This book made available by the Internet Archive.

TO THE

Proteftant Reader.

Hen the motion was firfi made for the Publishing of thefe Papers, it feemed to me to be as the Carting of water into the Sj|U fo great ts the Number of the uearned Writings of Proteftant Divines againft the Papijls (which will never be well anfwered ) that the moft elaborate addition may feem fuperfluous 7 much more thefe hafly Difputations prepared but for an exercife which is the Recreation of a few Countrey-Minifters at a monthly meeting , when they eafe themselves of their ordinary work. But upon further consideration , I faw it was , The Calling of water upon a threatning fire, which the Sea it [elf doth but refrain. Its more

To the Proteftant Reader. Engines than a few that are openly or fecretly at tvork atjhis time, to captivate thefe Nations again to the Romane Pope. When fo many hundreds , if not thousands are night and day contriving our fedudion, under the name of Reconciling us to the Churchy if no body counterwork them, what may they not do. It's not enough that- we have had Defenders > and that their Books are yet in the World, old Writings are laid by \ though much fronger than any new ones : But new ones are fooner taken up and read. The Papifi shave of late been very plcntiftill > and yet very [paring in their Writings. Plentiful, of fuch as run among the ftmple iriyidicious people infecret, fo that the -Countries fwarm with them \ But fparing of ]uch as may provoke any Learned man to a Con-futation : That fo, they may in time difufe m from thofe Studies > andfo di fable the Mini fry therein, and catch tis when we are fecure through a feeming peace , and fall up on m when we have loft our fircngth. And I am much afraid that the generality of cur people (perhaps of the befj are already fo much difufed from thefe fludies , */ts to be much unacquainted with the Nature of Popery , and much more to feek for a preservative againfl it, and a through confutation of them. So that if Papifts were once but as fully out among us in their own likenefs , as they

are

To the Protefhnt Reader.

are under the names of Quakers and other Secis, what work would you fee in many places ? I doubt many would follow their perntcim wayes , and fall like Sheep of a common rot-, or people in a raging peftilence , especially if they had hut the countenance of the times : Not through their firength , hut becanfe our people are naked , , and unmeet for a defence.

The work that now they are upon, is, i. By Divifions, and Reviling the Miniflers , to loof-en the people from their Guides; that they may be as a Majlerlefs Dog that will follow any body that will whijlle him.

2. To takedown the Miniflers maintenance and encouragements, that they may be dijabled fo vigor ou fly to re ft ft them.

3. To hinder their union, that they may a-bate their firength, and find them work^againfl each other.

4. To procure a Liberty of [educing all they can under the name of Liberty of Confidence, that fo they may have as fair a game for it as we: And ignorance and the common corruption of nature (efpecially fo heightened by a cuftome in fin) doth befriend the Devils cauje much more than Gods y or el fie how comes it to pafs that the Godly are jo few , and Error > idolatry and impiety doth fo abound in all the earth !

To the Proteftant Reader.

5. To break the common people into as many Seffs and parties as they can y that they may not onely employ them againft one- another > but aljo may hence fetch matter of reproach , or gainfl our profefsion in the eyes of the World.

6. To plead under the name of Seekers again ft the certainty of all Religion 5 that men may be brought to think that they mujl be either of the Popifiprofefsion or of none.

And indeed when all Secis have done their worjl it is but two-, that we are in any (Treat danger of (Andof thofe I think we are in more danger , then the moH are aware of) And that is*> 1. Papifts .- who plead not as other parties y onely by the tongue y but by exciting Princes and States againfl us •> and disputing with the Fagot or Hatchet in their hands: And if we have not Arguments that will confute a Navy, an Army > or a Powder-plot y ~we can do no good again ft them.

2. Prophanenefs \ animated by Apoftate Infidels : This H the Religion that men are born in. A}?d mm that Naturally are fo endeared to their luflsy that they would not have the Scripture to be true , will eafily hearken to him that tells them it is filfe.

Tea fo much doth Popcn befriend men in n vie torn cciirfe a that (o?ne are apt to )oyn

thefc

1 To the Proteftant Reader.

thefe together , thinking at the heart that Chriftianity is but a fable: but yet for fear it jhould prove true , they will be Papifis y that they may have that eafie remedy for a referve.

if Cod will preserve us but from thefe two dangersj Popery ^ and Prophanenefs animated by infidelitie, it will goe well with England.

The moft of my former Writings having been bent againfi the later ; I thought it not amifs to let go this one againfi the former. That jo I may entice the common profeffors to a little more [erious Study of thefe feints, and fttrnifh them with fome familiar Arguments that are fuited to their capacities, that every deceiver may not fnd them unarmed. And here I thought it befi to defend our own profefsion and overthrow theirs in the main > and not to fiand long upon particular contro-verfies > except that one of the Refolution and Foundation of our Faith, which is the great difference. Jet that private unfiudyed men may underhand wherein the particular differences lie *> I have given them a Catalogue of them in other mens words in the end > as re-folving not to do it in my own.

In fJyort, I have here made it plain that Popery is againfi Scripture , Re of on , Serf? ,

and

To the Proteftant Reader.

and againjl the Unity and judgement of the Church.

i. Hither Scripture is True or nov true r. if not , Popery u not true , which pleadeth its warrant from it ( And fome vf them Argue , as if they purposed to dijprove the Scripture, and to imitate Samfon > in pulling down the houfe on their own heads and ours, in revenge for the difhonor they have j'ujfered by theScri-ture.) if it be true ( as nothing more true) then Popery is not true, which palpably con-tradicteth it, as in the joints of Latin fer-vice , and denying the Cup in the Lords Supper , audmany other is mo ft evident.

2 . Either the Catholike Church is one, or not: if not , then Popery is deceitful , which maketh this its principal pretence , for the usurping the limver\al Headjlnp. if it be One then Popery is deceitful , which is renounced by the far greater part of the Catholike Church, and again renounceth them •> and jeparateth from them, becaufe they will not be fub)eci to the Pope , who never yet in his greatefl height had the actual Government of half the Chri~ (lian world.

3. Either the judgement of the Antient Doctors is (ound or not : if not, then the Church of Rome is unbound > that is (worn to expound the Scripture onely according to thtir

concent-

To the Proteftant Reader, concent : if it be jound, then the Church of Rome is unfound > that arrogate a Uiniver-fal Government and Infallibility > and build upon k foundation, that was never allowed by the Antient Doff or s (as in the thirdDifput. I have fully proved) and which mofl Chrifltans in the world do fill re)e£i.

4. Either Reafon it felf is to be renounced or not: if it be, then none can be Papifls but mad men. Jf not > then Popery mufl be renounced y which foundeth our very faith upon impofsibilities > and teacheth men of necef-fity to believe in the Pope as the Vicar of Chrifl y before they believe in Chrifl > with, many the like which are afterwards laid 0-pen.

f. Either our five Senfes, and the J>udve-ment made upon them, is certain and InfaU lible or not. if not, then the Church of Rome y both Pope and Council are Fallible y and not at all to be trufled. For when all their Tradition is by hearing or reading , they are uncertain whether ever they heard or read any fuch thing $ and we mufl all be uncertain whether they Jpeak or write it : And then we mufl not onely fubfcribe to Franfc. Sanchez 5 Quod nihil fcitur, but alfo (a

ay

that Nihil certo creditur. But if fenfe i?t

certain and Infallible > then the Church of

Rome y

To the Proteitant Reader,

Rom,e even Pope and Council are not onely Fallible ■> but certainly falfe deceivers and deceived* For the Pope and his Council tell the Church that it is not Bread and Wine which they take-, eat and drink in the Eucharifi. But the fenfes of all found men , do tell them that it is. I fee that its Bread and Wine, I fmell it y I feel*>, / tafte i%\ and fo?newhat /hear to further my ajjnrance .* And yet if Popery be not falfe , its no fich matter. One would think the dulleft Reader > might be quickely hire refolvedy whether Popery be true or falfe. Look on the confecratcd Bread and Wine, touch tt , jmell it y tafle it , and if thou canfi but be fure that tt ts indeed Bread and Wine , thou maijl be as fure that Popery is a delufi-on. And if thou canfi but be fure, that it is not Bread and Wine > yet thou maifi be fure that the Pope or his Council, nor any of his Doff or s are not to be believed. For if other mens jenfes be deceitful r theirs and thine are fc too.

But theje things are urged in the following Difputations.

Its worth the observing how much they are at odds among t hem fe Ives , about the Re-fohtion of their Faith , and how y neer fo?ne of them come to m of late > as in The. White' s Sonus Buccina; , and Do^or H.

Holden

To the Proteftant Reader. Holden d^Refol. fidei, and in Crefly and V^ne and others may be feen : And thetr filly followers in England think verily , that theirs is the common Doctrine of that Church. And how folicitous Creffy and others are.to take that Infallibility out of our way ax a ftumbling fione, which the Italians aud moft of them y make the Foundation and chief corner-ft one. What a task were it to Reconcile but Bellarmine W Holden < Knot and Creffy (' both in Englifh. ) White had fo 'much wit in his Defence of Rufhworths Dialogues, whn he wrote in Englilh , to carry on the matter as fmoothly > as if they had been all of a mind. But when he writes in Latin, How many wayes of Refolution of Faith y that are unfound can he fnd among the Pafijls as different from his own ? Vid. de fide & Theo-log. Trad:, i. Seft. 28. 25?.

Reader, Adhere to God, and the Righte-oufnefs of Chriit 5 and the Teachings of the Holy Ghoft 3 by the Holy Scriptures, and a faithful Miniftry, in the Communion of the Saints, and as a member of the Catholike Church 5 which arifing at Jerufalem 5 is dif-perfed over the world. containing all that are Chriftians •, renounce not right Reafon, or thy fenfes ; and live according to the light

which

1 o cue j/roteitani rvcducr. which is X'ouchfafed thee » and then thou (halt be Cafe from Popery and all other pernicious damning errors;

Marc. 10.16^.

4 i<, 2>,

To

*To the Literate ^Romanifis that mil read this Hoo\%

Men and Brethren^

Writing that fo much concerneth yourcaufe 5 I think. 5 fhould tender you fome account of its publication 5 efpecially when I know that not onely the.divulging 5 but the holding of the Do&rine contained therein , is fo hainous a matter in your eyes, that if I were in your power 5 the fufpicion of it might bring me to the Rack and the Strappado y and the confeffion of it would expofe me to the flames, I have many times confidered D that you could never fure endure to torment men in your Inquifition, and confume them to afties, and fo induftrioufly to embroyle the Nations of the earth in blood and miferies, to work them to your minds 3 and fet up your own way 3 if you did not think it right 5 and think them exceeding bad whom you thus de-

ftroy.

To the Liter Ate Romamjts* (troy. I find that my own heart would ferve me to ufe Toads and Serpents, and deftroying Vermine, half as bad as you do Proteftants , that is, to put them to death, though not to torment them fo long : but for gentler and more harmelefs creatures , I oould not do it without a great relu&ancy of my nature. I muft needs therefore by your works bear you record that you have a zeal for God-, but fo had iome before you that guided it not by knowledge,, Rom* 10. 2. And I fuppofe your way is undoubtedly right in your own eyes,or elfe you durft never profecute it with fuch violence:And yet one that was once as zealous in his way, and ihut up the Saints in prifon, and received authority from the high Priefts to put them to death, and compelled them to blafpheam, did afterward call all this but madnefs^ Affs 26.9, 10, 11. Butmethinks I find my felf obliged, when I fee men differ from me with fuch height of confidence, to give them fome Rea-fon of my differing thoughts: And yet it is no great matter of fuccefs that I can expeft from this account. To make any addition or alteration in your belief, I have no great reafon to expe<5t 5 while you read my words with this prejudice , that they are damnable herefie; and depend upon him whom you fuppofe infallible , for the fafhioning of your Faith* And

v o we literate Komtimjts. if I (hould fay that I expett fatisfadion from youy with any great hope, I itiould but diilem-ble. For I have not been negligent in reading fuch writings of your own as might acquaint me both with your Faith, and your Theological Opinions 5 and can lcarce reafonably expedt that any of you lhould fay more to fatisfie mej then thefe contain. For any of you to recite the Canons or Decretals ot your Church or popes, in a writing to me is in vain : For I have them at hand already, or can have them at a trice. And if you lay any thing to me by way of Aniwer, which is not mthofe Canons or Decretals , or folemnly pronounced already by your Church to be de fide , you can give me little aflurance bf its verity \ but your own writing muft incur all thole reproaches, which Knot beftows on the Dc&nne of- Chilling-worth 5 and we hear from you io frequently,^or the defect of Infallibility. But-yet, let what will come of it, I ihall leave fome flender Te-ftimony to pottenty, that I diflented not from fomany confident men, without giving them fome or the Reafons of myciilent. . I was born and bred here anion? the Pro-feffors of the Reformed Catholik Chriftian Religion. When I was young, I judged of your Profeifion as I was taught, and the prejudice which I received againil it. did grow up with me, as yours doth againil us. Yet re* r a 3 ceiving

fiftMing.much good to my foul by ParfonsJkxk ok Refolution corr§fted(when I was but fixteen years of Age) it run much in my mind 5 that Jkre there were fome among you that had the Fear of God. - When I was capable of. it, by Age and Studies yr J made fome diligent fearch into your Writers, that J might know the true ftate of the controverfies betwixt us. But ftilll confefs I read them with prejudice and partiality % till at laft I attained (as far as I can Hfid^rftand by my own heart) fuch a love to the : truth, and an impartiality in my Studies and judgement of thefe things , that I read your Writers , withas free a mind (I mean, $$ willing to find what truth was thereto be found) as I do the Writings of Protefhnts themfelves. When I had diicovered undoubtedly .that in fome coftrinal points 3 the differences were made by moil on both fides, much greater then they were, and much greater then the moft Learned on both fides that had any moderation, did conceive them to be, I was the more confirmed in my refolutions to be impartial in my Studies ,.. and fo have proceeded (if I be a competent judge of my own mind) to this day. And after all, lam leftinthedifl'atisfadion which I here manifefL And by what {heps my averfenefs to your way hath been brought on fince I began to fearch in-, to it impartially, I (hall here further declare.

Rrft,

To the Literate Romanijls. Fir ft, I have been moft offended with thofe doctrines and practices 5 that did inoft notori-ouily run againft the ftreamof the Holy Scripture 7 for here the cafe was fo plain that without any lingular acutenefs it might be difcern-ed: as in your Latin Service of God with thofe that underitanditnot, your adminiftring the Bread in the Lords Supper without the cup • that Image-worfhip which your Writers do maintain 5 forbidding Prtefts marriages 5 with many fuch like. And yet fufpe&ing my own under {landing 5 I read what your Writers fay alfo for thefe: But when I faw how palpably they ihrccd the text,, it increafed my dif-like : And then knowing that you contradi&ed the Scriptures in thefe 5 and finding withal that you build your faith upon your Churches Infallibility , I was exceedingly turned againft your profeffion, when I (aw your foundation fo clearly overthrown. But yetthis was not all: There was fcarce any thing that more offended me 5 then the tendency of your Doctrines .> to deftroy the Knowledge of the people y and lead them en in ignorance , and pleafe and deceive them by a company of ceremonies, in-ftead of a Reafonable fervice of God : and the manner of your worilup I could never digeft. Other things did grate very hard upon thofe .truths which I was confirmed in, but theft went againft the very bent of my heart > and [a 23 croffed

To the Literate Romanijls. » -croffed the very ends of my Religion and' my Life. Your keeping the Scriptures from the Laity 5 as for as you do t, and maintaining it fo commonly to be the Original of Kerefles to tranflate them into a known tongue -, and making it fo deadly a crime to have a Bible which they can read $ with your Latin Service aiore-faid, and the formalities and.fceni.cal worfhip inwhichyoutrainup the ignorant vulgar with many other things in your do#rine :nd pra<fiice 3 are iuch as leave mCbut little room for deliberation 5 whither I fl'iould own them or not,, he-caufe they are fo .plainely agamft the very end of the Chriftian Religion. Had theie things come under my confederation in a carnal itate, when the flefh was my enc^and not God I know not how I fhould have entertained them. But your own Dcdtors confent that God muft be my end, zvA chiefly Loved 3 de-fired 5 and fought; And will you teach a man ■thiSj and whoodwinke him when you have <doiie < Will you bid him love God I and keep

• him from the Knowledge of him? Will ycu bid - him.defire andfeek him\ 5 and when you have

.done Jock him up in the dark ! Or will you bid ' him ferve and obey him 5 and yet forbid him to

• fearch after the knowledge of his laws and will? • If you \vould bring me to be of theft opinions,

' your reafonings would be to as much purpofe as if you fhould pcrfwade me to put out my

eyes

To the Literate Romanics'

eyes and put them in your pockets 5 for fear of miffing my way in my race, when my life is at the (take: Or as if you fhould perfwade me :.q be ignorant of Plowing and Sowing, and Merchandize, and yet to feek after provifion and riches in the world. I am 3s eafily reconciled as another to thofe that Hep out of the path that I am in, if they go towards the fame end:-But if you would teach me u> turn my back upon Heaven, as the onely way to attain it, this will not eafily down with me : I know that God is light, and with him is no darknefs 3 and that Chri(l is the light of the world,.and his fpir.it is the illuminater of the£aints,cmd the word is a light to our feet,mdgiveth wifdome to the fimple: > And yet would you have us refufe this Light, and choofe the Darknefs i I know that Satan is thefrircc of darknefs,& a ftate of death is a ilate of darinefs , tending to outer darknefs : and that it is the laving way of God to tranflate men out of darkenefs into his marvellousHighi i And yet would you perfwade me that this is the way of Life i What a difference is thers between this dodlrint of yours , and the very; fcope of Scriptures , and antient Writers , and the fenfe of a gracious foul ? Solomon would have men to Hide the commandment with them , and incline their ear towifdom > and apply their hearts to understanding, and cry after knowledge,and lift up their voiecfor under ft and-

To the Literate Romanifis.

ingj and feek for it as filver-> andfearch after it as for hid treasure, prov. 2.2,3,4. And is your Do&rine like this^ I fay bids, To the Law and the Tefiimonj. If. 8. 20. And the Bereans are commended for fearching the Scriptures daily to fee whether the things were fo that were taught them even by Apoftles : And will you forbid this, and burn men for to promote their falvation i Did not Paul write his Epiftles to the Laity as well as to the Clergy < You muft ftrip me of the grace of God, and reduce my mind to a itate of darknefs *, before I can ever entertain thefe principles of darknefs : For light and darlmiefs will not have communion. If by Arguments you would per-fwade me, fo plainly againft the life of nature , as that I am bound to blind or kill my felf in order to my good, there's fomewhat within me that would confute them befides reafon ; And why fhould not the Life of Grace alfo be a principle of felf-prefervation < As for your Reafon, that men muft let alone the Scripture and hearken to their Teachers for fear of hereltes, it will never take with me till I can believe you to be lefs fufpefted guides then Chrift and his Apoftles, and till I can believe that a Scholar may not learn of his Book & his Teacher both without any contradiftion. And then for your devotions, it is not all the Arguments in the world 5 that would ever

re-

To the Literate RomdMjts. reconcile me to them, while I have that „La\v in any prevailing meaiure written in my heart, that teacheth me to worfliip God in Spirit an^l in truth- What man of Spiritual experience can choofe butdiftafte your way of worship 5 that doth but read over one ofyour offices ? and Lady's pfalcers, and fee the atte&ed repetition of words 5 and the ludicrous kind of devoti?-ons 3 which you teach the people, more like to charms then ferious prayers to God! efpeci-ally if he alfo obferve the huge number of ceremonies which the very body of your worfliip is compofed of. As there is iomewhat in nature, that hindereth a man 5 from delighting to eat chaffe j or feeding upon meer air •, fo is there fomewhat in the new nature of a Chriftian , that is againft this trifling and jefting with God.

* Another thing that * The abominable wick-hath ericreafed my diftafte ¥™\ or l >' our Wj£>

r . J even the Romane Cardi-

ot your wayes.is the com- n ais flftnifdves, is pro-

mon unffOOlinefs Of your claimed by many that ° J have^ been your Priefts

and turned from you : as Coply, Sheldon , Bjxhorne, and many more fakh Sheldon fin his Survey of Rome : Miracles, jf>. 18. having fpoken of the Cardinals Sodomy ) [Believe k Reader, the abominations which are committed by thefe purpured Fathers, and the Sup ream Fathers of that Synagogue are fo deteftable, that'they pifs'-all narration either of modeftor immodeftpen. J And it's long fince Petrarch^ Dant?s\Av:ntin%Panfitnf.Clem(tn?it y Sabt and more of your own Writers hive faid enough, to fatis-fie us of your fanftity. Many a one that hath been deed to Popery in England , have been cured by a journey to ft#ft?,feeing the abominations of that place.

To the Literate Romamfis.

followers. I have endeavored as well as I could to be acquainted with them where I came and I have known but very few of them, but have been either Whoremongers, or Swearers, or Drunkards, or Gamefters,or fenfual livers : nor did I ever meet with one to this day, to my belt remembrance, that manifefted afpiri-tual frame of heart , or had an/delight to fpeak of the workings of God upon the foul 5 and the fweet communications of the love of Chrift, or could give any favory account of any fuch fpiritual workings in them : but all their Religion was to ftick to the Romifh Church , and go on in their ceremonious forms of worship, abftaining from this meat, or that, and rioting and pampering their flelh on Holiday es, &c. If I had know n this to be the cafe onely of the common people in Italy joy Spawpr France, I fhould not have wondered : for I know that moil: of the people, do take up their Religion but upon carnal accounts, and accordingly will ufeit : But tolind it thus in England^ where your number isfmall, and you pretend to hold your Religion in fo much felf-denyal , the flare being againft you 9 and therefore your party fhould be the pureft zelots, and ihew the face of yowr dodfcrine in its greateft glory 5 this makes me judge of the tree by the fruites* And the obferving of this hath made me admire ,

To the Literate Romamfts. mire 5 that ever you can make the holinefs of your Church 5 the matter of fo great oftenta-tionasyoudo: Yea that fuch men asH.P.de Crefiy can have the face to pretend that your admirable holinefs in companion of ours 5 was the means of their conveificn to. you. Unhappy man ! with whom did he converfe whik he teemed a Proteftant < or where did he live < But this was not his fate alone ♦, but of divers of his ftrain. When they are earned Prote-ftant9 5 abhorring the power of the Religion ^ which they profefs , and avoiding and reproaching the praddcers of their own Religion, and fo have no communion with them 5 nor experience of their holinefs •, it is a righteous thing with God to leave them to fo much biindnefs 5 as to run iiomjEnghnd to Rome for htflinefs h and that becaufe they abhorred purity ^ they fbould be fo blinded as not to difcern the beauty of it 5 and yet to dote on the name and coate of it, which may be put on in the morning, and off at night. And indeed this hath fomewhat increafed my averfnefs} toobferve that by how much the more godly and confcionable any are of our profeilion^ the more they are againft yours: and that fo few of this fort are turned to you 5 that I yet know not certainly of one 5 that e-ver feemed a Godly perfon. And the common ignorant fort of people that know not

what

Tt; the Li for at? Romanifts. what a Church is, nor what Religion is ■ and that live in fenfuality and wickednefs ; are the favourableft to your wayes , yea fo forward to promote them that many of them would quickly be yours if the times were but changed to you • and thefe are the people that I have known become your prolelites. When we have loft our labor upon them , and left them in their wickednefs, and they that were filthy are filthy ftill, then fome of them turn Pa-pifts D and this forfooth in admiration of the nolinefs of your Church : When I confefs for fome of them, I have not been forry to hear that th£y we're turned to you: for I thought 5 it may be the liking they have to you, might make them hearken more to your reproofs, then to ours • and poflibly you. might per-fwade them from Whoredoms and Drunken-nefs; and Swearing 5 and Lying 5 when we were out of hope : But when I perceived that they fled to you for an indulgence in their fin 5 becaufe fome of thefe are but venial fins with you , and they have a palliate ceremonial cure at hand to befool them 5 I then acknowledged the juftice of God againft them. I am none of thofe that think that there is none among you {hall be faved. I have read that in fome of your Writers, that perfwadeth me it came from a fan&ifted heart. I am ready •cb acknowledge and honor the Spirit of Chrirt

where-

To the Literate Romamjls. wherever I can difcernit. Butlmuft profefs that I was never yet fo happy as to converfe with a Papift, that manifefted an experienced, gracious, heavenly mind ? though I am truely willing to make the heft of them. And that your Church fhould be as the fink or channel^ to receive the excrements and filth of ours, is no great argument of its holinefs in my eyes. And if a few that are lefs fenfual turn to you, it is commonly, as far as I can difcern , the Tenants or fervants of fome of your way, that are led by worldly refpefts, and they are fuch - ignorant fouls that they know not what the Religion is which they are turned to, nor are a-ble to give a reafon of their change. I have fpoke with fome affe&ed to vour way, and fome turned to it, that have thought our do-ftrine wfts yours, and vours was ours ' for in-ftance, that we taught that men misht live without fin, and you taught otherwife: and have deny ed that you hold the co&rine of mans merits, and divers the like. Are not thefe good Catholikes, and well converted, that be of our mind , and do not know it i And I ob-ferve among your own Writers, that ufually thofe that write in the moft heavenly ftrain^ are thofe that give fome wound to your profeffion, by fome confiderable oppofition, as Miranh-U^ Gerfon^ Bernard^ and many more.

To the Literate Romanifts. And it hath more difofre&ed me to your way, to obferve how low the defign* of your Religion is, in comparifon of ours: You can let the common people be as blind 2s Moles , and worfhipthey know not what! And youal-moftconfin Religion unto Votaries and Cloy-ilers. Whenas the defign of our Religion is to make the generality of our Paftoral charge more holy by far then your retired Votaries. And (as far as I am able to learn) I do verily think that there are in the fmall Town that I live income hundreds of fouls, that have more true felf-denyal , humility \ acquaintance with the faving works of Grace , abhorrence of fin, delight in God, and believing ferious thoughts of heaven , then is to be found in twenty of your Monafteries. When I am in ont of their meetings which you account but a curied SchiC-matical conventicle, I can behold their diligent attendance, their humble learning , their mo-deft, orderly, ferious devotions, and afterwards their painful recollections and improvement of what they learn. But among you, Ifhould fee a dumbe (hew, a pompous oftentation, compounded of Ceremonies, and words which are as no words,being not by the people under-ftood. And lam certainly informed by travellers that have known them, and by your own confeflions, that you have Prieftseven like your people and your fervices. Even unlearned

To the Literate Komamjls. learned men, that are but able to read their Mais • like fome of the woi ft of our old Readers, whom we have caft out: However you may have learned jefuites and Fryers 3 that are bred up chiefly tor your Theological wars, while the people that live in peace under you are famiilied.

It hath alio much increafed my difaflfe&icn, to obferve, by what grofs kind 6r cheating you carry on your caufe. Yon make a noifewith the oftentation of Miracles $ but we can never fee one of them, nor have certain proof of it. I confefs if I could fee them 5 they would work on me much: and I would go from Sea to Sea to fee one: but I know not whither to go with the leaft hope of fuch a fight.

You talk much of perle&ion 5 and keeping the Lav of Cod without fin : But how long will it be before you willfhewus one of thofe Chiefs perfect men < I have enquired of thofe that I thought moil likely 5 and they have told me that fuch men* there be in the world 5 but would not be intreated to (hew me one of them* Nay 5 itama7ethme !) that you fliould glory of perfection, where it is fo hard to find fincerity, and to meet with a man that will not curfeand fwear D and whore 5 and be drunk. Yea more to find that after this oftentation of perfe<5tion 5 you come fo lew as to make thofe to be perfect which we fuppofe to be in a damnable ftate :

For

J o the Literate Romamfis. For how many abominable fins do you make to be venial C Do I need ro tell you what fome of

&° ,,VI l W [ lters % of Fornication, and of a Pneft rather keeping a Concubine then a wife • aixd what games have come to the Church b y Whoi-ehoufes. and what a trade it is at *„ J ,na Venice ^c To give inftance but in the fin ot lying, how light do you make of it' vea you fear not to teach your Englifh p ro felyt« That IA lye is a mortal fin, when it is anyLeat Monorto God or notable prejudice to J #£ borx Otherwife if it be meerly offciousorfeft-W"< ¥■ iW^MtMey are the woi dsof &T, (they lay Henry Turbervile) in his Cate-chifm ^pag. 160. Yea he faith ^. 268 That LSj this mmufi know when a finis morial, and when vema.1- Becaufe to any mortal (m it \ required, both that it be deliberate and perfectly voluntary-^ And then fet altogether and confider what your Writers make of venial fin-no worfe then your Dodor Thorny faith, that ■ genial fin hath not perfect am rationem peccati but is Analogically called fin: and thai"none$ contra Legem- quia venialiter peccans nonfacit quod lex prohibet, nee pretermits id ad mod texperprtceptumobligat, fed factt p-mef U-T% Y/frT^ 6 La »>~»o/forbidden

And that it deferves not damnation-, and eternal fumjhment is not due to it, but temporal onely,

iz.q.ffl+a.l.c.&q.l&.a.i.c. And that it mdu.ceth not a blot on the foul, 12. (j. 89. a i.e. But onely as it hindereth the lufire of Grave, and therefore may be done- away without the infufion of habitual grace, 3.^.8.7.2.*-. Apply this now to your Lift inftanced cafe. It feems now that the Law of God forbiddeth not Lying y when it difhonoreth God but a little and not greatly^ or when it is a prejudice to another but not notable, It forbids not men to lie Offici-ouily or in jeft •, as H. T. fpeakes. Nay it feems if you curfe or fwear or blafphcam the name of God, or kill your own Father or Mo-ther 5 it is but a venial fin 5 if you do it not deliberately ^ and perfectly voluntarily. And is not here a fine do&rine to make men perfect * Have you no way to make your felves perfe<ft> but by making the Law of God l'mperfeft i How can you perfwade us to value fuch perfection < Doth H. T. think that a man tha hath the ufe of Reafon is not bound by God iq deliberate ot all the weighty adtions of his life J And if a man fhall kill and blafpheam inpaffi-on 5 and fay Q/ did not deliberate 5 4nd therefore it is no fin: God did not forbid it we*:~\ Shall this excufe him < Or is fuch dodirine to be endured among Chriftians: Jf God do not make it a reafopable mans duty to ufe his reafon in the greateft things, and to deliberate of what he faith or doth 3 I know not what either Reafon

To the Literate Romanifts.

jfon or Law is made for. I think on the contrary that [ Not deliberating 5 efpecially in weighty cafes is a heinous fin \ and the principal caufe of all other fin , in many of the ungodly. So I fay of the other limitation: that (it beper*-feff ly voluntary'] Paflion may make a blaiphe-my or murder but imperfectly voluntary $ and yet that proveth not that God forbiddeth it not. For the will it felf is under a Law , which puts it upon duty 5 and not onely retrains it from finful volition or nolition : And therefore if the will do but fufpend its aft 5 in whole or in part. r and thereby let the commanded faculties miicarry 5 I (hall yet believe that this is forbidden^and a proper-fin. What if you have a charge of the fouls of your flock \ and you fleep while they are milled: Or if you were a Phyfician, and had charge of your patients lives 5 and you tall alleep till they are part recovery 7 are you no linner; and do you not go againft the Law < Yes, you are a murderer : For though the thing be not voluntary quoadafftm voluntatis, it is morally or imputa-tively voluntary 5 propter\omifstonem actus. If Wolverhampton Papiits be fed with fuch do-ftrineas this-, they may well be many ^ but they are unlikely to be good. Inconfiderate-nefs (which I took for one of the itaoft de-ftroyingfins) itfeemsisanotable prefervative from fin 2 For be fure you deliberate not D and

you

you break no Law of God what ever you do» And if there be no Law againft Lying, except the lyes of the higher ftfain that are by H. T K excepted, no wonder then if Papifts be Lyars. And can you think it any injury to you if from hence I interptet, not onely many of your Hiftorical writings (fuch as the Image of both Churches,^.) but alfo much of the jug-ling that is in England at this day. If you put your felves in the Garbe of Quakers, Euthufi-afts , Anabaptifts, &c. and pretend that you are of their opinions, and deny your felves to be what you are, as long as you think that thefe lies are pious, and rather honor God,then greatly dijhonor him, and rather do good to o-thers, by promoting the Catholike caufe, then notably tn]nrc them , can any man (ay, thats of your opinion T that they are againft the Law of God i And why call you that a venial fin, which is againft no Law , when fin is a tranjgrejfion of the Larv , and wbitt there is no Lmv there u no tranfgrejfon y i Ioh. 3. 4. Rom. 4. 15 • And why fay you that veniam mcretur , when yet you fay that fdnam dte-rnam non meretur ! How can there be vtnia fine mento vcl debito yan<z ? What need you any pardon of that which was never deferved by you i And what need yen ask for-givenefs of thefe fins, or be beholden to God tor it, if the puniftunent to be forgiven were

£b] never.

To the Literate Romamjts. uever due ( Will you beg the remiffion of a debt which is no deht^ Aquinas makes venial qnd. mortal iin to differ as Reparabile & trrepa-rabile % becaufe fiom an inward principle the dne may^be repaired, but the other not without mfufed fupernatural grace. Bnt is it ever the lefs iin \ becaufe it is refarabile i Nay what needs it reparation if it be not a tranfgreflion i But what is th s Reparation that he fpeaksof.f Is it the remiffion of the guilt and punifhment? No fare'; for eternal punifhment he faith 3 it deferveth not 5 and internal principles do not litre forgive the puniihment of fine On we foxgitfe cur ielves < \fy hat is it then i Is it the removingof the blot < No-: properly pecca-tum venule non inducit mactdam, as before faid^ Is it that venial iin is eafier conquered and forfaken then mortal i , No fure : For Aquinas tells us that a man may live, for a little while without venial fin,.but not long^ ■, , a r , but without mortal fin.

Veniale, culpa non e/r, Jed . ■ n \ -ii

difrfith ad cuipam. Ret- they may eaiily live till nerm.cont. Waldenf.ubi death. What this repa-w f ra * ration then is, I do not

certainly know. But whatever it is 5 methinks it fhould fuppofe a proper iin 5 and not onely A-nalogical, an a defert of eternal punifhment to be remitted.

And here I muft adde, that another thing that lately hath much difaffe&ed me to your

pro-

To the Literate Romawjls. profelfion, is to fee by what ?clual fraud and jugling it is propagated. Do you think I fee not the game that you are now playing in the darke in England^ in the perfons of Seekers, Behmenifts, Paraceifians, Origeniits, Quakers, and Anabaptifts i I muft confefs I naturally abhor collufions and diffimulation in the matters of God. If your way were of God , it needed not fuch devices to uphold it y nor would it fuk fo well with works of drrknefs? If you have the truth, produce it naked D and deal plain-ly 5 and play above board! For my part I do not fear being cheated out of my Religion 3 by any thing but feeming force of Argument : for I mean to know what I receive before I take it , and to tafte and chew it before I let it down : but the blind incautelous multitude, and half witted giddy perfons 5 and difcontented licentious half ftudyed Gentlemen , may poflibly be caught by fuch chaffe as this.

Another of your diilimulations which in-creafeth my diflatisfa&ion is , Your pretending to the ignorant people, that you are all of a mind, and there are no divisions among you , and making our divifions the great Argument to raife an odium agrinf^our dovfh ine D calling us Schifmaticks, Hereticks and the like. When indeed no one thing doth fo much turn away my heart from you as your abominable Schifm. Do we not know of the multitudes of Opini-

To the Literate Romanifts. °ns among you 5 mentioned by Be liar mine and other of your Writers:' If you call me out to any more of this work j I mean the next time to prefent to the world a Catalogue of your Di-vifions among your felves, that it may appear how notable your unity is i If the Jefuites are to be believed, what a filly fottifh generation are your fecular Pricitsflf your Prieits are to be believed, what a feditious hypocritical, cheating packe are the Jefuites i I fpeak not the words of your Proteftant adverfaries,but of thofe of you* own Church. Do I not know what Guiliel. d? Santto Amove and many another fay of your own Church i Do you think I never read Wat-jons guodlibets, and the many pretty {lories of the Jefuites exploits there mentioned by him rff I do not think that you fuffer many of your own followers to read thefe books that are written againft one another by your felves. But the great divifion among you, that oolite overthrows your caufe in my efteem, is that between the French and Italian , in your very foaadati-on which all your faith is refolved into. You have no belief of Scripture, nor in Chriit 7 no hope of heaven, you differ not from Turkes and Infidels, but onely upon the credit and authority of your Church: And this Church muft be infallible, or elfe your faith is fallible: At leaft it muft be of fovereign authority. And when it comes to the up{hot,you are not agreed

what

To the Literate Romanijis. what this Church is i One faith it is the Pope with a General Council ^ and another faith it is a'General Council, though the Pope diflent. One faith the Pope is fallible , and the other faith a Council is fallible. One faith, a Pope is above the Council 5 and another faith the Council is above the Pope. And now what is become of your Religion < Nay is it not unde-nyable that you are of two Churches fpecifical-ly different < Certainly a body Politick is fpe-cified from the fumma foteftas. And therefore if the French make a Council the [umma poteftas, the fovereign power 5 and the Italians make the Pope the fovereign , and a third party make the Pope and Council conjunct on -ly , the fovereign, are not here undeny-ably feveral Churches fpecifically different i

And then you have another deceit for the falving of all this, that increafeth my difaffefti-on. You glory in your prefent judge of controversies, and tell us it is no wonder if we be all in pieces that have no fuch judge. And what the better are you for your judge * 7 when "he cannot or dare not decide your con-troverfies < No, he dare not determine tins fundamental controverfie , whether himfelf or a Council be the fovereign power, for fear of lofing the French and thofe that joyn with them. So that it muft remain but dogma Theologicum

and no point defide^ what is the \ummd Potefta*^ and yet all that is dc fide 5 even our Chriftiani-ty and Salvation muft be refolved into it? And doth not this dire&ly tend to infidelity? Would you have ferious Chriftians deliver up them-felves to fuch a maze as this for the obtaining of unity i What the berter are you for a judge of controverfie, in all thofe hundreds of differences that are among your felves 5 when your judge either cannot or will not determine them? Are not we as well without him as you are with him? plain things that are paft controverfie have no need of your judge! It is no contro-verfiewithus whether (Thrift be xhzMefsiah^ whether he rofe £ afcended and will judge the world: And if we go to darker points 5 your own judge will fay nothing or worfe. Why do you cry out fo much agamft expounding the Scripture otherwife then according to the fence of the Church 5 when your Church will give you no interpretation of them ? Do not your expoiitors differ about many hnndred texts of Scripture \ and neither Pope nor Council will decide the controversies ? Thefe are therefore meer delufions of the world y with the empty name of a judge of controversies. And indeed you fometime ihew your felves that you have no fuch high conceit of your Pope (whatever you would make the world believe) as to truft bis judgement. Your own VxkftWatfon tells

u s

To. tic Liter**? Rcmanijts. us in his Quodlib.pag. 56. 57. That thejefuites cc [Preached openly in Spain againft Pope Six-QC tus the laft of all holy memory 3 and railing a-cc gainft him as againft a mod wicked map y and "monfter on earth : they have called him a " Lutherane heretick, they have termed him a cc Wolf^ they have laid, he had undone all cc Chriftendome ir lie had lived: and Cardinal cc B ellar mine himfelf as judge paramount being cc asked what he thought of his death, anfwer-cc ed 5 £)ui fine ptnitentia vivit? define paniten-cc tia mcritnrrfrocnldubio adinfernum dejcendit : and to an Fngliih Doctor of our Nation he faid, " \JZonceptts verbis, quantum capio, quantum H fapio, quatrtum intelligOj dejcendit ad infer-"num.'] And yet we mufthold our Belief in Chriit on the credit of iuch a mans infallibility.

But yet I have not come to that point.of your Schifme which above all things in the world doth alienate my mind from your pro-feflion. And that is your reparation from all other Chriftians in the world r I find in my felf fo great an inclination to unity D and the title QCatholike] is fo honourable 5 in my efteem, to them that deferve it 5 that if I had found you to have the unity and Catholike Religion and Church which you boaft of, it would hive much inclined me to your Church and vvay. But when I find you like the Donatifts confining the [b4] Church

To the Liter Me Romanifls. Church to your party, and making your felves aSe&andFa<ftion 5 and unchurching and damning the far greateft part of the Chriftians in the world; this left me affured that you are mcft notorious Schifmaticks. When I faw fo much knowledge and holinefs comparatively among the Reformed Catholikes ^ and fo much ignorance and wickednefs among the Papifts teven here where are but a remnant that adhere to their Religion againft thecourfe of the Nation) and when I read fo many plain promifes in Scripture, that Whoever believeth in Chriftfhall notferifhy and that if by the fpirit tve mortifie the deeds of the body we fhall live , and that if we* Kefent cur fms fhall be forgiven, yea that Godli-nejs hath thefromife of this life and that to come% and then when I nnd that the Papifts for all thefe certain promifes 5 do unchurch and damne us all, becaufewe believe not in the pope of iJfl/z^aswellasin Chrift-, this fatisfied me as fully that you are moft audacious Schifmaticks s as I am fatisfied that you are Papifts, What! muft I be a Papift on fuch grounds as thefe f Muft I believe becaufe you tell me fo 5 that all the moft confcionable heavenly Chriftians that I am intimately acquainted with are unfan<5tifi-ed 5 ungodly 3 and in a ftate of damnation i When I am a witnefs of the earneft breathings pf their fouls after more communion with God 5 .When they would not live in one of

thofe

thofe fins that you call venial, for all the \yorld 5 When they mortifie the flefli , and live in the fpirit, and wait for Chrifts appearance. And yet that fuchas the Papifts fhall be faved that .are fo far below them, becaufe they believe in the Pope of Rome f Why you may almoft as well perfwade me to become a Papift by telling me that you have eyes in your heads , and nofes on your faces, and the reft of the world have none. Doth Chrift fay. He that helieveth y and refenteth fhall he faved •, and muft I believe that all Proteftants (hall be damned, let them believe and repent never fo much? This is to bid me \jeafe to helieve Chrifi ] that I may believe the Pope \JCea\e to he a Chrifiian] that I may become a Papift. I am confident I fhall aever be Papift, if it may not be done but by believing that all the Godly that I am acquainted with are ungodly, and in the way to hell.

And (to fptak of the quantity as well as the quality) I feel a kind of universal charity within me, extending to a Chrifiian as a Chrifiian, and therefore to Ml the

Chrijlians in the World , Armenwum Ecclefta , fa

which will not give me Eth J ofum & y d ™™ &

, 11-^1 ***** *\ Uc " Apofloli con-

i€3.Ve tO believe if a hun- venenata nonfubfunt Ro-

dred Popes fliould fwear wan * Ecd f* Reinerm it, that the far greateft ffiffiSSS&i! part of Chriftians fhall be

dam-

To the Literate Romanifts. damned, becaufe they are not fuhje&s to the Pope! The Papifts are but a handful of the Chriftians in the world \ at leaft the fmaller part by far ! The moft of them never acknowledged the fovereignty of your Pope. And a few ages ago , before Mahometanifm and Hea-thenifm diminifhed the number of Chriftians in Afia and Africa , the Papifts were but a fir all proportion. There are but lately taken off from the Chriftian Religion , its probable, twice as many as all the Papifts in the whole world I If it were but the Kingdomes of Nubia and Tendue ^ how far would they go on this account i A Bifhop of your own, and Legate of the Popes that dwelt in thofe Countries $ faith, that the Chriftians in the Eafterly parts of Afia alone, exceeded in multitude: the Chriftians both of the Greek and Latin Churches: J>acob. d Vitriaco Hift. Orient, c. 77. And which is more 5 the whole Church for many hundred years after Chrift were far from being the fub-jeds of the Pope of Rome ! And indeed had Chrift no Church till the Pope became univer-fal Monarch? Muft Paul be datrtned becaufe he was not one of Peters fubje&s i Do not your confeiences know that fwearing obedience to the Pope of Rome , was a thing unknown for many hundred years, yea that it is a novelty in the world < Muft Chrift lofe for ever the moft of his Chiirch, even thofe that never

heard

To the Literate Romanifts.

herrd oi'Rcme; becaufe they believe not in the Pope * Never fliall I be Papift while I breath ~ if I muft be engaged to fend the moft of the Ghriftianson earthy to the Devil, 2nd that upon fnch an r^xc-wnt as this. Thefe things are F6uric3 tl>olike 5 fo unchriftian, fo inhumane, that I wonder and wonder a hundred times, how any learned 5 fober men among you i are able to believe them. For my part I am a re-[olvQ^Cathldih 5 that own the universal Church of Ch/ijl ; and cannot limit my charity to a corner or a faction $ efpecially Fo grefs a one as yours. I own not the errors or other fins of any of the Churches , Fo far as I can difcover them : But if I muft make them Hereticks ?nd unchurch them for thefe (yea even thoFe that ro under the name of Neftorians , and Eutichians) I muft needs put you in amoegr them 5 who I think do erre more grofly then they. But I am none of your judge : Nor none of your moft rigid adverfaries. I am one that hive been oft called a Papift in print 5 for avoiding Fome of tho r e extreams, into which fome others have run from you. I am one that cannot choofe but hope that there are thouFands that fhall be Faved that profefs themfelves of your Church and way. But that I cannot do Fomy Felf , and the p v eafons why I cannot do it, Ihave thought good here to let you know. Many more there are 3 but

7 o we Literate Romamjts. I have mentioned fome of them in the following Difputations , to which I refer you. I can truely fay this in the prefence of the Lord that knows my heart , that if I knew it my felf, I would mod gladly turn Papilt before I fleep if I could difcern it to be the way of God : Yea if I had but any probability of it, and knew but the man that could give me fatis-fa&ory evidence on your fide, I would wander from Sea to Sea to find him, as weak and unfit for travail as I am. And therefore if any learned man among you y have fo much confidence o£ his way, and charity to my foul , as toper [wade me to his opinion, hefhallaiany feafonable time be rvellcom, and I (hall thankfully entertain any e-videncethathe can bring, according to my capacity. But then I muft defire him to deal plainly and compare facet , and not to juggle Under the vizor of a Seeker , or any other Sedt -, for that way will never take with me.

And I muft further here profefs that this paper comes not with any cruel or bloody defign againft you. I write not to exafperate the Governors agAinft you, fo far as to deal unmercifully with any of you. And whereas under the vizor of the feds before mentioned you are of latefoearneft in pleading for a toleration r deal but impartially like honeft men, and I will fet in with you. Procure but a toleration for

the

To the Literate Romanifts. the Reformed Chriftian Religion in Italy and Sfaine and your part of Germany Vortugal^&c. and I fl-ould willingly petition the fovereign Powers in England that you might have as much liberty here: But that you fhall have full liberry here 3 andProteftants have none where you can hinder it 3 this is not equal dealing. But how comes it to pafs that you that pretend fo much to unity are in this alio of fo many opinions ; the Englijh Papifts are for liberty of Religion 3 and the Sfamjh and Italian are againft it i But I muft cry you mercy : I now con-fider, It is but your ielves that you think have right to liberty here 5 and others fhould have it but in order to yours. As hardly as you think you are ufed in England^ you live openly a-mongus, and no man that I hear of layeth hands on you: When you know if a Spaniard or Italian be known to be a Protefiant, hee's as fure tormented and burnt at a flake as the coat is on his back. Do ycu not know this to be true:' Were I in thefe places where your Religion hath its will 5 I know one leafe of this book would caufe me to be burnt to afhesrthat I am alive is becaufe I am not in your power: But tor my part I wifli not the fhedding of one drop of your blood, nor your imprifonment or banifliment^but only your moderate and necef-fary reftraint from open iniquity and feducing of thofe that are unfurnifhed to encounter you.

u. (j urn, x>*K^*t j.vu//;urtt /frj«

I havelbme invitation to make this profeffw on, by the ufage of a Juflice of Peace of this County ^ who was fo far your friend as to cen-fure me and others for a late Gratulation, and petition to his Highnefs the Lord Prote&or, iubfcribed by many juftkes, and by the Grand Jury and thoufands of the County ^ and to centure the faid petition to be of a'cruel and bloody complexion •, inferring to your honor and the reproach of the Reformed Churches, a vindication of your Religion from the guilt of the Powder-plot and Spanifh invafion, and other foreign bloody a&s, and charging as much on the Reformed as can be charged on you, according to the Hiftory, called [The Image of both Churches.'] And what was this bloody petition of this County < Why i when you hadmurthered, andbaniihed, and lfarved fuch a multitude of the poor Proteftants in Savoy, and we were aflured of it by a Narrative from the Lord Protestor himfelfj inviting us to contribute to relieve the remnant , in the fenfe of your continued bloody dealings, and of the fad caieof thofe poor people, and the favor of his Highnefs toward them, we returned him a thankful acknowledgement of his care, and added our defires to ufe the moft eifeftual means to hinder the growth of fo bloody a do&rine, left it lhould reach our felves at laft, yet adding that we dtfired no rigor as to your perfons: but

craved

craved the promoting of the Reformed Religion , and of unity among our felves as the means of our prefer vation. The world is come to a fair pafs: when our brethren are murdered by thbufands, we are bloody for mentioning it^ and blaming you tor it , and defiling our felves to be preferved from your dodxine and rage > fo as without any rigor to ourperfons. Alas poor Proteftants ! When your throates are cut by the merciful Papifts 5 you are cruel and bloody for faying fo 3 When they have killed one half, the other half is bloody if they de-fire to efcape. By my good will Tie never come to the Bench for Juftice where this Gentleman, hath power: For if I accufe a thief for robbing us, or a murderer for murdering twenty of my friends, I may on thefe terms expeft to be accounted cruel for complaining: Yea though I adde [I pray Sir fpare the perfon of the Murderer : onely do your beft to prevent the death-of the reft of my friends]] I may look to be told its a bloody requeft. But perhaps if leifure fervelmay fay more to this Gentleman , in a full Reply to his paper.

Yea I am fo far from defiring your blood y that I hope I have given you no abufive language. Sure I am, I come far iliort of the language that you give one another, where you may judge me to be moft (harp. I had once very Reverend thoughts of your Father Par-Jons

To the Literate Romanifts.

fons when I read his book of Refolution, and thought that if ybu had any good one it was he. And yet your own Prieft Watjon calls him [An Athealfiratagemitor,^^. 160. A baftardly Vicar of hell, p. 15 7 • fadge far amount on earth under the Divelin Hell, p. 156. The arch couf cner, p. 149. That he was a bafiard , unhonejily begot, bafely born , a Wolfey in ambition , a Midas in immundicity,a traytor in attion,^. 108. That all Catholikes mufl depend upon the Arch-friefi, the Archpriefl up on fat her Garnet, father Garnet upon father Par fons, and father Parfons upon the devil,the author of all rebellious confpiracies, treafons, murders,difobedience, herefies,and all other fuch diabolical and bloody deftgnments as this wicked Refute hath hitherto devifed~] p. 151 I One that as fure as you live on earth, doth c arena more for the lives of all the Catholikes them-felves, then for fo many dogs lives, in a time of infectious plague .~\ p. 153. Tea (faith he) que-fkionlefshe could rvifh in his heart, to Jee all the feculars and other Catholikes in England hanged rather then to befrufirate of his conceited ^apo-nian Monarchy. Tea I verily think he would be the hangman of them all himfelfi rather then his platform fhouldfail, if it food upon Jo defperate a point: as a fitter off ce for fuch a bafeirregular baflard,then to come neer Gods holy Attar,&cc.~} gyodlib. pag. 153,154^ I will not foul my paper with any more concerning him.

And

To the Literate Romanics] And of the Jefuites in general I have thought that there are^ among them Tome temperate vertuous men : but your Prieft Watson faith, jpuodlib. p. 346. [I call them tfefuitical, that is , the Faction of jefuites > by a breviation, to avoid circumlocution > in one word expreffing them to be a factious, [editions y ambitious, ava-ritious, treacherous^turbulent y Machivilian , A-theal con fori , that abnfing the rules of their focie-ty, and quite perverting the conrfe } caufe, infti-tution, and intent of their order,&c,~] The rea-fons he gives at large, p. 340. And p. 108, {The jefuites have a fpecialprivikdgein two things. One is to ?nake all things to be believed asGofpel, be it never Jo falfe that they [peak cr write: another y to make all things be judged falfe, be it 04 true as the Gofpel it f elf .ihat any other pal write or fpeak without their approbation ' But if direttly againft them ? cut up071 it% it is not to be hear dy fpoken of> or once locked upon— And withal? the vilejl parts thai can be played, ere counted atts of zeal among their, if done by a Father : fo as it may be any way covered with either of their two principles,frt licet^propter bonum fecietatis,vel crdrne ad Deii7n.~] And p. 149/he m^es their principles wh^Omnif pro tempore ', et divide & impera. And p, 150. 151. he af> firmeth that it was the Jefuites own choice and doing that the Papifts had not toleration in England ^ becaufe by fiifferings they'Would

£ c 3 have

To the Literate Romdnifls. have the people more paffionately ferve their ddigns. j This is the language of your own brethren (even more as well as he) but not mine.

To conclude ^ concerning thefe following Difputations 5 I need not tell you 3 that they are none of the elaborate writings of any champion of the Proteftant caufe 5 challenging your Anfwer: but a few hafty (yet confidered) lines, delivered in a monthly meeting of a few Country Mini fters/or mutual eciification,by one that never pretended to much skill or will for fuch Difputes. if any of you have a mind to try your Jlrengthyvsebolrfy challenge you to do it on thoje mentioned by me in the end: to whom let me add Dr. Crakenthorpe^ efpecially againft Spalatenf. and DalUus on feveral particular fubje&s, as de Pmis & fatisfacl. de Imapntbus, de le'ywits and the reft. I pretend not in to fmall room to handle the particular differences between you and t us ^ but to give my general reafons againft you 5 and to choofeout one particular about our foundation and yours. For I had read in Ccfierus Bnchtr. c. defum. Pont. p. 15' 1.15 2. That No-men Fetra plus tncludit quam fundamentum^ fundament a^quippe edifcium jnftinent, Petr+au-t em feu Rapes ipfa fundament a > & Apojloli alti fundament a dicuHtur. Petrus vera ut Rupes fo-lidijfima, etiamfundamenta ipfa continety & ne in err ores & vhta labantur detinet author it ate

pafto-

To the Literate Romanifts. p aft or alt. ] AndSkulkemus faith Apol. fro Bell 9 c.*6. p. 255. Pontiftcia poteftas eft velut car do 7 fundamentum ( & ut uno verbo omnia com^ plettar) jumma fidei Chriftiana. Gretfer laith Bef. c. i.l. i.deverb. Deiy. 16. Idfolumpro verbo Deiveneramur acfujcipimus, quod nobis Pentif ex ex cathedra Petri, tanquam fupremus Chriftianorum magi ft er, ommumquz contriver ft arum Index deftmtndo proponit.~]

Bellarm. faith lib. 4. de Pont, c, i, In con-troverfiisReligiomsultimum )ndicium eft [ummi Pontifcis. & cap. 3. fclnm Petrum Chnftus vo~ cavit Petram,& fundawentumi) nonpetrum cum Concilio. Et ibid, Petrus &quilibet e)us [uc~ ceffor eft petra & fundamentum Ecckftu -— Ejus prxdicatio &confeffio eft radix mundi> & ft ilia errarety touts mundus erraret. — Ex quo apparct tot am frmitatem conciltorum efje a Pontiftcc y non partim a pontifice,partim a Cencilio.'] The Pope then is your foundation 5 yea your Church : For faith GretjerDef.c. 10, /. 3. de Verb, Dci.f. 1450. Per Eccleftam intelliqirmtspontifcem Ro\ manum> qui pro tempore Ecclefta mviculamme-deratur. Etp. 1451. EccUftam papam inia-pretaniur: Non abnuo^]

.But the Frencbhave another foundation. But that we renounce both yours znd theirs > I thought meet to tell you in the third Deputation. Acept this account from , Your friend

Ri $ Baxter. . [C2] THE

mmmn

T HE

CONTENTS,

Difp. i.

QJT IX J Hither the Reformed Catholike Chriftian V V Religion, commonly called Trotejhnt, be a fafe way tofalvation ? A ff The terms explained to fag. 11

Thefirft Argument p. 11

The fecond Argument p. 14

The third Argument p. 16

Argument fourth p. 17. to 26.

Obj. I 7>#* Religion is but ene y anfwcred p. 26. Obj 2.7 /;* tr tie Religion hathftill had a vifibls Chnch profejfing it p. 3 2

Obj. 3. Tiw Religion h^th no certain teft to difcover it m p. 40

Obj. 4. Tou have feparated from all the Churches in thew&rld p.41

Obj. 5. Tou are divided irito'Scfff, and havenotmitj among your felves p 42

Obj. 6. Ton have no infallible certainty of jour Relt-ijcn p,43

Obj 7. Ton want many Articles of the faith p.45 Ob;. 8. Tou condemn one amther ibid.

The Contents.

Obj. 9. Tour titles /hew you are SeBaries p. 46

Ob j. 10. Yon found us in pojjejfton : where Vras jour

Church before Luther ? 47. to 5 2

A ^Defence of TZiJhep lifters Serm of the Churches u-nity, againft the cenfutatiw of Paulus Veridicus: p. 52. to 77. wherein the cowmen Arguments of the Tapifts againft m are refetted. x

Difp. 2. Q^ Whether Pepery b$ afafe way tofahati*

en ? Neg. p. 78

The term QPopery 3 and the reft explained, to p.84 Twelve proportions for the full anjwering of the cjuifti-

on p. 84

Argument 1. Popery U huilt upon and refolved into a

a notorieus falfhood p. 91

Argument 2. They hold Chrlftianity it felfon agrsund

utterly uncertain, if not, certainly fatfe. p.93

Argument 3. They are dijagreed among themfelves in

the very fundamentals p. 104

Argument 4. Popery u a novel profejfion, unknown to

the Apoftlesand Primitive Church p. 106

Argument f. They make a new Catholike Church

p. no Argument 6 They are the greateft Schifmaticks en

earth p. 126

Argument 7. Popery is an uncertain changeable things

f& that a man can never tell when he hath it all

p. 1:8 Argument^,. They exprejly contradict th* Vcord of

God, andfet up man above it p. 142

By the firft means he keeps from Salvation, all A-theifts and Heathens that know not,or believe not the life to come: by the fecond, all Infidels that Believe not Chrift to be the way, and all Hereticks tbaf Believe not thofe Truths which are of abfobte ncceflft-ty in lubordination to Chrift : and by the third, all Hypocrites aiidunfand:ified r ungodly, impenitent men, in the vifible Church, that yet have a ftperficial Belief of thefe Truths.

Our Queftion in hand is for the efcaping the fecond of thefe fnares.by difcovering which is the fafc Way to SalvationrThe Policy of thcDevil hath always endeavoured to hinder the world from knowing this way, by thefe two means: Firft, if it be poffible by keeping them in utter darknefs,that this way may not be revealed to them, or being reveaied, may not be underftood; Secondly, or if that will not do, by making fuch a number of by-ways on every fide,that the true and onely way may hardly be difcerned. And this is his end m raiting fo many Herefies; and this is the courfe he takes to miflead them that have efcaped from the darknefs of Infideliry. He begun this trade betime, evert in the dayes of the Apoftles: They faw the multifarious off-fpring of the Deceiver fpreuting up apace in their own times: yet did it never enter into their thoughts to tell the Church, that by this,all Herefies (hould be known , That the Church of Rome fkould condemn* them , or to fend it down to all pofterity as the true touchftone to tell them which w*is the onely right way amoEg all thefe Herefies, to wit, That Which id believed by the P pe or Church vf Rome. This had been a ready andeafu'way for the Apoftles to have prefcribed, and for us to have received > if it had been true. It

might

(I)

might have faved them much labor in giving us that Body of facred Dodrine which they have made indeed ths Touchitone of the fafe way y and it might have fpared us much more labor of fearching and ftudying which is the way; and we might all have fent to Rome , and been refohed without any more ado. Surely the A poftles were not fo envious to our eafe and fafety , as to have filenced this eafie way if they had known it themfelves. Cut as every Here-tick when he findcth out a New way, doth con-demne che Old , as inconfiftent with his New, fo do the Papifts; Since this new way hath been cryed up, that \^No man can come to heaven but £jRome]] it is their bufinefs to deter people from any other way * and to that end, to tell them that there is no fafe way but theirs. As the Quakers tell us, that there is no way to Heaven but theirs, and fome * Anabaptifts fay * * lach contrary to ^4. • it wid/cefl£ 3 who faun that the

there is no way to Heaven R i, pt ' i2ed Jo crucifi ,

but by being Baptized (again chrift apin, onbolfid. as they are) fo do the Papifts /;* 4. c. 5. p. (mtbi) 196. tell us that there is no way to ( Though I fuppofe he Heaven but by Believing £ d " fac on the ° :her in the Pope and Church of l "' Rome^ and obeying himas the head of the Church. I never faw the place, but fure that Town hath fomd admirable excellency in it f that the God of Heaven fhould fomuch fet his heart upon it, as to endow it with fuch a ftuperidious Prerogative, that no man fhould be faved from everlafting Torment that doth not Believe in the Bifliop of that City , and obey him as the univerfal head. Its a wonder to me , tha: he that fet not his heart fomuch on his Temple ae fern/Mem, or on that chofen people | as not to for-B 2 teH

fake them for their fins, ahd chat hath the Heavens fcrfrs Throne, and to whom the Sun it feif is as Darknefs, (hould yet be fo taken with a Town called "SMe , built and long inhabited by Idolaters, defiled with the blood or thoufands of Martyrs , a-gainft which the fouls under the Altar cry out [_How long Lord Holy and true wilt thou not avenge our blood ,&c.~] as to ordain that no man in the remoteft parts of the world, even the Antipodes that never heard of the name of Rome, can be laved, though he (hould never fo much believe in Jefus Chrift,unlcfs he Believe in the Bifhop of this Town and obey him : when yet with Andrtidltu and other Papifts, its a hard queftion whether a man may not be faved in thofe heathen Countries without believing in Chrift himfelf. Is it not a marvaile that we never read that Rome was once named by Chrift himfelf, and that it never was put into our Creed as one of the neceffary Articles to falvatton ? efpecially when wc find there the C*ih6U\e Church, and Communion of Saints,which fure would have been fome way intimated to be the Roman? Church or that which is headed by their Bifhop, if it had been fo indeed. I find but three names (ftri&ly fo called ) in theCrecd 3 and the\ Popes or Rcmf.ne Churches is none of them: One^ Jefus Chrift, and the other is hers that bore him, and the third is his, that Judged him to death ; and this indeed was a Romane name, and if the honor of it in the Creed will do thert any fcrvice, lee them make their beft of it.

But however, this advantage the enemy of the Church hath got by it \ that the new Romane Title, hath made the old Catholike Title feem queftionable to#nany , and now fo great is the audacity of the

^ lifuro--

(;)

ing Pope, that he not onely queftioneth whether any Chriftians fhallbe faved that believe not in liim as well is in Chrift , but he flatly denyeth it; and what he cannot get by Scripture and reafon, he would get by threatning and terrible words to affright the fim-pie, telling them that Proteftants are not of the true Church or Religion, norinafafe way to falyation, becaufethey will not be the fubje&sof the Pope of Rome : Well, v/e fiiall briefly prove our way to be fafe, if not to the fatisfa&ion of perverfe, arjibiri-ous, or paffionate and prejudiced nien, yet \ doubt nottothefacisfaftionof all humble, impartial^ diligent perTons, that are willing- to.know the truth, and deny themfelves, that they .may know it, and do not ftifle it by their lufts, or irnprifon it in un-righteoufnefs in their by affed resolutions. And firft we (hall briefly open the termes.

By * [Religion~] here we mean, the * Religion in

' Dortrine de credendts & azendis * a- c r he firt * fcR , cc

«* 7 leems to be

(as fyartinim)proprfi4fli$ ejus qui res divina* ftudiofe Relegit , picmk ergo, though the word be thence variowfly ufed.

(i) LaftantiM.Uhh (Inftit. li, 4. <;. 18J Hacconditkntgig-vimur, ut gencrarai nes Deo jufia (^ deb ha Dbfequiz prekmws , biric (dum novcrimm huiic'l'cquamur Hoc vinculo pietxtk ob-firiaiWeo (?\tli&ti (umus i unit iff* Rcligionmenacccpit 5 nonut Cicero interprctatutcft a Relegeiido. CMclim id nomc* Lucretius interprctttus eft, qui nit, Religionum fe nodos txolvere. liierotne in c. 9, Amos, & Auguft. de viaRd. c. $5-& Re-trad. L 1. c, ij. & li. 10. deCivir. Dehc*4. are for the fains derivation.

• 0) Mscrob. Saturn, li. $, c, $. ServmSulpitius Religmem rjji diftm tradidit qua propter fanftiwem aliquum remota ac fepo-fijn nobis fit t qujtfi a relinquendo dictx.&iC. vid. Martin in verb. Sometime Religious h taken for the fame with frcred s and fo is sfptyed to Perfons, Actions, Things, Places, Ttatijgfc we here take it for a prescribed way to falvation, or that which by us is Believed or profeiltd to be fuch : and this is our Religion.

B 3 bout

(<5)

bout matters to be believed and pradifed, which we hold and profefs as of Divine Revelation, and in-jundion, in order to Gods Glory and our faWati-on. For though this be but the means towards thofe holy Affedionsand pradices which are of neercr ne-ceffity to our falvation , as being the necefTary ef* feds of the former ? yet is it not this later • but the former that we are now inquiring after; Not of Subjective y but Objective Religion : not of the fde: qua^ but the fides qua creditur : not whether rre be true to our Religion and fo truly Religious, but whether we be of the True Religion , or Jhold that Dodrine which will fave them that are true to it, in Belief and Pradice. I (hall not much ftop the plain Reader therefore with any further and nnnecefTary inquiry into the Etymology of the word Religion , which fome derive (i) a Relegendo, fome (2) a Re-ligando , and fome (3) a Relegando & Relmquendo •* But as long as we underftand what is meant by the word, we fl^all not ftiek ac the Etymology or propriety.

By the £ Reformed ~] Religion , we mean , the Chritlian Catholike Religion , as it is feparatcd from Popery: and fo by this word we do diftinguifti our Churches from the Romane Sedaries. For, it is not every Reformation (much lefs every thing fo called) that-here we have refped to , but the Reformation by which we caft off Popery it felf, which becaufe it was in one Countrey done by a foIemnProteftati-onof certain Princes and Citiesagainft Popery,hath been fmce called the Proteftant Reformation, and our Churches the Proteftant Churches and cur Religion, the Proteftant Religion.

(?)

Our Religion is called Catholik* * becaufe it is , the Religion of theGacholicke Church, which is f> called a ^ *** , hecaufe itisuniverfal , confiftir.g not onely of Jews and their Profehtes,_a$ heretofore, nor of one Town like Rome , and thofe that wi!! he the fubje&s of the Bifhop of that Town , as the Pa-pifts dream, but of all that Believe in the name of Chrift through the whole world , holding the Foundation or points of abfolute neceffity to falvacion-> and not again denying them by any fuch contra-di&ing Errors, as will not confift with the pra-dical belief of the faid Fundamentals.

As that was called^ Catholtke Epifile , which • was dire&ed to the whple Church, and not tfc any one perfon or people; fo is that the Catholike Chu-cb which contained^ all Chriftians.

As tstiuftin was wont to defcribe it againft the Donatifts (who would have confined it to the ad -verfaries of Cacilianus and followers of c Danatw in sAfricke) that the true Church was that which was fpread over the world by the Gofpel which was commanded to be preached to all Nations, beginning at ferufalem :• fo do we.

By the Chriflian Religion.! fuppofe we are agreed, is meant the Religion of Believers in Chrift, or that whereof Chrift is the Foundation and prefcriber, and faith in him the firft a& , whichmuft contain all the effential parts ("though it may poflibly want many integrals) or elfe it is not to be called the Chrifti-an Religion. They that were called Chrifts Difci-ple$ were afterwards called Chriftians firft at Antioch^ AB. 11. 26. To be a Chriftian therefore, and to be Chrifts Difciple is all one. Note therefore, that as the word Religion denot-

B 4 eth

(S)

eth the film of doftrincs and way of falvation abfo-lurely neceflary, fo it is but One in all the world (that's true andfaving) and that is the Chrifrian Re-UgUn. So that if a Heathen, Jew or Maho'metane ask me what Religion I am of, in oppofuion to theirs, I will fay, Tara a Chriftian', and not onely that 1 am a Proteftant : But if a Chriftian aske me what Religion I am of, I will fay, I am a Reformed Catholike Chfiftian : for fuch a queftion in the mouth of a Chriftian ufually implieth that I am a Chriftian, snd inrendcth thedjfcovery of what fort or party of Chriftians I belong to. But indeed Chriftianity is not many but one, and therefore Chriftians & Chnfiians are not of many Religions \* but of one: No nor Chriftians at all, that are truely fuch, if by Religion you mean, afjficmc ofdocirir.es in the main, yuctfiary or Efficient to ftlyation ( or conceited fo to be:) For,as there is no fuch Body of Doftrine but Chnfts, forroman that is indeed a Chriftian, can believe that there is, feeing fuch a Belief contradideth the cffentia'sof Chnftianity., But among thofe that call themfefves Chriftians, there are fomeHcreticks that deny or plainly fubvcrtfome pare of the eftentials- of Chriftian Religion. And among thofe that are Chriftians, fon.e fcave'fcch dangerous corruptions as do much hazard the fal-vacion, and tehd to fruftrate them of their benefits of the Chriftian Faith , and thefe very cornipr.tons •they Entrde by the name of Part of their Religion, as the Papifts do : In which fence Imuftfay, I am riot of the fame Religion with them , though I hold xhe fame Chriftian Doftrine as they , becaufe I hold not their mixture, and add not thofe corruoti-ons which they make a part of their Religion.

The

(?)

The name Protcftant I rcjeft not , becaufe it was ta < ken'up on a juft occafion : but I take it to be too ex-trinfecal, and private to be the ftanding denomination of my Religion; as being not taken from the nature of the thing, but from an occafionali aftion of a few men in one Countrey ; though it intimarcth that all of their judgemenrin all other Countries,do virtually at leaft make the like Protection in the maine. I do therefore rather choofe to fay that I am a Reformed Catholike Chrifiian ; and when fcall my felf a Proteftant, this is my meaning.

So that by the name \^Chri(lian~\ which exprefleth all my Religion it felf Pofitively confidered , I am differenced from Heathens, Jews, Mahometans, and all Infidels, andthofe (by fome called Hereckks) who ufurpe the name of Chriftians, while they deny part of the very efTentials of Christianity. And by the name \JZatholikf\ I adde nothing Pofitivc to the former, but onely intimate that I am of the Universal Chufch,and negatively exclude my felf from all divided parties,or from any that are yet in thatChurch, and yet take up any dividing titles or wayes therein, though they withdraw not from it; as they are fuch, 1 am none of them 1 and therefore difclaim (when I exprefs my Religion ) fuch private names • I am no Lutheran , Calvinifi^ ssirminiatt^ Papifi, Socinian \ &c. but a Catholike.

But yet when I fay lam a Reformed Catholike, I purpofly declaim the Corruptions of Popery , and in that word renounce their Errors as fuch, as by the word Catholike I renounced their Schifme: Andfo I may agree with Luther , Calvin or any man in Reformation, fo far as they hold to the word of God: fo that if malicious adverfaries will put the name of

f.o)

Sed upon the Catholike verity, and call it by the name of Ztiinglianijme , Luthtranifme, Calvinifme or the like, pretending that it had its fpring from thefemen, they fhall not by fuch unworthy means, remove me from the Catholike Religion, nor yet caufe me to own their Corruptions, becaufe they have named the oppofition of them as a Herefie-eytuguftine would not turn Donatifi , becaufe they named the Catholikes Chilians *; nor would Proffer turn 'TtUpfify becaufe they called the Orthodoxe, Prcdeftinamns or Fatalifts, qor would Athanafius before them turn Arrian becaufe they called the Orthodoxe Tritheifts. It is not other mens fattening upon us the name of a man , or of a Sed that proves us Sedaries ^ or that we had our Religion o-riginally from that man. Yet do we fo much reverence their names, that we re Joyce in their labors for the Church, a^d blefs God for them, and endeavor to imitate them in their holy dodrine 2nd lives , though we make none but Chrift the Lord of our Faith

As for the terms of the predicate they need no great explication. By falvation we mean princi pally EverlatiingGloryig Heaven: By theW^jtoit, we mean the means appointed by God for the attaining it. The principal means indeed is Chrift him-jfelf, who is eminently called , The way, and no man comcth to the Father but by him. But in fubordinauoo to Chrift all other means are the jviay.

By a fafe Vpay y we mean a way that infuo genert is Jjufficient to the attainment ot the end; fo that all that fmcerelyare that way ftiall attain that end; A certain means of happinefs to all that faithfully ufe it.

For

For it muft be known that no Religion for found Doftrincs^ will fave a man that isnot faithful in the reception and improvement of them. ATrue Religion will not fave him that is not True to his Religion. And therefore it is no wonder if multitudes even of Proteftants do perifh, though their Religion be the 6nely Religion in the world. For they are not heartily of the Religion which they profefs. They have that doftrine which is the feal, and fit enough of its own nature quantum infe to imprint the image of God upon their fouls ; But if they keep this feal in their Chefts, and apply it not effedually to their hearts , they may have unholy hearts and lives, though they profefs a holy faith and Religion , and therefore may perifh for all that profeffion; yea and perifh moft deplorably becatife their profeffion doth aggravate their fin. If a maris Religion ( or believed do&rines) be bad in the maine, the man him-felfmoft needs be bad too; and therefore no man of fuch a Religion can be faved : But if a mans Religion (or profeffed doftrines) be never fo good it is poffible he may be bad that doth profefs them : and then no Religion can fave a wicked man. So that of the true Religion fome are faved,but not all: but of a bad Religion (in the main) no man can be good, or be faved.

I come to the Arguments by which I prove the Affirmative, that [The Reformed Catholike Ckrijii-an Religion, commonly called Protefiant, is afafe way tofafoation.

Arg. i. That Religion which beft agreeth with the word of God, above all other Religions in the world , is a fafe, yea the fafeft way to falvation • But the Reformed Catholike Chriftian Religion

com-

CO

commonly called Proteftant i doth beft agree with the word of God: therefore it is thefafeft way to falvation.

One would think among Chriftians the Major ihould he unqucftionable : But here the corrupt Ro-m&mjls have prefumed to make a new word of God," that fo the -determination of the cafe might beim-poffible , unlefs we v/iil go up to thefe Phiiiftines to {liarpen our weapons: For they deny the holy Scripture to be, the whole, word of God , or fuffi-cient to be the Rule for deciding of controverfies in matter of faith, and tell us,that unwritten Traditions are another part : And thofe Traditions arefuch as are received by the whole Church as delivered down from thfl Apoftles y and that whole Church is onely theJiomane party; and thus do they by their own Authority undertake to damne all the reft of the Chriftian world, and make themfelves onely theCa-thoiike Church : and by this trick of wit they have got one half of Gods word into their clofets, and chat it is his word, which they fay is his word : And that you may know that they are no blabs'.or r.eveal-ers of fecrets, they have for forne hundred years kept this clofe as a fecret to themfelves; yea from themfelves as well as to us: fo that when the : cQmmon Proverb takes that to be a fecret which one or two Knows , but not when three know it; yet thefe men have a word of God which all the Catholic Church is the keeper of, and yet thofe that keep it, know it not themfelves , much lefs can we that .{land by come to the knowledge ofit;but we piuft all wait till the laft Pope have breathed out his J.^ft determination , before the Catholike Church that is faid to keep it can come to know what is the

whole

whole wofd of God. And fo among them it is come to this pafs, that to be judged by Gods word, is to be judged by the Pope and his entrufted Subjects.

But if any man whatever bring us forth a Tradition, and fay, that this is the word of God and came down from the Apoftles, we (hall defire more then his word for the proof of it. And when he brings us as good proof that Lis Tradition came from the Apoftles, as we (hall bring him th#t the Scripture came from them , then will we cheerfully receive his Traditions : but not without fufficient proof, upon the boaftings of corrupted intcrefled men. •

As for the Minor, that our Religion is moft agreeable to the Scriptures, I fhall now fay but this to the proof of it. Firft,we take the Scriptures for the only Teft or Rule of our faith and practice; and we tye not our fclves to any other by-rule which may force us to a mifiinderlianding of it. It is onely the Scripture that we ftill profefs doth contain our Religion : And it is the chief part of the Quarrel between us and Rcme^ that they will not take thisl word for the perfedor fufficient Rule of Judgement. It is this word onely that we appeal to , and defire to be judged by: AndthePapifts wilful declining of this Tryal and Judgement doth give any impartial obfer-ver fufficient caufe to fufped, that they take the Scripture to be againft their caufe, or elfe why (hould they not have as much confidence in it, and commit their caufe to it as well as w T e.

