Christ to be the Pillar of Truth so as that she was never so over-clouded with error but that she hath enjoyed the fruition of that Promise Matth. 16. in some good measure ever since it was made Nor shall she ever so close with the gates of Hell as by general consent and full authority to dissert that Faith which having Christ for its object is the Rock she is built upon and therefore you see I hold the Church cannot err in some sense and indeed he that holds the contrary must for ought I see raze out that Promise Matth. 16. and many other And yet nothing from all this accrues to the Papal Church of Rome I alledged Stephen as defending the Truth by the authority of Scripture Only c. Nor can it be groundedly imagined that had it been the mind of God that such as are not of the Church should be summoned to her Tribunal Stephen being full of the holy Spirit the leader into all truth would have omitted the use of that means but he knew that such authority the Church had none as I shewed from 1 Cor. 5. What have I to do to judge them that are without do not ye also judge them that are within And therefore he could not mention any such power And though Stephen did many wonders among the People yet at this time when he so powerfully vanquished his adversaries he did none at all but only overcame them by the assistance of the Spirit speaking in the Scripture c. I desired you to shew me but one Instance where ever any of the Primitive Saints did appeal to the Church of which they were present Members as Judge between them and such as never received their Doctrine but you have not done it nor indeed can it be done As I shewed that Stephen appealed to Scripture ONLY c. so I also shewed That it was the way of Christ and his Apostles frequently to vindicate their Doctrine against such as were not of their Church by appealing to the Scriptue especially amongst such as owned the Scripture this you confess and also you tell me that your Church doth the same But this cannot be true of All your Doctrine because you have told me That many Points of your Faith are resolved without the written Word of God or else you never answered my first Antiquery which demandeth What Controversie in Religion you can resolve without the written Word of God And in your Answer you assigned The Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son Sabbath Infant-Baptism and MANY OTHER POINTS OF FAITH and I shall shew anon that we have it pro confesso from your Champions that there be some Points of your Faith which is not GROUNDED UPON nor MENTIONED IN the SCRIPTURES and therefore your Church cannot vindicate such Points of her Faith and Doctrine by the Scripture Although Christ sent Paul to Ananias for instruction yet it followeth not that we must take Romes instructions without Scripture Is there no difference between the time that now is and then was Much of the Scripture if not all the New Testament was then unwritten Again Ananias was immediatly sent of God If you are so sent prove it to us as Ananias did by shewing the Miracle of restoring Paul's sight If you are not so sent to what purpose do you alledge this Text I believe I might form you a monsirous Consequence here PAPIST You that will not trust the Churches Judgment lay down four wayes of resolving Doubts The first To argue it out till Truth prevail But if we must argue only out of Scripture and be our own Interpreters of it there can be no end of arguing as I have often shewed The second To appeal to God as the two Tribes did Josh 22. A rare way to end Controversies to look for Miracles in our Disputes The third To appeal to Scripture and right Reason But if I challenge them to be on my side who must take up the difference The fourth To cast Lots But though the Apostles did it who certainly were inspired to do so yet must not we presume to tempt God or to look for the like Miracles or to build our Faith upon such doubtful events BAPTIST You here wrong us to say that we will not trust the Judgment of the Church for the Church truly and universally taken we do credit as her that is appointed of the Father to be the Pillar and Ground of the Truth of which Church we take the Prophets and Apostles to be the principal Members and so in all Points of Faith to be credited in the first place But if by Church you mean the Papal Church of Rome I confess we dare not trust her Judgement at least not in all that she saith for example these following 1. Your Church tells us That it is not needful for the Scriptures to be read to or by the Laity in a tongue which they understand and that though they Pray after another in Latine though they understand not what they say yet such prayer is sufficient Rhem. Test Annot. in 1 Corinthians 2. Your Church tells us That the Sacrifice of your Masse is available to take away or obtain remission of sins by the work wrought Con. Trident. Sess 22. That the whole Masse is a propitiatory Sacrifice for the quick and dead and whoso saith it is only a commemoration of Christ's Death c. is accursed Con. Trent 3. Your Church holds That such as deny that the real Flesh and Blood of Christ is in the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament ought to be burnt to death 4. Your Church holds and tells us That Images and old clothes of Saints ought to be worshipped with religious Worship 5. That men are AS FULLY Justified by good Works AS THEY ARE DAMNED BY evil Works 6. That it is unlawful for Ministers of Christ to Marry 7. That the Scripture doth not contain all things necessary to Salvation To omit many other these are Points of your Churches Judgment which we dare not trust till by you or some other proved to be Truths I assigned the use of Lots as lawful in some doubtful cases to end Controversies and for proof I quoted Acts 7. and this you will not allow for two Reasons 1. Because you say the Apostles were inspired to use them but were it so as that you cannot prove yet it cannot be denied but we may do some things which they were inspired to do for the Holy Ghost was to lead them into all Truth and they were to lead us into the same Truth by their Example and Doctrine Joh. 16. 13. 1 Cor. 11. 1 2. And be it here observed That the Holy Ghost led those our Teachers to ordain the Ministry by Prayer and laying on of Hands Acts 6 and Acts 13. which practice of theirs is a good president to act by a president I say for this practice is not expresly commanded in Scripture no more than the use
