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
should furnish them with texts in which the second sort of Articles are contained where for example it is said expresly that there is no fire of Purgatory and that the Pope of Rome is not the head nor spouse of the universal Church and to say for want of this the holy Scriptures as we have it is not perfect is an impertinence fit onely to dazle the eyes of children for the Perfection of the Scriptures according to our supposition consists in that it teacheth all things that ought to be done and believed for salvation as the perfection of a book consists in containing all the Truths necessary to the science of which it treats Will you say that the bookes which Aristotle hath left us of Philosophy are imperfect because they do not expresly reject that which the Masters of the sciences have since his time opened or that the treatises of the antient writers upon eloquence are imperfect because they did not expresly contradict these new lights which the phantasie of our moderns boast of having discovered Error is an infinite thing for which the sciences cannot nor ought not to have a good esteem T is enough for their perfection to have shewed all the truth of the things of which they treat otherwise there would never be any thing perfect in this matter For upon this account the Mussilman will reproach our Scripiure because it hath not expresly anathematized his Mahomet Mareion and the Manicheans the David Georgists and all the other impostors will impute to it as an imperfection not to have made an inventory of all their follies What need was there that it should black its paper with their names and dotages so many ages before their birth 'T is sufficient to keep me from it that she hath said nothing of them The surest and shortest means to keep the right way amongst so many confuted ones is to dispise all that which the Scripture does not recommend and not to disdain to examine what she doth not disdain to teach us It speaks to me of God and of his Christ what he hath done for me and what he requireth of me It instructs and fills my soul with that wisdome which is necessary to Salvation It is enough for me to be saved I am contented with knowing so much As for what the Pope dogmatizes besides this let him shew it me in the Scripture and I will believe it as I do the rest but if it be not to be found there who can imagine but I must be ignorant of it and cannot believe it without danger faith coming by hearing and hearing by the word of God Rom. 10.17 of which the Scripture is the first the most clear most certain and in my judgment the only infallible Doctrine CHAP. IV An answer to what our adversaries alledge that they are in possession of them BUt these new disputants make another stop here to oblige us to their pretended method saying that they have had them in possession many ages since thinking that sufficient for them without being obliged to produce any other titles or Doctrins of their Religion that it belongs to us who contest with them to make their wrongs appear by clear and inviolable proofs It is a word which they alwaies have in their mouths and which they believe cannot be answered But in truth we can say nothing more vain nor less pertinent for if this possession as they call it might be alledged in the case the Apostles of Christ would have wronged the Heathens about their Religion seeing they possessed it far long before the Jesuits would do wrong to the Chineses if they should endeavour to drive from their hearts the idolatry and worshiping of Pagods which they have possessed time out of minde truth and vertue should leave in mankind the error and vice which they found established there for fear of violating unjustly the right of their long possession The old man will have little to maintain himself against the new and philosophy ought not to yield to the Gospel upon this account we also ought to return under their yoak as that of our first and most ancient Masters But God forbid that a little word ill understood should ever make so enormous a prejudice to the right of God of his Christ and of his truth we confess clearly that where there is a question made about lands or houses or any one thing which is and which is seen in nature the possession may be alledged and that it belongs to him who turns out the possessor to shew that he held it unjustly and to make it appear by good titles that the things belongs to him in our contest with the Doctors of Rome there is nothing like this they press us to believe with them the Purgatory the Mass and other articles We desire them to shew us the truth of them of which we can yet see but little Instead of satisfying so just a request they alledge that they have them in possession and so consequently are not obliged to prove any of them certainly if they think to make the world believe things mearly upon their saying them without demonstrating the truth of them they propound to us a position evidently unjust and tyrannical For a man cannot believe before he knowes the thing to be veritable and he cannot without denying his nature yield an intire faith to that which is to him either sall or doubtful Those who will perswade him to any thing are necessarily obliged by the right of nature to demonstrate to him that it is true either by sense or reason and if the thing be above sense and reason let it be done by divine revelations it remains then that these gentlemen renounce this possession which they alledge to us since t is so contrary to the rights of our nature and that they make it their endeavour to demonstrate to us that which they desire to perswade us to They are in possession to demand belief of things doubtful and incertain and as for me I am in possession to believe nothing but those things the truth is of which they make appear to me My possession is evidently more antlent then theirs 'T is but reason then that they yield to my right and not that I submit to their usurpation Moreover in civil causes where this maxim hath place the possessor is sued and pressed to forsake that which he holds Here quite contrary there are pretended possessors which contend with us and press us to enter into possession with them for they would havee us believe what they believe and 't is this belief which they call their possession who sees not not then that Fundamentally 't is they properly who have begun this action with us and who ought by onsequence to shew us by good and lawful Doctrin that we have right to enter into this possession to which they call us we are ready to yield to them if they can make us see that that which
Sempstress and Scullion and so by this fine method become teachers in an instant But now to shut their mouths and to arm ours against their little punctillios I have undertaken briefly to prove our Faith by the Scriptures And that I may proceed as I ought before I enter upon the matter 't is necessary for me to clear two points The one is what those things are which we are obliged to prove and the other is by what means we are obliged to prove them CHAP. II. That we are obliged to prove by the Scriptures the things only which we believe and not those which we reject AS to the first point it is evident that our Faith is that which we have to prove that is to say the things which we believe true in Religion and by the beleif of which we hope to obtain Salvation As for other things which we do not believe and which are not included in our Faith we are not obliged to say any thing of them If any one believes them it belongs to him toprove them and to shew the truth of them by convenient reasons it sufficeth us who do not believe them to hear and then answer by good and pertinent arguments For in all disciplines it belongs to him that imposes an opinion and will oblige others to believe it to make the truth of that opinon appear it being evident without that no one is tyed to believe since reason does not oblige us to believe any but what is true From whence does already appear the extream injustice of those new Disputants who demand of us not onely a proof of that which we believe but also a formal rejection of that which we do not believe and when it is their part to shew the truth of that which they believe they desire us to produce some passages importing the falshood of what they believe for example they are not contented that we prove by Scripture that the Son of God is our Mediatour which is precisely that which we believe but they press us still to produce some passage in Scripture which rejects and condemns this proposition that the Saints are our Mediators which is that which they do and that which we do not believe They would have us not only to furnish our selves with passages which establish the Sacrifice of the Cross of Jesus Christ which we believe but with others too which formally rejects the pretended propitiatory sacrifice of the Mass which they believe and we do not Likewise they pretend that besides the passages which say that Jesus is the head of the Church which is one of the Articles of our Faith we ought to put in another which saith that the Pope of Rome is not the head of the visible Church which is as every one knows one of the Articles of