2. To run over every point of difference between us and them, and prove our part by Scripture , would bea very eafie work, but it would make this Djfputationfwelltoobig. And it is donefo largely

and

Cm)

and often already by our Writers that it i$ lefs necef-fary. If any of them corn plain for the omiffion of this part, let him but affure me that he will ftand to the Judgement of Scripture, and I (hall quickly and willingly enter the lifts with him , and go over this part of the task again. In the mean time let it fufficc to tell young Students, that Amtfint his Bellarminus Enervattu hath fpoiled all their caufe of this defence and manifested Scripture to be fully againft them, in a little room ; which may fpare them the reading of niany larger. And for the meer Engtifh Reader, M r . Ri. Bernard in bis book called, Look beyond Luther, inhishelp annexed to it, hath given a brief and effectual difcovery that Scripture is not on their fide, in an enumeration and proof of many of the points in difference, between them and us : which for brevity, I refer them to.

Ina word, if the Scripture be true, then that Religion which agreeth with them is a fafe w&y to falva-tion : But the Papifts confefs that the Scriptures are true : Therefore, &c. The Major is plain , in that Scripture affirmeth of it felf, that it is able to make us wife unto falvation, and furnifh us to every good work , and is written that we might believe 3 and believing might have life in Chrifts name, &c. fob. zg. 3 i . 2 Tim. 3. 16,17. Of which we have faid fome-what in a (hort Determination of that Queftion by it felf.

Arg : 2. That Religion is a fafe way to Salvation, by which the Apoftles and the Churches in their days wercfaved: But by the Reformed Catholike Chri-ftian Religion, now called Protectant, were the A-poftles and the Churches in their dayes faved : therefore it is a fafe way to falvation.

The

The Major with reafonable men n*deth no proof. There is not many Religions but only one that are a fafe way to Salvation : and thai which the Apoftles went in and the Churches in their dayes, is undoubtedly that one. God hath not fince taken down that Religion and fet up another, and made that way fafe td us, which was unfafe to them.

The Minor is thus proved , The Apoftles and Churches in their dayes were faved by that Religion which is contained or exprefled in the holy Scriptures : But that is the feme with this which is called the Proteftaht Religion. For proof whereof I refer <you, and offer as abovefaid. Yeeld once that Scripture (hall be the Rule to judge by, and the contro-verfie will foon be ended betwixt us.

And I need not to % but thefe two things for proof of the point.

i. That their own Writers confefs that the Affirmative or Pofitive part of our Religion , as it was herein £^/^Wprofefled, was not againft the word of God, contained in the holy Scriptures, only they told us that the Negatives were^ of which we (hall conftder further anon.

2. As it is the great care of the Papifts to keep the Scriptures from the people, accounting it the Original of Herefics to have them tranflated ( as Arboreta and many exprefly fay ) and barning men to a(hes for reading the Scriptures, when God will burn them in Hell f if they obey them not (which they are not like to do without knowing them) fo experience hath convinced them that where the reading of the Scriptures in a known tongue is but permitted, there doth our Religion moft encreafe, and Popery decay; fo that if this one means were but

per*

(16)

permitted, inipam and iWyasit is whether they will or no in other parts ^ undoubtedly the Popes Kvngdom would foon come down : I fay, if they durft but permit men to read the Word of God in a knowa tongue. They know this well enough , or elfe they would never fo torture poor Chriftians by the Inqui-ikion for having a Bible in their houfes. They have furefome humanity in them, as well as others : and therefore could never go fo exceeding far beyond the Turke in Cruelty to Chriftians themfelves J but that they know their whole caufe and Kingdom is concerned in it , and if once Scripture get in, they are gone. In a \yord, multitudes of volumes have al- V ready proved that Scripture is againft Po- t pery.

Argn. 3. That Religion is a fafe way to Salvation, in <&hich the Church in the three or four firft Ages ac lead was laved: But the Church in the three or four firit Ages at lead: was faved in that Catholike Chrifti* an Religion, which now is called the Reformed or Proteftant Religion : Therefore this is a fafe way to filvation.

I mention not the former Ages as if all other (<A* lowing Ages had come to hea yen by any other Religion, then the former; but i. becaufe in them alone there is a fufficienn proof of the Major Propoiitioni None could be faved in it , efpecially notfo many Ages of the pureft times, if it were -not a fafe way. 2. Becaufe fome Popifh Errors began among the worfer fort of Ambitious, Superftitious Prelates to ereep in betimes; and Popery it felf appeared in the world foon after the fix hundredth veer, and was openly, eiUbliftied about the thoufandth yeer. And according to the degrees of corruption in the

Church

Church there was a greater difficulty of falvacion , becaufc more impediments : but ftill thofe that were faved, were all faved in and by the fame Religion of the former Ages; and if they were faVed in any Corruption, yet not By it, hut from it, or againft

it.

As for the proof of the Minor as it requireth a full volume of it felf, to produce the particular Testimonies of the Fathers for us, fo is it already done in many Volumes : And becaufe the continual clamor of the Papift, is, that Antiquity is on their fide, I (hall anon difprove them in the fundamental difference between them and us, in the following Difputation, about their pretended Soveraignty and Infallibility; and in other particulars defire thenrto give fome reafonable aiifwer to what is already al-ledged by Bi£hop Vfher^ D r Fields and many more of our Writers, before they exped we (hould regard their vain immodeft pretences : And ftill let it beremembredthat for all the Poiitive part of our Religion, they themfelves cannot deny but that the Churches ftill held it. Our Religion is the Bo&rine of the Holy Scriptures; and doubtlefs that was entertained by all the Churches; and in that Religion they were faved.

Argu. 4. ThadUeligion is a fafe way to Salvation , whofe faithful Profeffors have a promife of Salvation made them by God in his holy word: But fuch is the Reformed Catholike Chriftian Religion, commonly called Proteftant : therefore it is a fafe way to Salvation.

The Major cannot be denyed : for God cannot lye, or break his promife. /ffhd the Minor is cafily proved by ptrts. Our Religion is tQ believe all thac

(i8)

is in the Holy Scripture to be the true word o£God : and more particularly we believe all the Articles of the Creed called the Apoftles\ the Nicene Creed, and that of Athanafim • with the Do&rine of the Sacraments of Baptifme and the Lords Supper, and we confefs thafcin a larger fence other facred myfte-ries may be called Sacraments: we believe that every man mull unfeignedly Repent of all fin, and turn from it to God, and Love God above all, and his neighbor as himfelf, and faithfully obey the whole revealed will of God; with other parciculars which may be feen at large in our feveral confeflions. And he that faithfully Believeth and doth all this,hath many promifes of Salvation in the Scripture, John 3.26, God fa loved the tyorId that he gave hi* only begotten Son, that %>hofoever believeth in him Jhould not feriflj but have everlafting life. But Proteftants believe in him; and fubvert not, nor nullifie that belief by any contradiction ; therefore they fhall not perifh (if they be true to their profeffion ) but have everlafting life.

Mark: 16. 16 Go and preach the G off el to every creature : he that Believeth and ts r Baptized Jhall it faved. But Protectants believe and are baptized. Oij. So Hereticks and wicked men may fay. Anf But not truely: For 1. Heretncks truly fo called, that cannot be faved , do not Believe the whole Do&rine which is fundamental or of Abfolu&e necefiity to Salvation. Let .them (hew that by us if they can, 2. As Hereticks have not the true faith , fa wicked men are not true in the faith; The former want the fides qua & qt*a both , that is, both true objeftive and ftibje&tvfc faith : and the later want true fob* jedlve faith at lead. And fo they will confefs

tha:

' (W)

that many a Pope hath done.

Rom. 10.9. If then confefs with thy mouth the Lord Jefus , and (halt believe in thy heart that God raifed him from the dead, thou /halt be faved. For with the heart man bclicveth to righteoufnefs , and with the mouth confeffion is made unto falvation. But thus do the Protcftants; therefore they fhalj be faved.

The Do&rinc which Peter preached to Cornelim was fufficient to fave him and all his houfe, Aft. 1 o. J4. But every word of that is believed by the Proteftants, therefore it may fate them.

The Jaylor is projnifed, AS. 16. 3 1. that if he will believe on the Lord Jefus Chrili he (hall be faved. So Heb. 10.39. Luk* 8. 12. It is not faid, If thou ttrilt believe in Chrift and the Pope of Rome thou (halt fee faved, eAtt. 4.12. [Neither U there Salvation in any other : for there is none other name nnder heaven given among men^ whereby we mttfi be faved~] Therefore not the Popes name. In A€t.i$.i. It's faid that certain men came down from fndaa taught the brethren, that except they were circum-cifed after the manner of Afofes they could not be faved: againft thefe Panl wrote the Epiftle to the Galatians , where you may fee how to think of fuch : And in the like manner do the Bapifts teach men, that except they believe in the Popa of Rome , and except they believe that there is a Purgatory , and that Images may be worfhiped, ana that the confecrated Heft may be adored , and that we may pray to faints departed, and that thePrieft muft take the Sacrament while the people only look on, and that only the Prieft nauft receive it in both kinds, and the bread alone may ferve the people, and t&at prayers

C % api

(20) '

and other Church -fervice (hould be in. the Lutinc tongue when the people underftand it not, with abundance more of their vile inventions, I fay, thofe that believe not all this, they fey cannot be laved; But what fay the Apoftles, Elders, and Brethren at ferufalem , when the former cafe is brought before them ? They would not hare men tempt God, by putting a yoak on the moft of the Difciples, but believe that through the Grace of the Lord Jefus Ghrift, thofe that ufed nose of thofe ceremonies (hould be faved as well as the Jews, Verf. 10, Ti. And the fum of their Decrees or anfwer is \ that [Thofe men who went oue from them and troubled people with fuch words, did but fubvert their fouls, by faying that they muft bs circumcifed and keep the Law, and that they gave them no fucfh commandment ; and that it feemed good to the Holy Ghoft and them ro lay upon the Gentiles no greater burden than thefe neceffary things, &c^ The Pa-> pifts thus go out as from the Apoftles, pretending an A poftelical Tradition, and impofeupon the whole Chrifttan world a multitude of Ceremonies and Doctrines as neceffary to falvation, which are not to be found in the holy Scripture. How (hall we know whether thefe men indeed have any command or Tradition from the Apoftles for any fuch courfe? Why i. Let them (hew their Commiffion, and the proof of their Traditions. 2. We fully difprove them from the Apoftles owne words. It feerns good to the Holy Ghoft and the Apoftles to lay on the Gentiles no greater bu iea then the neceffary things here named; and by thefe they may be faved, and they that te&ch otherwife are pronounced by them fubvertersof fouls, that had n$

com-

command from them for what they did. Bat it feemcth good to the Pope and his fafti.on to lay on the Gentile Churches unnecefiary things, and multitudes of them, pretending a neceility of them, when they are none of the four that are hereonely made ncceflary by the Apoltles, nor are fo made by any other word of Scripture ; and fome they impofe on pain of damnation , which they will not pretend te be of neceffity themfelves. By proportion therefore we may hence judge, that the Papifts are meer falfe pretenders to Apoftolical Tradition, and fub-vertcrs of fouls, and that the Proteftants may be fa-ved for all their prefumptuous fentence to the contrary.

The Gofpel which Paul preached to the Corinthians , and which they received, was fuel) as would . fave them , if they kept it in memory, viz,, that Chritf dyed for our fins according to the Scriptures, and that he was buryed, and that he rofe again the thirdday,e£r. as Vaul witneffeth, 1O.15.1,2,3,4. And the Corinthians by the beliefe of this Do&rine, were a Church of God and faaftified, 1 Cor. 1.1,2. But the Proteftants believe all that the Corinthians received to make them fuch a Church and fan&i-fied and faved; Therefore the Proteftants are fo too.

John wrote his m Gofpel that men might believe, and believing might have life, J oh. 20.30,31. Therefore he that bclieveth that Gofpel (hall have life ; but the Proteftants believe all that Gofpel; therefore they (hall have life (fuppofing it to be a true faith that worketh by love.) The Jews that heard *Fcters Sermon, Ail. 2. were converted and added to the Church (even three thoufand fouls) and put into a

C 2) ftate

ftate of Justification by Believing that Sermon, vtrf. 37, 38,41,46,47. But the Proteftants believe all that Peter preached in that Sermon : therefore they alfo are of the Church and j.uftified.

Andleaft the Accufing Devil or Papifts, rtiould trouble the peace of any of his people, Chrift hath proteftedit with his own mouth, Job. 5. 24 \_Veri-/j, Verily I fay unto pu^ He that heareth my word and believed on him that fent me , hath everlafiing life , andfhaR not come into condemnation , hut itfaftedfrom death to life ] Me thinks this (hould make any Be-lieter tremble at the thoughts of condemning thofe that Chrift hath protefted. (hall not be condemned.

Chrift hath promifed that all thofe that receive his words, and in whom his words abide , (hall be beloved of the Father and have everlatting life, and be heard in what they aske, fob. 14.2 3; & 15. 7. Doubt -tefe that which Chrift himfelf preached was the true Gofpel, and fo far fufficient that whoever believeth itfhallbe faved. Ochcrwife Chrift could not have converted any foul, fo far as to have brought them into a fiate of Salvation by his Doftrine : and then Peter and the reft of the Apoftles were not true Chriftians by the belief of the Doftrine of Chrift,Buc if the Dofti ine which Chrift preached be fufficient zq make true Chriftians and Church-members of thofe that receive it, then the Proteftants are fuch : For,they believe every word that the Evangclifts record of the Dodrine of Chrift. And if the Papifts fay that there is more of his Doftrine neceflary to falvation, -which the Evangelifts did not record in Scripture, 1. We call for their proof of it, and 2. We knew'W t he Evangelifts did purpofely write the

four

(»3)

four Gofpels or Hiftorics of Chrift ? of purpofe to acquaint the world with his Nature^Biril^Life^o&rine DearirandRefurrcdion,e^.£*^ profeffeth that he wrote his Gofpel upon pcrfeft underiian4ing of all things from the very firft,which conteyneth a Declaration of thofe things which are mod furely believed among us, even as they were delivered by them that from the beginning were eycWitnefTes and Minifters of the Word, Lnk. i. i, 2, 3,4. And he tells us Aft. 1.1,2. that he wrote his Gofpel of all things that Jefus began bbthto do and teach, untill the day in which he was taken up. It would therefore have been an exceeding -biemifh to the Evangelifts that wrote of fet purpofe both the Hiftory of Chrifts Life and Doftrine^ if they had left out any part of it that was of necemty to falvation. Proteftants therefore that believe all the Gofpel do believe fo much as may bring them fafely to falvation. If Chrift him -fclf be not a fufficient Teacher,nor the Gofpel it felf a fufficicnt Do&rine of Life Then whither (hall we go to feek it ? Then Pet^r himfclf was not the Rock, nor a trucChriftian by Chrift3 Teaching : And then the Pope ceuld not derive that from Peter which he had not. But Peter himfclf thought and taught o-therwife. He faith Q Lord whether flail wegQ ? we know that thou haft the Words of Eternal Life ] For my part I will take Peterssounkl , and go to Chrift for the words of Eternal Life, which are purpofely recorded by foar Evangelifts in the Gofpel : Let who will go to the Pope for anothet Gofpel, to fup-ply the fuppofed defects of this, for I will net.

Ih Aft. 22. & 26. and other places P*»/preacheth fo much of the Gofpel, as might have made true

C 4 Be-

(Z4)

Be/ievers, and all that, the Protectants receive.

The Church of Rome when Paul wrote his Epiftle to them , were a true Church, Rom. 1.7. and all the Do&aine that Paul writeth to them we do believe.

TauiteWtth the Elders of Ephefm^ Aft. 20. 27. that he had not fhunned to declare to them the whole councel of God : and this is fummed up in ^Repentance toward Cjod , and Faith toward our Lord Jeftu Cbrifi~] verf. 21. And whatfoever Paul hath written to thefe Ephefians or any other Churches or perfons,we believe.

But what (hould we talk any more with fuch an ajrrogant unreafonable fort of men , that dare main-taine that the belief of all the Holy Scripture is not large enough to falvation. Atheifts and Infidels fay of the Scripture , that it is too big to be all true : And Papifts fay that it is not big enough to bring a man to heaven that believeth and obeyeth it. Shall the Holy Ghoft endite a Volume as big as the Bible, and when he hath done (hall any pretending to be Chriftians, perfwade the world that he that believeth all this, (hall be damned if ht believe not the clofetr Traditions which the Romane Biftiop pretendeth to be the keeper of?

Nay fee the ftrange contradi&ions of this giddy faftion ! They lockup this Scripture it felf from the common people in an unknown tongue : They damne the tranflating of it as the root of all Herefies, and burn men to a(hes for ufing the Bible; when they cannot keep'it unknown any kmger, they tranflate it themft!ves as far as they can to their own advantage , and puck forth with their perverting Annotations; and yet when they have all done, they condemne any

that

(*2)

that read it without a fpecial licence from their Ordinary : which in England and France they fome-time grant to avoid fufpicions; but in Spaine, Italy y &c. too few if any at all. And when they have written voluminoufly to prove that the Scriptures are not neceflary to the people for falvation , and that Ignorance is the mother of devotion, they come back again, and difpute againft the Proteftants, that the whole Scripture is not fufficient to falvation, and he that believes but the'Scriptures is not in a fafe way to falvation. Icfeemsthen that the Popes Canons are more necefTary then the Scripture ; For a man may be faved without the knowledge of Scripture , but not without the knowledge of the Canons of the Pope : Yes,- that he may too: if fome of them miftake not, if they will but implicitely believe that the Church of Rome is the Catholike Church, and that the Pope is the infallible fqveraign of the Chriftian world, i and believe fome Articles of the Creed upon his credit, he may be faved without either Scripture or Canons, fo he be but ready to believe and obey whatever (hall be offered to him by the Pope for the time to come.

Moreover Chrift and his Apoftles do frequently promife Remiilion and falvation to all that truely Repent, that love God in Chrift, that mortifie the fie(h,&c. but all this do the Proteftants, and their Religion teacheth them to do it. Vaul concludeth that, There is no condemnation to them that are in ChriFl fefu* , that w'alk^ not after the fieJb but after the fpirit, Rom. 8.11. But the Proteftants are in Chrift Jefus, and their Religion teacheth and en-gageth them fo to walk: therefore there is no condemnation to them (that do fo) and they may with

the

(a6)

the fame Apoftle, Rom. 8. 33, 34. Challenge all the Papiits in the world., It is God that juftifieth, who (hall condemne us?

Paul telleth Timothy that the holy Scriptures are able to make him wife to falvation , 2 Tim. 3.15. therefore they may make us alfowife to falvation, And he addeth , that [_ All Scripture is given by in-fpirationof God , and u profitable for DoHrine , for reproof\ for correction , for inftruElion in right eeufnefs, that the man of God may be perfeEl, throughly furnijb-ed unto all good workjf]ver\. 16, 17, It were endlcfs to recite all that proveth the falvation of them that believe and obey the holy Scriptures. But this all true Proteftants do. I (hall therefore leave this taske y and next hear what the Papifts can fay to the contrary, and what they are able to produce to prove that we are not in a fafe way to falvation.

Obj. 1. There is but one fafe way to Heaven: The •Proteftant Religion is not that one way : Therefore not a fafe way. The Minor is proved thus: that Religion which the Church hath owned from the A-.poftlesdayes till now, is that one way : The Proteftant Religion is not that which the* Church hath fo owned : therefore it is not that one Religion. The Minor is proved by parts : 1. As to Doftrine, 2. as to Difcipline, 3- astowodhip. 1. The Church ever fince the Apoftles dayes , hath- maintained the Do&rines of, 1. Free-will to good or evil, 2. of Predeftination upon forefeen faith, 3. of mans merits, 4. of Juftification by Inherent Grace, 5. a-gainft the certain Perfeverancc of all the Juftified, and confequcntly againft their certainty of falvation.

6. Vow-

(*7)

6. Vowed Chaftity andMonaftical Life. In Difcipline the Church ever held, i. The Popes Supremacy and IJniverfal Jurifdi&ion ; 2 The Government by Bifhops over Presbyters: 3. Ordination by them, and not without them. 4. Pennance and Confefli-on of fin. 3. In matter of Worlhip the Church Imh ftill ufed, 1. Chryfme to the Baptized. 2. Im-pofitionof hands in confirmation. 3. Thefacrifice of the Altar. 4. The Crofs. 5. Holy dayes. 6. Fafting dayes. All which the Proteftants have caftoff: Therefore they are not, of the fame Religion-

Anpto. 1. To the Major Propofition of the main Argument, I anfwer. The word \J*ff\ referretb to fome Danger that we are fafe from : The way may be called fafe therefore, either in refpeAof fin or damnation : Alfa this way may be called \jnf\ in re-fped of the Effentials of Religion, or elfe in refpeft of fome inferior truths and duties, that are not of abfolute necefiky to falvation. And fo I fay that there is but one Religion as to the Effential and abfo-lutcly neceffary points, in which a man can be fafe from Damnation. And there is but one Religion as comprehending all the Integral parts, in which a man can be fafe from fin : But yeFthat Religion which in the Effentials and Abfolutelyneceffary points is but one, may yet eonfift with errors in lower and leffer things in the minds of thofe that hold it; and yet be a fafe way to falvation,though not fo fafe as to freemen from all fin.And confequently there may be differences among true Chriftians that {hall be faved, though there be nothing but perfed Harmony in the entire

Do&rifle

Dodrine of ChriiHan Religion as delivered from Chrift and his Spirit: ,Becaufe no man holds that Dod rine entirely and per&dly without any error or ignorance , and therefore there will be much difference among thofe that (hall be favsd. To the Major of the Pro-fyllogifme, I arstwer, Implkitelyand in Generals the Church hath owned the perfed truth in all ages, becau^ it hath Believed that all that God faiih is true, and that the Scripture is his word : But explicitely Zf\d particularly the Church hath not held alijihe truth of Religion, in any one age iince the A-poftles. For every man on earth hath been Ignorant, and themoft knowing men erroneous in fome things: feeing we are all imperfed,and here know bat in parr. And fo one particular Church might erre in one thing, and another in another thing,as the differences about Eafter, Rebaptizing, the Millennium, Infants Communicating, ejre. {hew they did. And of the fame Church one Member might erre in one thing and another in another thing : it being as certain that no two men on the earth are in all things of the fame minde, as that none on earth*are perfed: in knowledge. To the Minor I anfwer, that the Religi-on called Proteftant is die fame in all points abfolute-lyneceflary to falvation which the Church hath flill owned : And in other inferior points, the Churches having not been all or alvvayes of one minde , fome ages were more pure , and others more corrupt: The Proteftant Religion is neerer to that of the purer times then the Papifts is: It is the fame in theEf-fentials; it is the neereft it in the Integrals; it is more remote from latter corruptions intrQduced in times more remote from the Apoftolical purity.

To

Tothc particular inftances of our differences from the former Churches, I anfwcr particularly. l.For Free will to God, if yon mean a natural freedome, which is [[the wills felf-determining Power 3 fo the Proteftants maintain it as well as the Fathers. If you mean a moral freedom from ill-inclining habits, which is properly a right-difpofuion, fo the Fathers maintained it not.

Oh). Let Scultetu* in Medulla Tatruw and others of your own Writers be judge who ftill number this inter n&vos Patrttm.

*s4*fw. Scultettuand Calvin and others might, miftake the Fathers fence and-think that they fpoke of moral Freedom, when they fpoke but of natural, which is infeparable from the will And its like that they did fo, feeing the Fathers maintained Original fin, which is that pravity of humane nature, which , is clean contrary to moral Free-will. 2. And if the Fathers were for a Free-will in a moral-Ethical fence, fb is one part of the Proteftants as much as they were: And if they were in the right, foare thofe Proteftants ? If in the wrong then the other part of the Proteftants are in this, in the right. '3. This is a point that men may differ in, as much as the Fathers did from us,and yet be in a fafe way to falvation. 4. The Dominicans and the Jefuites differ about it as much as we and the Fathers; yea, they cannot yet agree, what natural freewill is. 2. For Predefti- * i n this the Ancicnci differ-•nation upon forefeenfaith. ed gmong themfelves Jujiin * I. There is no Decla- ant * M* f©Hewers being for ration of the Churches jfcWurt RcddHiittioii and

for Reprobation «• feenunbeief: arfd others being for Predeftiagiion \ ie-dios) upon forefeet

aiinde

mindc in thofe times about it, but what is found in the wrigtings of particular Do6?ors. 2. We confefs that men areEle&ed to Glory and Juftifica-tien from guilt, upon forefeen faith : But we fay withall that they are Elefted to that faith; and that God did forefeeitas a thing which he intended to give f and not as a thing which corrupted unregene-rate nature would produce. 3. And wefayaifo, that this is a point that men may differ in that yet arc in a fafe way to falvation.

3. As to the point of mam merits, we fay; that the Fathers differed from us but in word and not indeed: It fcemed good to them to call every moral aptitude or Ordination ad ^Pr&mium , that is, the Rewatdablencfs of our a&ions , by the name of merit; and every Rewardable work meritorious. We thinke it fitteft to forbear this name. This Verbal difference makes not two diftind Religions.

4. As to the point of Juftification , we confefs that the Fathers commonly called that Juftification which we now call Sandification. And we our felves maintain that Sanftifieation dothconfift in Inherent Graces. This difference therefore being but verhai, the Religion and the way to falvation is neverthe-lefs the fame.

* Auftin , Profper -5 As for the pwnts <rf* Pcr-Wuigcutm, &c i fatly Severance and certainty of Sal va-maiatain the Per- tion , and Virginity or vowed fcrerance of ail tbc Chaftity, with the fuppofedme-

R TdSlfi 7 ° f rit thcreof > and of a Monaftical

lc i u or Eremetical life; we think that

moftofthe Churches fiace the firft century, have

departed from the Apoftles Do&rinc in thefe points;

and

and therefore we appeal to the Scripture. But yet we know that thefc are not points of abfolutc neccf-fity to falvation ; fo that whether thofe Churches, or we were miftaken, yet is our Religion the fame, and both they, and we in a fafe way to Heaven.

* 2. For matters of Government and Difciplinc we fay i. That we undertake to manifeft it as cleare as the light, that the Popes Supreme Headlhip, and univerfal jurifdi&ion, is a novelty introduced above fix hundred years after Chrift. 2. Far Diocefanc Epifcopacy and their ordination, fomeof the Reformed Churches do own it: But it is not a matter foneceflary to Salvation , as that all men that will be faved muft nteds be of one-minde in it, 3. We confefsand maintain the neceffity of true Penitence and fuch confeffion of fin as is neceffary to manifeft' Penitence to the Church after a notorious fcandal t and of confeflion to thofe that we have wronged : and of private confeflion to our Paftors, in cafe that we cannot have a through care of our wounds, or comfort to our confeiefices without it. Laftly, as for the Ceremonies mentioned which the former Churches ufed, and as for the bare name of a Sacrifice and Altar ( while they agreed with us in fence) we take them not to be matters of fo great moment, as muft make them and us of two Religions; as if both were not in a fafe way to falvation. The heft men on earth may differ in as great a matter as one of thefc : and if they ifi a miftaken : r eal (hall depart from the Apoftles, fo that we cannot imitate both the Apoftles and them, we had rather of the two leave them then the Apoftles; yet holding with them ftill in the maine.

(**)

qb). The Religion of Proteftants differs from the Abiiliae and Greek Churches and all thef world as well as the Romkne , and therefore cannot be a fafe way. Anfw. i. If chat be not a fafe way which differs from the Greeks, Abaflines, &c. then the Pa-pifts way is much lefs fafe then ours: for they do not onely differ from them , but un-Church them and condemne them to Hell, and fo do not we. 2. We are <3f the fame Religion with them : onely we have by-Gods great mercy call ou: of that one way fome (tones of offence, which they have not; yet caft out.

Ob). 2. The true fafe Religion hath had avifible Church profiling it from Chrifts time till this day : But the Protd-tant Religion hath not had avifible Church, profefling it to this day : therefore it is not the true fafe Religion.

*Anf. The Major leafilygrant and difclaim the needlefs fhift of them chat would deny it. But the Minor I deny : If they,call for the proof of that vifible Church, and aske where it was before Luther^ w'e fay that it was wherever Chrift hadaChruch: From CRrifts time full many hundred years after,evea at Rome, it felf and many other places : and from Chrifts time to this day it hath been in Ethiopia, Greece^ Egypt y MefipotamU, and many other Countries t if not ftill among the Romanifis therafelves: for full proof of which, note, that it is from the

EfTentiais,

Effentials, and points of great neceffity that we de' nominate our Religion ; ::nd every difference in lefier things doth not make a diftind Religion : clfe there were as many Religions in the world as men. Note alfo that the main difference between us and the Papifts is, not that they deny the fubftance of our Religion direftly , but that they fuperadde a great many of new Articles to the old Creed, and have made their Religion much larger then ours , many of their new Articles confequently fubverting the Fundamentals which they profefs. So that our Re* ligion is, and ftilt hath been among the Papifts, and other Churches: and if they adde more to it, that makes it notceafein itfelf to be what it was Our Religion is wholly contained in the Holy Scriptures, and that all the Churches have ftill allowed of : The Papifts themfelves confefs it all to be the Word of God, which we appeal to as the onely Touch-ftone and rule of our faith.

Obj. So you would make our Religion and yours to be all one. Anf. As the word Religion fig-nifieth the Effentials of the Chriftian Faith , or the points of abfolute neceilicy to Salvation, fo our Religion is with you, and is owned or confefled by you : As it fignificth all thofe points that are conceit-f^neceflary to Salvation with the profeffors, fo your Religion is not all, but part, with us : Andasitcorn-prehendeth alfo all thofe Integral parts, which a man may confefledly be faved without, fo he do not wilfully rejeft them, fo yours and ours do much differ• And that your Religion is not all with us is no lofs to us; becaufe the points of yours which we difown are both novel additioss of your own brain , and alfo fuch as contradid the acknowledged verities.

D Where*

Wherever then Chrift had a Church that did believe all the Doftrine of the Scripture, and fpecially 1 the Creed, die Lords Prayer, the Decalogue y theDo-drine of the new Covenant, Baptifme, the Lords Supper, and the Miriiftry ; there was our Religion before Luther: If any added hay and ftufeble, if their work be burnt, and they fuffer lofs, yet our Religion among them is the fame ftill.

Ob), But do not you make this Negative a part of your Religion;-that nothing but Scripture is to be believed^ divina ? and what Church was of that Opinion ?

dnfw. i. We have oft at large (hewed that many of the ancient Doftors of the Church have aflerted the Scriptures fufficiency at large , and appealed to them as the fiilhReveiation of Gods will concerning all things ncceffary to falvation , and the fufficient Rule to Judge of conrroverfies. 2. If they did any of them think that the Church had a fupptradded Revelation by Tradition , in points of order, of no neceilityto falvation; this doth not make them and us to be of two Religions \ or wayes of Salvation , as long as they do not introduce any dangerous or deflruftive points under that pretence.

Ob]. But the Church ftill held thole things as ne-ceflary to Salvation which you deny. Anf. We deny that to be true: Some of the points in difference are novelties of your own, which tke ancient Church didiiever hold : the reft are fuchasthey never laid fuch a ftrefs,as mens Talvatiort upon.

To conclude, Let it be confidered whether this Argument may not damne your felvcs which I turn againft you Thus. The truefafe Religion hath had a vifible Church profeffing it from Chrifts time till

now:

now : But the Religion of the Romaxifts (as comprehending all poiats of their faith,«or made by them to be neceffary to falvationj hath not had any vifible Church profeffingit of many hundred years after Chrift: Therefore ic is not the true Religion , nor a fafe way to falvation, The Minor I (lull undertake more feafonably to make good: And eur Divines have done it already.

No doubt but common reafon and juftice rcquir-cth, that you chat call to us fo earneftly for.a Catalogue of the ProfefTors of our Religion in all Age* fhould be as much obliged your felvcs to give us a Catalogue of yours: yea and to give it firft, becaufc you are the firft in pleading the neceflity of it. Undertake this task therefore, and perform it well, and you {hall carry the whole caufe. Give us a Catalogue of any, beiiies impeached Hereticks, that did own your main points of Popery for many hundred years after Chrift , and we will give youafullac« count of fuch ascontndifted thofe conceits and believed as we do, and let both be compared together, andletthemoftfatisfa&ioa and the fulleft evidence carry if You make a meet* empty noife among the vulgar , of Antiquity and Universality , and call for a proof of the perpetual or continued visibility of our Church, as if in this you had the adrantage , and the ballancc did turn on your fide : When as (though we know that there is no f uc h neceflity of our proof in this as you pretend yet) we know your difadvantage here to be fo great, that if you will but be perfwaded to this way of tryal, it will be to the utter fhame and confufion of your caufe. Whats the matter elfe that you ftill appeal to the latter or prc-fent Church, and that is only to the Roman* ,and thats

onelytoyour felves? If we do but invite you to a tryal by Scripture; and the Fathers and Records of the three firft ages, you prefently fcorn the motion and fall upon the Fathers with accufations, as if they had not underftood or believed all that was neceflary to faivation ^ or to the being of a Chriftian or a Church ; for you fay they did not meddle with tfaefe controverfies; and fo you call us down to the latter or prcfent times, as hiving equal authority with the firft: To which we fay, i.That the filenceof the firft times .concerning, thefe matters, if there were no more (as yet there is) is fufficienc to prove that they were not then taken for any naceflary points of faith. For , Though our Records of the fecond Age be very fiiort, yet both .they and much more thofe of the third and fourth • Ages do containe flich pur poTely undertaken , explications/of the'Ghrifttan faith, that we cannot imagine fuch a mukimde of neceffary points would have been omitted. I 2. And though the Paftors of the prefent age have equal Authority in Ruling their Congregations, with thofe of the fecond , yet they cannot give us fo furean account what was the dodrine ai)d praftice of theformer Ages/ nor any way prove it to us but by producing fuch records.

The Papifts themfelves are fo far from denying that the Ancient Fathers and Churches did hold the Pbfirivc part of our Religion, that they hold it thera-fdves; For they themfelves profefs to believe every book of holy Scripture that we do: They fay they believe the Creed called theApoftles, and the Ni* ceneaniCovftantiHopolitaneCtccd, and that of t/f-thanafitui and lb do we (ftill taking-the holy Scripture onely for our Rulej fo that their own tongues

muft

(37)

nuift confcfs the Antiquity , and Univerfality , and fucceilion of our Religion :• For this is ours.

But all that they have to obejeft is this, That we can name no Churches or Fathers that held our Negatives, To which I fay, I. The Negatives (atleaft, for the raoft part of them , if netallj are the mcer confequences of the Affirmatives and Pofi-tives, andirnplyed or plainly included in them : For example, when our Religion faith \Thm (halt worship the Lord thy God^ anaI him only Jhalt thouferve'} this includeth the Negative [[Thou (halt not worftiip or ferve Saints, Angels or ac% 4 * 10# any other, fave only by a fervice and honour duely fubfervient to the fervice and worfhip of God : and therefore that we give not Divine worfiiip to the confecratcd hoft, or the Virgin Mary , or to any other meer creature. Our Religion teacheth us £to do all things to edifying] iCcr. 14.26. Thisinclud-eth the negatives [[that we muft not worftiip God ia an unknown tongue or Onedifying manner, bleating and bellowing out our prayers in hideous or ridiculous tones.] Our Religion maketh it the Minifterial Commiffion , to teach the Nations and Baptize, Mat. 28. 19,20. This includeth the Negative that women or lay men fhould not fo teach ^that is, as Comrnifiioned officers) nor baptize : Thisaffirmative^P^rwasfentto Dif- * 2 ' ** % ciple Nations] includeth this Negative [Peter was notfent to be the fixed Bifhop of Reme, arid there torefide. This affirmative [The Apoftles are the Foundation of the Churcb] includeth this negative [/Peter alone is not the Foundation of the Church] This Affirmative Qlt is bread and wine which we take and eat and drink in the Eucharift] containeth or im-

(}8)

plyeth the Negative, that |[It is not Chrifts flcfti and blood, which the bread and wine is tranfubftantiated into] I might thus inftance in many more: Our Ne-r _ gatives are contained or implyed

fSS 52" A *™^s which V oot bring > O.i hold or confcfs your fe|y«.

logue of thofe that in all ages have maintained our Nega. tionsof tfeeir corruptions, becaufethe Corrupters were net then rifen up 5 and how fliould w^ prove that the Church ©►-pofed an error before it was hatched.

2. I anfwer further, that we haveexprefs nega T tives alfo both in Scriptures and Fathers; in the main points of difference between us and the Papifts. We have a plain £ Thau Jhalt ttat make to thy [elf any Graven Image , &c. Thou Jhalt not bew down to them nor tyer&ip them^ &c. "] We have a plaice Qln the Church I had rather fpeak five words with my underftanding that I might teach others alfo, then ten thoufand words in a tongue] (unknown) 1 Cor. 14.29. We have a plain [[See thou do it not, fori am thy fellow fervant ] Rev. 22. 9. And fo of the chief differences through the reft.

3. If we had but this one point proved, thatQthe holy Scripture is a Efficient Rule of Faith] it fully warranteth all our Negatives wherein we differ from the Papifts. For, to Believe all that is in Scripture,and that this is fufficient, will furcly warrant as to exclude their additions. And we have oft proved that the firft ages did maintain the Scripture fufficiency. This one anfwer doth fully juftifie us againft this ca* vil of the Papifts. The Ancient Church and Fathers believed the Scripture and the fufficiency of that Scripture as containing all points of faith : And fo do

we.

we. And fo alt Popiih faich is excluded (Though w e confefs many Ceremonies and points of order were then admitted as from the Ouircfo.

4. Negatives beceune necdTary ro be exprefly af-ferted by occafion of Hereiies. And therefore who can wonder if many of them are never mentioned till thofe herefies did call them out. When there was no man fo impudent as to fay that £The Pope of Rome is the Univerfal Biftiop and Governor of the whole Church]] or that [[God muft be worlhipped in an unknown tongue] or that [Images muft be wor-{hipped] who could expeft that the Church (hould have occafion in words to exprefs it as a part of their faith that [The Pope is not the univerfal Biftiop; not infallible, &c7\ and fo of the reft ? If Popery had rifen fooner, it had fooner been contradifted.

5. There may be an hundred Negatives made ne-cefTary hereafter by herefies, which it is notnecefla* ry now to put into our Creed or confefiions, becaufe they are not yet Sufficiently 'contained or implied in the contrary Affirmatives. If Hereticks a-rife that fay that man hath feven fouls; that the foul returns to be GodsEflence,and was fo eternally;that there are fourteen Sacraments; that Infants muft take Orders; with a hundred the like; then it might be Receflary for us exprefly to deny thefe; and (hall they then tell us that our Religion is new and theirs ©Id, becaufe we cannot prove that any did before deny theirs ? So what if we could not prove that any before had faid QThe Pope is not the Univerfal Governor ?] that is becaufe there was none fo (ham-Jcfs for fix hundred years as to fay he was. Whefe Religion then is proved new by this, ours or theirs ?

But I (hall fay fomewhat more to this anoa in the end> D 4 Obj.

K$°J

Obj. 3. That Religion which cannot be known as having no certain teft to difcern it by t can be no fafe way to falvation ; But fuch is the Reformed Religion, therefore, &c. The Minor is proved : If they hav« any fuch teft, either f it is Scripture, or fomc confeflions of their own : But neither of thefe: therefore not Scripture : For that is appealed to by many Religions, and therefore can be no proper Teft todifcerneoneof thfcmfrom the reft; Befides it knows not fomuch as the name of the Reformed P rot eft ant Religion : Not any confeffion : for they .have no one which they agree in, but one difclaim-eth what another owneth : And they have none agreed on by a General Couneel, or by all them-felves.

Anf 1. The.Teft of our Religion is the holy Scripture; This we profefs joyntly to be the Rule of our faith and life: To this we ftill Appeal, If we mifunderftandit in any point,wc implicicely renounce ail fuch errors, becaufewe explicitely in general re<* nounce ail that is contrary to the Scripture. This may be the true Teft of our Religion though others fall-ly pretend that theirs is more agreeable to it. Many things maybetryed by the famcTouchftone, and weighed by the fame ballance; whereof Tome may be currant, and others unfound, or light. May not the Law of the Land be the true Rule of our obedience to our Governors, though the Rebellious or difobedient (hould pretend to be Ruled by the fame La#s.

(40

2. They are not all diftind Religions which the Papifts call fo: Many appeal to the fame Scriptures, who agree in the maine concerning the fence, and difagree onely in fome inferior things. Thefe are not feveral Religions.

3. Our confeflions do fhew how we underftand the Scripture ; wherein we agree in the main, as the Harmony of Confeflions teftificth, though in fome leffer things we differ.

Ob). 4- They that have c&uflefly feparated from all the Churches in the world are not of the true Religion nor in a fate way to Salvation : tut fo have the Proteftants done: for they are divided both from Romane Church, the Qreekj^ AbaJJlnes^ ^Armenians, and all: therefore they arc not in a fafe way.

Anf Its one thing to withdraw from fome corruption of a Church and another to withdraw from the Church. 1. We that are now living did not withdraw from Rome or any of the reft : for we were never among you or under you. 2. Our Fathers withdrew not from the Church as ChrifUan or Catho-like, but from the particular corruptions of the Ro-mane fa&ion, in Do&rine,Difcipline,and Worfhip; rejecting their lately ufurped Tyranny ,by which they would have ftill obliged them to fin againft God, As we are commanded to withdraw from each particular Brother that walketh diforderly , fo muft we from a particular Church when they will be fo di& ordered, as to Tyrannize over the univerfal 3* The Church of Rome re jeded us by a caufelefs excommu-

nica-

.(42)

nication, who were not de jure under her power. 4, We ftill profefs our felves of the fame Church with the Greekj , sAbajfines^ Armenians , Cofties^ and all others on earth that hold the Scriptures, and that fo hold the Anticent Creeds or fundamentals of Chriftianity; as that they do not evidently fubveri' it again by contradidory Errors : Iftheyholdno Errors but what may confift with a true belief of the Fundamentals i« the fame perfons (though by an un-feen confequgnce they may contradid them) we fe-perate not from that Church fo as to difclaim it from being a true Church : And therefore its not true that we io feparate from all the world : but as to the Local Perfonal Communion or prefence, we dare not joyn with the trueft Church in the leaft known fin : But in that refped we cannot be faid to feparate from the Greeks o» Abajfincs , that we have no opportunity of Local Communion with. While all men are imperfed, one may fee that Error which another feeth not: and to feparate meerly from a fin of one man or a Church is not fimply to feparate from the man or Church.

Obj. 5. That Religion which hath no unity in it {elforconfiftency, but is broken into many Seds, and ftill running further, is nofafewayto falvation. But fuch is the Protectant Religion, therefore.

Anfto. We deny the Minor. Our Religion is #ne, fimply one, and raoft confiftent, and having one fure ftanding Rule, not fubjed: to changes as yours is ; even the word of God himfelf. The

fame

(4?)

fame Rule that the firft Churches had f and the fame Teft by which the Chriftian Religion was known of old, when the Belief of thrScripture,and particularly the Ancient Creeds, and the a&ual Communion with the true Church , was the teft of a Catholike the oneinDoftrine, the other in Communion, as freeing him from Schifmes. We believe all the fame Articles, and we divide not from the Catholick Church. If any depart from Scripcures as to the fence in points absolutely necefTary , they ceafetobeof our Religion. If any depart from it in lefler things, they may yet be of the fame Religion with us • but fo far we difown them , if we know it. Popery hath no,fure teft, or means to prevent mutation. But we have in that we fix on the Immutable Rock. If Anabaptifts, Scparatifts, or any erroneous perfoas live among us, fo far as they hold thofe errors fo far they are none of us : And if any err,whom we dare not rejeft, we yet rejed: their errors, and take them for ro part of our Religion. And if this Argument hold, it will much more condemne the Romanifts who have more diverfity of opinions and wayes a-mong them then the Proteftants, as may in due place be fliewed.

Ob). 6. That is not the true Religion norafafe way to Heaven, which men can have no Infallible certainty of. But the Proteftant Religion is f Ue h : For they all profefs their Church to be fallible.

Anp*. Wemuftdiftinguifh between a man that May be deceived, and a man that Is deceived: And

between Infallibility in the Objed:, and in the Subjed: or Intellect. And between Infallibility in the abiblutely neceflary points, and in fomc Inferior fmaller matters. And fo I Anf. i. The Rule of our Religion,?/**., the word of God, is Infallible , yea the onely Infallible Rule of Religion : and therefore we have an Infallible, and the onely Infallible Religion. 2. The weaknefs of the Recipient muft be differenced from the Religion which hathnofuch weaknefs There is ftill the certainty and Infallibility of the Objeft , when the believer through his own weaknefs may be uncertain. 3. No man is Falfm a&ually deceived, while he believes that do&rine of our Religion, that is, the holy Scripture ? And this we are certain of. 4. No Chriftian mfctifn comfojito^ nor no Church is fallible, or can err in the Fundamentals or points abfolutely neceflary. For if he do fo, he ceafeth to be a Chriftian , and that to be a Church, 5. In fenfu divifo , he that was a common believer, may Apoftatize from the faith, and fo may a particular Church: and therefore is fallible, but is not, as is f&id, Deceived, till it turn from the Infallible truth. 6. The beft man or Church on earth doth know but in part, and therefore erreth in part,and thcrfore is fallible in part or in lower things, So that it is not the leaft proof of the fallibility of Scripture or the ReformedReligion,that men may A-poftatize from it, or that they m&y ftaggcr in Believing an Infallible Truth, or that we are fallible in lefler things. All true Believers are aftually Infalliblly per-fwaded of the Truth of Gods Word,and particularly of all things abfolutely neceflary.

Ob).

(45)

Obj. 7. That Religion is not true nor a fafe way to heaven which wanteth many Articles of faith; But the Proteftant Religion wantcth many Articles of faith: Therefore.

An/ft. 1. We rauft diftinguifh of our Religion as it is in the ProfcfTed Rule, and as it is Impreffed in themindes of men : In the former refped:, we fay that our Religion wanteth no Article of faith: for Gods perfeft Word is our Religion : But in the minds of men Religion is more or lefs imperfed according to the ftrengch or weaknefs of mens faith. 2. We rauft diftinguifh between true Articles of Faith, and falfe ones made by the Church of Rome, We are without the latter (but want them not^ but we exped that they who call them Articles of faith, do prove them fo.

Obj. 8. Your Religion is unfafe by your own Teftimony : You condemne one another : the Lutheran condemneth the Calvmift as Blafpheaious, impious, and damnable : the Calvimjis condemne the Lutherans: the Anabaptifis both : and every fed is condemned by others: Therefore.

Anf. 1. The Churches confeflions pafs no fuch condemnation; nor any moderate fober men, 2. If two children fall out,&call one another Baftard,they arc never the more Baftards for that, nor will the

father

(46)

father therefore call there fo; elfe what will become of your Jefuites and Dominicans.

Obj. 9. The very name of Lutherans y Cahi*ifts 3 Trotefiants, do plainly exprefs a Seft or party, different from the Name {Catholikg ] which denoteth the true Church which only holds the true Religion : And the very name £ Reformed"] is novel, and no proper title of the Catholike Church ,. but oncly a cloak for your Schifme , which difclofeth the novelty of your Church and way.

Anfw. 1 And of how much better fignification think you, is the name £Papift] or £Romanift ? You call your fel*es Catholikes,and we call our felves Catholikcs: You fcornfully call us Lutherans , and Calvimfis which are names that we difclaime, and then argue from your own impofed names. Would you have us do foby you ? And as for the names of KP rot eft ants, and Reformed, we ufe them not to ex-prefs the Effential nature of our Religion , but: the Accidental Removal of your Corruptions. So that though Scripture or Antiquity talkenot of QA Pco-teftant, or Reformed Religion] by name , yet it commendeth to us that fame Religion, which we now call QProteftanc, or Reformed] but then it could not fo be called, becaufe you had not then hatched your corruptions and deformities, which are prefiippofed to our Reformation. The man that fell among thieves, when his wounds were healed, was a £Cured man] whereas before he was not a cured man, becaufenota wounded man : And yet

he

(7)

be was the fame man as before -, and the Thceves chit wounded him would have made but a foolifti plea, if they would have difpoflefled him of his Inheritance on pretence that he is not the fame man , and have proved him not the fame, becaufc he hath not the fame name, it being not a Cured man that owned that inheritance before.

0£j. 10. Where the Catholike Church is, there the Catholike Religion is, and ne where clfe: But the Catholike Church is not with you, but with us • For,you found us in Pofleffion of the name and thing and then departed from us as Hereticks in former ages did from the Church : Therefore it is not you but we that have the true Catholike Religion, which is the onely fafe way to falvation.

Anfw.i. The Church muitbe known to be true and Catholike by the Religion which it ownctb, and not the Religion by the Church. You begin at the wrong end: As if J would prove fuch a thing to be a Vertuc becaufe it is in fuch a man, as Iiftecm , when I ftiould rather grove him to be honeft and Virtuous, becaufe that which is firft,proved honefty,fc Vertue dwelleth in hifti. 2. Did we not find the Greek** £-thiopianand other Churches in pofleffion of the name of the] Catholike Church as well as you ? Yet you would difpoflefs them. 3. Wc found you in Pofleffion of All in your own account: and all is yours if your felves muft be Judges. But in the account of the Greeks Abaffine and other Churches we found you in Pofleffion but of the name of £ A Church]] and not

[The

(4&)

£TheChurch]] apart of the Church Catholike, and not the whole ; a Corrupt part and not the Head, or the Pureft part. 4. We departed not from you as a Church, much lefs as the Catholike Church, but as corrupted : Nor do we yet deny you to be a Church, but to be a found Church or' the Catholike Church.

Concerning this and the former Queries, efpe-cialiy [when our Church was in all Ages before Luther"} we (hall clear our felves by giving* the true ftate of the cafe , which wi*l Juftifie it felf.

ChriftcametobethePhyfician of difeafed fouls 1 In hisGofpel he'proclaimeth his office, and calls them to him felf for cure, and prefcribeth them the means: But he takes the time of this life for the ac-complifhing it, and cureth no man perfe&ly till death. His Church therefore is as an Hofpitalor a City fo infe&ed, that there is not one in it that is perfe&ly found ; One of the deepeft radical difeafes is Pride, which corrupted the blood evqn of the A-poftles themfelves. So far that it broke out into fuch, an Itch, that they could not forbear contending whofhouldbe the greateft even in the prefence of Chrift himfelf. He derides the controverfie, telling them [with you it (hall not be fo, but lie that will be great (hall be the fervant of all. "] This difeafe of Pride was ftill alive in part, even wherever it was mortified, fo that fuch like defires of fuperiprity were excited by it a!fo in the Apoftles fucceflors, the Paftors of the Church in following ages. But it came but to a troublefome Itch till Confiantines time: For the nailes of Perfecution did fo claw it, that the corrupt blood waa let out,and the Itch was frequently abated by the fmart : Bat when Ctnjtantine lifted

up

(49)

up the Bifhops with honors, revenew, and the adjunction of fecular power to their wills or cenfures, then the itch turned to a plain Scab, the corrupt blood continuing, and the liarifying fcratches of perfection ceafing. But this overfpread not the whole body , theCatkolike Church much lefs all a-likc : but it feized mainly upon the Clergy who fhould have been examples of humility and felfde-nyal to the reft : And principally on the Cleargy of thzRomane Empire, and fome others that they infefted : But on none fo much as the Bifhop of Rome, andhisCIergys. For Rome being the Imperial feat , and drawing to it the glory, riches, and obfervanceofthe world, the Biftiop of that place muft needs be accordingly magnified and obferved: efpecially becaufe that he being at the Emperors ear might have pleafured or diipleafured almoft any Prince or Prelate in the Empire.Aft laft by translation of much of the Glory to Conftantinople , the heat of the difeafe was conveyed thither too, fo tkat John of Conftantwople and Gregory of Rome , contended a-bout the Univerfal Supremacy : John laid the firft claime to it, becaufe he was Biflaap of the Imperial feat. Gregory laics no claim to it hirnfelf, but con-tradi&eth Johns^ pronouncing it a note of Anticbrift to claim the title of Univerfal Bifhop , little thinking that his own fucceflbrs would have claimed it fo foon. At laft Phoca* being helped by the Romane Biftiop to poflefs the throne of his murdered Prince, doth help the Pope to the Title of Univerfal Bifhop, and the glory and ftrength of Conftantinoplc abating, Rome did the more eafily hold what they had gonj By this time the Scab was turned to a Leprofi<?,which dre# on many other concomitant difeafes as its fym-

E gtoms"

ptucus: The reft of the Church was fome of it infected with fome of the forefaid Scab, fome more and farnelefs, and fome of them ftiii were onely troubled with the old itch, though none perfectly found, nor w&sthattobeexpe&ed; much of the Wsftern parts comply with their Leprows Patriarch, and fub-mit to him while he calls hirafelf Univerfal Bifhop and Head of the Cacholike Church, fome confent, fome fay nothing though they "diffent, and indeed the power was got into his hand , fo that for fear of perfccutionfewdurftcontradift, and fpecially when they faw no likelihood of doing good : Yet fome in all Ages even under his nofe, did fignifie their diflike and Oifer fome help to the cure. At laft in Luthers dayes whole Countries d« withdraw from the Remake Lcprofie (as thousands called tAlbigenfesjral-denfcsfix. had done before them) and fo free them-felves from the infe&ion , and get off the very fcab, and make/fair attempts for the Cure of the very irch. Now what doth the Rcmane Clergy, but cry out after usasKerccicks and Schifmattcks, and aske us [] where was our Church before Luther ?]] and 0 were of our Religion till then? We anfwer them that if they have the Lcprofie, and the times before them had (in moft parts) thefcab, and the former times the itch, cannot we prove that we aire Men as well as they, unlefs we prove that we have the Le-profie, Scab, or Itch as they had ? Are thefe Bffen-tialor Integral parts of a man? As humane nature is ftill with a Leper, but Leprous; and ftill with him that bath the Scab 3 but fcabbed: fo our Religion and Church was at Rome and ftill is y but Leprous fince the Ui'iirpation before mentioned : It was before that at Rome , but forely fcabbed : It was before that

at

at Rome troub/ed with the itch : It is ftill in Greece , esiUJfia, and other parts, but fomewhat feabbed : It is in millions of the people free from that feab , who in all Ages difliked the Clergies usurpations: thongh we cannot expe&to hear this from them in a General Councel, where they are not to be. But we take the peopled be a true part of the Church. We have feparated from you as from Lepers, not as from the Dead. We bury not your title of Church or CHHMkns; fo you will adde ["Leprous"] And a Leprofie proves moil commonly a killing dif-eafe. We have realbn to fecuremu* (elves from yoir: ifcfeftion , though our love to you were never lo dear.

So that here's the quarrel; and liege's our defence. If ail Chrifts Hofpital'in the Weftern part of the world, have much incrcafei the difeafe that he wQuld have cured them of; it doth not follow thaoany man tbatjs cured of their Leprofie, ceafeth prefently to teaman, that he that is reformed of thofe vices , ceafeth to be a member of the Catholike Church > Or that fuch Reformed Churches are new things that were not before : The Reformation may be new as to the latter Ages, fince corruption prevailed , but the Religion or Church-ftate is not new.Its a fad cafe with the Church when its corruptions are come tp be ounted of itsefTence, fo that he that will not re-taine the corruptions, muft not be accounted to be a Chriftian or a Catholike at leaft f and he that will be cured muft be accounted to be killed- The Church was a Church before it catcht the RomfoSwb or Leprofie, and therefore is a Church where that te cured • and I think far better without it, then with It.

E By

By all this therefore it evidently appeareth that the Papifts do moft vainly charge us with novelty and

call for a Catalogue of How far we account the the profeflbrs of our Re-Cfcurch ot home a true uLzIl „ 7 k^ -u- ~^™i Church,, and yet th: Pa- h 8 l0n '. Whe " ^ T'*" pacy no trnc Chureh. Sec ty 1S th eirs , and then-■$umwi in his exad baok de felvesdoyet profefs our Ettkfu cm. Bettarm. tptr. Religion, though to it Vol. a.«/.i 019. And the they have adde< j thcic

judgement 01 feveral ot our ,HcLik: ■ T „a

DivinesbyBiftiopH^infais ^ruptmg Leprofie. Defence a^m& Burton. Though we cannot un-

der take to prove that the Church was perfed (nor never will be, till it come to heaven) yet we have oft proved that it was many Ages without their Popery, and are ready to undertake the further proof: Of which the next Difputa-tioh (hall give you a taft.

There is a Railing Pamphlet extant, called £ A brief confutation of certain abfnrd , heretical and , damnable doBrines\ delivered by Mafter James Ufher in a Sermon preached before King James at Wanfted, Jun. 20.1624.3 The Author calls himfelf'7W//# Vtridkm : Its printed-al S z Orders, l'627*Becaufe I take the fame way againft the Romanifts as this Reverend Bifhop of Armagh taketb, and hath led me in that Sermon , I think my felf the mor^ obliged to confider of what is faid againft it.

The firft onfet of this M r Maledicu*> pag.9.10,11. Is againft our aflertion that we are bf the feme Religion, and Church as the ^redans,tA?gjf$ian's 9 Chr* filing <!s£thidpians : fkc. and that all thefe are not to be damned as Herericks and unchurched,beeaufe they

are

(«)

are not fubje&s of the Pope, To this i. He eon-feflcth chat even the Greeks themfelvcs are not fab-jeft to the Pope; and that Q tliey foon departed from the (feeming) union made in theCouncel of Florence^ about the year 1439. ] -• He confefleth that their doftrine about the Procefiion of the Holy Ghoft a patre pcrfdium and not a pane filioque^ was fuch, that [[when they had explicated it they were found to believe very Orthodoxly and Catholikely in the fame matter, and for fuch were admitted.]

3. He affirmeth that Qhefindeth not that in any fub-ftantial point they do diffent from the Roman; Catholih Church, excepting the matter of Primacy.]

Let us firft obferve the confequences of this much, i. From hence it followeth that the Greeks Churches are guilty of no Herefie, but non- fubjeftion to the Pope of Rome. 2. And that therefore indeed they are no Hereticks. 3. And therefore it is not of ne-cefiity to the being of a Church or CatholikeChri-flian tobefubjeft to the Pope : And that the Pope or Romane Church is not to enter the definition of the Catholike Church : for as tire Greeks may be Ca-tholikes without fubjeftion to Rowe , fo may others.

4. And therefore they are no General Councels where all thofe Churches are abfent, as at Trent , Conftance&c. And that its a falfe excufe of Bellar-mine and the reft , to fay that the Cjreeks and the reft are Hereticks or Schifmaticks. 5. And therefore it declared) to all the world, both that the Popifti de-figne and Religion is carnal and felfifh, to exalt thcmfelves above the whole Church of God, and alfo that they are more then barbaroufly tyrannical and cenforious, and moft extreamly fthifmati-cal, that will prefurae to cut off from Chrift and

E 3 the

<#5

fhe Church , the greateft part of the. Cbriftians in the world, even thofe that themfclves confefs to be in all other things Orthodoxe, and that raeerly becaufe they will not be the Popes fubjects. I now proceed to the next.

The fubftanee of his Anfwer confifteth of two grofs untruths in a publike matter of fact, wherein many millions of men are able at the firli hearing to prove him a bold falfewit nefs, making faUhoodthe prop of his ill caufe. The firft untruth which he layeth down , is, that the Grecians do claim that fu-prearnacy to their own Patriarke of Conftantiwfle , which they deny the Pope : and therefore if it be bad, it is as bad in them as the Papifts, and fo they are no Proteftants. To which I fay, it is not true : whatever any private or particular man may fay , its well known that its not true of their Church in common, nor found in any of their Church confeffions, but utterly and ordinarily difefairned by them. Though fahn of Cmfia^ihof'ie did claim the title of Universal Bifhop becaufe of the Emperors residence there, yet did he not get it,mueh lefs to be the Uni verfalGo-vernor , and yet: much lefs is it now chimed when the Chriftian Empire is removed. To hz Epfccpus pinuzfedisxs as much as is defired by the Patriarch' him'fejfj which yet heis content to leave, arid take th* fecpnd piW„ though neither of them concerned! an llniverfal Epifcopacy.

Can they read fuch books as * You mi fcc mlm * Archbifhop of : Tkefi

CMkb Cfolfaftm falonica de prinuitu Tapx

arch- psg. jo.Torn.*; Parham , and many other of ^ the Greeks , and yet believe themfelrcs in thefe^Mions? Why do we read or

hear

(55)

h*ar nothing from the Patriache of CcnfiantinopU inviting and perfwading us all tofubmit to his Go\ eminent , as we and all the C hriftian world afmoft ha ve been folicited by the Popes EmifTaries tofubmic our felvestohim? A. fhort Reply may ferve to &Si immodeft falfe aflertions as this nicknamed Veridical makcth the chiefeit part of his confutation.

The fecond untruth which conftituteth this part of his anfwer, is, that [The Grecians, Mofcovites, and Egyptians do in one only point difentfrom Rome , and in no point At all agree with the Proteftants ?'m quantum fuch , and dijjent from their Catholike Church, ]

This one great falftioodcontaineth two not fmall ones in it , and each of thofe two contain abundance more.

i- That all thefe Churches differ from you in no one point but the Popes fupreamacy is a falfhood beyond all modefty. For.befides the fupremacy they believe not your pretended Infallibility , nor do they pretend to the like of their own: They believe not your Purgatory: they own not your pardons for eafingthe pains of Purgatory , nor prayers for the dead to that end; nor the application of the trea-fury of the Saints Merits to that end, orforfatis-faftion to the Juftice of God. They own not your Tranfubftantiation : They have the Scripture in their known languages: They worfliip God in their Liturgies in their known languages, the Mofcovites in the Mofcovian tongue, the Georgians in the Jberick^; the Arabians in the Arabic^ and fo the Carmani* ans, Slavonians, Greeks in theirs : They adminifter theEuchariftinboib kinds, and deteft your Sacri-

E 4 lecious

(5*)

legious withholding of the cup : They rcjeft your jconfirmation : fo do they your extreme Un&ion ? They admit Priefts to live wirh their wives which were married before ordination : They rejed the Religious ufe of graven Images or Statues : They teach that the holy Scriptures are a fufficient and per-Jeft rule of faith: they believe that they (hould not be lockt up from the people : They maintain that God is to be worftriped in understanding , and they abhor your praying by Beads and tale :They thnk not to wa(h away fin or drive a\rt/av the devil by holy water: They take not Traditions to be one part of Gods Word, neceflary t > fupply the defeds of Scripture; but take them and Church cuftomes and conltituti-ons to be onely for matters of order and determina • tion of fuch circumftances as it belonged not to the perfection of Gods Laws, to determine, but were to be left to the wifdom of Governors; the Scriptures containing fufficient for falvation : They believe with the Proteiiants thnt Justification is not by the Merit of works: And that it is impollible for us properly toMerltexcondirnt theleaft mercy, rnuchlefs the Kingdom of Heaven at the hands of God : They have butoneord*r of Menkes, viz. of S ? Baftl, and thofe not fuch as the Papifis, that live a privare, unprofitable, droanifh life • but their Monafteries are as Col-ledges to fit them for the fervice of God in the Church,and thence they oft proceed to be Priefts and Prelates: They take your Pope to be condemnable for his pride, cruelty and preemption : his pride for pretending to an univerfal >urifdiftion,and ufurping a power to depofe Princes and difpofe of their Crowns: his cruelty in perfecuting other Chriftians for their differing judgements: and his preemption in granting

ing pardons and deliverances from Purgatory. In ft word they take the Papifts for Schifmatieks and accordingly condemne them with a folcmne condemnation. The Afhfcovites and Ruffians admit not Priefts or Deacons to Ordination unlefs they be marryed: and they refufe to communicate with the Romane Church. The Egyptian Chriftians allow not of Bap-tifrae in any neceility whatfoever but enclyby the Prieftand in the Church, and adminifter the Sacrament of the Eucharift in both kinds : they give noc the Lords Supper or extream unftlon to the fick. They deny Purgatory and prayer for the dead: They marry in the fecond degree of confanguinity without difpenfations; They elevate notthehoft : They re-jeft all the general Councels after that of Ephefns : They repute the Papifts to beHereticks, and avoid their communion no lefs then of the Jews; Moft of thcfealfo is commoa to the Abajfmes , who alfo admit Marriages of Priefts and Biftiops, and eat flefli on Fridayes, communicate ftanding in both kinds.

Are all thefe nothing? What, no one difference , with this Popifh Veridicns ? I will notdefire him to take my word for all this, becaufe I will not take his for the contrary , nor will I turn him to any Pro-teftant for fatisfa&ion, unlefs he will better ufe that one which himfelf citeth ( Sands Relation of the Weft. Relig. or Eurcpa SfecuLp.zs^&c.) But I may with reafon intreat him to believe his own brethren the Papifts, and the Greeks themfelves : And in fome of them he may fee many more differences then I have here named : For Sample i'n their rpcffevin. de Rebus Mofcov. at large. See alfo ConclL Florent. Sejf. 18. ferem.

Pttri-

C?8)

fMriarcb.Conft. in Refp. i. ad Germ. Zonar. AnnaL Tm&* 3- in Imper. Leo. Nilm de^rimat. Papa. Bar-lam de Primatn Papz. figebert in Chron. ad ann. 1054. Leb&Epifi* adEprfcop. Confiant. facob. a fitriacQ hiftor. Orient. Sigifm. de Rebus Mufcov* Quags*, defcripu Mufcov. Sacram de Errorib. Ru-ihtn* Beleri. Relat. Thorn, a fef. Conver. Gent. Gui-UeL de Rubri. Itiner. Tartar, Oforim de Reb. Emanuel. Saligniac.Itiner. Alphonf. a CaFiro contr.Haref. Damian a (foef Prateol. de Harefib. Alvarez kifior. Ethhp. (which yet hare much falihood) Gmd. fnwm* de H&refib. TZurchardm Defcript. terr. SaTtEl.

If our confuter cannot have leifure to read all thefe, let him onely read Thorn* a fef. & Pofevin. dereb. Mofcov. & Appanat. Sacra* and fee to his ihame what his own friends fay againft his falf-hoods.

And that all thefe Chriftians are as confiderable as all the Papifts in the world, far over matching them for number, is apparent: Much more when we adde to the Cjrecians and 'JMofcovites^ and Copt%s % all the Syrians jhe Georgians,thzIndians oiSimtThomas the Abaffines, theJVefiorians, the facobits, the Armenians^ and the Maronites, and to them as Proteftants, where then \% the Papifts Univerfaiity , and how few are they comparatively , and how plainly do they play the Donatifts (but that it is on a far worfe ground ? )

The Patriarch of Confiantinople alone hath under him in Afia (as Brierwoodnoteth ) the Chriftians of Natolia (excepting Armenia the lefs and Cilicia) of Circaffia^ CMevgrclia, and of Raffia: And in Europe alfo the Chriftians of Greece, Macedw, Epirm^

Thrace,

(59)

Thrace, Bulgaria, Rafcia, Sextia, Bofma^JValachia, Moldavia, Podolia,md Mnfcovia ( till lately) together with all the Iflandsof the *s£gean Sea , and others about Greece , as far a^ Corfu , with qiuch more.

And as is noted in Ctiropilat. de Offic. Palaf. Con-fiant. & Offic Mag. EccL he hath under him, The Archbifhopof Cafarekifi Cappadocia ; l.Ephefu*, 3. Heraclea, 4. Ancyra, 5. Ci^hum, 6. Sardis j^Nicomedia, S.Nice, y.Calcedon, 10. Mitylene, 11. Theffajonica, 12. Laodicea, 13. Sjnad*, 14. Jco~ nium, 15. Corinth, 16, Athens, 17. Patrt, iS, Trapezuntium, 19. Larijf<e 9 20 NaupaElus, 21. AdrianopolU. Thefe are all Archbilhops , and have many Biftiops under them, t/i*. Of Mufcovy 17. of ' Lariffai^. of tAthens II. of Corinth 10, of Teffa toxica 9.&C

And if thefe be under the Patriarch of C^-ftantinople alone, how great a number are all the reft in the great Empire of the tAbafllnes , and elfewhere through the reft of the Chriftian world ?

I do not mention all thefe to intimate eithei;that multitudes prove them or any to have the beft caufe, if we were in all things of their mindes , or as if I preferred them for Arts and Civil Policy to the Romanes, but to (hew both the hanioufnefs of thePo-pifhSchifme that would unchurch fo many, and the cruelty of their cenfures that would damne fo many and the Impudency of their pretence of Universality , and their vainc boafting of £ All the Church "J when they are fo frnall a part of the Church^and more bad then frnall.

But we have beet; too long on this: let us come to

the

(6o)

the confuters next untruth • and that is [That the Grecians ,&c do in no one point agree with Pro-teftants as fuch] what hath been faid doth fufficient-lyftiame that fid ion.

But he inftanceth in our differences: And i.he faith Q The Grecians hold one fuprerne head of the Whole Church under ChrifT\ Repl. An immodeft fiction to uphold a caufe thats like it.

2. He faith [The Grecians hold the Realprefence of our. Saviours body and bhod in the Encharifk ] RepU not Tranfubftantiation; which they deny : The But Protectants do hold forne kind of Reall preface.

3. He faith Q The Grecians defend the neceffitj cf Baptifme tofalvation , and that Original fin is remitted thereby^ Repl. And the Proteftants hold itne-ceffary neceffitatepr&gepti, and as an ordinary means where it can be had : And neither the Greekj nor all your own dare damne all Infants that dye before Baptifme, when it could not be had ; but you fay that the Votnm may ferve turne. And alfo Proteftants hold that if the Infants be within the Covenant, as it pardoneth their Original fin primarily, fo Baptifme pardoneth it by way of obfignation and folemnc conveyance: But what is all this to your error that Original fin is not onely remitted , but quite extinft or done away out of our natures by B3ptifme; fo that the new baptized Infant, is per-feftly without any Radical fin , as well as without die Guilt of it ?

4 He faith [] They fay that wwkj do juflifie with faith: Ton nof\ Repl. They fay that we are not jufti-fled by the Merit of Works, but by the alone Merit of Chriftj and fo do we. Wc deny not in every

fenc*

fence that Qwe are Juftified by Works, and not by faith onely] for in fames his fence we maintainit; elfe we fhould deny the Scripture: The queftion is not therefore abfohitely, whether we are Juftified by Works ? but, In what fence we are, and in what not ? We fay that Chrift is the oncly Satisfier of Gods Juftice and Meriter of Righteoufnefs; and that Faith is the onely Receiving Condition ; and that the Works of the Law that "Paul excluded have no hand in it; and that the Works of Grace which fames takes in, are but conditions

I without which our Juftificacion ( begun without them) (hall not be contfnued, and of our fi-nall Absolution or Juftification in Judgement ; and fo are but a Particular , and not an Univerfall or Legall RighteoufnefTe. (Of which I have given a full account in my Confeffi-on.)

5. He faith [Thej maintain Freewill , even in the befiaftidns. Ton not"] Repl. Freewill is either 1. Natural; which is but its felf- determining power, with fpontaneity; and this we deny not (For who deny-eth man to be man, and to have the Facultatem Volenti?) Or it is, 2. Moral, and that is i. Political, when a Governor gives the fubjed leave to do a ehing; and fo we maintain that God giveth our Wills

| Freedom to all good, and to no evil: Or 2. Ethical, which is nothing but the right inclination and Habits

I of the will with the abfence of the contrary Habits : And fo we fay that, the better men are, the Freer, that is, the better are their Wills : And the unconverted have not this Freewill: nor the converted in perfection till they come to Glory: For the Freedom

(6t)

domis the Goodnefs. And feting the Willfo far Free Ethically as it is Good, Vertuous or Holy, the Queftion then is , Whether every mans Will be Good and Holy ? which I am conceited you will not dare to affirme. A covetous man, a drunkard, an ungodly man, is as much or more denominated fudi, from the habiteas from the aft ; he is mofl: vicious that is Habitually fo : To fay therefore that fucha mans Will is Free in this Ethical fence is to fay that . he is habitually no covetous man , no drunkard, no ungodly man no iinner : which being contrary to unqueftionable experience , me thinks fhould be eafily deferred. If you know of any thing elfe'caP* led Freewill befides tbefe three before mentioned , we fhould be glad to know it too. The natural Effen-tial Freedom, viz. A fpontaneous felfdetermining power , we all confefs : The Political Freedome , yea and obligation hone denyeth: The Ethical Free-dome, that is f , Vertuous or holy Inclinations in wicked men , you will deny your felves; where then is the difference between us and either the Greek* or , you.

Why you'l fay, perhaps, that its here, That we deny the will to have that Indiffere-icj which you affirme, astooppofitcobjefts. But we are loath to fight with you in the Dark, Do you mean by In-dlffcrencj xa\Viiiv?ktQ\\^ of Natural Power , or an indifferency of inclination-or Habite ? The firft we do not deny : The will is a natural faculty that hath naturally no <determinAtT$H to One, where many means are propounded , but is undetermined, and hatha natural Power to determine it felf to either : But yet you know the Wills Natural Power is exer-cifed according to inclining Ob jefts and Habits; And

you

(<5?)

you cannot expeft that men who are Habitually inclined earthward^ (hould Will Heavenly thirtgs and renounce earthly things, raeerly becaufe they have a natural Power of choofing : for they want that inclination I which is called commonly the Moral Power : And I (hould fuppofe that in regard of this Moral Power, you will not affirm your felves that he hath indiferentiam ad oppofitnm ? To fay that a mans Will is indifferently inclined to Good and to Evil, is to fay that the man is habitually neither good nor bad, unlefs as privation of due inclinations deaomi* , nate him bad. I fay the more of this^ Dr ^ r becaufe I finde others of your party, and fome that feem to difown both you and us (as a late Treatife of Repentance among others canwitnefs^ to harp fo much on this firing, and cOnfufedly talke of Freewill before the/tell us what they mean , and to perfwade the world chat we teach that God hath laid fuch a natural neceffity on man to fin as he hath to eat and drink and deep, and that God might as well damne men for being hungry or fleepy , as for being finful in our fence ! As if there were no more faultinefsinaviciousdifpofitionof the Will it felfe , then in a necefTary natural inclination or Appetite of thofe faculties which were never made to rule them-felves, but to be moderated by the Will of Reafon, It may be thefe men will either deny the truth of the words of the HolyGhoft ,that They that are accufiom-ed to do evil cannot learn to do Well no more then aLeop-ard can change hisfpots^or a*BUckamore hu skin^ox elfe they will think fuch men excufable becaufe they are fo ftrongly enclined to evil; and fo if a man habituated to Luft (hall vitiate their wives, or a man habituated to malice (hall beat them often,or maim them, or kill

their

(«4>

their friends, they may think that he deferveth not puniftiment but pity, becaufe he is fo bad that he could not ( morally, that is, he would not) help it

But they fay, we teach that mens Wills have a ne-ceffityof finning impofed on them. But we have learnt that Habites do not determine the Will naturally , nor alway infallibly , but leave it free to a natural felf-decermination: But yet we know that it prdinarily deterrnineth it felf according to predomt ■ nant habits. And there muft be fomewhat extraordinary to procure the Will to determine it felf to good where it is habitually inclined to evil. So much may ferve to vindicate our Doftrine about Freewill ; And as for the caufe of its captivity , it belongs not to this fubjeft to fpeak of it, but to that of Original fin (where the laid Dodlorfo notably playeshis part) to which we fhall not now digrefs.

The next inftance of the Papift is this £ They (i e. the Qreekj maintain ) J even Sacraments, yoti mt7\ Sepl. i This is another very immodeft untrutlr.I wonder that men dare venture their fouls upon a Religion that muft be thus upheld by faSfhoods. Your own Writers before alledged, witnels that the Greek* deny the very ufe of confirmation and extreame Unftion : and how then can they account them Sacraments! Nor do they take Marriage for a proper Sacrament. 2. We cannot difpute this point with you upon the bare name • Give us the definition of a Sacrataent, and we (hall give you our Reply. As a Sacrament fignifieth any Chriftian myftery, ormy-fterious Ordinance fignifying fome Spiritual thing i we doubt not but there are more then feven Sacraments , but not as it fignifieth, an inftituted figne, to

feaV

(*5)

fcal the Covenant of Grace, and exhibit its great benefits. Calvin hath yielded to you, that in a larger fence Ordination is a Sacrament

He next addeth \JTbey fay that Chrift dyed for all mankind; Ton fay not^ but onelj for the £Utt7\ RepL Still more confufion , do not your own Schoolmen and other Divines fay chat he dyed, for All men fuf-ficiently , and for the Eled onely effeftuaUy ? And fo do we ! where then if the difference ? Not fo much in this point as in another conjund:: You fay that its mans Free-will, that is the chief differencing caufe, in making Chrifls death effcdual for thefal-vation of the Eleft ; and we deny it, and fay that it is Gods fpecial G race. 2. Do not you know that about this and the former point of Freewill, you differ as much among yourfeh'es, and that we fay no more then your Dominicans do ( no not fo much in the point of predetermination.) 3. Do you noc know that half the Protectants (thofe whom you call Lutherans) do hold universal Redemption as well as you? Be it right or wrong therefore you {hould not impute the contrary to all.

