Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
truth_n ancient_a church_n true_a 2,421 5 5.1957 4 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
A26931 Full and easie satisfaction which is the true and safe religion in a conference between D. a doubter, P. a papist, and R. a reformed Catholick Christian : in four parts ... / by Richard Baxter. Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691. 1674 (1674) Wing B1272; ESTC R15922 117,933 211

There are 9 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

When you come to prove us heretical denyers of any of its essence we will give you a sufficient answer The twelfth Principle That the Essence of our Religion or Christianity as Active and Saving is Faith that worketh by Love Or such a Belief in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost as is accompanied with a true devoting of our selves to him by Love and willingness to obey his Laws so far as we know them in opposition to the temptations of the world the flesh and the Devil And he that is truly such shall be saved P. I grant that he that truly Loveth God shall be saved But a Protestant cannot truly love God because he hath not true faith R. Do you not agree and confess then that If any Protestants do truly Love God and are sincerely willing to obey his will and to know it that they may obey it such are of the true Religion and shall be saved and that popery which denyeth their salvation is false P. If your false supposition were true these false consequents would be true But you are all deceived when you think that you sincerely Love God and are willing to know and do his will R. 1. Let all Protestants note this first that you grant that none but ☞ falshearted Hypocrites that are not what they profess to be and Love not God nor would obey him should turn Papists 2. And if a man cannot know his own Mind and Will what he Loveth and what he is willing of no not about his End and greatest concernments how can he know when he Believeth aright Why do you trouble the world thus with your noise about Believing the Proposals of your Church if a man cannot know whether he believe or not ☞ And he that cannot know what he Willeth Chooseth or Loveth can no more know what he believeth For the Acts of the Will are more plenary and easily perceived And do all Papists know their own Hearts or Minds but no Protestants What would you expect but indignation and derision by such arguing as this if you will go about the world and tell men You none of you know your own Minds and wills but we know them You think you Love God and are willing to obey him but you are all mistaken it is not so with you but you must believe our Pope and his Council and then you may know your own minds and hearts They that believe you on these rates deserve the deceit of believing you and punish themselves The thirteenth Principle That when Christ described all the Essence of Christianity by our Believing in and being baptized into the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost the Apostles and first Pastors of the Churches instructed people to understand the meaning of these three Articles And the ancient Creed called the Apostles is the exposition of them as to Belief And that this Creed was of old the symbol of the true faith by which men were supposed sufficiently qualified for baptism and distinguished from Hereticks which after was enlarged by occasion of heresies to the Nicene and Constantinopolitane Creed To which that called Athanasius's was added as a fuller explication of the doctrine of the Trinity And he that believed all these was taken for one of the true Christian Religion which was sufficient in suo genere to salvation P. All that was then Necessary to be explicitely believed necessitate medii was expressed in the Creeds if not more But not all that is now necessary when the Church hath proposed more R. 1. Some of you say no more is necessary ut medium but to believe that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him Others say that the chief articles of the Creed also are commonly necessary And in your discord we lay no great weight on your Opinions 2. But is not Christianity the same Thing now as it was at the beginning Is Baptism altered Hath not a Christian now the same definition as then Are not Christs promises and the Conditions the same Shall not he that was a Christian then be saved if he were now alive May not we be Christians and saved by the same Constitutive Causes which made men Christians and saved them in the primitive Churches Subvert not Christianity and confound not the Church and cheat not poor souls by labouring to hide the essence of Christianity and such plain important truths You cannot deny our faith to be true without condemning the ancient Church and Christianity it self While we aloud profess that the Christian faith explained in all the ancient Creeds is the faith which we own in its Essentials explicated The fourteenth Principle That the Books which the Protestants commonly receive as Canonical Scriptures are in the agreeing Original Copies as to the very words and in true Translations as to the sence the most true Infallible word of God R. I grant that where the Copies disagree by various Readings we are no more sure that any of them is the word of God than we are sure that such a Copy is righter than all that differ from it But as long as the essence of Christianity on which our Salvation is laid is in the Covenant of Grace explained in Credondis in the Creed and in Petendis in the Lords Prayer and in Agendis in the Decalogue as explained by Christ And no one Duty or material doctrine of our Religion dependeth on the various Lections but those texts that Agree are sufficient to establish them all yea as Franc. à Sancta Clara system fid professeth the ordinary Translations so agree as that no material point of Religion doth depend on any of their differences It is as much as we assert that the Agreeing Original Copies and the sound-Translations so far as they are such are the True Infallible word of God the former both as to words and sence and the later as to sence alone Do you not grant this P. We grant the Scripture as you say to be Gods Infallible word But 1. You cannot know it to be so because you take it not on the Roman Churches Authoritative Proposal 2. And you leave out part of it R. 1. Whether we can know it shall be tryed in due place 2. And whether we have All of it or enough is another question to be debated when you will You grant us expresly that which we now desire which is the Infallible Truth of our Canonical Scripture And this is All our Religion containing not only the Essentials but all the Integrals and Accidentals needful to be recorded So that All the Protestants Religion is confessed to be Infallibly True And from hence further note that in all our disputes you are obliged to be the defendants as to Truth For we deny the Truth of much of your Religion but you deny not the Truth of one word of ours but only the Plenitude or Sufficiency P. The name of a Protestant was never known till Luthers
