the 19. he writes thus We confess that neither conference of places nor consideration of what followeth or goes before nor looking into Originals are of any force unless we find the things which we conceive to be understood and meant in the places interpreted to be consonant to the Rule of Faith that is Tradition conserved in the Church neither is there any of our Divines that ever taught otherwise Where you see by Doctor Field M. Menzeis is discarded from being a Protestant Divine the Scripture however clear is declared to be no Rule or Ground of Faith but according to the sense of them that went before us as all other means besides Tradition in his 16. Ch. are propounded to be but probable Conjectures and not infallible grounds And this most rationally for what private man as I have said can assure himself that either the finding out the true sense of Scripture as to him is tyed to the means of Interpretation M. Menzeis sets down or that he makes a right use of all these means For as the same Dr. Field judiciously remarks and ingenuously grants with S. Augustine contra Ep. Fundam and de Util. cred few men have leasure fewer strength of understanding to examine the particular Controversies so many and so intricate in these our dayes and that the way to satisfie their Consciences in this most important affair is to find out the true Church and rest in her judgment Ad sapientiam says S. Augustine in Ecclesia Spirituales pauci perveniunt caeteram vero turbam non intelligendi vivacitas sed credendi simplicitas tutissimam facit that is few even Spiritual ones in the Church attain to perfect knowledge the rest being made most sure not by their quickness in understanding but by their simplicity in believing 2. This the Protestants way is but a trifling loosing of time never having been found able to settle debates amongst themselves as witness 60. Synods holden in 60. years time says Rescius l. de Atheismo in which all taking Scripture for their ground without any Infallible Judge did so little agree that they parted not so much as good friends Neque dantes dextras fraternitatis aut humanitatis How many Examples of this amongst Lutherans and Calvinists Prelaticks and Presbyterians and even in our confessions of Faith and Covenant among our selves I know M. Menzeis Answer will be their Dissentions are not in Fundamentals of these I shall speak presently in the next Section only here I ask why then so great cruelty so much bloud so many Excommunications and Curses If they did not think them so who moved such troubles they were either most cruel or mad as Tertullian l. de praescr most truly says in Disputing out of Texts of Scripture that is as every man reads and understands there is no other good got but either to make a man sick or mad It is not so in the Catholick Church what ever M. Menzeis says of Jesuits and Dominicans neither party having ever contested in any thing that was once decided by the Church 3. The Protestants way is Preposterous Religion being Established before the Scriptures and they only written to true believers whence Tertullian prescribing against all Hereticks says We do not admit them to dispute from Scripture till first they can show who their Ancestors were from whom by whom when and to whom the form of Christian Religion was delivered Whereupon to conclude all this I ask at M. Menzeis is every particular man amongst Protestants infallibly assured by Scripture of what he believes If so why not then Catholicks and all the Catholick Church they receive the Scriptures with Protestants yea Protestants only from them their Churchmen read the Scriptures with as great diligence they be in a far greater number they have ten for one who have Expouded it they apply no less all the means for a right Interpretation they study the Originals confer Places pray many hours both day and night have no Wives Children or Family to divert them most of them have renounced all pretence to Riches Honours and all Temporal Interests wherewith they might be Byassed any wise in what they profess The extraordinary and unparallelled pains they take in the most Barren Savage and cruel nations of the Earth for their conversion to Christianity would seem sufficient to evidence both the good disposition of their minds and the sincere intention of their hearts beyond the Preachers of whatsoever Sect Their manifold Writings witness enough the solidity and quickness of their wits and even their Wonders and Mracles in latter ages in all most Authentick Records of History would make believe they want not the assistance of the the Spirit yea and of the power of God and yet that we should think that they are blinded Protestants see clear they mistake Scripture Protestants take it aright they are misled by the Spirit of Errour Protestants directed by the Spirit of Truth what Reason Proof or Probability for this But why do Protestants pretend it is so Forsooth chiefly because they acknowledge one high Bishop in the whole Church as Protestants a primate in each Kingdom with the Negative voice to silence all private sowers of Dissention and keep unity because they take the Canons and Rules of their Faith from Scripture explained in general Councils and the Unanimous consent of the Church and Fathers and not by private Reading because in a word they reverence Publick Authority establisht by God in his Church above particular Opinions and Conceits Why then should Scripture be called a Ground to Protestants who neither did receive it from Christ and his Apostles as all Historians and Chronologues marking the rise of Protestancy in Luther his dayes do evidence nor have it uncorrupt as their own Doctors and Ghospellers do acknowledge Nor take it in the true sense upon publick Authority but as they fancy upon private Reading and Interpretation against the Apostle And not rather to Catholicks who having received the Scriptures from Christ and his Apostles as the Word of God left to his Church which she is bound to have an Eye to in all her Decisions Statutes and Laws so that none of them be Repugnant to it in the least neither by adding or pairing in Words or Sense but all fully consonant and conform to both In acknowledgement whereof in all her General Councils she placeth it above Pope Prelates Pastors who in all the search they make into former Councels Fathers Schoolmen Tradition or practice of the Church intend nothing else generally speaking then to find out by all possible diligence the true sense and meaning of what is taught us in General and Particular Terms in the Written Word Yet Protestants with all Hereticks most vainly bragg of Scripture as their Ground and Catholicks be calumniated to abandon it as if Loyal Subjects did less rely on the Acts of Parliament and funâ—â—mental Laws who receive them their Sentence and meaning from the lawful Judges establisht
Figuratively as clearly so spoken in Scripture some other place of Scripture must be brought or some other Infallible Authority telling me this in express words otherwise I cannot have that certainty of it which is required in Divine Faith 3. Amongst all the clear places in Scripture to pick out the Fundamental ones how hard is it for every one Not to say Morally impossible M. Menzeis himself granting he cannot do it more then make a Coat to the Moon For by this means all should be obliged to know all Texts of Scripture and then to examine diligently each one first whether it be evident or obscure least it should appear upon examination to be evident which at the first sight did not seem so And secondly Whether it be generally commanded and have a Character of necessity to be believed by all for then according to M. Menzeis Rule I know it to be a Fundamental but Chillingworth his learned Divine tells him a little above to distinguish what was written because it was profitable from what was written because necessary is an intricate piece of business S. Paul to the Heb. 2. C. 6. V. requires no more as necessary as would seem then that he who cometh to God believe he is and that he is a rewarder of them who diligently seek him S. John 3. Ch. 6. says he that believeth in the Son hath everlasting life the Prophet Royal that all who fear the Lord are blessed and many other such passages there be in Scripture which might make a â—â—n think one thing or two at most were necessary to Salvation as sometimes the believing of one Point sometimes the doing of one good action Heaven is promised to Prayer in one place full Remission of sins to Alms deeds in another c. and yet who will say either of these two is sufficient for working a mans Salvation Add to all this I find in Scripture If thou wilt enter into life keep the Commandments S. Matth. 19. Yet Protestants teach that to be impossible and consequenly this Fundamental must lead all to despair as that other make all to presume it being a Fundamental again amongst Protestants that every man should believe he is one of the Elect which being an Article of his Faith may reasonably secure him and yet all not being of this number some from this Fundamental must or should at least presumptuously believe a lye Further the eating of blood and strangled meat is generally forbidden by the Apostles to all the Gentiles converted to the Christian Faith as it was before to the Jews whence I infer what is generally commanded to all should generally be believed by all and so if M. Menzeis Rule be good this must come in amongst the Fundamentals of the Protestant Religion which if it be so in the Pulpit I know not but at Table I am sure it is not A hundred such absurdities follow upon seeking Fundamentals in Scripture by these deceiving signes and uncertain marks M. Menzeis gives us without any Infallible Guide 2. It is to be remarked that Protestants neither agree in setting down Fundamentals nor cannot give a precise Catalogue of Points of Faith they think to be Fundamental as was required of M. Menzies but that also they mistake the very Notion and name A Fundamental verity in the Christian Religion being either that which makes us believe all the rest or without the express knowledge and belief whereof none can be saved Now the Question amongst us is not about this but whether a Man may either suspend his assent or positively dissent from lesser things then these when they are revealed by God and propounded to him by the same Authority with the former For then say Catholicks he is equally obliged to believe them by reason of the formâ—â— Object which is Divine Revelation can in nothing deceive or should in any thing be called in question though in respect of the Material Object or thing revealed we be not so obliged to know it For there is nothing less or more certain when God speaks he being the first verity yea verity it self who delivers all he says with one and the same Infinite Certainty where no degrees of more or less certitude can have place Protestants it would seem as they take Fundamentals will not be tyed to this whence they receive in communion with them and as the true Members of their Church some who hold most contrary Tenets as M. Menzeis the Waldenses Wickliffians Hussists who in his seventh Paper grants the whole body of the Church collectively taken cannot err in Essentials or Fundamentals yet so as that in some whole ages the Integrals may be vitiated But if he understand by Integrals lesser Points of Faith as to their Object and Matter yet equally revealed by God and propounded by his Church to us with chief Mysteries wherein the Protestants mistake and Errour in their Distinction of Fundamentals and Integrals consists his Assertion is both Erroneous Heretical because an Act of Faith grounded on the Motive of Gods Infinite and infallible Veracity in revealing is a Vertual and Implicite Belief of all he has revealed so that the true Belief of one Article implyes a belief of all Wherefore S. Athanasius says in his Creed whosoever doth not hold the Catholick Faith whole and inviolate he shall perish for ever And S. Hierome l. 3. contr Ruff. for one word or two contrary to the Faith many Hereticks have been cast out of the Church Yea S. Gregory Naz. tract de fide says nothing can be more dangerous then those Hereticks who when they run through all things uprightly yet with one word as with a drop of poyson corrupts the true and sincere Faith of our Lord and of Apostolical Tradition S. Basil as Theodoret reports l. 4. Hist c. 6. being desired to relent a little to the time Answered That such as were instructed in the Divine Doctrine do not suffer any Syllable to be corrupt but for its defence if need require willingly imbrace any kind of death And the Church in her Publick Decrees of General Councils strikes with the Thunder bolt of Gods Curse and Excommunication all such as refuse to believe any one Point decided to be of Faith which she could not justly do if every Article she declares were not necessarily believed when known to be decided by her So doth the Church of England Excommunicate all who hold any thing contrary to the 39. Articles though they judg them not all Fundamental As the Athenians punished without remission the least word against the received opinion of their Gods and the Jews says Joseph contra Appion the least transgression of the Law So God threatneth that he shall be blotted out of the Book of Life who ever shall deminish any word of the Revelation Apoc. 22. v. 19. Yet Luther rejecting whole Epistles of Scripture in M. Menzeis Book is called a holy man but so speaketh not Luther of him denying the Real Presence
Auricular confession on the 5. Ch. of James seven Sacraments in his Postscript on the first Ep. and 1. Ch. to the Corinths Wherefore Melancton Ep. ad Micon thus censures him I have read Wickliff and found in him many Errors he never held nor understood Justice of Faith which is the Protestants main Fundamental With the same confidence M. Menzeis calls the Waldenses Protestants who held the Real Presence that the Apostles were but Lay-men that all Magistrates fall from their Dignity by mortal sin that it is not lawful to swear in any case c. as witnesseth Illyricus in Catal. Wald. Confess Bohem. c. And with these the Grecians upon a private Letter sent as he pretends by a Patriarch to the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury though all who ever conversed with Grecians know they say daily Mass hold Transubstantiation seven Sacraments Prayer to the Saints and for the dead c. as all may see in the censure of the Oriental or Grecian Church and deny the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son and consequently make no distinction betwixt these two Persons in the Godhead But it is enough to M. Menzeis it seems that they disown the Pope to be called Protestants and so Turks and Tartars may come in with them Whence I leave to judg how constant a Protestant M. Menzeis is owning such Doctors and Doctrine and what Credit again he deserves after so many clear Testimonies and that even of learned Protestants and the very writings of the persons in question convincing him of most notorious falshood and Errour The most antient and holy Fathers as S. Ireneus Tertullian Philastrius S. Epiphanius S. Augustine Theodoret S. John Damascen and others who have written a Catalogue of Heresies did not certainly distinguish Fundamentals and Integrals amongst Divine Truths sufficiently propounded as Protestants do when they condemned many lesser things as Heresies and consequently damnable Errours then what they think to have no repugnancy with Fundamentals and essentials in the Doctrine of the true Church as in the Pelagians Novatians Donatists Monothelits who all embraced the Trinity Incarnation Passion of Christ c. S. Epiphanius Heres 75. and S. Augustine l. de heres C. 33. condemn the Arians for denying the Fasts commanded by the Church the first remarking they were accustomed to eat flesh on Fridays and in the Lent yea chiefly in the holy Week wherein Christ died S. Hierome in his 2. book against Jovinian condemneth him for saying Fastings and all other Exercises of good works were not meritorious S. Augustine in his Book of Heresies c. 54. condemns the Eunomians for teaching no sin could hurt a man if so he had but only Faith S. Epiphanius haeres 64. all who denied free will S. Hierome Vigilantius in his Book against him for affirming the Relicks of the Saints ought not to be reverenced the same S. Hierome against Jovinian with S. Augustine in his Book of Heresies C. 82. condemn him for holding Wedlock equal in dignity and merit to virginity S. Augustine again l. Contr. Julian C. 2. the Pelagians for teaching the Children of the Faithful Parents did not need Baptism but were born holy and in his 1. Book 2. C. and last against Maximus the Arians for not receiving Traditions Now let M. Menzeis choose either to acknowledge all these and many such like condemned Heresies by the Fathers to be no Fundamentals and consequently that many other things then these which Protestants call Fundamentals are necessary to be believed under the danger of incurring Heresie and Eâ—ternal damnation or owning them as such let him confess Protestants Err even in Fundamentals with them seeing all here condemned is Protestant Doctrine borrowed from those more ancient Hereticks and condemned by the Fathers even then 4. As to that he says all Fundamentals are clear in Scripture and that according to S. Chrysostome S. Augustine S. Irenaeus S. Thomas of Aquine and Sixtus Senensis holding what ever is obscure in one place to be clear in some other I answer very easily with a manifold distinction 1. To such eminent Doctors of the Church as he cites most Scriptures are clear I grant to all indifferently I deny 2. To such as take the places of Scripture commanding us to hear the Church and hold fast the Traditions of the Apostles conserved in her as two main Fundamentals for clearing all the rest I grant to others I deny 3. With Vincentius Lyrinensis c. 2. to such as level the Line of Prophetical and Apostolical interpretation to the square of the Ecclesiastical and Catholick sense I grant to others I deny 4. With Doctor Field a Protestant in his 4. Book C. 14. to such as be first setled in those things which the Apostles presupposed in their delivery of Scriptures I grant to others I deny Neither are these my Distinctions any wise to shift the Argument which maketh nothing either against us or for him But to clear the Fathers words in the very genuine sense they speak them See S. Chrysostome his meaning in his 14. Hom. on S. John S. Augustines contra Cresconium C. 33. where he says if any one fear to be deceived in this question through its obscurity let him ask Councel of the Church which the holy Scriptures do demonsrate without any ambiguity That of S. Irenaeus in his 2. Book Ch. 47. and more expresly in his 1. Book Ch. 49. S. Thomas his words That what ever is necessary to be believed under the Spiritual Sense that some where is manifestly declared by the Letter as they do not specifie to whom this manifest declaration is made so we grant it to the Church and her Doctors for to her all things are known says St. Irenaeus in which is perfect Faith as to the Apostles it was given by our Saviour Christ to know the Mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven 5. But I would ask M. Menzeis did ever any of these Fathers receive the Scriptures as the undoubted Word of God otherwise then on the Churches Authority S. Augustine saying I would not believe the Scriptures if the Authority of the Church did not move me to it is no less clear for this then Scripture it self in Fundamentals Or did ever any of them fancy to himself a place of Scripture as clear for any thing the whole Church standing in a contrary Judgment For this is the only Point we debate with Protestants and clearly prove both by the Scriptures and Fathers against them 6. However Scripture be clear in Fundamentals in the sense I have given that is particularly and in as many words or generally and as commanding us to hear the Church yet surely it doth not set down all that is Fundamental in express terms if we trust the Fathers whom M. Menzeis appeals to as holding Scripture clear in Fundamentals or can all be so evidently deduced from scripture but by the Authority of the Church that Hereticks be silenced and Unity preserved in Faith S. Chrysostome on
