all other plain points in which the Translators agree are truly translated Though the knowledge of it in lesser points is not so necessary § 4. And thus and no other way both unlearned Protestants and Papists that cannot read must know that there is a Bible in the world and that the Priests do ordinarily read truly that publickly read it to them and that there are Canons of Councils in the world c. Because it is not possible for so many men of cross interests to agree in feigning it without detection § 5. There are some passages in some Translations so palpably distorted to the Translators interests and ends as that the Text and Context to the Learned and the common agreement of the world to the unlearned may notifie the error § 6. There are many passages or words so difficult about which Translators differ as that few or none are Certain which of them is in the right And this uncertainty is of no danger to the Church or to mens souls CHAP. X. Quest. VII What Certainty have we of the true sense of the Text. § 1. Answ. THis Question is partly the same with the former For to Translate is to give the sense of the original in other words The sense is either 1. The sense of single terms 2. Or the sense of propositions and sentences 3. Or the sense of many sentences conjunct in Method § 2. The first is known to Translators as is aforesaid As you know the sense of all words of all languages by common usage and common Tradition The second is made up of the first by common reason As a sentence is made up of common words He that understandeth what these words Repentance and is and necessary signifie may know without a Pope what this sentence signifieth Repentance is necessary The same is to be said of divers sentences conjunct The sense is known by the way that men learn to talk and to understand one anothers speeches And as you understand Baronius Bellarmine the Councils or any of your Priests even by the common acception of words and reason setting them together as man from his Infancie is taught to reason § 3. But as Infants understand not common talk till they are taught nor children and untaught persons so well as men and Scholars so the plainest things in Scripture require some use and consideration and Teaching to the understanding of them Much more the harder parts And God hath made it the duty of Parents to teach the Scripture to their children at home and abroad lying down and rising up Deut. 6. 11. without asking the Pope the sense of it And God hath appointed the elder and wiser to teach the younger and more ignorant and especially Pastors and Teachers to teach the world and instruct their flocks to understand the word of God Not barely to rest in their opinion and words but to shew men the same Evidence which doth convince themselves Which Teaching is not a final Iudging § 4. But yet where the Teacher knoweth what the Learner doth not the Learner must have the humility of a Disciple and not set his untaught wit conceitedly against his Teacher and wrangle before he understandeth but must judge his Teacher whether it be Grammar Logick or Theologie words or sense that he Teacheth him to be wiser than himself Else why will he be his Scholar And so he must believe him as a fallible man with a humane faith in order to his attaining of a proper Certainty § 5. But there are in Scripture many passages so exceeding difficult that we have no Certainty of the sense And some that only a few extraordinary Students have a Certaintainty of neither Protestants nor Papists further understanding them And this is no disparagement to the Scripture nor hazard or injury to us CHAP. XI Quest. VIII What Unity of faith may be expected to be conserved by our foresaid Certainties § 1. HEre are two Questions for haste included I. What Unity in faith may be expected II. What Certainties are necessary thereto § 2. I. To the first 1. A Unity in all the Essentials of the Christian faith is already existent among all Christians in the world For they were not Christians if they agree not in all Essentials of Christianity § 3. 2. A Vnity of faith in the Integrals of Christianity is desireable and so far hopeful as that the wiser all Christians are in the more of the Integrals they will agree But here will never be an universal Concord or Unity any more than in mens age strength Stature and complexions This Paul openeth at large 1 Cor. 12. Rom. 14. 15 c. § 4. 3. A perfect Vnity in the common knowledge of all things in Scripture or all the revealed Accidentals of Religion will never be found between any two persons in this life because that no ones knowledge is perfect § 5. II. From hence the other Question is easily answered 1. To a Unity of Christians as Christians or the body of Christ and Church Universal and of necessity to Salvation no Certainty is necessary but of the Essentials of the Christian Religion 2. To the more Comfortable progress and the melius esse of Christians and the Churches as great a Concord and Certainty in the Integrals of Christianity is needful as the degree of melius esse doth require 3. To mens peaceable and comfortable Communion in Christian Societies an Unity and consequently knowledge of the points of Christian Love and holy communion is necessary 4. To our Heavenly Union Heavenly perfection is necessary § 6. But to insinuate that a Certainty of the sense of all the Scripture or all that God hath revealed to us Objectively or of all that Popes and Councils determine is necessary to that unity of faith which maketh all Christians to be Christians and one body of Christ is but a cheating trick which is against Scripture reason and their own Doctors CHAP. XII Quest. IX What Determination is necessary to this Certainty and Unity § 1. Answ. 1. GOds Determination of the Object by Verity and Evidence and his helping the faculty in determining it self in act is necessary § 2. 2. The inward true Determination of every mans own perceiving faculty sense and Intellect is necessary to his true perception § 3. 3. A Parent Schoolmaster Senior and Pastor must tell the Scholar their own Judgement and then open to him the Evidence of truth § 4. A Magistrate or other Superiour Parent Master c. hath a determining Judgement under God and his Laws in order to the ends of their proper Government and no further That is They are the only publick Judges in their Society who shall be punished or not punished by the sword restrained or encouraged as teaching false Doctrine or true But this is not an absolute and unregulated power If they determine contrary to Gods word they sin and bind not me to obey them though I am bound to continue my subjection
