of her Champions out of meer condescension to Protestants have fought them with their own weapons in which way of combating the Church is not engaged the judgment of the victory must be from the arbitration not of any private Man but of the Learned World The king's next position is That it is not left to every phantastical Man's head to believe as he pleases but to the Church Beware here of counterfeit Coin 't was out but he called it in again and replies The Church of England cannot be liable to any imputation of this nature for our Church receives the three Creeds embraces the four General Councils and professes to hold nothing contrary to any universal Tradition of the Church from the Apostles time Had he been pleased to have given in security for the Church of England that notwithstanding this glorious profession she could never err against the Creeds nor the four Councils nor universal Tradition he had well merited of that Church For we do not charge her for not professing these things at least upon a pinch but for erring against her own profession and deserting that Church to which all these Authorities bear testimony and of which her Progenitors and first Reformers had been Members and from whose hands she received whatsoever she had either of Scripture Creeds Councils or Tradition consequently whose judgment she was bound to follow for the Eastern Churches even by the profession of Protestants being lapsed into Heresies there was then no visible Church in Being but such as was in Communion with the Church of Rome which never went out of any elder than her self and out of whom the Church of England sprang It seems he would have the Controversie betwixt us put upon this issue that is the three Creeds four Councils and Tradition But who shall be Umpire the instructing or instructed Party This discourse in the mouth of a Protestant against Presbyterian Anabaptist or Quaker would be sound though at the same time a self-condemnation in the Church of England The rest of this Paragraph is made up of voluntary assumptions without proof and which are already answered as to the main only I cannot let slip this concession we do not deny that the Church hath Authority of declaring matters of Faith but this must be the universal Church in a General and free Council as when the Nicene Creed was made not when a party in the Church the most corrupt takes upon it self to define many now Doctrines This plea if it be good justifies the Arians and condemns the Nicene Fathers vindicates the Eutichians Nestorians and Donatists and confounds all General Councils for there is nothing of this but was as fully charged against them by the Heretics of those days The following Paragraph is adulterated Coin for whereas the King by the inhabitants of a Country means Subjects instituting the comparison betwixt them and their Lawful Judges of the same Country he stretches those words to signifie the People of one Society and Judges of another The King's discourse is home and to the purpose God would not leave us at those uncertainties as to give us a Rule to go by and leave every Man to be his own Judge He answers We cannot reasonably suppose God should give us a Rule not capable of being understood by those to whom it was given to save their Souls As if there were no way to render a Man capable of understanding Scripture to the saving of his Soul but to leave him to be his own Judge Is there no Church No Pastors to instruct him He that is blind or dim-sighted and will not use a Guide merits to fall Not to be wilfully mistaken in matters of Faith and not to be damn'd is of one and the same consequence The knowledge of good and evil truth and falshood I confess in some sense is to Man's conscience of the same concern but he that willingly shuns light and gropes for either of them in the dark is an Enemy to his Soul and equally culpable There follows We do not leave every MÃ n to be his own Judge any farther then concerns his own Salvation which depends upon his particular care and sincerity But if the judgment of his own Salvation be in his own hands I think he is made his own Judge of the Rule And notwithstanding all his care and sincerity though they should protect him from the Artifices of foreign Seducers which is not possible but by accident without an inerrable Guide yet the corruption of his own heart may be his own most powerful Seducer and God if he will hath provided a guide even against that As to his refuge to the Ancient Creeds of how little concern it is may appear by this that if I should allow they followed exactly what they pretend to embrace which I never can yet if he denies it to be in the power of the Church to make new decisions of Faith upon any new exigence of Heresie or the like the sequel will be that every Man is left to be his own Judge To the question started by the King Whether it be not the same thing to follow our own phansie or to interpret Scripture by it His reply is That if we allowed no Creeds no Fathers no Councils there might have been some colour for such a question And is that colour vanish'd I believe not for if those Creeds those Fathers and Councils have no infallible Authority to oblige the Church of England why should not the King's question be still in force For neither is that Church obliged to follow those Rights which may deceive it nor is there any rational Authority in the Church of England to force any of her Members to embrace them But the truth is that Church neither stands to Creeds Fathers or Councils otherwise