against the Pharises who denyed the resurrection from the dead you err said he to them not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God c. Have you never read that which was spoken to you by God I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. God is not the God of the dead but of the living He blames them for not having learned the resurrection of the dead in this sentence of Scripture Certainly then they ought to have learned it there for he is too good to blame him who hath done his duty Now the sentence which he produceth saith nothing of the Resurrection of the dead expresly and directly he draws it only by the consequences of that which he layeth down We must confess then that t is our duty not only to learn and believe the things which we read in the Scriptures but also to draw from them and conclude those things which may be deduced from them although they are not read there in so many words and to embrace them with the same faith as we do the others and that without this weare ignorant of the Scriptures and are in danger of erring CHAP. VI. That the new method is contrary to the procedure and maximes of the holy Fathers in their disputes and favourable to the Heretiques and Infidels THe Holy Fathers following the command and example of Christ and his Apostles make use every where of this sort of proofs without any scruple esteeming they have sufficiently shewed their belief by the Scripture when they had drawn them from thence by good and clear consequences Those whom we have above named do not dispute otherwise injoying freely that right which they give their adversaries I should be too long should I here repeat all the examples of them as when they prove by the Scripture against the Sabellions that God the Father is not begotten and is without beginning * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and against the Arians that the Son is consubstantial with the Father †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and against the Nestorians that the Holy Virgin is mother of God * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and against the Eutichians that Jesus Christ hath two natures †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all propositions which are not found in the Scripture exactly set down in the same words and which nevertheless they profess to demonstrate by the Scripture as every one may see in their books are an evident sign that they have believed that t is a good and sufficient way to prove a belief by the Scriptures when one draws from it by reasoning although one cannot alledge any passage where it is formally and expresly set down In a word you must either forsake the cause of God and instructions and convictions of the Heretiques or proceed in this manner For otherwise how could the fathers dispute against them Let us give an Arian to one of our Methodists to be instructed or convinced which way will he take how will he prove the consubstantiality of the Son he cannot alledg one exact text for it for it is clear that in the whole Bible there is not one of that nature and he cannot take advantage of the texts which shew this truth since they do not exactly express it for the law of his Method forbids him the use of this sort of proofs Will he use the Authority of the council of Nice or of the Church which he pretends is Catholique but this would be to deceive himself and not to dispute this would be to alledge for proofe of the question the same thing which is directly in question For if the Arian should appeal either to the Nicean faith or to the authority of the Catholique Church he would not be an Arian That which made him renounce both these is the beleif that you will prove it to him You must necessarily then leave him in an error because your pretended Method hath divested you of all the means of drawing him out of it You can prevail no better against a Sabellion an Eutichian or in general against any of the Heretiques who denie the Church any of her positive beliefs not expressed in so many words in the Scripture Even the Jew will take advantage of your maximes and laugh by your example at all which you produce from the Old Testament to make him believe the New and will say as you do that the consequences are Chimeras and phancies and will protest not to yield unless that he hath a formal passage which saith expresly that Jesus Son of Mary born in Bâ—thlehem under Augustus Caesar is the Christ promised by the antient Oracles Concil Lateran sub 4. lex 3 cap. 24 Concil Lateran sub Innoc. 3. exped pro recup terr sanct p. 63. col 1.8 So he will find when all is done that your fine Method is the gagg of the Church and not Heresie and that it fortifies it instead of subdueing it And acquires to the Church nothing but losses and Funerals instead of victories and Triumphs which it promised her But if formally one hath judged them worthy of an Anathema and of the loss of liberty by the Council who should furnish these infidels with sword poinyard and cordage What thunderbolt and ex-Communication do the Fathers of this Method merit who as much as in them lies arme the Jews and Heretiques with a buckler Shot-proof and take from the Church the only arms which God hath put into her hands to scatter all sorts of enemies to wit his Holy word But this method doth not only deprive us of the use of the Scriptures against those who receive them either all or in part It renders likewise all truths unuseful to us the knowledge of which God hath imprinted in the nature of men taking from us discourse or reasoning without which it is not possible to explain them to be useful either for the instruction or conviction of the ignorant For according to these new maxims every one will demand formal proofs of that which one would perswade them and will hold himselelf obliged not to believe any thing beyond those very things which nature hath taught him The Pagans will reject the unity of the Divinity because it cannot be drawn but by consequences from our General notions he will receive none of the arguments which you will use to establish the Justice goodness and Power of God the truth of the Scriptures the Authority of the Church and other such like grounds of Christianity because you have taught him that these reasonings are but meer dreames and none of their conclusions is worthy of an assured beleif Briefly there was never any method so perplexing and troublesome as this which renders all the differences of philosophy and Religion Aeternal without leaving us any means to determine them For since that to make them agree it will not suffer us to imploy any other that an express and formaldecision by the Authority of
so many words the worshipping the Devil nor the second the casting himself down from the top of the Temple For in S. Matthew he alledgeth the law Mat. 15.4 honour thy Father and Mother and the ordinance he that curseth Father or Mother shall die the death against the traditions of the Scribes and Pharesies who hold that a child who is obliged by an oath or a rash vow not to give any assistance to its Father and Mother would not sin in refusing them the honour which is due to them And nevertheless neither of these two passages do formally and in so many words express what they would conclude from them To the Saduces who questioned him about the resurrection of the dead he produced that which God said in the Scriptures Mat. 22.32 I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob the Saduces remained confused and all the multitude admired the force and strength of this proofe Our methodists laugh at it and demand a formal passage and say that the consequences are faulty The Apostles follow faithfully the tracts of their Master they prove the truth of the gospel against the Jews not by formal passages of the old Testament but by consequences and reasoning which they drew from it In this manner holy Peter shewed the sending and comming of Christ to the world by the words of Moses Act. 3.22 Deut. 18.15 Act. 2.27.29 30 31. Ps 16 10. Rom. 4. Ps 32 1 2. Gen. 15.6 a prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren like to me his resurrection by that of the Psalms thou shalt not suffer thy holy one to see corruption so St. Paul concludes that a man is not justified by the law but by grace in those words of the Prophet blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven Rom. 9.8 and from that which is written that Abraham believed and t was imputed to him for righteousness Thus he proves in his epistles to the Romans and Galatians Gala. 4.28 that 't is by faith and not by workes that we are justified and by the word of the Lord to Abraham Gen. 21 12. Rom. 9.15.16 Ex. 33.19 in Isaac shall thy seed be called and that the calling of beleivers is not of him that willleth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy from that which God sayed to Moses I will be gracito whom I will be gracious and I will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy In the same manner he shewes the rejection of the Jews by these words of the Scripture Rom. 9.23.33 Hos 2 23. Rom. 14.10 11. Esai 45.25 behold I lay in Sion a stumbling stone and the calling of the Gentiles by this I will call them my people which were not my people and the last judgment by these other as I live saith the Lord every knee shall bow to me What