adding any thing as a part of them otherwise it will exclude all other Scripture as well as tradition But it may be you think the Revelation the last written book of Scripture and that St. John there did speak of all the Bible But this is a conceit out of ignorance seeing Chemnitius your great Gun sayes his Gospel was written after the Revelation And some say so of his Epistles in the very last of which and last verse he sayes I have many things to writ unto you but not with pen and ink but I trust to come unto you and speak face to face But ye would not have believed him speaking face to face who will believe nothing but that which is written Answer You again defend traditions by your old argument A genere ad speciem affirmative Prote ∣ stants Duply which is none concludent as I have proved fully already upon the sixth question to which I referre the Reader And your answer to the 4. Deut. and Rev. 22. confuteth your self For you grant that it is not lawful to adde any thing as a part of these books Then say I it is as unlawful to adde traditions as a part of the Bible and make an entire object of faith with both which is your doctrine If the Pirrat was faulty for taking a ship Alexander was more faulty by taking of Nations We will put nothing to the Scripture that way For then we might make a new Bible and nothing into our Creed but what was written by the Penneâ—s of it You make me ignorant of the time when the Revelation was written and goes about to father that on me which came not into my mind How far and wherein we hold traditions Vide supra on Quest sixth I have no delight to make repetitions Eightly Ye mis-regard the Lords-day and § 8. Inst celebrate dayes of your own devysing contrar to and without any warrand from the Word see Gal. 4. 10. You reply that these are calumnies for we Papists Reply are taught to keep the Lords-day most religiously and with it the holy dayes of Christs-Birth Circumsion adoration by the Kings presentation in the Temple the feasts of the Mother of GOD of the twelve Apostles of some Martyrs and other Saints upon the same ground of Apostolick tradition and ordinance of the Church which the Scripture commandeth us to hear hold fast so what we do in this is neither contrar to Scripture nor without warrand from the written Word And your citation may be as well applyed against your observation of dayes of humiliation and thanks-giving For that place forbiddeth only Heathenish or Jewish days or dismal days superstitiously keeped on frivolous remarkes See Hierom on the place Aug. cont Argenant cap. 16. and in his epist 118. cap. 7. and hear the same Aug. speaking of all our holy dayes in express terms which Protestants taking away what St. Aug. saith may creep in both ungrateful forgetting of Christs mysteries and unkind oblivion of his Saints You call this Argument a Calumnie but it in too well known how small regard is had Prote ∣ stants Duply to the Lords day throughout the Popes Dominions And how farre other dayes of humane institution are by you preferred to them And for Aug. whom you cite as the main patron of them he was so far from approving the trash of his time brought in by the devices of men in the worship of God that in his 119. ep he sayeth If they continue they will become Heathnish and Judaize in many things So according to Hieroms exposition on the text Gal. 4. 10. concerneth you for some of your stust is Judaicall some Paganish Polyd. Virgil de invent lib. 4. in proaemio sayeth That a verie world of Jewish and Heathnish ceremonies pestereth the Lords field Agrippa de Vanit cap. 6. sayeth That Christians now are more oppressed with ceremonies then the Jewes were The Jewish holy dayes were but few in respect of the Romish for they had but their Passover Pentecost feast of Tabernacles of Trumpets Reconciliation New-Moons Purim and Dedication the most of which were of divine institution These have holy dayes for every Saint All saints all soules for the Cross Corpus Christi two dayeâ— every week Lent fast c. without any warrand from scripture or pure antiquitie For Aug. sayeth ep 86. against Urbicus we are indeed commanded to fast but I find not the dayes prescribed in the Evangelicall or Apostolicall writtings The same saith Socrates that it was left by the Apostles to every mans free choise lib. 5. cap. 22. and Erasmus on the 11. of Matth. complaineth that in Hieroms time there were few holy dayes beside the Lords day but now they were unreasonable and burdensome because of their multitude Thus you see neither Hierom nor Aug. savour your holy dayes unless it be in yoâ—r Utopian tractate contra Argentinant for there is non-such among his workes You might easily perceive that Gal. 4. 10. doth not militate as much against our dayes of humiliation or thanksgiving as your holy dayes if you woâ—ld consider First We have more regarde to he Lords-day nor any of these this we desiderar mâ—inly in you for as ye preferre humane traditions to the Scripture so do you these your dayes
lamentable that ye resolve your faith into humane testimony yea into that which is a very lie the Popes infallibility Were it not safer to make Scripture your ground then to build upon this sandie foundation and so river your selves incurably into errour Reply You runne out upon the Popes titles till in the end you make him a Demi-God Papist Reply imputing this as that by way of calumny to us Whereas all the Apostles were equal in power and dignity say you Matth. 20. 26. Where brist only forbiddeth spiritual Superiours to exercise that power with pride and tyrrany as did the Princes of the Gentiles but with humility and meekness as himself did Yet he there expresseth a greater and a lesser a superiour and inferiour amongst them as he saith more clearly in Luke 22. 26. he that is amongst you greatest let him be as the lesser and he who is chief as he who would serve them You cite Cyprian saying the Apostles were equal in dignity but suppresing the following words that Christ disposed the order of unity beginning with Peter whom in his epist ad Julianum he calleth both head and root of his Church All that followeth is that Moses spoke unadvisedly the Propher Elisha was ignorant of some things the Prophet Nathan made a retractation and St. Peter controuled the Heavenly vision To shew the Prophets and Apostles were not infallible save in penning the Scripture and so that the Pope is not such This is but a vain rapsodie to colour your own unsetled belief and contradiction in doctrine but nothing against us For suppose they had erred in these things that concerned not their doctrine all that you can inferre by comparison is that the Pope may erre in the like But as in penning the word of GOD they were infallible were they not also in preaching of it Or is not the high Bishop in all Councils as in the representative Church infallible in subscribing approving and confirming her decrees If the same decrees of the Council be infallible So that when you deny the Pope as head with the Bishops in general Councils as chief men to be infallible you deny the infallibility of the Church which I have sufficiently shewed reflecting on your sixth Answer Duply You labour to prove imparity amongst Prote ∣ stants Duply the Apostles from Luke 22. 26. and would have us to believe that the Papal Monarchy is there which is like the consequence of Mr. Vaux in his Catechism proving Image worship from the second Command For it is clear from verse 30. that albeit Kingly government was in the state yet it should not be so in the Church And that tyrranie is not the only thing forbidden here appeareth from this that somewhat is interdicted to Church-men which is granted to others but tyrrany is licensed to none Compare Matth. 20. 25. with Luke 22. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the one place is expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the other Then it is not only inhibited here Beside the 20. Matth. which you call unclear is most clear he that will be greatest seeking to exalt himself shal be least for he shal be abased And be who is called greatest in Luke 22. is opposed to the youngest the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the verse So by this opposition the greatest is the eldest or the greatest in gifts who should be humble self-denyed Ministers as if they were not so priviledged See 1. Peter 5. 3. To the place of Cyprian cited ye answer nothing Only you alleage that I suppress what followeth in stead of the citation you take your self to another place ad Julianum where he caâ—leth Peter first in order and this we do not deny But what will that make for his visible Monarchy For sure I am dic Ecclesiae Matth. 18. will resure that to the worldâ— end This is confirmed by Cyprians own practise for saith he Cyprian epist. 6. ad Clerum de cura Paup Ab initio Episcopatus mei nihil statui agere sine consensis cleri plebis See Cyprian epist 52. al Antonium and there you will perceive that your Pope is not like Cornelius of whom he speaketh for he was chosen Clericorum omnium testimonio plebis qui adfuit suffragio The faithful Martyr was much for peace unity and order and being infested with the Novatians he saith inde sunt nata schismata quod sacerdoti DEI non obtemperatur and telleth that by way of regrate But when he writteth to Cornelius he calleth him frater and no more Where then was your Popedom But ye equal your Pope to the Prophets and Apostles who penned the Scripture which is an odious comparison not worthy of an answer But forgetting your self you say the Pope in the Council then it is not the Pope alone of whose Monarchy we are here speaking and ridiculously you subjoyn if the Council be infallible what language is this The Pope is infallible in subscribing the decree of a counsel if the Council be infallible I say neither of them is infallible so your faith is resolved into a lie You would seem to hang the Popes infallibilitie on the sentence of a council if it be so the Pope sealing their decrees is infallible accidentally and relatively not in himself Others hang the infallibility of the Council on the Pope so a fallible council may consequently be infallible and if he ratifie the sentence of a Session it is all one with an Oecumenick-council All these crotcheâ—s are the pillars of your faith which are worm-eaten proppes to which I have spoken formerly in answer to your mentioned reflection 20. Ye make Christ as many Bodies aâ— their be administrations of the Supper § 20 Inst. by that your Transubstantiation Whereas Scripture giveth him but one natural Body which the Heaven must contain till the restitution of all things Act. 3. 21. And we believe in our Creed that he ascended to Heaven from thence he will come to judge quick and dead Ye break not the Bread contrar to the Scripture 1. Cor. 10. 16. Yea ye deny that Bread is there after the consecration contrar both to sense and reason And whereas Christ entered within the Vail not that he should offer himself often An unbloody sacrifice expiatory of sin under the Gospel is contrar to Scripture Heb. 9. 22. Heb. 9. 25. And by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified Heb. 10. 14. Ye make as many bodily offerings of Jesus Christ both for dead and living as there be Masses Reply You have many false accusations Papists Reply as formerly but no witness or warrand It is to be altogether ignorant of our terms to say that we give Jesus Christ as many Bodies as there be administrations of the Sacrament of the Supper For as we teach one and the same Body is given in every one of our administrations So we believe that he ascended to Heaven that the Heaven containeth
uncleanness which would make chaste ears to â—ingle And that men who in hainously are not bound to repent imediatly as it is fully proved by Reverend Learned Mr. MENZIES in his Papismus Lucifugus pag. 158. to 169. And when it is defended that minus probabile may be chosen although it have no ground in scripture contrar to more probable grounds and the stream of Doctors doth not this open a door to make the may of Christianity broad whereas the scripture calleth it strait and narrow Thus ye gaine proselites And it is observable that manâ— loose livers in the land who are adversarieâ— to the power and puritie of Religion hate to be reformed do encline to Popery And to me it is not minus probabile that it is only upon this account We are not against fasting chastity mortification Nor do we say that men sin not willingly or that good workes are impossible yea we hold them necessar to salvation Only we deny that faln man can be justified by the workes of the law otherwise we needed not a Saviour not a Gospell-remedy It is your ordinar way to mistate questions and then intend a skirmish which is easie work this is a sinfull and shallow evasion Thirdly You fall out with bauling expressions which rational men cannot value much and scoâ—fe at these worthies who did take their lives in their hands and closed with persecuted truth neither for gaine nor for honor but for conscience sake Was not this a commendable duty If self denyall be not a chief ingredient in Christian performances I know not the Gospell You assert that it was blindness not integrity I averse it was integrity and not blindness Who art thou that judgest another mans servant remember thou shalt be judged You talk much concerning the authority and unity which is amongst you but some who were at Rome and have come not long ago from you to us againe tell what sort of integritie puritie and chastitie is amongst you So it is no wonder albeit many tongues and pennâ— be employed to pull down that whorish Babell which ye call Zion Fourthly You imply that none can be saved but such as are subject to the Pope Therefore our run-awayes must nor be apostats with you for they are Prodigals returned and lost sheep found When I pray you went they from you to us Were they not baptized in our Church and partakers of all ordinances with us till of late Then I pose you and them again whither ye damn all who are not Popish and judge them unconverted If they be Hereticks in your sense this must follow Yet you have nor the confidence to speak it directly And sure I am Scripture requireth not subjection to the Pope as an article of the Creed If without this â— man cannot be saved albeit he believe and live like the Gospel the Apostle Paul was no chosen Vessel which is contrar to Scripture there was no Pope in his dayes nor long after that Your Church hath been visible by bell book and candle fire faggot pomp policie Your Pastours are more for the fleece then the flock Ye are superstitiouâ— by addition substractioÌ„ multiplication without any warrand Your Ceremonies are partly Paganish partly Jewish and for the most Schismatick so not religious nor venerable Your miracles woÌ„ders are such that it is good for you to have them wrought in America and told in Europe Like are ye to him who cometh with lies and wonderâ— 2. Thess 2. 9. Your conscience can witness what Leger-demain is in these And it is our way to try miracles by the Scripture I wish Infidels were converted to the Christian faith and not to a faction By the Scripture noâ— by fopperies and military Compulsators Stephen the Apostles and some primitive Fathers were Martyrs but they died not in the Romish Faith as it is now mantained And how can your Church be called Catholick which is a particular one wherein be many dissenters It is not strange to us albeit ye indulge them who runne away and Apostatize from us but it is strange why they have done so and what hath sascinated them to burst all bonds and swallow on a sudden the whole bulk of Popery It requireth an Ostrich stomach to digest such iron Where in did Gospel-truths Gospel-worship or their mother and nurse weary them testifie against her if they can Fifthly You say we have Faith without unity then you grant us faith and our unity in fundamentals is more then your own A Church without a head We acknowledge no Pope head of our Church Christ is our head and the visible Government of the Church is Aristocratical not Monarchical the mystical Members of his Body are united in him so we are not a body without united members Neither want we a Judge in controversal matters It is known that many points of Christianity cannot be judged by râ—en because the Kingdom of Grace is within us and consisteth not in meat or drink but righteousness peace and joy in the holy Ghost Rom. 14. 17. Who will say that the hidden man in the heart can be cognosced by any external living judge on earth The spiritual man â—udgeth all things but he himself is judged of no man 1. Cor. 2. 15. The written word is the rule of this and other such cases For other matters we have Councils and Church Ruleâ—s appointed by the supream Judge who are bound to discern according to Scripture and all are appointed to obey them in the Lord so we have not a Law without a Judge The golden Altur is our Altar we have sacrifices of Prayer and Praises and one living sacrifice is better then many carcases that is reasonable service Rom. 12. 1. Then we have order and decencie and such positives as set forth the worship in a Gospel way without pâ—mpous observation therefore we lack not an Altar Sacrifices and Ceremonies in such manner as Gospel-work under the New Testament requireth Our Sacraments are instruments to seal and sanctifie our rule is infallible for it is Scripture the grounds of our faith are such as will not make us ashamed for we have his revealed will and word for it Therefore it is a calumny to say we have Sacraments which do not sanctifie Doctrine without infallibility and Belief without a ground If our Preachers had runne unsent the Lord had not sealed their Ministrie with such success Ier. 23. 32. It may be spoken without vanity to the praise of free-grace that there be many real sincere serious solid Christians in BRITTAIN Blessed be the Lord we go not without our CoÌ„verts who can speak with any adversary in the gate And they will and do bless our Ministry upon the brink of eternity which hath been the power of GOD to their Salvation So our Ministry is not without a call we say not that any divine command is in it self impossible to be keeped but that fallen man through his own fault is imperfect in obedience