she had never deserted her Mother Church who ever regarded those Authorities as Oracles infallible and sent from Heaven to direct us and to whom she owes whatever is Sacred of that nature To his first question of the Church of Rome assuming to it self the sole power of giving the sense of the Scripture I answer she gives no sense but what she received from former Tradition of the foregoing Church and consequently makes not any Rule to her self but follows that Apostolical Tradition which God hath given her as the best interpreter of holy Scriptures To his second question the answer is the same The third question stands upon a false bottom for it supposes the Pope to be the sole interpreter of Scripture whereas neither he nor the Church do pretend to any other way but by Tradition The fourth question is also grounded upon Errour as if the publick disorders which happen in the Church were not to be reformed by General Councils The fifth question is also built upon Sand for it pretends that the Papal Authority is to be debated in Councils whereas no General Council did ever dispute it The sixth question is as strange
of Rome of whom they were once a part at Liberty betook themselves to the Examination of the Popes Supremacy and other Articles of the Council of Trent by Scriptures Fathers and Councils but could find nothing in any of them to make out that Supremacy or any Article now in dispute But still the King's Questions pressed upon them who shall be Judge Is not this a President for all Rebellion either in Church or State They have neither Scripture Tradition Councils nor Fathers but what they had from the Roman Church and at the first Breach they were in number very Inconsiderable and yet by a strange Presumption they pretend to have a clearer Sight into those Principles than that Church who gave them their very Being in Christianity I believe were this Gentleman to argue against those Sects that have spawn'd from the Church of England he would not suffer a pride so intollerable as to prefer their own sense in Scriptures or the Rule of Faith before that Church that gave them the Rule Well but having finished this inquiry What did they do He goes on thus Articles of Religion were drawn up wherein the Sense of our Church was delivered agreable to Scripture and Antiquity not the private sense of particular Men. If they be Articles of Religion then they are Articles of Faith if so they must come by Divine Revelation either by the way of Holy Scripture Tradition or otherwise Now I beseech him to declare in which of these principles are all or any of these negative Articles contained as no praying to Saints no Purgatory no reverencing of Images no Transubstantiation and the like with which the nine and thirty Articles are stuft Clearly this is a new Creed which neither the Eastern nor Western Churches did ever profess to hold Nor will it avail to reply that nothing of praying to Saints Purgatory or the like is to be found in the Scriptures or Antiquity which notwithstanding is a manifest illusion for if they be Articles of Religion or of Faith he must bring positive Texts to assert them by which all persons should be obliged to believe them and so to Sacrifice their Lives for them if occasion should be otherwise the Creed-makers will be lookt upon as Cheats and their new Creeds as the deluding Fancies of particular Men. As to the advantages of the Clergy in the Church of Rome I must needs confess they are very considerable and therefore not likely to be lost by any Reformation in Religion since if an Angel from Heaven should bring it they are caution'd not to receive him But that the Clergy should be against and Princes for the Church of Rome is as surprizing as that a Clergy may be byast and a Prince unbyast a Blessing so signally fallen from Heaven upon the Prince who now reigns and his blessed Brother that no advantage under Heaven can be thought so powerful as to have byast them in their Choice THE SECOND Royal Paper VINDICATED HIS late Majesty out of Paternal commiseration and his Princely care for the safety of this Nation breaks out into this complaint It is a sad thing to consider what a world of Heresies are crept into this Nation And this Assailant is much concerned that no distinction should be made between the Religion establish'd by Law and the Parties disowned by it and dissenting from it As if an establishment of a Religion by Law could protect it from being an Heresie or as if Error fix'd by a Law were not more to be pityed than what is vagrant and unsetled He need not trouble himself to vindicate other Sects from Heresie against the four or six General Councils let him defend his own and his work is done But how comes the Church of England to bear the blame of so many Heresies The reason is obvious to any one who reflects upon the breach she made from the Church of Rome and by that example opened a Gate for all Heresies to enter nay the truth is she is a fruitful Womb of Heresies of which Time has and will still deliver her for by throwing the Rule of Obedience and Government over-board the Presbyterians revolted from her from them the Anabaptists the Quakers and how many links more there will or may be God alone can tell since 't is not in the power of that Church but by the Sword to suppress them which if she should use against them nothing would be more unreasonable than to persecute them for adhering too closely to a Rule or Example which she first gave them To his Question How came the Church of Rome to have this power