Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
truth_n according_a church_n word_n 2,678 5 4.0797 3 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A36614 A defence of the papers written by the late king of blessed memory, and Duchess of York, against the answer made to them Dryden, John, 1631-1700. 1686 (1686) Wing D2261; ESTC R22072 76,147 138

There are 7 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

not in the Office of Baptism that it is required that they believe the Roman Catholic Church As if the Roman Baptism by requiring belief of the Catholic did not require belief of the Roman Catholic Church If he think in earnest that it do's not let him present a Man to this Baptism who professes not to believe the Roman Catholic Church and try whether his professing to believe the Catholic Church will obtain it He reflects not that the Limitation which is in this Expression Roman Catholic Church comes not from Roman but from Church That Word indeed always limits the Expression to those who believe and sometimes to those who practise the Doctrine of Christ. Roman neither makes nor marrs as to Limitation but owns the Romans for such Christians Taking in those whom Injustice would keep out is it seems Limitation in his Language As it griev'd him in likelihood that this Expression as visible as that the Scripture is in Print should be applied to the Roman Catholic Church he had a mind to retort it upon her but very unluckily chuses to do it in an Assertion contrary to the sense of all the World besides himself and by an Argument contrary to the sense of the whole Church not excepting his own He says then in his third Head That it is to him equally visible that the Church of Rome it self do's not believe that it is the one Catholic Church mentioned in the two Creeds and this every body but he plainly sees it do's And proves it by this Argument Because if it did it must void all Baptism out of its Communion which it hath never yet done when 't is plain that all the Church agrees it ought not to be voided This he very well knows is a Plea over-ruled by the whole Church many Ages ago and which I little expected he would have borrow'd from Men who he says were excommunicated because they made and stood to it especially wh●●● he I think condemns it himself For he excludes the Donatists I suppose and Novatians from the Catholic Church because they re-baptized When he bethinks himself he will not sure have the Church heretofore not believe her self the Catholic Church because she would not void Baptism with the Re-baptizers nor exclude the English from the Ca● holic Church because she voids it not The truth is to say in one breath That the Donatists were not Catholics because they Re-baptized and in the next That Roman Catholics cannot believe themselves Catholics because they do not is a cross piece of Business and much too hard for me As far as I can understand the very Reason he gives why they should not is one Reason why they should believe themselves the Catholic Church For in not voiding the Baptism of Heretics they do as the Primitive Catholic Church did And had I made such an Argument for a Friend I am afraid he would have thought I plaid booty The Answerer nevertheless strives to make it good by this Discourse As long as Baptism doth enter Persons into the Catholic Church it is impossible that all who have the true Form of Baptism though out of the Communion of the Roman Church should be Members of the Catholic Church and yet the Communion of the Roman and Catholic be all one as it must be if the Roman Church be the Catholic and Apostolic Church professed in the Creeds This if I understand it is in short Persons Baptized out of the Roman Communion are Members of the Catholic but not of the Roman Catholic Church and therefore the Catholic and Roman Catholic are not the same Churches He was not I perceive aware that he supposes what he should prove and when he has done proves it by means of that Supposition For he could not make a Member of the Catholic not to be a Member of the Roman Catholic unless he suppose that those are two different Churches And this is the very Point in Dispute which he should prove and which he puts for proved in his Conclusion But we are all subject to oversights I wonder more how it could scape him that the Baptized Persons he speaks of are as much Members of both Churches as of either I speak in his Language as if they were different Churches that his Argument may go on Those Persons are not truly Members either of the Catholic or Roman Catholic Church but as far as Baptism makes Members they are altogether as much Members of the Roman Catholic as of the Catholic And He if he will recollect himself knows very well that both Points have been long since determin'd and that by the whole Catholic Church The old Contest about Rebaptisation puts it past Dispute that they were not truly Members of any Part of the Catholic Church For the Contest was How they should be made Members Whether by a new Baptism or only by Imposition of Hands Both Sides therefore that is the whole Church agreed That they were not Members of the Church till one way or other they were receiv'd into it And to think they did not agree in this is to make very wise Men of them Men who fell out with one another even to Excommunication if we will believe the Answerer how those should be brought into the Church who were in already Again That they were nevertheless as much Members of the Catholic Church tho' baptised out of its Communion and so of the Roman tho' baptised out of the Roman Communion as Baptism could make them he knows too was carried against the Re-baptisers by the rest of the Church in whose Judgment the whole Church ever since has acquiesced And he stands single against