prophecies The Roman Trash may well make seeing men blind but will never make blind men see the right way Fourthly We do not deny ministeriall An. 4. helps to unlettered people for such are commanded Heb. 13. 7. and 17. provided alwayes their faith be resolved into the word of God at least interpretative virtualiter What ever means be used this milk of the Word is the authentick instrument which begetteth faith and it must be received not as the word of man albeit the treasure be in earthen vessels and the milk in a wooden pape The difference of assent betwixt the learned and the unlearned is only accidental and modal the one being more express then the other we Catechise and instruct the ignorant and require them to hear the Church and follow their guides so far as they follow Christ 1. Cor. 11. 1. we hold forth coâ—munia fidei motiva interna 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inward testimonies the common motives of faith reasons and testimonies of old and late and what ever may help their edification but we dare not lead them from the Scripture to men neither will the interpretation of the Scripture permit us to admit of an other determiner And it may be wel enough known by them who understand these languages that these Greek and Hebrew words do thus signifie as they are translated without the help of an infallible decree of Pope or Council thereanent Without this also GODS word can discover it self to be from GOD as hath been shewed already Reason 5. Reading of the Scripture with the privat spirit and taking it up as every one Pa. Rea. 5 thinketh maketh all the controversies in Christendom daily multiplying both Heresies and sects Luther no sooner swerved from the Church and denyed her authority but as soon he broached this principle That every man might take the Bible follow that interpretation which after due diligence used he thought best whereupon preseÌ„tly did spring up an incredible number of different sects Antimonâ—ans Osiandrians Majorists Synergists c. Now hear what Luther himself said of Calvins heresie Tom. 7. fol. 380. I scarce ever read saith he of a more deformed heresie which presently in the beginning was divided into such variety of sects as so many Toads and such disagreement of opinions not one like to another You see then how the word cannot be the determiner of faith which all these sects take with you for their rule yet alone will never agree â—hem As for that you say the scripture hath Divine authority Heavenly majestie and maketh Spiritual impressions on the soul all this I grant if once a man know or believe it to be the word of GOD. Answer First All this is answered to the fourth or fifth question and should not be Pro. An. 1 brought in here yet passing the digression and informality which I hope the Reader cannot impute to me the Defender I answer to the 5. Reason the Scriptures in the Primitive Church were published â—o all this your own Azâ—â—iâ—s confesseth Iust mor. p. 1. lib 8. c. 26. â—he Scriptures in the Primitive Church were to be published throughout all Nations and therefore made common in the most famouâ— languages In Hierom and Chrysostoms dayes the ley people were exercised in reading the Scriptures Espencaeus saith Comment on Tit. 3. 2. it is manifest by the Apostles doctrine Col. 3. 16. and by the practise of the Church that the publies use of reading the scriptures was then permitted to the people The Council of Nice decreed saith Agrippa that no Chriâ—tian shoulâ—â—e without a Bible Augustin alloweth de Doct. Christi the use of scriptures to all for he saith they are not so hard but every one by his use making of them may attain to so much knowledge of them as may further him in his salvation Chrysost hom 3. de Lizaro exhorts all men and women yea Tradsmen to get Bibles Now I pray you to what purpose if they dare not search for the sense of them Secondly It is denyed that when privat Pro. An. 2 men search the Scriptures this is an act of a privat spirit †It may be privat respectupersonae which is publick rationâ— modi medii è contra for such may pray and have the spirit of grace and supplication poured forth on them according to the promise Zach. 12. 10. and none call that a privat spirit so they may interpret Scripture by Scripture and have the gift of it Hear your own Gerson primâ— part de ex doct Si aliquis non authorizatus sit excellenter in sacra scriptura eruditus plus credendum est ejus assertioni quam Papae declarationi i. e. If any not ordained be well instructed in the holy Scriptures his assertion is more to be believed then the Popes declaration Secondly Our Divines distinguish well three sorts of interpreters the first is extraordinar and miraculous 1. Cor. 12. 30. The second is ordinar and ministerial 1. Cor. 14. 32. The spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets The third is of privat persons who are commanded to â—ry the spirits and are commended for so â—â—ing Aâ—t 8. 28. 29. Aâ—t 17. 11. The first kynd of interpretation is gone the two next are in use as yet but the one is subservient to the other Thirdly â—he different sects that lay claim to Scripture cannot deprive us of the priviledge to search it and make use of it Will any man approve this argument Meat and drink is abused by some therefore none should eat or drink If the matter be indifferent and subject to abuse then we are to restrain our selves of liberty in the use of that in different thing Vâ—tandum estlicituÌ„ non necessâ—riuÌ„ propter vicinitatem illiâ—â—ti Aug. de câ—v Dei lib. 15. But when it is necessar necessitate precepti medii by necessity of precept and mean who can forbid the use of a necessar mean Now it is most necessar to improve the Scriptures by reading understanding application meditation and blessed is he who doth so day and night sitting or standing Deâ—t 6. 6. It is absurd to say â—lbeit Luther and Calvin did differ in some points that he fathered the sects of Germany on Calvin who was as free of Munster malady as the man unborn and was malleus haereticorum as his learned writtings testifie aboundantly In that place cited he speaketh of the swarms of sects which were indeed monstrous like at that time but never imputed it to the use making of Scripture for then he would not have understood himself nor could he blame Calvin for it upon that account seeing it was his own tenet Now Reader stay and impartially consider the weaknes and impertinency of these 5 reasons why our faith should not be resolved into the Scriptures and determined by them For the sume of all is thus concluded The word of GOD is not wel understood by some is evil translated by others and
directly answered by me whither on man or many should be judge of controversies To this he saith I dare not answer because I will not grant the power either to the high Bishop or general council nevertheless he findeth this to have been the constant practise of the Church both in the Old and New Testament established by the express word of God and received by the Fathers in all ages for in the Old Testament from Deut. 17. from 8. to 13. we read that GOD did command the people in matters of controversie to go to the Priests Levits and judge who should be in those days appointed by him for that end saying and thou shalt do according to the sense of the law which they shal teach thee and according to the judgement which they shal tell thee Remark he saith not according to the sense of the law which thou shalt read but which they shal teach thee not taken according to the privat judgement and spirit but according to the judgmeÌ„t which they shal tel thee where God promiseth out of their mouth judicii veritateÌ„ truth and verity in judgement or as you turn it sentence of judgement See for this also 2. Chr. 19. 8. where Jehosophat established what was first instituted Viz. a council of Levits Priests and chief fathers of Israel to judge not only between brethren and brethren blood and blood but also betwixt law and coÌ„mandments statutes and judgements Not leaving law and commandments to the peoples privat reading and interpretation as you do in your rule of faith In the 11. verse he concludeth thus Amaziah is over you in all matters of the Lord where it is evident that the council and chief Priest is established judge of controversie and not the written Word as every one readeth and expoundeth In the New Testament again you have this practise clearly set down Acts. 15. Where Paul and Barnabas though Apostles themselves go up to Jerusalem about the question of circumcising the Gentiles converted to the faith And there was holden the first council in which this is decided not out of Scripture but by the authority of the Council it self It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us said they having the assured promise of the assistance of the Holy Ghost as the Church hath at all time Wherefore after the Apostles councils have decided with the same authority and upon the same infallible ground of the Holy Ghosts assistance promised to the Church Many controversies are acknowledged by Protestants for points of faith without express passage of Scripture Marcion teaching that Baptism should be conferred more then once and Donatists that Baptism conferred by Hereticks should be reiterated as invalid are condemned in the council holden at Rome under Melchiadâ—s Pope in the year 313. now what passage of Scripture I pray you is for this Sâ—bellius putting one person only in the God-head is câ—ndemned in the council of Alexandria under Pope Cornelius in the year 319. but scripture maketh no mention of persons Nestorius putting two persons in Christ is condemned in the Generall Council holden at Ephesus under Pope Caelestin the year 434. Yet neither doth the Scripture speak of thâ—â— The Monotheliâ—s giving to Christ one will in two Natures are condemned in the third general Câ—uncil holden at Constantinople under Pope Agathon the year 679. albeit there be no formal scripture for this So you see it belongeth both in the Old and New Testament to the high Priest and general Council to decide controversie either by Scripture if there be any passage clear for that point or without Scripture by Apostolick tradition conserved in the Church which scripture it self warranteth 2. Thess 2. 15. Hold fast the traditions which ye have learned either by word or our epistle but it seemeth you care not who be condemned or by whom if you take away all power on earth to condemne your selves Every Protestant will be condemned by none but Scripture and yet will make none judge of the Canon Version and sense of Scripture but himself All your answer is that we grant the Promulgation of the law to the pure Gospel Church but you shew not what is this pure Gospel Church neither can you infallibly prove the purity of the Gospel it self or that there is a Gospel or the true sense of the Gospel but by the Catholick Church her authority Hear Aug. contta Ep. fund cap. 5. Where he saith I my self would not have believed the Gospel were it not that the authority of the Church moved me to it Now the Catholick Church is that whose faith is spread through all the world in the Apostle Paul his time which maketh her to be justlie called the Catholick Roman Church and whose faith hath been in all ages since Christ which all the records of the Protestant writters witness of the Roman Church wherein the succession of Popes Bishops Councils is made conspicuous to all who have written Chronology or Church history in every age none whereof make mention of your Church or of men professing your tenets before Luther and Calvin from whom ye dissent in many things Answer first This is a prolix reply the Pro. Du. 1 substance of which might have been taken up in seven or eight lines As it is spacious so it is an impertinent rapsodie and like a beggers cloak clouted here and there with divers parcells without any method or cohesion It seemeth to have been taken out of some Index and cast in here to fill the page For the answer was That the promulgation of the law is not denyed to the pure Gospell-Church which is not the Roman-Church for it is impure Is not this a direct answer You prove that there hath been a Ministerial-Church in the old and new Testament which we doe not deny but this is the point did they so pronounce sentence and decide Controversies that all discretive judgement was taken from people or called they themselves infallible whether they had scripture warrand or not Or wil the promise of presence to the Apostles Prophets and penners of Scripture in measure and duration agree to any Church Officers now on Earth Or should promises made to the Universal-Church agree to any particular Church such as Rome Or will promises made to the collective body of the Church agree to the representative unless these be proved you fight with your own shadow For we are much for the authority of Christs Church and think that her judgment of old and late should sway privat men unless they can prove by scripture or sound reason that she erreth We are much for the authority of all lawful Councils and we give them all reverence in regard of the authority of their constitution but if they depart from the scriptures we owe them not active obedience Well speaketh our learned Camero tom 1. tract de infallibilitate ecclesiae So oft as any thing is decreed by a Council or assembly of men appointed by lawfull autharity
in the Church it should have this weight with us that rashly without grave and diligent enquiry after the truth it should not be rejected by us And whereas it is alleadged there will be no effectual way against Controversies and divisions in religion unlesse some one supream and infallible judge be appointed on Earth in whose â—udgement and decision parties controverting should â—â—st and acquiesce It may be well answered in your own Bellarmin his wordes lib. 2. de Concil cap. 19. It is no wonder if the Church remaine without any humane remedy seeing the welfare of it doth not primarily rely upon humane industrie but upon divine protection seeing its King is GOD therefore may and ought the Church to pray unto God and it is certaine he will care for the well-fare of it Answer second Albeit I cannot comprehend the purpose of this laxe discourse yet Pro. Duply 2 for satisfaction to the Reader I shal inform him in these 5. particulars First what Papists mean by the Church or whither they understand themselves in this Secondly Whither Church officers since the dayes of the Apostles are infallible Thirdly What kind of obedience should be tendered to them Fourthly What government the Christian Church should have whither Papal and Monarchical or Aristocratical and Ministerial Fifthly How that testimony of Augustia non credidissem Scripturae c. is to be understood For the first by the Church all the Jesuits who are the Popes life-guard understand the Pope So Valentia disk Theol. tom 1. disp 1. qu. 1. Coster Enchir de sum Pont Gretser Colloq Ratis Ses 1. Bell. hanketeth in the point for once he saith that the Pope without the Council may determine matters of faith De Christo. lib. 2. cap. 28. and de Concil lib. 2. cap. 17. Against this de verbo Dei lib. 3. cap. 3. he saith the Pope with a Council is the judge of the true sense of Scripture So speaketh this reflecter The Sorbonists Jansenists and others of the Popish partie understand by the Church the present Romish officers assisted by the Pope and stand by the Canons of the Councils of Constance Sess 4. 5. and Basil Sess 2. wherein it was decreed that the Pope should obey the Council The Council of Trent according to its manner is ambiguous herein Sess 4. decr 2. And saith that the Church should judge the true sense of Scripture yet tell us not what they mean by the Church Now whatever way it be taken whither for Pope or Council there must be another judge of controversies otherwise the Church wanted a judge 300 years for there was no such judge then pretending to the infallible supremacie now claimed Secondly The Romish Synagogue headed by the Pope cannot be our judge for they are party partial against whom we have just acception Thirdly Is not this a jugling trick that when controversies occasioned and raised by them are in the Christian Church they will have none to be judge but themselves so they would be sure of the sentence and must suspect their own cause Fourthly If by the Church they mean the Pope as now they mantain it is hard to call him judge of controversies seeing it is a great controversie whither there should be any Pope at all and beyond controversie with us that he is an usurper Fifthly According to the Popish tenet the intention of the Priest is necessar in his ordination in his Baptism succession without interruption is necessar and Simony maketh him no Pope as Gratian telleth from the Canon law causa 2. qu. 1. Now if so he may be a Pagan for who knoweth the Priests intention who baptized him He may be a Laick and yet without ordination upon the same ground if one be such it marreth uninterrupted succession and so ceaseth the Pope Then by your own writters it is clear that many Popes entered by Simony as Barronius testifieth Annal tom 9. ad annum Christi 912. And Alexander the 6. was notorious that way This un Popeth all for it breaketh the chain of succession and leaveth the Church collective without any judge It is clear hence how slipperie the Romish Church is in its foundations seeing he whom they call the Church may be a Pagan Secondly As to the second thing proposed viz. Whither Church officers since the days of the Apostles are infallible The Church whither taken for Pope or Council or Pope Council is not infallible When the Councils condemned hereticks of old they did it not pro arbitratu imperio but judged by the Scriptures which is indeed an infallible rule but the church taken whither for Pope or Council or Pope and Council is not infallible First If the Jewish-church erred in matter of faith and worship then may the christian-church erre also For they had statutes judgements and promises to them were committed the oracles of GOD. Rom. 3. 2. But Aaron and the people erred grosly Ex 32. So did Uriah the Priest 2. Kings 16. May not then Popes erre Seeing Aaron the saint of the Lord was not infallible Yea both Priest and Prophet erred in judgement see Is 28. 7. on which words Sanctius the Jesuit saith Priests Prophets and people were spiritually drunk Did not the Church rulers while the Levitical Priest-hood lasted procure the death of Christ Secondly Under the Gospel Popes and Councils have erred Ergo they are not infallible Tertullian telleth contra Praxetam that Eleutherius the Pope approved Montanus heresie and obtruded it on the Church as his Irenicum Your own Barronius telleth ad ann 302. that Marcellus the Pope sacrificed to Idols Athaudsius †Athanasius in epist ad Solitariam vitam agentes testifieth that Liberius the Pope was Arrian Honorius was condemned in the sixth General Council as a Monothelit Anastasius the Pope saith Alphonsus de cast lib. 5. cap. 25. was Nestorian Now can Monothelism Nestorianism Arrianism Montaaism and Idolatry be â—nherent to a man infallible Or can a chair make that man who is Arrian Orthodoxe or him who sacrificeth to Idols unerring who will believe this Councils may erre adversaries being judges Occam asserteth so much and Petrus Alliaco Cardinalis qu. vespert art 3. for he saith that this promise the gates of hell shal not prevail against the Church is made universo catui fidelium to the whole number of the faithful not to the representative Church which may erre Panor sup 1. part sib decret Dicit Ecclesiam quae non potest errare esse totam collectionem fidelium nam ista est Ecclesia quae non potest errare that is the whole company of believers which cannot erre Nic. de Clemang in his disp with the Parisians saith the promise Matth. 18. as likewise that Iohn 16. The spirit of truth shal lead you into all truth belongeth only to spiritual ones and it were better to be much in fasting and prayer for direction then to bragge we cannot erre So then I reason the Pope may erre
Councils may erre Ergo the Pope and Council may erre The argument will hold here a divisis ad conjugata as well as thus the Magistrat may be diseased and his council infected therefore both Magistrat and Council are subject to sickness It is a deluding evasion to say that the Councils confirmed by the Pope cannot erre for the Jesuits place the infallibility in the Pope the Parlsians in the Council and they are not agreed in this amongst themselves In the sense of the one a Church Session confirmed by the Pope is as infallible as a Council And in the sense of the other a Council confirmed by a privat Bishop is at infallible as if it were confirmed by the Pope Thus then we argue that must have no entity which can find no subject but Papists cannot agree upon the subject of this infallibility therefore it is not ens Further General Councils have been of this judgement that the Popes consent is not requisit for making their decrees right For in the Council of Chalcedon where were conveened 630. fathers in the year 454. where Martianus the Emperour was present it was contrar to the desire of the Popes Legats appointed that seeing the seat of Rome had no divine warrand for its supremacie Constantinople should have alike priviledges with it This was as full a Council as we read of and yet all these fathers thought the Popes coÌ„sent not necessary for their statutes Yea they declared his supremacie not to be Juris Apostolici in the first Council of Constantinople which was the second generall Council The Councills of Constance and Basil judged the Council to be above the Pope In the first three generall Councills the Pope did not so much as preside in them either by himself or by his legats For in the first presided Hosius Bishop of Corduba In the second Nectaâ—ius Bishop of Constantinople And in the third at Ephesus Cyril Bishop of Alexandria in which Councills Controversies were deterrained by the plurality of suffrages and every one of the fathers there did subscrive their name to the constitutions and conclusions of the Council The council of Trent again did all Proponentibus legatis therefore either it or they were in an errour so not infallible And indeed it is above dispute that the council of Trent was erronious and not the council of Chalcedon in that which Gregory the Great and all ancients so extoll and commend This is said not in the least to derogate from lawfull councills which we judge necessary helps for ordering the effaires of the house of God in diverse exigencies Yea we give more to the foure Generall Councills then Papists doe for they cast both at the second and fourth But we have another judge and determiner the Scripture of God Augustin confirmeth this Nec ego nicaenum nec tu debes Ariminense tanquaÌ„ prajudicaturus †Aug. contra Maxi. Arrian Episcop praeferre consilium nec ego hujus auctoritate nec tu illius detineris Scripturarum auctoritatibus non quorumcunque propriis sed utrisque communibus testibus res cum re causa cum causa ratio cum ratione consentiat i. e. Neither would I preferre the Nicen nor ought you as prejudged to preferre the Arimin council I am not holden by this or thou by that but by the authority of the Scriptures which are witnesses common to all appropriat to none let one thing agree with another cause with cause reason with reason Thirdly As to the third thing proposed The Church is not appointed to be obeyed Pro. An. 3 but in subordination to the law of God for I know not the Church but by the word therefore I cannot obey it but by it also Secondly Subjects should not judge the law authoritatively If thou judge the law thou art not a doer of it Iames 4. 11. The word of God is the law and all churches are subject to it Thirdly The Text you cite the 17. of Deut. from the 8. v. to the 13 where the people are commanded to go to the Priests for decision of controversiies hath this expresly in it v. 11. According to the sentence of the law which he shall teach thee Cajetan upon the place sayeth That in the Hebrew it is super oâ— legis ideo doctrina eorum esset conformis divinae legi There doctrine of decision should be warrandable by the law Glossa ordinaria explaineth the place thus non dicitur tibi ut obedias nisi â—uxta legens docuerint i. e. thou art not commanded to obey if they teach not according to the law Lyra is of the same judgement si dicant falsum non sunt credendi if they speak false they are not to be believed In Mal. 2. 7. The Lord sheweth that the Priests lips should preserve knowledge where he declareth not what was for they had gone out of the way at that time but what should be Ribera saith the words are not to be read in the present but in the future tense and according to Cyril he is called the Messenger of the Lord because he should give men of the oracles of God as he hath received them from the Lord. Also that place Matth. 23. 2. where Church rulers are appointed to be heard when they siâ— in Moses chair Theophylact expoundeth iâ— quando docent ea quae continentur in lege when they teach the things contained in the law O if your Scribes and Pharisees would do so they might be better heard That place 2. Chr. 19. 8. 11. concerning Amaziah who was over them in all matters of the Lord holdeth only forth this that Magistracy and Ministry are distinct offices And in the church of Jerusalem albeit the Apostles were infallible yet they proceed according to the word and built their sentence on the Prophets Acts 15. 14. these places prove that implicit obedience is not to be given to any Church rulers And the Bâ—reans were commended for searching the Scriptures when the message was delivered to them How gross then is Bellarmin who saith †Bell. lib. 4. de â—ont cap. 5. Sâ— Papa erraret praecipiendo vita prohibendo virtutes tenetur Ecclesia credere virtutes esse malas vitia bâ—nâ— If the Pope saith he should coÌ„mend vice and call it good which they grant he may do notwithstanding of his infallibility then people were bound to obey and call vice good Valentia saith more that the people are bound without any enquiry Valent. Tom. 3. disp 1. disp 7. qu. 3. Punct â— to erre with their rulers and errores corum in tali causa sunt actus Christianae obedientiae their errours are acts of Christian obedience Aeternae vitae meritoriae deserving eternal life When Papists speak so great absurdities what will they not do for their interest Fourthly As to the fourth thing proposed Pro. An. 4 the Church of Christ is to be ruled by its officers lawfully called but the government of it here is not Monarchical
