separatur Cypr. de Unit. Eccles that consequently who ever forsakes her and adheres to an Adulteress any Heretical or Scismatical Congregation looses all right to the Promises made to the Church So certain was St. Gregory Nazianzen that this Si nunc vel ante suscepti sunt qui Apollinaris placita sectantur hoc ostendant nos aquiescemus Perspicuum enim Erit eos ut rectae Doctrinae assentientes susceptos fuisse nec enim se res aliter habere potest 〈◊〉 hoc consequuti sunt Church could never admit any Heretics into her Communion That as zealous an opposer as he was to the Apollinarists he owned he would acquiesce to them if they could prove they had ever been received into the Catholic Churches Communion which would be an undoubted proof that they were fallen into no Heresie And in that case it could not be otherwise but that they did assent to truth St. Athanasius owned this Rule so infallible that he conceived no other Arguments ought to be used against Heretics but this which alone Epist ad Cledon Tantummodo ad ea respondendum est quod ipsum per se sufficit ea Ecclesiae Orthodoxae noti esse nec Majores nostros it a sensisse Epist ad Epist Epist Corim. is sufficient that their Opinion was not the Doctrin of the Orthodex Church that our Ancestors were of another perswasion But what debate can there be of this truth amongst Christians after so plain a decision of Christs own Divine Mouth Matt. 16. 18. The Gates of Hell shall not prevail against her having first assured Peter that he was a Rock unmoveable and that on that Rock he would build his Church On Peter then and his Successors not on their Shoulders indeed as a Protestant Divine very briskly proved but on their personal unmoveable Faith this Church is ever to be built whence all holy Fathers have ever derived the Infallibility of Doctrin promised to the Church Let the great Patriarch of Alexandria S. Cyril be an Instance of it Tâ—â—s Sirname Petram opinor per agnominationem nihil aliud quam inconcussam firmissimam discipuli fidem vocavit in quâ Ecclesiâ Christi ita fundata firmata esset ut non laberetur esset inexpugnabilis inferorum portis in perpetuum manens Cyril in Dial. ad Prin. l. 4. of Rock says he is the unmoveable and most firm Faith of this Disciple on which the Church of Christ should be so founded and setled that it should prove impregnable to the Gates of Hell lasting for ever And that all might know that 't is the virtue of the Holy Ghost by whose Infallibility in Guiding the Church remains Infallible in being Guided our Saviour informs his Apostles of it and us by them Joh. 14. 16. He my Father will give you another Paraclite that may abide with you for ever and consequently with their Successors as a Land given to one for ever by force thereof belongs to his Heirs the Spirit of Truth whom the World knows not St. Ambrose who observed no such Promise made to particular Men reading Scripture had hence reason to conclude Let no Man make the Law the measure of his Faith but report it to Nemo fidem suam intra mensuram legis includat sed ad Ecclesiam conferat in quâ septiformis Spiritus gratia relucet uam Princeps ille Sacerdotum fulgore supernae divinitatis illuminat Lib. 7. c. 11. in Luc. the Church in which the Grace of the seven-fold Spirit shines whom that Prince of the Priests doth enlighten with Rays of the Divinity from above Hence Origen concuded That the Son of God as the Scriptures teach us is the Soul of the Body of Lib. 6. contra Gels Christ which is the Church of Christ That the Word of God by a wonderful Virtue moves together all the Members of his Church And can it enter into a Christians thought that a Body guided by the Holy Ghost moved by Christ shall ever go astray But Tertullian represents with a most sensible Energy the weakness of those who can harbor the least suspicion of it The Holy Ghost says he to this intent was sent by Christ to this end was asked of the Father that he should be the Teacher of Truth Did this Steward of God neglect his Office Did this Vicar of Christ permit the Church to believe to teach otherwise than Christ himself Preached by his Apostles St. Paul did not believe it possible when he called the Church not only the House of God but also the Pillar of Truth I omit here those plain Texts of Scripture to be found so frequently in it by which Christ declares this Churches Perpetuity only minding you Sir of that Saying of one of the most famous and Learned Primates of this Kingdom ' T is the same in the Church to Err and to Perish Idem est errare perire Ecclesiam Hanc sacrilegam vanitatem evertit Evangelica veritas Prophetarum atque SS Patrum non violanda authoritas Lanfranc contr Bereng Wherefore since the latter cannot happen if God in revealing cannot Err we may conclude with him that to say it can Err is a Sacrilegious Vanity which the Authority of the Prophets of the Gospels of the Fathers utterly reproves That what Promises were made to the Apostles for the Support and Continuance of the Church are made good to their Successors the lawful Pastors Reason it self evidently makes out God not withdrawing the Means whilst he designs the End. And St. Augustin expresses it fully in these words Commenting on those of the Royal Prophet For thy Fathers Children are born to thee The Apostles did beget thee they were sent they Preached they were thy Fathers but Genuerunt te Apostoli ipsi missi sunt ipsi praedicatores ipsi patres sed numquid nobiscum ipsi semper esse potuerunt Ergo eorum discessu deserta est Ecclesia Absit pro Apostolis nati sunt tibi filii constituti sunt Episcopi c. Aug. in Psal 44. could they remain for ever with us Was then the Church deserted by their departure God forbid For thy Fathers Children were born to thee Bishops were Constituted Think not thy self abandon'd because thou seest not Peter thou seest not Paul Out of thy Issue Fathers are given thee Hence in his Dispute he wonder'd at the sensless Position of Gaudentius Lib. 2. c. 8. contra Gauden the Donatist teaching that the Church had Perished and yet owning their Congregation to be the true Church since Donatus could not be a Father in the true Church had he not been a Son thereof had she Perished before he laid the Foundation of his Schismatical Body Against the same Heretics and the Schismatics of these Days he is as plain on the Psal 103. What mean some says he in the Name of the Church who abandoning me murmur against Quid est quod nescio qui recedentes a me