that Judgment when he thinks a Man baptised out of the Roman Communion is not a Member of the Roman Communion as much as Baptism makes a Member and as much as if he were baptised in her Communion In truth there is nothing to dispute of but Words When he says that Baptism enters the Baptised into the Catholic Church if he mean that those who are duly baptised by Men who are out of the Communion of the Catholic Church need no other Baptism to be brought into the Catholic Church he says very true and no more than what the whole Church has long since said before him Neither do they need any other Baptism to be brought into the Roman And if he will have this called an entry and the Baptised called Members with all my heart For I think it time lost to quarrel about the Names of things when we know what they signifie But if he mean that their Baptism so enters them that they need nothing more to be what every body understands by Members Men who believe and profess the Faith of the Catholic Church he contradicts every Member of the Catholic Church and every Man in the World For all Men see they do not profess that Faith but the Heresies of their Baptisers and all Christians know they need notwithstanding their
things Whether it be easie or no to find the Churches Infallibility in the Scripture has been answered by Her Royal Highness and I will not presume to answer where she has especially when the Question has no relation to our Business In the last place who has found the Churches Infallibility has yet says the Answerer a harder Point to get over viz. How the Promises relating to the Church in general came to be appropriated to the Church of Rome By the way the Promises of which he talks are they not in Scripture and no harder to be found there by another than by him How comes the Churches Infallibility to be easily found there in this Period which was not easie to find in the last For who has found the Promise has foun● Infallibility as certainly as that the Promises of Christ never fail But why are we not all agreed now That there are Promises of Infallibility made to the Church in general he agrees and doubts not I suppose but that those Promises are made good I suppose too he will allow that the Church in General and the General Church are all one and that the General and the Catholic Church are but two Names for the same thing And so we are arriv'd at Infallibility in the Catholic Church Yes but it must not be appropriated to the Church of Rome Why it shall not if that will content him We ask no more than what he allows That the Catholic Church be Infallible and the Church of Rome with all her faults one of the many Churches which make it up To allow so much is to allow the Roman Catholic Church is Infallible For Roman Catholic is nothing but the Catholic with the Roman in What remains then but to take the Infallibility promis'd to this Catholic Church for the Foundation of our Salvation inquire and believe what she teaches and leave off disputing For they are undoubtedly firmly grounded who build on the Promises of God It is true the Answerer has not all this while answered the Question For he says not whether Salvation ought to depend on a Sandy Foundation or whether the private Judgment be a Sandy Foundation But he has done much better by instructing People the Catholic Church is Infallible and shall for me keep his Thoughts of that Matter to himself since he has no mind to reveal them People I hope will profit by his Instructions and for their own sakes chuse Infallible rather than Fallible Security for their Souls now they know where 't is to be had There follow several lines in his Majesties Paper which are not transcrib'd by the Answerer because they are he says as effectual for the Church of England as Rome And truly I am of his mind that the Church of England has her share in those favours as much as any particular Church if she be as they are incorporated into the General For neither do they claim otherwise nor can the Favours granted by God to the Faithful be imagined extended to the not-faithful It is for this Reason I have always thought them no Friends of hers who make her of a d● fferent Faith from all or indeed any part of the Catholic Church that is no part her self For evidently there is no pretending to the Priviledges of a Body but by being a Member nor pretending to be of the Body of Faithful but by Faith And pray consider says the King on the other side that those who resist the Truth and will not submit to his Church draw their Arguments from Implications and far fetch'd Interpretations 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 Here are two particulars mentioned drawing Arguments from Implications and denying plain words In answer to the first out of the whole heap of Controversies the Answerer chuses Three in which they have he says plain and positive words on their side Now it had been altogether as easie and as short to have produc'd those plain and positive words if there had been any as to have past his word that there are such Besides that People love to see with their own Eyes and plain things may easily be seen He is a Party and even Supreme Powers according to him must not judge in their own Cause It rests then with him to shew where the Scripture says No of what the Roman Catholic Church says I or contrariwise For this is what People understand by plain and positive and all besides is Implication And by the favour of his Confidence I affirm to him that who argue against the Roman Catholic Church out of Scripture argue always from Implications tho' it be more than needs to justifie His Majesties Assertion For if they draw their Arguments from Implications at any time they draw Arguments from Implications In answer to the Second he pitches