their Faith and none of ours and because that is not produced they assert we are not able to prove our Faith by the Scriptures and therefore we are Obliged to embrace theirs Can any one imagine a more irregular piece of injustice The law orders that he that puts an action should be obliged to prove it It is enough for one that is accused to shew the nullity of the proofs of the adverse party No right no law no custome let it be never so injust hath ever obliged the accused to prove by affirmative witnesses that he hath not done that which they charge him with he is quitted so soon as it appears that the reasons and allegations of the accuser are nulled and from hence comes the proverb of the Lawyers evidently Grounded upon natural justice that it belongs to him who layeth the action to prove it for there is a respect to be had to the right of the action as well as to the action it self So as it belongs to him who supposes a fault to prove it so also it belongs to him who supposeth a right to make proof of it as for example if I suppose that according to the right of the Romanes a house should return to the vender after having been fifty years in the possession of the buyer it belongs to me to produce some Roman law expresly containing this deposition and if I cannot produce this clearly and expresly my pretensions will evidently come to nothing and no man will be obliged to believe it But if instead of doing this I should press the contradictors to produce me a passage of the right of the Romans expresly importing that the Sellor should not be put into the possession of the estate alienated by him and in case of his not producing such a passage of right I should protest against him Who has patience sufficient to bare such an impertinent procedure But nevertheless 't is this exactly which the Disputers of this age hold They pretend that 't is a deposition of divine right that the Faithful worship their Host that he partakes of the Sacrifice of their Altar that he acknowledges the Pope of Rome to be head of the Church And instead of producing some passages of divine right which say that their Host ought to be adored that the Mass ought to be our sacrifice and the Pope our head they press us to prove that this is not so and if we do not produce such proofs they protest that our Faith is not to be proved nor theirs to be refuted by Scripture What man is there so blind who seeth not that it belongs to them alone to prove what they believe what they preach and that which they would perswade me to and to me only to hear their proofs and resolve and in case they cannot produce pertinent arguments to conclude that their pretensions are vain CHAP. III. That the Articles of the Confession of our Faith are some affirmative and some negative of their difference and how they are proved by the Scriptures THE colour with which they paint so wicked a procedure is that our Churches in their Confession of Faith doth not onely propose that which we believe but joyntly rejects that which we approve not in the Romans belief These men take from thence an occasion to make the whole pass for Articles of our Faith and demand of us proofs from Scripture for both these points which is an artificial disguise it being evident that although these things be exposed in the same treatise nevertheless we do not hold them to be of the same rank and nature For as for those which we believe as revealed from God we esteem the knowledge of them necessary it being not possible that a man should be saved without believing as for example that there is a God that Jesus Christ hath suffered for us that we are obliged to live holily and righteously and other things of the like nature But as for those which we reject whither added or maintained by the Pope 't is onely necessary not to believe them for we are so far from thinking it necessary for us to have the knowledge of
them that we as well as our Doctors reject them formally and precisely and wish that they had never been spoken off and that they may be Aeternally buried in the cave of errors from whence they came For as Eating good meat is sufficient to preserve the life of man nor is it necessary for him to know Hemlock Aconite or Antimony or to know poysons 't is enough that he is not so unhappy as to eat of them even so 't is in Religion for to obtain salvation 't is sufficient for a man that he believe the holy and wholsome truths communicated to us by the Lord Jesus there is no need that he should know particularly the innumerable poysons which the enemy hath scattered in the World nor that he should know exactly to what degree every one of these false doctrines are poysonous 't is enough for him that he is so happy as to believe none of them To speak properly the express and formal rejection of an errour makes no part of Faith for then Faith would have been imperfect before the birth of the error Before Mahomet came into the World the Faith of Christians was intire and sufficient although it was ignorant of the seducements of that Impostor and though it knows nothing of Marcion of Manicheus of Arrius nor of Pelagius yet it is sufficient to salvation provided that it believes firmly that which Jesus Christ hath revealed There is then a great difference between those propositions which supposeth and affirmeth the truth and those which reject the error The reason why our Fathers have ranked them in the body of the same declaration was not because they were ignorant of this difference but another occasion obliged them to do it for being separated from the Church of Rome and afterwards having been calumniated of holding diverse very strange opinions vide Epist 10. the K. which is in the beginning of our Confession of the year 1559. in fine to make the King their master his subjects their fellow Citizens see clearly what their thoughts were about Religion they not onely declared the belief they had of Christianity and of every one of the articles of which it consisted but also what they thought of the doctrine and communion of the Pope from which they had withdrawn themselves We ought then to distinguish carefully these two sorts of articles which this reason joyns and mixeth together some affirmative and positive declaring that which we believe others negative and exclusive declaring that which we do not believe the first lays down that which is our Faith the second rejects that which is not so For example these are of the first sort that there is a God that he ought to be worshipped with all our affections that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and God Eternal that he was made man that he hath taken our nature in the womb of the holy Virgin that he dyed to expiate our crimes that his blood hath washed and purged our souls from all sin that he is risen and ascended into heaven and there reigns at the right hand of the Father that sins are pardoned to men by the grace of God when they believe in the Gospel that believers are obliged to live holily that Charity is necessary for salvation that the Lord hath ordained that we should be baptised in the name of the Father Son and holy Ghost for the remission of our sins and that he hath likewise commanded us to celebrate the memory of his death in taking eating and drinking the Sanctified bread and wine that this bread and this wine are the communication of his flesh and of his blood that those who believe and live according to the Gospel of Jesus Christ shall have Aeternal salvation and that those who believe not in him shall perish But these following are of the second sort That we ought not to adore the Host of the Church of Rome nor invoke their dead Saints that the mass is not an expiatory sacrifice for the sins of men that the Pope is not the head and spouse of the universal Church that he hath no power neither directly or indirectly over the temporals of Kings and States of the world that neither he nor the Church which adheres to him have the right of never erring in the Faith nor are they the reason and grounds of our Faith that it is not for the merits of our works that our sins are forgiven us or that grace or life is given to us that the bread which we break and the cup which we bless in the Church loseth not their substance that none of those who communicate at his table ought to be hindred from drinking of the Cup of the Lord that neither the chrism nor the penitence nor the ordainor the marriages nor the extream unction are Sacraments that believing souls departed this life are not burned in the fire of Purgatory Since we believe the first Articles and that we preach and recommend them to men we are obliged to shew the truth of them and since the most part of them are so obscure that we have not natural light enough to discover and perceive them it remains that we prove that God hath revealed them to humane kind For these are the three sources of all our knowledge sence reason and the revelation of God now 't is neither the sins nor reason of man that demonstrates to us that Jesus Christ is the son of God or that those who believe his Gospel shall have the happy Aeternity We cannot prove the truth of it then but onely by the means of revelation Now all Christians and namely those of the Church of Rome with whom we dispute in this Treatise confess that the writers of the Old and new Testaments were inspired by God and did write by the revelations of the Spirit now we cannot more clearly ground the Truth of the Articles upon which our Faith consists then by shewing that they are taught in these divine writings T is for this we acknowledg our selves obliged and of which 't is most easie to acquit our selves as we hope to make appear in this book And as for the other Articles which are of the second sort it belongs to us to justifie and make appear that the holy Scripture teacheth no where to believe what it self rejects as it teacheth no where that there is a Purgatory or that the Pope is the Monarch of the Church or that the Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice For having once shewed that we shall have clearly justified that we have been obliged to exclude such opinions of our Faith since we hold that all the things which we ought to believe as necessary to our salvation are taught in the Scriptures for that if these be not found there Rome is in the wrong to believe and preach it as necessary and have reason not to receive it in our belief T is an unjust cavilling to demand this of us further that we