true or spurious c. Whether do you think that the Intrinsick and Extrinsick Evidence with the Consent of all the world that knew them Christians Hereticks Heathens c. be not a more satisfying Evidence of truth than if a Pope of Rome and his Council should say so and so it was as Liberius condemned Athanasius without or against the rest of the world If the Question were whether ever there was such a man as Gregory the first or seventh or such a man as Luther or as Charles the Great or Car. 5. or King Iames in England or such a thing as the French Massacre c. Is not the current uncontroled self-evidencing History of these matters more certain than if the Pope and Council of Trent only had told us of them And we have all your valid testimony in with ours As you are part of the witnesses that received the Scriptures and as you have among you the Teachers and Professors of them or have any other Evidence of their truth besides a pretended Power to Iudge for all the world you are a part and but a part of our Historical witness And cannot the Pope and his Council tell us as credibly whether Homer Virgil Ovid Cicero were ever in the world and their writings be not spurious as they are part of the world that hath credibly received it as if they pretend a power to judge infallibly whether it be so or not XI It is an injury to God for such arrogant fellows to pretend that he hath entailed on them a power to do that which he enableth men by Natural means to do as well and better without them As to pretend that God hath given them a judicial power to tell us whether the Statutes of England are true or spurious Whether ever there were such Kings or Parliaments as made them c. Doth not the Certain Historical Tradition of the world suffice for this without a supernatural power If you say that soul-concernments must have more certainty than bodily I answer 1. The more impudent are you that would give us less 2. The nature of the matter alloweth ordinarily no more As sense told the seers of Christs and the Apostles Miracles that they saw them and the hearers and readers of the Gospel that they heard and read it so all the difference between their way of faith and ours is that what they took by their own sense Immediately that we take by a concatenation of successive senses and Tradition historical by currant proof 3. You your selves find you have no more certainty that the Scripture is not a forged writing than you have that there was such a man as King Iames in England whatever you pretend 4. Do you not know that you must resolve even your pretended Authoritative Certainty into our Rational Historical Certainty He that knoweth not that ever there was a Pope e. g. Greg. 7. Innoc. 9. Clem. 8. or that ever there was a Council e. g. of Trent Lateran knoweth not what they determined But how know you what Popes and Councils you have had but by common Historical proof Do you believe it only by the Iudicial decrees of later Popes and Councils XII If the Pope and his Council know the Certainty of these things it is either by Evidence and History as all men may do or by Inspiration If by Historical Evidence it is extant before If by Inspiration let them prove themselves to be Prophets Either by their Prophesyings Miracles or other Evidences that may satisfie a man that is not mad XIII Alphonsus a Castro tells us some Popes understood not Grammar and common history tells us what lads and ignorant fellows divers of them have been And their own writers and General Councils tell us how horridly wicked many of them have been as Ioh. 22. Eugenius and other damned as hereticks by Councils And Honorius the Monothelite c. And is it probable that God should Inspire to Infallibility Hereticks Ignorant fellows debauched wicked men and work a Miracle to teach them to know that Infallibly which they knew not at all When the Scripture and Nature tell us how he abhorreth such men XIV They give us no Proof of their Infallibility Either from any promise of God antecedently or subsequent effect How then shall we be sure of it XV. It is impossible for us to know who is a true Pope And is every man that will call himself Pope or only the true ones possest with this Infallibility If all then one of our Bishops may have it when he will If not no man can be sure of Gods word for want of being sure who is a true Pope Read but what a plunge poor Mr. Iohnson alias Terret alias c. is put to as to the Questions about what makes a Pope in his answers to me and you will see how they are bewildred Their fourty years Schism in which there were divers pretended Popes and the uncertainty who is the true successor to this day especially since Eugenius was deposed as a Heretick by a General Council hath left this matter unrecoverably uncertain If Electors give the Essence People Priests Princes Prelates Cardinals have been Electors by turns If Consecration be necessary it must be by an Inferiour and no man knoweth by whom and some have been Popes unconsecrated and their power defended If the Churches acceptance be necessary no man knoweth in many schisms which had the greater party but certainly neither had the Church XVI It is impossible to know which have been true General Councils and therefore impossible to know which of their Decrees are Gods word and the Churches faith They are utterly disagreed of this among themselves Bellarmine and the Papalines tell us it is those only that are approved by the Pope and so if all the Christian world had no more wit than to send their Bishops from all parts of the Earth to sit as long as the Council of Trent did divers Popes Reigns it is in the Popes power whether they shall be Approved Councils when all is done But how know we which are Approved Is it by the Decree of other Councils No None hath ventured to determine it It is therefore by Common Historical Evidence And so your faith must be thereinto resolved And yet here History faileth you How many Councils are Controverted Bellarmine will partly tell you What wanted Ephes. 2 What wanted that at Basil And many more such I have elsewhere debated XVII There never was a real General Council in the world unless you will call the twelve Apostles one This is the great cheat of the Papists which I wonder all men that ever read History do not see as plainly as any lie in History can be seen Was it not the Romane Emperours that called the Councils Had they any power out of their own dominions Were not all the Patriarchs only in one Empire Is their Jurisdiction mentioned in the Concil Nicen. any further extended Read in
When also we see the wickedness of mens lives among you in common Fornication and other heinous sin when the certainest faith will have the holiest life when it is Subjectively as well as Objectively certain XXXIX You destroy or greatly discredit the Grand Evidence of the Christian faith even Miracles How then can your faith be the most Certain For when you pretend that Miracles are as common through all the world as Priests Masses are in turning bread into no bread as aforesaid and yet no man seeth any proof of one such Miracle when really it is no less than Christs Resurrection which you pretend to be so common before all the Churches what is this but to tempt men to take all the Scripture and Apostolical Miracles to be no surer And then where is our faith XL. Lastly I end where I almost began If our sense be true the Pope and his Council are false and therefore our faith not to be received only nor chiefly on their trust For their faith teacheth us not to believe Gods most Natural Revelations to the sound senses and Intellective perception of all men in the world as I have shewed about the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament And when a Controversie it brought to sense it self we can bring it no lower And when we must either believe your faith and its foundation false or believe Gods most Natural Evident Revelation false and all mens Senses and Intellective perception false we are not able I say not able to be of your faith And now judge whose faith is more Certain the Protestants or the Papists And whether you do well so zealously and busily to make use of such soul-traps and fool-traps as the paper is which I have answered September 12. 