Sacrament considered with the Eyes of Faith and believe that this Sacrifice helps much to a holy life but not at all without it 30. Amongst them one can Merit for twenty so there is no need above one in twenty should be Good. Merit with us is Personal and not Communicative no one is better in the sight of God for the Piety of another and in what ever sense one may satisfie Gods Justice for the Penitential works he exacts from an other whose sin is remitted no one hath a title to the least degree of Glory and consequently hath any Merit by an others Sanctity or Merit Many more of this Man's Calumnies I pass by these Thirty and the other Ten I have laid down being a clear Evidence that he is the most confident Calumniator that ever Preached or Writ who dares say any thing without the least respect to Truth without any regard to Charity Honor or Conscience Now Sir give me leave to offer you some few of the many Fanatical Principles he advances as destructive to what you call your Church as to Christianity in general that in your second thoughts you may blush if you are capable of it for having set your Name to them and Licensed them to the Press The First God being a Spirit must not be sought for in Houses Fol. 48 50 51. of Wood and Stone because he must be worshipped in Spirit he must not be worshipped by any material or sensible Representations Those words Except your Righteousness exceeds the Righteousness of the Fol. 38. Scribes and Pharisees you shall in no wise enter into the Kingdom of Heaven cuts off every thing that is External in Religion Do not these Principles remit all Christians to the Silent Meetings of Quakers Exclude the use of Churches rather than Barns Singing of Psalms and such other material Representations of the God whom we Praise The Second God and Christ are not present in the Assemblies Fol. 37. of Christians by any Figurative or Symbolical Presence There is no Symbolical Presence of God under the Gospel 'T is a great Fol. 34 55. Absurdity to talk of more Symbolical Presences of God than one for a Symbolical Presenc confines the unlimited Presence of God to a certain Place in order to certain Ends as for Example to receive the Worship which is paid him Now to have more than one such Presence as these is like having more Gods than one To say nothing of the absurdity of this Discourse which makes that Christian an adorer of two Gods who by Faith adoring God in Heaven and in his own Soul worships him in both places doth not this destroy the very Essence of your Sacrament the Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper which you own to be a Symbolical Presence of Christ The Third If God be better worshipped before an Image than Fol. 53 54. without one then the Worship of God is more confined to that Place where the Image is I cannot see how to avoid this whereas there is no appropriate Place of Worship under the Gospel And 't is the same tho' the Image be not appropriated to any Place but carried about with us for still the Image makes the Place of Worship This is an Argument for all Dissenters from you and all Fanatics against a Set Liturgy a Set Form of Prayer for if God be better worshipped by a Set Form of Prayer than without it then the Worship of God is more confined to that Place where that Set Form of Prayer that Set Liturgy is used and 't is the same tho' no set Place be appointed for that Set Form of Prayer c. The Parallel is exact The Fourth Having laid this Principle All that is meerly Fol. 34 36. External in Religion is taken away all Rites believed to be in themselves Acts of Religion and to render the Worshipper acceptable to God and this because God must be worshipped as a meer Spirit To defend the use of Baptism and the Lord's Supper he brings this only Reason Mankind by Sin hath forfeited all natural Right to Gods Favor they can challenge nothing but by Promise and Covenant such Covenants require a mutual Stipulation on both Sides Therefore they must be transacted by some visible and sensible Rites whereby God obliges himself to us and we to him Is not this last Inference destroyed by the former Principle taking away all Rites that are Acts of Religion all that is meerly External And on this Principle ought he not to teach that the mutual Stipulation betwixt God and us must be made by his interior Graces and our interior Worship because God must be worshipped as a meer Spirit Upon whatever account that interior Covenant requires a visible sensible Mark and our actual Communion with Christ another all the Communications of Gods Graces to us all our return of Worship and Adoration will equally admit of sensible Signs and Rites To avoid farther Prolixity I will end with the following Principle of his most injurious to Christ and an open and never to be coloured Blasphemy Fifth Principle There never was never can be an Infallible Fol. 68 69 70. Judge Christ himself was not an Infallible Judge altho' he were an Infallible Teacher I must my self judge of his Doctrin before I know that he is Infallible therefore Men were to judge of Christ's Doctrin before they believed him and they are thus to this day to Examin his Doctrin by the Law and Prophets and he never required that they should submit to his Infallible Authority without Examination He could not be an Infallible Judge obliging Men to receive all his