upon a point wherein he acknowledges the words of Scripture seem plain and positive on our side and their Sense to be from Implications and far-fetch'd Interpretations and alledges what he has to say why notwithstanding they are not plain and positive As if there were any other way of denying plain Words of Scripture but by denying them to be plain No Christian has the confidence to deny what Scripture plainly teaches but who has no mind to believe what it teaches denies that it teaches contrary to him and for a Pretence to deny That raises some Mist or other to obscure the Clearness of every Text alledg'd against him The Answerer then is far enough from shewing that they do not deny plain Words of Scripture by pretending that they are not plain not did not could His Majesty mean they denied them otherwise who knew very well that there is no other way to do it and that no Words are so plain but who will make it his business may find something to say against them This which the Answerer alledges was far from a Secret to Him In short the Answerer would have them cleared from arguing from Implications by saying they have in three Points plain Words which he thought it needless to produce and from denying plain Words by denying that they are plain And this is all his Answer What he says of Implications in the Pope's Bulls might if he could shew the Church of Rome builds her Faith on those Implications be an Argument against her but none for himself For Paul is not a just the less a Thief because Peter is caught stealing too But some in the Church of Rome argue from Implications upon which they do not build their Faith therefore others may build their Faith upon Implications seems to me but an odd Argument The King's Conclusion is Is there any other Foundation of the Protestant Church but that if the Civil Magistrate please he may call such of the Clergy as he thinks fit for his turn at that time and turn
the Church either to Presbytery or Independency or indeed what he pleases This was the way of our Pretended Reformation here in England And by the same Rule and Authority it may be alter'd into as many Shapes and Forms as there are Fancies in Mens Heads This says the Answerer looks like a very unkind Requital to the Church of England for her Zeal in asserting the Magistrates Power against a Forreign Iurisdiction to infer from thence That the Magistrate may change the Religion here which may be pleases I need not observe that this is no Answer because I suppose it was not meant for one It seems rather a kind of Complaint to my thinking very unreasonable For he is a great deal more justly to be complain'd of who takes a concerning Truth unkindly then he who speaks it Religion I think should not depend on Compliments and I pray God preserve me from the Kindness which not to fail in the Punctilio's of nice Civility forbears to tell me what may be useful to my Salvation Again Zeal against Forreign Jurisdiction very well might and much more according to knowledge actually did appear in England without any alteration in Religion a thing to which I am persuaded neither Magistrate not Church have reason to think themselves beholding because it was the Gap at which the Heresies crept in of which His Magesty complains and which not long since ruin'd Both. Neither is any inference made from that Zeal but a plain Question ask'd to which a plain Answer would much better become the Part he now acts and shew much more Zeal to Truth and to the Church of England than talking of her Zeal unseasonably But although we attribute the Supreme Iurisdiction to the King yet we do not question but there are inviolable Rights of the Church which ought to be preserv'd against the Fancies of some and Vsurpations of others Rights and Fancies and Usurpations Pray let him keep these things till their time come and tell us at present why the Protestant Church may not be alter'd as it was made by the Authority of the Magistrate and Concurrence of such of the Clergy as are for his turn This if he have forgot it is the Question For the Rights of the Church his Care will be more seasonable when he has settled the Foundation We do by no means make our Religion mutable according to the Magistrates Pleasure But only according to the Pleasure of other Folks perhaps If it be immutable let us see the immutable Foundation which makes it so and have some Reason to think it so There it sticks Barely to say it is immutable costs nothing nor was there ever so great a Criminal who could not say Not guilty For the Rule of our Religion is unalterable being the Holy Scripture Not to turn our present Question into a Dispute about the Rule of Faith I pray him to make it appear that the Holy Scripture is such a Foundation as makes the Protestant Church unalterable The Letter of Scripture is common to all who bare the name of Christians and may be as much a Foundation to every as to any one The Sense is not a Foundation of Religion but Religion it self As Protestants build Protestancy upon Scripture the Presbyterians build Presbytery the Independents Independency and every one his own Religion Their several Religions are nothing but their several Expositions of the same words Why now is this Foundation more unalterable in respect of the Protestant Church than any other It sustain'd a Catholic Building heretofore It sustains a Protestant now Why may not the same Hands which removed the Catholic and set up the Protestant in its place remove the Protestant and set up the Presbyterian the Independent Building or what you will this is the Question to which a Body would have expected an Answer from an Answerer But he in stead of thinking of that Matter gives us for an unalterable Foundation of Protestant Religion a Foundation upon which all the Alterations