they would have us possess is real For to believe a thing which is not a possession but a dream and an error 't is the heritage of the wicked to whom the wise man gives nothing for his possession but the winde Truth is ample and specious and can receive possession Error on the contrary is a nothing which cannot properly be said to be possessed by any Untill then they do shew us the truth of the things which they believe 't is in vain for them to boast of their possessing them That which is not is not possessed The feild of which one alledgeth the possession in the Court is a thing which appears and of whose existence no body can doubt Here the purgatory the Sacrifice of the mass the all powerfulness and infallibility of the Pope the transubstantiation of the eucharist and in short all their pretended possessions are things which our sense perceives not and which our reason cannot find out That very thing then of which they pretend a possession obliges them to shew the truth of it by the Scriptures since it doth not appear in nature For to alledg the possession of a thing which one cannot make out to any one is evidently to mock the world 't is to pay it with illusions and chimaeras So 't is clear notwithstanding this allegation that our adversaries are obliged to ground the Articles which they lay down upon good and clear doctrins of Scripture and for us who will not receive them t is sufficient for the justification of our refusal that no part of them can be found in that authentique instrument of the revelation of God which both parties acknowledg to conclude then it remains that to prove our faith by the Scriptures we are only obliged to shew that the things we lay down and firmly believe in religion are taught in the scriptures and that those which we do not believe are not taught there CHAP. V. That the new method was unknown to the Lord his Apostles and the holy fathers and that it is contrary to the procedure which the Lord and his Apostles took in disputing with their adversaries BUt it behoveth us now to consider in the second place what proofs we ought to furnish our selves with to ground our belief upon the Scriptures For these Methodists dedemand of us formall passages these are their terms where that which we would prove be expressed in so many words If you produce any thing of it where the same thing is signified but in other words and from whence with the light of discourse 't is very easie to conclude it they cry that these are dreams and Chimaeras and in short they will not acknowledge any thing for the Doctrines of Scripture but what they read precisely there for example they do not think that the belief of the holy Trinity is a doctrine of the Scripture because they do not meet with the very word there though the thing which signifies it be evidently set down there This is all the cunning of this brave Method with which they boast to gagg the Ministers and subdue all the enemies of the Church but if this pretended meanes of overcoming the heretiques be as lawful and as powerful as they seem to believe it how comes it that neither Jesus Christ nor his Apostles nor the ancient Doctors of the Church have ever taught it their disciples or imployed themselves against those of their adversaries who disputed by Scripture Matt. 4.6 When the Tempter alledged to our Lord that verse of the Psalmes he shall give his Angels charge over thee to perswade him to cast himself down from a high pinnacle how comes it to pass that he answered him not according to this abridged method that the passage was not formal Matt. 12.2 3 4 5 6. and when the Pharisies imployed the ordinance of the Sabbath against his disciples plucking the ears of corn why he give himself the trouble to justifie their Action by the example of David and the priests why did he not tell them in one word that the passage was not formal how happens it that his Apostles in so many books which they have left us have not not given us at least some notice of so wonderful a secret Why did not the holy fathers make use of this to resolve those infinite reasons that the heretiques pretended they had drawn from the Scriptures Sabellius alledged I and the father are one Arius the Father is greater then I Eutychis the word hath been made flesh the first to prove that the person of the son is the same with that of the father the second to shew that the substance is different the third to establish the mixture of these natures The ancients were so shallow as to write great books to explain these passages and to resolve the sophisms of these heretiques Where was their judgment if they could as they pretend make voyd all the difficulty in one word only by saying that the passages are not formal and that the consequences are nothing but Phantasies Read the Books of Irenaeus against the Gnostiques of Justin against the Jewes of Tertullian against Marcion Apelles Hermogenes and others of Athanasius Hilarius Basil Gregory Chrisostome and an infinite number of others against the Arians of Cyril against Nestorius of Theodoret and Gelaze against Eutychus of Hierome Augustine Prosper against Pelagius and in short all the writings which the Christians have composed against the Heretiques sixteen hundred years since you will find that none of them have ever answered to any of the arguments propounded by their adversaries that which the methodists now a days answer to ours that the conclusion is not in formal terms in Scripture Who will believe that the Church hath been ignorant for the space of so many ages for so excellent a means of gagging its enemies and that these honest men whom one may call without offence not the most accomplished and learned of our age should alone be advised of that in our dayes which the lights of the world have not yet been able to discover and that poor truth should have sighthed so long in the bonds of consequences expecting its liberty onely from the sword of these new Alexanders But the Lord and all his servants hath not only permitted that to their adversaries which ours deny us viz consequences and reasonings upon Texts of Scripture but made use of it themselves to establish truth as well as to refute errors The tempter promising the Son of God all the Glory of the world if he would worship him the Lord checked his impudence by that Scripture which saith Matt. 4.9 10 6 7. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely shalt thou serve and when he desired him to throw himself down from the pinnacle he answered as it is written thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God unusefully if you believe these methodists since neither the first of these passages denieth expressly in
