say then to this procedure of the Heretiques do they grant them that one ought to hold nothing but that for a doctrin of Scripture which we read there in so many words and not reading exactly there the words of which the question is have they recourse to the Church to defend by its authority that which they think cannot be proved by the formal words of the Scripture which is the point at which all the cheating blowes of our methodists aim They do nothing of all this They doe not put the infalibilitie of the Church in play They hold themselves to the Scriptures and use its authority but for the defence of their cause and confessing that the terms of their questions are not read there exactly they protest that t is enough that the thing it selfe is found there and that t is gathered and deduced lawfully from thence and prove upon discourse found upon diverse passages and after having so proved it conclude that they have demonstrated it by the Scripture T is no matter saith S. Athan. Ep. de Synod Arim. Seleuc. T. p. 913. D. Athanasius in one of his bookes above named whither the words which one makes use of be in the Scripture or not provided that the sense of them be Orthodox and in the treatise of the decrees of the Council of Nice c idem l. de decret Synod Nic. p. 270. B. although that the words saith he be not so laid down in Scripture t is no matter so long as they have a sence truly drawn from the Scripture as it hath been said before what can one call more contentious saith S. Austin answering to Pascentius then to dispute of the name when the thing is manifest a Aug. Ep. 17 T. 2. p. 150. F and a little after you see saith he to him that from those words which are not in the Scripture one may give such reason by which it may appear that they are truths b Ibid. O. Maximinus who pressed him to prove by express terms of the Scripture that one ought to adore the holy Ghost t is well said answered he as if from the things which we read there we could not learn certain other things which we do not read there c Id l. 3. contr Max. c. 3. and following this distinction he professeth elswhere to have said what he read in or understood by the Scriptures conforming himself to their authority and St. Chrysostome d Id. l. 15 de civit D. cap. 1. gives us this rule that we ought to hold those things for holy writ whose sence is found in the Scriptures although they are not found there in the same words e Chrysost Hom. 7. in 1 Cor. p. 380. S. Gregory of Nazianzen in his thirty seventh speech disputes against the Hereticks who denying the divinity of the Holy Ghost urged him with the same wrangling to produce them a passage of Scripture which testifieth it expresly a Greg Nazian c. col 37.599.605 edit paris an 1609. Our methodists would have yielded to this assault and would have granted them that there being no formal passage to shew this truth it could not be proved by the Scriptures But S. Gregory on the contrary makes to them this wise and judicious remarke with the Style and manner of the teaching of the holy Scriptures b p. 605. that there are things which are said there which notwithstanding are not there and there are other things which are not said there which nevertheless are not wanting there some others are not said there nor are they there in effect and in fine some others are there and are spoke there He puts in the first ranck sleeping wakeing and the motions of God in the second his impassibility and that he is without beginning for though the Scriptures say often that God sleepeth or that he awaketh or that he moves locally yet notwithstanding it doth not signifie so And though that be in these words 't is not in that sence And though it never sayes expresly that he is impassible or without beginning c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it signifies it notwithstanding in divers places in other words Which the Divine made his adversaries confess who held that God was not begotten and without beginning and yet they could not produce any one passage which said it formally from whence he concludes that since by their own confession own may very well prove by the Scriptures that God is without beginning although it saith no where so expresly their procedure is altogether ridiculous for concluding that the divinity of the Holy Spirit cannot be proved by Scripture under pretext that t is not expressed there Shew me these things saith he that God is not begotten and without begining written in so many words or else we will reject them because they are not written a p. 606. And a little after how saith he dost thou keep thy self so closely to the letter and how dost thou side with the Judaical wisdome tying thy self to syllables and leaving the things if thou shouldst name twice five or twice seven and I should come and conclude from thence ten or fourteen or conclude that this thing which you call a mortal and rational animal is a man should I talk idly in thy opinion in discoursing after this manner but how canst thou think so fince I say but the very same things which thou saidst before For the determination is not more from who saith it then from him who doth oblidge necessarily to speak it b p. 606. D. viz. in saying things from whence it necessarily and inevitably follows See how this great man clearly establisheth the consequences which are drawn from Scripture Theodoret in a Dialogue printed with the works of S. Athanasius brings in one of these Hereticks which they call Macedonians from Macedonius their Author who alledged likewise that t is no where writ that the holy Ghost is God a Dialog contr Macedon tom 2. operum Athan p. 276 B. edit Paris An. 1627. To which the Orthodox Divine answered let us suppose that the name of God is not attributed to him in the Scriptures do but acknowledge that he hath the nature and operations of God and that satisfies me for the confession of his divinity But saith the other why do you say that which is not written 't is sufficient answers the Orthodox if you but only acknowledge his nature for though it were not written his nature of it selfe would consequenly draw this name from it For if once one confesseth that the holy Ghost is a person subsisting sanctifying and uncreated he of necessity is God though thou will not confess it Where is it that t is written saith the Macedonian that the Spirit is God even there answers the Orthodox where it is written that he is of the same essence And upon this Groand the Heretick having replyed that the Fathers had called the Son consubstantial
the Son and the Holy Ghost are three it must of necessity be that they have in them three Substances For upon this account I can also reason more truely if the Father and the Son are one according to that which he saith himself I and the Father are one how is there more then one Substance but you have not been willing at all to enter into this way of Dispute in demanding of me a passage where the word Consubstantial was exactly and properly laid down 'T is then for you also by the same reason to read to us the three Substances properly and expresly set down in the Scriptures a Ibid. p. 476. infrmed And upon this debate of the manner of the proofs which should be used by both parties the Author of this Dialogue caused a good man whom they made arbitrator of their Disputes to pronounce this judgement In as much as it appears by your Dispute that you cannot shew formally and expresly in the Scriptures neither you the word Consubstantial nor you that of three Substances to the end then that we may not lose more time in a childish debate of superfluous things leave of demanding of one another a formal passage and gather from the authority of the Scriptures by the reason of consequences that there is either one or three Substances in the Trinity b Ibid. p. 477. ante med and at the beginning of the following Sessions repeating the result of the foregoing dispute he saith that they did agree to prove the confession of one or of three Substances by the consequence of Holy Letters passing by the demand of a passage where the word is found Properly and Nakedly laid down a Ibid. med Judge if this be not the very Image of the Disputes of our Methodists do not they demand of us as the Arians do of the Catholicks formal passages upon every point of our differences Do not they reject with the same importunity the consequence and conclusions drawn from the Scriptures Do not they reproach us with the same injustice that these are tricks in logick with which we endeavour to save our seves b Ibid. p. 475. fin Arius de Athan Do not they press us with the same opiniatrety either to read exactly what we believe or to quit the belief of it blessed be God that our cause is found to be like that of the ancient believers And the procedure of our adversaries like that of the old Hereticks Since they choose the method of the Arians let us keep our selves to the desence of the Holy Fathers and by their example let us put our Methodists upon their own rack You demand of us Gentlemen formal passages Let us then have the same liberty Shew us exactly and expresly in the Scriptures that the Pope of Rome is the spouse of the Church and the Monarch of the World that out of his communion there is neither Grace nor Salvation that his judgements are infallible oracles and that in matters of Faith 't is impossible he should err That 't is from his hand only that we ought to receive the Scriptures and that without the Testimony which he gives them they should have no more weight with us then Aesops sables or the Alcoran of Mahomet Shew us written in any one of the books of the Old and New Testament that there is a place bordering upon Hell where some souls sanctified by the blood of the Son of God are burned that there are Altars upon the earth where