of Religion which are and perhaps ever have been pretend to stand as much as the Protestant But the exercise of Religion is under the Regulation of the Laws of the Land Must the Laws which regulate the Exercise of Religion be obey'd not only for Wrath but for Conscience or must they not If they must People are oblig'd to exercise a new Religion as often as the Laws appoint a new Exercise For they cannot exercise one Religion and be of another And then they are oblig'd in Conscience to alter their Religion as the Laws alter from Protestant to Presbyterian or Independent or as the Law pleases If such Laws are not to be obey'd that the exercise of Religion is under the Regulation of the Laws signifies that People may be punish'd for not doing what in Conscience they are not oblig'd to do So Christianity is under the Regulation of Pagan or Turkish Laws and every weaker Man under the Regulation of a stronger which to may Ears sounds odly But take it which way you will the Case is equal If there be an Obligation from the Laws there may be an Obligation to the Presbyterian or Independent Exercise and Religion when the Law pleases And if there be none Presbytery indeed and Independency cannot be impos'd upon our Consciences by Law but they may be as much settled as Protestancy is now For all are under the same Regulation with the same either Obligation or not Obligation from that Regulation He concludes with a Prayer with which it is as with Scripture Take it right and 't is a good Prayer but yet they may joyn in it who will be Good Christians and Loyal Subjects no longer than their King is a Nursing Father to their Church But now he is parting from His Majesty it will not be amiss to reflect how it stands between them His Majesty as he had perhaps more reason than other Men was deeply sensible of the sad effects of Differences in Religion which he saw must needs last till an effectual course be taken to compose them Wrangling about particular Points that is turning Religion into Ergotery He had reason to think would never do it For there never came so bad a Cause into Westminster-Hall nor ever will into the Church for which no Argument can be made As long as Men have Tongues they will never want something to say which 't is but dressing up in handsome Language and it may take with those who distinguish not the Plausible from the Solid The bare name of an Answer is enough to make a shew and keep up the Reputation of not being overcome and so much is Victory to one side In short Men die and Disputes live and all that comes of them is what was long since observ'd There is no end of writing many Books He saw besides that it agrees not with the Goodness of God and His care of Man to leave us at uncertainties which without Infallibility he saw unavoidable And
her words which he hath falsifi'd in this place are these I would never have chang'd if I had thought it possible to have sav'd my Soul otherwise He never misquotes without design Now by altering these words If I had thought it possible to save my Soul into these If I could have sav'd my Soul he would shuffle off her true meaning which was That her Conscience oblig'd her to this change And that 's a Point he would not willingly have touch'd for he cannot deny upon his own Principles but that after having examin'd the Scriptures as she professes to have done as well as she was able concerning the Points in dispute and afterwards using the assistance of her Spiritual Guides the two Bishops she was to judge for her self in the last resort and the Judgment she made according to her Conscience was That the Scripture spoke clearly in behalf of the Catholic Church or Church of Rome as he calls it Therefore according to his Principles and her Conscience she was to be of that Church of whose Truth she was thus convinc'd so that whether she could be otherwise sav'd or no was not the Proposition to be advanc'd but whether she thought it possible to be otherwise sav'd And therefore though it were true that she could otherwise be sav'd yet she had a sufficient reason for her change though he says she had none which was her Conscience and supposing that were erroneous yet upon his Principles she must be the Judge of it without appeal Her Scruples began upon reading Dr. Heylin 's History of the Reformation and there she found such abominable Sacriledge upon Harry the Eighth's Divorce King Edward 's Minority and Queen Elizabeths Succession that she could not believe the Holy Ghost could ever be in such Councils Thus he compendiously quotes her Paper as being it seems asham'd of the Particulars therein mention'd but for once I will follow him his own way To read Dr. Heylin's History in order to settle her he confesses was none of the best Advices given to such a Person He is much in the right on 't as appears by the success and I add nor any other either Protestant or Catholic Writer then extant for no Paint is capable of making lovely the hideous Face of the pretended Reformation But says he there are two distinct Parts in the History of it the one Ecclesiastical the other Political the first built on Scripture Antiquity and the Rights of particular Churches the other on such Maxims as are common to Statesmen at all Times and in all Churches who labour to turn all Revolutions and Changes to their own Advantage But why might not her Highness consider it her own way which is that of Nature in the Causes which produc'd it and the Effects which it produc'd though I doubt not but she consider'd it his way too because a Child could not have mist it that very Distinction being inserted into the History by the Author himself Now the immediate Cause which produc'd the Separation of Harry the Eighth from the Church of Rome was the refusal of the Pope to grant him a