I urged that of necessity the Scripture must decide all our Controversies as aforesaid because as things now stand the Word or Scripture is antecedent to the Church so that inasmuch as it is impossible to find the Church without the Scripture it supposes clearly that the Scripture must be found before the Church and so if the Scripture must of necessity resolve this great Controversie about the Church it consequently followeth that they must resolve all Controversies because all Religious Controversies are involved in this one general Query Where is and who are the Church Something here which the Adversary doth further write is omitted because it may be more fitly taken notice of afterward PAPIST I had reason to take notice of your general saying that the Word was antecedent to Faith and the Church since there was a Church and consequently Faith before the Scripture was written Now it seems you meant not the Scripture by the Word but I know not what Word which was afterward committed to writing It is past my understanding what Word you mean for since it cannot be Verbum Scriptum before it be written It must either be Verbum Traditum and I suppose you will not allow that or Verbum Dei Patris and that cannot be the Word you speak of as committed to writing BAPTIST By that Word which was antecedent to Faith and the Church as it relates to the Church under the Patriarchs c. I mean the Word which God spake to them and by them at sundry times and in divers manners And if you take that term Word to relate to the Church of Christ in its plantation then I speak partly of the written Word of God and partly of that which was at that time only spoken by word of mouth by Christ and his faithful Stewards and if you will call this part of the word Verbum Traditum I say that is the Word I speak of And I do also say this Word was afterward committed to writing which Word together with the former I mean that of the Prophets is that whereon the Church as now considered is founded by which she must be known And in this sense I say the holy Scripture is now antecedent to the Church And therefore well spake that Learned person Chrysostom when he forewarned the sons of men that if they took heed to any thing in order to their knowing the Church in the latter times beside Scripture they would fall headlong into the Abomination which maketh desolate and not be able to know the true Church BAPTIST I Think it meet here to give the Reader some account of my Judgment of these five Texts which I brought to justifie my Answer to the first Query which with my Answer was as followeth Qu. Whether we are to resolve all Differences in point of Religion only out of the written Word of God Answ The Spirit speaking in the Scripture together with right Reason as truely subservient is that whereby we are to resolve all Differences c. For proof I cited Isa 8. 20. 1 Tim. 6. 3. 1 Joh. 4. 6. 2 Joh. 9 10. 2 Thess 3. 2. where note that under the term We ought not to be understood any person but the Papists on the one part and the Baptists on the other who do deny each other to be the Church of Christ Now that the Church is to defend her self against all that come to spoil her of her Church-state by the Scripture onely as that which includes her whole strength is that which I brought these Texts to prove And first for that place Isa 8. 20. The Prophet foreseeing a Judgment coming upon Israel even such as God would hide himself from them and the Law and Testimony should be like a Book bound and sealed up as ver 16 17. compared with ch 29. 11 12. The Prophet likewise foreseeing that when God should hide his face Israel would enquire of Wisards and such as spoke from familiar Spirits as Saul did when under the like judgment as 1 Sam. 28. 6 7 8. wherefore the Prophet that he might warn the remnant of faithful ones whom he foresaw would be as wonders amongst the rest commands them as from the Lord that WHEN men should say unto them Seek unto such as have familiar spirits c. to go to the LAW as being their way to go to God himself for saith he Should not a People seek unto their God To the LAW c. and certifies them that by that they should know Deceivers for saith he If they speak not according to This Word the Law there is no light in them So that I infer thus much that when such as are enemies to the Church come to invade the Saints with their deceit the only infallible way to know them to be Deceivers is to enquire of God's Law and Testimony I know that Israel had the Testimony or standing Oracle beside the written Law And the Church now hath the new Testimony open in the Church beside the Law Prophets hereunto I say the Church is only to apply her self as aforesaid to find out the deceit of those who would rob her of that inheritance which she holdeth by the deeds of God's Law and Promises contained in Scripture by these as the only infallible Rule she knows those to be lyars who say they are the Church and are not And to this agrees the next three Scriptures the very reading whereof sheweth that when the Controversie is between the Church and such as pretend falsly to that Title the onely infallible means to refel them is the Spirit speaking in Scripture c. For thus saith the first of them If any man teach otherwise and consent not to wholsom words even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Doctrine that is according to Godliness he is proud knowing nothing but doting about questions c. Thus saith the second He that knoweth God heareth us he that is not of God heareth not us Hereby know we the Spirit of Truth and the spirit of Error The third saith thus Whoso transgresseth and abideth not in the Doctrin of Christ hath not God He that abideth in the Doctrine of Christ hath both the Father and the Son If there come any unto you and bring not this Doctrine receive him not into your house neither bid him God-speed From these Texts it appears that unless the Papists can produce something which they can infallibly prove to be Christ's Doctrine beside what is contained in holy Scripture or that the Apostles may be heard as infallibly by some other means as by the holy Scripture or that the Saints received some Doctrine for Christs that is not contained in the Scripture I say unless they can infallibly shew something of this nature my Answer is good But if they can produce any other thing of such authority then I acknowledge my Answer to be deficient Howbeit if any man or the Church her self
do decide a Controversie by insisting upon the Scripture this is no more than my Answer included for I do not imagine that the Church must not pronounce what is contained in the Scripture but if she hath power to speak as from the Lord in these dayes when yet the Scripture saith no such thing then I profess my self short of understanding the power of the Church 2 Thess 3. 2. I only made use of this Text thus far that in Religious Controversies the Apostle gives Reason her place and therefore desired to be delivered from unreasonable men PAPIST ONce more you offer to justifie your Consequences drawn out of the five Texts But I ask once more To what purpose did you bring them was it not to prove what you had said in your Answer to my Query That the Scripture so we took right Reason along with us was sufficient to resolve all Controversies in matters of Faith No rational man can reade your first Paper but must think so and indeed otherwise you must have brought them to prove something that was not under debate which had been impertinent Must not that very Assertion of yours be the Consequence to these five Texts and them have I not reason to cry out that there never appeared such Monstrous Consequences But to avoid this inconvenience you fall into the other and will have some of your Texts brought to prove certain Propositions which you had not mentioned in your Answer Howsoever let us now see what you make of them Isa 8. 