of defining or declaring what 's Heresie I answer By the same way the Church had power in her General Councils to make Creeds and Anathmatize Hereticks and as the Church then did not make any new Articles of Faith when she defined that the Son was Consubstantial to the Father and that Christ had two Wills and one Person so the Church of Rome in her definitions never pretends to make new Articles of Faith but to declare the old ones When the King had pronounced That every Man thinks himself as competent a Judge of Scripture as the Apostles themselves He answers by a Counter-questio Does every one amongst us pretend to an infallible Spirit Yes for by this Gentleman's Position no Man of them will believe but what he sees or understands in the Scriptures and in what they see or understand he conceives they cannot be deceived consequently their Spirit is infallible To use a Man's understanding about Scripture is not to be Judge of Scripture For a Man that so uses his understanding as to submit it to the Tradition of the Church makes the Church the Judge and not himself And whoever uses his understanding in opposition to the Churches Tradition makes himself judge indeed but not to his Salvation We says he own the Authority of Guides in the Church and a due submission to them What 's this Is that submission so due that Heaven will be lost without it If so his Church is as competent a Judge as the Apostles for that is the only punishment due to those who hear not them if otherwise the submission is ad pompam and in the sense of the King every Man thinks himself as competent a Judge of Scripture as the very Apostles themselves The King gives here a Reason for his foregoing Assertion and the sum of it is that the Church of England dares not press her Authority upon other Sects in giving the sense of Scriptures for fear they should confound her for having cast off the Authority of that Church of which she was once a Member and to whom she was equally bound to submit To this he replys That the Church of England pretends to no Infallibility but this is to disguise the Royal Coin for the King abstracts from all Infallibility and his Argument is as forceable without it as with it for if the Sectaries can
the great work of our Salvation ought to depend upon such a Sandy Foundation as this Upon this Proposal of the king's he runs out into an airy Excursion against the Church of Rome under a pretence of a new Faith hatch'd in the Council of Trent which being an assertion as voluntary as 't is Sandy it leaves the Church unattack't and still standing upon a Rock But I appeal says he to any ingenious Man whether he doth not as much build upon his own Judgment who chooseth the Church as he who chooseth the Scripture for his Rule The answer is easy for certainly a Man hath more reason to rely upon his own Judgment in finding out the Church than the Scripture since the one is a Noon-day Light and may be discovered by every one the other is in the dark and so might continue if not discovered by the Light of the Church He advances for the Church can never be a Rule without the Scriptures but the Scriptures may without the Church It seems this Gentleman has forgot there was a Church before the Scriptures were written and consequently a Rule nay some Ages passed before a Collection of the Books of Scripture was made and owned by the Catholic Church for certainly the Apostles and Apostolick Men did not when they went to convert the World by Preaching bring about Waggons laden with Bibles to every Parish and even in St. Irenaeus his time there were many barbarous Nations Converted that could neither Write nor Read the Church then was the only Rule without the Scripture but without light from the Church there could be no certainty of Scripture either as to the Book it self or to the Copy or the Translation or Sence of it He pushes farther it is no such easy matter to find the Churches Infallibillity in the Scripture I answer there is no absolute necessity of finding it in the Scripture since the Church was found out before the new Testament was in Being and if God's special good Providence had not given us the Scriptures to our great Comfort yet the Church notwithstanding would have still been visible to the World's End and therefore when we cite those texts of Scripture about Christ's being with his Church to the end of the World about the Power to forgive Sins about God's Labourers Husbandry and the like t is only ad abundantiam and to shew the advantages the Church hath over her Enemies even at their own Weapons But in his opinion these Texts of Scripture do as effectually prove the infallibility of the Church of England as of the Church of Rome But I beseech him how can a Church but of yesterday and whose Negative Articles of Faith were lately Coined dure from Christ to the World's end The last thing the King charges upon those who resist the truth and will not submit to this Church is that they draw their arguments from implications and far fetch'd interpretation at the same time that they deny plain and positive words which is so great a disingenuity that 't is not almost to be thought that they can believe themselves This I perceive touches to the quick but truth though she cuts must still be amiable Is it says the Answerer to deny truth to argue from implications and to deny plain and positive words of Scripture to say we must not worship Images we must make God alone the Object of holy Worship I reply it is for nothing of this is to be found in Scripture and