proved that on the denyal of this Roman Authority as the Doctor calls it Men would have no reason to believe a God it must needs have followed that the Roman Authority was not to be denyed Besides An Arian might have upbraided the Antient Catholics after the same manner and said that so much insisting on the necessity of believing a Trinity would rather make the People Atheists or Vnbelievers than Converts And that the Indifferent would be ready to say content We cannot believe the Trinity and we will have no Deity For Athanasius tells us that it will stand us in little stead to believe a God unless we also believe what is plainly repugnant to our Reason a Trinity of persons in an Vnity of Substance And this Discourse would not have been less conclusive in the Arians Mouth than it was in the Doctors This was the Answer which the Doctor by the Spirit of Prophecy thought not worth the tarrying for and therefore faced about to Mr. P. Which I should not have complained of had it been to have Answered Mr. P's Question But instead of this to shew how sollicitous he was for the Discovery of Truth in so important a Point as a Rule of Faith he * Pag. 6. near the end falls into an insignificant cavil Where I leave him it being too troublesome for me to trace him through all his turnings and windings However what is here said may serve to give the Reader some kind of Notion of them He says p. 14. Mr. M. had some while before asked Pag. 14. Dr. T. who had said that we find the Bible which we now have Quoted by the Antient Fathers how he came to know they were Fathers To which Question he thought an Answer in that place a condescention to an Impertinence The Doctor had been asked upon what Authority or Testimony for the Doctor distinguishes between them he had received his Bible He answered amongst other things that he found his Bible Quoted by the Antient Fathers Now I considered that the Fathers and their works stood in need of some Testimony themselves for their being relyed on And therefore I asked the Doctor how he knew they were Fathers By Fathers I suppose he meant Orthodox Bishops or Doctors of the Church Wherefore the meaning of my Question was how he could prove those whom he accounted Fathers to be Orthodox If he should have said that they had been allowed to be such by all Christians It would have been denyed him there having been and still being several Societies of such as Profess Christianity who assert the contrary And therefore unless the Doctor could give us a mark whereby we might know which sort of Christians are in the right and which in the wrong it would be impossible for us to understand from their Testimony whether the Fathers were Orthodox or not If he should have replyed that these Fathers were approved by our selves That also would have been as little to his purpose For if he looks on our Authority as Good he ought to receive several other things upon it which he does not And if he takes it not to be such he cannot confide in it either for Scripture or Fathers Since here they are not Arguments ad hominem or concerning only the Private difference between us and them but general Arguments which we require of them I mean such as may serve to evidence the certainty of Holy Writ to the whole World. And if the Doctor would have granted that this could have been done by our Authority it may easily be believed that we should have asked no more Lastly If he should have said that he knew those Antient Fathers to be Orthodox no otherwise than by the Conformity which he observed in their Tenets to the Doctrin of the Scriptures which is the Protestant way of proving the Orthodoxness of either particular Men or Churches he would have involved himself in a Circle by proving the Fathers to be true from their agreement with the Scriptures and the Scriptures to be so from the approbation of the Fathers By this time I suppose it sufficiently appears to unbyass'd Readers that Doctor Tenison would have shewed his Learning more by Answering this Question than he has done his Manners by calling it Impertinent Here I cannot but take notice that this Question of mine is inserted in a wrong place to make People believe that I was present to so much of the Conference Whereas I am as certain as my memory can make me that I heard none of those Discourses from the middle of the Doctors 10th Page till towards the latter end of his 17th When the Doctors loud Clamors about the Quotation out of St. Ambrose brought me back from the Window whither I had retired long before viz. before the abovesaid Discourses which begin at the middle of the Tenth Page I say I was present to none of those Discourses between the middle of the Tenth and the latter end of the 17th Page excepting somewhat which is mis-placed viz. Mr P's Reprehension of the School-master for his Wry Mouths c. which was soon after the beginning of the Conference and a little