but Aristocratical Under the New Testament the Lord appointed no visible Monarch on earth to be an officer in his church for our last appeal in dubious cases is regulated by that well known Scripture Matth. 18. 17. If he will See Bish Laud. againstâ— Fisher not hear the church let him be to thee as a publican Now it is absurd to say that this should be the sense of it tell the Pope for in no language the word Church can signifie a visible Monarch Secondly The council of Jerusalem maketh not for this for not only proceed they upon Scripture grounds but although they were infallible men yet none of them took the Papal way and the government was not Monarchical It seemed good to the holy Ghost and us Thirdly Church power is Ministerial Matth. 20. 25. 26. 2. Cor. 1. 24. 1. Pet. 5. 3. but Monarchy is Magisterial therefore it agreeth not with church power And when Papists reason for the power of the church and mention councils the argument may be thus propounded church officers councils have been appointed to rule and order the affairs of the house of God Ergo they may do what they will and who can say unto them what dost thou I deny the consequence Ergo the Pope is one of these officers it is absolutly refused And this is summa totalis of the prolix answer to the fourth question which may be taken away with a word Ergo if the word make not for them theâ— they may betake themselves to their own traditions and rule by them That is denyed also by us And suppose they should give the Law to their own Vassals will it therefore follow that they empire it over the whole Christian-church And seeing all churches are bound to a rule can any be infallible which have need of a rule When you make the Pope your church do ye not build your faith on him Is this like the foundation Eph. 2. 20. What is this but to make your faith humane And is it not absurd to say that Alexander the siâ—â—h Pope Iohn 22. in the cathedra were infallible as the Prophets and Apostles in dyting Scripture they cannot blush who speak so Fifthly As for the fifth particular viz. That place of Augustin cont ep fund cap. 5. I would not have believed the Scripture Pro. An. 5 unless the authority of the church had moved me Our Divines have answered fully long ago so it is a threed bare argument for he speaketh not there concerning the formal reason why Scripture is believed but concerning the mean and motive by which intrants are brought at first to the knowledge of the Scripture I mean the consused knowledge of the Scripture as when a man delivereth a letter he may tell from whom it is but the faith of it is from the subscription So here then by the church he understandeth not the church or Pope of Rome but the Primitive-church of the faithful which did hear see Christ and his Apostles So saith Durand †Dur lib. dist 24. qu. 1. he had to do with the Manichees who would make him believe their Gospel No saith he the testimony of those who did see with their eyes hear with their ears and handle the word of life is to be preferred to your assertion and this is a motive which made me at first quite Manichism and close with the Gospel of Christ so speaketh Melchior Canus lib. 2. de loc cap. 8. therefore it maketh nothing for the imperious supremacie of the Pope or Church in matters of faith fot there is a difference between coÌ„muma motivafidei and formalis ratio credendi See learned and perspicuous Dr. Barron against Turnebul Tract 4. pag. 188. Who hath unanswerably demonstrated this truth and so interpreteth these words of Augustin The testimony of the church is a principle inductive and a motive to new intrants to read hear and consider the holy Scriptures and it produceth only an humane faith the inward testimony of the holy Spirit is the principle effective of divine faith and the Scriptures themselves are the formal reason and terminative principle whereinto divine faith is resolved as a building upon its foundation Eph. 2. 20. To conclude this answer We judge that the pure Gospel Church is and should be the pronouncer of divine sentence from the Scripture that the authority of Councils should be inrerposed for making men willing and obedient to the divine law so should the Magistrat concurre in his station for that effect But the church of Rome is not pure nor like that which once it was in the Apostle Paul his time and at no time could she be called the Universal church far less now Albeit then her faith was spoken of throughout all the world Is this a good argument the faith of the Church of Brittain is mentioned throughout all the reformed churches of Transylvania Hungaria Polland Germany Bohaemia Flanders France and Helveâ—ia therefore it is the Universal-church no we claim no more but to be a Sister church to these in the confession of faith according to the Scriptures †Alb. Pighius lib. 6. Eccl. hierarc cap. 3. and all together make up the Universal-church And any one of these is preferable to the church at Rome as it is now corrupted and apostatized Will ye hear Albertus Pighius Quis unquam per Romanam Ecclesiam intellexit universalem who ever did by the Roman Church understand the Church universal Why do ye then speak so and ambitiously empire it over all the world Question fifth Seeing no Scripture is of Pa. Qu. 5 privat interpretation 2. Pet. 1. 20. should privat men take upon them to interpret the same Answer The sense of that text is no scripture Pro. An. is the indytment of a privat spirit but proceedeth from the holy Ghost for it followeth holy men of GOD spake as they were moved by the holie Ghost and it came not of old by the will of men Therefore it is no ways to be thought that privat men should be barred from searching the Scripture seeing Christ Jesus commanded the contrar Io. 5. 39. This was spoken to a whole multitude of persecuting Jews The word is the sword of the spirit Eph. 6. 17. should any privat man be disarmed amongst his foes And blessed is he whither privat or publict who meditateth in the law of the Lord day and night Ps 1. Reply In your fifth answer you grant with the Apostle that no prophecie of the Scripture Pa. Rep. is of any privat interpretation so should you grant also that the Scriptures cannot be rightly expounded of every privat spirit and fancie of the vulgar Reader but by the same spirit wherewith they were writren which resolveth in the Church And I am very confident no learned or wise Protestant will allow any privat man to expound scripture against the common consent of the whole Catholick Church wherein they were immediatly before But you insist that it is
not to be thought that privat mâ—n should be barred from searching the scripture seeing it is contrar to that text John 5. 39. where if by searching the Scripture you mean the reading and interpretation of it that cannot be the sense of it For the Apostle Paul saith 1. Cor. 12. GOD hath set in the Church Prophets Apostles Doctors c. Then he addeth are all Apostles are all Prophets are all Doctors do all interpret Then this doth not belong to every man to read and interpret Scripture but to search the deep meaning and sense thereof from the Doctors of the Church For the Jews did search the scripture reading and hearing it read in their Synagogues and yet did deny Christ to be the Messiah which scripture doth clearly testifie Even as Protestants do read Scripture and in it the real presence the power to forgive sins granted to men justification by faith and good works anointing the sick virginity preferred to marriage and yet deny all this Wherefore as Christ exhorteth the Jews to do it with greater reflection and attention not superficially turning and shuffling it over as Protestants do so do I exhort them The word is the sword of the spirit upon which you inferre should any privat man be disarmed amongst his soes So let me tell you that the Apostle calling it a sword sheweth that it should not be put into a mad mans hand or in the hand of a fool i. e. Poor ignorants who as Peter saith wrest it to their own destruction and yet this is your consequence if it should be granted to all privat men Children and fools get not arms amongst their foes wherewith they might rather wrong themselves then their enemies but are under the protection of their Paedagogues and attendants And so the ignorant should not easily handle the sword of the word being ignorant and only capable of the letter but should receive the sense thereof from the Church and her Pastors that it may be to them an arme of defence Pro. Duply 1 Answer first All this is answered fully in the return of the first question to which place I referre the Reader lest I make idle repetition If the rule of right reasoning had been observed nothing of this ought to have come in formerly but here in its own proper place I distinguished betwixt privat men and privat interpretations then betwixt the extraordinar gift of interpreting and the ordinar Thirdly Betwixt the priviledge and the exercise Privat men have the priviledge to search the Scriptures you say it should be by no other then doctors if that be true then the Lord Jesus did not direct the people who heard him to use prayer and meditation for knowing the Scriptures but to go to their rulers Scribes and Pharisees who did what they could to make the Scriptures testifie against him and all his I appeal to the conscience or reason of any if this exposition on the place can hold water Or if an indvidual act such as this being performed by another is an obedience to a command If this exposition be good then when the Lord pronounceth the man blessed who meditats in the Law day and night the sense of it must be if his Pastors do it for him it is enough Who will admit this But the one is as true as the other Secondly You contradict your self for once you say that privat men should not interpret Pro. An. 2 Scripture but take it from the mouth of the church then immediatly you exhort them to do it not superficially but with attention and we exhort to no more Thirdly You make all the people who are Pro. An. 3 privat men mad fools and Children by your coÌ„parison in whose hand the word of GOD should not be put then it must be taken from them and how agreeth this with the former exhortation What if this were told to the Kings and Queens who are Popâ—sh By the testimony of your doctors ye are all de clared unfit to rule others for mad men fools children caÌ„not govern In effect ye guide theÌ„ as such in divine matters for ye muzle and blindfold the people all this passeth under the notion of Paedagogy But sad is the case of such pupils â—f they knew what belonged to their peace Let ignorants be catechised and trained in the ways of GOD this may make them more discerning of the sense and meaning of the word of God Seneca telleth Coenant nobiscum quidam quia sunt docti alii ut sint doâ—li Some men suppe with us because they are learned others that they may be learned The testimonies of the Lord make wise the simple should they then be deprived of them Question sixth Ye agree not about the Pa. Qu. 6 rule for some cast at the Epistle of James others receive it Answer None of the pure reformed do Pro. Qu. so it was only rejected by some Lutherians in which we do not owne them Secondly The number of Scripture books is not the question but whither these mantained by all be the rule of saith Seeing all men are murable creatures and at their best state vanity Popes clash with Popes Councils with Councils Pulpits with Pulpits let any judge whither it be safest that the revealed will of God be our rule or the dictats of self contradicting men Reply You say none of these pure reformed Pa. Reply reject the Epistle of James and you disclaime the Lutherians who do so and they you for I am confident they will acknowledge none for pure reformers who take an Epistle for scripture which they hold to be none Then you say the number of Scripture books is not the question Sir you move questions as you please but hear Mr. Hooker one of your most learned Protestants lib. 1. Eccl. pol. Sect. 14. pag. 36. of these things necessar saith he the very chief is to know what books we esteem holy which is impossible for it self to teach Apply this to your only determiner of faith in your first answer And truely I think this should be the first question of all to the pure reformed according to the pure word of God as you cal them which are the books of the pure word of GOD Now if you answer these are mantained by all which you make the rule of faith how few books of Scripture shal be this rule if any at all For there be few or none whereof some have not doubted or flatly denyed Saint Augustin contra Faustum Manichaeum and lib. de mor. Eccl. cap. 1. Saith the Manichees did deny Moses and the Prophets the Jews did deny the New Testament What books of Scripture are mantained by all For by that you make the consent of all judge of canonical Scripture how then can you disclaim tradition and say immediatly after men are mutable creatures and at their best state vanity Seeing upon the consent of men ye take up your rule of faith and number of Scripture books I know other Protestants
alleadge for this that the books of Scripture like the Sun shew themselves to be such to him who hath the spirit But I would ask at such why the Rev. St. James Epistle the second of St. Peter and two of St. John did not shew themselves to be Scripture to Luther that spiritual man and the Protestants very first Apostle in the work of reformation in the end you say Let any judge whither it be safest that the revealed will of God be your rule and determiner or the dictats of self contradicting creatures Where you seem to rubbe on Catholicks But Sir this toucheth not them at all for they profess not to believe self-contradicting creatures but the unanimous consent of Councils and fathers or the Catholick Church known to be the only Church established by Christ and his Apostles and by the continued succession of Popes Bishops and Pastors the unity universality and gifts of miracles in all ages c. Which Christ hath called the ground and pillar of truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. and against which he assureth us the gates of hell shal not prevail Math. 16. 18. and which he hath commanded us to hear otherwise to be holden as heathens and publicans Math. 18. 17. so you see that the written word maketh the Church our judge which we should obey and that ye who make so much of the written word do not believe it when ye do not obey her And here I remarke that Protestant Ministers and preachers deceive the people in that they ground their faith on the written word only and Roman Catholicks say they on humane tradition and their Churches authority which being composed of men is subject to errour Whereas the contrar is true for Roman Catholicks believe nothing which the written word believing both the tradition of the Church and Apostles doth not expresly warrand As for the Church what is more expresly said then what I have cited both to prove that we are bound to hear her Mat. 18. 18. and hold her authority infallible Math. 16. 18 and the house of God which is the pillar and ground of truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. Neither doth it avail you to say this is not said of the Roman Church which is not the universal Church but a particular one a strumpet c. For we speak not of any particular Church when we say that the Church is infallible nor when we say the Roman the Catholick do we understand the particular Church at Rome But that Church which professeth constantly the Romans faith spread in saint Pauls time through all the world As we call yet the Roman Empire that which hath its seat in Vien of Austria Yea Protestants calling their own the reformed Church cannot say but we have one Church on earth which Christ commanded us to hear constantly And if the reformed Church be the true Church then she must have taken the place from that church which was deformed and had fallen into an errour and so deserved no more to be called the pillar and ground of truth or to be heard Moreover the very pillars of the Protestant Religion grant all the world to be in an errour before themselves and so against the express written Word must deny the infallibility of any Church whatever For Calv. Instit lib. 4. cap. 18. saith they made all the Kings and People of the earth drunk from the first to the last and Hospinian epist 41. saith Luthers separation was from all the world White in his defence chap. 37. saith Popery was a leprosie breeding so universally in the church that there was no visible company of men free from it Jewel in his Sermon on Luke 11. The whole world Princes and people were overwhelmed by ignorance and bound by oath to the Pope which if it be true that the Church in former ages did erre the reformed Church may erre that themselves do not deny Thence it followeth clearly that the Protestant Church is not the house of GOD called the pillar and ground of truth that she is not Christs Church against which the gates of hell shal not prevail that none are bound to hear her in matters of faith being subject to errour And so Protestants may well desire men to read the Scripture and believe what they found there but not urge any man to follow their doctrine but in so far as they find it conforme to Scripture which all Roman Catholicks protest they do not As for traditions are we not commanded to hold them in the clear written Word 2. Thess 2. 15. Hold the traditions which ye have learned whither by word or our epistle Protestants read documents but documents by word and traditions are the same thing on which place Chrysost saith It is evident that the Apostle did not deliver all things by writ but many things by word which are worthy of credit as wel as the other That is Christs word as well as his writ therefore we call them divine and Apostolical traditions Aug. lib. 5. de Trinit cap. 23. speaking of rebaptization The Apostle saith he commanded nothing of it but that customâ— which is believed to proceed from the Apostle is opposed against Cyprian in it as many things are which the whole Church holdeth and therefore are believed to be commanded by the Apostles though not written Aâ—d in the first age saint Dennis chap. 1. speaking of the Ecclesiastick hierarchy saith These our chief captains of Priestly function did deliver to us the chiefest and supersubstantial points partly in written partly in unwritten institutions Epiph. Haeres 61. is of the same minde we must hold traditions saith he for the Scripture hâ—th not all things and Tertullian de praescrip grounds his faith on the authority of the Church and what tradition I believe saith he I received from the present Church the present Church from the primitive that from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ Here I hope you see you must either admit traditions as necessar in themselves and infallible in their authority or else disclaim both Scripture and Fathers All that Protestants can say either against the authority of the Church in general Councils or Apostolick traditions delivered by her is that all her decisions and traditions flow from men and so are not infallible But I answer neither were the Prophets Apostles Evangelists who penned the Scripture but men yet I hope their writtings are not fallible or subject to errour Because they were inspired directly and assisted by the Spirit of God The Fathers of the Church have to this day that promise verified to them Math. 28. 20. which was made as well to their successours as to themselves As for that some Protestante speak of an invisible Church composed of the Elect it is but a shift to delude the ignorant for as it is a Maxime of law Idem est non esse non apparere i. e. it is the same not to be and not to appear to be in the matter of any
