5. And St. Paul tells us other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid which he saith not is St. Peter not Petrus but Petra is Jesus Christ the true Rock who is the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets both that upon which they themselves were built and stood and that upon which they as God's Builders built his Church 1 Cor. 3.11 Ephes 2.20 And surely no man can stand more strongly by being built upon St. Peter than by being built upon Christ Nor find we either Christ himself or any of his Apostles to say or signify any such thing as that the place or Church where Peter should reside or praeside should be more Infallible than any other Church or Churches founded resided in or praesided over by any other of his Apostles Nor that such as should succeed him as Bishops in any place much less in Rome praesided in by him should be more Infallible than other Bishops If the praesidency of St. Peter in Rome can secure that Church or it's Bishop from failing or falling into Errour how comes it to pass that his sitting at Antioch did not also secure that place Church Yea those Churches of Judaea of the Circumcision whereof he was the Prime and immediate Apostle Gal. 2.9 Surely they ought rather to have had this Privilege and Praerogative from him than Rome a Gentile Church which was rather under S. Paul's Barnabas's Jurisdiction as being the Apostles of the Gentiles It 's strange that none of the Churches more certainly planted by him should have this Privilege but only Rome which it is not certain that he planted or ever came into for some of no small learning have made a question of that that I say not have positively denied it Surely none but simple persons and such as are easy and willing to be deceived and therefore look not well to their goings will believe such groundless praetexts imposed upon them True it is that some of the Ancient Councels gave a Patriarchal power to the Bishop of Rome subjecting these Western Churches thereunto but that was but an humane constitution for order and unities sake and gave him no more Infallibility than the like constitutions gave to the Bishops of Jerusalem or Antioch or Alexandria or Constantinople whom they made Patriarchs also in their respective Jurisdictions Nor yet did that make Rome or it's Church the whole Catholique Church or the Bishop thereof the Head of it as is evident by the 6th Councel of Carthage where Faustinus the Popes Legate challenging for his Master a power to order all great matters in all places pretending for it a Decree of the Nicene Councel was upon diligent search into the Records of the said Councel found a falsifyer thereof and thereupon was decreed an equality in power with the other Patriarchs But beside all this against the plea of that Church's Infallibility it is evident 2. That she hath in Fact erred and can there be a clearer and better demonstration of the possibility of her Erring deceiving and being deceiv'd than that she hath actually Erred For though à posse ad esse non valet consequentia yet ab esse ad posse est validissima Now that she hath actually Erred is evident not only in her members and different parties but also in her conjunct consideration and in her Head As for her having erred and yet erring in her parties and members it 's demonstrable in this that contradictoria non possunt esse simul vera of two contradictory positions maintained by different parties the one must needs be false Now in the Church of Rome there are contradictory positions maintained by several parties witness the Dominicans and Franciscans the one contradicting the other in the matter of the immaculateness of the conception of the Virgin Mary the one denying and the other asserting it if the Virgin Mary was conceaved in her Mothers womb without sin then the Dominican Party of the Roman Church errs and if otherwise then the Francâ—scan Party errs The like may be said of the Jansenists and Jesuites in the five Articles wherein they differ But I say not only their members but their Head and Bishop may erre also even in Cathedrâ or in his solemn Determinations and doings yea in matters of Faith as is made manifest in Liberius subscribing to Arrianisme and Vigilius who both condemned and commanded the same things to be believed as in the three Chapters condemned by a Councel as favouring Nestorianisme and in Honorius who was condemned by a Councel for a Monothelite And surely if a Pope may contradict himself and say and unsay a thing as Pope and Head of their Church and both condemn and command the belief of the same thing as in that case of Pope Vigilius he must needs be Fallible and erre in the one of them And there is no way to avoid it but that either some of their Popes have erred or some of their General Councels which is the Church representative and were some time also declared and held to be about the Pope and were usually consented to