while before I withdrew But the Doctor sets it down in this Pag. 15. place that the People may not imagin that the School-master came so soon to his Assistance as in Truth he did Neither was this Reprehension occasioned as the Doctor would have it by any Discourse concerning the Lateran Council which was not then spoken to but on the School-masters producing a Picture in a Breviary and to shew his Wit laughing at it Which was an action no way pertinent to the matter then in debate And therefore the Doctor to disguise the School-masters intrusion says nothing of the Discourse which happened about the Picture It is unhappy says the Doctor p. 65. that amidst so many things we can have nothing sincere and in it's Naturals The reason of it is because in such occasions the Truth is seldom honorable for both sides And I question not but the Doctor is convinced by this time that he was much in the right when he chose rather to trust his own Memory than his own Amanuensis Concerning what he says p. 14. viz. Mr. M. asked what Writers I do not remember that Question neither did I hear the Discourse of that Paragraph What he said also to me in Derogation of Mr. P. tho' he hath it p. 15. was a long time after But the Doctor is resolved to spread my Controversie through his whole Narrative tho' by this means it be very thin and neither much for my credit nor his It is possible that the Doctor thinks to help it out by putting my Name at length so * Six times in two Pages often as he doth throughout this famous Story whereas the rest of the persons of his Drama excepting only one as I take it have only the first Letter of Theirs However lest the Doctor should design
and Socin Meth. p. 26. Work of his own in these Words Though he the Right Socinian thinks a Doctrin is plain in Scripture yet if he believes it to be against HIS REASON he assents not to it And p. 27. A Man of this Church of England suspects not Reason it self but his own present Art of Reasoning whensoever it concludes against that which he reads and reads without doubting of the Sense of the Words This he lays down for the Difference between the Church of England and the Socinians Hitherto I have taken the Socinians at least for a witty Generation But henceforward if the Doctor 's Character of them be true I must hold them all for Blockheads on pain of being held for one my self For what is it to think a Doctrin plain in * Supposing Scripture to be the Word of God. Scripture but to think it to be revealed by God And consequently what is it not to believe a Doctrin which is thought to be plain in Scripture but not to believe what is thought to be revealed by God And is not this in other terms to suppose that it is possible for God to reveal a Falshood Wherefore if this be the sign of a Right Socinian as the Doctor would have it a Bedlam is fitter for him than an Inquisition But the truth is the Socinians are not such Fools as this Gentleman would make them They do not think the Doctrin they reject to be plain in Scripture Nay before they reject it they conclude it not to be * The Arians and Socinians are so far from thinking the Catholic Doctrin touching the Divinity of our Savior to be plain in Scripture that they think the contrary to be plainly there bringing for in many Texts as My Father is greater than I Joh. 14. 28. and the like which the Doctor knows well enough plain Wherefore in those points wherein they differ from the Catholics what the One understands Literally in the Word of God the Other interprets Mystically or Figuratively And in reference to these Texts they behave themselves no otherwise than the Protestants do towards those Words of our Savior in the Institution of the Blessed Sacrament viz. This is my Body which they will not understand in a Literal Sense Again the Doctor says That a Church-of-England-man suspects not Reason it self but his own present Art of Reasoning I have not time to speculate on the nicety of this Distinction and so I let it pass altho' I believe that a Socinian would be extreme glad to know how he might come to be guided by Reason it self when he suspects his present Art of Reasoning * What causeth a Church-of-England-man to suspect his present Art of Reasoning Is it not his present Art of Reasoning Can Reason guide him without any Reasoning The Doctor seems to be very subtil here Is not the Faculty to be suspected when its Operation is faulty Can the Reason be Perfect and yet the Reasoning which flows from it Defective But whereas the Doctor 's Church-of-England-man suspects his own present Art of Reasoning whensoever it concludes against that which he reads and reads without doubting of the Sense of the Words I dare likewise engage that whatsoever the Right Socinian reads in Scripture without doubting of the Sense of the Words he shall believe as firmly as any Church-of-England-man in the World. This is proved already and if