Dictates as Divine Oracles without Examination 'T was impossible to know him to be Infallible but by judging of his Doctrin by the agreement thereof with the Principles of Reason and of former Revelations Doth a Christian teach this and a Christian approve and license it What JESVS our God blessed for evermore even when owned the Son of God even from us Christians cannot exact a Submission to his Infallible Authority without Examination of the truth of what he says by comparing it with the Principles of Human Reason He cannot oblige us to receive all his Dictates as Divine Oracles Was Christian Faith was the Author of it JESVS ever thus affronted Did the Apostles err did they act against Sense and Reason when they believed what he had taught of his Flesh being meat indeed Joh. 6. v. 69. only because he had the words of Eternal Life because his Dictates were Divine Oracles Were all men of this mind Christ would not indeed find any Faith on Earth What tho' we certainly know Christ to have taught and declared a Truth must we not upon his word submit to it and embrace it till we have consulted our Reason and found it can object nothing against it Were the weapons of S. Paul's 2 Cor. 10. 5. warfare such as could humble what raised it self against the science of God and bring into captivity all understanding in obedience to Christ and had the Word and Preaching of Christ less power Christ teaches it is not yet a sufficient Motive for me to believe Should an Angel from Heaven teach me this I would with St. Paul return him no other Answer than Anathema and do you Sir approve this Do you License men to teach to Christians they are not to submit to Christ's Word as to Divine Oracles that they must make themselves his Judges and Examin by their Reason whether he spoke truth or no Well Sir were it but not to give occasion to the spreading so horrid Blasphemies against our Lord and God I take my leave of you and of such Books Licensed by you and end with this Profession of my Catholic Faith Christ is an Infallible Judge I must not Judge of his Doctrin but believe it and submit to him I submit to his Infallible Authority without Examination I receive all his Dictates as Divine Oracles If tho' Summoned by me you still refuse to Subscribe to this Doctrin I will obey St. John's Counsel I will have nothing to do with you nor return to you so much as Ave or any Greeting but content my self with Subscribing to this Profession of my Faith LEWIS SABRAN Of the Society of JESUS
murmurant contra me quid est quod perditi me periisse contendunt certe enim hoc dicunt quia fui non sum Annuntia mihi paucitatem dierum meorum quam diu ero in hoc saeculo annuntia vit dixit ecce ego vobiscum sum usque ad consummationem saeculi totius orbis Communio Aug. l. 2. c. 2. cont Gaud. me How do those lost Men pretend that I Perish for they say I was and am not Tâ—ll me O Lord how short are my days how long I shall last on Earth And he announced it to me and said Behold I am with you to the end of Ages What can be said more plain This Church then or this Communion with lawful Bishops this Vniversal Communion as St. Augustin calls it will ever be guided by the Holy Ghost infallibly in the of Truth They believe right who are in this Communion they are in Error who are out of it This is the most palpable and most secure way of discerning the Truth Wherefore St. Augustin tells us that disputing against Fortunatus an Heretical Bishop he pressed him but in vain to answer one Question pretending that the Answer to it would as it was manifest to all clear their Controversie Whether he could give Letters of Communion which should be accepted of by Bishops in all Parts of the World whither ever he should assign him We ask Protestant Bishops here the same Question and because there is not One Bishop in the whole World out of his Majesty's Dominions that will own their Doctrin and acknowledge himself of the same Church with them we conclude with St. Augustin that there is no need of Quaerebam utrum Epistolas Communicatorias quas formatas dicimus posset quo vellem dare affirmabam quod manifestum esset omnibus hoc modo facillime illam terminari posse quaestionem Aug. Ep. 163. Huic generali Ecclesiae communicans Christianus Catholicus est ab hâc segregatus Haereticus S. Prosp in dim temp c. 5. a farther Debate it being evident they belong not unto and are no part of the Catholic Church and they may share betwixt us and themselves this Sentence of St. Augustin's Scholar S. Prosper A Christian in Communion with this Vniversal Church is a Catholic if separated from it an Heretic which is the very Sentence of St. John in the very Text which Dr. Sherlock's Footman cited against me I have been somewhat profuse on this Subject because it is of the greatest importance and to shew what silly Questions are proposed unto us as unanswerable to which each Leaf of Scripture each holy Father yield a ready Answer against them and for us No understanding Protestant can be disputed into this kind of Preser Fol. 17. Popery which owns an Infallible Church First because no Arguments or Disputations can give me an infallible certainty of the Infallibility of the Church I observed that this way of Reasoning was a Plea for the Answer Jews against Christ our Lord this Position proving that Christ our Lord who own'd himself Infallible did imprudently to Preach or work Miracles by which he exacted a certain firm Faith grounded upon his Infallibility in Teaching for since his Preaching and Miracles did not give an Evident infallible certainty of his Infallibility and such an evident one Dr. Sherlock must mean for the certainty we have of a real Infallibility cannot be in reality Fallible no prudent Jew or Gentile could be disputed by Christ into Faith. Arguments so offensive to pious Ears ought to meet with no other Answer than Prayers for him who offers them First he tells me the Arguments which I call offensive to Defence Fol. 7. pious Ears are mentioned 2 Tim. 4. 