the unjust excommunicating Athanasius Again The Council of Constance deposed Pope John 23. where it was proved that he held there was no eternal life nor Immortality of the soul nor Resurrection of the dead Pray Sir let Reason judge whether I may follow such a Catholick Guide You add a third Reason to prove that Reason is not judge in matters of Faith for then say you it would follow that it is possible to please God for Reason would teach us how to please him May not a man from the same Premises infer that your Church is not the Judge because then it would follow that it is possible to please God without Faith because the Church would teach us how to please him But you will say the Church doth teach us to please God by Faith I say it is well if she do But what is this to the purpose she did not teach us to please God by Faith before it was required and made known to us that God would be so pleased In like manner Reason will direct a man to do the same when he is informed God requireth such a duty But must not the Scripture nor my private Spirit nor my Reason judge I pray then tell me how I shall be the better for all you have written for if my Reason must not judge of the fallibility and infallibility of your Arguments then you had as good have told your late Brethren thus My Bâ—â—â—tren I see that there is a great difference and contention among us whether the Roman Church be infallible or not This Controversie cannot be judged by a private Spirit for that may sail nor by Reason because mens Reasons are uncertain and subject to variation neither are the Scriptures an infallible Judge of Controversies therefore they cannot judge of this Let me therefore advise you of a way to decide this question First Agree that the Roman Church is infallible and then your contention whether the Roman Church be infallible will soon be ended An excellent advice because you say all other ways to judge and decide controversies are fallable You now come in the third place to enquire whether the Scripture be sufficient to teach us the true Faith c. You say You found this highly contended for and several reasons urged for it First The words of our Saviour John 5.39 Search the Scriptures for in them you think to have eternal life and they are they which testifie of me To this Text you say you found several answers given which were satisfactory I That it doth not appear whether this in the Original be the Im perative or the Indicative Mood St. Cyril you say with whom Beza agrees takes it in the Indicative Mood What a strange Mood are you in then to give an Answer to a Text which you say you were satisfied withal And in the same breath you say it doth not appear whether it be the Imperative or the Indicative Mood Do you think infallibility had any assinity with this Answer Nay you further say that they are so farr from being a Command to all to road and search the Scriptures that they RATHER SEEM a Reprehension to all that shall frame that Conceit of them But how can this sense of that Text be Catholick when in stead of an infallible Exposition you tell us it RATHER SEEMS to be so then otherwise But what if I should tell you that those words Search the Scriptures rather seem a Command then a Reprehension I should rather seem to be infallible then you You say If it be the Indicative Mood the sense will run thus You do search the Scriptures and so it seems to be a Reprehension But this is a sense contrary to Chryfostome Hom. 39. in Joan. Christ sayes he sends us to the testimony of the Scriptures then it cannot be that he should reprehend them And the Colledge of Rhems translating the Text as we do give this Interpretation of it He viz. Christ reprehendeth the Jews not for reading but that reading dayly the Scriptures and acknowledging that in them they should find life that yet they viewed them so superficially that they could not find therein him to be Christ their King Lord Life and Saviour And in the Marginal Note upon this Text they say that neither Jews nor Hereticks find the truth because they search not the Scriptures deeply but read superficially See Rhemish Annot. upon John 5. Now see how you contradict your selves you say the Scriptures are so far from being a Command to all to read and search that they rather seem to be a reprehension to all that shall frame that conceit of them And your Rhemish Commentators say that they are reprehended because they did not search deep enough for if they had they might have found Jesus to have been their Christ their King Lord Life and Saviour And how can the said Annotators give that as a reason why the â—ews and Hereticks did not find the Truth because they did not search the Scriptures deep enough If either of these two opinions of your be true 1 That men are reprehended for searching the Scriptures 2 That the Scriptures are not an infallible guide to direct us to find the Truth if the whole Colledge have translated and interpreted truly then surely you and many of your Authors speak falsly But if you shall say the Scriptures may direct Jews and Hereticks to the truth because they direct them to the Church which is the Pillar of Truth then it follows 1 That both Jews and Hereticks ought to search the Scriptures deeply to find out the true Church 2 It must rest upon their private judgments of discretion to determine within themselves whether the Romanists or the Protestants be that true Church after they have made this deep and diligent search 3 It follows that the Scripture is an infallible guide being deeply and diligently searched and that the reason why both Jews and Hereticks err is not the fallibleness of the Scriptures but want of diligent and deep search which being used they might have found Christ to have been their King Lord Life and Saviour they might have found the Truth and the Church and consequently all things necessary to Eternal life You come in the 14 pag. to give a second reason why the words search the Scriptures cannot extend to prove the conclusion because you say if they were uuderstood in the Imperative Mood which cannot infallibly be proved because they cannot be profitable to work Faith in them that cannot read which you say are the greatest part of Mankind You say it cannot infallibly be proved that those words search the Scripture are in the Imperative Mood but have you that pretend to Infallibility proved that they are in the Indicative Mood What a madness is this that you should exact infallible Interpretations from those that do profess fallibility and not perform an infallible Interpretation when you pretend to be guided by a Church that is infallible But