shall I say of his Epistle to the Hebrews all interwoven with proofs of his nature as when he sheweth the excellency of Christ above the Angels by the words of David Heb. 1.5 Psal 2.7 Heb. 5.7 tot thou art my son this day have I begotten thee his eternal preisthood by the History of Melchisedeck in Genesis the advantage of his alliance above the ancients by the oath set down in Psalms 21.10 the Lord hath sworn and well not repert of it Heb. 7.21 I must wholy transcribe the Epistles of this divine man if I would deny here all the examples where he furnisheth us with these sorts of proofs for he disputes every where thus and draws from the holy Scriptures by the force of reasoning thousands of conclusions which cannot be read there expressly And if one cannot prove by the Scriptures except it speaks in so many words as the new method pretends how did the same Apostle dispute by the Scripture against the Jews of Thessalonica that it behoveth that Christ must suffer Act. 17.2.3 Act. 18.28 and that he should rise from the dead and that this Jesus viz. he who was crucified in Judea was the Christ and how did the Apostles demonstrate the same proposition by the same Scriptures certainly this proposition that Jesus is the Christ is found couched in these terms in no places of the old testament as every one confesseth How comes it then that Paul and the Apostles shewed it by this ancient Scripture it is be cause they shewed divers things in the Scripture from whence it necessarily followed for they gathered together all the marks of Christ contained in the books of the old Testament from whence they formed this proposition he who has such and such qualities who is born at such a time and in such a place who doth suffers and teaches such and such things is the Christ this being once so put they consequently apply to their Jesus all the marks and qualities of the Messias proveing by clear and irrefragable witneses that he had exactly in him all that the prophets had attributed to the Messias from whence the conclusion follows of it self that Jesus is then the Messias this is that which S. Luke calls to declare propose in the book of the Acts Acts. 17.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 useing two words most proper for this subject the first of which signifies to open the second to put one thing neer another to tell us that the Apostles prove these conclusions by the Scriptures first in making the prophecies appear clear and shewing the true sence of them and then in examining them with the events and comparing the figures with the things and the shadow with the body from whence the light of the truths of the Gospel shine forth of themselves Since the Lord and his Apostles used this way we must acknowledg that a proposition is lawfully and valuably proved by the Scriptures when one showeth that it evidently follows from the things which are contained in it although it be not there it self expressly except one were so desperate as to accuse the Soveraign Wisdome and his most faithful and intimate Ministers of having imployed vain and frivilous Sophisms instead of good and sollid deemonstrations But besides their examples they have authorized this way of proof by their command For our Lord according to the exposition of the most parts of the antient and modern Interpreters commanded the Jews in the fifth of St. Joh. 5.39 John to search the Scriptures Why should he command that we should search for other things then those which are directly expressed there all the circumstances of the passage shew that he wisheth them to learn who is truly the Christ But this cannot be drawn from antient Scriptures but only by consequences It follows then that the Lord expects that we should learn not only that which it tells us directly but also that which may be concluded from it by good and valid consequences Mat. 22.29 31 32. And in Matt. 22. disputing
but those things which as well the Prophets as Moses had foretold that they would come to pass that it behooveth that the Christ should suffer †Acts 26.22 23. and finally how could he in another place assure the * 1 Cor. 15 34. Corinthians that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures that he was buried and that he rose again the third Day according to the Scriptures since it is evident that none of these propositions is literally and expresly so written in any of the Books of the Old Testament but only are gathered from thence by consequence Now if that which is drawn from the Scriptures by good consequence is really in the Scriptures why do you reject it since you confess with me that there is nothing in the Scripture but what is Holy True and Divine conclusions of Truth are not formally in their principles but one cannot deny them to be there in Vertue and Power so that admitting of a principle one admits also all things that can be inferred from it by that very act as for instance he who saith that we have four gospels saith also that we have two and two of them these numbers being evidently contained in that which he hath expressed And the Scripture saying that Jesus Christ is a man saith also by those very words that he hath a soul and body the two parts of the nature of mans 'T is very true that a man may sometimes lay down things the consequences of which he will not allow of but this proceeds from the weakness of his understanding which doth not see all the Lawful consequences which may be drawn from them God whose Wisdom is infinite never affirms any thing without Knowing all the consequences which can be drawn from it so that we need not fear that he will go back from his word or deny any Doctrine to be his that can reasonably be concluded out of his word Since then that all things that can be lawfully inferred from the Holy Scripture are unavoidably true and Divine it is clear that one doth sufficiently prove the truth and holiness of a Creed when he shews that it follows from the positions expressed in the Holy Scripture without any need as formerly the Arians and now the new Methodists pretend to shew it in so many words This is the first principle which Scholarius a Greek indeed but of the side of the Latins laid down at the beginning of his Dispute against those of his own nation concerning the procession of the Holy Ghost first a Scholar orat Henet 3. part Act. Conc. Flor. p. 580. then we must not exspect saith he to find all the proofs expresly and in so many words in the Scripture for this is an excuse which many Hereticks used to save themselves but if there be any thing that may be deduced from what is said in the Scriptures we must Also receive it with the same honour as the Scriptures it self Cardinal Bellarmin who alone hath more desert and reputation in the Roman party then all the Authors and defenders of this new Method have put them all together acknowledgeth this same truth That which one inferreth evidently from the Scriptures saith he is evidently true the Scriptures presupposing it b Bellar. l. 4. de Ec. c. 3. Melchior Canus c Can. loc Theol. l. b. c. 8. Bishop of the Canaries Vega d Veg. l. 9. dê justificat c. 39. Gabril Vasques e Vasques Tom. 1 in Thom. dispute 5.6 3. and disput 12. art 8.6 ◠Alfons Salmeron f Salmer T. 1 prolegum de Canc. 91. all very famous amongst our adversaries make the same judgment of it and the last especially speaks thus of it We ought to hold for Doctrins of Divine Authority and worthy to be received by Faith not only the things which are expresly contained in the Scriptures but those also which are inferred from them by an necessary and evident consequence Certainly 't is enough for us to prove to our adversaries the truth of our beliefs either that we read them in the Scripture or that we infer them from thence since they agree with us that 't is a book Divinely inspired CHAP. X. That this pretended Method takes away certitude from all humane Knowledge and plungeth Religion the Sciences and all the life of men into a horrible confusion But these men demand of us here how we can assure our selves that the consequences which we draw from the Scripture are good and lawful for say they reason is sometimes abused concluding from a principle that which cannot truely be inferred from it Arians and Eutichians who demand formal Passages of the Chatholicks did not they pretend to conclude their false and pernicious opinions from divers places of Scripture where notwithstanding they were not Nestorius Palagius and before them all Origen were deceived in the same manner and there is not perhaps any Heresie which hath not endeavoured to ground it self upon the Scripture by false and abusive discourse Reason then being faulty how can we be assured of the truth of the things which by its means we have discovered in the Scripture for since it is often deceived who can tell us that it is not so now I do not think it strange that an Atheist should make this objection to us since his impiety obliges him to confound all knowledge in an infinite and remedisess incertitude But that men who make profession of the Christian Religion and whose interest t is to preserve Faith Assurance and Credulity in the world should propose to us a discourse which rums all these things from top to bottome in my opinion 't is either an impudence or an extream passion For consider I beseech you how far this fine discourse goeth reason say they is faulty therefore we cannot be assured of the conclusion which it draws from the Scripture But if this consequence be good what assurance can we have First what will become of this so much bragged of certainty of the Catholick Faith which they have alwaies in their mouths it will be accounted to them no other then a meer in discretion For whether they will or no 't is our understanding which receives the things of Faith which considers them and is lead to believe them by the reasons of truth which it seeth in them If our understanding by mistakes and abuses sometimes makes its aprehensions and conclusions uncertain our faith must necessarily be so too The consent of the people the ancient and uninterrupted successions of the Bishop of Rome the Majesty and brightness of the power Beauty Order and pomp of the ministers the light of the divine protection and such like considerations may perswade you that Rome is truely the Church of Jesus Christ but I say how can you be sure of it since this reason to whose report you give credit is false and if it may be faulty in other things why not in this and
