The Second Part OF THE Preservative AGAINST POPERY Shewing how Contrary POPERY is to the True Ends OF THE Christian Religion Fitted for the INSTRUCTION OF Vnlearned PROTESTANTS By WILLIAM SHERLOCK D. D. Master of the Temple The Second Edition LONDON Printed for William Rogers at the Sun over against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleet-street M DC LXXXVIII THE Second Part OF THE PRESERVATIVE AGAINST POPERY Imprimatur Liber cui Titulus The Second Part of the Preservative against Popery May 3. 1688. Guil. Needham R. R. in Christo P. ac D. D. Wilhelmo Archiepisc Cant. Ã Sacr. Domest The Second Part OF THE PRESERVATIVE AGAINST POPERY CHAP. IV. Some Directions relating to particular Controversies THose who would understand the particular Disputes between Us and the Church of Rome must of necessity read such Books as give the true State of the Controversie between us and fairly represent the Arguments on both sides and where such Books are to be met with he may learn from a late Letter Entituled The Present State of the Controversie between the Church of England and the Church of Rome Or an Account of Books written on both sides But my present Design is of another nature to give some plain and easie Marks and Characters of true gospel-Gospel-Doctrines whereby a man who has any relish of the true Spirit of Christianity may as certainly know Truth from Error in many cases as the Palate can distinguish Tasts There are some things so proper to the Gospel and so primarily intended in it that they may fitly serve for distinguishing marks of true Evangelical Doctrine I shall name some of the chief and examine some Popish Doctrines by them SECT I. Concerning IDOLATRY 1. ONe principal intention of the Gospel was more perfectly to extirpate all Idolatry 1 John 3.8 For this purpose the Son of God was manifested to destroy the works of the devil That is not only all Sin and Wickedness but the very Kingdom of Darkness that Kingdom the Devil had erected in the World the very Foundation of which was laid in Idolatrous Worship To this purpose Christ has expresly taught us that there is but one God and has more perfectly instructed us in the nature of God 1. Joh. 18. For no man hath seen God at any time but the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father he hath declared him Ignorance was the Mother of Pagan Idolatry because they did not know the true God they Worshipped any thing every thing for a God and therefore the most effectual course to cure Idolatry was to make known the true God to the World for those men are inexcusable who know the true God and Worship any thing else Tho' indeed according to some mens Divinity the knowledge of the true God cures Idolatry not by rooting out Idolatrous Worship but by excusing it by making that to be no Idolatry in a Christian who knows God which was Idolatry in a Heathen who did not know him for if as some say none can be guilty of Idolatry who acknowledge one Supreme Being then the Heathens when once they were instructed in the knowledge of the one true God might have Worshipped all their Country Gods which they did before without being guilty of Idolatry which is as if I should say that man is a Rebel who through mistake and ignorance owns any man for his Prince who is not his Prince but he is no Rebel who knows his lawful Prince and pays Homage to another whom he knows not to be his Prince And therefore our Saviour confines all Religious Worship to God alone Mat. 10. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy GOD and him only shalt thou serve It is his Answer to the Devil when he tempted him to fall down and worship him but he gives such an Answer as excludes all Creatures not only bad but good Spirits from any share in Religious Worship Our Saviour does not deny to worship him meerly because he was the Devil tho' that a man may do without the guilt of Idolatry who knows him to be the Devil if those men are in the right who allow nothing to be Idolatry but to worship some Being for the Supreme God who is not Supreme for then you may worship the Devil without the guilt of Idolatry if you do not believe him to be the Supreme God but our Saviour's reason for not worshipping him was because we must worship none but God. Which is as good a reason against the worship of the most glorious Angel as of the Devil himself Nay our Saviour denies to worship him though the Devil made no terms with him about the kind or degrees of Worship He does not require him to offer Sacrifice to him which is the only Act of Worship the Church of Rome appropriates to the Supreme God but only to bow down before him as an expression of Religious Devotion he did not demand that degree of Worship which the Church of Rome calls Latria and appropriates to the Supreme God nay he confesses that he was not the Supreme God for he does not pretend to dispose of the Kingdoms of the World in his own right but says they were given to him and he had power to give them to whom he pleased in which he acknowledges that he had a Superiour and therefore could not in the same breath desire to be owned and worshipped as the Supreme But our Saviour denies to give him this inferiour degree of Worship and thereby teaches us that no degree of