Divorce from his first Wife and to gratifie his Desires in a Dispensation for a second Marriage Neither the Answerer nor I nor any Man can carry it so high as the original Cause with any certainty for the King only knew whether it was Conscience and Love or Love alone which mov'd him to sue for a Divorce But this we may say that if Conscience had any part in it she had taken a long Nap of almost Twenty years together before she awaken'd and perhaps had slept on till Doomsday if Anne Bullen or some other fair Lady had not given her a Jog so the satisfying of an inordinate and a brutal Passion cannot be deny'd to have had a great share at least in the production of that Schism which led the very way to our pretended Reformation for breaking the Unity of Christ's Church was the Foundation of it I pass over the manner of those first Proceedings and the Degrees by which they came to terminate in Schism though I doubt not but her Highness was sufficiently scandaliz'd in both and could not also but observe some of the concomitant Causes as Revenge Ambition and Covetousness all which and others drew with a strong Biass towards it But the immediate Effects even of this Schism were Sacriledge and a bloody Persecution of such as deny'd the King's Supremacy in Matters wholly Spiritual which no Layman no King of Israel ever Exercis'd as is observ'd by my Lord Herbert As for the Reformation it self what that produc'd is full as obvious in the Sequel of History where we find that Chanteries and Hospitals undevour'd by Henry the Eighth were left only to be Morsels for Edward the Sixth or rather for his Ministers of State and the Reason was given That the Revenues of them were fruitlesly spent on those who said Prayers for the Dead Now this was as naturally produc'd from the Reformation as an Effect is from the Cause so that as it is observ'd by some had that young King Reign'd any considerable time longer the Church of England had been left the poorest of any one in Christendom the rich Bishoprick of Duresme having been much retrench'd by him and 't is probable those of Rochester and Westminster Harry the Eighth had indeed eaten so much of the Churches Bread out of his Son's Mouth beforehand that even Calvin complains of it in a Letter to Cranmer concerning the paucity of good Pastors in England in these words Vnum apertum obstaculum esse intelligo quod praedae expositi sunt Ecclesiae redditus One open obstacle I find to this he meaneth the increase of good Pastors is That your Church Revenues are expos'd to Rapine Besides these things what an Usurpation this change of Religion caus'd is most notorious that of the Lady Iane Gray being evidently grounded on the Testament of Edward the Sixth by which she was made his Successor because she was of the Protestant Religion As for the Title of Queen Elizabeth to the Crown the Histories lie open and I shall not be over forward to meddle with the Rights of Princes especially since the Answerer has avoided that Dispute 'T is enough in general to say that her Interest carry'd her against the Pope whose Power if good she was Illegitimate She had also been inform'd by the English Resident at Rome that the Pope expected she shou'd acknowledge her Crown from him and not take upon her to be Queen without his leave These were strong Solicitations in a new unse●● led Succession for her to shake off a Religion whereof his Holiness is Head on Earth What matter of Conscience was in the case I say not but her Temporal Interest lies bare-fac'd and uppermost to view in reassuming of the Supremacy and to make the Breach yet wider in subverting the Foundations of the Faith For the Affront is the same
would have any Man shew me says the King where the Power of deciding Matters of Faith is given to every particular Man He distinguishes and says The Power of Deciding so as to oblige others is not given to every particular Man the Power of Deciding so as to satisfie the particular Decider is Denial is a fair Answer and this seems to deny what His Majesty says and yet in truth says nothing to it Deciding of particular Men being our own Iudges following our own Fancy or private Spirit believing as we please and the like Expressions signifie all the same And the King as Men use to do who mind Sense more than Words and have Language at will takes now one now another as they come in His way As it could not scape an ● ye less piercing than His that he judges every jot as much who believes upon the Authority of the Church as he who believes upon his own Fancy of Scripture and that every Assent is a Judgment and so the Assent of Faith as well as the rest it cannot be imagin'd that He would have Men not judge at all But He meant as all the World means by those Phrases that they should not judge unreasonably For as they are blamed who will be their own Judges and no body blames another for doing well and Judging is of it self a good thing an Exercise of a Faculty planted in us by God there is nothing to be blamed but the ill use of that Faculty by suffering Passion to 〈◊〉 it which should only be guided by Reason That Men 〈◊〉 mean thus by those Expressions we see by the 〈◊〉 to which they apply them He who being 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 or Conceit of 〈…〉 〈…〉 the Advice of his unpassionate and 〈…〉 or he who has no skill in Physic or 〈…〉 will commence and prosecute Suits 〈…〉 against the Advice of able Lawyers and Doctors is said to be his own Judge He is not who understanding Jewels or Pictures buys them at his own Rate tho' never so many of less 〈◊〉 than himself persuade him to the contrary 〈…〉 is said to be his Judge Now the King 〈◊〉 because Christ taught his Apostles and 〈◊〉 who with those that believ'd his Doctrine 〈…〉 Preaching and their Successors through 〈…〉 are