if the word Image had been in the Commandments as it is not the Original signifying a graven thing yet it would be an implication or far-fetch'd interpretation because it is singled out and snatch't from the context which gives life to the words importing Divine Worship Nor is it any where expressed That God alone is the Object of holy Worship Though it may be deduced thence that worship to holy things is refer'd to God alone as the only final Object of all such Worship Again to say that Christ's Institution of the Eucharist in both kinds is a Command to the Lay-people to receive it in both kinds is an implication confounding Institution with a Command which are very different For Matrimony was Instituted by God yet I know no Man by virtue of the Institution commanded to Marry Lastly The discourse of St. Paul touching the understanding of our Prayers meddles not with the publick or settled Liturgy of the Church as may be evinced from the Chapter it self So that for any of those Examples there is neither plain nor positive words of Scripture on their side Let us now change sides and see how it squares with the Catholic Party They affirm Bread to be changed into the Body of Christ because of these plain and positive words This is my Body this is true because the words are so plain that they import no implication of Impossibility or Absurdity a Rule observed by the Fathers in the understanding of Scriptures literally but against this there lyes an Objection That it is as plain and positive in Scripture that God has Eyes Ears Hands and Feet My reply is That there is an Implication of Impossibility which appears not in the plain Sense of these words This is my Body He presses to know the difference betwixt these two Propositions A Rock is Christ and This is my Body I answer That had it been thus Bread is my Body there had been none for then both Propositions would have imply'd an Impossibility But the words being This is my Body the words are plain as to their Sense that they inferr neither Impossibility nor Absurdity since by these omnipotent words the Bread is changed into the Body of Christ which neither is impossible to God nor absurd to do and therefore in those places where Christ is said to be Bread 't is always with some Emphasis as the Bread of Life this Bread or the Bread which clearly imports an Analogy The Conclusion of this Royal Paper is That if the Civil Magistrate pleases he may turn the Protestant Church either to Presbytery or Independency or indeed to what he pleases for this was the way of our pretended Reformation in England and by the same Rule c. This he tells the King is an unkind requital to the Church of England for her Zeal in asserting his Majesties power against a foreign Jurisdiction But Truth methinks when uttered with design of publick good ought never to be taken unkindly especially from the Pen of a King and if it seems an ill requital I am sure it is a worse complement to palliate one Errour with another The King's reason is to the purpose for as our Princes lately notwithstanding all Laws Divine and Humane did by their Regal Power cancel a Religion which came into this Nation with Christianity and was Established by more strong and forcing Laws than ever gave Being or Preservation to the Church of England For besides a thousand years Prescription and the
so she either out of some disgust or for reasons best known to her self did not so well relish the advice given her by the Bishop of Winchester Had she no Body else to consult If she had there is no reason to charge her with the not using ordinary means unless this Gentleman has a Revelation for it After this he cites the following discourse of her Royal Highness That she spoke severally to two of the best Bishops we have in England who both told her there were many things in the Roman Church which it were much to be wished we had kept as Confession which was no doubt commanded of God That praying for the dead was one of the ancient things in Christianity That for their parts they did it daily though they would not own it And afterwards pressing one of them very much upon the other point he told her that if he had been breed up a Catholic he would not change his Religion but that being of another Church wherein be was sure were all things necessary to Salvation he thought it very ill to give that Scandal as to leave that Church wherein he received his Baptism Which discourse she said did but add more to the desire she had to be a Catholic By this long Text 't is clear that her Royal Highness had made many steps towards the Catholic Religion and that the Conference she had with these Bishops did but add fuel to the flame that was within her for such is the result of her last words did but add more to the desire she had to be a Catholic This being so her Highness and the two Bishops were now upon different terms as Party and Party she making advantage of their Concessions as of Truths coming out of the mouth of the Enemies to the Religion she either actually professed or was inclinable to and they notwithstanding those Concessions keeping their own ground So that it was not the Authority or Example of these Bishops that prevailed with her but Truth forced from an Enemy which for that reason convinced her the more Since therefore this Gentleman allows of the Concessions 't is unreasonable to put this question Why should not the last words have greater force to have kept her in our Church than the former to have drawn her from it Because 't is easier for a Catholic