Religious Worship must be given to any Being but the Supreme God. And because Mankind were very apt to worship inferiour Daemons as believing them to have the care of this lower World and that it was in their power to do great good to them to answer their Prayers and to mediate for them with the Superiour Deities or with the Supreme God if they believed one Supreme which appears to be a received Notion among them to prevent this kind of Idolatry God advances his own Son to be the universal Mediator and the Supreme and Soveraign Lord of the World that all Mankind should make their Addresses and Applications to him and offer up their Prayers only in his Name that in him they should find acceptance and in no other Name Which was the most effectual way to put an end to the Worship of all inferiour Deities and Creature-Patrons and Advocates for when we are assured that no other Being can mediate for us with effect and power but only Christ it is natural to Worship no other Mediator but him who being the eternal Son of God may be worshipped without danger of Idolatry Thus St. Paul tells us That tho' the Heathen World had Gods many and Lords many 1 Cor. 8.5 6. yet to us there is but one God the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ One Supreme and Soveraign Deity and one Mediator between God and Men. Now this being so apparently one end of Christ's coming
which is to un-Soul all Mankind in matters of Religion And therefore though there have been a great many infallible Teachers as Moses and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles yet none ever pretended to be infallible Judges but the Church of Rome that is none ever pretended to deny People a liberty of judging for themselves or ever exacted from them an universal submission to their infallible Judgment without exercising any act of Reason and Judgment themselves I am sure Christ and his Apostles left People to the exercise of their own Reason and Judgment and require it of them they were infallible Teachers but they did not judge for all Mankind but left every man to judge for himself as every man must and ought and as every man will do who has any Reason and Judgment of his own but an infallible Judge who pretends to judge for all men treats Mankind like Bruits who have no reasonable Souls of their own But you 'll say this distinction between an infallible Teacher and an infallible Judge is very nice and curious but seems to have nothing in it for does not he who teaches infallibly judge infallibly too And must I not submit my private Judgment which all men allow to be fallible to a publick infallible Judgment which I know to be infallible If I know that I may be deceived and that such a man cannot be deceived is it not reasonable for me to be governed by his Judgment rather than my own I answer All this is certainly true as any demonstration but then it is to be considered that I cannot be so certain of any man's Infallibility as to make him my Infallible Judge in whose Judgment I must acquiesce without exercising any Reason or Judgment of my own and the reason is plain because I cannot know that any man teaches infallibly unless I am sure that he teaches nothing that is contrary to any natural or revealed Law. Whoever does so is so far from being Infallible that he actually errs and whether he does so I cannot know unless I may judge of his Doctrine by the Light of Nature and by Revelation and therefore though there may be an Infallible Teacher there never can be any Infallible Judge to whom I must submit my own Reason and Judgment because I must judge of his Doctrine my self before I can know that he is Infallible As for instance when Moses appeared as a Prophet and a Law-giver to the Children of Israel there was no written Law but only the Law of Nature and therefore those great Miracles he wrought gave authority to his Laws because he contradicted no necessary Law of Nature but had any other person at that time wrought as many Miracles as Moses did and withal taught the Worship of many Gods either such as the Aegyptians or any other Nations worshipped at that time this had been reason enough to have rejected him as a false Prophet because it is contrary to the natural Worship of one Supream God which the Light of Nature teaches When Christ appeared there was a written Law the Writings of Moses and the Prophets and all the Miracles he wrought could not have proved him a true Prophet had he contradicted the Scriptures of the Old Testament and therefore his Doctrine was to be examined by them and accordingly he appeals to Moses and the Prophets to bear testimony to his Person and Doctrine and exhorts them to search the Scriptures which gave testimony to him and how the Miracles he wrought gave authority to any new Revelations he made of God's Will to the World since he did not contradict the old The Law of Nature and the Laws of Moses were the Laws of God and God cannot contradict himself and therefore the Doctrine of all new Prophets even of Christ himself was to be examined and is to be examined to this day by the Law and the Prophets and therefore though he was certainly an Infallible Teacher yet men were to judge of his Doctrine before they believed him and he did not require them