We fay that it was the fins of all mankind and not onely of the Eled that lay upon Chrift in his fufFering: and that God as Legiflator of the old violated Law hath received a fufficient fatisfadion for all, and that hereupon a conditional Pardon is granted to all by a Law of Grace, and that thecondition is but their Acceptance of what is freely offered (according to its nature and \x(t) and that all and onely they that perform this condition (hall have Adual pardon ancttajvation. But then we do notfay,that Chrift did equally intend the procurement of the performance ef this condition : but that he giveth fame

(66)

an infeparable fpecial Grace which (hall infallibly procure ic, which he doth not to others, who yet have fo much as (hall leatfe them in their own cen-iciences and at his bar without any juftexcufe. I pray you fliew us next what the Greeks fay more then this. In particular that Reverend man againft whom yon write hath an excellent M.S. abroad forllniverfal Redemption.

The next feigned difference between us and the Greek? is this \They csnfefj that God hatlq given fnj* fieient Grace to every one to he fatted : Ton not 3 but only to the £le£f\ Repl. You again wrong them , fhew us where they fay fo if you can. You own tkat Doftrine your felves it feems; and thereby difco-ver your enmity to Grace ; Do you think that e-very childe, ignorant (ot, or wicked perfon hath Grace fuffident to falvation ? If he have fufficient, either he needs no more, or he may be laved without more. And then it feems converting Grace is needlefs toanlafidel, for he hath enough already: then it feems, you will be beholden to God for no more Grace after the firft hour of your converfion, riSV after the firft hour of your life or ufe of reason, to your death. For if yon had Efficient for falvation the firft hour, then what need you anymore; you will it feems pray God to keep it to himfelf, for you have enough already. I will tell you what the Greekj and we, and fome of your felves hold , that is „ that every man hath fo much Grace ( that is, Hdpeand Mercy contrary to Merit) as is in its own kind fufficient to make him better then he is, and to bring him neerer to Chrift or falvation, and which his owne will is obliged to make effe&ual by a nghc entertainment and improvement, and might

do;

f«7)

do: But we do not fay that all men have fuffieient Grace to belie veto jollification, or fuffieient tofal-vation; nay we fay that no Believer hath fuffieient Grace to fal vation , till the foul pafs from the body : forftillhe hath.need of preferving Grace to thelaft breath. Men that are at a great diftancc from Chrift may have fuffieient Grace to come neer to him j and juftly perifh if they refufe or abufe fuch Grace % though they never had Grace fuffieient to believe; becaufe it is their own fault that they had ic not.

The next pretended difference, is £Theypraj and offer Sacrifice for the dead: Ten nof\ RepL I will fee your proof of this too, before I will believe you. We know they do it not in the Popifh fence, that is for delivering.fouls out of the fire of Purgatory, becaufe they deny fuch a ftate. If you will read this Reverend Bifhop whom you oppofe in his Anfwer to the Jefuites challenge, on that point, you will fee the difference between the Ancients (and fo the Greeks) praying for the dead and yours.

He addcth \_Jhey invocate Saints and Angels ; joH noQ Repl. Of this alfo fee Bifhop VJber in the fore-cited place. We take this for their error : and we do not take our felvcs to be of a different Church or Religion from every one that erreth.

Hcnextaddeth [Thejwtrfbip the Crofs And Images : joh not~\ Repl. But they do it not as many of yours, with Divine worfhip. Their worfhip is buC reverence for the Relation fake; and they will not fo much as ufe any Statues or Graven Images as yo» do. And do not thofe you call Lutherans, do fl* they in this (though how rightly I fay not ?)

F z Hee

(6F)

He addcs [Thej honor rcliques : jou nof\ Rep. We honor them as far as they have any true Relation to any honorable perfon. But we will not therefore carry them about us to keep away the Devil, or forge a multitude of lies about the cures which they miraculoufly perform: Nor do the Greeks fo far as I know or hear.

The next is [They Maintain Traditions : jou nof\ Repl. They renounce your Traditions which are pretended to be part of Gods Word, fupplying the defects of Scripture which is but the other half : For they maintain the Efficiency of Scripture to falvati-on. And fome Traditions both they and we maintain: As the Tradition of the Scriptures themfclves down to our hands; the Tradition of the Sum of Chrifti-anity in the Creed and Baptifm, &c. Of which fee what I have faid elfwhere,in the Preface to the fecond part of the Saints Reft Edit. 2. &e. And in the determination in a book called, The unreafonablenefs of Infidelity: And fee what the Biftiop, whom you op-pofe hath faid againft the Jefuite on Tradition.

The next is \They AnricuUr confejfun: jou nof\ Rep. 1. TheChriftians that deny your communion are divided in this: Thefe called Neftorians and many more deny Auricular Confeflion: and others ufe it. 2 .We deny not our fel ves,bur that it is the duty of Chrlftians when fin Iyeth on their confidences, or when they have fain into it, and know not the way out a gain to have recourfe to their faithful judicious Guides for advice herein for the fafety of their fouls, and fo far to confefs as is necefTary to fuch advice and fefecy. But we do not believe that we are bound to tell the Prieft of every fin, no nor of every hain-ous fin : for in fome cafes we may have a fitter care.

I will not go to a Pyhfician for every prick of a pin , or cut finger, which many neighbors or my felf can cure as well as he : I will not fo far ncedlefly trouble him : Nor will I go to a bad unfaithful Phyfician , when I can have a better; nor yet to an ignorant man, becaufe he hath got the degree of a Docftor of Phyficke, when I may go to an able man that pro-feffeth not Phyfick. You know the Application.

Its next faid [They Enan«elkal councels and workj offptpererrogation: Ton not ] Rep. We acknowledge that there arc many very good works, i. Which are the duty of fome few Chriftians upon fome fpeci-al occafions, and not of all or moft. 2. Which are fo the duty of thofe few, as that yet many of them arc laved that perform them not; being not made of the fame neceility to falvation as fome other duties are. And we fee not how any man can reafonably imagine, that there is any work more excellent than others, which yet is not a duty; when God hath commanded \is to love him with all our heart, and might, and ftrength^ and to imploy all talents to theutmoltfor his Glory : and that any Duty can be negleded without fin, isasabfurd. How the Greeks and we differ in this, we fhall better know when you (hew and prove it to us

He next adds £ They the Merit of good JVorks: yen not ] We acknowledge, that Good Works are pleafing to God through Chrift, and rewardable; and they fay in fence no more ; We thinkc not meet to quarrel about the meer name. They renounce and abhorre the Popifh Merit of con-dignity ex proportion operi* ; as is before faid.

(70)

In the next place the cenfuter alledgeth his proofs of all thefe differences from us, and confent with them. Thefirft proof is out of AH. Tbcolog. Wittenberg, in Crifpin.de fiat ti Eeclef. in thefe words [The Greek ^Romane Chnrci^ are divided onely in the contrtverfie ofPrimacy^andyarktj efCeremcnj~^RepL I have not Crifpinius now py me, and therefore can make no other anfwer but this , that if he be truely alledged, yet i. Abundance of great differences (as about Sacraments, Orders, Traditions, &c ) may be comprifed in that of Ceremony. 2^ Elfe your own Writers will tell you that this is a miftake.

His fecond proof is from Sir Edtoin Sands Europe Specul. To which I fay 1. How unworthily did you conceal the multitude of differences mentioned in the fame Author in the fame place between you and the Greeks , and fay there was but one i 2. By Purgatory Sanhs tells yeuafter he means not your Purgatory : And its known the Greeks deny it : Though they think that the Saints have fome lets degree of glory diftant from the face of God before therefur-re&ion. 5. About TranfubRantiation and uhe Mafs Sands is miftaken. Tht Greeks hold a kind of Real prefence , but not Tfranfubftantiatjon : And the Mafs of the Papifts doth abundantly differ from theirs (as in the denyal of Tranfubftantiation , elevation , &c+ may appearand is at krge by many of ours ex-prefled, which may fave me the labor of a recital.)

Next the ignorant Prieft would by a Syllogifme p; ove the Bifiiop a Papift, and in the making of his SyHogifmeheis out before he could reach the con-o fion , and begins again, and yet would not blot out his former error, fo wary is he that he lofe not a

line of his own writing. The mended Syllogifme is this \Thofe who embrace the Communion of the Grecian Church notWithfianding the error offupremacy , cannot in reafon refufc the Communion of the Romane for the fame : But Mr. Uftiers Church embraeeth the Communion of the Greek Church notwithfianding that Srrort Therefore ,&c] RepL I. To the Major it is falfly fuppofedchatwe refufe your Communion for that Error alone : It is for that with abundance more.. 2. To the Minor, I anfwer by denying it: and fay you fhamelefly flander the(Jw^Church:They maintain not any Power of Governing the whole Church as the head of it, and Chrifts Vicar general, nor any infallibility, &c % as you do.

Next he will prove that Mr. Vfieri Church can have no Union or Communion with the Greeks Church at all : and that by this Syllogifme [That Church which is a member of another Church , that other Church muft alfo be a member of it: 'But the Greek Church it no member of CMr. Ufhers Church : therefore Air. Ufhers is no member of the Greek Church.'] The Minor he proveth from feremiasVa-triarch of £$nftantir.ople and Refponf. 'jBaftl. Ducis Mofcov. Rep. i. The part is not a part of another part,a member is not a member of another co-ordinate member; but of the whole. 2. I fay i the proofs of your Minor are vain. It is not two mens fayings that tan make the Greeks Church and the Pro-teftants fo dif-joyned as not to be members of the Univerfal Church. If Italy tell France , and France again tell Italj that they are no part of Europe , it is not therefore true. If Canterbury tell Torl^ that they are not a part of England, it is not therefore true. Every childe is not aBaftard that is fo called

F 4 b>}

by an angry brother. IF Patriarch Jeremiah fit your turn (which I know not, for I have not feen him ) why may not we as we]] plead the confent of Patriarch Cyri/l , whofe Proteftant confeflion you may fee in Aljleditu's Euclucopadia • and elfewhere ?

Next he comes to the $s4bajfmes \ where ( after the mention of their circumcifionj he as falfly affirm-eth , that \Jn all other things thej profefs the faith of the Catboltke Church acknowledging the Pope the fn-preme head thereof, and Chrifis Vicar upon earth~\ which he proves by a confeflion exhibited to Gregory the 13. and recorded by Pojjevine. Rep. This is to make the foundation like the fuperftrufture, and defend falfliood with falfhood: If you were fo ignorant yourfelvesasnot to know the Romane jngling about that confeflion , you could not imagine the learned Bifhop fo ignorant. Notonely your own Godignm derebm Abaffinorum , may tell you , but the generality of your fadion may fare inform you by this time, that all your cunning induftry cannot get the fiAbaffines under your Papal Yoak. And if you fhou/d prevail for the time to come , thats nothing to the time paft. The Abaffines (to let pafs their errors wherein they differ from y on and us) do communicate in both kinds, they believe the fouls of Infants departing unbaptized to befaved becaufe they fpring from faithful parents: They rejeft Statues or ma fly Images : They elevate not the Sacrament, norreferveit after Communion : Their Priells, labor, but beg not: The Emperor conferred Bifhop-ricks and Benefices : They ufe no confirmation nor extreame unftion : They admit a firft marriage in Bifhops and Priefts; They eat flefti on Fridays, And

vet

\15J

ye* this man faith they differ not from them.

The fecond Chapter is the meer ebullition of foo-lifti malice, deferring no reply to thofe that do not defire to be deceived. He would prove that according to th^fe laxe principles of our charity , we may agree with Jews, Turkes, Mahometans! As if we needed a difpute to prove that thefe are no Chriftians, and that, the Greeks ^ Abajfines^&cc. are : But fuch difputes do the Papitts puc us upon.

The Biftiop had concluded in his Sermon, that £Vf we fhould furvey the fever al profejfions of Chrift Unity that have any Urge fpread in any fart of the world i and put by the points wherein they differ one from another , and gather into one body the reft of the Articles therein all generally agree , We fhould findefo much truth in them , at being foyned With holy obedience may be fuffcient to bring a man to everlafling falvation ; neither have we canfe to doubt but as many as do Walk according to this rule, neither overthrowing that which tbey have bftilded by fuperinduc&g any damnable here -fies thereupon > mr otherwife vitiating their holy faith , with & leud and wicked conversation , Peace jhall be upon them and Mercy and uptn the Ifrael of God7\

And what hath the Confuter to fay againftthis? Why firft he begins with the Sacramonts, to try whether thofe commonly agreed on may fave. And here he firft tells us, that£ Some Churches are for fe-ven , fome for three , and feme for two ^ and no more: therefore here is no agreement^ Rep. I. Let the nominal differences about the word Sacrament be firft laid by ( unlefs you think that word aeceflary to falvation) and then we (hall the better fee what real difference remaineth. 2.The two Sacraments then are confefled

by

by all, and the uie of the reft which you call Sacra-raents: This much (in its own place) then may fave, where no more is confeffed. 3. You vaiply put in the excltifiw of wore , for thats none of the things that all agree on: All agree that ther^arc two Sacraments : and thofe may fave. But all agree not that there is but two. This man therefore feems to dote 5 when he (hould gather up the common agreements according to the Bifhops propofal, he gathers upthedifagreements, or vainly precendeth that we agree in nothing. What, do not you confefs that Baptifme and the Lords Supper are Sacraments ? and do not we do fo too ?

Next he comes to the ufe of Baptifme , and faith that £ The Romanes and Greeks i fay , that there is no other ufe of baptifme but to Veaflo away fin : The Protefiants of England and Geneva fay , that it is no laver of Regeneration at all , but onely a fed of Gods promife made to the party baptised: and that the childe unbaptized may be favedand the baptised damned.'} Repl. 1. You make your fclves (much more the Greeks) worfe then you are. Do cot your own maintain that Baptifm admitteth into theChurch and granteth many other priviledges, befides wafti-ing away fin. 2. We fay, that to the children of promife it doth fecondarily and by obfignatton wafti away (or pardon) fin by way of obfignation andfo-Jemne exhibition, as the promife doth primarily as a deed of gift or legal Grant: asalfo that in the fame way it fecondarily convcyeth further Grace according to the capacity of the fubjed, and admitteth into the Church. And all this is commonly confeft by your felves and all Chriftians of the Greek or Abaf fine Churches, &c. This much alone without your

addi*

(75;

additions is as much (at lcaft) as is neccflary to falva-tion , to be believed concerning baptifm.

Next he cometh to the Lords Supper , and faith t that one party holdeth the real prefence and the o-ther not ? And what of this ? Doth that prove the inefficiency of what all are agreed on ? what we hold, you deny not: We hold the fignifying f and fealing and exhibiting ufe of the Sacrament (though we deny Tranfubitantiation ) And dare you deny thefe ? We hold that it is the commemoration of the facrifice of Chrifts body and blood offered once on the Crofs for the fins of the world: and that it is a means of Church-communion : And dare you deny thefe ? Lay by your Additions, and that which we are all agreed in is enough to falvation.

His next inftance is about Faith ; Becaufe we fay, that Hiftorical faith may be in Devils, and Miraculous faith in the wicked, and CWw*defineth juftify-ing faith to be a firme and certain knowledge of the love of God to us,^. and the Lutherans, that it is an undoubted peufwafion of the pardon of our fins and adoption,^, and this faith is by the Councel of Trent condemned to the pit of hell, therefore he concludeth that there is no faving faith common to Papifts and Proteftants.

Repl. Here again you vainly and fallacioufly bring in the difagreements, and over pafs the agreements. i. We are agreed that all thofe which the Proteftants call the Canonical books of Scripture are the word of God : and true, and particularly all the Articles of the Creed, and many things more : We arc agreed thatChrift and life is offered by the Univcrfal pro-mife in theGofpelto all that hear it: and that all muft firft believe the truth of this proraife and then

heartily

(76)

heartily confcnt to the offer and accept the benefit, afnd alfo believe and fear the threatning, and joyn fincere love and obedience to all this. This we are all agreed in : And this is certainly faving to all that fincerely believe and do as they thus profefs. But then, whether Hiftorical faith be common or not ? whether affuranceor ftrong perfwafion of pardon , be faith, or juftifytng faith 5 with other the like, thefe we are not agreed in ; and without thefe we may be faved.

The next exception is only this, The Bifhop tells usnotwhatbethofeHerefies thatdeftroy this common faith. Rep* And doth that crofs his former charitabte conclufion ? What ? becaufe he undertakes not an alien task? Why in general, they are any thing that is fo held as that the common Articles of faith cannot be held with it, and that practically.

The fum of the next paflage, is this {That its ab~ furdfor Hi to call them the true Churchy or fay they may befavid , Vvbtn Vee have charged them with fo much error and idolatry Jkc ] Rep/, z; We onely fay that you are a polluted part of the Church. 2. If your falvation be made fo difficult by your errors look you to that: The Biflhops conclufion (of the fufficiency of the comrrmniter credit a ) is nevertheless found, though you deftroy your felves by your corrupt additions. 3. Multitudes among you believe not your Infallibility, Tranfubftantiation, and many the like errors. 4. Many that behold them as o pi -nions fpeculatively,mayyet hold the contrary truthes pradically, not difcerning the contradiftion.

I would gladly have (hewed the vainty of the reft of that Pamphlet, becaufe I fee he hath contrad:ed

moft

\ #'

moft of their common cavils into a narrow room; but the reft is lefs to our prefent purpofe, and the fame things are already anfweretl by many • and therefore I (hall no further Digrefc in the purfuk of this Conftiter, having already faid fo much againft the chief of their ob jc&ions, as may leave the impartial Reader confirmed in it, That notmthftand* ingtke Pofifk cavils to the contrary , it U apparent that the Chrifiian Catholike Reformed Religion cm-monlj called Protefttnt * afafi way to Salvation.

Qu-

(?»)

Qu^E R Y*

Whether Topery he afafe way to Sahationi Neg*

}T is not as other mens Judges that we determine this Queftion; to their own matter do they ftandor fall : but it is to render an account of our own Belief and pra&ice , and for our further confirmation in the truth for the defence ofitagainft gain-fayers, and for the eftablifhing of our people againft the fophiftry and fcdu&toa of Deceiv* ers.

For the explication of the terms , I (hall tell you i. What I mean by Popery. 2. What I mean by Salvation. 3. What by the Way to it. 4. What by the word Safe.

1. Popery is a certain farrago, a mixture of many grievous errors in the doftrine of Fatth,Government and Worfhip, exprefled in their Authorized writings,

\f* J

ings , cfpccially in their decretals and Councils, corrupting the Chriftian Religion which they profefs; the whole being denominated from that one falf-hood, that the Pope of Rome is, the Univerfall Biftiop, andVifibleHcadof the Univerfal Church and Chrifts Vicar-General on earth , and that only is the Catholike Church, and thofe only Catholiks that (o believe.

Where note i. That the Papifts profeffing to be Chriftians, do firft own the fubftance of Chriftian dottrine, and then corrupt it, and contradiA it by this fardle of their own inventions fuperadded.They profefs to believe the holy Scriptures to be the word of God, and to be true : every Book that, we believe (and more,) They profefs to believe all the Articles of the ancient Creeds commonly called the A-poftles , the Nicene , or Conftantwofolitane. It is not the Chriftianity or true doftrine which they profefs , which we call Pcpery. 2. It is therefore onely their own invented corruptions, by which they contradid: the Chriftian verity which they profefs, which we caH 7operj. 3. Note, That the common denominating corruption, is the forcmentioned do-ftrineof the Popes Univerfal Epifcopacy and Head-fhip, or a fuprearaacy at leaft , if not Infallibility : and that the Catholike Church , and the Romane Church is all one: and the Pope is the vifible center of its Unity. 4. Note alfo that as to the reft of their corruptions, they agree not among themfelves what is to be eftcemed of their faith or Religion, and what not: and therefore it cannot be expeftcd that we (hould give you an exad enumeration of the points* of their faith i and fo a compkar defcription of Popery, which is fuch a felf-contradi&ing unreconcile-

able

able hodg podge. But their errors may be diftri-buced into thefe three rankes. i gThofe that are e-ftabliftied by the Pope and his ( fuppofed ) genera! Councel: Thefe they all receive and own. 2. Thofe that areeftabliftied by the Popes Decretals without a Council. Thefe fome own as points of their faith , and fome rejeft them. I will not adde as the third, thofe that are eftablifhed by a Council without the Pope; not becaufe there never was a Council that diflented from him in Good, but becaufe it is a difficult matter at leaft to find any Council that did go beyond or without him'in Evil, or erred without his Approbation. 3. The third fort therefore (hall be thofe opinions that are commonly maintained by their mod Approved Writers which are publifhcd in books that are lieenfed and commended by the Popes Authorized agents, but are not determined by the Pope or his Council. Thefe though they contend for, and lay great weight on them in their difputations,yet dare they not own them as any part of the matter of their faith, left they feem to be what they are ; divided and mutable. A man would think that thofe volumnious hot difputes about Divine things, did intimate that the Authors did fide divink believe thofe points which they do fo zealoufly dtf-pute of. But if it be their pleafure , that we fhould fbdiftinguifh, t¥e will call the reft the Popifh faith or Religion , and thefe laft, the Popijb opinions , becaufe we would fajlen on them nothing but their own.

If you ask me, which be thofe doftrines which *bey take for points of faith, which we.call Popery • I muft refer you to their Decretals and Councils on one fide, and Gods word on thz other j and all the

doctrines

CO

Doftrincsin thofe their Csnoos or determination* that are againft the word of God, are thedoftrine* which wc mean by this name. If they do lay greater ftrefs upon any one point than others, its likely to be on thofe that are put into their Creeds and Vows, and therefore I (hall onely recite the latter half of their Tndentine Creed, feeing they will own that or nothing: When they have begun with the ancient Confiantinopolitane Creed , containing the true Principles of Chriftian Religion , and have ended that they proceed thus as followeth.

Tht*s4poftolkal and Ecclejiaflicaltraditions f and the refi of the Obfervations and conftitutions of tiie fame Church , / do moft firmely admit and embrace. I admit alfo the [acred Scripture according to that fence Which the Holy 'Jftfather the Church hath held and doth hold, to whotrt it belongcth to judge of the true fence and interpretation of tbe Holy Scriptures : and I VpM never take and interpret it , but according to the unanimom confent of the Fathers. Idoprofefs alfo that there are [even truely and properly Sacra* ments of the new Law infiituted by Jefu* Chrifi our Lord , and ncce(fary to the falvation of mankind , though not all to every one ; to wit 7 Baptifme , Confirmation , the EuchariH 7 ? ennance^ extreamt ZJntti-on^ Order , and Matrimony : and that they confer grace ; and that of thefe > Tiaptifmc^ Confirmation^ and Order , cannot be reiterated without Sacriledgc. I do alfo receive and admit the received and approved Rites of the Catholike Church in thefolemne Admini-ftration of all the aforefaid Sacramsnts. 1 do embrace and receive all and ftngular things which in the HeIj Council of Trent were defined and declared about Ori -ginalfin and fufiification. In like manner J do pro-

G fefs

(8»)

fefs that in the Cfrlafs there is offered ie God a true pre* per, and propitiatory facrifice for tbf. living , and for the dead ; and that in the mofi holy Srerament of the JBucharifi there u Truely, Really, and Substantially , the body and blood , together with the foul and 'Divinity of our Lord fefus Chrifi ; and that there u a change made of the whole fubfiance of Bread into the Body, and of the \\>hole fubfiance of Wmc into his blood • which change the Catholike Church calleth Trafubfiantiation. I confefs alfo that under one kind cnely^ whole and entire Chrifi % and the true Sacra-went is taken. I do confiantly hold that there Up fur-gator y , and that the fouls there detained are holpen by thefuffrages of the faithful. As alfo that the Saintr raigning with Chrifi , are to be reverenced and called upon , and that they do offer prayers to God for hs : and their rcliques are to be reverenced (or honoured.) I do mofi firmely affert that the Images of Chrifi and of the Mother of God-ever a Virginia* alfo of ether Saint s % are to be had and kept , and thai due honor and Veneration is to be given them. I affirm alfo that the poller of Indulgences u left by Chrifi in the Church, and that the ufe of them is mrfi wholefome to Chrifiian people. I acknowledge that the holy Catholike and *Apo-Jiolike Church of Rome, is the Mather and Mifiru of all Churches: And I do promife and fitiear true Obedience to the Pope of Rome fucceffor of Bleffed Peter Prince of the C^pofiles, and the Vicar of fefus Chrifi, sflfo all other things delivered , defined and declared by the facred Canons, and Oecumenical Councils, and efyecially of the holy Synod of Trent , I do without doubting receive and profefs : and alfo aU things contrary 9 and all here fie s whatfoever condemned by the Church 9 andrejetted, and Anathematiz>fd, do I in

like manner condemne, rejeli and Anathematize. 1 true C at holike faith 9 Without which no man can be fay ved 9 -which at the frefent I do voluntarily profejfe 9 andtruely hold 9 ihtjamt will 1 fake care to hfild and csnfefs entire and invioUte y by Gods htly y moft cok-ftantlj 9 even to the laft breath of my life; and as much as in me lyeth , to be held , taught and f reached , by tbefe that are under me, or thofe whofc care belongs to me in my office. This I. N. do Fromife , Voto , and Sftear , Jo help me God , and thefe holy Gofpels of

god.

So far the Trent Confeffion, which I the ra* chcr recite that you may fee what their Religion is in their own words and oaths ; where you fee alfo that this is but a fmall part of it; for it is moreover as large , as all the Council of Trent f and all other Oecumenical Councils and holy Canons; of the Im-poffibilitiesand felf-contradi&ions of which faith, we (hall fay more anon.

So that I conclude that it is not Chrifttanity , but this additional Leprofie which we call by the name of Popery; they believe this much more then we (or a great part m<jre) and by believing more,they believe lefs, while they deftroy the found faith which they before feemed to profefs.

2 For the next term to be explained \Jiafaation\ we mean by it principally ,- Everlafti*g Glory y and withall thofe beginnings of it inclusively which wc have in this life, confifting in our Juftification, A-doption , San&ification, Confolation, and Perfe-verance.

3. By theterm jjf^^wernean, fuch neeeffary

means as are prefcribed us by God for the attainment

joi Salvation, either as to our Belief, orourAffe&i-

(?)

on and Prafticc accoiding to the directions of the do-drinc which we do believe.

4. As to the fence of the word [Safely it figni-fifetti that which is free from danger, or which tend-eth to a mans welfare. Now here is a double fafety considerable in Do&rines t anfwerable to a double danger. Firft, its one thing to be fafe from any fin in the way to Salvation ; and fo we may well fay that Popery is no fafe way which leadeth to fo much fin : But thats not all that is here intended : But its another matter to be fo deep in fin , as not to be fafe from the Everlafting Pumftuneat, but that ufalvation it felf is endangered thereby : and this we principally intend. And whereas there are feveral Degrees of Danger, we mean that true Popery heartily entertained and pratticed, doth leave but fmali probability], if any fojfibMtj, of the Salvation of any that do perfevere impenitently therein to the end.

Though you may fee what I deny in what is already faid, yet for the greater perfpicairy , I (hall exprefs my fence in thefe few Propbfiuons following.

Prop. 1. That C hriftiart doftrine contained in the holy Scriptures which the Pa'prfts do profefs to believe, is of it felf without their corruptions, a fafe way tofoWation.

Prof. 2. Whatever errors are held by Papifts or any others, which do confift with a true pra&ical belief of the forefaid Chriftian do&rine which they confefs, and we are agreed in, thofe errors fhall nor exclude the erroneous from Salvation.

Trap. 3. The Papiits do not exprcfly in termes §nd fence deny any fundamental point of faith.

Pref.

(8))

yProp* 4- Its poftible even praftically to hold an error, which by remote confequence contradi&eth a fundamental Truth, and yet to hold that truth praftically, and fo to be faved. For either all moral errots in Theology (vstt^rnefw* thought) do contradict the Foundation by consequence, by reafon of the neceffary concatenation of Truthesj or moft at leaft.

Trop. 1 }. There arefome errors fo great that if they were cordially and praftically held, would bein-confiftent with the cordial pjraftical holding of the Foundation • which yet may be held but fpeeulativc-ly andnotionally inconfiftency with the cordial and practical belief of the fundamentals • and the perfon not knowing thecontradi&ionmay be faved.

Prop. 6. Multitudes of people while they take common termes in Divinity in a wrong fence, do maintain Propofitions which by plain confequence, if not directly contradift the Fundamentals according to the proper genuine fence of the words j when yet in the fence as they miftake and mifufe them in , there is no coiftradiftion. Even as many on the other fide, do hold the Chriftian verity in words, who in fence deny it.

Prep. j. We have great reafon to think that many millions of the Laity among the Papifts, if nos the far greateft part of them , do not cordially embrace the moft of the Popifti ^corruptions in dodtri-nals, nor the moft dangerous of them.

i. Becaufe they do not underftand them , and fo cannot fo much as fpcculatively receive them. It is not one of a hundred, perhaps of many hundreds a-niong them, that knows all contained in the Council of Trent alone , much lefs in all the reft of the

G 3 Cquii?

(8(5)

Council, and Canons and cufto#ies wherein they place their Religion. Nay perhaps its but few of their Clergy that know this comparatively. So that it is but an implicite general belief that they can give to fech Canons as are unknown , which is not a belief of the particular dodrines contained in them, as fuch.

2. Becaufe (I hope among moft or many of them) they are firft taught the Creed, the Lords Prayer , and ten Commandments ( or at leaft the Creed^ndDecalogucthough the Lords Prayer be uf-ually taught them in Latine) which contain the Fundamentals of Chriftian faith and pra&ice: and there-Fore we have reafon to hope that thefe are deeper in their minds then any contradictory do&rines: efpe-cially when they muft have fo much time afterward , to build upon this foundation their hay and ftubbies, that wc have great reafon to hope that it is but few that throughly undcrftand or ent€rtame them.

3. Becaufe we know that the generality of the people, ©r a very great part of them , do look upon their Clergy as having a carnal felf-intercft to carry on, and fo far have hard and different thoughts of them; though they ar« yet captivated by them loo much.

4. Becaufc we fee that the Pope is faine to keep them is fubjeftion by the moft cruel force of fecular power : by the bloody inquificion , tormenting and burning them, or rafingwarsagainft them to ruine them; or elfe by worldly honors, dignities, and

5 to entice and enfnare them; which were need-lefs if he could carry it by the cogent evidence of his do&rmas $r their underftandings.

S. Bar

(to)

5. Becaufewefee by experience, that even here with us among their few moft zealous and voluntary Profelites, it is but very few that cafl themfelves fio-w***Catholikes,or Papifts, that indeed know what Popery is : Nay moft of them, if yoa^do but name &me points of the Popifh faith , will tell you that you (lander them ; and they hold no fuch thing. I have talked with many of the Laity, and find very few that will own the do&rine of mans Merits, but profefs to reft on the Merits of Chrift onely : The like I could fay of other points; By which it is plain that the Priefts do hide from the Laity fo much of the venotnc of their doftrine as they think will prove di-ftaftful to them, and dare not let them know the worft.

<7 J rop. 8. Thefe perfons before defcribed, together with that part of the Clergy, who caft.off much of the Romanc corruptions, and yet adhere to their party, are not full and compleat Papifis , but onely Papifts fecun^nm quid , incompleat, and of a lower fort, and fo are not in fo great danger of damnation as the reft : even as the Scab is not fo bad as the Morphew, nor the Morphcw fo mortal as the Elephantmfis, or the full Leprofic; though all are of kindred one to another. 9. Pro. Yet thefe better fort ofPapifts are commonly tainted with fo much of their corruptions as makes their falvation much more difficult; fo that we may well judge that it is fewer by far that are faved a-mongthem, then in the Reformed Churches. E* ven as it is poflible for men to fcape catching the Plague that live among the infe&ed , and its poffi-ble for the infefted to efcape with their lives, but where one fcapes many dye, and its I think more

© 4 dan-

(83)

dangerous to live in an infe&ed houfe or air then in a found one.

Prop. iOy A man that cordially and practically received the whole body of Popery , and fo is a corn-pleat Papift, is in fo great danger of eternal damnation , as that it is a very hard queftion whether it be pofiiblefor him at the fame time to hold cordially the fundamentals of Chriftianity , andfo to be in a ftate of Salvation ? Which becaufe it is fo hard a queftion that Proteftant Divines are of different opinions about it , fome thinking it fojfiblc for fuch to be faved , and fome impojfible , I will not prefume here to determine it , feeing the matter in hand doth not call for the determinatien of it.

cprop. 11. Whofoever is faved among thePapifts; whether he be more or lefs tainted with their errors, it is not By Popery chat he is faved , but from Popery y or againft it by the Chriftian faith. So that if a Pa-pift may be faved, it muft be as a Cljriftian , and not as a Papift : Popery and Chriftianity having fome contrariety; fo than it-muft be by the prevalency and predomineflcy of the Chriftian faith againft Popery if ever he be laved. If a Iyer might be faved ic muft not be by lying,hut by faith inChrift and repentance. If a Leper, oroae that hath the Plngue, or the like difeafes, may live, ic muft not be by the Uprofieor Piague that they muft live; but by natural vigor arcj the help of Medicine by which they are preferved from the killing power of thefe dil-eaies.

And here you may take notice, what a fond and vain delulion it is, by which the Priefts do perfwade tl^poor people that their Religion is a fafer way to heaven then e^rs, even becaufe that we confefs a

Papift

Papift may be faved , but they affirm that a Proteft-a»c cannot be faved. For i. Some Proteftants think they may be faved,and fomedeny ic 2. Thofe that think they may be faved do withal 1 think that it is not by Popery, but againft it and from it. 3 And they think that its very hard,and therefore that they are very few that are faved among them, in compa* rifon of the number faved among us. And is not this a fair and comfortable encouragement to their poor feduced followers , that fome among us confefs that as its poffible for here and there one to efcape of a raging Peftilence, fo may fome Papifts be faved. 4. Their condemning of all Proteftants doth make themfclvesworfe, but it makes us never the worfe, nor our cafe ever the more dangerous. Chrift hath told us that all men fhall know us to be hisdifciples, by Loving one another, and hath bid us, judge not that we be not judged ,. for with what judgement we judge , we (hall be judged : and Taul tells us, that charity thinketh not evil, but hopeth all things: Is ic then a good & Chriftian arguing to fay that they are fafer then we , becaufe they are more cenforkms , and radb condemnors of others ? Then he that hath leaft Charity is of the fafeft Religion. Suppofe that a company fhut up in a Pefthoufe, being raging mad with the Plague, or ©therwife diftempered in their brain, (liould cry out, that all the Town are fick and will certainly dye, except themfclves. Were ic wife reafoning now to fay £ You confefs that fome of thofe that are fick in the Pefthoufe may efcape ; but they fay that none of yon that are out can efcape, therefore it is fafer to be with them then with you.] Even fuch is the reafoning of the Popifti.Priffts in the prefect cafe. It is the difeafe of Popery that of

(90)

its own nature caufeth them to condemne all the world except themfelves : And it is becaufewe are free from their difeafe, that makes us not fo ra(h and hafty in condemning them : But yet as charitable as we are to them , we are fo charitable withall to our felves, that we would not be in their cafe, fo* all the world.

Prop. 12. We may welt conclude therefore that whether a Papift may be faved or not, that cef-tainely Popery is no fafe way to Salvation.

If a cup of Poifon be tempered for the killing of men , and one drinks it all 9 and dycth, another drinks alfnoft all, anddyeth, another drinks lcfTe, and yet ufing no remedy dyeth, another drinks but a little, or taking more, yet ufeth fome effe&ual Remedy ,and fo with much ado fcapeth death. I think, notwithftanding the fcaping ef thefelaft, we may well conclude that £ Poifon is no fafe or wholefome food. ]

I come now to prove the Propofition laft ex-preffed.

In general i. Popery is No way to falvation; Therefore it is no fafe way. God hath no where preferibed it as a way to falvation $ therefore it is not a way to falvation.

2. It is the way toward damnation, and from falvation ; therefore it is no fafe way to falvation.

The pr^of of all together (hall be next fetch t from fome general reafons drawn from the daogeroas na -ture of Popery; For if I ftiould defcend to every particular error I muft be voluminous , and do that which is fufficiently done by multitudes already.

(90

Arg. I. Thofedottrincs which are founded npon a '"Notations faljhood , and refolded into it , are not afafc way to Salvation. But fuch are the doftrines Which We call Toperj : Therefore.

For the Minor, They are founded on and refolved into the doftrine of the Popes Infallibility , or at leaft his Councils : This the Papifls do confefs and maintain. But that this is a Notorious fallhood t is evident.

i. In that it is notorious that Popes have erred, and judicially erred, and erred in matters of faith. Bellarmine is put to anfwer to no lefs then fourty in-fiances of erring Popes > and how fliamcfully or ihamelefly he doth it, any Learned man that will fearch the records and perufe the cafe, may foon difcover.

2 It is notorious that Councils have erred. I (hall not now intermix my Teftimonies to interrupt the plain courfe which I have begun , but rather giv« yeu the proof of all this diftinftly By it felf in the nextdifputation.

3. The Papifts themfelves confefs this that we affirm. I mean, One part of them do cenfefs that the Pope may err fas the Trench) and the other (the Italians and Spaniards ) confefs that a Council may erre. One faith the Infallibility is not feated in the Pope; and the other that it is not fealed in a Council , particular or general, of which fee Bellarmine de ConciliU lib. l.cap. io. & n. In which laft he feeks to prove that a General Council may crre. i. When they diflent from the Popes Legates. 2. And when they confent with the Legates, if thofc Legates

gates do crofs the Popes inftru&ions. 3. Yea if the Legates have no certain Inftruftions, the Council and ail they,may confent in error: And he proves the two former by the inftanceof the Second Council of Ef befit* , and the Conftantinofolitane Council in the time of Pope Nicholas the firft, which erred , faith he , becaufe the Popes Legates followed not his inftrudlons. The third he proves by the Council of BafilSeff.z. which together with the Popes Legate did by common conlent Decree, that the Council is above the Pope, which now ("faith Bell-drmine) is judged erroneous.

4. Some Popes themfelves have confefTed that they are not the feat; or chieffubjed of the infallibility: As Adrian the fixth.who hath wrote his judgement of it, that the Pope may err out of Council. And in my opinion we (hall do the Pope much wrong ifwe (hail not believe him when he fpeaks the truth , and tells us that he is fallible. Did r Bellarmine better know Pope Adrians underftanding, then the Pope knew his own ? Surely I muft do as I would be done by : and if any man (houJd perfwade me that I know that which I do not know, or that I am infallible , when J know my felf fubjeft to error. I (hould confidently expeft that all pien would rather believe me of my felf then believe another of me that fpeaks the contrary: AJnd fo will I believe Pope Adrian that he was fallible.

But of this more in the next difputation ; where you (hall have fuller proof

>!•

(5>?)

Arg. 2. IfPoftrj do build even the Chrifiian Religion itjelf(<u held by themjon a foundation that u ut-ttrlj uncertain, orelfe certainty falfe, then it it no faj* waj tcfalvation : For it Would extirpate Chrifiiamtj it felf. But the.Antecedent is true, as I (hail thus prove.

i. They are divided and difagreed among them-felves even their greateft Learned Doftors about the very foundation of their faith, as I (hall further (hew in the next argument: They believe upon the infallible judgement*of the Church, and they are not agreed what that Chucch is.

2, They build the afTurance of their faith upon fuch a ground as none of the common people , no nor any Do&oks in the world ,' can have the knowledge of: therefore their faith muft needs be uncertain. To mamfeft this I (hall review one leaf that I wrote heretofore an this fubjeft ifi the Preface' to the fecond Part of the 'Saints Reft.

It is the Authority of the Church they fay, upon which we muft believe that the Scriptures are the word of God , and were it not for the Churches authoritative affirmation ,they would no;t believe it (faith one of them, no more than zs£fcps Fables) Now fuppofe they were agreed what this: Church is, and that tee now take notice of their more common opinion/that it is, all the Bifhops of the Church headed by the Pope, or a General Council approved of and confirmed by the Pope, I would fain know how the faith of any of u$ that live at a diftance, yea or of any man living, can be fare and found, when all theft following particulars muft be firft known t

before

(

before we can have fuch affurance. i. It muft be known that God hath given to the Church this power of judging what is his word, and what is a point of faith, and what not : fothat that is fo to us, which they judge fo; or that we are bound by God to believe thecn. Now which way doth God give the Church this Power? hit not by Scripture,or unwritten tradition in their own judgment? And by what means doth he oblige us to Believe the Church in fuch determinations? It muft be alfo by Scripture or un-writtenTradition by their own confefliotr.For if they fly to univerfalTradition,and natural obligation,they give up their caufe, and let go their Authoritative Tradition and Obligation, as from their Romane Church. So that a man muft (according to their do-drine) believe that the word of God (written or unwritten) hath given Power to the Church todeter-mine~what is the word of God before he can believe the word of God, or know tt to be the word of God: that is, He muft know and believe the word of God before he can know and believe it. Here is one of the impoftlbliities that lye at the very foundation of the Romane way of faith.

2. Before men can know the Scripture to be Gods word , yea or their fuppofed unwritten verities, infallibly , according to the Romane way of believing, they muftfirfl know that the Church is infallible in her judgement, and rhisalfo muft be known by the word of God, which is fuppofed not to be known yetitfelf.

j. They muft alfo know, that it is the Church of Kamt in particular that is the true Church and hath this power given from God,

4. To this end they muft know that all thofe per-

verted

verted Texts (or fome ©f them J that fpeak of peters own perfon , were alfo fpoke of eertain fucccflbrs of hrs, as well as ef himfelf ("as that on them the Church (hall be built, and their faith (hall not k\\ t &€.)

5. They muft knOw that the Pope is this fucccflbr of Ptttr,

6. To this end , they muft not onely know that Ptttr was at Rome (of which read well Vlrkm Vt-JtttHt in GoUnftus ) and was feiftop there, but they muft know that he was the only Rifhop there, or at leaft the chief, and that 7*/*/was noBiftiop there (who is more likely to have been) or elfe that he was the inferior, and that the Pope is Ptttrs fucceflbr and not Pauls; or elfe fucceedeth them both, and hath his infallibility but from one, ualefs the fuc-ceflbrsof the reft of the Apoftlesare infallible too.

7. If Ptttr and Paul were Bi(hops at once of one Church in Romt , then it muft be known why they may not have two fucccflbrs at once ; and if there be two , which of them is to be believed when they difagrcc. But if Peter and Paul were Bifhops of t^vo particular Churches in Romt , the one of the Circumcifion, the other of the untircumfion , then it muft be known by what right their fucccflbrs made them one? or whether it were not by a failing or reflation of the Church of the Circumcifion, when all Jews were baniftied from Romt , and fo the Church of the uncircumcifion only continuing, the Pope be not only Pauls fuccctfor.

8. And it muft be known whether Ptttr wefe not Biftiop of other Churches as well as of Rome (f*a of tsfntioch before Rome ) and fo whether the BiftiQp of Afttioch be not his fucceflbr as well as the Pope of

Rome

(94)

Rome , yeiand the chief fucceflbr if it follow the right of primogeniture # either as to the Church or the Biftiop;; feeing Antioch was a Church before Rome , and Peter was fuppofed to be Bifhop there before he was of Rome. And then if the Bifhop of Rome and Antioch differ (as they do) how fhall we know whom to believe, and how (hall we know that the Bifhop of Antioch i% not infallible a9 well as the Pope of Rome ?

j 9. It muft be known what it is that makes a Pope , what is neceflary to his being Peters fucceffor. Is it enough that he trep up into the chair and caihhimfelf Pope? Or.that his party call him fo? Then if any Heathen or Arrian conqueror i though a Lay man did fo, he fhould be Pope, And he that conquers Rome may make him felf Saint Teters infallible fucceflbr at any time. But if there muft be an ordination and Eledion , then it muft be known whether c-very Ecclefiaftical Ordination or Confecration ; and Ele&ion will ferve or not. If it will, then-when there have-bees three Popes chofen and confecrated at once,they were ail Saint Veters infallible fucceffbrs, though one condemned the oi:her ; If not, then it muitbeknfcwn, who it is that hath the power of e-leftion (which being the aft that determineth of the perfon, is the maine that muft refolvc our doubts) and alio of confecration or ordination. And how {hall the people know this, when the Clergy have been fo difagreetj among themfelves.

10. And here it muft be known whether the Cardinals have the fo!e power to eled ? If they have t then how came they by it ? And then, whether were all thofe that were eleded bv the people in the firft ages, and by the Emperors in after ages, true Popes,

(.91)

or not: If they were not; then Saint Peter hath rio fucceffors, becaufe of the interruption of the fuc-ccflion fo long ; and the Church had then no vifible head. If they were , then the fufficient power is not onely in the Cardinals. And if it be not onely in them i then whether are any of thofe true Popes that have been chofen onely by them of late ages ?

ii. Andfoit muft be known how a poffibility of uninterrupted fucceflion can be proved, when Popes have been chofen three fcveral wayes, fometimeby the people (or elfe there had not been fo many flain at the eleftion of Damafus , nor had the ancient Canons made this neceflary to all Bifhops) and fometime by the Presbyters of that Church , and fometime by the Emperors; and now by titular Presbyters, who are Bifhops of other Churches, and are uncapable of being true Presbyters of the Church of Rome. If all thefe feveral wayes of E-leftion may make true Popes, then it feeriis any way may ferve,and then the three Popes at once will be all true: If not,tben there hath been an interruption of the fucce/Iion, and fo according to their own Principles, there can be now no true Pope.

12. And here it muft needs be known too, whether i there be any thing in the perfon that is a qualification fo materially neceflary, that he can be no true Pope without it. If not, then a Pagan or a Mahometan may be Pope. If there be, then it muft I be known what that is, which few private men at lieaftdoknow.

13. Particularly it muft be known whether they tot are known Hereticks, yea judged fo by Coun-rls, or by their own fueceflbrs, and thefe that were

H noto-

(J>8)

notorious Whoremongers, Sodomites, Murderers, Poifoning their Predeceffors to get the Popedome, Simonifts, buying the Popedom with money, &c. were capable of being true Popes ?

14. If they are not capable, then we muft all know that all the Popes were none fuch , when the Papifts themfelves confefs $hey were fuch, before we can know that they vyere the infallible fucceflbrs of Saint Peter.

15. But if fuch may be Popes, then muft we know why a Mahometane maynot as well be a Pope ? or how an enemy of Chrift and the Church fhould conic to be a Son of Promife, and the Vicar of Chrift , and the head of the Church , and whether fuch were infallible in their judging fallhood to be truth, as they did ?

16. And we mftft know, that the Pope ondyis lawlefs, and under no power of Canons, or Decrees of former Popes and Councils? Orelfe many fuch Canons will proclaim their calling null : and fo the facceffion ftill hath been interrupted* And if the Authority of the former Church oblige the Pope to believe, e.g. the truth of Scripture and Traditions, then why muft not. the Authority of the former Church in its Canons be as obligatory to him in point of duty and penalty, andfo null his calling.?

HelLrmine faith that it is agreed among all CatboTiks that the Pope as a private Do&or may erre, through ignorance, even in univerfal quefti-citi's of faith: Alfo that many Papifts and Pope A-cWian the fixth himfelf tacghc that the Pope as Pope may be a Here tick,, and teach Herefie, fo it be out a General Council: And that moit of the

reft

($9)

reft do only hold , that whether the Pope be a He-retick or not , yet he cannot define any thing heretical , as to be believed by the whole Church ; this faith he, is the moft common opinion : Bellarm. de Rom. Pont if. /1.4 cap. 2.

Now this being fo we muft be refolved, if a Pope beaHeretick in heart, and open profeffion, and yet if a General Council be called 3 this Pepe cannot give his fentence in it according co his own belief, whether indeed we can prove that God hath promised to caufea Hcreticke Pope to diflemble, and to fpeakagainft his own judgement, which is to lye, though the thing that he faith be true, or yet to tye his tongue that he fhalJ not be able tofpeak that which he believes, and fpeaks at other times ?

18. And whether the promife which theyalledge

to tfiis purpofe (I have prayed for thee that thy faith

fail not) be indeed fulfilled to a Heretical Pope.* If

not, then its evident that this promife belongs not

to all Popes. If yea, then the faith of a Heretick

doth not fail; which Hellarmine himfelf confeffeth

tobefalfe. And here note what a naked ihameful

(hift it is that BeUarmine makes about this text ? He

faith that [Inhere are two things promifed there toVt-

\ ter : The firfi mhat Peter fhould never lofe the true

faith , though tempted by the Devil ; The other privi-

ledge #, that he as Pope fhould not be able ever to teach

any thing contrary to the faith ^ or that in his feat no

man fhould ever be found that fhould teaeh againfithe

faith: of which priviledges 9 the firfi perhaps was not

derived to his fucceffors , but the feconk undoubtedly

Veas derived to them ~] So faith TBellarmine de Rom.

Pcnt.li. 4. cap. 3.

Now mark how contrary this is to the fence of thfi . H 2 text*

(100)

text. The promife that Chrift made to Peter y was not to his tongue but to his heart: not that he (hould not fpeak againft the faith , for he did deny Chrift % and curfe and fwear that he knew not the man: but it was that his inward belief (hould not fail, and fo that he (hould not fall from Chnft, and confeqaent-ly indeed that his heart (hould reduce the tongue it felf. Now BelUrmim confefleth that perhaps that part of the promife that concerneth faith it felf, reacheth not to Teters (ucccffoi't > but onely that which concerneth the tongue: which was diredly none at all; fo that he gives up the true promife made to Titer , which was that his faith (hould not fail, and not that his tongue (hould not fail, and. he forgeth another in its ftead.

19. How can we be affured that this or any promife belongeth to the Popes, when the Papifts themselves fay that they were made to Peter before he was Pope. For fo *BelIarmine is fain to anfwer,when we fay Peter bimfelf erred in denying Chrift , te faith \_Saint Perer whenhedenyed Chrift , Was not jet made Pope : For its manifeftthat the Ecclefttfti-cal fufrewaej Vtas given him in the Ufl of John, when Chrift after the refurreUion hid him Feed my ftiecp] BelL de Pontif li. 4. eap. 8.

20. It is of neceility that all Chriftians who believe upon the Popes authority , muft know who it is that is the true Pope, and to be believed : And when there are many Popes at once pretending to that infallibility and authority, how can all Chriftians be refolved which is ihe true Pope when one Countrey owns one, atid another owns another, whom (hall the vulgar own that are out of reach and uncapabk ef undcrftanding the quarrel ? And then , who

knows

infws which of them muft be fuceeeded by thencx f ? Nay can learned men tell? Nay can- the Cardinals tell that choofe them ? And are we (ure that any of the pretenders are true Popes ? ShaU we hear TBellar-mine in one particular cafe, that is in his anfwer to the 37. inftance of Heretical Popes, to wic, fohn 23. who befidesopen Adulteries, Murders and o-ther horrid wickednefs, of which no left then fifty three Articles were put in.againft him at the Council of Confiance , all confirmed , faith Bellarmine , by certain witnefles, he was moreover accufed of molt pernicious Herefie , even of denying the Refurre&i-on of the body, and everlafting life. And to this Bellarmine anfwereth Qoannem 23. nonfuijje Ponti* fcem omnino certum & indubitatum i proinde non nee * ceffario ejfe defendendum, erant enim eo tempore tres^ qui Pontifices ha fori volebant, Gregor. 12. Benedict. 13. & Johan. 23. nee poterat facile judicari qui* e-orum verusac legitimes e(fetPontifex cum non deejfent jingulis dcttiffimi pv.troni7\ that is [_J anfWer that John/^ 23. Was not altogether the certain and undoubted Pope , and therefore he is not necejfarilj to be defended , for there "toere at that time three that would be accounted Popes, Gregor. 12, Bencdid:. 13. and John 2 3. and it was no eafie matter to judge Which of them was the true and lawful Pope , When there were not Wanting to each one of them mofi Learned Patrons r\ And yet the fame "Bellarmine faith, deConoiL 11 1. cap. 8. that its almoft the common opinion that this John, Alex $. were true Popes.

You fee then the cafe of the poor people according to the Romifh Religion: They cannot know the word of God Co be his word but on the authoritative determination of the Pope : apd who is the

(to,)

truePopeitisimpoffible for them to know, when even moil Learned men cannot know, and BelUr-mine himfelf fo long after faith, it could not eafily be known.

21. Mereover, how can all Chriftians many hundred miles diftant know whether indeed the Cardinals chofe and conftcrated him that is in the feat, or whether he forc't in himfelf, or bribed them to pretend what xms not done, and fo whether he have all theeflentials of his call.

22. And if a Council muft be the determiner either with the Popes, or alone, How (hall the Chn-ftian world know that Chrift hath promifedinfallibility to a Council, when there is no fuch promife i n the word : much lefs can Infidels know this in order to their believing the word of God.

2 3 v And how (hall we all know what is a General

Council, and when we have one? whether it muft

be alkhc CJeriftian/Bifhops in the world that muft

meet? or the delegates at leaftof all? or whether

forne Countries „ or part of all may ferve ? and then

what Countries or pares it muft be? B&llarm. de

C$nc. I. X'C.ij. Saith, that once the Patriarchs muft

beprefent, but now its not neceflary becaufe they

are all Hereticks or Schifmaticks. And how ihall

ive know that ever there was fuch a thing as aGeneral

Couocil? For my part I fee no probability that ever

tnere were many, if any one fuch Council, was the

Council of Trmt General when, the greateft part.of

the Chriftiaa world was abfent?When all the Biihops

of *y£thicpia r €gypt, Paleftin? T Greece, with all the

Turkes dominions-were abfent s befides the Pro-

teftahts, and moft of the Popifh Bifhons themfeltfes.

24. Howfliall wc be furethat ailthefe, ytot the

greater part of them are true Biftiops and lawfully called? If as BcUarmint faith de CorxiL L 2. e.g. That the contrary be not manifeft , be enough, chen mans error can make Gods promife of Infallibility belong tothofethat it was never made to; or elfe God hath promifed infallibility to all that maybe Popes or Bifhops for ought we know : and then ic belongs not to the Pope and Bifhops, but to all tint feem fuch.

25. Yea that all thofe Bifhops or moftdefcend by uninterrupted fucceifion from-the Apofties , which is made necefiary , If they plead onely the Bifhop of Homes fucceffion to warrant ail the reft , before the forementioned particulars be well anfwer* ed, it will appear that Romes (ucceffion hath been

. frequently interrupted.

26. Howfhalimen at adiftance be fure that the Conncilsare indeed confirmed by the Pope ?

27. How(hal/webe fure when all is done that we have the right fence of the Canons or Decrees of fuch Councils, when they fpeak as ambiguoufly as the Scripture ,• and the Papifts think they can have 90 certainty of the right fence of that without a living judge : And if there be a living judge (till of the fence of Councils,eithcr he is as infallible as they,or not: If not, then he cannot make us infallibly certain by his Authoritative determination. If he be , then what need of a Council, when he is infallible alone ?

28. When feveral Popes and Councils contradict one another; how (hall we know which of them to believe? And this is no rare matter among them ?

•29. When the Pope and Council contradict each other, how (hali the people know which is infallible ?

H 4 30 When

3 o, When both Pope and Council contradid the exprefs Scripture , mult we take them for infallible, and believe that Scripture only on their words.

Thefe or moft of thefe muft be known by all Christians, before they can believe the Articles of their Creed, or that Scripture is Gods word, actor * ding to the Romifh grounds : When as it is impoP-fible for any man to know them as true; they being either falfe or not evident and demonftrable. So that its now apparent that according to the Popilh grounds, the People can have no certainty of the truth of their Religion, and that they fhake the foundation of Chriftianity it felf.

2. Andlaftly, notonelyfo, but they build on a foundation certainly falfe, that is, the Popes infallibility or a Councils .- as I (hall prove in the next difpute where their fallibility will be further mani-feited.

: Arg. 3. If the Patjiflsare not agreed amonf. them-felves' either Cleray or Laity about the very fundamentals of their faith (or matters which they make of ne-ce[fitj tof&lvation)thm Popery k m fafe way tofalva-tion : But the Antecedent is true : Therefore,^.

We need to go no-further for the proof of the" Antecedent then ro what is faid already. They com; monly maintain that we muft receive our faith and the Scriptures upon the Authority of the infallible Church : and they are not yet agreed among them-felves, nor ever like to be what that iofallible Church is. And the difference is not with a few in-confiderable difTenters, bat in their main body. The Papifts of France maintain that it is a General

ral Council that is infallible , and that the Pope is fallible : The Italians maintain that a General Council is fallible , and the Pope is infallible. Some others think that both of them are fallible feparated, but both infallible when they concur. And fome think chat they are both infallible though feparated. If the Church be the foundation., and all muft be received upon its infallible authority, then no man can be faved that knows not which this infallible Church is : either therefore the French or Italians , one part or the other of them do erre in their very fun-" damentals, when one faith, This is the fubjed of infallibility , and the other fay,. Thi* is it. And if a Pope or General Councel differ, to wtom muft the people hearken ? One part of them faith that the Pope is above the Council ; and other? of them fay the Council is above the Pope , and of this mind have been General Councils themfelves, as the Council of Bafil and Cmftance^ and of this mind Bellarmne names 3 Cardinal Cameracenfis , Cardinal Cnfanus , foh. Ger-fonjac. Jlmain£,ax&. Florentine 7 > dn§rmitan, Set. What a ftrange impudency then is it of thefe mea , to make the filly deluded people among us believe , that they are all of one mind, and its we that are divided : when as they are never likely to agree in their very principles and great fundamental , who it is thai is the infallible Judge ? And till men know who it is , what the better are they to know , that fuch a judge there is fetfng that the fpecaes exifteth only in the individual , and no man can believe him ,. or apply him-felf to him as the infallible judge , till he know that it is he indeed that is fuch. See-

Seeing then according to their own principles, either the French Papifts or the Italian and Spanijh Papifts muft be in the way to damnation , how (hall we know which itisand which to joyn our felvesto with any fafety ? Were it not for weakening the Popes intcreft, they would burn the French Papifts as Hereticksaswell as us.

Arg. 4. If popery be a new hvifed way te heaven fitch as the ^Apofiles never kneVv nor the £hur*h after them for many a hundred year (in the main parts of Popery ) then is it nofafeVvajtofalvation : But the Antecedent i$ true: therefore fo is theconfequent.

The confequence they will not deny,that which the Apoftles & the PrimitiveChurches went in is only the fafe way to heaven(for there are not many fafe ways) But that which the Papifts as Papifts go in,is not that which the Apoftles and Primitive Church went in : therefore it is not the fafe way .And chat the Apoftles and firft Churches knew not Popery, but it is a new Religion, or new corruption of Religion, appeareth by comparing the particular points withScripture and Antiquity : For Scripture which is the trueftAnti* quity , it rrjay give any indifferent manjuftcaufe of fufpicion that the Papifts do fo obftinately refufe to be tryed by it; which plainly fhewes that they take it not to be on t-heir fide. And for the Councils and Fathers, far the firft three hundred years or much more, they ordinarily feom us for mentioning them to this end , becaufe they fay they wrote not of the points now in controvertie , and therefore are uafit to determine them. But did not thofe ages take up thur filth on the fame grounds as we fhould do now?

And

And can they be all filent about the onely ground of faith ? If the Pope of Romcs infallible authority had been the ground , would they not have told us fo ? How could they convert the infidels, and confirm believers without acquainting them with the grounds of their Faith ? And what they took for the grounds their writings {hew. Nay he that fhall faithfully and impartially perufe the Writers of the firft three-or four or feven hundred years, is blind if he fee not the novelty of Popery > and in particular of the Popes infallibility, univerfal headfhip and Epifcopa-cy \ and his pretended authority to be the Judge of controverfies, with the reft of his ufurpations. Our Divincs, Chamier , Jewel, VJher , Field i and many others have manifefted this fo largely, that it would be fuperfluous for me to do ic after them , and fomewhat will necefTary fall in with the nest dif-pute.

I do not deny but that mafiy ceremonies, and many controverted dodrines were very ancient: as the ufe of Chrifme, and a white garment, and milke and honey to the newly baptized, exorcifme, confirmation by imposition of hands, the Memories of the Martyrs^with prayers and praifes at thevr graves, or places of fuffering ; the oft ufe of the figne of the Crofs, the observation of Lent (as well as Eafter zxAivhitfonttie) not to kneel on the Lords day , not to eat things Strangled or bloody, fo the doctrines of the power of Free- will, and predefti-nation upon forefeen faith, and the mifufc of the terms ^\Svierit and Jufiification ]] the denyal of the perfeverance of all Saints,^, were too early and commonly entertained- But thefe be not the things that we call Popery 3 nof wherein the great difference

(toS)

ence between us, and the Romaxifts doth confift. But as for uhe great points in difference between the Papifts and us, it is lo evident in all antiquity, that Popery is a novelty, and that they have devifed a new way to heaven which the Apoftles and the Churches for many hundred years did never know f that otrely grofs ignorance of the Churches records, or a willingnefs to be deceived, can keep men from the knowledge of it.

And here I might eafily prove what isfaidof the novelty gf Popery , even from the confeiiions of their ownrnoft learned writers, that fo they may not fay, ic*is concluded from our own mifunder-ftanding of Antiquity; But that it would fwell this difputation beyond the intended bulk and bounds. I (hall onely give a brief touch in a few points of moment , which may (hew you what to think of their charg4ng us with novelty , and of their general pretences to Antiquity. I

Of the humane Ordination of Papacy, and its late increafe beyond its ancient bounds, and the limitation of Ecclefiaftical Power; I (hall defire you to fee what in the following Difputation is cited out of their Cardinal Nkol. Cufanus , a man fo violent for the Sugtnian faftion, that lALxdnas Sjlviiu , afterward Pope Pim the fe-cond lamenteth that fo learned a man (hould be the pillar of that Popes caufe j and a man fo clofe to Papal intereft, and fo addi&ed himfelf to domineering, that he oppofed his Prince Si-gifmHnd Duke of Anfiria 9 and caufed the fame Pope Pim the fecond to take his part , and excommunicate Sigifmund and all his Counfailors, and his fubjefts, for taking this Cardinal prifoner N by

(top)

by force of Armes • of which fee the flory'in GV-dtftttsfNWh Gregor* Bemburgs ( oncof the Princes txcommunicated Counfailors) his Defence againft the Pope and Cardinal : Yet this man hirafelf in his books de concordiahixh confefied enough todeftroy the Popes eaufe, and takedown the Roman? tyranny , if they would ftand to the principles of that confeffion.

Others alfo in the next deputation are mentioned as mo that fubjeft, which I fliall therefore now pretermit.

Tolidore Virgil a Learned writer of theirs in his lib. 8. de Invent. Rmr.caf. 5-/><*£• 475-476. Saith \Jtem ut nullum convent urn indict , nullumque a qui-bu[v* dttum haberi return liceret fineRomaniP ontificii authoritate . Marcellm primus omnium fanxit, dt» inde fulim &*Dam*fH6 & Gregorim Mud idem fia-tuere^ £ •• €. \^Al[o that no JJjembly ( or Council) fhould be cAiled, mr any aU of tvhomfoever be efieemed ratified without tie Authority of the Pope of Rome , thu Marcellus Vs>a$ thefirfi thAt did ordain % and afterward Julius rfWDamafus and Gregory did ordain the fame thing^ And though this fufficiently proveth the novelty ; yet Polidcre is miftaken in taking this part of PapalUfurpation to be fo ar.cient.For he took it on the authority of the decretals,whkh are meer fiftions. Of which I refer the Reader to Blondeilm de Decretal. The fura of whofc cenfore on Marcellm Bl ' ndeU ' dc *«"<-Epiftlesis this [As the fre- P 2 ^** 7 ' 40 *-quent Barbanftne fhew the Author, fo the following oft the verfion of Hiertme , the excribing of divers inftances

( V.O)

OUt of .Innocent, Leo, Hilary , Gregory, Adrian i. awl Acacim , (hew that he was many ages later then Marceilns^\ See alfo the full evidence that he giveth in his ceniures againft the Epiftle ofS.fulius and 1)a~ mafas; and for Gregory, his Eptftles to the contrary purpoie are well known. So that by Polidorm eon-feflionthis Papal ufurpation is a novelty : but indeed many hundred years neerer then he imagined.

And what good this ufurpation did, himfeff con-feffethin the following words [Though a fir ft broke -the conventicles gf Heretickj —— Ita deinceps nihil attulit commodi, cum per idjampene defitum fit a con' cilis- habendls, in quibiu cuntla ex aqm traiHarentur ^Fontifice, Romano cjufmodi negotium non magnopere curante^] i. e. £ Afterwards it did no good, When by reafen of this, Councils are almoft ceafed , in which all thingsfhould be equally handled, the Pope of Rome not much regarding any finch matter^ Where he add-eth [fThat therefore Pope Martin the fifth in the Council of Conflance decreed that a Council fhould be called every tentj^y ear,Vvhich hitherto hath wot been kept, and therefore Religion vrows daily yporfe~\ Where by the way we may fee what power the Laws of the Pope and General Councils have* and what a Religion Po-pery is, which fwcareth men to believe and obey the Decrees of fuch Councils, which no man ever obeyed fince they were made: For th^re hath been never fince a Decennial Council; And the Pope himfelf by confirming that Council which decreed that a Council is above the Pope, did fliew himfelf obliged to obey it, and fo to have called a Council accordingly. But all others muft fwcar to that as Gods Word and infallible, which themfelves contemne. But to proceed. The

(ill )

The fame Tolidore yirgit.lib.8.cap.ig.4$6. fhcvvs that the beginning of Indulgences was not till Gregory appointed hisftations, and made them a reward, And (hewing that thy were grounded on the Do-drine of Purgatory 9 he bringeth in Bifhop Fijher of Rochefier to witnefs, I. Thatlndul- p^^r , ♦ gences are lately brought in. 2. And Lutbtrnm. that even of Purgatory tsipudprifcos nulla vel ejuam rariffima febat mentio; fed & Gr$ck ad hunc ufqne diem non eft credit um efle : yuan din e-nim nulla fuerat depurgatorio cura 7 nemo quefivit. in* dulgentias, nam ex illopendet omnis indulgentiarum exiftimatio. Si to IIa* pur gat or turn > quorfum indulgentiarum opn* exit ? Cocperunt igitur Indulgently^ poftcjuam adpwgatorii cruciatm aliquandiu trepida-tumeft"] i.e. \jVtth the ancients there was no men' tion of Purgatory^ or exceeding rare : And the Greeks believe not that it is to this day : And as lon% at there was no care about 'Purgatory, no man fought for indulgences ; for all the eftimation of indulgences dependeth upon that. If joh take aVvay

<Purgatory, *hat ufe u there of See }*.; S W* Re : . it 7 ' /. . J joyrider in Deteni.of

indulgences : indulgences there- ^ Qi0? uJber p< ?8 .

fore did then begin , when men jffiofi'i&c. bad trembled a while at the pains of Purgatory] So far Bilhop Fifier their Mar-tyre,

Polidore Virgil reciting thefe words, next to them addeth [_J£u& tu forte cum tantifint Momenti^ nt magis certa ex ore Dei exptttabas] [Perhaps you expefted to have had thefe things as more certain from the mouth of God , feeing they are of fuch moment'] A fufficient hint thac he had more in his mind if he durft have fpoken out.

Yet

(II*)

Yet note that the profit of indulgences is exprefs-ly fvvorn to in the new Trent Creed as part of their Belief.

This paffage of Fijbers was allcdgcd by Biftiop Vjber in his Anfwer to the Jefuites challenge , and the like from Cajetans confeffing that the beginning of indulgences is not known: What the adversaries can fay againft thefe citations i you may fee confuted by Mr, Sing in his Rejoynder in Defence of Bifliop Vjber againft the Jefuite^ fag. 8i« 82,83.

That the ufe of the Sacrament in one kind is a new invention,is commonly confefled by them. See-^/-bafpinam a fober Bifliop of theirs inhisobfervations, after his notes on Optatm^ cap. 4. de Communione Lrica 9 pag. 10. ii. (hewing the novelty of the now Romljb Communion. And Gregor. deValentia the Jefuite confefleth that minime confiat , it is not known when the cuftome of receiving the Sacrameat in one kind onely began , but that it was not by any Decree of a Bifliop, but crept in by fome cuftome of the people. Of which alfo fee Biftiop Vjber ibid. and his Defender Mr. Sing p. 78. 82,1^3.

About the beginning of Monkery , fee Polidore Virgils confeff. lib. 7. cap- J fag. 414* 415. 416. And that [Monachi prime omnium introduxer&nt in Ec-cleft am Dei votafacra, & vefiimenta prof ana pmul religiofafccerunP~\ \_Monke$ were the firjl of all men that brought into the Church of God, facredvows, and made common (orprofane) garments become Religi-

*w*lp*& 4341

Of the beginning of forbidding Priefts to marry, Jee the fame Polid. Firgil. Ii* 5. cap. 4- fag. 2 93 ; &c.

Of refers fupremacy the hmtPolidote faith/. 4 c. 0. p. 240. Q Veruntamen exiftnntettam nnnc^ &c.

There are/owe now that contend that Peter badpoVver over all the Apoftles: of which it belongtth not to us to determine J who are onely enquiring of the original .of Prtefthood : hut fomt thinly the contrary , becaufi VwifecMethtodenj i'r 3 &c] Where he addethmore reafons.

Of the Original of Cardinals, and the changes of the Eiedors of Popes, fee him alfo /. 4. c. 9. where alfo he faith fag. 252. Q Verum cum poftea Bomfacin* 3. ab Imperatore Phoea impeiraffet ut in omnes Epifcspos prtrogativam habere , omniumque caput perpetuoforet^jam turn Roman** Pont if ex wul~ to quam ante a unam cumfuo urbane facerdotum fena-tu cunUisfine contrQvcrfia pre ft are authoritate c&pit , ac fimul illi presbyteri quibus Tituli dati , quibtu Cbriftianorum anmas cutandi munm delatum ftferat, eo Cardinalium nomine velut fuprtma illius dignitatis proprio cum primuhoxeftari ctpit,^ Here you have a hint of the Original of the very new frame of the Rcmijh Church.

Many more points odhtRomi/h way doth he in that Book difcovcr to be novel. And in oppofition to all their way if you will fee how he defcriberh the Reformed Religion , perufe bis narrative of ths occa-fion of the Reformation, pag. 410. cap. 4. /1. 8. where he faith Q Ita licentia part* loquendi : feUa brevi tempore mirabiliter crevit qu<& Evangelica ditta eft eo quod , baud ullam ajfeveret recipiendum ejfe legem qna ad animarum falutem pertineat nifi quamChrifttuaut*Af<>ftolidedif[ent~\ i.e. £ Hav~ ing once have to fpea^ that feft did marvailouflj iucreafe; Which ii calkd Evangelical, becaufi they

.(HO

m that no Lavt is to be received which belongeth to fa Iv at ion but what id given by Chrifl or the Apoftles~\ Thus you fee what the Proteftant Religion is and whence called Evangelical, and wherein it principally differeth fropiPopery, from the mouth of a Papift himfelf ( an Agent of the Popes with the King of England H. 7. An Archdeacon, and at laft the Dean of Tauls in London , from whence he removed becaufe of the entrance of the Snglijb changes under R 8-)

And though he fay that it tkeh begun , meaning Luthers particular Reformation , yet what is like to be the end of it in the next words he fubjoyneshis Prognoftick \jJManfururn ut videtur quoad Chriflus ipfe popular** fuum culpa reflorum it a in duasfeElas fejunfttim , rttrftq coegerit , a quo iftud optima* qnifque maxime petere precarique debet , ut ne major indidemfiat Religimu labes~\ Q Its like to remain till Chrifi himfelf Jhifll again bring together his people^ Who bj their Rectors fault are

* N f e n tha: ] 5 " lls this divided i*to tWo * Sells ; the Fapius a Sett as r / ,

well as the Reform. f rom , ^omeytrj good man - C( j. ought cjpecuiuj to beg ana

pray for it 3 left Religion do daily decay ] more and more.

T!;e novelty of their dodrine de ejficacia Sacra- . wenti ex op ere operatois.not onely by fubtile Scottu but many more of their own confeffedto.be new. More of their corruptious are by their own Writers confeiTed to be novelties j and therefore it is great immodefty in the Papitts to pretend the Antiquity of Popery , though we ealily grant them the Antiquity of tl^fir Chrifti-aaicy. In fo much as they agree with us they may

prove

prove their Religion to be ancient: but its new in the points wherein we differ , acd moftnewinthe grcateft differences. Bifhop Vflier in his Anfwer to the Jefuites challenge, and in his book deStatu & fucceffiwe Scclefiar^m , hath proved the novelty of the main body of their corruptions, efpecially the points of whofe antiquity themfelves moft boafted of, andchis diftinftly and fully to their perpetual confafion, beyond all reply.

If therefore the Romamfts would have us return to their communion (not to their iubjediom; for that we never owed them) let them hut caft off their novelties and return to the ancient faith and pra&ice of the Rom.vte Church f and we ftiall do it fpeedily and do it gladly : They (hall fee that we arefo &r from affeding an unneceffary feparation , that we will embrace them.in a lawful communion with alt t our hearts. I cannot better exprefs my hearty de-fires of this, then in thole hearty words of Ukr* Zanchy Vol. 3. The/, de Ecclef Milit. Tbef. 19. C&L 540. \_Nonenim ab Ecclefia Roman a fimpliciter & in omnibus defecimm • fed in Mis duntaxat rsbnt in quibus ipfa defecit ab ayfpofiolica , at que adeo a feip* fa , vcteri & pur a Ecclefia : neque alio difcejfimns animo , quam tit fi correct a, ad prior em Scchfia for-mam redeat , nos quoque ad illam revertamttr, & communionem cum ilia in fuii porro ctttibm hakeatnm : £luod itt tandem fiat > toto animo Domino fefum pre* camur y £htid enim pio caique optatius 9 quam ut ubi per baptifmum renati fumm , ibi etiam in finem nf-que vivamus ? modo in Domino ? Ego Hier.Zanehius. Cum tota meafamilia tefiatum hoc volo totp Ecclefia Chrifii in omntm eternitattm.

Arg. 5 • IfToftrj do make * neW Cat he/ike Church, \\>hich \*w never kno^n for many hundredyears after Chrifijken it it no fafe way tojalvation. Hut popery dotb make a new Catholike Church that was never known of m&ny hund'edyears after Chriji : therefore its no fafe way to falvation.

The confcquence of the Major will not be denyed; for they confefs that Chrifts Church is but one; He had not a Church of one fort for the firft ages, and a Church of another fortfince:though its accidents may vary, yet fo doth not itseffence. The Minor I prove thus,That which the Papifts make to be the Catholike Church, is only all thofe Chriftians that acknowledge the Pope to be the univerfal Biftiop and head of the CatholikeC htirch,having univerfal fapreme jurifdi&i-pn, and the Church of Heme to,be the Mother and Miftris of aii other Churches,and its cnly a Catholike Church convertible with the Romane Church. But fiich a Catholike Church as this was never known by the Apcftles, orofmany hundred years after Chrift : Therefore Popery maketh a new Catholike Church, which the firit ages never knew.

Its true that'when Rome being then the ruliag City of the world did come to own Christianity, that the Glory of the Empire occasioned the Bifhop to be &\-tedPriwafedisEpifcopiw^s one that was to take place ofthereltof the Patriarchs, who had their fcveral orders-or places affigned them (as Alexandria to be the fecond, Antiocbthe third,^,) which BelUrmine confeffeth might be after lawfully changed: but as A-lexandria had not the Government of Antioch by chat predecency/onekher hzdRome any government, or the reft: And as Constantinople was afterward fet up

above

(U7)

above Alexandria and Antioch (and claimed to be a-bove Rome) fo might it as lawfully have been fee up above Rome But what ever be feud about the r quarrels of precedency,which pride begun and cberifhed , yet its moft evident in all antiquity.that of many hundred years after Chrift, there was no fuch Catholike Church in being,or known,as was centred in the Pope as the head or univerfa! Bifhop or Governor , or in Rome as the Mtftris of the reft. We have long ago challenged them to give us the leaft proof of fuch a Church in all antiquity, and they give us nothing, but fuch forced paflages that are nothing to their pur-pofe, that its hard for the moft charitable rational man to believe that they do indeed believe themfe!ves, and do not know that they hypocritically endeavor to cheat.poor fouls by their vain cavils.All the Papifts on earth will never be abletoanfwer what our Divines have faid already to prove the novelty of their Papal headfhip : nor can all the Popes fervants in the world bring us one word of currant antiquity for many hundred y*ars after Chrift , to prove that ever fuch a Church was once dreamed of 3 as they now call the R<** mane Catholike Church.Indeed Rome was called then, a Catholike Church,and fo was Alexandria, Antioch, and all that held the Catholike faith,and were not heretical : but it was never known* till Boniface had u-furped the Title of univerfal Bifhop above 600. years after Chrift (which he procured by ^boc/u a Murderer that ufurped the Empire when he had (lain the Emperor Manrititu) that the Romane Church and the Catholike Church was all one,or that it was neceflary to make any particular Church or perfon Catholike, that they acknowledge the univerfal headfhip and ju-riftli&ion of the Romane Pope, much lefs his infallibility. 13 To

To heap up Records here would *but flop the plain Reader in hiscburfe; and fomewhat (hall be fid of it in the next difpute : Onely I now fay , that if any one queftion whether indeed the Romane Catholike Church as now conftituted be ameer novelty I here offer my felf to the fuller proof of it, and fhall defire no better recreation of fuch a fort then to entertain a dtfpute about it with any Papifts that will undertake their caufe.