your practice take God for your God even for your All and Christ for your Teacher King and Saviour and the Holy Ghost for your Sanctifier turning in heart and life from the Devil the world and the sinful pleasures of the flesh This is the question which I desire you to answer But I will prevent your answer lest you mistake my purpose and think I make my self your Confessour and I will tell you why I ask the question Either you have thus Kept your Baptismal Vow by a Godly life or else you have broken it by worldliness and sensuality c. If you have kept it and are a truly Godly person you have resolved your own doubt and absolutely confuted Popery already For no honest man and true Christian can possibly turn Papist without gross contradiction D. How prove you that R. Most easily I pray you do but mark 1. It is their principal Doctrine that the Pope is the Head of the Universal Church on earth and that the Church subjected to him is the Universal Church and that out of that Church there is no salvation and that no one is a true member of Christ and his Church who is not a subject of the Pope 2. And they all confess that every one shall be saved that is a true Christian and keepeth his Baptismal Covenant and that Loveth God above all So that they must needs hold that none in the world but Papists do truly Love God keep that Covenant and are true Christians Now if you can know that you have the true Love of God and are true to your Baptism you must needs confess that Popery is false which saith that none Love God above all but Papists D. But what if I have not Loved God and obeyed him above my flesh R. I 'le tell you what followeth 1. It is no wonder if you forsake the Protestants Religion who never truly entertained it If your Heart and Life were not devoted unfeignedly to God you were no true Christian nor indeed had any true Religion at all And he that hath no Religion turneth from none which he truly had If you were never a true Christian you were never a true Protestant And then what wonder if you turn Papist For you have no experimental Knowledge of that Religion which you seem to forsake 2. And how could you expect better but that God should penally forsake you and give you over to believe deceits if you have dealt so falsly and deceitfully with him as to live to the world and flesh which you renounced and neglect that God and Saviour and sanctifier to whom you were so solemnly devoted And if you have been so treacherous and unwise as to prefer a bruitish transitory pleasure before Gods Love and the Joyes of Heaven 3. And what honour is it to the Church of Rome that none but Infidels and false-hearted hypocrites and perfidious breakers of their Covenant with God did ever turn to them If you turn Papist you confess that you were a wicked hypocrite before 4. But the chief thing which I would tell you is that turn up and down as oft as you will to this Church or that Church to this side or that side you will never be saved unless you become a holy serious mortified Christian As long as you love pleasures wealth and honour more than God and Holiness and Heaven you shall never be saved whether you be Papist or a professed Protestant It would make the heart of a Christian ake to see so many thousands cheated by the Devil to take this opinion or that opinion called the true faith and this side or that side called the true Church to be to them instead of a holy heavenly heart and life And how many thousands especially Papists that are truly of no Religion do dispute and plot and disquiet the world as for Religion To hear a prophane man swear that his Religion is right or that man to think to be saved for being of the true Church and faith whose heart was never set on Heaven but liveth in drunkenness lying idleness fornication and thinketh that the Priests absolution sets all right again Without true Holiness no man shall be saved what Church soever he joyn with and with it no man shall be damned For God cannot hate them that have his nature and Image D. Well sir I came not to dispute with you but to desire you to meet a Roman Catholick Priest that I may hear you both together R. I have the greater hopes of you because you have so much regard of your soul as to be willing to hear what can be said For most that turn to them never come to an impartial tryal but rashly follow the deceiver or stay till they are secretly hardened by false insinuations and then take on them to desire to hear both when they are first resolved to be gone But you must tell me what is the question that you desire should be disputed D. I would know whether the Papists or the Protestants be the True and safe Religion R. I undertake to give you that plain undenyable evidence for your resolution which should fully satisfie any reasonable man at least that professeth himself a Christian so be it you will perform these reasonable conditions 1. That you will be impartially willing to know the truth 2. That you will honestly resolve to Live according to it when you know it and to be True to the True Religion 3. That you will bring such a man to confer with me who will yield to the Reasonable Conditions of a disputant such as your Doubt and the nature of the matter doth notoriously require and not a Knave and studied Deceiver who will set himself purposely to hide the truth D. These conditions are so reasonable that I must not deny them CHAP. II. The Conditions of the Conference between a P. and R. and D. R. SIR I am desired by this person who is brought by some of you to doubt of our Religion to debate this Case with you in order to his satisfaction Whether the Papists or the Protestants be the True and Safe Religion P. That is too large a Question We cannot dispute of all our Religion at once I will begin with you about some one of the Articles of the Church of England or the Visibility of your Church in all Ages or the Resolution of your faith c. And this I will do only on these conditions 1. That you bring some express Text of Scripture which without your Interpretation Reasonings or Consequences doth assert that Article of yours which I shall accuse or contradict any Article of our faith which shall be questioned 2. Or if you will go from the express words to Reasoning that we keep to the strictest Rules of Logick and that you use nothing but Syllogism and that all be done in writing and not by word of mouth R. Neighbour D. you promised me to bring another kind of Disputant
You hear his conditions you shall hear my answer 1. The Case which you told me you were in doubt of and desired satisfaction in was Which is the True and Safe Religion This he refuseth to Dispute Pretending that we cannot dispute of our whole Religion at once But did you never hear him give any Reasons against our Religion If he have Why can he not do it now I expect not all in a word but let him give them one by one and say his worst I am sure I can give you many against theirs And we will after debate them particularly as largely as you please 2. If Writing be it that you desire for your satisfaction I ask you whether you have read all or the fourth part of what is written against Popery already Have you read Dr. Challoner of the Catholick Church Dr. White Dr. Field Dr. Downame of Antichrist Chillingworth Dr. Abbot Dr. Willet Bishop Vsher Bishop Morton Dr. Stillingfleet and an hundred more Why should I expect that you should read what I shall write if you will not read what 's written already 3. Can you stay so long unresolved without injury to your soul till he and I have done writing You cannot but know that from Sheets we must proceed to the writing of Volumes in answering each other as others have done And this