Pâ—â—asch 2. p. 96 A. B and 98. B. and 102. D. and Paschal 3 p. 109 c. 110 B. Bibl. PP T. 3. and for the Hereticks in General Chrysost Hom. 87. in Mat. 7 9. D. and Hom. 59. lat 58. in John p. 298. A. Hierom. com 2. in Mich. p. 378. F. and comm in Agg. p. 506. F. Gregro Mvg. Moral in Job l. 18 c. 14. but nevertheless so let it be since they will have it so Shall their fond imagination wrong truth and that under the pretence of thinking to see that in the Scripture which is not there I cannot assure my self of having found there all that which is there divers men have all reasoned in Mathematicks and drawn from the principles of that Sience some conclusions which are not really there But shall it be denied me under the pretence of this to hold this consequence for good and assuredly veritable that the whole is greater then the part that a triangle is bigger then the basis and the Body of a man bigger then his finger but where is the man how stupid soever he be who notwithstanding the paralogisms of Brison and all the other doth not presently see that this arguing is most true and necessary so there are Authors found in natural Philosophy Astrology and Phisick who have discoursed ill phancying to find something in the principles of these Siences which is not there Would not this be not ony injustice but Sottishness or madness to endeavour to peswade us under this pretence that we cannot receive any of the consequences drawn from these principles as certain and necessary nor assure our selves that if a horse sees hears and runs he is then an animal or if a stone hath nothing of sence then it is no animal now we are exactly upon these terms in respect to the Scripture Many have a mind to draw from it by discourse things which it speaks nothing of Gen. 1.16 and the Roman doctors more then all the others who in the two Luminaries which it placeth in the heavens have pretended to find out the power of their Pope to be above the Emperour and his spiritual monarchies in the Faith and qualifications which it attributes to S. Peter and his power to interdict States to depose Princes among animals Act. 10.13 which it represents to us to have been signified to the Apostle in a vision 'T is by the same Logick that they conclude their purgatory from the parable which saith thou shalt not go out till thou hast Mat. 5.2 paid the last farthing and their Sacrifice from the words of the Lord 1 Cor. 11.24 Matt. 26.26 do this and their transubstantiation from the other this is my Body But if their consequences are false and even absurd doth it follow that I cannot assure my self that the Scripture teacheth us that Jesus Christ hath a Body and a soul since it saith that he is a man that it teacheth that he is the God of Israel since it saith he founded the earth in the beginning and that the heavens are the works of his hands and that he was tempted by Israel in the wilderness certainly neither sense nor reason ever offended without some reasons These are saculties naturally right and every one capable of their functions but sometimes they meet with perticular causes which hinders them from acting so For as to sense who knows not that its errors comes either from the indisposition of the Organs from the Scituation of the object or from the quality of the medium which is between them as for example 't is the bilis with which the tongue of a sick man is moistned which makes it taste all meats bitter and to those who have Jaundies 't is also the spreading of that humour which dieth all objects yellow but t is the too great distance from the sun which makes it appear to us much less then it is and which blunts the Angles of a Tower which we see a far off figuring it to us round when it is really square and which makes the two sides of the end of a long Gallery seem to be very neer each other in fine 't is the diversity of the medium through which we see which makes an oare appear to us in the water as if it were bent and crooked when it is really streight except in these and the like cases the eye alwaies to doth its duty faithfully and the other senses likewise do theirs so that it being most easie to know for a truth whether the functions of our senses are so well disposed or not 't is an insupportable error to conclude that we are not able to assure our selves of any one of their reports under pretence that it happens to deceive them when they fail of any one of the conditions necessary to perform their function well Now 't is the same in reason If she concludes wrong 't is certainly because she takes that for a true thing which is not so or that for clear and certain which is obscure and doubtful As when our adversaries conclude from that which the Lord said to St. Peter thou art Peter that their Pope is by right the Monarch of the Christian Church they conclude falsly because they take that for an evident truth in Scripture which doth not so much as appear there viz first that our Lord in these words promiseth the Monarchy of his Church to St. Peter and Secondly that their Pope is the successor of St. Peter in this quality But if these two things which they take for truth were truth then that which they conclude from them must necessarily be so too and he to must be out of his senses who denies the consequences of them And this necessary connexion of propositions with their conclusions is a work not of the mind and reasoning of man but of the will of God as S. Austin expresly remarkes The truth of consequences says he and connexions which propositions have one with another hath not been instituted but considered and remarked by men to be able either to learn or teach it for it is perpetual and divinely established in the reason of the things themselves for as he who counts the degrees of time doth not make them himself and he who shewes the scituation of places the nature of animals of plants or of Stones doth not shew the things instituted by men and he who shews us the stars and their motions shews us nothing made and established by any man in like manner he who saith when the consequence is false 't is not possible but the thing from whence it follows should be false also speaks most truly and doth not make the thing to be so but only demonstrates that it is so †Aug. T. 3. l. 2. de doctr clic c. 32. From whence it comes that he observes elsewhere that no man in disputeing is reduced to a false conclusion unless he has first granted something false from whence this conclusion
LA FOY fondée sur les Saintes Escritures FAITH Grounded upon the Holy Scriptures Against the NEW METHODISTS by JOHN DAILLE Printed in French at Paris anno 1634. And now Englished by M. M. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God Rom. 10.18 LONDON Printed for Benj. Tooke at the sign of the Ship in S. Pauls Church-yard 1675. AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER ALthough the French translation of the Holy Bible made by the Doctors of Louvain can by no means be comparable to the neatness clearness and faithfulness of that which is read among us yet to fit my self to the gust of our Adversaries I have drawn from their Translations and not from ours the most part of the places of Scripture which I make use of in this little book namely in the second and third parts to the end they might not wrangle with us about words as many of them doe and perticularly these new Methodists against whom I have composed this Treatise Onely let me inform you that in three or four passages which are nothing to our controversie I have taken the liberty to correct that in the Greek and Latine texts which these Gentlemen had too evidently turned false by in advertency as I am willing to believe and ignorance and not by malice As for example in the second part Chap. 4.3 pag. 124. I produce the first verse of the Gospel of S. John in these words the word was God and not as these Doctors have expounded it God was the word whereof the two construction which these words are capable of Deus erat verbum they chuse to follow that which is less to purpose and which besides the consusion which it brings to the contexture of the Apostles thoughts does manifestly overturn the words of the Greek text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shews