he cannot reclaim him he must tell the Church which cannot be understood for any but that particular Church among whom he resides which you say are such as may err in judgment 3 By the same parity of reason a single private man cannot err because the Text saith he ought to be heard if he admonish his brother of his fault ver 15 16 17. and that it is his brothers sin if he do not hear him and the Text further saith If his brother do hear him that he hath gained his brother But if this brother might err then he might err in admonishing and the admonished person in stead of being gained to the Truth might be gained to an errour This is the sum of your Argument I am to hear the Church therefore the Church cannot err might you not as Logically infer that because I am to hear a single private brother therefore a single private brother cannot err and by this you would make all the Sons of your Church infallible like the Pope your Father and by this rule Parents are infallible because they must be heard by their children Your next Scriptures are Mat. 28.20 Lo I am with you always to the end of the world and Joh. 24.16 I will pray the Father and he will send you another Comforter that he may abide with you for ever even the Spirit of Truth which the World cannot receive and ver 26. The Comforter which is the Holy Ghost which the Father will send in my name he shall teach you all things and bring all things into your remembrance whatsoever I have said unto you and Chap. 16.17 I have many things to say unto you but you cannot hear them now howbeit when the Spirit of Truth is come he will guide you into all Truth From which you infer that if Christ and his Spirit should be with his Apostles for ever to lead them into all Truth it follows they shall be preserved from all errour To which I answer 1. That this Text in St. Mathew cannot be a good argument for you because you say you have lost the Original of St. Mathews Gospel and cannot tell whether he that did translate it was an honest man or no. 2 The Spirit of Christ might preserve the Apostles from all Errour and yet not be engaged to secure the Church from erring to the end of the World But 3 I answer further If this promise was made that the Holy Spirit should lead the Church in all Ages into all Truth it doth not follow as I have said that it should lead them irresistably though it might lead them sufficiently But 4. May I not as well infer that because the Spirit was promised to convince the World of sin because they believe not in Christ that therefore all the world cannot be but effectually and irresistably convinced as you may say that because the Spirit is promised to lead into all Truth that therefore the Church cannot err but must be effectually so led 5 It is called the Spirit of Truth which the World cannot receive meaning notorious and wicked men Now then this Spirit some of those Popes which you call the Apostles successors could not have because many of them have been notoriously and confessedly wicked all which doth plainly shew that this promise of the Spirit was made to direct and guide us into a further knowledge of the Truth till we come to be perfect in Christ upon condition that we are faithful in what we already know Like unto that promise Joh. 17.17 If any man do his will he shall know of his doctrine and to this agrees the Rhemiâ—â— Testament translating that Text of John 14.15 16. If you love me keep my comandements and I will pray the Father and he will give you another Paraclete that he may abide with you for ever Now how can I be infallible that the Pope is thus guided unless I do infallibly know that he loves God and keeps his Commandements 6 You say 〈◊〉 into all Truth implies preserving from all errour but this follow not not more then because the Scriptures say Gods goodness leads to Repentance that therefore all men should be preserved from impenitency And lastly If leading into all truth implies preserving from all Error how comes it to pass that since your Church as you say is an infallible guide into all Truth that she doth not preserve all her sons from all Errour And if you shall say see doth guide them all sufficiently though not efficiently although that be false yet you have answered your self For though Gods Spirit and goodness be sufficient to lead to Truth and Repentance yet it doth not follow but there are as sad experience teacheth multitudes of erring and impenitent persons Your next Text is Ephes 4.11 He gave some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and some Teachers for perfecting the Saints for the work of the Ministry for the edifying the body of Christ till we come in the union of the faith and ver 14. that we be no more children in understanding c. From which Text you would prove that the succession of the Apostles in the Church was to preserve people from being tossed to and fro with every wind of Doctrine but what then doth this prove the Church cannot err This means was used by God for the perfecting of Saints and yet we see that they are full of imperfections Thus God may teach and the Church not learn Gods Spirit may lead and the Church like Rome may be refractory Your last Text is 1 Tim. 3.15 The Church of the living God the Pillar and ground of Trust. Hence you would infer that the Church cannot err because we may securely relye upon her as upon a Pillar To which I answer That these words do not respect the universal Church as you would have it but the particular Church which Timothy had the oversight of in which Paul admonisheth him how he should behave himself But 2. If this were granted that the universal Church is here meant and not a particular Church I answer that this proves nothing to your purpose because Churches and People receive their denomination ordinarily from what they should be in point of Duty and not from what they are by necessity Thus the Disciples are called the Salt of the Earth because they were in duty to be so and not that there was a necessity that they could not have been otherwise else it had been in vain to threaten them that if they lost their savour they should be good for nothing but to be trodden under foot In like manner the Church is the Pillar of Truth and ground of in point of Duty and yet this doth not hinder but she may neglect and violate this Duty and become the Teacher of Errour But lastly The Church may be the Pillar and Ground of Truth not only because she should be so but because in all Ages she is so in that she teacheth and maintaineth