is like to be many years work for men that have other business And how know you that we shall all Live so long 4. Are you able when it cometh to tedious Volumes to examine them and find who is in the right Or will you not rather take him to conquer who hath the last word And it 's like that will be the longest liver 5. And as to a strict syllogistical form do you understand that best I avoid it not but shall consent to use it as far as you understand it Do you know all the Logical forms of arguing all Moods and Figures and all the fallacies Or do you not perceive that you have broken your promise with me and brought a friend of darkness who cometh purposely to hide the truth D. I must needs profess that the Question which I would have debated is Which is the True and Safe Religion And that it is not tedious writings nor long delayes but present conference which must satisfie me And that it is plain Scripture and Reason that must satisfie me who understand not Logick I pray let me hear your own Conditions which you think more just R. The Conditions which the nature of the Cause directeth us to are these I. That we first truly state the question to be disputed For we cannot dispute till we are agreed of what That is 1. That we agree what we mean by our Religion and 2. That I tell you what is the Religion of Protestants which I undertake to defend And that he tell us what is the Religion of the Romanists which must be compared with it II. That our Conference consist of these several parts 1. That premising the principles in which we are agreed I tell you the Reasons why you should not be a Papist 2. That he tell you the Reasons why you should turn Papist or what he hath against Our Religion 3. That then we come to dispute these Reasons distinctly where I will prove my charges against them and he shall prove his charges against us one by one III. And that in all our disputes we shall consent 1. Not to interrupt each other in speech but if the length seem to overmatch the hearers memory we will take brief Notes to help our memories as we go and crave the recitation of what shall be forgotten For the strength of Truth lyeth so much in the connexion of its parts that when it is mangled into scraps by uncivil interruptions it is deformed and debilitated and cannot be well understood 2. That we bind our selves by solemn promise to speak nothing which we unfeignedly judge not to be truth nor any thing designedly to hide or resist the truth which we discern These terms are so just and necessary that I will avoid him as a fraudulent wrangler who will deny them For I come not to scold nor to try who hath the strongest Lungs the nimblest Tongue or the lowdest voice or the greatest confidence or fiercest passion but to try who hath the truth and which is the true way to Heaven For the servant of the Lord must not strive especially about words and barren notions for that doth but tend to increase ungodliness D. Your Method is so reasonable and so suited to my own necessity that I must profess no other can so much tend to my satisfaction And therefore I hope it will not be refused Here after long opposition the P. at last agreeth to these terms CHAP. III. What is the Religion of the Protestants R. I. THe word Religion is sometimes taken Objectively And so I mean by it The objects of Religious Belief Love and Practice which are 1. The Things themselves which are the principal objects called by Logicians The Incomplex terms 2. The organical object or the Revelation of these Things containing 1. The Words or other Signs 2. The sense or notions signified For instance Matth. 17.5 This is my Beloved son in whom I am well pleased Here 1. The Real Incomplex object is Christ Himself the beloved Son of God and God the Fathers well-pleasedness in him 2. The signal part of the organical object or Revelation is the Words themselves as spoken then and written now 3. The signified notions are the Meaning of the words and are the chief part of the organical object that is the Divine Revelation The word Religion is of larger extent in its sense than Faith For it containeth all that Revelation which God hath made Necessary to salvation which is twofold 1. That which is to inform the understanding with necessary knowledge and faith 2. That which is necessary to a Holy Will and a Holy Life to the Love of God and man and to well doing which are Precepts Promises and Threatnings II. The word Religion is oft taken also subjectively as they speak For the Acts and habits of Love and Obedience Now I suppose we are agreed that it is not Religion in this last sense that we are to dispute of which is as divers as persons are But it is that which we call Objective Religion even the Organical part directly And if by all this D. understandeth us not in plainer words our Question is Of the True Divine Revelation viz. Which is the True Rule of Faith Will and Practice that which is held to be such by the Protestants or that which is held to be such by the Papists P. I grant you that this is the state of the Question R. I here declare to you then What is the Religion of the Protestants IT IS THE LIGHT and LAW OF GOD CONCERNING HOLY KNOWLEDGE and BELIEF HOLY WILL and PRACTICE CONTAINED IN NATURE and THE
are less doubtful and resolved into a conceded Principle PART II. The Principles which Papists and Protestants are agreed in And therein the full ●ustification of all the Protestants Religion THe first common Principle That we are Men having Reason and Free-will and Sense whose Natural way of knowing things sensible is by the perception of our senses having no way of greater Certainty R. I take it for a common principle that we are Men having Reason and Free-will and Sense whose natural way of Knowing things sensible is by the perception of our senses And therefore that our rightly constituted or sound senses with their due media about their proper objects are to be trusted being either certain or we have no certainty P. I know what you intend I grant it as you express it R. It must then be granted us that there is true Bread and Wine in substance remaining after the words of the Mass-Priests consecration P. Yes When you can prove that the consecrated Bread and Wine are the proper objects of sense which we deny they being not now Bread and Wine R. Is it by the Perception of sense that you deny it or by other means P. No It is by Faith and Reason which are above Sense R. Now you come to deny the Principle which you granted Sense is the perceiver of its own objects No Faith no Reason can perceive them but by sense And if due sensation perceive them and Faith deny them then Faith denyeth sense to be the proper natural perceiver of its objects and our judgement of things sensible to be such as must follow that perception But we must dispute of this anon and will not now anticipate it Only remember that if you deny sense which is the first Principle no mortal man is capable of disputing with you there being no lower principle to which we can have recourse and resolve our differences The second Principle That there is One only God Infinite in Being Power Wisdom and Goodness Our Owner Ruler and Chief Good Most Holy Just and True and therefore cannot lye but is absolutely to be believed and trusted and loved R. I need not repeat it Do you not Agree with us in this P. Yes Heathens that are sober and Christians are agreed in