that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot of necessity be the predicate but the subject of the propâ—sition as those who have any knowledge in the Laws and use of the Greek tongue know well enough So in the Epistle to Titus see how they translate the words of S. Tit. 2.13 Paul expectantes beatam spem adventum gloriae magni Dei Servatoris nostri Jesu Christi expecting say they the blessed hope and the coming of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ separating this God whose advent we expect from our Saviour Jesus Christ as if the Apostle should say we expect the coming of God and we expect also the coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ an interpretation neither pertinent nor advantagious to the Church for first the Greek text cannot bear it which binds and ties up all these words great and our Saviour in the same bundle by means of the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Apostle put into their heads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obliging us necessarily to take them not as names of two persons one of which is called God and the other Jesus Christ but as two different qualities attributed to one onely and the same Jesus Christ which is altogether the same with the great God and the Saviour whose advent we expect but this same interpretation is also prejudicial for it takes away from the Catholicks a clear and invincible proof of the divinity of Jesus Christ for if you follow it suppose that Jesus Christ be our Saviour which the Samotosateniens and Arrians confess yet still he is not our God and this is that which they struggle for principally No body then can blame me for leaving the Louvain version in this place to follow the Greek Text in translating this passage Part 2. Chap. 4.3 pag. 124. where I produce against the hereticks expecting the blessed hope and the coming of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ That which I have changed part 2. Chap. 8. 1. pag. 106. in the second chapter of the first of S. Peter is less important Love the brotherhood instead of which our adversaries Bible saith Love brotherhood leaving out the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is in the Greek So in the first of S. Luke I read and therefore that which is born of thee holy shall be called the Son of God Part 2. Chap 4. Sect. 7. pag. 92. therefore the holy one that shall be born of thee as they of Louvain have translated it contrary to the Faith of the Greeks who say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Latine which saith likewise quod nascetur ex te Sanctum not qui nascetur ex te Sanctus As for the small change of words in the 2 Cor. chap. 5. verse 8. where we say we have a good will rather to be out of the body and to be with the Lord instead of that which is in the Louvain bible I have a good will better to be out of the body we have done this only to sweeten the manner of speaking avoir bonne volonte meiux estre is rough and unknown in our language and the Greek and Latine texts do no way oblige us to interpret it so These are if my memory doth not cheat me all the passages in which I have varied from the Louvain version in divers other places I bear with its faults because they do no great prejudice to the justice and truth of my cause although there are some of them which testifie in these Doctors a passion unworthy of the quality which they take of interpreting the Word of God as among others when in Pet. 1.5 3. alledged part 2. ch 8. 5. pag. 109. they read having dominion of the Clergy of the People of God instead of the plainness of the Greek and Latine having dominion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Cleris over the heritage being licensed to add the words and people of God and to hide by this means the sence which the Apostle gives in the word Clergy imployed to signifie the Christian people which is contrary to the use and pretence of those of Rome FAITH Grounded upon the Holy Scriptures Part I. CHAP. I. The Preface of the whole Work SOme years since certain Doctors started up who to render our Religion odious published that it could not be proved by the Scriptures which nevertheless according to us is the only thing capable to ground our Faith upon Their invention was found so plausible that many of our adversaries have reduced all their dialectiques to it thinking that to defeat us there needs no more but to demand some express and formal passages upon every Article of our Confession of Faith and whosoever can press that demand home he is the man that must overcome us This easie way of arguing hath increased Disputants among them and instead as at first of shunning conferences concerning Religion and not permitting any but Priests to discourse it now all sorts of people hunt after it even to the
them that we as well as our Doctors reject them formally and precisely and wish that they had never been spoken off and that they may be Aeternally buried in the cave of errors from whence they came For as Eating good meat is sufficient to preserve the life of man nor is it necessary for him to know Hemlock Aconite or Antimony or to know poysons 't is enough that he is not so unhappy as to eat of them even so 't is in Religion for to obtain salvation 't is sufficient for a man that he believe the holy and wholsome truths communicated to us by the Lord Jesus there is no need that he should know particularly the innumerable poysons which the enemy hath scattered in the World nor that he should know exactly to what degree every one of these false doctrines are poysonous 't is enough for him that he is so happy as to believe none of them To speak properly the express and formal rejection of an errour makes no part of Faith for then Faith would have been imperfect before the birth of the error Before Mahomet came into the World the Faith of Christians was intire and sufficient although it was ignorant of the seducements of that Impostor and though it knows nothing of Marcion of Manicheus of Arrius nor of Pelagius yet it is sufficient to salvation provided that it believes firmly that which Jesus Christ hath revealed There is then a great difference between those propositions which supposeth and affirmeth the truth and those which reject the error The reason why our Fathers have ranked them in the body of the same declaration was not because they were ignorant of this difference but another occasion obliged them to do it for being separated from the Church of Rome and afterwards having been calumniated of holding diverse very strange opinions vide Epist 10. the K. which is in the beginning of our Confession of the year 1559. in fine to make the King their master his subjects their fellow Citizens see clearly what their thoughts were about Religion they not onely declared the belief they had of Christianity and of every one of the articles of which it consisted but also what they thought of the doctrine and communion of the Pope from which they had withdrawn themselves We ought then to distinguish carefully these two sorts of articles which this reason joyns and mixeth together some affirmative and positive declaring that which we believe others negative and exclusive declaring that which we do not believe the first lays down that which is our Faith the second rejects that which is not so For example these are of the first sort that there is a God that he ought to be worshipped with all our affections that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and God Eternal that he was made man that he hath taken our nature in the womb of the holy Virgin that he dyed to expiate our crimes that his blood hath washed and purged our souls from all sin that he is risen and ascended into heaven and there reigns at the right hand of the Father that sins are pardoned to men by the grace of God when they believe in the Gospel that believers are obliged to live holily that Charity is necessary for salvation that the Lord hath ordained that we should be baptised in the name of the Father Son and holy Ghost for the remission of our sins and that he hath likewise commanded us to celebrate the memory of his death in taking eating and drinking the Sanctified bread and wine that this bread and this wine are the communication of his flesh and of his blood that those who believe and live according to the Gospel of Jesus Christ shall have Aeternal salvation and that those who believe not in him shall perish But these following are of the second sort That we ought not to adore the Host of the Church of Rome nor invoke their dead Saints that the mass is not an expiatory sacrifice for the sins of men that the Pope is not the head and spouse of the universal Church that he hath no power neither directly or indirectly over the temporals of Kings and States of the world that neither he nor the Church which adheres to him have the right of never erring in the Faith nor are they the reason and grounds of our Faith that it is not for the merits of our works that our sins are forgiven us or that grace or life is given to us that the bread which we break and the cup which we bless in the Church loseth not their substance that none of those who communicate at his table ought to be hindred from drinking of the Cup of the Lord that neither the chrism nor the penitence nor the