Jesus Christ is realy sacrificed by a mortal man for the remission of our sins Let us see a passage which saith expresly that we ought to render adoration to your Host which you Name Letrcia or that we ought to worship the Images of Saints departed and kneel down before them invoke their Spirits and acknowledge them for our Mediators I would not have you say that all this can be concluded from Scripture I demand according to your example precise and formal passages either permit me to prove my Faith by consequences or renounce yours full of so many things of which you cannot read one word in the Scriptures Here you have much more interest then I. For my Faith consisteth of less Articles then yours and the Articles which I believe are for the most part so clearly and expresly laid down in the Scriptures that I need no logick to draw them from it 'T is enough for our eyes to read them there In stead of which the beliefes which you and I contest about are so far from the words and sense of the Scriptures that the greatest logick in the world is not sufficient to draw them from it Here to unravel your selves from these straits you will not fail to alledge the authority of your Church But besides telling me of that you go about to perswade me doubtful things by that which is as much or rather more doubtful and by this you evidently renounce the procedure of them whom you call your Fathers for if the authority of the Church ought to decide matters here why did not they interpose it in their Disputes And if it be an ill proceeding to say either prove your Faith by express and formal passages of Scripture or suffer me to prove mine by consequences why did they use it against the Arians say what you please you cannot turn it so but it will manifestly appear to be a great precedent for me against you to prove that you Dispute like the Arians and I like the Holy Fathers CHAP. IX That that which is concluded evidently and necessarily from the Scriptures is veritable and Divine and is part of the Scripture NOw to come to the bottom what can one Imagine more unreasonable then this wilfulness of you the Arians Macedonians and and Eutichians not to receive for true and divine that which is concluded from the Scriptures For since from a truth nothing can be inferred but what is true confessing as you do the truth of the Scriptures is not this an intangling of your selves in an evident contradiction to make a doubt of what is drawn from the Scriptures is not this an offence either to the Scriptures in suspecting it to be alse in certain places or to the truth in accusing it to produce sometimes lyes and bring forth in a manner monsters That which one gathers out of the Divine Scriptures is there or not there if it be not there how could it be drawn from it since 't is not possible to draw from a subject any other thing but what is there nothing giving that which it hath not if it be not there why did our Lord say speaking of the Scriptures of the Old Testament that they bare witness of him †Joh. 5.3.6 and how could he declare by all the Scriptures biginning with Moses and so through all the Prophets the things concerning himself * Luke 24.27 and again how could his Apostles protest that he had said nothing
Religion which he hath given us to obtain this consists in Faith and Charity that the Father appeased by his Obedience receives to mercy all those who knowing their misery and repenting of their Sins do confide in his bounty and believe in his promises that he pardons them gratis all their faults and treats them as if they had never offended and these being animated and enlivened by Faith live afterwards holily and Christianly in Piety towards God and Charity towards their Neighbours according to the Gospel of Christ For he wills that all his Faithful love and serve God with one love and soveraign adoration and that they have a true Charity towards all men carefully keeping themselves from violating their dignity Life Chastity Estates or Honour neither in Deed Word nor Thought every one subjecting themselves to their Order and Laws of their Civil Societies and to the state of the Country where they live but that they entertain a particular amity with the rest of the Faithful cherishing them as their own Brethren uniting themselves to them that so there may be but one Body in Religion and that for this end there be amongst them Pastors and Supervisers who have the overlooking of their Communion administring to them as well the divine Doctrine as the holy Sacraments which the Lord hath left as tokens of his grace and marks and seals of his Covenant having commanded that his faithful Servants should be baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost for the remission of their sins and that they should eat the Bread and drink the sanctified Wine in commemoration of his Death and communication of his Flesh and Blood We believe that although the truth of these things is most clear yet men are so blinded by the Passion of their malice that they would never understand them if the HOLYSPIRIT true God eternally blessed with the FATHER and the SON did not inlighten their understanding opening their hearts that the light of this heavenly Doctrine may enter in and that God affords them this grace of his own good pleasure giving it when to whom and in what measure it seemeth good to him We believe that to those who shall have believed and lived according to this holy doctrine God will give his Salvation preserving them and taking care of them and when they depart this Life gather their Souls into his repose expecting the last day in which having raised their Bodies will lift them up with Jesus Christ their Head into an incorruptable Heaven there to live eternally in his Glory but the Wicked and incredulous shall perish being punished with the Devil and his Angels in the torments of Hell Reader if thou art conversant in reading the Holy Bible say in thy Conscience whether it be not too great a boldness to deny that these things are clearly contained there onely hearing them named do you not as soon perceive that these Divine Books and especially those of the New Testament are full of them How hard is it to find one verse which layes not down some of these instructions Nevertheless because they will have it so we verifie them Article by Article and to the end that they should not as t is their custome wrangle with us about words we will produce passages of Scripture in those very words into which the Interpreter of our Adversaries hath translated them and then say a little upon every point contenting our selves to mark the rest in the Margint For if we should gather together all the places of Scripture where these Doctrines are positively laid down or hinted we must transcribe almost all of them and as to the Scripture it self we suppose the truth of it without disputing it in this Treatise where the business is only to prove that the Articles whose belief we esteem necessary to Salvation are all found in the Book which we hold for the Rule and principle of our Faith For that is sufficient to bring to nothing the calumny of these new Disputants who to convince the Scripture of imperfection and constrain us by the same means to have recourse to the Authority of their Church crying incessantly that we our selves who make so much account of Scripture cannot prove by it all the things which we believe necessary to Salvation CHAP. II. Of the Essence and Nature of God Of his Qualities and Works 1. FIrst then as to the Article of the Essence and Divine Nature the Scripture layes down at the first word that there is one God in saying that he created the Heaven and the Earth in the beginning and speaks of him every where as of a thing whose being and subsistance every one knows and understands holding them not only for impious and irreligious but for meer fools and sense-less creatures who think there is none Psal 13. Heb. 14. 1. The Scripture makes him Act and speak in infinite wayes and manners from the beginning to the very end teaching not onely that he is but that there is none besides him who truly is all the rest not being but in him and by him So long then as there are passages in Scripture which attribute to God some quality action or word and of this kind there are an infinite number they are so much the stronger and evident proofes of this truth See Duet 4.39 6.4 â—sa 45.5.6.21 John 17.3 and many other places Heb. 11.6 It behoveth him that comes to God to believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of those who diligently seek him Act. 17.27 28. God is not far from any one of us for in him we live move and are 1 Cor. 8.6 We have one God who is the Father from whom are all things and we in him Exod. 3.14 The Lord said to Moses I am that I am then he said thou shalt tell the Children of Israel he that is hath sent me to you Esaiah 37.16 Lord of Armies the God of Israel who art set upon the Cherubims thou art alone God of all the Kingdoms of the earth thou hast made the Heaven and the earth Esaiab 43.10 11. There was no God formed before me nor shall be after me I am I am the Lord and there is none other Saviour but me Psal 89. Heb. 90. 2. Before the Mountaines were made and the earth and world were formed from age to age thou art God 2. That Godis Eternal Gen. 21.33 See Ex. 15.19 Job 36.26 Psal 9. Heb. 10 8.37 38. Heb. 90.2 Abraham c. called upon the name of God Eternal Psalm 101. Heb. 102. 27 28. The heavens shall perish but thou shalt be permanent and all of them shall wax old as a garment and thou shalt change them as a vesture and they shall be changed but thou art the same thou art and thy years fail not Rom. 16.26 Esai 41.4.43.10.44.6 and 48.12 1 Tim. 1.17 Re. 1.8 By the commandment of the Eternal God 1 Tim. 6.16 God onely hath immortality 3.