out of the great St. Austine against Manicheus whose Words are these If thou shalt find any one who doth not as yet believe the Gospel what wilt thou do when he shall say unto thee I do not believe But neither had I believed the Gospel unless I had been thereunto moved by the Authority of the Catholick Church Those therefore to whom I submitted when they required me to believe the Gospel why should I not yield Obedience to them when they perswade me not to believe Manicheus Thus speaks Austine and more to the same purpose lo which I Answer That this Text out of Austine may be applyed to any Church as well as to yours And if the Church of England shall perswade any one that is a Jew to turn and become a Christian may he not say he did well to believe them when they perswaded him to believe the Gospel Why therefore should he not believe them when they perswade him not to turn Roman Catholick But to this Text I shall subjoyne Two Texts more out of the same Authour against the Donatists The Question saith he between Us and the Donatists is where is the Church This is the Question between the Protestants and the Romanists He Answers Let not these Speeches be heard among you This I say and this thou sayest but let us hear what the Lord sayes There are certain Books of God unto whose Authority we both consent There let us try our Cause There let us seek the Church And again in the Scriptures have we learned Christ In the Scriptures have we learned the Church Ep. 166. ad Donatift Whosoever shall compare these Texts out of Austine may easily satisfie himself What his Judgment was in the Question between You and Us viz. whether we should learn Christ and the Scriptures from the Church or whether we should learn Christ and the Church from the Scriptures To this purpose Epiphanius speaking of a Heritick Saith This Man is found differing from the HOLY SCRIPTURES as will appear to all Men that Read attentively If he then dissent from them he is altogether an Alien to the Holy Catholick Church Epiphanius Tom. 1. lib. 2. haer 48. It seems in his time all men were permitted to read the Scriptures attentively to inform iheir minds in the Truth whatever is now a dayes pretended to the contrary I proceed now to the Epistle it self In the beginning whereof Page 1. You give an account of the Reasons of its Publication which are To Answer Expectation to prevent the World from censuring and to manifest your charity to your late dear Brethren from whom you have received returns of Assection I did expect that among those Motives that prevailed with you to publish the grounds of your change I should have found you saying that the Glory of God had been the chief moving Cause But I finde not a word of that and therefore however you may have Answered the Expectations of others I am sure you have not answered mine But further you say you published your Epistle To prevent the World from censuring Sir whatever you promised your selfe in the beginning of your Book your heart failed for fear of obtaining when you had finished it And therefore you are forced to Ride Post after your Reader and pray him That he would not up-braid you As if you had some private ends of your own in your present change See the Post-Script in Page 40. Which plainly shews that you had some mis-givings of heart that all you had spoken throughout your Book would not Answer your end Viz. Keep the World from censuring And as for that other end which you pretend in the publishing of your Book Namely Charity to your late Brethren Truly whatever you pretend they will scarce believe you because in your Post-Script you uncharitably impute the Calumnies and Slanders that were cast upon his late Majesty and his Majesty that now is to the Presbiterians and Independens Indefinitly without exception Is this Charity And this uncharitableness of yours is grievously aggravated First Because it is basely remembred by you who were in the same Condemnation with others And Secondly Because it is mentioned after it hath been pardoned by the Kings Majesty And is this your gratefull return for that love which your late Brethren have manifested to you If so surely the charity of a Catholick and the mercies of the wicked are alike cruel You proceed like a Romane Catholick and in the latter end of page the 1. Sound a Trumpet in your own praise by saying That your carriage was alwaies such while you was in Communion with them meaning your late Brethren As gave them sufficient reason to believe that you was not Byassed by world interests and selfish considerations But if any body believes so they may erre because they do not believe as the Church believes In the Second Page you tell us how you came to be acquainted with a Lay Gentle-Man of the Catholick perswasion and how he interrogated you about the grounds of Christian Religion The substance of his Questions was to this purpose Whether you were sure the Christian Religion in General was more true then the Religion of Turks Jews or any others c The Reason he gave for this question was that if neither your self nor those that taught you that Christianity was the only safe way to Salvation was infallibly certain or were capable of any mistakes or errour in this thing Then it followed that Christianity was but probable and not certain From Page second to the eighth you recite what Arguments your Catholick Friend used to prove these things to you Viz. That we could not convince a Turk or a Jew of the certainty of Christianity but by the Churches Infallibility Which I forbear to make a reply unto partly because it is but a Narrative of a private Conference between you and that Catholick Gentle-Man And chiefly because I shall have occasion to speake to the very same things in my following Answers to your Arguments to which I refer the Reader You come in the latter end of the 8. Page to tell us what Effects this Conference had upon your understanding as that thereupon You resolved to have Recourse to Almighty God by Prayer for his Divine assistance and to make it your businesse according to your skill and understanding to take a full view of the Catholick Faith and of Christianity and laying aside all Prejudices Pride and Humours You Resolved to embrace by the assstance of God whatsoever you should understand to agree to his most Holy Will and Pleasure Hereupon let me aske you a few questions First how are you sure you had a Divine Assistance in this choice as an Answer to your Prayers since when you made these Prayers you were not a member of your pretended Catholick Church Secondly How are you sure since the heart of Man is deceitfull that your heart did not deceive you when it inclined you to Popery Thirdly