it R. You grant then that this may be known by them that are no subjects of the Pope Remember anon that we are not to be blamed for Believing God The third Principle That the whole frame of Nature within us and without us within our reach is the signal Revelation of God and his Will to man called Objectively The Light and Law of Nature R. I suppose that this also may pass for a common granted Principle P. Yes as you express it If we agree not of the Light and Law of Nature we come short of Infidels and meer Natural men R. Observe then that we are Justified by your principles for Believing and Trusting Gods Natural Revelation The very first part of which is made to our senses By Natural Evidence God sheweth us that Bread is Bread P. Yes when sense is sound and objects and media just and God doth not contradict sense by supernatural Revelation The fourth Principle That Natural Revelation is before supernatural and sense before faith and we are Men in order of Nature at least before we are Christians and the former is still presupposed to the later R. This also I suppose is a granted Principle P. It is so But see that you raise no false consequents from it R. I conclude from it that He that denyeth the perception of sense to be the certain way of Judging of things sensible denyeth all the Certainty of faith and subverteth the very foundations of it And that we are justified for our Assenting first to Gods Natural Revelations It is God that made my senses and understanding and God that made the object and media as Bread and Wine and therefore God deceiveth me if I be deceived in taking it for Bread and Wine after Consecration But God is to be believed in his first Revelations P. You vainly call Sensation and Intellection or Knowledge of things sensible by the name of Believing R. We will not vainly contend about the Name if we agree of the Thing But this leadeth me to another Principle The fifth Principle That the Knowledge of things fully sensible hath more quieting satisfying Evidence than our Belief of supernatural Revelations alone as made to us by a Prophet or Apostle And that where all the sound senses of all men living do agree about their near and proper sensible object there is the most satisfying Evidence of all R. I suppose that we are all agreed also in this principle P. As you word it we are For our Divines distinguish of Evidence and Certainty and are so far from saying that Faith hath more Evidence than Sense and Knowledge that it is ordinary with them to say that this is the difference between Faith and Knowledge and that faith hath not Evidence but yet it hath no less certainty R. Some men use words first to sport themselves out of their understandings and then to use others to the same game Evidence is nothing but the Perceptibility or Cognoscibility of a thing by which we call it Knowable which is the Immediate necessary qualification of an Object of Knowledge Certainty is either Objective which is nothing but this same Cognoscibility or Evidence as in a satisfying degree Or it is Subjective or Active which is nothing but the Infallible or True and quieting satisfactory knowledge of a Truth Where the Certainty of Object and Act concurr For no man can be certain of a lye or untruth For to be Certain is to be certain that it is True Those therefore would befool the world who would perswade men that a clear and confident perception of an untruth or confident error is Certainty There may be Objective Truth and Certainty of the Matter where there is not in us an Active or Subjective Certain Knowledge of it But there can be no Active Certainty of an Objective Vncertainty or certain Knowledge of a lye Now if you mean that faith hath Objective Certainty without Evidence of Certainty or Ascertaining Evidence that is but to say and unsay It hath Certainty and no Certainty For this Certainty and Evidence is all one But if you mean that Faith hath an Active Subjective Certainty without an Objective Certainty in the Matter you speak an impossibility and contradiction as if you said I clearly see a thing invisible or without light P. Do you think that our Divines knew not what they said when they say that to believe without Evidence maketh faith meritorious R. The old asserters of this meant the same that Christ meant when he saith to Thomas Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed There is a sensible Evidence and an Intelligible Evidence Faith hath not an Immediate sensible Evidence that is we believe
including Godliness which is its final part R. By Christianity I mean both our Believing Loving and obeying Christ as the way to the Father and our Believing Loving and Obeying God our Father as the end of Christs Mediation The Knowledge of God and the Mediator being Eternal Life Joh. 17.3 And as Taking a man for my Physicion is taking him by his medicines to help me to my health and so Health is finally included so taking Christ for my Saviour is to take him by faith to be the means of bringing me to the Love of God and to Glory And so I include Godliness in Christianity and the Law of Nature in the Law of Grace P. We are agreed on the truth of this but not of the medium by which it must be made known to us R. At the present I ask no more than that we agree in Christianity as the true and sufficient Religion and way to life The tenth Principle That Baptizing is our Christening And that all that are truly Baptized are Christians and members of the visible Church untill they Apostatize or are justly excommunicate at least P. I grant you all this as a common Principle with Christians R. Then you grant us 1. That our Religion is the True Religion of Gods appointment sufficient to salvation For it is Christianity which you confessed to be such 2. You grant that we are baptized into the true Catholick Church which is the body of Christ The eleventh Principle That all that are truly Baptized have the pardon of all their sins and have present right to salvation if they so die R. I mean that they that are Internally true Consenters to the baptismal Covenant and are baptized have all these benefits of Baptism And that Infants have them as rightly dedicated to God and baptized Do not you Consent to this P. Yes you know we do R. Then you fully grant that all among the Protestants who in Infancy or at age are truly baptized are in a state of salvation Why then would you make people believe that there is no salvation in our Churches when you grant the right to all that are Baptized P. But you are not Baptized by lawful Ministers R. Take heed what you say Your party holdeth that even Schismaticks and Hereticks Baptism is valid if they have all that is essential to Baptizing in the doing of it Yea that a lay mans or womans baptizing is valid If you deny it I will shame you by producing the common consent of your Doctors and your censure of Cyprian and making the contrary doctrine to be a Heresie P. But you have not all that is essential to Baptism because you are not intentionally Baptized into the true Catholick Roman Church For while you are not subject to the Pope you are not baptized into the Church and therefore Bellarmine sheweth that indirectly we are obliged to the Pope by baptism which you intend not R. Come come strive not against your knowledge 1. If our Baptism have not all that is essential why do you never rebaptize Protestants when they turn to you Do you not find that you condemn your selves 2. Why do not you your selves put the name of the Pope into your words of baptism 3. Doth your Tradition tell you that the ancient Churches did baptize men into a subjection to the Pope 4. Did any of the Primitive Christians baptize men into the name or subjection of Peter or any Apostle 5. Doth not Paul expresly renounce it as to himself and Peter 1 Cor. 1.12 13 14 15. Every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollo and I of Cephas and I of Christ Is Christ divided Was Paul Crucified for you or were ye baptized in the name of Paul c. 6. Did not Christ himself tell us all that was Essential to baptism in his institution Matth. 