ordainor the marriages nor the extream unction are Sacraments that believing souls departed this life are not burned in the fire of Purgatory Since we believe the first Articles and that we preach and recommend them to men we are obliged to shew the truth of them and since the most part of them are so obscure that we have not natural light enough to discover and perceive them it remains that we prove that God hath revealed them to humane kind For these are the three sources of all our knowledge sence reason and the revelation of God now 't is neither the sins nor reason of man that demonstrates to us that Jesus Christ is the son of God or that those who believe his Gospel shall have the happy Aeternity We cannot prove the truth of it then but onely by the means of revelation Now all Christians and namely those of the Church of Rome with whom we dispute in this Treatise confess that the writers of the Old and new Testaments were inspired by God and did write by the revelations of the Spirit now we cannot more clearly ground the Truth of the Articles upon which our Faith consists then by shewing that they are taught in these divine writings T is for this we acknowledg our selves obliged and of which 't is most easie to acquit our selves as we hope to make appear in this book And as for the other Articles which are of the second sort it belongs to us to justifie and make appear that the holy Scripture teacheth no where to believe what it self rejects as it teacheth no where that there is a Purgatory or that the Pope is the Monarch of the Church or that the Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice For having once shewed that we shall have clearly justified that we have been obliged to exclude such opinions of our Faith since we hold that all the things which we ought to believe as necessary to our salvation are taught in the Scriptures for that if these be not found there Rome is in the wrong to believe and preach it as necessary and have reason not to receive it in our belief T is an unjust cavilling to demand this of us further that we
which these two parties should be agreed it is clear that their debates will never be decided since it hath its birth from that same thing which this method wants to determine it For if in their common principle there should be found any such decision of their controversies they would not enter into contest about it for example the Methodists will not let any one make use of any one thing in Scripture to prove that the Pope is not the head of Church if there be not some passage which saith expresly that the Pope is not the head of the Church Who sees not that t is to flie the decision of the controversie and desire the continuation of it for ever for to demand of me to determine it is a condition according to all the appearance of reason impossible to be done it being not credible that the adversaries who acknowledge with me the Divinity and truth of the Scriptures should bare me down that the Pope is the head of the Church though it denies it formally and in so many words If we desire then to end our differences we must absolutely renounce this Method and proceed that very way which they so unjustly condemn by proving all our conclusions by the principles so well known to both parties and those are by the grace of God the oracle of the old and new Testament determining doubtful things by certain clearing the obscure by evident and perswading those things which they reject as false by the connexion and dependance which they have one with another that they confess them true This is the true Method which one ought to follow in all disputes and which indeed all masters of all Sciences have followed those of Philosophy Civil-law Physick and others St. Augustin defended it a long time against the calumnies of the Donatists who because he took it upon himself to dispute against them accused him of being a Logician †Aug. contr Crecon l. 1. c. 13. and under this pretence shunned him as a dangerous man He shewed at large that the Lord * The same chapt and 14 17 18. Aug. tom 6. l. ◠cont Circon Gramat c. 15. G. and his Apostles made use of this Method and were Logicians if this is to be a Logician to reason and from a clear thing to prove a thing that is obscure and willing to propose to us a Pattern of a wise Disputant see how he describes him First he endeavours saith he not to be cheated himself for want of discerning truth from falshood and this he cannot obtain without the help of God Then being willing to unfould for the instruction of others that which he hath in himself he first considers what it is they already know for certain to the end that from thence he might conduct them to the things they know not or would not believe shewing them these follow from those which they hold either by reasoning or faith so that by the truths which they consent to they may be constrained to confess and approve those which they had denied and by this means the truth which seemed false to them at first would be discerned from the false being found conformable to the truths which they knew before Hitherto St. Austin who could not more clearly Authorise the procedure which these new Disputants now condemn with so much injustice and passion CHAP. VII That the procedure of the methodists is the same which the Arians and other Heretiques held formerly against the antient Fathers ANd though it be a thing most unworthy those praises which they give ordinaryly to antiquity to expose a novelty to the view of the world and that on the other side t is not much honour to be thought to be esteemed the father of an invention so impertinent and so contrary as well to the practice of the Lord of his Apostles and of the holy fathers as to the common sence and reason of men nevertheless to take from them in this place all subject of vain glory I will farther advertise the readers that those of our adversaries which at this day make use of this method are not the first authors of it For I find at the bottom of it that t is an old and superannuated wrangling of the Arians and other antient heretiques who to flie the searching and decision of the truth demanded of the Catholiques of their times in the same manner formal passages where the consubstantiality of the son and other points may be expressly read this we learn by the books of the fathers In St. Athanasius the question being concerning the word consubstantial used by the Council of Nice to express the truth of the eternal divinity of the Son say the Arians is not writ And in a dialogue printed among his works though in my opinion t is none of his leave these Sylogisms say they and give us a Demonstration by writing that the Son is the true God a Atha Ep. de Synod-Arim Seleue. T. p. 911 Part. ultim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Dialog cont Arim. p. 126. In St. Austin the Count Pascentius an Arian by Religion pressed likewise this only Doctor with whom he had the presumption to enter into Conference to shew him the word consubstantial in the Scripture not suffering him to draw it from thence by reasonings b Ep. 174.178 Aug. St. Augustine having else where proved the Divinity of the Holy Ghost by these places of the Apostle which say that we are his temple so that if he were not God he would have no Temple Maximinus an Arian Bishop against whom he disputed answered that the truth is not concluded by arguments but proved by certain testimonies c Id con Mixim l. 1 6 fol. 444. G. and in a dialogue published under the name of S. Vigil but in my judgment t is certainly Pope Gelaz's the Arian who is brought in there disputes exactly as our Methodists do now He would have one shew him the word Consubstantial expresly and properly so writ and that it be proved not by any reasonings but by the naked and pure propriety of the words Let them read it to me saith he so properly laid down or let them depart from their Confession d Dial. inter Atha Sabell Arian inter Cassand opera p. 475. Eutichus the head of another Heresie who confounded the two natures of the Lord disputed in the same manner demanding in what Scripture t is set down that Jesus Christ hath two Natures e In Act. cont chalced p. 115. A. so that one ought not to wonder if Scholarius hath long since observed that many Heretiques made use of this praetext viz. desire that they would shew them all things expressly by the Scripture f Scholar orat Henet 3. concil flor p. 590 E. CHAP. VIII That the Fathers have rejected this pretended method as impertinent and that by their examples we can retort them upon our Adversaries WHat do the Holy Fathers