having caused the shadow to vanish by the true body which he hath publikely shewed Secondly because God expresly commanded Moses that he should do them whereas he never ordained such-like Images in the Roman Church All that one can conclude from it is that since the Serpent made by the Command of God was nevertheless broken by Hezekiah when the people rendred to it a religious honour it would be very convenient also that Christian Princes and Bishops should take from Churches and publike places the Images of he and she Saints when men begin to worship them though they were neasted there not only as every one knows by humane Authority but Divine Institution But this Consequence doth not favour their Veneration CHAP. XI That the Scripture teacheth not that the Bishop of Rome is the Pontifical Spouse and Monarch of the Vniversal Church nor Authorizes any thing which is founded only upon the Authorities of the Pope 1. THe great and principal Article follows which they esteem alone capable and needful to maintain all the rest viz. the Monarchy and infallibility of the Pope of Rome They endeavour to prove by Scripture that he is the Head Spouse and Monarch of the Universal Church but by reasons so strange and far from all appearance that 't is very easie to finde that 't is their Passion and not their Judgment which hath conceived them For first they assert the Sovereign Pontifex which precided over all the Church of Israel during the time of the Old Testament and that this Type may have its accomplishment under the new Covenant they conclude that there is a Sovereign Pontifex in the Christian Church Heb. 3.2 4.14 5.5 6. 7.26 27. 8.1 2. 9 to the 11. and add that the Pope of Rome is the Monarch of it as if St. Paul the Apostle had not taught us that Jesus Christ is the Sovereign High Priest of his Church or as if this his Priesthood alone had not body and truth enough to accomplish all the figure of the Ancient and as if on the contrary the Unity of the Antient Pontifex did not evidently exclude the pretensions of Rome it being clear that if they have place there will be two High-Priests in the Christian Church against that which was figured in the Judaical where they had but one and finally as if this High-Priesthood ought to belong to the Bishop of Rome rather than to any other supposing that there was one in the Christian Church besides that of our Lord Jesus Christ They have also recourse to that which the Lord promised St. Peter Matth. 16.18.19 to build his Church upon him and to give him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and the power of binding and unbinding and that which he commanded him three times after his Resurrection John 21.15 16 17. to feed his sheep and to some advantages which he seemeth to have had above the other Apostles Matth. 10.2 Matth. 17.24 as that he is called the first and that the Lord payed Tribute-Money for him and from all this conclude that the Bishop of Reme is the Prince and Sovereign Monarch of the Catholick Church an ill and impertinent reasoning which supposeth falsities and concludes ill For to begin with the last that St. Peter was the Foundation and Monarch of the Church the Prince and King of the Apostles and in sum what you will what is this in common to the Pope at present or with any of his Bredecessours to conclude from one to the other Peter was the Head of the Church the Pope sitting now at Rome is therefore so How many Seas and Abysses must be filled before these two can joyn for they must first prove that St. Peter was at Rome Secondly that he was Bishop of the Roman Church Thirdly that he left the Bishop of Rome all the dignities that he had Now 't is evident that they cannot prove any one of these three Articles by the Holy Scriptures not so much as the first of these which is the important For let Rome be this Babylon from whence St. Peter dated his first Epistle 1 Pet. 5.13 there is no necessity obligeth us to believe it so that to be able to prove a Thesis by Scripture one must not according to them enter into any Proposition in the proof of it which is not in the Scripture it is perfectly clear that the power of the Pope cannot be found in the Scriptures And as for the other two Propositions one that St. Peter was the Bishop of Rome the other that he left all his Dignity to the Bishop of Rome they are infinitely far from all appearance of truth and reason But it sufficeth us for the designe of this Treatise that it cannot be founded upon the Scriptures So then although it saith Thou art Peter and feed my sheep one cannot draw from thence the Monarchy of the Pope But I say moreover that what they presuppose in their discourse viz. that St. Peter was the Master and Prince of the other Apostles is false and cannot be proved by any of those passages which they alledge The Lord said to him Thou art Peter and upon this stone will I build my Church But in what Logick doth that signifie that he should be the Monarch of the Church and the Prince of the Apostles I shall pass by the belief which the most part of the Ancient Fathers and some of our Adversaries have of taking this Stone upon which our Lord promised to build his Church for the Lord himself the Rock or Stone of Ages confessed by St. Peter a August de verbis Dom. See Mat. Serm. 13. Tract 124. in John for his Faith and Confession b. Tract 13. in Epist John D. T. 9. Serm. 22. ex 40. Serm. edit a Serm. p 248. primals l. 2. in Apoc. p. 13.84 c. l. 5. p. 1456. C. Bibi pp. T. 1. Anselm in eum loc Gloss interlin Lyran. Joan. Arbor Theosophia l. 5. c. 5. Alliac concord l. 2. c. 13. c. Hilar. l. 6. de Trin fol. 30. b. col 2. Ambros 6. de Incar Dom. Sacram c. 5. in it Aug. tract 10. in ep John l. tom 9. Auctor and not for the person of St. Peter I will suppose that these words and upon this stone I will build my Church be applied to St. Peter What is it that gives him so much advantage about the foundation of it and upon the Prophets themselves which God raised up at the beginning of Christianity following that which St. Paul saith That we are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone and what other thing doth it signifie except that in preaching the Gospel they have abolished the Synagogue and founded the Christian Church the new Republike of the Lord his Celestial Kingdom All the advantage which St. Peter had over the other in this respect was that he preached the first of
our selves than to consider the just value of that which is attributed to the Church in these places whether that this Infallibility and Sovereignty be pretended or real it is enough to resolve their Reasons to say that they can conclude nothing for themselves until they have proved that the Christians of Rome are the true Church of Jesus Christ which they can never prove by the Scriptures 6ly Now this Sovereign Authority which they give to the Pope and to the Church wch acknowledgeth him being impossible to be proved by the Scriptures it followeth that all the things which depend on it are not grounded there Such for Example is that distinction which they make between meats at certain days permitting the Christians to eat fish and not flesh in Lent and other-like times the establishing of Feasts the single life of the Ministers of their Religion the retrenchment of the Sacred Cup to all those who communicate except to him who hath consecrated the Eucharist and other-like things for which they alledge for the most part no other soundation than the Authority of the Pope and of the Church which depends upon him At least it is clear that they cannot prove by the Scriptures all that which any one of them affirm eth or useth for this purpose it being so slight and so far from their purpose that I do not think it worthy the relating CHAP. XII That the Scripture doth no where assert the five pretended Sacraments which Rome adds to Baptism and the Lords-Supper I Come now to the Sacraments the number of which they have increased adding five to the two which we allow of The first is the Ceremonie of the Confirmation where the Bishop anoints the person baptized with Oyl and Balm consecrated after a certain manner giving him a light box on the ear and making the signe of the Cross sayeth I signe thee with the Signe of the Cross and confirm thee with the Oyl or Chrysm of Salvation In the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost All this to strengthen him that he may be the better able to resist temptations Where is it that the Scriptures orders or commands us this Ceremony Certainly it so little agreeth with the Scripture that Alexandre and Bonaventure two of the first and most famous Authors of their School held that it was instituted neither by Jesus Christ Biel in 4. Sent. dist 7. nor by his Apostles as Gabriel Biel witnesnesseth writing upon these Sentences Others seeing that it cannot be a Sacrament of the Christian Church unless it had been ordained by the Lord they wrack the Scriptures to finde it there Dominic a Sot in 4. dist 7. art 1. They produce some Testimonies such according to their own confession which without the Authority of their Church who were not capable of shewing and concluding their Opinion And first they remark that which is written in the Acts Acts 8.17 that the Apostles laid their hands on those who had been baptized in Samaria But what hath this in common with the Roman Confirmation Where is it there spoken of the Oyl which is the matter of it From these words I signe thee c. which are the form of it of the increase of Justifying Grace which is the end of it for it doth not appear that the Apostles anointed with Oyl or consecrated with the Signe of the Crose those upon whom they layed their hands And as to the end for which they layed their hands upon them Acts 19.6 it appears from the nineteenth Chapter which was to communicate to them the extraordinary Grace of the Holy Ghost as the gift of Tongues and other the like things which are very different from justifying Grace Secondly The Imposition of hands Heb. 6.2 of which there is mention made in the Epistle to the Hebrews not being accompanied with any anointing or visible Consecration can serve for nothing to establish the pretended Sacrament of the Roman confirmation of which these things are the two essential parts Thirdly Concerning Repentance we agree that it is necessary and that the Pastors have Authority to forgive sins to those who repent and to retain them to the impenitent according to that which the Lord said to his Apostles John 29.23 To all those to whom you remit their sins they are remitted or rather shall be and to whomsoever you retain them they are retained Only we deny that such an action is a Sacrament and there appears nothing in the Scriptures which obligeth us to believe it Fourthly For the Confession which they make part of this wonderful Sacrament we believe that every faithful one is obliged to prove himself before he approacheth the Table of the Lord 1 Cor. 11.28 For St. Paul orders it expresly But none of the Divine Authors prescribes to any Christian to go and reveal to a Priest all his sins yea even his most secret ones before he communicates at the Table of the Lord. 