And here I rnuft needs annex this obfervation • What a ftiamelefs cheat it is by which the Papifts do delude the ignorant, perfwading them that theirs is the old Reltgion , and the ancient Church which hath continued from the Apcftles without interruption ; and that we are men of a new Religion , and of a Church that had never a visible being till the dayes of* Luther, 9 Cofierms the jefuire in the Preface to his Enchiridion iiiftru&etb his deluded novices how to deal wirti the Proteftants by urging them with three Qneftions ('which we fhall refoive anon to his ilia me) and the laft of them is a challenge to us [To name one man before Luther that agreed with us in all things] But we challenge , and moft confidently challenge all the Papifts on earth to name one man for ihrec hundred years after C hrift (I might fay fix hundred year.<) that agreed with them (not in all things but) in their very Articles of Faith , yea* in theii Church fundamentals , yea in the very definition of the Catholike Church: We challenge them to name us one man and (prove it) that ever knew or owned fuch a Church as Catholike that is now fo called a;id owned by them. We confidently

ra (ard challenge all the Papifts in the world to dilute the point with us) that their Church asPo-

pi(h

pifti, is a new thing, unknown to our forefather ^ of the firft ages; that Popery is a fardel of new do" ftrines, unknown to thefirft Churches We ad* mire at the immodefty of chefe men to aske ns where our Church was before Luther, and to call it a new Religion which we profefs, and to ask us whether we think our felves wifer then all the world was heretofore in the purer! times? Wedomoft confidently return on them their own demands? We would know from any of them where their Church was for three hundred (yea for fix hundred) years after Chrifts birth ? And we wonder how> they can think to be faved in a way that was not known for fo long time I Do they think themfelves wifer then Chrili andhisApoftles', and all the Chriftian world forfo many hundred years. Again we challenge them to (hew us the leaft proof that ever there was fuch a thing forfo long time, as a Githolike Church convertible with the Romane , and headed by the Pope as the univerfalBifhop having a univcrfal jurifdiftion o-ver the reft, or an infallible Judgement in determining of controverfics in matters of faith. It is none of the leaft of our Reafons why we dare not be of the Romijb fa&ion or opinions, called by them their Church and their Religion , becaufe it is fo new, and we dare not venture our fouls upon new wayes, nor dare we believe that Chrift hath two forts of Churches eflentially different fince hisRefurre&ion; one fort before the Popes univerfalheadfhip, and the other fince : nor dare we once imagine that Chrift had no true Church on earth till Pope Boniface would needs be the univerfal Bifhop, or till Reme was advanced to the dignity and titles which it doth now ufurpe. I defire no better iffue then this

of our difference : Let any Papifts living bring out their caufe to the tryal of antiquity, and let them that are of the moft Ancient Church and Religion, carry the caufe. If we prove not theirs new and ours the moft ancient, or if they prove theirs more Ancient then ours (as fince Cbrifts Referred:ion)then we are contented to be of their Church and way.

Arg. 6. If the Papifts be the great eft Schifmatkkj upon earthy moft defperately rending the Church and feparating themfelves from the maine body of the viable Church jhen Popery U not ajafe yvj tofdvation. But the Papifts art the greateft Schifmatkkj on earth, moft defperately rendingthe Church , andfeparating themfelves from the main body thereof: 'Therefore Popery is nofafeway tofalvation.

The confequences of the Major will be confeffed by themfelves. It is only the Minor, therefore that is to be proved : which is too eafily done, being a matter of fad.

- Firft, The Papifts do a&ualiy rend themfelves from the greateft part of Chrifts Church on earth, condemning all others to everlafting fire : 2. They do lay the grounds of a continual fehifme, in making a new center of the unity of the Church : of thefe two in order.

i. He that fhallconfider of all the Chriftians in ths world at this day, who fubjed not themfelves to the Pope of Rcme , and may truly be reputed to be of the Catholikc Church, will fee that the Papifts are but a fmallfsrt of the Church: But efpecially if we confider them as they were not many ages ago,much more numerous then now they be. The Grecians t the Syrians called CMelchites , the UMcfiovites and

QUI) ,,

Ruffians , the Georgians, all of the Greek* Religion befides the multitude of the fame Religion dif-perfed throughout the Tnrkes dominions; alfo the Abajfins^ Egyptians, Armenians, Jacobites, who are neer of a mind, and differ from the Papifts, and fub-mit not to their authority : Befides all the Reformed Churches xnGermany, Sweden, Denmark Hnngary, Tranfylvania, Tlrittain , Ireland , France , Belgia , Helvetia , and other parts with thofe in the Indies ; I fay confider of all thefe Chriftians together and it will appear thai the Papifts are but a few to them, or not neer fo many as they. But if you further confider of the ftate of the Chriftian world not many ages ago, when the Turkes had not yet fubdued the Eaftern parts, and when the AbaffUn Empire was much more large, and Nubia and other Countries had not revolted , it will appear that we may well fay that it was but a fmall part of Chriftians comparatively that did acknowledge the univerfall head-(hip and jurifdi&ion of the Pope, or fiabmit them-felves to him : befides many other points of Religion in which they differ from him. I know that the Papifts fay,tt>at thefe are all either Hereticks or Schif-maticks, and fo no part of the Catholike Church. But the accufation of Schifme is the mecr voice of Schifme , and for Herefie, its true that all men and Churches hgve their errors, which yet deferve not the name of Herefie : The Jacobites and the reft that are neer them, are afraid of acknowledging two Natures in Chrift, left it lead them to make two perfons with the Neftorians; but yet they are not plaine Eutichites : and both they and the Neftorians acknowledge Chrift to be perfeft God and pgrfeft man; only the Neftorians do amifs

name

(lit;

have thefe. two natures, two ferfons- and that the Eucicheansin flying too far from them are afraid to call them two Natures , though they confefs the Godhead and Manhood to be really diflind; yec they fay that both are as it were conjoyned or coupled into one Nature : fo that wife impartial men thinkthat theEutichices (orat leaft thefeChriftians that arefocaliedatnifsby the Papifts) do butmifufe the term Nature for the term Per/on a and fo deny two ^erfms onely in fence, and two Natures only in name, and that by the fame mifufeofthe terms the Neftorians do affirm two Natures onely in fence, and two Perfcns in words onely. Of this I define the Reader to confider What Luther hath faid de Conciliis* This I muft needs fay , that if I did not exercife the fame charity in judging of the Romanifts, as I do in this excufe of the Jacobites, and other Chriftians that are not of their 'Communion, I fliould be forced to cenfure the former much deeper then the latter , and if by air their errors I muft hold the reft to be Here ticks or Schifmaticks, I muft by the fame meafure judge the Romanifts to be doubly Heretical, as I cercainly know them to be moft noto-rioufly Schifmatical. For though I know that they are not fo barbarous and unlearned as moft of thefe forementioned Chriftians ? and alfo that they are free from many of their miftakes, yet withall they have many more in ftead of them which the other are free from. And for the Proteftants they are Hereticks only on this fuppofition, that the Pope be Judge.

By this time then it partly appeareth how great a part of the Church of Chrift the Papifts do differ from.

But

Rut yet this is not all, nay the fmalfer part. For if you will but confider the ftate of the Church of Chrift for the firft three hundred, yea five or fix hundred years, you will find that the Papifts do differ from them all, even from the whole Church. For then the Popes univerfal Epifcopacy and jurifdidion was not known in the world (as is faid before.)

All thefe doth the Romane party now feparate themfeves from : All thefe they do pronounce to be no true Churches or true Chriilians, but Heretieks and Schifmaticks: All thefe do they condemn to the pit of Hell. They have now concluded that onely thofe are of the true Church , that acknowledge the Mafterlhip or univerfal Headfhip of the Pope, and the Miftnsfhip of the particular Romane Church which none of all thofe forementioned did. They now conclude that none can be faved but who are of this (new-framed ) Church of theirs.

Now I do appeal to any reafonable impartial man alive, whether there be any more notorious Schif-maticks on earth , then thefe men; that dare un* church the far greateft part of Chrifts Church on earth at prefent,& the far pureft, and renounce communion with them all, and proclaim them Heretieks or Schifmaticks, and fentence them all to the flames of Hell: Yea that dare do the like by ajl ages of Chriftians that have gone before them; yea that dare unchurch and damne to Hell the whole Church of Chrift for many hundred years ! For what do they lefs when they unchurch and damneall that ac« knowledge not their new made univerlal Bifhop which thePrimitiveChurch never did?And when rhey make tha: to be efTcntial B to the Cathol&e Church

which

which the firft Catholike Church did never know ? I know there be feme Enthufiafts and Anabaptifts and fuch giddy perfons,that do as the Papifts do,condemn all the Churches of Chnit except themfelves. But yet the Schifme that they have made hereby is nothing to that which was made by the Papifts , who have fet theChriftian world into a flame of diflention , and make it their very bufinefs daily to blow it up; and do noun(h ;o many Colledges of Jefuites and other orders to that end,

What nocorious impudency is it then in thefe men to tell us that *e arc fchifmaticks, & feparace from them and aske us, how wc dare ;udge all our forefathers to damnation , a»d why we will pot be of our forefathers Religion ? and do rtot obferve how they con-dernne themfelves by ail thefe queftions. What more evident then that the Papifts have feparated from all other Chriftiars in the world? How dare theycon-demne the far greateft part of Chriftians on earth to eternal torment? yea and (by plain confequence, though they will not acknowledge it) the whole Church of Chrift for many hundred years?were it but one foul that they ftiould prefume to oenfure, they might well bethink them of an anfwer to Panls Que-ftton, Who art thou that judgeft another mans fer-vant? to his own mafter doth heftand or fall, When Paul wrote that to the Church at Rome , he knew of none then that would juftifie the judging of all the world, and fay, They are my fecvants,or fubie<3:s,and therefore I muft judge them. Do the blind Papifts think that any fober confederate impartial Chriftian can be of their mind, and damne the moft of Chrifts Church on eard^meerly becaufe they will not be fub-jed to the Pope of Rome. If this Article be fo necef-fary to falvacion, Why do not we find it in any ancient

till)

cnt Creed? Why muft we not fay £ I believe in the Pope of Rome'] as well as Ql believe in God?] Or if indeed it be the Pope and Romamfis that is meant by £the holy CatholikeChurch]why would not the com-pofers'of the Creed tell us fo ? And why did none of the ancient Churches undcrftand and expound it fo ? And why did no age add the word [_Romane] and call it Qthe holy Romane Catholike Church.]

2. And then withal, befides the prefent Schifme which they have made,they have laid the ground of a perpetual fchifme. For they have made a new definition of the CatholickeChwch , and made it another thing then it was before , and they have made a new head and center of its unity; fo that all the old fort of Chriftians to the end of the world,that cannot change their Chmxh and unite to the new head and center, muft needs be of a different body ifrom the Rornanifis. And if thefc men fay that it is the reft of the Chriftian world that firft withdraws from tbem. i. Let them prove that the Greek % Ab&jfins & the reft of tfie Cbri-iiian world that deny fubje&ion to them,except tbefe in the Weft,were ever under them. 2. And as for the Reformed Churches if they weje drawn in heretofore (I mean their forefathers) to countenance the Rowijh ufurpation & tyranny ,they withdraw only from that ufurpation,&feparate from/Jew* only as it is a faftton & not as from a Church. If we be drawn into a fchifm &feparationfrom all the Chriftian world ,by the fraud oiRente^ it unlawful for us to repent & retarn to the unity of the Gatholike Church, and to renounce the Schifm that we were guilty of? This is our great (in? wc are fchifqnaticks becaufe we will not continue fchif-rnaticks? we are Scnifmaucks by c< ftingoff the Schifm of Rome, becaufe we wii: i:or be Sehifms ticks by continuing to feparate from all the Churches elfe on earth.

\ •

3. But let us come to the tryal with them who laid the firft Schifmatica^ Principle? Was it not they that firft defined the Catholike Church as equipollent with the Romanel and firft made the univerfal Headfhip of their Pope to be the ceater ? Did ever Peter or Paul or any Apoftle do fo ? Did they give us fuch a definition of the Catholike Church ? Or did the Church do fo for many a hundred year after them ? Prove this well, and take all; and we pro-mife to turn Papifts without delay, The plaine truth is this. The Catholike Church for many hundred years after Chrift was that Body of Chriftians who were united or centred only in Chrift the head , and held communion in the fundamentals or great and ncccffary points of faith and worfhip : and had no ' norcal head or Center: But the worldly greatnefs of the City of Rome , occafioneth the inflation and protld ufurpationof her Biiliop , and he will needs make himfelf the Center of union and univerfal head, when there was no Center or head, but Chrift before : And is not this the vileft Schifme that men can tell how to be guilty of? fuppofe that the ?\ing of Spaine having his Dominions remote one part from another, fomein Europe; and fome in the Indies , that for five or fix hundred years the Indies (hould acknowledge no other bead but the.King of Spaine 5 and the Governors of each Province {hould receive their feveralCommiflions immediately from him , and ftand in no regimental ilibordinati-on to one another i but onetabe bound by the King to have communion and h©M c^rrefpondence for their mutual fafety and the common good : If now after fo long time the Vice Kvng of Mexico^ (hall by Degrees make himfelf the fovereign of the reft ,

firft

firft claimir-goncly thefirft place in their Affcmbiies, bee: itiic he is Governor of the greateft City; anil then requiring them toxio nothing without him, or hisconfent, and at laft proclaiming himfelf the head of the Indies under the King of Spaine , and than none are fub/efts to the King but thofe that profefs themfelvcs alfo fubje&s to him f but all the reft are rebels and tray tors, and to be ufed accordingly ; exhorting and commanding all to fall upon them and ufe them as fuch : And all this upon pretence that Spain is fo far off, that the King there \% invifible and inacceflible to them in the Indies , and therefore the King hath given him a Commiffion to be his^fcb-ftitute,as being more vifible and acceffible.If now the reft of the Prcfidents,Governors and Provinces,{Ral.l refufe to acknowledge the Headfhip of this man, and {hall declare that they dare center to no head , but the King of Spaine without his exprefs Commiffion manifefted, and the Provinces of UWexico and the adjacent parts onely fhall be otherwife minded and iubjeft themfelves to theufurper, who is it that caufeth the Schifme in the King of Spains dominions? And which partie is it thatholdeth ta the ancient terms of unity ? and which are the dividers ? I need notftandto make a particular application : It ise-ven fo, between us and the Pope with his Romanifts. The Church of old was centred onely in Chrift and headed onely by him ; At laft the Pope pretending Chrifts diftance and invifibility , and a Commiffion that he hath from Chrift to be his Vicar General (written^ letters that n*>ne can read but himfelf and his party ) will needs become the vifible head and center: and whereas before thofe onely were the rebels that rejefted Chrift now all muft be rebels

bcls that are not fubjcft to the Popes.

And to aggravate the crime by the addition of hi-pocrifie , all this Schiime and reparation muft be carryed on by a pretence of unity : They make the poor fimplc people believe that the Pope being the Head and center, there is no unity to be held but in him , and that we muft all be guiltv of Schifme that unite not in him, and that all our divifions arecaufed by our departing from this center of unity: when it is himfelf that hath divided from the reft of the Chrifti-an world , and would drown the infamy of it by accufing others of the fame fin that he is fo notort-oufly guilty of. By which we may well fee, that ac-cufing others is none of the fureft figns of innocen* cy , but too common a trick to divert the fufpition from themfclves. When the Papifts that are the greateft Schifmaticks on earth , do make fuch an outcry again ft us as Schifmaticks, becaufe wie have repented of our joyning with them in their Schifme, and will not confederate with them in evil, againft the Laws of Chrift, and the ncceflary means oi the unity of his Church.

Arg. 7. If the faith of Papifts as Papifts^hkh is it that we tall Popery , bi a meerly uncertain^ changeable thing , fo that a man can never tell when he hath it aU then is it no fafe way to Salvation.' Bat the faith of Paptjh (as fuch) u fuck a meerly uncertain changeable thing : Therefore it ia no fafe way to Salvation*

The confequence of the Major , I fuppofe they will grant. For how on that be a fafe way, 1. which is uncertain, 2, $nd changeable ; when the true way

to

to falvatioa is one and the fame, and changeth not finee Chrift had eftaJblifhed arid lealed his Laws.

All the queftion therefore is <*f the Minor: which I prove, i- From the Popifh principles, 2. From their Pra&ices^both which do plainly ihew that their new Religion is a meer Weather-cock chat mult fit with the winde of the mutable conceits of the Pope and his Clergy. Even like the Religion of the Enchu-fiafts that wait ftill for new Revelations to befuper-added to the Scripture.

And firft for their principles, one is that [[The Scripture is not the whole word of God , or Efficient rule of faith or manners • but oncly a part of the Word and Rule ^ and that unwritten Traditions are the other pare : Yea Rujbworths Dialogues, BelUr-mine , and the reft of them ordinarily , tell us that Scripture was not chiefly given to be a Rule of faith at all : faith 'Beliarm* de verbs deili. 4. cap. 12. £jF*-nts Scripture pracipum non eft* utfit Regulafidiijed ut varils document is, exempli*^ adhortatjonibpu, nunc terrendo, nunc inftruendo , nunc minandt, nunc cqh-folando adjuvet n$s in kae peregrinati$ne. ] that is \_The chief end ofScripture , u nut to be a Rule of faith: but that by divers documents^ examples\adkor-tations , fometime by affrighting , Jhmetme by in* jirutting , fometimt by threatnixg , fometime by com-farting , it may help tu in thi* our peregrinationC\ It ss then unwritten Tradition* that are part of Gods Word, and at lcaft part of the Rule of faith : And where thefe Traditions are to be found, and what they arc, and how many, and by what notes they may all be known, either they dare not tell us, for fear of bringing mens faith to a certamty , from unit der

ocr the lock and key of the Pope , or elfe in telling us they do but cloud the buiinefs with general terms, or elfe difagree among themfelves. That the Scripture it felf is delivered to us infallibly, we doubt not : and thereby we know the Canonical books: Bat this may be done without another word of God : The aft of Delivery from the Apoftlesis not a new Revelation or Word of God, but the natural means of conveying the word to thofe for whom it was intended : And the ob]tU of that Aft of Delivery was not another Word of God, but all and onely thefe fame Canonical Books: To that I know which is the Canon (among other reafons) tecaufe I can prove (not by another Word of God , but) by infallible humane Teftimony ( fuch as I have of the Laws of this Land) that the BiHe, and thefe particular books in ic were aftuaHy delivered by the holy Writers to the Churches. If God write the two Tables of ftone*, and therein make known that they are his Laws, and then Deliver thefe to Aiofes, this Delivcrwji is not a new Wor&of God, but a neceffary aft for the promulgation of the Word : So that if youaske an Israelite how he knows, whether onely the ten Commandments, and ail thofe ten were contained in the Tables? He can prove it to you by the Tables Delivered , and by proving the Aft of ^Delivery , though he could bring no other word of God which told you what was in thofe Tables. And indeed, if thefe muft needs be another Word of God, he fides the Delivering Afts to prove the former to be the Word of God, and tell us its parts, then there muft alfobe another werdtodif* cover that fecondWord to be the Word o' God, znd another to difcover that, and To in infinitum.

Our acknowledged neceflary Tradition, therefore is not another materia tradita , or Word of God i but onely one of the al~t*s pradtnii , and ad ef delivering the fame matcer or word.

But tor thePapiih that will have another part cf the Rule of Divine faith , they will never be able to tell us wrtat it is, and where , and to let us under-itand when we have ail, *Be£armIne de verbo dei mn Scriptoli. 4 cap. 9. layes down five Rules by which we may know the true Traditions. The firft is \jvhen the whole Cliurch tjnbraceth anything as a point of faith , which i* not found in the Scriptures of God\ We mufi. needs fay >. that this was had from the tradition cf the %Apoftles. ] The fecond is \whtb the univerfal Church kzepeth Jomewhat Which none could conftitute but God y and Which is not found written, we mufi needs jay , that this was delivered from Chrifi and the ^p-flUsT^ The third is Q That which is kept in the univerfal Church , and through all timespaft, is defervedlj judged to have been inftituted bj the nA* poftles , though it be fuch a.thing as the Church might injtitute. ] The fourth is \_ When all the Doftorsof the Church do with one confent teath that fuck a thing defcendedbj ApoftolicalTradition , either Congregate General Councel , or Writing it apart in bookj , this is to be believed to be an Apoftoli'ke Tradition. T The fifth Rule is this [_ That is Without doubt to bo believed to defeend from Apoftolical Tradition, which iihildfor fuch in thyfe Churches where the fucceffion from the Apoflles is entire and continued.^ Thefe are Hcllarmines five Rules.

But 1. What the particular ApoiUlical Traditions are which are Gods Word according to thefe Rules, he hdd more wit, or lefs honefty then to let us unit 2 dtf-

derftand. Is it becaufe the word of God is indeed yet unknown ? or cannot be known? ©r becaufe it is not fie to make it known ? or becaufe the Pope muft pretend to the keeping of thefe hidden Laws, that fo the world may receive them at his mouth ?

2. And I would fain know whether thefe Rules of *B diamines to know the unwritten word by, are themfelves the Word of God, or not ? If they be, are they written or unwritten , and how known to be fo ? If not, then it feems we may have Rules and means which are not the word of God, by which we may infallibly know which is the true word of Gcd? And then there needs no unwritten word to deliver or prove the written word.

3. And why may not another Doftor by thefe Rules, know the unwritten word, as well as the Pope^ and another Church as well as the Ro* mane}

4. And why may not the Chriflian people through the world procure from fome one charitable Pope, through lo many hundred years, a Catalogue of thole unwritten verities, that the word of God may be once commonly known, and men may knojv when they have all, without uncertain dependencies on the Pope, or travailing in vain to ieWtd know.

5. And for thofe few that Bdlarmint hath inftan-ccd in, viz,. The perpetual Virginity of the Virgin Marj, The Baptifme of Infants, the validity of He-, reticks Baptifm, the faftofLent, the inferior orders cf the Clergy , the veneration of Images. To the firft, I fay, It is no Article of Divine Faith, but of humane Ecclefiaftica!: The fecond is proved fully out of Scripture ; And fo is the third, if you take it of

fuck

fuch Hcreticks (in a larger fence) as exprefly exclude nothing eflential to baptifm , but exprefly include it all: But for the reft , BelUrmine fhould remember hoCv dfwhere he defendeth the Council that required the rebaptizing of thofc chat were baptized by the Paulinifts, becaafe they were Anti-trinitarians. For Lent, I fay, no more can be proved of it, but onely that it is an ancient Ecclefiaftical conftitution. And the inferior orders are apparently novelties, introduced after the firftage,ifnot thefecond too, and not mentioned in any of the firft writers, but the fum of Church Officers enumerated without them. Much more novel is the unlawful ufe of Images in Churches or as immediate inftruments to excite devotion in prayer, and for other lawful ufe, we deny it not.

6. But principally I would intreat Bellarmine and the Pope that hereafter they would obtrude no unwritten word upon us,but what is proved to be fuch , at leaft by his own Rules. Let us have fome proof that it proceedcth from the univerfal Church f and not their naked word without evidences. And then wemuft intreat them to be fohoneft, as not to unchurch the Gnekj, Abtjfwe:^ Armenians\Pro~ teftants , and all the Chriftians in the world except Romanifts y that fo they may be the whole Catho-like Church , and then prove any thing to be the word of God by their own Teftimony alone. Nor yet to perfwade us that fuch a Council as theirs at Trent conteined the whole Catholike Church real or representative: nor yet to bring us two or three -Fathers, and fay that thofe were all the Doftors of the Church.

K 3 . More

(J4)

More particularly I anfwer to his Rules in order. To the firft I fay. i. That prove if you can that e-ver the whole Church embraced any thing as a point .of Divine faith which is not contained in the Writ* ten Word 2. If the whole Church embrace rt, then it is no fecret, and therefore we al! may know it , yea and a&ually do know it as well as the Pope,

To the fecond Rule I fay , You may prove a mi-ftaken obfervanceof rites by the greater part of the Church, but prove that the Vehole Church kept any thing unwritten, which none could conftitute but God: But if they did, ftillitmuft needs be known to all, and therefore not controvertible, or locktup m the Popes clofet Prove alfo that the univerfal Church may not erre in fome lefler matters about Chrifts fuppofed conftitutions.

To the third I fay, If by \jill timespjft~] you include the Apoftles , then we grant your Rule: but meer Eccleiiaftical Carions may be obferved throughall times (hortly after the Apoftles, and yet not-as Apottolical, but Ecclefiaftkal : Yet when you come to try your Traditions by this Rule, Iain not out of doubt that you will but difgrace them , and fail your Readers juft expectations.

To the fourth I lay, 1.1 will believe you, if you fpeak of ail the Doctors of the Church next to the Apoftles, or fo neer as that the danger of miftaking was not great. 2. Rut I do not believe that you will find any of your Traditions afferted to be Gods Word, by all the Doftors of the Church (nor neer alt) in any one ^ge : unlefsyou make your fadion to be all

- The lad Rule is but a meer trick of wit to get the

key

into the Popes hand alone: To which I fay, i. A hurch rjiat hath had an interrupted fueceilion of true Paftors from theApoftles, may fall into many errors in procefs of time , which in TertuEians and Iren&m dayes, when the memory of all the Apeftles pra&ices were fo frclh^ they could rot fall into fo eafily. 2. Thofe Churches have received their unwritten verities, 'cither by writings from their pre-deceflbrsor without: If by writings, why cannot others find it there as well as they ? If without, it muft be an uncertain, and mutable means; or by a means fo publike itill that all as well as they may know of it. 3. And wt undertake to prove that the fucceffion of. true Paftors of the Romijh Sre hath been long ago, and often interrupted. And therefore'this Rule will not ferveyour turns.

But though I have been long upon this principle of the Papiiis to prove the uncertainty of their faith, yet the next is the chief that I intended, which alfo proveth the mutability of it.

2. ThePapifis ordinarily hold that as torn , that ^ Gods Word which the Pope with his Clergy fay is Gods Word; and that his determination or Declaration that this or that is a point of faith, doth make it to hs a point of faith, and neceffary to be believed to falvation, which before was not fo; So that according to the Papifts, the Churches faith qnuft alter at the Popes pleafure (at leaft with his Clergy) And by new declarations £nd determinations, he may make them a new Article of their Creed, when he will: fo that their faith is as mutable and fallible as their Pope; and this they are themfelves aware of: and therefore feign him to be infallible that they may prove their faith infallible : which if they could do

K 4 fas

(as they never can) yet fiill their faith is mutable by their own eonfeilion, if not by revocations, yet by new additions as tow : fo that their Religion is in continual progrefs or flux, and groweth in quantity as every Pope doth adde his Determinations. Now I would know of any Papift in the world, or of the Pope himfelf if he would condefcend to fuch con-fiderations, whether they are fure that yet they have all that is made neceffary'to be believed to falvation, upon fuppofal of their determination ? How can they tell but that their fucceflbrs may make the Creed as long again as it is, and make their Religion another thing ? I know they will fay , that -as to them no more is de fide then the Pope determineth to be fo,

But then, i. If he would not determine it, no man (hould be bound to believe in Chrift, and fo HOnc be damned for unbelief.

2 If it be a benefit' to have all points of faith determined , Why are they not dsne, but one Pope muft adde one, and another 2cdQ another to the end of the world (if Chrift {hould let them go on.)

3. Sure the preaching of any one Apo-file or other Preacher of the Gofpel in the firft age did leave the unbeltevers without excufe; and not onely the Cathedral Determination of Saint Peter And why then doth not any Preachers Revela'tion of Gods will from his Word, oblige men now to believe as well as it did then?

And 3. It is evident and undenyable that their praftice is according to their principles. The Po-pifh Religion changeth fo faft by the new additions

('37)

dons of fevcral Popes , that it is not the fame thing now, as ic was heretofore. Look but into the Oath, or Trent Confeflion which I recited in the beginning ,. and you may prefently fee how their Religion is fwclled bigger then it was,' All the Popes Decretals, or at Jeait all the Canons of Trent , and every General Council (at leaft, ^confirmed by the Pope) do enlarge their faith, as they adde any thing to what went before. What a multitude of things arc de fide now , that were not fo within a thoufand years? What man can give up himfelf to fuch a growing Religion, where we muft waite on the Pope, as the Enthufiafts do on God, for new Additional Revelations ? And cannot know when we have all or halfe. How can they tell but their Creed may fill more volumes yet before that all their Popes have done with it ?

Nay further note, that the Pope can make not onely new wayes to Heaven , but feveral wayes to Heaven at once. He could once dif-pence with the Bohemians for receiving in both kinds, and yet make it neceflary to the falvatt-on of others, to take it but in one, becaufc he fo decreed it to be given. So that there fhall be one Creed in one part of the world, and another in the reft.

It is a damnable Herefie in parts that are ab-folutely under his power, for thevuglar te read the Scripture in their own Tongue. But in England , he can make it Lawfnll , left it hinder his defignes , though his Doftors have long determined that it is the Mother of all Here-fies.

So

So chat Popery is not the fame thing in one Country Visit ism another* nor the ferae thing ztRome it felf in one age as it is at another.

To give you a frefh example: How long have the Dominicans and Jefuites, the Janfenifts, and the Molinifts been in contention aboue'Predeftination , Freewill, Predetermination, Uoiverftl Redemption, &c> and one party condemned the other, profeffing their opinions to be heretical i a-;d deftru&ive tq» •the Catholike faith ? as is to be feen in the writings between r Petavim > Ricardw, and Vincentim^ Lenis\ tUat From&ndm^ with many "more before them : But when they fpe^k to us about thefe matters they per* livade.us that it is onely about certain Shool points thac'the-y differ ,.and not about any points of faith : For they are not points of faith to us till the Pope have determined them. And while the eager con-. tenders on either fide endeavor to have the Pope determine the controverfie on their fide, no Pope durft do it for fear of iofing the reputation of his infallibility with the adverfe party; and fo the unmerciful Popes have long fuffered their Doftorsto live in contention, and to write voluminoufiy a-gainftone another, and their Romane Church to be broken into parties, becaufe they would not once open their mouths to decide the difference. But now at laft it pleafed Pope Innocent the tenth(though he durft not touch the principal points ) to favor his jefaiccs fo far as to determine^ five of the controverted points for the Molinifts againft the Janfenians (when Pope Clement was once about determining all for the Dominicans as tt^cy thought) Mark here the agreement of the Papifts, and the ftability of their faith. Before the determination each party maintain-

(n9)

tained their way as de fide , and accufed the other as Heretical i fome boldly prognofticated ( as our Thomas lAnglu* alias white ) that the Pope would never determine the eontroverfie about Predetermination. Acd now the Pope hath tryed the ftomacks of his Dominican* with the Determination of rhefc five Articles. Firft, to fee how they will digeft them before he went further : And he pronouoccth them to be Heretical, and fome of them temerarious, impious , and blafphemous too, condemning them with Anathema : Now thofe become points of faith on one fide, and Herefies on* the other which were none before. Till this Determination the Church of Rome wanted five Articles of their Creed, or had five fewer then now they have : A man might have been faved before, that had believed, that Q Liberty from necejfitj u not neceffarj to LMerif^ with the reft of them, but now all of that belief muft be damned. And was not the Pope unmerciful to the poor Dominicans, to fend them all to Hell, that cannot change their belief, knowing how hard it is for a learned Tribe , efpccially fo countenanced by Au-guftine,and Thomas, to alter their mindes unfeigned-ly at a word. And yet in the Trent Confeflion they muft all folemnly fwear and vow that all things delivered, defiued, and declared, bythefacred Canons and Oecumenical Councils, efpecially that of 7>*/tf, they do without doubting receive and profefs; though no man had ever heard the Popes Reafons ; yet if he do but fee the Determination of their Church, he muft prefently not onely believe the contrary 'to what he believed before, but do it alfo without doubting ; though they'l confefs millions are faved that* believe Chrift to be the Son of God , though

not

not without doubting. Well: but fee what unity is procured by the addition of thefe new Articles to their Oeed? The French Doftors afcribe to his holinefs that the faid Articles may be taken in feverai fences: The one fence is Heretical, Lutheran or Cal-vinian^ but that is a fence , That* the toords lawfully ufed will net hear, but mely may malignantly be fafi-enedto them (fay they) The other fence ( which is genuine and proper ) they Defend themfehes , as true, and as pertaining to the Belief of the Church , as theTtoBrine of Auguftine, and as defined by the Council of Trent, and tire contrary Opinion eiMolina and the adverfaries others maintain to be Pelagian or Semipelagian, See here whatthrPapifts them-felves now do impiicitely charge upon the Pope; That he (by his exprefs uolimited condemnation ) doth malignantly faften an Heretical fence en the words , which properly they will not bear , or clfe that hccontradi&eth Auguftine and the Council of Trent f and Anathematizeth the Chriftian faith, and maintaincth the Semipelagian Herefie of CMolina. And yet muft we judge either their Pope to be infallible; or their Church to be at fuch unity in faith as they would make the ignorant vulgar beIieve?Morc of the like contention about his holinefs Determinations you may fee in Tho. whites Appendicnla ad fonum Bnccina , and Franfcus Macedo his Lituus Lufttanm: In all which you may fee that all the comfort that the poor Dominicans have left them (even their hope of fal vation if they be Papifts indeed) con-fiftethinthis, that the Popefpeaks one thing and means another , and that ( as white fo merrily faith, in fo fad a matter ) The wife father of the Church Was necejptated for the appcafwg of contentions , to

grm

(140

grtnl lh* wtort turbulent party their TPords , ank the more obedient fArtj their fence : fo that when the Pope hath done all that he can to determine their contro-verfies, they will ftill &y, that he determined but the words (nay he doth but grant one party their words ) and not the meaning: gnd fo not onely fenc€ , but bare terms muft be made Articles of faith.

And here you may fee the great force of the Pa-pifts arguing for a ne 4 ce/fity of a living Judge to determine of the fence of Scriptare, becaufe the Scripture is fo ambiguous that each one will elfe wrcft it, bis own way : And do we sot fee, that the Pope can-net, after fo many years deliberation , determine five ftiort Articles fo exprefly and plainly , even when he dotb it of purpofe to decide the controjtr-fie, as to make his learned Doftors anderftand him ? but that each party doth take his Words to be either for,or not againft their opinions, and bold their opinions as faft fince his determination as before : And fo tiiey do by Angnftine, Thomas and the Council of Trent: each party confidently perfwading the world that they were of their fide. And may not God have the honor of fpeaking as plainly as the Pope or Thomas or the Council of Trent ? and cannot we well be without the Docifion.ef fuch a Judge, as cannot fpeak fo.as to be underttood by hi$. grcateft Doftors himfelf.

So that the Principles and Practices of the Roma-nifts do affure us that their faith is unfixed 9 growing and mutable • they may be one year of one Relt-£ion,and another year of another ,as pltaft the Pope: A Dominican might have been fared at any time fince the creation till Maj 31.165 3. when the Popes

Deter

Determination was dated : but rifrw they mud all be damned for herefle. There is a new way to heaven made 1653. that never was before : and for ought they .know to the contrary before their Popes have done Determining, there may be five hundred Articles more in their Creed. So that for my part I defire not either to be (hut out of heaven at the pleafure of every new Pope, nor to be of To uncertain and changeable a Religion ; Andleannot think therefore that Popery is a kk way tofaiva-tion.

Arg. 8.. ThatDoBrine Which derogatethfrom the written Wordof God , and fetteththe Decrees of men above it* enabling them to contradict its <mofi exprefs inftit tit ions, ts no/afe way tofalvation : r ButJ)tch is the c DoUrineof Poferj : therefore it is no fafewaj t$ falvation

The Major is unquestionably true among trOe Chri-ftians. For the proof of the Minor I (hail only give you three inftances of the Poptih Do.ftrine, hecaufe I intend not to be too particular , left I be too large.

The firft is,their affirming the Scripture both to be infufficient to difcovQr the whole dodrine of faith,a« being hue @ne part of God? Word , and Tradition the other part, and alfo to be no Word of God at 3\\.to:us, till the Pope and his Clergy do authoritatively determine it fo to be; or that we cannot know die Scripture to be Gods word, but upon the Authority of the Churches determinatipn. But of this I have fpoken before , and (hall do more in another difpute.

The

(m)

Thefecondinftancethatlgive is, Their changing Chrifts moft exprefs inftitution , by withholding ' the Cup in the Lords Supper from the people, and giving them but half the Sacrament.I am not now disputing about the efficacy or inefficacy of one half, fo delivered; but proving the intolerable Arrogan-cy of the Papifts that dare fet up the will of man a-brove Gods Word , and give power to the Pope to change Chrifts Inftitutions; and not onely to adde but to diminifh , and exprefly to contradift Chrift, and forbid what he comraandeth. I know they pre-tend^hat it was but to the twelve Apoftles that Chfift gave the Cup , and not to thp Laity : True , nor the bread neither : but then if he intended that none but the Clergy have the Cup, why may they not as well fay fo of the Bread ? But do not thefe deceivers know ? i. That Chrift gives this reafon of his adminiftringtheCup [Brinks jet All of 'it : F$r this is rnj blood of the Nety Teftament which isjhedfor many for the Remijpen of fins?] So chat if this reafon hold to others, if his blood be fhed for the fins of others as well as for theClergic, then the command extendeth to others [Drinks je all of it*~\ And do they not know that Luke further intimateth this in his narration of the words of Chrift [This Cup is the New Tefiament in my bhod Which is/bedfor you}'] So that thofe whom it is (bed for (and we may difcern to be Believers) it may be applycd to, 2. And do they not know that Paul delivereth the dodrinc both of the Biead'andCup^s from the Lord, to the whole Church of Corinth, i Cor. n. and not onely to the Clergy ? Is it not ail that he exprefly commandeth to [Examine themfelves , and fo to eat ■of this Break and "Drink of this Cup Q Aias j they

know

(H4)

know all this: they cannot but know it, and yet they will contradid the exprefs word of God : God faith {^Drink^ye aUof *r]] and Q Let a, man ex- ' aminehimjelf', mdfodrin\\~\ The Pope faith, Let none of the people drink of it, but the Clergy only. What is this but to abrogate Gods Laws, and fet up the Popes above and againft it? Yeaunlefs it were to (hew the world their Power to contradid: Cbrift and deftroy his word, who can imagine what {hould move them to this attempt ? If there were any temptation of profit or honor in the bufinefs ^as there is in themaintaingof the Popes fupremacy, Purgatory, Indulgences, Pardons, e^.) we (hould not wonder at*it: But what profit, or honor, or picture is it, thus to contradict Chrift? and for them that adde fuch a multitude of their own Cere-' monies, to affeft fo to cut off one half of the Sacramental Rite and matter which Chrift ordaitv-ed.

Nay thirdly, Do not thefe men know that the Bread and Cup were both given to the people by the Primitive Church? and that it fo continued for many hundred years? and that their alteration is a meer novelty. Yes, they kn$w all this: For the matter is fo far pail doubt tha: they cannot but know it. And yet thefe deceivers would make the people believe that they are of the old Religion, and our Region is new. Thefe are they that cry out againft our cafting off Apoftolical Traditions, and the Churches conftitacioiis and ctiftoms,' and going in new wayes which our forefathers knew not : Thefe are they that make it a mark of an Apoftolical Tradition, that the -whole Church hath received it, and tfet as from the Apoftles. And yet thefe men dare caft off,

not

not onely that which they know the whole primitive Church received and pr^tttfed as from the Apoftles (as fuftin CMartjr , TertuUian , and all antiquity proiefs) butalfois exprefly. contained in the Scripture. With what face can thefe that exclaim againft novelty, introduce fuch a palpable novelty into the Church? with what face can they that fo cry up antiquity,gainfay all antiqiuty? and they that cry up the wholeChnrches confentfo goagainft thecbrlfent of the whole Church for fo many Ages after the Apofties ? They dare not deny but this part of Popery is utter* 5 ly New, againft the conftant pradtit'e and Canons of all Churches.

The third point ^vhich I {hall inftance in , is i Their performing Gods publike fervicc in La-tine , and forbidding the people to read the Scriptures in their known vulgar Tongue; when as the Apoftle "Paul hath written the greateffc part of a whole Chapter, i Cor. 14. exprefly a-gainft this opinion and practice \ and for ufing of a known tongue that others may underftand and be edified. The evaflons by which they would elude that part of Scripture; are fo fence-kfs that I think it nOtneceflary to recite them : but rather fuppofe that they need no other confutation , than the bare confiderate reading'of the Text; and therefore I fhall venture the Reader ( if he have j common capacity and impartiality,and be but willing to know the truth) upon any thing that the Papifts Iftiallbe able to fay , for their Latine Service % and locking up the Scriptures, fo be it he will but.read that Chapter confiderately. And are not thefe good Teachers in Chrifts School that will lock up the Grammar from their Schollars, when it is

the very office of the Presbyters to teach it the people ? And to hide from them that word of the living God, which he hath given the world to be their Di-rctStory to falvation ? The Prophets, andChriftand the Apoftles did fpeak and write this w©rd in a known toflgu^ to the people to whom they did immediately dire& it: And muft All hear and read it then, and onely the Learned now ? Are not thefe the men that takeaway the Key of knowledge, and will neither enter in themfelves, nor fuffer others to eater ? They do exprefly contradift the Commands of Gdd, and bid the people not read the Scripture, when God hath charged them to write it on the very pofts of their houfes, and on their doofs, and that it be as a frontlet between their eyes, and that they teach it their children , fpeakingof it lying down and riling up, at home and abroad, Dent. 6 & 11. God makes it themarkof the Blcffedman, PfaL i. 2,3. To meditate day and night in his Law, as making jt his delight: andthePapifts commonly maintain in their writings that to have the Scripture in the vulgar tongue is the root of all herefies. God makech theftudy of his word th£ duty and mark of all his Difciples, and the Papifts make ic the mark of a He-retick , and have burned many a one for it here in Queen Maries dayes,and tormented and burnt many by their bloody inquifition for it abroad. The very Pharifces thought that their vulgar were curfed that knew not the Law, and the Papifts will not let it be made known^ to them left it make them accurfed. God faith {To the LaW and to the Teftimonj : iftbej fpeal^not according tcthisVeord^ it m becaufe there it m ligm in them^ Ifa. 8. 20. ] The Papifts cry out frtcnl* — bine away : let it alone, meddle not with

(H7J

it , it will make you Hcrcticks : And indeed they have had large experience that the way which they call herefie, and ccntradi&eth their impieties , is moft effe&ually promoted by the word of God : and therefore they think they haVe fome rcafon to fpeak againft it. Saint John faith [Thefe things are written that ye might (relieve , and that believing yee might have life throagh his name~\ Joh. 20. J I. The Papifts fay, Read not thefe holy writings, left they de-ftroy your faith, and bring you to damnation. When the man Lu^ 10. 26, asketh Chrift [what Shall I do to inherit eternal life Y\ Chrift anfwerfeth him thus [what U written in the Law ? how readeft thou ?] directing to the courfe which the Papifts da forbid.The Apoftle faith* that [ tvhatfoevcr things Were Written aforetime y were written for our Learning , that we through patience and comfort of the Scripture might have hope2 Rom. 15.4. But the Papifts will not have men learn that, which was written for their Learn • ing, Comfort and Hope. John wrote to fathers $ young men,andchildren, ijohn 2. 12,13,14. Gods anger againft the Jews was that [ He had written to them the great or wonderful things of his Lato , and thej had accounted them *s ft range things~\ Hof 8.12. And the Papifts will force people to be ftrange to thefe writings. Yet how familiar (comparatively) they were to the vulgar Jews and their very children ii known and acknowledged, Is it not a high advancement of the Gofpel Church, above the legal Jewilh Church, which the Papifts do vouchfaie it ? That we may not have the fame liberty or means of knowledge as the rcry children of the Jews had? their children muft be taught the Scripure, lying I dtfwn and rifing up 3 and our eldeft people even to

L z the

the left breath mufinot read them, vmlefs they can learn die tongues which chey were firft written in. The Jewes had the Septuagints Tranflation (or that fo called) when the Hebrew grew ftrange to them, which the Apoftlesufed in their ordinary citations; and they heard the Gofpel preached in the Syriack,which was then their vulgar tongue: But we may not read the fame in our Vulgar tongue by the Papiits confent t Mofes^ Jofbua^ fofiah, Nehemiah , Read the Scriptures to all the people, Sxod. 24. 7. 7^.8.34,35^ 2 King. 23* 1,2, 5. Neh. 8.3.8.18. &-9,3 & 13*. 1. And it was their cuftome to read M(£?s3lti& the Prophets to the people every Sabbath day, Act. 13. 27. & 15, 21. 2 Cor. 3.15. Lh^ 4,16. And Chrift ufeth to reprehend their ilrangenefs to Scripture paffages, as if they had not read them with ffcch words as thefe £ Have ye not read, &c?"J and \Jrtave ye never read\&i*f\Mat .\z. 3, 5. & 19. 4. & 2126.& 22. 21. Alarh^ *Z> KX 26. Luk^6. 3.■£»£. 10. 26. And Mofes commandeth Urael, the Priefts, Levites and all the Elders thus t JJctft, 31.11,12,13. \When all Ifrael it come to appear before the Lord thy God in the pUce ^hich he fhall chovfe , thon fhalt read uns Law before all Ifrael in their bearing ; Gather the people together, men and w&men and children 3 and the jlran*er that is within thy gates , that tiny may hear , and that they may ham 5 and fear the Lord your God^ find obferije to Jo all the words of this Law ; and that their children which have not known any thing maj hear and lean: to fear the Lord your God , as Ung as ye live in the land,&:c~2 It was therefore in a known , tongue that itomft be read; And when the people un- j derftocd not the old Hebrew tongue in which the Law was Britten, by reaion of the change of their fpeech •

in the captivity, NcbemUh caufed them to understand the Reading, Nch.S.8. No doubt, by expreinng it in the language which they underitcod. Ar.d yet the Papifts forb.d ihe unlearned, that have mod need of teachings, the ufe of the holy Scriptures in a known tongue , and make it the mother of all Here-fies. How impioufly againft God , and how cruelly againfl; men t is this committed ? Muft the God of heaven fend down his Spirit to didatean illuminating Doftrinc to his Prophets and Apoftles for the world? muft he give them a perfeft Law, by which Truth and Herefie muft be difcemed ? Muft he fend his own Son to preach the Gofpel ? and caufe his inftruments to write it, in a language belt known to thofe than they converfed with, or to the world that was to be converted by it ? And muft this Dodrine now be made the mother of Herefies, and kept from the eyes of the people that ftiould learn it ? What, muft the onely rule that condemneth Herefies, be made the caufe of them? Muft the light jvhich God hath given the world, be blamed for 411 the Darknefs of mens errors? Or muft men be kept from the light , for fear leaft it lead them into Darknefs? This is the Popifh Piety and Charity: Xn ftead ofc" ! helping to Illuminate the dark world, asattpreach-I ers of the Gofpel fhoulddo (Aft. 26.17,10.) they I muft have all the unlearned to put out their eyes f I and be led by their guides , and truft their fouls I with them , for fear left if they have any eyes in I their heads, and any light to walk by, they fhould ftumble or erre through the imperfe&ion of their

; fight.

L 5 And

And yet the Paptfts, who fo much pretend to tint -ty, are various and changeable in this high point of their abomination, as well as in other things. For when they once fee that they cannot keep the Scriptures from the people, becaufe the Proteftants Tran-flations are among them* then they will permit them to read their own Tranflations : And upon this account the Rhemifts tranflated the New Tcflamcnt into Englifbr when they faw they could not wholly fupprefs and hrde that light: And on this account it fcffi&t our Papiftsin England^ and feme other parts where the Proteftants abound among them, are per-niitted by their Priefts (with fome warnings of the ijcedleflnefs \ and the danger of it) to 1 cad the Scripture in their Country tongue: When as to a Papift sn Spaine or Italy it is no Jefsa crime then to m«rit the Rack or Strappado of th'e Inquificion , and its ftrange if they be not burnt for it at a ftake. So that I have rnet with fome feduced Papifts in England , fo ignorant oi their courfc abroad, and fo gulled by the lies of their companions or Priefts, that they would not believe that they do any where forbid the vulgar to read the Scripture in their own tongue; but i^ereconfidently perfwaded that ie was our flan-der of them : fo that thefe poor people believe that the Sun is not fct in Spaine at midnight, becaufe it {hin$$ at noon in England. Let them read but fob. Arbor em Theefoph- l$.c. 9. Andradim 'Defevf.Con-cil. Trident. L 4 Petrm Li^etus ^Dialog, defacris li-brit in vulg* E/oaj non evertendu ♦ HofiHS Dialog, dt Coinmnnion, &C. Pttrmfutor de Tranjlatione BiblU: 'BelUrm. deverbo Dei 1.2. r. 15. &\6. S aimer on. in iCor. < Vifp.$o. BeKarmine himfelf mentioneththe Index Ubrorum prohibit, of Pope Tim 4. Reg. 4.

which

which forbiddeth the reading of the Scripture, in the vulgar tongue,except only to thofe that the ordinary (hall think will receive good and not harm by it, and fo {hall have a licence from him in writing , and they pronounce that the common permiflionof the Scriptures thus doth more harm then good : The lame Index wa$ after enereafed and approved by Pope Sixtfu 5. and Clemens 8. And how few they are that their Ordinaries will grant Licences to, for the reading of Scripture, is too well known by common experience. The Kings oi Spain* forbid all Tranflati-ons of the Bible into the vulgar tongues; and A I-phonfw a Cafiro commendeth them for it: and many a one hath been burnt to afhes for felling, keeping, or reading fuch Bibles, in Spaine, Italy , and Savoy. And Hellarmine mentioneth the Seff. 22. cap. 8. and Can. 9. of the Council of Trent forbidding both the Common reading of fuch Bibles, aad alfo the publike ufe of them in the Churches, in both which we muft have them onely in Bebreto , Gree^ and v Latine. Be/larm.ubifupr. If thefe.be not notorious enemies of the Light, who are ? David faith, Pfal. 119. That the word was a Lanterne to his feet, and a Light to his Paths. Ifaiah fends us to the Law and to the tettimony , faying that if they fpeak not according to thefe it is becaufe there is no light in them, Jfa. 8.20. And the Phpifts fay (as Arhoretu nbifnpra ) that the reading the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue is the Rife or Root of all Herefie*: And (o the Sun muft be taken out of the firmament as being the fountain of all darknefs, or at leaft the caufe of mens wandrings. Onely where they cannot help it (or as S tap let on faith, where Herefies are moft common ) there they will permit or connive at;

it, for their own ends. For Neceffity hath no Law.

I conclude therefore,and confidently conclude, that Popery is not afafe waytGheaveaJzecmfe itdothi.botb vilifie Gods Scriptures as an inefficient Rule, and but part of his word : And 2. prefumeth to alter its moft exprefs inftitutions (as the Cup in the Lords Supper ) And 3. exprefly contradid: it, in forbidding the Prayers of the Church to be in a known tongue. 4. And forbid the publike reading of Scripture in a known tongue. 5. And forbid the tran-flating of Scripture, and the reading of fuch tran-flatiohs even by'any private man, unlefs hehavethe Ordinaries Licence, which he may get in thofe Countries where there is no remedy. The Kingdomeof the Devil is called in Scripture the Kingdom of dark-nefs; and Chrifts Ktngdom is called, a Kingdom of light: and when ever God converteth a finner* he tranflateth him from (he Power of Darknefs into his marvellous light, even into the Kingdom of his dear Son > /f^?.26.i8;0/.i i i3, l Pet.2. 9, And God is the father of lights, Jam. 1. 17. And Satan is the Prince of -the powers of dairknefe, Luk^iz 53/ Rev 16.10. And Ghrift hath told us, that he rfiatwalketh in dark-nefs ftujpnbleth and knoweth not whither he goeth, foh. 12. 35, 46. And that oyery one that doth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light left his deeds(hould be reproved; but he that doth truth cometh to the light that his deeds may be made mani-feft, that they are wrought in God^foh. 3.21. The Papifts therefore give us reafon to think they have not the truth, were it but in this enmity which they bear unto the Light.

Ar£.

(•53)

Arg. 9. That dottrine which teacheth men to worjbip the creature with Bivine Worfhip, is no fafe way tofal-vation* Hut Popery teacheth men to worfhip the creature With Divine Worjhip : Therefore it u nojafe Way tofalvation.

The iflajor will not be denyed by Papifts: The Minor I prove by one inftance onely (at this time:) and that is, their worfhiping of the confecrated Hoft or Bread in their Mafs, and at other times. He that worfhipeth the confecrated Bread with Divine worfhip , dorh worfhip Jthe creature with Divine worfhip : But the Papifts worfhip 'the confecrated Bread with Divine worfhip therefore. They deny the Major 3 and tell us, that it is no longer Bread but the Body of Chrift: But that they worfhip that thing which we call "Bread , and they call Chrifts "Body ^ with Divine worfhip, they do not deny. Onely fome would excufe them from the guilt of Idolatry (which is a worfhiping the creature inftead of the Creator) by this, becaufe they think it is Chrift that they worfhip, and fo interpre-tatively it is he in deed fnd the worfhip right. But if they will think that to be Chrift which is not Chrift, and then worftiip it, that will not excufe therafrom being fomckind of Idolaters : What if they will think a Ranter or Quaker to be Chrift, who call them' felves Chrift ? are they therefore excufable if they worfhip them ? Then why might not the old Pagan Idolaters be juftified, or thus excufed, feeing they thought that the Sun and Moon had been Gods. And when they worfhiped an Image , they thought that fome Deity had affixed

this

this fpecial prefencc to that Image : What if an Egyp*. tUn thought that an Oxe was God , or that a Deity did dwell in him, were they therefore no Idolaters ? And then, how hainoufly God taketh the fin of Idolatry, the Scripture fully witneffeth.

That which we have to do , therefore is oncly to enquire whether indeed it be bread or Chrifts body, a creature or the Creator which theywor(hif > Concerning which there is fo much faidby Doftor Feat If againft Fijher , and by Peter CMartjr againft $mkk % and elfwbere, and by feVee/, Foxe % and abundance more, that if people would read ic, I fhould think it vakHo fay any more. I (hall onely annex thefe Reafons ( very briefly ) which come firft to my thoughts to prove that the Bread is not turned into the very body of Chrift, but remaineth Bread ftill.

i. If the Bread were Chrifts real Body,then Chrift had two real bodies: for he had one fitting at the table, which delivered the Bread, and if the Bread were another , he had two ; or elfe the body that Chrift fate swd lived with , was not a whole body, but a part: But Chrift had b«t one body, and that was entire.

2. It would follow alfo that Chrift had a living and a dead body , a fenfible and infenfiblc body both at once.

3. It would follow that the Apoftles did tear Chrifts true flefh, and draw out his blood as well astbc Jews did.

4, Yea and that they began to the Jews, and did it before them ; And therefore why (hould the Jews a&,and theirs be fo much differenced ?

5, It will follow that cither # Chrift had one body

tornc

(-55)

tornc by the Jews, and another by the Difciples f or elfe that one part of his body onely was crucified and not the whole : lor the other part was eaten and drunk by the Difciples before.

6. Alfo either Chrift had one body that did Rife again and another thai never rofe, or elfe it was but one part ofChrifts body that rofe from the dead; for the other part was eaten and drunke before.

7. The like may be iaid of his afcenfion; Then it is not Chrifts whole body that afcended up into heaven: for part of it was eaten before by the Di£ ciples, and digetted by them.

8. It will follow that Chrift s glorified body is corruptible , and may be digefted by a mans ftomacke and turned into dung : For fo is that which is eaten,

9. It will follow alfo that Chrifts body may become an integral part of our very natural bo^yes andfo his body is become finful, as being a natural part of a (inner : for the Bread and Wine do nourifh us, and turn into our fubftance.

10. Yea it followeth that Chrift doth thus tarn into the fubftance of every child of the Devil that eateth the confecrated Bread, and drinketh the Wine. For they certainly nourifti him and turn into his fubftance : A raoft horrid confequent: Fop what communion hath Chrift with Belial}

11. Nay (which is in fome refpeft more horrid and abominable to imagine) it will follow, that the Glorified body of Chrift may turn into the fubftance of a moufe or a Dog : for if they eat it the bread will cerrainly nourilh them, and become their fubftance.

* It

erf)

12. It will follow that either Chrift hath aninfen-fible body, or elfe men hurt him by eating him in the Eucharift.

13. Icfolloweth that Chrift hath as many thou-fand bodies ,• as there be eonfecrated hofts, or elfe that by continuation of parts it is every where, and filleth ail the world (which the Papifts difa-vow.)

14. Itfolloweth that Chrifts body admittethof augmentation f and either dajly or weekly receiveth new made parts , or elfe that he harh new bodies made daily.

15. Alfo it followeth that a creature (either the Jkkeror the Prieft) may make God , or make his Saviour , at leaft inftrumentally : which is a horrid imagination,

16. It followeth that either Chrifts body hath the accidents of colour, :afte,dimenfion, &c which are there fenfible, ox elfe that thofe Accidents have no fubjed, whicliisacontradi&ion.

17. Ie followeth alfo that Chrift hath not indeed a true humane body, if it be fuch as is before im-plyed.

18. And it followeth that the body of Chrift is (part of it) condemned , hated of God , and tormented by the Devil. Becaufe his body was turned into the bodies of many millions of wicked men, which rauft be fo condemned, hated and tormented.

19. Alfo it followeth thai the Scriptures are not true, which tell us that the heavens muft receive him (in that humane nature which afcended from earth) till the times of the reftitution of all things, A&. J. 21. and that he (hall come again to judge the world.

20. Laftly

20. Laftly it will follow that a man muft not trnft his fences: that though my eyes, my f zncl^my tafte, my feeling, tell me that this is Bread and wine , yet they are all deceived : and not mine only but all the fenfes in the world, to which they are objeded. And if that be true, i. What reafon have I to truft any Papift living? For all my good opinion of him muft be ultimately refolved into fomething that I fee or hear of him : And it feems, I am uncertain whether I fee or hear him indeed or not. 2. And then how can I tell that I or any man is fure of any thing ? For if the fenfes o f millions in perfed: health may be all deceived in this, why not in other things % for ought we know ? 3. And then how can any Papift tell that the Brend is turned into Chrifts body ? If he fay, becaufe the Church or the Scripture faith fo; How knoweth he that ,but by hearing or feeing ? and therefore for ought he knows his fenfes may be deceived when he thinketh he hearethor readcth fuch a thing, as well as when he thinketh that he feeth , feeleth, fmelleth, and tafteth Bread and Wine.

And is there not need of very ftrangely cogent evidence now to impell them to believe againft the concurrent vote of Scripture, fenfe and reafon ? And what is the ground of their contrary belief? Not the Ancient Church (unlefs they willfully or negligently deceive themfelvcs) for the ftream of antiquity is full againft them : fofull that its hard to believe that any of them thats verft in antiquity can truly think that antiquity iar for them > if they have but the common reafon of men to underftand what they read. What is it then that bringeth them to this belief? Is it the Scriptures ? Thats not likely, becaufe they make fo light of it, and fwear to take

cm)

it in the fence of the Church f or ancient Do&ors (in which lait they are here and oft raoft defperatcly forfworn) It muft be then upon the Authority of the prefent Church, that is, the Pope and his Clergy, that they entertain this hard belief. That is|, The Pope and his Clergy believe it, becaufe they fay it themlelves, and the reft believe it becaufe the Pope faith it. And is it truely poftible that any man (hould have fo good a conceit of himfelf, yea or any other think fb well of him, as to believe unfeignedly fo great a thing upon fo weak a ground ? Can the Pope therefore believe it becaufe he doth believe it ? Or is it not too probable that thoufands of them are of that Belief which ^JAUlantthon fometime told them of very fmartly [Ton Italians ( faith foe) Believe Chrifi is in the Bread , before yon Believe that thtre is any Chrifi in heaven 3 while they pretend to a faith above men (that is, to believe Impoffibilities upon the Popes credit) I wifh they prove to have the common belief of Christians; and that in heart they do not (as once one of their Popes did) account the Gofpel but a commodious fable. But let us foppojfe that indeed it is the word of God thac is the grotind of their ftrange belief,and th^Hoc eft Corpus menm, This is r/ty bodf\ is the very word that doth convince them, as fome of them do pretend. I would here be bold to askethem that fay fo, a Queftion or two. i • What,if the Ancient Church had intecpreted this Text as we do, againft your Tranfubftantiation ? would you then have believed it upon the bare Authority of this Text ? What need I ask this ? Your own Oaths and Profeflion faith, No : It is not theft any evidence in this Text that compellcth your belief. And let meadde, that if I prote not (in a

fair

(•59)

fairjdebate upon a juft call) that tfie ancient Church for many hundred years after Chrift, was againft Tran&bftantiation, I will give all thePapifts in England leave to fpit in my face (for all the high expref-fions of the Eueharift that forae fathers have.) 2. What is there in thofc words [This is mj bocij\ that can perlwadc any fobcr Chriftian to their ftrange belief? What is if, becaufe that they are properly and not figuratively to beunderftood? And how is that proved ? Is it becaufe we muft not force the Scripture , but take it in the plained, otvious fence? Icafily grant it. Sut who knows not that both in Scripture and in all our common fpeecfa , the figurative fence is oft the moft plain and obvious, and the literal the moft improbable? What three fentences do we ufc to fpeak together without fofne figurative axpreflion f I will appeal to any unprejudiced man of reafon , whether a Chriftian that fhould newly read thofe words of Chrift, and had never heard them or read them before, would not fooner take them in our fence f then in the Papifts? They may eafiiy try this upon a new convert, if they pleafe: and I dare make their own confeiences judge, if they have any left to befriend a common truth. What is there more in [This is mj Bokf\ being a Sacramental bufinefs , then for a man that is in a room among many Images , tqfay [This is Peter or Paul, or this is Auguftinc or Hierom or Chry foftomc?]] And would not any unprejudiced ftandcr by fuppoft that the moft obvious fence of thofc words is [This is the fitturc of Peter, Faul,tfrrj Or would a mancafily believe that it was the meaning of the fpeaker, that this Pi&ure was the very real fle(h and blood of Pt-ttr and PauI, and all other Pi&ures that ever fhould

be

be made after the fame exemplar, (hoald be (o tran-fubftantiated ? So what is the obvious fignification of thofe words [ ThU u my body ] but [ Thu u the Sacrament or Reprefentation of my Body} ] Efpe* cially when hts real body was diftin&ly there prcfent, and he exprefly biddcth them [ Do this in remembrance of me7\ 3. I would defire any Papifts living to tell me, why the Text doth not as much oblige him to believe that [The Cup is the New Teftament~\ fubftantialiy without a figure, as that [The Bread ts his Body} For the Text as exprefly faith one as the other, Lnk^zz.zo. Thu Cup is the new Tefiament in wy Blood.'} Yet I fuppofe*hey will be content to fay that by [The New Teftament} is meant, the Sacrament or Seal of the New Tellament. 4. Why will not thefe blind wretches believe the Holy Ghoft,who calls it Bread ac the eating after the confecration ? 1 Cor* 11.26,27^28. three times together^and tells us that the ufe of it is to remember and (hew the Lords death till he come.

I might here adde to this in the next place their worfliiping oi Saints, efpeaally of the Virgin Mary, with prayers to her as the Queen of Heaven, to forgive their fins, and to command her Son to forgive thera, with abundance more of fuch impious, idolatrous or faqrilegious expreflions, as might make the ears of a fober Chriftian even to tingle. But thefe things have been fo oft told them, and are fo viftble in their Offices and other.* writings that I {hall pafs them over. As alfo their worfhiping of Images, and publike ufing them tq that end in their Churches: Though moii of their Laity that I have met with, fay that they ufe them" buc. for a remembrance of the Saints and d$ not worfhip them .( and thats bad

enough

(15.)

enough in fuch cafes) yet their learaed Schoolmen and Doftors tell lis another tale , as is too vifibie ih many of their writings.

Arg. io. That l^vttrive V?hich teacheth men to turn the mofi of Gods worfiip into meer unreafonable ceremonies and vdtn formalities of mans deviftng , is not afafe ftaj to falvation. Hat fuck is the diUrine of Popery : 1 herefore y Scc

The Major is certain : For i. God hath takeri down the ceremonial Law which he himfelf had made, and theiefore will raot give leave to mantQ fez up another in its ftead, and to burden his Churc a with unnceflary things 2. It is contrary to the freedom and fpiritual ftateof the Gofpel Church. TheApoftle bids us (land faft in the liberty wherewith Chrilt hath made us free: And Chrift faith, that God is a Spirit, and they that worftiip him, muft worfhip him in Spirit and Truth: for fuch worfhipers the Father feeketh : And he telieth the formal ceremonious Pharifees, that they worftiipped God in vain, teaching for doftrines the Commandments of men, C>f^. 15. 6, 7, 8,9. 7^.4.23,24. Gal. 5.1.

As for the Minor, it were tedious to recite but half the R$mijh ceremonies and formalities with which they both delude and burden poor finners. For the word of God in a tongue which they tnderftand, they muft hear a found of a ftrange language which they underftand not: In* ftead of finging praifes with the heart ( as David ) and with the underftanding (as Paul rcquireth) they fing over prayers and Scriptures and other things in uncouth notes and in the

M Laun*f

Latine tongue, which the people underftand not : The Eucharift or Lords Supper is alfo celebrated in Latins and the prayers and prailes adjoyned ; and the Cup taken from the people : and all turned into a mecr (hew, by elevation of the hoft, adoration of it, gaping while the Prieft doth pop the Bread into their mouthes. Prayers alfo are ufed in Latine, fo that the fubftance of publike worfhip is thus made a very Pi&ure, or unreafonablc fervice: Yea, they teach them to pray partly in Latine in private, and partly with vain repetitions, multiplying over the namejefu, nine times together , and rchearfing o-ver their canting fhreds, and numbering their prayers on their beads to keep tale , and obferving fuch and fuch hours, and praying to Saints, to one Saint for this and another for that, giving die elogies and prayers and praifes to the Virgin Mary , that are due to God alone: Sacraments they multiply : even Marriage which in the Clergy is a deadly fin, and the avoiding it by the Laity is a work of fupererogati-on, yet rauft it be a Sacrament. The Rules of their feveral Monaitical orders, were tedious to recite: Touch not,* tafte not, handle not: fuch meats muft not be eaten on fuch a day ; fuch orders rnuft ufe fuch mears, and forbear fuch : other Orders forbear o-ther meats; fome muft be thus {horn, (haven, clothed ; and fome thus : Much of their Devotion con-fifteth in being fprinkled with Holy Water, anointed with Chryjjpe : creeping to the Altar; ftriking on thebreaft; making and wearing the Crofs; fetting it up, and worfhiping it in high wayes and Churchyards, worfhiping Crucifixes; and bowing before the Images of God, the Holy Ghoft in the form of a Dove, and of the Saints; sravelling to certain

Images and (brines in Pilgrimage, offering to them > efpeciaily to our Lady at iorne famous places; com* parting the Church fo oft; formal penances : ob~ lerving multitudes of Holy-dayes for the Saints > hearing fo many Ma Acs, faying fuch or fuA words, carrying Palms, taking afhes, carrying banners 4 following the Croft, and hott in procefiions, and worfhiping it, bearing candles: In Bapcifme,falting f croilin^ fpathing, exorcizing, wafhing hands : Alfo bapti£tngbels;Ceremoniousconfecrations;fayingDir-ges,and Mafles for departed fouls: forfwearing marriage : renouncing propriety : pardons and tndul- " gencies from the Pope; with abundance of the like delu'ory carnal formalities in which much of the Popiih devocion doth confift. And how can any unprejudiced man, that is but pofleffed with the Spirit of God , and truely knoweth what it is towor-{hiphim, imagine that God is pleafed with fuchhi-ftrionical gaudes, and childifli things? Iconfefs the reading of their very books of devotion, their office; to our Lady , and other* the like , which arc ftu-ffed with fuch fuperftitious and unreafonablc paflages, feems enough to me to turn the heart of a fober man againft their way. For who can think that the Holy and Bleffed God will be delighted in their vain bablings and childifli cantings, and affe&ed repetitions of words,and faying, and hearing we know not what I would any wife man regard fuch cxprefllons of love or honor?If your friend or your child (hould cxprefs his Love and refpefts to you by raimicfc geftures, and gambals, and making ftrange faces, os repeating over your name nine times in a breath, or ridiculous canting*, complements and aftings tike a Stage Player, would you applaud, or delight in fuch

M 2 ex-

(

\6i

cxpreffions of love and honor as theft? Or would you not rather fey as the Philiftine King of T>a-vU^ when he fpit, and feraped on the Wall, Have I need of mad men ? It is fare a carnal un-reafonable do&rine, that leadeth men to fucb carnal unreafonable fervices, of that God who will be ferved reafonably in fpirit and in truth. They that have but an Image or fhadow of Faith and Grace, and' can expeft no more of Glory, arc like enough to be well pleafed with thefe Images and mcer fhadows of Gods worflhip : But its ' like to be otherwife with him that hath a fpirit of fupplication and holinefs within him, and hath known by experience what it is to walk with God, and offer him acceptable facrifices , and to receive the tokens of his acceptance and approbation.

Arg. II. If Toperj be maintained cotmrnnly bj mofi rvic^rd and abominable meants i and fo by the 'Devil , then it is no fafe Way to Salvati-&n> But the Antecedent is too true : Therefore, &c.

I fpeak not here of the meer mifcarriages of fome of their party ; but of the Pillars by which the Popes Kingdome is fupported ; which chat it is by abominable wickedneffe , I (hall give you but thefe few inftances following.

i. The very bufi nefs or prize which they fo

much contend for, is Pompe, Greatnefs, Do*

minion, yea Tyranny in the world : fo that it

is evidently Pride, Vain-glory, and Covetouf

• BC& chat fets thein ^n, and is the Spring of all

their

their c^ntefb. Whats the chief parr of the quarrel, but whether the Pope and Cardinals ot one City , even Rome , (hall be the Rulers and Matters of all the Chriftian world, and all Prince* and People obey them ? What unprejudiced man can be fo blind, as not to fee thai thiseon-teft is Tyrannical, and that their'Dominion is their Religion, and their Pride is their faith, and time the queftion is but that which one would think Chrift had once fufficiently determined , Who (hall be the greateft ? Did not Chrift chide his Difciples for this conteft ? and fay, With you it (hall not be fo f But the Pa-pifts, having no better way to prove the Scripture a nofe of Waxe, and as flexible and multiform , as they accufe it to be, then by makirg it fo to rhemfelves by ahufive violence and per-ver.ing it , puting by the plaineft words that Chrift can (peak , and will take his Decifion for no Decifion, when it makes againft the Decifive Power of their Pope.

2. And this is yet further manifeft , in that fuch a multitude of their Popes have been Whoremongers , Murderers, Heretickes , Siraoniacall, buying the Popedome with money , and poyfon-ing one another to obtain the Popedome, and living in it liker beafts then men ? Of all which I oncly appeal to Platina and other of their own Writers.

3. Another Pillar of Popery is moft unconfeion-able impiety : They can difpenfe with the vileft fins for the promoting of their Kingdom. They can difpenfe with Oaths and with obligations of fubjefts

M 3 to

(t66)

to their fovereignes, with leagues of Peace and amity amongPrinces, yea they can themlelvcs a&ually promote and execute the moft abominable impieties, that will but help them to attain their -ends. I will now onely inftance in that which is frefti before our own eyes in England. The Papifts know that Ana-baptifts and Separatifts are erroneous; they know that Ranters and Quakers are abominable; and yet for their own ends, dare they here in England , put on the vizard of Anabapcifts and Quakers, and with all poflible fubtilcy and zeal, and unwearyednefs, go up and down to feduce the people to be Anabaptifts and Quakers, as they did a while ago to be Seekers, if not Infidels. This is fufficiently known and proved not only by the P'opifh [pretended Jew that turned Anabaptift at Hexham , and was taken at Newcttftle^ and others of them taken , but by many other Tefti-monies, feme upon oath of thofe that have heard fuch confeffions from their mouthes; and many haveknewn them in the Quakers AfTemblies, that have feen them before elfwhere: And all this is done by them that they divide us and break us in pieces, and fteal a credit to ttieir pretended unity and Church Government, and turn the hearts of the people.from our Miniftery , and unfettle them, and make them more capable and receptive of their own opinions, and that they may make o-thers abroad beiieve that we r.re all running mad. Andean thatdoftrine be of God, which teacheth cien to do ftich abominable things ? Or is that like to be theeaufeof Chrifrthat muftbe thus upheld? Is tfeat perfon guided by the Spirit of Chrfft, that dares draw others to the vileft blafphemies and wickednefs in a diffembling garbe, that fo he may promote his

(i<>7>

own caufe? certainly Chrift needeth net fochhypo-crifie,and wickednefs for the promoting of his I dom ;• but it feems the Pope doth need it for! is

4. Anot^r of the Pillars of Popery is molt groli and impudent lying. Did I not know it to be true, I durft not accufe them of it, I will give you but thefe three inftanccs following,

1. They do raife and with greateft confidence propagate , meft (hamelefs lies of thofe whom they takeAr their leading adverfaries. We read them in the open writings of CochUw , Ticlfe > Staphilm, Thyraus 9 and many more. What abominable ftories have they of the Death of L&iher, Otcolam* -paditu, Bucer^ Calvin, and others; which it is-very unlikely that they can be fo blinded with malice as to Believe themfelves ? What conference do we ever manage with them which they do not mifreport ? Witnefs the lace ridiculous paffage after the conference between Fificr and Doiftor Featly and Doftor White, when they boaft^d beyond Sea of the number of Converts, and in particular oftwoEaries, and this to the Earl of Warwick^ himfelf (npt knowing him ) who was fained to be one of them ; and who had been a witnefs of their wcaknefs. And how poorly doth trejlon in his Pamphlet put this off.

2. The next inftance I wiU give is their abominable lying legends, by which they have befooled the people , and made themfelves ridiculous to the world , and occafioned others to qucftion their reports in o-ther things. I (hall give you a tafte of forae of them, as Doftor Featly hath gathered them to my hand in his Epiflleto the forefaid conference, yet with the Authors that report them > that you may try whe-

M 4 ther

thcr they bewionged. As that Saint Brigii laid her wimble., and Saint AUtlme his chcfible upon a Beam of the Sun which fupported them (vit. SanS. Brigit. & vit. S. Aldclmi. ) That Saint Nicolm while he lay in his cradle faded Wednefday and Friday • thefe dayes he would fuck but once a day ( Fefiivale de S&ntto Nicol) That Saint Patrick* caufed a ftoln Sheep to bleat in the belly of him that had eaten him {Legend, de St. Patricio) That the Corps of Saint Laurence at the coming of Saint Sttfbens body fmiledfor joy, and turned himfelf to the o-ther fide of the Sepulcher to make room for him (Legend, de S. Stefh.) That Clemens wrote a letter to Saint fames feven years afcer he was dead ( Clem. Fp.ad J-ac. in Fp. Pent if.) That Saint ^Denis cdxrj' cd his head in his hand three miles, and refted at each place of the ports, that are fet between Paris and Saint Denti (Brett & piUur. Dionyf) That Saint Qunftaue held the Devil fait by the nofewith a pair of Tongues (Leg deDanft.) That the chamber of our Lady was carrved by Angels through the air from Pale/fine to Lontte in Italj ( Hijl.de N oft re "Dame de Lintto.) That our Lady helped Saint The* mas Secret to mend or itieh his haircloth *( Annot. in Clcrnanges ex C<efirio. ) That a Parrot crying our, Saint7^w/w help me, was delivered from aHawkc (Legend, de Thorn. Cant.) That Saint Luptu did (hut up the Devil in a Tankard ail night (Legend, de Lu~ p.) That S&intBommcke made the Devil hold him the candle fill he burnt his -fingers ( Legend.de Domin. vid. CMelch. Can. loc.Tbeol.) That Saint Francis fwallowingaSpiderin a Chalice, it came whole out of his thigh ( vid. Franfcif) That Fryer Andrew to corred his apoetite of eating Birds at the Table by

the

the fign of the Crofs, commanded them to fly a-way after they were roafted ( Sedu\ Franclf.)