1672. FINIS APENDIX CHAP. I. I. WHereas I have here and more fully in my More Reasons for the Christian Religion asserted a Certainty in some Morals it will give some light into the matter if I give you Ocham's decision of the Certainty of Moral Science in it self which because it is short I will translate Quod lib. l. 2. q. 14. Quest. Whether there can be a Demonstrative knowledge of Morals Resp. It seemeth not Because there can be no demonstrative knowledge of those things that are subject to the will But such are Morals ergo c. But contrarily Morals are a Science In this Question 1. I will expound one Term of the Question 2. I will give you one distinction 3. And then answer the Question 1. As to the first I say that Moral is sometime taken largely for humane Acts which are under the will absolutely Sometime more strictly for Acts subject to the Power of the will according to the natural dictate of Reason and according to other circumstances 2. As to the second you must know that Moral Doctrine hath many parts of which one is Positive another is Not-positive Moral Science Positive is that which containeth humane Laws and Divine which oblige us to follow or avoid things which are neither good nor evil nor because prohibited and commanded by a superiour to whom it belongeth to give Laws But Moral Science not positive is that which without any command of a Superidirecteth humane actions as Principles known by themselves or known by experience so direct As that all that is honest is to be done and all that is dishonest is to be avoided and such like of which Aristotle speaketh in his Moral Philosophie 3. As to the third I say That Moral Positive Science such as the Science of Lawyers is is not Demonstrative though in many things it be regulated by that which is demonstrative Because the reasons of Lawyers are founded on humane Positive Laws which receive not propositions evidently known But Moral Science not positive is Demonstrative I prove it Because all knowledge deducing conclusions Syllogistically from Principles known by themselves or by experience of him that knoweth is demonstrative But such is Moral Doctrine ergo c. The Major is known The Minor is proved Because in Moral Philosophie there are many Principles known by themselves As that the will is to conform it self to right reason that all evil is to be avoided and such like In like manner many Principles are known by Experience as is evident to him that followeth experience And I further say that This is more Certain than many other things in as much as every man may have more Experience of his own acts than of other things From whence it is plain that this is a Science very Subtile Profitable and Evident To the Argument for the Contrary I say That of things subject to the will may be formed Propositions true and known by themselves which can demonstrate many Conclusions CHAP. II. How much the wisest Papists are for our way of Resolving faith before Luthers time by controversie perverted them IT was ordinary till Luthers disputing convinced them that the Scriptures would not serve their turn for the wisest Papists 1. To make Scripture the perfect Rule of faith without the supplement of Tradition to add more 2. And to give such Reasons for their Faith as we now do for ours I. I must not be tedious in citing many 1. Aquinas Cont. Gent. Cap. 9. fol. 3. saith But the singular manner of convincing an adversary of this truth is by the Authority of the Scripture confirmed of God by miracles And Summ. 1. q. 1. a. 8. ad secundum he saith that Sacred Doctrine useth the authority of the Canonical Scripture arguing properly and from necessity but the authorities of other Doctors of the Church as arguing from its own but Probably For our faith resteth on the Revelation made to the Apostles and Prophets who wrote the Canonical Books but not on the Revelation made to other Doctors if there were any such Whence August to Hier. I have learnt to give this honour only to the Books of Scripture called Canonical as that I firmly believe that no Author of them did at all err in writing them But others I read so as that how excellent soever they were in Learning and Holiness I take it not to be therefore true because they so thought or wrote Durandus in his Preface hath little else but of the Scripture excellency in Dignity Goodness Certainty and Profundity And from Hier. ad Paulin. saith Let us learn that on Earth the knowledge of which will continue with us in Heaven But this is only in the Holy Scripture 3. The Holy Scripture exceedeth all in Certainty of Truth We must speak of the mystery of Christ and universally of those things which meerly concern faith comformably to what the Holy Scripture delivereth As Christ Joh. 5. Search the Scripture c. If any man observe not this c. The Measure is not to exceed the Measure of Faith which Measure consisteth in two things that is that we take not that from faith which belongs to faith nor attribute that to faith which is not
of faith For both waies is the Measure of faith exceeded and men deviate from the continence of the Holy Scripture which expresseth the Measure of faith And this Measure God assisting we will hold that we may write or teach nothing dissonant from the Holy Scripture But if by ignorance or inadvertencie we should write any thing let it be ipso facto esteemed as not written And so on And Prolog q. 1. his description of Theologie is 1. For a habit by which we only or principally assent to those things that are delivered in Scripture and as they are there delivered And so Theologie differs not from faith The reason of which is because the things that are delivered in the Scripture are so only held by Divine Authority Scotus Prolog Q. 2. doth conclude p. 7. that the Doctrine of the Canonical Scripture is sufficient to the attainment of our end And that the Holy Scripture containeth sufficiently the Doctrine necessary to a Viator a man in this life II. And to prove this Scripture to be true he giveth us these ten proofs which I must not repeat at large 1. From the predictions of Scripture which God only could do 2. From their notable concord 3. He proveth that their own Doctrine against Lying and such like prove that the writers lied not 4. From the great diligence and concord of the Receivers 5. From the Rationability of the Contents 6. From the unreasonableness of all other waies 7. From the stability of the Church 8. From the Miracles which God would never affix to a lie which he largely urgeth 9. From the testimony of aliens and adversaries 10. That God would not give up those to a lie who so seek him with all their hearts as many Christians do Abundance of their Authors more I could cite who thus argue for the truth of Scripture and not from an Authoritative decision of a