20. God's People are commanded to have recourse rather to the Law c. than to superstitious Oracles Ad Legem magis c. And they have a sign given them to convince such Oracles of falshood if they speak not according to the Word or Prophesie of Isaiah This is the clear sense of that place out of which you draw this strange consequence Ergo the Scripture c. is to resolve all matters of Faith A strange Consequence I say as will appear if we turn your Euthymeme into a Syllogism thus Recourse is to be had rather to the Law than to false Oracles whose falsehood appears if they speak not according to the Word or Prophecy of Isaiah But if this be so the Scriptures c. are to resolve all points of Faith Ergo c. What a prodigious minor have we here How doth it follow that because God's Word is to be more credited than superstitioas Oracles or that such Oracles are not to be credited when they speak against God's Word Therefore the Scriptures c. are to resolve all points of Faith I know you have not the word rather in your English Translation as we have in ours but the clear sense of the place bears as much 1 Tim. 6. 3. saith they are proud that teach contrary to the Doctrine of Christ Ergo you infer that the Scripture is to judge whose Doctrine is of pride This is as mad a conclusion as the last for when there is no clear Text of Scripture for either side as it often happens or Scripture brought on both sides How can the Scripture judge whether party be proud or how can it be judge of its own sense when it is alledged on both sides who both pretend to have the Spirit and Reason on their sides 1 John 4. 6. Those that hear not the Apostles are not of God nor have his Spirit Ergo say you the Scripture resolves who are religious Doth it follow out of this Text that when parties contend that they hear the Apostles the Scripture can resolve the difference and pronounce who are religious c. Not at all 2 John 9. 10. Gives Judgement against those that follow not Christ's Doctrine You infer ergo the Scripture must try whether men bring this Doctrine Strange Logick for unless your Text proved that the Scripture containes all Christ's Doctrine which it doth not your Consequence must needs be faulty 2 Thess 3. 2. you say proves that Reason is some wayes necessary to decide Controversies in Religion I will not examine the goodness of this Consequence but I am sure you need not have brought Scripture to have proved so manifest a Truth which cannot be denied by any but such as pretend to have so much of the Spirit that me-thinks they should have little need of the use of Reason BAPTIST Concerning my five Texts and what I infer thence I need not speak much here yet it is worthy observing how apparantly you miss the clear sense of Isa 8. 20. whilst you restrain the relatives this word to the Word or Prophecy of Isaiah whereas it is as clear as the Sun at noon that they ought to be referr'd to the Law and Testimony for thus I read To the Law and to the Testimony if they speak not according to This Word Having thus missed the sence of the Text then in all that you say further you discover a taunting spirit endeavouring to bespatter me with what dirt comes next to hand I did not quote any one of the five Texts as taking it singly to prove the whole Assertion and therefore you did injure my understanding to argue from them apart as brought to prove the whole Position but I brought them to prove such Propositions as being laid together do amount to so much as my Assertion as I explicate it doth contain For the first four Texts do all of them shew how God's People ought to try and defend themselves against such as oppose the Church and Truth of God as I shewed in my Rejoynder and the fifth gives Reason her place in Religious Contests But there is not one of the Arguments which I formed from my five Quotations but you deprave and abuse it by both adding terms of your own and omitting mine yea sometimes whole sentenoes and when you have so done you flout at the Conclusions Which dealing is too bad for a sober Disputant It were a very easie thing to turn all your Objections here against the Scripture as insufficient to resolve differences in Religion upon the Church as therefore insufficient to resolve them For whereas you say That when both Parties pretend to have Scripture and Reason on their sides then the Scripture cannot decide the Controversie Might not I as well say when both parties pretend to have the Church on their side as that 's the case between us the Church then cannot decide our difference Again where you seem to say that when both parties contending do say they hear the Apostles that then the Apostles cannot as they speak in the Scriptures decide the Controversie Hath not this the same force against the Church when both parties contend they hear the Church See how you can defend your self and I doubt not but therein you will defend my Arguments for the Scripture And because you do cry up the Fathers c. for so clear a way to decide all our Controversies I will therefore shew you that they do clearly
Lord yet we will not cease humbly to beg of all such persons in the Name of Jesus Christ that they having his Law would carefully observe the terms whereupon Life is held forth unto them and become such glad receivers of the Word as is mentioned Acts 2. 41. Then they which gladly received the Word were baptized and the same day were added to the Church about three thousand souls The Argument thus explained I shall now endeavour to make it good The Tenth Argument maintained That the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers and no other present Assemblies of men are the true Church of Christ I prove thus Either the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers or else some other Assemblies now in the practice of Infant Baptism must be the true Church of Christ because without Baptism the Papists say and say truly too there can be no true Church of Christ at this day Now these two wayes of Baptizing only I mean of Water-Baptism is pretended as necessary in order to a visible Church-state viz. the dipping or baptizing persons upon their personal profession of Faith as the present Assemblies of the Baptists do practise or baptizing or rather sprinkling of Infants without personal profession of Faith as the present National Churches do practise For most undoubtedly the true and legitimate claim to this Title of Christ's Church must be found in one of these two Parties And that no National Assembly gathered together by Pedo-baptism can fairly claim this Title I have shewed before whither now I refer my Reader And for the evincing yet further that the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers are the true visible Church of Christ I thus argue They and they only have the true Ecclesiastical Marks of truly Antient Primitive or Apostolical Gathering Constitution and Government Therefore they and they only are the true Church of Jesus Christ These three points namely Gathering Constitution and Government I take if right to be the infallible Marks of a true Church And that the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers and they only have them will be evident to him that considereth what they were at first and how they agree with what in these respects is only found in the Assemblies of the Baptized Congregations The truly Antient Primitive and Apostolical Gathering in respect of the first means used in order thereunto was the preaching Repentance and Remission of sins or the Gospel unto every Creature and upon their conviction to command them as from the Lord to be baptized every one of them in the Name c. as appears Matth. 