against the Pharises who denyed the resurrection from the dead you err said he to them not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God c. Have you never read that which was spoken to you by God I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. God is not the God of the dead but of the living He blames them for not having learned the resurrection of the dead in this sentence of Scripture Certainly then they ought to have learned it there for he is too good to blame him who hath done his duty Now the sentence which he produceth saith nothing of the Resurrection of the dead expresly and directly he draws it only by the consequences of that which he layeth down We must confess then that t is our duty not only to learn and believe the things which we read in the Scriptures but also to draw from them and conclude those things which may be deduced from them although they are not read there in so many words and to embrace them with the same faith as we do the others and that without this weare ignorant of the Scriptures and are in danger of erring CHAP. VI. That the new method is contrary to the procedure and maximes of the holy Fathers in their disputes and favourable to the Heretiques and Infidels THe Holy Fathers following the command and example of Christ and his Apostles make use every where of this sort of proofs without any scruple esteeming they have sufficiently shewed their belief by the Scripture when they had drawn them from thence by good and clear consequences Those whom we have above named do not dispute otherwise injoying freely that right which they give their adversaries I should be too long should I here repeat all the examples of them as when they prove by the Scripture against the Sabellions that God the Father is not begotten and is without beginning * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and against the Arians that the Son is consubstantial with the Father †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and against the Nestorians that the Holy Virgin is mother of God * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and against the Eutichians that Jesus Christ hath two natures †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all propositions which are not found in the Scripture exactly set down in the same words and which nevertheless they profess to demonstrate by the Scripture as every one may see in their books are an evident sign that they have believed that t is a good and sufficient way to prove a belief by the Scriptures when one draws from it by reasoning although one cannot alledge any passage where it is formally and expresly set down In a word you must either forsake the cause of God and instructions and convictions of the Heretiques or proceed in this manner For otherwise how could the fathers dispute against them Let us give an Arian to one of our Methodists to be instructed or convinced which way will he take how will he prove the consubstantiality of the Son he cannot alledg one exact text for it for it is clear that in the whole Bible there is not one of that nature and he cannot take advantage of the texts which shew this truth since they do not exactly express it for the law of his Method forbids him the use of this sort of proofs Will he use the Authority of the council of Nice or of the Church which he pretends is Catholique but this would be to deceive himself and not to dispute this would be to alledge for proofe of the question the same thing which is directly in question For if the Arian should appeal either to the Nicean faith or to the authority of the Catholique Church he would not be an Arian That which made him renounce both these is the beleif that you will prove it to him You must necessarily then leave him in an error because your pretended Method hath divested you of all the means of drawing him out of it You can prevail no better against a Sabellion an Eutichian or in general against any of the Heretiques who denie the Church any of her positive beliefs not expressed in so many words in the Scripture Even the Jew will take advantage of your maximes and laugh by your example at all which you produce from the Old Testament to make him believe the New and will say as you do that the consequences are Chimeras and phancies and will protest not to yield unless that he hath a formal passage which saith expresly that Jesus Son of Mary born in Bâ—thlehem under Augustus Caesar is the Christ promised by the antient Oracles Concil Lateran sub 4. lex 3 cap. 24 Concil Lateran sub Innoc. 3. exped pro recup terr sanct p. 63. col 1.8 So he will find when all is done that your fine Method is the gagg of the Church and not Heresie and that it fortifies it instead of subdueing it And acquires to the Church nothing but losses and Funerals instead of victories and Triumphs which it promised her But if formally one hath judged them worthy of an Anathema and of the loss of liberty by the Council who should furnish these infidels with sword poinyard and cordage What thunderbolt and ex-Communication do the Fathers of this Method merit who as much as in them lies arme the Jews and Heretiques with a buckler Shot-proof and take from the Church the only arms which God hath put into her hands to scatter all sorts of enemies to wit his Holy word But this method doth not only deprive us of the use of the Scriptures against those who receive them either all or in part It renders likewise all truths unuseful to us the knowledge of which God hath imprinted in the nature of men taking from us discourse or reasoning without which it is not possible to explain them to be useful either for the instruction or conviction of the ignorant For according to these new maxims every one will demand formal proofs of that which one would perswade them and will hold himselelf obliged not to believe any thing beyond those very things which nature hath taught him The Pagans will reject the unity of the Divinity because it cannot be drawn but by consequences from our General notions he will receive none of the arguments which you will use to establish the Justice goodness and Power of God the truth of the Scriptures the Authority of the Church and other such like grounds of Christianity because you have taught him that these reasonings are but meer dreames and none of their conclusions is worthy of an assured beleif Briefly there was never any method so perplexing and troublesome as this which renders all the differences of philosophy and Religion Aeternal without leaving us any means to determine them For since that to make them agree it will not suffer us to imploy any other that an express and formaldecision by the Authority of
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
Pâ—â—asch 2. p. 96 A. B and 98. B. and 102. D. and Paschal 3 p. 109 c. 110 B. Bibl. PP T. 3. and for the Hereticks in General Chrysost Hom. 87. in Mat. 7 9. D. and Hom. 59. lat 58. in John p. 298. A. Hierom. com 2. in Mich. p. 378. F. and comm in Agg. p. 506. F. Gregro Mvg. Moral in Job l. 18 c. 14. but nevertheless so let it be since they will have it so Shall their fond imagination wrong truth and that under the pretence of thinking to see that in the Scripture which is not there I cannot assure my self of having found there all that which is there divers men have all reasoned in Mathematicks and drawn from the principles of that Sience some conclusions which are not really there But shall it be denied me under the pretence of this to hold this consequence for good and assuredly veritable that the whole is greater then the part that a triangle is bigger then the basis and the Body of a man bigger then his finger but where is the man how stupid soever he be who notwithstanding the paralogisms of Brison and all the other doth not presently see that this arguing is most true and necessary so there are Authors found in natural Philosophy Astrology and Phisick who have discoursed ill phancying to find something in the principles of these Siences which is not there Would not this be not ony injustice but Sottishness or madness to endeavour to peswade us under this pretence that we cannot receive any of the consequences drawn from these principles as certain and necessary nor assure our selves that if a horse sees hears and runs he is then an animal or if a stone hath nothing of sence then it is no animal now we are exactly upon these terms in respect to the Scripture Many have a mind to draw from it by discourse things which it speaks nothing of Gen. 1.16 and the Roman doctors more then all the others who in the two Luminaries which it placeth in the heavens have pretended to find out the power of their Pope to be above the Emperour and his spiritual monarchies in the Faith and qualifications which it attributes to S. Peter and his power to interdict States to depose Princes among animals Act. 10.13 which it represents to us to have been signified to the Apostle in a vision 'T is by the same Logick that they conclude their purgatory from the parable which saith thou shalt not go out till thou hast Mat. 5.2 paid the last farthing and their Sacrifice from the words of the Lord 1 Cor. 11.24 Matt. 26.26 do this and their transubstantiation from the other this is my Body But if their consequences are false and even absurd doth it follow that I cannot assure my self that the Scripture teacheth us that Jesus Christ hath a Body and a soul since it saith that he is a man that it teacheth that he is the God of Israel since it saith he founded the earth in the beginning and that the heavens are the works of his hands and that he was tempted by Israel in the wilderness certainly neither sense nor reason ever offended without some reasons These are saculties naturally right and every one capable of their functions but sometimes they meet with perticular causes which hinders them from acting so For as to sense who knows not that its errors comes either from the indisposition of the Organs from the Scituation of the object or from the quality of the medium which is between them as for example 't is the bilis with which the tongue of a sick man is moistned which makes it taste all meats bitter and to those who have Jaundies 't is also the spreading of that humour which dieth all objects yellow but t is the too great distance from the sun which makes it appear to us much less then it is and which blunts the Angles of a Tower which we see a far off figuring it to us round when it is really square and which makes the two sides of the end of a long Gallery seem to be very