2 Thes 2. says it is evident that the Apostles did not deliver all things by Writing but many things without and those be as worthy of credit as others Which he could not have said if Fundamentals were only the infallible Truths and they clearly revealed in Scripture S. Epiphanius Heres 61. we must use Traditions for the Scriptures have not all things yet no necessity of using Traditions if all Fundamentals were in Scripture they only being necessary according to Protestants S. Augustine l. 5. de Bapt. Contr. Donat Ch. 23. the custome of the Church in baptizing Infants is neither to be contemned or any wise thought superfluous yet not to be believed if it were not an Apostolical Tradition If this was not in his Judgment a Fundamental hear himself again l. 3. de Orig. Anim. C 9. if thou will be a Catholick believe not teach not say not that Infants prevented by death before they are baptized can come to the pardon of their Original sin Is it not a Fundamental to believe Scripture to be the Word of God which S. Augustine takes on Tradition What if a man should receive the New Testament as sufficiently containing Fundamentals and reject the Old with the Manichees admit of some of the Evangels but not others with the Ebionits What if one should deny the word Person the name and definition of a Sacrament the keeping of Sunday because not clear in Scripture and consequently no Fundamentals according to M. Menzeis Rule Marcion and with him the Anabaptists teach Baptism should be conferred more then once The Donatists that Baptisme of Hereticks at least should be reiterated Sabellius one only Person in the Godhead Nestorius two Persons in Christ and for this are accounted Hereticks yet no clear Scripture is brought condemning their Errours S. Augustine l. de unitate Eccl. says expresly of the Donatists Errour this neither you nor I read in express words 7. How many Scriptures are clear against Protestants in all controverted Tenets So that however it be clear in Fundamentals it clearly speaketh against them See for this the Touchstone of the Reformed Gospel with the Manual of Controversie and after you have pondered the places quoted in them judge whether the Protestant Religion be rightly defined by M. Menzeis The Christian Religion as contained in Scripture and their protestancy only their protesting against Popish Errours Which Definition if good having its Genus proximum differentiam ultimam should distinguish Protestants from all other Sectaries but this it doth not it being common to them with most Hereticks who have ever been all of them professing with you Sir to adhere to the written Word they received and as understood by themselves as the Arians Nestorians Pelagians Photinians c. and all protesting against the Churches Errours and Popes Authority For as the sole Roman Church did ever oppose all Hereticks as the only zealous Defender of the true Faith and Doctrine which S. Paul calls the Depositum entrusted to her So all generally how soon they turn Hereticks Protest prattle Preach chieflly against her turn over all the Writings of Authours who have made mention of Heresies and you shall find that all from the first to the last have opposed themselves to that company of Christians which was in communion with the Pope and Bishop of Rome for the time and that this company hath opposed it self to them all neither did they oppose themselves all to any other company whatsoever Yea this was ever the distinctive mark of Hereticks not to communicate with the Pope and Sea of Rome as may be seen in the Writings of the Fathers St. Irenaeus l. 3. C. 3. S. Hierome Ep. 57. S. Cyprian in his Epistle to Pope Cornelius S. Augustine in Ps Contr. part Don. and generally in all ages and by all so that you protesting with them against the Church and Pope take their very Badg and Livery and shamefully declare by this Charactaristick Mark of your Defection from the ever acknowledged true Church and high Bishop thereof by all the Fathers your Apostacy Heresie and Schism It is very plausible I must confess to poor Ignorants when Preachers make them believe they teach nothing save only the pure Scripture and written Word protesting against all unwritten Traditions as Popish Errours But if any man consider a little with himself your Tenets in particular he shall presently find it is openly against God and his written Word ye protest in all points of Controversie under the false pretence of protesting against Popery and that not so much as one Tenet peculiar to you is contained in Scripture This I evidence in most Articles of Popish Doctrine you protest against where all may see and judge how well your Religion is contained in Scripture Is it not to protest against the goodness of God to say with you he created some for Hell independently of their works and likewise against his Word 1 Tim. 2. where it is said he will have all to be saved and in the 2. Ep. of St. Peter 3. where he is declared not willing any should perish Is it not to protest against his Mercy and express word again to say he died not for all The Apostle S. Paul assuring he did die for all and as that in Adam all died so in Christ all be restored to life 1 Cor. 13. Is it not to protest against his Justice and Word to teach that he punisheth us for what we cannot do as for the want of good Works which Protestants will have not to be in our power Yet the Apostle says Heb. 6.10 God is not unjust that he should forget our work Is it not to protest against the Wisdom and Word of God to say he obliges us to perform things impossible as Protestants call the Commandements where as Saint John in 1 Ep. C. 5. says they are not so much as heavy Is it not to protest against his Veracity and Word to affirm that the Church can teach Errours and stand in need of Reformation Christ having commanded us to hear it in S. Matt. 18. and the Apostle S. Paul 1 Tim. 3. calling it the Pillar and Ground of Truth Is it not to protest against his Providence and Word to assert that he has given us the dead Letter of the Law without an Infallible Visible Judge leaving to every poor Ignorant to Interpret Scripture according to his fancy S. Peter having said no Scripture is of private interpretation and Christ having commanded us to hear his Church Is it not to protest against the Efficacy of Christs Mediation Sufferings Death and also his Word to hold that he hath freed us from the pain but not from the guilt of sin S. Joh. 1. Rev. 5. Saying he washed us from our sins in his own blood And S. Paul 1 Cor. 6. we are Washed justified Sanctified Is it not to protest against his Divine Order to tye our Sanctification to Faith only and his express word in S. James
endless Contentions and Quarrels Councils are called Conventiles when they sentence or censure them the Church is changed into a Synagogue the Fathers forfeit their credit places and passages from Scripture are applyed or misapplyed as they list Now a jeer now a jest in handsome Language which jovial and jeering humours most look upon are their common Answers to solid Reasons Evidence in Motive of credibility is mocked at Faiths certainty is changed into probability a few Fundamentals comprehending chief Mysteries what or how many they cannot tel are judg'd only necessary to be believed Errors in Integrals as they call them which make the greatest part of Christian Doctrine are taught to be things indifferent to our belief In them even the Apostles were not in allible say Rainolds and Whitaker with some other Protestant Divines In them the whole Church may err says M. Menzeis and upon this as if she had erred come in all Sectaries to reform her she is old and her Spirits exhausted they have the fulness of the Spirit her Eyes by age are dimmed she sees not what is manifest in Scripture they as younger see clear shee is too Superstitious in her Religious Ceremonies they as more familiar with God use none like Prophets Extraordinarily sent by God they preach against Priests and people they set out a New Gospel of their own as if they were Apostles and Evangelists finding no true Scripture before Yea as if they had Christs own power they abandon the Antient Church as the Synagogue and make up a new one changing both the Priesthood and Sacrifice No more pennances and satisfactions of men to Gods Justice for their offences because Christ hath satisfied for all No more fasting except very seldom and that only for temporal ends No good Works are left in our power they are too hard yea impossible seeing even our best actions are sins Faith only justifieth and to believe is an easie task So the strait path is made plain and the narrow way broad to them Whil'st others strive to work their salvation with fear and trembling chastizing their bodies with the Apostle S. Paul least they become reprobates They live secure that each of them is one of the Elect making even this an Article of his Faith And this they perswade to simple ones with some refined words uttered in the tune of the Sybilles giving responees from the belly so far they are fetched with a deep sigh as if they breathed nothing but zeal some more Learned relying on the acuteness of their wits go willingly along with them not to captivate their understandings or submit to any Visible Judg 〈◊〉 men of interest comply outwardly with the prevailing party keeping their own retentions of mind and this it is which their Preachers for the most part desire of us that we would but comply in hearing that is believe one thing and force our Consciences to profess another Come hear us say they and you shall not be troubled we seek no more and of their most understanding hearers they get no more as I have often heard from themselves We are not say they so Proud and Arrogant as Papists to call our Church and her Doctrine Infallible the Scripture is only so By it judg of us and what we teach as you your selves read and understand This is the liberty of the children of God to be tyed to no Churches Faith to no Councels Decrees to no Fathers Doctrine The Word as clear in it self or explained by it self the Spirit speaking inwardly in our hearts and every mans Natural Reason directed by certain Rules for the right understanding of both is the only means God hath left for the conversion of Infidels conviction of Hereticks and setling of every good Christian in his belief O Liberty Liberty and Freedom of the children of God from the Popes Supremacy Councels Infallible Authority the Churches Jurisdiction in matters of Faith and Religion and generally the usurped power of any Visible Judg. This is M. Menzeis and Protestants great Principle which as I have demonstratively I hope above proved makes all our Debates in Religion and takes away all cerrainty in Faith But because to ruine Protestant Grounds and give no better in their place were rather to destroy then edifie to throw down then to build and in a Controversie of Religion rather to set up Atheism then root out Heresie as M. Menzeis continually cavilling at our Tenets but never once settling his own with so much labor hath done I therefore do here for a Conclusion briefly here set down and clearly prove solid the Grounds of the Catholick Faith The Ground then of true Faith and Religion Established by Christ and his Apostles not only solid and infallible in it self but also clear and perspicuous to all yet special and particular to us in Communion with the Sea of Rome to which no Sectaâ—y Schismatick or Heretick doth or can pretend removing all Doubts deciding all Controversies silencing all sowers of false Doctrine and Errours keepâ—ng Unity stopping Divisions quieting mens Consciences instructing the Ignorant setling the Unstable captivating the understanding of the most Learned to the obedience of Faith and which the greatest and quickest wits of the Christian World that is all the holy Fathers have ever built their faith upon Is Scripture and Apostolical Tradition conserved in the Church as delivered expounded by her both as an infallible Propounder and Judge Whence if any man here ask the Analysie and resolution of our Faith I answer him in a very few words We believe such things as are from Scripture and Apostolical Tradition taught in the Church to be true because God hath revealed them The reason again why we believe God did reveal such things is for that we see evident Motives of credibility in this Church and none else wherein God shows himself Author of her Doctrine confirming it with diverse infallible Marks and chiefly Miracles 〈◊〉 which manifestly appear both his Subscription and Seal Digitus Dei hîc est Pharaoh's Magicians could not but acknowledge this Exod. the 8. V. 19. Seeing only the Dust of the Earth suddenly by Aaron changed into Vermin they cryed out The hand of God is here So that there be two things to be remarked in the Resolution of Divine Faith The first is God revealing Deus revelans And the second is God showing himself Authour of such a Revelation Deus proponens se authorem revelationis say the Divines What God hath revealed is taught us by his Church as an infallible Propounder that he is Author of the Revelations made to her he attests in the Motives of credibility as infallible marks that it is he who speaks So all in our Faith is infallibly from God and all infallibly propounded to us The things revealed by the true and infallible Church and the Revelation by infallible Motives which being clear to all who have Eyes Ears and Understanding make evidently credible and infallibly certain all and
every one Point of our Religion and Faith Now to prove what I have set down to be the only true solid and infallible Grounds of the true Christian and Catholick Faith 1. That Scripture is this Ground is granted by M. Menzeis and all Protestants so needs no proof as to them 2. That sole Scripture without the Declaration and Exposition of the Church as an infallible Propounder Expounder and Judge cannot be this Ground is proved at length in my fourth Section and presently you shall see it again 3 That Apostolical Traditions are necessarily joyned with Scripture Is 1. proved from clear Scriptures most expresly commanding us to receive them 2 Thes 2.13 Therefore brethren stand fast and hold the Traditions which ye have been taught whether by word or by Epistle 2 Thess 3.6 Now I command you brethren in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that ye withdraw your selves from every Brother that walketh disorderly and not after the Traditions which he received 1 Corinth 11.2 Remember me in all things and keep the Traditions as I delivered them to you 2. By the Authority of the Fathers of the first three ages quoted in my sixth Section with that of S. Chysostome S. Augustine and others above mentioned 3. From manifest and Demonstrative reason in some chief Points which all Christians believe without any express Scripture as I have instanced in persons in the Trinity Sacraments in the Church the keeping of Sunday c. and in many Heresies condemned by the Church Councils Fathers yea and Protestants themselves without any clear Scripture can be brought against them as S. Augustine avoucheth of the Errour of Donatists c. Rests then only to prove that the Church's Authority as an infallible Propounder is necessary to make all these Divine and infallible Truths in themselves contained either in Scripture or delivered by Apostolical Tradition both solid and infallible Grounds to us For this I presuppose 1. From the Apostle S. Paul Hebrews 11. That without Faith it is impossible to please God 2. From the same Apostle Ephes 4.5 That there is but one Faith one Baptism one Lord JESUS Christ 3. From him again Hebr. 10.23 That we must hold fast the profession of our Faith without wavering From which Texts importing the Necessity of Faith the Unity of Faith and the steadiness in believing required in Divine Faith it doth follow that some infallible means which all may make use of must be appointed by God to attain to this Faith so absolutely necessary to all For to say God hath commanded us and that under the pain of Eternal Damnation to believe undoubtedly and not furnished infallible means to attain to such belief were to accuse his Goodness Providence and Wisdom And this no Christian or rational man will deny so that all the Question that can be moved is about the infallible means to attain without doubt or wavering to Divine Faith which may perswade infallibly all sort of persons that such things are revealed by God removing all reasonable doubts that can arise either concerning Gods Revelation which is the formal object of Faith or the things he hath revealed which makes its material Object and this means I say again must not only be solid and infallible objectively and in it self as M. Menzeis will have the Protestant Religion and Grounds of it but also subjectively and to us it being the same thing as to make a perswasive motive not to appear and not to be according to that Maxime Idem est non esse non apparere Wherefore a ground however infallible in it self yet not appearing so to us and known to be such availeth nothing as to our belief The Mathematicians Demonstrate the Sun to be many times greater then the Earth and their Demonstration no doubt is both certain and evident in it self yet never shall perswade a Country clown that it is greater then his Cap for that no Demonstration of this is clear and certain to him Even so is it in the Ground of Faith it must be both solid and and infallible in it self and it must be known to be such by all who prudently rely upon it This presupposed to conclude all that has been said and fully prove both the Ground of Faith in the Catholick Roman Church solid as the Rock it is built on and the means for conveying it to us infallible I first show against M. Menzeis or rather for him and his conversion the necessity of an infallible Propounder of what â—e must undoubtedly believe for if this can be made good he engageth again to turn Papist 2. That the true Church is this infallible Propounder â— That the Catholick Roman Church is the only true Church 1. Then as to the necessity of an infallible Propounder If no men no Church be infallible in propounding then holy Scripture and consequently all that is contained in it is only delivered to us by fallible means and so no infallible certainty in Faith The consequence is clear for most infallible Truths may be changed altered corrupted and both fallibly and falsly propounded to us as the first and chief Mysteries of the Christian Religion by Hereticks have been 2. Faith comes of hearing says the Apostle then as there be infallible believers and hearers so must there be infallible Teachers for Hearing and Teaching are Correlatives 3. No other infallible means is or can be assigned by Protestants to Ignorants yea to all who understand not the Original Languages for what is contained in Scripture save only the Authority of their Pastors and Church but this Authority in propounding is not acknowledged infallible by them then no infallible means is left 4. There is no less necessity the Church be infallible in propounding then the Evangelists in penning and the Apostles in Preaching no disparity can be given Gods Word being equally infallible in it self before both as iâ— is now 5. Our Saviour Christ most expresly owns the necessity of an infallible propounder granting the Jews had not sinned in refusing to believe him if by his Works and Wonders he had not evidenced himself to be the Son of God and consequently infallible in his Doctrine 6. For this the gift of Miracles is given to the Apostles and left in the Church to show their infallible assistance in propounding If you answer that was necessary at first but not now because it is the same Doctrine you teach which the Apostles did propound infallibly You say nothing for that it is we doubt of or rather undoubtedly we deny that your Doctrine is the same You presently appeal to Scripture but in vain till first you answer to all that is objected in my fourth Section how ye know infallibly what ye call Scripture to be Gods Word then the Letter you read to be uncorrupted the sense you give to the genuine c. and to all the clear places of Scripture I have brought against most of your particular Tenets I do not here ask