I will not trouble you with the recital of more, nor do I fay that their Councils have made thefe Articles of faith, but their Church doth indulge and make ufe of fueh lies for the beguiling of the vulgar.

3. The third inftance that I give is, their abominable forgeries, and depravations of ancient writings : Feigning Decretal Epiftlfcs of their Popes, and many other writings under the names of ancient Fai-thers: and prefuming to expunge, alter, and falfifie the true writings of the Fathers, and of the better fort of their own.as is proved alreadyagainft them by many, and I need not here recite: (See Dodor Feat-lyes aforefaid Confer. Append.) Which hath done us fo great a mifchief, by making much if not moft of the writings of the Ancients uncertain to us, as is fearce eafily expreflable nor are they ever able to repaire (as the late King of England told the Marquefs of Worcefier jn the beginning of their conference.) See more in Doftor Willets Tetrafiilon Papifmi.

5. Another of the principal props of Popery , hath been moft horrid inhumane bloodfhed and cruelty. How many thoufands of the Wal-denfesand Albigenfes they cruelly murdered in Savoy and France , fince the year One thoufand one hundred and fixty. How many in 'Bohemia ! How many in other Countreyes , who can pof-fibly enumerate. Cefarius faith, The Walden-fes had infefted a thoufand Cityes, Tarfont faith , That they were fo numerous that they had an Army of feventy tkoufand men to fight for them , and that they were

fo

("70)

fo fpred even in Germany that they could travail from Colen to Milan in Italy and every night lodge with Hofts of their own profeffion. Yet did the Papifts by fire and fword difperfe and deftroy them, from the year 1206. to 1228. they had fo filled their prifons with thofe that they had left, that the Arch-bifhops (lay it, becaufe it was impoffible to defray the charge of their food, or to build prifons for them fas they themfcives fpeak) yet after this 1260. Morrel in his Memorials faith, pi 54. That there was above eight hundred thoufand perfons that made profeffion of the faith of the tValdenfes : {And feme of their ownPopifh writers fay , that it was fo ancient that they affirmed themfelves to have thus continued fucceflively from the Apoftles : And yet the Papifts would make men believe that Luther was the firft founder of the Reformation) I defire the Reader that can have it to read Mr. S. Clark* general Martyroiogy of the perfecution of the jvaldenfes and Albigenfes , and alfo of the Spanifi Inquifition, the Bohemian , and Frsnch cruelties , a$d the Irifh of late to fpare me the labor of further recital". The very perfidious French Maffacrc at once was thought in a few dayes fpace and a little room to fiaurder a-bout thirty thoufand perfons, and this in a pretence of peace and quietnefs. So many bloody bouts hath that Nation had, that it is not like to be ft ill unavenged. The cruelty of the Inquifition in Spaine and other parts, will hardly here be believed. The moft horrid cruelty of the Papifts in Ireland lately were beyond all thejeft. The number that they murdered in time of peace by a fudden infurre&ionis almoft incredible. In the very Province of Vlftcr alone, about a hundred and fifty thoufand were computed

to

to be murthered. But God hath gone fer in avenging their blood already. What (hould we mention fuch leffer matters as the burning fo many in Qtieen Marier dayes, the Powder Plot to have blown up King and Parliament; with many fuch fruites of the Romaic fury? In a word I conclude, that it is not kke to be the caufe of Chrift that hath been fo long upheld by fuch Devililh inhumane bloody means-nor is it like to be trueDodrine which poffefleth men with fuch a bloodchirfty fpirit; nor is it a fafe way to falvation to fwim thither through the blood of Saints: nor is it any better then a cruel fcorning of Chrift when they have perfecuted him , to murther Chriftians by thoufandsfor feeking Reformation, or not yielding to the Romifh errors, and then to challenge us to name or (hew our Reformed Church before Luther , or-to accufe us of Schifm for feparat-ing from them: Thcfe Wolves will accufe,where they cannot devour.

Arg 12. If Popery do adde to all thefe abminatU ons impenitency and uncttrablcnefs, then it u certainly no fafe way to Salvation : But Popery doth adde tg all thefe abominations , impemtency and uncnrable* nefs : Therefore it is no fafe way to Salva-

tion.

I do not mean that the perfens are Amply uncur-rable; but while they are Papifts, or go according to their fundamental principle, they are utterly un-curable and impenitent. For their Principle is that their Pope or Church cannot crre , bftt is infallible: And fo they are bound to ftand to all their Determinations right or wrong : For if they (liquid repent

of any, and we return from any fmall or great, they ftiOHldin fo doing proclaim that they were fallible, and fo let go the principle of their profeffion. So that there is no hope of repentance and amendment of any error once determined of, but onelyby recanting the point of their Infallibility, to make way thereto. If therefore repentance and amendment be of neceflity to Salvation 9 what will become of thefe men that fuppofe themfelves fo infallible ? and how can that be a fafe way to falvationthat locks up the door againft repentance and amendment? Popery therefore is no fafe way to falvation.

Arg. 13. That profeffion &hkb fix** ft lo men into certain perjury , andengagetb them to impojfibilities, and contradictories^ is no fafe way t& fitivatien. 'But fmh U the profeffion *f Poferj • as I Jbali prove even out of the Trent Oathw Confeffien, which Irecittdin the beginning.

1. They vow and fwear that QAll other tilings delivered, defined and declared by die {acred Canons, and Oecumenical Councils, and efpecially the Holy Synod of Trent , they do without doubting receive andprofefs]] When as many of thcfe Canons, and Councils are contrary each to other , one undoing what another did, as (hall hereafter be fhewn : and yet they fwear to receive them all. 2. They fwear to receive them even Q without doubting ] when as they are thus contradi&ory , and when they confefs that a true faith even in the written word of God , may have doubting mixtwith it. 3. They vow and fwear that [[They will never'take and interpret the Holy Scriptures, but according to the unaniomous

eonfent

Km*

confcnt *f theFathtrs.] When as i. The Fathers do not unanimonfly confenc among themfelves concerning the fence of the grcatcft part of Scripture^nd fo they arc fworn to take it in no fence, becaufe the fathers arc not unanimous. 2. He that knows not the unanimous fence of the Faihers,where they are unanimous , is fworn hereby to take and interpret the Scripture in No fence. 3- If ky C The Church ] whofc fence they alfo fwear to admit i be meant the prcfent Somatic Church, then that Church and the Fathers do differ in the Interpretation of many Scriptures : fo that in one Article they muft needs be for-fworn. 4. Nay there are divers particulars of the Popifh faith , yea which in this oath they fwear to f which are againft ( much more without) the unani-moas confent of the Fathers. The Fathers never confented to this very Article, that we muft take and interpret the Scripture onely in the unanimous feace of the Fathers: They never confented that the Bread and Wine are trudy reallv and fubftantially the whole Body and Blood of Chrift by Tranfubttantia-tion ? Nay the conien t of the Fathers is agaiaft thefe: And yet tbefe wretches fwear noi to take and interpret Scripture but in the unanimous fence of the Fathers, and withal fwear the contrary in particulars; even that they believe that which the Fathers never #onfentcd to , but againft. Never did the Fathers confenc that £ There are feventruely and properly Sacraments Inftituted by Chrift. ] Never did the Fathers confent (who lived a thoufand or fourteen hundred years before) that the Council of Trent did not erre, or could not crre: Nor £ That in the Mafs is offered a true proper propitiatory Sacrifice for the living and dead 3 Nor that the Euchanft may

be

be taken under one kind , and the Cup withheld : nor [[That there is a Purgatory, or the fouls there holpen by the fuffrages of the faithful] nor Qthat the Saints with Chrift are to be prayed to] Nor chat Images were to be worlhiped] nor the power of Popilh indigencies left by Chrift in the Church., and the ufe of them wbolfornje: Never* did the Fathers eon-fenc that the Roma-no, Church is the Miftris of all Churches.-or that the Pope is theVicar of Chrift over them : nor that ail Chnftians or Bifliopsor Paftors ihould fwear true obedience to the Pope as Chrifts Vicar ? Let thefe proud deceivers (hew us if they can when the Fathers, or any one of the Ancients i did ever take any fuch oath himfelf, or perfwadc others to it ? Yea or that rhey have confented to any one of thefe Articles of the Romijh faith , and Trent oath? What more evident to any man that hath any acquaintance with the Fathers, then that thefe wretches do here moil palpably forfwear them-felves? Even as if they fhould (wear to believe nothing but according to the Ancient Creed,and withat fwear to believe that Chrift never dyed, rofe, oraf-cended, or that there is no refurreftion , or ever-laftinglife. Certainly if the very faith of Papifts be contradiction, and the profeffion of it plain perjury > then Popery is not a fafe way to Salvation.

I would here have added as the fourteenth Argument : That Popery is a mixture of old condemned errors, formerly called Herefies; which the ancient Church hath teftified againft; and therefore it is no fafe way to Salvation : And here I Ihould have tryed their particular errors not yet mentioned , or infixed on, as their Doftrine of Merits and Juftifica-

ticui

tion thereby, Satisfactions, and many Semipelagian errors, Image-worfhip, with many the like : But that this is beyond my prefent intended fcope , and purpofed brevity, and is fo fully performed already by fo many unanfwefable Treatifes of our Divines.

Let us next here what is faid of moft moment, to prove Popery to be a fafe way to Salva-tion.

Ob j. I. That Religion which hath been delivered do^n from the Apflles to this day without interruption , u a fafe way to Salvation (For it it the fame that the A~ fofiles and all the ancient Chriftians were faved in) ISutjhe Religion of the Church of Rome is that which hath been delivered down from the Apoftles : Therefore^ &c.

Anf i. There is a change of the very fubjeft of thequeftion- It is [JPopery] that we aredifputing of; and this argument inftead of Popery fpeaks ©f [[The Religion of the Church of Rome .] The Religion of the Church of Rome hach two .parts; Firfl:,the Chriftian Faith: Secondly, their own corruptions depraving and contradi&ing this Faith: Thefirft as it ftandetk alone uneontradi&cd in the Religion which we profefs : Thcfecond is it that we sail Popery, and fay, It is no (afe way tofajvation. 2. And of this I deny the Minor, and fay that Popery is not the ancient Religion, the Apoftles and Primitive Church never knew it: There was no fuch creature as a Pa-pifi: known in all the world till fix hundred years after the birth of Chrift: It was about 606. when Pope Bonifact did firfc claim his univerfal Papacy and

Head-

(176)

Headfhip: and after that it was not till about one thoufand years chat the ufurpation and Tyranny was confentcd to any thing generally in the Weft : And even the multitudes, ftiil di (Tented , and fomeop-pofuion wa5 ftill made againft it; and all the Efterne Churches and the reft of the Chriftian world did dif-fent. Of thefe things there is enough faid to filence all the Papifts on earth in Biftiop Vfber de contin. fuecejfione &ftatp* tcclef. Occident, and his Anfwer to the Jefuites Challenge, and by Bifhop feVee/t,&vtd Doftor Field, and in many of the old Treatifes a-gainft the Pope publifhed together by Goldaft/u , which ftiewus that he fetled not his Kingdom without continnual oppofition and contradi&ion. We affirm that Popery is a meer novelty , and challenge all the Papifts in the world to prove the Antiquity of it. When they have once arrogated to themfelves the name of theCatholike Church, and taught the people to believe as the Church believes, that is, to believe that all is true which the Pope and his Clergy will report of themfelves, it is then an eafie matter f&r them to prove any thing to be true which makes for their turn : then they may fay ? The Fathers are for than', and that they have their Papal fovereignty from S z Peter , when there is never a true word in it. Then they may frame and forge new Decretals, and cutout of the Ancient Writers that which is againft them , and bring forth fpurious writings under their names; and tell the people that our Religion begun with Luther : for its eafie to prove any thing, where themfelves are the Judges, and no witnetfes but their own muft be heard: But if they dare leave that hold, and come into the light, its eafie to evince the novelty of Popery (though not of every particular error they hold,) Obj.

(v?)

Obj. 2. ////?£ Church of Rome £* *? ***** Church $ then Popery is a fafe Way to jalvation : But the Church of Rome is a true Church : Therefore, &c. The Antecedent is granted by meft Protectants : The conjequence & good; for it is the true Religion that ma-keth a true Church and Popery is their Religion* If their Religion be not true^ their Church is not true t If their Religion be true, then their Church is tme ; ana if Church and ReJigiw be true, then thej are in a fafe Xvaj to falvation.

Anfw.i .Theworc'QChurch]doth ufually fignifis amongChriftians^aChriftianiociety, or a company of Christians aflbciated for Gods worfhip and mutual edification:fometime any companyofChriftians whether fo affociated or not : fometime thofe are called QChriftians] as diftinft from Infidels, who profefs nioft of the fubftance of Chriftianity, but deny fome part, or who profefs the whole fubftance or the fundamentals, though they cootradift it again by plain confequence in other luperadded poftts : Though thefc as compared with the Orthodox are wont to be called Hereticks. We deny not but that the great-eft Papifts arc fuch Chriftians, and that as the word « [[Church ] is applicable to combinations or compa* nies confifting of fuch materials; fo far the Roma-nifts are a true Church; fuppofing that we oneljk ipeak of Mctaphyfieal Truth. But as the word QChriftian[]is takenfor one that fo holdeth the fundamentals of Chriftian Faith, as not to fubvert them by plain confequence after he hath profeffed them, foic is yet under difpute whether the Romanifts be a true Church, and therefore not to betaken as granted.

N How-

vever thofe Protcftant Divines that grant them to be a true Church, do fay that it is but by a Metaphyseal verity, convertible with the eflence; but that Morally it is a falfe Church and not a true; as a thief is a True man, that is, truely a man t but he is not a true man, that is, not an honeft faithfull man,

2. The thing called [The Church of Romf^ con-lifteth not of Homogeneal parts: or, at leatt that word fignifieih feveral forts of perfons. There arc fomethat with the Pope and his Cardinals entertain

J th'e full body.of Popery, andenflave the reft: There 'are multitudes of the people, that filently live'under them, and let them alone, and are defiled by them in many things, but receive not the great and moft dangerous part of their corruption. Thefe are not equally to be called the Church, nor are they equally in danger of damnation.

3. I deny the confequence of the Major Proportion ; For if the Church of Rome be a true Church it is becaufe they are true Chriftians, and not becaufe they are Papiffc : fo that to argue £ The Church of Rome is a true Church, therefore Popery is a fafe way to Salvation] ^ as unfound as to argue \jGebezi the Leper is a living man : Therefore the Leprofie is a thing fafe of profitable to mans life] Popery is the difeafeof their Church, and Chriftianity is it that makes them a Church : You may well therefore conclude that Chriftianity is a fafe way to heaven; bat not that Popery is fo.

To the confirmation I anfwer, That the Religion of Papifts hath two parts : The Chriftian Religion, as they are Chriftians, and that maketh them a true Church if they be one. And the Popilh corruptions,

(#9)

ruption?, which denominate them Papifts, and chat makes them not a true Church , nor is a fafe way to falvation.

Obj. 3. If Papifts may be faved^ then Poperj is d fafe way te falvation. 'But Papiftj may be fated : Therefore^.

Anf To the Antecedent or Minor I anfwer, that Papifts be not all of a fort: fome may be faved, and fome cannot, if they fo live and dye. If you aske who may and who may not t I anfwcr.that all thofe of them that hold the fubftance of the Chriftian faith, and that pra&ically, notwithftauding their errors } or that hold no errors but what cenfift with the Praftical holding of the Chriman faith, thefefhall be fayed: But all thofe that finally hold any error which for matter or manner is inconfiftent with the Pra* fticat holding of the Chriftian faith, (hall be condemned.

2. To the confequence of the Major I anfwer, by denying it; and that on the aforefaid account. If a Papift be faved,it is not by ^Popery ,but fr*m Popery. Ic is therefore no better reafoning than to fay Qlf a Leper may live,then the Leprofie is wholforae,or a fafe to prefcrvc life] I have already fpeke more to this. If fuch do live , it is with more trouble, and left comfort, and its fewer that lire loag with it, then of other founder men : Menlhould not caft themfelves into a courfe of great doubt and difficulty as to their falvation, and whea they have done encourage them* felves in it , becaufc other men of moderate and charitable mindes are afraid to conclude that they ftiall certainly be damned? Is it not a great probabili«

'N 2 ty

C*0

ty or danger of damnation very terrible, though you were not certain to be damned.

Obj. 4. There u but one true Church , and con* fequentlj bnt one fafe Vvaj to Heaven : That one Church is the Romane Church : And therefore they and onely they, are in the fafe way to Heaven.

Anfw. If you fpeak of the Universal Church , which is Chrifts body, there is but one and that is all true Chriilians. But if you fpeak of particular aflfociations of Chri-ftians called particular Churches, there are many thoufands : And fo we fay that the Church of Rome is (at beft) but one particular Church , or one combination of feme particular Churches under the Bifhop of that City : But that Rome , or the Romane party * are / the" whole of the Catholike Church of Chrift ,• we do with abhorrency deny.

2. If the Church of Rome be any part of that Univcrfal Church , and fo in a ftace of Salvation, or way to it, it is not as Papitis, but as Chri-ftians, as was faid before. And therefore though there be but one fafe way to Heaven, yet that one being hot Popery, but Chriftianity '" why may not other Chriftians be in a fafe way to Hea-. ven, as well as the Papifts ? efpecially who are free from thofe dangerous difeafes vJherewith the Papiits Chriftianity is corrupted.

(i3.)

Obj. 5. That Church which hath Vnitj y Vniver-fnlity y Antiquity^ and nnintteru^ted fucceffion of Pa-fiers and dpoftles y is the onelj true Chnrch , and consequently onelj in thefafe way to Salvation, T>nt fuch u the Church of Rome: therefore.

Anfw. 1. This concludeth not the point in Quefti-on QThat Popery is a fafe way to Salvation.]]

2. We deny the Major, and blame them,that they ftiil thruft it on us without proof. To theparticu-, lars, i, If Mahometans have unity, or If Satan be not divided againft Satan,, it doth not follow that they have the true Church; men may agree in evil. 2. where was your univerfality alfo, when there were fcarce feven Biftiops left that were free from the plague of Arrianifme ? Univerfality abfolute(lb thaG all errors or other parties (hould be excluded) the Church hath never had the happinefs to enjoy fir.ce thcbeginingofitsflouriftiingin the Apoftles dayes. Univerfality comparatively, that is, the greater part the Arrians had , at Ietft of the Bifheps. The do-ftrine of the Millenaries, with many fuchlike may plead more antiquity than Popery can : And as for fucceflion, there is no doubt but a Biftiop or Church in the line of fucceflion may turn Heretical ,and have fucceffors in their Herefie. Have none of the Greek Churche$,nor Alexandria, A ntiech&c.h&d a (uccefli* on till it fell into the hands of aHeretiek?and it would have beeen no good plea for the firft Heretical Bi-fhop or Church to plead fuch fucceflion. If there be not a fucceflion in Apoftolical doftryie, the fucceflion of perfons will be no proof of the truth ■ or foundnefs of the Church,

N 3. 3. Ar.d

(iSi)

3. And for the Minor of your Argument, Ian-fwcr. I. The Ethiofian, Alexandrian and other Churches can as truely boafl: of thefe qualifications as Rome. 2. The Papifts lay a higher claim to them then they can make good. Asr 1. I have (hewed already how far they arc from unity , who are not only of fo many Religions or wayes of Difcipline; and of fo great diftance in many doftrinals, as the controverfies among themfelves do manifeft, butal-fo are fo difagreed about the very center of their uni-• on, their infallible foveraign Power, whether it be in the Pope 3 or a GenA'al Council, or both ? Besides their unity is but of their own party, theRo-manifts: And (ball other parties are at fome unity among themfelves : er many at Icaft. \ij$h* of Confiantinofle had prevented the Pope, and got the Title of univerfal Bifhop, or Pope, as he did (by compofition^} of univerfal Patriarch; and had pretended chat this would have united the Churches, I think it would not have juftified his caufe.

2. How can the Papifts for ihame pretend to uni-verfality either as to the prefent or former ages ? Is it nothing that all the Ethiopian, Greeks and Reformed Churches are not of their party, befides many a thoufandmore? Or will they arrogantly condemnc ill the reft of the Chriftian world as heretical, and then fay that they are the whole Church ? Did they not learn this of the Donatifts ? But what is become of their modefty who pretend to an univerfality, for the tknepaft , when all the Chriftian world was againft their prefent belief, and chere was not fuch a thing as a Famft known (and revealed to usj in the world of fix hundred years after the birth of Chrift.

('83)

J. And for their fucceffion,we undertake to prove it interrupted long ago, and that there were no true Bitt\op$atRcwc of a long time : Though men have fat there that were chofen by Cardinals, and call themfclves Bifhops or Popes , yes if according to the Scriptare and ancient Councils, they were matter utterly uncapable of that form , then its plain that they were but Statues, and had but the nsme without the thing, i. e. the office or authority, and therefore arc unworthy alfo of the name it felf. Let nae name two or three of their own Writers that bear witnefs of this. And firft their great parafite Cardinal Baronim faith (ad an* 912, §8.) \_what then was the face of the holy Romane Church ? how exceeding filthy, When the moft potent and yet mefi fordid whores did Rule at Rome ? by whofe pleafure Sees were changed , Bifhops were given % and Which is a thing horrid to be heard , and not to be fpoken , their fWeet hearts (or mates) were thrufi *»rc Peters chair v being falfe Popes , who are net to be Written in the Catalogue of the Romane Popes , but cnely for the warding out of fuch times.] And after he welladdesto (hew that the interruption was not like to be onely in the fucceffion of true Bilhops £ And what kind of Cardinal Priefts and Deaeons think you We mufi imagine that thefe monfters did choofe ? when nothing u fo rooted in nature as for every one to beget his dike] See tqore in Taron. ibid. PUtina fpeaking of the evil of thofe times (de "BenediB. 4.) faith that [fBy ambition and bribery the holy chair of Peter was rather feUed on y then f*f[efjedr\

Geneirard(in Chronolog. I. ^.fecul.io* ) fpeaking of the great unhappinefi of that age, faith, that [_In this one Mng it Was unhappy that for nrer one hundred

N 4 and

And fifty years about fifty Topes hid wholly fall away from the vertue of their anceftors , being Apotattici, eslpofiatkive pot ins qnam Apefiolici , Biforderly and Apcftatical, rather then ApoftolicaL~\

WJiat (hall we think of all thole that murdered thtir pf edeceflbrs to obtain the place, were they capable of being true Biftiops ? What fhall we fay of Pope cfo'/w/fcr the fecond who was a conjurer, and sgrced with the Devil to help him to be Pope, and by the deceit of the Devil was again deprived of it by fuddain death ? Doth the Devil make true Biftiops of conjurers? I know the deceiving Papifts Would make the fimple people believe that all thefe things that we fay of their Popes art lies of our own forg* ing: but men that have eyes in their heads may fee who are the lyars Their own Writers do common^ Jy affirm the fame that we affirm. A Cardinal of their own (Benno) in vita Bildebrandi , affirmeth this of Pope Sihejler : and he lived in the times next him, and therefore might know. Platina another of their own affirms (in vita Silvefi.) that [_ Gef-bertus impelled by ambition , anddevillijh defire of rule y didfirfi by bribery (or Simony) get the Archbijhoprike ofRhemes, then of Ravenna, andatlafioj Rome, the 'Devilgiving him more of hi* help, but on this con* dition, that after his death he Jbouldbe wholly hu^ by ^ch&fe deceits he had obtained fuch dignity. ~\ The like hath LyrainGlcfs. ad cap. 14. Maccab. I. z. find a timkitude of their Hyftorians unanimoufly confirm it. Yea zALmm Sylvim who was a Pope himfelf (degefiis Concil. BafiL L I.) faith £ Wt are not ignorant that (Pope) Marcellinus did at Cefars command t'ffer incenfe to Idols^and that another y , which is a great" er and more horrible thing , did come to be Pope $f

Rome

Rome bj the fraud of the ^Devil-J^na word if Murderers, Adulterers, Conjurersthat <*m e j n ^ ^ Devil, and Hereticks t inay be true BiftiO^pf Rome and yet a man that believeth not the Popes ^j ver I verfal Vicarfhip can be no true Catholikc Chrifticu then it feems, it is a greater fin not to Believe in the Pope then not to Believe in Chrift, or then it is to bargain with the Devil, or be a Murderer or Adulterer? Certainly thefc men were as uncapable of being true Bifhops when thefe things were once pub-likely known of them (at leaft) as a Mahometane would be: And therefore there hath been many an interruption in their fucceffion. And many a fchifm there hath been wherein two or three Popes have raigncd at once, and he that-had the greateft ftrength bath carryed it, when his Right was not the great -eft,

[Query;

cm)

E R Y.

OS

Whether the Infallible fudge* mentof the Romane Vofe^or his Qlergy mujl be the Qround of our c £elief of the Qhriftian DoBrine, or of our %eceh^ ing the Holy Scriptures as the Word of God? N. *

!ftggAving already enquired whether the TR Romamfis or the Reformed Churches ' are in the fafe way to Salvation; we fhall now more particularly enquire whether their faith or ours be built on the furer grounds. Our Belief is thus refolved: we believe the Chriftian Dodrine to be True, becaufe the True God is the Author of it. We difcern that God is the Author of it, both by his Intrinficke and Extrinficke Seals or atteftations of it : in that it beareth his image and fuperfcription, and is confirmed by his undoubted uncontrolcd Miracles,

racks, and other effe&s which lead us to the eaufe. The revealing containing figns or chara&ers are the the holy Scriptures. That thefe Books were written by the Prophets, Apoftlesand Evangelifts, and were confirmed by Miracles, and are uncorrupted in the main, we arc infallibly affured of, by the evident certainty of the hiftorical atteftation and Tradition: For we depend not barely on the credit of adeceiv-able or deceitful man ( fuch as is the Pope of Rome) or of any fallible fociety of men; but on fuch Hifto-ry as we can prove by plain reafon to be infallible , containing in it, befides theTeftimony of the Pope and all his party, the fame Teftimony alfo of all the reft of the Chriftians in the world, yea and of the very Hereticks who were enemies to much of the truth; and enough alfo even from the mouths of Infidels to confirm us: fo that by this infallible hi-ftory, and univerfal Tradition , we have a fuller difcevery that thefe Books are the fame that were written by the Apoftles,^. then we have that the Statutes of Parliaments in the Reign of King James or Queen Elizabeth are the fame that they pretend to be: And to a man that heareth not God himfelf or the Lord Jefus or the Apoftlcs, and hath not their immediate infpirations, we know not how the Laws of heaven (hould be more fitly delivered in an ordinary rational way , nor what fwrer other means fuch as we can expeft , who live at fuch a di-ftanccfrom the firft receivers of it: unlefs we would have God to fpeak to every man as he did to Mofes or have Ghrift or Apoftles ftill among us , or unlefs God muft make us all Prophets by his extraordinary infpirations. And laftly , the true meaning of this word we underftand as we do the meaning of

other

(M)

other Laws or writings having moreover the aiBftance of the fpirit, which is neccffary bccaufe of the fublimity and fpirituality of the matter , and the neteffity of the great effeds upon our hearts : Our Teachers by Tranflation and further inftruftions are our helpers (as they muft be in other things that we would learn ) and by the help of them without and of the feint within , we are able to underfland the meaning of the words (efpecuHy comparing text .with text) and fo receive the far&ifyng iraprefs upon our hearts. And thus is the Faith of the Reformed Catholike Refolved. He recciveth tne Bible frem the hands or mouth of his Teachers (and perhaps firit believech t&em fide hnma-m ; that it is Gods Word : ) He knoweth that this Book was written in Htbrew and -Greeks by the PropTiets and Apoftles, by Infallible Hyfto» ry or Univerfal Tradition. He knoweth that they,did it by Infpiration of the Holy Ghoft , by the Image of God which he findeth on it, and by the uncontroled Miracles by which they fealed it. He believeth it to be True, bceaufe it thus proceeded from the Holy Ghoft , and fo is the Word of God who is moft True.

Of the Refolution of our Faith according to the Proteftant Doftrine. See L. da Plejjis of the Church, cap. 4. Tranjlat. pag* 121, 122, 123. and Conradm 'Btrgius Prax. CathoL Can. p. 208. 209, zio. Difp. 2. § 125, 126. To this fame fence. Vid. & SibranL Lttbbert. Princip* Chrift* Dogm. li. I. fag. 20&C.

What

C «9 J

What the Refolution of the Romane faith is, the Qgeftion which we are now to difcufs (Jo{h intimate in part,for it cannot be laid down in one propofuion, becaufe they are of fo many minds themfelves Indeed we may fee in this their foundation that Popery is a very maze and dungeon; for the builders of this 2fa£f/areallin confufion at the laying of their firft ft one. Yet this much they feem to be moftly agreed in: * That the Scripture is ? B ^ f ^ Vefbo ^ ,, f the word of God, and fjp . 2 . \>&nar ihlL L 4> part of the Rule of faith cap. 3. 'Sellar.ibj. $x.iq. and duty, b but not the ^retfer.de ^gnefc script.cap. whole Rule,nor the whole £ ** f * 08 - Vd % $ - T ° m - h Word of God h* that ?* &■£?&?£ unwritten Traditions .are judgement of the prefent the Other part , c and the Church is Gods word. vid.

judgement of the prefent ^ elch ; c f*™-». * • <• J.f.j. Church is Gods Word af- T ? ur ^ in r "'« <* •ter a fort (as they fpeak)

That the Scripture hath its Authority in it felf from God the prime trxtifafrvxquoad nos,zs to us,it hath its Authority from the Church-.That it is the aft of Tradition or the unwritxen part of Gods word to tell us that the Scriptures are the word of God,or a Divine Revelation- d And that it is the Office of the Church-to judge d «*awAra» »w-

both of this Tradition and the % *;??****;£ „ • tr j j fi $Mnic$.prmtp. deft.

Scripture; as alio to decide all & g € t,i,& it\ 9 . £ .

S-refponf *d*rg.$. E* in mtrov. rcl. Contr. 44. $• **V'. a. & ^enfinfjutbfr.Ecclef-I.3.C. i6.§.4. & TurnebuMTetragOKifm.c. 6. §.2.g &<?%.§.$. BelUrin. de VerUVei /• 4- *. 4> Grttfcr %>tfeuf. iftim capitis al. M75, i'>76,& i Vcfe*f.c. 10.de FertoGel.1411. fed econtrd mcliua fcribentcm leg. Feter. de Attmo in Cent, 1. j«, 1 ,*r*» 3. liter a HE.iy Ljrtvttm troteg. in Btblifr

con*

controversies m Religion, and to judge which is the true fence of Scripture : and that this Church muft be one only,viftble,infatlible,authorized thus to judge by Chriftjand this is oncly the KomafjtChurch. Thus far the raoft of them feem to be agreed. But when thefe my fteries of iniquity come to be opened, they fail all to pieces. For i. Sometimes they fay that the judgement of the Church is Gods ward after a fort : fomctirae that it is fpme middle thing between a Tefttmony Divine and <riiT*mb»S.re* Humane. «2. And what the for-

2. ie fide (cff. z, § i not all of a mind: whether it be 5. (<? 'Difput, 2, (cH. only the Prime Truth , or whe-

4 § s.&vifpt*. 3- ther the Revelation of the Ma-/c»ai.§4.»cKir». terial ob - ft be t f

//. z, dcVerboVei c. c • r> t r r

io^^iS.O-15. the f0rmal : < BUE I COnfcfs EtUb.de ubcro At- this controvetfie is more ver-

bitr. c g. § At Ca bal then real. ) 3. f And what) tholici. Gretfer.r i n place here to affign to theTefti-8&L. > &j& monyof t h c Ctarch, .hey *

infcnt.i.difi. !*.§ 4 . noc a S recd neither, g4. Efpecial-Mdicr.in 11* Tbom.

q. l.a 1. fee. $. £ Ltgc Rivetinofiri Jft&og.fic.feript. cap. 20. futrc^Vifp. defidc I.fc8. 7. § * 1. 5 pid.vdent. Tom.

3. Dtfp. 1. qu. x. pttnft. 7. $ 12. < B.Uarm. 1. 2. dc Sacrum, in Gencre cap. if. fuare\ Vifput. f. dc fide foft. f. § ?. fed contra Helm Wa\da\f%$li % %. Doftrin.fid. am. a9. opernm.Tom. j.&c. 27. fa Alpbonf a Caft, Mdu. btref. ft x. c. z. ZMdcb. Can lib. c. z.&U.z.c.i. Petr>7rigof. tnfummmBonavcn.qu.i. at. 1. (mrei (contra feipfum) defideVifp. 5. §. $. BeUarm. (cm* tra feipfum) general in controv* fine. vid. <s? Vurand. in z.fent. dift. 24. ?«. *» 67* G erf on. deviti fpirii. an. left. 2. CoroH. 7. &* e contr jfjann* Vriedon. lu 1. deEccl Script, tutd&gmat. cap.i. & Walden\, li. 2. doftr-fid. antiq. cap, 19, # 20, tfielcb, C&mrn toe. ThtoUL z.c. 8.p, z6 ; 27.fcc.

^

ly uiey arc uiviueg in cne main^x.. wuai tins v^nurcii is which is the infallible Judge, and into whofe judgement their faith is refolvcd,whcthcr it be the prefent Church or the former Church ? Whether it be the Pope only (at leaft in cafe of difference between him and his Council) or whether it be a General Council though the Pope agree not (as the French and Venetians fay ? ) h Yea whether it be the Clergy only,or the Laity I m - M€l - *"*»-alfothat arc this Church? Nay [tifrb^u^ lome of them plead Umvenal j cm% Tradition(as HsUtn,Tphite,Vane, and divers other Englifhmen of late) as if that were the fame with the Rcntane Tradition, or as if it were the point in controverfie between us and them. And ordinarily they ufe to tell us of QA11 the Church] and £ All the Chriftian world ] and to mouth it in fuch fwclling words, that the fimplc hearer would little think that by£All the Churchjthey meant but one man , or at the utmoft, him and his fadious Clergy ? Soalfo they aredifagreed among themfelves whether i the Btfhopsin a General Council are Judges with the Pope 'Jf e f- c '* us £ f J j-or oncly the Popes Counfellors ? c ™^ \t^ % ° * Yea or what a General Council is ? Though they all agree that it is not ncceffary that it be out of all the Chriftian world , much lefs the Bifhops of all Churches, but onely fomeof thofe that adhere to the Pope of Rome 3 yet they agree not whether it mtift be freely ele&ed by all the Bifhops of thcRomifh faftion, or onely fo many and of fuch Countries? as the Pope lhall choofe ? and whether the major part of the Council muft ^concur with the Pope, or the Pope and the Minor part may not

fcrre

k Mel, Cams I ' % .£.5./,?/.164, 1 bupletjdeft* cmr. 4. qu. 1. in'expl, art*'ze-tab. a. IA .Volenti a Tom. £. Dtfput.i.punH.

lerveturn*. 5. so anotney are exceedingly difagreed about the nature and extent or pretended infallibility of the Church of the Pope in judging. l Some fay that the Church jadg-eih de'rnediis dtfourfive , fedde cone Ih» fione per doElrinam prophelicam & Di-vinam: And fo thefe men may affirm (agreeably to this principle) that the Popes Definitions are part of the holy Canonical Scripture, as tMelchior Canm affirrnethhe heard a moft excellent Divineconfeis, and citech Gratian and InnccentdMo as of che fame mind. m And thus all the moft wicked Popes are made Prophets, and fpeak by in-fpirationoftheHoiy Ghoft. But others of them n do deny this: Though yet they know not how it is that the Pope is infallible, without declaring themfelves Enthufiafts. Alfo (though faith Bellarm. I. 4. de Pontif.cz. all yield that the Pope may per-fonallyerre through Ignorance, yet) they are difagreed among themfelves whether he maybe a He-reticke. Some ° fay he may not, and others that its mod pious and probable to think he may not: Others rejeft that as falfe p and fay he may ; And one would think it fliould have been out of queftion by long experience before this time? And Bcilzrrmne confeffeth that three General Councils did believe chat the Pope might be a Hereticke

Cub*

164, 165. n Osttl. Qdnmulifup.&l. i. c.j.f 27. Bellarm. ie Coxcil I. i.e. * ?, fuirc^ piffkt 8. def defect. 5. § 4- «Al$hcnf. a Caflroah bmf Ij.c. 8 iVrtivfii doctr.fid. L *;**».-££ 2$. fie~ cinui Tra'l. ae fide c.

0 Tiglimli. 4. Hut* Ecclef.c S.'Beliarm. k. 4. de Petit, c. 6. P 6tdplet.coni7. 3. qu. +.cen:L z.Canuhli.6. c. 8.

a

when the Pope is confuted and * Cmt *-***»«*

it- • J in Luc. 22. ? i. H*r*,

givech his judgement in matters zn(>lif J b Uc! ^

of faith, hecannoterr (though nolLc 7.{<&.$. in matters of fact he may) and that he is Infallible in hisXrmrts^and Councils , though not as a private Do&or. Others r fay that he cannot err when he intendeth to binde the whole iJJJf 4 *' *' , 4 ^ Church to receive his fentence,or r *™£ t ^J e xifp^. when he teacheth the whole f e ft, 8. § 4. vdtnt. Church. f Others fay that the Tom- i.mfp. \.qu* Pope may err even defining in *-P ?• § 40.

Council i but not in errors ma- J E2R * ^ r n >, ~, , , , . (umm.de Eeclq.c.iz,

nifeft to the Church but onely in &U.+ pm. i.e. 16. new or not manifeft points. c O- raltnt.ubi(up t ccLz}i thers come yet neerer the mat- r VH viipbon. a a-ter, and tell us merrily, that the fl r$ u - l *to.\>*tt\ % Pope cannot fo err in judgement. c ' 4 * -about matter of Faith, becaufe when he firft erreth thusjieceafeth to be Pope : but this is a hard con-clufion in the eyes of their brethren.

The like difagreements there are among them a-bout the infallibility of a General Council : fome will make it the proper feat of Infallibility , and fay that the Pope cannot err if he be guided by the Council ; elfc he

may • Others u fav u ^ c ^ irm - dcCeucil. II z. cap. z. Vulem, that' a General! Tm ' *' w ^ 1, * M t-P***** § «-f «£

Council may err, § 10.BtUtm. deConciLlL z. c&p. it. if it be not confirmed by the Pope, yea though the Popes Legates did confetic: or if they do not fallow the Popes in-ftruftions; But that they cannot erre if they follow

O them,

them, or be confirmed by him, So BelUrmine^ Ca~ j*«*andche late champions. And if the Pope and Council differ (as they have (hrewdly done, when Councils have depofed Popes for herefie and wicked-nefs) fome x fay, that we may * Turmrm. (umm. m0 re fafely follow the Council

l !i? ' 'c ft *i* d L* d ; S then the Pope. But others y fay defenf. fid. Trtdent. , f r t . . *

U J X f J 26. the clean contrary, and place the

y Vtd. Bclltm. it Infallibility in the Pope onely,^

Fontif* k. 4' csp. $. and make it his work to reclaim

staple*. C*n 6 qn. the Council.

2. art. 5. Valentin*

Tm.i.Diff. x.jk. i.punft. 7. §-4f. So Canusini ethers.

Though they are thus all in pieces among them-felves everi about thefe their fundamentals, yet is ic the cuftome of their deceitful Writers, to make the fimple people believe that they are all agreed, and to tell them that they have theQConfent of theliniverfal Church , and of all the Chriftian world, and they have Univerfal Tradition] &c. that by the noife of thefe big words, they may do that which they cannot do by argument. Thus Doftor Fane their late profeHte, and divers others do in their writings o-veriookingall their own difagreements, and palling on as confidently in their boafts of the Q Univerfal Confentjas if they were either fuch Novices as underftand not their own Religion, or fuch hardened feducers, as are not willing that others fhould underftand it.

Here are in this our Queftion contained three of the greatcft centrovcrfies between us and the Papifts. 1. Whether it belong to the Pope or RouMneChmxh,

to be the Judge of Faith and Scriptures to all the world ? 2 Whether the Pope or his Clergy be ir« fallible in judging of matters of Faith? 3. Whether our Faith muft be refolved into this infallible judgement of theirs ? Our intent in this prefent Dispute is to deal moft wi:h the fecond , yet fo as it is connexed with the other two; and therefore (hall take them in on the by , but fay lefs to them diftinft-ly; and the rather becaufe there is fo much fatd already by our Divines, as all the Papiffo on earth will never be able folidly to anfwer : To let pafs all thofe beyond Sea that have effe&ually confounded them, we have 7>rittans enough to hold them perpetual work : as fcm/l, Bfignotts^ tvhitaker, White, Field^ V(her ^Camera, Bar wins ^avenant ^hilling-worth ( to whom they have lately loft their caufe , by (hewing in a vain and frivolous Reply , how little they have to fay againft himj with many more, who will either remain unanfwered, or the anfwerswill be worfe to the adverfaries caufe , then filence ic felf; which we have fufficient ground already to foretell.

As to the firft of thefe controverfies ( to difpatch it in (hovt) as we diftingaifti between Judicium Defer etionis, Dinftionis^ & Deciftonis , a Judgement of Difcretion, of Diredion, and of Decifion, fo we know that it is onely the later that properly denomi-nateth a Judge in the publike and ordinary fence* Take our do&rine in thefe few Proportions.

1. We fay that every Chriftian hath a judgement of Difcretion, to know that the Chriftian Faith is true, and Scripture is the word of God: Or elfe he were no Chriftian, or faith were not an ad of judgement, or Reafon, but a bruitifh thing; This there-

(l$6)

fore weconfefs the Pope either hath or ought to have.

2. Every Paftor of the Church hatha judgement of direftion; that is, it beloageth to him by office to be a Director of the people, and to teach thofe the Chriftian Faith, that yet receive it not, and to confirm thofe in it that have received it : And they ought to have abilities for the work of this office. If therefore the Pope were a true Paftof, Bilhop , or Preacher, this power we fliould confefs to be in him, as in others,

3. It belonged! to thefe Teachers alfo , to be fpe-cially careful to preferve the facred Scriptures from corruption , and to deliver them down to pofterity in the purity as they receive them, and to translate them into known tongues, that the people may un-derftand them. Though others alfo have a part in this work, yet the Pallors of the Church have by Office the chief eft part.

4. It belongeth to them alfo to be witneffes and informers of the people, how themfelves did receive the Faith and Scripture from their Anccftors, and to fhew them how it came down to our hands by certaine Infallible Tradition from Age to Age.

5. The Church guides they are both Prefer vers of theSeripture,Witneffesof the Tradition,and Teachers of the truth,and have fuch a power of judging as beloageth to all thefe three.

6. In thefe a As of their office they ought to be Believed, and that on a threefold account. 1. Be-caufe of the evidence which they (hew to prove the truth of their Affertions: Though ftriftly this is rather to be called tz timings and fo Knowing, then Believing

Csr)

■Hiving : and is common to Teachers with any others that fhewthe lime proofs; Yet it being fuppofed ' that ordinarily they have much more Knowledge in the things which they teach then other men have, therefore we may well fay that it more belongeth to them to convince t and more efficacy is in their Teaching be( aufe of their proofs, and better entertainment is due to their Teaching. 2. Such a Belief alfo is due to them as all men fhould have in their own profeflion , wherein they have long ftudyed and laid out their time and labor i and wherein they are commonly known to excell other men. Every man that is left ftudyed in Law , Phyficke, or any other Science or Art is bound in reafon to give fome credit to Lawyers, Phyficians and o-thers that Study and Pradice thole Arts. This is but a humane Faith. 3. Befides this credit before mentioned which Infidells themfelves may give to the Minifters of the Gofpel (according to their capacities) there is a further credit due to them from / profefled believers, and that is, as they are officers authorized by Chrift, and have a promife of his afliftance to the cad of the world : which though it make them not infal> lible in all matters of Faith, yet doth it aflure them of a more than common help of Chrift if they are his fervants indeed.

7. There is more of this kind of Belief due to many Paftors (ceteris faribm ) than to oae, and to the whole Church than to any part,

8. The credit of the Church or any Paftors in witneffiag to the faith, dependeth on their competency for fuch a Teftimony; which confifteth in their fufficency or Ability, and their fidelity, which they are rationally to manifeft that it may gaine credit with others.

9. la things which God hath left undetermined in Scriptures and committed to the Governors of the Church to determine of , they have a Decifive Power. 1. For the Time or Place, or the like cir-cumflancesof Gods worfhip they are neceflary in General (viz,, there muft be fome Time,Place, &c.) but not in fpecie ( fuch a Time, fuch a Place is not neceflary, unlefs it be fome that God hath already made choice of ) Here the Church guides muft Authoritatively Determine, whereupon the people are obliged to obey 5 unlefs in fome extraordinary cafes, where the Determination is fo perverfe and contrary to the Genera{ Rules which Scripture hath given for it, thatit would overthrow the fubftance of the duty it felf. 2.And in cafe of Church cenfures,when any man is accufed to deferve Excommunication, the phurch Governors have a Judicial Decifive Power,as to thofe ends,thcugh not to make a man guilty that is Innocent, yet to oblige the people to avoid Com-rnunioh with the perfon whom they Excommunicate 5 except in fuch palpable mal-adminiftration and evident contradidion of the word of God, which may nuttifie their fentence (for even here their Power is not unlimited.)

10. No man or company of men (muehiefs the Pope) hath a proper Decifive Judicial Power in matter of Chriftian faith , ©r whether the Scripture, or any part of it$ be.thewordof God or not?

For

For the opening of this, underftand what we mean by a Decifive Judicial Power : to wit, fuch as a Judge hath in a controverted caufe, where the Plaintiff and Defendant rauft ttand to his Judgement, be it right or wrong: fo that though the fentence be not juft, yet muft it be Decifive and obligatory : fo that he hath Power to Judge in utramque partem^on either fide, and the judgement muft be valid. Such a Decifive power no creature hath in thefe cafes, that we have now in hand.

Where let it be ftill remembred, that it is not the name, but the Thing that we contend about. If they will call that a Decifive Judicial Power , which is fo limited to one part, or fide, that it {hallnot be valid or obligatory to the ftibjeft if it erre, or go pn the other fide, 'concerning which all men have a judgement of Difceming granted them by God (fo far as they are able to Difcerne, they have leave and authority) then we eafily grant, that every Paftor of the Church is thus far the Judge of Faith and Scripture ; That is, if any man doubt whether the Scripture be the Word of God, and ask a Preacher or Biftiop, he hath Power to fay, Yea: but not to fay No : But this is no Judicial Power : but a Teaching and Witneffing aft : For the people are bound to difobey them, if they erre, and therefore bound to try whether they erre or not; and not to follow their judgement further then it is right and found : therefore they have no deciding Judicial Power : which I prove thus.

Arg. i. If the Pope or any other had ftjch a Judicial Decifive Power, then might they oblige us to Believe that there is no God , that Cbrift is not the Redeemer, that Scripture is not the word of God ,

(sooj

and f© they might caft Faith and Scripture but of the Church : But this is falfe and abominable ; therefore the Pope hath no fuch Power.

For the confequence , it is manifeft, fsppofing that the Pope fhould give judgement againft God , Chrift, or Scripture, then men muft (by this Do-ftrine) be bound to obey it,and forfake God, Chrift, and Scripture for the Pope.

Whereunto add a fecond Argument from a further abfurdiry ; Then either iuch as renounce God,Chrift, and Scripture may be faved 5 or elfe God bindeth men (by the Pope) torenounce him and the faith to their own damnation. But both thefe confequents are falfe and abominable : Therefore.

I know they will here reply, that we muft not fup-pofe that the Pope can err in his judgement, and therefore being infallible, he will certainly make no fuch falfe Deafion. To which I fay, i.Why then, fhould it be faid that God hath given Authority to ; decide in utramqKe partem , on cither fide?,Doth God give a man Authority to do that,which he hath promifed him and all others that he fhal never do:But he will keep him from ? This is to make Gods Com-rmfnonstobe impious, and his Grace to the Pope onely to hinder the execution of them in an impious way. Who dare fay openly that [God hath given authority to the Pope to judge decifively and obligatorily that there is no God, Chrift or Scripture, though he will gracioufiy hinder him from fo doing] If the Paptfrs fay that they do nor fay fo 3 I would know then what their judicial power in thefe matters is? Is ic onely this, that the Pope hath Power to judge, ehit there isaGoJ, a Chrift, a word of

God?

(lOl)

God? &c. Why fo have others as well he ? If they ftialldaretofay, that matters of faith are not fuch to us ("that is, we be not obliged to believe theraj till the Pope have determined them : I anfwer, What / is no Heatken or Infidel bound to Be-licVe that there is a God, a Chrift, a Scripture, till the Pope tell him fo? Shall all Infidels be excufcd in judgement, that had the Gofpel preached to them by any other Chriftians except the Pope ob others in his name? Is no man on earth bound to believe in Chrift that knows not the Popes mind in the matter ? And muft men believe in the Pope before they believe in Chrift ? And muft they believe in Chrift onely becaufe the Pope bids them , or becaufe they firft believe in the Pope ? I do not think that either the eares of Good Chriftians, or rational Infidels will re-liih fuch dodrine. And what is this Believing in the Pope that muft go firft? Is it not to takehim to be Saint Teters (ucceffor, and that Saint Peter was Chrifts Difciplc , who had a prottiife of' infallibility, which is now devolved to the Pope: And muft this be believed before men believe in Chrift ? We muft believe what he promifed i and who were his fervants, before we believe in hifcafelf ? This is a ground too like the Popi(hfu-perftru&ure.

But perhaps, they may in time grow moderate , and tell us, that it is not in all points of faith , but fome onely that the Pope is made Judge : He may not judge about Chrift him-felf. whether he be the CMeJpah, but about his Dodrines?

(toi)

Anptoli. By what warrant will they diftinguifli, and claim power in one, which they have not in the other ? 2. Is it all, or fome of Chrifts Dodrines that the Pope is Judge of? If all ? then it leeras he muft judge whether he that Believeth (hall be faved, or not ? Whether we fhouid love God or hate him ? Whether we {hould feek firft Gods Kingdom, or worldly vanities ? Aud whether a man (hould commit Murder, Adultery, Theft, &c. or not ? May he decide thefeon either part ? or on one only,as others may do > May he judge that there is no Judgement, Refurre&ion, or lifeEverlafting ? I know they dare not (ay it : If it be but fome of .Chrifts Doftrines that the Pope is made Judge of, then let them tell us which it is, and give us their proofs, and they fhall hear more from us. Let it be the fmalleft point they will imagine ; Hath God given power to the Pope to contradict him and give him the Lye? If God faith, It is fo : May the Pope fay, It is not fo ? What if the Pope fay that the Gofpel ©f Mat hew or Lake op fohrt is no part of Gods word ? Muft we believe him? What if he tell as that the world was made in five days and not in fix?Muft we believe him? 2. If they yet flye to his infallibility, I (hall fpeak more to tliat anon (though the former anfwer may well fufficethem) But to another.

Arg. 3. The Scripture is Gods Law- The Pope is not the Judge of Gods Law : therefore he is not the Judge of Scripture.

The Major I hope no Chriftian will deny. The Minor is evident from the nature and ufe of Laws and Judgements: The Law is Norma judicu in jadi-cando: th.e Judges Rule : He is not to Judge the Law, but thecaufe of particular perfons by that Law. Indeed

(203)

deed as to the right guidance of his own aft of Deceive Judging the caufe of the perfon, he hath a Judgement of diferetion concerning the fence of the Law; but, as if he Judge upon a falfe expofition of the Law, the party may appeal from him, fo (which concerneth our prefent cafe) he hath no power to Judge the Law it felf: As he cannot make a plaine text to bear a falfe fence, or oblige the fubjeft to believe a falfe fence : fo in a doubtful cafe it belongeth to the Law-givers onely to interpret their own Laws. Onely a fentence of a lawful Judge grounded upon a falfe expofition, may fometime be executed among men where juftice cannot be had : but no man is bound to Believe that it is true and juft; fames tells men what it is to pretend to be a Judge of the Law infteadofdoingit, and leaving that to the one Law' giver, JW4.11,12: And if the Pope be made Judge of every controverted difficulty in Scripture, then why is h^ fo unfaithful that he hath not hitherto written ui an infallible Commentary on it ? and why doth he not determine all the controveriies abouc it that among his own followers remain yet undetermined ? (of which more anon.)

Arg. 4. If the Pope be made the Deciding Judge of Faith and Scripture, then either of the plain points, or onely of the controverted difficulties or of both : But not of the plain points; For 1. That which is evident and not under controverfie, needs no Judge : To the ignorant there may be need of an interpreter and teacher, but not of a Judge: 2. Such texts of Scripture do oblige us whether the Pope Judge of them or not: Therefore there is no need of his judgement that they may oblige us. Who dare think that a man is not bound by the word of God,

to

to love God above all, to believe the Refurre&ion of Chnft, and of us, to love Chrifts difciples,^. unlefs he know the judgement of the Pope. Do not all Laws of the Land obiige the fubjeft upon the bare legiflationand promulgation, before the Judge meddle with them ? If they did not firft oblige us to duty, there were no place for cfce Judge tofentenceus to punifnment for difobedience. Ic is the Legiflator that obligech to duty by his Law^ proclaimed or any way publifhed in his aame * But judgement interve-neth to oblige men to punifhment, and bring it to execution, and to help them to thae which by the Law is their right. If therefore it be evident in the very nature of Laws and judgement, that we are obliged by Gods Laws to Believe and obey them in the feveral particulars before any judgement of the Popes 5 it is then but dotage to talk of a Judicial Decifive power in the Pope to oblige men to Believe thofe fame dodrines, and obey thofe fame precepts of the word. And for the dark and controverted texts, i*. Thofe are not of that moment, as that mens falvation muft lye upon the expolition of them. The points abfolutely neceffary to falVation are plainly delivered. 2. Obfcurity (hews the need of a Teacher, but not of a Judge. At leaft itsplaitf, that when any Teacher (hall remove the obfcurity , thofe texts oblige us as well as the plaineft. 3. As I faid , If the Pope be Judge of ail difficult controverted texts, he is an unfaithful Judge that wiil not expound them to u$ y and decide fo many eontrovcrfies as yet depend. What good will it be to the Church to have fuch a Judge of difficult controverted texts of Scripture, as in the confeioufnefs of his ignorance dare not give us his judgement ? but hath left ^em

un-

K w 7 J undecided thefe fifteen hundred years ? This dumbe Oracle that hath eyes and fees not, and a mouth but fpeaks not, is not a fit foundation for the Churches Faith. 5. Where God calleth men to Office and Power,he accomplifheth or fitteth them in fome meafure for the performance of ir.butGod hath not fitted all Popes, no aor any, to Jugde Decifively of all controverted difficultyes in Scripture, and Religion : Therefore he hath not made them Judges of them. The Minor (hall be further proved a-non : Many Popes have been ignorant, and unlearned ; many Heretickes, unfit to decide all fuch contfoverfies; and they have (hewed their unfit-nefle by their non performance or ill performance.

The great Obje&ion of the Papifts is this.

Obj. 1. What ! Shall every one be the fudgb of Scrip tire ? and take it in Vrbat fence he pleafe ? (ball every unlearned- man or Vpoman expound it according to their dWn fancies ? then we /hall have variety of expoftionf. whether is it fitter for the Church or every fimple felloty to be fudge ?

Anfw. 1. Neither? Hath God made fubjefts to be Judges of his Lawes by which they muft live, and by which they muft be judged ? Neither they nor your Pope, muft be Judges of the Lawes, in a proper fence, but obeyers of it.

2. We fay not that the people fhould expound the Scriptures as Teachers of others (unlefs in their own callings, as to the children fervants, &c when they are able) This we refcrve to the Officers of th* Church.

3 C Nor do we fay that any people muft expound Scripture according to their own fascies or mif-guid-ed conceits, but according to the true meaning of them. 4. Nor fhould they in difficult cafes which are paft their underftandings, prefume of their own wit to know the right meaning; but have recourfe to the Teachers that God hath fet over them , that fo by their help they may learn the meaning of that word which they underftood not. 5. And if their Teachers be Angular, or give them juft caufe to fuf-peft their skill or fidelity , they have more reafon to regard the Judgement of the Judicious, then of the ignorant, and of the whole Church then of any one or few; fo far as the credit or authority of men, muft fupport a learner while he is a learning. 6. Bun what 1 Is it indeed fuch a monftrous heretical conceit in the eyes of a Papift , that every Chriftian (hould have a judicium difcreticnu^ a Judgement of difcern-ing to perceive and difcern which is truth and which is falfhood ? Good Lord, whether will the heat of contention carry men ? Why if they muft not have this difcerning judgement. 1. Then God doth bind them all to be fools, and ignorant. 2. And then Religion and the Chriftian F^ith, are the endowments of bruits that know not what they hold or do, and not of N Reafonable men. 3. Orelfe they that will be Chriftians muft have no Fmth or Knowledge; which is a contradiction. Is not Faith an aft of dif-cretion ? Muft not he that believeth the Refurrefti-on, and Everlafting Life , believe them with his own underftanding ? And doth he not in believing them, Judge them to be True , and Judge the contrary doftrine to be falfe ? 4. Why will you read , or preach Scripture to the people i if yeu woiald

not

not have them receive it,by a judgment of difecrning? would you aot have their judgment difcern theTruth of whatGod hathwrittenjOr the Prieft fhal preach to them? 5. Doubtlefsyou will allow them a judgement of Difcretion, about the Popes Decrees and Canons, and your own Determinations. How can they believe you , if they do not by judgement difcern the things you fay to be true ? And why will you not allew them the like towards God and his Word? Will you fay, It is their duty to believe the Pope 3 and their fin to believe God ? Or its their duty to undcrftand the Popes Laws, and their fin to un-derftand Gods Laws? Why/ what do youfaylcfs when you yield them a judgement of difcretion as to the Pope or Church, and deny it in Refpeft to the Word of God ? If you fay that they will mifunder-ftandthe Scripture. I anf. 1. So will the Pope and the beft and wifeft man on earth in fome pambecaufe while we are here, we know but in part. 2. Their error is their fin : But doth it follow that they may not fee at all, for fear of miffing their way ? Muft they put out their eyes/ and be led by the Pope, for fear of erring ? Muft they not know or labor to know, for fear of miftaking ? Will any Matter take this well of his fervant , to put out his eyes, or do nothing, for fear of doing his work amifs ? Or re-fufc to go his journey , left he mifs the way ? Then wenauft not judge of the Popes Laws neither, and confequently, not judge them to be true, for fear of erring in our judgement. When you prove that the Church of Reme is the tru<2 Church , would you not have the people judge of your proof for fear of erring ? This is even to make beafts of Christians. 3. What are Teachers for, but to guide them, and

help

.help them to underftand. If you are afraid left they (hould erre, be the more diligent in inftrufting them. But this is the difference between the work of aPo-pifh Teacher and ours. They make it their work to put out mens eyes that they may have the leading of them, becaufe they are troubled with an imperfefti-on in their fight, and therefore will erre if thofe imperfeft eyes be lefc in their heads: we make it our work, by all means we can life, to cure their eye fight that they may be able tp~ fee themfelves, in the mean time advifing them , while their eyes are under cure, not wholly to truft to them, but to ufe the helpe of others, to fhew them the way , and to tell them of dangers. The Proteftant will fet his Childe to School that he may learn to know, that which through childifhnefs he knows not : But according to the Popilh way, we flaould forbid them all books or learning, left they rmfunderftand them ; and let them never knowauy thing left they know amifs. The next ftep, is to fend them to Bedlam. The Apoftle would have men have their fenfes exer-cifed todifcernGoodandEvill, Heb. 5. 14. The Pa-pifts would not have the people to have a Judgement of Difcerning: If they muft not Difcern, they muft be ignorant: When God fo much requireth andex-tolleth knowledge.

Bat Tie leave this Queftion, and pafs to the

next.

Qu. 2. whetherth$ Pope be .Infallible , inthis'De-cifive lodgement which he pretendeth to ? Which we deny.

But before I come to give the reafons of our de-

nval,

nyal, I (hall further declare our judgement about the whole matter of the Churches Infallibility , that the true ftate of the controverfie may appear.

And uWeeafily grant that as thereisanObje-ftive certainty in ail.points of the Chriftian Faith % and in the very truth, to the Pope is infallible whiic he beiie%eth anddeclareth nothingbut the truth. He and every man elfe that fpeaks according to Gods word , is fo far infallible, becaufe that word is infallible. They need not thank us for this concef-fion.

2. We grant that ^either the Church of 'Rome (if a true Church^or any other particular true Church can erre in funchrcrtentals, or in points of abfolute neceffity tofalv^tion , in fenftt cowpojlto; that is, while they remain a true Church,they never deny the effentialsof a true Church : For if they once deny the eflentials 9 theydo^^mi^-ceafe to be a true Church.

3. We grant that Chrifts univerfal Church fhall never deny any one point of faith eflential to Chri-ftianity, orabfolutely neceflary to Salyatten: For then Chrift (hould have no true Church on earth ( when the whole fhould thus Apoftatize or turn Hereticks) and all the then prefent world fhould be damned.

4. The Church as Reafonable fenfible men are infallible in many matters of fad, of which they may give us unerring reports: as that, This Bible was delivered as the word of God by their Anceftors, as they might teftifie it was delivered to them : and that

• this Creed or fum of Faith alfo was thus delivered in the words now in ufe, &c.

P 5 .There

5 .There is an infallible certainty in the evidencewhich the former Church hath left, and the prefent Church poffefTeth,to prove that this fame Scripture was written by the Apoftles and Evangclifts, and was delivered to the firft Churches, and from them, down to us: and that multitudes of miracles were wrought for the confirmation of the Doftrine contained in them. |

6. An illiterate perfon may have an infallible certainty that all points neceffary to falvation are ex-prefled in certain tranflations of Scripture, and that lb far, and much farther, they are truely tranflated, and that fuch things there are in that Book as the Readers affirm thereto be/though himfelf cannot read them. For all this is infallibly difcovered by common confent, and efpecially of adverfaries : When all men that are certainly able to judge, and arehoneftand impartial, affirm it without doubt, and thofe that would gladly eontradift it, as being by their interefts carryed thereto, yet cannot do it, or at lead not with any considerable" pretence : This gives men as infallible a' proof, as the common tefti-mony of msn doth, that there is fuch a City as fyomipx Par it which we never favv.

7. And we further grant, all that Teaching and Wicneffing power to the Church officers, which was exprefled under the laft Queftion; and all that due-neis of Belie* and obedience to them , which was there afferted. So much for our Concefiions.

But we deny, 1. That either the Pope of Ronse^ or a General Council arenaturally or fupernatural-]y priviiedged from all error in matters of Gods revealed will, or that they are priviiedged from the dacger or pqffibility of teaching thefe their errors to

other?,

{2UJ

other^evcn to the Church. 2« We deny that the Pope or the RomaMeCkrgy are fecured from-the danger of Apoftafie or Herefte : They may fall fo far as zo deny the Fundamentals or Effendals of Chriftiantty : though the Umverfal Church fhall never fofalla-way.

We fhall firft fpeakor the Popes Infallibility, and afterward of a General Council, that wemayfpeak to the feveral parties among the divided Papifts here.

And againft the Popes Infallibility we thus argue.

Argn. i, They that lay claim to this Infallibility 4 do give us no proof of their daim : Therefore they cannot expeft that we (hould believe them. The proof lyeth on the pretenders, who give- us no proof.

If they can prove it, it muft be either by his natural perfection, or fome fupernatural endowment^ by which the Pope muft be more Infallible then other men: Th« former they pretend not to (and no wonder) The later they do pretend to : But, if God fu-pernaturally haveafcertained all Popes of an Infallibility in matters of Faith, then he hath done this either by his written Word, or by unwritten Tradition , or both : by which it muft to us be proved: But he hath done it neither by hi* written Word, nor by unwritten Tradition. For Tradition they muft (hew it us, either in certain monuments of the Church which are in ftead of writing (but that they cannot do) or elfe in the mindes of all the rtie'ftibert* of the Church. For that which co^cerneth all their

F z Sal-

(ill)

Salvation, muft be delivered to all: But this they cannot fhcnv : Nay we fliew them the contrary : that is, thegreateft part of the prefent Church on earth denying any fuch Tradition : and the moft approved Writers of the former Ages, telling us the contrary , and all taking the Pope as fallible, fo that they cannot givers one line .of any one Father or Council for many hundred years after Chrift, that ever had fuch a conceit as theirs- And if they will pretend to a private Tradition which none but them-felvcshave received and are entrufted with i and fo make themfelves the abfolu&e Judges of their own caufe, and give us no proof but their own words , we will believe them as faft as we can, but we muft defire them not to be too hafty with us.

And for the written Word they cannot thence prove a grant-of their infallibility, i , Becaufe they teiius that we cannot know the Scripture to be the Word of God, but by their infallible judgement: Therefore we muft know their judgement to be infallible firft; and therefore it is firft to be known fome other way, and not by Scripture- Indeed hare they have long tired themfeives in their Circle, which fome of them would hide by vain words if they could, but Bolden and others of them are forced to confefs it, and that they have noway out but by retiring to the univerfal teftimony or tradition as an infallible evidence, in fteadof the Authoritative judgement, or infallibility, or private Tradition of the Church of Rome. They tell us that we cannot know the Scripture to be the Word of-God , but fey the infallible judgement of their Church (And* that is in the Iffue of the Pope) And when we call for

the

(«J)

the proof of that infallibility, they refer us to the Scripture. So that this is plainly to fay that neither Scripture-nor Papal infallibility can be proved; and fo to forfake both Popery and Chriftianity : Then it. feems,nQ man can know the Popes infallibility but u \ -on the authority of Gods word, which cannot it felf be known till that infallibility be known. It muft be Gods Grant, written or unwritten that muft prove their infallibility : But that word or Grant, written or unwritten, cannotbs known to be of God , till we firfi>know their Authority to judge, and infallibility in judging : It evidently follows therefore kef cording to them, that neither one nor the other can be known, becaufe ao one of them can be known till the other be firft known.

But 2 If we could know the Scripture to be Gods Word, before we know their infallibility in judging, yet we cannot know the true fence of that Scripture (as ihey confidently tell usj firft : AVell then, lam one that doubt of the Popes infallibility, and demand his proof : BelUrmine turns me loLuk^zz. I have prayed tbsJ thy faith fail not. I muft know how I (hall be fare chat this is the meaning of thaC Scripture (which is fo little apparent to an oidinary eye) He hath nothing to tell me, but that the Church faith fo: And how (hall I know that the Churchis in the right ? Why becaufe it cannot errfc. And how fhall I know that ? Why by this Text. And fo they are amazed in another Circle, paft recovery. For they cxprcfly and frequently.tell u$, that the Scripture is no good evidence but when it is rightly expounded : and that no exposition is right but that which is given by the infallible judgement of the Church j and fo the Popes infallibility cannot be

P 3 known

known till the true meaning of Texts be known that prove it 5 and the true meaning of thofe Texts can* not beknown,till their infallible judgement be firft known: What follows therefore, but that neither of them can be known ? The true produft of Popery. This is the ufualfuccefs of falfe arguing for a good caufe ; to overthrow both the caufe and argument ; fa do the Papifts as much as in them lyes overthrow both Chrifts Do&rine and their own

3.But let tis examine the particular proofs from Scripture that they bring.Hisfirft p wot (/1k4.de Pontif. cap. 1.) is from Luk-22> £Simon, Simon^Satanhath defered, tec. but 1 have frayed for thee that thj faith fai/e not > and when thou art converted^ ftrengthen thy brethren7\ Doth this Text fay that the Pope QiRome is infallible ? Yes, if you will take Bcllarmines word. And firft he tells us that ( among themfelves) there are three feveral txpofitions given of this Text; and it is but one of the three that will ferve their turn : r Good ftili! And how (hall we know that this one which'.2?*//drwi0*hiton, is the right? Let anyinv partial man perufe his rcafons, and make his beft of them : For indeed there is no reafon in them. But on the contrary \ fhall prefume to tell them , why I fuppofe that this Text doth not talk of the Popes infallibility. 1; Becaufe here is never a word either of the Pope, or of Rome, or of Infallibility. 2. Becaufe the thing here promifed is exprefly retrained to one individual perfon, Simon.. 3. The thing here promifed was about Peters perfonal Faith,, and not about infallibility in judging. For 1. In that refpeft that Satan dsfired to fift Peter, in thatrefped Chrift promifed the not failing of his Faith. But it was in

refped

refpe&of his perfonai Faith , and not his Cathedral judgement that Satan is here (aid to defire to fife him: Therefore,^. 2 It is exprefly faid to be Qhis Faith]] that fhould not fail : But his Faith, is not his tongue or Cathedral fentence : words be not Faith.

4. It is not all degree of infallibility or not failing that Chrift prayeth for to Simon : but he onely pray-eth that his Faith may not be overcome , foreseeing that it would (hake \ and that he would deny him : So that this is no promife of perfeft Infallibility to Teter himfelf as appeared by the if-fue.

5. Peter himfelf was to be converted from- fome failing : Therefore he was not exempted from it ; And the cafe here in hand is fueh as that converfion had refped to. Therefore it was not, that he fhould not fail in Cathedral Determinations; for he was not converted from fuch, HelUrtnine here moll immo-deftly would intimate that the text fpeaks not of Peters convention from any (in , But of his turning to his brethren to fpeak to them; as if it were £ When thou turneft thee to fpeak to thy Brethren, ftrengtfe-en tberri] Nothing but the Popes infallibility, or the grofs fallibility of common reafon, could make a Jearned man think that this is the fence of the Text. »

6. The Papifts pretend that here is fomewhat pro-mifedto Peter which tjie reft of the Apoftles were not partakers of: But that is not fo: For, if it were fas it was) that he fhould not Apoftatize : the fame was given to them all (except Judas) If it had been that he fhould be infallible in teaching the Church, fo were the reft too as well as he. The reafon there-

P 4 fore

(si6)

fore of mentioning P<?r£r in particular , was becaufc Chrift forefaw the temptations and lamentable fall of ypfter in denying" Chrift with curling and oathes: from which he had need of a fpecial converfion, that God might not forfake him and give him up to a to-ta!l failing of his Faith.

7. Two things, faith Ttellarmine , are here obtained for Peter: The one is that SccSmbw fa *.».?. he himfelf (hould never lofc

a $ 7J^ r Vt the faith, nor fall as to his faith, ltraimng tnc texe to ' .

Peter alone. The fecond is, that he as Pope

fhould never reach any thing contrary to faith , or that none fhould ever be found in his feat that (hould fo do. Of which priviiedges (faith he ) perhaps the firft did not defcend to iiis fuccefTors, but doubtids thelaft did.

But note here what a pafs this learned Cardinal hath brought his great caufe to. 1. The text fpeaks but of one thing and not of two : Faith is one thing, and Cathedral determination is another. Doth Chrift mejw both,when he names but one ? Exprefly it is onely the firft priviledge that he ptomifeth Peter, and faith not a word of the later : It was his Heart, and tiot his tongue that wa* the feat of faith , and that Chrift eftabliftieth : which is alfo evident by tbeiffue: for fure his tongue failed by fpeaking a-gainft the faith, when hecurft and fwore that he knew not the man. 2. *Bellarmine confeffeth that this priviledge [_ that his own faith fhould not fail] extende-th not perhaps to the Popes : fo that for all this their faith may fail 5 If fo 1. Then the onely priviledge mentioned in the Text extendeth not to them : For it fpeaks of no more : The text promifeth then nothing to the Pope, but what it never promifed

to

\*17 )

to Peter. 2. And if it did promifeboth priviledges to Peter (that neither Faith nor tongue fhould fail) how can BeUarmine prove that one part belongeth to the Pope, when he confefleth the other doth not? The Text fpeaks but to the fame per fon, and not in one half to one, and in the other half to o-thers. I may well argue therefore in this manner: To whomfoeverChrift here promifeth that his faith (hall not fail,to him onely doth he fpeak in this text: But he promifeth onely t9 Peter here that his faith fhould not fail, therefore it is onely Teter and not the Popes that he fpeaks of. The Major is clear according to the intelligible fence of the words (and BeUarmine hath not yet proved a myftical fence) The Minor is confefled by himfelf.

Laftly BeUarmine faith (de verbo dei lu$* f.3, jthat \Onelj out of the litter al fence of Scripture, effectual arguments are to be fetched ]] But this great argument of bis for the Popes infallibility is not fetcht out of the literal fence of Scripture : therefore by his % own confeflion it is uneffe&ual and un-juft.

The fecond Text which he cites to this ufe, is Mat % 1 6. \jDnthi6 Rocl^ lrtill build my Church , and the gates of hellfhall mt prevail againft if] A double argument he would fetch from hence- One from the Name Rockg 7 the other from the nature of a Foundation, which both imply firmenefs. Anf i.Note that here is in the Text not one word of the Pope, of the Church of Rome more then any other, or of infallibility. '2. How doth he prove, that by the Roche is not meant Peters Faith , or that Doftrine which-heconfeffedbut Peter himfelf? 3. If he had proved it, are not all the Prophe* and Apoftles as

well

(«8)

well as Peter called the foundation? Epk 2. 20; So that here is no more promifed to him, then what was elfwhere proraifed and given to the reft : Onely his prefent confeffion, occafioned the promife to be made exprefly and particular at that time to him. 4. As the reft of the Apoftles were the Foundation on which we are built, and yet their fucceffors are not fo: So though Peter were the Foundation , it followeth not that all or any of his iiicceffors are

The third text which B ellarmine titzih is fob, laft [^Fcedmj Sheep^ywhcrz note ?gain, i.That here is not a word of the Pope, or Rome^ or infaKibihty. 2. Did not Chrift bid che reft of the Apoftles Feed as well as Peter} SuteVkfet. 28. He bid them all, Go teach alt Nations , baptising them , and teaching them to obferve all things whatever he commanded them. And what could Peter do more in Feeding ? Yea thirdly, Are not all Paftors, though inferior to Apoftles bound to Feed the Sheep of Chrift ? and yet it follows not thence that they are infallible.

4. r Bellarmine would next prove this from £The High Priefts wearing thellrimand Thummim, Jixod. 28.] When he firft confefTeth that it is not agreed among Jews or Chriftians what thefe are : And yet it will ferve him for a proof. 2. The Priefts were not infallible for all their Urim and Thummim : therefore no more is the Pope. They judged Chrift not to be the 'JM-ejfiak , and therefore crucified him. They lived and died Infidels,and hardened the people in the fame Infidelity, for which they were broken off and unchurched.

(2(9)

3. And whereas he arguieth that the High Prieft was infallible becaufe the people were to go to him for rcfolution of difficulties ,♦ and obey them, Beut. 17. Imuftfay that BeUarminc had forae fault in his eyes that caufed him to overlook the Judge,and name onely the High Prieft. God fendeth them to the Judge 5 who was the chief Magiftrate in thofe dayes,as well as to the High Prieft; as any man that will read the text may fee. If therefore the one of them be infallible, bceaufe of this , why is not the other fo too ? But perhaps they will make the Pope to be the fucceflbr both of the Magiftrate and Prieft, and fo to be the univerfal Emperor as well as the univerfal Bilhqp; and ufe both his fwords, that fo this pro-mife may belong onely to him : For he will hard-ly grant every King or Judge to be infallible.

4. By this rule the reft of the Priefts alfo (hould be infallible: For the people were alfo to receive the Law at their raouthes.

5. When was there ever one Prieft in any age fo impudent as Bcllarmine and his faftion are, to plead for or pretend an infallibility in themfelves? Let them name one Prieft or perfon if they can, that ever had fuch a conceit of themfelves, except it were Gods Prophets in the matters of their Prophecy.

6. What if the Jews High Prieft had been infallible? Whats that to the Pope of Rome any more then to another man ? Hath he indeed yet proved himfelf fucceffor of the Jews High Prieft ? Except as a corrupter of the Law, and a perfecutor of the Church of Chrift.,

Well!

Well! you have heard all the Scripture arguments that Bellarmine had to bring (for he brings no more) to prove the^pretended infallibility of the Pope. May I not well fay that it is no marvaile that they are fuch ill friends to Scripture, who have no more Scripture (that is, none at all) to befriend the very foundation of their caufe ? And ntay I not juft-ly recite again HeUarmines own conclusion lib- 3. de verbo 'Deic. 3. and from thence (hew them that their caufe is built upon confeffed fraud and vanity |~/£ vs agreed b : t\\>een m (faith HclUrminc) that cnely out of the literal fence cf Scripture ejfettval Arguments are fetcht:~] Rut Cellar wine bringeth no one Argument for the Popes infallibility out of the. literal fence of Scripture: therefore he bringeth no one effeftual Argument from Scripture.