called the Church that he could not 〈◊〉 reasonably who would pretend to find out that Doctrine by his own Wit or Study or any 〈◊〉 but by learning it of the Church which 〈…〉 at first from Christ and preserv'd it ever 〈◊〉 And this unreasonable Judgment made on their own Heads or Fancy against the Judgment of those whose Profession it is His several Expressions strike at The Answerer reflected not on the meaning of them but would persuade us That to say particular Men must be satisfied of the Reasons why they believe is an Answer to the Question Whether there be indeed any Reasons why they should believe besides the Authority of the Church To go forward Christ says his Ma●● sty left his Power to his Church even to forgive Sins in Heaven and left his Spirit with them which they exer●●●● d after his Resurruction He answers as if he were at 〈◊〉 purposes where then was the Roman 〈…〉 What has where was she to do 〈…〉 left to her 'T is a strange Qu● stion 〈◊〉 and he I believe the first who ever ask'd where a Church was before she was The Roman was a part of the Catholic as soon as she was a Church till then she was where all the Churches 〈◊〉 the World besides were except that of ● ierusalem and where the Church of ● ierusalem too was before Christ was born in the order of Providen●● But how can it be hence inferr'd that these Power● are now in the Church of Rome 〈◊〉 Roman Cath●●●● Church I suppose he means exclusive to all others unless it be made appear that it was Heir-General to all the Apostles As if there needed Logic to infer that Powers left for the Salvation of Mankind remain in being as long as there remains a Man●●●● to be saved or Powers left to the Church of Christ are in the Church of Christ and those excl● ded from the Powers who are not incl● ded ● n the Church or to make appear She is Heir-General to all the Apostles who as visibly as that the S● ripture is in Print is the One Chur● h 〈…〉 he could be content to be 〈…〉 Point but since his Majesty 〈…〉 purpose to do more than barely mention it I 〈◊〉 it not to mine to stray from the Papers I 〈◊〉 In the process of his Discourse he would 〈◊〉 the ordinary Power of the Keys out of the 〈◊〉 and shall with all my heart so he remove it not out of the Church For since it was with the 〈◊〉 given only to her I do not see what 〈…〉 Title there can be to it but 〈…〉 Her He is by his good favour 〈…〉 removing Miraculous Power out of the 〈…〉 God who slights not the Roman 〈…〉 so much as he continues 〈…〉 her And would he be content to 〈…〉 〈◊〉 on Miracles I would be content to undertake the Proof But alas I fear there needs a Miracle to make People willing that Differences of Religion should have any Issue He would have it question'd What part of the Promise of the Infallible Spirit was to expire with the Apostles what to be continued to the Church in all Ages And how f● r that Promise extends Strange Questions for Christians to dispute after they have been answer'd by Christ himself When Christ has extended the Assistance of that Spirit to All his Doctrine and All Time for us to ask which part of that Assistance shall cease or to 〈◊〉 is to ask Which is the Part of Christ's Promise which he will not perform Neither indeed are these Questions with his Distinction between Sin and Errour and subtle Speculations upon it for any thing but to bring in Deposing Doctrine a Com● on-place bang'd in every Book of late It is a Theme than which as much as it is 〈◊〉 upon I do not think a worse can be taken 〈◊〉 an Invective against Infallible Assistance pick a● d chuse through the whole Bundle When I con●●● er what has past and reflect there wanted neither Power nor Propension in Men and nevertheless that the Persuasions about Deposing were never settled as those in other Matters which displease the Answerer what he takes for an Argument against Infallible ●●●● tance I take for a strong Argument for it For 〈◊〉 else could be the Cause of that Effect but that 〈◊〉 Power even of willing Men was directed by an 〈◊〉 Assistance of the Divine Spirit He may 〈…〉 shew he pleases with the Errours of 〈◊〉 who will not reflect they never exercis'd the Power of Church-Guid●● upon 〈◊〉 Errours or in his Language so as to 〈…〉 which yet he knows very well no Council of 〈◊〉 he had in his eye ever did As the Church
therefore wish'd People in stead of floating uncertainly up and down in the Ocean of Disputes to take Port in that one Church which Christ has upon Earth and to which Power was given to govern us in Matters of Faith and a promise of perpetual assistance Which Church he says is vibsily the Roman Catholic The Answerer flatly denies the Roman Catholic to be the one Church of Christ for Reasons ever since St. Cyprians Days condemn'd by all Christians and never minds that he denies two terms the same with a third to be the same between themselves For Church of Christ and Catholic Church are the same both signifying all the particular Churches which believe the Doctrine of Christ. Again Roman Catholic is the same too with Catholic for both signifie likewise all the same Churches with the Roman for one of the number which the Answerer acknowledges she is Catholic says All and who says All says Roman if she be one And who says Roman Catholic says those very All neither more nor less And yet the Answerer can fancy a difference For the rest he gives no direct Answer that I remember to any one Question yet hovers so about it that one must keep his thoughts very attentive not to have them diverted quite another way As for Certainty or Uncertainty they are Matters which he seems not to mind Not but that he talks of a sure Compass and Infallible Rule but he never tells us whether or how a Man shall be sure that he do's indeed steer by that Compass or is guided by that Rule Those great sounds vanish