ye 〈◊〉 prove that to be infallibly Gods Word which was preached by the Apostles this they did sufficiently themselves Neither that the Doctrine of Authentick Scripture is infallibly true that was also done before there was a Protestant in the world but coming from those Generals which make all the Answers of your best Writers we desire ye shew by some infallible sign that your Bible is Gods pure Word and your Glosses on it conform to the Sense and Letter To reply Scripture doth evidence it self by its innate light to be Gods Word so that all may sufficiently know it by this and all be obliged to believe it is refuted by Christ himself presently telling us his own hearers had not sinned in not receiving it as such if he had given no External Evidence of his infallibility in propounding for as I have remarked above Scripture hath no greater Efficacy Evidence or Light in our Books then in our blessed Saviours own mouth Neither will the Majesty of the Stile or the purity of the Doctrine do it both these being as great in the the Books of Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus which Protestants reject as in the Ecclesiastes and Canticles which they receive Besides that the first of these two is imaginary as to the Letter there being less Majesty in the Letter of Scripture then in the Philosophers and Orators Writings as is conâ—essed by Paul And the second is in question chiefly in Protestant Bibles which do not agree with any Original or Copy that before Luther can be found if we trust their own Authours whom I have quoted Lastly If all Councils all the Fathers all the Pastors of the Church be fallible then let Protestants bring nothing but Scripture against us for we will receive nothing but upon infallible Authority and all their Volumes of Controversie shall not come to one line Yea further could they bring Scripture for what they teach as they will never be able to do yet without an infallible Propounder and Judg well might we dispute but conclude nothing wrangle but agree in nothing to the Worlds end For as sole Scripture without an infallible Church propounding and Explaining it so a naked Church without infallible Marks and a Doctrine without infallible Motives prove nothing Secondly I say the true Church is this infallible propounder on whose Authority we must rely For proof of this It is to be observed that in holy Scripture there be three Foundations or Grounds of Faith mentioned by the Apostle S. Paul The 1. Is our blessed Saviour Christ 1 Cor. 3.11 Another Foundation no man can lay then that is laid which is Jesus Christ The 2. Is the Apostles and Prophets Ephes 2.29 Built upon the Foundation of Apostles and Prophets The 3. The Church 1 Tim. 3. The house of God which is the Church of the living God the Pillar and Ground of Truth From which clear places of Scripture I remark 1. The Foundation of Faith is ever a Living Visible and Speaking Ground to wit Christ the Apostles Prophets and Church the dead Letter of Scripture being no where called this Ground 2. That these three Grounds of Faith both in the Old and New Law properly speaking make but one according to the same Apostle for another Foundation no man can lay sayes he beside Christ JESUS So that the Prophets Apostles and Church must not be thought different Foundations from Christ all their Vertue in upholding Faith and Veracity in propounding Faith Whence they are called the Foundation and Ground of it coming from the particular assistance of his Spirit Strengthening Inspiring and Directing them Hence also is their infallibility for the Foundation of Christ stands sure says the Apostle 2 Tim. 2.19 And consequently is altogether infallible 3. That the Church here called a Ground which supporteth our Faith is not to be said the only diffusive body of all true Believers but more the Representative Church in her chief Pastors as the Prophets and Apostles in old Wherefore some few Catholick Authors so often objected as holding the Canons and Decrees of Councils only infallible when they are generally received by the whole Church in my opinion are highly mistaken and surely to be understood if any in Express terms speaks so of Councils not wholly Oecumenical or not Lawfully convocated and knownly approved by the Pope or whereof some rational doubt may be made in things essentially required in which cases I grant the general belief of the Church could best warrant the infallibility of their Decrees Otherwise a few particular persons might cope with General Councels as Luther and his Adherents at first Vendicating to himself the Negative voice as if he had been high Bishop in the whole Church which were to take away all possible means of preserving Unity in Faith yea to foment all Schisms and Divisions every one pretending the whole Church holds no such Doctrine whil'st he who is a Member dissents So that such Doctors if they should allow no obligation in receiving the Decrees of the Representative Church to the which they do and must submit even this their Sentence could neither be thought Catholicks or rational men But however some few speak or think God did promise us an infallible Church Isa 2. V. 2 3. Wherein he should teach us his ways and judge amongst the Nations himself not personally for he never went out of Jewry but by her Pastors He has establish'd this infallible Church in St. Matth. 16. V. 19. Upon the Rock Christ hath commanded us to hear her in St. Matth. 18. V. 17. And the persons we should hear in this Church as well as the end wherefore we would hear them and rest upon their Authority is clearly set down in these words 4. Ephes 11. He gave some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and Teachers for perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministry till we all come in the Union of Faith that we henceforth be no more children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of Doctrine c. From all which places of Scripture it is Demonstratively manifest that as the true Church is infallible and we bound to hear her yea and to rely upon her Authority as the Pillar and Ground of our Faith so is it most evidently clear that as she speaketh only to us infallibly by the voice of her Pastors and teachers united it is them we should hear seeing God in her not personally as I have said but by them both Judgeth and Teacheth as the infallible Propounders of his Divine Truths with the Prophets and Apostles in old and the infallible Judges of our Controversies and Debates 2. The same is proven from the unanimous consent of the Fathers quoted at length in my third Section for the infallibility both of the Church and Councils And may be confirmed even by the confession of many Rational and Moderate Protestants who receive the Scripture and consequently all and every Point contained in it
as the Word of God upon the sole Authority of the Church As M. Whitaker against Stapleton p. 1. c. 11. I deny not but the Churches Tradition is the Argument whereby to convince what Books are Canonical and what not M. Fulk in his Answer to a Counterfeit Catholick The Church hath judgment to discern the Word of God from the Writings of Men. M. Covel in his defence of Hooker Doubtless it is a tolerable Opinion of the Church of Rome to affirm that the Scriptures are holy in themselves but so esteemed of us for the Authority of the Church And M. Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Policy we all know that the first outward Motive leading men so to esteem of Scripture is the Authority of the Church And as these own her Authority in Propounding the Scripture Books so other Protestants in resolving all Doubts and deciding all Debates as Bancroft Lord Archbishop of Canterbury in his Sermon on the 8. of February 1588. God says he hath bound himself to his Church of purpose that men by her direction might in matters of doubt be relieved he speakes of the Representative Church which onely directeth Master Field in the Epistle to his Treatise of the Church Seeing the Controversies of Religion are grown in number so many and in Nature so Intricate that few have time and leasure fewer strength of understanding to examine them what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to search out which among all the Societies of men in the World is that blessed company of holy ones that houshold of Faith that Spouse of Christ and Church of the living God the Pillar and Ground of Truth that so they may imbrace her Communion follow her Doctrine and rest in her judgement Here again the Representative Church both Judging and Teaching M. Hooker in the Preface of his Books of Ecclesiastical Policy We are right sure of this that Nature Scripture and Experience have taught the World to seek for the ending of Contentions by submitting it self to some judicial and definitive sentence whereunto neither part that contendeth may under any pretence refuse to submit And what is this but a General Council M. Bilson in his perpetual Government is clear for it To have no Judge sayes he for the ending of Ecclesiastical Contentions were the utter subversion of all peace Synods are surest means to decide doubts Sr. Edwin Sands in his Relation of the Religion used in the West parts of the World The Protestants are as severed and scattered Troops each drawing a diverse way without any means to take up their Controversies c. No ordinary way to Assemble a General Council of their part which is the only hope remaining ever to aswage their Contentions 3. Reason evinceth it The true Church is the School of infallible and Divine Truths then she must have infallible Masters and Propounders A fallible Church is most properly named by a Learned Writer a Spiritual cheat it may well be called the Ground of Opinion Doubt and Despair but not of Infallible and Divine Faith If the Sheep hearing the voice of their Pastors and following them be misled who shall be their sure Guide And if all the Fathers and Doctors of the Church together assembled may mistake either the uncorrupted Letter or true sense of Scripture who I pray you can assure himself he takes it aright No infallibility in matteâ—â— of Faith and Religion is left upon Earth 〈◊〉 the high Bishop and chief Pastors of the Church unanimously Teaching and Propounding cannot err It were more then madness any man should say the contrary and yet hold himself infallibly secure of what he believes Would a Protestant be but once at the pains to speak to an Infidel for his conversion to the true Church calling all her Pastors even assembled in a Council fallible I should willingly hear what he could so much as say in general for Protestancy yea or for the Christian Religion No doubt he should first speak of one true God then of Christ and Faith in him as necessary to salvation telling his Proselyte how out of his Goodness and Mercy towards us he had made himself Man and died upon the Cross for our sins Yet afterwards had risen again and by his Miracles showen both his Civinity and Power and by these strange Works and Wonders having established his Church he had delivered his Will and Doctrine to her in his Written Word called the Holy Scripture Upon this the Infidel no little astonished at such a Discourse surely should ask him some Ground for it and how he could be perswaded it were true Here I imagine the Bible is produced as the Word of God and sole ground of Faith But who assures me of this says the infidel It was attested by many Miracles which Christ and the Apostles did work who first preâ—â—hed it Answers the Protestant they were holy men chosen by our Saviour Christ for the conversion of the World they did Teach his Word Infallibly They did set it down in Writing confirmed it with Wonders and left it to the Church How long ago replies the Infidel Nigh 1700. years answers again the Protestant One Question more says the Infidel have you any infallible Witness in your Church or any Infallible External Motive that this is the same Word of God that was Preached by the Apostles and delivered by Christ or that in confirmation of it ever any Miracle was wrought The first needs none says the Protestant it is clear to all well disposed persons turn Protestant and you will Evidently see it to be the Word of God and the second is sufficiently attested in it Presently the Infidel having received further instruction in most Points of Protestancy and made more earnest to see how all that has been taught him is true desires he may have for a time the Bible and diligently perusing it finds some things in the Historical Books look like Fables many more in the Prophets he doth not understand many seeming contradictions betwixt the two Testaments many points he was taught by his Protestant Master not in Scripture at all yea many things clearly against it Of all which he asks his Master a diligent account And first whether at present there be no man or company of men can resolve him infallibly of all these doubts None concludes the Protestant but Scripture it self for since the Apostles there is in the Church no Judg no Propounder infallible If so Sir you conclude nothing with me says the Infidel but here I end with you for the Book you ground all you have said upon as if it were clear and infallible to me like the first Principles in our Philosophers Schools is so deeply obscure and highly above the reach of reason that without some powerful motive and inducement no reasonable man can believe it And since you grant it was at first propounded with infallible Motives which now have ceased It seems God would
the least they being scarce like to the Apples of Sodom in his confused Rapsody that is pleasant to the eye though no less rotten in the heart as who has best right to the Root and Tree may justly claim the Branches and Fruit so whoever proves he hath the true Grounds of Religion may easily prove all Superstructures on this ground to be true the accessary followeth the principal and this is the chief and principal question amongst us let this be once decided in their favour and we have no more process with them Secondly he desires nothing be brought has been answered by Protestants Answer if he had given example in this he had never written a line However if any thing has been solidly answered to what I bring against his great principle of no Infallible visible Judge of Controversie or both his grounds as I most sincerely protest it never did come to my hands so let Mr. Menzeis send it me and here an end Thirdly That personal Criminations be laid aside Answer then these personal Criminations when he calls Mr. Dempster a dull and Lethargy-head a Neat-herd a man of a Prostitute reputation a Knave a Sycophant a Devil should have been blotted out of his Book As Infamous persons are not received for witnesses so Calumnies can be no wise sooner refuted then by shewing that he who calumniates has lost all reputation and credit If it were not softly insinuated what a quick wit Mr. Menzeis is who names Mr. Dempster a dull and Lethargy-head How learned a Pastor who calls him a Neat-herd how famous who challenges him to be of a prostitute reputation how honest who calls him a Rogue and a Knave how sincere and ingenuous who terms him a Sycophant and how great a Saint who compares him to a Devil his sole authority in Print might perhaps endanger Mr. Dempsters good name wherefore he must not take ill a little hath been said of this not for Criminations but as Answers to Calumnies and notorious falshoods especially his Apology being the greatest of his wrongs as if Mr. Dempster had extorted them he was forced to it because for sooth he can suffer no man to withstand him or not to be satisfied with what he brings This is all the Injury we read in Mr. Dempsters papers which can be no excuse certainly to him who easily foreseeing what might be replyed dare glory with Job he takes injuries for a Crown citing as a Heroick word in Luther Indies magis mihi placeo superbus fio quod video nomen pessimum mihi crescere I please my self more and more daily yea I become proud to see that I have got a very ill name and that it grows upon me which if true his pleasure may be great and his pride too for few of his coat after Luther have got a worse name for changes in Religion Jars and contentions with his brethren disobedience to his Bishop and disloyalty to his Prince Here presently to set up his good name a little he playes the Prophet striving to pry into Mr. Dempsters Intentions and thoughts why he slighted all the points stated by him and Instances only that he should prove there be two Sacraments and no more but here the Spirit fails him in all his Divinations the only reason of this being for that all other controverted Tenets with Protestants are borrowed from divers old condemned Heresies and this only proper to them However Mr. Dempster should have proved seven Sacraments Answer No not this or any thing else in the present dispute as not to the purpose save only that Protestants for their Religion could shew no solid ground this he sticks to this he insists upon and this only whilest Mr. Menzeis like a Bird ever upon wing flies from branch to branch a mark of no great Constancy and Solidity either in Wit or Learning But he will needs bring in the Romish Religion by the head and shoulders upon the Stage and have Mr. Dempster to decline it be tryed by Scripture and the Doctrine of the Church in the first three ages Answer The Romish Religion has no part in the present Scene neither is Master Dempster acting any thing directly in defence of it but Impugning the Protestant grounds and this Mr. Menzeis in his first answer clearly grants his words are The Thesis then which we defend and you impugne is this The Protestant Religion is the true Religion No mention here of the Catholick Roman Faith and yet Mr. Menzeis in all his papers and Books speaks very little for the Protestant Religion but always against the Popish laying aside the Thesis which he sets down himself as his Text so often in the Pulpit to rail at random against us And this with a like Sincerity and Candor as when he says Quakerism is but Popery under a disguise Answer then most men mistake it thinking it so far from Popery under what ever disguise that it is nothing but Puritanism in puris naturalibus and undisguised Is the private Spirit our Ground and Guide Do we allow Laicks and Women to preach or private persons whatsoever upon pretence of New Gospel Light to reform the Church This Presbyterians and Puritans in the beginning of the Reformation and again in the Covenant did with them Yea on the same very ground of adhering to the pure Word and to the Spirit and Light within them against all Authority in Church and State Is not this the Quakers chief Argument against Protestants when they ask their Power and Call We are come to Reform you say they and all your Hirelings even as you the Papists and Priests We ground our selves on the pure and naked Word the Spirit speaketh within us we regard not men Church Councels Fathers have erred Which Answer Mr. Menzeis if constant to his own principles with all his Needle-headed Nicities as he speaks will hardly refute In fine he sayes Romanists boast his Papers shall have an Answer these six Moneths might have done it Our Reply will discover we apprehend some danger c. Answer Few Romanists do think his papers deserve a Reply yea nor their pains to read them as saying little to the purpose much less do they esteem the enterprise to answer them so high as it should be called a boast He who rather contends with us in solidity of reason then celerity of dispatch will neverthleess have this expected answer six Moneths before his Book did appear at which time he makes the Magistrates command the Stationer under the highest pains that he should Print no Reply Yet after his Book has been a twelve moneth under the Press at home we may have a Book Printed at a start abroad neither is there such hast in replying for any danger we apprehend his railings never having wronged Catholicks in the least but much Protesiants many whereof have turned Quakers to hear Tub-preachers professing greater Modesty Sincerity yea and Solidity in belief then he who by his frequent changes in