But yet one other Argument he hath, though not from Scripture, and no more : and that is from a double pretended experience : And his firft experience is [That in all the other Patriarchal feats there have been Heretickj^ but not in that of Rome.] t But here 1. Bellarmine muft be judge, or the Pope who is a party, before all the Patriarchs can be thus condemned. 2. And what if that were true ? Can he fay the like of all the Bifhops, as well as Patriarchs ? If not, they may as well hence prove themfelves infallible, as the Pope can do. 3. Whether ever there were in the chair at Rome either Vopt Liberies an Arrian, Pope Uonoritu a Monothefte, Pope fohn denying the immortality of the foul, with abundance more fuch like, we (hall have fitter opportunity to open anon, to the fhame of this experinemt of Cellar mines.

His

His fecond experiment is that [The Pope without a Council hath condemned many Herefies , which upon that very account have been taken for true Herefies by the whole Church of ChrifF] Anf But you muft firit unchurch the greateft part of the Catholike Church, and damne moft of the Chriftians on earth, the Greeks, Armenians , Abaffmes^ &c. and make your own fa&ion , to be the whole Church of Chrifl % before you will ever give us the leaft proof of this. All the Church doth not do that which your flatterers do. Nor did the ancient Church do any fuch thing. As other Bifhops condemned Herefies as well as the Pope, fo many a Herefie was judged fuch by the faithful, without any fhore in-terpofition of the Pope then another Bi-(hop.

Having feen thus how little their great Champion hath to fay for the Popes infallibility, I could willingly have look't about me into fome of the reft of them , to fee if they can fay any more; but that its known that moft of them tread the fame path Only I may not over pafs the new way that fome of them have taken up of late, to prove their infallibility , and to avoid their common Circle. And this you may fee in the Jefaitcs late fupcrfieial anfwer to Chi/-lingftorth. Forfooth, they tell us, that when they prove the infallibility of their Church from Scripture, it is but for our fakes becaufc rce confefs the Autho • rity of Scripture, but not of their Church. But when they go according to the true nature and order of the matter, then they fetthe Church before the Scripture, and independantly of it,] The rcafon of thi« Jefuitc (fuppofed to be Knot) is this |[ Becaufe the Church is before the Scripture, and becaufe the

Miracles

f»»)

Miracles wrought by the Apoftles did firft prove their own infallibility , and from thence fecondarily th^ infallibility of their Do&nne. And when we are in hrgh expertations of the proofs of the Romane infallibility by bis Arguments which are Independant of Scripture, and before the belief .of it, he tells us that it is by the like Aaguments as the Apoftles proved their infallibility, which he thus enumcrateth So the Church of God by the like fill continued Arguments and Notes 3 of many great andmanifeft Mira* cles, Santtity, Sufferings ViElory over all forts of enemies ,. converfion of Jnfidels , all which Notes are Aaily more and more, confpemm and convincing , and fhdl be ertcreafwg the longer the Vvorldjhall/aft ] And withall he tells us, that £ Theft Miracles^ &c. prove them to be infallible in All things, and not onely in fome , or elfe we cannot t*noty which thofe fame be, and tyhat to believe and what not.~]

Thus you have the fum of the new Fundamentals of the Romilh faith, and of the famous confutation of Chilltngworth. But all thefe Knots are eafily lofed without cutting; yea (hake them onely , and they fall loofe like juglers Knots.

i. We eafily grant that Chrift the head of the Church was before the Doftrine by himfelf delivered in the flelh , as it containeth many things fuperad-ded to the old Teflament and the doftrineof John Baptift.

2. Its evident that Chrift himfelf gathered his firft Gofpei-Church by preaching his Dodrine, thai is,„ he drew ^ernto be his Difciples, by convincing them that he was the Mejfiah, the Lamb of God thac takes away the fins of the world; fo thac this his Doftrine was before this his Church.

(«3>

'3. We grant that the Apoftles were Apoftles before themfelves did preach the Gofpel as Apoftles : But it was the Gofpel, and preacht by Chrift, before they preach'c it.

4. We eafily grant that both Apoftles and Gofpel were long before the writing of this Gofpel, which we call the holy Scriptures.

5. Wegrant chat the Apoftles Miraculous works did fufficiently prove, not fbme onely, but all the Do&rine which they delivered to the Church or any part of it, in the name of Chrift and as his : For though they confirmed onely thofe Doftrines which were delivered in execution of cheir Commiffion, yet feeing God would not have fetto this Zeal, if they had gone beyond and agatnft their Commiftion, therefore it alfo aflbreth us that they kept clofe to it. But this proved then not infallible before they received that Comrnifiion , nor afterward in arty point which theyihoulddeliver as their private opinion, which they fathered , not on the Infpiratton of the Spirit. The Apoftles were not infallible ^about Chrifts Death, Refarredion, and Afcenfion, when

-they underftood them not : The Difciples were not infallible about the Acceptablenefs of Infants to Chrift, when they forbad them to be brought, Thomas was not infallible aboutChrifts Refurredion when he believed it not.Petcr was not infallible when he gave Chrift that SatanicJtl councel, for which he was tantnm non (alcnoit) excommunicated, LMat 16. 22,23. Even prefently after the great promife to him ; Nor when lb denyed that he knew Cbrift, with ctirfes and oaches ; nor when he diilembled and Barnabas with him, Gal 2.

6, We maintain that the Apoftles Dodrine thus

fealed

fealedby Miracles, and Delivered in Writing to the Churches, doth carry with it an Atteftation from God of its infallibility, if there be never more Miracle wrought in the world. For the proof of this I refer the Reader to my Determination in a Book Intitled , The Vnreafonablcnefs of Infidelity.

7> It is this fealed Doftrine contained in Scripture, and preached by Minifters, which converteth men to •Chrift, and raaketh them Chriftians, and therefore it is in order before the prefent Church and*he caufe of it.

8* We deny and confidently deny that God hath Commifiioned the Pope to do the*work which hie Commiffioncd the Apoftlesto do, and gave them the power of Miracles to confirme, that is, to Atteft the Works, Sufferings, Refurrection, and words of Chrift as eye or ear witneftes of them from himfelf *-and to be the firft promulgators of feme of his Laws to the univerfal Church, and to deliver down an infallible fealed Scripture, to all fucceeding Ages, and by the ordinary working of Miracles to convince the unbelieving world. Let him fhew his Commifti-on for this Apoftlefhip if he would be believed.

9. We a? confidently deny that the Pope is a Pro-phct,or isinfpiredby the Holy Ghoft, as the Prophets and Apoftles were,that fo they might infallibly deliver us Chrifts doftrine.

10. And they cannot expeft thnt we (hould believe till we have fome proof of it, that the Pope,or the Church of Rome hath the Poirer of working Miracles, or are endowed with a fpirit of Miracles, or that they can convince thofe that deny the Scriptures by their own Miracles that they are the true Church,

or

Cm)

er that ever they confirmed thofe points by Miracles; which is now catted Popery.

Thus much to let the Jefuite know where wc differ from him : And now to the point: We call for his proofs, which he heiementioneth to us in general names Non <j]e & non tpparerc, are to us all one. Give us fufficienc proof of your fealing tie Do&rine of Popery by Miracles, or the Popes Infallibility by Miracles, as the ApolHes did the Scriptures, and their preaching i and then you (hall carry the caufe, and we profefs chat we will rejoy-cingly pafs into your Tents, and proclaim yotf Prophets or Apoftles of Chrift : But when we live among you , and fodid our Fathers before us , and hear you prate and boaft of Miracles, when we cannot fee that ever you did fo much as make a dead ' flea alive again, nor cannot fee the leaft Miracle from you, if we would rideor go as far as our horfe or legs can carry us , to fee it, what can we take you for but the moft fhamelefs fort of cheaters ?

If you could accufe us o£ negligence, as if we might fee your Miracles if we would but travail for it, or of unbelief, as if we denyed that which we have evidence of, we might bear the blame : but there's no fuch thing. I profefs as weak as I am , I would go many a hundred miles to fee fuch Miracles as you boaft of, if I had fufficient ground of expedition that I might not loft my labor. And I would read over any Volumes that I were able to find luciffient Teftimony of them; But where is this teftimony ? Knot refers us to TSrifr/j , and others co fuch like reciters of their Fables. And when all is done, there are three forts of Miracles that they

f

%i6)

fpeak of. i. The Miracles of the Apoftles and firft Churches mention in Scripture, and thefe are againft Popery: fo that we may well fay that the do&rine which contradifteth Popery is confirmed by Miracles in that the Scripture is fo confirmed. * 2. The Miracles of the following Churches till fix hundred. Thefe were comparatively few, and lefs certain, and fabulous mixtures in many of the reports of them. But whatever they were, they were no confirmation of the Popes Infallibility, or univcrfal Epifcopacy or Jurifdi&ion, which neither the Inftrumcnts of thofe Miracles, nor any man elfe on earth , as far as can be proved did then believe. And whereas there were fome Ceremonious fopperies that were then ufed, which the Papifts do yet ufe, and would per-1 fwa&e us that thefe Miracles were confirmations of them, we deny it, and profefsthe nullity of their pretended proofs. They fay, £lf they be not infallible in all things, how can we believe them in any jbinp?31 anfw. Becaufe that i. Their Miracles are ex-preffed Atteftations to fome thing, that is, toChri-ftianity, but not to all things that they may think I Nor could they ever work a Miracle to confirm fuch private opinions. 2. And the liibftance of Chri-ftianity which their Miracles do atteft , Were more unqueftionabie before attefted by Scripture and former Miracles - whereas the errors which they introduced are eontradi&ed by Scripture and the Miracles that attefted it.

Arid whereas they would make the Apoftles cafe to be like that of the Fathers; It is very much different. For though the Apoftles Miracles were atteftations to all their doftnne, as well as to fome. part; that was becaufe they were Officers Commiffioned by

Chgft

(»7)

Ghrift to that work, to deliver his cUftrinc firft to the world, as infpired infallible men, and tofealit to poilerity for future certainty. : But the Fathers had no fuch work in Commiftien; but onely to preach the do&rine thus fealed and delivered them by the Apoftles, and therefore their Miracles were to another more private, and jreftrained ufe, accor* ding to their Commiilions and work; that is, to convert thofe perfons to the faith that kiew of chem, by a fubfervient atteftation , fo that- it could oblige none to believe them in other things • much lefs in their miftakes.

3. The third fore of Miracles are thofe of later times contained in their Legends. And ferioufly, would the Jefuites perfwade us that thefeare of equal authority with the Miracles^m&ittoned in Scripture? or any whit like th'em ? I have given you a tafteof fomc W tfcem in the former Difputation : more you may fee of their ridiculous vanity in Doftor Franc. Whites Defence of his Brother,/uf. 147. 148. \jVe mufi believe a Baronius that Saint ¥u\btckfuc!(t our Ladyes * B * r ^\™>*°**/ br-fis* And Antonine b that Saint f u £j, iftt p , \ , ™™\ Dominiek wallet in the rain ank c , 4. § 6.&>c* 7. § 8, was not wet * y and hi* Heck* lying (pc *« §4. Math* allniqhtin the river y Were taken F *™ bi ft- ^ngl. m cut dry and without hurt: That >$*&*-&»& the fame Fryer fpyed the Devil fitting in the Church like a Sparrow , and calling him to him, deplumed him s andfo put him to d great reproach : "And that he made the Divel hold him the candle in his bare fingers tilUthey were burnt: that a leacherous Priefi by kif* fing his band, "toot cured of incontinency. That Saint Bernard by blejfing their Ale f and giving if font*

Q^2 lewd

(228)

lewd perfons to drink^, caufed Gods Grace to enter in-te them ; That he made an old Grandamt of above fcarfcore jears eld to give fucj^ to the Infant , when the mother was dead : That he killed Fljes by Excommunication ; and excommunicated the Divel , and thereby difabled him from lying with - Women : c That Saint Francis turned a \ Vix ^ K*™ r pr*fi*' Cafonintoa Fijb , andwater $n-

€ ZTZVSZ t0 wi " : m i' the t ^c^dforth &Lcgend.bae recitm ^ater, and Anchors to fmmme; Preacheth to Birds and Beafis , to praife God, tillthej were Jo attentive to his doUrine^ that they Would let him touch them , and would not de -part till he gave them leave s and had blejfed them with the fign of the C ro f s ; converted a cade Lamb by preaching to him, fo that he Would frequent the Church of his own accord , and kneel before the Altar of our Lady at the Elevation of the Hojl : By Which ex* tmvle, Surius calleth on the Heretickj to learn towor-fijip the Blefled Virgin y and to adore the Sacrament. Alfo y that he caufed Swallows, Grajboppers and a Wild Falcon to joy n with him in the Traifes of God.~] Abundance more of the like, more foppifh , and too many to be here meddled with , their Legends are full of; And thefeare their proofs of their true Church and infallibility by which they may be known by them that believe not the Scripture, I think indeed that thefe proofs are well faid to be In* dependent of Scripture; for the lefs a man believes the Scripture, the more he is like to believe thefe.

But by what certain or probable Teftimony (hall we know that ever, fuch things were done? What / muft we needs believe every doting Fryer that gives

us

(zip)

tis but his bare word, and chac many a year (if not age)aftcr chefe Miracles are fuppofed to be wroughi: Maft we believe them that fo ftiamefully con-trad^ one another? Math. Par u d ^ ^ * faith that Saint Francis was branded hcwj f.j^* with his five wounds fifteen dayes before he dyed: BuilScxavcnture , Vincentin* and Snriiu fay he had them two years before he dyed.

Nay muft we bclive as the very foundation of our Faith, that which the Papifts themfelves believe not ? How commonly do they among themfelves deride thefe ftories, as pious fraudes, and fome of cheru foundly ehide the Authors. I will at this time cite but the words of one, and that is no Babe, even CMelch* Cantu , whom H diamine referreth us to fo oft.

* c [_Lib. II. cap. 6. pag. (mibi) 33. 34. ghudaw 4e enimeornm ant vcritatis amore indntti , anti^gcnpti " pudoris&Q. That is, Someof them (the Heathen u Hiftorians) either induced with the love of Truth , M or in ingenuous modcfty,did fo far abhor a lyc^than '* perhaps we (hould be nowafharaed r that fome hea-u then Hiftorians were truer then ours. Ifpeak ra-" ther with grief then in reproach ; the Lives of <€ the Philofophers are much more feverely (that is, " truely) written by Laertixs, than the Lives of the " Saints are by Chriftians : and SxtuniHt did fas "more incorruptly and more entirely fct forth u the affairs of the (Romane) Cxfars, then Catho-" likes have fet forth, I fay not the affairs of Em-" p?rors, but of Martyrs, Virgins and confeflbrs.

M For they But ours do for the molt part either

" follow their own affe&ions, or elfe of fet purpofe

Q^3 "forge

" forge fo many things % that indeed I am not onely <c aftiamed of them, but alfo aweary of them. For " I know that thefe have-brought to the Church of , €t Chrift fmall profit, but much difprofit : I fpare " (mens) names becaufe-- — It is certain that they Cf who write Church Hiftory feignedly and deceit-<c fully, cannot be good and fincere men; and "that their whole Narration is invented \ either <c for lucre, or for error, whereof one is filthy, and " the other pernicious. The complaint of Ludovi-<c cm is mod juft of fome feigned Hiftories in the <c Church, ke doth indeed prudently and gravely " reprove them that take it to be a matter of piety *' to forge lyes for Religion. A thing that is very *' pernicious* and no whit necefTary. For we are <c wont not to believe a Lyar, even when he tells "truth. They therefore who by falfe and lying <c writings would ftir'up the minds of mortal men to lt worfhip the Saints, thefe feem to me to have done <; nothing elfe, then to make men deny belief to <: truths, becaufe of faifhoods — To what purpofe V is it to pretend the name of Hiftory to fiftions and €c fables? As if the holy men of God did need our "Lyes - — But while fome do too much indulge their ~ ownaffedions, and write thofe things which the writers mind, and not the Truth doth di&ate, r< they make us fuchSaincs, fometime, as the Saints f ; themfelves would not be, if they could : Can any <c man believe that Saint Francis was ufed to rake the " Lice on him again which he hadftiak't off him ? tc The Writer thought this was part of the mans " holinefs, but fo do not I, who know that the holy cc man was pleafed with poverty, but not with filthy-f c nefs. And how ridiculous is this, that the Divel

cc

li ra & n g on a time againit our father Dominklie was cC conftrained by this Saint to hold the candle fo long

in his hands, till it did not onely trouble him, hue tc incredibly pain him. Such examples cannot be " numbred : but in thefe few mod of the reft may be " underftood, which have darkened the hiftories of Ct the moft famous Saints ---- They do therefore cx-" cccdingly wrong the Church of Chrift, who think lc they do not well fee forth the excellent deeds of c *the Saints, unlefs they adorn them with feigned " Revelations and Miracles Wherein the irnpuden-<c cy of men hath neither fpared the Holy Virgit,nor " the Lord Chrift —-Of late years when I was at |f the Council of Trent , I heard by fome that Al<g-"fins Lifpomannus was healing this difeafe , by writ-" ing a hiftory of the Lives of the Saints in a conftant cc and grave fpeech: But I could never yet fee this, " nor any other which I could allow, of " all thofe that have come into my hands. *t* So far for Melch. Canus.

And do their own moft Learned and Judicious Writers cry out of Lyes, and Hiftories fo much more falfe then the Heathens, and impudent forgeries , and fay that, they tiever faw any of thefe Hiftories which they could allow of; and yet muft we needs make thefe the Found§tion of our Faith, infteadof the fealedWord of God? What a Religion have the Papifts that is built on fuch a foundation!

Yea of the reports of fome of the late Writers that were next before Popery, I will add a few more words ofCanw, ik li.u.pag. 337. 4< QC>-" cero thought 'Dernofthener nodded fomtime j and " Horace thought fo of Homer himfelf. For though

Q 4 " they

" they were excellent, yet but men.- And the fame <c perhaps may I fay juftly and truly of Beda and ■ c Gregory. One of them in his Hiftory of the Evg-" Uih, the other in his Dialogues f do write certain V Miracles, talk't of and believed by the vulgar, cc which the criticks of this age will judge to be un-** certain I (hould have more approved thofe Hi-" ftories, if their authors had according to the afore-4t faid rule, to feveritv of judgement, joyned more "care in their choice —] And how he lets fly at the If es of AntoniM and Valvacen : The next page (hews: And pagej^S. 339. how he cenfures E-uje* him himfelf. But I muft forbear more fuch citations left I weary the Reader.

It is now long fince Do&or John white told them

of their a Cajetans words, who faith

* opuftuLdc i«p t cannoc bc known infallibly

Lvncep. Vitl. <c ih%% the Mirac | es upon which lhc

>> /art. 1. tt*. " Church groundeth theCanonization £ c . c. " of Saints, are true] And their 9 An-

twiniM Florent faith of the vifions of Bernard and Urigit about the Virgin Alaries conception " [They are fantaftick vifions and mens "dreams] And their Claudius £fpew I*'™ f*" c Jaith " [No ftable is fo full of

" dung , as the Legends are full of " fables.— Yea very fiftions are in their porteflcs] *?m. 1. And Gerfon^ "[All thefe the Church . receives,and permiteth them to be read, cc not as certainly true, but more attending to whac " might be in pious recogitation,then to what indeed "was done] And Dodiox white then made a challenge to tfccm , that we will admit of all thofe* Mi-f^tlcs,, which are reported by fuch men, as fome

*>f

(*3J)

of their own Writers do openly Note for

Lyars. c Which challenge the p „„. ... , y § ** /v r» 1 u j • j •- e W^/W Works 6>L

Popifti Replycr had no mind it ^ M g ^

feemsto take up.

But though it belong to the Romtrtijls to prove their Miracles (whiih prove their Infallibility without Scripture) and not to us to prove the Negative, yet I ihall try to (hame their confidence by a few pertinent Queftions, when it {hall appear how little they have to fay in anfwer » them Jllj. And firftl defire to know of them whether the Miracles that prove their infallibility without Scri -pture are wrought by the Frefent Church t or by the Church of former ages onely ? If by the prefent, why cannot we fee them? Why are we ftillfcnt to Saint Brigit , or Saint Francis , or Saint Somebody that is long ago dead and gone ? We thought once we had had one neer us here, I mean, the Boy of Bilfon y who did wondrous things in favor of the Papifh 3 but in the IfTue, by the induftry of Biftiop Merten he was proved to be a counterfeit, and con-feffed himfelf trained up by the Papifts for the cheat. But if it be onely the Generations that arc dead and gone that wroughjt Miracles, thea I would further aske. i. Doth it not feem then that your Church is Apoftate, in that it hath loft the gift of Miracles, which you fuppofe fo necefTary ? And how will the Gifts of your predecefTors prove your prefent infallibility, any more then the Gifts of the predecefTors of the Cjreek^ Bifhops will prove their infallibility that now are? 2. If paft Miracles may ferve without prefent, then what need any more than the old Miracles of the Apoftles ? And then why are not

all

all the Apoftles fucceffors infallible as well as the Pope? Seeing all the Apoftles had the gift of Miracles (and many thoufand more ) Therefore thofe paft Miracles (hould prove all Bifhops infallible that fuceeeded them.

2.^£efi. I defire alfo to know whether it be your Pope himfelf that Works thefe Miracles , or fome other perfons ? And if others, whether it be oncly fome of your Church, or all ? If it be the Pope himfelf, why then have we moremurthers then Miracles charged on your Popes by your own hifto-rians ? and why will not hisholinefs do fome Miracles in charity to poor Hereticks? Why do you boaftno more of you Popes Miracles J One Icon-fefs we read of in the Golden Legend , that Pope Leo the firft by the means of a woman kiffing his hand was fo vehemently tempted with luft, that he was fain to cut his hand off: but the Virgin Mary having companion on him, joynedhis jiand to his body again. But this is no foundation of our faith.

But its plain that it is Saint Hecket , and Saint Bri-git and Saint Katharine that you (end us to for Miracles, and not to the Pope: And then I would further know whether one mans Miracles will prove another man infallible unlefs they were wrought in con-* firmation of the affertion of that other mans infallibility ? It fhould rather prove Saint Urigit and Saint Katharine infallible that are faid to have the Revelations and Miracles, then the Pope, that had none. Would it prove the Patriarch of Csnttanti-nople infallible , if any one that is under his Government (hould work a Miracle ? ? Or are you fure that there is no Miracle wrought among the Grecians, A-bajfines or Armenians > More-

Moreover, if you are All Miracle Workers, wliy can we never fee one, nor have certain proof of one ? But if it be but fome very few of you (as good as none) how will that prove the infallibility of your whole Church? When'the Apoftles wrought Miracles, that proved their cW» infallibility : but that proved not the infallibility of all in the Church nor of every teacher in it,nor of the greater number of them

3 • £lii c ft- *f y° ur Po P e * n( * Church be proved infallible, by fuch Miracles as the Apoftles were doth it not follow then that all your Popes are infpi-rcd perfons or Prophets as the Apoftles were by which the gift of infallibility was conveyed to them?

4. jjhffi. Yea will ic *not follow that all your Church arc infpired Prophets, if all your Church be thus infallible: But you cannot expeft that we fhould too eafily believe thefe. If you have Apoftolick infallibility grounded on the like Miracles, then rauft you not be each one dif- ;undly infatlible,as the Apoftles were; and not onely altogether ?

5. £u/ft. And is it not plain then that all your di&ates are Gods word , if you have the fame feal and infpiration as the Apoftles had? And foyour Pope, at leaft, i£ not each one of you muft make us new Revelations, or new Scripture : And is not this hainous arrogancy, thus to equal your felves with Prophets and Apoftles, when you are none ? They could but be infallible, and fo you fay is the Pope , They could but feal jheir do&rine by Miracles, andfo you fay <loth your Church.

6. £>#efi. Will you grant thart we are all infallible here in England^ if we can prove any Miracles done among us and by us?

7. £>ueft. Is it not abfolutely ncceffary to the

vali-

validity of the Tcftimony of a Miracle, that it be not conrroled by fome greater Miracle or evidence ? Ocherwife the Magicians in Egypt , and .yimenxAin-gus might have gone away with better refutation. But your pretended Miracles are controlled b^ far greater and furer, and therefore of no force: For yours are to confirm a dodrine contrary to the Scripture, which was confirmed by many furer Miracles. This we are ftiil ready co prove, though here we take it for certain : bucyouufe to decline that tryal.

8. Jll*rfi Is not every Prieft infallible, and every Church that hath the Eucharift, according to your doftrine ? For fure Tranfubftantiation is a Mtracle : I do not think you wil! deny it. And a Prieft, even in deadly fin, may bean inftrument of this Miracle, if your Church be infallible. Is there then no Eucharift among the Abaflines % Greeks, or any that iUbje&not toyou ? Or are they all infallible? And if Miracles be as common as Tranfubftantiation , the priyilcdge proved by them muft be as common. So much to Matter Knots firft proof of his Infallibility without Scripture.

i His fecond Independent proof, js£San&ity3 But Sir i. Are all Saints infallible? Sure you dare not iay fo ?

2. Will the Sanftity of one man, as Saint Francis or Saint c Domimcke 4i prove the infallibility of the Pope that hath no Sandity? By what means? Rather if Saints be infallibfe, a Murdering, Simoniacal, Drunken, Fornicating Pope (as yours confefs many of them were) are not like to beinfal{tble ^ efpeci-ally Saint "Brigit cannot make the Pope infallible by that Sanftity, that would not make or prove her fdf infallible. 3-Who

(*}').

- ;. Who muft be judge of your San&ity and ours? Your felves no doubt. For my part, if my falvation lay wholly upon the pa/ling of a righteous cenfure between us in this point, I moft needs pro-fefs, that even in Sngland, where the Papifts fhould be of their belt fort, beeaufe it is not the common way of the Nation, but a difcountenane'e way , and where they are but few , yet I have known fo few of them that have not been common Swearers, Curfcrs, Drunkards, Whore-mongers, or the like, and yet fewer that evermani-fefted any ferious minding of God and the life to come, or any experience of the work of Sanftifica-tion on their hearts; and who fhewed any more ho-linefs than what lay in certain ceremonies, words, gefturcs or other formalities; and on the contrary I know fo many Protcftants of heavenly hearts ("as far as I can judge) and obedient lires; that there if no comparifon , in my moft impartial judgement between Papifts and Protcftants in matter of holinefs. If this therefore be the proof of infallibility , fure God will excufe me, if I take England to be as infallible as Rome^ beeaufe lie requires me not to put out ray eyes, nor to fay the Swan is black, and the Crow white, beeaufe the Pope fhail fay fo before me. And yet we ftill difclaim all pretences to fuch infallibility.

The third mark that Knot brings, is their [^Sufferings.;]

But i. Sure the Pope fuffers but little (in this life : but in the next, let him look to himfclf) How then do other mens fufferings prove him infallible?

2. Do not the poor Greek Churches and other Chriftians under the Turks, fuffer more then the Ro-rnanifts? 3. Do

3. Do they not Aake us fuffer incomparably more then they ? Is it not impudence almoft inhumane after the murder of fo many thoufands of the Albi-genfes y fV-aUenfcs, 'Bohemians^ after the Maffacres. in France^ Savoy, Ireland^ the burnings in SnfUnd^ the Powder-Piot, after their bloody inquifition of fo long continuance, and the reft of this kind , to tell the remnant of their furviving neighbors , that their Sufferings prove them infallible, while ouir itnfbrings prove us Heretical ?

4. Is it not ambition and defire of Rule that is the very cauiewhich they contend for? Whatstheun-reconcileable quarrel fo much as that all the world will not be fubjt&to them ? And yec the Sufferings of thefe men prove them infallible ? If one Butcher Hf»rj-the third of France, and another Henry the fbarth, and others would blow up the Snglifb Parliament with Gunpowder, is the Pope infallible if fome of thefe be hanged ? Or what if iome of them have fuffered from infidels ? Are not others as ready fo to fuffer as they ? and have fuffered as much as they ?

The next mark that he layes down is £Viftory o-ver ail forts of enemies] But is it over their minds, or over their bodies that they mean ? If the firft, who muft be judge of their vixilories, but themselves ? I never heard any of them plead their caufe but in my judgement they had the worft. There is no party but may turn divers others fo their opinions, Mahomei'htth got Far more followers in the world then Chrift, and Heathenifm than either. If Papifts can turn all thefe, why do they fuffer thern-felves fttll to be confined to fo fmall a part of the world ? And if it be victory over mens bodies that

they

they mean, I fay the Iikfc. Have not the Turkes a larger Dominion than the Pope ? Have they conquered the Great Turl^, the Great Mogol, the Grand Cham of Tartary^&i? Are we not as infallible as they on this account, when we conquer them ? It feems then, when Papifts arc fo induftrious to enlarge their Dominions, to deftroy their enemies byPoyf-oning or dabbing Kings, or other means , it is that they may have a further Teftimony of their infallibility.

The laft mark which the Jefuite raentioneth, is £the converfion of Infidels.]

But i If that be a fure Mark, we af e infallible as well as they: Foi we have been means of converting Infidels, And fo have the Greeks Churches, and o-thers that difown the Popes infallibility.

2. If that Argument be good, then it was not only the Apoftlcs, but all that converted Infidels at the firft (or after) preaching of the Gofpel, that were infallible : which fure they never pretended to.

3. If it will prove any body infallible, its liker to prove them fo that did convert any Infidels, then the Pope that onely gives them leave or order to doit.

4. Let them not boaft too much of their convex fions, till we have a better chara&er of their new made Chriftians, and a better report of their means of converfion, then Accfia and other of their own Jefuites give us, who have been eye wkneffes of the cafe. To cut men off by thoufands or millions, and force the reft to Baptifm, as cattle to watering,when they have nothing of a Chriftianbut the name and thatfign, andfpme forget the name it felf; this is

not

. not a converfion much to b^ boaftcd of. Nor muft they think that all are Chriftjans that the King of Spain conquereth for love of their Gold and Silver Mines. The Apofties did not con vert Infidels by an Army, but by the word and miracles; but it is the King of Spaines fouldiers that have been the effeftu-al preachers to work the conversions that you have moft to glory in. If the Jcfuit had put his proofs into well formed Arguments, what fluff fhould we have had?

So much for the Anfwer to Chillintmrtb , and the new Fundamentals of the Romifb faith, by which they can prove their Pope fnfallible without being beholden to Scripture for its help ( Andlmarvaile not at their contempt of Scripcure-Tefticnony to them, unlefs there were more, or more appearance for them then there is.)

Having confidered the Papifts proof of their infallibility J (hall next (though it be more then the caufe obligeth me to)fay foraewhat to prove the Negative, and fo proceed to my fecond Argument againft them.

Argn. 2. If the common fenfes of found men (or their fenfible apprehenfions) be fhfallible, then the Pope with his pretended General Council is fallible : But the common fenfes of found men are infallible: Therefore,^.

I know not how we fhould come nccrer hand with aPapift, nor to plainer dealing, then to argue from common fenk. And as to the Antecedent, Either fenfe is infallible, or it is not: If it be, I have that I feek. If not, then mark what follows.

i. Then

( W)

I. Then no man can be fure that the Chriflian Religion is true : For the proofs of it all vanifh, if fenfe be not infallible. If you plead the Miracles of Chrift and his Difciples , no man was fure that he faw them. If you plead the death and Refurrefti-on and Afcenfion ot Chrift, no man was fure he faw them, and therefore could give no aflurance of it to another. All the Difciples fenfes, and the worlds fenfes were for might be/or ought we know)dccerv-cd. Nor are you fure that any writings or traditions came down to us from the Apoftles: For the eyes of the Readers and the ears of the hearers might be deceived. 2. And then moft certainly the Pope him-felf and all his Clergy are fallible : For they cannot be fure of that which the Apoftles and following Church were not fure of > Nor can they be fure that in reading and hearing,their eyes deceive them not. And I take it for granted that the Pope and his Cler* gy do ufe their fenfes, and by them receive thefe matters into their inrelled. Nay if fenfe be fallible, no man in the Church of Rome can tell whether there be any fuch place as Rome , or any fueh perfon as the Pope at all, or ever was. Nay what elfe can any man be fure of?

I fuppofe you will marvail why I beftow fo many words on fuch a point ; But you fee what men wc have to deal with : When all the quarrel between us muft be iflued by this point, whether common fenfe be infallible ? For if it be, we infallibly carry the caufc: Yea whether it be or be not, as (hall ap* pear*

I come nftct therefore to prove the confequence: and that I do thus.

R tM

The judgement of the Pope and his pretended Ge» neral Councilfcdiredly contradi&ory to theappre-henfion or judgement of common fenfe ; therefore if common fenfe be infalliblc,the Pope and his Council are fallible.

The confequent is unqueftionable ; the Antecedent I prove by this known Inftance.

Common fenfe takes it to be bread and Wine that remaineth after the words of confecration : The Pope and his Council fay, it is not Bread nor Wine that remains after the words of confecration: therefore the judgement of the Pope and his Council is dire&ly contradi&ory to the apprehenfion of com-mon fenfe.

For the firft, I appeal to the fenfes of all men that ever received the Eucharift. Whether feeing, feeling, fmelling, and taking, do not as plainly cake it to be Bread and Wine, as they do an^ other Bread or Wine at their own tables ? and whether they can fee or tafte, or fmcll, or feel, any difference to give them the leaftcaufe of doubting? I am fure I have the judgement of thoufands and millions on my fide, which in a matter of fenfe among found men, is certainly enough. And if thePapiils are fomadas to tell me, thatitis othcrwife with their fenfes; and will ferioufly profefs that their eyes, and tafte,^. do not take thefe for Bread and Wine, but perceive that they are not, I will take tkem for (hamelefs lyars, or madmen; and I fuppofc no man in his fenfes will blame me for fo doing. Well ! itspaft doubt that all our fenfes tell us its Bread and Wine , < as confidently as they tell us any thing iS fuch. And it is certain that the Pope and his Council tell us it is not Bread and Wine: Jf our eyes be infallible that

read

(*55)

" the 12. Benedict, the 13. andfebn 2-3. and it could <c noteafily be judged which of them was true and *' lawful Popef, feeing there were not wanting to " each of them moft learned Patrons] So far Erfl-armine.

Whereobferve 1; That even learned men, yea General Councils, and the Church may be uncertain which is the true Pope. Its worth the enquiring then, whether they be not uncertain that the Romane fucceffion i$ interrupted; and uncertain at that tifne whether God had any word ? or what was the fence of it ? and whether it 4 was certain to. them that the Church failed not, when they had no certainty of the head ? and whether their head and fo their Church were then vifible orinviiible, when they could fo hardly be known ? And note, that Bellarmine doth difclaim the Com-popes with this John 2$. and faith elfewhere, that it was moft likely that this was the true Pope. They have brought their glorious head, Church and infallibility to a fair pafs!

Belides this, the General Council at Bafill did fhortly after depofe Pope Eugenia* the forth, declaring him to be \_A rebel againfi the h$ljf Canons' , a Mteriotu dijlurber and fcandalizer of the peace and unity of the Church, a Simonifi , and a perjured Wretch, incorrigible , a

fchifmaticl^ and an obftinati * yn % &e V(Z u Sylvi. heretic!^] * To this Bellar- geft. conciL *B*fil. It. 2.

And note that this Euge* xw fey force kept the Popedome .'after a General Council had depofed him for tbefe crimes : How then caa the fucceing Popes have a jiifi title, and Kline pretend to an in. cerrupted lucctffioiv or any other Bifhops or Presbyters frem them ?

mine

CM*)

mln^ hath not a word to fay $ but onely that the Council did hira^ wrong, and at Laufanna, undid their a&s. And thus he is content to grant that i. A General Council may erre (which he maintainetb) 2. And that a Pope may be a herecick and to be de-pofed in the judgement of a General Council ? k And are the Papifts forced to yield us thus much ? I would fain know then from Bellarmine or any Papifts fur-viving him, whether that General Councils do erre in faith, and be Hereticks or not , for that their judgement ? If they do fo err,then where is the visibility of their Church with the reft of its privileges which they fo boaft of, when its Reprefentative body, a General Council are Hereticks, as thinking the Pope to be fallible ? But if they erred not defiie , or were no hereticks. i. Then its feems the Popes infallibility is no fundamental, 2. Then it feems we are no hereticks neither, for denying that which General Councils of Papifts (pretended by them to be General) have denyed. 3. Nay why fhould they be angry with men for erring fuch an error (as they account it) which their own general Council* may one after another erre.

- Argti. 6. From the Papifts own open known con-feffion : If the Papifts themfelves do confefs both Pope and Council to Joe fallible, they have, little rea-fon to blame us for affirming the fa«mewhich they confefs : But the Papifts themfelves do confefs both Pope and General Council to be fallible : Therefore, &c.

I do not mean that all the Papifts confefs it of both, but one part of them confefs it of one and the other

(257)

of the other of them. TSellarmine and his fellow Jcfuites with the Italian party do confefs that a General Conncil may erre in matters of Faith: The French and Venetian Papifts , with all the Doftors of their party affirm that the Pojf)e may erre and be aheietick, and teach herefie : fo that by the confef-fion of one hxlf of them a Council may erre and by the confeflion of the other half the Pope may erre. If any imagine that though both may erre dif- jun&> ly, yet not conjunftly, I (hall onely now fay, thac the concefiion thac each of them dif-junftly may err, deftroyeth the force of all thofe Arguments which are brought for their infallibility • and therefore will prove it of them alfo conjunftly. But we have yet further proof*

Argn. 7. If the very fubftance of Popery be nothing but a fardell of errors brought in by the Pope and his Council to corrupt the Chriftian Religion a? mong them, then certainly the Pope and his Council may erre: But the Antecedent is true : Therefore fo is the confequcnt.

All the Qgeftion being of the Antecedent, and it being proved before in the former difputation , and fully by our writers againft them, I (hall thither for brevity refer you. What impudency is it to introduce fuch abundance of corruptions contrary to the exprefs word of God and after all this to fay \ they cannot erre when they have fo plagued the Church with their errorf?They teach men to ferve God in an unknown tongue, and fpeak and hear they know not what,to worfhip the Bread with divine Worfihip, to

receive onely the bread, when Chrift ordained that they ftiould have the cup, and fo do abolifti one half of the Sacrament, they adore the Virgin Marj and other Saints; they plead for jnftification by the merit of their own works, as having a condignity of the reward ; they make the Church a new thing by making a new head and center of unity and a new and daily mutable Religion, in a word they poifon both Church policie, Worlhip and Doftrine by their errors; and when they have done they ftand to it that they cannot erre. Like a Leper that ftiould maintain he cannot poflibly be Leprous, when he is covered with it already : or like a fwearing or drunken beaft, that ftiould fvvear that he never did fwear nor was drunk, nor ever can be, whenheiyeth drunk in the dirt, and breaths out his oaths. What need any impartial difeerning man any other proof that the Pope and the Church of Rome is not infallible, then actually tQobfervethefwarm of their errors that have troubled the Church ?

Argu, 8. If the Popes themfelv-.es sre to be believed, or if they are not to be believed, they are not infallible. But either they are to be believed or not: Therefore.

If they he aoc to be believed, what need there any more proof.? Jfthey are, what need there alfo any more proof, when they tfcerafelves confefe chen> felves fallible. ? Not a Pope for; above fix hundred year^afrer Chrift did ever pretend to infallibility as cm be proved : Pope 4M*n the fixtb, one of the rnoft Learned and beft that -ever they had this many hundred year?, hath written his judgement that the

Pope

(V9)

Pope may crrc. And I think he is likcr to know himfelf, as to his infirmities, than aay of his flatterers are. His words pre thefc Be Sacram. Confirm, art. 4 a&fin* tC \jDico^ cjnod p per £celefiam Ro m cl man&m i*tclligAtptr c.iput ejH*, p*ra Ponsifex^ cer-cc rum ifi qtiodfojfit crraro, itiuv* in iu qna tangnnt *'fidim; hare fin per [turn dstcrminztjxmem aut chert* c * talent afterendo ; plures cnimftterurit Pontifices Ro» * l mam btreticijTbat k [I liiy,chat if by the Church "of Rome be meant the Head of it, to wit, the " Pope, it is certain that he may erre, even in thofe " things that couch the faith by dilerting herefie by *i his. Determination or Decretal: for there have ma-<c ny Popes of'Rme been tereticks. J Thus you hear* what a Pope faVes of himfelf.

ArgH.9. If the Pope be infallible, then either it is hi* mind in believing, or his tongue in (peaking, or his pen in writing, that is infallible. But it is neither his Mind, nor Tongue, nor Pen: Therefore he is not infallible.

i. That his mind is notinfailible, la point of belief, is confeft by the Papifts themfelves. One part of them faying he may erre, and the other maintaining that he may be a hercticke, and that many have been fo.

That his tongue and pen is notinfailible when his underftanding erreth is plain.

Ji .In that otherwife he (hould be infallible in diffem-[ Ming, and God is feigned to promife a man to keep his tongue from error when he fpeaks againft his own heart j which cannot be proved , nor foundfy imagined.

2. The infallible (Mates of the Pope while he er-reth in mind fhould be all cither unrcafonable ads as being the words of one that knoweth not what he &ith, or interpretatively lies. For when a man fpeaks contrary to his judgement,if his words be true in themfelvesyec they are interpretatively lys.becaufe he fo takes them, and intendeth them as falfhoods to deceive others. For inftanceJf Pope John the 2 ?. that was depofed by a General Council upon Articles exhibited againft him for denying the Refurretfion and the Life to come, ftiould with his tongue'have taught the Refurre&ion and the Life to come ; this had been as lying to him, though the thing it fclf be moll true. Andwemufthaveaproraife that the Pope of Rome and his Clergy , among "all the Lyars in the whole world,fhall be the onely infallible Lyars.A happy « e -neration of Lyars fure ? But where is that promil ? 3. It was for the error of the tongue as well as of the mind,that the Clergy defpofe'd Liberim & Felix and that the Councils of Pifa, Confiance, and BafiJ depofed the other Popes above mentioned. For 1. they could not know their minds but by their words. 2. They-charged them with the errors of their tongues as well as mindes.

■'

ArgH 10. If Popes be infallible in the matters whiriuhey understand not, then it muft be by Ea-thnliafm or prophetical infpiration. But all Popes are ignorant of many Divine Trudis, and fome more tjotor.eufly )gnorant,and yet neither All nor Any of them (tor ought is ever proved ) were Prophets or Civ.nery irfpired:.therefore they are not infallible For the Major its plain, that as no erring man muft

(*<«>

w

fpcak againft his own mind, if he be infallible , (o an ignorant man (in thofe points) muft i. either have his ignorance cured fuddainly by prophetical infpira-tion : or clfc 2. muft fpeak as in an extafie,without or befidehis own mind : there being no other way im« aginable.

And as for the Minor I prove both parts of ic. i. That Popes are ignorant of many Divine truths, I prove thus. i.They that are ignorant of many truths revealed in the Scriptures, are ignorant of many Divine truths: For Scripture being Gods word, all that is therein revealed is Divine truth. But Popes have been ignorant of many things revealed in Scripture: therefore I need not fure ftand to prove the Minor,for they confefc it themfelves. And if the Pope understood aU the Scripture, be were fure the moft damnable finner in the world, for not revealing his knowledge to others, 2 .Yea fomc of them have been fo notoriously ignorant and unlearned that their own Al^honfm a Cajiro faith ^tdverf. haref. li, i.e.4.) that <c [_It is certain fome Popes fo fo unlearned , that tbej <c do not under-ftand the Grammarr\ And fure if they that underftand not any Hebrew or Greek (which arc the languages in which the Scripture is written J no nor the Latin Grammar fhould underftand all the Bible and erre in nothing , it muft needs be by a Miracle, and by Prophetical infpiration. *

2. But that all Popes be not infpired Prophets, nor illuminated by Miracles, I will leave to be judged by the Papifts themfelves. Read Platina^ Stella, yea or Baroniiu himfelf, or if they have any other (bat is a more notorious Parafite to them, and lee them be judges.

$,3 Argu.

(%6t)

Argn. 11. If the Pope and his Council be infallible, then it is either in Ail things that God hath revealed in the Scripture or are neceffary to be known, or but in fome: If he be infallible in all things neceflary to be known, believed, or decided, then will it follow,

i. That the Popeisthemoft cruelly wicked man on earth, and the greateft enemy to the truth and Church that will fuffer the Church to lye info much ignorance and contention, and will not reveal the truth to reconcile and enlighten them. Why doth he not write an infallible commentary on all the Bible to psrfed our knowledge and end all our quarrels? And why doth he not write an infallible fumm&ry of all his fuperadded traditions? Hath not Chrifttold him that no man lighreth a candle to put it under a Bufhel, but where it may be fcen of all ?

2. Why doth not one Pope reveal that which they think fit to reveal; but leave it to fucceflbrs one after another to do it by degrees ? Dare they fay that there is any point of faith revealed in Scripture, and neceflary to this age to know, which was not meet: to be revealed by the Pope to the laft or former

3. Why do fo many of themfelves, yea their General Councils fo much contradid: their Popes in many things, if he be infallible in all things ? And all of them confefs that either a Pope, or a Council may erre ?

But if it be but fome things that tht Pope is infallible in,then how fhaH we be fare which be thofe fome? Can we know before he difclofeth them, or onely

after ?

after ? I fuppofe they will fay [It is in all thofe tWngs which he determined or declareth] But if that be the rule to know the extent of his infallibility by; then i Every Pope beginneth to be infallible , when Jhe beginncth to Determine or declare , and not before. 2. And then every Pope increafeth in his infallibility, asheincreafethhis Decret?ls or Canons

3. And then one Pope is much more infallible then others, who have made more decrees then others.

4. And then fome Popes were never infallible, who never made any decrees or determinations or expo-litions at all , fo that their caufe is loft, if their a&u-al dife^veries be the Rule of the extent of their infallibility. And yet I cannot imagine what elfe they can fay that may have any appearance of confiding with their intereft.

For it is either a Pofitive or a Negative infallibility which they mean and afcribe to their Church. If a Pofitive, then 1. All the forefaid abfurdicies unavoidably follow; whether they fay that they can infalli. biy teach us all things (and will not}or but fome? But if it be a Negative infallibility which they maintain (vU that the Church (hall never teach any falfe doftrine; Or the Pope (hall never deceive us by ob • trading any error, though withall he may poflibly teach usrbut pari, of the truth,yea the neceffarj truth, yea perhaps teach us none at all) I fay, if this be their meaning, then every infant or bird or beaft hath as glorious a priviledge as the Pope of Rime: For every infant and bruit is fo infallible; that we are certain they will not deceive the Church by teaching any error.

Perhaps they'l fay chat the Pope is pofitively infallible as a fufficienc Teacher of the Church, in all

S 4 tilings

things defide at that time; or neceflary to falvation • and negatively infallible in all the reft, which are not defide or neceflary ;To which I anfwer: i.Either fueh points are de fide and neceflary before the Pope de-declare them fo, and he therefore declares them fo becaufe they arefo : or elfe he'declares them defide and neceflary before they are fo , that by declaring them fo,he may make them fo. If thefirft, i. then the Papifts have loft their caufe; for thats it which they deny, at leaft qmad nos, though not infe^ as they ufe to diftingui(h.2. And then its plain that no Pope hath been positively kifalliblein necetfariu f ov&\\ points de fide : for no orie hath declared alienor are they yet all ' (fay they) declared by them, but every Pope may ftill add more,and who knows when we (hall have all. But if they take the later way, then i. They fuppofe that Gods word how exprefs foever doth not make a point to be de fide and neceflary, till the Pope declare it fo (at leaft quoad nos : and how it can be de fide and neceffary, any other way then quoad nos, they fliould do well to declare : For that which is credendunf, eft ab aliquo credendum (that which is to be believed, muftbe believed by fbmebodyj and that which is neceflary is neceflary to fome one.) So that the Gofpel (hall be no Gofpel with them,nor the Law of God any Law, though we read it and hear it* a thbu-fand times,tiil the Pope tell us by parcels the meaning of its particular words and fentences. 2. They make the Popes afts to go before their obje&s, which is a-gainft the nature of aftions: while they make him to declare a point to be defide that it may become de fide-For to declare that it iffi , fuppofeth that it ufo^ and not onely that it Witt or feallbt fo defuturo. 3. And

fo they make all the Popes infallible Declarations, Expositions, and Determinations de fide* to be Lyes: for if he Declare a thing to be neccflary before it is neceflary, or declare this or that to be the fence of Scripture , before it is the fence of Scripture y or to be de fide before it be fo , what is this but plaine lying ? But if they fay that he declareth it to be de fide and neceflary onely for the future , and not to have been fo before this Declaration , then the forementioned Abfurdities fall upon them. And alfo i. The Pope is thenaGofpel-maker, and the Law giver of the Church, and that in fpirituals and internals • and confequently it is he that is the King of the Church ( who hath the Lc-giflative power, and without whom nothing that Chrift hath faid (hall bind us) 2.Then the Churches faith is mutable and in a continual change by new additions: For the Decrees or Expofitions of every Pope do make more Articles of faith then were before. 3. Then the prcfent Papifts are not of the fame Rtligion as their fore-fathers (or their fore-fathers not of the fame with them ) nor do they go to Heaven by the fame way: For according to then* own doftrine, if the prefent age of the Church did not believe as de fide many things more then the former ages were bound to believe, they cannot befaved. 4. And then it is evident unmerci-^ fulnefs in the Popes of Rome to make more Ex-pofitions, Decrees or Determinations! and fo to make us of this Age, fo much work to do before we can get to heaven and fcape damnation, which our forefathers never had to do.

(z66) ,- , I know* one of them reply-IMS* t0 ' eth t0 th ' 3 ' that chefe Addi -

tigns are no crtteicy, bccaufe they make not faivation more difficult , but facilitate that which was necefUry before s ( or ro that fence) Buti. tc feems then that fomewhat was necerfary and ie fide before the Pope defined, determined or declared them fo : By that titae we are plainly told which thofe points be, the PapiSl that undertakes and performeth it, will finde hirnlelf at a fad lofs. 2, Buc is this man ferious? Doth he think indeed that it is not eafier to believe the Apoftles Greed, than to believe all that is in the Councils of Trent % Hajil, Cenfiance, Latiraxe, with all the reft, and all the Decretajs ( both the Popes and JJidore Cfrfeccators alias Pcccator) For inftance, before the Pope determined the other day for the Molinifts againft forne part ef the Dominican, Jan-fenian doftrine , both parties might have gone to heaven : But now the poor Dominicans, rtiuft change part of their doftrine, or go to hell fire. I .demand now whether the Popes determination have not made Jalvation harder to many then before? I appeal to all the Thomifts, Dominicans, Janfenians, whether the Pope hath facilitated their faivation by this determination ? I appeal to 7 "ho. whitt '/-friendly combatc with Francifc/SMacedo^dc to the lateAnimadvetfions of the French Doftors on the Popes determinations. Further I adde that if all the Popes infallibility Po-iitive be. onely in points of abfolute neceffity to faivation, then many a private Doftor, nay every Ghriftian man or woman, is at prefent, as infallible as the Pope: for it implyes a contradidion to be a true Chriitian, and not to believe all that is cffential to

. Chri-

Chriftianity,or abfoluttly necetfary to falvation* And if it be not dfprafenti & in fenfu cempcfito , but de fntnro & in fenfu divifo that they mean it, that is that another man may faK from th« faith , but the Pope cannot, i. Clean contrary, we maintain, and the Papifts confefs, that no eleft perfon fhall fall quite from the faith. 2: But a reprobate Pope may: witntfs fthn 23. and many another. So much for that Argument.

Argn. 12. If every Pope be infallible (Pofitively in all matters of faith, or in expounding all Scrip-ture) then all Popes are of equal underftanding and fidelity in matters of faith, and Scriptures. For the moft learned, wife and pious can go no higher , but to be able infallibly to interpret all Scripture, and declare all Gods will concerning our faith and duty. But furc allPopes are not equal.None of thofe children or dunces that Alfhonfu* a Caftro faith underftood not the Grammar, are equal to Pirn 2. or Adrian the 6.

Argn. 15. If every Pope be infallible, then ftndy, learning, confultations, yea and Councils are necd-lefs : for the moft unlearned Pope is as infallible as the moft learned; and after all the ftudy in the world confultation and advice of General Councils, he can he but infallible ; and fo, fay they he was before. If they fay ftill, that, before he was but negatively infallible ; I fay again, fo is a block, an infant or an ideot. But that ftudies, learning, confutations and Councilsare notneedlefs, I fuppofe all Papifts will grant: therefore they muft grant that all Popes are not infallible. Argu.

(%6%)

Argu. 14. Notorious ungodly men that live in murder, fornication, inceft, Sodomy, blafpheray , &c. have no promife from God, nor any other af-furance of infallibility : but fuch were many Popes, Therefore, &c.

The Major I provefromraany Scriptures, zTheff. 2. 10, 11* TZecatife thej received not the love of the tr&th that they might befaved , and for thi* caufe God fall fend them flrong delufon that thej fkotdd believe 4 lje.~\ They that receive noc the love of the truth that they may be faved, are threatened to be given up to dclufions; and therefore have no certainty of being infallible. They that choofc their own wayes, God Will choofe their delufions, Ifa. 64.4. There is no communion between light and darknefs, Chrift and Telial : therefore no infallibility with the children of Belial. Of all men naturally till Chrift illuminate them by fpecial grace, it is faid in Scripture that they are blind, deceived, lyars, of no underftanding, receiving not the things of the fpiric of God, for they are foolifnnefs to him, neither can he know them, becaufe they are fpiritually difcerned. 1 Cor. 2. 14. Prov. 28-5. Rom 3.1 1. Prov. 6. 3T2.& 9.4.10. & 15.21. & 7. 7. & 12. iliZPtt, 1. 9. 2 Tim. 3. 13. Tit. 3.3. It is onely the eleft that cannot be deceived even in the foundation, yTi4r.24.24. None of the wicked (hall understand but the wife fliall under-ftand, T>an. 12.10. They are threatned to be given over to blindnefs, that they mvy not underftand, 7/4.6.9.10. j4tt.2$.26 s 27 Jttar.^ 12. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wifdom,P/*4/.i 11.10. God proraifech to teach the humble Pfal.15. ^ ut c ^ c proud he ft ill refift, when he giveth to the humble his grace, 1/^,5.5. f aw. 4.6. i And

(i6$)

And not oncly the minds of the wicked, but their tongues are deceitful, even when they know the truth, fothata wicked Pope may lye and deceive. Tftl. 36. 3. Prov. 12. 5. Man J. 22. Rom, 3. 13. I confefs that a wicked man may have fome kind of fuperficial knowledge of all thofe do&rincs (dif-jun-dlyatlcaft) which arc known to true Believers; but as he hath no folid knowledge of them, fo he hath no promifc or afTurancc of infallibility in that which he is capable of knowing : Nor is it fo like that a blind deceitful man fhould be univerfally orthodox.

And for the Minor, that many Popes have been notorioufly wicked, I need not prove it, while their own Hiftorians and difputcrs too t do fo commonly confefs it. Its well known what wickednefs the Councils that depofed them charged upon fome, and what poifoning, and other murders, Simony, conjuration, inccft, common adulteries and other wickednefs, is by the writers of their lives and other Hiftorians charged on fo many more, that I (hould but trouble the weary Reader to no purpofe to cite them. Read the lives of Pope Sylveftcr ("the Witch) the 2. *s4lexander the 3. and the 6. John 13. and the 22. and the 23. Gregory the 7. Vrbane the 7. &c. in Pia-*ina, Luitprtndu* , Fafcicultu temforum, Martinm PoloKHtficz. Tici»H4 hifi.Ii.6. of * John 13. ftews that his * «* *<wfcr. **- Safins were Droved inCourcii fc™^]** 1 ?-™ 0 ? 6 *; 1 ins were proveu in council Amn ^ rQn fJ % %itl6

thai heraviihed and commit- c .i,^ U.Bar ^.96^.17 ted filthinefs with maids, widows and wives at the Apoftolick doors; commit* ted many murders; drunk to the Devil; and at Dice ask'c help oijnpttr and Vtnm : and at laft was

(lain

flain in the a& of adultery. See ofSylvefter 2. Faf* cic. temp a#* 1004, Martin. PoUnus zslnno. 1007. *? ) latin, inejvs: vita. Of Boniface the 7. See3?*r0-#**» himfelfanno 985. «. I. Of Alexander the & fee Guiccwrdinc hifi. li. 1. and Onuphrim vit. Alex. 6. But I will name no more.

. Argu. 15. Other Biftiops and Churches who have as good a pretence to plead for their infallibility as the Biflriop and Church of Rome s are yet generally acknowledged fallible, even by thetnfelves and by the papifts : Therefore the Pope and Church of Rome alio are fallible.

A!! chats doubtful is whether any other Churches erBifhopshave as fair a plea for infallibility as the Homane > which I prove thus.

1. The Plea of the Romanifis is that their Biftiop is the fucceffor of an Apoftle who was infallible, and lb the Promifes belonging to him, do belong alfo to his fucceflbrs. ' And thefueceffors.of the reft of the Apoftlcs may have the fame plea : For ail the Apo* ftles,after the HoIyGhoflrfell on them,were infallible, as well &%Peter : And therefore their iuceeffors hava as fair a plea as Teters fucceffors.

Obj. 'But there vpo4 net th: lil>e promife made to the reft for their fuccejfors ftability as wot to Peter. Anfw. t. There can no greater a promife to Peter* fucceffors be Slewed, then was made Mat. 28. 29. to them ail {^Lo 1 am withy ou alwayes even to the end of the \XtorId2 2, The Papifts (according to their new fundamentals) mult not plead Scripture promifes for their infallibility; for they fay, their infallibility is in order firft known, evidenced and to be proved,,

before

>cfore it be known that Scripture is Gods word. i 2* The plea of the Romanifis for their Popes in-allibility is, that he is the fucceflbr of Peter. But he Bifhop of Antncb might as well pretend to be he fucceflbr of Peter , and yet he pretendeth not to nfallibility: Therefore, c^tf. That Hiftory which tel-eth us that "Peter was Bifhop of Rome y doth tell us hat he was Bifhop of Antiechalfo; yea and that he vas Bifhop of Antisch before he was Bifhop of Rome, b that Antmh is undoubtedly the ancienter Church. What rcafon then can thePapifts give why theBi-hop of fiAntioch might not as well piead that he is ?eters fucceflbr f as the Bifhop of Rome} llnlefs hey could prove that Peter did by his Jaft Will and Teftaroent bequeath the honor of fucceflion, and the >ri viledgesof infallibility to Reme onely; which they iave not yet (that I can find) been fo bold as to go hout to prove. Otherwife, if one muft needs be referred, why fliould not the eldeft, unlefs they be lifinherited, and the younger hath the Hefting, vhich muft be proved. Whence is it but from the lonor of their Antiquity that *sfniioch 9 Uierufalem^ Alexandria, and Rome fhould be preferred as Patriarchates before all other Churches? And if Annuity be a good reafon for tfiat, then why fhould wtferttfalem&nd Anthch on the fame account be preferred before Rtme, feeing its beyond ail doubt :hat they were both the more ancient Churches, in4 Antioch the more ancient feat of *Peter r in the judgement of them that make him Bifhop of either. >o that its clear that other Churches have as much $r nore to fay for infallibility then Remjxho yet make io prentence to it.

Argn.

C'?0

Argn. 16. The Apoftlesthemfelves werenotin* fallible till the holy Ghoft fell on them t nor by any other help without the extraordinary infpiration of the Holy Ghoft (forbefore, they underftood not that Chrift muftdye, rife and afcend,till it was done: but Peter Mat, 16.20. diffwadeth him from fuffering) therefore the Pope if he might plead fucceffionfrom *JPeter^ cannot exped more then Peter himfelf had • and therefore cannot exped his infallibility without his fpirit and infpiration : And therefore thofe Popes that have not the Holy Ghoft % and that infpiration as Veter had, cannot pretend to be infallible, as his fucceffors : For they muft fucceed him in the caufe, if they will fucceed him in the effe&s.

Argu. 17. If the Catholike Church be infallible, then the Pope and the Church of Rome are not infallible : But the Papifts fay the Catholike Church is infallible ; therefore according to their own dodrine it muft follow that the Pope and Church of Rome arc * not infallible.

The argument being ad bomintm and the Antecedent their own, all the doubt is of the confequence : which I prove thas,either it is the real or reprefenta-tive body which they muft call the Catholike Church: But both thefe are againft the Popes infallibility : Therefore.

1. For the real, no man can poffibly know all their minds, nor ever expeft that they (hould in this life be all of a minde : therefore it is the Major pare that we muft have refped to, %% its ufual in all fuch

Bodies

Bodies, or Aflemblics. Now the greater part of the Catholike Church on earth, is and hath betna-gaiaitthc Popes infallibility. That it is fo now, is well knownjcvrn-all cheGrceks,AbalIin, Armenian, Reformed and othtr Churches are far naoie then the Papifts. 2. And that ic hath been fo formerly the pills themfeh I will noreafc this time but

one of the molt learned and k lem, Mei

Canm LocTbeoL/i&cap.JjcI. (>x:bi) 201. " £ r

turn cfi fiquhdem vehementer, riona Gratis jolnm* "fed . rctitu orbu.dpifcdphiUt Rom an a

i% Scclejix Wivifcgidm tabefaEidrslur. At que habe-Ci bant pro feilU q-iidcm y & Ifiiferaiotum arwa, & <c M-iprem Ecclefuirinh name-rum : npmquam tamen " efficere potverunt , Hi miw Romani Pontificu pote-"Jtatem abrogarent-*~f\ That u ("Not only the ^ <l Greeks, but almoft all the reft of the Bi-Cl (hops of the whole world,have vehemently fought 14 to deftroy the priviledgc of the Church of Rome : ¥ And indeed they had on their fide both the Armes " of Eftiperors and the Greater number of Churches : cc and ^et they could never prevail to abrogate thfc "Fowfcrof one Pope of Rome~\ Mark here that it is only fnccefs that he pleadeth,but confeffetb that mofi cfthe Bifbops of the whole world^and the greater number of Churches % befides the Arms of Emperors,' were a-gainft the Rjomane pnviledges,as they call rhera,& the Popes power. So that by^this you may fee the conlci-ence and modefty of thefe men , that not onely call themfelvesthe whola Church , as if all other befides them were'fome inconsiderable parcels, but alio would make the fimple people believe that before/,/*-thers time, there were fcarce any that denyed their I pretended power : we may fee from therafelves then

T where"

(*-4)

where ourCbrnch was before Luther So far asChrifti-ans oppoiing the Romijh ufurpations,are our Church, even moft of the Churches and Bilhops of the whole world by the Papifts own confeflion. And therefore this may ftop their mouthes that ufe to call out to us for a catalogue of their names ? would they have the names of Mofi of the Tiijbops and Churches in the whole world}

2. And then for the Reprefcntative Church if there befucha thing it muft be a General Council. And I have (hewed before, that many fuch as them* felves call General Councils have contradided the Pope, depofed, and condemned him. This 2?*//**-' mine, Canm and the reft of them do confefs, and therefore I need not fay more to prove it.

Aryt. 18. That General Councils may erre, is , „ proved fully, both by the

i.*£"S T&Z. errocuhat they have com-Jppcnl de imagin. c. $. mitted, and by their contra-dieting one another. Its too well known that the Arrians had as General Councils asmoft ever the Orthodoxe have had v 2fr//-armine and Canw give more inftances of erring Councils then can bt anfwered by the contrary miad-*rj «i> »f ,: in, c ^. Pope Adrian and the fe-

££3? % : ° tt ' cond Council of Niee H him

confirmed, decree for adoration of Images: And the Council of Frank ford determined the contrary - againft the faid Council of Nice, though die Popes Legates contradifted them.

So did the Council of Paris ug.fma.Drftif.nApoL anm g 25# who cxam i n ed ,

fart 6 e. 17. Dtvif. i. ($> J *

fdtt.i.c .S.E/w/.i. (?part.z.c.s<div.i.&ptrt'4 c t i%. Vivif, i.

judged

judged and reprehended the Council of Nice , and and Pope Adrians confirmation and defence of it; and therefore Bellamine faith [Thej judged the judge of the Whole ^corlcT\ Their words arerecited by Bcllar~ mine Append, de Ima^ c. 3. Baromas anno 825. ». 5. Its commonly known, how Na<ianz>ene complained that [He never jet (aw a Council have a good end, but things Were made w&rfe by it nnd not better. ] And Hierom (in Epift.-ii Galat.) faith [That is the doElrine of the Holj Ghofi Which u delivered in the Canonical Scriptures, again ft rvkichif Councils determine any thing Iaccount it $ickea^\ Inftances of the errors of Councils w& have too many. The Council of Neo- L*&-frbsn.Jtvmldi.tbcf. cefarea, confirmed by Leo the L ^ rm deCmillUpg . fourth and by the nrit of g 7 88,89,96,0V. Nice (as faith the Council of Flerence [efs. 7.) condemned fecond marriages, con-trary to Scripture, 1 Cor. 7. Though Bellarmine vainely excufeth them by plaine forcing their words.

The fourth Council at Carthage , forbad Bifhops to read the Gentiles Books, which yet the Apoftle makes ufe of, and the Church hath everfince allowed.

The Council of Toletane. 1. Ordain that he who inftead of a wife hath a Concubine, (hall not be kept I from the Communion : which Bellarmine alfo falfly excufeth.

The fixth General Council at Conflantinofle hath many errors, which 'Bellarmine confeffeth , and laycth the caufe on this that they had not the Popes authority : Whereas Pope Adrian approved T 2 them*

v'-ii , f r them*, and the feventh

^Adrian \i\\h)jie Jextam jj-nodum cum omnibm canonibm recipere ; he receiveth thejixt Synod with, all itsCanons andconfeffeth it to be Eivinsjtht Council at Confianee decreed that a General Council is above the Pope: and the Council at the Laterane under fulius 2. and Leo 10. decree that the Pope is above a General Council Sefs. n. The Council of Caleedone abrogated the Afts of the fecond Council of Ephefm^ and decreed the contrary. The Council of Trent , # is notorioufly erroneous, and contradifteth theConncilof Laodkea and Cart hag. 3. about the Canon of Scripture. - The number of their contradictions and errors is too great for me here to recite. Many of our writers a-gainft thePapifts give you large Cataloguesand full proof of them. See Doftor Sutline. ft. 2. de Condi, cnp. l. What Greger. Naz,ianz>* And Bierome fay of them , I toucht before : Hilary li, de SjmdU exelaimeth againft the errors andblafphemies of the Councils of Syrmium and An-cjrk■: *s4ugnfiine faith lu 3 cortt. Maximni, c. 14. \_Nec ego Niceman , nee ttt debes Arirninenfe, tan « quam prAjitdicaturm prof ere concilium , nee ego hujus authcritate 9 nee tu tllim , detinenu ] He faith alfo lib. 2. de Haptif. [^Concilia -plenaria prior a, a pofterkribus emendari~] That is [[Former Councils that were full have been mended by later ] Bellarmines deceitful (hifting anfwers to thefe tefti-monies, are not worth the repeating. Ifidore faith

* Cc jQ^otiefcunqne in gefiis

lC-J>**™-oMfi.%o ^ConcUkrum Sfcors fen. See Audradm Confeffi* J . J

ons of this Cent. Cbemniutib. 1. *

" tentia

<c tentia invenitur , Mint concilii fententia ma* " gis tenentnr , cujus antiquior & p6tior eft " mthoritaf\ That is £ As ofc as we find in thea&s " of Councils difagreeing judgements, let us hold the <c judgement of that Council which hath the more "Ancient and the greater authority.]] But the confeilion of the adverfaries here may fpare us more labour , who acknowledge that a General Council though rightly Congregated , and though the Popes Legates concur , may yet erre in the faith, if fo be that the Pope doth not approve or confirme their Decrees. So that when they fay that Q All the Church cannot err] and therefore a General Council cannot erre; their own meaning is, that one man cannot erre; but All the Church (viz,, a General Council), without him may erre.

Argtt. 19. The infallibility of the Pope or i?o-

mane Church , was never ackaowledged by.the

Ancient Churches, or Fathers, for fix hundred

I years after Chrift : Therefore it is not now to be

received.

The Antecedent is fo fully proved by our Writers, and fo eafily difcernable by thofe that read the writtings of thofc times , that there needs not any more to be faid. That which I (hall produce to this pupofe, (hall be anon to prove the following point and this together. In the mean time I refer them to Bifhop fewell£ha-mier , Bifhop VJher , Doftor white , who with many more have fully proved this.

T 3 ArfH.

Argu, 20. If the Pope be not the Authorized judge of Scripture, nor our faith to be refolved into his judgement (or the judgement of his Churcb)then is he not the Infallible judge of Scripture,and ofcon-troverfies about matters of faith. For he that is no judge can be no infallible judge : nor doth he need infallibility to qualifie him for a work which he was never called to, nor doth at all belong to him. It is not the Pope as a private Dodor, or as the Bifhop of a particular Church, which is made by them the fubjed of infallibility, but the Pope as the fuppoJed head of the Catholike Church authorized to interpret Scripture, and to judge of all controverfies of faithjnto whofe judgement (at lealt with his Clergy) our faith, they think muft be refolved. If therefore we can prove the nullity of the fubjed we do thereby prove the nullity of the Adjund. And this leads us up to the third Queftion, which we have now to deal with.

Queft. 3. whether our faith mufl he refolved into the infallibility of the Romane (fret ended) Author i* tative judgement ? Or Whether the Popes Authority and infallibility be the thing firfi to be known , and thence the truth of Scripture or Chriftian Religion to be received m upon his judgement ?

But becaufc this is not the principal point intended in this difpute, and becaufe there is enough faid to it in the beginning on the by, and becaufe I have faid yet more for explication of the whole matter in the Preface to the later Editions of The Stints Refi , I

(hall

(*?9)

(hall therefore fay but little to it now , referving a fuller handling it (if neceffary) to a fitter feafon. Only I (hall hereaddea few more Reafons to prove that the Pope or Romane Church have no fuch Authority to be judge of Scripture or comroverfies to all the reft of the Churches on earth; and then I fhall adde a few words to prove that we rauft believe in Chrift and receive his do&rine before we believe in the Pope and receive his oretended authority and judgement, that is, without it.

Arg. i. If the Pope (or his confiftoryj muftbe theuniverfal Governor and Judge to all the Chri-an world, then muft the greatcft part of the Chrifti-ftian world be ungoverned and have no recourfe to their Judge. But the consequent will be denyed by themfelves; therefore we have reafon to deny the Antecedent.

The proof of the confequence is moft obvious and certain from the Popes natural incapacity and infuffi-ciency for fuch a work (and fcTof his confiftory) It is naturally impofliblethat the Pope {hould perform the works of this Government to all the Chriftian world: therefore the confequence is good. He cannot make known his determinations to all: If all men through the Chriftian world that hare fuch doubts to be refolved as his Holinefs fuppofeth belong to him properly to refolve, (hould have recourfe to him for refolution, Ohow much would the wayes to Rome be beaten and frequented ? What a concurfe would be about his Holinefs doors? What time would he have to refolvcthofe millions of men : If any differences or difficulties arife in *s£thiofia , or at the

T 4 An-

(alio

Antipodes , before they go or fend to Rome for Re-folution, and receive an anfwer, the perfons are like to be in another world where they will have a more infallible refolution* And if they live to fee the return of their meffengers, they muft take it on the truft of their words, that this is indeed his Ho-linefles refolution. Hence it is that de fitBo there is fo few people on earth 3 even of the Papifts them-felves that are really goyerened or refolved by the Pope himfelf, nor know what he is, or what is his minde : but all is done by his Mifiionaryes or Delegates; And if the Pope can delegare his power to others, and make fo many others alfo infallible , themnfallibiiity is not proper to himfelf : and then why may not the reft of the Biihops of the Church be as infallible, whoarefent byChrift, as thefcarc that are tent by him. *

Argu. 2. If the Pope be fcch an univerfal Governor and Judge, then all Popes muft needs be damned for utter negleft of the works of their office. For fure when the wel-fare of the whole Church doth fo much depend on the office of the head, it cannot but be damnable in him to be a neg-Icfter of the works of that office to the far greateft part of the Church on earth. But he rauft unavoidably negled (I mean omit) that work which it is im-poffible for him to perform ; Therefore.

What I have further to fay agaitfft the refolving of our faith into his judgement (hall be contained in tfaefe few Qrcftions following.

guefi.

(*8s)

Jgueft. i'. Doth he not contradidt the very definition of a Pope,that tells us that we muft firft believe him to be an infallible Pope, before wc can believe the Do&rine of Chrift ? For a Rowans Pope is fup-pofed to be the Vicar of Chrift, the fucceflbr of Saint Peterjhe head of the Church ; And can he be thus kaown by a man that knoweth not or believeth not that there is a Chrift, who is the Saviour and principal head, and who is fuppofed to fend him, Jzlaeft. 2. And doth it not contradid the definition of a Churth,to fay that we muft believe the Church before we can believe the doftrine of Chrift ? For what is a Church but a fociety of Chriftiaas, that is, men profeffiog the Chriftian Faith ? And how can they know that fuch men are Chriftians 9 or profefs that faith, before they know what that faith is ? And how can they know that they are to be credited as Chriftians, before they believe that Chriftianity it felf is of credit ?

j^3- Is there any man breathing that can bring fufficient Arguments to prove. 1. That there is a Church of Chrift. 2. And that this Church is infallible. 3. And that the Pope and Papifts are this Church, before their hearers have received or believed the word of God? If they can, why have they not fain clofcr to work in this neceffary point, when they know how much it would do to the determination of the whole? If they pretend fuch Antecedent proof by miracles,as the Apoftles proved the Doftrine by, I have fhewed the vanity of this pretence ( againft Knot) before : and we fnuft ftill defire them , if fniracles that is their firft witnefs, to let us fee, cr have certaine proofe of thofe Miracles. We proteft to air the world that we are heartily

willing

(*8>)

willing to fee them and know of them if they be true, but though we have lived in the midft of Pa-pifts all our lives, yet could we never to this day fee any fuch matter from them, nor hear fo much as of .any probable proofs of any. And would they have us in a matter of falvation to believe every prating boafier that will tell us of Miracles and (hew us no fuch thing, nor any proof of them >

J£f**/?. 4. Whether thofe that do not go this moft abfurdway (of proving their Church infalliblevtoan infidel that yet believeth not Gods word , and fo by means antecedent to the belief of Scripture) muft not unavoidably confefs that Gods word muft be firft believed before the Popes or Churches infallibility or authority (smd confequently our faith depended! not in them, nor is refolved into them) orelfe tbey are inextricably infnared in the Popifh circle , and contradidingly do make two primo credenda^ the Church or Pope,the firft to be believed , and yet the word of God is firft to be believed ? And do not Holden^ Vane, Knot^ and others of them fee this, who therefore (hun the circle , and ufe not the old fhifcs of 'Secanm and others to blind the eyes of thofe that fee them in it ?