is that saith the Orthodox the sense and intention of the Scripture which hath moved them to use that word which is not writ or have they said it of their own Authority it is saith the Macedonian the sence of the Scripture which hath moved them to it Now answered the Orhodox this is also the sence and intention of the Scripture which teacheth that the Spirit being uncreated and subsistant of God inlivening and sanctifying is a divine Spirit Thus far Theodoret who knew not how to maintain more clearly that one could ground the articles of our Faith upon the consequences of Scripture and not upon words onely But this same Authour in two pieces which Photius warants us to be his although by some error they have printed them also amongst the works of St. Athanasius shews us that the Spirit of our Methodists reigned at his time in certain Hereticks whom he names not Pho. biblioth cod 46. P. 31 but who in my judgment were the Eutichians He saith that they would have every one receive the words of the Scripture simply without considering the things which they signifie under pretence that they surpass the understanding of all men b Theod. tract 16. secund Phot. T. 2. Op. Athan p. 308. that they be constrained to hear some words of the Gospel those which they think favourable to them but they will not suffer them to understand and interpret them religiously that one hear the words but not search the truth and convenient sence of them that they call Faith and inconsiderate not belief which without any examen imbraceth to its own ruin things not established by any demonstration e Id. tract 23. p. 325. d. that they command to believe without reason a Ibid. to believe simply that which is said without considering what is convenient and what is not so b Ibid Tit. tract 23. without examining whither the thing be possible useful seemly agreeable to God or convenient to nature whither it agreeth with the truth whether it hath any connexion with the design of the Author whether it doth not contradict the mystery whether it be not agreeable to Godliness c Ibid. D. that they would have c Ibid. their words believed without permiting any one to examine their Doctrine for fear they should be convinced d p 326. A. Are not these the same fancies with our Methodists who receive nothing but formal words who reject all expositions evidences and reasonings but now Theodoreâ— Dispates sharply against these men accusing them of overthrowing by this means all humane affairs and of making men irrationale e p. 903. of changing them into bruit beasts making them take their nature and habitudes of making all the intentions of the Prophets and Apostles unuseful who according to this reckoning of theirs beat our ears in vain with the sound of their words the hearers not carrying away any fruit from them nor profit in the Treasury of their hearts f Ibid. D. that their procedure confounds every thing and that he who follows this Method knows not how to make those things agree which seem to clash nor answer those who desire to ask him as we are all obliged to do to them a Ibid. 3. which he verifieth at large by the induction of divers passages of eternity and of the temporal birth of Christ which seems contrary b p. 310. D. so they expose the Scriptures to the mockery of the Infidels c p. 326.327.328 and for these and such like reasons he declares at the beginning of one of these Treatises that this invention is the worst of all the Doctrines which the Devils have introduced among men d 327. D. and give us a rule quite contrary wishing that in the interpretation of the Scriptures in stead of being tied to the words made naked by their sense they should seriously consider what belongs to God what is convenient for our purpose that which the truth carries that which agreeth with the Law that which hath a just correspondence with nature the Purity and the Liveliness of Faith the firmness of Hope the sincerity of Charity that which doth no wrong to Esteem that which is above Envy that which is worthy of Grace e Ibid. p. 325. A. and that he ought not to believe without reason nor speak without Faith Let them take the pains to read these two Treatises through for they are very short and most excellent Athanasius whom the Author of the Dialogue published under the Name of S. Vigil made to Dispute against the Arians follow exactly the precedure of Gregory and Theodoret against the Macedonians For he constrained the Arians to confess that one may prove by the Scriptures many things which are not expressed there alledging to him the words which the Arians held although they were not expressed in the Scripture as when they said against the Sabellians that the Father is impassible and against the Ennomians that the Son is like the Father and against Fotinus that the Son is the Light of the Light shew me said he to him where it is written Purely Nakedly Properly and in so many words that the Father is impassible or not begotten that the Son is God of God Light of Light or like the Father It is not enough that you say that the reason of Faith requireth it piety teacheth it the inference or consequence from the Scriptures obligeth me to the profession of this Name I desire that you would not alledge these things to me since you will not suffer me to alledge them for the proof of the word consubstantial Behold at this juncture of time the volume of Divine Books in my Hand read there the Names of the Words above said in so many syllables and in the same sences either shew us where it is written that the Son is like the Father or confess that he is unlike him there is no way for you to draw your selves out of this evil path being wraped up in your own objections 't is not in your power to unty the knots of this Proposition Give me leave then to prove the consubstantiality that is to say the belief of the one Substance of God by consequences where if you will not agree with me you must also renounce those things which you confess your self since you find them no where directly set down in any place in the Scriptures a Dialog in t Sabel Photar Athan. liter opera Cassandri p. 475. med then beating him with his own weapons he pressed him to bring him some passage which speaks formally the belief of the Arians viz. that there is three Substances in the Trinity Here saith he the arguments serve for nothing where one concludes the truth by the consequence of reason they demand proper and express passages read to us three Substances expresly so laid down in the Scripture do not come hither to argue that if the Father
Age Soberly Justly and Religiously expecting the happy Hope and advent of the Glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ 10. That this Holiness of life is necessary for the having a part in the Kingdome of Christ Matthew 5.20 John 3.2 I say unto you that if your Righteousness doth not surpass that of the Scribes and Pharisees you shall not enter into the Kingdome of Heaven Rom. 8.13 If you live according to the flesh you shall dy but if by the Spirit you mortifie the deeds of the flesh you shall live 1 Cor. 6.9 10. Know you not that the unjust shall not inherit the Kingdome of God Eph. 5. Heb. 12.14 Gal. 6.7 8. do not abuse your selves neither Whoremongers nor Idolaters nor Adulterers nor Effeminate nor les bougrees abusers of themselves with mankind nor Thieves nor Covetous nor Drunkards nor evil speakers nor ravisseurs Extortioners shall inherit the Kingdome of God CHAP. VIII Of the Vnion of the Faithful Of the means necessary to preserve it as of the order of the Ministry of the Gospel and the Discipline 1. That we must perticularly love the Faithful JOhn 13.34 35. I give you a new commandment that ye love one another as I have loved you to the end that you love one another by this all shall know that you be my disciples if you have love one to another John 15.12 13. 1 John 3.2 4.12 1 Pet. 3 8. Heb. 13.3 Mat. 18.6 10. This is my commandment that you love one another as I have loved you None hath greater love then this viz. when any one lays down his soul for his friends Gal. 6.12 Whilst we have time let us do good to all but especially to the Houshold of Faith 1 Peter 2.17 Bear honor to all love the brotherhood 2. That the Faithful ought to meet together to pray to God and to mind other exercises of Religion Heb. 10.24 25. Let us take care of one another to incite us to charity and good works not forsaking our assembling as some have used to do but admonishing one another This appears by the examples of the first Christians in the times of the Apostles when you gather your selves together saith St. Paul to the Corinthians you hold not the form of eating the Supper of the Lord 1 Cor. 11.20 And by the promise which the Lord made us Matt. 18.20 Where there be two or three gathered together in my name I am there in the midst of them 3. That there ought to be Pastors and Overseers in the Church of the Faithful Rom. 12.6 7 8. Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us whether prophesie let us prophesie according to the proportion of Faith or ministery let us wait on our ministring or he that teacheth on teaching or he that exhorteth on exhortation he that giveth let him do it with simplicity he that ruleth with diligence he that sheweth mercy with chearfulness 1 Cor. 12.27 28. Now ye are the Body of Christ and membres de membre members in perticular Eph. 4.11 And God hath set some of them in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Doctors after that vertues then gifts of healing helps governments diversities of tongues interpretations of them Tit. 1.5 I have left thee in Crete to the end that thou shouldest correct the things which remain and that thou shouldest constitute Priests or elders through the Towns as I have ordered thee You have the History of the institution of the Deacons and the distinction of the Ministers serving the word from those who serve the table and Almes in the 6 Chap. of the Acts. 4. What ought to be the Morals of Pastors and other Ministers 1 Tim. 3.1 2 3. and so on Tit. 1.7 8 9. This word is certain if any one hath an affection to be a Bishop he desireth an excellent work But a Bishop must be irreprehensible the Husband of one woman onely Sober prudent modest chast willingly receiving strangers apt to teach not given to wine no striker but benigne no quarreller not covetous but governing his house honestly having his children subject in all chastity c. Not a new convert for fear he being puffed up with pride should fall into the condemnation of the devil he must also have a good testimony from them who are without least he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil Likwise the Deacons must be grave not double in words not given to much wine nor covetous of dishonest gain holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience and let these first be proved then let them serve being irreprehensible c. 5. What the Charge of Pastors is 1 Pet. 5.1 2 3. Act 20.28 1 Cor. 4 1 2 1 Tim 5.20 2 Cor. 1.23 and 13.8 5.1 2 3. I beseech the esders which are amongst you I who am an elder with you and a witness of the sufferings of Christ who am also a partaker of the glory which shall be revealed feed the flock of God which is committed to you having care over it not by constraint but willingly according to God not for dishonest gain but of a ready mind not as having Lord-ship over the people and clergy of God but so that you be examples to the flock by good will 2 Cor. 4.5 We do not preach our selves but Jesus Christ our Lord and that we are your servants for Jesus 2 Tim. 2.2 that which thou hast heard of me among many witnesses do thou commit to faithful men who shall be sufficient to teach others also and verse the 14 remember these things protesting before God c. Study to render thy self approved to God to open without confusion and handling rightly the words of truth 2 Tim. 4.2 Preach the word be instant in season out of season reprove rebuke exhort with all patience and doctrine 6. The dignity of the charge of Pastors and Supervisors 1 Cor. 4.1 Let a man esteem of us as of the Ministers of Christ 2 Cor. 5.10 and dispensors of the secrets of God 1 Tim. 3.1 This word is certain if any one hath a mind to be a Bishop he desireth a good work 7. That the Faithful ought to honour their Pastors obey and nourish them Matt. 18.17 If thy brother disdains to hear the Church let him be to thee as a Pagan and Publican Luk. 10.16 He that heareth you heareth me saith the Lord speaking to his Disciples and he that rejects you rejects me Heb. 13.17 Obey them who rule over you and submit to them for they watch for your souls as they who ought to give an account of them that they may do it with joy and not with grief for that will not become profitable to you 1 Tim. 5.17 The Priests or elders as the Louvain version renders this word Sect 5 in the passage of St. Peter 1 Ep. Ch. 5.1 who rule well let them be reputed worthy of double honor principally they who labour
they have the qualities and conditions which are convenient for them since it is to them who are such 2 Thes 1.6 7. that God promiseth these things in his Grace Thirdly Moreover they say that this retribution of God is a work of his Justice 't is a just thing before God saith the Apostle That he giveth affliction to those who afflict you Heb. 6.10 and to you who are afflicted deliverance with us when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from Heaven with the Angels of his power and elsewhere God is not unjust to forget your work and charity which you have shewed towards his Name in as much as you have ministred to the Saints and do minister 2 Tim. 4.8 Psal 112.9 2 Cor. 9.9 Mat. 6.1 Dan. 4.24 9.16 Ezech. 18.19 21. in the Version of the 70. Deut. 24.3 Eccles 44.10 and again in another place The Crown of Justice is kept for me which the Lord the righteous Judge shall give me at that day and not to me only but also to all those who love his coming But I say first that this word Justice according to the phrase of the Hebrew Language signifieth very often benignity and liberality and just likewise benign and gracious as in the 112 Psalm alledged by St. Paul He hath dispersed he hath given to the poor his righteousness endureth for ever from whence it comes that Alms which is an act of gratuity and beneficence is called Justice in the 6th of St. Matthew In this sense who seeth not that retribution of life eternal to the faithful is truly an act of the Divine Justice that is to say of his Grace and benignity that 't is an Alms which he giveth us Secondly I say that it is just that God should give life eternal to those who have believed and obeyed not that they have merited but because hehath promlsed it As 't is also a justice to keep ones word in accomplishing that which one hath promised Nohem 9. although one hath promised it but upon meer gratuity without being obliged to it by the merits of him to whom one promiseth it In fine in comparing the cause and case of the faithful with that of the wicked who afflict them the one having manifestly the right on their side and the other the wrong it is yet in this respect for the Justice of God to maintain the one and condemn and punish the other But this is not to say that considering throughly the persons and works of the faithful in themselves and without this comparison there is nothing in them which to speak properly merits the Heavenly Glory with which the Father will one day Crown them gratis according to the saying of the Apostle Rom. 6.23 that life eternal by Jesus Christ our Lord is a Grace of God But there is no need to insist much upon this Article since that amongst our Adversaries themselves there are found great and celebrated Authors who openly reject this Doctrine being far from pretending that it is in the Scriptures some disputing that the good works of the faithful are not meritorious by reason of the works themselves but only by reason of the Promise and Divine acceptance as Scotus and Vaga Others that supposing the Promise of God yet they are not such that the hire is due to them by Justice See Bellar. of Justif l. 5. c 16. but only by the liberality of God as Durandus so Cardinal Bellarmin reports it CHAP. IX That praying to Saints departed is not taught in the Scriptures 1. LEt us now consider of praying to the Saints departed for which there is found neither Command nor Example in all the Writings of the Old and New Testaments and they alledge for its foundation nothing but passages very far fetched as for example that wch Jacob said being upon his death-bed Let my name be called upon these Children Gen. 48.16 that is upon Ephraim and Manasseh which is not a Command to invoke him after his death but a declaration by which he adopts them willing that they might be called by his name as if they had been his proper Children as all the Learned party of our Adversaries confess Nic. d'Lyra Pintus Eman. Sa Pagnin Arias Montauus and 't is the same manner of speaking which is found in Esai in the fourth Chapter where he brings in women which say to a man Isai 4.1 only let thy name be called upon us Secondly But say they the faithful under the Old Testament make mention of the Saints departed in the prayers which they put up to God Have remembrance of Abraham Exod. 32.13 Isaac and Israel thy servants to whom thou hast sworn by thy self saying I will multiply your seed as the Stars in Heaven We do not deny that it was permitted them to produce to the Lord the Promises which he made to their Fathers as it is lawful for us to put him in minde of that which he hath done for us in Jesus Christ of which these first were the figures But the question is whether we may and ought to address these prayers to deceased Saints which cannot be drawn from this allegation by any good reason Thirdly Moreover Mat. 22.30 they discourse thus Our Lord teacheth us that the Saints departed are as the Angels of God in Heaven Gen. 48.15 now Jacob invoked an Angel It is then permitted us to invoke the Saints A feeble a pitiful reasoning For first the Lord speaks of the state of Saints after the Resurrection and the Question is of the condition they are in now before the Resurrection Secondly The Lord compares them to Angels not generally and in respect of all the conditions of their beings for upon this account they must conclude they will have no bodies after the Resurrection since the Angels have none but only in respect of these things viz that they will not marry Maldon upon this passage as St. Jerom and after him the Jesuit Maldonat remarks in the Resurrection saith the Lord they shall neither marry nor be given in marriage but shall be as the Angels of God in Heaven And as to the Angel which Jacob invoked who knows not that 't is the Angel of the Covenant Mal. 3.1 Gen. 48. 15 16. the eternal Son of God The God saith he before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac have walked the God who fed me from my youth to this day Cyril Alex Thesaur l. 3. the Angel who hath defended me from evil bless these Children St. Cyril of Alexandria hath so amply defended this truth against the Arians who would as our Adversaries at this time bend these words to a created Angel which we have no need to insist upon any longer to clear Fourthly They argue again thus We pray the faithful living here below with us to pray to God for us as St. Paul commanded the Romans Rom. 15.30 Coll. 4.3.1 Eph. 6.9 1 Thes 5.25 2 Thes 3.1 1.