to baptize Canon 100. ye allow it The Sacrament was administred in the primitive Church to all present and they who did not partake were appointed to remove Ite missa est exite foras qui non vultis accipere Sacramentum i. e. Go it is closed go forth ye that will not receive the Sacrament Now the words are muttered and administred before all They took with their hand and the bread was broken of old Now it is not for ye make whole wasers and put them into their mouth For fourthteen hundred years the Church appointed the Sacrament to be administred by bread and wine to the people all Christians of whatever judgement except Papists do so communicat as yet Petau de poenit pub lib. 2. sheweth that it cannot be denyed nisi ab homine insigniter supra omnem modum vel impudenti vel imperito i. e. Except by a man remarkably and above all measure either impudent or unskilful that this was the primitive practise yet the Council of Constance hoc non obstante and the Council of Trent decree the contrar The primitive Church heard nothing of the Popes universal supremacie or infallibility which now by you iâ— made Summa rei See Cyprian ep 55. â—â— Cornelius Bishop of Rome and how he stileth him fâ—ater c. and he saith that they were formerly chosen to officiat Non sine consensu plebis not without the Popes consent ep 68. Ipsa plebs habet potestatem c. Is not this far from your imperious pompous way of Monarchy how then can you so boldly averre that ye have the unanimous consent of Councills and fathers for you when indeed ye do not regard them so much as we Hear your own Cornelius Mus †See Dâ—lleus ubi supra ep Biâ—ont in ep ad Rom. cap 14. Ego ut ingenue fâ—teâ—r plus uni summo pontisici crederem in his quae fidei misteria tangunt quam mâ—lle Hieronymis Augustinis Gregoriis Credo enim scio quod summus Pontifex in his quae fidei sunt errare non potest quia auctoritas determinandi quae ad fidem spectant in Pontisice residet i. e. That I may ingenuously confesse I would give more credit to one Pope in tâ—e things which belong to the misteries of truth then to a thousand such as Augustin Jerom or Gregory For I know certainly that the Pope cannot erre in these things that belong to faith because the authority of determining matters of saith resideth in the Pope yet ignorant people are made to believe that Papists have the consent and practise of the primitive Church along with them and Melchior Canus lâ—c Theol. lib. 7. cap. 3. num 10. Sequi majores nostros per omnia in illorum vestigiis pedes nostros figere ut pueri faciunt per lusum nihil aliud est quam ingenia nostra dâ—mnare judicio nos privare nostro facultate inquirendae veritatis i. e. to follow our ancestors in all things and to â—race their footsteps and fixe in them as children use to do in play is no other thing but to condemn our own wit and to deprive our selves of our own judgement and faculty of searching the truth Salmeron in cap. 5. epist ad Rom. disp 5. asserteth quo juniores eo perspicaciores sunt doctores and citeth Exod. 23. follow not the multitude viz. of ancients This is sufficient to prove that as the Papists are jealous of Scripture so are they of the Primitive Church her consent But it is alleadged that ye have the word of God for your warrand Matth. 16. 18. Matth. 18. 18. 1. Tim. 3. 15. To this I answere that the first Text is meaned of the collective body of the Church which fall not away this is clear from the context for it is the Church builded on that confession mentioned by the Apostles and an house so builded cannot fall because it is builded on a rock Matth. 7. 25. Yet it will not follow that there be no drops in it for particular beleevers cannot totally and finally fall away but that they are infallible who can say see Iohn 10. 28. and comyare it with 1. Cor. 13. 9. Iames 3. 2. beside your own writters interpret it so see Melchior Canus lib. 5. de loc Theol. cap. 5. and Panormitan on the place The second Text Mat. 18. is to be understood of a particular Church which you grant is not infallible so Chrysostom interpreteth the place and it is further clear from the Connexion for it is the Church to which appeals should be made in prima instantia this undoubtedly is a particular Church But admitting that it is meaned of the universal church your Pope nor your Church is not it The third Text 1. Tim. 3. 15. holdeth forth no more then what is granted in the answer to the fourth question or if you please to take learned Cameron his exposition who knitteth these words with the 16. verse you may do well But what ever be the priviledges of the true Gospel Church which is the Bride of Jesus Christ Rome hath forefaulted all these and is but a leprous part of the universal Church you grant that the church of Rome is but a particular church Why plead you then for the whole priviledges of the universal Church Is not this absurd arrogance Nor doth Calvin Hospinian Luther or White speak absolutly as ye alleadge but assert that the generality for a time was leavened by Popery which is truth But what then followeth That the mysterie of iniquity did arise by degrees and over-runne all for the most we grant so did the Arrian heresie therefore was not Athauasius and such as adbered to the truth right in their way The whole world in the Apostles time did ly in wickedness 1. Iohn 5. 19. Therefore were they not Sons of truth who endeavoured a Gospel reformation Your last hold is tradition and you say we are commanded to hold them 2. Thes 2. 15. for this you cite Aug. Cyprian St. Dennis Epiphanius To this I answer we are not against Apostolick traditions nor Church history in matters of fact We make use of traditions there mentioned But for your Legends we deny that they are such and disclaim them Have you Sir learned Logick Why do you argument so a genere ad speciem affirmative Is this a good argument Est annual ergo est homo he is a living creature therefore he is a man Can this be better there were traditions delivered to the Church of Thessalonica ergo yours are these Credat Judaeus Appella Secondly If there were unwritten traditions why do you dare to writ these things which the Apostles would not writ Thirdly Will that argue the Scripture of imperfection You may as well argue the Minister writteth a book the summe of which he hath preached to people Ergo his book is imperfect You have then to prove for your end that these traditions mentioned 2. Thess 2. 15. were
about matters of faith Secondly If so they be no where written in Scripture Thirdly That if they be not written they be the same which ye deliver to the people and by what authority ye press and writ them But to take this text wholly from your mis-interpretation hear Theodoret who saith that the Apostle spake not of diverse doctrines but of the same diversely delivered For first he preached to the Thessalonians and then did writ the substance of it But as where ever ye find fire in the Scripture ye make it Purgatory so where ye find tradition ye make it pari ratione yours Will ye listen to Bell. lib. 4. de verbo Dei cap. 10. and he will put all out of doubt for he granteth that all in substance were written by the Apostles which they preached to the people or were necessar to salvation Cyprian in his epist ad Pompeium admitteth not any traditions but such as may be perceived to be in the Evangels in the Epistles or Acts of the holy Apostles Therefore it is a perfect rule to all discerners say I and no more was at first asserted Your Maxime Idem est non esse non apparere holdeth in law but not in divinity For the soul is not visible yet who can deny the being of it What is more in the Reply I judge not worthy the noticeing and I am forced to make digression because of an impertinent return Is it not strange that when I called men mutable creatures and at their best state vanitie subject to clashing contradiction and that the written Word is the only infallible rule for direction that upon this tradition universal consent should be so prolixely commented on without any connexion They who follow this reflecter must resolve to deviat from tho high way Question seventh Your Church which ye Papists Quest. 7 call reformed is but of yesterday where was it before Luther Answer It is as old in its doctrinals as Prote ∣ stants Answer the Scripture therefore not of yesterday See what societie from the beginning professed the doctrine mantained there that was out Church The Romans Corinthians Ephesians Philippians Thessalonians as taught by the Apostle Paul are our Church of old so it is not new Secondly In all ages there have been and are eminent professours of that doctrine which we mantaine as is abundantly proved by Flaccus Illyricus in his Catalogue Testium veritatis and learned Dr. Usher in successione Ecclesiae reform which testimonies no Popish shaveling of what ever ordour yet could answer Thirdly where was the church of Rome as now constituted before the council of Trent Nay more was the Popes supremacy and infallibility heard of the 600 year after Christ Is not all Popish faith as such resolved into a lie viz. the infallibility of the Pope or Council which though errand untruths are the key of the Popish Religion Fourthly All the positives of the reformed Religion were mantained substantially in the Primitive church the first 300. years I speake not of changeable circumstances nor integrals but essentials and the negatives could not be there because the controversies were not then started But ye Papists have amassed a body of humane inventions gross errours contrare to scripture obtruding them under Anathema to be the established doctrine of the Church And because we of the reformed Profession will not own these and call that which is new old ye excommunicat us as Hereticks Reply In your seventh Answere you say Papists Reply your doctrine is as old as scripture and your Church as the Apostles and this is common to you with all sectaries to claime the scripture and the Church in the time of the Apostles And like to that answer of the common people we are all come of Adam and Eve But I shall let you presently see how contrar your doctrine is to that scripture and how unlike your Church is to that of the Apostles the first 300 year In the second part ye pretend that Illyricus and Doctor Usher have sufficiently shewed that there have been eminent men of your Profession in all ages and that without a Reply of any Popish shaveling of whatever ordour But Sir I am sorrie that you who are a Nazarian and not a shaveling shoule be so ill versed in books of controversie as not to have seen so many Catholick writters who demonstrat clearly that of all these eminent men before Calvin you pretend to be yours there is not one hath holden all the same tenets with you and no more For it is enough for you that they dissent from the Church of Rome and sling at the Popes authority what ever tenets they hold in matters of belief to call them yours Which hath made Dr. Vane Chaplain to our late King judiciously compare them to Sampsons foxes which were all bound together by the tails although their heads went diverse wayes So that when you call the Luthereans Valdenses Albigenses Hussites Catharists Wicklessians Graecians Egyptians yours you may as well call the Turks and Tartars yours if we trust all records which speake of their tenets And as for the Fathers hear if they were yours in the opinion of the most learnea Protestants Dudithius apud Bezam ep 1. If that be true which Papists say the Fathers with mutual consent are altogether on their side Pet. Martyr 2. de verbo col 1539. as long as we stand to Councils and fathers we shal alwayes remain in the same errours And fully confesseth that Hierom Ambrose and Augustin held the invocation of Saints Chemnitius in ex concil trid art 3. pag. 100. did not disput but avouch that most of the Fathers said the souls of the Martyrs heard the petition of those that prayed to them they went to monuments and invocated Martyrs by name Whitgift in his defence pag. 473. all the Bishops and writters of the Greek and Latine Church too who no doubt were the Fathers for the most part were spotted with the doctrine of Free-will Merit Invocation of Saints Judge then Sir if they were pure In the third part you ask where was the Church of Rome before the council of Trent I answer you even where she is now except in Jappony India China and some parts of America where by their Christian labours and by the blessing of GOD she hath been established since Neither can you instance that she is not constantly the same in all points Nay more say you was the Popes infallible universal supremacie heard of the first 600. years Where it seems you must be very deaf who hear not the voice of 1200. Fathers speaking only in the four first general Councils He who holdeth the See of Rome is chief and head of all Patriarchs saith right seeing he is the first as Peter to whom all power is given over all Christian Princes and all their people and who ever contradicteth this is excommunicated Can. 29. Concil Nicaeni anno 325. Where 316 Bishops were conveened Secondly
obstinatly deny what they so clearly testifie but to consider and reflect on the Catholick verities there delivered as that Christ was truely the Son of GOD. Answer If my Answer be weak it is the more easily refuted But how can a Scripture Prote ∣ stants Answer argument be weak except it be misapplyed which you do not alleage here I had almost forgotten the reason which is this that all Scripture is like Aesops fables to you unless it be sensed and animated by your Church Hinc illae lachrymae Then you say I am confused in the met od I beginne with the Scripture then I go to the woâ—ship c. Is there any thing jumbled here I know no rule tendered by Methodists for sorting Scripture citations if they be pertiuently cited And whither you speak truth in â—athering contradictions upon me it will afterward appear when I consider your anâ—weâ—s to these 20. texts of Scripture and compare them with your former Replyes it putteth me in mind of our Sea fouls which can flee only above water and slutter on the land So you mount up with humane traditions but can scarcely slutter when you mention Scripture it is not your Element this appeareth by your first Reply and the rest are no better For once you deny that the people I said you call them Laicks not that we deny a distinction betwixt Pastours and people as you would insinuat But to note your vaine appropriating the name of Clergie or the Lords heritage to your Priests as if the people of GOD were not a part thereof contrary to 1. Pet. 5. 3. and as if you had a coÌ„manding power over them For the arrogancy of your Roman Clergie Jerome called them Senatum Pharisaeâ—um the Senate of the Pharisees I say the people are forbidden to read the Scripture by you And that some in SCOTLAND of your way are licensed to read them if this were true why is it a ground of inquisition abroad to have a Bible by them and made a ground of perâ—ecution here in the time of reformation if there be no countermand why is it held a transgression Secondly The granting of a licence to some implyeth an inhibition and ye are wiâ—ty in licensing some few to read it here and none in Italy or Spain For there be no hazard to the Popedom here which might be there if they were not so muzled Next you say the wâ—rd Iohn 5. 39. is not in the imperative but indicative mood for that you cite Cyril and Beza Gâ—ving noâ— granting that it is so it maketh still against your practise Fot they searched the Scriptures with his approbation and our Lord referreth the people to them as the rule of their direction for knowing him which ye refuse to do for ye must have another infallible judge to bear testimonie of him Thirdly You desire people not to shuffle but search the Scriptures I am glad to hear you speak so you yeeld the cause we seek no more Blessed be the Lord GOD of truth Magna est vis veritatis and blessed is the man who meditate in the Law of GOD day and night For your application of the place it is selfish and the similitude halteth on more leggs then one The second Scripture is that 1. Cor. 14. Protestants 2. Inst § 2. 14. which forbiddeth your Latine service If I pray in an unknown tongue my understanding is unfruitful c. How shal one who occupieth the room of the unlearned say amen verse 16. Reply You reply that the word unknown Papists Reply is not in the Original but taken in by interpreters neither is if great inconvenient albeit men pray publickly in an unknown tongue sithence preaching only is for edification and information of the judgment not prayer Iâ— there any scripture forbidding us to pray except the understanding of the hearers be instructed The high Priest amongst the Jews prayed in the sanctuary and was seperated from the people therefore could not instruct their understanding yet that was their forme of publict worship And the Apostle in the same chapter verse 5. To speak with tongues I forbid not I wish ye did all speak with tongues and he desireth them to pray that they might interpret And the Liturgies of the Church are interpreted to the people This scripture maketh more against your Ministers who with extemporarie prayers speak non-sense which hath made one of your own Poets say fools understand not us nor wise men you Answer You have need to understand the Greek tongue better that there be a difference Prote ∣ stants Answer betwixt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is an unknown tongue and when the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it needed no other word for that comprehendeth barbarous language as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth the known tongue Further he desireth them to pray that they might interpret Ergo it was an unknown tongue Varro lib. 6. de lingua latina when he citeth Aristotles book intituled Absolet names calleth them Glossae Aristotelis any may see more of this in that learned Critick Mausacius †Mausacius in Harpoerationem pa. 352. If you will read the 7. verse the equivalent of it is in the original for he mentioneth speaking in a tongue not understood and is not that an unknown tongue Then it is in a tongue to which the unlearned could not say Amen when one blessed oâ— gave thanks Thus verse 16. and it is the purpose of the Holy Ghost to refute that unedifying way at length by sundry arguments Amongst which this is one that the understanding was thereby rendered unfruitful Therefore the Apostle resolveth to pray with the spirit and the understanding also verse 15. You absurdly contradict the Apostle by your practise and adde in termes that it is no great inconvenient albeit the understanding be unfruitful He saith it is one You deny it Whither shal I believe the Apostle Paul or you I am ashamed of your impudencie herein How dare you Palam in â—s contradict the Scripture Your ragged reasons subjoyned Because prayer is not so much for the understanding as Preaching and Catechising Is there any scripture say you not to pray except they instruct the understanding of hearers I answer the scripture is for it verse 15. I will pray with the spirit and the understanding also And if this were not so Parâ—ats might pray but we ought to speak because we believe Your other reason against the Apostle is That the high Priest amongst the Jews praying in the Sanctuary was separated from the people and did not instruct their understanding yet that was the forme of their publict worship Yea in the same chapter verse 5. The Apostle saith and to speak with tongues he prohibiteth not I answer that the high Priest amongst the Jews when he was with the people prayed in an known tongue Num. 6. and when he was alone in the most holy place where he entered but once a