28. 19 20. Mark 16. 15 16. Acts 2. 38. Acts 8. 37. Acts 10. 47 48. And herein onely the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers do closely follow Christ's Primitive Ministers The Primative and Apostolical Gathering of the Church of Christ in respect of the subjects gathered were only such as through the virtue and prevalency of the Word preached or made known did give a demonstration of their Regeneration by the profession of Faith and manifestation of Repentance and being dipped in Water in the Name of the Father c. For the proof whereof I appeal to those several Scriptures alledged against the gathering of Christ's Church of such persons as of whose Regeneration no demonstration is or can be given answerable to what the Scripture doth require in order to persons admission into the Kingdom of God or Church on Earth And secondly I appeal to the practice of the Apostles acting in pursuance of that Commission given them in that behalf And thirdly I do appeal to the Churches themselves which were gathered by the Apostles as they are described to us in these several Texts following These Texts do shew to the diligent Reader that here is such things spoken of this numerous Church as is necessarily exclusive of any Infants being admitted into their Society as to participate of any Church Ordinance And the like will appear to the Scripture-searching Soul in all those other Churches as the respective places will sufficiently convince I have it freely granted under the hand of a learned Clergy-man That Churches at the first were gathered only as we affirm but he tells me That when Persecution ceased God took in all Nations or whole Nations which hitherto he hath not proved The Church at Jerusalem Acts 1. 15 21 22. Acts 2. 41 42. Heb. 5 6 8 Chapters The Church at Samaria Acts 8. 12 13 14 15 16 17. The Church at Cesaria Acts 10. 33 44 45 46 47 48. The Church at Antioch Acts 11. 20 21 23 26. Acts 13. 12. with Acts 9. 38. The Church at Philippi Acts 16. 12 13 14 15 31 32 33 34 40. Phil. 1. 6 7 8 9 10. The Church at Thessalonica Acts 17. 1 2 3 4. 2 Thess 1. 3 10 11. The Church at Colosse Coloss 1. 4 5 6. Coloss 2. 10 11 12. The Church at Corinth Acts 8. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. 1 Cor. 1. 2. The Church at Rome Acts 28. 24. Rom. 6. 3 14. The Church at Ephesus Acts 19. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. Ephes 1. 13 14 15. The Church at Galatia Gal. 3. 26 27 28 29. Gal. 3. 1 2 3 4 5 6. These Scriptures duely considered shew That all those famous Churches were gathered in a way contrary to that of the National Churches and consonant to the way of the present Baptized Churches And be it here observed that no man ever yet could shew by any Record of such Authority as may suffice to be a Foundation of Faith in this case that by the Apostles any were ever admitted into the Church in their infancy Wherefore look well upon the Scripture and then upon the gathering of the Churches of the Baptists and you will find that they and they only have the true Antient Primitive or Apostolical-mark of Church-gathering Of CONSTITUTION THey onely can be truly constituted that are rightly gathered which the Baptized Churches onely are The Primitive Constitution of the Church consisted principally in these two heads viz. Free-fellowship in the Doctrine of the Apostles Acts 2. 40 41 42 47. Job 1. 11 12 13. Act. 17. 4. 1 Thess 1. 5 6 9. 1 John 1. 3. Rev. 22. 17. No force of a worldly nature was used in the begetting or continuing her Fellowship for it was a mutual consent The second thing pertaining to the Constitution consists in the disposing of her Members to those places to which they are fitted to serve in the body 1 Cor. 12. 27. with vers 18. 28. Acts 6. 3 4. Now that the present Assemblies of the Baptized Believers have this form of Constitution in both respects is evident to all that will take knowledge of their Constitution Of GOVERNMENT THe true Ancient Primitive and Apostolical Government of the Church was only Spiritual and did recide not in the Pastors apart from the Church but in the Pastors together with the Church yet so as that those to whom the Church hath committed her
aside the Commandments of God you hold the Tradition of men THO. GRANTHAM THE BAPTIST AGAINST THE PAPIST The FIRST PART sheweth the SCRIPTURE and ROME to be in Contention about the SUPREAM SEAT of JUDGMENT in Controversies of RELIGION THe first of all Controversies is founded upon this Query What is the authoritative Judge of Controversies And indeed till there be some agreement in this point there can be no expectation of any fruitful issue of any Controversie Now all Controversies amongst the sons of men are reduceable to one of these two heads namely things humane or things divine things precisely pertaining to this life or things which only pertain to that which is to come concerns of a secular consideration or concerns of a religious consideration And according to the nature of these Controversies such ought the Judge for decision thereof to be Concerning this Judge of Religious Controversies there are divers opinions Some say that the Light or that of God in Every Man is this only infallible Judge of all Religious Controversies But if this be admitted a multitude of inconveniences must needs follow of which this is not the least That there can be no end of Controversies because if every man have this Judge of all Debates in himself and he aver that what he saith and doth is according to the voice of this Judge or that of God in him no man can take in hand to judge contrary thereunto without becoming the Judge's Judge and so violate the Rule proposed For this opinion refers not doubtful matters to that of God in some men or a select number of men but to that of God in every man There is another Opinion which saith That amongst all men which pretend to own Christ and challenge to themselves the title of his Church and yet do deny each other to have an interest in that title That amongst all such parties of the sons of men the only infallible and authoritative Judge of their Controversies about Religion is the LORD Himself as he speaketh by his Spirit in the holy Scriptures together with right Reason or thus which is all one The Apostles and Prophets as they speak in their holy Writings are the onely infallible authoritative Judge in these Controversies Yet three things are in this Opinion allowed first That the living voice of the Pastors with the Church in their respective Ages wherin they live are of great importance in order to the terminating strife in the Church as a Church Secondly That Records of Antiquity are of some