28 without making any mention of Peter or the Pope P. I cannot deny but our doctrine inferreth that all that are baptized among you have a true Sacrament but not the Benefit of it and so are not in a state of pardon and salvation Or at least when you come to age by refusing the Pope you turn Hereticks and lose it R. I know some of your divided writers say that we have Sacramentum but not Rem Sacramenti But 1. You say that a Character is imprinted by Baptism and all sin done away and the person in a state of life unless he come feignedly which you will not charge on Infants nor can you prove it by those of the Anabaptists themselves that are baptized at age And saith Aquinas when the fiction ceaseth the fruits of baptism are obtained 2. And it will be long ere you will prove that to be baptized into the name of the Trinity is uneffectual if we leave out the Pope 3. And you will hardly make a man understand what you mean by the validity of the Baptism of Hereticks and Schismaticks if it neither take the Baptized into the true Visible Church nor the invisible or a state of saving grace And as to Infants losing it as you say at age by Heresie 1. Will you save all the Anabaptists that are baptized at age If their baptism put them into a state of salvation and they continue just of the same faith and mind that they were baptized in sure that faith which put them in a state of salvation will keep them in it or not be damning through defectiveness to morrow which made them heirs of Heaven to day But you cannot make your doctrines hang together 2. And they that are Baptized in Infancy are baptized into the same faith which they continue in at age The Minister intendeth no other The Parents Sponsors c. intend no other And will that prove defective even to Salvation after which was saving then 3. If Baptism make us Christians and if Christianity be the true Religion sufficient in suo genere to salvation then we that continue in the Christianity which we were baptized into by your confession continue in the true saving Religion And this is all our Religion P. It is not every one that owneth Christianity that shall be saved Hereticks own it in general and yet contradict it by their Heresies R. It is every one that truly owneth Christianity in mind and will that shall be saved else Christianity were not a saving sufficient Religion The question is not whether objective Christianity or faith be sufficient to save him that believeth not or is not subjectively a Christian nor whether the doctrine of faith be sufficient in omni genere But whether it be a sufficient doctrine or ob●ective faith in suo genere If a Heretick deny any essential part of it he believeth not that which he really understandingly and prevalently denyeth It is but the Name of Christianity and not the Thing which he owneth who disowneth any of the essence Our question is now whether our professed objective Faith be true and sufficient
time And the occasion of it was a particular Protestation of the German Princes and not directly a Protesting against Popery R. It is not Names but Religion which we dispute of And it is that which each party Professeth to be their Religion Therefore you must take our Profession or you change the subject of the dispute And we profess that the Law of Nature which no sober man questioneth and the Scriptures are All our Religion Therefore if you please you shall suppose that the name Protestant were not now in the world It doth not signifie our Religion But we now use it to signifie our Protesting against Popery or that we agree in substance and in rejecting Popery with those that made that particular Protestation mentioned by you Names are oft given from accidents as Africanus Germanicus Britannicus c. to several Roman Captains when yet their Humanity was the same before they were so named P. Turks Socinians Quakers c. Protest against Popery It seems then they are Protestants too and your companions R. 1. Thus some men study to deceive by turning from the question to another Our question I tell you is Whether the Religion of the Protestants be Infallible and not Whence is their name 2. But by a Protestant we mean only one that taketh the Scripture for the Rule and Christianity for the Essence of his Religion Which no one doth that denyeth any essential part of it If we do so prove it and you shall have our answer How do you judge of any man among your selves that taketh Gods word proposed by your Church for his Religion and yet mistaketh the Church in any point As Durandus that thought the matter of Bread continues whom Bellarmine yet denyeth to be an Heretick So is it with any among us that mistake the sence of Scripture in some such point When a Name is put upon any person or party from a common accident you may if you will call all by that name which that accident agreeth to And so Papists are called by some Non-conformists now in England because they Conform not But the world knoweth well enough that it is Protestants which are commonly meant by that name and not Papists Quakers Seekers c. though these conform not And so you may say if it please your self that Turks Jews Heathens Socinians Quakers Ran●ers are Protestants because they Protest against or reject Popery But the world knoweth who is meant by the Name Even Christians rejecting proper Popery And for my part I deal openly with you I care not if the name Protestant were utterly cast aside If any man be so deceived by it as 1. Either to think that it signifieth the Essence of our Religion unless you mean as we Protest for Christianity 2. Or that we take those called Protestants for the whole Catholick Church they make it an occasion of their own deceit Names of distinction are used because men know not else readily how to speak intelligibly of one another without circumlocutions And then cometh the Sectarian and taketh his Party for all the Church at least which he may lawfully Communicate with and the name of his party to notifie his Religion And then comes the crafty Papist and pretends from hence that such a named Religion is new and asketh you where was there any e. g. Protestants before Luther My Religion is naked Christianity the same as is where the name of a Protestant is not known and as was before it was known and as if the name of the Pope had never been known But now the Pope and his Monarchical Vsurpation over all the world are risen and known I am one of those that protest against them as being against Christianity which is my Religion But so as to addict my self to the opinions of no man or party that opposeth them wholly and absolutely and beyond evidence of truth I take the Reformed Churches to be the soundest in the world