Religion from Prelaticks to Presbyterians from Presbyterians to Independants from Independants to I know not whom again is more like the Weathercock on the Steeple turning at every wind then the Member of any one Church His Exclamations wherewith he concludes his two long Epistles are both ludibrious and childish in misapplying so many Scripture Phrases to the Catholick Roman Church whose Faith is so highly commended by the Apostle St. Paul and holy Fathers in all Ages who ever amongst them did tax her of Errour flie her Communion renounce her Faith decline her Censures question her Authority disapprove her Doctrine or chalenge the Supreme power and Headship of her Bishop In the second age St. Irenaeus extols her Authority All Churches says he l. 3. c. 3. round about ought to resort to the Roman Church by reason of her more powerful Principality In the third St. Cyprian Ep. 55. calls her St. Peters Chair and the principal Church to which Infidelity or false Doctrine cannot have access In the fourth St. Athanasius has his recourse both to her Bishop and her against all his Adversary Hereticks In the fifth St. Augustine thinks her Sentence an end of Controversie Scripsimus Romam Roma rescriptum est quaestio finita est c. And in following ages do not St. Gregory St. German St. John Damascene Venerable Bede St. Bernard St. Thomas of Aquine and generally all the Fathers and Doctors of the Church the same So that I answer his places of Scripture as St. Augustine Petilian's the Donatist Heretick l. 2. c. 5. He brings the words of the Law but takes not heed against whom as the Devil speaks Scripture to Christ not discerning to whom Verba legis dicitis sed in quos dicitis non attenditis sicut Diabolus verba legis dicebat sed cui diceret non agnoscebat And with the same St. Augustine I answer to all Mr. Menzeis pretended victory and triumph over Mr. Dempster Facile est ut quisque Augustinum vincat quanto magis ut vicisse videatur aut si non videatur vicisse dicatur facile est St. Aug. Ep. 174. SECT II. Wherein the Question is stated as propounded by Mr. Dempster and Mr. Menzeis great Principle and Grounds set down as cleared by him with the Design of the Author thereon THe sole Argument that I find Mr. Dempster urges in all his papers in substance runs thus in this one Syllogism That Religion cannot be a true Religion which hath no peculiar principle or ground to prove that it is a true Religion and conform to the true sense of the word of God But the Protestant Religion hath no peculiar ground or principle to prove it self the true Religion c. Then the Protestant Religion cannot be true Mr. Menzeis cavils at this Syllogism as not being in form both the premises being Negatives as well as the Conclusion Mr. Dempster Answers the second is Affirmative and only objectively Negative As if one should say in Latin wherein the form of Syllogisms best appears Sed omnis Religio Protestantium est talis ut nullum habeat peculiare fundamentum quo se probet veram or else Est habens nullum peculiare fundamentum c. which the least Logician in the Colledge presently sees to be an Affirmative Proposition And yet what Clamours hath not Mr. Menzeis made for this as if at the first bout he had disarmed his Adversary So well this great Professor of Divinity is versed in Logick that he cannot resolve and answer a proposition if not set down as to a Bajan Like to that young man who lately come from the Fencing-School and hardly put to it mistaking the thrust is put off his Guard and so both wounded and mocked So the Syllogism standing in good Form the first Proposition in it suffers no debate The second is denyed by Protestants whereupon they are required to produce this peculiar Ground which proves their Religion to be true Master Menzeis after many Wheelings Turnings and Windings in his Scoldings Digressions Retorsions at the end brings two grounds for the Protestant Religion The first Scripture and that clear in Fundamentals or things necessary to Salvation The second its agreement in Essentials with the Faith of the purest and most ancient Primitive Church in the first three Centuries or Ages To clear his first Ground which in his sixth paper he storms to have called his Achilles or strength seeing he had given another which it seems he holds no less strong then it he sets down That all Scriptures are not clear Secondly that Protestants do not exclude means of Interpretation Thirdly by perspicuity he understands in Terms or by firm and clear consequence Fourthly that by this perspicuity again he means an External and objective Evidence which is nothing impeached by the misunderstanding of Hereticks or others Fifthly that by things necessary is here understood whither necessary as means or as commands What he cites in his eight paper as Maximes taken out of George Scholarius a Grecian is but to the same purpose with what he hath formerly said One onely thing I add which he urges most in all his Book that though Protestants do not exclude means of Interpretation in explaining of Scripture and in deducing consequences from it yet no necessity there is that we should know that he who gives the true Interpretation and Sense have the assistance of the Holy Ghost because forsooth this savours rankly says he of that Erroneous Popish Tenet concerning the necessity of an infallible visible Judg of Controversie whereof he proves in his third paper there is none for that a Jurist without any such Infallible assistance may be known to explain aright a Municipal Law and a Mathematician to demonstrate a Proposition of Euclydes This is the state of the Question as propounded by Mr. Dempster and this in substance is Mr. Menzeis Answer to it their debate is long Mr. Dempster constantly putting Mr. Menzeis to it that he would prove these Grounds to be peculiar to Protestants and support their Controverted Tenets with us but this he still declines to bring any Positive proof for either desiring his adversary should rather Positively prove the contrary No says Mr. Dempster make good your Assertion as he who affirms should prove I will not be so put off of my medium I have taken against you Let us see the Grounds you build on in the sence you take them and without any Infallible visible Judg of Controversie assuring you either of the uncorrupt Writings and sincere Doctrine of the Fathers in the first three ages or of the uncorrupt Letter and genuine sense of Scripture first to be solid and Infallible and then to agree peculiarly to you and the business is done You confidently assert both but what Sectary sayes not the same their claim to the foresaid Grounds say ye is meerly pretended rests to see how your own is proved as just Many Digressions and Retorsions against Popery are made Many
Protestant Writers spoken of who have done this but nothing as either borrowed from them or as laid out by himself is brought in Many passages of the Fathers are misapplyed Many Cavils Criminations and Calumnies are objected Many strong words as Logomachies Vertigo's and Needle-headed Nicities with Prophecies from Poets are used a great part of Erasmus Chilias spent in Proverbs Much paper blotted but what concluded I shall not here interpose my judgment as Mr. Menzeis publishes his victory as Trumpet in the Triumph himself leaving to each one to read and judge of the papers adding only of him what was said of a Prolix and tedious Orator who on little matter spent much time in many flourishes of words and frequent Digressions Nullum vidi qui magis operosè nihil diceret Multa sed non multum Magni passus sed extra viam Seneca That is I have seen none take greater pains to say nothing he sayes many things but not much he walks at a great pace but out of the way For me as I mind not here actum agere so neither do I presume to add any thing to what Mr. Dempster has said in his way of Disputing which I acknowledge both the shortest and best to make Mr. Menzeis prove his Grounds but he ever declining this and urging we should shew in them any weakness or defect this I here undertake for Mr. Menzeis further conviction and happily some Protestants conversion by the goodness and mercy of God My design being to prove positively the falshood and nullity as well of his great Principle of no Infallible visible Judg as of both his Grounds and that very succinctly in a few Sections without Digressing in the least or medling with what hath been said SECT III. Wherein Mr. Menzeis great Principle That there is no Infallible visible Judge of Controversie in the true Church is Positively refuted as the main Ground of all Divisions Schisms and Heresies and contrary to the Scriptures Fathers and Reason AS all Rebellion in Kingdoms and Common-wealths has its rise from contempt of the lawful Authority of Princes and Magistrates upon the specious pretence of abuse of Power against the Laws of the Kingdom and Liberties of the Subjects So all Heresies in the Church begin with appeals from the Pastors of the Church the only Judges establisht by Christ to his Written Word which is to all Christians as their Law Book LEX REX cry out Rebels with their Calipha Buchanan LEX JUDEX or nolo verba quae non sunt scripta Answers the Heretick with an Arian in the Councel of Nice They will believe what they read and not what they hear though the Apostle teach us that Faith comes of hearing and the reason is because with Mr. Menzeis they acknowledge none speaking in matters of Faith and Religion Infallible No Infallible Visible Judge This is indeed that great Principle Protestants did broach to themselves in the beginning of Reformation and at their very first leaping out from the Church they would admit of no Infallible visible Judge stand to no Sentence or Decree of Church Councils Fathers Now this Principle being supposed by them to be solid and an unquestionable truth nothing can follow thereon but what is true Ex vero nil nisi verum and consequently any private Protestant reading Scripture with a sincere intention may yea ought to adhere to what he thinks to be in Scripture should all the Protestant Church with all her Assemblies Synods Preachers be of a contrary mind Upon this Luther and Calvin leave the Catholick Roman Church and all visible Congregations in the Christian World at that time because sayes Chamiers Ep. 49. though Mr. Menzeis deny it was so Then Apostacy averted the whole body from Christ. They made all the Kings and people drunk from the first to the last says Calvin Inst l. 4. c. 18. and Whitaker Cont. 4. q. 5. c. 3. No Religion but the Papistical had place in the Church Duditius apud Bezam Ep. 1. sayes more if that be true which the Fathers have professed with mutual consent it is altogether on the Papists side Upon this same Principle innumerable other Sects and Sectaries have left again Protestants and the Protestant Church upon this and this only Principle every particular man reading Scripture and taking it as he thinks both words and sense clear is made his own Judge and so as many heads almost as many sentences and diverse Opinions in Religion some thinking Scripture clear for this some for that Sect some admitting or rejecting whole Books of Scripture at their pleasure Yea some and that too too many seeing most clear Scripture tossed and wrested by contrary Sects suspend their Judgment renounce their Faith and quit all Religion not knowing with what party to side Others in fine who think themselves deeper wits as they are more speculative and searching brains having run through all can be said to ascertain any point of Faith save only the Divine Oracle in the Church have turned Scepticks in Religion grounding themselves on meer probability Which Seed of Infidelity sayes the Author of a Treatise Intituled Faith vindicated from possibility of Falshood Sowen when the Infallible Authority of the Church as the rule of Faith was renounced dared first appear publickly above ground in the Writings of Mr. Chillingworth and the L. Falkland dressed up in a plausible Rhetorick and set out under a yet more pleasant Title to Protestants as being against Popery was most graciously received by many Yea when it appeared in Mr. Tilletson his Eloquent and Famous Sermon did begin to get credit as an Evangelical truth and all this upon the foresaid great principle Upon it the holy work of Reformation by private men opposing the Law and Gospel to the judicial Sentence and Decrees of the whole Catholick Church Upon it the glorious work of the Covenant by some factious Zelots against Prince and Pastors in the Protestant Church Upon it Preachers and Pulpits clash at randome Sects and Sectaries multiply the Christian world is put in confusion with endless Jars and Debates in Religion And all this because there is no Infallible Judge of Controversie to give Sentence in favour of any one party silencing all others In a word for that according to Protestants God hath given us a Law without a Judg however inconsistent this may seem with Order Providence and wisdom This one Principle I say once more with the great St. Augustine Serm. 14. de verbis Ap. Ruines the very Grounds of Religion In aliis quaestionibus non diligenter digestis non plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate firmatis ferendus est disputator errans ibi ferendus error non tamen progredi debet ut fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliatur According to the same St. Augustine ib. whosoever run their heads were they never so great with Mr. Menzeis against this Inexpugnable wall of the Church Authority are crusht Hoc habet Authoritas matris Eccelsiae
hoc fundatus veritatis obtinet canon contra hoc robur contra hunc Inexpugnabilem murum quisquis arietat ipse confringitur Is it not on the Church her Infallible Authority St. Augustine admits the Scriptures contr Ep. fund c. 5. Ego vero Evangelio non crederem nisi me Ecclesiae commoveret Authoritas Doth he not stick so close to the same Authority of the Church that he sayes Ep. fund c. 4. If any clear testimony were brought out of Scripture against it he would neither believe Scripture nor Church for that on the Church her Authority he believed the Scripture Quod si forâ—e in Evangelio aliquid apertissimum de Manichaei apostolatu invenire potueris infirmabis mihi Catholicorum Authoritatem qui jubent ut tibi non credam quâ infirmatâ jam nec Evangelio credere potero quia per eos illi credideram Was not the Church Judge in Religion for the first two thousand years before any Scriptures were written Was not again the Church of the Jews the same Judge after the Law was given till Christ his time and this by the express Order of God in Scripture Deut. 17. v. 8. would God there direct them unto a Judge and punish them with death for not obeying in matters of the Law and Religion an Authority which might any wise deceive them Or in the Law of Grace it self has Christ in St. Matth. 18. v. 17. commanded us to hear a Church not Infallible or subject to errour Is not the Church of God built on a Rock so that the gates of Hell shall not prevail against her S. Matth. 16.19 Has not the Church this promise from Christ S. Matth. 28.20 And loe I am with you even to the end of the world Is not the Church called by the Apostle S. Paul 1 Tim. 3.13 The Ground and Pillar of Truth However Mr. Menzeis will have this ground sole Scripture In fine if these and such like Texts we should hear the Church receive her Decisions obey her commands be not clear what is clear in all the Scripture or if they be subject to diverse Interpretations who can better judge of their true sense then the same Church Will you say Natural Reason with the Socinians or the private spirit with Anabaptists and Quakers or conferring of places and passages with Protestants Is there any one more rational then the whole Church of God any spirit to be trusted rather then the Spirit of Truth promised to her or any one better versed in all the places of Scripture then all the Bishops and Pastors of the Church composing her Supreme Judicatory in a general Council Let us hear I pray you the Fathers upon this I mean the Authority both of Church and Councils as an Infallible Visible Judge the better to silence Mr. Menzeis vain glorious bragging S. Irenaeus l. 1. c. 49. We must believe those Priests that are in the Church those that have a succession from the Apostles who together with Episcopal Power have according to the good pleasure of the Father received the certain gift of truth And again the same S. Irenaeus c. 62. the Church shall be under no mans judgment he excepts not Mr. Menzeis yea nor Luther nor Calvin to reform her for to the Church all things are known in which is perfect Faith of the Father and of the dispensation of Christ and firm knowledge of the Holy Ghost who teacheth all truth Origen praef in lib. periarch That only is to be believed for truth which in nothing disagrees from the Tradition of the Church and in understanding Scripture we must not believe otherwise then as the Church of God hath by succession delivered to us S. Cyprian de unit eccl That the Church cannot be adulterated with Heresy S. Chrysostom in c. 2. is That all the Hereticks in the World cannot pervert her Doctrine S Cyril of Jerusalem Catech. Myst 18. That what she once hath received from Christ she ever holds S. Cyril of Alexandria l. 5. in Is c. 54. That she is founded by Christ in truth for 〈◊〉 S. Ambrose l. 4. Hexam c. 2. That she cannot fail Eusebius Caesariensis de praeparat Evang. l. 1. c. 3. That her Faith is invincible to the very Powers of Hell S. Augustine l. 4. de bapt c. 4. I know by Divine Revelations that the Spirit of Truth teacheth the Church all truth S. Augustine again l. de Utilit cred c. 16. Fear not to run to the bosom of the Church which by succession of Bishops descending from the Apostolical Sea manifestly even to the acknowledgment of all mankind hath obtained the height of Authority Hereticks who on every side barked against her being partly by the consent of Nations partly by the Authority of Councils partly by the Majesty of Miracles condemned to which Church not to yield primacy is a point either of highest Impiety or headlong Arrogancy In fine the same S. Augustine Ep. 118. To think not right what the Catholick Church practises is most insolent madness I leave to the Physicians judgment what foot of this Distemper and Madness had the first Reformers of the Church not only thinking and calling what she practised Idolatry and Superstition but even judging and condemning her of Apostacy Schism and Heresy as Mr. Menzeis here of Arrogancy and Pride Odi Ecclesiae illius fastum I hate says he that Churches Pride speaking of the Catholick Roman Church for calling her self Infallible but let me answer him as Plato Diogen Calcas Ecclesiae fastum majore fastu he most persumptuously accuses her of Pride no lawful establisht Judicatory being proud in censuring private Delinquents as they deserve but Rebels to their lawful Judges in censuring them both Presumptuous and Proud with him But least any with Mr. Menzeis should apply all these Testimonies of the Fathers to the diffusive body of the Church and not to the Representative in a general Council as if the one were Infallible in Believing and not the other in Teaching according to that promise of Christ in S. Matth. 28.20 Go teach all Nations and lo I am with you all days to the end of the world We must remark that when the necessary good and preservation of the Church requires the performance of Christs words and promises in future ages no less then in the Apostles time then we are to take them for all ages except there be some express limitation made as to Preach Baptise remit Sins feed his Flock lead men in all Truth c. Yet because each Apostle had a power over all the Church this is said to every one of them but to their Successors who have not each one this power together in a Council which for this all the Fathers in all ages have acknowledged as a Soveraign and Infallible Judicatory what ever Mr. Menzeis standing to his Great Principle say to the contrary Thus S. Cyril l. 10. de trin averres Decrees of General Councils to be most Holy and Divine Oracles S. Leo