to believe a Protestant speaking against himself in matters of Religion than for himself Ex ore tuo te judico is an Argument invincible against a Man's self The Concessions then being admitted both by the Catholic party and these two Bishops she had reason to believe them as to the Concessions but not in that wherein the Catholics and they differ'd which was That all things necessary to Salvation are certainly in the Protestant Church and that it was ill to leave it The next two Paragraphs concern not her Royal Highness For whether the two Bishops did let fall words inconsistent with their own Religion or not her work was done she not being obliged to reconcile them to their own Religion But the late Bishop of Winchester instead of untying has cut the knot a sunder For says he he first doubts whether there ever were such Bishops who made such answers and then he affirms That he believes there never was in rerum natura such a discourse as is pretended What pity 't is the Bishop of Winchester should be a person of so small a faith as not to give credit to so great a Lady in a concern wherein 't was no advantage to her to tell a Lye and if she had was by all the Laws Divine and Humane bound to restitution for the wrong she did them Non dimittitur peccatum nisi restituatur ablatum Or if he doubted whether there were ever any such Paper we have now the Royal word of a King for it attesting it to be hers Matters being thus we do not charge upon the Church of England the single Opinion of one or two Bishops but 't is reason to believe that a Lady thirsting after truth might defer much to persons of so eminent a rank in that Church This Gentleman I perceive is very studious very industrious to find a Lady in Errour and hopes she may contradict her self thus then She protests in the presence of Almighty God that no person Man or Woman directly or indirectly ever said any thing to her since she came into England or used the least endeavour to make her change her Religion and that it is a blessing she wholly owes to Almighty God So that the Bishops are acquitted from having any hand in it by her own words But I beseech him did she or any else charge upon these Bishops that they said any thing to her or used any endeavours to make her change her Religion How oft doth it happen that the speaker of words may utter them for one design and the hearer make use of them for another though then the Bishops did not say any thing to her with endeavour to make her change her Religion yet their words may have added much to the change of her Religion He proceeds And as far as we can understand her meaning she thought her self Converted by immediate Divine Illumination This construction of her words so tickled his fancy that it made him sport upon the Church of Rome's private Spirit for a long time But for my part if he has done laughing I can understand nothing of this immediate Divine Illumination from her words For God who disposes of all things strongly and sweetly has infinite methods to convert Souls to himself without immediate Illumination by so unexpected a concourse of second Causes so well tempered and knit together by his wisdom that a conversion of a Soul may and will follow thence she not knowing how and consequently as 't is the sole work of the Almighty so that blessing she wholly owes to him What this Gentleman understands by a private Spirit I know not but be it what it will 't is therefore vitious because it is inconsistent with those publick Methods and Rules God has left to govern his Church by which whether the Protestants when they went out from the Roman Church did not desert by following an Ignis Fatuus of their own in their singular interpretation of holy Scripture against the known Sense of their Mother Church is the subject of another dispute or rather indeed 't is put out of all dispute that they then did unless they can shew that the constant Tradition and Practice of the Primitive Church interpreted Scripture as they then did in all the Points they reform'd in which they know is impossible Her Royal Highness declares that she would never have changed if she thought she could have saved her Soul otherwise and he answers if this were true she had good reason for her change if it were not true she had none as it is most certain it was not I cannot perswade my self
as any for it confounds Phancy and Tradition whereas the one is publick to the whole World and the other is private His next Paragraph adulterates the Royal Coin for when the King demands to know where the power of deciding matters of Faith is given to every particular person the sense is clear for the question cannot be meant otherwise than in relation to himself But he extends it so as if every one was to give Laws to another's Faith and this without any ground is made the first Member of the division But he adds If by deciding matters of Faith no more be meant but every Man 's being satisfied of the reasons why he believes one thing to be true and not another that belongs to every Man as he is bound to take care of his Soul So that by his reply every Man whose Soul is dear to him may and ought to discuss and dispute every Article of his Faith and bring it to the Test of his own reason and so the Omnipotence of a God revealing and the Authority of a Church declaring what is revealed weighs not with him until reason be satisfy'd and the understanding becomes a measure of all revealed Truths Whereas in truth Authority is the correlative of Believing and Reason of Knowledge