3. Next he asks me Whether my Reasons and Arguments for my Churches Infallibility and those which Christ offered with the addition of Miracles hold a Comparison Thirdly he tells me that Christ tho' Infallible tho' he wrought Miracles to confirm his Doctrin did not command them to be content with an Implicit Faith but the contrary Search the Scripture Joh. 5. 39. and Mark 12. 24. tells them they Erred not knowing the Scripture Then he concludes that Dr. Sherlock did not say that the Jews could not be disputed into Faith unless that Faith were infallible No he leaves that to be talked of by us who are the great Pretenders to it An Error ever draws on a greater to its defence and Heresie Answer seldom supports her self without Blasphemy we have both here in store As for his first Observation I understand not the meaning of it the Text hinted at being this There shall be time when they will not bear sound Doctrin but according to their own desires they will heap to themselves Masters having itching Ears I blamed not the Hearers but the Teacher and in this particular Case I am very well satisfied that the witty and Learned Gentlemen of the Temple are so far from hearing this Doctrin of Dr. Sherlock with itching Ears that they pity his Ignorance and blame his forwardness and blush at so weak and ill-knit a piece of Sophistry and therefore I willingly submit what I write in this Engagement to their Censure As to the Question he asks me his ignorance of our Belief prompts it to him For we believe our Church Infallible by the Infallibility of Christ who remains with her and of the Holy Ghost who guides her into all Truths And for this we bring the same Proofs to wit Prophecies Christ's Preaching it and his Miracles Confirming it besides the continual visible Event of Christ's Prophecies concerning his Church This Question then is very silly But his two Proofs are in another Strain by the First he intimates That Christ could not have challeng'd an Implicit Faith reasonably from the Jews A Position which to the shame of Christianity this last Age and pretended Reformation hath often offered and supported Contrary to Christ's own Sacred words who often urged the Jews to believe his words on the account of his miraculous Works by which if he had not proved the truth of his words he owned that they had not had sin The Matter is finely mended and Christianity is brought by these Men to a fair pass when Christ's words are not to be believed by an Implicit Faith. The Church of God tho' Infallible sends as much to the Scriptures as Christ did since that she offers each Point of the Faith she teaches as delivered immediately or mediately in the Holy Scriptures The Prophecies of himself which Christ cited were indeed to be sought and found in the Scriptures but 't is a pleasant Fancy to apply those words Search the Scriptures to all that Christ did teach as if the Gospels and whatever Christ did Preach contained no new Revelations nothing but what could be found in the ancient Testament A great stock of Patience is necessary to answer calmly such Impertinencies as are brought to support the Errors
with which these late Heresies are patch'd up But the last Defence brought for Dr. Sherlock is surprising and I could well quarrel with you Sir as a Christian for Licensing it What do you own that we only are to look on the Faith even as Preached by Christ as necessarily Infallible Is it no part of your Belief that you are any way concerned in that that certain Faith which Christ exacted from the Jews St. Paul from each Christian must of necessity be Infallible 'T is impossible by Reason to prove that Men must not make use Preservative of their own Reason and Judgment in Matters of Religion That Men must use Reason to come to this Knowledge that Answer Fol. 5. God hath revealed what they believe is very certain As the Jews Exod. 14. Crediderunt Domino Moysi servo ejus Did believe God and Moses his Servant As all Nations believed Christ and his Apostles So each Christian now believes Christ and his Church the first as Author the second as Witnesses Commission'd from God of their Faith being moved by the Proofs they offered of their Commission So far Judgment Thus the Apostles believed Christ teaching himself to be the Son of God their Judgment having first been convinced that God spoke by him which Method appears more particularly in the Man born blind whom Christ our Lord cured and who Nin̄ Dominus esset cum illo was thereby convinced that God was with him taught by him and in consequence to that Conviction having barely heard from Christ that he was the Son of God he fell prostrate and adored him not exacting any farther proof beyond his Word After a full conviction that God speaks by those who Preach to us there is no farther use of Reason if we believe St. Paul but in order to the bringing into captivity all Vnderstanding in obedience to Faith. 2 Cor. 10. Defence f. 7 8. If my Sense and Reason will serve me to find out an Infallible Church it is a little severe to renounce it when I come there The Apostles were as Infallible as the Church can pretend to be now yet 1 Epist John 4. 1. Believe not every Spirit but try the Spirits if they be of God. 1 Cor. 10. 15. I speak to wise Men judge you what I say And Acts 17. 