image-worship whither of the true or false Gods which is here forbiddeÌ„ For it is certain that the Golden-call was intended by them to represent the true GOD. Exod. 32. 5. To morrow is a feast to the Lord and 2. Chro. 33. 17. They sacrifized in high places yet to the Lord their God only The like may be said of the Calves at Dan and Bethel Ps 106. 20. And of Micahs Image For be confidently sayeth Now know I that the Lord will bless me Judges 17. because I have a Levit to be my Priest They used not Levits for the worship of false Gods Further the speech of Stephen seemeth to prove it strongly Acts 7. 40. 41. for speaking of Israels worshiping the Calf he saith The Lord for this gave them up to worship the host of Heaven Now when sin is punished by sin that sin which is the judicial punishment useth to be more gross then the antecedent sin which is the procuring cause but the worshiping the host of Heaven is not so gross as the worship of an Oxe therefore they did worship GOD at first by the representation of a Calf yet were Idolaters This answer then cannot satisfie the conscience or reason of any man And admit that the image of false Gods is forbidden in the second Command how dare Papists without warrand and contrar to the word make the Image of the true GOD which he hath expresly forbidden Deut. 4. 12. Seeing Omnis cultus saith Tertullian de Jejunio should be ex imperio divinâ— non ex arbitrio humano Lastly We are forbidden to worship the likeness of any thing in the Heaven above or in the Earth beneath Now the Lord GOD is in the Heaven above gloriously therefore we should not make his Image for to what can ye liken him saith he Isaiah 40. 18. Bellarmin de Imag. and Gregorius de Valentia distinguish the Minor another way and reject the two former answers as extream For first they say that they worship Images properly so they are againâ—t Durand a great Anti-Thomist who maketh them only memorials Secondly They say that they give them not worship equal to the Pattern so they renounce Thomas and all his adherents Valent. lib. 3. disp 6. saith it is not sicut DEO that they worship the Image of the Trinity Bellarmin saith further that it is not Aeque certum an Imagines Trinitatis sint in Templis collâ—candae reperendae Yet say they that veneration suitable to them is to be rendered Which is he ambiguoâ—s phrase of the Council of Trent like the Delphian oracle If this answer hold good then Thomas and all his Clients are guilty of Idolatrie for they give veneration to Images equal with the Pattern all the Thomists say sicut DEO so to the Image Secondly Cultus religiosus est accidens hominis if we speak Physice now gradual difference in these altereth not the kind of worship Therefore according to the rules of Logick the worship is one with the worship of Thomists or else they disclaim a maxime by making the one Idolatrie the other not Thirdly We are forbidden to bow down to them therefore the meanest degree of religious worship is forbidden in the second Command And they who break the least Command and teach men so shal be least in the Kingdom of Heaven Matth. 5. 19. Lastly the seduced people know nothing of this difference Yea Bellarmin thinketh it not fit that in concione â—oram populo it should be divulged and he hath reason to say so seeing they cannot conceive the groundless distinction betwixt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for their Clergie men will not make it hold water Fourthly Some as Eckius in his Enchir answers nothing but this to the argument that it is the tradition of their Church and Command of their Pope which they judge themselves obliedged to obey If this answer be relevant then they were not faulty who with their traditions made the word of GOD of none effect Matth. 15. 6. And Papists are too like the Pharisees in this Secondly By that Logick the Turk may mantain his worship of Mahomet for his Church and Mufti authorize it Thirdly The Pope in his Conclave may bring in the Alcoran the next day for that may have authority from them contrar to the word of GOD. Arg. third If Image-worship be condemned by all pure antiquity then this worship is not only a breach of the second Command but contrar to the custom of all the Churches of Christ Upon which argument the Apostle layeth stress 1. Cor. 11. 16. But the first is true Ergo c. The Minor is proved thus Many of the Ancients as Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian c. Were against the art of statâ—e making Epiph. in his ep to John 23. of Jerusalem abominateth the putting them up in Churches and saith it is contrar to scripture that any Image should be in the Church of Christ Now if they wer against the making of them against the hanging of them in Churches much more against teligious veneration given to them Secondly the council called Eliber which is as old if not older then the Council of Nice made a decree that no Image should be in the Church ne forte quod in parietibus pingatur colatur least that which is painted be worshipped and till the second Council of Nice which was in the 8. Centurie no such thing as image-worship was approved in the Christian Church Thirdly It is an ordinar objection made by Celsus and all Pagans against Christians as I said before from Lorinus Ye have Nulla Templa nulla simulachra nullas aras quod colitis celatis To this objection Origen and Arnobius answer yeelding the matter of fact and vindicating their way which they could not have done if Images had been in use amongst them Further when Adrian did build a Temple for himself the Pagans suspected that it was for the Christians because it was sine simulachris without Images whence it is clear that the Image worship cometh nearer Paganism then Primitive antiquity See Dâ—laeus de Imagin Arg. fourth That which notwithstanding of all distinctions draweth and driveth people to Idolatrie is abominable but by the concession and confession of some learned Papists the Romish worship doth involve people into Idolatrie therefore it is abominable The Major is proved by reason that when the people made an Idol of the brazen Serpent the statue was brocken and called Nehushtan although at first it was appointed by GOD. The Minor is thus proved by the testimonies of learned Romanists as Polyd Virgil. de invent lib. 6. cap. 13. Many are now saith he become so mad that they worship the Images of wood and stone as if theâ— had sense in 〈◊〉 and put more confidence in them then theâ— do in Jesus Christ or other Saints to whom they are dedicated Cassander consult de imag saith It is too manifest that the worship of Images hath so prevailed that
him and from thence he shal come to judge the quick and the dead But we believe also that he is really present in the Sacrament in as many places as it is given in Which you nor any man else cannot shew to imply contradiction and yet ye delude the people as if there were an impossibilitie in this When you say we break not the bread it seemeth you know not how either the bread is broken or given If we for greater decencie prepare the bread in a just greatness for one man before it be given so did ye of old cutting it in pieces albeit now ye break and bite about What you say in end of his once offering himself in a bloody way on the Cross it is true but if you understand it in an unbloodie manner on the Altar it is false Otherwise Christ should not be a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedeck Psalm 110. Sir for all these passages of Scripture which you have cited in thiâ— your eight Answer which you see make nothing either against us or for you look to the Touch-stone of the reformed Gospel and you will see the Scripture altogether ours Duply You pass over all the scriptures Prote ∣ stants Duply which I have cited against Christs corporall presence or bodily offering with a strong denyall calling it a calumnie Sir is this right reasoning think you Sure I am if whole Christ be corporally present in every sacrament then when it is administred at Rome Millan c. there be as many bodies there as sacraments And by this tenet doe not the words of consecration make Christ on the altar as wel as by the holy Ghost he was coÌ„ceived in the womb of the Virgin And doth nor his corporall presence take away his ascension sitting at the right hand of God and his return because he is bodily already here He is a Priest for ever by the infinit vertue of his once offering which needeth not be repeated as the Apostle reasoneth well seeing it is not imperfect but only applyed by faith and this is all our salvation As for the distinction of a bloody and unbloody offering it is a device like the rest of your humane inventions Shew me scripture for iâ— if you can This you are bound to do at the least seeing now we are on scripture arguments and I brought scripture to the contrar You call it real presence only I am for real presence spiritualities are realities Your tenet if you understand it is corporal presence See Bell. de Ench. lib. 1. c. 2. 5. the body of Christ is in the sacrament with the whole magnitude thereof and that same body which is in heaven is on the altar either then he must have many bodies or els one body having magnitude and dimensions must be in many places at once in heaven and earth both which is impossible seeing it implyeth contradiction Theodoret. dial 2. against the Eutichian heresie telleth us that the sacramentall signes change nor their nature but remaine in their own substance and shape It is said Iohn 6. 56. He who eateth my flesh shall live by me And ye interpret this place of sacramentall eating ergo all who take the sacrament shall live according to your glosse Although Christ had a spiritual body after his resurrection yet he had a true body because he said to his disciples feel and see saith Aug. ad Dardanum ep 57. Now then he hath true dimensions and when he appeared to the Apostle Paul going to Damascus Aquinas thinketh that for the time he left heaven Summa q. 57. And when he came in amongst the Disciples the doors being shut Theodoret saith that they made passage for him as their Creator And the ancient Hierom speaketh with the scripture that the Angel removed the stone from the grave Although his risen body be glorified yet it is a real body and they who are for transubstantiation make it phantastick without any warrand from the word For Bellarmin acknowledgeth in the forecited place that this tenet of corporall presence cannot be clearly proven from scripture and lib. 3. de Euch. cap. 19. Tollitur verborum Domini obscuritas per patrum consensum And Andradius de caena Domini Licet transubstantiatio ex scriptura probari nequâ—t tamen furor est non credere ecclesiae hac inâ—e And Scotus lib. 4 dist 11. uoÌ„ extat ullus locus scripturae cogens nos admitte e transubstantiationem sine ecclesiae declaratione And addeth that ante Lateran concilium non fuit dâ—gma fidei Further this taketh away the sutableness betwixt the sign and thing signified If transubstantiation be the bread and wine nourish not the body How can accidents nowrish the body How can they be without a subject How Capernaitan like can reprobats ear the body of Christ You referre me to the Touchstone I wish rather you had touched pertinently scripture or reason in your answers then that you should shift satisfaction to the Reader with a reference to a book which possibly he cannot find I have seen that alreadie and an answere toâ—r printed twelve years ago by Dr. Guild who is now at his rest and his answer is yet unanswered if you have time it may be worth the while to peruse it for your conviction Now I beseech you to lay aside interest prejudice passion and weigh again these twenty scripture-arguments it may please the Lord to discover how Antiscriptural your way is who knowes what the Lord may do by weak instruments when his word and truth is on their side Question ninth But seeing we mantaine Papists quest 9 the Apostles Creed why did ye separat from us Answer first The Apostles creed commonly Prote ∣ stants Ans 1 so called is a notable confession to which we owe all respect and do make constant use of it Yet your own Lessius de vera fide in his appendix page 17. sayeth that symbolum Apostolicum is not sufficient test for knowing a pure Church Ye know Socinians will say it who are scarce Christians It mentioneth nothing to be believed concerning the fall of man the worke of conversion the two sacraments which are sealing Ordinances So it is the whole scripture which tryeth best Christians and Churches We did separate because of Idolatrous superstitious worship by setting up Imagerie which the Lord hateth Deut. 16. 22. Secondly We separat only from these Ans 2. errours and cleave to the Scriptures and primitive pure antiquity Thirdly We were persecuted fugati fuimus Ans 3. non fugâ—mus what fire faggot bell book and candle could do that we endured before we break off Fourthly when the light of the Gospel Ans 4. broke up we had a clear call for separation Rev. 18. 4. Reply In your ninth Answer you say you did cleave to Scripture and pure antiquitie Papists Reply and only left our errours You had said better that you had left Scripture and pure antiquitie by so doing
the Church from the Apostles and their successours were to seek their Genealogy and Birth Such answers are made to deceive the ignorants and to let any rational man know ye have no lawful successsion at all however ye intrude your selves into the Ministrie upon pretence of doctrine as all phanâ—ticks and sectaries do Duply Here is multum scribere and a rabble of ragged discourse to smal purpose Prote ∣ stants Duply passing from Succession which was the question to a call which was formerly answered In the first part how poorly plaister you over the crimes of your three Popes by giving Calvin and the Magdeburgenses and the ages wherein they lived the lie And is this all your vindication of them That it may appear this covering to be too narrow for so foule faults not only have Calvin and the Magdeburgenses said so but Platina Bâ—râ—nius Sigonius c. Are these also lyars These are not authors like Bolsecus the Apostate but such as ye will not deny to be credible witnesses Silvester the 2. lived in the eleventh Centurie and not in the ninth as ye mistake Once he was called Gerbert and studied the Mathematicks saith Onuphrius then turned a consulter with the Devil saith Platina for instance this is brought that he enquired curiously how long he would enjoy the Papacy And the response he received was till he laid Masse in Jerusalem Within four years thereafter he was saying Masse in the corner of the Roâ—d-Church which is called Jerusalem and asking how the Chappel was called it was answered by some Jerusalem Then he knew that his death was near and becoming to be sad he confessed his sins before many witnesses whom he exhorted to bewarre of ambition and commerce with the Devil Some say that he desired his body to be cutted and layd on a cart c. This his tragedie is recorded also by Polid. Virg. de invent rerum lib. 5. Nauclerus vol. 2. gener 34. If these be your Matheticks I will learne none of them So it is sure by testimony of your own that Silvester was a Magician Next ye say that John 23. your Pope is wronged by Calvin for saying that he denyed the immortality of the soul and ye alleadgâ— what ever was his opinion as a privat Doctor of the soul before the day of judgement yet that he recanted his errour and died in the faith of the Church If Calvin wronge him Bell. lib. 4. de Pontif. wrongeth him also for he saith the Cardinals resisted him in this gross tenet and doth disput whither it was heresie seeing it was not defyned in a Council Nauclerus saith that many Divines hold this Pope to be an heretick And his successor Benedict did publickly condemne him and it Erasmus in his preface to the 5. book of Irenaeus saith that he laboured to propagat this heresie in France and being challenged was compelled to recant which he did coldly saith Nauclerus Had â—oâ— Calvin then reason to say that this Pope was heretical Otherwise why was he put to recantation Thirldy Ye say that Alexander the 6. was blamed by no impartial writter Was not Guicâ—ardine †Guice lib. 1. impartial What think ye of Phil. de Comin †Phil. de Bello Neap. was he partial also They give us this relation that he came by bribes to the chair And when Charles the 8. intended warre against the Turke the Pope advertised Bajazet and promised for a suÌ„me of money to make a stop to the expedition which the Turke undertook to pay Was not this a holy Father Further Onuphrius telleth that he was much given to whoredom and did beget four sons and two daughters whom he avouched His familie was stained with incest So that a Poet in these times did write this Epitaphe on his daughter Hoc jacet in tumulo Lucretia nomine sed re Thais Alexandri filia nupta â—urus His death was tragical for having prepared a bottel of poysoned wine for some whom he invited to dinner was poysoned therewith by the ignorance of his Cup-bearer and fell into the ditch which he prepared for others his candle was thus put out and he left an unsavoury snuffe behinde him as his Epitaphe witnesseth written by Ia. Sannazarius who when he hath mentioned his many faults into which pudle I love not to raike shutteth up all with this I nunc Nerones vel Caligulas nomina Turpes vel Heliogabulos Hoc sat viator reliqua non sinit pudor Tu suspicare ambula Then you reflect upon the society of the Apostles where there was one Judas But when he fell did he not cease to be an Apostle and fall from his Ministrie But your Popes continued such till their death infallible and they erred as men but not as Popes This could not be said of Iudas though once an Apostle They are liker to Iudas then any of the rest of the Apostles But to make such a head of Christs Church upon Earth is a strange paradox O but ye say David and Solomon fell yet were pen-men of holy Scripture Ans They penned no Scripture while in that state I hold the Negative you are bound to prove the Affirmative but will never do it Their repentance was more then ordinar witness Psal 51. and the book of Ecclesiastes O if your Popes had a grain weight of their repentance soon would we hear other language from them and you Then you say that Hereticks speak evil of your Popes as criminal persons do of a judge Was Platina a criminal person or heretick and yet he marketh eminent viceâ— in more then 33. Popes Read him and resent your expressions or refute him as ye do Calvin with a broad lie and no more You put us to it to tell the time when Rome became Idolatrous and vitious in the worship c. Which was the ground of our separation This belongeth to the former question Yet to this I say with reverend and learned Bishop Usher Rome was not built in a day nor the great dung-hill of errors which now we see raised in it in an age therefore it is a vain demand Secondly There be a difference betwixt open Heresies which oppose the foundation Prote ∣ stants Duply 2 and Apostacie which the Spirit hath evidently foretold should be brought in by these who speak lies in hypocrisie 1. Tim. 4. 1. 2. The impiety of the one is notorious the other mysterious as the Apostle reâ—â—â—eth it 2. Thess 2. 7. they who watched against the one might sleep while the seeds of the other were in sowing or peradventure might have a finger in bringing in this Trojan-horse under the name of devotion Thirdly Albeit we cannot â—ell day place when and where errours did at first beginne yet that will not make errour truth The Dup 3. Sâ—ddueces taught their was no Resurrection nor Angels can any man tell under what High Priest this errour was broached Shal it be a truth for that So ye have damnable