'T is true they alledge the words of St. James James 5.16 Confess your faults one to another But how far is this from their Auricular Confession Cajetan upon this passage The Cardinal Cajetan one of their most subtle and most famous Writers and a great Adversary of Luthers being sent Legat against him into Germany answereth there for us I speak not here said he commenting upon this passage in the City of Rome when he was above threescore years of age of the Sacramental Confession as it appears in that which he sayeth Confess you one to the other For the Sacramental Confession is not done mutually from one to the other but to the Priests only But of the Confession by which we discover our selves mutually one to another that we are sinners to the end they may pray for us and of the confession of faults committed of the one part and the other to appease and reconcile us one to another 5ly This same Cardinal confesseth ingeniously also Eph. 5.32 Cajetan upon this passage That that passage which he alledgeth in the 5 Chap. of the Epistle to the Ephes to demonstrate that Marriage is a Sacrament is nothing to the purpose Wary Reader saith Cajetan upon these words St. Paul doth not furnish you with any thing in this place to prove that Marriage is a Sacrament For he saith not this Sacrament but this Mystery is great viz. of the words which St. Paul in the preceding Verse alledged of Moses For this a man shall leave his father and his mother shall cleave unto his wife and they two shall be one flesh Sixthly 1 Tim. 4.14 5.22 and 2 Tim. 1.6 As to the Orders we confess that the Apostles laid their hands upon those whom they established in charge and that this Ceremony is holy and praise-worthy and practised carefully amongst us in ordaining our Pastors But that this action is one of the common and properly-named Sacraments of the New Testament neither Scripture nor reason
is that saith the Orthodox the sense and intention of the Scripture which hath moved them to use that word which is not writ or have they said it of their own Authority it is saith the Macedonian the sence of the Scripture which hath moved them to it Now answered the Orhodox this is also the sence and intention of the Scripture which teacheth that the Spirit being uncreated and subsistant of God inlivening and sanctifying is a divine Spirit Thus far Theodoret who knew not how to maintain more clearly that one could ground the articles of our Faith upon the consequences of Scripture and not upon words onely But this same Authour in two pieces which Photius warants us to be his although by some error they have printed them also amongst the works of St. Athanasius shews us that the Spirit of our Methodists reigned at his time in certain Hereticks whom he names not Pho. biblioth cod 46. P. 31 but who in my judgment were the Eutichians He saith that they would have every one receive the words of the Scripture simply without considering the things which they signifie under pretence that they surpass the understanding of all men b Theod. tract 16. secund Phot. T. 2. Op. Athan p. 308. that they be constrained to hear some words of the Gospel those which they think favourable to them but they will not suffer them to understand and interpret them religiously that one hear the words but not search the truth and convenient sence of them that they call Faith and inconsiderate not belief which without any examen imbraceth to its own ruin things not established by any demonstration e Id. tract 23. p. 325. d. that they command to believe without reason a Ibid. to believe simply that which is said without considering what is convenient and what is not so b Ibid Tit. tract 23. without examining whither the thing be possible useful seemly agreeable to God or convenient to nature whither it agreeth with the truth whether it hath any connexion with the design of the Author whether it doth not contradict the mystery whether it be not agreeable to Godliness c Ibid. D. that they would have c Ibid. their words believed without permiting any one to examine their Doctrine for fear they should be convinced d p 326. A. Are not these the same fancies with our Methodists who receive nothing but formal words who reject all expositions evidences and reasonings but now Theodoreâ— Dispates sharply against these men accusing them of overthrowing by this means all humane affairs and of making men irrationale e p. 903. of changing them into bruit beasts making them take their nature and habitudes of making all the intentions of the Prophets and Apostles unuseful who according to this reckoning of theirs beat our ears in vain with the sound of their words the hearers not carrying away any fruit from them nor profit in the Treasury of their hearts f Ibid. D. that their procedure confounds every thing and that he who follows this Method knows not how to make those things agree which seem to clash nor answer those who desire to ask him as we are all obliged to do to them a Ibid. 3. which he verifieth at large by the induction of divers passages of eternity and of the temporal birth of Christ which seems contrary b p. 310. D. so they expose the Scriptures to the mockery of the Infidels c p. 326.327.328 and for these and such like reasons he declares at the beginning of one of these Treatises that this invention is the worst of all the Doctrines which the Devils have introduced among men d 327. D. and give us a rule quite contrary wishing that in the interpretation of the Scriptures in stead of being tied to the words made naked by their sense they should seriously consider what belongs to God what is convenient for our purpose that which the truth carries that which agreeth with the Law that which hath a just correspondence with nature the Purity and the Liveliness of Faith the firmness of Hope the sincerity of Charity that which doth no wrong to Esteem that which is above Envy that which is worthy of Grace e Ibid. p. 325. A. and that he ought not to believe without reason nor speak without Faith Let them take the pains to read these two Treatises through for they are very short and most excellent Athanasius whom the Author of the Dialogue published under the Name of S. Vigil made to Dispute against the Arians follow exactly the precedure of Gregory and Theodoret against the Macedonians For he constrained the Arians to confess that one may prove by the Scriptures many things which are not expressed there alledging to him the words which the Arians held although they were not expressed in the Scripture as when they said against the Sabellians that the Father is impassible and against the Ennomians that the Son is like the Father and against Fotinus that the Son is the Light of the Light shew me said he to him where it is written Purely Nakedly Properly and in so many words that the Father is impassible or not begotten that the Son is God of God Light of Light or like the Father It is not enough that you say that the reason of Faith requireth it piety teacheth it the inference or consequence from the Scriptures obligeth me to the profession of this Name I desire that you would not alledge these things to me since you will not suffer me to alledge them for the proof of the word consubstantial Behold at this juncture of time the volume of Divine Books in my Hand read there the Names of the Words above said in so many syllables and in the same sences either shew us where it is written that the Son is like the Father or confess that he is unlike him there is no way for you to draw your selves out of this evil path being wraped up in your own objections 't is not in your power to unty the knots of this Proposition Give me leave then to prove the consubstantiality that is to say the belief of the one Substance of God by consequences where if you will not agree with me you must also renounce those things which you confess your self since you find them no where directly set down in any place in the Scriptures a Dialog in t Sabel Photar Athan. liter opera Cassandri p. 475. med then beating him with his own weapons he pressed him to bring him some passage which speaks formally the belief of the Arians viz. that there is three Substances in the Trinity Here saith he the arguments serve for nothing where one concludes the truth by the consequence of reason they demand proper and express passages read to us three Substances expresly so laid down in the Scripture do not come hither to argue that if the Father