Ep. 37.64 A Sentence inspired by the Holy Ghost S. Epiphanius haeres 77. A Decision not to be questioned S. Athanasius Ep. ad Episc Afric The Word of God which endureth for ever S. Basil Ep. 10. The Touch-stone to discern Hereticks Vincensius Lyrinensis in his Book against Heresies c. 4. says all who will not be accounted Hereticks must conform themselves to the Decrees of Oecumenical or General Councils S. Augustine Ep. 162. Calls them the last Sentence can be expected in matters of Faith S. Gregory the great l. 1. Ep. 24. Reverences the first four General Councils as the four Evangills And Constantine the great the first Christian Emperour Ep. ad eccle Alex. as witness Sozomenus l. 1. c. 24. and Socrates l. 1. c. 6. holds the Decrees of the Council of Nice against Arius a Divine Sentence flowing from the mouths of so many and great Bishops inspired by the Holy Ghost Wherefore S. Augustine de bapt contra donat l. 1. c. 7. concludes That no doubt ought to be made of what is by full Decree establisht in a Council Neither is Mr. Menzeis Objection from him of any force for when he speaks l. 2. de bapt c. 3. of mending Councils by Councils upon further experience his words are Cum aliquo rerum experimento aperitur quod clausum est cognoscitur quod latebat clearly shewing he means not any Decision of Faith can be mended which no experience can learn us but Divine Revelation alone can teach Thus to shun prolixity in Citations do not all the Fathers who were ever present at Councils Subscribe their Canons and Decrees annexing Anathemas and Excommunications against all who oppose them in the least I hear Mr. Menzeis Reply to all this first but where is that Infallible Church the Scriptures and Fathers speak of Answer That is not here the question but that there is one which is contradictory to his great Principle That there is no Infallible visible Judge Only I add the Protestant Church cannot be this they speak of she not being Infallible as themselves confess and consequently cannot be the Church and House of God which the Apostle calls the Ground and Pillar of Truth Secondly How many Questions may be moved touching the lawfulness of Councils now the Fathers speak not of the Council of Trent but only of lawful ones Answer a contentious spirit will question any thing but St. Augustine above cited tells you of what is by full Decree establisht in a Council no doubt or question ought to be made Whatever Protestants object against the Council of Trent did not the Arians against the Nicene Council Nolo verba quae non sunt Scripta that is I will believe nothing but the written Word which is but the eccho repeating now what was at first cryed out then Thirdly God has obliged no man to hear Church or Council against his express and clear Word Answer This is true but is not the Church the most faithful Depositary of Gods Word best Judge of what is clear and best Interpreter of what is Obscure For no Scripture says St. Peter Is of private Interpretation and doth not Christ in his written Word most clearly and expresly command us to hear his Church if we will not be holden as Publicans and Heathens Fourthly No Council can be general where all are not called and sit with a decisive voice Answer Should even Hereticks be called to and have in Councils their decisive voices What agreement could this make in Points controverted why not Socinians Anabaptists Quakers as well as Protestants should Presbyterians sit with Bishops Prelaticks in Protestant Assemblies what a pitiful shift is this If so let the Covenant be renewed Bishops again thrust out and Mr. Menzeis set high for yielding obedience to them only through compulsion and fear of loosing his place Fifthly The Church her self when fallen in errour cannot be Judge being Criminal and Impeached of most hainous crimes she cannot be both Party and Judge Answer This Objection is all Utopian and Chymerical if we hear the Scripture and Fathers assuring us she cannot err But giving and not granting she did who then her Judge When Subjects rise against their Soveraign Citizens against their Magistrates Children against their Parents leave they to be their Judges because arraigned by them Even Hereticks must submit to the Sentence and Censures of the Church when they fall at variance with her though they turn Unnatural she cannot become a Stepmother to them Sixthly Infallibility in judging is proper to God Answer yes none but God has it Essentially and by Nature but none I hope will deny he may make the Pastors of his Church as well Infallible in teaching points of Faith as his Prophets and Evangelists in penning the Scripture Books or at least as any Protestant in reading and understanding them Seventhly The Church of Rome is but a particular Church Answer we take it not so when we say the Catholick Roman Church but for all Churches in Communion with the Roman as all Countries under the Roman Emperour are called the Roman Empire and all people under the Law of Moses the Jewish Church though that name taken strictly belonged to the Tribe of Juda because the chief City appertained to that Tribe where the High Bishop resided So the Universal Church is called the Roman Catholick Church by reason of St. Peter and his Successors her high Bishops residing there whence Rome is the Centre of Ecclesiastical Communion infusing unity in the whole dispersed body as the Form of Universality or Catholickship Wherefore St. Cyprian Ep. ad Cornel. Calls her Ecclesiam principalem unde unitas Sacerdotalis exorta est That is the Principal and chief Church the Source and Centre of Unity amongst the Priests of all other Churches and consequently the people Eighthly But whereon Grounded this Infallible Authority of the Church Answer On the clear places of Scripture and Fathers above cited It is the Ground and Pillar of truth therefore cannot err It hath the promise of Gods Spirit to lead it into all truth therefore cannot err It is said to be built on the Rock against which the gates of Hell shall not prevail therefore cannot err Christ hath placed in it Apostles Doctors Pastors and Bishops to the consummation and perfection of the whole body that we be not carried away with every blast of new Doctrines therefore it cannot err It is the House the Spouse the Mystick body of Christ his Lot Kingdom and Inheritance in this world therefore cannot err On the Authority of the Church the Fathers have received the Originals Translations and Sense of Scripture Books yea some chief Points of Faith not mentioned in Scripture as persons in the Trinity Sacraments in the Church keeping holy the Sunday c. therefore cannot err Christ has commanded and that under pain of Damnation to hear the Church in matters of Faith and Religion therefore it cannot err All are obliged to live in
Communion with the Church therefore cannot erre The Church hath from Christ and ever has exercised a Judicatory Power in all belonging to Faith and Worship therefore cannot err Christ hath sealed constantly in all Ages her Doctrine with Wonders and Miracles therefore it cannot err To conclude if the Church and her Pastors assembled in Councils mistake clear Scripture misapply Scriptures deceive or be deceived what particular man can either justly censure her and them or solidly Ground himself Magna vis veritatis great is the strength of Verity and nothing more true then what is here holden out that to admit with Mr. Menzeis of no Infallible visible Judge of Controversie is the only Fountain and Spring of all Divisions Schisms and Heresies to which this one Protestant Principle opens so wide a Gate SECT IV. Wherein Mr. Menzeis first Ground of the Protestant Religion to wit sole Scripture is shewn to be no Ground to them and that they have not reformed the Church according to the uncorrupted Scriptures but corrupted the Sciptures to deform the Church SCripture then is Protestants ground of Religion and in it all Fundamentals are clear this is very plausible to the ignorant people who think it to be so upon their Ministers Tradition and highly Glory both in reading and explaining the Bible Yet no peculiar Ground to them as was required all Hereticks for ought M. Menzeis hath said pretending with as great reason the same Neither have Heresies says St. Augustine l. 1. c. 4. contr ad vers leg proph or certain Doctrines bewitching the mind sprung from any other Head then from good Scriptures not well understood But to proceed with order before we come to the understanding of Scripture First What Scripture I pray you is this the Protestant Ground Is it the Scripture Translated or in the Original Tongues Mr. Menzeis speaks nothing of this The learned Chamiers cited as a chief Protestant Champion by him in his Panstratia l. 1. c. 2. s 15. Says only true Originals adding as for Translations the sense of Protestants is that all of them of what standing name or credit soever they be and with what Diligence Sincerity or Learning soever they were made are only so far certain as they agree with the first Context I mean says he as they express that sense which is certainly manifest to be the true sence of the Hebrew and Greek words And Doctor Daniel in his Treatise the Dippers Dipped has these words p. 1. No Translation is simply Authentical or the undoubted Word of God To these Subscribeâ— Doctor Baron our Countrey man inferiour to no Protestant I know either in Loyalty or Learning Tract 1. c. 2. p. 46. Laici illiterati c. Unlearned Laicks says he believe only Implicitly confusedly and 〈◊〉 upon the Divine Authority of Scripture formeâ—ly taken by reason they can have no certain express and distinct knowledge of the Doctrine contained in Scripture as such or of the agreement of Translations in vulgar Languages with the Originals yea they know not so much but upon other mens testimony and report as that the Doctrine propounded to them to be believed is set down in the Scripture or written Word at all Whence followeth according to these learned Protestants the ground of the Protestant Religion must be only the Scripture in the Original Languages that is Greek Hebrew and Syriack which of a thousand Protestants 2. does not understand Where then must all other Protestants ground their faith a very few number of Linguists being excepted shal they believe only Implicitely and on other mens report as D. Baron will have them But this is the Colliers Faith Mr. Menzeis jears though I fear all his skill in Languages often force him to turn a Collier himself or shall they rely on Translations which Chamiers after all diligence used and Doctor Daniel with him confess not to be the undoubted Word of God but in so far as they are known to agree with the Hebrew and Greek Texts and how few undoubtedly know this Yea Protestant Translations of the Bible are so generally corrupt that you shall find none that has not been challenged even by most learned Protestants for manifold corruptions and that very gross To begin at Luther let us hear Zuinglius of him Tom. 2. ad Luther C. de Sacram. fol. 412. Where after detection of many corruptions in Luther he concludes thus See how thy case standeth that in the eyes of all men thou art seen to be a manifest and common corrupter of holy Scripture which thing thou canst never deny before any Creature how much are we ashamed of thee who hereto have esteemed thee beyond all measure and now find thee to be such a false fellow Neither can Luther deny his corruptions himself for in that place of St. Paul where a man is said to be justified by faith he grants l. Contra Cochleum p. 408. he puts into the Text the word only which the Apostle has not Licet Paulus verbo sola non utatur qou ego usus sum and is not this a main place Protestants use against us so well are they grounded in Scripture Of Calvin Charles Molinaeus in his Translation of the New Testament part 2. fo 110. says Calvin in his Harmony maketh the Text of the Scripture to leap up and down as the truth it self declareth he useth violence to the Letter of the Gospel and in many places clearly transposes it and besides this addeth to the Text. Are these the Reformers of the Church by the uncorrupted word or corrupters of the Word to deform the Church Castalio saith of Beza That to note all his Errors in translating the New Testament it would require a great volume Five times he differs from himself though one of the best Linguists ever Protestants had King James a great Scholar as a great Monarch in the sum of the conference before his Majesty thinks the Geneva Translation the worst of all others And Mr. Parkes in his defence of the first Testimony concerning Christs descending into Hell says as for the Geneva Bibles it is to be wished that either they be purged from those manifold Errours which are both in the Text and at the Margent or else utterly prohibited Now as to our own Translations in English Mr. Bruges in his Apology Sect. 6. Says plainly that the approved Protestant Translation hath many omissions many additions which sometimes obscure sometime pervert the sense And M. Carleil p. 116. remarkes that the English Protestants in many places detort the Scriptures from their right sense and shew themselves to love darkness more then light falshood more then truth they have corrupted and depraved the sense obscured the Truth deceived the Ignorant and supplanted the simple And Mr. Broughton a chief Linguist in England in his Epistle to the Lords of the Privy Council desireth them to procure speedily a new Translation because that which is now is full of Errours And in his
God did reveal such Doctrine as theirs either by his Word or Spirit For we receive now no Immediate Revelations as the Prophets and Apostles did in old times nor have we Evidentiam in attestante as the Divines call it that is any Evidence that it is God who speaks points of faith being only propounded to us by men who either put the Scriptures in our hands to read or teach us by word of mouth The Protestants great Principle let 's own no man or Church as an Infallible Judge yea M. Menzeis in his sixth paper offers upon this to turn Papist if the Infallible assistance of the Propounder can be proved necessary but never clears what other way we can be Infallibly assured that all which the Protestants do teach was revealed by God Unless it be in his third paper where speaking of the True and Genuine Sense of Scripture he tells us we may have it as from a Jurist the Explication of a Municipal Law or from a Mathematitian a demonstration of Euclides But what a weak Answer is this Do any receive Demonstrations on Authority as Points of Faith Or is the assent I give to the Law so explained by a Jurist Infallible If Christ himself had not shown his Divinity by his Works and Wonders he grants the Jews had committed no sin in refusing to belive him The Apostles Credentials were their Miracles both did thus evidence the Infallible assistance they had of Gods Spirit to the World and shall any man trust M. Menzeis boldly asserting there is no necessity of any was it not for this the power of Miracles was left in the Church as the marks of her assistance and seals of her Doctrine with other Motives of credibility Notwithstanding Protestants with M. Menzeis will propound to us the Catalogue of Canonical Scripture Books assure us of the uncorrupt Copies and Letter enforce upon our Consciences the sense they give whil'st so confidently obtruding all this they neither dare or do say nor can evidence by any external mark or sign they have the particular assistance of Gods Spirit As if all this were clear in it self with Mathematical Demonstrations But doth Scripture in our Bibles show it self better to be the Word of God now then when Christ was speaking in person Then an external Evidence God did speak by his Son is acknowledged as necessary by him and now shall any man reasonably say there is no necessity of any when he speaks by his servants and Church however this prove efficacious and strong for M. Menzeis conversion it would seem to me more then sufficient for his or any mans conviction Fourthly to claim to Scripture yet so as they can no wise evidence they take it aright is common to Protestants with all Hereticks so no peculiar Ground When Sectaries clash with Sectaries is not all their babling out of Scripture You shall see says Vincentius Lyrinensis c. 35. Hereticks so abound with Scripture as they fly through all the Volumes of the holy Law through Moses the Books of Kings the Psalmes and Prophets c. read the works of Paulus Sam satenus Priscillian Eunomius c. you shall not find ae page which is not Coloured and painted out with the sentences of Old and New Testament Nestorius to support his Heresie gloried as Gennadius reporteth in his Catalogue in the evidence of threescore Testimonies which he produced as the Covenant in three hundred whereof scarce three any wise to the purpose The Valentinians Marcionists Arians will submit to none but Scripture as St. Augustine witnesseth of Maximinus the Arian Bishop in his first Bok against him Neither doth it avail M. Menzeis to say Scriptures are clear in terminis or made clear by conferring of places or show themselves clearly to a well disposed mind First for that though a place of Scripture be clear in it self yet when divers Sects take it diversly a man may justly suspect his own judgment seeing so many of a contrary mind So that it wanteth not difficulty to determine always what is absolutely clear there being many clear places as would seem not to be taken in the clear and obvious sense as the passages Hereticks did most build on will presently shew As when Marcion despiseth Moses and the Prophets upon Christs own clear words in S. John the 10. How many soever have come before me are Thieves and Robbers The Manichees affirmed Christ to be the Sun upon a like Scripture in St. John the 8. I am the light of the world The Waldenses taught no man could be put to death no not by the lawful Authority of a Judge upon clear Scripture again Exod. 20. Thou shalt not kill c. The Devil citeth clear Scripture to Christ and the Jews against his death we have heard in the Law the Messias abideth for ever Moreover many seeming Contradictions in Scripture you shall find in Becan and others one might think clear And many things are believed even by Protestants which be not in Scripture at all as Persons in the Trinity Sacraments in the Church and the Command of keeping holy the Sunday the Scripture neither naming persons or telling what a person is defining Sacraments as M. Menzeis doth or setting down their number abrogating the keeping of the Sabbath or having for the Sunday any command Many places of Scripture again are flatly against Protestants and clear for us as for the Real Presence This is my Body this is my Blood S. Matth. 26. For Justification not by Faith only but also good works Ye see then how that by works a man is justified and not by Faith only S. James 2.24 For Traditions from the Apostles besides the written Word Therefore brethren stand fast and hold the Traditions which ye have been taught whether by Word or our Epistle 2 Thes 2.13 And such like places cited in most Books of Controversie for all Controverted Tenets Protestants never being able to bring any one clear place of Scripture against any of our Tenets not evidently mistaken or confessedly corrupted as when they make S. Paul say a man is justified by faith only Luther above cited granting he has put in the word only which Saint Paul hath not or Thou shalt not make to thy self any Graven Image in place of Idol as is clearly the word Pesel in the Hebrew Text. Secondly as to conferring of places and explaining the more obscure by these which are clear did not Arius boast of this against the Fathers of the Council of Nice proving the unity in Nature of the Father and Son out of these words in S. John the 10. I and my Father are one No says the Arian this place as obscure to us and passing the reach of Humane capacity must be explained by this other more clear in St. John 17. where Christ prayes his Apostles May be one with him as he and his Father are one that is in will and affection and surely the second place is clearer to us and