you say that if they were understood in the Imperative Mood they cannot work Faith in those that cannot read But then it seems they may work Faith in them that can read because as the Rhemists say they can shew both Jews and Hereticks the Truth if they search deeply and diligently But secondly How can general Councilsshew the Truth and beget Faith since if they are infallible every body cannot read their Decrees and Canons If you say they understand those Decrees and Canons by the general Consent of those that can read then by the same means may a man that cannot read the Scripture be guided by them 3 You say that by those words search the Scripture cannot be understood that the Scriptures should be our Judge and guide because then they would have excluded Christ and after him his Apostles from being the infallible means by which true Faith was to be taught to the World But how doth this follow since you say the Church under the Old Testament was a Judge and an infallible guide But did their being an infallible guide till Christ exclude Christ from being a guide and did Christs being a guide when he was on the Earth exclude the Holy Ghost from being a guide when he left the Earth In like manner it followeth not because the Scriptures of the Old Testament for of them Christ speaks in the place under debate were a guide to instruct men into the knowledge of the Messiah that they should exclude Him His Spirit or Apostles from being Guides But further it followeth by the same parity of Reason that if the Scriptures of the Old Testament could not be an infallible guide because then they would have excluded Christ and after him his Apostles from being infallible guides I say it follows by the same reason that if Christ and his Apostles were infallible Guides and Judges in matters of Faith that then they have excluded the Church of Rome from being that infallible Guide and Judge which she pretends her self to be and thus you have sharpned a Knife to cut your Mothers throat You pretend pag. 14. and say that the second Reason that is urged for sole Scripture being a guide is 2 Tim 3.15 From a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make thee wise to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus All Scripture is given by Inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction in righteousness that the man of God may be perfect throughly furnished to all good works This Text you say proves not what is intended viz. that the Scripture alone was the way the rule and means appointed by God to judge and decide all doubts c. your Reasons pag. 15. are First That though They might be profitable to such a man as Timothy who had faith already yet they could no way be profitable nor useful to one that had not faith or did not believe them to be the Word of God for Faith comes by hearing not by reading To which I answer First If the Scriptures are not a Guide to them that believe not why do the Rhemists say that the reason why Jews and Hereticks do not finde Christ to be their King Lord Life and Saviour is because they did not search the Scriptures deeply Surely you will not say that Jews and Hereticks are Believers and you say they are no guide to Unbelievers why then do the Rhemists say Christ reprehended them for not fearching the Scriptures deeply To what purpose then are Jews and Hereticks blamed for not searching the Scriptures deeply if the Scriptures had been as you say no way profitable to them but further you say they are not profitable to them that do not believe them to be the word of God Suppose this were granted which cannot be proved doth it not follow that your Roman Church by the same reason is no way profitable no way a Judge nor an infallible Guide to any that do not believe her to be so and by the same reason an Atheist may say All gods providences are no monitors to him All his judgements are no examples to him because cause he doth not believe there is a God Is not this as good Logick as to say the Scriptures are no way profitable to them that do not believe them to be the Word of God You proceed to give another reason why this Scripture 2 Tim. 3.15 is not a proof for what is pretended because then if the Scriptures more solely sufficient which Timothy knew from a child they being but the Scriptures of the Old â—estamâ—nt it would follow that Christ and the Now Testament and the Sacraments and the Apostles are at least not necessary I answer if by the Scriptures sole sufficiency you mean that they are sufficient to bring men to salvation without Faith Repentance and Obedience then this is a Puppit of your own as you Phrase it for where is there any Protestant of that mind therefore you do but bark against the Moon But we say they are solely sufficient to direct us to those ways by which we may obtain salvation But then say you What needed Christ and the Apostles and the New Testament if the Scriptures Timothy had learned which were those of the Old Testament were sufficient But then I answer as before if Christ and the Apostles were solely sufficient what need is there of your Pope and Council So that by this Argument you either make Christ and his Apostles not solely sufficient or if they were then what need this waste of a General Council But you may say that a General Council was to direct people in succeeding Ages So were the Scriptures much rather for whatever was written aforetime was written for our Learning upon whom the ends of the World are come In the last place you say pag. 15. The word All Scripture must either signifie every Scripture as the Original word 〈◊〉 ought to be rendred or All Scriptures that ever were or All Scriptures that were when this Text was written or All that we now have If it be to be understood of every Scripture or any Scripture then you say it doth prove too much because then all the Scriptures save one Book are useless Though what hath been said doth sufficiently answer this innumeration and therefore I might be excused from answering any farther yet because you intimate a farther proof of what you now urge I shall therefore when I meet with it give a further Answer You come in the 16 page to tell your Reader That you met with no Arguments for the sole sufficiency of Scripture among those that were usually urged and therefore you resolved to see what could be said against this common General opinion of all who oppose the Church of Rome why the Scriptures could not be this Rule and Judge You say you have not met with any Arguments to prove the sole sufficiency of Scripture to be