usefulness for the resolving some Controversies and for the better discovery of some Errors yet not so absolutely necessary but that the Church may sufficiently resolve her Controversies without them Thirdly That there is a Judgment of Science to be allowed every man as touching all things which he chuseth or refuseth in matters of Religion to be used with moderation and discreet subjection And this is the Opinion to which for my part I do adhere There is another Opinion which saith That the Papal Church of Rome is the Supream Judge and Catholick Moderatrix of all Disputes in matters of Faith and that All are bound to hear and obey her Voice under pain of Damnation and that the Scriptures as taken in the second Opinion is not the Judge of Controversies Now this is the Opinion which at this time I am to examine which in much seriousness I humbly purpose to do and leave it to the sober consideration of all men And for the better discharge of this duty it is meet we should understand what the Papists mean by the Church of Rome And this I find that under that title they would involve the whole Church of Christ from the Apostles dayes until this present time at least all the Faithful since the time that Paul declares the Roman Church to have been famous as Rom. 1. 8. But this is the very thing denied by us for though we willingly grant that there was a very famous Church at Rome when Paul wrote his Epistle to them yet it followeth not that there is such a Church there now or that all that ever from that time to this have walked in the steps of true Faith must needs be supposed to have been Members of the Roman Church or rather of the Church of Rome so called especially since it was Papal So that in this Controversie they must be content to define the Church of Rome on this wise viz. All that in any Age since Christ was of the same Faith and Practice in things religious which is at this day found in the Papal Church of Rome and those only are the persons of whom the Papal Church of Rome doth consist And indeed this is as much as they can reasonably desire for if those holy men who lived in times past were of a Faith and Practice contradistinct to that which Rome hath now received Then may not the present Papal Church without wrong challenge them to be of their Church As for example Paul who bore witness for Christ at Rome and the Christians there in his dayes was of the Church of Christ at Rome yet we deny that they were any part of the Papal Church of Rome The Church of Rome therefore defined as before I do deny to be the infallible authoritative Judge of all Controversies about matters of Faith or Religion And I do further say That the Scriptures and right Reason as laid down in the second opinion much more deserves to be received for this supream Judge of Controversies than the Papal Church of Rome and that there is not an other Umpire that can so effectually decide the Controversies of Religion which depend between such parties of men as lay claim to the Title of Christ's Church and yet deny each other to have an interest therein And how far forth the truth in this Point hath been evidenced in that pro and con Discourse so far as it relateth to the first of them which hath been occasioned by the writing of the Seven Queries I have before spoken of is here offered to the Consideration of all sober men that profess to own the Glorious Gospel of the blessed God and our Saviour Jesus Christ The first Query of the Seven was this propounded by the nameless Papist PAPIST Whether we are to resolve all differences in point of Religion only out of the written Word of God BAPTIST To which Question these ensuing Answers were given before I received the Adversaries last Paper which with the Answers thereunto I will transcribe verbatim I say the Answers were That the word Controversies being understood of such Controversies only as depend between those parties of men who deny each other to be the Church that then there is no other way whereby WE can resolve those Controversies but by the assistance of God's Spirit speaking to us through the undoubted Prophets and Apostles and Primitive Churches in the lively Oracles of God the Scriptures of
their due estimation And saith Origen We have need to bring the Scriptures for witness for our Meanings and Expositions without them have no credit the discussing of our Judgements must be taken ONLY of the Scriptures Thus you see the Fathers were not of your mind that the Readers of their Books should not try them by the Scripture but the contrary and that as we find them consenting to or dissenting from Scripture not one another as you teach accordingly they advise us to believe or not believe them As I have said it is a cloudy way to appeal to Councils and Fathers so you now prove my saying true for I alledged Augustine as being opposite to you and your Church touching the meaning of Matth. 16. Upon this Rock c. and first you tell me I read him not but I must tell you I read him after a Scholar sufficient and though your reading differ something from his yet they both destroy the received Opinion of your Church concerning that Text for if Christ be that Rock as you confess Augustine there teacheth then it cannot be meant positively of Peter and so not consequently of your Popes My quotation out of Chrysostom in Ps 22. you invalidate by telling me that Book was not writ by him And this I find to be the usual way of Learned-men when the passage alledged is clear and convincing then a suspition must be cast upon the Book c. I could instance the best part of a thousand Books Epistles c. which are intituled under the names of the Antient Fathers amongst which as you observe is reckoned the Book of Dynis the Areopagite which I alledged in my Rejoynder And do not these things contribute something towards the proof of my Assertion namely That it is a cloudy way to appeal to Fathers and Councils to decide Controversies in Religion If then your way be cloudy mine must needs be clear unless you can assign a third way opposit to both for undoubtedly there is a clear way to decide Controversies You again prescribe me a way to find the meaning of the Fathers and that is to explicate their obscure places by such as are plain c. But by your leave we can neither know which of their speeches are obscure or plain without some rule whereby to know this And now what can supply this our necessity For example Augustine is sometimes read affirming the Sacrament to be the real Body and Blood of Christ otherwhiles he is read directly opposit to this And how can you or any body else tell which of these sayings is clear or obscure fith none must be permitted the use of his reason by you in this Controversie and how he should judge according to Faith I know not sith you as yet debar us of that by which Faith NOW cometh namely the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles as contained in the Scriptures PAPIST Something you would say for this living Voice of the Church you once had required as necessary to resolve Differences in Religion but this signifies nothing in our present Query for after all your shifting I cannot perceive that you