11. we have this particular Commendation of the Bereans that they were more noble than those of Thessalonica in that they received the Word with all readiness of mind and searched the Scriptures daily to see whether what they heard were conformable thereto or no. Answer Do I renounce my Reason when I embrace what my Reason hath convinced me to be infallibly true Sure Sir you have too much Sense not to own this to be a sensless Position But let us apply it to another Case When a Protestant is convinced and that if you please infallibly that the Word of God in the Bible delivers a Truth and his Reason hath convinced him of it is he not to abandon whatever Reason can object against the Mystery If you say he is not then a Man may doubt of the truth of Gods Word A very Christian Protestant Principle If you say he is then 't is not severe but most reasonable to renounce Reason when it opposes it self to a Truth infallibly Preached and received from an Authority acknowledged Infallible As for the three Texts I have before shewed how the First is wrested from its plain natural Sense to the opposite The Third is against him for the Bereans received First the Word with all readiness of mind and then searched the Scriptures to see in them those Texts which the Apostles used to convince the stubborn and so do Catholics The Second is neither directly nor indirectly to the purpose For St. Paul having brought a Reason why they were to abstain from such Meat and Drink as was offered to Idols to wit that since they did partake of the true Sacrifice of Christ's Body and Blood they could no more use what was Sacrificed to Idols than serve at two opposite Altars and adore the true God and the false ones he asks them Whether this Reason is not convincing Now I would know whether a Supreme Judge much more an infallible one doth disclaim his own Power because he offers evident Reasons for the Sentence he gives and shews the Parties obstinacy that should refuse to submit to them As for those words As to wise Men I speak the honest Footman little understands the meaning of them it being the Language of the Primitive Church when any thing was touched concerning the great Sacrament of our Blessed Lord's Body and Blood not to publish that high Mystery but to refer to the private Instruction about it which was given after Baptism and never trusted to the Catechumens an evident Proof that in this Sacrament there was a high Mystery beyond the Faith in Christ our Redeemer as Saviour of the World and Food of our Souls by his Passion without which no one was admitted to Baptism Thus St. Augustin ever expressed himself in this Subject The Norunt fideles norunt qui Initiaati sunt In Ps 39. 33. Ps 109. Hom 42. c. 4. l. 50. Hom. Orig. in Levit. Hom. 9. Chrys Hom. 27. in Gen. Hom. 5. ad Antioch c. Faithful know what I mean those understand me that have been Christned Thus Origen and St. Chrysostom before him and St. Paul himself I speak to you more boldly of this Mystery as to the wiser and more fully taught Pray Sir leave off Licensing such wretched Trifles and such wonderful wrested Texts or never expect there should be any Answer returned to them tho' how far this Motive will prevail with you I have some small reason to doubt Preserv f. 21. We have as much assurance of every Article of our Faith as you have of the Infallibility of your Church First because we are in general assured that the Scriptures are the Word of God. Answer f. 5. This is the great Point indeed which if a Protestant loses he loses all For 't is certain and evident that the Catholic hath the same assurance for each Article of his Faith proposed by the Church which he hath of the Churches infallibility as I have the same certainty of all that my Friend says to me which I have that he speaks nothing but certain truth He proves it first because he is in general assured that the Scriptures are the Word of God Hitherto there holds some parity though but lame but suppose it were entire the Conclusion would be this Catholics are as certain of the sense of Scripture as Protestants are that they have the Letter whence it follows demonstratively that when Protestants differ in the sense from Catholics they have less assurance for it than Catholics who have always the same assurance for the sense as Protestants have for the Letter Defence f. 6. and 7. You are Judges in your own Case
about infallibility We have the concurrent testimony of all Churches that we have those Canonical Books But let us suppose a while that your Church were infallible what greater certainty for that is the point you know which the Doctor was upon have you of it than we have of any particular Point of Faith as for the certainty of Reason and Argument That we have and would fain see you shew more What we believe is according to Scripture and doth not Contradict either Sense or Reason nor any other Principle of Knowledge Answer Never was a starved Cause so pitifully defended No wonder a Footman only doth not blush to appear in its Defence the Learned and judicious Gentlemen of the Temple had each of them too much Honor Conscience and Wit and therefore none of them would Patronize so wretched a Cause and support such weak Contradictions as the Excellent Master of the Temple so the Preface-maker calls him had blundered out Pray Sir review this last Discourse blush that your License Authorises it and hereafter have some care of your Reputation and set not your Name to such Stuff This is the Case on one side there is supposed an Infallible Interpreter of the Christians great Law-Book for thus Dr. Sherlock states the Case on the other are some men far the greater part unlearned and weak who allow not any sense to this Book which seems to them to Contradict either their Sense or Reason or any other Principle of their Knowledge And I am asked whether I proceed more prudently in receiving the sense of the Law from that Interpreter which is actually supposed infallible or in proceeding by the second method Sir if you are so weak or wilful as not to declare that I have a greater certainty in submitting to that infallible Interpreter your Counsel is not worth the asking and I appeal to that of the judicious Gentlemen of the Temple But I must not omit the untruth couched in those words We have the Concurrent Testimony of all Churches that we have those Canonical Books For no part of the Catholic Church no part of the Greek Scismatic