Pope or Council only And what in this they give to them at other times doth but shew that their foundation was so much weaker than ours CHAP. III. That where the Learned Papists differ from us they are so far from building on a Certainer foundation that so far they are forced to deny all Certainty of faith TO prove this it may suffice to mind the Learned Reader how even the most judicious as Greg. Armin. Prolog Estius and commonly most Schoolmen deny a proper Certainty of Evidence to faith Not only that the Object is not Evident to sense which all confess but that the truth of the conclusion is not Demonstrable and that Faith is a pious act of the Election of the will which were not meritorious if it had rational demonstration or evidence And that it is but opinion which is resolved into humane Authority and yet that they believe the Scripture to be Gods word and this or that to be the sense meerly because the Church holdeth it I cannot stay to cite many Plain Durandus shall be instead of all Who Prolog q. 1. saith p. 6. c. 1. Faith which resteth on humane Authority differeth not from opinion because the place from humane authority is topical and an argument thence taken is the weakest And therefore the faith which resteth on that authority is the weakest opinion But pag. 9. of the faith which resteth on Gods authority he granteth us that it may stand with Science of many of the same things and that Divine authority and demonstrative reason may concur to cause the same assent But p. 10. he dissenteth from them that hold that Gods attestations were such to those that saw Christs Miracles and Resurrection c. as certainly proved the truth of his Godhead and so of his word which is Aquinas his honest Doctrine 3. q. 43. act 4. against which Durandus writeth this And because it is us as well as Aquinas that he opposeth I will briefly confute his reasons The first is Because Demonstration necessitateth the understanding to believe But many that saw Lazarus raised c. believed not Christ to be God c. Therefore Miracles were not a sufficient demonstration Answ. Not sufficient to all things but sufficient to do their own part By this you would prove that there is no demonstration of any thing almost in the world For there is almost nothing which convinceth all men I distinguish therefore of a disposed and an indisposed understanding And as to the later I deny the major Demonstrations constrein not millions of undisposed Intellects Recipitur ad modum recipientis What need any other proof than your oft mentioned denial of Bread in the Eucharist Because millions deny the perception of all mens Senses and Intellects thereby are not things sensible demonstrable or evident Can you hope to bring more cogent proof And yet this is rejected And so were Christs miracles The second is Gregory Faith hath no merit where humane reason hath experience and there is Science Answ. A falshood as easily denied as asserted without proof If by Merit you mean Rewardableness For it is only Natural involuntary necessity which evacuateth moral Good or Evil. The will may shew its virtue or vice in receiving or rejecting Objective ascertaining Evidence The third is that it was not known of it self that this miracle attested the truth of what Christ said But whether per se or by consequence it is a most evident certainty that a man yea abundance of men that assert such a point of unspeakable consequence to the world doing abundance of open notorious miracles as professed witnesses or proofs of their Doctrine could not do this but by Gods extraordinary providence And that if this be not to be taken for a Divine Testimony we know of none that mortals are capable of nor a possibility of the worlds escaping the deceit as caused unresistibly by God His Answers to this are not worthy the repeating The same Author li. 3. d. 23. q 7. Enquiring of the Certainty of faith whether it be certainer than Science brings in the several answers of others 1. That there is a Certainty of Evidence and this Science hath and a Certainty of Adhesion and this Faith hath But this he rejecteth and sheweth truly that Adhesion is not properly Certainty and also that the fullest Evidence causeth the closest Adhesion 2. That Faith hath most Certainty in se in the thing and Science most Certainly quoad nos as to us But the vanity of this he truly sheweth For to be Certain in it self and not to us is but to be True And all things True are equally True But no truth is Certain to us or Credible without revelation to us And as he saith The Certainty of Act or habit is not from the Certainty of the object in it self but from the mode which the habit putteth as to the person and the act No way therefore saith he is the act or habit called Certain unless it be certain as to us Therefore he is forced to conclude that many habits and acts of
Science are Certainer to us than faith and its act and that both extensively Science having both certainty of Evidence and Adhesion if that be Certainty And intensively for Science hath no doubt permixt as faith oft hath And he is forced to conclude his faith into the further uncertainty following CHAP. IV. That the most Learned Doctors of the Church of Rome resolve their faith in earnest or jeast into such an Inspiration of the Pope and Prelates in Council as the Apostles had and so are meer Fanaticks And this against notorious sense and experience THe said Durandus saith ib. li. 3. d. 23. p. 573. Nothing is more certain than experience to which the resolution of other things is made that we may have the fuller certainty But experience telleth us that there is Bread after consecration And that he took the belief of humane authority for the weakest opinion I told you before And v. 12. he saith How are we sure that God saith what we believe Non nisi quia sic tenet Ecclesia Only because the Church so holdeth Which he brings to prove that Divine Authority is not surest to us And Ocham Quod l. 5. q. 31. so answereth the question Whether the substance of Bread remain after consecration as I verily believe he did but Ironically jear them and shew that he durst not speak his thoughts Mentioning three opinions The first that the substance of bread which was there before is after the body of Christ I think he meaneth Durandus opinion condemned by Bellarmine c. he rejecteth The second saith he that the substance of bread and wine cease to be and the accidents only remain and under them Christs body begins to be is the common opinion of all Divines which I hold for the determination of the Church and not for any other reason The third that there remaineth the substance of bread and wine with Christs body would be very reasonable if the Churches determination were not contrary for that opinion solveth and avoideth all the difficulties which arise from seperating the accidents from the subject And the contrary to it is not had out of the Canon of the Bible nor doth it include any contradiction for Christs body to consist with the substance of bread any more than with the accidents And after more answering the argument of Mass-miracles by every Priest he saith Sometime about some things there must more Miracles be put though it might be done by fewer and that because it pleaseth God And the Church knoweth this by some Revelation that so it is and therefore the Church hath so determined Either he jeareth them or else he professeth that their faith even of daily miracles against common sense is resolved into a Revelation which the Church hath of that which is not in the Bible which must be Prophetically The like you have in Paludanus Durandus save that he leaveth them as aforesaid Scotus c. I will end with learned Rada who Vol. 4. Contr. 