neer each other in fine 't is the diversity of the medium through which we see which makes an oare appear to us in the water as if it were bent and crooked when it is really streight except in these and the like cases the eye alwaies to doth its duty faithfully and the other senses likewise do theirs so that it being most easie to know for a truth whether the functions of our senses are so well disposed or not 't is an insupportable error to conclude that we are not able to assure our selves of any one of their reports under pretence that it happens to deceive them when they fail of any one of the conditions necessary to perform their function well Now 't is the same in reason If she concludes wrong 't is certainly because she takes that for a true thing which is not so or that for clear and certain which is obscure and doubtful As when our adversaries conclude from that which the Lord said to St. Peter thou art Peter that their Pope is by right the Monarch of the Christian Church they conclude falsly because they take that for an evident truth in Scripture which doth not so much as appear there viz first that our Lord in these words promiseth the Monarchy of his Church to St. Peter and Secondly that their Pope is the successor of St. Peter in this quality But if these two things which they take for truth were truth then that which they conclude from them must necessarily be so too and he to must be out of his senses who denies the consequences of them And this necessary connexion of propositions with their conclusions is a work not of the mind and reasoning of man but of the will of God as S. Austin expresly remarkes The truth of consequences says he and connexions which propositions have one with another hath not been instituted but considered and remarked by men to be able either to learn or teach it for it is perpetual and divinely established in the reason of the things themselves for as he who counts the degrees of time doth not make them himself and he who shewes the scituation of places the nature of animals of plants or of Stones doth not shew the things instituted by men and he who shews us the stars and their motions shews us nothing made and established by any man in like manner he who saith when the consequence is false 't is not possible but the thing from whence it follows should be false also speaks most truly and doth not make the thing to be so but only demonstrates that it is so †Aug. T. 3. l. 2. de doctr clic c. 32. From whence it comes that he observes elsewhere that no man in disputeing is reduced to a false conclusion unless he has first granted something false from whence this conclusion
in the earth and so you think to oblige them by that to hold this conclusion that the Body of Christ is not on the earth for a thing certainly and Divinety revealed they will tell you that it cannot pass for any more then for a humane doctrine since from two propositions from which one is drawn viz. The first is drawn from maxims of reason only and not from Scripture as the second is They triumph in this observation and put it upon all occasions amongst their gravest and most serious conference but I say first that if our particular interest were only concerned in it there were no need to consider it since that which is granted is sufficient for this dispute For it grants us that the propositions which are lawfully drawn from two truths one of which revelation teacheth and sense or reason the other are true at least to the same degree as the truths which we learn by reason and sense and that we may give at least the same kind of Faith to believe them in the same manner as we believe for example that Snow is white the Heavens round or that the whole is bigger then its part Now we demand no more for our designe for we imploy the most part of these discourses mixed with propositions of a different nature only to overthrow their belief and not to establish ours now to destroy a doctrine and render it unworthy of belief 't is enough to shew that t is contrary to some truth and then one ought to hold it for false of what condition or origine soever that truth be which it opposeth whither it be revealed or natural For truth is a simple thing and uniforme alwaies like to it self lies often wound themselves one falsity destroying another but all truth agree perfectly conspire together and t is impossible they should oppose or overthrow one another If it be found then that the Doctrines of our adversary are contrary to some truth be it to that which sense teacheth us to that which we learn in thescholof reason or to that which divine revelation tells us t is enough to justifie that they are by no means veritable far from being as they pretend the articles of the Christian Faith For the Author of Nature Grace Sense Reason and Faith is one and the same God who hath not destroyed in the school of grace what he hath taught in that of nature God forbid but hath polished and perfected in one what he had begun the rough drawn in the other So t is manifest that far from being obliged in this kind of discourse to imploy propositions contained in Scripture only I can use arguments drawn intirely from sense and reason without taking the propositions of which they consist from revelation As for example if I should conclude that the Eucharist is not a humane body because a humane body cannot be held intire in a mans mouth whereas the Eucharist may be held in an infants he would answer impertinently that should alledge that t is not Scripture but sense and reason which learns us these two propositions and therefore the conclusion is not a truth revealed For at this time we have concern about that the question is not about the Master who hath taught these propositions whither it be sense or Faith but about their quality whither they be true or not for if they are both true their conclusion is so of necessity and by consequence your opinion which opposeth its inevitable false it being absolutely impossible that two contradictory propositions should be both true as this the Eucharist is a humane body which is your opinion and this other the Eucharist is not a humane body which is the conclusion of my discourse But I say in the second place that their maxim is false that to infer a conclusion from authority and divine Faith it behoveth that the two propositions be drawn from the revelation of God it is enough that one be revealed and the other evident by the light of nature The Church discourseth thus against the fond imaginations of Apollinaris every man hath a foul indued with understanding Jesus Christ our Lord is a man therefore he hath Soul indued with understanding of the two propositions from whence this conclusion is drawn the second is in the Scriptures the first is not there but we have learned it in the school of reason would you say under this pretext that the conclusion viz. that Jesus Christ hath a soul endued with understanding is not a divine truth but a humane learned from earth and not from heaven but where is the infant that does not see that God revealing to us that his Son is a man doth not reveal by the same means that he hath a body a Soul understanding and in short all the essential parts of the nature signified by this word man Otherwise one must say that in teaching us that Jesus Christ is man it teacheth us nothing but simply strikes the ear with the vain and unprofitable sound of the word for what is it to say that Jesus Christ is man unless he hath a body Soul understanding and the other things of which the nature of the subject consist signified by this word man In the same manner when the Scripture teacheth us that God hath created the earth it teacheth us by the same means that he hath created America and the Austral Countries China and the Isles of the Sound although it be sense and reason and not Scripture which teacheth us that these Countries are part of the Globe of the earth and he would be impertinent to the hight who should say that the Scripture hath not revealed to us that God hath created China or Taproban because it simply tells us that God hath created the earth without telling that these Countries are part of it And so of the rest for God in his Scripture presupposeth every where that those to whom he speaks are men and not beasts that they know if not subtily and Phylosophically that which is not necessary for his design at least grosly and in some measure the nature of those things of which he speaks to them and by consequence that they are capable of applying to every part of a subject what he hath told them in gross so that when he learns us some thing of a whole it is clear that t is as much as if he revealed all and every one of its parts to us perticularly as when he tells us that Jesus Christ is a man t is as much as if he should say he hath a Body formed like ours consisting of quantity occupying a space which is fit to it moving it selfe in time from one place to another in such manner that its parts are not altogether in the same place that he hath a Soul which reasoneth wills loves and in short indued with all the essential faculties of man This is so clear that no Body ever can put it in doubt
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.