the Doctor think otherwise I shall have cause to suspect if not his Reason yet at least his present Art of Reasoning The Reason why I have examined this Quotation is because it is taken out of a Book which I am recommended to by the Doctor for an Answer to those Questions I would have propos'd to him at the Conference The Readers have my sense * Above p. 73. sequ already concerning the Answering of short Questions and proposed in a Personal Conference by a Reference to long Books which seems to be but the putting off the Trial at best What Encouragement I have from this Quotation to have recourse to that Book in particular out of which it was * But if this he the choice what is the refuse chosen by the Author himself let them Judge For if we may guess at the Stuff by the Pattern they will be able to do it A. P. press'd Writing says the Doctor pag. 60. yet when Dr. T. began to do so he declin'd it The Reader will have * Above p. 67. seq See also Mr. P. 's Acc. p. 10. seq seen that A. P. had a great deal of reason to decline the signing an insignificant Wrangle about the Authority of one single Book which was all the Writing Dr. T. propos'd and that the Doctor had no Reason at all to decline what was propos'd to him viz. the writing of the whole Conference unless it be such as he will be loth to own Whereabouts proceeds Dr. T. would these Disputers Pag. 60. be A while ago they were all for Verbal Conferences when Written ones were offer'd as more safe and useful Now when Verbal Conferences are agreed to Writing is press'd What a pretty Sophism is here Does not Dr. Tenison know whereabouts these Disputers would be Did not those who were all for Verbal or rather Personal Conferences desire that the Argumentative part of such Conferences might be taken in * Viz. for hindring such after misrepresentations as we have had from our Dr. as I said before pa. 61. Writing and that nothing else might be published as Authentic but what was so written And were not Conferences so managed viz. Personally and by Writing * See the above-mentioned Letter to Dr. E. S. p. 26. seq preferr'd before the carrying on of a Disputation by Books and not Verbal Conferences as the Doctor insinuates before Written ones Was the Doctor ignorant of this I do not think he was But a pretended Mistake is an excellent Instrument in the hand of a Controvertist It serves to deceive his own Party and at least to make Work for his Adversaries And now I would not have the Sense of what I have said here or elsewhere on this Subject so far mistaken as that I should be thought to look on such Personal and Written Conferences as infallible means of deciding Controversies whereas I only prefer this way of proceeding in them before that of writing Books I know there is nothing of this Nature which some time or other is not liable to the underminings of Craft and therefore as far as I have been able to observe when such kind of Conferences are obtained which is only where they cannot be kept off with any credit the Protestants either refuse to dispute of the Main Points such as the Rule of Faith the Proof of Scripture or the like and fall on some other Branch where as I have said before there is more room for disputing unless the matter be soon brought to the Rule of
Learned Protestants But on the contrary I have been so far from repenting that I turned so Young that the more I read or discoursed of these matters the more I discerned the Excellence of the Catholic Religion on the one hand and the blindness of so many of my fellow Creatures on the other and consequently I had no other causes for grief than first that my Conversion was no sooner and next that I had not yet been grateful enough that it was so soon The Doctor says that * Pag. 5. no Man who well understands their Church departs from it upon true Principles And I am much mistaken if there be not very many who know well enough what the Church of England Teaches and yet depart from her on no other principles than those which they learnt from her self viz. That the Church is to be followed no farther than she agrees with Scripture and every particular Man is left to judge how far she agrees with it It would be tedious and unnecessary to set down here all those Principles or Motives upon which I departed from the Church of England since I cannot so much pretend to extraordinary things as to deny but that they are the same which have led others from her both before and since and may be seen at large in many Books However if my Readers will give me leave I will lay before them some of those Points which began my doubts and prevail'd more particularly with me * Some Motives of my Conversion to the Catholic Faith. First I had been taught that the Church of Christ continued pure for the first Five Hundred Years after it's Institution and that from thence downwards several gross Errors and Corruptions had crept into it