make use of her Authority in point of Faith which is our Qu. but only to take up other quarrels by exhorting reproving c. and in this also it seems you will be your own Judge whether she follow Christ or no. Three things you affirm in relation to the Churches Authority 1. That she is to rule her self according to Scripture which no body denies 2. That the Church in former Ages is not to be a Rule for after Ages to rule themselves by because she could not foresee the Controversies that rise up afterwards What if the same Errors be revived now which in their times were condemned is not the Judgment of the Church in those dayes a safe President for us to condemn the same Errors Besides Is it not evident that the Pastors of the Church the nearer they were to Christ's time were the better able to judge of Christ's Doctrine You say 3dly That the Church is to be no Rule for those that are out of her communion A strange Assertion As if a clear light as the Church is in holy Scripture with so many marks to know her by as Unity Sanctity Universality Miracles c. were not a good means for him that gropes in the dark to find out his way Look well upon these marks and you will find them to agree Only to the Roman Catholick Church and to no upstart Congregation and consequently that you ought in all reason to give her the hearing in matters of Faith and to have recourse unto her as to the pillar and ground of Truth 1 Tim. 3. which place you let slip and this under pain of being accounted a Heathen c. Matth. 18. for though this place doth point out chiefly the obedience which Members of the Church owe her in point of Discipline as you say well enough yet hath it no small force in our present Debate since those that will not hear her Voice when she ecchoes out the Voice of God may well be esteemed by her as a Heathen And in your own sence I suppose you will have your proviso That the Church is to be obeyed only when she ruleth according to God's Word of which you will be Judge too So in conclusion all comes to this That you and your spirit must be Judge of all Disputes And then have not I reason to ask again since I or any body else may challenge as large a share in the Spirit and right Reason as you who shall take up the Quarrel And is not my comparison here very pat That there must needs be as great confusion in your Church as in a Kingdom where every one were left to decide his own case This was not the old way as you may see Deut. 17. 8 9. and Malach. 2. 7. which places you had no mind to take notice of and yet you charge me for letting pass your Instance of St. Stephen concerning the Libertines Alexandrians c. which makes nothing at all for your pretended Evidence of God's Word For though his Judgment might be well taken in expounding Scripture as being full of the holy Ghost and confirming what he said by Miracles as the Scripture tells us he did yet this is not your case for I think you will not arrogate so much to your self What you say of Christ and his Apostles vindicating their Doctrine out of Scripture is very true and our Church doth the same but it is not true that either Christ or the primitive Saints were alwayes wont to send their Proselytes to the Scripture to regulate their Faith Did not Christ himself send St. Paul to Ananias for instruction Had you been of his counsel you would have rather wished him to look into the Word of God and see there what he was to do And when there arose a Debate even in the Apostles dayes about
the necessity of Circumcision Act. 15. did they not assemble the Church and so pronounce Sentence conciliariter with a visum est Spiritui sancto nobis BAPTIST It is here worth noting how you dispute beyond the due bounds of the Query which as it concerns you Papists and us Baptists hath no relation to the Differences which arise in the Church as such and indeed you go amiss in this matter throughout the whole Discourse Here you seem to acknowledge that the Church ought to rule according to Scripture but you will allow me to judge whether she do so or not But I answer that there is a Judgment of Science as well as a Judgment Authoritative the latter I know cannot be exercised by me nor any other Member of the Church because this Power lyeth in the Church as imbodied together but the former to wit a Judgment of Science or Knowledge is particular to each individual and so my self if a Member of the Church am allowed the exercise thereof even in matters of Religion 1 Cor. 10. 15. I speak to wise men judge ye what I say The Apostle doth not here give any wise man at Corinth leave to judge of that which he said so as to censure what he had delivered yet he must exercise his understanding to judge of what Paul had said thereby to find out the verity of what was spoken But yet I do confess that our case and the case of Christians then do differ for Paul was a Foundation-layer a Master-builder so that the Members might not so well judge then as now yet the Church now is to build upon the Foundation which is laid already and you know that I have in my Rejoynder acknowledged that it very nearly concerns particular Members of the Church to have great regard to the Judgment of the Church when after serious debate they deliver their Sentence in any point disputable And further as touching your Church you tell me anon that even a Heathen may judge of the holiness of your Church by the Law of Conscience and then why may he not by the same Law judge your Church concerning her unholiness nay verily he must be able to speak both wayes or else he hath no Judgment And if a Heathen have this priviledge and ability then why not a man professing Christianity who hath not only the Conscience-Law but also the written Law of God by which he understands things more excellent Rom. 2. From all this I only conclude that each particular ought to have the free exercise of his Judgment in what he chuseth or refuseth sith without this he cannot chuse or refuse any thing with confidence nor to his comfort And concerning Controversies in the Church I do not see that in these dayes we are bound to follow the sentence of a multitude though assembled in Council SO as to hold their Sentence absolutely infallible for the promise of infallibility is not made to a certain select number of Bishops but to the Church taken collectively and we may remember that a great Assembly of Prophets in the old Church erred in Judgment with unanimous consent when yet the Lord had one Micaiah at home which understood the truth of his Will Wherefore I here conclude although the Members of the Church ought to weigh with great respect the things concluded of by their Pastors yet so may it be that they may swerve from the Truth whilst God clears it up by some particular rather than by such an Assembly And to this agrees very well a saying of Gerson If it should so happen that there should be a General Council assembled in which such a man were present as is well instructed If the greatest part should decline through Malice or IGNORANCE to the opposition of the Gospel such a LAY-Man may be objected against the said General Council And saith Panormitan In matters WHICH CONCERN FAITH the saying of a LAY-Man ought to be preferred before that of the Pope if his saying be more probable by better authority of Scripture than that of the Pope You often tell me that to appeal to the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures c. is not a sufficient way to decide OUR Controversies and that because you may challenge them to be for you c. To which I answer by retorting your Argument thus That which you call the living Voice of the Church to wit Volumns of Fathers and Decrees of Councils is therefore insufficient to decide OUR Controversies because your opposites do say they are for them and against you and now you must answer your own Query viz. Who must take up this Quarrel You answer that we must explicate them one by another the places which are obscure by such as are plain And then I still ask you why we may not as well agree our selves this way by the Volumns of the Prophets and Apostles I shewed before how you misapply that Text Matth. 