Whether I wrong them H.Helden himfelf (an Englifhman, and Dodor of Pari*-, (hall be judge, who thus commcndeth his own new devifed Foundation or rcfolution of the faith,in his Divin.fid. ana/yf. II i. c. 9 pag. 180. " [Ex qnibm patet kancCbri-u HUn<& fidei analjftm hand inciden in labyrinthnm <c vulgarem & circuUre perfugium, cjUofolcnt Tbe-u ologipa$m involvi^ qui fidei Refolntionem juxta u communem & farum Attente exawi^atam cpinienen* ci confer Hunt ae effingunt. Querent i numque **di

" ttQVC'

c< nevcrint fcripturam efte revelatum Dei verbum > ct Respondent; ex univerfa confentientu Eccleft* after. <c tione. ^uibusfiiterumfiet interrogate, undcfci-€i verint unanimem[hanc Ecclefia Catholic* affertio* l 'nem efte ab errors liberam fen infallibilem > R em "fpondent, ex revelato Dei verbo. Adeoutncnau-Ct denies fidem Divinam in certitudine & evident ia na-cc turali fundare 9 incirculum hunc inevitabiliter il-k< labtintur, & in orlem turpiftimefaitantes , fidem cc q nam ipfa prima ratio format & efficit, rations ex' " perem reddunt - voluntque homines rationales " mentu ac judicii partioipes % infidei aftenfu eertlores (c efte, qmmvel ratio poftulat, ^l apfrobat^Hafitant " quiff* Theolegi quidam afteverare & agnofcere cC quia omnia argument* . etiam firmijftma, omnefque " rationes, itemevidentijfima^ quibns univerfam Met "Divin* & Catholic* traditionem folidam errorU <€ immunem & infullibilem efte demonf ramus a deo *" vetitatem banc evincant, tit nulla prorftu fulft a* " berrationis facultas ? Ideoque opinantur Cbriffia* cc nor urn animos adhuc it a vacillantes & fuHuantes " dereliElos efte, ut privatum aliquem & fwgularem u injiinttum perneceffarium autument- quo omni fi-c | dei Chrtfiiana ajfenfui certitudo & infallibilitas dii cC vina (at ajunt) attribuatur. Nos ant em levibus Cc hi fee & voluntatis opinationibm fidei divina &, " Religion** Chriftiana certitudinem & foliditatem tc inniti aut fundari , nequaqnam judicamus, ' That it in Englifh " £From hence its evident that • || this refolution of theChriftian faith, doth not fall " into the common Labyrinth and circular fhift in u Which Divines are commonly wont to be involved " who do frame and fafyion the refolution of faith " aecordiiip to the common and unheedfully ex-

."amined

" amined opinion.For when they are asked, how they <c know then Scripture to be the-revealed word of "God? theyanfwer,By theaflertionof theuniver-" fal confenting Church ? And if chey be again asked, <c how they know that this unanimous aflfertion of the <c Catholike Church is free from error or infallible ? " They anfwer, By the revealed word of God/o that <c not daring to found divine faith in natural certain-" tainty and evidence, they unavidably Aide into this " circle, moft filthily dancing in a ring (or round)the LC faith, which the firft reafon formeth and effefteth, <c they make void of Reafon, and would have reafon-cl able men who have understanding and judgment,to 4t be more certain in the afTent of faith , then reafon " doth either require or allow. For fome Di* vines, #£.---] Here you fee a Learned Papift confefling that the Papifts are commonly entangled in this circle, and filthily dance in a round, and would make our faith an unreafonable tiling. Let Knot note this that -would mike Chilling-worth a Socinian and an Infidel for making faith a reafanable ad. And let the common fort of Papifts note this that deny faith to have any evidence. And let it be confidered according to this mans judgement, on what foundation the generality of Papifts do build their faith,and what a faith it is that hath fuch a foundation. Yea and let it be confidered whether the wiferfort of Papifts begin not to change the very foundation of their Faith ? And how neer they begin to draw to the Reformed Churches in the Resolution of their Faith ? For this fame Do&or doth well difprove the infallibility of the Pope , f&g % 179. Saying ''[Orxnes quidsm Efifcofi Afo-"fioUrnm face chores funt , ssipoftolos vero *dco

con-

tc confirmates in gratia fuijje , ut infallibiles cmni* e< fto 9 fen in do&rina Chriftiana tradenda ab cmni <c erroris pericklo immune* fuerint , agmfcit uni-€t verfa Bcclefia, Nnnquid ergo omnes Epifcopi ab * c errore iiberi > Omnibm qtiidem iApoftolis re-<c velata faijfe fecreta C&lefiia , iisfque , Ht nee €% Aeeipi nee hallucinari poffent ; divina & extra-** er dinar ia via don at urn ejfe eertijfime tenemus- Nune <c quid ergo vel fnmmo Pontifiei vel c<zterk JEpif-c< cop is h<ec funt divinitus concefja privilegia ? ~] " That u Q All Bifhops arc the Apoftles fuccef-<c fors: And that the Apoftles were fo confirmed " in grace, that they were altogether infallible , ct or free from all danger of error in delivering the ''.Chriftian doftrine , this the univerfal Church " acknowledged}. But are all Bifliops therefore <c free from error ? We certainly hold that to S c all the Apoftles the heavenly fecrets were re-cc vealed, and that by a Divine and extraordinary " way it was given to them, that they could not. " be deceived or erre. Bur are thefe priviled-" ges therefore 'granted to the Pope, or to o-ct tber Bifhops?]

And what is the infallibility that this Do-dor refolvcth his Faith into ? Le£ it be obfer-ved whether it be neerer the Miracles of Knot^ov to the univerfal Tradition of ^hilling-worth. Pag. 174,175. He hath thefc words a [_Statuen^m 2 0 , Cl jnxta fuferim ftabilita principid, Scclefi* foli-C| ditatem in fide , fen in fidei divine & Catholi* cC ca in h#rendi certitttdinem & infallibilitatem , ec mn in privilegio aliqm ant fedi Romans , c ' Deo author? , coneejfo' 9 ant S $ Petri fucceffo* cC ri Pgntifici Romano divinitm impart i/o 9 &x

* Sed

(ite)

ic Sedunivtrfdt & Catholic* tradition* Ecclefi&fpeci-4 * ali Dei providentia, & Chrifli 'Domini promijjis "fulcita, pr&cipne tribuendam ejjel± & poftea \^T)e* " inde Catholtcjz & univerfa traaitionvs rationemtm* €c nibtis ommino fidei divw<e do^matibm perneceffariam <c e(fe» Traditioniu vero medium feu teftimonium adeo *' publicum, univerfale^ & apartum effe debere, ut. ** fenfibm ipfis externit fidelibn* omnibus Chriflidnis *' oporteat conftare.^ That k, The Churches infallibility and certainty of faith Qs not in any privilege Cc either granted by God as the Author to the See of " of Rome, or beftowed from God on the Pope of "Rome as SaintTttwfuccefTor; but its chiefly to " be attributed to the tradition of the univerfal M and Catholicke Church upheld by thefpecial provi-cc den'ceof God, and the promifes of Chrift—And " the account of this Catholike and univerfal Tradi-c 4 tion is moft neceflary to all points of divine faith. "And the means or Teftimony of this Tradition 4c muftbe fo publike, univerfal and open, that it <l mult be manifeft to all Chriftians to their very out* " wardfenfes.

I confefs thisDo&or allows us pretry fair quarter incomparifon of many others of his party- If they will but give us fach Open publike universal certain Tradition^ Which mufi be knotyn to the very outward fenfes of every Chrifiian, we {hall be very ready to comply with them in receiving fuch a Teftimony. But if all the Romifh Traditions had been fuch, they would be known to all Chriftians as well as to the Pope, and not lock't up in his Cabinet, and our felves ftiould fare have known them before now > if we be Chriftians.

Jfyteft. 5. To proceed, I am very defirous to

know

know whether it be upon the credit of the prefent Church (Pope or Council) or of thofe former that are dead and gone, that we muft receive our faith and the Scriptures ? Or upon both ? Jf it be on the credit of any former Church, then would I know of which age? whether of the neercft, Or the middle, or of the firft and remoteft age, that is, from the Apoftles and the Church in their dayes ? If from the laftage % then i. How know we their Teftimonv? If it be by their writings, Canons or Decrees, why cannot other men who are much wifer and better , undcrftand thefe as well as the Pope ? And why do they not refer us to thofe writings, but to their own determinations ? If it be by the Fathers telling the children what hath formerly been believed, then, why cannQt I tell what my Father told me, without the Pope, and better then the Pope that never knew him ? 2. And then it muft be known upon whofe credit the former ages did receive that faith and Scripture which they deliver down to us ? Doubtlefs they will fay, from their predeceflbrs ; and they again from their predeceflbrs, and fo up to the Apoftles. And why then may not we take it , immediately on the credit of the Apoftles as well as the firft ages did ? fuppofing that we have the mediation of a forehand to deliver to us their Writings, without meditation of the like infpired prophetical perfons, or of any priviledged infallible judge of the faith j And if it be on this Teftimony of former ages that we muft receive theScripture as the wordof God, I (hall then proceed further to demand,

^uefi, 6. Why may not the Greeks, Abaffines, Proteftants, &z. that acknowledge not the Popes authority or infallibility, receive the Scripture as the

word

(i88)

word of God, as well as thePapifts ? Do they think that ©one elfe in the world but they can tell what was the judgement of the formerChurch?What records or Tradition have they which all the reft of the world is ignorant of? Or dare they fay (if they have the face of Chrifti:r/!s) that none of ail the Chriftians on earth, but Papiftsonely,have any fufficieat evidence .that the Scripture was written by the Apoftles, and delivered from them, and that this is it which is now in the Church? Can no man indeed but a Papift know the Scripture to be the word of.God, upon juftifi-able grounds ?

But if it be on the credit of the prefent Church (or both ) that we muft take the Scripture to be Gods word, then I (hall further defire to be informed,

'J%igft- 7- What is it which they call the prefent Church : Is it i, The whole number of the faithful. 2. Or a major vote, or part. 3. Or the Biihops, or Presbyters in whole or part. 4. Or a Coancil chofen from among them, 5! Or :he Pope ? If the firft,

JW?. 8. Do they not then make all Chriftian* infallible as well as the. Pope. And fo they are in fenfa comp&pp in the effcntials of Chri£ianity and the whole Chuixhftial! never deny thofe eflentials, but 1. whole particular Churches may, and 2. the whole Church may erre forae fmaUer errors againft the revealed will of God « the Apoftle Cellethus that we know bur in part; and- as in many things we offend all, fo'in many things we err all. And moreover if this be their knk.

JVtteft. 9« Will it not then follow, that the Pope cannot be proved infallible, becaufe it is moiicertain

thae

cm

that All the Church doth not take him to be iofalffc ble; no nor the greacefl part of Chriftians in the world. Yea if they will tajte none for Chriitians but Papitts, yet it will hence follow that there is wo certainty that either Pope or Council are infallible. For the French take a Pope to be fallible, and rhe Italians and others take a General Council to be fallible'. and therefore the whole Popifti Church being net a-greed of it, we cannot be fure that either of them is infallible. And moreover on this ground I demand,

£l*e(t> io. How fhall we know (in very many cafes at leaft) either which is the judgement of the whole C hurch or of the major part ? What opportunity have we to take the account ? Or can no poor Chriftian believe the word of God, that cannot take an account of this through the world ?

The fame Queftion alio I would put, if they take all or moft of the Paftors for this Church.

jQueft. ii. But if they take a General Council for the Church, I would firft know, How we fhall be fure that ever there hath, at leaft, thefe thoufand years^been eVer a true General Council in the world? The Popifti Doftors ( as Doftor Bolden de Refolvt. fid. II i; cap. 9-pag. 156.) fay that \Jtmuft arife to that degree of aniverfality that there may not be any fufpicion of con/piracies and combined factions , that ft every prudent man may be able heartily to fay that the Ajfemblies Are trnely General* ]] And is it fo i when there arc none but the fworn obliged vaflals of the Pope of Rome , and the Greeks, Ethiopians , Prote-ftants,^. and moft of tfie Charch are abfent ? and when it is a known combination to promote thtir own efpoufed caufe ?

Jhteft. 12. And then i? the whole foundation of

(apo)

Divine faith cxtind and loft, when there is no General Council ? Ic may be we may have no General Council of a hundred or fix hundred, or a thoufand years together? Have we no Church then? Or no certainty of Scripture or of the faith } If they fay that we are certain by the determinations of former Councils, then they fpeak of the Church that is paft and gone, of which I moved the doubts before: And the Canons of thefe 5 we can read and underftand as well as the Pope: But when we appeal to former Councils and Ages, they would hold us to the pre-fent Church, and that muft be their own: and fo be fare to be judges in their own caufe.

j^ 13 I would know alfo whether it were by the judgment of a General Council that thefirft Churches believed the Scripture to beGods word?Did not tUeChurch of Rome believe theEpiftle to l\\zRomanes r and the Church of Corinth believe the Epiftle to the CerinthUns , and fo the reft.to be the word of God, ss foon as th*y received them by an undoubted mef-iengerfrom Paul ? Or did they ftay till they had the judgement of a General Council or of all the Churches ? Indeed they made ufe of the intervening humane (bnt certain) teftimonv, of him that was the peifeagee or bearer of theEpiftle,to know that it was the writing of Paul indeed : and fo we ftill maintain the neceflity. of a credible humane Teftimony that thefe writings came from the Apoftles hands : But Tychicm ", onTretthimm , or 7imothy , or Onefi* mm, were not a General Councils nor the whole Church And doubtlefe'thofe Epiftles that were ' written to each particularChurch were received by all ►the reft of theChurchesupon the credit of that parti-cukr Church as having received it from an Apoftle:

and

and not that the particular received It from the uni-verfal. How did rhe univerfsl Church know that. thofe Epiitles were written by Tavlto Titw, Timo* tbj^ ^Philemon, to the Ephcfuins, &c. but on the report of the perfons and Church to whom they were written ? or elfe of thofe particular perfons or Churches to whom the Apoftk did communicate a copy of them

j£#f^. 14 And how did all the Church know the Scripture to be Gods word before the Council of Nice , when there had been no General Council to determine the bufinefs ?

JJHueft. 15. DareaPapift undertake to juftiiie at Gods judgement all that part of the unbelieving world , for not taking the Scripture for the word of God , who have feen or heard it, and had all other teftimoniesof it, but never knew of tke TefUmony , of the Pope or a General Council? Shall none of thefe perifh for this unbelief?

£hfffi. 16. And if it be dre Pope that they call the Church, and take it to of this infallible judge, I then demand, How knows the Pope that the Scripture is Gods word, or that the Chriftian Faith is true ? The like alfo I ask of a Council : How doth that Council know it themfelves from whom we muft know it? Either the Pope and Council Bauft believe it becaufe they firft believe theiwfelves,and fo take it on their own words,or elfe on the words of fome others. If the former, then theyBelieve it becaufe they Believe it: then they are the original of their own belief,and believe themfelves firft, and then would have alt the world to believe them. And this is not onely to be fo arrogant as to be the God of themfelves, and the Church, but alfo fo impudent and unreafonable a i

U 2 to

(2Q2)

to believe themfelves without rcafon, and to exped: that all others ftiould do fo too. But if it be not frcm themfelves that the Pope andCouncil believe the Script ures/rom whom then is it ? not from any others of the preientChurch doubtlefs.therforc it muft be from the former Church : And if fo i. Have not we the fame means to know that the former Church belicv -ed the Scriptures as the Pope hath,and therefore may believe it without recourfe to him, and as infallibly as he? 2 And then it feems that according to their dodrine the Pope and his Council receive not their faith or the Scriptures on the fame ground as all the reft of the Church muft do: fo that the Church muft have a twofold foundation of her faith, whereof one isneceflary only to one part, and not ro the other that is, All the reft of the Church muft believe the Scripture to be Gods word , becaufe the prefent Pope or Council faith fo (having firft believed their infallibility ) but the Pope and Council themfelves need not any fuch gro^id of their faith? Arid this diftinftion is not maOT between the Laity and the Clergy in general : But even the Clergy themfelves out of Council, or who never u r cre of the Council (which fare is more then a hundred for one)muft thus differ from the Pope and Council in the foundation of their Faith. This is another tafte of the famous Romane unity .• Paul faith there is One Faith: but if two divided Foundations, or Reafons of Belief do make two Beliefs, furely the Church of Rome hatfe two.

jQucft. 17. Do you believe that the Lord Jefus Chritt understood the do&rine of your Papal Authority ana infallibility, when he fo chid his Apoftles for

ftriving

ftriving who ftiould be greateft : and tclieth them fo expredy, that the Kings of the Gentiles exercife Authority over them, and are called, Gracious Lords : but with you it (hall not be- fo : And when hs lets before them a little cbild«4nd celleth them that he^that will be greateft among chem, muft be as that child: that is, that humility is the thing that they muft ftrive to be great or excell in > and fo to ferve one another in love Alfo when he commandeth them to call no man on earth Father or Ma-ftcr, that is , of their Faith. Did ever Chrift di-reft the world to go to the Church of Rome to know whether he be the Chrift, or whether the Scripture be his word or not ?

JQwft. 18. Where is the Faith of the Church when the Pope is dead, and-when there are three or four at a time, and when there is an interruption by Schifme thirty years together, as it is known there hach been : Hath not the Church then loft her faith by lofing the foundation of it ? Or whether then muft poor Pagans have re-cGurfe to know that Scripture is the Word of God ? If Infallibility furvive in other Paftors , then it feemes it is not the Pope onely that is infallible, but others as well as he.

And was not the Churches Faith refolved into the Infallibility of a Woman in Pope foanes dayes ? I know the Ihifts ©f BelUrmine and Onufhrim to make the werld believe that the Story of Pope Joane is but a Fable ; Flo-rimondtu Rtwondus is common on this fobbed.

But the cafe is out of queftion thus farre ,

that we have neer fifty of their own Writers,

U 3 efpe-

cfpccially old Hiftorrans that give us the Hiftory of this Pope foane; as PUtina invit. fob* 8. Sabellicus ^Snead- L i. Antoninus Archbifhop of Florence fart. 2.U. \6.Chaleondjla It, 6, Marianm Scttus^ Mar* tinm Polonxt , Fafcicul^s Temforum^ Nauc/er^s , , Volaterane^ Textor. Carjon , Sigebertm Gemblacen-fis, UMat. Patmeriw^ CMaffans&c.

And I marvaile v why thePapifts fhould be foindu-ftriousinrefcilingit, as if their caufe lay more on this then other things. If a Conjurer, a common Whoremonger, a Murderer, a Simonift , a Here-tick , may be the infallible judge of the faith , why may not a woman ? Hath Chrift laid more on the Sex then on aJl thefe? fpecially if (he had but kept her felf honeft, I fhould have thought fodtne had been better then folm the 22* or 23. and many another that yet was of the more worthy gender.

jQtffft; 19. And further I would know, If theCi-fy of Howe were con fumed with fire , or the Pope-dome removed from that Sea (which "Bellarmine confeiTeth , it is not impoffile to be done ) where then were the infallible head of the Church, and what were become of theRomifh faith ? If they fay that this can never be , and that Chnfts promife im-plyeth the prefcrvation of the City of Rome, I an-Jwer, 1. It will be long before they will give us any proof of that. 2. Their own writers confefs the contrary. 3. Let the end determine it. But if they fay that infallibility is not tyed to the place, but to the Perfon, who (hall be Peters fucceffor, I an-fwer, we thought hitherto that to be Peters fucceffor, and to b€ the Bifhop of Rome , had been all one with them, If another man that is no Bilhop of i may hz Peters fucceffor , then how (hall we

-know

(*S5>

know who have fucceeded him all this while ? v not theBifhop of Alexandria, Eiernfalem, cp-or other place as well as the Pope ? fpecially why noc the Pamarch of Antiocb juho is faid to be the z]dcit fon of Sainc Peter, as inheriting his nrft chair e- I doubt, if Rome were extinft , and the B;fhop of Mentz,) or Cullen, ox Vienna, or themes, or Par id or any other (hould pretend to be the infallible head of the Church, not only the old Patriarchs but their neighbor Biftiops would much contradift it; and the world would be at a great lofs to find the Popifh faith or infallible head.

Jjhteft. 20. Laftlylwill appeal to the conference of any Papift that hath any confeience'left, and hath read the Fathers or Hiftory of the firft Ages of the Church whether the reft of the Biftiops and Curches in thofe times did believe the Scripture upon the credit of the infallibility of the Pope or thcRomane Church ? Did the reft of the Apoftles receive the Gofpel on the credit of Peter , or were they fent by him ? or did they receive their authority from him ? Do they find that ever the Apoftles, or any following Bifhops of the Church did take fuch a conrfe to bring men to the faith , as firft to teach them that the Romane Pope or Clergy were infallible, and therefore to perfwade them to believe the Scriptures or Chriftian faith, becaufe they fay its true. Is ic pofiible that any learned Papifts can ferioufly believe that this was the ancient way of believing } Do they think in good fadnefs that the world was converted to Chriftianity by this means > Sure it is fcarce pofiible that they fhould be fo far diftraded by their prejudice and fadion .? Do they read in Clemens Rom. or Alexandria, in Ignatius ^ ftftia, Irenatm^ Tertul-

U 4 Han

other of chofc times,

e men co ChniBamty , did crcr ufc this Po»

i^thisun Didchtyfirft

presch the Pope and R<m**c Church before they

• ■ :

:orc up-

co convince the ccbdit

- - : e wre car :nfhan faith, ard that it croft

:ors : Undoubtedly , had

infallibility. Whatman will go to evince a whole fyftemc of do&rines to be true, and quite forget that medium , by which onely it is firft to be proved ? Would not this have found one place at leaft if not the chief among Sufebins his Vreparati^ ens Qt'Demonft rations} Where was there ever in all Antiquity found fuch an Argument as this to convince an unbeliever ? £ whatsoever the Poft and Church of Rome deter mweth is trne ? Tut thej do determine that Serif tare is the word of God , or that Chriftiamtj is the right Religion : therefore this h true.~]

Nay further confider : If this kind of arguing bad been then ufed , may not any man fee that hath not renounced his wits, that the Heathens would have forely ftuck at the Major propofition ? and that it would have met with fo many objections and contradiftions from them , that furely we fhould have found fome of them remem-bred to pofterity. Did fxlian never flick at this very principle of the &ith , the Romane infallibility ? who ftuck at fo many things in the faith it felf ? Or have Cyril Alexandr. and others quite forgot to mention thefe among the reft of his contradictions ? Did it never come into the mind of Celfnsfporfhjrj , orany other unbeliever that we rend of to doubt of and objett agair.ft this fundamental infallibility ? O what an incredible thing is this?

Yea and yet the more incredible will it appear, if you confider , that all the whole caufe between the Chriftians and the Infidels , according tothePopifli conceit, meft depend upon this cne point of their For what man will be fo mad asjro con-tradift the Church if he orxe believe that the Church

is infallible. Can they think that all the learned Heathens were fuch fools > It muft needs be therefore that their firft flop muft be at the Jyfej >r proposition , even at this principle of the G.arches infallibility ; and therefore certainly their moti objections would have been againftit, and themoftofthe Chrfttan D (tors labor would have been in the defending of it: But chat its certain they thin believed no fuch thinf ,and the Church was at that time utterly unacquainted with the foundation of the prefent ■Rmifb faith.

Moreover, if this Popifh foundation had been then known, do you think chat the Fathers would not have appealed to Rwe , for a decifion of all their perplexing controverfies ? What readier way tohaveiilcncedail gain-fayers, and ended allftrifes, and to have faved the labor of fo many volumes, then to have beftowed their pains with all diffenters upon this one point alone [That Rome is infallible^ and then havefent them thither for fatisfaction in all the reft. Common reafon muft needs have told men of fuch principles, that this was the way ? But do we find that this way was taken ? How come we then to have fo many volumes-ofthe Fathers controverfal writings, and not one Book, or Chapter, or leaf or line, to prove the Remane infallibility ?

And becaufe the ofder of our difcourfe hath brought us up to the judgement of the Fathers, I fhall here give you a brief tafte of their judgement in this point, and fo conclude this argumentation.

(w)

In the contention about Safitr day between the Emftem & rrejlertt Churches,

p.L* w w.th the ^« ff2i r 2*!2""**-

Bilhops refitted the Popes ju *

dicial determination^;^ 198. And therefore doubt-lefs they believed not his infallibility nor univerfal jurifdi&ion.

In the Council of Nice, thefirft that fubferibed was SnfiathitH Patriarch of Antioch before the Legates of the Bifhop of Rome : Theodor. li. 1, c. 7. So did Hofius Biftiop of Corduba in Spain, as Athanaf. Apolog. 2.

In the Council of AfricJ^ the Popes Legates had the laft place, Cone. Afric. Can.ioo, In the Council of fj^^*!*'* 1 ** 6 * Calcedon there was 157.Tub y

fcribed before Philip the Popes Legate. In the fifth Council of Covftantinople \ Menna their Bifhop was Prefident: EvagrU. 4. c. 38.

And if the Pope had not then fo much as the Pre-fidency, how much lefs an univerfal jurifdi&ion with infallibility ?

When Stephen the Biftiop of Romi determined ju* dicially againft rebaptizing Heretieks, and excommunicated Firmiliatnts for not aflenting, and wrote to Cyprian about it, what did they do? Did they either fubmit to the judgement of the Pope as infallible, or obey him it their univerfal Ruler? No,but Cyprian , Firmilian , 'with the reft of the Bi-(hops, did unanimoufly jo'yn agairtft che Popes decree. I would fain know by what fpeftades the Papifts

can

(

6o

can read thefe words of * Cy

iailibility in them ? In his Epift. 74. ^ Vempeitm, he faith t( us " [1 have " feat a Copy of our Brother Stephens letters which "when you read you will fee his error, more and cc more, who endeavoured! to maintain the caufe of V Hereticks againft the Cnnftians, andagaintt the "Church of God, For among things which he <c writeth either proudly or. nothing to the pur-c 'pofc, or contrary to jiimfelf and ignorantly " and unadvifedly, he addeth ,<#•£. ] Here mentioning Pope Stephens pieading of Tradition , he faith Cl ^Whence is that tradition ? Is it from the Cc Authority of the Lord and the Gofpel ? Comes " it from the commands and Epiftles of the Apoftle ? " For that we muft do thofe things that arc written, " God tedifieth and propounded to Jo/hxa faying , t; Let not this Book of the Law depart out of thy " mouth, &c. If therefore it be contained in the Cc Gofpel, Epifties or in the Afts, then let this Di-< c vine and holy Tradition beobferved. — What ob-<c flinacy is this? And what preemption , to prefer " Humane Tradition before Divine appointment ? €C and not to conjider that God is angry and offended c< as oft as humane Tradidon doth lofe or pafs by the ct commands of God. As Ifaiak faith, This people cc honoureth me with their lips, but their hearts are ct far from me : in vain do they worfhip me, teaching ct the do&rines and commendements of men : and as tx the Lord in the Gofpel reproveth them , Yee re-cc jeft the commandments of God to eftablilh your c: Tradition. So Paul iTtK.6.3. If any teach o-"tlierwife, and reft noc indie wholfome words of

<c our Lord JefusChriil, and of his do&rine he « <c proud (or lifted up with ftupidityj knowing no-" thing, fromfuch we muft depart.— The cuftome <c which hach crept in with fome , ought not to hin-<c dcr the truth from prevailing and overcoming. For <c cuftome without Truth, is but antiquity of error, * therefore leaving error, let us follow truth.—It is <c through a fludy of preemption and contumacy cC that a man will rather defend his own wicked and V falfe opinions, thanconfent to anothers that are "right and true: Paul therefore faith that a Bifhop * c muft be no quarrelier, but mild and teachable; * € for a Biftiop muft not onely teach, but be taught.-C£ And there is a fpeedy way for Religious and ficnple " minds to lay down error , and to find and dilclofe "the Truth. For if were- * ~ L . [ r . ? turn to * theHead and Ori- -£ hac 1S > the Scr ** " ginal of Gods tradition,hu-i€ mane error ceafech, and whatfoever was in cloudy "darknefs, it opened in the light of truths- -If the <c water Pipes be ftopt, do we not run to the foun-c * tain to fee what's the matter. -*- So now muft. the " Priefts of God that keep his cornrnaiKlement, that ■ € if in any point Truth have changed or wavered,we " may return to the original, even the Tradition by ci the Lord, by the Golpcl and by the Apoftles: and Cc the Reafon of our a&ion may rife from thence cc from whence both order and beginning did arife.] So far Cyprian.

If the Papifts can make their followers now believe that Cyprian believed the Popes infallibility, or that the Church of Feme was the onely keeper of Tradition, or that Traditions were not tobetryed by the Scriptures, then you may fee to whatpurpofcit is

that

that they mufl needs be the judges of Gontroverfic and the fence of Scripture, and why they call it a Nofe of wax; even that it may be at their fervice, and fo flexible as to yield to what fence they will put upon it, when they will needs exercife the fame Authority on the Fathers themfelves who in their familiar Epiftles fpeak as plain as they can.

Firmilianm , a famous Biftiop writeth a confuta-

* cjpmpg. %%6. tg 7 . tio » ° u f P °P C StepbensE V mc and therefore took him not to be infallible; and he parallels him with the Ancient HcreucksyAfarcion^ Apcllcs, Vaientinta^ Bafili-des, as bringing in error under pretence of Tradition as they did. And faith u £ And for them that are at <s Rome,they do not in all things obferve thofe things cc which were delivered from the beginning , and " do in vain pretend the Authority of the Apoftles • ci as may be feen m that about Eafter and about ma* tc ny other Divine myfteries, there are fome diver-cc fides with them, and they do not equally obferve <c all things as at HitrtifaJem they are ebferved. As " alfo in many other Provinces many things are va-" ryed according to the diversity of places and names, " and yet no breach of the Churches unity and peace " for this. Which now Stephen hath dared to do, "breakingthe peace with us, which his anceftors cc kept in love an J honor: and moreover defaming <c Peter and Paul, as if he had this Tradition from cc them. •-- And in this I have juft indignation at the " open and manifeft foolifhnefs of Stephen , that he ct that thus boafteth of the place of hisBifliopricke, cc and contended that heholdeth the fuccefiion of " Peter, upon whom the foundations of the Church c< are laid, doth bring in many other Rocks and ma-

ktth

(3°S)

**keth new buildings of many Churches while by his u authority he defendeth that there is Baptifmc —-46 And as to the confutation of Cuftome, which they ct feerntooppofe to truth, who is fovain as to pre* <c fercuftom before truth? Or that feeing the light " will not forfake the darknefe ? Except that when " Chrift, that is the truth, was come, the moft anci-M ent cuftom would have in any thing belpt the Jews, " that leaving the new way of truth ■ they remained €c in Antiquity, Which you Jfricans may fay again$ "Stephen, that having knowledge of the truth you " have forfaken the error of cuftrfme. But we do " both joyn cuftome to truth, and to the cuftome of <c the Romanes, we oppofe cuftome but of the truth, '• from the beginning holding that which from Chrift <f and his Apoftles was delivered to us. Nor can we "remember any beginning of this - —Yea thou arc .'^worfe then all the hereticks — See then howigno-<c rantly thou dareft to reprehend them, who ft rive M for. the truth againft a lye. For who fhould more " juftly be angry with the other ? he that defendeth cc Gods enemies or he thatconfenteth ? But that it is , "manifeft that the ignorant are haughty and angry, " while for want of judgement and fpeech they eafily Ci turn to indignation ; fo that of no man more then <€ of thee doth Gods Scripture fay, An haughty cv man breedeth ftrife, and an angry manheapeth up u fins (iW 29. iz.) For what ftrifes anddiffenffi-. "onshaft thou made through the Churches of the 41 whole world? And how great a fin haft thou heap-c < ed on thy felf, when thou haft cut otf thy felf from cC fo many flocks ? For thou haft cut off thy felf: de-" ccive not thy felf: For he is truely the fchifmatick, " who maketh himfclf an apoftate from the commu-

<c nion of Ecclefiaftkal unity. For while thou think* <c efttofuipendallfrom thy communion, thoudoft C| onely fufpencJ thy felf from the communion of all— <c Can there be one Body and one fpirit with fuch a "a man whole foul perhaps is not one, foflippery " and mutable and uncertain is it--And yet is not "Stephen afhamed to patroaize filch againft the <c Church , and for the defence of hereticks to divide " the brother hood; and alfo to call Cjprim 2l falfe "Chrift, and falfe Apoftle and a deceitful worker; " who being confeious that all thefe were in. himfelf, cc did by prevention, objed: all that to another by a " lye, which himfelf defervedly ought to hear] So far Firmilianm.

The queftion is not whether Stephen of Rcwc^ or the Eaftcrn Bifhops were in the right, but whether thefe paflages do not fufficicntly declare , that they had then no conceits of the Popes infallibility ? and that when he excommunicated other Churches, they took it but as an excommunicating of himfelf, and therefore plainly called him a Schifmatick.

In the Council of Carthage^y. Bifhops dcciced cxprcfly againft the fentence of the Bifhop of Rome. AndCjprian m Council fp~aks thus "[[Let every €C man fpeakhisjudgemetrt, jigging no man, nor re-cc moving anyraaa from the right of communion ,that Cc thinks others fe.For noac of us takes himfelf to be " a Bilhop of Bifhops j or by a tyrannical fear doth <c compell his Colleagues to obey : feeing every Bi* c< fnop hath by licence free choice of his own liberty Cf and power, and can neither be judged of another, <c nor can judge another ; But let us all exped the " judgement of our Lord JefusChrift, who onely " and folely hath power to kt us over his Church

"in

in Government, and ro judge of our adions.

If chis be not as plain as need be fpoken againft the Papal ufurpation, I know not what can be accounted plain.

Yea Cyftian and the Ccnneil fay the like to the Popehimfclf 'TThefethings 3L'''/.

-dear brother we fpeak fSBS**** ***** * to thy confcience for the

"commonhonor and for (implelove But we

<c know that fome men will not lay down that which Cc they have once drunk in 5 nor eafily change their "purpofe, but faving the bond of Peace andcon-<l cord among Collegues will retain fome things of " their own, which are once grown into ufe among cc them. Wherein we do neither ufe violence , nor: " give Laws to any; feeing that every Ruler ( or " Bifhop)hath the free arbitration of his own will 4C in the administration of the Church, as one that c< muft give account of his doings to the Lord.]

If this be not plain {till againft Papal, and all Archiepifcopal government of Biftiops, I know noc how a man fhould fpeak plain.

The Council of Carthage (faith GrAtian 1>ift-99) faith tC QEventheP0pe'of Rome muft not be called " the umverfal Bifhop.]

Gregory called the great Btfhop of Rom ^ but a few years before Boniface claimed the univerfal Epifco-pacy, wrote thus againft John of ConjUntinofle who would have had fome fuch - _ A Q title "[Noneofinypredc- G ^^8 °-"ceffors would ufe this prophane word (vi*>. tini* " vcrfal Bifhop ) becaufe if one will call himfelf <c univerftl Patriarch, the name of Patriarch is ftolti "from others: But far be it from a Chriftian fou!

X u thai

CI

" that any fhould falfiy afcribe to himfelfthat where-u by he diminifheth any thing from the honor of his " Brethren To confent to that un juft fpeech is no fc other thing then to fall from the faith. One Cc thing we owe to the unity ©f the faith , andano-" ther to fupprefs pride. And I fay boldly that he " who calleth hirafclf univerfal P aft or or defireth fo <l to be called furpaffeth the Antichrift in pride—] So Spift. 188./.6. He faith " QI have faid that " he cannot have place with us, if he cerre&ed not i c the vanity of that fuperfticious and ambitious ct word which hath been invented by the firft Apo-" ftate. Andto.fpeak nothing of the injury done " to your honor, if a Biftiop be called umverfal 9 <c that umverfal once failing the univerfal Church " muft alfo fall.]] Here it is efpccially to be noted that this very reafon by which Gregory condemneth univerfal Epifcopacy, is now ufed by the learned Papifts to prove the Popes infallibility : For they argue that the Pope cannot err defide in Cathedra , be-caiife elte the univerfal Church fhould fail with him if he fail.

The fame Gregory in Epift. 78. faith <l £ It is a " thing too hard to endure that our Brother and fel-"lowBifhop, fhould be alona called Bifhop incon-11 tempt of ail the reft : And what other thing doth ci this arrogaccy portend, but that the time of An-ic tichrift approachcth already , info far as heimi% *' tared him who difdaining the company of Angels cc affayed to afcend to the top of Angularity?]]

A man would think that all this fhould be plain e-nougfa to refoive us beyond all farther do«btinj},that the Popes Univerfal Epifcopacy is new. But to this the Piipifts have no thing to fay , but a fooiifh

pre-

(i°r)

pretence chat John of Confiantincple would have been the fole Biihop on earth , and have had no Bifhop elfe buc himfelf alone, which the Pope never arrogated. Anf. A filly fhifc, which fuppofetlv all tke world to be fo unrealbnable as ro be fatisfied with any thing, ,or elfe would make them fo : A fhifc that hath not a word or' -proof co fupport it , but contra-di&eththefullcourfeof Hiftory, and the words of Gregory themfelves/ which all (hew that it was buc an univeffal Epifcopacy to which all othfer fhould be fubjed, which John of CovftantinodU did challenge; if fo much. * And all their fhew of proof of the contrary is, becaufe Gregory here faith that [[He would be alone called Bifhop ]] But chats not as if diredly in terms, but onely by confequence, he is fuppofed to lay fuch a claim, in that he claimed the title of Hniverfal BiJhoP.' Buc - . . .

I now fee that thePapifts will JJ*fS*«««'<**•• make anofe-ofwax of their own Popes Writings as well as of the Scriptures; and that the Pope hath no more the gift of fpeaking intelligibly than <Pe ter y Taul or Chrifi himfelf is by chera fuppofed to have. And therefore what fhould they talk any more of a living judge t wlien that living judge himfelf cannot fpeak fo as to be uaderftood?

P latin* faith that "[^Bonifacim tertitu a'Thca cc ImferatQreobtinttit, magna, tauten contentune^Stc. * c That Boniface the third obtained of Pboea* the Em- ' <c peror, but not without great contention, that the " feat of the blefTed Apoftle „, . . . „ , e « Peter which is the Head of «*™ «*•**/• ^ " all Churches, fhoujd be fo called and accounted " of all ; which place indeed the Church ofConftan* " tintflt did fcek to challenge to it felf— -j

X 2 So

So that it was the fame place or name which the Bifhop of Conftantinople would have frad v which Bom/act after got, and not as TielUrmine feigneth, a quite different thing. Nay I cannot perceive any probable evidence thac Boniface himfelf had any thought of that Univerfal Jurifdiftion, which now is arrogated, bat onely to be the Greateft and High • eft of all Bifhops , and in that fence called the Head or the univerfal Bifhop.

If they kriew the Pope to be the fupreme infallible head of all the Chiarch, why did the Council of Gal-cedon(thc fifth general Coun-VU. Bmnium Tern,i.Cenc. y^ examin £ * Epift j e ,and part 1. art. 4. cone.Cdiced. c r * • 1

p. 218. wptrt. i.Atu profefsto reciveit onely on fine. gene. 1. Cotlat.6.p. its agreement with former 1 o r. er; ellit. &. p. 11$. doSrine ? Yea why did this Vd toxfiim. Vigil in Council condemne Pope Vi-

jj, de 3 captHlt* ? Yea and ana-

thematize all that condemned not Theodonts^ of whom VigiUm was one ? and this in a Dodrinal Point, Whether Hereticks may be condemned after death ? Yea they pronounce the Pope and his adherents defenders of impiety, and fuch as cared not for Gods decrees, or the Apoftles pronunciations , or the Fathers Traditions. If thefe 165. Bifhops had believed the Popes infallibility , they would rather have crarcd his Definitive fentence. And why did the Council of Cdctdon alfo Decree without the Popes confent, that the Bifhop 6f Conftdxttneplc was equal with him;and the 5 -fixth general C ouncil confirm it ?

Any aaan of undemanding that readeth over the Decretals of the feveral Popes (hall find befides all

(3°9)

other errors, fo many falfe expofuions^of Scrip" ture, even common reafon, and the Papifts them- . felves being judges, that there needs no other proo* that they are too fallible.

AMHfiim in /. 2. Contr. Augufl. S. 2. CentrVonJ

€C cila qtta per fingulat regv-<c ms % &c. That is, Who knoweth not that the very "Councils themfelves which are held in feveral Re-M gions or Province s, do without more ado yield to u the authority of fuller Councils which are made out "of the whole Chriftian world? And that the "full Councils themfelves which were before are «' oft > mended by the later, * Qr Corrcaed# "whenby iomeexperiment <c of matters that is opened which before was (hut up, " and that is known which lay hid, and this without " any fmoak of facrilegious pride, without any infla-" tion of arrogancy, without any contention of livid Cc envy, with holy humility, with Catholike peace,' " with Chriftiaa charity.]

This he brings as amajere to (hew the Donatifts the invalidity of Cjprians authority, telling them that it is the holy Scriptures that are undoubted and of unqueftionablc credit, but not the writings of any Biftiops fince, no nor of Councils themfelves.

This place of Aufiin doth confirm the FrencbV*-pifts as well as the Italian, that they have nothing to fay againft it , that without meer im pudency can be thought to be of any weight. What is vainly faid by them , you may fee anfwered in A. B. Laud's ; Book again ft Fifier and A. C. Pag. 240, 241, 242.

In Aufiines Book againft Petilianm the Donatift the very queftion debated, is, How they may know where the true Church is ? And is it not a wonder that zAnflin never remembred to direft them to Mome ^ or to the Popes infallibility , if that had been the approved way?Here then what way Jufiin went

A a ~ rr , r, Ca P' 2 ' P a £' ( **&* Edifr.

c i&i Parts) 141. jguaftto certe

<c inter nos verfatur , abi fit <c Ecclefia ? utrurn apudnos, an aptt'd illos ? — £hiid <C ergofatturi fnmm ? in verbid nofiris earn quafituri, , Cc an in verbis capitis fui'Domini noftrijefu Chrifii : c< & puto qmdinillifu&Qjh&t is,T[equcftion handled between us is where is the Church? with <c us or with them? What muft we do then? muft le we feefc it in our.words.or in the words of our Lord "JefusChrift o**r head? I think in his who is truth ct it felf, and beft knows his own body, iTim.^. The P Lord Joioweth who are his-*-] Cap^.p. 142. Sed • cc ut dicere c&perjtm, ncnaudiamus>k(zc dico, bacdicis, ''fedaudiatww, h<zc dicit dominm.dcc. That is, But cc as I began to fay, Let us not hear 9 1 fay this, and cc you Jay that, but let us hear, Thus faith theLord. * c There are certainly the Lords Books, to whole au-ci thority we both confent, we both believe them, we <c both obey them ; there let us feek the Church , cC there let us difcufe our caufe. -•>- Auferantur.ergo ^ ilk de medio ,&c. Away with thofe things from a-" mong us, which we bring againft one another , " not out of the Divine Canonical Books, but from ,c elfwhere —* Slftia note httmanis dcctimlntk&c&z-cc caufe I will not have the holy Church to he^de-f* rnonftrated by humane documents, but by Gods " Oracles. For if the holy Scriptures have placed'

the

" the Cfiurch in Africa alone, and in a few places of <c Remeficc. then whatsoever may be brought:out of <c other papers, the Church is oneiy with theDo-"natifts. .'Si atttem,&cc But if the Church of "Qwft.is placed by the Divine and moft certain ie teftimonies of the Canonical Scriptures in all Nati-<c tlops; then what ever they bring, and whence <c ever they recite it, who fay, Lo hereisChrift, or tc lo there; let us rather, if we be his fheep hear the " c voice.pf oyr Shepherd, faying, Believe them not. ,c For thbfe parcels are not found in many Nations, "where that (Church) is : but it, which is every " where, is found even where they are; therefore Cc let us feek it in the holy Canonical Scrip* cc cures.]]

AncTihushegoeson and proves at large by the Scriptures the true Church y fitting all as meet to the prefent fchifme of the Papifts, ahnbftasif he. had feen and named it. *

'C& '18. Begins thus "£Becaufe therefore the c c holy Church is manifefftly known in the Scriptures, " ® , 9,J RemotU ergo omnibus, &e. Laying afide ''thereforeall fuch matters, let them demonftrate "their Church if they can ; not in the fpeeches* " and rumors of the Africans , not in the Councils <c of their Bifhops, not in the writings of any dif-"puters, notinfignes and fallacious Miracles, be-"caufe we are prepared and cautioned againft fuch " things by the word of "God: but in the writings C *^ x '

cc of the Law jn the predictions of the prophets, in cc the Pfalms, in the words of our Paftor hinafelf, in " the preachings and labors of the Evangelifts, that " is, in all the Canonical authorises of the facred < c Books.] X4 Next

Next he (hews that it muft not be out of Parables, Allegories or fuch Scriptures that make no more for one fide then the other (what then ? doth he tell them that it is all fuch, and fend them to Rome to know the fence ? no) but it is the plain Scripture of which he produceth abundance that muft tell us which is the true Church. And he thus begins the 19 Chap. ,c Omijfis ergo file Letting pafs therefore the fnares #*,* '^Mm.mm r ^f delSyes let him (hew

**«9.«-U4. << their ch U rch,e^. and fo-11 (View it, as not to fay, Its true, becaufe I fay ir,or ''becaufe my collegue faid it, or thefe colieguesof ct mine, orthofeBiftiops, or Clerks, orourLayity,

" or therefore its true * be-

* How fit is this wedge cc cau f c thefe or thofe won-tor Matte* Kn&t itbewii « j % v t\

but apply it, k may call- „ der * WCr * d ° ne ^ D °»f*» ly cleave his new found a- or Pontttu , or any Other, cion of the fafcfi, 'ior becaufe men pray and

cc are heard at the Memories 11 (orJflirines } of ours that are dead, or becaufe **"fuch or fuch things happen there , or becaufe that IC brother of ours, or that fifter of ours faw fuch a ct fight waging, or had fuch a dreaming vifion fleep-

* ing. Away with thefe either fi&ions of lying ** men,or wonders of deceiving fpirjts: For either the <c things that are faid,arc not true,or if any wonders <c are done by hereticks, we muft the more beware, ce feeing the Lord when he told us there would come <c decei vers,who by doing certain figns would deceive li if it were poffible, even the ele&, addeth , Lo I " have foretold you,-- And if any be heard praying "at the Memories of hereticks, it is not for the f'defert of the f lace, but the defert of his defire

that

(»»0

1 c that he receiveth good or evil. —No man can have u Chrift for his head, that is not in his Body, which <c is the Church: which (Church) we muft know as Cc wc do Chrift himfelf in the facred Canonical Scrip-<c tures, and not to inquire into the various rumors <c of men and their opinions, and deeds, and fayings, " and fights. --But let them (hew me whether they €< have the Church, no way but by the Canonical " books of the divine Scriptuers: Becaufe neither do " we therefore fay, that they ought to believe us that "we are in the Church of Chrift, becaufe that * ,c (Church) which we hold is commended by Optatm u Mdevitanw , or by Amhrofe of Milian y or in* " numerable other * Bilhops "of our communion, or be- * Was the Pope of Rime

«■**£ profaed (or -f %*% >~<

" praifed) by the Councils or church ?

<c our Collegues, or becaufe

u through the whole world in the holy places which

* arc frequented by our communion , fo great mar-

" vailes of hearings, or healings are done (here-fonjc

" are named.) Whatever things of this fort are done

" in the Catbolike Church, are therefore to be -^

" approved, becaufe they are done in the Ca-

" tholike Church , but it is not therefore manifefted

" to be the Catholike Church, becaufe thefe things

' " are done in it. --Thisheteftifietbis written in the "Law and the Prophets and Pfalms; this we have " commended by his own mouth. Thefe are the documents of our caufe , thefe are its foundati-c 'ons, thefe its upholders (orconfirmers.) Wc " read in the Afts of the Apoftlcs of fome Be-

| 'Mtevers, that they daily fearch'c the Scriptures " whether thofe things were fo : What Scriptures?

But

" but the Canonical of the Law and prophets? Hcre-

" to are added the Gofpels, the Epiftles of the Apo-

cc files, the A&sof cheApoftles and the Revelation

cc of John. Search all thefe, and produce fornewhat

" manifeft which will demonftrate that the Church

o " either *remaiiieth.'in »^/-

Or Rome. < c ^ % Q ^ is tQ be f rom

cc ^fric^ fo that it may he fulfilled which the Lord " faith^ ThisGofpelof the Kingdom (hall be.prca-iC died in all tlie world, &C. But bring fomewhat that "needcth not an interpreter, that you may not be "convinced that it fpeaksof another mattered that -* c vou ftrive to turn it toy our * Like tfac Papifts, F*f« ^ own fence *—lcW 25. ™ w ; er p « F- <c £Tbe . qucftk)n 4 no f dark

\m wmch they may deceive * ( you-- You fee the Church is every where oiffufed, u and increafcth to the harveft. j - This whoif Sook of sAttfiin is written, as if it had been purpofed as a confutation of the Papifts that have the. Church toxontaiq, pnely the Rcmane :lon,, arid, exclude all die reft of the/world, and wtft try the Scripture by the'Church , and r A ot the ChiifchJby Jtfic Scripture, but fly to I know not what vinons. and '.pretended , miracles to .prove their Church which AhJUh profefTtth are not.a proof no not of the true Churchy though there bei^uch more then there to bqa$of : fo that the Papifts canuot hereby that Attain thqs dealeth with the Donatifts, beeaufe they denyed the Church of Row* and believed the Scripture: he ex^rcfly enough prevented) all fuch exp.oikipns of his words.

4Hgujl. CM. Crcfcon li.i. j ^ugufi. con- CrefconiHtit It. *•$$• 2. cap. 33. /?. 177. Saith

<c

[EgohvfusEpiftoltet&c. Lara not bound by the

authority of this Epiftle ( of Cjprians ad Jubai:) c 'beeaufcItakcnot Cipriani Epiftlesto bcCanoni-€c cal, bat by the Canonical I confidcr them and c< that in them which agreeth to the authority of rfie ''Divine Scriptures, I accept with his praife, but ct that which drfagrceth I refufe with his peace. And ic fo if thou hadit recited thofe. things which he Cc wrote to fubajan out of fome Canonical book of " theApoftles or Prophets, I (hould have had no-u thing at all to gain-fay : But now, feeing what thou sc recitcft is not Canonical, by that liberty to which " the Lord hath called us, I refufe it, &C.J And he " compareth it to Peters compelling the Gentiles to "Judaize Gal. 2. (hewing that even "Peter fhould cC have been fo refufed in error.

The words of AufiininJEpift. 19, ad Bier on. are commonly cited <c £ I have < c learned to give onely to ^JW ad Hieron.Ep. <c thofe writings which are • c now called Canonical, this reverence and honor, Ce as that I dare fay, that none of them erred in wri-" ting: but others I fo read, that how boly and lear-Cf nedfoever they be, I do not therefore think it cc true, becaufe they fo judged, but becaufe they " perfwade me either by thole Canonical books or ci by probable reafon that they fay true.]

As commonly cited is that//. 3. Cont. Maximin. •Arrianxa^.pag. (mihi) 3 06. cc fSed nunc nee twtJkz. But **»«£ cont. Maxim*. I.

tC 1 1 T ?'• C, 14.

now neither ought I as J/iA ;' A ,

fore-judging (or for pre- .<Pf*Ln.expofit 2.

" judice) to bring forth the

f € Nicene Council, nor thou the Council of Arinti-

" um; I am not bound by the authority of this nor ci thou of that, Let matter contend with matter,caufe *• with caufe, reafoa with reafon , by the authorities €e of the Scriptures,which are witncfTes,not proper to " -cither of us^ but common to both. ]

It were too long to recite the fourticth part which jiuguftine huh to this purpofe. He that would fee more, let him read his Ep$.\\z*& de Morib.Scclef. Cathd.c.j.& EpiftAii &Contr.Faufifim Ii.l1.c5. & de Trintat. li. 3. &c.

The words of Optatuslib. 5. adverf. Parmtn. are

frequently cited by our writers : which are thus

; ■ ' "V-Qft&rendi font indices ficc.

O^ush.i. adverf. Far- "^nu^eek judges. If

"Chriftians, they cannot be cC admitted on either fide, becaufe by fiding the truth £ is hindred. We muft feekta judge abroad ( or lc without.) If a Pagan, hecannot know theChri-**ftians fecrets. If a Jew 1 he is an enemy to the €c Chriftian Baptifm. On earth there can no jndg-Cc mentofthis matter be found. We muft feek a Ct J^ge from heaven. But wherefore fhould we go 1* knock at heaven, when we have it here in the Gof-< l pel? A Teftawent (I fay,becaufe here we may well "compare earthly things to heavenly J is fuch, as <c that a man that hath many fons, doth command ' .. A * _ . „ "them all himfelf as long as ?$££i?$;l " the **« is prefer there vindicating this, c ■ * s then no need of a Tefta*

"ment. SoChrift,aslongas cC he was prefent on earth(though yet he be not wan-ct ting or abfent) commanded the Apoftles whatever " wis needful, for the time. But as a father when ct he feeleth himfelf neer to death, fearing left after

his

(1W)

cl his death, the Bcethren {hould unpeaceably quar-" rel, doch before witnefs put his Will out of his i€ dying breft into writings which may endure. And " if there (hall rife any contention among the Brethren, thejfgo not to the Grave, but feek the cC Tcftament; and he that rcftcth in the Grave doth ic (ilently fpeak by the writings. The Living (Lord) " whofe the Teftaaitnt is, is in heaven. Let his will <c therefore be fought in the Gofpel, as in a Tefta-" ment.]

The Author af the imperfeft work on tMat. * commonly imputed to Cbryfiftemc Homil. 49. faith 'TAt this time, fincehercfie .3 ... J ,. -hathpoffeffedthefeChur. £.T " "" h% " ches, there can be no proof c< of true Chriftianity,nor any other refuge of Chri-"ftiaas, that would know the truth of Belief, but <c the Divine Scriptures. For before it was declared u by many means, which' was the Church of Chrift, " and which was Gentilifm. But now it is by no way Cc known t# them that would know, which is the true ci Church of Chrift, but only by the Scriptures. — " How therefore (hould he that would know which • * is the true Church of Chrift, come to know it, ci but o'nely by the Scriptures ?]

One would think this were plain enough, if the Papifts were not the Judges of the meaning of all writings f as well as the holy Scriptures » which condemne their caufe ?

•

f 3i3)

Saith <c [Vxdeprobamwli-<c i>res,fkc. How do we prove that the Books of our u Religion are wticten by Divine infpiration ? Many " wayes, of which the firft is the truth of Scripture cC it felf, then the order of things; the agreement of "precepts, the manner of fpcech without afteraction (or compaflesjand the purity of words: There g " is added aHb 5 the quality of the writers and prea-u chers; that meer men could not have delivered Cc fuch Divine things, and vile men fuch high things, " and uneloquent men fuch fabtile things, unlefs they t6 were filled with the Holy Ghoft. And the force of <c the preaching of it, which it had when it was prea-cc ched, though by a few contemned men. Hereto is <c added the witnefs of the contrary party , as the " Sybils or Philofophers : the expulfion of adver-c ' faries; the utility of the* confequenfs 3 the event <c which by acceptations and figures and prediftions <c were foretold :_" and laftly the Miracles which were u continually wrought till the Scripture it felf was re-<c ceived by the Nations: of which this fuffieeth for " the next Miracle that it is known to be received by "all.] Saith Chamier citing this paflage, Here are argu-. r ■ ments enough to prove the

rMV-mfy *•** author j ty of Scripture, inter-nal and external; but no mention of the Churches antecedent judgement to determime it. The fame may be fajd of Enfebitu^ Auftin and the reft that prove the Scripture and Chriftian Religion.

Hiercms

Hiercmes words *re frequently cited on Math. 2 3. *'VHk cjhm de Scripturis, . % . .

" &c. This is as eafily con- HttTm -l *' *"* **' " temned as proved, bceaufe it hath not authority €c from the Scriptures. ] And on Ifaiah 8. He faith "f Sike aliqtiodtihitatis£>CC. , . „ ort , . •' If you doubt of any thing «™l n + *& <"'; "know what is written--<c If you would know the things that arc doubt* " fal, rathe^give up your felves to the law and to the * c testimonies of the Scriptures.] And on the 86. pfalm, HeTaith <€ ^guam*

-Though there be fome J^^™*'*-"' st Saint after the Apoftlcs ne-ct ver fo eloquent, yet he hath not authority.] And Epift.adRuftic. " [[Since covetoufnefs entered into " the Church as into the Empire , the Law is pcrtfh-a ed from the Priefts, and the vifion from the Pro-" phets.]

And the fame &ieror%e Epift. aABvagr. (foL 150. Edit. HajiL per Froben^ 1516. Towo. 3. & pag. 329. Edia. f BafiLi$36.Torm.2.) Saith thus "[guid tfi emtm facit exceptaerdinatione £pifeopHS % quod pref* <c byter nan faciat ? Nee altera Rtmana urbis Eccle ■ Cc fta , altera tctiui $rbu exiftimanda eft: Et Gallia , V & Britannia , & Africa ,

* #P*rjfr, &Oriens> &fndia Er f/^ r \n his fir3 Aonc x tationsiaith that [pac olim

forttjfevcrt, nunc rn*g*dex parte emmntata funt ,viz. ^gupf** quM Eitgubienfem Epifcopnm cum Romano, nee put at ullum Kpifce-pum Alio majonmeffsuifiquifenui fuperat bmilttate, (& non fuut. Epifefpum quovisftccrdotepreflantiertmejfey nifi qttod jus bibet or. ditvmdi-'] But in feis latter Annotations he merrily leferreth aA the equaiiry in their rcfpe&tothc Beacon*; thai he might fees to tbtte the oftcBSc.

cc omnes 'Barbara nationes, unum Chrifttm adorant, <c unam cbjervant regular** veritatis. Si Author it as '* qu^ritar, Orbx major eft Vrbe» Vbicunqnefuerit \* Spifcoptu^fivs Roma, fiveEttgHbii, five Conttan-t( tinopoli five Rhegii^five Alexandria five Tanis^ejaJ* " dem meriti^e'jHfdem eft & facerdotii. Potentia di-tS> vitiarum, & paupcrtatta bumilitas , vel fublimior-4c em velinferiorem mEpifcopum non facit.' Cater am " omnes Apoftdornm fttcceffores funt. Sed dicU % * 6 Quomodo Rom& ad ttftimonUim Uiaconi presbyter <c ordinatur? Quid mihi prefers twins nrbis confue* ^tftdinem} Glmdpaucitatem % de qua ertumeftfu-ie percilinm in leges Ecccfia vindicas ?] That is£For " what doth a Bifhop except ordination which a " Presbyter may notdo?Nor is the Church of the Ro-11 maneCity to be efteemedone and theChurch of the whole world another ; Both France, and Brittaine, ci and Afru\, and Ttrfia, and the Eaft, and fndta, u and all the Barbarous Nations do worfhip one " Chrift, and obferve one Rule of truth. If you feek •'forAuthority, the worlds is greater than the Ci-C: ties (of Rome) Wherever there is a Bifhop , whe-iC thev&t Rome, or at Engubinm y or at Cenjlanti-<c nople , or at Rhegium, at Alexandria or at (Ta* " nis , of the fame Merit , he is alfo of the " fame Priefthood. The Power of riches, and 4C the lownefs of poverty , make not a Bifhop high-,"eror lower: But they are all the Apoftles fuccef-"fors. But you fay, How Ban*™ ad Tom 401. « i$ j t that at Rom a p rcs by-

%-j™t! ,: 6 dS s :; <« ••<**** «*••*

vaia.f^kio void the mony of a Deacon ? What

force of .his p&lia^ as if

ibi equality vveie oniy quoad(icros crimes. Ic feems the Popes jariididion is no part of hiseffice^ nor belongech to him by (.<crfd itfdrts. tttt

(

3*0

cc tdl you me of the cuftome of one City? why. do yo u "defend a few (of which fuperciltoufnefs isarifen) " againft the Laws of the Church ?~]

lciqaybe the Papiits by their fupereminent power of interpreting all Church writers, can put fuch h fence on theie words oiBufim^ as {ball confift with that which he purpofly doth oppofe-: But I think an impartial man can hardly believe that when he wrote thefe words, he was acquainted with Rome: claim of univerfal jurifdiftion and infallibility.

Nay when it is the fcope of much of the former part of this Epiftle to prove the equality of Bifhops and Presbyters, in the beginning, and that at that time they differed in no power but that of ordaining (when yet he faith the Presbyters of Alexandria^A long make their own Bilhops) how then could Hie* rome .believe the Popes univerfal jurifdi&ion ? Could he think that the Bifhop of Rome had that power o-ver the Church which he thought not any Bifhop to have over the Presby ters of any one Church ?

Greg...Nazianzene faith of Councils " [[If I muft <" write the truth, I am of "this mind, that I will Aye JS^S??!* '•or avoid all Councils of <•**«*«f«*) •»• " Bifhops : for I never faw a glad or happy end of " any Councils, or which did not rather bring an ad. cc dition or increafe of evils, then a removal of thto.J To this of'NatJavzene BelUrmine anfwereth than \jSregorj meant that in his time no Council could be wholly lawful: for he lived between the firft and fc-cond general Council , where he had feen many Councils which becaufe of the great number of He-reticks had a bad end. 3 And he names five of them.

Y An ftp.

Anfw. i. But by what Authority doth Be/Iarwine coafine GregQries words to fome Councils f which he fpeaks in general of all that he had feen or might do refolving to avoid all hereafter. 2. Here note that BelUwint confeflcth that Councils may erre; and then where is the French Religioa ? 3.1 would fain know where was the Churches infallibility , and power of judging of matters of faith in Naziannens dayts ? If there were no lawful General Councils, noreouldbe ? thenitwasnot in them; therefore it muft be either is the people (and how (hall we gather the world together tQ confult with them) or elfe zsB$liarminem\\ivj, in the Pope alone, or in the Romane Clergy with him. I hear not yet that they are very forward to prove Why did Naiiani.i never t h at the Romane Clergy in

TSZSR2& «"*■"« «. ¥**

Pope was theanelyliving (though 'BeUarmtue hath gi-faliiMe judge , to have ven us his bold conjectures of pleaded this with the that) It muft needs be there-Hereckks, and to have fore that at that time all the S^tr^SZ Cheches in f allib lc j.diria. tils. power, and io the foun-

dation of our faith muft he refolyed into the Pope alone; and fo the faith of all the world muft then be refolved into the credit of the word of a fingle and filly man. I know the Italian faftion.will not abhor this at any time- but then they fhouldfor ihame fpeak out and deal plainly with the world, and not talke of the whole Church and all the Church, when they mean but one man. 4. And I would fain know of any friend-of Btllarmines , how far the univerfal

C&urc*

Cm)

Church was vifible at that time , when all Councils were bad, aqd none could be lawful? The vtfibility was not In a Council to reprefene the whole: and the Laicy are not much noted when Councils go wrong, fo that the Church was vifible oriely inoncman 3 or* a few particular perfons, according to the Papifts common reckoning , who judge b^ the Paftors vifi-bility : Yea the Church of Rome it felf was invifibie' then and divers times when their Biftiop Was a Here-tick. If therefore they will fay either that the Church was vifible in one man , or in the Laity of many partes oppreftbythe Clergy and Magiftracv (and they have nothing more to fay ) then we will fay a$ much of the vifibility of our Church before Luther, and more too. 5 Its confeft here alfo that not onely a Council, but the greater number (by very many ) of the Biftiopsofche Church may be heretickes or erre in faith. 6. And then the Church may lye in the fmaller opprefled part; and wfey theft may not the moft erre now ? * Stapleton himfelf confefTeth * s "P let0 * defrimp. *-that Luther was not much ^Jj^^.SZ out of the way, when he faid^ f er . there were fcarcc fivfeBilhops to be found that turned not Arrians. And Hicreme faith dialog* adverf, Lucifer.) {The whole ftcrld groaned: and -mndrtd that it Vvas turned Arrian.~\ 7. And did the authority of the Scripture at that time fall ejutad nos % when the judge was turned heretick ? even Liber im and the Councils ?

And if the high Elegies of the Roman* Church

would prove its Authority , then fee what Nanion-

*ene, faith of the Church of Cafarea* In his 2«

Bpi&it ad defarknfespatru nomine fcripa (found a-

(3M7

, ,£ mong.his own works; £Wi>.

^fifl^m"- **! ^ *• W/785.and alfo in /?*$// works translated by Mnfsulm Sdit. BafiL 1565 Tom.2. pag. 17.) *'[^Seeing every Church as being Chriits body is to "be watched over (or looked to ) with greateft 1 • care and diligence, then fpecially yours, which an-cc ciently wa$, and new is and is efteemed,almoft (or "nigh) the mother of all Churches, on which the " Whole Chriftian Commpnweakh doth caft their c : ctyes even as the encompailing circle doth on the ".center, ;not onely for the fouhdnefs of dodrine tc ;long divulged;to all, but alio for that confpicuous " grace of Concord which God hath given them — ] What would the Papifts fay , but that this were for their fupremacy,-if they found but thisnruchinhim for the Church Q)i[Jlowje.

And I think there is no.<JQubt but that in thofe atidenc tinier the Church .v/as acquainted with the true way of Government as well as fawtfls now; and thereforeTwbuld know further, 8 Whether the fri]fiVGovcrnnVer.t nr.ay not /(land wkh great defola-divi'lioris of rhs Church and multitudes of errors? Cjrea. Nazianzene iaith -(Orat. 20 pag t mihi \\- I in 34s0; .tnac when 'BafiLfct N^n.orat ,0^545. uponth^re.twork.of heal-JpJ the Church "£The hi>Jy Nation, .the. Kingly cc .PriefthQcd>Yas fofar arrufs lift \A wasdiftrfc&ed in-c ■' to fixliurujced opinions dnd .errors; And fpoiled "and wafted by the Devil.•] If.the Popes JM^nar-. chicai Govtr&ment was thep ji foot, then it leans that Govenh^entwillno more prevent fedg and errors then the.^orft': If it wefe not;, then 1. They are now iifuj$eft, 1. And-they cannot prove out:

way

way of Government to be wrong by the multitude of errors that are in the Church.

Baftl was far from reiolvinghis faith into the Popes infallibility when he wrot his AJcetka ( or f at leatt

£u(t'Athixs SebaftienmAithzy . r% r

i. AluX

p. 197-

be his) when (fag. 195 .Tom 2. t ran flat. Uiittfculi, Bajil) he faith cC [Itis a manifeft lapfe of faith, and ap-" parent vice of pride, either to refufe any thing " which the Scripture containeth, or to bring in any " thing which is not written : feeing Chrift faith \ " Mjfieep hear my voice, and prermfeth, Butano-" ther they will not follow, but flye from him, be-" caufe they know not a ftrangers voice.] And fag. 193. he faith, that fometimes he had ufed unwritten fayings againft hereticks "[[But never aliene <c from the Scripture fence, &c7\ and that now he was refolved " QTo make ufe of what he had learn-1 ■ ed from Scripture, and but fparingly \ to ufe the " very names and words which are not literally con-<£ form to the divine Scripture, though they do re * il tain the Scripture fence] The fame Bafil Epifi. 80. To. 2. 'p. mihi. 74. re- m ., _ , A 0 ,

nouncing the argument from. ^£^12° " cuftome , faith c [_Let us J . • ci ftand therefore to the arbitration of the Scriptures " infpired from God : and with whomfoever is found cl the opinions which are agreeable to the Divine o-"racles, to him let the fence (or feritence) of truth Cc be wholly adjudged.] This is "Baftls judgement of the judge of controvcrfies. Hilaritts PiBav. in his j?-

Hilarius FiftdV. Edit. T&rif. 15 2 1 psg. j 18; jpc. idem k Tnnit. li z, p. i6< Idea in MM. p, 49^.

Y 3 f'ftl*

pfile de SjnedU adverfw Arrianos fag. (mihi) 318. 319. and fully fheweth his thoughts that Councils have erred, and that even thofe of the Orthodox are to be tryed by the Apoftolical do&rine. And HL2.deTrinitatefag>i6,eol.2. he faith " {jCommen-44 dat autem fideibujw integritatemjkQ. The intcgri-" ty of this faith is commended by the Authority of "the Gofpel and Apoftolical doftrine — For this "foundation ftandeth ftrong and unmoved, &c.~] And he maketii it a remedy againft all Here-fies.

And in his Commentary oh tMat. Canon. 8- fag. 498. he faith "\_Igiturfect4ndttm h^c Ecclefnz intra " qu<u verbum *Dei mn vigilavcrit, naufraga [tint, " &c u e. The Churches in which the word of "God doth not watch, areftipwrackt.]

And moft fully lib. 4. de Trinitate fag. 31. col. 2. <c Nemim autem dubium ejfe cportct&Q. that is, No " man ought to doubt but that we muft ufe Gods "doftrine for the knowing of divine things. For <c humane weaknefs cannot of it felf attain the know-44 ledge of heavenly things. — It is God himfelfthat ** we muft believe concerning himfelf,and thofe things ct which he ofFereth to our knowledge, of himfelf, " muft we obey. For either we muft deny him as c ' the Gentiles do, ifwedifallowhis teftimonies; or cl if he be believed to be God, as he is, nothing of li God can be underftood , but as he hath witneffed lf of himfelf; Let mens own opinions therefore teafe c ? (or be laid by) and let not mens judgements extend "themfelves beyond Gods constitutions-*- For the " underftanding of fayings, muft be fetcht from the 4t caufes of the fpeech,becaufe the thing is not fubjeft '• to the woi-ds, but the words to the matter.1. ' And

And li 4.dcTrinitate y fag*29.col. i- when he flieweth chat the hereticks ufe to plead Scripture mif-undcrftood, he doth not fend them to Heme (or a judgement of the fence, but ftill concludeth '* [Re-^fftndendum e(fe exifiimo h&reticarum perverjitati,& u omnes eorum fiultax ac[mortiferxs inflitationes 8-" vangclicid atque Apofiolicis Ttftimwiis coarguen* " dot: That is, I judge that we muft anfwer here-ct ticks perverfenefs, and all their foolifh and deadly " inftitutions, by the teftimonies of the Gofpel and of the Apoftles.]

And the fame Hilary doth r ,., *» ± largiy perfwade to i clofe ^£%t* **» adhering to the Gofpe|, and the fum of Faith called the Apoftles Creed, without adding or altering, unjler any pretence of amending, and fheweth the divifi<}n$ and depravations that have followed fince the Cobncil of Nice would make one emendation, and on their example other Councils had made and mended, done and undoae foofc, that they had marr'd all by it: and he perfwadeth

the Emperor * to hearken * T . . , .

,-~ »i> • . r^^r \ c \.u It is a great doubt whe-

to the ancient Gofpel faith tne r this Book were wrk-and not to Synods, His te n in covJUntius his life words are in Epift. vel Lib. time or fince his death: *dGonftant. A*iufi. par.(E- ofwbich &* Hiemim. de dit.Parif. ) 307 308. where ^*M«Jj^-having (hewed how he had 7I4 , 7 ^/ B elUrmtn. de

Scripter.Ecclef.pag. (nibi) 8 j. But its plain by the Epiftle it felf, thatic was written as to Conftantius aliyc^ though its pofTible, as Hetttrmint con-je&ureth , that he might be dead 3 and Hi'Mry in France noc know it j For its clear that was wrinen a little before or afcer his d 3 ath , even the fame ycare tUc he dyed.

Y 4 erred

erred in looking after Councils, he faith tl £ Recog* ' 4 nefcefidem quam^ficc. that is, Reacknowledge that " Belief which thou defireft to hear from the Biflaops " but heareft not. For they of whom it is required ' c do write their own things, and do not preach the €i things of God ; they have drawn about an endlefs " and perpetual circle. For the modefty of humane '' infirmity fliould have contained all myfteries of " divine knowledge in thofe bounds of confcience < € onely, which he believed in, and not after a Belief confefled and fworn in Baptifm, in the name <c of the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft, to doubt or "ibnovateany thing elfe.—Under the improbable

'^,, . , . , "occaiion of this neceffity LS. ^ ' lt " * thc cuftome is come up of cc writing and renewing the " Belief Which after that it began rather to frame "new things, then to retain what, was received , it * c neither defended the old, nor confirmed the new, tc and Belief is now become rather (a belief;) of the u riwes than of the Gofpels ? while it is written ac-" cording to the years, and not held according to the cc Confellion of Baptifm. It is a moil perillous and fcC miferable thing, that we have as many Beliefs as " Wills- and as many Do&rines as manners; and * c that as many caufes of blafphemy fpring up, as '* there are vices. And when according to one God cC and one Lord , and one Baptifm , there is one Be-lC lief, we are fain from that Belief which is but one, 11 and white many are made, they therefore begin to " be ; that there may be none- For we are on both <c fides conftious, that fmce the meeting of the Coun-f-cilof Nice 9 we have wrote nothing but Bdiefct.

•f While there is quarrel about thc words ?.nd quefti-

U*9)

" ons about the newnefs, and occafion about the am-

4C biguityes, and complaints about the Authors, and

cc ftrife about the parties, and difficulty in confents,

c 'and while every one begins to bean Anathema to

cc another, almoft no one now is Chrifts. For we

"are carryed about fcry an uncertain wind of Do-

<c ftrine, and either while we teach we trouble ; or

" while we are taught we erre. And what is the

"change that is in the laft years belief? Thefirftde-

€, creeththat the.word hemcufien fliall be filenced :

" The next decreeth and preacheth the bewcufion :

" The third doth by indulgence excufe the word ufia

Qt which was limply before ufed by our fathers. The

" fourth and laft doth not excufe it, but condemn ir.

" and at laft its come to this, that there is nothing

<c remaineth eftablilhed and inviolable with us, nor

" * with any before us. And ^ _, _

" as for the likenefs of God u /^ Thac was fo whh

* c the Son to God the Father, Sj

11 it is the Belief of our miferable time, that he is not

"like in whole, «r but in part. We are excellent

"* judges (or Arbitrators) .

"fore 7 the feekers of the > £g* the Council, .. , ' % .,, . , . ot thole umes.

heavenly miiteries who do iC calumniate in our profeffions of the faith of God, c - we decree yearly and monethly Beliefs of God; we u repent of our decrees,we defend them, we Anathe-Cf matize thofe thac were defended, we damne other c ' mens matter in ours, or they damne ours in theirs^ " and biting one another, weareconfumed one of a-" outher. A Belief is again fought for,as if there were * "nobeliefe. A belief muft be written , as if it were " not in our hearts. -Being already regenerated by V faith,we are now tsught to believe : As though the

Rcge-

"Regeneration were without Belief. We learn " Chrift after Baptifm; as if B'aptifm could be any ^_ , 1Jt ''thing* without the faith of

BaS^T C ° ^ "#-?• 309. Among

cc thefe fhipwracks of faith, " the heritage of our heavenly patrimony being now " almoft profligate, it is the fafeft way for us to re-" tain that firft and onely Evangelical Belief confef-" fed in Baptifm and underftood , and not to change tc that good Belief which onely I have received and tc heard. Not as if thofe things which are contain-

* t-l. r -t c » r . " cc * * n c ^ e Council of our

* The Council of Mtcc s <c t- i * l j j

Fathers, are to be damned

" as irreligioufly and impiosfly written; but be-"caufe through mens ralhnefs they are ufed to con-" traduction, that foi this the Gofpel might fafely a be denyed under the name of novelty, as if ic " were innovated that it might be mended. That " which is mended alwayes effe&eth this, that while "every amendment doth difpleafe, every amend-<c ment may be condemned by a following amend-t: ment; asifnow,whateverit be,it were no amend• "ment of an amendment, but began to beacon* 44 demnation of it. In this much, O Emperor £**-"jlavtiw, I admire thee as of a bleffed apd Religious €< will, defiringa Belief onely according to what is . " written; and indeed juftly haftening to thofe

'«/" cc ver y ^ vor( j 5 0 f t he onely begotten God, " that thebreft capable of impartial folicitude, may t€ alfo be full of the knowledge of the words of ct God. He that refufeth this is an Antichrift : and 16 he that counterfeited it, is Anathemao But u this one thing I intreat of thee, — that the Council

" cil being prefent which now quarrels about the Be-€t lief, thou wile vouchfafe to hear me a few words, " of the Holy Scriptures, and I may fpeak with thee " of the words of my Lord Jefus Chrift , whofe ba-" nifhed man, or Priefl I am. •- O Emperor doft " thou feek a Belief I Hear it, notoutofnewpapers, " but out of the Books of God.—Remember, that it cc is not a queftion of Philofophy,but in the doftrine " of the Gofpel. I defire not audience fo much for ^ my felf as for thee, and the Churches of God. " Fori have my Belief with my felf, and need none u from without. That which I have received, I hold, " and I change not that which is of God. But yet " remember that there is no hereticke but doth falfly " pretend that he fpeaks that in which he blafphem-4< ech, according to the Scripture. — (Here he names " MarceUHS^hotinus^SdelliHs, Montanem , Ma-" nichtui , Marcion. ) They all fpeak Scripture M without its meaning; they pretend faith without "faith- For the Scriptures lie not in reading , but " in underftanding , nor in prevarication, but in "charity. Hear, I pray thee, what is written of " Chrift, left under them thofe things that are not "written "be preached. Submit thy ears to thofe "things which from (thefe} Books I (hall fpeak; " lift up thy faith to God: Hear that which profit-tc eth to Belief, to Unity, to Eternity. I will fpeak <c to thee with the honor of thy Kingdom and thy u faith, all things profitable to the peace of Eaft and M Weft : under the publike knowledge , under a dif-<c agreeing Council, under a famous contention, — I " will defend nothing to fcandal, nor that is without " (or befides) thc'Gofpel.] Here he reciteth a fhorc creed in Scripture words, efpecially about Chrift.

Iconfefslfearlamtootediousin thefe longctta* tions; but I do it, that the Papifts may not lay that we take particular words or (hreds of fentences, without the full fence. Here I defire that it may be noted, i. That Councils may erre and differ. 2.That they are fo far from being the authorized judges of our belief, that in HiUry.es judgement, their determinations have occasioned the ruine and dangerous divifions" of the Church. 3» And that this ts not oneSy true of the Arrian Councils; but©fthe Council of Nice it leif though its Belief were found,even bytthe novelty of terms \ and example for further innovating. 4. That Hilary never calls the Emperor to confqk with the Pope or Church of Rome as the authorized infallible judge, even when he pro-feflcth to tell him all that was neceflary to the peace of the whole Church Eaft and Weft. If it be faid, that this is becaufe Hereticks believed not if omes authority or infallibility; Ianfeer, It had then moft neerly concerned Hilary to teach it them, when he ' taught them aii that was neceffary to peace; efpeci-aily it that be the foundation into which the reft of our faithjnuft be refolved. 5. Laftly note, that it is only the word of God, and the ancient Baptifmal Creed which Hilary here calls them to for Peace and healing of all the worlds divifion.

. O fad-cafe that this advice was never taken ^ to this day i O happy Church when ever ic fhall be taken, and never till then.