other differences we are not for one GOD one Faith one Baptism it is absurd to speak so Question thirteenth May there not as yet Papists qu. 13 be an accommodation and union betwixt you and us Answer Will ye be like the Church at Rome to which the Apostle Paul did wâ—ite Prote ∣ stants Ans 1 his Epistle we will presently accord with any prosessing that faith and not destroying it by contradicting consequences and practices But ye are no more like that Church of Rome except in name then a strumpet is like to a Virgin The Epistle to the Romans is now against the Romans witness the point of Justification and subjection to the higher powers Secondly Will ye take the Scripture for the only rule of faith worship and manners We differ from none such But ye regard not the Scripture so much as your own traditions For ye fainzie that it is imperfect obscure must have an authoritie from your word otherwise that it is not to be believed Thirdly Those who have intended that work have lost their labour and thanks at all hands as Cassander Antonius de Dominis Barnesius Forbesius What agreemeÌ„t can the Temple of God have with Idols 2. Cor. â— 14. Reply In your 13. Section you answer to a Papists Reply Question which no Catholick would have made if ye understand by an accommodation betwixt you and us such as are in Scottish Trysts We granting something to you and ye something to us For as to gain the whole world a man should not lose his own soul so neither can be quyt one article of his faith without which it is impossible to please God But your way being better asking only two conditions to make this so much desired agreement The first is if ye will be like that Church of Rome to which the Apostle Paul did write his Epistle And the second is that we will take scripture for a rule We most willingly grant you both not taking scripture as every bungler who wresteth it but according to the exposition of the Church and the unanimous consent of the fathers Appoint the meeting where ye please on these terms He challenge no moe calumnies on this Question seeing now we are in terms of agreement having sufficiently confuted them before Duply You say no Catholick would have moved the question Are ye nâ—â— for unitie in the Lord amongst all Christians where is Prote ∣ stants Duply 1 your charitie now I remember you said once nothing here was mentioned by me but what was mentioned by others but now you graunt this hath nor come to your ears formerly this is strange Have you not seen Grotius and de Sancta Clara who move the same wheel At first you seem to be against all accommodation asmuch as against all reformation You cannot quite on article not unum jot a saith Bellarmin otherwise your Church might be declared fallible therefore such as hanker after reconciliation with you unless they mind to come up your length will prove fools in the end and lose all their labour Yet on a sudden you forget your self accepting of these terms offered but in repetition you embezle them unfaithfully For first will ye be like that Church to which the Apostle Paul did writ in point of justification by faith and subjection to the Magistrat These two you leave out being conscious that ye are contrar to divine direction in both these And how cometh it to pass that when the Apostle chap. 16. saluteth so many Saints at Rome he omitteth the Pope If he was then head of the Church and maketh no mention of his supremacie nor of their subjectioÌ„ to him which is summa rei one of your fundamentals seeing chap. 13. he ordained them for conscience sake to be subject to Nero. The world may see that the Apostle Paul hath been no Papist Secondly When you propound the second condition it is propounded lame barely you say that ye hold the Scripture for a ruleâ— but I said for the only rule of faith worship and manners Hold that then ye renounce traditians in matters of faith for the law of the Lord is perfect Ps 19. The Popes infallibility and univeâ—sal supremacie your latine worship communion under one kind prayers to Saints and for the dead Purgatory all which are clearly confuted by Scripture So if ye do not adhere to these conditions the meeting will be to smal purpose where ever it be appointed Justin Martyr Expos recta fidei saith Amongst the children of the Church matters divine must not be ordered and directed according to mens reason and thoughts but our speach and interpretation of them should be sitted to the sense and will of the Spirit of GOD. Basil in Exercit. de Fide It is a manifest defection from the faith and a clear evidence of pride either to reject any of these things which the Scripture contain or to bring in as a point of faith any thing which is not written in the word and he citeth that of our blessed Lord Iohn 10. 5. My sheep hear my voice a stranger they will not hear but flee from him Hilar. lib. 1. de Trinit when we speak of divine matters let us give to GOD the knowledge of himself and let us with all veneration follow his sayings for he is a meâ—t witness to himself who is not known but by himself Aug. lib. 6. Conf. cap. 5. Thou hast perswâ—ded me O GOD that not these men who believe these books which thou in all Ages hast founded upon thy authority are to be blamed but such as believe them not neither are they to be heard If any perchance should say to me whence knowest thou these books to have been ministred to man-kind by the Spirit of the one and most true GOD even that very same thing was mostly to be believed Aug. lib. 2. de Baptismo contra Donatist as Let us not bring false ballanceâ— wherein we may weigh what we will and as we will according to our own arbitriment saying this is heavy that is light but let us bring the divine ballance out of the holy Scriptures as the Lords treasurie and let us weigh in it what is more heavy and weighty Yea let us not weigh only but also acknowledge scriptuval truths to be weighed and determined alreadie by the Lord. Si Scriptura habeat controversiam ex eadem Scriptura adhibitis ejus testibus terminâ—tur Aug. de doctr Chr. lib. 3. cap. 28. Papists Quest. 14 Question fourteenth We are still gaiâ—ing Proselyts from you but few turne off from us and become members of your Church Answere Your pelf and policie is greater Prote ∣ stants Ans 1 then ours hereby simple soules are ensnared Secondly Ye give indulgencies for looseness this catcheth prophaine ones who love to live at random but without some such carnall design or prejudice we hear not that any turn off from us Thirdly Have not sundrie left Rome in the integrity of their heart and closed
prophecie it vvill make against the Pope of Rome vvho giveth himself out for sole Bishop and all under him his Vicars onlie This is clear from the historie of the Trent Council lib. 7. pag. 599. Father Simon the Florentine there speaketh after the same tenour When it is demanded whither any Bishop be Jure Divino One must answer affirmativelie One onlie the Successour of Peter And thus the famous saying of Cyprian must be expounded there is but one Bishoprick and every Bishop holdeth a part thereof in solidum otherwise it cannot bâ—e defended that the government of the Church is the most perfect of all that is Monarchical but must necessarlie â—all into an Oligarchie All the Popes Prelats did speak then the same language will not this make him solus Episcopus so that in Estius sense he must be concluded to be Rex superbiae because he is sole universal Bishop The primitive Fathers studied modestie charitie humilitie But Head of the whole Church Prince of Priests infallible universal Monarch were names unknown to them Yet this is the Popes motto summarei the great foundation sine qua corruit Ecclesia saith Bellarmin in the forecited place Further worship in an unknown tongue was not heard in the Church till it was commanded by Witalianus in the 7. Cent. saith Platina and Aquinas on the 1. Cor. 14. telleth that the worship in the primitive Church was performed in the vulgar language The mutilation of the Sacrament of the Supper by withholding the cup froÌ„ the people was unknown to ant quitie For Valentia de legitimo usâ— Eucharistiae cap. 10. saith that the receiving of the Sacrament under one kind came into the Church by no decree but by the custom of the people not long before the Council of Constance at which time the custom was made a law The with-holding Scripture from people was detested in the primitive Church Was it not decreed in the Council of Nice saith Agrippa that no Christian should be without a Bible espcially if he could read in Augustin Chrysostom and Hieroms days the people are required to search the Scriptures according to the rule Iohn 5 39. Tutius ambulatur per Scripturas saith Aug. lib. 3. de doct Chri. cap. 28 nor by humane traditions or glosses Some names of things occurring in antiquitie are preserved in the Roman Church but it will be found that the Fathers understood them not in that sense nor made use of them as they do The nature of things new in Poperie is unanswerable to the old names as snal afterward appear By this we may perceive that Popery was not from the beginning The mysterie of iniquitie encreasing vain men set their posts beside the Lords posts their thresholds beside his Ezek. 43. 8. And making up a bodie of superstitious inventions have placed Religion in these which they hold forth to the world as eldest and have so falne out with Scripture truths that they are not ashamed to accuse them and their professours of noveltie heresie c. But be it known to all that we wil have no Religion to be called ours younger nor the Apostles and primitive Christians It shal eitheâ— be sixteen hundred years old it shal be founded on the Scripture sensed by pute antiquitie or else not outs Beside this their foistery that which is foisted poysoneth souls and filleth them with the East-wind For by their merits and mediatours they derogat from the honour of Christ and from the faith of Christians seeing he is is so precious to them who believe 1. Pet. 2. 7. It is not strange that contrar to Scripture they will deny the imputation of the righteousness of Christ Iesus to the blessed Elect and that imputed righteousness of Saints is affirmed by them to profit others and relieve them from temporal punishment As if the death and merits of the Mediatour were not of sufficient value to save us frâ—m all evil They say that no man can have certaintie of SalvatioÌ„ by faith and yet without any revelation they will canonize others as Saints Can any be more certain of the salvation of another nor his own Their doctrine concerning the Priests intention taketh away all certaintie of faith if the Priest do not seriously intend what he professeth to do there is no Sacrament no consecration no ordination And who but the Lord searcheth the heart and knoweth human intentions By making the Body of Christ now in Heaven to be corporally present in the Sacrament of the Supper when it is administred they deny many articles of the Christian Creed they strengthen the heresie of the Valentinians who said that his Bodie was phantastical not real they contradict the Scripture which calleth it the fruit of the vine after consecration Luke 22. 18. And Aug. tract 5. in Iohn who saith that the bread remaineth bread after the consecration and the Body of Christ a real Body after the Resurrection By their doctrine of Free-will they make free Grace to stand at the beck of the wil whither it shal be operative or not Yea they make providence in its acting dependent on the will For this is their tener GOD worketh because the will consenteth not e contra see Bellar de gratia libero arbitrio lib. 4. cap. 15. Will it not follow then that we should thank our will for our Conversion and intreat it to make grace efficacious and providence effectual Seeing it hath a negative voice in all these matters And what is more prejudicial to the providence and worship of GOD or to the efficacie of grace nor this tener which Aug refuteh well in his Enchrid cap 32. By invocation of Saints the worship of Reliques and the whole house of their imagerie they give the glory of the Lord to another and are reproved Is 42. 8. Yea there be many whom they invocat of whom they are not certain if either they were Saints or lived in the world Cassander who lived in communion with Rome acknowledgeth that much superstition is sostered by this way Consult â—1 Is it not then soul-damning By their distinction of mortal and venial sins by Purgatory by prayer for the dead by their absolution under so bare a degree of contrition they make people sin securely for under the name of vâ—nial sins they comprehend grievous crimes as sivearing by the wounds of Christ Per Membra Christi est venialis irreverentia si reverenter juretur nullâ—â—s videtur esse peccatum saith Valentia tom 3. disp 6. quast 7. punct 3. Legerdemaine in vendition ubi quantuns quale mutatur may be venial si materia sit levis saith Tolet. de 7. pecc cap. 49. whereas diverse measures without exception are declared abomination Pro. 20. 10. All these remedies which they apply after death make men less diligent in dutie while they live And if Purgatory be the Popes peculiar as they call it he must have little love to Souls and too much to his own gain who will not
Firmament we may see the singer of GOD so here †See Barron against Turnbul tract 9. p. 643. we may behold divine Majestie Heavenly efficacie the consent and harmonie of parts the fulfilling of Prophesies see August lib. 6. Confes cap. 5. Persuasisti mihi non qui crederent libros tuos quos tanta in omnibus fere gentibus authoritate fundasti sed qui non crederent esse culpandos nec audiendos esse si qui forte mihi dicerent unde scis illos libros unius veri Dei spiritu esse humano generi administratos id ipsum maxime credendum erat The Scripture it self then testifieth whose it is holy men of GOD did so speak and writ that ye may know the certainty of these things Luk 1. 4. and believe them Jo. 19. 35. this is taken from the very Scripture and not from any distinct Tradition from iâ— Beside all this we have miracles wonderful providences sealing this word the testimonie of adversaries Jews and Gentiles to the doctrine therein contained the testimonie of old and late writters to our whole Canon And seeing the Lord hath sealed it and it is called his Testament none should adde to it or alter any point contained therein This is expresly forbidden Deut. 4. 2. 12. 32. Pro. 3. 6. how grosly Papists make void the Testament of the Lord by new datives and in that are like the Pharisees Matth. 15. 3. 6. shal appear hereafter Answer fourth Although all books †The Papists reject some of these Apocriphal books from the Canon of Scripture aâ— Esdras the book of Baruch c. are not rejected by us upon this account only because the Iews did so but for many other good reasons for self-murder is commended in Razis there contrar to the 6. Command c. The authours crave pardon for that which is spoken amiss whereby it is acknowledged that they had not the spirit of infallibility in all ages exceptions were made against them as is well proved by our Divines S. Thomas and Nicodemus Gospels have approbation of none so need no refutation Now I referre it to any Reader whither this first reason be sufficiently refuted or if this reflecter understandeth Logick or himself who thus reasoneth The number of Scripture bâ—oks is controverted therefore that which on all hands betwixt PROTESTANTS and Papists is acknowledged to be Scripture is not the determiner of faith Who will not perceive here a mis-stated question and gross non-consequence Yet no greater not that concerning the Messias which deserveth no answer being so absurd and bordering with blasphemie The second Reason Why Scripture cannot Pa. Rea. 2 be the rule of faith is because PROTESTANTS believe many things whereof the Scripture maketh no mention at all as the keeping holy the Sunday for the Sabbath or Saturday the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son the Trinity of Persons in God that there is one person although two natures in Christ for the Scripture maketh no more mention of Persons then of Papish-tran substantiation that Baptism of Hereticks is not to be reiterat against the Donatists that Ordination of lawful Ministers should not be reiterâ—t against Marcion that Baptism and the Lords Supper are Sacraments which are the very fundamentals of your Religion I answer to this that errour is broodie for ere it be confessed by some men they will Pro. An. 1 broach absurd Tenets and shake foundations which appeareth evidently here For this man deâ—yeth the Articles of our Creed to be grounded on Scripture which is most abominable to utter What is not the Trinity the Sacrament of Baptism and the Supper scriptural truths Let not this be heard in Gath. This giveth the Council of †Sess 7 Can. 1. de Sacr. in gen Trent the lie so the author is anathematized by them Let Papists read such as writ positive Divinity these points are aboundantly proved by them from Scripture Catechists will teach them to speak better and it they be not founded there why do your own writters prove them thence Secondly The mysterie of the Trinity is directly in Scripture 1. Io. 5. 7. there are An. 2. three which bear record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit these three are one The Word Person is in Scripture Heb. 1. 3. we indeed make use of words in the doctrine of the Trinity which are not Scripture words but all the things are there otherwise our foundations would soon dissolve This is Augustins answer against the Arrians Contra Max. lib. 3. cap. 5. and Naz. Orat. 5. de Theol. yea your own Bellarmin lib. 2. de Christo cap 2. saith Quadam verba sunt utilia ad explicanda mysteria Scripturae quae licet in Scripturis non habeantur eorum tamen aequivalentia semina ibi habentur i. e. Some words are necessar for explaining the mysteries of Scripture which though they be not contained in the Scriptures yet their parallels and seeds are contained there This he proveth by instances cha 3. 4. 5 which I need not to translate So that the Tenets which we mantaine concerning the Trinity and the two Sacraments being Scripture truths it is gross to say we have no Scripture warrand for these seeing we may make use of words for explaining divine truths any may behold the weakness of this Reply The name Trinity and Sacrament is not in Scripture therefore the thing is not there As for the Sabbath we once prove from Scripture that Saturday is no Sabbath to us Col. 2. 16. 17. then from Scripture that one day of seven behoved to be observed by reason of the fourth Command which is Moral Secondly That the seventh in number â—â— Moral the seventh day in order only ceremonial Thirdly That the Lords-day by right succeedeth †See Palmer Candrey about the Sabbath as is here made out And what day can be more sit then that on which Christ Jesus arose and put an end to the work of Redemption Then our Lord came in amongst the midst of his Disciples Io. 20. 26. which Mâ—ldoâ—at on the place confesseth to be some proof to shew that the Lords-day hath its origen from the will of Christ Acts 20 7. The Disciples conveened to the worship and the breaking of bread that day and 1. Cor. 16 they had their collections that day Hierom contra Vigilantium sayeth that per unaâ— Sabbati is understood the Lords-day And Rev. 1. 10. There is express mention of the Lords day on which place Ribera the Iesuit remarketh that in the Apostles times the solemnity of the Sabbath was changed to the Lords-day and consecrated by the Lords Resurrection Esthius on Gal. 4. v. 10. refuteth you fully by saying Diei Dominicae observationem Apostolicam esse constat ex Scriptura i. e. It is clear from Scripture that the Apostles observed the Lords day How then can you say that we have no Scripture for it Thirdly That the holy
all must say Enter not into judgement with thy servant for in thy sight no flesh living â—â—n be justified Psalm 143. 2. And the Church must confess that all her righteousness is ragged and as a menstruous cloath Reply In your thirteenth Section you denying Papists Reply that we are justified by faith and works do both contradict scripture and your self It in the Epistle of St. James chap. 2. verse 20. 24. You see then how by works a man is justified and not by faith only No wonder after this ye contradict your self when you grant that faith is justifying or made justified by works For what is it to say that works justify faith But that faith without works is not justifying And so that faith justifyeth not all or no other way then as it is decompanied with good workes as two conjunct causes For as the Philosopher saith causa causae est causa causati But what needeth any reasoning if this place be not clear to a Minister what it clear to ignorants in all the scripture Wherefore ye had done better to reject the Epistle of James with Luther then to acknowledge it for scripture to deny that we are justified by faith and works the two parts of Christian dutie being belief and life Yet to shew that the place of St. James is not to be taken according to the letter you cite three passagâ—â— excluding workes of the written law from justifying but not excluding workes of grace and the Gospel The first whereof expoundeth the rest and St. Augustin them all de fide operib cap. 14. saying St. Paul speaketh of the workes of Abraham in so much as they proceed from the law excluding the spirit and grace of Christ Then you say neither can any good work be wrought by us till we are justified for how can an evil tree bring forth good fruit To which Question I answer with our Saviour in the Gospel asking how a good tree can bring forth evil fruit as David committing adulterie For if you understood the one you may easilie understand the other Which if you do not go to the school and learn the distinction betwixt simpliciter and secundum quid betwixt good and evil simplie and in part For as there be few so good but they do some evil so there be few so bad but they do some good being assisted by GODS actual grace albeit they want sanctifying grace Yea very good actions may be done with some little imperfection which maketh the Prophet compare our righteousness to a menstruous cloath Duply You are like to your self all along in this reflection for I cannot call it a return Prote ∣ stants Duply seeing you have a flourish of fectless words for catching women and children but do not touch the arguments proposed for justification by faith without the workes of the law My first argument was this That the Apostle Paul saith we are justified by faith without the workes of law therefore not by them You say he meaneth not of workes of grace What then Of sinful workes before Coversion And is it indeed like that sinful workes can be called by the Apostle workeâ— of the law seeing these are transgressions of the law Or that the justitiaries amongst the Romans in the dayes of the Apostle were so gross as to assert that sinful workes justifie a man which condemn him Secondly you say that justification by faith contradicteth scripture James 2. 24. which place I explained and reconciled with the 4. of the Romanes and all you say to that is that I contradict my self I said workes justifie faith for my faith is known by my works to my self and others But that will nor say that workes and faith justifie the man So I clash not with my self here And for your Maxime causa causae est causa causati If I understand this you contradict your self in the application of it for faith being the cause of workes and justifying the man workes are the effect of justificatâ—on not the cause of it Hence the Apostle James saith shew me thy faith by thy workes O man For it cannot be showen without workes v. 18. Albeit we say that faith alone justifieth yet that Fides sola in approhendendo non est solitaria My next argument was that a man must be justified before he can work well therefore workes are not the cause of justification I hope you will not say that the effect is antecedent to its cause if you have read Ramus Logick And that a man must be justified before he can work well I prove thus He must be sanctified Ergo c. a corrupt tret cannot bring forth good fruit Matth. 7. 18. Ere you have not something to say to this you close with Pelagius for a defence and speak non-sense For you say that you answer with our Saviour by a distinction of that which is simply such and secundum quid In what part of the Gospel is this Logick to be found For it is clear from the verse above cited that our Saviour denyeth simply the thing so he granteth it not secundum quid Some good acts you say may be done by evil men being assisted by actual grace I would know if actual grace can be in exercise where habitual grace is not at all then if men habitually evil in an unconverted state can do any thing well That something materially good may be done by them as well as sin may be committed by the regenerated I doubt not but that they can do ought upon a good principle for a good end by a good morive I deny it simply Now if they be not such they cannot justifie a mâ—n For nullum agens potest agere extra Spharâ—m suae activitatis Till he be sanctified he cannot be be such till he be justified he cannot be sanctified Workes justifie no more the man then the fruit maketh the tree good My third Reason you leave untouched which was this that the present time requireth all our work Ergo it cannot justifie us for bygones or the future What is now debituns cannot pay my bygone debt nor free me for the time to come And you grant all I have said in the fourth that our best workes are unperfect and so cannot hold water before the Tribunal of GOD. I am glade to hear you grant so much for then where will workes of supererogation and merit appear For further clearing of our Doctrine of Justification take notice the Papists and we thus differ First They say there is a two fold justification one whereby a mâ—n unjust is made just for attaining this there must be previous dispositions by the acts of faith fear hope love whch fit the man for his justification some of them terme this Meritum congrui others say tâ—at this is the free gift of GOD not deserved by workes The second Justification is that whereby â— man being just is made more just this they say is merited by their workes and proceedeth