18. and though the case is so plain as that you cannot defend your self yet you seem loth to decline your error and would fasten a very gross passage upon me namely that I should say That the Church is no Rule for those that are out of her Communion as not to be a light for such as grope in the dark A manifest wrong I only say and prove That those that are not of the Church are not within the power of her Discipline nor can she reasonably desire unconverted ones to appeal to her Judgment-seat in Controversies between them and her And I asked you If you would not scorn us if we should call upon you to appeal unto us as your Judges Whether we or you be the Church and not doubting but you would I concluded that it is equally absurd for you to desire us to appeal to you as our Judges But you may find it plain enough in my Papers That I do believe the Church SO to be a Rule to the world as to shew them the way of Life and so a good means for their Illumination and Conversion As for your three Texts 1 Tim. 3. Deut. 17. 8 9. Malachi 2. 7. As they do your cause no good so they do mine no harm I grant the Church is the pillar and ground of the Truth and that she hath Power to hear and determine all Controversies among her Members as aforesaid and that it is the duty of the Members to enquire of their Pastors what is the way of God concerning them But what of all this Ergo The Papal Church of Rome is the only infallible Judge and Moderatrix of all Contention about Religion Ergo we must all appeal to the Papal Church of Rome as our Judge in this Question Whether we be of the Church or not though we be in doubt Whether she her self be a true Church or not yea though we are satisfied she is not Are not these Monstrous Consequences Be it here observed That I do believe the Church of
avouch the Answer which I have given to this your first Query as will evidently appear to the impartial Reader of the several Quotations which I have before alledged and which do here follow The ANSWER to the FIRST QUERY Avouched sufficient by the Sentence of divers DOCTORS both Antient and Modern VVHether of us be Schismaticks ask not me I will not ask you Let Christ be asked that he may shew us his Church Neither must I alledge the Nicene Council nor you the Arimi I am neither bound to the one nor you to the other let the matter be tryed by the Scripture Augustine saith Let the Scriptures judge let Christ judge let the Apostles judge Yea it is confessed by the Papists that Aug. Optatus and Basil summoned their Adversaries to the arbitriment of holy Scriptures and did allow the sufficiency of holy Scripture to decide the Controversies depending between them In time past saith Chrysostome there were many wayes to know the Church of Christ viz. by good Life by Miracles by Chastity c. but from the time that Heresies did take hold of the Church it IS ONLY known by the Scripture which is the true Church Again he saith The Lord then knowing that so great confusion would come in the latter dayes therefore willed the Christians that would take to the sureness of true Faith to have refuge to nothing but to the Scripture otherwise saith he if they regard other things they shall perish not understanding what the true Church is Thus my Answer is avouched good as it respects the means to decide the differences which are about the Church Next hear what they say touching such differences as are in the Church Iren. If there be any disagreement risen up among Christians concerning Controversies in Religion what better course is there to be taken than to have our recourse into the Most antient Churches which must needs be those planted by the Apostles considering the time when he lived and to receive from thence what shall be certain and manifest Augustine Because the Scripture cannot deceive whoso feareth to be misled in the obscurity of this Question let him ask COUNSEL of that Church which the SCRIPTURE without any ambiguity pointeth out Constantine Mag. There are the Gospel the Prophets and Apostles which do teach us what to hold in Religion wherefore expelling all hostile and bitter contention let us seek the Solution of these Questions out of the Scriptures Thus spake this famous Emperor in the Council of Nice at what time the Bishops had like to have jarred into pieces THus have I given an impartial Relation of what hath passed between the Popish Querist and my Self in our two last Papers which contains the sum of what passed in the other as touching this Question about the Judge of Controversies And now for further satisfaction That the Scripture as aforesaid ought to be admitted the high Prerogative of Judge in our Debates consider that of necessity it must be so My reason is because either the Scripture or some other Writings must be our Judge especially in this important Question WHICH IS THE TRUE CHURCH For when we contend about her it is very unreasonable that any party contending for that title should be permitted to give Judgment in their own cause As for example The present Assembly of Papists say That they are the true Church and the present Assemblies of Baptists say That they are the true Church Is it fit that either party contending should here give Judgment decissive What then must we do why of necessity we must to some Writings whereby to be decided or agreed in this Controversie These Writings must be either the Scriptures or some other but no other can compare with those so that they do deserve this Prerogative better than any other The Papists ordinary way in this difficulty is to tell us that we must here be tryed by the Tradition of our Fore-fathers in which they say we cannot be deceived which Tradition they say is the only thing that is unquestionable and needs no other ground to stand upon but it self And against the Scripture's being received upon its own evidence or authority they usually do thus object that before we can receive what it teacheth we must be assured of its truth And again they say the Scripture may not be the Judge of Controversie because it may be corrupted translated ill interpreted not rightly understood And by these and other like objections they usually in all their Writings invalidate