and confirmed by their Popes have been deceived in condemning them as having erred either of which supposals mightily infringes the Infallibility of their Church Nay and it is believed that the Jansenists would they speak out do not look upon the late Pope Innocent as Infallible in his condemnation of the five Articles maintained by them Nay did not St. Peter himself greatly erre in a main matter of Faith and that too after our Saviour had said to him Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church when he preaches such doctrine to his Master as that he should not suffer death for which our Saviour rebuking him cal'd him Sathan Mat. 16.22 23. But not only have and do great Parties in her and branches of her erre and even their Popes themselves but She herself in her whole Authoratative Constitution and Catholique complex consideration and that very grosly too if we look upon her Doctrines and determinations in the light of the infallible testimony of God and of his holy Spirit speaking in the holy Scriptures which is the Touch-stone to which the Prophet Isaiah or the Lord himself by him in Isai 8.20 and Christ himself in Joh. 5.39 directs us and to which the noble Boereans brought the Apostle Paul's preaching with commendation for their so doing Act. 17.12 yea and the Apostle St. Peter himself directs the Churches and the believers therein to that in 2 Pet. 1.19 and 3.1 2. and the Apostle Paul commends Timothy for that from a child he knew the holy Scriptures they being able to make men wise unto Salvation 2 Tim. 3.15 implying therein that even Children if they will mind the holy Scriptures and set themselves to seek the knowledge of them may as they grow up in some good measure obtain it to their great benefit and salvation Now contrary to these holy Scriptures
vers 9 10. Even so the Church of Rome and it's Teachers reject the word of the Lord as is evident in the instances we have given and yet they say the Law the Scriptures and it's Exposition are with that is belong unto them They are they from whom men must receive it and upon whom they must depend for it Yea they do as the false Church in Isa 48.1 2. is said to have done who make mention of the name of the Lord but not in truth nor in righteousness though they called themselves of the holy City that is in effect the holy Catholick Church The like is timated of them in Jer. 18.18 where the persecutors of the Lord's Prophets that were such in truth yet said of themselves come let us devise devices against Jeremiah and add as if they had thence authority to do so for the Law shall not perish from the Priest nor counsel from the wise nor the word from the Prophet Now when we see or may see by the Scriptures of truth and the testimony of the Holy Spirit in them that there should be false Teachers among the Christians answerable to the false Prophets among the Jews that would bring in Doctrines swarving from the Scriptures and find that the Papists and their Teachers evidently do so their challenge of authority to be the sole Expounders of the Scriptures should nothing move us while we see that they therein walk in the steps of the false Prophets especially seeing also that they challenge an authority which the Holy Ghost hath not given them nor directed his followers any where unto For the Holy Ghost himself who led the Apostles into all truth Joh. 16.13 doth not in any Scripture testifie to us of Rome or the Roman Church that we should derive our Faith from her or resolve it into her or her Doctors more than into any other Church The Apostle Peter whose authority they pretend to have committed to them but without any evidence of the holy Scriptures and whose Successors they tell us their Popes or Bishops are could not leave more authority to them than he had exercised himself Now we find him expresly preferring the authority of the Scriptures before his own saying or testimony as to the resolution of other mens Faith Yea he as well as other Apostles proved his sayings by the holy Scriptures as is evident in his Epistles 1 Pet. 2.6 7. and 3.10 11 12. and obtruded nothing upon men on his own authority barely as the Popes presume to do He calls the word of Prophesy a more sure word than what he related of his own knowledge 2 Pet. 1.16 17 18 19. and instead of directing the Believers after his death to the Church of Rome and her Bishops which surely he would and ought to have done had he known of any power given of Christ to her or to them for resolving mens doubts and determining their Faith and exercising a dominion over mens consciences more than to other Churches or their Bishops yea or directing them to himself more than to the rest of the Apostles when he forewarned them of false Teachers Scoffers that would come in the last days He stirs up the Believers minds to remember the words of the Prophets and the Commandments of the Apostles of our Lord and Saviour He