the unlawfulness of it nor all the Rhetorick of Muretus can wipe off For as an excellent Poet saith on that subject Maribus ore oculis atque auribus undique ano Et pene erumpit qui tuus iste cruor Non tuus iste cruor sanctorum at caede cruorem Quâ—m ferus hausisti non poteras coquere Eighteenthly Ye call your selves the Universal Church which was never attributed § 18. Inst. to the Church of Rome in the Apostle Paul his time notwithstanding that then their faith was spoken of through all the world Rom. 1. 8. Beside ye are but a particular Church at best not so numerous as we and the Greek Church are with whom we joyn in one Confession except about the manner of the ProcessioÌ„ of the Holy Ghost As witnesseth their Confession set forth in the name of the Greek Church by Cyrillus Patriarch of CoÌ„stantinople and printed Anno 1633. which booke can easily be produced Whereas ye bragge of Unity ye are great Schismaticks renting the universall Church and taking the tittle from them to your selves Ye are miserably divided within as appeareth from the strong factions of the Councill of Trent and these hot skirmishes amongst Jesuâ—ts Dominicans and Jansenists lasting to this day Moreover the scripture calleth Rome Bâ—bylon the scarlet whore according to your own Interpreters upon Rev. 17. 18. which Babylon is to be destroyed Reply You accuse us for calling our selves the Universal Church and yet would willingly Papists Reply take that title to your selves if the common practâ—se in all Ages to your shame and discreâ—it did not oppose it None acknowledging your Church under this title but all generâ—lly ours But I have heretofore told you why the Roman Church is called the Catholick as being the Mother Church constantly since the Apostles times which hath a power of head-ship and jurisdiction over all the rest holding communion with her through out the world Then you say we are but a particular Church not so numerous as ye and the Grecians with whom ye joyn in one Confession of Faith except about the manner of the procession of the Holy Ghost Which it seemeth you hold but as a trissle although it maketh no distinction betwixt the second and the third Person of the Trinity for where there is no Procession and relative opposition in the Trinitie there is no distinction say Divines after Iohn Damascene yet notwithstanding ye joine with this in the confession of faith albeit they plainly disclaim them in the censure of the Orientall Church where chap. 7. 12. 13. 21. they hold Transubstantiation seven Sacraments an unbloody sacrifice prayers to the saints and for the dead whatever you alleadge of that confession of faith printed only in the last year But however this sheweth the Protestants weaknes and wavering faith that they claim the Grecians and Lutherians albeit both do openly disclaim them Neither do you prove better our division amongst our selves seing all the parties in the Council of Trent subscrived the Canons thereof nor doth the hot skirmishes betwixt Jesuits and Dominicans in school questions hinder their Unity in all the tenets of the Catholick Church both being willing to subscribe them with their blood as amongst Jesuits many do to this day As for Jansenists we altogether disowne them and to make you more numerous if ye please are well content that in many things you call them yours I am content also Rome be called the scarlet whore Rev. 17. 18. viz. Rome under Pagan Empeâ—ours But was not the Church of Rome then in her greatest integrity and virginity under the Apostleâ— St. Peter and Paul who praising her faith as spoken of through the world both declare her Universality and speak of her preheminence Duply I had reason to challenge your usurpation Prote ∣ stants Duply of the Catholick title for your own Pighius Eccl. hierarch lib. 6. cap. 3. saith Quis unquam per Romanam Ecclesiam intellexis universalem He thinketh it absurd and repugnant and so it is As for the Grecians I can presently produce their Confession †See it set down after the Preface Printed not the last year but 30. years ago and upward wherein they disclaim seven Sacraments the unbloody service of the Masse prayers to Saints or for the Dead Purgatory Transubstantiation c. And Dr. Rivet in his 3. Tom. pag. 1257. setteth down at length how the Jesuits by money and moyen of the French Ambassadour accused the same Cyrillus of treason before the grand Segniour and said that he favoured the King of great BRITTAIN by which accusation he was for a time thrust out of charge and forced to flee anno 1627. but afterwards by the good providence of GOD restored the Greek Church would owne no other Patriarch during his absence and how sore he was persecuted thereafter see Hornbeck in his Summa Contro As for the Jansenists you gift us with them calling them ours So Augustin and the Dominicans are ours also in this so your unity and universality â—s not so much as you pretend You grant also that the scarlet whore Rev. 17. and Babylon is Rome but under the Heathen Emperour and not as it is now under the Pope Your own Ribera refuteth you fully in this for he saith †So saith Sixtus Senensis and Baronius also that it must be meaned of Apostat Rome in the time of Antichrist because she is called an adulteress the mother of harlots but there can be no adultery where Marriage was not once Secondly The people of GOD are required to leave her lest they partake of her plagues But they were never incorporated with Pagan Rome as Christians for they had no communion with Pagan Idols Ergo if your Church be the Mother of Fornications and less numerous then these who hold the Scripture for the rule in no sense can ye be called the Catholick Church Ninthteenthly Ye make the Pope Christs § 19. Inst. Vicâ—r on Earth Peters successour the head of the Church an infallible man a Demi-God Whereas all the Apostles were equal in power and dignity Matth. 20. 26. And Cyprian lib. 3. de unitate Ecclesiae saith hoc idem Petrus quod reliqui Apostoli pareâ— consortio dignitate Peter was one with the rest of the Apostles in dignity and fellowship Ambros de Sp. S. lib. 2. cap. ult Nec Paulus est inferior Petro. see August ad Hieron epist 97. and Hierom ad Evagr and Cyprian epist ad Quintum 71. Prophets and Apostles were not infallible except in penning the Scripture Did not Moses speak unadvisedly Psalm 106. 33. the Prophet Elisha professeth that the case of the Shunamit was hid from him 2. Kings 4. 27. Nathan gave forth a verdict to day and made a retractation to morrow 2. Sam. 7. Peter controuled the Heavenly vision and knew not what to do Acts 10. 17. And shal your sinful Popes then be infallible who will believe it Is it not then
with naked persecuted truth in our Church as the Marques of Galeacia Mr. Smeton c. yea sundry have gone to Rome been converted by taking a distaste at their worship and way Fourthly Our run awayes runagads have to mourn before the Lord for their Apostacie seeing they cannot deny that the Ordinances in our Church have been by the Lords blessing instrumental to beget children to God This they must graunt unless they will say that all the reformed Church is unconverted which they have no confidence to averre Now how gross is it to spit in the face of her who did bear and foster them which I wish the Lord may lay to the consciences of such revolters But not to insist further I desire you in the fear of God to pause and consider well whether you are going to heaven or hell and by what rule you walk If the will of man or the revealed will of God have the power of your consciences or whether it be safer to take the scriptures way in which the Prophets and Apostles walked to heaven or the way of your own traditions and vaine inventions He who walketh according to the scripture rule peace and mercy shall be upon him and upon the Israell of God Reply In your last answer you say our Papists Reply pelf and policie is greater then yours both which I grant but glories in neither Yet if Ministers augmentations hold on they will shortly equal our pelf but not our Christian policit in employing it so well our glorious and goodly edifices of Churches Hospitals Monasteries dispersing and distributing their rents to pious uses But the thrusting down of Churches Hospitals Monasteries dispersing and dissipating their rents testifie your want of policy blind avarice mad passion Secondly You say we give indulgencies for looseness as if in Catholick times there had been greater looseness then since the Reformation Whereas the keeping of Lent and Fasting dayes were abolished Pennance and satisfaction for sin taken away Celibacie in Church men thought a crime Laicks allowed after divorcement to marry all good works thought impossible the Commandments thought impossible to be keeped and that men sin of necessity in their best actions which as it excuseth all wickedness and sin so it giveth way to all looseness and prophainness Thirdly You say many quit Rome in the integrity of their heart such as the Marquess of Galeacia and closed on their peril with naked truth in your Church To which I answer that all Hereticks and Schismaticks have quit Rome not in the integritie of their heart but in the blindness of their mind and that with their own peril eternal damnation closing with a very naked faith and Religion not well cloathed with the least colour of truth but not with naked faith or belief which Catholicks confidently and constantly assert what ever you say to the contrar And it is no where else to be found for they know there is but one faith and one GOD and one true Church Consequentlie united in the same faith in all which points as she was established by Christ and his Apostles hath continued since their time visible in her Pastours and People in all Ages holy and incorrupted in her Doctrine religious in her Sacraments and ceremonies powerful and glorious in her wonders and miracles conversion of Infidels in the which the holy Fathers have lived and all true Martyrs have died Which only all new upstarts and Sects do persecute and oppose as Protestants at this day under the pretence of Reformation and upon the same ground of wresting Scripture against the common consent of the Church and Fathers with them For as all divisions in Christianity have been from the Roman Catholick Church so all have turned both their armes and pennes chiefly against her but in vain she is builded on a rock against which the gates of hell shal not prevail against her And so who return from you to her are neither run-awayes nor run-agads as you call them but like the forlorn child or lost sheep return'd Whose example undoubtedly many more would follow if they would consider Faith without unity amongst Protestants a Church without a Head a Body without united Members a Law without a Judge a Temple without an Altar Religion without Sacrifice Divine service without Religious ceremonies Sacraments which do not sanctifie Doctrine without infallibility Belief without a ground Preachers without a call Commandments impossible to be keeped Exhortation to what is not in our power Reprobation without workes Reward without Merits Sin punished where there is no Free-will Scripture received or rejected upon the catalogue of the Jewes GODS word patched up by men Reformation without authority New-lights against old received veâ—iâ—ins the Privat-spirit against the whole Church single mens opinions against the unanimous consent of the Fathers in a word wavering Pastours unsetled Government unstable Faith In the post-script there be a parallel patched about our Reformations which being composed of the gall of bitterness without verity or reason deserveth no answer but that which Hezekiah commanded Is 36. 21. Duply You graunt that ye are rich and politick this is true there is much prophain Prote ∣ stants Duply 1 policie where Jesuited equivocation is mantained But tell me if this be like the Godly sinceritie and Gospell simplicitie which was the old Apostolick way and ground of their rejoicing 2. Cor. 1. 12. If ye exceed us in sumptuous buildings which politickly you mistake for the policie mentioned by me though your pelf be greater then ours we want not Hospitalls Bridges Temples according to our abilitie But what is that to the doctrine which is according to Godliness The Turks exceed you as farre that way as ye doe us And the Temple of Diana at Ephesus exceeded you and them also Secondly You deny that Poperie fostereth prophanness but it is too apparent and Duply 2. how can it be otherwise If indulgencies bought and sold like an horse in a market tend not ex natura operis in it self to make men loose and prophane let any sober man judge For thus may they reason shall I quite my lusts for a little money I know what will do the bussines and put me in favour with God Why should I pluck out my right eye and cut off my right hand when a little time in puâ—gatorie will do the turne and a soulemasse which I can have for the Legacie of a summe of money will free me thence But we with the scripture forbid men to deceive themselves for they who do such things shall not it herit the kingdom of heaven So with us nothing less will satisfie then Gospell repentance and the least ground of hope is not granted to those hereafter who turne not away hore from their iniquities How can this be denyed seeing your latest Casuists such as Escobar Busenbaius and Diana the Sicilian have purposly devised latitudes for rendring prophane men secure about Duells Sodomy and other acts of
We are bound as Christians not only to bear the scourge of tongues but more also for the Gospels sake when called to it Augustin said to Petilian his tongue was not the fan I am a man in the floore of Christ and if good grain will be laid up in the Garner blow the wind as it will So we may say to such râ—ilers yea if the adversarie would write not only pasquils but a book of this kind we may bind it to our shoulders and wear it as our crown For the Lord will in due time wipe of the rebuke of his people Is 25. 8 which they bear for his Name That saying of Bernard is sweet Cimbae me comitto in tanto discrimine confidens in Domine qui pro illo recte lâ—quentibus pro illo laborautibus dicit Adsum 〈◊〉 run the reaâ—k trusting in the Lord who hath promised presence to all who speak and act rightlie for him And heroickly Luther to the same purpose if truth be on my side quidni pro viribus agam why should â—â—ot do my uttermost sim homicida sim adulter â—â—â—do silentii non arguar dum Christus patitur Let them call me what they wil if I be not guilty of sinful silence when Christ suffereth in his truth It is a very smal matter upon this account to be judged of men 1. Cor. 4. 3. these things are light and heavy as we ordinarily take them If this strain of reproaching did siste at us it were not so much but they reproach the written word of GOD and sentence it boldly of imperfection contrar to Psalm 19. 7. 2. Tim. 3. 15. 17. and of obscuritie as if it were not a light and lantherue to our paths Psalm 119. 105. Yea they shamelesly averre that the authority of the Church and Pope of Rome is greater to us nor Scripture Is it not lamentable that men called Christians for pompous selfish interests should laboriously studie to cast aspersions upon the unâ—ported word of GOD and depretiate it so in the world May not this render Popery suspicious to any knowing man that the abettors thereof decline the written word of GOD to be the sole umpire of faith and manners and endeavour to discredit it before the Nations which is the touch-stone of truth and best fence we have against Satan and all his complices such non sunt audiendi saith holy Aug. Confes lib. 6. cap. 5. they should not in this be heard far less obeyed Their second device when they are pressed with the truth is to coin evil grounded distinctions and with this ley money to make merchandise of poor simple souls Needle headed men have strangely acted their inventions herein and cruÌ„bled Gospel truths thus that he is now thought the best and most learned Papist who can findout subtile subterfugies and receptacles against plain Scripture verities So that the Romanists are the great foxes which eat up the tender vines Other Sectaries who separat themselves from the Church builded on the foundation Eph. 2. 20. and deface the doctrine which is according to Godliness are of lesser magnitude That ye may know what sort of proppes uphold their rotten building take these five instances First When we prove that the Scripture is the rule of faith this they grant in part but say they it is a partial not the total rule they must sowder somewhat of their own tradition to it erre they acknowledge it for a rule This is a reasonless shift If the rule be not total and perfect in its own kinde for its own ends it is no rule at all but a semi-rule regula nec appositionem nec ablationem admittit saith Theophilact on the 3. chap. to the Philip. Nothing can be added to or taken from a rule the law of nature the law of reason are sufficient for their own ends so is the written word of GOD for salvation When we say Secondly that the word of GOD cannot have authority from men therefore the Scripture is judge of the Church and not the Church of the Scripture They answer by a leaden distinction that it hath authority from the Church in respect of us but not in respect of it self This is a reasonless evasion for all authority is an act quoad extra and relative to us The Scriptures have excellency and dignity internal but all its authority is external and relative to men So that distinction is null If the Scripture hath its authority from the testimony of their Church then their faith must be ultimatly resolved into their Church testimony as more authoritative nor the word of GOD. Propter quod unumquodque est tale illud ipsum est magis tale Therefore Popish faith by this maxime is not divine but ecclesiastick and humane Now the Church and faith of Believers should be builded immediatly upon the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles Iesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone Eph. 2. 20. Therefore the Pope with his traditions cannot found the Church nor the faith of Christians other foundation can no man lay then that which is laid 1. Cor. 3. 11. To this they returne a distinction that Iesus Christ is the principal and the Pope the secondary foundation seeing it was said to Peter upon this rock I will build my Church This subterfuge in like the rest if this was said to Peter personally as Tertul. de praescrip thinketh then not to his successours suppose the Pope were the man a personal individual prerogative is incoÌ„municable If it was not personal but to him and his successours then if the Apostle Paul were living the Pope behoved to be above him in dignity and Church prerogative by reason Peter was above him and he succeedeth to his superioritie This to any discerner may appear absurd Beside the Church is builded on the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Eph. 2. 20. then not upon one Apostle take the words as ye will The true meaning of these words upon this rock I will build my Church is this the confession of Peter concerning Iesus Church the Son of the living GOD was a â—ock on which the Church was builded This interpretation is authorized by Augustin who interpreteth the words thus Tract ult in Iohan. serm 13. de verbis Apost he giveth also strong reason for it lib. 1. retract cap. 21. non enim dictum est Petro tu es petra sed tu es Petrus which reason Valentia challengeth in vain disp 1. to 3. quaest 1. punc 7. Further there câ—nnot be two foundations if we speak properly If no man can lay another as the Scripture speaketh why should it be asserted Christ Iesus alone set forth in the doctrine of Prophets and Apostles is that solid foundation on which we build all our salvation he is that sure foundation laid in Zion and no wayes can this without blasphemie be applyed to the Pope seeing the Apostle Peter maketh application of it to Christ only 1. Peter 2. 6. Thirdly When we