7. a. 1. pag. 164 165. having shewed that This is my Body will not in its own proper sense infer what Aquinas and others gather saith Yet indeed now we must not take that sense but as the Church taught by the Holy Ghost understandeth those words For the Scriptures are expounded by that spirit which they were made by And so it must be supposed that the Catholick Church by that spirit which delivered us the faith even taught by the Holy Ghost so expounded and exploded the first sense and chose this being that other was not true as to the remaining of the substance of bread after consecration But this sense he chose which is true and so delivered by our Lord himself as it is solemnly declared C. firmiter c. And he concludeth that This is my body is not enough to convince a Heretick but as understood by the Church by that spirit by which they were given and delivered they exclude the substance of bread O all men of common sense and reason in the world we appeal to your humanity in the Controversie between the Papists and us While they assert a Miracle by every Priest every day that he masseth in all the world and deny the truth of Gods primary natural Revelation to all mens common senses they resolve their faith of the Certainty of all this not into the Scripture but into such an Inspiration of the Holy Ghost as the Scriptures themselves were written by The Scripture must not be our proof of this Inspiration but must be proved by it We must believe that thus every wicked Pope and the Prelates of the major vote in his packt Councils have this Inspiration When they do no Miracles they live so much worse than other Ministers of Christ that the Reforming of them hath long been the vain wish and attempt of the Christian world They murder the servants of Jesus in their Inquisitions and yet we must lay all our faith and salvation on it that they have all a Prophetical spirit Well If it be proved Certainly to the world that the Pope and his Church are all Prophets or Inspired by the Holy Ghost as the Apostles were then I declare that the Papists are in the right If not I will be no willing Subject of the KING of Rome while he so abuseth the Word the Church the Honour of the Churches King FINIS
THE CERTAINTY OF CHRISTIANITY Without POPERY OR Whether the Catholick-Protestant or the Papist have the Surer Faith Being an Answer to one of the oft canted Questions and Challenges of the Papists sent to one who desired this Published to direct the unskilful how to defend their faith against Papists and Infidels but especially against the Temptations of the Devil that by saving their Faith they may save their Holiness their Comfort and their Souls By Richard Baxter 2 Cor. 4. 1 2. Seing we have this Ministry as we have received mercy we faint not But have renounced the Hidden things of dishonesty not walking in craftiness nor handling the word of God deceitfully But by manifestation of the truth commending our selves to every mans Conscience in the sight of God LONDON Printed for Nevil Simons at the Sign of the Princes Arms in St. Pauls Church-Yard 1672. TO THE Protestant Reader IT is for your Reading and not for the Papists chiefly that I publish this short and hasty writing For I may probably prognosticate of them 1. That the lay men will not must not read it 2. That the Priests will not read it with any impartiality as Lovers of Truth 3. That what they cannot answer they will silently dissemble or if any meddle with it they will either take some scrap and leave the rest or they will spend paper in cavilling at my 40. Reasons against them because lest I be tedious I have not improved them by Syllogistical form and full confirmation and they will put off the full answers already given them in the former Books to which I refer them without a Reply And they will pass by the strength of what they meddle with 4. And when I am dead they will patch up some confident answer to some of my Books as vain as Mr. Iohnson alias Terret hath done to one and will borrow some lies from the writings of some against me that are of the same spirit with them wherewith to reproach my Name which shall be instead of an answer to my Books The Answer to their present Question I have already fullier given them 1. In my Reasons of the Christian Religion 2. And in my More Reasons 3. In my Life of Faith Part 2. 4. In my Safe Religion throughout especially Disp. 3. 5. In my Key for Catholicks 6. In my Preface to the 2. Part of the Saints Rest. And none of them that I know of are answered But they cant over and over the same thing and tempt or necessitate us thereby to write over and over the same thing to the wearying of the Readers while they silently dissemble all But the end of this writing is to tell young unstudied persons on what terms and in what order they must deal with this great Question and defend the foundations of their faith against Infidels Papists and the Devil himself who will here assault us with greater craft and force than Papists or Infidels can do Reader study it well till thy soul is clear and well confirmed For the Keeping or Losing of this Fort is the Keeping or Losing of thy Religion thy Comfort and thy soul. This following Paper was sent me from an unknown person in a Letter which had these words SIR THe business of this Paper is to beg a favour of you of a publick nature an Answer to the inclosed Paper which was sent me from a friend of mine who is a Papist with an earnest desire that I would procure it to be answered The resolution of which would be of use to us both in the things in Controversie between us I cannot but wonder at the confidence of this deluded people who though they are so often again and again Learnedly and Religiously writ against yet they can with as great confidence and boasting challenge and dare the Ministers of Truth to encounter and answer them in such kind of Papers as if their tenets had never been refuted at all And though I have referred my friend to your Books that will not satisfie but he doth as it were Goliah-like bid defiance to our Ministers telling me that if any be so hardy let them answer his Papers The Paper followeth ALL who call themselves Christians are agreed in this principle That every Revelation of God or whatsoever God says is most certainly true in the sense wherein he intends it And this is a matter of right on Gods part to have this granted But all Christians do not agree and it is the sole point wherein Christians differ Whether God hath Revealed or said what is proposed to us as his Revelation Or as the sense intended by him by that which they all agree to be his Revelation And this is purely matter of Fact viz. 1. Whether several Books affirmed and proposed to us as the Revelations of God be