but those things which as well the Prophets as Moses had foretold that they would come to pass that it behooveth that the Christ should suffer †Acts 26.22 23. and finally how could he in another place assure the * 1 Cor. 15 34. Corinthians that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures that he was buried and that he rose again the third Day according to the Scriptures since it is evident that none of these propositions is literally and expresly so written in any of the Books of the Old Testament but only are gathered from thence by consequence Now if that which is drawn from the Scriptures by good consequence is really in the Scriptures why do you reject it since you confess with me that there is nothing in the Scripture but what is Holy True and Divine conclusions of Truth are not formally in their principles but one cannot deny them to be there in Vertue and Power so that admitting of a principle one admits also all things that can be inferred from it by that very act as for instance he who saith that we have four gospels saith also that we have two and two of them these numbers being evidently contained in that which he hath expressed And the Scripture saying that Jesus Christ is a man saith also by those very words that he hath a soul and body the two parts of the nature of mans 'T is very true that a man may sometimes lay down things the consequences of which he will not allow of but this proceeds from the weakness of his understanding which doth not see all the Lawful consequences which may be drawn from them God whose Wisdom is infinite never affirms any thing without Knowing all the consequences which can be drawn from it so that we need not fear that he will go back from his word or deny any Doctrine to be his that can reasonably be concluded out of his word Since then that all things that can be lawfully inferred from the Holy Scripture are unavoidably true and Divine it is clear that one doth sufficiently prove the truth and holiness of a Creed when he shews that it follows from the positions expressed in the Holy Scripture without any need as formerly the Arians and now the new Methodists pretend to shew it in so many words This is the first principle which Scholarius a Greek indeed but of the side of the Latins laid down at the beginning of his Dispute against those of his own nation concerning the procession of the Holy Ghost first a Scholar orat Henet 3. part Act. Conc. Flor. p. 580. then we must not exspect saith he to find all the proofs expresly and in so many words in the Scripture for this is an excuse which many Hereticks used to save themselves but if there be any thing that may be deduced from what is said in the Scriptures we must Also receive it with the same honour as the Scriptures it self Cardinal Bellarmin who alone hath more desert and reputation in the Roman party then all the Authors and defenders of this new Method have put them all together acknowledgeth this same truth That which one inferreth evidently from the Scriptures saith he is evidently true the Scriptures presupposing it b Bellar. l. 4. de Ec. c. 3. Melchior Canus c Can. loc Theol. l. b. c. 8. Bishop of the Canaries Vega d Veg. l. 9. dê justificat c. 39. Gabril Vasques e Vasques Tom. 1 in Thom. dispute 5.6 3. and disput 12. art 8.6 ◠Alfons Salmeron f Salmer T. 1 prolegum de Canc. 91. all very famous amongst our adversaries make the same judgment of it and the last especially speaks thus of it We ought to hold for Doctrins of Divine Authority and worthy to be received by Faith not only the things which are expresly contained in the Scriptures but those also which are inferred from them by an necessary and evident consequence Certainly 't is enough for us to prove to our adversaries the truth of our beliefs either that we read them in the Scripture or that we infer them from thence since they agree with us that 't is a book Divinely inspired CHAP. X. That this pretended Method takes away certitude from all humane Knowledge and plungeth Religion the Sciences and all the life of men into a horrible confusion But these men demand of us here how we can assure our selves that the consequences which we draw from the Scripture are good and lawful for say they reason is sometimes abused concluding from a principle that which cannot truely be inferred from it Arians and Eutichians who demand formal Passages of the Chatholicks did not they pretend to conclude their false and pernicious opinions from divers places of Scripture where notwithstanding they were not Nestorius Palagius and before them all Origen were deceived in the same manner and there is not perhaps any Heresie which hath not endeavoured to ground it self upon the Scripture by false and abusive discourse Reason then being faulty how can we be assured of the truth of the things which by its means we have discovered in the Scripture for since it is often deceived who can tell us that it is not so now I do not think it strange that an Atheist should make this objection to us since his impiety obliges him to confound all knowledge in an infinite and remedisess incertitude But that men who make profession of the Christian Religion and whose interest t is to preserve Faith Assurance and Credulity in the world should propose to us a discourse which rums all these things from top to bottome in my opinion 't is either an impudence or an extream passion For consider I beseech you how far this fine discourse goeth reason say they is faulty therefore we cannot be assured of the conclusion which it draws from the Scripture But if this consequence be good what assurance can we have First what will become of this so much bragged of certainty of the Catholick Faith which they have alwaies in their mouths it will be accounted to them no other then a meer in discretion For whether they will or no 't is our understanding which receives the things of Faith which considers them and is lead to believe them by the reasons of truth which it seeth in them If our understanding by mistakes and abuses sometimes makes its aprehensions and conclusions uncertain our faith must necessarily be so too The consent of the people the ancient and uninterrupted successions of the Bishop of Rome the Majesty and brightness of the power Beauty Order and pomp of the ministers the light of the divine protection and such like considerations may perswade you that Rome is truely the Church of Jesus Christ but I say how can you be sure of it since this reason to whose report you give credit is false and if it may be faulty in other things why not in this and
of necessity and whither he will or no form it self * Id contr Crescon-Gram l. c. 20. Now every man who is in his right senses may know certainly if he gives a convenient attention whither the propositions which one first layes down to conclude something from whither I say those propositions be in the Scripture or not For as to the consequence of things themselves it is of necessity so evidently inevitable that no body can contradict it as for example since every man is composed of soul and Body if you grant that Jesus Christ is a man t is not possible but you must confess also that he hath a Soul and Body so if you know that the Scripture puts this proposition as 't is very easie to know whither it doth or not you cannot without renouncingsense and reason deny that the conclusion is also in the Scripture So all this fear which they give us of the incertitude of conclusions drawn from Scripture by reasoning is but a vain Chimera which passion alone hath made them produce to Authorise this redicule Method by which they pretend to reduce men not to discourse and without which they know well enough t is not possible for them to defend their Faith Dial. inter Sab. Pbot. ar and Athon p. 476. For to apply to them that which one of the Fathers above named said of the Arian they know very certainly that if rejecting their Method we would once prove our belief by consequence from Scripture t is very easie to overcome them and so the defiance and fears of this danger carries them to demand of us proofs consisting in Nude and formal words Shall I repeat hear the impertinent objections which they make to us upon this subject that if we believe that which our reason concludes from the Scriptures our Faith will then begrounded upon reason as if our reason in this dispute should declare the proposition from which we draw a conclusion and not the faculty of the spirit with which we draw it certainly upon this account one might say also that our Faith is grounded upon the sense of hearing since the Apostle teacheth us that Faith comes by hearing But where is there a child that doth not see that it is grounded upon the divine word which we hear and not upon the ear with which we hear the ear is the Organ which receiveth this word but the cause which moves us to believe it is the truth which is there and not the ear CHAP. XII That the faith which we add to the truths drawn from Scripture by reasoning is grounded upon Scriptures and not upon reason Rom. 10.17 REason in like manner or to use another tearm less equivocal understanding seeth in Scripture that which is there that conceives discerns and believes it But that which makes it believe it is the Authority of the Scripture in which it hath seen it and not the action which it hath made use of to see it As when the Apostle saith that Jesus Christ is a man you conclude then that he hath a Soul the ground of your conclusion is the saying of the Apostle and not the faculty or act of your reason All that your reason hath done is that it hath found in the Apostles words that which is really so Now this is not to give us Faith but to receive it and to do that which is not onely permitted but commanded If it teacheth any thing of its own growth if it makes its inventions