having caused the shadow to vanish by the true body which he hath publikely shewed Secondly because God expresly commanded Moses that he should do them whereas he never ordained such-like Images in the Roman Church All that one can conclude from it is that since the Serpent made by the Command of God was nevertheless broken by Hezekiah when the people rendred to it a religious honour it would be very convenient also that Christian Princes and Bishops should take from Churches and publike places the Images of he and she Saints when men begin to worship them though they were neasted there not only as every one knows by humane Authority but Divine Institution But this Consequence doth not favour their Veneration CHAP. XI That the Scripture teacheth not that the Bishop of Rome is the Pontifical Spouse and Monarch of the Vniversal Church nor Authorizes any thing which is founded only upon the Authorities of the Pope 1. THe great and principal Article follows which they esteem alone capable and needful to maintain all the rest viz. the Monarchy and infallibility of the Pope of Rome They endeavour to prove by Scripture that he is the Head Spouse and Monarch of the Universal Church but by reasons so strange and far from all appearance that 't is very easie to finde that 't is their Passion and not their Judgment which hath conceived them For first they assert the Sovereign Pontifex which precided over all the Church of Israel during the time of the Old Testament and that this Type may have its accomplishment under the new Covenant they conclude that there is a Sovereign Pontifex in the Christian Church Heb. 3.2 4.14 5.5 6. 7.26 27. 8.1 2. 9 to the 11. and add that the Pope of Rome is the Monarch of it as if St. Paul the Apostle had not taught us that Jesus Christ is the Sovereign High Priest of his Church or as if this his Priesthood alone had not body and truth enough to accomplish all the figure of the Ancient and as if on the contrary the Unity of the Antient Pontifex did not evidently exclude the pretensions of Rome it being clear that if they have place there will be two High-Priests in the Christian Church against that which was figured in the Judaical where they had but one and finally as if this High-Priesthood ought to belong to the Bishop of Rome rather than to any other supposing that there was one in the Christian Church besides that of our Lord Jesus Christ They have also recourse to that which the Lord promised St. Peter Matth. 16.18.19 to build his Church upon him and to give him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and the power of binding and unbinding and that which he commanded him three times after his Resurrection John 21.15 16 17. to feed his sheep and to some advantages which he seemeth to have had above the other Apostles Matth. 10.2 Matth. 17.24 as that he is called the first and that the Lord payed Tribute-Money for him and from all this conclude that the Bishop of Reme is the Prince and Sovereign Monarch of the Catholick Church an ill and impertinent reasoning which supposeth falsities and concludes ill For to begin with the last that St. Peter was the Foundation and Monarch of the Church the Prince and King of the Apostles and in sum what you will what is this in common to the Pope at present or with any of his Bredecessours to conclude from one to the other Peter was the Head of the Church the Pope sitting now at Rome is therefore so How many Seas and Abysses must be filled before these two can joyn for they must first prove that St. Peter was at Rome Secondly that he was Bishop of the Roman Church Thirdly that he left the Bishop of Rome all the dignities that he had Now 't is evident that they cannot prove any one of these three Articles by the Holy Scriptures not so much as the first of these which is the important For let Rome be this Babylon from whence St. Peter dated his first Epistle 1 Pet. 5.13 there is no necessity obligeth us to believe it so that to be able to prove a Thesis by Scripture one must not according to them enter into any Proposition in the proof of it which is not in the Scripture it is perfectly clear that the power of the Pope cannot be found in the Scriptures And as for the other two Propositions one that St. Peter was the Bishop of Rome the other that he left all his Dignity to the Bishop of Rome they are infinitely far from all appearance of truth and reason But it sufficeth us for the designe of this Treatise that it cannot be founded upon the Scriptures So then although it saith Thou art Peter and feed my sheep one cannot draw from thence the Monarchy of the Pope But I say moreover that what they presuppose in their discourse viz. that St. Peter was the Master and Prince of the other Apostles is false and cannot be proved by any of those passages which they alledge The Lord said to him Thou art Peter and upon this stone will I build my Church But in what Logick doth that signifie that he should be the Monarch of the Church and the Prince of the Apostles I shall pass by the belief which the most part of the Ancient Fathers and some of our Adversaries have of taking this Stone upon which our Lord promised to build his Church for the Lord himself the Rock or Stone of Ages confessed by St. Peter a August de verbis Dom. See Mat. Serm. 13. Tract 124. in John for his Faith and Confession b. Tract 13. in Epist John D. T. 9. Serm. 22. ex 40. Serm. edit a Serm. p 248. primals l. 2. in Apoc. p. 13.84 c. l. 5. p. 1456. C. Bibi pp. T. 1. Anselm in eum loc Gloss interlin Lyran. Joan. Arbor Theosophia l. 5. c. 5. Alliac concord l. 2. c. 13. c. Hilar. l. 6. de Trin fol. 30. b. col 2. Ambros 6. de Incar Dom. Sacram c. 5. in it Aug. tract 10. in ep John l. tom 9. Auctor and not for the person of St. Peter I will suppose that these words and upon this stone I will build my Church be applied to St. Peter What is it that gives him so much advantage about the foundation of it and upon the Prophets themselves which God raised up at the beginning of Christianity following that which St. Paul saith That we are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone and what other thing doth it signifie except that in preaching the Gospel they have abolished the Synagogue and founded the Christian Church the new Republike of the Lord his Celestial Kingdom All the advantage which St. Peter had over the other in this respect was that he preached the first of