Churches own the same Canon of Scripture-Books which you do Preservative Ibid. In particular we are assured that the Faith which we profess is agreeable to Scripture Answer fol. 5. If he means they have the same Proofs for this which Catholics have for the infallibility of the Church that is for the Continued Being of that Church which assures us that She is infallible in directing us for a Church Erring in so Fundamental a Point would cease to be the Church of Christ then it is evidently fase since each Christian in this Age hath the same Evidence of Her being the Church of Christ and of Her teaching all Truth and consequently of Her being as She declares infallible in thus teaching which he hath of Christ to wit the ancient Prophesies those of Christ himself his Miracles and the Miracles wrought in that Church according to the Promises of Christ besides the Conversion of Nations to Christianity c. These things Protestants do not so much as pretend unto as Proofs of their particular Sense in Interpreting Scripture Defence fol. 10. This is a pretty Conceit the infallibility of the Church that is to say the Being of the Church can't a Church be without being infallible We have heard much of Miracles but could never see any Answer Do you allow such Answers Sir that have so little of Sense and less of Piety Can a Church remain the Church of Christ and yet teach her self to be infallibly guided by the Spirit of Christ whil'st she is abandon'd to the Spirit of Error and that so far as Idolatry and the Evacuating of the Passion of Christ Are we come to own that Herod might well be excused from believing in Christ because he had heard much of his Miracles but could never see any Well Sir when you License such an other Discourse add to your Titles that of a Christian that we may think you are one Preservative fol. 23. If you must not use your Reason and private judgment then you must not by any Reasons be persuaded to condemn the use of Reason Answ f. 5. I never heard so much and so little of Reason All he says might with equal weight be said by a sick Man who dissuaded from choosing his own Remedies and desired to send for a skilful Doctor should answer ' T is impossible by Reason to persuade me not to use my Reason in governing my self by Reason as my own Reason teaches me which would be to Condemn Reason and yet be guided by your Reason or the Doctor 's Reason Such a Discourse would prove the Sick party at least somewhat light-headed What 't is a Symptom of in Dr. Sherlock I will not be positive Defence f. 11. Is this Sick Man persuaded to renounce his Reason or rather is it not that he should submit his judgment not renounce his Reason in that case to that Person whom he hath all the reason in the world to believe hath better knowledge and understanding of those things which are to be used for his recovery than himself And all this while methinks he is governed by Reason though he doth not think fit to trust his own skill But this bears no comparison Religion is or ought to be the Concern of all Answer The Footman prevaricates here or is ashamed of his Master 's gross Sophistry and will not stand by it 'T is Dr. Sherlock who pretends that a Catholic by following an infallible Guide renounces his Reason I contend that all the while he is governed by Reason and chiefly because that in a matter of that Concern he thinks not fit to trust his own skill which God hath as often declared to be too weak in any private person as he hath declared he would give to all such Pastors and Teachers as should guide them and Commanded each to repair to them to be guided by them But Religion is or ought to be the Concern of all a wise Observation So is or ought to be each ones health and the preservation of his life as therefore each one ought to advise with a good Doctor concerning his Health a good Lawyer for the preservation of his Fortune so and much more with a good Guide and since it can be had an infallible one for the securing of his Souls eternal happiness the Practice of Religion is the duty of all but the teaching it of those Doctors whom God hath appointed to that end as St. Paul teaches us Eph. 4. is not this Sir a most evident truth Preservative f. 25. Thou shalt Worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve is such a plain and express Scripture that no reason can justifie the Worship of another Being Answ f. 6. A rare Consequence to Infer a Negative for an Affirmative Antecedent that bears no opposition with it 'T is like this a Subject must
love his King and pay Allegiance to him alone therefore no Reason can justifie the love of a Man for his Wife or of a Child for his Father St. Augustin drew from that very Text the contrary Conclusion he takes off all blame from Abraham who is said in Genesis to Q. 61. in Gen. have Adored or Worshipped the People of the Land because 't is observable says the Holy Doctor That in the Commandment 't is not said thou shalt Worship God alone as it is said and him alone thou shalt serve which in Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for such a service of Latria is given to God alone Defence f. 12. What a delicate piece of Sophistry is here The Commandment is to serve God only which service we must of necessity understand to be that which is Divine but Worship is so Therefore the Text is plain against the Worship of any other but God. Answ All that is plain in this Answer is that men necessarily want a Guide in the interpreting of Scripture and that an infallible one also for such is the pride of some men that even an ignorant Foot-man as you see thinks he understands the Bible better than the Holiest and most Learned of Doctors S. Augustin and what reason teaches of the Service of God better than the most enlightened Patriarchs Abraham Worships men S. Augustin declares that the Commandment hath nothing against it there being an inferior Worship which is far below Divine Service but the Protestant Doctor teaches his Footman to aver that all Worship so he should have said to have spoken sense is Divine that the Text is plain against the Worship of any other but God. How likely is it they shall by their own judgment and reason understand the Bible who cannot construe right the Commandments no not the first of them and if Dr. Sherlock and his Footman understand right the first Commandment St. Augustin did not Do you not blush Sir to License the boldness of such ignorant Pride Preservative f. 26. Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image Is so express a Law against Image-Worship that no reason must be admitted for it Answ f. 6. What if you be told that the Jews may perhaps have had a Command of making no graven Image c. yet this being a positive Law and not renewed in the Gospel doth not oblige us will this Reason be admitted of No no reason and yet you have no other reason for passing by as Express a Law of Sanctifying Saturday What if it be rejoyn'd that only the making to themselves by private Authority making that to be which is not a Statue for Example which of its nature is the representation of a Man or a Calf to be to them a true God an Idol to adore it which divine Worship thus misapplyed is forbidden Cannot this Reason be heard No then Belezeel by Gods direction and Command making several likenesses of things on Earth below and in Heaven above Salomon placing such in the Temple sinned against the first Commandment for the making of such is as distinctly forbidden as the Adoring So if a Law thus says Thou shalt not carry any Arms thou shalt not strike the carrying of Arms would be as directly against the Law as the striking so do all Painters and Carvers and all our London Merchants that hang out a Sign-post The truth is what sense they put on any Text is the express Law against which no reason must be heard so they challenge to themselves that infallibility which they so sturdily deny to the Church of God. Defence f. 13 14. 'T is held on all hands that the keeping of the Seventh day was Figurative and so abolished at the death of Christ but as far as it was Moral namely that a Seventh Day should be kept that still remains Besides Christ and his Apostles were Authors of this change Christ as he rose on that day so he usually did appear on that day to his Disciples and Scripture maintains the Celebration of it by the constant practice of the Apostles Acts 20. 7. 1 Cor. 16. 21. Answ We have four untruths in very few lines The first that 't is agreed on all hands that the keeping of the Seventh day was Figurative all that understand Scripture right say the contrary to wit that it was not a meer Shadow of a thing to come as Figurative speaks but a Memory of the past and never to be forgotten benefit of the Creation from the work whereof God rested on that day and says Moses blessed the seventh day 'T is a second Untruth then that the Moral part of it was only the keeping a seventh day and that Christ our Lord altered it 'T is an untruth that Christ our Lord usually appeared on that day to his Apostles for Acts 1. 3. S. Luke assuresus he appeared every day to them Perdies quadraginta apparens Eis Act. 1. 3. Act. 2. 7. Salutatio mea manu Pauli 1 Cor. 16. 21. How St. Pauls meeting at Troas with many in the participation of the Sacraments and disputing till Midnight it being the Eve of his departure or his subscribing his Epistle with his own Hands for these are the two Texts produced is a Proof that the Scripture maintains the constant practice of the Apostles of keeping Sunday Holy I leave it to you Sir to make out the truth of it Defence f. 14. 'T is sufficient with Catholics to submit to an infallible Guide and that too if he declares as the Council of Constance did Concerning the Eucharist that notwithstanding our Lord did Institute it in both kinds and the Apostles so celebrated it yet now it should not be so But for us Protestants we cannot think that any Reason can be sufficient to lay aside an Express Text. Answ The meaning of these words as they lay here is to persuade the Readers that the Council of Constance did own that Christ did Institute or order that the Sacrament should be taken by all in both kinds and that in the Apostles time it was ever so taken yet that by the Church Authority it was ordered it should hereafter be otherwise If the Honest Footman means not so and would not have all to believe so there is no sense at all in this his Inference That Protestants cannot think that any reason can be sufficient to lay aside an express Text. But in this sense 't is a most outragious Calumny and though a Footman's ignorance may be excused yet with what face Sir can you pretend to judge of Books and License them if you are in the same gross Error or if wilfully and wittingly you License such impudent Slanders against the whole Churches Representative what Libels and Lampoons are you not qualified and disposed to License These Decreta Concil Cons Dec. 4. are the words of the Council Although Christ did Institute this Venerable Sacrament after Supper and did administer it to his Disciples under both the