to lay aside their Reason and Judgment and submit to his Infallible Authority without Examination So that all this while there could be no Infallible Judge to whom all men were bound to submit their own private Reason and Judgment and to receive all their Dictates as divine Oracles without Examination because they could not know them to be such Infallible Teachers till they had examined their Doctrine by the Light of Nature and the Law of Moses and we cannot to this day know that Moses and Christ were true Prophets but in the same way Since the writing of the New Testament there is a farther Test of an Infallible Teacher if there be any such in the world that he neither contradicts the Light of Nature nor the true intent of the Law of Moses nor alter or add to the Gospel of Christ and therefore there can be no Infallible Judge because be he never so Infallible we can never know that he is so but by the agreement of his Doctrine with the Principles of Reason with the Law and the Prophets and with the Gospel of Christ and therefore must examine his Doctrine by these Rules and therefore must judge for our selves and not suffer any man to judge for us upon a pretence of his Infallibility Could I know that any man were Infallible without judging of his Doctrine then indeed there were some reason to believe all that he says without any inquiry or examination but this never was never can be and therefore though there may be an Infallible Teacher there can be no Infallible Judge to whom I must submit my own Reason and Judgment without asking any Questions Which by the way shews how ridiculous that Sophism is The Church has not erred because she is Infallible when it is impossible for me to know she is Infallible till by examining her Doctrine by an Infallible Rule I know that she has not erred And the truth is it is well there can be no Infallible Judge for if there were it would suspend and silence the Reason and Judgment of all Mankind and what a knowing Creature would Man be in matters of Religion when he must not reason and must not judge just as knowing as a man can be without exercising any Reason and Judgment And therefore not only the reason and nature of the thing proves that there can be no Infallible Judge but the design of Christ to advance humane Nature to the utmost perfection of Reason and Understanding in this World proves that he never intended there should be any for to take away the exercise of Reason and private Judgment is not the way to make men wise and knowing Christians and if Christ allows us to judge for our selves there can be no Infallible Judge whose Office it shall be to judge for us all 4ly To pretend the Scripture to be an obscure or imperfect Rule is a direct contradiction to the
of the Saints furnish us with and yet I know of no better the Church of Rome has It is impossible to prove that a private Tradition cannot be corrupted it is unreasonable to think that any thing which concerns the necessary Articles of Faith or Rules of Worship should be a private and secret Tradition for several Ages Miracles themselves cannot prove any Tradition which is contrary to the written Rule and the Catholick Faith of Christians for several Ages as several of the Trent-Doctrines are nay no Miracles can prove any new Article of Faith which was never known before without proving that Christ and his Apostles did not teach all things necessary to salvation which will go a great way to overthrow the truth and certainty of the Christian Faith for Miracles themselves can never prove that Christ and his Apostles taught that which the Christian Church never heard of before which is either to prove that the whole World had forgot what they had been once taught which I doubt is not much for the credit of Tradition or that the Church for several Ages did not teach all that Christ taught which is no great reason to rely on the teachings of the Church or to prove against matter of fact that Christ and his Apostles taught that which no body ever heard of and I do not think a Miracle sufficient to prove that true which every body knows to be false or at least do not know it to be true though they must have known it if it had been true And does not every body now see how improper unwritten Traditions are to supply the Defects and Imperfections of the written Rule for they can never make one Rule because they are not of equal Authority A Writing may be proved Authentick an obscure unwritten Tradition cannot and can any man think that Christ would have one half of his Gospel written the other half unwritten if he intended to perfect the knowledge of Christians for they cannot have so perfect a knowledge because they cannot have so great certainty of the unwritten as they have of the written Gospel Writing is the most certain Way to perpetuate Knowledge and if Christ intended that his Church in all Ages should have a perfect Rule of Faith we must acknowledge the perfection of the written Rule The truth is I cannot but admire the great artifice of the Church of Rome in preaching up the Obscurity and Imperfection of the Scriptures for she has hereby put it into her own power to make Christian Religion what she pleases for if the Scriptures be obscure and she alone can infallibly