truly so For Instance the Old Testament affirmed by some to be and proposed as the Revelations of God are denied by the Valentinians and the Manichees The Gospels of St. Mark St. Luke St. Iohn and all St. Pauls Epistles proposed by some Christians as the Revelations of God are denied by others namely by the Ebionites So likewise several parties agreeing several Books to be Scripture and the Revelation of God do notwithstanding differ touching the Copies and touching the Translations Some affirming one Copie to be true and one Translation to be true whilst others expresly say that Copy is false and that Translation false And Lastly several parties agreeing the Books to be Scripture the Copies true and the Translations true and to be the Revelation of God do nevertheless differ touching the sense each party delivering a particular sense of such a Text and proposing such sense as the sense and the only sense Revealed by God to be intended by God by that Text and each proposed sense being contrary to the other It is clear in any difference arising touching matter of Fact there can only be one party which can have the true Faith touching that matter for it is impossible one thing can be a Revelation of God and no Revelation of God That one Copy or one Translation or one Sense can be true and not true It is now enquired whether Christ hath setled any principle or medium in the world And what principle or medium it is which Christ hath setled in the world for the determining of matters of Fact of this nature By which Unity in Faith may be conserved and Christians may with certainty know what is a true Revelation of God which a true Copy of such true Revelation which a true Translation of such true Copy and what the true sense thereof that Christians may not be carried about with every wind of Doctrine The solution of this is desired to be by fixed and solid principles and not by tedious discourses for the Nature of the thing requires that there be a firm Principle setled among Men for the final determining of matters of Fact THE CONTENTS THe Papists
receive them as such because the Pope and his Council as the only Judges say they are such Of which more anon CHAP. V. Quest. II. Whether it be true that the Papists grant us that all Divine Revelations are true § 1. Answ. YES if you will first take their bare word what are Divine Revelations 2. And will take in this word in the sense that God intends them 3. And will allow them to speak contradictions For thus 1. They can tell you when they have a mind that Gods plainest Revelations are none of his Revelations 2. And that whatever Evidence of truth or sense there is in the signs revealing God intendeth something contrary 3. And that that is his revelation which is contrary to his Revelation § 2. For instance The first fundamental Revelation of God to man is unto our senses of things sensible and thereby Intelligible to our understandings Now we cannot get the Papists assent that these Divine Revelations are certainly true yea they say that daily they are certainly false God made Sense God made the Intellect God made the Medium and God made the object In the Lords Supper all the sound senses of all men living Christians and Heathens Papists and Protestants perceive Bread and Wine by seeing smelling touching and tasting Yet the Papists say and their Priests swear that there is no Bread and Wine and that God by another Revelation hath certified us that this Revelation to sense and the Intellect by sense is false He that will not swear that there is no Bread shall be no Priest He that will not renounce this Divine Revelation in Nature and all his senses and all mens senses is a Heretick to be burnt and damned All Temporal Lords that will suffer such as thus renounce not sense and sensible Revelation are to be excommunicate and deprived of their dominions and their subjects absolved from their oaths of allegiance All this is in the Council of Lateran sub Innoc. 3. Can. 1. 3. And the Trent Oath and Council Is this now a Divine Revelation or not If not then they that heard Christ speak and saw his Miracles and saw him after his Resurrection had none For their senses might be all deceived if all mens now may § 3. And if God intendeth here the quite contrary to the Evidence even of sensible natural signs how can they ever prove that he doth not so in his word too even in Hoc est corpus meum and in every article of the faith Certainty lieth in Evidence and if all the declaring evidence may be false because of the contrary intent then who knoweth what is true or whether ever God said true to man § 4. And here Revelations are pretended against Revelation yea the superstruct against the fundamental the consequent against the antecedent the less certain against the more certain yea certain forgery fathered on God against his Certain Natural Revelations For 1. We are men before we are Christians we have sense before we have faith We can have no certainty of faith but by means of the Certainty of sense For we cannot tell that there is any man or book in the world nor that ever we saw a letter or heard a word What then shall we believe 2. And they have nothing but pretended Miracles against this Constant Evident Natural Revelation For every Priest how sottish and wicked soever to turn Bread into no Bread and Wine into no Wine when he list For all the Priests in the world these sixteen hundred years to do this every week or each day that they celebrate their Mass publickly or privately must needs be an undeniable Miracle if true being as much beyond all natural power as raising Lazarus from death And to make these miracles as universal constant and easie as Gods worship in the Assembly is to turn Miracles into the familiarest of Gods dealings And hath not all this need of good proof to prove Gods natural Revelations to be as ordinarily and universally false 3. Yea the Miracle is doubled while the accidents remain They deny them to be the Accidents of Christs body and blood If they are Accidents then it is either of Bread or of Nothing An Accident of Bread which is no bread the Quantity and Colour of bread which is no bread or of wine which is no Wine is a plain contradiction If they be the Accidents of nothing the Quantity of nothing the weight of nothing the locality of nothing the colour tast smell of nothing all these are as plain contradictions Then God must be said by his Omnipotence to cause Contradictories and to work constant Miracles for that end and all to prove his Natural Revelation false § 5. And what cogent Evidence bringeth them to all this Why Hoc est corpus meum No more than Davids I am a worm and no man or Christs I am the vine and ye are the branches and Pauls that Rock was Christ Though paul becometh Christs expositor and three times in the three next verses 1 Cor. 11. calleth it Bread after the Consecration And the old Fathers as often as Edmundus Albertinus hath shewed in folio Yet because the foresaid Later an and Trent Council have in the later end of the world new made this Article of the Papists faith by their exposition of Christs words contrary to St. Paul all Christs fore-revelation in nature must go for falshoods and God daily worketh Miracles to