and that it had been infected with these Plagues for about a Thousand Years And that then Almighty â—od out of his Infinite Commiseration enlightned Martin Luther Zuinglius and other as I thought Pious Men so far as that they clearly discern'd these Corruptions Preach'd against them and by that means rescued a great number of Christians from that darkness which the Gates of Hell contrary to our Lords promise or some unaccountable Fatality had engaged them in And Lastly that I my self had been so happy as to be one of this number This was that Idea of Christianity which I then had For as to what they talk'd of a constant Succession of Protestants from the fifth Age down to our times I had never heard it from any Wise Man nor indeed can such an Imposture find place with any one who is so much an Historian as the common Discourse will make him Every body knows that the first Reformers when they left the Roman Church joyned with no other Society or Sect of Christians then in the World either in Communion or Doctrin which must have been done had this pretended Succession continued Their pretence was at that time to Reform the whole Church and not to seek out any True one which then had a Being and stood in no need of Reformation Nay they were so far from thinking it necessary to joyn with any former Church in order to the preserving a Succession that they did not unite with one another But parted their stock and each Adventurer set up for himself This then was the most Rational Account that I could give of my Faith viz. That our Church finding that all Christian Churches had been in Error for a Thousand Years forsook that Error and reformed it self according to the pattern of the first Five Hundred Years after Christ For to be of a Christian Church which never had any being from Christs time till this present I thought a most unreasonable thing Now none can write after a Copy without having that Copy which they pretend to Write by I mean it was impossible for the Church of England to Reform it self according to the first Five Hundred Years of Christianity without knowing what those Christians Taught and Practis'd And how could this possibly be done but by the Holy Fathers and other Writers of those times Wherefore I firmly believed as I am persuaded many Thousands do that these Writers were meer strangers to all those Doctrins which we had forsaken and consequently that no mention was made amongst them of Purgatory Prayer for the Dead Invocation of Saints Veneration of Holy Images and Relics the Sacrifice of the Mass the Reality of Christs Flesh in the Eucharist the Decisive Authority of the Church in Controversial matters the Spiritual Supremacy of St. Peter and his Successors with some other things of this nature I say I took it for granted that nothing of all this was to be found in those Primitive Records of the Christian Religion But when I looked into them I found it quite otherwise and that those things which hitherto I had accounted Novelties were as clearly set down in these Writings as any other Points of Christian Doctrin For instances to avoid length I will refer my Readers to a Book not long since Published Entituled Nubes Testium which hath Collections out of some of those Books which then fell into my hands and must weigh with Men of any tolerable moderation notwithstanding that which is or can be said against it Now what was there for me to be done in this condition I had taken it on trust that I was a Member of a Church which had Copied out the first Five Hundred Years but found my Error It was not unknown to me that several Quotations out of the Fathers were produced in the behalf of Protestant Opinions But-to me they all seemed wrested or at least capable of interpretations which were not repugnant to what the same Fathers more plainly and fully speak in other places for a contrary Doctrin In a word what appeared to me in favor of the Catholic Cause was clear full and incapable of any other meaning But that which offered it self in opposition to it was obscure short and interpretable in another sense and indeed for the most part evidently requiring another when joyned to it's antecedents and consequents Others said That the Fathers were Men and had Errors and that they contradicted one another and themselves to boot But this Plea was as little to my satisfaction as the former For this serves only to weaken the Authority of the Fathers and if good evinces nothing but that They are not to be relyed on And then how can the Church of England make out that she follows the first Five Hundred Years when she hath no other means of knowing what was believed in those times but by such Authors as are not to be trusted For what some People say of our being able to know by Scripture what was the Belief and Practice of these Primitive Christians is wholly absurd For we know not from Scripture at least according to the Principles of the Church of England whether the Christians of the first Five Hundred Years lived according to the Scripture