the Scriptures certainty authority and sufficiency that so they advance the authority of their Traditions But let it be seriously considered whether these Objections have not the same force against what they rest upon which they have against the holy Scripture First then whereas they tell us the Scripture cannot teach us any thing till we be assured of its truth Doth not this conclude against any other thing as strongly Ought we not to be assured of the truth of the Church before we receive her documents Ought we not to be assured of the truth of that Tradition which we receive for the Rule of our Faith But how must we be assured of the truth of the Papal Church and Tradition There is not a man living that can remember when either began and so avouch its beginning to be of divine Institution and the continnance of the same ever since its beginning to have been without any corruption What then must we do Why we must search Romes Records And then I ask are they not as questonable and liable to mis-interpretations as easily mis-understood as the Records of God What is now become of these Objections the force whereof is evidently against the Papal Church and her Traditions of the truth whereof we must be assured BEFORE we can be taught by either of them I say again There is not a man of all the Papists that can evidence Rome to have been a Church two hundred years ago and then much less one thousand six hundred years ago So that OF NECESSITY we must to the Writings of some men whom we never saw write one word to find the Church And then I would know why we may not make enquiry at the Pen of Paul what the Church was at first and what it ought to be now as well as at the Pen of Augustine Cannot the Pen of Peter the Apostle give us as good information in this matter as the Pen of any Pope pretending to be his Successor If the Papists answer That we know not the Pen of Peter or Paul We answer as well as they know the Pen of Augustine or Gregory If they say Paul's Writings may be corrupted and must be interpreted may be mis-understood I return the same Answer of all other Books whatsoever yea those which contains Romes Tradition See therefore what is gained by devising objections against the authority or certainty of the holy Scriptures Such
Power are the Instruments that in the Name of Christ and his Church are to exercise Government Matth. 18. 17 18. 1 Cor. 5. 3 4 5. 1 Tim. 1. 20. 5. 20. This Government consisteth in these things Exhortations Rebukes Reproofs c. with all long-Suffering and Doctrine 2 Tim. 1. 2. And if this prevail not with the Offenders then is the power of Excommunication to be exercised to the with-holding their Priviledges in the Church and to the delivering them up to Satan for the destruction of the Flesh and for saving the sinner from his sin And if this prevail not then the sinners sin is retained till the day of Judgment But if the sinner be humbled the sin is by the Church to be remitted and the Offender restored Matth. 18. 17 18. 1 Cor. 5. 3 4 5 11 13. 2 Thess 3. 6 14 15. Tit. 3. 11. Joh. 20. 23. And this Government is to be exercised without partiality 1 Tim. 5. 21. and without respect to filthy lucre 1 Pet. 5. 2. and without domination or lordship 2 Cor. 1. 24. 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3 4. 1 Thess 5. 6 7 8. Now that this Goverment is only found in the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers is thus proved Out of the Church it cannot be and in the Church it must be Ephes 4. till all the Saints be perfected and that this Society and no other can be the Church I have also proved and for further evidence I refer every one to the exercise of the present Churches of baptized Believers in point of Ecclesiastical Government As for other Marks it is needless to insist upon them for that Church which hath these cannot be without the other so far as they are necessary Yea let it be well observed That that Church which hath true Antiquity is the Church alone which hath the Promise of Succession or whatsoever else is needful in a way of necessity in order to her being And therefore though we could not prove by History those things which many make great boast of yet having the most certain Mark Antiquity we have the other in Promise and therefore must believe that the Church hath not failed of the accomplishment of them for Histories some of them be quite lost and others partly silent and partly contradictory about these things Again if History did mention an un-interrupted continuance of Baptized Churches such I mean as we contend for yet it would be but Testis humano and so no foundation of Faith And beside it would suppose that the Church of Christ is so beholding to humane History as it 's impossible for her to prove her self the Church of Christ without it though she have the holy Scripture But this is surely to make the Church to stand upon too sandy a foundation THE END The Printer to the Reader Courteous Reader THe Author being at a great distance so that he could not attend the Press this Treatise was hastily read over by a Friend of his who having observed these few faults desires thee to correct them with thy Pen as also any other which thou shalt meet with that probably he hath overseen Page 16. line 19. for will allow reade will not allow P. 20. l. 23. f. these following r. in these things following P. 31. l. 22. f. they advance r. they might advance August contra Max. l. 3. c. 14. Mar. 7. These were both General Councils Mat. 26 1 Cor. 11 Cyprian Serm. Penet Gelas consec Dist 2. Aug. de Nat. Grat. Aug. in Iohn Tract 94. Aug. ad Fortunat August Prolog l. 3. de Trin. Orig. in Jer. hom 1. * The Apostles are here excepted Gerson exam of Doct. Panor chap. signif * Note there is not the word AS in my words only I say the same that is God must take up our quarrels and how that must be is shewed in my Answer following Heb. 1. 1. * Not denying Christ to be her foundation in the main Eph. 2. 20. Chrisost Hom. in Mat. 24 Aug. cont Petil c. 85 Aug. cont Max. l. 3. c. 14 S. N. Antidot Chrysost Hom. in Matth. Iren. l. 3 cap. 4. Aug. 7. Tome cont Ere 's Author 7. Qu. T. B. End to Contro Author of the 7. Queries Author of the 7. Queries * It would be here noted That neither the marks of Unity Universality c. nor the Creed do prove a People that hath them all to be the Church because none of them mention Baptism without which there cannot be a visible Church * See a Book entituled A well grounded Treattise concerning Baptism Justin Mart. in or at ad Autho. pium Jerom. super Mat. 28 Athan. in serm 3. cont Arrian Haimo in postil sup text Beda super Act. 19. Tertul. qui sunt Bapt. parvil Aug. de Civitat Dei †2 Cor. 5. 20. Hillar contra Auxen Willit Synops Rhem. Test Annot. Rhem. Test Annot. Dist 32 cap. 10. Fab. Chron. Rhem. Test Annot. in Rev. 17. Aug. de Civitat Dei lib. 18. Chrys in Rev. 13. Luk. 12 51 52 53. Mat. 10 34 35. Luke 21. 16. 1 Cor. 7. 11 13 15 21 22 23. Mat. 3. 9. 2 Cor. 5. 16 17 18. Gal. 3. 2 6 29. Acts 10 35. Rom. 9. 6 7 8. Rom. 5. 16 18. Acts 2. 38 to 41. Fab. Chron. 4th part Yet this Eusebius doth seem to contradict Willit Synops Papis Jerome in ep ad Rom. Luk. 24 * Alias Rantism