deceive all the common senses of the world when yet no word or Miracle can be believed but on supposition of the certainty of senses § 6. This his blind supposition called me to premise that you may see how far Papists and we are or are not agreed that all Gods Revelations are true and how impossible it is for them to know what is a Divine Revelation or when Gods meaning is agreeable to his Revelations These are things neer and plain and weighty CHAP. VI. Quest. III. What Certainty we have what is a real Revelation of God § 1. Answ. AS I have before partly distinguished of Certainty I will now tell you as to some sorts what it is that goeth to make up Certainty and then how much and what of this we have § 2. I suppose you to remember that it is not subjective Certainty in our selves that we speak of but Objective which may be at hand when men see it not And that it is not meer Truth which we now speak of but the Evidence of Truth or its perceptibility and that neither the lowest nor only the highest degree but any of the various degrees which truly satisfie quiet and resolve the soul. § 3. And that Objective Infallibility or Certainty is 1. Not only that which deceiveth no man which receiveth it for that 's the case of all truth 2. Nor yet that which no man can be deceived about for that is nothing at all that I remember unless it be me cogitare vel sentire 3. But it is that
and not to resist § 5. Even so it is with Pastors in the Church who have power to try particular mens cases and judge them according to Gods word and that only in order to the ends of their Society which is holy Communion in Love § 6. But this much power as it supposeth the sense of the Law and declareth it only as far as the decision of the particular case requireth and not an Universal Regulating determination which hath the nature of an Universal Law it self so it belongeth to none but true Pastors of the Church and that only within their proper charge And if any one will do as the Pope who will be Ruler in all Churches of the world his usurpation maketh him a sinner but not an obliging determiner § 7. And thus you have our Answer to all his Questions which he thrust into one as plainly and distinctly as I can well speak And because his snare lieth in putting you on the deciding of all these cases while he doth nothing to it himself that so he may destroy where he cannot build and so would make the world believe that they have a greater Certainty in all the cases propounded than we have I will next try their Certainty compared with ours and shew you the difference And withal I will tell you why we use not their Medium and take it not for any Certification at all § 8. But withall professing that if I knew where to find that Man or company of men that I could be sure could Infallibly certifie me of all the doubts and difficulties in the matters of faith it would save me such abundance of labour in my long studies and so gratifie my love of ease and my earnest desires of the greatest Certainty in these greatest things that I would spare no possible labour and cost to find out such an Oracle And I wonder not that slothful men had rather conceit that others by number or prerogative are Certain and so to trust upon a common faith than to search and pray till they have a Certainty of their own CHAP. XIII What the Papists ascertaining Medium is and why we reject it § 1. THough I will not intitle my Answer as Mr. Pool doth his book The Nullity of the Romish faith yet you might be ashamed if you have any modesty lest to go about still with confident challenges with the same case whilest neither that book of his nor his Dialogue nor the many in which I fully answer this very Question have any reply And indeed I have said so much to this point already that without repeating the same things I scarce know what is yet to say Almost the whole book called The Safe Religion is of it But most directly all the third part Where pag. 186 187. I briefly and plainly give you the grounds and resolution of the Protestants faith And pag. 189. and forward I shew you the lamentable difference among the Papists about the Resolution of their faith And pag. 195. and forward I give you abundance of unresistible Arguments to prove 1. That It belongeth not to the Pope and Roman Church to be the Judge of Scriptures to all the world 2. That they are not Infallible 3. That our faith must not be resolved into their Infallible Judgement And in my Reasons for the Christian Religion and in my more Reasons for it and in my Life of Faith I have fully opened and desended the reasons resolution and certainty of our faith But seeing their Impudency and Designs are such as that nothing of this must be considered though they are referred to it but they must lay snares for souls by canting over the same things and calling out for that Answer which they will not take notice of when it is before them some more they shall have for the sake of those whom they would deceive But in great brevity lest I tire the Reader by repetitions of things that have been so often said § 2. Though the Papists are disagreed greatly among themselves in this matter yet the most prevailing opinion is that it is upon the Authoritative Determination of the Bishop of Rome and a General Council if he approve it that all Christians in the world must have the Certainty what is indeed the word of God And men must take all for Certain which is so determined of and no more even because this Authority hath so determined And that this is to believe by the common certain faith of the Church when otherwise men must have but an uncertain private faith of their own And consequently that he that will convince an Infidel and convert he world must first make them believe that the Pope and Council are Authorised or Enabled to determine judicially and not only to Teach by Evidence what is Gods word and what not before any thing can be Certainly taken for Gods word § 3. The difference between the Papists opinion and ours for brevity sake shall be included in our Reasons against their pretended Certainty which are these Reason I. We have another Certainty already by notorious Evidence of many things in your present Question And must we quit all that Certainty to take the same things only on trust from your Pope and his Council We cannot do it Because some evidence is Cogent and the Intellect is necessitated by it Must we not know that Thou shalt Love God and thy neighbour is Gods word by its proper Evidence We have the witness within us we see on all true Christians that Holiness wrought by this Gospel which God will not use a lie to effect even to save men from sin and recover the hearts of men to himself and repair his Image on mans soul Must I needs give the lie to this Evidence till the Pope speak He that Loveth God may be sure by inward perception yea Intuition if Ocham say true that he Loveth him and consequently is beloved of him and this Gospel wrought it Must I not know that He that believeth shall be saved is truly translated out of the Original till the Pope determine it Must I believe no Grammar no Lexicon no Antient Author no Jew no Teacher of Greek or Hebrew no vulgar use concerning the sense of words till the Pope determine it Must I not know what the Baptismal Tradition of all Christians in the world doth tell me that we must believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost till I know that the Pope determineth it Must I not receive the Creed Lords-Prayer or Decalogue by all other Evidence till his word cometh in Then I must throw away Certainty for uncertainty II. Your own party do not thus receive all in your Question They teach and learn the Hebrew and Greek Grammars and the Rules of Translating and Criticize upon the Text and search after the Copies to discern the best by intrinsick Characters and by comparing them as any man may see who readeth all your Gramarians Criticks and