But I take their Confessions to be all the Imperfect expressions of men and the Writings of Protestant Divines to be some more clear and sound and some more dark empty and less sound and in many things I differ from many of them Choose now whether you will call me a Protestant or not I tell you my Religion which is simple Christianity Names are at your own Will I could almost wish that there were no name known besides that of CHRISTIAN as notifying our faith and Religion in the Christian world Though as notifying Heresie and sin there must be proper names as in Rev. the name Nicolaitans is used Even the word Catholick had long a narrower sense in the Empire with many than I now own it in Though as it signifieth One that is of the Church Vniversal loveth Vniversally all true Christians and hath Communion with them in Faith Love and Hope so I like it and am A CATHOLICK CHRISTIAN I dispute for nothing else I perswade this person here in Doubt to nothing else but 1. To hold fast to true and meer Christianity 2. To Reject all in Popery or any other Sect that is Evidently against it 3. To suspend his belief of all that 's doubtful and to receive nothing as a part of Divine faith or Religion till he be sure that indeed it is of God And now these Principles being supposed let us proceed and try whether Popery be of God or not PART III. The Protestants Reasons against Popery D. I Have heard what you have said in stating the Protestants Religion I now expect to hear what Reasons you have against that which you call Popery And afterwards that you prove all that you charge upon it But I adjure you first that you say nothing but what you believe in your conscience to be the truth as one that looketh to be judged for it R. With many Papists confident and vehement protestations go instead of Arguments and we oft hear them say If this be not true I am content to be torn in a thousand pieces We will seal it with our blood We will lay our salvation on it And do you think we have not souls to save c. Which is much like as if they would end all Controversies by laying Wagers that they are in the right or by protesting that they are honester and credibler men than their adversaries And it is no more than a Quaker or other such Sectary will say the most proud and ignorant being usually the most confident But yet though I expect not that you should receive any thing from me upon Protestations but upon Proofs I will here promise you that I will charge nothing on the Papists but what in my Conscience I am verily perswaded to be true The Reasons which resolve me against Popery are these and such like I. Reason Their Doctrine of Transubstantiation is so notoriously false and inhumane even contrary to the fullest ascertaining evidence that mankind can expect on earth viz. for all men on pain
if you make Gods own ordinary Natural Revelations or significations to be false how will you be able to disprove the Infidel about the rest 3. And then note that our Case is yet lower and plainer than all this For if the very Being of the Creatures which is the Matter of these Signs be uncertain to us and all our senses and minds deceived about it then we have no place for enquiry Whether this Creature be any sign of the mind of God As if the hearing of all men was deceived that thought they heard that voice This is my Beloved Son or Pauls that thought he heard Christ speak to him Saul Saul c. or if their Eyes and Intellects were deceived that thought they saw Christ and his miracles or that think now that they read the Bible and indeed there be no such thing as a Bible no such words c. then there is no room to enquire what they signifie For nothing hath no signification Truth and Goodness are affections or modes of Being And if we cannot by all our sound senses know the Being of things we can much less know that they are True or Good Therefore all knowledge and all faith and all Religion is overthrown by your denyal of the truth of our Senses and Intellects perception of things sensible Reason IV. And by this means you are not capable of being disputed with nor any Controversie between you and any others in the world of being decided while you deny sense For then you agree not with mankind in any one common principle And they that agree in nothing can dispute of nothing For this is the first principle Est vel non est is first to be agreed on before we can dispute any farther of a substance What will you do to confute an adversary but drive him to deny a certain principle And can you drive him to deny a lower fundamental Principle than the Being of a substance perceived by sense yea by all the sound senses of all men in the world Reason V. Yea it is specially to be noted that our difference is not only about the species of a sensible substance but about the very substance it self in genere Whether all our senses perceive any substance at all or not Suppose the question were Whether it be water or not which all mens senses see in Rivers If a Papist would deny it to be water doubtless he denyed the agreeing judgement of all mens Intellect by sense But if he should also say It is no substance which we call water or earth This were to deny the first Principle and most fundamental perception in nature Now that this is your case is undenyable For 1. You profess that Christs Body and Blood are not sensible there That it is not the quantity shape number colour smell weight c. of Christs Body and Blood which we perceive and that these Accidents are not the Accidents of Christ 2. And you believe that the Bread and Wine is gone that is changed into the body and blood of Christ so that no part of their substance matter or form is left And you put no third substance under these Accidents in the stead So that you maintain that it is the quantity of nothing the figure of nothing the colour the weight the scituation the smell the number c. of nothing which all mens Intellects by sense perceive So that the Controversie is Whether it be any substance at all which by those accidents we perceive And when we see handle taste smell it you believe or say you believe that it is none neither Bread or Wine or any other Now if by sense we cannot be sure of the very Being of a substance we can be sure of nothing in the world Reason VI. Yea it is to be noted that though Brutes have no Intellects yet their Sense and Imagination herein wholly agreeth with the common perception of man A Dog or a Mouse will eat the bread as common bread and a Swine will drink the Wine as common Wine and therefore have the same perception of it as of common bread and wine And so their senses must be all deceived as well as mans And Brutes have as accurate perfect senses as men have and some much more And meer natural operations are more certain and constant as we see by the worlds experience than meer Reason and Argumentation Birds and Beasts are constant in their perceptions and course of action being not left to the power of Mutable free-will Reason VII You hereby quite overthrow your own foundation which is fetcht from the Concord of all your party which you call all the Church You think that a General Council could not agree to any thing a● an Article of faith if it were not such when it is bu● the Major Vote that agree You say that Traditio● is Infallible because All the Church agreeth in i● when it is perhaps but your Sect which is a Mino● part But