to enveigh against Protestants for their private doubtfull and uncertain expounding of Scriptures Let me give you the exposition of a whole Colledge of Catholicks upon this very Text under debate Either say they St. Paul means this Epistle in the words before or some other See the Rhemists marginall Note upon the place Surely this is infallible indeed it is either this or some other At this rate of Infallibility any private spirit shall interpret Scriptures all day long viz. either this is the sense or some other Ninthly and Lastly If any Canonical Scripture be lost will not this redound to the prejudice of the Romane Church Since they acknowledge that they only are the Church and that the Church is the keeper of Divine Truths and that they have been the conservatours of the Scriptures to posterity Now if any Books be lost as you say there is how have they infallibly kept what they say was long since committed to their trust Thus you desperatly venture to wound the reputation of the Scriptures though you make the Sword by which you do it to pass through the reins of your darling infallibility In pag. 19. you come to a Fourth Reason Why the Scriptures cannot be a guide to conveigh Divine and Infallible faith to all and that is because they cannot be understood by all nay you say they are very subject to be mis-understood if we will believe the 2 Pet. 3.16 Where speaking of St. Pauls Epistles he saith there were some things hard to be understood which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest as they do also the other Scriptures to their own destruction It is in vain you say to urge that the Scriptures are plain and easie in fundamentals and in what concerns salvation for we have here a plain testimony that they are wrested to their own destruction therefore they cannot be a safe rule nor any rule at all to the ignorant c. Though this Argument be answered already yet I answer further in the words of a learned man That if the Scriptures are so hard to be understood and the Pope can infallibly interpret them what a madness and childishness is it for the Catholicks themselves to lie swaggering and contending with one another before all the world with fallible mediums about the sense of Scripture when they have one among them that infallibly can interpret them and that with such Authority as all men are bound to rest in and contend no further And the further mischief of it is that of all the rest this man is always silent as to exposition of Scripture who alone is able to part the fray Now methinks this argues a great want of good nature that the Pope can see his Children so fiercely wrangle about the sense of Scripture and yet will not give out the infallible meaning of every place and so stint the strife among them seeing he can do it if he will But again how doth it follow that because the Scriptures are hard to be understood and are by some wrested to their damnation that therefore they are either no Guides at all or at the best but uncertain ones Pray let me ask you a question or two May you not as well say that Christ was no infallible Guide because many of his words were wrested by the Jews to their destruction as that of his destroying the Temple and building it in three days Job 2.19 And did not they wrest his words to their own destruction when Christ said Mat. 26.64 65. that he was the Son of God and they thereupon said he had spoken blasphemy and therefore needed no other witness against him and likewise they said he blasphemed when he told the man that was sick of the Palsie that his sins were forgiven So that speech of Christ was hard to be understood to learned Nicodemus Job 3. Except a man be born again he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God Doth it follow from hence that Christ was not an infallible Guide Again are the Canons and Decrees of General Councils more secure from being misinterpreted then the Scriptures or do they use more plainness of speech then the Spirit of God used in the Scriptures or is nothing that they determine of necessity to salvation If so then why may not their words be wrested to the destruction of those that are unlearned or unstable as well or rather as ill as the Scriptures And if so I demand whether this be not as good nay a better Argument against themselves viz. some wrest the judgment and definitions of the Church to their destruction Ergo the Church is not an infallible Guide to all nor indeed any Guide to the ignorant which are the greatest part of mankind Is not this the same if not a better argument then to say the unlearned wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction Ergo the Scriptures are not an infallible Guide to all nor any Guide at all to the ignorant I come now to consider your 5 Reason which is That if the Scriptures be a Guide Rule and Judge it must onely be meant of their true Original and Authentick Writings and not of corrupted Copies and therefore if we have not the true Originals our rule is imperfect And again pag. 20. you say If we had the Originals it would be hard to find a man that doth so infallibly understand the Originals as to give us a true translation This you endeavour to prove out of several Protestant Writers pag. 20. 