Binnius Surius or any others the subscribed Names to all the Councils and then peruse the Maps and Topography of the Roman Empire and the notitias Episcopatuum even Aub. Myraeus famed for a feigner and you will see that all the Councils were made up of the subjects of the Empire alone or such as had been thereto accustomed while they were their subjects and but few of them unless some odd Bishop that no man knows what he was Indeed when Scythia and Persia wanted help they placed a Bishop in an Imperial City neer Scythia as Tomis and Persia and gave him leave to help the Country as far as he could and called him Bishop of Scythia or Persia. But what is this to a true General Council representing all the Churches in the world on the terms as Dr. Holden honestly requireth If you have a mind to laugh at the mans Ignorance in Cosmographie you may read Mr. Iohnson alias Terrets Reply to me which I am not so idle yet as to answer confuting me by instances out of Thracia and such like But the thing is most Evident in History that as the Scots call the meeting of their Ministers a General Assembly meaning of that Kingdom and not of all the world so the Councils in the Empire were called General only as to that Empire and not to all the world which I am ready to make good to any man that can understand History The Pope was by one Prince made the chief Patriarch of that Imperial Church as the Kings of England preferred the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury And four others they joined with him of which one claimed Primacy when the Imperial seat was removed thither never dreaming of a Divine right else he could never have laid that claim And the Councils were only as our Convocations and seldom extended to half the Empire And little did those Emperours think that thence their subject Popes and Councils would claim Supremacy at the Antipodes and turn the orbis Romanus to orbis terrarum XVIII There never will be nor must be nor can be a true General Council in the world I have fully proved it in the second part of my Key for Catholicks Read it there or Choose XIX Your Popes and Councils have made no determination at all of many of the matters in your Question Where have they determined which are the true Copies of the Hebrew and Greek Text Do you call us for our only Certainty to a Determination that was never made to this day O for Modesty and Conscience Where have they determined which are the right among all the various Readings What need Lucas Brugensis Alba and so many others search after this with so much industry if the Pope have determined it Where have they determined which are the only Currant or true Translations however they have extolled the Vulgar Latine Is Montanus and other such Condemned Where are all the Translators differences reconciled by the decision of Pope or Council When did they determine the Controversies of Commentators of the sence of a thousand Texts of Scripture I must confess that a just indignation ariseth in me at the reading of such soul-cheating snares where men have the Impudence to perswade us that we can be sure of none of our faith unless we be sure of Copies Translations c. by that Authority that never durst nor did determine of the many remaining Controversies thereabout And where hath the Pope or Council given us a Grammar or Lexicon to know the true sense of words by for the future Fathers differ Papists differ the world is disagreed of the sense of words and many Texts The Pope hath an infallible skill and power with his Council to decide all and will not Was there ever a crueller wickeder wight in flesh To see all this difference and darkness and not vouchsafe to speak a few words or write one Infallible Commentary to end them Just as if the plague or feaver were common and one Physicion would say all men shall die that will not believe that I can cure all men when in the mean time he will not cure those that do believe it What is it that your Pope and Councils are to determine Is it the great Essentials of Religion We thank them for notthing Cannot we know that there is a God and a Christ till the Pope judge it Have we not the Sacramental Covenant of Grace the Creed Lords Prayer and Decalogue surely delivered before any Pope or Council judged of them Or is it of the hard controverted points Do it then and let us see that you can do it XX. Hath the Pope power to judge in utramque partem either way or only one way May he judge that there is a God or no God a Christ or no Christ a Heaven or no Heaven a Scripture or none at his pleasure If so must we believe him if he be for the Negative Take you that Certainty we will have none of it Or is he only to Iudge truly and then only to be believed that there is a God a Christ a Scripture c. So may and must every Teacher yea and every Christian Judge If you say that he cannot go besides the truth General Councils and Pope Adrian himself said otherwise XXI The Pope and his Council differ from the Council of Laodicea and the ancient Church upon this very Question What is the word of God even of the Canon of the Scripture For full proof whereof I refer you to Bishop Cousins Book which bringeth full testimony from antiquity XXII The use of Authority is not to disclose all Verities but to Govern Societies in the management of them If the King of Rome could prove himself King of all the world that would but enable him to Govern the world When one man that is at his footstool that is more Wise and Learned may know better than he and his Council too what 's true or false XXIII Your very foundation is a Contradiction in its self What do you make a Pope to be but the Vicar of Christ And mark Reader can any man be sure that he speaks true as Pope or Christs Vicar that never knew that he was Pope or Christs Vicar Or can any man believe that Christ hath an Infallible Vicar before he believe in Christ himself and that he is Infallible It 's a contradiction to believe the Pope as his Vicar or Pope before we believe Christ. If you believe that the Pope hath Power or Infallibility you must believe that Christ gave it him And if you believe that he gave it him it must be by some Revelation that he gave it and that you must believe it And can you believe that Revelation that made him Pope or Infallible before you believe any Revelation XXIV The same contradiction there is in believing a Council or the Church before you believe Divine Revelation For you cannot know till you believe Divine Revelation that Council or Church have any such