do you not overthrow all this when yo● profess that All the senses of all the sound men in th● world and all the simple perceptions of their Intellect● by sense do agree that there is substance yea d● specie Bread and Wine after the Consecration No on● mans perception by sense disagreed in this from th● institution of the Sacrament to this day that can be proved or the least probability of it given And i● this Concord be no proof much less is yours For 1. The Intellect in Reasoning is more fallible than i● its Immediate perception of things sensed or perceived by sense 2. Yours is but the Consent of some men but ours is the Consent of all mankind Yours among your selves hath oft in Councils a Minor part of dissenters who must be overvoted by the rest But our Case hath never one dissenting sense or perception Reason VIII By this denyal of sense you overthrow the foundations of Humane Converse How can men make any sure Contracts or perform any duty on a sure ground if the Concordant senses of all the world be false Parents cannot be sure which are their own Children nor Children which are their own Parents Husbands cannot certainly know their own Wives from their neighbours No Subjects can certainly know their own Prince No man can be sure whether he buy or sell receive money or pay it c. No man can be sure that there is a Pope or Priest or man in the world Reason IX You seem to me to Blaspheme God and to make him the greatest Deceiver of mankind even in his holy Worship Whereas God cannot lye It is impossible And the Devil is the Father of lyes And you make God to tell all the world as plainly as if words told them even by demonstration to their sight smell feeling taste that here is Bread and Wine when there is none yea that it is at least some substance which they perceive when it is none at all Reason X. You thus fain
seen the Priest and Action and Accidents are seen but no Miracle seen by any So that Aquinas concludeth 3. q. 76. a. 7 Though Christ be existent in this Sacrament per modum substantiae yet neither bodily eyes nor our Intellects can see him but by faith no nor the Intellect of an Angel can see him secundum sua naturalia nor do Devils see him but by faith nor the blessed but in the Divine Essence All these make these Miracles far more miraculous than the raising of Lazarus from the dead WHether all these are Miracles or most or many of them Contradictions and therefore Impossibilities I make no great matter of at this time I think it utterly needless to add any more to what is said in answer to such sayings as Aquinas's 3. q. 75. 76. and other Schoolmen that The senses are not deceived because there are the Accidents and the Intellect is by faith preserved from deception that the remaining accidents are in quantitate dimensiva quasi in subjecto that these Accidents can change an extrinsick body can be corrupted can generate Worms can nourish can be broken c. For all this at least confesseth that its all done by Miracle Though I will say 1. That they could scarce have chosen a more unhappy pro-subject of Accidents than Quantity nor have given more unhappy reasons for it than Aquinas doth q. 77. a. 2. c. 1. Because the sense perceiveth that it is Aliquid quantum that is coloured 2. Because Quantity is the first disposition of matter c. For this includeth matter and Aliquid quantum is a word that giveth away his Cause And no Accident is more the same with its subject than Quantity or moles extensiva 2. And he will be long before he will make or prove mans nature to be such as that his Intellect can judge of substances by Believing as incomplex objects before it have perceived them by sense and imagination When we see taste smell feel hear them the Intellect will suddenly and necessarily have some species or perception of the Thing before it come Logically to dispute from extrinsick media of Testimony What this thing is in a second notion And our question is Whether the Intellect in this first Perception be deceived or not If you discharge the Intellect from perceiving substances presently before it know them by second notions or Argument you will make man quite another thing than every hour and action tells us he is But what will not a man say when he sets himself only to study what to say for the making good of his undertaken Cause But my next work is to prove the Falshood of these pretended Miracles CHAP. V. The Minor proved viz. That these Miracles are false THat these are all but feigned Miracles I thus prove I. Because the holy Scriptures do plainly deny such an ordinariness or commonness of the gift of Miracles 1 Cor. 12.8 9 10 11. To one is given by the spirit the word of Wisdom to another the word of Knowledge by the same spirit to another faith by the same spirit to another the gifts of healing by the same spirit to another the working of miracles c. But all these worketh that one and the self same spirit dividing to every man severally as he will 28 29. And God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers after that miracles then gifts of healing helps Governments diversities of tongues Are all Apostles are all Prophets are all Teachers are all workers of Miracles Here it is most expresly told us that working Miracles is a peculiar gift of some and even in those times not common to all that were Priests But the Papists make it common to every Priest though a common Adulterer Drunkard Murderer or Heretick no one Priest in the world is without it II. Though some few that were workers of iniquity might have some such gifts Matth. 7. Yet that was so rare that Nature it self taught men to judge Miracles to be signs of divine approbation so that Nicodemus thence argueth Joh. 3.2 No man could do these Miracles that thou dost except God be with him And the man Joh. 9.31 God heareth not sinners but if any man be a Worshipper of God and doth his will him he heareth And the people vers 16. How can a man that is a sinner do such Miracles And it was Christs own proof that he was of God and his Gospel true and therefore to Blaspheam his Miracles by ascribing them to the Devil was the unpardonable Blasphemy of the Holy Ghost And to deny Miracles to be a sign of Gods attestation is to subvert all Christianity Act. 2.22 Jesus of Nazareth a man approved of God among you by miracles wonders and signs which God did by him in the midst of you Joh. 5.36 The same works that I do bear witness of me that the Father hath sent me Joh. 10.25 37 38. The works that I do in my Fathers name they bear witness of me If I do not the works of my Father believe me not But if I do though ye believe not me believe the works that ye may know and believe that the Father is in me and I in him Joh. 14.11 Believe me for the very works sake Joh. 15.24 If I had not done among them the works that no other man did they had not had sin This also was Pauls proof of his Apostleship yea and of the truth of all the Apostles doctrine Heb. 2.3 4. God also bearing them witness both with signs and wonders and divers Miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost according to his own Will Therefore that Doctrine is unlike to be true which tells us that every wicked Priest in the world though a Simonist or an enemy of Christ and Godliness and drown'd in all Vice is such a constant miracle-worker When God hateth all the workers of iniquity Psal 5.5 III. But though this Reason be but probable this following is demonstrative to a believer That doctrine which maketh every Ignorant wicked or Heretical Priest in the world far to excell the Prophets Apostles and Christ himself in the Greatness Number and facility of Miracles is false But such is this doctrine of Transubstantiation I know that Christ telleth his Apostles Greater works than these shall ye do But 1. There are Greater works such as the converting of greater numbers in the world which are not Greater Miracles 2. And what was promised ●o the Apostles as to Miracles was not promised to every Priest in the world I appeal to the Consciences of sober Christians whether it sound not as an arrogant if not blaspheamous speech to say that Christ and his Apostles did fewer and smaller miracles proportionable to their time than every Priest And as to the Minor it is soon proved in its parts 1. As to the Greatness of the Miracles those of Christ were exceeding Great especially his Raising Lazarus and his own