pass for Oracles t is but just to be condemned For usurping that which belongs to God onely but if that which reason believes and perswades others to hath been taught by the word of God if that was there before she believed it that which she hath seen there and that which she hath done to the end that others might see it there cannot be imputed as a crime to her as if she attributed to her self in doing this to be the foundation of our Faith This is all which we require for her in this place that she may have leave to open her eyes to mind and see that which God hath propounded in his word We do not pretend to the gift of revealing new secrets to humane kind nor the priviledge of making articles of Faith We only beg that they would not take from us that which nature hath given to all men the faculty of seeing that which is exposed to our eyes and to understanding that which is said plainly to us and from thence conclude that which evidently follows Rom. 3.10 11 12. Hebr. 4.15 John 3.16.18 It seemeth to us that one may very well judge though he be not altogether a prophet that the Scriptures which tells us that all men have sinned except our Lord saith also that John James and Peter have sinned and that which tells us that all those who believe in Jesus Christ shall not perrish hath also said to us that Paul and Peter presupposing that they believe shall not perish Gal. 3.10 Deut. 27.26 Exod. 20.14 and that which sayeth that cursed is he that confirmeth not all the words written in the law sayeth also to us that he who commits adultery is cursed by the law since 't is written thou shalt not commit adultery Our adversaries will pardon us if we say that to deprive us of the judgment of such consequences t is to endeavour to take from us not onely the light of the Prophesie or the Spirit of perticular revelation things to which we never pretended any thing but the sense and nature of men and to transform us into Geese CHAP. XIII That t is sufficient that one of the propositions be in Scripture to infer a conclusion of divine truth BUt they produce another difficulty upon this point let it be so say they let the consequences take place then when that is done we can receive no conclusions for divine but those which one draws from two propositions both of which are layed down in Scripture if one be not drawn from the word of God but from sense or humane reason we cannot receive that which follows from it unless it be for a humane truth that is to say doubtful and uncertain because in arguing the conclusion alwaies follows the weakest part as Logicions have observed for example if you dispute thus he who hath created the heavens and the earth is the true and eternal God worshiped heretofore by the Isrealites Now Jesus Christ hath created the heavens and the Earth he is then the true God worshiped heretofore in Israel they will make no difficulty perhaps to receive this conclusion for a Divine truth and worthy of an intire and certain belief because the two propositions from which it follows are both of them in the Scripture as we shall see hereafter But if you reason thus a Body which is in heaven is not at that time in the earth now the Body of Christ is in heaven therefore it is not
abstaining certain days from certain kinds of meats does oblige the Consciences of the Faithful And as to the Ministers of Religion in particular we do not believe as you do that they are obliged to abstain from Marriage which the Astle calls honorable believing that it is enough that they have the good qualities which is required in them in the first of Tim. and elsewhere Upon the Articles of the Sacraments we confess that Baptism and the Supper are sufficient for us not being able as you have ordained to receive for true and proper Sacraments of the Christian Religion your Confirmation Orders Extreme Unction Penitence nor Marriage nor do we believe as you do that the faithful are obliged before they communicate of the holy Eucharist to confess to a Priest all and every one of their sins in particular declaring to him the kinds and circumstances of them believing that it is sufficient that a man trie himself 1 Cor. 11.28 and so eat of that bread and drink of that wine of the Lord as the Apostle prescribes In a word we cannot believe that your Clerks ought to be exempted from the Jurisdiction and Subjection of Princes and States in the Country in which they live nor that Princes and States should be subject to your Pope or to any other Ecclesiastical Minister in his Temporal Concerns as the Court of Rome holds which you acknowledge as the Mother and Head of the Catholique Church These are the Principle Articles of the Faith of our Adversaries which we will not receive Let us consider now as briefly as 't is possible whether they are found in the Holy Scriptures If we will follow their Principles it will be very easie for us to finish all this Dispute in one word For since according to the Maximes of their Method we ought to hold for Doctrine of the Scriptures nothing but what we read there precisely in so many words the Consequences being faulty and discourse deceitful abusive who seeth not but by their own Confession all the Articles which we have excluded from our faith are out of the Scripture and cannot be proved by it it being clear that one cannot read there any one thing expresly formally and literally in the same terms as they believe them and expound them and upon this account I should be already at the end of my task For since that according to us the Scripture is the only Principal of faith so perfect that we do not think that it is permitted us to receive into our Religion any Article of Belief which is not taught by the Scriptures and since on the other side none of the Articles which those of Rome lay down can be read there which is according to these new Disputers the only Method to justifie a Belief by the Scripture it follows clearly that my faith is all intire and most agreeable to the Holy Scriptures which is all the designe of this Treatise since that which it believes is found there and that which it doth not believe is not found there But God forbid that we should take advantage by the wrangling of our Adversaries We shall always acknowledge for true Doctrine of the Scriptures that which can be clearly and necessarily drawn from thence all that which they charge upon Reason being false and not to the purpose as we have shewed here above Let us deal honestly then and examine whether their Beliefs which appear no where in formal and precise terms in the Scripture may notwithstanding be concluded from thence by some evident and necessary Consequences We will recite here only those which seem to them to be most strong passing by a great number of them which though used by their Authors are so weak and if I may be permitted to say it so extravagant that whoever hears them will think them the idle talk of a sleeping man rather than the discourse of one that is awake For to what purpose should I go about to spoil Paper and lose time to copy the Arguments of those who conclude the Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome from that which Jesus Christ said to St. Luke 5.4 Peter Duc in altum Go into the deep or the truth of Purgatory from that which David said Psal 129.1 Lat. 130.1 Hebr. De profundis clamavi ad te Domine Lord I have cried to thee from the deep places or that the Priests are obliged to a single life from that which St. Paul sayeth Rom. 8 8. that those who are in the flesh cannot please God or the worshipping of Images from that which is said the Lord made man after his own Image and the like Without lying if these Consequences and the works of our understandings were all of this nature these Gentlemen would have great reason to reject them We will produce as much as possible we can only those of their proofs which seem to have some colour and shadow of Reason although at the bottom any one may easily know in bearing but attention to them that they are nothing in effect CHAP. III. That the pretended Sacrifice of the Mass is not taught in the Scriptures FIrst To prove that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice truly propitiatory for the sins of men they alledge that Melchizedek the Type of Jesus Christ offered bread and wine Geu 14.18 But what appearance is there in this Consequence First the Sacred Text both in the * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Original and in their own †Proferens Version signifieth that Melchisedek produced bread and brought out wine and not that he offered it and all these circumstances lead us to believe that it was for the refreshment of Abraham and his men being weary with fighting 2 Kings Hebr. 2 Sam. 17.28 and with the Journey by a humanity like to that which Berzillai the Gileadite hath since used to David and those who were with him Secondly though Moses did say that Melchisedek offered bread and wine not to refresh Abraham but in Sacrifice to God how can they prove that it was a propitiatory Sacrifice and not rather an action of thanks since under the Old Testament all the propitiatory Sacrifices had with them an effusion of blood Heb. 9.22 And in a word suppose that this pretended Oblation of Melchisedek had been a Sacrifice realy propitiatory how can they prove that it figured the Eucharist which is never called Sacrifice in the New Testament and not rather the death of Jesus Christ acknowledged for a true Sacrifice through out all the Scriptures and by all Christians where the Lord the true bread of life descended from Heaven hath been offered to the Father for the expiation of the sins of humane-kinde Secondly They produce Malachy Mal. 1.11 who prophesying the times of the New Testament saith that in every place they shall offer to the Lord an oblation pure or clean that is say they the Eucharist But first although it should be so how