a Copy conform to the Original such a Translation Authentick such a place clear such a sense genuine 2. The Judge of Controversie ought to give a clear sentence which the learned and unlearned may equally understand and as the Law sayes the Apostle is not for the just but the unjust so the Judg of Controversie is not only for the well disposed but more in some manner for others and especially the unlearned and unstable who according to St. Peter Wrest the Scriptures to their own damnation Yea the most learned amongst the Fathers as S. Basil and S. Gregory Nazianzen after much pains in the study of Scripture as testifieth Ruffinus l. 11. Hist C. 9. refuse to interpret them but according to the Rule and Uniform consent of their Fore-fathers not relying on all the means of Interpretation M. Menzeis prescribes and they had reason the Scripture being the Book S. John describeth to be clasped with seven Seals Apoc. 5. v. 16. which Ezekiel termeth the enrolled volume written within and without S. Ambrose Ep. 44. A Sea containing most profound Senses of Prophetical Riddles S. Augustine l. 2. de doctrina Christ C. 6. hard in the Stile Discourse Places as well as in the Subject and Matter which makes him cry out l. 12. Confess c. 14. O the wonderful depth of thy speeches O the wonderful depth S. Hierome Ep. 13. C. 4. Says the Text of Scripture has a Shell to be broken before that we can tast the sweetness of the Kernel and Vincentius Lyrinensis C. 2. That all take not holy Scripture by reason of its deepness in one and the same sense but some interpret one way some another so that there may seem to be picked out as many senses as men for Novatus doth Expound one way and Sabellius another otherwise Donatus otherwise Arius Eunomius Macedonius otherwise Photinus Apollinaris and other Hereticks with them therefore very necessary it is for the manifold turnings and by-wayes of Errors that the Line of Prophetical and Apostolical interpretation be levelled according to the Square of the Ecclesiastical and Catholick sense whereof Tertullian de Praescript gives this reason for that the sense adulterated is alike perillous as the Stile corrupted But what danger of this says M. Menzeis if Scripture be clear men cannot mistake if not wilfully blinded what is so Could not the Law-maker speak as clear as the Judg Answer we have seen there is nothing almost in Scripture but has been and so may be mistaken Therefore the necessity of a Judge however the Law speak clear has been acknowledged by the greatest men and best wits in the world Aristotle in the first Book of his Morals and fourth of his Politicks And Plato in his Republick prefers good Judges even to best Laws Judges have been ever establisht by the Laws in all Nations as by Scripture in the Church of God and the necessity of one to keep concord and unity is partly grounded on the nature of most clear Words and Sentences which may be taken according to the Letter or Sense Properly or Figuratively Morally or Mystically and so forth Partly on the diversity of Opinions men commonly judging as they are affected and diversly of one and the same thing as their understandings inclinations or interests leads them His Majesties Secretary of State may write no doubt as clear as the Lords of Council and Session speak yet his Letters are directed to them in most businesses of weight least others should take them otherwise then written or wrest them to their own ends even so is it of Scripture written by the Prophets and Evangelists and delivered to the Pastors and Doctors of the Church Whence Catholick Romans build their Belief upon Scripture not taken as they fancy but Explained by Apostolical Tradition conserved in the Church and the unanimous consent of the Fathers and if any doubt arise of both these on the General Definition and Decision of the present Catholick Church Protestants as M. Menzeis holds out ground their Faith on Scripture which they have corrected or rather corrupted as clear in it self or made clear by diligent reading and conferring of places with prayers and as they imagine a well disposed mind that is a Prejudicate Opinion that their own Tenets are right Now let any man judg which of these two is most conform to Scripture it self in both Testaments to the practice of the Church in all ages to the consent of Fathers above cited and Reason For first This the Protestant way would seem vain arrogant and presumptuous in so far as that a man who followeth it must be so confident of himself that if he fancy Scripture to be clear for such a Tenet were all the Christian World in a contrary judgment yea had all Christians been so from the time of the Apostles yet must he stand to his fancy grounded upon clear Scripture as he thinks So that no perswasion can remove him from it for that it is a point of his Faith but for a man to be so peremptorily resolute in the sense he hath found in Scripture by his private reading is very presumptuous I say for wherein can he ground prudently such a strong assent as is required in Divine Faith which ought to be above all can be said against it Shall it be on the clearness of the words conference of places on his skill in Tongues on his weighing the precedent and consequent places or on the assistance of the Spirit given to him If so is it not intollerable pride and presumption in any one man to think that no other was ever so clear sighted or quick witted to see and understand in Scripture what is clear no other in such a multitude of Doctors and Fathers so well versed in the Original Languages so circumspect to confer places so exact to weigh Circumstances so acute to draw Consequences in fine so well disposed to find the Truth so fervent in Prayer so particularly enlightned directed and assisted by the Spirit of God What is whymsical Phanatick and Foolish if this be not wherefore Doctor Field ashamed any should think this to be Protestant Doctrine says None of their Divines teach the Scriptures to be so clear that they may be certainly understood by reading and conferring of places For the Rule of Faith says he in his Appendix 2. p. p. 12. is Doctrine descending by Tradition from the Apostles according to which the Scriptures are to be Expounded And in his fourth Book C. 14. The Rule of Faith is the consenting judgment of them that went before us the Rule without which we cannot know the meaning of the things that are in Scriptures for who shall be able to understand them but he that is setled in these things which the Apostles presupposed in their delivery of Scripture Afterward in the 15. Chap. having said There is no question but there be many obscurities in Scripture And in the 18. Ch. having set down many senses of Scriptures in
who in his Book against the Sacramentarians says plainly They believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost in vain all these things avail them nothing for as much as they deny this Article of the Real Presence and attach him of falshood who said of the Sacrament This is my Body And he had reason for St. Thomas 2.2 q. 5. a 3. with other Divines teach he has no Spiritual Faith who believeth not every thing little or great Fundamental or not Proposed to him by the same Authority Whereupon they infer that no Sectary upon his own choice adhering to this or that believeth any thing So Tertullian l. de praesc speaking against Valentine says some things of the Law and Prophets he approveth some things not that is difalloweth all whil'st he disproveth some 3. From all this appeareth how idlely this distinction of fundamntals not fundamentals in the Protestans sense was brought in by them it serving to no other purpose then to palliate their divisions at present deceive Ignorants in the pretended succession they claim to in old condemn'd Hereticks whose Errors they will have to be no Fundamentals As M. Menzeis taking Hierome of Prague John Huss Wickcliff the Waldenses and Grecians for true Protestants before Luther to make up an imaginary Succession in the Protestant Church which to do with any apparent shew of Truth 1. He should prove those Sects to have been the Catholick Church spread through the whole world and owned as such by the Fathers of those times 2. Justifie their Doctrine which we find partly in their own Writings partly in the most Authentick Records of the Ages wherein they lived to have been in many things most false erroneous and unchristian 3. Their succession from the Apostles times finding their Bishops and Pastors in the Registers of the Church History or Fathers Neither will he make this good by the Authority of Friar Reiner who speaking of the Waldenses whom he names Lionists says at most even as Illiricus quotes his words some affirm they have been from the time of Pope Sylvester others from the dayes of the Apostles M. Menzeis to make the Argument stronger will have Friar Reiner to say absolutely they were from the time of the Apostles with his ordinary ingenuity but what I pray you concludes he from this Those who said so being Lionists themselves as witnesseth Piliâ—hdorphius So a little before Waldo there arose Hereticks who falsly bragged of the same even as after them Protestants do now But if you or they either sir were in all ages from the Apostles tell us the Authours in every age who marked the succession of your Pastors where lived your people c. then refute the great number of learned Writers who lived when such Sects did start up in a suddain as a Mushrome in a night marking their Rise and noting their Errours which certainly they had never done if such Doctrine had been professed before as that of the true and visible Church But to speak a word in particular of every one of those Sects with what ignorance and falshood M. Menzeis calls them true Protestants you shall presently see And first in John Huss to whose name I am sure he has a more just claim then to his Religion if we trust all the most Authentick Records of Huss his Doctrine I cite not for this the Juridick Acts of the Council at Constance because Popish not Father Gordon of Huntley no less eminent for his Learning then Birth because a Jesuit though living in Prague in Boheme where Hussits most abound and having made most diligent enquiry of their Tenents he found as he witnesseth Cont. 3. de Euch. c. 17. they did hold Invocation of Saints Prayer for the dead the Fastings and Ceremonies of the Catholick Church with free will confession of Sins seven Sacraments c. But I hope he will trust Fox a most firy Protestant speaking thus upon the 2. Ch. of the Revelation What did Huss at any time teach or defend in the Council wherein he did not seem superstitiously to consent with the Papists what did the Popish Faith decree concerning Transubstantiation which he likewise with the Papists did not confirm who celebrated Mass more Religiously then he or more Religiously observed the Vows of Priestly Chastity Concerning Free Will Predestination informed Faith that is without Charity the cause of Justification and merit of good Works what other thing did he hold then is taught at Rome All this he and more in his Monuments that he did acknowledge seven Sacraments and the Popes Supremacy p. 216. and 227. And if he should as yet disown Fox as a private Writer yet must he trust Luther as a man extraordinarily sent by God to Reform the Church and the 14. Apostle The Papists burned Huss says he Colloq Germ. C. de Antich when as yet he departed not a fingers breadth from the Papacy for he taught the same which the Papists do only he found fault with their Vices against the Pope he did nothing To the same purpose Luther has much more Tom. 2. in Assert art 30. and Tom. 3. in Ps 2. But in fine should not Huss himself be trusted better then any his works are extant and perusing them you shall find he did hold seven Sacraments upon the fifth of S. James Transubstantiation in his Book of the Lords Supper Ch. 2. and 3. the Sacrifice of the Mass in his Sermon of Funerals Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead in the same place confession of sins to a Priest in his Treatise of pennance invocation of Saints in his Epistles 22.30.35 Veneration of Relicks upon Ps 115. yea in his question of believing the Popes Supremacie as to his office dignity and power though with this Caveat common to him with Wicliff that ecclesiastical dignity as well as Civil was grounded on Inherent Justice and so lost by Mortal Sin which neither Catholicks nor Protestants do teach Nevertheless M. Menzeis is not ashamed to own Huss for a Protestant so constant is he in professing his Fundamentals which he will have to be in Scripture so clear I insist not so much on the rest yet to say a little of every one Of Hierome of Prague Fox pag. 585. relateth whatever was his Opinion in other things yet stood he constantly in defence of the real Presence and Transubstantiation saying he did give more credit to S. Augustine and other Doctors of the Church who affirmed the same then to any that denyed it Wikcliff again M. Menzeis is not ashamed to call a Protestant who in his own Writings so expresly holds against them 1. Worship of Images in his 9. Ch. of the Eucharist Images says he we adore purely as signs but God we must adore with all our power It is therefore granted that Relicks Images and the Sacraments be with prudence to be adored He did also hold Invocation of Saints in his Sermon of the Assumption into Heaven of our blessed Lady
2.24 Ye see then how that by Works a man is justified and not by Faith only Is it not to protest against his Divine Appointment again and his Word to teach that good Works done in his Grace and by his Grace merit nothing when through all the Scripture Heaven is promised as a reward to our Works and in St. Matth. 10. It is said Christ shall render to every one according to his Works Is it not to protest against his Divine Authority and Word to deny the Real Presence All the Evangelists speaking so clearly This is my Body this is my Blood Is it not to protest against his express Command and Word to forbid Images as Idols He having ordered two Cherubims to be set on the Ark of the Covenant Exod. 25. Is it not to protest against his own Practice and Word to deny we should honour his Saints whom God himself Honours yea and glorifies Them that honour me I will honour 1 Reg. 2.30 Is it not to protest against his Dispensation and Word to deny the Power given to his Apostles and their Successours to forgive sins he having said in S. John 20.23 Whose sins ye shall forgive they are forgiven Is it not to protest against the Satisfaction which his Justice requires for our sins even after the guilt is forgiven to deny Purgatory The Scripture witnessing that he did exact satisfaction of David and many holy penitent sinners after he had forgiven their sins And S. Paul 1 Cor. 3. If any ones work burn he shall suffer loss but himself shall be saved yet so as by fire where we have clearly a purging and punishing yet saving fire Is it not to protest against Christs Eternal Priesthood according to the order of Melchisedech Ps 109. and S. Paul Hebr. 5. to reject the unbloody and unspotted Sacrifice of the Mass which the Prophet Malachy 1. C. 10. V. calls a clean Oblation to be offered amongst the Gentiles from the rising of the Sun even to the setting and that in every place Is it not to protest against all God commands us and his Word to take away free Will in obeying Deut. 30.19 I have set before you life and death chuse To conclude what Point is there in all the Catholick Faith which Protestants protest against which is not either Directly against Gods Divine Attributes Christs Mediation and Dispensation his Churches Authority his Saints and Servants honour some part of Christian duty belief or life or generally not against his express written Word as it is plain in it self or expounded by the unanimous consent of the Fathers And yet so impudently bold is this spirit of Heresie as to dare say that that is contained in Scripture which Scripture most evidently contradicts that is only in opposition to Popish Errours which impugnes the very Fundamental and most substantial Verities of the Gospel and Christian Faith that by the pure and uncorrupted word it will reform the Church when corrupting the Word and correcting the Church as subject to failings and Errours in Religion it ruinateth both Church and Word What has been said in this and the former Section further instanced in two Particular Controverted Points The Real Presence and two Sacraments THE Protestant Religion is The Christian Religion as contained in Scripture Sole Scripture is their Ground and in it all Fundamentals are clear Says M. Menzeis How false all this is in general doth evidently I hope appear by what I have said above Here I instance only further two particular Points he handles at length the better to make see the falshood of his strong and bold Assertions in the weakness and nullity of his Proofs And this first in his refuting one of our chief Tenets viz. The Real Presence then in maintaining one of his own to wit That there are two Sacraments and no more 1. Then to prove Christs body is not really in the Sacrament these most clear words This is my body must not says he be taken in the literal sense but Figuratively why so doth the Scripture say this no no Scripture is brought What then a Philosophical Demonstration as he pretends The word this in the literal sense is inexplicable and the Proposition implyeth a contradiction ergo c. But why the Pronoun this inexplicable because let Romanists strain their wits Answers M. Menzeis and squeeze their Authors they cannot tell what it can signifie whether the Bread Body or something indeterminately Who would not laugh here to see Mr. Menzeis a professor of Divinity take such a weak Argument for a Demonstration most like in this to a certain Romantick Knight Errand call'd Don Quicsot who imagining to himself a Windmil to be a Gyant and then fighting with it as with a Hector he did both blunt his Sword and batter his Reputation For what I pray you doth the Pronone this signifie in any proportion but Indeterminately till it be determined to some particular thing by the following words So that let a man say a hundred times this he determines nothing but by the ensuing words as here This is my Body makes a determinated sense the last words determinating the first which alone and of it self signifies nothing determinately and so to seek what it signifies determinately alone and before the other words be pronounced is to quibble and speak non-sense by seeking a determinate Object under a word which of its nature hath none And this is the first part of his Demonstration for establishing by a Logick Sophism without any clear Scripture a main Point of Religion The second part of this Demonstration is That it implyes a manifest contradiction a true Affirmative Proposition de praesenti should produce its Object Why this because in the instant of Nature wherein the Proposition is conceiv'd before its Object as the cause before its Effect the Proposition should be true as is supposed and not true because the Object in that instant is not The same Argument he urgeth in the instant of time wherein the Copula is pronounced or Particle is before the two last words And for that Catholick Authours give many and diverse Solutions of this Argument as the Custome is in the School he will be satisfied with none But because Mr. Menzeis is good at Retortions I retort his Argument thus Is not this a true Affirmative Proposition de praesenti which produces its Object in St. John 15. This is my command that ye love one another Now what difficulty in the former Proposition either in the word this or in the Instants of Nature and Time or that a true affirmative Proposition make its own Object which is not here do not these words make a new Command says Christ as the former his body what if M. Menzeis could have brought an Axiome of Philosophy against the Real Presence as that Maxime so commonly propounded and answered in the School quae sunt eadem cum uno tertio sunt eadem inter se proving as would seem that