And though we make use of our reason to find out that Authority which ought to sway us as a blind Man serves himself with his reason to find out his Guide yet after that 't is Authority not Reason that moves us and the previous motives inducing us to embrace the Authority of the Church from whence we have Scriptures and all other inscrutable Mysteries are much more visible and resplendent than for any other Article of our Faith The King goes on Christ left power in his Church even to forgive sins c. He replys But where then was the Roman Catholic Church Undoubtedly where now it is one and the same from whence all other pretended Churches went out she never departing from any Church that was elder than her self If she had I doubt not but her Eagle-ey'd adversaries would long er'e this have brought to light the Fathers the Councils or whatever else stood in opposition against her and since they never did nor can their plea against her is common to all whoever opposed the true Church In a good Sense therefore she alone remains Heir general to the Apostles as to those gifts which were not personal but given by Christ for the necessary support and government of her self which is to continue untill the consummation of Time And though he seems surprised that God should keep Man more from Error than from Sin Yet if he recalls but to mind that some of the Prophets were led into truths by the holy Spirit and were great Sinners at the same time and that all the Prophets though infallible in delivering such truths as God put into their mouths yet were obnoxious to sin the miraculous surprize will cease and the reason why infallibility is necessary and not impeccability is manifest because without the first the Church could not subsist for if once she makes Shipwrack of her Faith she is no more a Church an effect not so proper to sin And whereas he demands Would any have believed the Apostles infallible if they had known them to have been persons of ill lives I answer yes for either by Miracles wrought in confirmation of their Infallibility or any other way they could have an assurance of it As to any concession that the Church may err in deposing Princes if he means she may err in the decision of Truth or definition of Faith about it he is purely beholding to himself for that concession not to the King or any else I know of who only engage for her inerrability in delivering what she received from Christ and his Apostles by an uninterrupted Tradition and in conformity to this Rule the Church of Rome with all those in Communion with her the rest either by Heresie or Apostacy being divided from her was judge even of the Scripture it self what was Canonical what not or else it had been impossible for the Church of England to have known any thing of Truth concerning that Point there being no other Church to inform her but what had forfeited her Credit by manifest Heresie and that owned by the Church of England this is a vindication of the King against three of his Paragraphs The King having put the question by what Authority Men separate themselves from that Church He replies that they have not separated themselves from the Catholick and Apostolick Church but are disjoyned from the Roman Church that we may keep up the Stricter Vnion with the truly Catholick and Apostolick Church But if the English Church reputes it self a Member of the Chatholick Church because she professes to stand to the three Creeds and four first general Councils then certainly the Arians Nestorians Eutichians and the Eastern Churches above-mentioned cannot be parts of the Catholick Apostolick Church because they hold not the Apostolick Doctrine contain'd in those Creeds and Councils But besides those Churches there were no other in Being at the time of Separation but those Churches which were in communion with the Church of Rome consequently the Church of England going out from them separated her self from the Catholick Apostolick Church and therefore unless he can prove the Church of Rome to have deserted any other elder Church than her self by Usurpation or otherwise his Story of an Usurper will be but a Shift and may authorise all Rebellion either in Church or State The last Paragraph is since Protestants do charge the Church of Rome with Imposition of new Articles of Faith the King desires to know who is to be judg of that whether the whole Church the Succession whereof hath continued to this Day without Interruption or particular Men who have raised Schisms to their own Advantage The Roman Church having been in Possession of all those Truths now questioned by the Men of the Church of England nothing can be more unreasonable than to devest her of her just Possession and to require her to fall a proving whereas this ought to be the Province of those who under the Pretence of Innovation revolted from her For either they must make good their charge or else by all Laws they stand condemned and she remains justified Wherefore since at the time of separation she owned the Papal Supremacy and other Articles to have descended to her by an universal Tradition whoever questions the Title must convince her of that pretended Usurpation and then as it is well observed by the King who shall be judg in that case To have answered the Royal Paper this Method he should have minded which in disputes of another Nature I doubt not but he would have Practised However after his challenging the Church to prove her Possession he proceeds to declare that the Protestants being now by falling from the Church