interpret them if the Scriptures be imperfect and she alone can supply their defects by unwritten Traditions it is plain that Christian Religion must be what she says it is and it shall be what her interest requires it to be But whether this be consistent with our Saviour's design in publishing the Gospel or whether it be the best way of improving the knowledge of Mankind let any impartial man judge 5ly An Implicit Faith or believing as the Church believes without knowing what it is we believe can be no Gospel-Doctrine because this to be sure cannot be for the improvement of knowledge Some of the Roman Doctors think it sufficient that a man believes as the Church believes without an explicite knowledge of any thing they believe but the general opinion is that a man must have an explicite belief of the Apostles Creed but as for every thing else it suffices if he believes as the Church believes without knowing what the faith of the Church is that is it is not necessary men should so much as know what the new Articles of the Trent Faith are if they believe the Apostles Creed and resign up their Faith implicitely to the Church Now this is a plain confession that all the Doctrines in dispute between us and the Church of Rome are of no use much less necessary to salvation for if they were they would be as necessary to be known and explicitely believed as the Apostles Creed and I cannot imagine why we Hereticks who believe the Apostles Creed and understand it as orthodoxly as they may not be saved without believing the new Trent Creed for if we need not know what it is there seems to be no need of believing it for I always thought that no man can and therefore to be sure no man need believe what he does not know So that it seems we know and believe all things the explicite knowledge and belief of which by their own confession is necessary to salvation except that one single Point of the Infallibility of the Church of Rome believe but that and ye need believe or know nothing more but the Apostles Creed and yet go to Heaven as a good Catholick which makes an implicite Faith in the Church of Rome as necessary as Faith in Christ is But if the intent of the Gospel was to improve our Knowledge then Christ never taught an implicite Faith for that does not improve Knowledge and if the Faith of the Church of Rome excepting the Apostles Creed which is the common Faith of all Christians need not be known then they are no Gospel-Doctrines much less necessary Articles of Faith for Christ caught nothing but what he would have known and though the knowledge of all things which Christ taught is not equally necessary to salvation yet it tends to the perfecting our knowledge and Christ taught nothing which a man need not know which I think is a reproach to meaner Masters and much more to the eternal and incarnate Wisdom Secondly The improvement and perfection of Humane Nature consists in true Holiness and Virtue in a likeness and conformity to God and a participation of the Divine Nature and this is the great end of the Gospel to advance us to as perfect Holiness as is attainable in this life Christ indeed has made expiation for our sins by his own Bloud but then this very Bloud of Atonement does not only expiate the guilt of sin but purges the Conscience from dead works that we may serve the living God for no Sacrifice not of the Son of God himself can reconcile an impenitent and unreformed Sinner to God that is can move God to love a Sinner who still loves and continues in his sins which an infinitely holy and pure being cannot do Indeed the expiation of sin is but one part of the work of our Redemption for a sinner cannot be saved that is cannot be advanced to immortal life in the Kingdom of Heaven without being born again without being renewed and sanctified by the holy Spirit after the Image and likeness of God. For this new Nature is the only Principle of a new immortal life in us an earthly sensual mind is no more capable of living in Heaven than an earthly mortal body In both senses flesh and bloud cannot inherit the Kingdom of God neither can corruption inherit incorruption The
salvation is of the Jews wherein he informs the Woman that though she inquired only of the place of Worship the Samaritans were guilty of a greater sault than setting up the Temple at Samaria in opposition to the Temple at Jerusalem viz. in a false Object or an Idolatrous manner of Worship they Worshipping a Dove as the Symbol and Representation of God and thus to Worship God in Spirit is expresly opposed to Worshipping God by Images 5ly However this comes much to one for if God being a Spirit his Worship must not be confined to any Place or Symbolical Presence then he must not be Worshipped by an Image for an Image is a Representative Presence of God or of the Saints for the use of Images is to represent that Being whom we Worship as present to us and therefore if men consider what they do they go to Images as to Divine Presences to Worship Images which as set up in Churches and Chappels for the Worship of God or of the Saints are confined to places and make those places as much appropriate and peculiar places of Worship as the Jewish Temple was excepting that the Temple was but one and they are