21. viz. That we have not the Originals themselves nor undoubted Translations and therefore the Scriptures are not an infallible Guide To which I answer That though what hath been spoken already might suffice to this Argument yet to make full measure running over let me add that this very Objection lieth with the like force against General Councils For first how do you know with a divine certitude that you have the true Original and Authentick Writings wherein those Decrees were contained Secondly How do you know with a divine certitude whether the Scribe that committed them to Writing was an honest man or not Thirdly How do you know with a divine certitude that these Councils Decrees and Canons are truly and infallibly translated since they were written in a Language that I know not If you say I have them translated by private Doctors then I query if private Doctors are infallible If they are what need is there of a Pope or a General Council If they are fallible why may they not fail when they tell me they have faithfully interpreted and translated the sense of Councils and Fathers But if they being private persons can give the true sense of Councils and Fathers why may not men of the same ability for Learning and Piety give as perfect a Translation and as infallible an Interpretation of the Scriptures of the Apostles and Prophets So that the Argument cuts as much with one edge as the other If the Scriptures be guide
These promises to the Church are made upon condition like that promise Ezekiel 36.27 I will put my Spirit within you and cause you to walk in my statutes here to use your own words is the Spirit of Truth promised to preserve them from errour But this is not absolutely promised without condition for the 37 ver saith For all this he will be enquired of them And to this agrees those Texts in the New Testament Act. 5.32 The holy Ghost which God hath promised to them that obey him Luke 11.13 My heavenly Father shall give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him By all which it appears that God did not promise to guide the Church absolutely and irresistably whether they would or no but upon their faithful adhering to what they had been taught he promiseth his Spirits continual supply for their continual instruction But 4. Whereas it is said Esay 35.8 that there shall be away that fools shall not err therein which is a Text so much insisted on by you I demand whether this Text doth imply an impossibility of erring If so then we may as well go to a Fool to be guided as to a Pope because it saith The wavering men though Fools shall not err therein so that this Text as truly concludes infallibility in any body as in the Pope and his Council But 5. To speak somewhat in particular to that Text Esay 59.21 As for me this is my Covenant with them saith the Lord my spirit that is upon thee and my words which I have put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor out of the mouth of thy seed nor but of the mouth of thy seeds seed from heneforth and forever To this Text I answer That these words are rather a charge that Gods Word should not depart from them and their seed then a promise of any such thing And therefore Mr. Calvin whom you sometimes produce upon the like occasion grants that the words will bear an Imperative construction God requiring them thereby not to quench his Spirit which he puts into them nor forsake his Word which he should teach them so that as the Covenants on his part to give them his Word and Spirit so he requires on their part that they should not resist nor quench it and to this agrees Junius and therefore he translates those word in the beginning of the verse As for me De me autem i. e. but as much as concerns me thereby shewing that as God had concerned himself in putting his Word and Spirit into them so they were concerned to see that it did not depart from them And therefore unless you can prove that the Church of Rome is the Church here prophesied of and also that these Texts are not understood conditionally and if conditionally that the Church of Rome hath observed these conditions you have but beaten the air in the citation of them You proceed to a fourth Argument to prove that there must be an infallible Church from several Texts of the New Testament the first is Mat. 16.19 Upon this Rock I will build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it To which I answer First that you have lost the Original of St. Mathews Gospel as you confess and therefore you know not whether this Text be so in the Original and this further appears because you say pag. 20. that you cannot tell whether he that translated it was an honest man or not But 2. The words upon which this Controversie depends viz. the Rock and the Gates of Hell are a Metaphorical expression from whence Logically you cannot infer your conclusion 3. No Scripture is of private interpretation Now to interpret the prevailing of the gates of Hell for the prevailing of Errour is a private interpretation first because Errour and Heresie is never so called in all the Scripture 2. Because Sheol which the Greek translates haiden or haides and we in English Hell is frequently taken for the Grave And of this mind was Chrysostom who paraphrasing upon these words of Christ saith If the gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church much more shall they not prevail against Christ therefore be not troubled when thou shalt hear that I am betrayed and crucified By which it doth appear that this Author understands by the gates of Hell prevailing that Death and the Grave should neither prevail over Christ nor his Church and therefore he could not understand thereby that it was a promise the Church should not err and that the gates of Hell is understood for the gates of the Grave see Esay 38.10 Hezekiah said when the fear of death came upon him that he should go to the gates of Sheol i. e. Grave So Job 38.17 Psal 9.13 Psal 107.18 4 Again As the gate of Hell cannot be understood for Error so the Rock here spoken of cannot be understood for Peters person because it is more agreeing with the sense of the place being compared with other Scriptures and the Analogie of Faith to understand it of Christ who is the Rock of Ages and the chief Corner-stone Ephes 2.20 and 1 Cor. 10.4 they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them and that Rock was Christ So that Peter having professed Christ to be the Son of the living God our Lord tells him that Upon this Rock or Christ whom he had made profession of he would build his Church and that though he might be put to death to use the words of Chrysostome yet Peter ought not to be troubled because death should not have dominion over him the gates of death should not prevail against him who will swallow up death in victory