off to ground their greatness on new Conquests And the Naturalists observe that Trees and Plants do presently fade when their Roots do not spread as the Branches spring up So the Protestant Religion should have instantly been chocked in its Rise and as smothered in the Cradle If Protestants standing constantly to their first Principle had still rejected the Doctrine of the Church under the specious pretence of adhering only to the pure and naked Word as a Ground most pure and clear Scriptures making so clearly against them Wherefore though the first Reformers as I shall presently shew did disclaim the Doctrine of the Church in any Age after the Apostles as infallible or Ground of Faith disclaim the Fathers disclaim Miracles disclaim a Succession from any Yet others after the first heat of passion had a little relented finding all this most disgraceful and a most evident Conviction of their Errours and fearing their Religions both fall and ruine if not speedily propped claim a Succession though from Old condemned Heresies with M. Menzeis here from the Waldenses Wickliffians Hussits as we have seen Cite the Fathers though either to no purpose or else corruptedly with Du Plessis so evidently confuted by the Cardinal Du Peron pretend to Miracles with M. Pool in his Nullity of the Romish Faith though falsly most Protestants disowning Miracles since the Apostles time and all the world witnessing it did never see a Miracle amongst them yea they grant in fine the diffusive body of the Church to be infallible in believing but not the Representative or Pastors even assembled in a General Council Infallible in Teaching with M. Menzeis again here Who upon this gives us for a second Ground of the Protestant Religon The Doctrine of the Church in the first three Centuries or Ages The sole reason he gives for the Churches Doctrine as being a Ground of Faith at that time is because if the Catholick Religion was not then purely conserved in her it was no where to be found ab sit says he blasphemia which without blasphemy cannot be thought Whereupon I first reflect that if it be blasphemy to deny the Catholick Religion must always be purely conserved in some Church many chief Protestants surely speak open blasphemy who most boldly affirm before the Reformation made by Luther and Calvin no Church to have conserved true Religion in its purity at all Luther comment in 1 Cor. 1.15 I was the first to whom God vouchsafed to reveal these Doctrines which are now Preached this praise they cannot take from us that we were the first that brought light to the world Without our help no man had ever learned one word of the Ghospel This M. Wotton both acknowledgeth and confirmeth in Exam. Jur. Rom. Luther might well say he was the first a Son without a Father a Schollar without a Master c. Calvin in an Epistle of his to Melancthon It doth not a little concern us sayes he that not the least suspition of any Discord risen amongst us descends to Posterity for it were a thing more then absurd after we have been constrained to make separation from the whole world if we in our beginning should also divide from one another Chillingworth Ch. 5. Sect. 55. as for the External Communion of the visible Church we have without Scruple formerly granted that Protestants did forsake it Bucer p. 660. All the world erred he speaks before the Reformation in that Article of the Real Presence Bibliander in orat ad princip Germ. c. 72. it is without all question that from the time of Gregory the great the Pope is the Antichrist who with his abomination hath made drunk all Kings and people from the highest to the lowest Brochard on the second Ch. Rev. p. 4. when the first assault was made upon the Papacy by Luther the knowledge of Christ was wanting in all and every one of his members White in his defence C. 37. Pa. 136. Popery was a Leprosie breeding so universally in the Church that there was no visible company of men appearing in the world free from it Bennet Morgentern in his Treatise of the Church calls it ridiculous to say any before Luther had the purity of the Gospel Simon Voyon Cat. Doct. in his Epistle to the Reader says when Pope Boniface was installed then was that universal Apostacy from the Faith which was foretold by Paul M. Jewel upon the Revelation fol. 110. The truth was then unheard of when Luther and Zwingle came to preach the Ghospel Febustian Francus in his Epistle of abrogating Ecclesiastical Statutes says for certain through the work of the Antichrist the External Church together with the faith and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure and for these thousand and four hundred years the Church hath been no where External and Visible From all which Testimones of most renowned Protestants yea and of the very first Reformers is evidently proved First that they did not think any visible Church to have conserved at all times the purity of the Gospel which M. Menzeis calls blasphemy to deny Secondly that they claim not a Succession from any that went before them except only from the Apostles what ever later Protestants do falsly pretend Thirdly that they own no more the diffusive body of the Church infallible then the Representative seeing no Church prosessing the Doctrine they did teach is acknowledged by them for many hundred years before the Reformation Fourthly That Popery was the only Religion generally prevailing and openly professed for no less time then fourteen hundred years before Luther Fifthly how well M. Menzeis agreeth with other Protestants in this his second Ground of Faith You shall presently God willing hear both greater and better witnesses deposing against him but first I ask what peculiar reason he has why the Church in her childhood and younger age should be a ground of Faith and not afterwards and in her full maturity as we grant her the fulness of Divine Wisdom even from her birth which did not increase by age so by age it cannot decay We shall now presently see how like the Protestant Church is to that of the three first Centuries but before this I would know why M. Menzeis gives her Doctrine rather for a ground then in following times Is there any peculiar promise made to her any particular reason militates for her or any testimonies of the Scriptures or Fathers given to her in one time rather then in another was her Doctrine then purer her Condition more flourishing her authority greater Doth not M. Menzeis grounding his Faith upon the Doctrine of the Church in any age after the Apostles confirm that Romish Tenet of the Church Doctrine as a Ground in other Ages by parity of reason Secondly I reflect that M. Menzeis who will admit of no Infallible Visible Judg of Controversie of no Infallible Tradition not contained in Scripture nor of any Assembly of the Fathers and Pastor of the Church in
a General Council as infallible in their Decrees Here either acknowledgeth the Records of the Ecclesiastick History and Writings of the Fathers as witnessing infallibly to us the Doctrine of these ages or else must grant he hath no infallible assurance that this his second ground of Faith is solid and Infallible There being no other way left us without particular Revelation to know what Doctrine the Church did teach and believe in the first three Ages save only the Writings of the Fathers and Tradition of the present Church which consequently M. Menzeis must either here own as Infallible or avouch he builds his Faith upon a sandy and fallible ground The first Reformers standing better to their own Principles then he and of much greater sincerity and learning grant plainly the Fathers of the Primitive Church to hold many things in opposition to them Luther L. de servo arbitr C. 2. and in his Table Conferences C. de patrib Eccl. The Authority of the Fathers is not to be regarded in the Writings of Hierome there is not a word of true Faith in Christ sound Religion Tertullian is very Superstitious I have holden Origen long since accursed of Chrysostome I make no account Basil is of no worth he is wholly a Monk I weigh not him a hair Cyprian is a weak Divine affirming there yet further that the Apology of Melancthon doth far excell all the Doctors of the Church yea even Augustine himself Calvin L. 3. Inst C. 5. It was a custome 1300. years ago that is in the second age to pray for the dead but all of that time says he I confess were carried away with Errour And in the fourth Book of his Institutions Chapter 9. he will stand to no Decision of Councils Fathers Bishops but try all by Scripture alone granting generally all the Western Churches to have defended Popery Resp ad Versipell p. 134. Melancthon on the first Cor. 3. speaks plain presently from the beginning of the Church the antient Fathers obscâ—â—ed the Doctrine of Justice by Faith encreased Ceremonies and devised new Worships In like manner Peter Martyr 1. devotis p. 477. that in the Church Errours did begin Immediately after the Apostles and therefore as long as we stand to Councils and Fathers we shall be alwayes in the same Errours Whitaker cont 2. q. 5. C. 7. it is true which Calvin and the Centurists have written that the antient Church did Err in many things as touching Limbo free Will merit of Works c. Chemnitius in Exam. conc trid pa. 200. most of the Fathers did not dispute but avouch that the souls of Martyrs heard the petitions of those who prayed to them they went to the Monuments of Martyrs and Invocated Martyrs by name D. Fulk in his confutation of Purgatory grants Tertullian Cyprian Hierome Augustine do witness that Sacrifice for the Dead is a Tradition of the Apostles yea in his retentive says Prayer for the dead prevailed within the first 300. years And in his Answer to a counterfeit Catholick That Pope Victor in the second Age did practise Supremacy in the Church The Centurists do reprehend Cyprian Origen Tertullian in the third Century and S. Gregory Nazianzen in the fourth for teaching Peters Primacy as they do also S. Cyprian in the third Century of Superstition for saying that the Priest at Mass holds the place of Christ and offers up Sacrifice to God the Father Sacerdotem Cyprianus inquit vice Christi fungi deo patri sacrificium offerre And generally confess the Fathers of the third Age do witness and that not in obscure terms invocation of Saints videas in doctorum hujus soeculi Scriptis non obscura vestigia invocationis Sanctorum They say further in the second Century S. Irenaeus admitteth free Will even in Spiritual actions and that S. Clement every where asserteth it so that the Doctors and Parstors of that Age were in this manner of blindness say they reckoning out in this number S. Cyprian Theophilus Tertullian Origen Clemens Alexandrinus Justine Irenaeus Athenagoras Tatianus c. As doth also Abraham Scultetus with them Yea Doctor Humphrey in his Jesuitisms pa. 2. and else where Eccl. C. 15. says it cannot be denyed but that S. Irenaeus S. Clement and other Fathers of the first and second age called Apostolicks for that they were Disciples of the Apostles or immediately followed them have in their Writings the Opinion of free Will and Merit of Works The Cenâ—ury Writers and Scultetus Tax for the same Clement of Alexandria S. Cyprian Justin Martyr c. In the third Century they say Origen made good Works the cause of Justification and in the 5. accuse S. Chrysostome for handling the Doctrine of Justification impurely as attributing Merit to Works M. Whitaker saith that not only Cyprian but almost all the most holy Fathers of that time were in that Errour as thinking so to pay the pain due to sin and to satisfie to Gods Justice in so far as Luther on the 4. ch to the Gallathians calls for this Hierome Ambrose Augustine and other Fathers Justice-workers of the old Papacy And M. Wotton in his defence of M. Perkins forbeareth not to censure for this very Point of Merit the undoubted and confessed Writings of Ignatius Disciple of S. John Chemnitius in his Examine par 4. p. 20. affirmeth the Antient Fathers Erred in making Pilgrimages to Relicks of Saints and Osiander with the Centurists Cent. 4. that S. Hierome did foolishly contend that the Relicks of Saints ought to be worshipped For owning Traditions Chemnitius in his Exam. Par. 1. p. 87.89.90 reproves Clement of Alexandria Origen Epiphanius Hierome Ambrose Basil Maximus Damacene and M. Whitaker de Sacr. Script S. Chrysostome as speaking inconsiderately when he admitteth them D. Reynolds in his Concla 1. p. 689. somewhat more moderate leaves the censuring of S. Epiphanius for this to the Church M. Whitgift in his defence against Cartwrights Reply grants Ignatius Disciple of the Apostles to have said of Hereticks They do not admit the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ which flesh suffered for our sins And M. Beacon in his Treatise the Relicks of Rome says the Mass was begotten conceived and born anon after the Apostles time if it be true what Historiographers write Calvin L. 1. Inst C. 4. confesseth in the Primative Church Confession Pennance and Absolution by the Priests and the Century Writers that in the times of S. Cyprian and Tertullian there was used private confession even of thoughts and lesser sins then so commanded as necessary Where any judicious Reader may evidently see how by chief Protestant Authours both the Primitive Church and the Fathers are censured for many Errours Yea and for the very same which are most objected against the Romish Church a most invincible Argument from the confession of our Adversaries That the Church and Fathers of the three first Ages did teach the self same Doctrine with the present Roman Church and
with Pope Pius in his confession of Faith in all those Points quoted by them Free Will Merit of Works Invocation of Saints honouring of Relicks Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead S. Peters Primacy amongst the Apostles the Popes Supremacy in the Church Mass Traditions the Real Presence Confession Pennance Absolution c. So that if M. Menzeis will stand to his own word and trust the Writings of his brethren He is here again engaged to turn Papist Many more such Quotations could I produce from chief Protestant Writers acknowledging both the Church and Fathers of the first three Ages holding most controverted Tenets flatly against Protestants And yet so confident M. Menzeis is he dare take the Church Doctrine at that time for a Ground of the Protestant Religion and this no doubt to shew the deepness of his Learning and how well he is versed in Antiquity till presently we hear the Fathers themselves speaking the better to make both his Weakness and Igorance appear But before I enter upon this I remark M. Menzeis in his 8. paper says we agree with Protestants in all their Positive Tenets and only in their Negatives disagree How true this is I do not now dispute yet must here reflect that all chief Heresies for the most part with that of Protestants have ever consisted in Negations and in denying some Points of Faith generally received in the Church Sabellius denyed three persons in the God-head Eutiches two Natures in Christ Nestorius in Christ one Person The Monothelites two wills in Christ as two Natures The Arians Christ to be consubstantial with his Father The Macedonians the consubstantiality of the Holy Ghost Marcion that Baptism in the Church should be conferred but once The Novatians that sinners after Baptism could be absolved upon Repentance and even such Heresies Protestants most claim to as the Grecians deny the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son the Waldenses deny Princes and Magistrates to conserve their Digities and Power when fallen in mortal sin The Hussits deny that the predestinate could sin the Albigenses Marriages to be lawful the Wickliffians Free Will and so forth Negatio est Malignantis naturae say the Philosophers Negations are of a Malignant Nature whence we see that as Atheism consists in denying God so Heresies are most in Negations as flowing from the Spirit of Pride contradiction Rebellion However it is time we shew what conformity there is betwixt Protestants Negative Tenets and the Doctrine of the Church in the first three Centuries or Ages M. Menzeis provoking so confidently his Adversary to bring any Essential difference from the Authentick writings of these Fathers and upon this engaging to turn Papist I do not here question further then I have done in my second reflection how he who admits of no Infallible Visible Judge can be sufficiently assured of their Authentick Writings for if he take this only upon their conformity with Scripture they can make no peculiar Ground to him rather then other mens Writings having the like conformity with it or can they be caled properly a distinct Ground from it But having seen how many chief Protestants disown the most antient Fathers chalenge them of manyfold Errours censure their Doctrine a most strong conviction against M. Menzeis that they take not their Writings for a Ground let us hear themselves deposing clearly in our favour against him and see if they who have confounded so many Atheists convinced so many Infidels converted so many Hereticks may even happily prevail with M. John I cite here only the Fathers in the first three Centuries after Christ as M. Menzeis makes only his appeal to them In which Ages the Church being still under persecution had not indeed so many Writers as in following times to witness her Doctrine against all Hereticks Yet you shall God willing see how clearly the chiefest of them dissent from Protestants in all controverted Tenets and most disgracefully bely him The Fathers of the first three ages clearly speaking against Protestants in all Chief Controverted Tenets I Begin even at what is most Principal to wit the Popes Supremacy this Potestants deny But in the first Age S. Denis de divinis nominibus C. 3. calls S. Peter first Bishop of Rome the Supreme and most antient top of Divines Where both Primacy and Supremacy is given to him S. Clement Disciple of S. Peter in his first Epistle declares him both the ground stone of the Church and the most powerful of the Apostles S. Ignatius Disciple of S. John in his Epistle to the Romans extolling their Church calls her The Church that presides at Rome In the second Age S. Irenaeus l. 3. contra Valent C. 3. says the Romish Church is the greatest and most antient And again l. 3. C. 3. all Churches round about ought to resort to the Roman Church by reason of her more powerful Principality In the third Age Zepherinus Pope in his Epistle to the Bishops of Sicily decreed That the greater causes of the Church were to be determined by the Apostolick Sea because so the Apostles and ther Successors had ordained In the third Age Origen on the 6. Ch. to the Rom. says The chief charge of feeding Christs Sheep was given to S. Peter and the Church founded upon him In the same Age S. Cyprian Ep. ad Jul. We hold Peter the Head and Root of the Church and again Ep. 55. he calls the Church of Rome S. Peters Chair Yea in the second Century Amandus Polonus M. Spark and M. Whitaker though Protestants confess that Victor then Bishop of Rome whom M. Whitgift calls a godly Bishop carried himself as Pope or Head of the Church So well has Protestant Doctrine in this Point a Ground in rhe Fathers of the first three Ages that Danaeus a Protestant in his Answer to Bellarmine acknowledgeth Soveraign Authority to have been practised by the Popes of the third Age the Centurists Cent. 3. that Tertullian did think the keys to be committed chiefly to S. Peter and the Church to be built on him and S. Cyprian to have taught that the Roman Church ought to be acknowledged of all others the Mother Church Now shall all this be called Protestant Doctrine that S. Peter was Head and Root of the Church that the Church was founded upon him that the chief charge of Christs Flock was given to him that he is the Supreme amongst Divines that the Church of Rome is his Chair which for this hath a more powerful Principality as greatest so that the greater causes in the Church ought to be decided by her where by parts all the Controversie of the Popes Supremacy is holden out against them Secondly Protestants deny we should believe any thing not contained in Scripture upon Apostolical Tradition conserved in the Church But in the first age S. Denis Eccl. Hierarch C. l. speaking of the Apostles says These our first Captains of Priestly Function did deliver to us the chiefest and most