the Roman Church Part III. CHAP. I. The Antiquity Vniversality and Clearness of our Religion and from whence comes our difference with Rome THus have we shewn our faith by the Scriptures The Passages are clear and for the most part express and formal which Rome and Geneva equally acknowledge in their Version which the East and West North and South read in common since the first times of Christianity to this minute without their being able to reproach us that we have violated the Original abused the Pricks of the Hebrew or the Accents of the Greek The Consequences are of so evident necessity that Children are capable of understanding them So easie is it to prove that the Beliefs which we have just now demonstrated by Scripture are common to all Christians The Antients have explained cleared them in their Symbols and Councils The Moderns have retained them notwithstanding all the Changes which has happened in Religion All the Climates of the Christian world have received them with an universal consent Rome it self doth not contest with us about them she makes a Profession to believe them also There is but Sabellius Paul de Samosate Arius Fotinus Manicheusi Pelagius Nestorius and Eutyches every one of whom debate something of them with us all Heretiques being crushed by the Thunderbolts of the Catholick Church many hundred years since They alone demand proofs of us the others believe all with us From whence it appears by the way how false the Calumny of those is who accuse our Religion of novelty or particularity For what is there either more Antient or Universal among Christians than those Creeds of which it consists Who can deny that the Catholique Church hath had them in all Ages That Rome it self hath them not now Whether Antiquity hath had any Opinion which I have not it is another Question and upon which it falls out to consider First Whether this be a thing which hath been revealed by Jesus Christ and preached by his Apostles And Secondly ipresupposing it to be a truth that it is so necessary that one cannot without believing it have part in the Grace and Glory of God But as to my Religion that is to say this faith which I have proved by the Scriptures it is clear that all the true Christians both Antient and Modern are agreed in it who by confequence are all of my Religion although perhaps I am not of their Opinion in all other things They hold all my Beliefs only I confess 't is better that I hold not all their Opinions see the terms upon which we are with those of Rome For they profess to believe the Articles which we have explained All the difference springs from the Articles which they lay down to the confession of which they would oblige us and which we cannot receive This is all our Controversie From whence every one may see the injustice of the new Methodists who press us to prove by formal passages the points of our faith controversed between them and us Whereas the Points of my faith Gentlemen are not controversed but those of yours as for Example the Question is not whether we ought to worship God and Jesus Christ which is a Point of my faith but whether we ought to worship the Host which is an Article of yours The Question is not whether Jesus Christ is our Mediator or whether the Oblation of his death is a Sacrifice which are Articles of my belief but whether the Saints departed are our Mediators and whether the pretended Oblation of your Altars is a true a properly called Sacrifice which are the Points of your Faith We do not dispute whether we ought to call upon God or hope for Paradice and fear Hell which is my belief but whether we ought to Invogue the Saints and apprehend the fire of Purgatory which is your Doctrine 'T is you then ought to prove your saith not I mine Since to dispute well and lawfully one ought to prove not things which the parties are agreed on which would be a superflous labour but those about which they differ Nevertheless to content your humour we have proved our faith by the Scripture Let us see now if you can as easily finde yours there and that which you add to ours upon which indeed is all your contest CHAP. II. An Exposition of the Principal Beliefs of the Roman Church which we reject from our Faith FOr we confess voluntarily that we cannot believe neither that which you teach that Jesus Christ the Saviour of the world besides his being once offered upon the Cross is still every day immolated and truly and properly sacrificed upon your Altars under the Signes of Bread and Wine for the expiation of the sins of men nor that which you presuppose to this purpose that the body of Jesus Christ although it be in Heaven in Sovereign Glory is notwithstanding here below really and substantially under the Species of Bread and Wine which you consecrate intirely under every part of the Species of the Bread and the Wine loosing their first substance and being changed into that of his Body and Blood nor that which you conclude that all the faithful of the Lord are obliged without scrupling to render to your Sacrament the adoration * Cult de Latria worship and service due to the true God We reject also from our faith this which you assert in yours that the Souls of some of the faithful after having been washed in the Blood of Christ which cleanseth from all sin ought yet to be purged by I know not what subterranean flames in a place which you name Purgatory Nor can we perswade our selves to believe what you so firmly maintain that sinful men obtain the pardon of their Crimes not by faith alone as we all believe but also by the merits of their own works such as most of you say as they even merit Divine Grace and life eternal Neither can we receive that which you teach that besides this great God whom we adore we ought also to serve the Saints departed and besides the love and honour which we bare them as persons who have lived in the fear of God and who now rejoyce in his Glory we ought moreover to invoke them pray to them and have recourse to their aide and render as well to their Images as to those of Christ a certain Religious Veneration in kissing and saluting them uncovering our heads and prostrating our bodies before them Less yet do we think our selves obliged as you do to acknowledge the Bishop of Rome for the Head and Spouse of the Universal Church besides Jesus Christ our Lord or to attribute to him a Sovereign and Independant Authority over all other Pastors and Bishops and even over Councils and an infallible Light in the Faith never erring in the decision of things which concerns it and therefore we do not believe that the Laws which he hath made of celebrating certain Feasts and of
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
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
them all and was the first that layed the foundation of the Church as well among the Jews as Gentiles for it was by his preaching that the three thousand Jews at Jerusalem and the family of the Centurion Cornelius in Cesarea believed the one being the first-fruits of Israel and the other the first fruits of the Gentiles who knoweth not but that is an advantage purely personal proper to St. Peter and incommunicable to any other consisting only in this that he had the honour to preach first the Gospel of Christ and to put his hand first to the building of this Celestial house That which he adds that he would give him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and that what he should bind on earth should be bound in Heaven and what he should unbinde on earth should be unbound in Heaven is but reason Serm. in Pentic inter opera Chrysost T. 6. p. 233. a. Chrysost Hom. 54. in Mat. p. 483. e. Hom. 21. lat 20. in Joh. p. 106. d. in Gal. 1. p. 961. f. Bazil Seleuc. Orat. 25. p. 142. 6. Vict. Atioch in Mark c. 3. p. 417. c. Bibl. PP T. 1. John Aurel. l 3. contr Claud. Taurin Bibl. t. 4. PP part 1. p. 586. à Carthusan Ferus Titelman Gorran in eum locum Apoc. 21.14 because he promised him For the honour of building the Church of Christ was founded upon the Apostleship which is writ in these words the which in my judgment signifieth only that he will eestablish Teachers in the Christian Church Eph. 2.20 Acts 2.14.41 Acts 10.5 34 47. to teach men what is truly lawful or unlawful commanded permitted or denied For the Key was the mark of Doctorship amongst the Jews and the Lord makes allusions to it where he saith Luke 11.52 That the Doctors of the Law entertained the Key of Knowledge and the Kingdom of Heaven signifieth every where in the Evangelists the Church of the Messias which is also the sense where this word is used by the * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hebrews both Antient and Modern So that these words I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven promiseth to St. Peter the Charge and Dignity of Doctor or Master as the Jews speak not in the Synagogue but in the Church not in the earthly and carnal Israel but in the Spiritual and Heavenly This binding and unbinding which he adds are the functions of this new and heavenly Doctorship which he promised him For the style in which the Judaical Language runs in which our Saviour then spoke to binde signifieth to forbid something and to unbinde on the contrary to permit and declare that it is lawful from whence it comes that to say a thing is to defend or permit it the Masters of the Jews saying only * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is bound and that is unbound the Lord promised then in sum to St. Peter that he should have in the Kingdom of Heaven that is to say in his Church the Dignity of Doctor to proclaim and declare to the Nations what is truly lawful or unlawful holy or profane unbinding many things which Moses or the Priests of the Gentiles had bound and binding many other things which the vices and follies of men had unbound and all with a wisdom and Authority so ample that Heaven approved all his Doctrines and was the Protector of it Now this dignity is not the Power and Authority of a Monarch nor is it particular to St. Peter the other Apostles having had share with him as it appears clearly both by their Acts and Epistles and namely by the 18th of St. Matthew where the Lord said to them all that which he here said to St. Peter Mat. 18.19 Verily I say unto you all that you shall binde on earth shall be bound in Heaven and all things that you shall unbinde on earth shall be unbound in Heaven Neither can they pretend any particular for St. Peter in that which was commanded him of feeding the sheep of the Lord. For had not the other Apostles also as well as he the charge of feeding common by his testimony to all the Ministers of the word and the commission of all the sheep of the Lord 1 Pet. 5.2 Mark 16.15 2 Cor. 11.28 Preach the Gospel to all Creatures and the care of all the Churches comes upon me from day to day 't is true that the Lord made towards him and repeated this command three times Cyril upon St. John l. 12 64. but as some of the Fathers have very well observed to abolish the failing of his three denials very far from thinking by this means to establish the Monarchy of others Secondly As to this that the Lord being at Capernaum payed the Tribute-money for St. Peter and not for the other of the Apostles that doth not infer any Authority of St. Peters above them For it may be that it proceeded from some other consideration as that the others had already payed it or that they were not present when the Tribute money was demanded of our Saviour or that they were not Inhabitants of Capernaum as St. Peter was who had his family there In brief whatever it be 't is a wonderful Consequence to say Christ hath payed the Tribute-mony for St. Peter therefore St Peter was the Monarch of the Universal Church and the Prince and Lord of the Apostles Thirdly Neither can this be inferred out of that place where Saint Matthew numbring the Apostles saith The first is Simon who is called Peter For a President is the first in his Chamber and a Dean the first in his Assembly nevertheless none can conclude that the President is Lord of the Counsellors in his Chambers or the Dean the Prince of his Brethren I grant that St. Peter either for his age his capacity his zeal or some other consideration hath had the like advantage in the Company of the Apostles he might have been the first of them but yet not the Master much less the Monarch of them Fourthly And that sufficeth to shew that they cannot prove by the Scriptures this marvellous quality which they attribute to the Pope of not being able to err in matters of faith For since all the things which they alledge are grounded upon those things which regard St. Peter who seeth not that they infer nothing for the advantage of the Pope except they prove by the Scriptures that all the right of St. Peter belongs to the Pope that which I think they dare not so much as attempt to shew by the Scriptures Fifthly I say as much of the Opinion of those amongst them who attribute the Infallibility and Sovereignity not to the Pope as at this time the greatest part of their Doctors do but to the Roman Church assembled in the Universal Councel For all which they can draw from the Scriptures in favour of their Opinion speaks of the true Church of Jesus Christ without amusing
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
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
been speaking concerning the precedent Article For since the Eucharist is truly bread in substance every one seeth enough how much this Sovereign service which they give it in the Roman Church is contrary to all Scripture which from the beginning to the end forbids us nothing more expresly oftner and under more grievous threatnings than the adoration of any Creature of what nature and dignity soever Exâ—d 20.3 Mat. 4.10 Thou shalt have no other God before me Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve 4. Vpon Purgatory ROme saith that it often happens that those who die in the faith of Jesus Christ are burnt in a fire as hot as that of Hell The Scriptures saith Apoc. 14.13 Rom. 8.1 2 Cor. 5.6 8. That they are happy that they rest from their labours that there is no condemnation for them that their earthly habitaion of this house being dissolved they have a building of God an eternal house not made with hands in the Heavens That so long as they are in this body they are strangers to the Lord and when they are strangers to the body which is when they quit it they shall be with the Lord Luke 23.23 and tells us that the repenting Thief was with the Lord in Paradise the same day he died 2. Rome sayeth that this subterranean fire purgeth us from some of our sins 1 John 1.7 The Scripture saith that the blood of Jesus Christ purgeth us from all sin 5. Vpon Justification ROme teacheth that we are justified partly by faith and partly by good works How agreeth this with that Scripture which saith Gal. 2.16 Tit. 3.5 that man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the faith of Jesus Christ and that God hath saved us not for the righteous works which we have done but according to his mercy with that which is asserted in so many places Rom. 11.6 that we are saved and justified by Grace since that if it be by Grace 't is not by works otherwise Grace would be no more Grace Rom. 4.4 and that to him that worketh the hire is not reckoned of Grace but of debt and with that which is said that we have not whereof to glory Eph. 2.9 Rom. 4.2 since that he who is justified by his works hath according to the same whereof to glory 6. Vpon the Merit of Works ROme teacheth that we do by our good works so much merit eternal life that if God should not give it to us he would do unjustly How can this agree with the Language which the Scriptures teacheth us Luke 17.10 when you have done all the things which are commanded you to do say we are unprofitable Servants we have done that which we ought to have done 2. Rome holds that eternal life is to speak properly a reward due to the value of our works Rom. 6.23 2 Tim 1.18 The Scripture saith that it is a gift or a grace of God and a mercy and that although we should have kept his Commandments that which we fail much in yet he useth gratuity and mercy towards us in well-doing Exo. 20.6 3. Rome holds that between the vertue of the faithful and eternal life there is a proportion and the Scripture saith Rom. 8.18 That the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come which shall be revealed in us 4. Rome holds that the Lord oweth him who hath lived well and holily eternal life The Scripture Scripture teacheth us that God oweth no body any thing Who is he that hath given him first and it shall be rendered to him again Rom. 11.35 7. Vpon the Worshipping of Saints 1. The Scripture condems those men who worship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those which by nature are no Gods Gal. 4.8 Rome worshippeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Saints which are no Gods by nature 2. The Scripture saith 1 King 8.39 that God only knows the hearts of all men that the dead know no more any thing that they understand not whether their Sons are noble or ignoble Eccl 9.5 6 Job 14.20 21. 2 Kin. 22.20 that their eyes do not see the evils which God brings upon the places where they have lived Rome teacheth that deceased Saints know all that is done upon the earth and that they know the most secret thoughts of our hearts 8. Vpon the Worshipping of Images Rome fills her Temples and Streets with the Images of God Father Son Holy Ghost and of the most Blessed Virgin and of all the Saints represented as well by flat painting as in all sorts of Sculpture She will have one render to them an adoration and veneration analogical prostrate before them kiss them offer them Bougies or Tapers go a Pilgrimage to the places which are consecrated to them How agreeth this with what the Scripture saith Deut. 4.12 15 16. You saw no similitude in the day that the Lord your God spoke to you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire lest perhaps being deceived you should make you any graven Image in the likenes of male or female Thou shalt make thee no graven Image Exod. 20. nor the likeness of any that is in Heaven above or in the earth beneath or in the waters under the earth Thou shalt not bow down to them nor worship them The Hebrew saith thou shalt not prostrate before them and serve them Lev. 26.1 You shall make you no Idol nor graven Image nor rear up any Image nor set up any Image of stone in your Land to adore it It is also in the Hebrew to prostrate before it 9. Vpon the Monarchy of the Pope of Rome 1. Rome teacheth that the Pope is the Sovereign Judge of the world a Monarch assisted by the Princes of his Court who governs Kings who makes the greatest of the earth kiss his slippers who wears three Crowns upon his head who can chastise the States of Christianity with pains not only spiritual but temporal How agreeth this pretended Power and the manner with which he hath exercised it many years since before the face of Heaven and earth with that which the Lord commanded his Apostles The Kings of the earth exercise Lordship over them Luke 25.22 and those who use authority over them are called Benefactors But it is not so with you but he that is greatest amongst you let him be the least and he that governs as he that serveth And with that which St. Peter commands 1 Pet. 5.3 Feed the flock of God which is committed to you c. not as having Lordship over the Clergy and people of God but as being examples to the flock by your charity 2. Rome holds that the Pope is above the Church The Scripture sends back him and every Believer having quarrelled with his Brother to the Tribunal of the Church and obligeth him to submit to