But lastly What if we pity the poor and grant you that which you are never able to prove viz. that by the Gates of Hell not prevailing should be understood that Errour and Heresie should not prevail against the Church Yet it doth not follow from hence that the Church shall be preserved from all Errour Might you not as well say that none that believe can sin because sin shall not have dominion over them and that it was impossible for Saints to die because Christ hath promised them the victory over death as say that because Christ hath promised Errour shall not prevail over them that therefore it is impossible the Church should err in any thing Your next Scripture is Mat. 18.17 He that will not hear the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publican I answer 1 It doth not follow from hence that the Church cannot err no more then it followeth from your former Arguments that the Scribes and Pharisees could not err because Christ commanded to hear them But 2 This Text proves more then you allow for it proves that particular Churches cannot err for of such a Church Christ speaks and not of the Church representative in a general Council my reason is because one that is offended with his brother if
mouth of the Pope or Chief Pastour then I querie whether it may not be possible for him to erre since many Popes have been Hereticks and have taught contrary to the Law of God as that Pope did that told King Henry the 8th he might marry his Brothers Wife Sixthly But suppose the Pope did not erre in giving me the true sense of Councils and their Decrees then I querie How every private person shall have his judgment informed in the Truth without going to Rome Seventhly If you say he may be resolved at home by the Pastours in several places then I querie whether those Pastours may not erre since it is manifest that the several Pastours and Churches of Asia did erre and then how can the members of this Church be sure they are under an Infallible conduct to Eternal Life and that these Pastours teach according to the Doctrine of the Infallible Church VIII Since you say that General Councils Lawfully Called by the Pope their chief astour cannot erre I querie How I shall be infallibly assured when Councils are so called Since sometimes the Pope may come in by Simony and Usurpation as Boniface the 3 did and sometimes be a Heritick as Lyberius was who subscribed the Excommunication of Athanasius in which cases they ceasing to be lawfull Popes I would then know how I can be sure of a lawful Council IX Since there must be alway a lawfull succession of Popes to make a lawfull succession of True Ministers How shall I know infallibly that the Minister that I heat did lawfully so succeed and this I would know because if he be not a lawfull Minister I may not lawfully hear him And since that sometimes Hereticks have been Popes and sometimes the Chair hath been Usurped and once a Woman was Pope and sometimes there hath been two at once How shall I that am to hear a private Pastour know whether his Ordination did succeed from a lawfull Pope and not from some of these X. How shall I know what Council I may infallibly adhere unto since one Council hath opposed another and some cleave to one Council and some to another the Roman Church they test in the Niceen Council the Greek Church they rest in the Council of Arminum both which are contrary to the other how shall any one be assured of the truth of all those things with a divine certitude And yet you make the world believe that all your wayes are so plain that a fool cannot erre in them and that the Scriptures are doubtfull guides when no Religion in the World is perplexed with more doubts then yours XI If your Roman Church be this Infallible Church and all her Doctrines Infallible then I querie if it be not sinfull to doubt of the Truth of what she teacheth XII If it be not a sin to doubt of what your Church teacheth then why do you blame us for questioning your Infallibility XIII But if it be a sin to question the Churches Doctrine then how came the Baraeans to be commended for searching the Scriptures to see if what Paul preached was so or not and whether might not their searching the Scriptures have run them upon all those inconveniencies of mistaking by false Pointings corrupted Copies false Interpretations to the multiplying of Sects and Hereticks if it might why are they commended for searching XIV How can the reason of the Jews erring be because they did not know the Scriptures if the knowledge of them would not have been a sufficient guide to the Truth XV. But if you shall say we cannot know the Scriptures but by the true Church then I querie how shall I know the true Church since there are as many different opinions about which is the true Church as there is about which is the true sense of Scriptures XVI If you say the Scriptures decide the question and guide us to the true Church then whether this be not to speak Daggers to prove the knowledge of the Scriptures by the Church and the knowledge of the Church by the Scriptures XVII But if you say we know the Church by universal Tradition then I querie whether your Church can be so known since a great part of the Christian World hath and doth disown her witness the Greek Church together with most of the Churches in Europe XVIII Whether then you can shew such an universal Tradition for your Pope and Church as we can do for the Scriptures to which we do well to take heed as to a light that shineth in a dark place till the day dawn and the Day-star arise in our hearts XIX Where was the Infallibility of the Roman Church in the time of Athanasius when he complained totus mundus Arianizat that the whole world Ariantized XX. I demand Where will be the Visibility and Infallibility of your Roman Church in the time of the great Antichrist which your Rhemish Annotators say shall come towards the end of the World and abolish the publick Exercise of all Religion wherein consisteth the worship of the true God and shall pull down all kind of Religious worship save that which shall be done to himself alone See Rhem. Annot on 2 Thess 2.4 How will your Church appear conspicuously and universally to be a guide to Fools infallibly in those days FINIS