the rest If therefore Protestants are in the wrong we are certainly in the right as far as we are opposite to them And besides since that all the positive Proofs that can be brought for the infallible Authority of Church-Teachers express also in what Church they are by evident Marks not to be found but in our Catholic Church it follows if the Protestants be in the wrong as to that Principle we are certainly in the right as to each Point of our Religion taught us by an unerring Interpreter Preserv f. 80. This that the Protestant Faith is uncertain may signifie two things First That the Objects of our Faith are uncertain and cannot be proved by certain Reasons Secondly That our Persuasion is wavering Answ f. 7. Besides the two mention'd it fignfies a Third thing also to wit That whatever Reasons there may be for a thing he who believes it hath not for the Motive of his Belief those certain Reasons There are for Example certain Reasons whereon to ground a Faith in Jesus Christ yet he that believes in Christ meerly because his Mother or a Minister hath taught him so to do hath a very uncertain and no Divine Faith. Defence f. 18. What can be the Gentleman's meaning I cannot conceive unless it be this That because Protestants take the Reason of their Faith from Scripture and not from the Church of Rome that therefore they can have no certain or Divine Faith which if it be I pity him if it be not I must desire him to explain himself Answer The honest Footman is grown very tender-hearted But is not this very plain that altho' there be very good Reasons for the belief of an Article of Christian Religion yet one that should believe it on the account of some silly Motive only such as I cited would have no Divine Faith But how can this be applied to Protestants who take the Reasons of their Faith from Scripture This I had shewed Fol. 6. but the Footman passes it by with this Answer only I shall say nothing to that Harangue so often Answered by our Divines It seems he had forgot those Answers or was conscious of their weakness Thus I discoursed there The Catholics prove that an uncertain or wavering Faith is no Divine Faith which the Protestants can never have of any one Article of their Religion because they never can have a certain one 'T is easily proved because they cannot have an act of Faith of any one Article till their Rule of Faith proposes it i. e. till they know certainly by their private Reading and Judgment what the Scriptures teach of it not by some one Text or two but by comparing all the Texts that treat of that Subject for the Sense of a single Text for Examp. My Father is greater than I cannot be had but by expounding it by other Texts on the same Subject Till a Protestant then hath a certain knowledge First that he hath all the Books of Holy Writ Secondly that all those he owns for such were really written by inspired Pens Thirdly that he hath a true and sound Translation in case he understood not the Original Languages and in case he doth a true Copy not altered by the Error or Malice of our Forefathers Fourthly since the Letter kills that he understands the true Meaning and Sense of each Text which relates to the Object of his Act of Faith Fifthly that he remember them all so as comparing them to see which be the clearer that must expound the obscurer and what is the true result of them all for any one which he understands not or hath forgotten may possibly be that one that must expound the rest he cannot have one Act of Faith. Now Catholics say this is impossible to most if not to all Protestants who are in each of these Points to Judge for themselves and not to submit to any Authority where a Doubt arises therefore few or no Protestants can in their whole Life-time frame one Act of Divine Faith concerning any one Mystery not that Scripture is not a very certain Rule but because they have chosen an useless because impossible and uncertain way of applying it Preservat ib. We believe the Apostles Creed and whatever is contained in the Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles This is all we believe and I hope they will not say these things are uncertain Answer They are very certain but not to any Protestant whose Rule of Faith considering the Method he applies it by cannot make him certain of any one Article But the pleasant Answer which Justifies Turk Jew and Gentile For this is a Rule of Faith most sufficient according to Dr. Sherlock and a good Plea We believe all that God hath revealed and nothing else is not all that he hath revealed certain Here lies the Doctor 's gross Mistake that no one is an Heretic for not believing that what God hath revealed is true 't is impossible to fall into so mad an Heresie But Heretics are such for not believing him to have revealed what in effect he hath tho' he hath given sufficient Methods to come to the knowledge of it if they would use them Defence Do Jews Turks and Gentiles believe all that is contained in the Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles Answer No Sir nor you neither If they believed all that God hath revealed as they pretend they would believe all that is delivered in the Bible which you pretend but upon as little ground What they think in their Judgment God hath revealed they believe what they think he hath not revealed they disbelieve that 's their Rule of Faith and 't is yours your own private Judgments being on both hands your Guides and not any Authority Established by Almighty God. Preservat f. 81. If these things which are believed by those who take their Faith from the Bible interpreted by their own final Sense be not built upon certain Reasons their Infallible Church can have no certainty of the Christian Faith. Answer Even this is most notoriously false since she is not Infallible by any Light of her own but by the Guidance of the Spirit of Truth Were not the Apostles when they had once acknowledged Christ to be the Son of God certain of all he revealed to them before he had given them certain Reasons for it It were a blind Impiety to think so Defence f. 19. Was there in that Case of the Apostles a certain Faith without a certain Reason An infallible Man must know things as they are or else he is mistaken Answer The Footman is very dull here and cannot distinguish between a certain Reason moving me to believe him that speaks and a certain Reason in the things that are delivered moving me to believe them This Second Dr. Sherlock requires saying That if these things which are believed be not built upon certain Reasons the Infallible Church seeing not any such Reasons can have no certainty of the Christian Faith. An