into Conscience at last and that Conscience may be right or wrong for any care he takes as perhaps he thinks it equal whether the one or the other The King desired People should have sure hold and shews them where they may He is only solicitous to keep them from fastning there and leaves them to find another if they can of themselves or be content if they will without any If he have a Pique to the Roman Catholic he may shew them another Catholic Church or if a Church be needless on what they may rest securely without a Church If on Scripture he may shew them how they may safely stake their Souls that they do not mistake it If on Conscience how they may securely trust it Let People be but safe and I ask no more But as there is after all but one way to Heaven the King shews it and he imputes deceit to him for his pains and then sets up for the faithful Friend himself who will neither let them go that way nor shew them that there is any other And thus it stands between them It is for the Reader to consider which of the two gives him better Counsel and where he can find better Security than what His Majesty offers or whether Security be needless One would think is not like to take up much Consideration in our Country whether in a concern of infinite more value than all the Money which troubles so many Lawyers and Scriveners one should deal without looking after Security And yet by whatever charm it happens there needs a great deal of Grace to make People sensible in this Case of what in all others they are but too much their greatest concerns God of his Mercy grant it to all who ask it and to all who by not asking it shew they more need it A DEFENCE OF THE Third Paper I Dare appeal to all unprejudic'd Readers and especially to those who have any sense of Piety whether upon perusal of the Paper written by Her late Highness the Duchess they have not found in it somewhat which touch'd them to the very Soul whether they did not plainly and perfectly discern in it the Spirit of Meekness Devotion and Sincerity which animates the whole Discourse and whether the Reader be not satisfied that she who writ it has open'd her Heart without disguise so as not to leave a Scruple that she was not in earnest I am sure I can say for my own particular that when I read it first in Manuscript I could not but consider it as a Discourse extremely moving plain without Artifice and discovering the Piety of the Soul from which it flow'd Truth has a Language to it self which 't is impossible for Hypocrisie to imitate Dissimulation could never write so warmly nor with so much life What less than the Spirit of Primitive Christianity could have dictated her Words The loss of Friends of worldly Honours and Esteem the Defamation of ill Tongues and the Reproach of the Cross all these though not without the struglings of Flesh and Blood were surmounted by her as if the Saying of our Saviour were always sounding in her Ears What will it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his Soul I think I have amplified nothing in relation either to this Pious Lady or her Discourse I am sure I need not And now let any unbias'd and indifferent Reader compare the Spirit of the Answerer with hers Do's there not manifestly appear in him a quite different Character Need the Reader be inform'd that he is disingenuous soul-mouth'd and shuffling and that not being able to answer plain Matter of Fact he endeavours to evade it by Suppositions Circumstances and Conjectures like a cunning Barreter of Law who is to manage a sinking Cause the Dishonesty of which he cannot otherwise support than by defaming his Adversary Her only Business is to satisfie her Friends of the inward Workings of her Soul in order to her Conversion and by what Methods she quitted the Religion in which she was educated He on the contrary is not satisfied unless he question the Integrity of her Proceedings and the Truth of her plain Relation even so far as to blast what in him lies her Blessed Memory with the imputation of Forgery and Deceit as if she had given a false Account not only of the Passages in her Soul and the Agonies of a troubl'd Conscience only known to God and to her self but also of the Discourses which she had with others concerning those Disquiets Every where the Lie is to be cast upon her either directly in the Words of the Bishop of Winchester which he 〈◊〉 or indirectly in his own in which his spiteful Deligence is most remarkable In his Answer to the two former Papers there seems to have been some restraint upon the virulence of his Genius though even there he has manifestly past the Bounds of Decency and Respect But so soon as he has got loose from disputing with Crown'd Heads he shews himself in his pure Naturals and is as busie in raking up the Ashes of their next Relations as if they were no more of kin to the Crown than the New Church of England is to the Old Reformation of their Great-Grandfathers But God forbid that I should think the whole Episcopal Clergy of this Nation to be of his Latitudinarian Stamp many of them