saith not his own Commands or his rather than of the other Apostles but indefinitely of the Apostles puting in himself with them as one of the same rank and of no superior rank or authority among or over them much less doth he say that we should after his death be take our selves to the Church or Bishop of Rome for our direction guidance and preservation from the Error of the wicked but directs us to the Scriptures of the Prophets and Apostles the things spoken and commanded in and by them He thought not of the Lord Peter or the Lord Pope nor signified that the rest of the Apostles stood in relation more than himself to any man as their Lord but only to him who is the Saviour Yea and the Lord Jesus himself when afterward he appeared to John in the Isle of Patmos and gave him visions and revelations of the things that should come to pass in the world and unto the Churches directed him not to bid us go to Rome for resolution of our hearts in the matters of God and in what concerns our preservation in his truth but he in his several Epistles to the Churches bids Let him that hath an ear hear what the Spirit saith to the Churches He bids not That he that hath an ear should hear the Churches simply no nor yet what the Spirit saith in the Churches much less saith he Let him that hath an ear hear what the Church of Rome saith or what her Bishop as an heavenly Oracle or the Spirit as either in it or him as Infallibly tied to his Chair should dictate to us And yet which is very considerable this Book of the Revelations according to the most authentick testimonies of Antiquity was written after the Deaths of all the other Apostles and its probable at least that he lived not long after it himself who was the Penman thereof and therefore if there were any judge or orderer of mens faith infallible to be looked to by all Churches besides the holy Scriptures of the Prophets and Apostles or any Infallible Interpreter of them above the rest to be taken heed to it had been the proper place and time surely for Christ the faithful and true witness of God the Amen the firm and sure friend and Pastour of his Church to have signified who it is and directed the Church and every one that hath an ear to hear and hearken to him but neither when he was asked or there was a strife among the Apostles who of them should be the greatest did he tell them Peter should be their Prince and chief among them nor did he direct them here to any Successor of his at Rome or elsewhere as an infallible Guide and Head to them no there is no other Director as to matters of Faith and Worship directed to of God by his Holy Spirit in any Scripture as our absolute and infallible Guide but only the Spirit himself as speaking in and by the Scriptures to the Churches what the Scripture saith being called the saying of the Holy Ghost or Spirit as is to be seen Heb. 3.7 and 10.15 Act. 28.25 And surely they are guilty of horrible Idolatry that prefer the Testimony Word or Determination of any person or persons Church or Bishop before or above yea or but as equal with the testimony of the Holy Ghost to cast by his sayings or commands to listen to and be ruled by men is indeed to have the fear of God taught us by mens precepts and in vain to honour God or worship him which was the fault of the Jewish Church reproved by the Holy Ghost in the Prophet Isaiah for which also he
rather argues them guilty of being a lying Church 4. There is a brief character of the true Church and her Children in the book of the Revelations by which we may better judg of the truth and rightness of any Church than by any or all those fair Pleas that Rome makes for her self namely that the true Church and its Children are that society and company of men that keep the commandments of God and the faith or Testemony of Jesus Rev. 12.17 and 14.12 But now if we bring the Church of Rome to this test I am sure she will be cast only let us mind that by keeping the Commandments of God is meant both the careful observation of them to walk after them and also the holding them forth sincerely and purely without corrupting them that others may know and walk after them also and by keeping the faith and testimony of Jesus is meant the keeping it without spot or mixture of corruption with it either by adding to or taking from it And surely if we take a little view of their carriage in either of them we shall find them not a little faulty in both 1. First as to the keeping of Gods commandments which of them do they keep in the sences above mentioned not the first for they have other Gods in the Scripture Language beside the only true God the maker of all things in Scripture Language they are called other Gods to whom men give that adoration that belongs to God and unto whom they perform religious worship or service asking of and expecting from them what is proper to God to give so the Calves made by Jeroboam to be sacrificed to