Mr. P. might mention this again after he sat down tho' I do not remember it Moreover after this first sitting down the Doctor added two of his Objections against me and offered at some Preliminary things as he called them And it was after these Discourses tho' they are omitted as trivial in Mr. P s account that Mr. P. began his Argumentation and not immediately after the proposal of having it Written as Dr. T. says for Mr. P. perceiving that the Doctor had a mind to consume the time in unprofitable Cavils endeavored to cut him short by putting him in remembrance of the business for which they had met I mention these particulars that the not admitting of this Proposal of Writing may appear what truly it was the Doctors Tergiversation Had Mr. P. been then as well acquainted with Dr. T. as he is now he would absolutely have refused the Conference had not his desire of Writing been yielded to And this is the resolution which he has taken for the future Which in my judgment is but shutting the Stable-door after the Steed is Stolen For I believe he is never like to have the Doctors Company on such hard terms notwithstanding that he seems to offer p. 70. what he refused at the Conference Whereas he says Mr. P. began a Verbal Conference by saying the Protestants had no Bible It was not so For he began the Conference by desiring the Doctor to Assign his Rule of Faith Having first given us some account how the Youth for whose sake the Conference was came to entertain thoughts of making himself a Member of the Roman Catholic Church And to that Proposition after much debate concerning these Desires in the Youth the Doctor replyed being again and again pressed to it by Mr. P. that his Rule of Faith was the Holy Scripture And it was on this Answer that Mr. P. asked the Doctor how he could prove that the Book which he called Holy Scripture was truly such and not before as it is made by the Doctors Account which as I have complained before is one of the most intricate things I ever met with and no more like the Conference than it is usual for the new hands at Cards after the Pack is well shuffled to be like the former ones The Cards it is true are all the same but their places being changed the Games are different I do not say that this Account is more confused than the Conference but the confusion has quite another shape or figure than it had But the matter of Fact being cleared as above it becomes more evident how much Dr. Tenison dissembled when instead of proving his Bible to be true Scripture as was desired he offered to dispute Pag. 6. out of that Book which Mr. P. should own to be Scripture since it could not but be manifest to him that Mr. P. did not only ask him for the proof of those places wherein his Bible differs from ours but for the proof of the whole or if he had demanded a proof of such places only it was not for the sake of any Arguments which the Protestants take thence for the defence of their Religion but that it might appear on what Testimony they had received the Scripture and consequently on what grounds their Reformation had proceeded And therefore when to avoid this proof he offered to dispute out of Mr. P's Bible which he might easily have done by the help of his own Interpretation it was a plain tho' with the Rabble a very plausible evasion This * Ibid. Method viz. of Disputing out of Mr. P's Bible says the Doctor Mr. P. would not allow but repeated his Discourse about our not having a Bible and our not being able if we had one to prove we had one and asked again about the Rule of our Faith. Dr. T. before he answered to this applyed himself to Mr. M. who seem'd to be the calmer person c. Here the Doctor discovers his way of Disputing How comes the Doctor to apply himself to Mr. M. whereas Mr. P. had begun his Conference with him and proposed the main Question of it How come we not to receive an Answer to this Question till two or three Pages full of wrangling after it was proposed nor then neither as he confesses p. 9. till Mr. P. and Mr. M. not suffering him to tell a Story pressed him to it nor even then as he farther * Pag. 9. owns till he had chid Mr. P. for asking him Questions and seeming to Catechize him Surely after so long an Expectation the Answer must needs be extraordinary In the next place how comes Mr. M. tho' a Convert and * Pag. 5. possessed with a Spirit of fiercer Bigottry than other Romanists to be the calmer person But Dr. T. wants an excuse for turning away from his Antagonist and speaking to one who as he was told at the beginning was to have no part in the Dispute And as for the Complement he is resolved that I shall pay dear for it before he parts with me Besides some such appearance of Candor the common Artifice of Detractors is necessary for the obtaining