against his Conscience in changing who had declar'd That he would not have chang'd in case he had been bred a Catholic And the Reason he gives is made of the same yielding Metal viz. That he had his Baptism in the Protestant Church for that Argument in it self is of no weight since the Right Reverend well knew that the Baptism even of Heretics is good so that if he had been Christn'd in the Lutheran the Abyssine or the Russian Church he must for that reason have continu'd in it But he timerously pleads his fear of giving Scandal which is as I said no Justification of himself no Dissuasive to Her but only a mean interessed Apology for his not changing As for his intimating That all things necessary to Salvation were to be had in the Church of England let any reasonable Man be Judge whether he could possibly have said less in defence of himself for continuing in it For this only shew'd that he thought Salvation was to be had in both Churches as even this Author himself is forc'd to confess afterwards in these words The utmost that can be made of this is That a certain Bishop of our Church who in the mean time has prov'd himself an uncertain one held both Churches so far Parts of the Catholic Church that there was no necessity of going from one Church to another That which he calls the utmost we can make of it is in truth the least which the Bishop's Words will naturally bear and I may safely put the Cause upon this Issue Whether such a Discourse might not reasonably add more to the desire she had to be a Catholic Let us hear now what he has to answer and I will reply briefly because I have taken away the Strength of his Argument already First He says in effect That the Bishops Authority and Example ought to have prevail'd with her on the one side more than his Concessions on the other I reply Not his Authority because he spoke more for the Church of Rome than against it Nor his Example for he gave her no encouragement to follow it by saying That if he had been bred a Catholic he would not have chang'd His Example of Praying daily for the Dead shew'd his Opinion at the bottom but his not publicly owning that he did so has prov'd him little better than a Black Bishop who was enter'd privately into the White ones Walk Our Author asks in the second place Why any Person should forsake the Communion of the Protestant Church wherein the Bishop affirm'd were all things necessary to Salvation And I enquire How she could be bound to believe him since Confession and Prayers for the Dead are wanting in it one of which he had before acknowledg'd to be commanded of God the other to be one of the ancient things in Christianity Thirdly He urges That the Bishop had told her it was an ill thing to leave the Church of England And I reply That the Answerer has falsified his Words The Bishop only thought it very ill to give that Scandal as to leave the Church wherein he was Baptiz'd First he spoke of himself only not of her Mark that Fallacy And then he said not It was ill to leave the Church but very ill to give that Scandal as to leave the Church relating again to his own particular Fourthly He says 'T is evident that the Bishops Concessions could have no influence upon her tho' she positively says those Discourses in which were those Concessions did but add more to the desire she had to be a Catholic This is full upon the Vizor but the Dead are to take all things patiently Well! How if he can convince her of Falsity from her own Words Why then he will carry his Argument as well as his Good Manners to the height and how broad soever the Word may be which he has slily given her yet he will tell you That Freedom ought to be permitted him as sustaining the Honour of the Church of England His Argument is this She declares afterwards That she would not have chang'd if she had thought it possible otherwise to have saved her Soul But the Bishop had told her That all things necessary for Salvation were in the English Church Therefore the Bishop contributed nothing to her Change So the Miter be safe in its Reputation no matter what becomes of the Ducal Coronet Now I can be very well content that the Bishop should have no part in the Honour of her Conversion for 't is plain that he desir'd it not and why should he do good against his will I wish my Author would have furnish'd me with an Argument to have brought him wholly off but I will bring him on his way as far as by the help of the Answerer's Scarf I can fairly drag him I say therefore That tho' her Highness chang'd not her Belief upon the Concessions of the Bishop yet his Concessions were an occasion of her farther Scruples in order to her Change For she says they added to the desire she had to be a Catholic The Bishop did indeed tell her That all things necessary to Salvation were in the English Church but tell me Sir I beseech you was that all he told her By your favour you have left out the better half of what he said for he told her also That if he had been bred a Catholic he would not have chang'd And she had reason to believe what he said to the advantage of a Church of which he was no Member as being sure he would say no more than scanty Truth And he acknowledges into the Bargain That Confession was commanded of God and that Praying for the Dead was one of the ancient things in Christianity What a shameful way of arguing is this to make a general Negative Conclusion from half the Premises Or in other Words to maintain that the Bishops Concessions could have no influence upon her because they had not the greatest influence And you in a manner confess it before you were aware in the close of your Argument where you say There must therefore have been some more secret Reason which increas'd her desire to be a Catholic after these Discourses Now some more secret Reason do's not hinder the Bishops Concessions from being one nay it argues that they were one of the Reasons though not the most prevalent because there was one more secret You have now contradicted your self so plainly that you have wholly justified the Duchess and the broad Word without naming it is fairly brought back to your own door After this our Answerer do's but piddle and play at small Game as if her Highness might possibly take encouragement from the Bishop's calling the Church of Rome the Catholic Religion But she was too much in earnest to lay hold upon a Word Neither is more advantage to be taken from his calling the Church of Rome the Catholic Religion than we receive disadvantage from the playing upon