visible in her Pastors and people by a continued succession from the Apostles which held S. Augustine in her Tenet me in Ecclesiâ says he Successie facerdotum I am holden in the Church by the succession of Priests then he reckons out the only high Priests and Bishops of Rome as the lawful Successors of S. Peter as in his 162. Epistle he says in the Roman Church has ever been the Authority of the Apostolick Sea In ecclesiâ Romanâ semper Apostolicae Cathedrae viguit authoritas No other having unity in Faith or the means to preserve it by General Councils which have all been holden in her No other and specially the Protestant Church having either Universality or Antiquity as is clear from their late Rise and little Extent Whatever Protestants and other Sectaries sophistically or Subtilly Object against all this is but weak and should stumble none many stronger Objections Atheists Infidels and Hereticks have made against God our Saviour Christ and the holy Scripture The first Principles most clear by the light of Nature suffer their Objections whence the Scepticks amongst Philosophers as the Socinians amongst Hereticks those admitting of nothing as unquestionably clear and these as infallibly true Wherefore to conclude all I have said the Catholick Roman Church being so gloriously marked so generally attested and so notoriously known to be the true Church established by Christ and his Apostles ever conspicuous and visible ever working Miracles converting Infidels making Saints ever holding Councils deciding controversies keeping unity opposing Hereticks and maintaining true Faith upon Solid and Infallible Grounds having so clear testimony from the Fathers from Scripture from God having charisma veritatis certum the Gift and Grace of certain and infallible Truth says S. Irenaeus origines firmas sure beginnings saith Tertullian Veritatem undequaque munitam verity solidly grounded and guarded says S. Epiphaniâ—s haeres 55. authoritatem stabilissimam most solid and constant Authority says S. Augustine Ep. â—8 may 〈◊〉 not say justly with our Countryman Richard of S. Victor l. 1. de Trinit c. 2. Si error est quem credimus à te decepti sumus If it be Error we do believe in this Church and upon her Authority it is thou O God who hath deceived us for with such signs this Doctrine is confirmed that it can be from no other but thee Let the impartial Reader here compare both Protestant Grounds and Doctrine with ours and see after all their Objections and Cavils what they bring for their new doubtful and inconstant Opinions against our old infallible and constant Faith what against our just claim our clear right our long and uninterrupted possession They come in with the Scripture in hand as the Fundamental Law against which there can be no prescription but what Scripture I pray you save that they have wrested from us olim possideo prior possideo says Tertullian it was first delivered to us we have it of old and we conserve it whole and intire But not so Protestants the many Books they reject shows it is but like a torn bond in their hands blotted in as many places as there be things put in of new or others rased out in their Bibles And then as they bring it it is altogether forceless and can make no security as a rent Charter without Subscription Witness or Seal Gods Subsciption would be seen and acknowledged if it were presented by them as at first by the Apostles with Supernatural 〈…〉 Motives witnesses if they could show it handed down from age to age by infallible Propounders his-Seal in Miracles But the Protestant Church granting her self to be fallible and being destitute both of infallible Motives of credibility and miracles can be no sure propounder of Gods Word neither can it as propounded by her be any sure ground to us Yea Examine well all the Principles Protestants build their Pretended Reformation upon and you shall find them all mearly Whimsecal Paradoxal and improbable For what Probability can there be 1. Of what they say against us that the Popish Church as they call it which they grant to be most antient should have continued so long and ever possessed the greatest part of the Christian World holding Councils condemning Heresies converting Infidels working Miracles and that the Protestant Church which they will have to be the Catholick or Universal all this time was no where to be found never once made mention of by any Author without Councils Statutes or Laws published to the World never converting one Kingdom opposing one Heresie having one Writer of note witnessing her Faith and Doctrine her doings or sufferings her Pastors or People That the antient Congregation diffused through the whole World should be Heretical and the new one in some few corners be Orthodox That corruption of Doctrine did enter so insensibly into the Roman Church that no Councils no Fathers did see or censure it who have observed many lesser things in private men that all the Fathers I have quoted in my 6. Section should have unanimously holden ever since the Apostles what Protestants call Popish Errors or that so many Learned men in the Roman Church who have dived into the very depth of most abstract Sciences could not see before Luther what in Scripture was clear 2. What probability for what they vent of their first Apostles and Reformers that God did send one Apostate Friar who in the Monastery as he confesseth lived so mortified chast and devote but quitting it is so hurried with his passions of Lust and stings of Conscience even for this his new Doctrine as may be seen in the Preface of his Works in Latine and his Table Conferences without any visible mark of his Mission to reform both his Word and Church in opposition to all her ordinary Pastors at that time that the Church before him I mean Luther as he himself glories should have been destitute of the true Letter and sense of Scripture of true Worship true form of Government c. that notwithstanding so many solemn promises made by God the Word should not depart out of the mouths of Pastors nor the true Church be so much as obscured yet that Christ should have suffered the light of the Gospel to be under a Bushel and the Cuhrch invisible for more then a thousand years That his Reformation should be the work of God and the world ever worse since it That Protestancy should bring back true Faith which is divided into so many Heresies and has caused so many Troubles Divisions and Schisms 3. What show of probability or solidity in Protestant grounds that the ground of Faith which they will have to be sole Scripture as every one reads and understands should support all the Heresies in the World That this Ground given us for keeping of Unity should make all our Divisions in Religion To deny the Authority and Tradition of the Church infallible and yet take Scripture on it that the whole Representative Church in a General Council is not infallible in its Decrees and yet private men reading Scripture are infallible in what they believe That what was at the Margent in their first Bibles would be now put in the Text That pure Scripture should be a cleer Ground for Protestancy and not one Point specifical or special to it to be found in Scripture in express words In fine that Protestants should have the pure Word and rely on the Originals their best Writers granting they have not found so much as an Authentick Copy any where If you will see what probability at last they have either for their Doctrine or Church consider amongst Protestants with the Author of a late Answer in Writ Faith without Unity a Body without united Members a Law without a Judg a Church without an Altar Religion without a Sacrifice Sacraments that do not sanctifie Divine Service without Religious Ceremonies Preachers without a call Doctrine without Infallibility Belief without a ground Commands impossible to be kept Exhortation to what is not in our power Reward without Merit Reprobation without demerit Sin punished where there is no free will new Apostles without Mission or Miracles Reformation without Authority the private Spirit against the whole Church new lights against old revealed Verities single mens Opinions against the common consent of the Fathers Scripture received or rejected upon the Catalogue of the Jews in a word wavering Pastors unsetled Government unstable Faith FINIS
SCOLDING NO SCHOLARSHIP IN THE ABYSS OR GROUNDLES GROUNDS OF The Protestant Religion as holden out by M. Menzeis in his Brawlings against M. Dempster We have heard of the Pride of Moab he is very proud even of his haughtiness and his Pride and his wrath but his lyes shall not be so Isaiah 16. V. 6. According to Protestants Translation The house of God which is the Church of the living God the Pillar and Ground of Truth 1 Tim. 3.15 Printed for the Author 1669. Sr. William Baird of Newbaith Bart. AN Advertisement HAving but a very few things whereof to Advertise the Reader I address no Epistle to him Yet one thing I must friendly tell him being to ask a Courtesie or two at his hands 1. Then he shall know this short Reply to Mr. Menzeis greater Book was offered to the Press at Aberdene within a moneth after it first appeared but the Stationer being inhibited by Publick Authority and that as is thought at M. Menzeis desire I was forced first to make it to be transcribed and then fitted for abroad where it is not easie to us to have any thing well Printed or returned in hast 2. I must beg upon this account the Errata and faults in Orthography may be excused I not being present to correct them 3. I desire none would think tedious or superfluous in some Sections very many Quotations yea some even here and there repeated for that in questions of fact things cannot be otherwise proved and to remit the Reader either to the first Authours of them or the places wherein they were cited before or in other Controversie Books were to divert his thoughts and attention and put him to such pains as few will take 4. I pray that he do not mistake me in refuting M. Menzeis Grounds for I onely take to prove that the Scripture and Doctrine of the Primitive Church can be no ground to Protestants denying an Infallible Visible Judge for both these as infallibly propounded by the true Church I most cordially imbrace and wish all may do with me AN Answer to a Letter sent from Aberdene with Mr. John Menzeis his Reply to Mr. Dempster for Reclaiming a Country Gentleman from Popery SIR YOur Letter shewing equally such zeal for the Protestant Cause and affection to me hath made me read the Book inclosed with such a Character of the Writer as carefully as if it contained Responses and as impartially as if I were a Seeker The Question here moved I ingenuously grant is the main Point if solidly answered could best reclaim me and most of my Profession who amid'st so many Storms raised against us have no small motive to comply if we could look at present to our little Temporal Interest without making a greater and Eternal loss whereof there could be no hazard if Protestants as is here debated could shew any assured and infallible ground for what they profess This Sir is all Mr. Dempster through all his ten Papers requires and we with him he propounds and states the Question most clearly and smoothly though in homely terms by reason of his long absence from home he makes no Digression from the main Point what ever be replyed beside yet engageth after this Point once decided to answer what ever is here retorted instanced or urged against him he answers humbly and mildly however provok'd with most bitter and lofty words Like another Fabius or old Warriour he keeps his Post neglecting all the Flowrishes and Skirmishes of his insulting Adversary who having engaged under his hand to defend the Protestant Religion the onely occasion of this Dispute strives still nevertheless fâ—de arte punicâ that is most deceitfully to impugne the Catholick Roman Faith with a like success to that of Hannibal who let Carthage be demolished and redacted to ashes whil'st he insisted in vain to Sack and Ruine Rome And this is proper to him with most Hereticks all Heresy tending rather to destruction then edification Atheisme rather then Religion and to question what hath been since Christ and his Apostles constantly believed in the Church of God rather then to settle their own new wavering and inconstant Faith upon any solid Principle or Ground Yet Mr. Menzeis most confidently thinking he had got as an unbloody so an undoubted victory hearing his Adversary was dead Petitions the Senate of Aberdene as for a Triumph that his Papers may be put in Print His Learning Loyalty and Religion most justly deserving it for as he is of a daring and stirring spirit so in all things Martially minded his Learning being most in Polemics his Loyalty much in debate and his Religion ever in controversy nevertheless as Umpire in all he deserveth well a Crown as his late late Victory by the Pen a Chariot of Paper This his Triumphal Chariot is not drawn but carried in the Air with high and violent blasts most suitable to his fierceness in fighting with a scolding and railing Tongue which makes his Adversaries deepest wounds Before it go indeed some worthy Persons at least in black upon white and in the Paper follow immediately the flying Colours wherein his late Arms sent from Edenbrough viz. The Bible reversed do shine with this new Motto I take from the present Subject The Grounds of the Protestant Religion The acclamations of the People are not wanting in the mouthes of some sighing Sisters He is Herauld himself sounding constantly his own praises aloud nothing is brought into the Treasury as in Triumphs had wont in old but some hundred Marks for the charges of the Triumph that is the Printing of the Papers exported One thing onely is wanting practised in such glorious showes one Admonitor sitting with the Triumpher to keep him in mind of humane weakness least too great honour should so puff him up as to think himself above the condition of men And this defect Sir I intend to supply in perusing his Book advertising him now and then of some weakness both in Conduct Courage and Strength as his Answers to the Question propounded shall deserve And first if I should answer his most invective Babling Scoldings and Railings with all the Venom he spits out to Ciment the Grounds of his Religion I could easily pay him home even with the general Applause and Acclamations of most Protestants amongst whom the more Moderate and most constant Professors scarce own him his Religion or Grounds as best knowing his Arragant Proud Contentious Spirit his unbridled Tongue his scandalous Carriage in so many Encounters his wavering Belief unsetled Faith and how oft he hath been Episcopal Presbyterian Independent His Pulpit jars with his Collegue in the time of the Covenant his base complyance with the Usurper in the time of Rebellion his variance with his Bishop at the time the Government of the Church was re-establisht how many living Witnesses have heard him Preach and foment Schism and Divisions in the Church Sedition in the State and even treacherous and Treasonable Sermons against
his Prince and King I instance only that base and perfidious bewraying of Gods Word belying of the known truth and betraying of his Countrey and King in that most unchristian Sermon upon these words How long wilt thou mourn for Saul whom I have rejected Applying them to our most Gracious Soveraign which I should have been ashamed to relate if this notorious Impostor and most absurd abuser of Gods Word had not first in the Preface of a Sermon in Print and now again so often in this his Book most deceitfully and maliciously cryed out Papists could be no good Subjects as if their Tenets did tend to Rebellion whil'st all Loyal Protestants in the three Kingdoms both love and respect our Loyalty how ever they hate our Profession and look upon him with all his Covenanting Fry as a most fiery Incendiary of Rebellion Now Sir if such a man whom you most cry up for his Eloquence as if like another Samson his strength consisted in his hair be a Person fitted to give the Grounds of Religion defend the Protestant Faith or convert any one to his Belief for that with a Pharisaical countenance a Puritanical tone and a strong voice colouring some slight Learning and reading of Pamphlets with plagiary Phrases and Passages to stuff up a Book in Print and turn the Glass twice in his Sermons let any be judge As that Philosopher of old hearing himself praised by the rabble who commonly approve nothing but such stuff as is in themselves did presently make an examen of his actions I hope Protestants seeing their Religion Defended by such a Writer will more diligently enquire of its weakness which they can never better see then in his Papers where having undertaken to give the Grounds of the Protestant Religion the only Subject of this Dispute either by Word or Writ in them all has not as his Adversary well re-marks so much as ten lines to settle clear or defend them in the least but scraping together objections against Catholicks so often answered by them borrows some passages to no purpose at present and heaps up undervaluing words with such injurious scoldings railings and imprecations against an Old Grave Learned and Modest Man that after he hath called him an impudent Liar a Knave Rogue Sycophant Fool a dull and Lethargick-head a Neat-herd in Ignorance a Devil in Malice and what not He imprecates in fine out of his corrupt Bible changing the word Imperet with imâ—reâ—et the same curse Saint Michael did in their conflict to the Devil such is the Pride Passion and poison of his heart so contrary to the Spirit of God After this what may we expect of such a person if we hear the Wise mans saying In malevolam animam non introibit sapientia True Wisdom never enters into a wicked and malicious soul yet Sir to satisfie your loving and friendly desire I intend to examine more at length what Wit and Learning he shews and first in his two long Epistles Dedicatory and to the Reader which could receive no Answer from Mr. Dempster as appearing but a twelvemonth after his death After this God willing I wil positively refute which he so urges may be done First his great Principle of No Infallible visible Judge of Controversie and then both his Ruinous Grounds SECT I. Some brief Reflections on the Title of Mr. Menzei's Book and his two long Epistles Dedicatory and to the Reader HIs Title being in Latine Papismus Lucifugus according to that saying a strong Thief shall have a strange name must needs be explained and surely understood of that New Gospel Light in the Covenant for in it Mr. Menzeis was a bright Star of the first Magnitude or Fiery Comet himself of which Light a Prelatick Poet in answer to a Satyre upon the Consecration of a Bishop Writes thus Your Phoebus from the West did rise A light that did put out mens eyes Welcome Confusion This Light indeed Popery shuns as all other New Lights against old received Christian Verities but not that either of Scripture or Antiquity the onely true Light of the Christian World as flowing from Christ the Sâ—n of Justice and carried by so many holy Popes Bishops and Priests in Communion with them even unto the most remote corners of the Earth as the conversion of all Kings and Countries to the Christian Religion do testifie which Light Mr. Dempster no where declines but constantly holds out to make nothing for clearing the Grounds of the Protestant Religion except it be in shewing them both ruinous and false so that Mr. Menzeis here Offendit in Luce in limine that is stumbles both in the light and in the specious Title of his Book whereof the very first line is not to the purpose The Question being only of the Grounds of the Protestant Religion and not of Popery at all He begins with a great show of humility who am I the meanest of the thousands of Israel Answer Est qui se nequiter humiliat interiora ejus plena dolo Eccles 19. But let his late Bishop in the Church Principal in the Colledge and fellow Brethren in the Ministery bear witness of this when they have opposed him in the least Yea his own Jactancy through all his Papers and Book with his base revilings in every page and under-valuing of his Adversary It is those his humble thoughts of his own abilities makes him so boldly assert there was consultation used in the present Dispute Surprizal intended and a choice Champion pitched upon to Encounter with him as a Hector But the known truth is to all them who had a hand in the undertaking as they did witness in his presence at the Meeting that they had only yielded to his Importunity in desiring a Meeting and that they had taken him only who was next at hand for the time a man most able indeed for a civil Conference but most unable for a Clamorous Dispute as being of a very weak Constitution and of a totally confiscated health But all this Conference must be set out by him in a disguised Dress Mr. Dempster proclaimed an Ignorant Catholicks charged with Calumnies the better to Paint out his Victory and Triumph As in like case another Conference as he quotes by Dr. Prideaux and Dr. Featly of late whom he might have spared to name being as good at Calumniating Inventions as either of them and no doubt but he will be cited hereafter as they now who nevertheless most deceitfully relates both the occasion of the Conference and what passed in it The clamours of women he speaks of if any for it was a most modest person did speak was onely to suppress his clamours heard even at the Cross and witness to his face that he had passed from his engagement to them which was to give and defend the Grounds of the Protestant Religion as he had engaged under his hand and this his missive was the Paper Mr. Dempster kept open at the Meeting which