a belief to the basest of Calumnies which is to * Pag. 23. follow Dr. T. * Pag. 6. put Mr. M. in mind that such Discourses as these concerning the proof of Holy Scripture and some others lately used by the Romanists about the Trinity and Transubstantiation would rather make the People Atheists or Vnbelievers than Converts And that the Indifferent were ready to say Content We cannot believe Transubstantiation and we will have no Trinity We cannot have the Bible unless we take it upon Roman Authority and none we will have Mr. M. said That would not be the consequence but gave no reason why he said so But Mr. M. can give a very good reason why he then gave none It is because before he could pronounce Six words Dr. T. turn'd back again to Mr. P. And it was not for one as I have intimated already who looked on himself as wholly unconcerned in the Controversie to interrupt it so far as to press the Doctor to hearken to him What I would have then said had the Doctor been pleased to stay for it was That those who would give themselves leave to consider would find so good Authority in the Roman Church for the belief of the Trinity and the Holy Scripture that tho' there were no other Authority for them as indeed there is none yet this alone would be sufficient And consequently that there would be no danger of Atheism but where Obstinacy and Perversness should interpose which would never leave Men destitute of a Pretence for Incredulity tho' they should want a just reason for it ever so much I should have added that it was an excellent Argument of the Truth of a Religion when it could be shewn that either such a Religion was True or else that none was so Wherefore if it could be
as all those must do who consider that they are Fallible and therefore may be Mistaken in their Interpretations There is also another supposed Irreverence towards the Holy Scripture that the Catholics are accused of which consists in this that they make the Tradition of the Church to be of equal credit with it On this Point I shall only ask this short Question viz. Whether it be not as much to be believed that St. Matthews Gospel is the word of God which is the Tradition of the Church as it is that our Saviour Fasted Forty Days and Forty Nights which is part of that Gospel If it be as I presume none will deny then it must follow that Tradition which is the unwritten Word of God must oblige us to believe as much as Scripture which is his written Word And indeed who is there that can doubt but that heretofore the Apostles Sermons and Verbal directions and that which the Faithful remembred of them were of equal Authority with their Epistles and other Writings Shall we not think that what was laid up in their Memories was as Obligatory as that which was committed to Paper Especially whilst we hear St. Paul Commanding the * 2 Thes c. 2. v. 15. Thessalonians to hold fast those Traditions which they had learnt whether it had been by word of Mouth or by Epistle On the whole matter I dare boldly affirm that there is none who shall impartially consider what hath been said here but will perceive that the Catholics have a greater respect for the Holy Scripture than the Protestants and this with relation both to it's Authority and Vsefulness First As to it's Authority I mean it 's Authentickness the Catholics Declare that it hath been handed from the time of the Apostles down to ours by a True and Uncorrupted Church Whereas the Protestants do not allow that they received it from any Society of Christians but such as according to their own sentiments were Corrupted The Inference of this and of what follows is too plain to need the making Secondly As to it 's Usefulness The Catholics affirm that God hath left us some sure means of understanding it a-right so far forth as it shall be necessary for our Salvation whereas the Protestants assign no other way of understanding the Scripture but what they acknowledge to be Uncertain And here I cannot but take notice that a Bible in an unknown Tongue which is capable of being rightly Interpreted and is daily so Interpreted to the Common People is incomparably of more use to them than one in the Vulgar Tongue which can be understood no otherwise than fallibly That is as I have said * See above Pag. 56. above cannot be * And consequently indeed can be of no use but rather hurtful understood An unknown Tongue which may be Interpreted being certainly less inconvenient than an unknown Sense which may not be Found out Wherefore if Scripture appear both more Authentic and more Vseful by Catholic Tenets than it doth by Protestant can it be thought to have less Respect amongst us than it has amongst them There is yet another plausible Pretence which serves rather to Amuse than Argumentatively to deceive the Common People whenever this Point viz. the Testimony on which Holy Scripture is to be received comes into Debate They say that the