her Judgment Mat. 18.15 6 17. If thy brother hath sinned against thee c. tell it to the Church and if he disdain to hear the Church let him be to to thee as a Heathan man and a Publican And elsewhere all it saith 1 Cor. 31.21 22. that all things belong to the Church and namely Paul Apollos and Cephas and in another place speaking of the Apostles in general it calls the Servants of the Church for the love of Jesus 3. Rome esteemeth St. Peter the Master and Sovereign Lord over the other Apostles How comes it then that the Scripture speaking of him doth not name in the first place or rank 2 Cor. 4.5 but in the second only James Cephas and John having known the Grace which was given to me How comes it that the other Apostles sent him to preach in Samaria Gal. 2.9 How comes it that St. Paul preached three years without communicating any thing of his designe to him How comes it that even Paul himself said boldly Acts 8.14 Gal. 1.17 18. that those who were in esteem added nothing to him and recounts very freely that he resisted St. Peter in Antioch to his face Gal. 2.6 Gal. 2.11 because he was to be blamed Are these the terms of a Subject to his Prince And would they suffer now adays that the Bishop of Hostia should treat so with the Pope or from him 10. Vpon the distinction of Meats Rome teacheth that the use of flesh is wicked and unlawful two or three days in a week and during all Lent 1 Tim. 4.1 2 3 4. The Scripture saith that every Creature of God is good that nothing is to be rejected when it is taken with thanksgivin and that God hath created food for the faithful and for those who have known the truth to use it with thanksgiving and calls the Commandment of abstaining from it a Doctrine of Devils and qualifies them who assert it with the terms of teachers of Lyes and deserters of the faith abusing themselves with lying Spirits telling us particularly that such will come in the last days 11. Of the unmarried state of the Ministers of the Religion Rome teacheth that for the Ministers of the Christian Religion to marry is an impure and unlawful thing The Scripture testifieth that some of the Aopstles were married as amongst the rest St. Peter Mat. 8.14 and where it propounds conditions necessary for a Bishop 1 Tim. 3.2 it requireth not that he be not married at all but only that he be the husband of one wife 12. Vpon the retrenching of the Holy Cup. Rome suffers none but him only who hath consecrated the Eucharist to drink of the Cup of the Lord denying the Communion of it to all others The Scripture saith to those who Communicate Mat. 26.27 1 Cor. 11.28 Drink all of it and St. Paul Let a man prove himself and so let him eat of this bread and drink of this Cup. 13. Vpon the Exemption of the Ministers of Religion The Scripture saith in general Rom. 13.1 Let every man be subject to the Higher Powers c. For the Prince is a Servant of God for thy good but if thou doest evil fear for he weareth not the Sword in vain 1. Pet. 2.13 14. Be subject to every order of man for the love of God be it to the King as Supreme be it to Governours as to them who are sent by him for the punishment of evil doers and for praise to those who do well The Apostle Paul knowing this order submitted himself to it Acts 25.10.11 appearing before the Officers of the Emperorour and appealing to him Rome holds that all her Clerks even the least of them are exempted from this Subjection CHAP. XVI A Refutation of that which the Adversaries pretend to elude the passages of the Scripture contrary to their Beliefs by certain distinctions of their Invention WHosoever will diligently read the Scriptures will finde many other things there incompatible with the Doctrine of the Church of Rome But this little proof is sufficient for our designe I know our Adversaries endeavour to shun these blows and to that purpose use many distictions But for the most part so strange that 't is not possible to comprehend them they wrap up things in inexplicaple contradictions as 't is easie to be seen particularly upon the Subject of Transubstantiaon of the Sacrifice of the Mass of the service to Saints and their Images Secondly All of them presuppose their Opinion and live by the passion wch they have for it For example before ever they had established Transubstantiation the world never heard speak of a body which hath its quantity and not the manner of its quantity which should be in many places at a time which penetrates the dimensions of another body which hath all its parts confounded under one point and not distinctly extended the one out of the place of the other neither of Accidents which subsist without subject a roundness without any thing of a Circle a whiteness without any thing of white neither a changing of Substances where the terms in which they were confined was in its full and entire being fifteen or sixteen years before the change arrived So before they had established the Service and Prayers to the Saints humane-kinde had never heard that the Religious Services of God were distinguished into Latria Doulia and Hyperdoulia from whence it follows that before they imploy these distinctions they are necessarily oblig'd first to ground the Opinion which they have produced and out of which they cannot finde for them neither in Nature nor in Scripture any stay where they may be able to subsist I shew that the Eucharist is not a humane body because it hath not the quantity of it that it is not the body of the Lord because the body of the Lord is in Heaven To that these Gentlemen answer that the Eucharist hath the quantity of a humane body but it hath not the manner of it that is to say it is five or 6 foot long although all its length is not extended more than two fingers that the body of Christ is in Heaven indeed but according to its manner of natural existence and that it is in the same time substantially elsewhere in a certain manner of existence the which though it can hardly be expressed by words is nevertheless possible to God Now what light doth these distinctions carry to the Subjects where they are imployed Do not they confound all our thoughts Do not they redouble the darkness instead of dissipating it And indeed what other things do they except to repeat the same thing that is in Question for when a body hath its quantity and not the manner of it and that he should subsist in one place in one manner and in the same moment should be in an infinite other places in another manner this I say is not grounded but upon the Doctrine of Transubstantiation without which never any of them would have thought to affirm things so inconsistent One ought then to begin by the proof of this pretended Doctrine For till they have grounded this well their distinctions are unuseful and our proofs clear and solid Now we have shew'd here above that they cannot prove by the Scriptures any of the places which they use to this end nor infer any thing like it There is then no need to examine their distinctions Since 't is thus 't is an injustice in them to make use of them and it would be lost time to me to stay to consider confute them In a word we have imployed this second means for the abundance of proofs and not by any necessity that obligeth us to it For although the Doctrines of Rome should not oppose as they do visibly so many truths of the Holy Scriptures it should be always enough for us not to receive them since they cannot be proved by Scripture Thus have we sufficiently in my Opinion justified our faith by the Scriptures having shewed that they teach clearly the Articles which we believe and that they assert neither directly nor indirectly but rather shake and destroy those of the Doctrine of Rome which we reject From whence it appears that it is against all reason and truth which some of our adversaries reproach us with that we cannot prove by the Scriptures no not one Article of our controversed faith instead of acknowledging that it is upon them that the blame falls Being evident that of all the Beliefs which they press us to believe with them they have not been able hitherto nor will they ever be able to ground any of them upon the Scriptures Pray God enlighten them and confirm us in the knowledge of his truth and give to both of us the spirit of Peace and Charity to treat our Differences with sweetness convenient to the Profession which we make of being Christians FINIS
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