teacheth us Seventhly There remains now the Extreme Unction which with a visible Oyl accompanied with certain words pronounced by the mouth of the Priest in form of Prayer remits sins to a sick person who is in extremity And it is here that the Disciples of the Methodists commonly triumph alledging a passage of St. James upon this Subject very express as they pretend and they begin the most part of their Disputes by this last piece of their Devotion Jam. 5.14 Is there any amongst you that is sick saith St. James let him call for the Priests of the Church and let them pray over him and anoint him with Oyl in the Name of the Lord the prayer of faith shall save the sick and the Lord shall heal him and if he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him But let Cardinal Cajet Cajetan upon this passage answer once more for us It appears saith he by these words of the Apostles and by the effects that these words were not spoken of the Sacramental Vnction nor of the Extreme Vnction but rather of the Vnction which the Lord Jesus instituted in the Gospel for the use of the diseased For the Text sayeth not Is any one sick unto death but plainly Is any one sick and sayeth that the healing of the sick is an effect of it and speaks not of forgiveness of sins but conditionally whereas this Extreme Vnction is not given but at the point of death and tends directly as its form signifieth to the remission of sins And besides St. James ordains that for one sick body they should call many Priests as well to pray for as to anoint them which is different from the Extreme Vnction CHAP. XIII The Scriptures doth not teach that Ministers should be exempted from the Subjection of Civil Powers nor that the Bishop of Rome hath any right over them in respect of Tempoporals I Do not see that they can reasonably draw from the Scriptures the exemption of their Clergy nor the Temporal Power of their Pope over the estates of Christians First That which they alledge the Lord said to St. Peter Mat. 17.25 26. Of whom do the Kings of the earth take Tribute and Imposts is it of their Children or of Strangers and St. Peter having answered of Strangers Jesus saith then are their Children free This I say doth not prove that the Clerks are of divine right exempted from paying Tribute to the Magistrates For first 't is not evident that the Tribute of the Drachmas of which the Question is was payed to the Magistrate and there is much more likelihood that it was the half Shekel which every Israelite at above twenty years of Age payed to God for the use of the Sanctuary according to the Ordinance of Moses in the 30th of Exodus Exod. 30.11 12 13 14 15 16. which is nothing like these Tributes which the Magistrates raised But although the same Question should be of a Civil Tribute 't is clear that the Lord exempted none from it not so much as himself Now since the Son of God even as he was Man was not of right subject to any Magistrate this is not to say that the Ministers of the Church have the same right seeing the great and infinite difference which is between their persons and his In a word although the Apostles ought to rejoyce in this liberty by the beneficence of their Master so long as he was on the earth it doth not follow that they since his Ascention into Heaven nor those who succeeded them in the Ministry of the Word ought always to enjoy the same exemption For so long as he was upon the earth they were his Family according to Civil Law following and serving him and as Domestiques had part in this his priviledge But since he is retired from the earth as to his humanity neither they nor we are any more of his Family according to Civil Law For as we are his Spiritual and Mystical Family in respect of Religion he gives us not this Priviledge For then one might say that all Christians must enjoy it since every one in this sense is of the Family of the Lord. Secondly As to this power let it be direct or indirect which those of the Court of Rome attribute to the Pope over the Estates of Christians even in respect of Temporals I think it not necessary to consider that which they alledge from the Scriptures to ground it upon since they are things so weak and so far from their purpose that the greatest and best part of our Adversaries themselves have rejected their Consequences and reject with us this pretended Authority of the Roman Seat namely in this Kingdom France where thanks be to God it hath not yet been established CHAP. XIV Resolution of that which the Adversaries pretend that the above-mentioned Articles have been taught by the Apostles although they are not contained in the Scriptures SO evident is it that none of the Articles of the Belief of Rome which we reject from ours can be shewen by Scripture First To which they will answer it may be that although it be so they have nevertheless been revealed by the Lord and taught by word of mouth by his Apostles the Scriptures not containing all the Articles of the Christian Doctrines of which many have been as they say given and preserved from hand to hand by a Tradition not written But I say first that to consider the thing exactly it seemeth to me that the silence of the Scriptures upon these Articles is sufficient to prove that they have been revealed neither by Jesus Christ nor received and believed by his Apostles nor by them given and commanded to their Disciples for Doctrines necessary to faith and Salvation For if at that time they had been kept in the list which Rome at this time gives them if they had been esteemed the principal Fundamentals of Religion and the most exquisite and important parts of the service of God why should not these holy men have made some mention of them in the many Books which they have purposely writ upon Divine things and which by the Providence of the Lord are come to us Why did the four Evangelists conceal them the Acts make no mention of them How comes it that St. Peter St. John St. James St. Jude and above all St. Paul in his fourteen admirable Epistles so full and so abounding every where in Christian Doctrine have not said one word of them I do not now urge that these Books are the Cannon of Faith that they have been set down in writing to the end the Doctrine of Religion should be preserved entirely there Let us suppose since Rome will have it so that they were written by chance and without the designe of giving to us the whole body of faith Yet one cannot deny but they have been written the most part of them upon matters of faith Now who will believe that so many
excellent persons writing so many Books upon such a Subject should forget the principal as by a consort and common conspiration how happened it that in some place they did not speak to us of the Sacrifice of the Mass the pretended Soul of all Religion Of Transubstantiation which is the ground of it of the worshipping of the Host the heart of Devotion of the Veneration of Images of private Confession of the Invocation of departed Saints all exercises of Piety so exquisite and saving If you believe those of Rome Why have they not in some places commanded obedience to the Pope magnified his Authority the only hinge upon which their faith turns the life and Salvavation of humane kinde according to the Mximes of our Adversaries Now and some Ages pust there hath not been written any Book of Religion how little soever it hath been where these Doctrines have not always been met withal and indeed if they were of that importance which they make them it were to betray men to speak to them of piety without touching upon these Let then the Scriptures of the New Testament be if they please a Letter only of Credence an imperfect Rule and in sum what they will yet it consisteth of many Books of considerable bigness and it is no way credible but in some part or other there would have been some mention made of these Doctrines if these divine Authors had believed and taught them Secondly Above all if you consider that the particular designe of their Tracts and Disputes would evidently oblige them to speak of them in divers places where they say nothing of them For Example St. Paul making a long comparison between Christ and Melchisedec in the seventh Chapter of his Epistle to the Hebrews and treating almost of no other thing in all that Divine Epistle but of the Priesthood was not he evidently obliged to speak of the Sacrifice of the Altar and of the Species under which he was offered and so mysteriously figured so many Ages before by the bread and wine of Melchisedec and nevertheless he saith not a word of it What do I say that he said not a word of it he hath done more For instead of saying these things so necessary to his Subject according to the Hypothesis of Rome he sayeth others of it which shakes it so rudely that the Devoto's of his Sacrifice were all scandalized at it their Doctors sweating unprofitably to make these agree with their belief Thirdly In the eleventh of the first to the Corinthians the Apostle chastiseth the irreverence of the Corinthians in the celebrating of the Sacrament who mixed their meals with the Communion of the Lord could he alledge to them upon this Subject any thing more to the purpose than the Transubstantiation and Adoration of the Sacrament shewing them that it is not bread which we receive in the Eucharist that it is the Lord of Glory the very body which was crucified for us upon the Cross What Romish Doctor is there who being to treat of this Subject doth not use this reason at the beginning middle and end of his Dispute But the Apostle saith nothing of it and that which is altogether strange very far from speaking so in speaking of the Sacrament he calls it Bread three times Fourthly in divers places of his Epistles as namely in