Holy Scripture hath a sufficient Authority from it self that it is discerned by it's own Light and that it's Style Contexture and Precepts are such as necessarily speak it to be Divine insomuch that it stands not in any need of being recommended to us by any Extrinsic Testimony whatsoever Certainly if this were so the Apostles would have had an easier task in the Conversion of the World than it proved to them They needed only to have Translated their Gospels into the Languages of all Nations and so by Ordinary Messengers to have dispersed them from one end of the World to the other And by this means they might have been in those days as sparing of their Journeys as their pretended Successors of the Church of England are in these And forasmuch as concerns those Miraculous Gifts which were Communicated to them for the propagation of the Faith all of them had been Superfluous excepting only that of Tongues Their Scripture would have discovered it self by it's own Light to be the word of God and what was Plain in it according to our Modern Doctrin would be sufficient for Salvation But since this was quite otherwise and that the Word of God was heretofore recommended to Mankind by the great Labors Holy Lives and frequent Miracles of those who Preached it and even with all these helps found not that Credit with the greatest part which it ought we must conclude that this Holy word stands in need of some Extrinsic Testimony since at the beginning it pleased God who does no unnecessary thing to accompany it with * But they the Apostles going forth Preached every where our Lord working withal and Confirming the Word with Signs that followed Mark c. 16. v. 20. such and that even when it came from the Blessed Mouth of his own * The Works that I do in the name of my Father they give Testimony of me John c. 10. v. 25. And again ver 38. Believe the Works that you may know and believe that the Father is in me c. Son. And yet tho' we should grant that there is somewhat so admirable in these Writings that forasmuch as concerns the whole frame of them it must necessarily appear at least to a well-disposed mind that they can have no other Author than God himself Will it therefore follow that every Verse is such every Historical passage or that some Syllable or Word may not be added or taken away in some Mystery of Faith without breaking in upon the Majesty of the Style or whatever else bespeaks our veneration for this Book May not I say somewhat of this Nature be done which may change the Meaning of a Sentence and yet thence no evidence arise that this Sentence so changed is not from God For further Illustration and Proof of what I say let us suppose that there were two Editions of the Bible delivered to us by an Extrinsick Testimony or Authority so equal that we could not discern which Testimony were best and that in one of these Editions our Saviour's words in the Institution of the Blessed Sacrament should be THIS is a Sign of my Body and in the other what they now are THIS is my Body Would it appear from the sound or any thing else which of these two Sentences was spoken by Christ I presume that considering the various opinions which are now in the World concerning this Mystery you are ready to say that it would not Suppose then that I or any other private person should put forth an Edition of the Bible which should have the former Sentence This is a Sign of my Body instead of the
and Knew the voice of their Church and therefore according to the Doctors own assertion needed it not But perhaps the Doctor will say that for the Verbal Translation of the Scripture the Protestants are not necessitated to have recourse to particular Men the Bible being Translated to their hands and warranted by public Authority tho' here too they will be at a loss unless it appear to them that they may confide in this Authority but for the Sense in all dubious places they ought to Address themselves to their Ministers They may do it if they please And if not I suppose they may let it alone and this last with most safety For according to our late Divines all things necessary to Salvation are plain in Scripture and therefore to look after the meaning of dubious places is to do more than of bounden Duty is required and has the appearance of a Work of Supererogation which is such an abominable thing with the Church of England that they have a whole * See 14th Article Article against it and declare that it cannot be taught without arrogancy and impiety much less as I suppose PRACTISED Wherefore as yet there appears no cause why the Apprentice should be chidden for not having waited on Dr. T. in this occasion And indeed if that be the case viz. That the Members of the Church of England are to go to their Ministers for the Construction of these dubious places I do not perceive that they have any great advantage over those of the Church of Rome tho' what the Doctor