saved whatsoever else he want But it is as true that he that Receiveth the Essentials will from the same principles and obligations receive more when it is aptly notified to him And he that truly Covenanteth will honestly keep the Covenant he maketh which bindeth him still to learn of Christ But if any man be saved without the Essentials he must be saved without Christianity D. But you know that they distinguish of faith Explicite and Implicite He may be Implicitely a Christian that believeth not the Essentials Explicitely as long as he believeth that which would infer them if they were made known to him to be indeed the Word of God R. Thus do Words abuse and cheat the ignorant Could you but read their own Dr. Holden before cited in his Analys fid you would find this distinction justly rendred by him shameful and ridiculous according to their common sense and use of it and the truer sense delivered and vindicated An Implicite faith or Knowledge we confess to be true as it is opposed to 1. A distinct or 2. To a well-expressed faith or Knowledge For it is Implicite ☞ 1. As to the Object when a man knoweth the whole matter but not by distinct parts As a man may know a Cup of water and not know how many drops or drams it is or he may know a sentence and not know how many letters are in it 2. Or it is Implicite as to the Act when it is yet but a crude imperfect conception and the thing is really known but not the Logical notions or Grammatical names either the verba oris or mentis by which it should be expressed So that the man cannot notifie his knowledge to another These two are called Implicite the first signifieth Confused and General Knowledge and the other Imperfect and undigested But to call that Implicite faith or knowledge which extendeth only to some Principles and not to the Conclusions themselves is 1. To Call No-knowledge and faith by the name of knowledge and faith 2. And by their application to confound the World and the Church and to make all the Infidels and Heathens to be Christians and every Fool a Philosopher For 1. All men of Reason know these two Principles who own a God 1. That God is not a lyer but all his Word is True 2. That all the Truths in the world are God's some way or other revealed by him Therefore if they knew that the Gospel were Gods word they would believe it or if they knew it to be one of those Truths that are in the world they would take it to be of God And thus all Infidels and Turks and Pagans may by such abuse be called Implicite Christians But why then do the Papists burn the Protestants when if their Religion were true we are all Implicitely Papists For we believe 1. That all Divine Revelations are True 2. And that all those are Infallible whom God hath promised to make Infallible 3. And that all those must be believed and obeyed whom God hath commanded us to believe and obey 4. And that we must not forsake that Church which God hath commanded us to adhere to 5. And that all our Lawful Pastors must be reverenced and submitted to 6. And all their lawful Precepts obeyed 7. And all Gods Sacraments holily used 8. And all Traditions from the Apostles to the Churches received with many more such Only we know not that the Pope is our Pastor or that his Councils are the Church or have a promise of Infallibility and so of the rest And yet we must burn for it if they can procure it And yet he is a true believer Implicitely who believeth not the Essentials of Christianity But the Design which is predominant here is too visible when this Implicite faith cometh to be described For it is not a Belief in God or in Christ only that will serve the turn but it must be a belief in the Church and their Church and their Pope too or else it will not do The Implicite faith is the explicite belief of these three Articles 1. All Gods Word is true 2. All that is Gods Word which the Church tells us is Gods Word 3. The Pope and his Council and Subjects are this Church And yet this man must be supposed if he know no more per impossibile not to know that there is a Christ or who he is as to his Person or Office or what he hath done or will do for us And yet that he hath a Vicar and a Church Or else they may know Christ and Christianity before they know that there is any Pope or Church and then the Pope hath lost the Game D. But if Popery be so senseless a thing as you make it how come so great a number of persons of all ranks and qualities Kings Nobles Learned men and Religiously-disposed persons to embrace it Have not they souls to save or lose as well as you and do they not lay all their hopes of Heaven upon it and can such persons and so many be so mad and senseless R. Do we need thus to ramble round about as if we would doubt of the thing till we know the Causes of it when we see and they all confess that they deny all our senses Will you not believe that there is a Sun till you know what it is made of Or whether the Sea ebb and flow till you know the Causes of it I pray you tell me Q. 1. Do you think that the Mahometan's is not a very foolish Religion and their foundation the pretended Mission of their Prophet without any shew of truth and his Alcoran if ever you read it a heap of Non-sense and Confusion D. Yes I think it deserveth no better thoughts R. And do you not know that though it arose not till about six hundred years after Christ much more of the world is Mahometan than Christian And are there not far Greater Emperours and Princes Mahometans than any that are Christians And have not all these souls to save or lose And do they not all venture their souls upon that Religion Why then is not your argument here as good for Mahometanism as for Popery D. Though the Emperours of Constantinople the Great Mogul the Persian Tartarian Mahometans c. be all Great as to their vast Dominions yet they are barbarous and unlearned in comparison of the Papists R. 1. It is not because they have not as much wit as we but because they think that our laborious wordy kind of learning is an abuse of wit and against true Policy ludicrously or contentiously diverting mens minds and time from those employments which they think more manly and profitable to the Common-wealth Though no doubt but they do err more unmanly on that extream But I further ask you Q. 2. Do you not think that the Common Religion of the Heathens is very unworthy for any wise man to venture his soul upon If you have but read