the 12 Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans in the fourth of the Epistle to the Ephesians in the third of the Epistle to the Colossians and elsewhere he infers all along the duties of the faithful as well for their piety towards God as for their charity towards their Neighbours But he saith not a word of their secret Confession nor of their Invocation of Saints nor of their worshipping of Images nor of any such-like things Fifthly 1 Thes 4.13 In the first to the Thessalonians he speaks of our duties in the mourning which we use for departed friends but without speaking to us to pray for them which was the fittest place for it Sixthly In the first to the Corinthians he reprehends their divisions at the beginning but 't is without saying any thing to them of the Chair of St. Peter the only line of the Union of Christians as those of Rome say Sevently 1 Cor. 12.28 Eph. 4.11 In the twelfth of the same Epistle and in the fourth of the Epistle to the Ephesians he makes a Catalogue of the Charges which the Lord instituted in his Church he having given Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastors and Doctors How in such a place should he have forgotten the Pope if he had known him 1 Tim. 3.1 2 3 8 9. Eightly In the first to Timothy and in the Epistle to Titus he writes at large the conditions requisite to to the Bishops and Deacons Tit. 1.6 How upon this point did he not speak of their not marrying if it were esteemed necessary in such charges Ninthly 1 Pet. 1.1 5.1 St. Peter in the beginning of his Epistle is qualified with the Title of the Apostle of Jesus Christ and in the last Chapter recommends to the Priests the duty of their charge and to make them value his admonition he alledges to them only that he is an Elder amongst them Why did he not take in such an occasion the name of Monarch of the Church or Of Servant of the Servants of God that is to say the first and highest of all the Officers of God which are in the world no body can be ignorant but that it would have been an imprudence near to stupidity of these holy Authors to have forgotten these things in such considerable places if they had believed them But their Writings although we knew no other things of them doth enough justifie to us their wisdom and dexterity in judiciously using every thing that might serve for their purpose Read St. Paul and the first Epistle of St. Peter and you will not demand other proofs for this It remains then that we say that their silence about these Doctrines of Rome so constant and so universal and even in places where it had been to the purpose to alledge them prove clearly that they did not know them 10. After all If it be not possible to shew by the Scriptures that these Doctrines have been revealed by the Lord and taught by his Apostles I do not see by what other means one can prove it For as for the Books of the Antient Doctors which they commonly call the Fathers their Authority is not great enough nor the testimonies which they render of these Doctrines evident enough to ground them upon and to oblige us necessarily to put them amongst the Articles of our Faith as we have in my Opinion sufficiently shewed in a Treatise which we have published upon this Subject And as to the Authority of the Roman Church which now is it is as doubtful and incredible as all the other Articles which they assert so that this cannot serve to prove that they
are Divine and Apostolique Since then that the Articles of our faith are in the Scriptures and those of Rome are not there it is clear that our Religion is certain and assured as founded upon the most authentick Instructions of Christianity and that it cannot be rejected without denying Christianity it self and that of Rome on the contrary in that wherein it differs from ours is doubtful and uncertain and cannot be imbraced with a full and intire faith 11. But I say in the second place that all this Dispute is out of our way For my designe is only to shew that our Beliefs are in the Scriptures and that those of Rome which we reject are not there to destroy the accusations of the Methodists who pretend that to establish our faith we are obliged to have recourse to other Principles than Scripture Whether the Beliefs of Rome be found in other Documents of Christianity as in Books of the Fathers or no 't is another Question 'T is sufficient at present for me that they are not found in Scripture Now this being so it is clear that I have had reason to reject them from my Confession since I receive nothing into it but what is taught in Scripture And this is sufficient as all may see to justifie our Faith by the Scriptures CHAP. XV. That the Articles of the Belief of Rome which we receive not into ours are contrary to the Scriptures and very far from being taught there BUt to fill up the measure of our proofs I will add in the last place that the Doctrines believed by the Church of Rome and rejected by ours besides their not being found in any part of the Scripture shake it divers ways destroying certain things which the Scripture lays down and laying down other things which it destroys This is so clear that whoever will consider the whole without passion and prejudice will incontinently perceive it 1. Vpon the Point of Sacrifice 1. ROme saith that Jesus Christ is and will be every day crucified in an infinite of places even to the end of the world The Scripture saith Heb. 9. â—5 26 27 28 7.27 That he hath not offered himself more than once and that he hath been once offered to take away the sins of many So as 't is ordained for men once to die Secondly Rome saith That Christ is now offered for our sins without suffering The Scripture saith Heb. 9.26 that if he hath been offered many times he must have suffered more than once Thirdly Rome saith That the remission of sins is obtained in his pretended Sacrifice Heb. 9.22 John 19.30 Heb. 1.3 9 26. without the effusion of blood The Scripture saith that without shedding of blood there is no remission Fourthly The Scripture saith that Christ dying on the Cross all was accomplished and before his Ascension into Heaven he himself hath purged away our sins and abolished them How then ought he still as Rome saith to be every day sacrificed for the same thing Fifthly The Scripture saith That none takes the honour of High Priest Heb. 5.4 and possesseth it but he who is called of God as was Aaron How is it then that the Priests of the Roman Church pretend this Dignity since they cannot make appear that God hath called them to it Sixthly The Scripture saith that Jesus Christ is eternal High Priest Psal 110.4 Heb. 5.6 7.3.24 25 28. that he lives eternally that he hath a perpetual Priesthood that he is consecrated for ever that he always lives a High Priest according to the Order of Melchisedec who remains a Priest for ever Why then doth Rome give Successors to him in this Office Seventhly Rome holds That the Priests bless and consecrate the body of the Son of God How doth this agree with that which the Scripture layeth down Heb. 7.7 That without all contradiction that which is least is blessed by that which is greater Are then the Priests of the Church of Rome greater than the Lord 2. Vpon the Transubstantiation and the real Presence 1. ROme sayeth that that which the faithful eat in the Eucharist is not bread The Scripture saith that it is bread 1 Cor. 11.26 27 28. Every time that you eat this bread and drink this Chalice you shew forth the Lords death till he come Wherefore whosoever shall eat of this bread c. unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man then examine himself and so eat of this bread and drink of this Cup. 1 Cor. 10.16 The bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of the Lord 2. Rome saith that that which the Lord made his Disciples drink in the consecrated Chalice was not wine The Scripture saith that it was the fruit of the Vine Mat. 26.27 28 29. Taking the Cup he gave thanks and gave it to them saying Drink all of this For this is my blood of the New Testament which shall be shed for many for the remission of sins And I say unto you that from this time I will not drink of this fruit of the vine till that day that I shall drink it new with you in my Fathers Kingdom 3. The Scripture saith that we shall not have the Lord always with us here on the earth Mat. 26.11 John 12.9 Acts 3.21 and that the Heaven must receive him until the time of restitution of all things How so if that which Rome holds is true that his body is yet perpetually kept here below upon their Altars and in their Pixes Fourthly The Scripture saith that the Lord is above sitting at the right hand of God his Father in a Sovereign Glory Rome saith that his holy Body is under the Species of a mean Creature inanimate and insensible that it enters into the Stomachs of mortal men yea sometimes of the most wicked and is subject to many other indignities which we hardly dare think on Is this to be in a state of Glory Fifthly Rome believes that the body of the Lord is entire under every crum of bread and in every drop of the wine of the Eucharist and that his head his feet and all the parts of his body are in one and the same place and that his body is altogether above in Heaven and here below in a thousand and a thousand places of the earth above visible here invisible Is this that which the Scripture saith that except in sin Heb. 2.17 he is like his brethren in all things that is to say to the faithful as every one confesseth is there ever a Believer whose body is capable of such accidents the flesh of the Believers is a true body and hath all the properties of it Now there was never seen a body of this nature which is held in a place much lesser than its proper quantity 3. Vpon the Adoration of the Eucharist THere is no need to add any thing to what I have