says were true viz. That Roman Catholics were to apply themselves to particular Priests for the Translation of the Scriptures since the Protestants themselves must make the same application for the Sense and Meaning of these Scriptures And this Sense is that which is of the greatest importance or rather That which is of any Importance at all But in Truth they are not particular Priests which Catholics depend on for either the Translation or Sense of the Scripture in any necessary Point of Faith but it is on their Church whose Voice is as Intelligible at least and with the Doctors leave much farther Heard than that of the Church of England For is it not full as evident in England and much more evident in other Parts of the World that the Church of Rome Teaches a Purgatory than it is that the Church of England Teaches the contrary And so of other Doctrins This is an Age wherein Men whilest they Scepticize on evident Truths are Positive in Absurdities and therefore there want not Those who ask how the Members of the Church of Rome can know what their Church holds But when they shall have considered how they themselves come to know what That Church holds whilest they Condemn it's Doctrins as also how a Man may come to understand what is held by the Church of England they will not I suppose expect any farther Answer This were it not so Common and even with Men of no Common Wit would have been too frivolous to have been taken notice of One endeavor which I used for the speaking somewhat of a Guide in Controversie was on the following occasion Dr. T. having called me to him and desiring as he said that * Pag. 21. Mr. P. would stick to something took upon him to explain a Text of Scripture which had been long before Cited by Mr. P. for the Authority of the Church viz. That of St. Matthew c. 18. v. 17. If he will not hear the Church let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican The Doctor said that considering the Antecedent Verses this ought to be understood of ordinary Trespasses such as the not paying of a just debt c. And not of Articles of Faith making use of a tedious Instance to that purpose the summ whereof was * Ibid. that in case a Man should refuse to pay his debts after one or two demands he is put into the Ecclesiastical Courts supposing it proper for their cognisance And if he will not stand to their Sentence then he is Excommunicated and Treated as such a One. Whereupon I told the Doctor that for my own part I understood that Text of Scripture quite otherwise than he did being persuaded that we were obliged by it to Hear the Church in all those things wherein the same Church doth declare that she hath Power to Judge And most especially in matters of Faith Which in their own Nature seem more proper for the Cognisance of Ecclesiastical Courts than a Question of Debt That it was not unusual for our Blessed Saviour on a particular occasion to deliver a general Precept as for instance when the Jews ask'd him whether or no it were lawful to pay Tribute to Caesar he * Mat. c. 22. v. 19 c. called for the Tribute-mony and ask'd whose Image it bore and being Answered that it was Caesars he gave this Rule Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesars Which Rule I suppose is general and hath regard not only to Tribute but also to whatever else is due from Subjects to Sovereign Princes as Respect Obedience and the like tho' the occasion on which the Rule was made and that which immediately preceded it seem to be Particular and to look no farther than his Pecuniary Rights That in like manner tho' this Text viz. If he will not hear the Church c. might be spoken in a Particular occasion it could not be thence inferr'd that it was not of a more large Extension especially if we should compare it with other Texts such as are * Joh. c. 20. v. 21. As my Father sent me so I send you * Matth. c. 28. v. 19 20. Go and Teach all Nations and lo I am with you always even unto the end of the World. a Luke c. 10. v. 16. He that Heareth You Heareth ME c. b Eph. c. 4. v. 11 c. And he gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints for the Work of the Ministry c. That we henceforth be no more Children c If Pastors are left to keep us from being tossed to and fro it follows that we must hearken to them as also that they must be kept from being tossed to and fro themselves Otherwise they will not be able to effect that for which they were left tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of Doctrin c. d Hebr. c. 13. v. 17. Obey those that are set over you for they watch as being to render account for your Souls All which places at least according to my own Judgment are clear for that Perpetuity and that Authority of the Church which are believed by Roman Catholics But above all this Truth seems to be most apparent to me when I consider what immediately follows in this place of Scripture viz. When