though intended as mediums to worship the true God by yet they are called Gods that he made to himself 2. King 14.9 and so the golden Calf in the wilderness though it was to Jehovah they pretended to Sacrifice keep a feast by it yet they were charged with changing their glory that is their God therein into the similitude of an Ox that eateth grass and so intimately of making a new God to themselves Exod. 32,4.5 Psal 106.19.20 now how many there are in the Roman Church that according to those Notions they make Gods to themselves it is not easy to determin The host in the Sacrament they stick not to own as God God-man to give divine adoration unto insomuch as one of their own Doctors acknowledges that the errors of those that worship some Golden or Silver Statues or some Images of any other materialls for their God as the Heathen worshiped their Gods or a Red Cloth hung upon the Top of Spear as is reported of the Laplanders or some live Animal as of old the Egyptians did Fran. Coster Enchir. contro vers Cap 12. were more tollerable than of those who worshiped a piece of Bread as hitherto the Christians have done all over the World for so many hundred years if the Doctrine of Transubstantiation be not true And that that Doctrine is not true we have as good evidence as Christ gave to his Disciples that he was not a Spirit that is we may handle and see it yea and tast and smell it too as was said above yea we have the same that we have that the Cup is not transubstantiated into the New Testament and we have no more authority from the Scripture that the Bread is Transubstantiated than that the Cup is so Transubstantiated nay rather we have more ground to believe that the Cup is changed into a divine writing than that the Bread is changed into the Body the very real and substantial Body of Christ For it is expresly said this Cup is the New Testament but it is not said this Bread is my Body nor this that was Bread is become my Body and for ought that appears to the contrary in the Text his Body being visibly present he might point to or speak of it in saying this is my Body as he speak of the Temple of his body when walk-in the Temple he said to the Jews Destroy ye this Temple and in three days I will raise it up again as our sences tell us the Cup is not the New Testament but a Silver or Golden Cup or Challice so the very same sences tell us as plainly that the Bread still remains in the nature of Bread non substantiâ aut naturâ mutatus not changed in substance or nature into God or into the person of God-man the Lord Jesus besides it is their own Doctrine that the change of the Elements depend upon the Intention of the Priest so that if the Priest intend not in saying the words to make the body of Christ it is not the Body of Christ but Bread still and then they are Idolaters that worship it as God and who can be certain of the Priests Intentions not to mention again the many Saints both Hees and Shee s that they give such adorations to as belongs only to God and ask such things of as God only can give so that they are notorious transgressors of the first commandment of God and keep it not and as to the second they are so far from keeping it and act so grosly contrary to it that they expung it out of their Catechisms The third also they grosly violate in their Doctrine and practice about sacred oaths dispenceing with them and loosing men from the obligation of them enacting them by mental reservations and breaking solemn Oaths and promises as in their breaking their promises with John Hus and in the Popes dispensing with the Oath given by Ladislaus King of Poland to Amurath the Turkish Emperour or grand Sultan and causing him to break his Truce with him to the great scandal of Christian Religion and slaughter of the Christians The Turk himself appealing to Christ if he were indeed God to revenge the perfidious Perjury of the Christians towards him which he also did in the ensuing slaughter and destruction of them but such abuse of Gods name in dissolving and dispensing with religious and solemn Oaths yea and with mens rash swearing they give allowance of in their Doctrines and treatises as well as in their practices yea it was a thing that the above cited Fryer Aegan tells us gave him one of his first disgusts at their Religion that when at his first being made a Fryer he took one and twenty Oaths and among them that he would never come on Horseback that he would never ware shoes that he would obey his superiours in what ever he commanded never examining the lawfulness of his commands not to be ashamed to beg never to be out of his Fryers habit c. yet after all these oaths taken his superiour told him that he must take his former garments and return in the same Posture that he came in which was on Horseback with Sword and Pistols and gay Apparrel and go see his friends though quite contrary to his oaths from which he would absolve him If