assert with the Scripture that Marriage is honourable amongst all therefore they should not forbid it Their answer is that all should not be taken here absolutely for then a brother might marry his sister but only of persons not prohibited and their votaries are such Is not this a fig-leaf covering Incest is forbidden by the law of GOD. But where are Church men forbidden by GOD to marry it is honourable among them saith the written word who can bind men to the contrar of that which the Lord hath permitted and commanded The evasion about the Sacrament of the Supper is of the same kind when it is objected that Christ said expresly of the Cup drink ye all of it By all say they is meaned all Priests but not all Christians Is this to be endured with patience to see men tear so the sense of Scripture with sophisms If all relate to them as Ministers of the Gospel then they should have the bread only and all privat Christians should be barred for he who said drink ye all of it said likewise to the same all take eat Fourthly When they are challenged of Superstition and Idolarrie by breach of the second Command here there is a distinction not lacking betwixt the worship called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reserved for GOD and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they avowedly say should be given to images Saints c. And this they father on Augustin But these two words are promiscuously taken in Scripture and both of them given to GOD as shal be proved in its proper place Papists give 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Images Reliques and Cross of Christ Thus they confound themselves When Iohn the divine would have worshipped the Angel doth he not forbid him Rev 22. 9. and say worship GOD Belike he knew not this distinction Is it not called will worship Col 2. 23. Then it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither doth Augustin make use of that distinction in the Popish sense he was farre from thinking that Religious worship should be tendered to Saint or Angel for he saith lib. de vera Relig. cap. ult Honorandi sunt propter imitationem non adorandi propter Religionem And epist 44. seâ—as inquit a Christianis â—ullum coli mortuorum He biddeth us praise the Martyres honour their memories follow their foot-steps sed DEVM Martyrum colite worship the GOD of Martyrs onlie This distinction then is groundless Is it not lamentable that men professing Christianitie should so hazard upon Idolatrie Superstition and will worship with a deceitful distinction which can neither satisfie reason nor conscience And dare any tender Christian think that such jugling work will be his peace in the day of distress and death What is this but a lie in the right hand Therefore let all who love and fear the Lord bewarre of that worship which standeth on such cogling distinctions Fifthly Their great refuge when they cannot mantain these absurdities is that we calumniat them mistate questions And if neither of these can serve then they alleadge that these are the opinions of some privat Doctors and not the judgement of their Church But in this vindication let all be assured that to my best uptaking nothing is fathered on this Adversary but what he saith directly or coÌ„sequentially nothing brought against him but that which is either literally or interpretatively in the written word of GOD or human Authours Albeit it he notoriously known that Papists uphold their tottering Babel by lies murthers treasons deluding wonders by corrupting mutilating foisting embezeling diverse testimonies divine and humaâ—â— as shal be made out hereafter yet we have not so learned Christ The truths of Christs Gospel need not such proppes and we are not allowed to lie for GOD. It is a meer evasion to cast over what they cannot make good on their privat Doctours For the decrees of the council of Trent to which now they profess adherence are purposly contrived in many particulars like the Delphian oracles and when they lurke under ambiguities what way shall they be found out but by their Doctours who are the expositors of their tenets Beside there be few or none of them cited whose books are not approven by Censurers appointed for that effect the tenour of whose testimonie is that such books contain nothing contrar to the Catholick faith of the Church of Rome Is not this equivalent to a Council statute Do they not impuâ—â—â—â—ur Doctours Calvine Luther c notwithstanding of 〈…〉 Confessions of faith whereof they cannot be ignorant They deal not only so with their own writters but also with the Fathers as some hard Masters use their servants if they â—lease their humours they will keep them if not they will dismisse them it may be with a stain betwixt termes Yea they deal worse with such testimonies as rellish nor their taste for they dispatch and gelde them also Their Monastries have not occasioned the murther of more infants nor their Golders by the index expurgatorius have the death of true testimonies which now being overlaid cannot see the light Shal not the GOD of truth make inquisition for these crimes in due time Surely he will arise and have mercy on Zion for some are yet living who take pleasure in her stones and favour the dust thereof Thirdly The third Engyne which thâ—se Engyneers use is the colour of antiquitie and pretence to closs walking and austerities The Church of Rome to which the Apostle Paul did write is indeed ancient whose faith was spoken of through all the world But Poperie as it is now dogmatised is a late invention plastered with antiquitie like the Gibeonites bread And so far from rendring men closs walkers that it is highlie prejudicial to Gospel interests For ex natura operis it turneth men loose and unfaithful to souls yea its pompous secular way is verie unsuitable to the simplicitie and self-denyal required in the Gospel this is soon proved The great pillar of the Romish Religion is the Popes pompous supremacie and infallibilitie In this saith Bell. prefat de Pontifice the summe of their Religion consisteth Consider Reader which of the Apostles did so empyre it Not Peter that he forbiddeth and calleth himself a fellow Elder 1. Peter 5. 1. Not any Church man for manie Centuries thereafter For Gregory who was Bishop of Rome anno 600. curseth the name of universal Bishop which Iohn Bishop of Constantinople usurped and saith epist lib. 4 Rex superbiae prope est he meaneth Anti. Christ Et sacerdotum ei praeparatur exercitus in this he prophecied truelie Estius in lib. 4. sent dist 47. being puzled with this testimonie saith that by universal Bishop Gregory meaned onlie sole Bishop who excluded others This is a meer forgerie for there were manie Bishops at that time in the Greek Church beside Iohn of Constantinople so he was not solus Episcopus But giving not granting this to be the sense of the
of commutative justice betwixt GOD and man by the dignity of their workes after conversion and their refusing to have Heaven gratis Andradius the interpreter of the Council of Trent Orthod explic lib. 6. saith The reward of the just is not freely given but Heaven is set to the sale for our workes Tâ—pperus saith in Explic. art Lovan tom 2. art 9. GOD forbid that the just should expect eternal life as the poor man doth his almes it is our conquest our triumph and the prize due to our labours Valentia tom 3. disp 7. telleth that the workes of the faithful are satisfactory for the punishment of sin Bellarmin bringeth forth a new evasion de just if lib. 5. cap. 10. saying that Christ merited that we should merit So that the merit of our workes is from his merits this is plaister to daub with For where do we read in Scripture that phrase He hath suffered for us that we should be holy in all manner of Conversation and serve him in righteousness and holiness but no where that we should merit eternal life the gift is wholly from him so it is written Rom. 6. 23. Secondly This is petitio principii for the question betwixt Papists and us is whither we are unprofitable servants when we have done all So speak we with Scripture they say we are meritorious men Thirdly Suarez saith Tom. 1. in Thomam disp 4. another thing that good workes are in themselves and of their own nature meritorious therefore not such because of Christ his merits Otherwise saith he we could not be said to merit We say this is the way to clipe the satisfaction of Christ Jesus the value of the price payed for us What good workes we do are mixed with imperfections and are too few alas if the Lord accept of them and reward these workes with temporal or spiritual blessings it is not for the merit of the work but of free grace and mercy and for the merits of Christ meerly So we may be freely rewarded see Matth. 5. 46. Luk. 6. 32. where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are promiscuously taken We cannot make amends to GOD nor satisfie his justice but his promise is sure not according to our merits but his own mercy so we must inherit eternal life this is Aug. doctrine on Ps 88. and Chrysost on Col. 2. Your satisfactions and merits are contrar to Scripture pure antiquity dishonourable to Jesus Christ and prejudicial to souls Now you see this reflection might have been well spared for it is no reply at all to what I said Sixteenthly Ye foster loosness and prophainess § 16. Inst by telling tales about Purgatory the use of prayer and sacrifices for the dead But the Scripture saith Heb. 9. 27. after death cometh judgement which must be understood immediatly otherwise it might be said after birth cometh judgement and in the grave there is neither work nor invention neither is there any place appointed for people after their removal hence save Heaven or hell Reply The telling of men that after their Papist Reply sins are forgiven they must suffer for the temporal pain due to them is not a way to foster loosness but rather to terrifie all who believe from offending GOD in the least seeing all such must be chastised either by GOD punishing or man doing pennance and that voluntary either here or in Purgatory hereafter according to the Apostle 1. Cor. 3. 15. If any ones work burn he shal suffer loss but he shal be saved yet so as by fiâ—e which place Augustin citing on Ps 37. saith and because it is said he shal be saved that fire is contemned yet that fire shal be more grievous then whatever a man can suffer in this life Purge me O Lord and make me such a one as shal not need that mending fire c. Now doth St. Paul or Aug. here tell tales Or can that mending fire by which a man is saved be more grievous then what he can suffer here Or can it make a man loose to pray with Aug. thus But it may be he was doting here as when he said Mass for his Mothers soul as we read in his Confessions committing both sacriledge and Idolatrie as commonly Protestants say to please an old wâ—fe after her death You adde that Scripture saith after death cometh judgement and in the grave there be neither work nor invention What maketh this against Purgatory Do Catholicks deny that we are justified at the very moment of death before they go to Purgatory Or that they work in the grave But how is it true say you there is no place mentioned in Scripture save Heaven oâ— hell to which the godly and wicked do go Albeit all go to one of these places yet is there not a prison mentioned from which a man shal not go till he hath payed the uttermost farthing Matth. 5. 25. which the Fathers expounded to be Purgatory viz. Hierom on this chapter St. Cyp. ep 52. Tertull. lib. de anima and doth not St. Paul above cited speak of another fire then that of hell Duply You have Rhetorications in defence Prote ∣ stants Duply of Purgatory which I pass and touch reason or testimonie produced by you You mention two texts of Scripture the one is Matth. 5. 25. where we are commanded to agree with our adversarie quickly c. this place proveth no Purgatory prison For first It is allegorick and so cannot be argumentative on a controverted point All that is here intended is that brethren should dwel together in love and forgive other their trespasses against them as is clear from the context Secondly If it were meaned of Purgatory it would make the Lord their adversarie they behoved to be delivered up to the Devil for he is the Jaylor of the prison Now it is strange divinity to say that the Lord is an adversary and the Devil a Jaylor to the man whose sins are forgiven him Thirdly If this prison be Purgatory then there is commutative justice betwixt GOD and man for such here pay the uttermost farthing And who can say to the Lord forgive me have mercy upon me and yet be of this judgement that he can pay all his debt by that mending fire and not owe any thing to free gracious pardon Fourthly It maketh punishment to purge away punishment which is Repugnantia in adjecto For you grant that the filth and blot of sin is removed here Your own Jansenius interpreteth it not of Purgatory Concor in locum The other Scripture is 1. Cor. 3. We shal be saved yet so as by fire that is not meaned of purgatorie fire but of probatorie fire in this life not hereafter Let any man read the chapter and he will see this the purpose of the Holy Ghost to shew what was doctrinally or practically erroneous should be put to the firie tryall when judgment should begin at the house of God as the Apostle Peter
speaketh 1. Pet. 4. 17. your own Pererius interpreteth not this place 1. Cor. 3. of purgatorie You say Ancients interpret these Scriptures so namely Augustin Tertullian Hierom Cyprian I would first enquire at you how you can cite the Commentars of any privat men on Scripture Seeing you averre before confidently that the sensing of Scripture and interpretation thereof belongeth to the Church of Rome and to no privat persons Augustin Cyprian c. were not the Church of Rome but privat Doctours Yea they were never members of this Church as it is now constituted being great strangers to supream infallibility and universal Monarchy engrossed in the person of the Pope They lived in Africk the one at Hippo the other at Carthage and were Bishops there Tertullian was a Presbyter and forced to leave Rome for the aspersions cast upon him by some envyous Doctors there which was the first thing tempted him to Montanism as it is told in his life he was formerly free of it When you interpret Scripture you are bound to bring one of the Popes decretals or a Canon authorised by him for the meaning of a text otherwise you are inconsistent with your own opinion But that which now you bring from these ancients is as I conceive fully satisfied and explained in the eight Duply to whâ—ch I referre the Reader You bring back hither and thither with your impertinencies All you have to do here if you would keep rule is to answer Scripture arguments seeing these taken from antiquitie have been debated formerly in their own room Yet to tell Augustines mind about the sense of the 1. Cor. 3. it is not so as you cite it he thinketh the text hard and difficult but doth not build Purgatory on it he is in that at a stand what to say and will not define the interpretation but modestly thus Non ideo confirmo quoniam non refello Aug. de Civit. DEI. lib. 21. cap. 24. Tertullian is so far from it that he saith lib. de patientia Christum laedimus c. We wrong Jesus Christ if we shal say that these who have their sins forgiven are in a state to be pitied But in Purgatory if the suffering be so great they are to be pitied Cyprian de mortalitate is of the same mind all who are in Christ when they go hence reign with Christ Ejus est mortem timere qui ad Christum nolit ire Let him fear death who will not go to Christ You say these in Purgatoty are in Christ then saith Cyprian they go to Christ not to Purgatory Justin Martyr saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 immediatly after death the souls of the righteous go to Paradise and of the unrighteous to hell resp ad Orthod quast VVhen you would have them then holding Purgatory you bring them under contradiction and are bound to reconcile them with themselves for any such clashings you may thank your Index Expurgatorius The Fathers indeed speak of probatory mending fire here of loca refrigerii before the Resurrection of Fluvius igneus after it this is the opinion of some Hence ariseth your citations but for Purgatory they knew it not It is the Blood of Jesus Christ which taketh away the guilt and filth of sin Now that this erroneous opinion maketh men loose reason proveth it For men who believe that they may live loosely here and yet go to heaven are tempted to prophainness ipso facto whatever be pretended to the contrar especially when it is told them withall that some Soul-Masses for a little money may be had to free them quickly thence And our experience in this land maketh it out also because many loose livers hanker after Poperie and hate to be reformed You answere just nothing to the 9. Heb. for if judgement cometh immediatly after death where is Purgatorie then That judgement is not temporane but eternall it is one with Eccl. 11. 9. And I would gladly know if this Tenet can hold with that scripture Rev. 14. 13. They who die in the Lord rest from their labours And if so they are not punished henceforth This purgatory fire of your own kindling maketh a hot kitchin to the Pope but purgeth no soul at all For Purgatory was noâ— decreed to be de side till the Councill of Lateran under Innocent the 3. the Florentine under Eugentus the 4. and the Tridentine under Pius the 4. so it is not old Many of the Fathers supposed that the saints received not full reward till the resurrection Aug. though dubious about it else where yet in one place De verbis Apostoli serm 18. sayeth There be two places there is not a third we are ignorant of a third meaning Purgatorie yea we find in scripture that there is none such In the Greek Fathers there is no mention of it saith Roffensis And whereas it is objected that Augustin said Masse for his mother Monica He sayeth only that seeing she prayed so frequently for him he was bound to send his best wishes after her if they could avail But speaketh very doubtfully of the matter in his book de civit DEI. Beside the Ancients prayed for these whom they thought to be in Abrahams bosom for a joyful Resurrection and full fruition to them The prayers of the Romanists are for men in miserie prisons in a place next to hell So the one and other differ much But the matter is that your gold groweth here it is your livelyhood your Mexico this maketh you so contend for it Seventeenthly Ye commit murther and § 17 Inst. allow it contrar to the sixt Command witnes the Massacre at Paris commended by the popish Oratour Muretus whose book is Printed by authority Reply The testimonie of a privat Oratour doth not make the articles of our faith And Papists Reply if this fact was done by privat Animosities neither Religion nor reason can allow it Nor do any Catholicks approve it except they who think it was done by the Kings authority to punish rebellious subjects whom he could not otherwise crub Duply This Oration of Muretus wherein he commendeth the Massacre is licensed Prote ∣ stants Duply and Printed by authority so it is not the meer testimonie of a privat Oratour but publickly allowed And whereas you say that no Catholicks approve it except these who think it was done by the Kings authority I answer the fact was clearly murther a breach of the sixth Command and admit the French King who then was young had consented to it will that justifie the breach of a divine precept How can that consist with Acts 4. 19. I am bound actively to obey my Superiours in the Lord ad aras religion reason craves no more Your own Thuanus hath not this poor evasion for justiâ—ying this murther but calleth it a bloody barbarous fact to murther men living peaceably And that universal flux of blood which flowed so aboundantly from all the passages of that young King at his death proclaimeth more lowdly to the world