your negative positions viz. That the private spirit Reason and Scripture is not the sole Judge you come to infer from the whole That the Catholick Church is this judge and that God had alwayes such a Church This you endeavour to make good by saying God had such a Church Two Thousand Years before any Scripture was written And to demonstrate this you say Circumcision was brought in by Abraham and practised by the Church without Scripture to try it by c. I Answer first If the Pope will bring in any new Law or Canon with that Authority as Abraham brought in Circumcision we will believe him without a Council or desiring him to prove it by Scripture But Secondly It seems here is some other Rule and Guide beside Reason Scripture the private Spirit and the Church for here is no Council to decree Circumcision nor private spirit to suggest it nor reason to contrive it But here is God appearing to Abraham and commanding it by an immediate voice from Heaven So that this was Gods way of guiding his People then and not by General Councils and of this opinion is Chrysostome Hom. 1. in Mat. who conceives God might use other means and this agrees with that saying Heb. 1.1 God in sundry times and in diverse manners spake to our Fathers by the Prophets Lastly If the Scriptures are lyable to many exceptions as you say by which they are rendred uncapable of being our infallible Guide then I demand how you know what was transacted in the World the first 2000 Years and whether there was any Church at all in those times If you say you are by the Hystory of the Scriptures guided to believe what was done 2000 Years before the first Pen-man was born I demand how you can believe this since they are so fallibly and subject to so many exceptions as you say But further may I not with more certitude believe what Moses and all the Pen-men of Holy Scriptures writ of things they were eye-witnesses of then you can be of what Moses writ the first 2000 Years that were expired before he was born You come in pag. 27 to a second Argument Namely That the Church of the Jews were so the Jews I suppose you mean an infallible guide after the Scriptures were written and for this purpose you cite Deut. 17.8 The man that will do presumptiously and will not hearken to the voice of the Priest or unto the Judge that man shall dye I answer The Scripture saith Pro. 16.10 A divine sentence is in the lips of the King his mouth transgresseth not in judgement Doth it follow from hence that all Kings are infallible in their judgments But how and by what Rule were these priests to judge whom the People were to obey upon pain of death Ezekiel tells us Chap. 44.24 And in Controversie they shall stand in judgement and they shall judge it according to my Judgement they shall keep my Lawes and Statutes in all their Assemblies and hollow my Sabbaths But did these Priests and Judges always judge according to Gods Law were they always infallible in their Sentences How comes it to pass then that Aaron sinned in hearkening to the voice of the People when they required him to make them a Calf Exod. 32.2 and v. 7. It is said They had corrupted themselves Where was this Churches infallibility at this time and v. 8. They turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them And again where was the infallibility of the Priest when he appointed them v. 3. To break off their earing which were in their eares to make a Calf Surely in this they were an excellent type of the Romane Church who were quickly corrupted from their Primitive Purity Again Ezek. 22.26 It is said The Priests have violated my Law they have prophaned my Holy things they have put no difference between the Holy and Prophane neither have they shewed difference between the Clean and the unclean and have hid their eyes from my Sabbath and I am prophaned among them Neither was this the fault or a few but the Text tells us v. 30. That God sought for a Man among them that should make up the hedge and stand in the gap before him for the land but he found none Where was the Priest and the infallible church all this while whom the People were to hear upon paine of death So that the Text by you cited Deut. 17. is abused for they had plain Laws written which were to be a guide to Priest and People which if the Priest did not judge accordingly as many times they did not the People were not to hear them Your other Text is Mat. 23.2 3. the Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses Chair all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe that observe and do I Answer If by sitting in Moses's chair you understand their teaching the People according to Moses Law we are of your mind for so it appears in the forecited Text in Ezekiel and in all such things the People were to hearken to them But if by sitting in Moses Chair you understand their Publick Authority and that whatsoever they so taught was infallible This I deny for they did sometimes like the Pope Mark 7.7 Teach for Doctrines the Commandments of men and v. 8. Laid aside the Commandments of God as you do the Scriptures that they might hold the traditions of men and v. 13. Made the Word of God of none effect by their traditions But if the Church of the Jews which was represented in the great Synedrion could not erre then it followeth that all Christian Religion must be discarded For if she was infallible in that judgment she made of Christ and his Doctrine then there remains nothing but that we renounce both him and it and turn either Jews or Pagans But lastly It appears that Christ himself had not this opinion of the infallibility of the Jewish Church which you have because then he should have referred all he taught to be decided by them whether it were true or no. But instead thereof he appeals to the Scriptures and offers Himself and his Doctrine as we do at this day to stand or fall by their verdict and to their Authority of the Church he opposeth that of the Scripture to which he knew the other ought to give place John 5.39.46 Mat. 22.42 43 44. Luke 24.27 You come in the third place in p. 27.28 to prove that there shall be an infallible Church under the New Testament your Texts are Esay 2.23 3. Esay 35.8.54.3.13 17. Esay 59.21 Esay 60.10 12. To which I answer First Why are these Texts brought to prove an infallible Church when the Texts themselves you say are no infallible guide how then can they guide us to your infallible Church But 2. How doth it appear that these Texts are to be applied to the Church of the New Testament Much less doth it appear that they are to be applyed to your Roman Church 3