many Heathen Temples were the Houses of their Gods or of their Images which were the Presence of their Gods and if we must not appropriate the Presence of God to any place then we must not Worship him by Images which are of no use but to represent God as sensibly present with the Image or in the place where the Image is If God be better Worshipped before an Image than without one then the Worship of God is more confined to that place where an Image is than to those places which have no Images I cannot see how to avoid this that if God must be Worshipped by Images then there must be appropriate places of Worship viz. where the Image is if there be no appropriate places of Worship under the Gospel like the Temple at Jerusalem then God must not be Worshipped by Images for an Image must be in some place and if God must be Worshipped at or before his Image then that is the proper and peculiar place of Worship where his Image is nay though the Image be not fixt to any place but be carried about with us yet if we must Worship God by Images the Image is not only the Object but makes the place of Worship for there we must Worship God where his Image is if we must Worship him before his Image It is impossible to separate the Notion of Image-Worship from the Notion of a peculiar and appropriate place of Worship for the Image determines the place as the presence of the Object does and as under the Gospel we may Worship God any where because he is an infinite Spirit and fills all places and is equally present with all devout Worshippers where-ever they Worship him So where the Image is Consecrated for a Divine Presence it is not only the Object but the peculiar place of Worship because God is peculiarly present there or more acceptably worshipped there than where there is no Image So that if a peculiar and appropriate place of Worship be contrary to the Notion of an Infinite Spirit the Worship of Images is much more so for besides that they are gross and corporeal representations of a Spirit they are Divine Presences too and appropriate places of Worship Secondly As God must be worshipped under the notion of a Spirit so under the character of a Father as our Saviour expresty tells us The hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in Spirit and Truth 4 Joh. 23. for the Father seeketh such to worship him and therefore he taught his Disciples to pray Our Father which art in heaven Under the Law God was worshipped as a King and that not so much as the King of the whole World but as in a peculiar manner the King of Israel The Lord reigneth let the people tremble he sitteth between the Cherubims in his Temple at Jerusalem let the earth be moved 99 Ps 1 2. The Lord is great in Zion and he is high above all people But under the Gospel the peculiar character of God is a Father and that not only as he is the maker of all men and so the Father of all but as he is the Father of Christ and in him the Father of all Christians Now this makes a vast difference in our Worship from what is daily practised in the Church of Rome For 1. When we pray to God as our Father we must pray to him as dwelling in Heaven as our Saviour teaches us to say Our Father which art in Heaven For as a Father Heaven is his House and Habitation In my Fathers House are many mansions that is 14 John 2. in in Heaven which is his House as a Father as the Temple at Jerusalem was his Palace considered as the King of Israel and this is one reason our Saviour intimates why the presence of God shall no longer be confined to any particular Place or Temple because he shall be worshipped as the universal Father not as the King of Jury Now when he is to be worshipped as a Father from all Parts of the World he must have such a Throne and Presence to which all the World may equally resort and that can be no other then his Throne in Heaven whither we may send up our Prayers from all Corners of the Earth but had he confined his Presence to any place on Earth as he did to the Temple of Jerusalem the rest of the World must have been without God's peculiar Presence could have had no Temple nor Place of Worship but at such a distance that they could never have come at it for though God fills all places it is a great absurdity to talk of more Symbolical Presences of God than one for a Symbolical Presence confines the unlimited Presence of God to a certain place in order to certain ends as to receive the Worship that is paid him and to answer the Prayers that are made to him and to have more than One such Presence as this is like having more Gods than One. So that all our Worship under the Gospel must be directed to God in Heaven and that is a plain argument that we must not Worship God in Images on Earth for they neither can represent to us the Majesty of God in Heaven nor is God present with the Image to receive our Worship there if God must now be Worshipped as dwelling in Heaven it is certain there can be no Object of our Worship on Earth for though God fill all places with his Presence yet he will be Worshipped only as sitting on his Throne in Heaven and then I am sure he must not be Worshipped in an Image on Earth for that is not his Throne in Heaven This the Mercy-seat in the Holy of Holies was an Emblem of for the Holy of