And here becaufe I am afraid of wearying the Reader, and making thefe teftimonies unproportion-able to the brevity of thedifputation, I fhall forbear adding thofe that I thought to have added, yet af-furing any Paptll that readeth it, chat it is not for

want

( w )

want of more fufficient Teftimonics of the Fathers on our fide. For I had ready to tranfcribe in thole few books which ftand at my elbow , fufficient Tefti-monies (Chatter or longer ) in all thefe following Author* in their own writings, viz. Clemens Romanns , Ignatius, J#ftin Martjr, Irenaens the fuppofed T>io* nifim Areop y TertH/lian^Origin , Clemens Alexandr y AthenagorAs, Fatiantu, tArnobitu, AtbanAfius, La* Bantiu4 i JM<icar%Hi, Cjril. A/exand. Cyril. Hiero-foL Sjnefim^ Spipbanint^ Eufebim Cafarien/is, Chrj-foftomg) Gregorim Thauniat* Neocafar. Greg. Njffez> y XaftltHS SelencU, Ambrofe, Tbeoderet, Vamafcene , Iftdore Hifydl. Gau&entim UrixUmu^ Vincentitu Li. rinenfis, Salvianus AlaffiL Cafarim Arelatenf. Al-cHinns.vel All?inpu,Beda, Vigilitu, Joannes Afaxen-tius y Alcimns Avitmproffer, Fvlgentiw, Oectime-• mh$ 3 TheopbyUih. Bernard^ with many others, be-fides all before named: of whom, fome fpeak fully to the point, and all the reft call us to the word of God in Scriptures, for the refolution or ground of our faith , and not to the authority or infallibility of the Pope of Rome. I (hall onely itay fo long as to adde two or three of theeldeft (thoggh briefeft) and two or three Canons of lome Councils, becaufe there vyill feem more weight in their teftimonks. And for any Reader Papift or Protectant chat would have more Teftimonies to this end (to fee whether \i be Rowes authority or infallibility , or rather the Scriptures, that is the Teftimony which mult fupport our ftith, and is fir-ft to be known) I defirc thetn to read them ajready collected in Chamier, in Do&or Spit-live, iii Sibran£u4 Lubbertm de prineip. Chrift. Dog' mat. in CMmnititu , and Bcli^rmihe himfelf who re-dteth them out of Cbemniiiui , and prete»deth

('and

(su)

(and vainly pretendeth) to anfwter them, to whom

Lnbbertus, and many more of ours have therein rc-

plyed : B»t ipecially read that excellent Treatife of

Philip Mornaj Lord dn Plejfis of the Church.

_ . . Clemens Romanm in his E-Clemens Rom. ad Cmntb. p|ffle tQ the Cwi%thUn$ ufeth

not once to them any argument from his authority

and infallibility, which fure he would have done for

the healing of fo great a fchifme, if it had be^n true*

JSlaywhcn he doth earneftly preis them tofubmitto

and obey their own Presbyters, he never requireth

any obedience to himfelf'or to the Rowan* Church.

Nay fo far is he from taking any notice of any uni-

verfal Monarchy or infallibility in himfelf that he

doth not fo much as take notice of any Bifhop di-

ftinft from a Presbyter in their own Church, not

once call them to be determined by any fingle or fu-

pereminent Biftiop at all • but onely to obey theie

Biihops or Presbyters,

. Ignatius writing to the

Igmim a Rom. , RomMes caMh thm Jy

the Church Q whs &&vJ.&Yim h xrfit& %&&.* VfyMef* ] £j£f^s & prafedet in loco regioni* Romamrunf] or a$ Bifhop Vfber-s ancient Verfion hath it \_^f*f & fr<t-ftdet in loco chori Romanortfnf^ which is not a prefi • dency over the whole Church. And towards the end a he faith £ ftrtfjfcotfptiW c#rv? 1^5? Otffi- *? c*> Svff* lKKKti<ri&£ %th dvr \w iroia^i y$-m rZ wzxtT\f .e \_Mt-mores eftote in precibm vefiris EccUft* qua ffi in Syria , tjtt* fro me ^ jam Chrijfo Paflsre mitHr.^ls Hier. Vairlenint Styfoim interpreted it in his Edit.fag.69, I know chat ttosold vulgar Latin Edition, which is in Jcachimus Peridmmhls Edition,f4g. 494* andinBi-(hop Vfiers fHg. 89. tratoflfteth it Mementotein ora*

tianibtte

(3?5)

tionibus veftris illius qui pro we reUurm eft ecclefrm qm eft in Syria] as if it were his fucceflbr that he would have them pray for : But as Vairleniut , fo Vedelius alfo better tranflateth it Q Ecclefa qua eft in Syria , qua pro me jam Dsmino f afton utitttr. ] (Edit. VcdeL fag. 250.) AndBifhop Vfiers old La-tine Tranflation, is \_EccIefi<z qu*pro mepaftore Dei utitur. J And the next words are Q/w©- *i;tW Z7nmc7Mr*i ^ w 1//$/ fV ivrlv dy*?™] u e- \_& folm earn vifitahit & fit vtftra in eo dilettio] as the vulgar Latin Verfion, or Solus ipfam cur obit <vifitabitqne~\ As Vairleni$u and Vedelius: or rather as Bi(hop Vfh er\r old Latin verfion £S*lus ipfe (JefusChriftfis)vice Epifcopi fit ] From whence I gather that the Biftiop of Rome was not the Bifhop univcrfal of that Syrian Church, or elfc Ignatius ti Would have furc commended it to his care. 2. Or at leaft not have ex-prefly faid that Chfift onely was their Bilhop when he was gone.

Moreover, is it a probable thing that Ignatius would hare fo frequently and importunately have prefled the Church , that he wrote to in all his E-piftles, to be fubjeA to and obey their Biftiops, Pref-by ters and Deacons, and yet would never have given them one word of advice to be fubjed to, and obey the Bilhop of Rome , if the peace and unity of the whole Church, and the very faith and falvationof the particular members, had fo much depended ori this as the Papifts would pcrfwade xx%> Certainly a Negative Argument from the filence of the writers of thofe time?, is a fufficient confutation of the Ro-mifh ufurpation.

.« * r*f.. Volkarp in his Epiftle to

m (im , Mf *. a Pb,i. £he Pkiii / piaHS f 9 £ mdeth

that

that Church Qco be fub;e& to the Presbyters and Deacons as to God and Chriii] not mentioning any other fuperior Biftiop, much kfs an univerfal Bifhop to whom alio-they muft befiibjed. And whereas Yakns one of their Presbyters was fain ( with his wife) into fom? fin which felicarpe profefleth his forrow for, he doth not direft them to feek remedy it any higher power, bur perfaadeth them to reduce himthemfelvbs as a ftraying member. And having before mentioned divers hercfi.es of chofe times., be addech as the Remedy , not an advice of appeal to Rome , or to feeke for their determination , or to hold to their infallibility, but

[A/j c&7&ki7rofef TJJJ (AcLTZlol.ii'TX TCOV KvKXtoV y. fy 7tt*

yv i7nsp&luuev~2Le. [_ Wherefore leaving the vanity of many , and falfe doftrines,« let us return to that Word which from the beginning was delivered to us.] It is to the firft word, and not to Rome that this blefled Difciple of John doth fend the Philifpians for liability againft errors.

Iren&us is laid by Euftbius

SSmS^J* ec ~ (AS* m,n lc ap .26.)

to have (harply reproved

Vi&or for breaking the Churches peace, by excom-

~ L Mt , ~, . municatingthea^/r^Chur-

The A fa Churches. ^ abpu f Eafter day ( and

tells him that [The like was never heard of] and that [[his predeceffors did other wife] therefore ha took"no: Victor to be infallible.

And

Cm)

And it is apparent that all the Afian Churches who flood againftr*ffar and were excommunicated by him, did little dreary that, he was the univerfal Bi-ihop or infallible. Nay their Bifhops \_ fharply reprehend him and their werdsare yet extant]] faith Eufebius.

Moreover in the fame Chapter of Eufebhts it is expreflfed by Iren&iu to ViEt .,..

or, that PeliearpthtBikiple FQb '" h tMi

of John differed from tsfnicttnt, and neither of them could be perfwaded to alter his opinion. Therefore Tolicarp never dream't, cither that Che Remane Bi-fhop was infallible, or was his Governor, whom he (hould obey.

And its worth the reading in the 24. and 25. Chapters of Eufebim , how confidently Policrates oppofeth Vittor^ alledginga General cuftome from theApoftles, andrefolveth never to change his cU-ftome : And the Bifhops and Churches here in Eng* land , did follow the fame cuftome, and differ front Rome.

And in the 28 Chapter Eufebitu rQentioneth an ancient writer, that oppofed the herefie of ' Anem$n % and whereas they alledged that ill the Bifhops of Rome till Zefhjrinw were of their raind, and preached it, even Viftor hia>felf (that is, againft the Godhead of Chrift)he anfwereth them thus "[This iC peradventure might fcem to have fome likelihood

of truth , if it were not oppugned, firft of all by

the holy Scriptures, next by the books of fundry <c men long before the time of Vittor~\ As fufiin , MiltUdes y Tatianns , Clemens , and IrenMs. So that this old writer fuppofed it no impoffible thing for a Bilhop of Rome to have taught herefie,

Z And!

c«

C«8)

And in the very conclufion of the Chapter and Book Stijebins recites many more of the words of that old writer among the whif h there arc thefc a-gainft the hereticks of thofe times for prefuming to correct andfo deprave the Scriptures, which me-thinks, (hould touch the Romanifts to the quicke : " ^Belike they are altogether ignorant whatprefum-c * ption is pra&ifed in this wicked deed of theirs. For " either they perfwade themfelves that the holy Scri-Cf ptures were not indi&ed by the inftindfc of the "Holy Ghoft, and fo are they Infidels, orelfethey cc think themfelves wifer then the Holy Ghoft; and tC what other thing do they in that than Chew them-<c fcives poffeffed of the Devil? j

So that if we muft go to die Arbitration of the Pope to know whether the Scriptures were indited by the Holy Ghoft. We muft go to him to know whether wc muft be Infidds or not? For they that deny this ;arc Infidels. But I hope all the world will not remain Infidels, till they know the Arbitrement of the Pope, or till his Authority move tbem to be Chriftians.. For itsanimpoffibilicy and contradiction , that any man faouid believe in Chrifts pretend* cd Vicar, ag his Vicar, and believe an authority and infallibility which he oi» his Church of Rome hath re* ceived from Chrift, before they believe in Chrift himfelf.

Kow TertHUian lib. de PttMcitiac. 21. takes up the Pope, if he pretend to his pardoning power r rGra 'Do tibi cUves , oxfupra banc Petram , I (hall For brevity refer you ro the place in him.

And Ongtn upon Math on the words, is large and full againft them, I refer yoa to the words cheoi-csinlum.

(m)

I conclude this ranke of teftimonies in the words f&TertnllUn V Credent fine Scrtpturu nt crcdant control t l r

Seripturti ] They believe without, the Scripture, that they may believe againft the Scriptures. . Had Scripture been forth* Pope and Papilis, then the Pope and they would have been for Scriptures; and then we might hare fpared all this ado. But becaufe it is againft them, no wonder if they be againft it.

I (hall next give a touch more of fome paflages of Councils concerning this controverfle. And firft it is known that the firft Councils did commonly decree that appeals fhould ht from a Biihop to a Synod , or the Metropolitaae, and that if the Synod of Comprovincialsdifagreed.that the Metropolitant fhould call fome of the next Province to aflift them, and that was die higheft , unlcfr there were a more general Cour.cil, as ConciL *Antiocktn. Gan. 14. and divers more, beyond doubt, declare : So that here was no appeal to the Pope. Yea in the 6. Canon of that Council of Antioch, it is decreed that till an offending Pricft, Deacon, or Layman, be reconciled to his own Bi(hop, or elfc have given fatis* fa&ionto a Synod, that no other Bifhopfhall receive hira : fo that Rem it felf may not receive him ; much lefs abfotvc him.

Alfointhe 22. Canon of the fame Council (and in many other Councils) it is decreed that no Biflaop ihall come into the City of another Biftiop, not fub-jed to him abeut ordination, and if they there ordain any, it (hall be void, and they (hall be qucfti-oned by a Synod. And Cbryfofieme hereupon com-plainethof Tht$pbilus Patriarch of Alexandria, for

% 2 exer-

ta&tUtng authority at Confitntintple , out of his own jurifdi&ion, contrary to the Canons; as may be feen in his firft Epiple to Pope Innocent. I know they pretend that by that Epiftle he yet acknowledged Innocents fuperiority and jurifdidion : As if a man might not make his moan , or feek all poflible relief from any that are capable of helping them , without refped to fuperiority or jurifdidion; It was Rcmes gve&tntk and intereft in the Emperor and others , and not a univcrfal jurifdidion, that made Innocent feem capable of affording fome faelp to * „,., - f ^Chryfofiome. But thus »*-

abi^odo ^ thGWa$n0t ronius the Popes Annalift, where ever he findeth but a letter writen totheBifliop of Rome, or his advice or help in any thing defired , doth prefently conclude that they acknowledged in the Pope nniverfde regimen , an univcrfal Government. ( And by the like reafon many another fhould be univcrfal Governor as well as he,

Moreover, in thethird Council of Carthage Can. 26. it is decreed ^Vt prima fedit Epifcopus nonap, pelletur princepsjacer-doturn, aut fum-musfkcerdos 9 ant tiliqxid htijufmedi, fed tantum prima fedis Epifcopus~\ that is [[That the Bifhop of the firft feat fhall not be called the chief of the Priefts, or the chief Prieft, or any fuch thing, but only the Bifhop of the firft feat.]

One would think that this were as exprefs againft Rmes ufurpation, as can be fpoken. But they that nwft be the interptm of Scripture becaufe it fpcaks not plain enough, muft be judge of Councils too, which it feemscsn fpeak no plainer then Scripture, till the Pope have taught them to fpeak anew.

Or

(340

Or if plainer may be" (of the power as well as th c name) let us hear thc Council of MiUvis (of winch faith "Profper^ %AnrtUrn was the Captain, and Ah-gnftine the ingeninm : And Baronim faith that Angti* fiine was magna pan a great part of the Council, and by reafon of his great abilities and intereft) Whether there were two Milevitane Councils, as Baronies not improbably thinks, or but one, it much matters not : The Canons are now ufually commixt as if they were one, and undoubtedly the true Canons, and fo that which is now the 22. Canon runs thus ^^Item placuit nt PresbyterifViaconi^vel cat'eriis in-c4 feriores clerici incaufis qua* habnerint , fidejudi* €l til* Epifcoforumfuorum qtt<sftifuerint,vicini Epif-iC copi eos audiant, & inter eos qmcquid eft finiant ad-H hibiti ab eis ex confenfu Epifcoporum fnorum. J^uod <c ft & ab eisprovocanckum putaverint , nonprovocent ct m[i ad African* concilia , vel ud Primates provinci* cc arum/varum, Ad tranfmarina antetn qui puta* M vkrit apptllandum> a nulh intra Africam in com* ''mmionemfufcipiatHr.'] That is [[It feemethgood <c that Presbyters, Deacons, and the other inferior " Clergy , if in their caufes they complain of the " judgements of their Bifhops, : neighbor Bifhops ' c (hall hear them, and being ufed by them with their "Bifhops confent, (hall end whatever is between lc them. But if they think good to appeal from " them, they may not appeal but to the Africane " Councils, or to the Primates of their Provinces. <c But if any think to appeal to thofe beyond Sea, il * let none in Africkjzz&vz .. _,'

"him into communion. I Th« is, to Raw or

,-r, r -J any enher.

1 ben it was a matter of ex

communication to appeal to Rome , and confcquent<

z 3 ly.

(S4*)

ly, to acknowledge their univerfal Government : and now it is become efTential to a Church, and to % Chriftian to believe it.

JThe General Council of CmU Hu. C*n. 6, ^ bcferc ^ ^ ccording

to fuch Canons as are now extant) C. 6. doth give the Patriarchs of ^Alexandria power over Egyft , Libia & Tentapolu, qmniam quUem & Efifcofo Rctn.tno farilu mos eft, Becaufe the Biihop of Rome hath the like cuftome, fo that the Biftiop of Rome is equalized with them , and his power reftrained to his own Patriarchate, uv the Scchfi* fttburbicari* (of the extent whereof read Salmafiw his learned Trea-tife againft Sirmcndm de Ecclefiis fubuarbieariis ) which was fo plain to Cttfanm a Cardinal of Rcme y that it made him fay,hercupon u \_Videmus quantum " Rcwzyiiu Poraifex nitrafacrds obfervationes, ex ufa " <l & ccnfuctHdwe fubjeftion* n ' alts wedientta hoaie vcqmji-

u yif\ That is QWe fee how cc much the Pope of Rome hath arthis day gotten be-' c * yond the facred obfervations by ufe and cuftome " of fubje&ional obedience.^ And Hank. Car anna having mentioned this Canon in his fumm* Cencil. p. ^8. had no other evafion but this, that among all the Greek and Latin Copies which he fearched, Cardinal MarctUm a Legate at the Trent Council, (hewed one Latirre Copy that had QMetropolitane]] in-ftead of \JRomancT\ But is this much to the purpofe? Or if it were, is one Latin Copy in a Cardinals hand more credible then all the red in the world, that have come to light ?

In.the 6. Council of Carthage^ Awe litis heard it and %An$ujlise was there, and there they again determined

tcrmined that the Bilhop of Rcme fbould not receive the Priefts or excommunicate perfons that appealed to him. And they give this as the Reafon **LJ%!*} a hoc null* patrvm, SccJ2 That is QBcl cl this was never derogated from the Africke Church <: by any definition of our Fathers, and the Nicene "Decree do commit both the inferior Clergy, and " and the Biftiops chemfeives to their Metropolitans. i; For they aRoft prudently and juftly provided that tf all bufmefles fhould be finilhed hi the places where " they were begun.- and the grace of the holy Ghoft •; will not be wanting to each, province : Let this e-iC quity be conftantly and prudently obferved by 4C Chrifts Priefte: cfpeciaily feeing every man hath "leave, if he be offended,with the judgement of " the known, to appeal to a Council of his Province, <c or to a General Council. Unlefs there be any man ic that can think that God can infpire a Juftice of Try-" al into any one perfon, and deny it to innumerable ci that are congregated in Council.]

And whereas the Biftiop of Rome would have fent his Legates into thofe parts, to take cognifancc of their affairs, they anfwered £ Vt aUqtii tanqnam a " tutfanffitatu latere ad nes mitt ant ur^ nnlUinw " nimmVatrum Sjnodo€onflitHtHnT\ That is [[That c| any (hould be fent againft as Legates from your " fan&ity, to us, is a thing which we find not cdn-ci ftituted by any Synod of the Fathers] But here Gratian hath falfified the Canon, by the addition of a [Saw t$ the See of Rome'} where the Milevi-tan Canon is repeated : In which manner they have ufed too much of the Churches records.

Z 4 Can

(144)

Can we think that Auguftine and the reft of the Bilhops in thefe Councils did not underftand what they did, and purpofly reftrairi the Romdne ambi* tion ? y

The cafe alfo which is related in Auguftine between the Catholikes and the Donatifts Ihcws how far they were in thofe dayes from dreaming of the Re* ^^^decifive judgement. The great controverfie was, who had the true Church the Donatifts, or the Catholikes? And the Donatifts great Arguments were, that Cacilian had been ordained by Traditors, and therefore his party-and thofe that communicated with them were not the Church nor to be communicated with. Mark now how the Catholikes plead ibis caufe. i. They pr<Jcure it heard by the Emperors Cogmtor^JMarcellinm ; and ngt by the Pope. 2.. They never once fetch their proof that the Catho-like Church was theirs from their agreement with Rome^ or fubje&ion to the Pope ,* nor once in all their mention of the Catholike Church do give the Popilh defcription of ir, or fetch it from the Romane Biihop as the head; but ever & over again they prove that their Church is the Catholike Church becaufeit is [That which beginning at ferufitlem, istranfufed over all the world.] and frequently they give this fame defcription of it, and hence prove it oat of Scripture, as is apparent in Aujiins writings at large. They never fay, the Catholike Church is the Romanc or th&t which fubmkteth to the Pope. 3. Note (which is the chief thing that here I do intend) that it was publicly proved in the conference that firft Melchiades Biihop of Rome , with other Biihops were appointed to hear the bufinefs between Dwa-iiu a nirris Cafis. and Cacllm au, and that thev ah-

(M5)

folvcd CAcUiMuijktA condemned Bonatns And rfien that the Bonatifis refted not here but appealed to the Emperor, and the Emperor caufed a certain num-ber of Biftiops to meet at Aries to hear oVcr all the caufc again , and thefe Biftiops not agreeing (though they were moft of them againft Donatus ) the Emperor Conftantinevtzs fain to determine the matter himfelf, who abfolvcd Tdix and C&cilianus, and condemned the Donatifts, yet giving them liberum arbitrinm , as it was called then, or Liberty of con-fciencc, as it is called now. So that the Bifhop of Rome afteth but as appointed with others; and his judgement is not that higheft from which there is no appeal; for the Biftiops at Aries muft judge of all a-gain, and the Emperor after them. Of all this fee AHgnfiine in TirevicuLCollation enm ^^.throughout , fpecially pag. 288. ( Sdit. Pari/. ) & lib. ad Donatift.foft. fotUtien. cap* 3 3./>*£. 245.

I fhall onely adde to thefe Teftimonies foregoing , the witnefs of fome of their own party. I have before (hewed that one part of their Church denyeth the Popesinfattibility, and the either a Councils: and that they are not agreed about the ultimate refolution of their faith. Their Cardinal Nic> Cufanus ti. de Concord. Cathol. c.13. & 34. maintaineth that QAHBiftiopi arc equal as to the jurifdiftion , though not as to the execution, becaufe the executive exercife is reftrained by eertain pofitive bounds , and that for the better, to bring men to God,\diich when it ceafeth,the pofitive rights ceafif] And hwfaith that in time of neceffity a fim pie Prieft may ablolve even one that is excommunicated by the Pope; And concludeth that the Papacy is but of Pofitive rigt.tj and chat both it, and all Majority a-

mong

(146)

mongBi(bopsiscohftitutedby fobjecViooal cenfent, that the power of binding andlofing is immediately from Chrift , and therefore that Priefts are equal, and that thedifticAion of Diocel^and that a Biftvop fkould be over the Presbyters, arc of pofitive right: And that Chrift gave no more to Pettrthento the reft of the Apofties, nor faid more to him then to them. Yea and he aiidetb, that if theBifhop of Trt-vers were by the congregate Church chofen to be their Prefident at)d head, he ftiouid properly be more the fuccefifor of Titer then the Bilhop of Rome-2 Tnis is l' lain dealing for a Cardinal.

* That the like paflages are *Q<cbm&'Almti«eiH}. f re q U ent in Gtrftn'is A) well ftnt. D. ft4.C««*. dub. *. known that j neec j n0t menti . There arc many heretical , » j • /-.. j- i

Decretal, Mpb «. < :*fir, ©n them. And in Cardinal

aiv.htr.i. ..cA.tfilltwf. de AlUco , and many other

Dtit.fii.i x.ar. t.c-ig. Cardinals , Biftiops , and

§ i. § 38. .v. 4. u*. Schoolmen of their own, the

CttLAeAlliut it reform. ^ ff „ kn

Ecclcf. *«*» f*/t. * and I of fc^ ^^^^ tha »

Me$ ut jim korrenitm I (hall forbear tQ recite them. quoruHdam froverhium eft

al tun ftmtxm dcvcmjje EtcUfam, ut nonfit iigu *([} nip fer ft-^robosinquit Card, di sAHiica*

I bave oft times obferved how they have aliedged Dttrandus 9 as pleading that tRe laft refolution of # our faith is into this primo creditttm, that the Church is guided by the holy Ghoft, and that therefore we believe the Scripture to be Gods word e. g. the Gof-pel of Matthew rather then that ofNicodcmus , be-caufe the Church approveth it, who is guided by the fpirit. Bat I find that even there Durandiis deftroy-

cth

eth the Romane caufe. For he immediately addetb, that "£H*£ ^wi dittum eft de apfrobatione Scripture €e per Ecclefiam intelli^turfolum de Ecclefta qua fat * tempore Jpeftolorum , qui fuermt repleti fpiritn "fan&o, & nihilominus vikermt MiracuU Cbrifti €c & andiermt ejus dottrinam, & ob hocfuerunt con-44 venientes tejies omnium qua Chrift fts fecit «ptt do&uit " ut per eornm teftimoninm

*<fcriptur<i continentfaUa& ® u " ndm **(*»• & f. " di8* Chrifti apprtbtretur-] *$ z *' *' »• P*&- ■*' That is, "[This which is "faid of the approbation of the Scripture by the <c Church is onely meant of the Church which was " in the times of the Apoftles 9 who were filled with " the Holy Ghoft, and alfo faw the Miracles of "Chrift , and heard his daftrine , and therefore ° were fil witneffes #f all that Chrift did or taught "that by their teftimony ** c the Scripture containing "the deeds and words of V *tJ*-' r ?\ 8? iin ' Chrift, might be approv- Cm . Thai future g^

Ce ed]] cils may abrogate that

. which was unjuftlydone in former , and that they may erre.

This he proveth from Scripture [ and concluded], chat the Gofpels which thatChureh approved cannot nowbercje&ed, beeaufe there is not the like caufe and that \Jmmo tenens contrariftm htrcticus eft ch* jufcunqtieftatHS aut conditions exiftat^ [[Yea he that holdeth the contrary is a heretick, of what ftate or condition foever he be] Not excepting the Pope himfelf. Is this liker the do&rine of Papiib or of ! Proteftants ?

Yea ons word to Mafxer Knot and thofe of his

pria-

ciplcs?, that will rcfolve their faith into the Miracles

of the prefent R&me Church. If thofe Miracles which

they glory in be indeed regardable, then the Church

of Rome is not infallible ; for the author of thofe

Miracles do witness them u be fallible. The old Saint

Anfiin and the reft of his time and before, whofe te-

ftimonies about Miracles they bring in, as I have fuf-

ficiently proved are agamft their ufurped junfdi&ion

and infallibility. Their Saint Maud faith,that the Ro-

mane Church (hall ere long Apoftatize from the faith

totally and openly, which did obfeurely Apoftatize

of a long time before. Their Saint Elizabeth faith,

That Chrift the head of the Church cryeth out but

A11 ^ ,. . his members are dead : that

M\mfrt&m tnferem. fhc Apofto]ike fcat ispoffcf .

fed with pride, and the flocks go aftray. The fup-pofed Prophet Abbat Joachim faith " QThere is yet # another figtree withered by the curfe of prevari-" cation; the Latin Church, or the Ship of Peter, <: whofe temporal leaves are made covers to excufc " fin, with which both Adam the Pope, and S*/e the "fubje&sof the Church do S:c many of the Papifti cc coycr t hedi(hoAefty6f their cited againit themifeives gc v j t li uj

by Dodo* SttlivcdeEe. ^ j. t and miferably hide

<?/«/.<?. i i.pt* 55.^,57. themfelves in the wood

" of Ecclefiaftical Glory, 3

BatI will trouble my felf and the Reader with no

more of this work , fearing that I have trefpaffed

in doing more than needs in fo plain a cafe, already.

I will therefore (hut up all that I have to fay from

humane Teftiraonyjwith the words of Chrjfoftom(oT

whoever clfe is the author of the imperfed work on

Math. ) and his own certain expreffions elfewhere.

In the lm$znz&Comment.(£dit.CQmm2Lan.i6i7.)

in Math. 20. Horn. 3 5. par. 900.901. it isfiid as follow- °JZ ,TlL m ' k -«h ,» iFruSlurr, bumlitatu """"■ ** >°°- ,8 " ^terreftria p$fuit primatum ealeftem, & primatw Ci terreftris fruBum 9 pofuit confuftonem c ale ft em. " M*}£*nque ergs defideraUpriwatum c deft em , fe~ u quatur humlitatetn terreftrem; qnicnnque atitem * deftderat ^ primatumin terra, inveniet confufionem " in calo: at jam inter fervos Chriftt nonfit de prima* " tncertamen\ That is £ He hath made the Celeftial u primacy to be the fruit of terreftrial humility : and u the fruit of earthly Primacy, lie hath appointed to " to be Celeftial confufion*. " = ^ L , "Whefoever therefore dc- l^lll'' " fireth Celeftial primacy let <c him follow terreftrial humility : but whofocver de-" fireth Primacy on earth , (hall find confufion in €€ heaven: That fo a mong the fervants of Chrift ** there may be no ftrifefor Primacy.]

And afterward he addeth \JPrimatum autem Ec-a cleftaftieum concafifcere, neque ratio eft mque can* "fa : quia neqnejuftum eft, mque utile : £fuit enim <c japieus nitre Je fubftcere feftinat fervituti, labori, *'dolori, &quodtnaJH4 eft, periculo tali , nt detra* tc tionem pre omni Sccleftaapud juftum judicem, nift "forte qui nee credit judicium Ifei, nee timet, uti u abutens primatu fuo EcclefiaHico feculariter , c$n-" vertat eum wfecularem.'] That is £But to defire " an Ecclefiaftical Primacy , there is neither reafon tc nor caufe, becaufe it is neither juft nor profitable: " For what wife man will voluntarily baftcn to fub-" jeft himfclf to fervitude, labor, grief, and which ''is more to fuch a danger, as to be accountable to " the righteotis judge for all the Church ? unlefs it

be

€i be one that perhaps doth neither believe the judge-<€ merit of God, nor feareth it, that abufing fecu-" larly his Ecclefiaftical primacy, he may turn it into Ci a fecular.J One would think this ftiould be plain enough againft the Papal ufurpation | If they tell me that this is none of Ch\y[oftomts works , hut fome hereticks j I anfwer, When they have ufe for it, they can magnific it. Let their Sixtus Senenfis words be weighed which are printed before this book, cfpccial* ly what he faith of fome ancient Copies, which have the errors onely in the Margin, written by fome jlrrUnhand, and wichall that it is very obfervable, that the errors are fo intermixed, that yet you may take them out, and not maim any of the fence, but leave the reft entire, yea they feem as parentbentical or fuperfluous, and then conje&Hre whether yet it may not be Cryfoftomes : But whofe fo ever it is, it is ancient, and commonly much commended. But let tlut'go which way it will, as long as in the undoubted works of Crjfoftome there is over and over again the like* In his Homil- 66. alias 67. %n Mat t 2,o.pag.

^ 577. he faith " [[They that

Cbrjfofi. tu&lvb zo. c^ cck Primacy arca dil Y Horn 6i>Gm.G6. V M& se rh*mfclw« nof

'* knowing that by this u means thev (hall thraftjthemfelvcs into the loweft] S flare. The Hke he hath in Hemil. on Math. 18. I ftiai! now (em it to the confederation of the impartial , by tins fmal tafte of the judgement ©f former tmes, whether the Romane infallibility &nd umverfal government were a thicg known [to the Church of Cfcrift of old, or yielded as foon as amh>. ought? And whether this be a

fit ground for to to build eur faith upon, or

re*

(150

refolvc it into ? And if any would fee more of the refiftancy of their ufurpaiions, even when it was at the higheft, he may read in Mich. Goldafiiu a multitude of Volumes, that will give hira further information : or inBiftiop Vfier de $Hcfie$. &ftat. Ecclef. he may find enough in narrower room.

Thelaft part of this difputatiori fhould confi&of an anfwer to the Popifh Arguments for their caufe : but I can find fo little irf any of their writings thats worthy to be taken notice of, more then what is anfWered before, thatlfhallnot need to ftand lo*ig upon this.

They tell us that, if cur Church be not infallible, then people havefmall reafon to hear us or regard us ? or to tnift their falvaciot? on the dof&rine which we deliver to them, fedng for ought we know, or they know, we may but deceive them, asbein||firft our felves deceived; fo that this makes way to infi* I delity or uncertainty of the faith , if the Church be not infallible»

This is their all, the fir ft md laft, for ought I can find (thats worth the repealing ) and of how little value this arguing is, me thinks fhould be very eafie to apprehend.

i. Look back to the ftatingof the Queftion, and remember how far we fay the Church is fallible, and how far infallible,andit may fuffics to confute all this.

2. Its not all one to be abfolutely infallible, and to be a&ualiy Not-miflaken. Nor to be certain of fame things, and to be certain of all things that bughc to be known or believed : Mor to be cer-'ain by fuch external evident of verity and internal

(31*)

nal grace, as is ordinary to the faithful, and to be certain by a pretended priviledge above all the reft of the world; even knowing the conclusion as fuch without knowing the medium. We are certain that Scripture: is Gads word : and certain that we are certain; and therefore pro tempore infallibly certain : And if we (hould fay that we are certain that no true Believer (hall ever fall from this certainty, we {hould fpeak more agreeably to the Proteftant do-ftrine then to yours, who fay that they may fall a-way. And we maintain that there is ftill an Objective certainty or Infallibility (if I may ufe the word aftively) in the word of God and every fentence of it, which* can never fail, if our faith (hould fail. And we can manifeft to our hearers fuch grounds of their belief, as are infallible t and will never deceive thpfe that truftiji them

Your argument therefore moft vainly fuppofeth i that nibiis faith muft be grounded on the word and credit of their Teachers, and that therefore they canhavenoftronger a faith, then is anfwerable to our credit with them. But its no fuch matter : It is Gods Veracity and not ours that is the formal ob jed of the hearers faith: We do not defire (as it feems the Papifts do) that they (hould take their faith on truft from us , and believe all on our words. We do but reveal to them that word of God 9 which is the ground of faith ; and we prove it to be the word of God, and (hew them that in it which will prove it feh to be fo : fo that as long as ourReafons,. Proofs, Evidences are infallible, what neceflity is there that the fpeaker muft be infallible, and that in every thing that ought to be believed ? Are all the "Preachers.of the fami/h fa&ion infallible ? You will

fav„

fay, no, your felves. Muft they not therefore be heard? Or may notthedo&rine which they preach beget a certain belief in the hearer? You will, I know, with one voice, fay, that it may and doth. How then do fallible men agiong you, by preaching bring men to an infallible faith (infantum) and why may it not be fo with us? Will yod fay that you preach in the name of the Pope who is infallible? Why but, how do your hearers know that; Muft they take it on the preachers word, who proclaim-eth himfclf fallible ? Why then, may they not as well take it on our words that Chrift and Scripture is infallible ! When we fay, we preach in Chrifts name, as confidently as you fay that you preach in the Popes name? and fo your do&rine and ours fhould be both uncertain , if both retted on the fallible preachers word. But if you will not bid your hearers take your word, but will undertake to de-monftrate to thtm by cogent evidence, thac you are fent by the Pope, and thac he is infallible, and thac you fpeak nothing but what he infallibly warranteth you to fpeak ( all which will be incumbent on you to prove) then will we much more eafily and truly prove, that God is true and that Scripture is his word (which is all that is incumbent on us to prove; feeing an infallible word, of an infallible God, mutt , be heard, how fallible foever we may be) fo that you might eafily fee, if you would that your task is incomparably harder then ours (evenas much as to prove a falfhood is harder then to prove a truth.^

How will you approve of fuch reafoning as your own in other cafes! What if ten men that have been at a fight, come home and tell yotf, which fide had

A a the

the better ? though they are all fallible , may they not poffibly give you fuch infallible proof of whan they fay, as may make it certain ? What if all the Lawyers in the Land are fallible men, yea and all o-ther men in the Land; and do not know all things, nor all that fhould be known about the Lawes? Doth it follow that thefe fallible men, may not infallibly know themfelves and infallibly prove to others, even by certain hamane teftimony, uncapable of deceit, that this or that is indeed a ftatute Law of the Land made by King and Parliament? Do all men hold their lands and lives by Law, and fo many dye at the Gallows by Law , and yet is it uncertain whether they be the Laws iudeed or not , and all becaufe the men that fay fo, are not infallible ( and all are dead that faw them made!) Why but a man may be certain of many a thing that yet is no: infallible in all things, nor in all that he ought to know. Your argument therefore is ftrong againft your (Stores, who refolve mens faith into humane credic f but its nothing a-liainft us , who refolve it- into Gods veracity , and teach not men to take all uppn truft from our bare words. It is fiifficient that God is infallible when we per fwade thejgj to believe , and that we can infallibly prove to them that the Scripture is Gods word, and what itcontameth in the points of neceffity to falva-tjton, We can without infallibility in all other matters, infallibly prove to them what God required! .them to Believe and Do as NccdTary to Salvation.lt is the infallibility of our proofs.and not of our bare words, that is neceffary to mens belief. But the Papifts exped: their milled flock fhould take their bare word, and fd make the faith of their followers, a humane faith- and to blind thebufiriefs they pretend

(w)

tend co a certain infallibility as if their fayings were Divine.

Men will makeufe of Phificiaifs for their bod:V-though they be not tfffal vjnight

they do it with encouragement, iF they could infallibly tell them the true cure of every rnonal difeafe , though there were an hundred fmaller difeafes that they could not cure , or a hundred queftionsin Anatomy and about/The nature of difeafes which they could not refolve. Why then fhould men conceit that the Miniftry is vain that is not infallible- andknowethnot all things. Hath Gods Church been without infallible ordinary guides from the creation to this day, andwemuft now begin to feign a Neceflity of their infallibility? Let it be [efficient that God, and the extraordinarily infpired Prophets and Apoftlcs are infallible , and that we have Teachers that can infallibly prove to us what he- requireth of us in his words in points of Neceffity to our everlafling happinefs.

And for themfelves, pietending to infallibility makes them not, nor procureth them infallible, whereas their voluminous errors , and the wicked pradices grounded thereupon , and their frequent felfcontradi&ions and mutations, do pro» claim aloud to the world that they are both de-ceivable, deceived and deceivers : while the holy Scriptures whofe fuffieiency they deny is by themfelves confefled to be of infallible verity.

We are refolved therefore by the grace of

God, in a bufinefs of fuch moment as the ever-

lafting faviag or lofing of our fouls to yintfire

(556)

and bottom all our Hopes*on that word of God vvhofe infallibility they confefs, then on the words of men who pretend to infallibility, and notorioufly declare the vainty of thofe pretences.

Some

cWa fiftj C.^SJiO' CsKfr tP^fe*V «*£?4

£0/^ W0>r 0/ *^ 5w* 0/ Antiquity in the main Controverfie between us and the Pa-fifts , to declare further who it is that is of the New Religion,

CYrill.HierefoL Catechef 4. SeB. defpiritufantto, pag. (Edit. Parif. 163 1.) 30. A« ytf 7ne\ tw Se-'.av )y dyluf n$ wt$za<; {jLuwpaVyStc.

i. e. For concerning Divine things, and the holy myfteries of faith, nothing, no not the fmalleft thing ought to be delivered without the Divine Scriptures; nor to J)e brought forth by fimple probability , nor by *t3l

a train of words. Nay do If the TonRue of man not fimply believe me my felf " n > ak P Iain thls ,$ when I fpeak of thefe things to thee, unlefs thou receive a demonftration of the things which I fpeak from the Divine Scriptures For the very fafety of our faith, refteth not on the elegancy of fpeech, but on the proof of Divine Scriptures.]

And pag. 36. SeB de Sacra Script, he telleth you what Scriptures he meaneth earneftly diffwading from the Apocryphal books, and numbering the feme oneiy which we own as Canonical, fave that he faith Q.fsptyu'g puiT ^4is^% *& Sfltxiw K&i li&qhw \ ariil omittech the E'pift. to Hebrews and the Apocalypfe

A a 3 A&&

And CatecheJ.17.fAi.191- Ke fetli CMdwe now alio ingenioufly corifcfs that we will not ufe humane reafonings; but will only commemorate thofe things which are in the holy Scriptures: for this is moft fafe as Saint IW, i.Cor. 2.4.

And Cattclatf. 1%-fAg. 220, 221, 222. See how he defcribeth the Catholike Church without the leaft intimation of the R omane defer ipripn.

Augufi. Cart, lit eras Pttiliani li. 3. cap. ,6. fag.

Edit.l>ari(.\Z7-) tiLt.

\_Prei«defivede Chrifto, Jwede ejus Scclefia, Jive de quacttnque alia re qu& per' Note here, 1. That it is, tinet fid f,dem utr&mque no-Fedefu vel qumnque re a- « Km j icAm mJ 4 _

hi, that Atijlm (peaks, J ,. . . A .

t That ifs im cLibm, 1 M »E mi P 4ra r n ?>" 1** dtxtt > and therefore not an Ap- Licet il n©S, Jed mntm quod gument onely for fuch as Jecuttu adjecit, Si Angelus de deny the Church and c3e j 0 vobis annunciaverit pre-ragarg«m«#. ?.Sodo terc , mm quo d in Scripturis

we procure the tiamesor , Vl or - 11 •

Popifii hatred. kgalibus & Evangeltus acce-

^ piltis, anatfiema fir. ti^c

4. So may wc (ay [As if vobifeum & cum oimibm

we bau bid rhe tfpoftks quos Chrifio lucrati cupimus

fuc nothing in the Bible aBitantes^ Atque inter €*tera

Dei lieru promtjfam legimm

{frjictttprcmijj* efi in omnibus giniibus reddi cerni-

mm^ prtdicdntes, ab iu quos ad ejus pdcificumgre-

attrahi cupimm^ pro aftione vratutrttm flainmas

innm odiorum."^ That is ^Moreover, whether

it be of Chrift , or of his Church, or of any other

which pcrtaineth to our faith and lift, I fay

not

(W)

not Eifwel who are not to be compared to Mm who fiid [Though fte] but tfrat which be next added [If an Angel from heaven (forfl preach toyouany other thing then that which you have received in the Scriptures of the Law and the Gofpel, let him be accurf-ed. While we deal thus with you and with all men whom we defire to win to Chrift, and among other things, do preach the holy Church, which we find promifed in Gods Scriptures, and which we fee to be placed in all Nations as was promifed, we have defer ved (or procured) the flames of hatred from thofe whom we defire to draw into its pacifike bofome in ftead of thanks.] And he proceedcth [as if it were we chat fo loag before had bid the Prophets and A-poftles that they (hould not put in their books any Teftimonies, by which the faftion (or party) of 'Donatm is proved to be the Church of Chrift.]

ThcEpiftle/t^ Dcmetriaa&m commonly reckoned the 142. among Atsgufiir.es cap. 9. faith [Sciioita-cjite in Scripturis divine (per cjhos folas potts flenam Dei intelligere voluntatem)&CQ.~\ By the Divine Scriptures alone thou maift underftand the full will of God.] I know the Lovaine Do&ors put this Epiflle in the Appendix and con je&ure it to be of Pelagita : but 1. it (hews the do&rine of that age : 2. Never did Aufiin contradid it, but oft fay the like.

Auguft. depeccat. Merit. & Remijf. li. 2. cap. 36. pajr. (mibi) 304. faith t% [Talispopnlm titprtdixi, ernditHi in Regno cdorumper duo teftamenta vetm Gr novum, non declinans in dextram fnperbaprefumpti-onejuflititt, necjuein fwiftramfccHi/a delettathne pec* j cati, in terram illivu fromijfwnis intrabit : ] & poftja j [XJbienim de re obfeuriffima difpntatur , non adjx-vantibm < Di t vinarum ScriptnrarHtn certit clarifque

A a 4 do-

document is , cchiberefe debet humana prefamptio nihil faciens in partem alteram declmando~\ So that in Au-JHus judgement the old and new Teftament teach us enough to fal vat ion; and in the difficult points we muft not fo much as incline to either fide, without the Scriptures, it being preemption to fpeak when they iire filent.

And in his49. Trad,on fohnhe faith \JLvange-lijla teftatur mnlta Ttominum Ckriftnm & dixifje & fecijfe qua non[crista fnni\ektla [tint autcm qttafcri-berentur, quafalnti erePentium J r zfjficcrevidebantur7\ i. e. [The Evangelift teftifieth that the Lord Chrift fpoke and did many things that are not written : but thofc were chofen to be written , which fecmed Efficient for the falvation of Believers.]

And li t de Nat. Grat c 26. be faith to the Pelagians \_Solu Canonicis debso fine uila recufatione con* fenfum ] That is [I owe a confent without any refu-fal to the Canonical Scriptures alone]] An hundred more fuch fayings might be cited out of Augu-ftinc.

Hierom on the firft Ch. of Bag. (fol. mihi: 102.) fpeakingof theufeof Hereticks, faith \_SeA & alia

qtt& abfque authoritate & tc-nAniraiim Vcfen, I. %. jUmomis Scripturarum qnafi Vainly replyeth thsc this \ 1. - A ' n r r~ i -1 is fpoken onely to thole ^iittoni Apoftohcafpontere-Hercticks that plead only prtunt at que conpngunt per' Tradition and rejeft cutit gladiui T>ei7\ i. e. £But Scriptnres.i.Thatsplain- other things which without ly faifc : for -T&tunus did the Authority and Teftimo-»ot lo- 2. He Jpeaks of re • / ^u a~ ~c

all fuch traditions there ™ es of Scripture they do of fore of the Popifh. their own accord find out and

feign asof'Apoftolical tradi-don the fword of God will cut down. ] And he

(3*)

inftanccth in the faftings and other aiifteritics of the Tatiani , which he faith they fuffer cauflef-

The fame Hierom againft Helvidius faith \Vt h<ec qu£ fcripta fant non negawus , it* ea qua non funt fcripta rtnmmns. Natam 'Deumejfe de virgine ere* dimus quia legimus : Mariam nupftjfe pofi partum mn credmus , quia ncn legimus\ So then the Church in Bierowes time would believe no more by Divine Faith , but what was written.

thrjfoftom? faith on the 95- Pfal. Qwhen any thing is fpoken that is not written, the very thoughts of the hearers are lame ] And again on the 2 Thefc 2. £All things are clear and fincere that are in the Divine Scriptures, every thing that is neceffary is therein plain ] The words are fpoken againft thofe that would not go to the Congregation becaufe there was no Sermon; And though Cbryfcftome was almoft daily in preaching , yet to (hew them that the word read was worth their hearing, he addeth this anfwer: And he proceedeth to anfwer their other objections taken from the fuppofed obfeurity of Scripture, telling them they are fpoken in their own tongue and plainly. Orat. i.pag.(mihi) 1503.

And on 2 Cor. How. 3. he calleth the Scripture the ballance, the fquare and rule of all things; which words Eellarmine de verbo Dei I. 4. £. 11. endeavor-eth to pervert in vain.

Theedoret Dialog. 1. inter Orthodox- & Eranifi, in the beginning (pag. 1.) faith p[ would not have thee by humane reafons to enquire after the truth, but feektheftepscf the Apoftles and Prophets and their followers] And in the fecond Dialogue \J am not fo raihas toafiert any thing wherein the holy Scripture is filent,] CjriL

Cyril of Alexandria in his feventh book againft Julian (pag.mibiisg- ) faith [The Divine Scripture is fufficient to make them that are exercifed in it, wife and mofthoneft, and to have fuffitient under-ftanding.") The like he hath twice or thrice over in that fame Seftion, which I will not iiand to repeal left I be tedious.

Ambrofe having mentioned the diverfity of Here-fies agreeing in una perfidia, give thus thisdireftiori for cure: Itaque tanqnam binigubernatores quo twins prxtermeare poffimns fidei vela tendamm $criptua» rumque relegamus crdinem* Awb* de fide li. I. cap. 4. fag.%6. And many more exprefs paffages he hath : as £ J^* in Scripturis fax fix non reperimm , ea qmmadmodum ufurpare foffemu* ?] This citation I take on truft from others that have before produced it j having before mentioned more.

Albxmfim in h\$Orat. again(i the Gentiles in the beginning faith £ The holy and Divinely infpire<4 Scriptures are iufficient for all inftruftion of vedty] And afterward he addech that the writings of the Fathers and our Teachers do help us to interpret and imderftand Scr i pture.

Hippolytus ( in Tib Hot he. Patrum Tom. 3. Edit. roL p. ZQs 21.) faith \JJnm Bern eft^ quern non a* Uunde agnofcimus^ qmm exfacrisfcripturis, £htew admodum enim ftquis vellet fapientiam hnjns feculi txcrcsre^ mnaliter hoc cenfequi poterit, nift dogmata Phifofopborum legate fie quicunque volumns pietatem in T5eum exercere mn aliunde difemw qmm in/crip* ixris Bivinitjji e.QThere is one God 3 whom we no o-* ^u . ro . 1 ^ ther way know, * but by the : Thac ^ C Sav.ngly^ ho j y 5^^, for as he

that will exercife the wildom ©f this world, cannot

otherwife attain it, but by reading the opinions of the Philofophers #: fo thofe of us that will exercife piety towards God, do no other way learn it but in the Divine Scriptures.

Clemens Alexandrinus Stroma* Ji.6. faith [^Without the Scripture we fay nothing. ]

In the Life of Antony the Author faith[[The Scriptures are fufficient for our inflru&ion.]]

Theodoret li. i. hifior. c. 7 reportcth the words of Confiantine the Great fpokerr to the Fathers in the Nicene Council, after Suftatkiui Oration to him thus c THe (hewed them m " how grievous a thing it was *'tf «»*" »***. " and how bitter, when the enemies were profligate M and there was none left that durft oppofe them' u that they Ihould ftrive againft one another, and " (hould make mirth for their enemies f and become " their laughing ftock : fpecially feeing theydifpute ct about Divine things, and have the doftrine of the " Holy Ghoft laid down ia the Scripture monuments: " For, faith he, the Books of the Evangelifts and A-cc poftles, and alfo the Oracles of the ancient Pro-" phets do evidently teach uswhat we are to hold con-* c cerning God, Laying afide therefore all feditious "contention, let us refolve the matters that are " brought into queftian , by the Teftimonies of the ''writings of Gods infpiration] And Theodore* add-eth, that QWhile he fpoke thefe and the like things to bring them to a confent in the Apoftolical do-ftrine , all the Synod except a few Arriavs obeyed and ftablifhed concord on thefe terms.

Yet

Yet doth sAndradiut think to difablc Confiantifte:

teftiraony by faying that the

Stt t ra tV f «£ A ™«> wete pteafed with

noe^tf WheiC are the r * "

reli of his cavils. the,c words or CorjjtanHne ,

and Bellarmine vainly endea-voreth to le(Fen their efteem, becaufe Gonfiantine was no Doftor of the Church.

,., , n Salvias faith V Sifcirevis

W. //. J. p^ («</;/) 61. Itidtenendnm fit babes hte-rasjacras perfect a ratto efihoc tenere quod legeriT\ i e. QYou fee Scripture is the only Rule of Faith with him.

But I will once more flop this work of citations, it being fo fully done already. Onely defiring the Reader to lay thofe before produced together with thefelaft, and to compare with them, i. thcPro-tcftants judgement, and then the Papifts, I (hall lay them here by him, that feeing them together he may the better judge.

And for the judgement of the Reformed Churches, I (hall fay no more then what I before mentioned out of their own Polidore Virgil QThat they are called Evangelical, becaufe they maintain that no Law is to be received in matters of falvation , buc what is delivered byChriftor his Apoftles] And this is in the Scripture fully contained and fafely delivered to us (which kind of Tradition of the books of the old and new Teftament as Canonical, faith Molinaus we readily receive, which is fo far from being an addition to Scripture, that it teKs us that nothing is to be added thereto ) Compare this with the Fathers judgment before laid down.

As for the Papifts judgement you (hall have it in their own words, left we feem to wrong them.

Vafi

Vafque^Tom. 2. Biff. 216. N. 60. faith Q Licet concederemm hecfmfje Apoftolormn pr&ceptum, niki-Umintu Ecclefia & fummw Pontifex fotuernnt illud jnfiid de canfis abrogare: Neque enim major fuit po-tejta* *s4foftolorttm, quam Scclefit & Pontificisinfe* rendis praceptie~\ That is [Though we fhould grant that this was a precept'of theApoftles, nevertheless the Church and the Pope might upon juft caufes abrogate it: For the power of the Apoftles was not greater then that of the Church , and Pope in making precepts.]

The Council of Trent fay, Se(f. 21. c. 1.2. that [This power was alway in the Church, that in dif-penfing the Sacraments, favtng the fubftance of them, it might ordain or change things as it fhould judge moft expedient to the profit of the receiver.] (So that they may change any thing that God appointed about Sacraments, except the fubftance : And it were well if they would have left that unchanged.)

The Council of Cwftance took the cup from the Laity £ Licet in primitive Ecclefia hujufmodi facra-rnentum recipcretur a fide lib m fnb utraque fpecieP^ Though in the primitive Church this Sacrament was received of the faithful under both kinds. ] So that they confefs they contradid: the Primitive Church.

Bellarmine plainly faith Ik 4.de r Po»tif.c 9 $. £Si Papa erraret in pr&cipiendo vitia^ velprohtbendo vir-ttites y teneretur Ecclefia credere vitia ejfe bona & vir-tutes walas , nifivellet centra confeientiam peccaref\ That is Qlf the Pope fhould erre in commanding vices, and forbidding virtues, the Church were bound to believe that vices are go6d, and vertues i bad,

(366)

bad, unlefs they would fin againft confcience. ] And againft Hare lay cap.* 3 1. he faith [in bonofenjtt dedit Chrijim Petro Poteflatem faciendt depeccato ncn pec* aaum , & de no* peccato, peccatimT] That is £lna good fenfe Chrift hath given power to Peter to make fin no fin , and no fin co be fin .[] (compare this do-drine with the Father.)

7heGL(fe in fan. LctlorVifi. 34. faith, {Tapa difpenfat contra Hpoftolum J The Pope difpenfeth a* gainft the Apoftle.]

Innocent, 3. Dec ret. de concef. prebend, tit. 8. c.pro-pofuit , faith Q Secundum plenitudinew potefiatis de jptreftiprajiis pojfttmw dijpenfare [] According to the fullnefs of our power we can difpenfewith the Law above Law.] And the Glofle addeth [[For the Pope difjpenfeth againft the Apoftle, and againft the old Teftament 5 as alfo in vows and oaths] And another Glofs faith [[The Pope difpenfeth with the Gof-pel, in interpreting it.]] More fuch Gloffes you may find, if not yet more grofs and impious ; which Fie not frand to recite.

Gregory de Valentia Tom. 4. difp* 6. ^//. 8- ^.5. § 10. faith [ft'eerte qnadam pojlerkribtu tempmbus retlim conftituta efje in Scclefia qnam initio fe habe-Yenf\ That is [[And certainly fome things are more rightly conftituted in the Church in the latter times then they were in the beginning.]

Andradim Defenf.ConciL Trident,lib.2.pag.(vtihi) 236. faith \XJnde etiam liquet winime e$s erraffe qui dicunt Romanos Pontifices pojfe xonnu&qmm in legibns dijpenfare a Paulo, priwiiqne quatuor Gonciliis ad Ec» clejiam excrnandaw, morefque componendos pro tent* porum neceJJItate editlis^ quads eft ilia qua interdicit , ut Aigatms creari ne liceat Epi/ccpos^ i. e. [[Whence

it appeared) that they did noterre who fay that the of n ome may fcmetime difpenfe with Lawes rnai / and the four firft Councils for the ne

cefiky or the times to the adoring of the Church and thecompofing of manners; fuch as is that, which forbiddeth, .thofe to be made Bifhops who are the husbands of two wives.]

Cardinal Perron againit King James ft. 2. Obfer. 3, c 3. p. 674. hath a Chapter purpofely [Of the Authority of the Church to alter matters contained in the Scriptures ] And pag. 1109. & 1115. he faith, that r ~£When in the form of the Sacraments .fome great inconvenicies are met-withal, the Church may therein difpenfe and alter.] And that the Lords words QDrink yee all of it] were a precept not immutable nor in difpenfable] for [the Church hath judged that there may be a dXpentation for

it. ]

Bavins Obferv. on C. 24. conflit. Apofi. faith [£r-clefia Romana qua Apoftolica mens poteflate f -fingula fro condition*: temper urn in melius mutAt~\ i.e* [The Church of Rome, ufing Apoltolical power,doth according to the condition of times change all things for the better.]

Cardinal Tolet faith {_ Cum certnm fit non omnia q*£ Apsfioliinflituernnt jure-Divin* ejfe inftituta~] i. e. [\t is certain that all things which the Apoftles inftituted were not instituted by Divine right.]

And the Council of Trent hath (hewed itsufur-pation of power above Scripture, in difpenfing with the degrees of Marriage in Lev. 18. & 20. adding to what God hath prohibited, and relaxing what God hath rcftrained, and that [To Great Princes and for a pubHke cawft ] When they make it fin to other men* Thefc

(;« ) •

Thefe and many more of their grofs fayings and ufurpations againft Scripture and above it : they have been long ago told of by fcWc/l , Retinoids , ivhittakers, Cfrfolinausfind others; and how fleight their evafions are, the ccmfiderate and impartial may difcern.

I have therefore recited thus much of their words here , that you may compare them with the Ancients \ and then fee who are the Changlings and No-veliiis, and who they be that keep to the old Church and Religion.

And among other ancient Writers I would defire you (befides all the forecited) to compare the Po-_,*"- r ,. . r . pifh frame with the Dire&i-

menfistiv Hcrcf. 0n * <f ftcenHm Unncnfu

which he giveth us for the dtfeovery of Truth and avoiding herefie, in his book Contr. Harcf Which I the rather mention, becaufe I admire that the Papifts fhould be fo immodeft as to boaft fo much of him as if he were on their fide. The fum of his advice to avoid herefie, is this. i° Fi-dem fflxnire Divina legis author it ate. 2° Eccleji<& CathdicatraSticne: To fbrtifie our faith, i. By the Authority of Gods Law. 2. By the Tradition of the Cacholike Church. This way he faith he washim-felf diredei to by all the holy Learned men Aat he enquired of: S'xpa magnasiudio & fumma attentioae fcrquirens a quamplurimisfanfiitate & dotlrinapra* Jlantibm viris qmnam modo poffem certa qnadam & quafi genre all ac regnlari via Catholics fidei verita* temabh arctic & pravitMis falfitate difcernere, hnJHf-wodl/cmper rc/po^fum ab omnibHtfere rctnlf^ cap. 1.

(EM.

(Edit. Colon a. l6i$ % & pag- 617. Sdit. Pcriokih Lngd. 1572.) So thac we are given to underftand by this paflagc.

1. Thac this was no private ojynion of Vincen-tins , but the common way chat was "then taken by Holy learned men to difcern Truth from Here-fie.

2. Andnote well that he doth not once in all the bookdircdus to the r Oetcrmrrmtion !,■ much lefs to the Infallible determination of the Pope or the Re-want Church as the way to difcern Truth from Here-fie. And can any man of common reafon that is willing to know the truth, imagine that there is the kaft probability that Vincentim fhould filence this Rom;(h decifion, in a Treatife written purpofely andonely on that fubjeft, and wherein he under-taketh to give us the full and certain direftionto a-void Herefies, if the Church had then been of the Romamfts opinion? O intolerably forgetful, negligent, deluforyman, thai: would not give us one word of that which is now the foundation of all , and into which our faith muft be ultimately refolved! What never a word to tell us that whatfoevcr the Pope or Clergy of Rome are for or againft may be known accordingly to be true or falfe, becaufe he is the infallible Head of the Church and decider of controverfics 1

3. Obferve alfo that Vincentim doth fully and purpofely acknowledge the Scripture fufficiency, and never once mention any Traditions as ncceflfary to fup-ply the defeds of Scripture -, or as part of Gods word when Scripture is but the other part. Not a word of fueh Traditions. But onfcly of Tradition fubordinatc to Scripture finalitcr for the true ex-

B b pounding

pounding of them. Hear himfelf [Cap. 2. Hkfor-fitan reqairat aliqtsis : cum fit perfeffzu fcriptararum Canon , fthique ad Omnia fat id fuperqtte fnjficiat , quid optu eft tit ei^ Ecclefiaftica intelligentU jttngatur authority ? j$uia videlicet fcripturam facram pro ipfafm altitudine non mo eodemque fenjts nniverfi accipiuuU ] And in Jiis recapitulation Gap.4 1. [_Dixi-tmu in [nperiorihm hanc fuijfet femper eft ejje hedie CatholicorumcoHfueiudinem^ ut ftdemvtram duobus bis modis apprebent. *Primum divini Cminis atttho-? it ate : dcinde £cclefi& Catholics Traditione : Non I Camn foltts non fibi ad univerfa fufficiat; fed qnia verba 'Divi&a pro [no plerique arbitrate inter-fret antes varias opiniones errorefque CBncipiant7\

So that Scripture is fufficicnt ai omnia y ad univerfa^ onely the Churches tradition , that is, interpretation is the fkfe way to avoid hercfie, fos the under-itanding of it.

4 Note alfo that the Catholike Church which Vin-ccntim mentioneth is not the Rcmane Church any r« ore then any orhe£ : but the Tradition that he re * ferreth us to i?, that which hath been taught or held nhiqne^ femper^ ■& ab omnibus : every where, al-wayes, and by all.

5. Note alfo that it is not any authoritative Determination , of-any perfon or pcrfons whomfo-ever : but univerfal confent that he referreth us to.

6. And it is not in lefler, probable, or controverted points : but in thofe great neceflary points, which the Church hath wholly , every where, in all ages agreed in.

7. Note diligently , that one of the cafes he puttethis this> cap % ^. X_£j*}d ft novella aliqaacon-

tagio

(aft)

iagio non jam portiuncuhrn tantum, fed tofcam pdriter Ecclefiam commacnlare cenfturi ^ i.e. £But what if any novel contagion , (hall not onely ftain a fmali part of the Ch vclf, bat alfo the whole Church?] Aprefumptuoui Queftion in the Papifts fence 1 But what faith he to it? doth he fay, it is impoffible ? no but £Tuhc item provide&it y ttt'-4ntiqHitati inhere &t: qua frorfits jam non pettft ab till* mvitktisfraude fidftcf\ i. e. Then let him fee that hi llick to antiquity, which cannot at all now be feduced by any fraud of novelty. ] Here t. he fuppofeth tint the prefene Church may allcrre; 2. He makes the remedy to bean" appeal to the ancient Chnrdi, and not as the Papifts, to* appeal in all cafes to the prefent Church or Pope. (Ccfrerm rfeefcs by a citation out of Tertxtivtn in his Annot. to detort both.)

8. Laitly note diligently, that it is not in all cafes that Vincentitu leadeth us f to the exposition of the Church and Fathers, but onely ( as in the weighty cafe beforefaid fo) in cafe 6f [jhdnewnefs of errors, when they firft arife : before they falfifie the Rules of the andent faith * , letlthem be forbidden by the ftraights * That \ten*il*j ofto] and before by^ JWftfiJjJ-f-g large fprcadingof thepoifon tend t0 antiquity them-they endeavor to vitiate the Celves. volumes of our Anceftors: But dilated and inveterate hcrefies are to be fet upoit this way, becaufe by the long traft of ticae, they have had a long oecafion of ftcaling truth (that is, Antiquity and other figns of truth.) And therefore as for all tbofe Ancient prophaneffes of fchifmes or he-tefics, wc muft by no means convince thera, but by the onely authority of Scripture ^ if there be need,

for*)

or avoid them as certainly already of old eonvi&ed and condemned by the General Councils of Catho-like Pricfts. ] They are his own words tranflated , f4g\ 677. Edit. Teriomit&pag. $7,88. Edit. Colon. 161 3.

So that you fee Vincentim fuppofeth error may in-fed nil the Church, and may grow old and fo feem to be the Trutb, and in fuch cafes onely Scripture muft be pleaded againft it, unlefs alfo we can produce fome ancient Council that hath condemned it. This is the very c;afe between us and the Papifts : Their hereficsareold, and far fpread, though not univcrfal nor of ucmoft antiquity : therefore between us and t?^na the Scripture only muft be pleaded.Where there is no need of a judge by reafon of its plainncfs we need not go to the Ancient Church; where there js Kced of an Expofitor, we are content to deal with ihem on Vlncentita grounds , and to admic 0; that which ubique^ ftwftr & ab minibus bath been held in ppint of faith ; if 'they will do the like fc And indeed this is our very Religion. Will the Papifts but difpute their cauft with us on thefe terms We (hall readily joyn iffuewith them , anddoubtnot of a good fuccefs. Of this fee more in our Conradm Bergius Prax* CatkoL divin. Canonu.

th.

Cm)

THe Difpute which we have hitherto managed being only againft Popery in the grofs, and two or three branches of it onely in particular ) I had thought to have annexed a Brief enumeration of the particular errors of the Papifts, that the vul> gar might obierve and avoid them; and therein I , thought to have endeavored the true ftating of the differences between us , both .-for the avoiding of error on the other extream , and alfo that we may take out of the Papifts hands thegreateft of all their advantages againft us , which is the falfe-oppofed opinions and unfound Arguments of fuch as thus erre on the other fide: But perceiving how it would lengthen this work beyond the intended limits, and how certainly all thofe that (o run into cxtrcams would fall a quarrelling with me for not ftating the controverfics according to their fancies , I have thought beft for anfwering all my ends at cheaper rates to give you the chief of the Popifh errors in the words of Do&or Feild , and to that end to tran-fcribe his feventh Chapter of the third Book ; that fo the limplc Reader may have fome help to inform him without a commixed means to pervert him. And for thofe that defire to fee the Proteftant Do&rincfolidly defended, and cannot have ^me to read many books, I know not of any one thfct they may more profitably and fafely read to that end then the faid Book of Docftor Field on the Church ; and cfpccially the Appendix to the third pare, which is

(374)

but the Defence of this very Chapter, proving it in particulars, that the Wcftern Church was Prote-ftant and not Popifh even in the worft times before Luthers Reformation; and that the Papifts were but a feducing tyrannical party in the Church, endeavoring to obtrude their errors againft the mind of the generality of good men: In whichh eha.th quite broken down thofe pretences of Vniverfalitj and \_AU the Church'] which the Papifts do fo fondly boaft in.

D

lUo}

(?75)

(^^ ^ ^

WwwwwmWww

T)r> Feild 0/^ (A* Qhurch^ li» 3» Cap* 7,

Of the feveral points of difference between hs and our adverfaries 5 wherein fome in the Church erred , but not the whole Church.

F Or neither did that Church , wherein our Fathers lived and dyed , hold that Canon of Scripture 9 which the Romanifts now urge; nor that infufficiency they now charge it with; nor corruption of the Originals, nor necejfity of following the vulgar Tranflati-on ; nor the Herefies touching t»ans creation brought into the Church by certain barbarous Schoolmen , as that there are three different eft Ates of men; the firft of pure nature , without addition of Grace, or fin ; and two other , the one of (jrace , the other of Sin : That all thofe evils that are found in the nature of wan* fince hk fall, at Ignorance % Concupifcence , Contrariety between the better and meaner faculties of the Soul y difficulty to do well, andpronenefs to do evil 9 were all natural , the conditions of pure nature, that u> of nature, asconfidered in itfelf, it would come forth from God : That thefe evils are $ot finfrd y nor had their beginnings from fin, that thej were the con-

fcquents

(37<9

fecjuents of nature in the ft ate of creation , but retrained by addition of fupernatural Grace , with* out which thj integrity of feature was fuS and perfeSl : Tkit men in the ft ate of pure nature , that is, as they might have been created of God in the in* tegrity of Nature , without addition of Grace , and in the eft ate of Original ftn > differ no otherwife , but as they that never had , and they that have loft rich and precious cleathing; fo that Original ftn is but the lofs of that , without which natures integrity may ftand : That no evils are brought in by the fall 9 but nature left to her ft If to feel that which was before , but not felt , nor difcerned while the addition ef Grace bettered nature : None of thefe errors , touching the rftate of mans creation, were the DoElrincs of the Church , but the private fancies and conceits of men*

So likewife touching Original Sin H there were tlaAt taught , that it is not inhrtnt in ?ach parti" cxlar man born cf Adam, but that Adams perfon-$1 fin is imputed ontly : That the propagatisn of ftn is not general\ Mary being Cvxctivsd without Original ftn : ThAt the pumjhment cf it is not any fenftbte fmart , or pefitive evil 9 but privative cmly\ and that therefore there is a thifd place s neither Htll , nor Heaven , named, Limbus Puerorum ; which is a place , whereas, feme thinly, they, who are condemned thither 9 though they be excluded from the Kingdom of Heaven \ and ad pofftbility of jver Ing thither , yet are in a Hate of natural hap-:s , and do enjoy the fwttt content of Sternal •\ Theft Pelagian Hereftzs were taught in the tsrch of God, but they were net the VoUrines ' the Church* being Condemned rejected and re-

futed

(177)

fitted, as contrary to the CfoifiUn Verity , by ma-ny worthy members and guides of the Church : who a* they never received thefe parts of falfe DoQrine: So Uktwifi the* Church wherein they lived , neither knot* , nor approved that difiinttion and difference of venial and mortal fins , which the Romaniftsnow Teach , nor power of nature to do the works of the Law according to the fubfiance of the things commanded 9 though not according to the intention ef the Law-giver to love God above all , and to do aUi* ons morally good , or not finful , without concurrence of fpccial Grace, nor eleftion and reprobation de -pending on theforefight of fomethingin us pofitive or privative; nor merit of congruence and condignity • nor works of fupererogatien ; nor courfels of per-feftion , as they now teach ; nor jufiifcatien by perfection of inherent qualities ; nor uncertainty of Grace ; nor feven Sacraments properly fo named , nor local prefence ; nor Tranfubflantiationy nor or all manducation of the body of fchrift , nor real facrificing of it for the quicks and the dead : nor re-miffion of fins after this Life, nor tormenting of the fouls of men dying in the flate of Salvation in a part of HeH , hundreds of years , by Divels in corporal fire ( out of which , prayer Jhould deliver them) nor that the Saints hear our Prayers , know or art acquainted with our particular wants: nor the grofs idolatry in thofe times committed, and intolerable abufes found in the number, fafhion , and w&fhip of their images : nor their abfolution , as now they define it : nor treafure of the Church growing cut of the fuftrfiuity of Saints merits, not rewardable in tkem[elve*\ to be difpofed by the Pops far the fupplj of other mens wants to rtltafe thtm

out of Purgatory ly wa% of indulgence: nor the infallibility of the Popes judgement , and, plenitude of his power fuch and fo great that he may depo/e Trinces s and difpofe of their Crownt^ a«d demies, and that whatfoever he dc 1 * be may not be brought into order, or dtppfedby author it) -f the whole world in a general Council.

Thefe are the errors which we condemne and our ad' verfaries maintain and defend: thefe we are allajfured were not the DoEtrines of that Church wherein our Fathers lived and dyed , though we do not deny, but they were taught by feme in that Church* All thefe we offer to prove to be error in matter of mr Chrifiian faith, and that feeing we could have peace no longer with our adverfaries , but by approving thefe impieties, we hadjuft caufe to divide cur felvesfrem them, or (to ffeall more properly ) tofuffer our feIves to be accurfed, anathematized^ and reje&ed by them, rather then tofubferibe to fo many errors, andherefies , contrary to the Chrifiian, and Catholike verity.

Where-

(V9)

WHcreas thePapifts have little elfe to fay to us, but onely to call ftill for a Catalogue of Profeflbrs to prove the fucceffive vifibility of our Church ; we require of them firft an anfwer to thofe Writings that have been extant fo long on this fub-

jeft : tfptchlly Blihop V/ier defucceffione ^ Statu Ecclef and his anfwer to the Jefuits challenge ( Defended by Matter Sing and Mafter Puttoc^) Dodor fields Treat, of the Church, efpeciaUy the Appendix to the third part ; Simon Birkbeckj Proteftants evidence: Dodor whites Way to the true Church Abbot zga\nfk>Hi/l.Illiricus his Catalogues tcftiurn ve-ritatu. Mornajs two Treatifes of the Church, and theMyftery of iniquity (to fay nothing of that of the fA&fyfohan* Lidii JValdenf. Nicol. Vignhr Ecclefiaft. HiBor. And the confeffions of your own Writers: Your after Pope *s£n&M Sylvius Hiftor. Bchem. and that commonly cited pafTage of ydUr inquifitor Rain-nerim , which I will ad joy n.

Rainerim contr. Waldenj. cap 4. Inter omnes feElas qu& adhucfunt &fuerunt^ non eftpermciofior Ecc/efia quam ea Leoniftarum y idque tribus de caufis, 1. Quia eft diuturnior : aliqpii enim dicunt quodduravit a tempore Silveftri: alii a tempore Afoftolorum. 2. Quia eft : gtmralior : fete enim nulla terra eft in qua hac fetta non [it. 3. £hria cum omnes aliaftSiaimmani 0 tate Blafphemiarum in Deum audientibus horrorem in-ducant ; h<tc fcilicet Leeniftarum rxagna habet fpe* ciem pietati< , eo>quod coram omnibus jufie vivant, & bene omnia de Deo credent , & omnes articulos qui in

fywbolocontinentur : folummodo Romanam Ecclejiam bUfphzmant ct Cleram.

That is £ Among all the Sefts that yet are and have been there is not a more pernicious to the Church then that of the Lyoniiis , and that for threecaufes. i. Becaufeitis the more ancient (or of longer continuance) for fome fay that it hath endured from the time of Sihtficr • others from the time of the ApofUes. 2. Becaufe it is more general, for there ts fcarce any land in which this fed is not. 3. Becaufe, when all other feds do by theimmanity of their blafphemy bring horror into the hearers; this of the Lyonifts hath a great fliew of godiiriefs; in that they live righteoufiy before all men, and they believe all things well concerning God, and all the articles that are contained in the Creed: onely they blafphem the Romane Church , and the Clergy.

To this adde what I cited out of Cahhs tvA others before.

Lailly, Give us fome tolerable anfwer to all that* voluminous evidence of your oppofitions,by Princes, Prelates, Divines and Lawyers, which Mich. Golda-fttis hath colle&ed and publtfhed, on his volnmes ds Menarche & confiitnt. Imperial.

A P.

m

&S5 I

APPENDIX.

A Tranflation of Biihop Downames Catalogue of Popifh Errors, lib. 3. ^ Antichrifio cap.7.

To fat is fie the earnejl defires of fome of the unlearned y who would fain know wherein the

1 Papijls differ from us > that they may be the better furmfhedagamfil them > and may the better underfiand thofe that under other Titles carry about their doctrines.

BEcaufe I find many ignorant perfons both unacquainted with the Errors of the Papifis, and yet very defirous to know them, I have adventured to tranflatc a larger Catalogue of them, gathered by Biflhop George Do^name in hisBook written to prove the Pope Antichrift lib. 3. cap. 7. fag. 1S9.&C. though it cannot beexpe&ed that in fuch brief expreffi-ons y the true point of the

Becaufemany of theft Errors are delivered onely bj particular T>ofl;ors , and all be not of a mind as to the fence , and fowe of the words may admit a to* lerahle and Orthodox meaning, 1 thought meet to adde thefe A-niwadverficns f to acquaint you in what fence we re)eU them. What I pafs by \W//,<-diflfe-

difference, (hould iti all lie plain , before them that are unacquainted with the con-troverfies, yet becaufe I was refolved not to give you any fuch Catalogue of my own gathering,■ aridkhew not where to find one fo large as rot-he number of errors, and brief as to theex-prellions, I give you this as I find it.

out AninMdvcrfion % J leave upon them as it u here charged\ and alfo; - * thi dife-re nee to lie plain.

—

Biftiop

Bifhop G.D.Cbap. 7. A Catalogue of the Errors of the Church of Rome.

THe Errors of the Papifts are either about the Principles of Divinity or the parts of it. The principles of Theology &re the Holy Scrip turn : Here thePapifts have many errors.

1.They deny the HolyScripture which is of Divine infpiration to be the onely Rule, and Foundation * of 1. a 7%*tii % as the Faith. Authentic ke ftgn cf

Gods Wi/l : For we all confefs that thrift and his A fifths arc the foundation of faith , as the Authorised chief reveahrs • and God himfelf onely as the principal efficient^ and Chrift the Mediator <u the firft corner ftene of the matter re* vealed; and the Catholike Church \ as the keeper or fubjett in quo oftrue ^Belief: for the Law is written in the hearts of its members 9 and it u thrTiliar and ground or foundation of truth.

2. They take certain Apocryphal Books into the Canon of the old Teftament § which neither the jewifli Synagogue (to which the Oracles of God were committed) nor yet the purer Chriftian Church did receive,

3. They

(3*4)

3. This error u one of 3. They make two parts the fundamentals of of Gods word 5 that is, the the Romijh Fabrike. Scriptures, and (their own) Traditions.

4. They contend thacthe Cuftomes and unwritten Opinions of the Church of Rome , are moft certain Apoixolical Traditions.

5. Thefe Traditions^ or ( as they call them ) unwritten vericys, they make equal with the Holy Scri-ture,and receive and reverence them with equal pious affedtioa and reverence.

6. They number the Popes

6. when yet it, ismofi Decretal Epiftles with the clearly proved by ma- holy Scriptures.

»7» c ffecUlly Blondel

in a jufi volume^ that abundance of them are forge* ries; and Dalaeus proves it particularly of the Clementines.

7. dfleaftquoqd nos, 7. They fay its herefie for So that they never any to fay, that it is notai-

V when their faith together in the Power of the

u at its fkII fixture. Church or Pope to appoint Articles of faith.

8. 'By this you way 8. They prefer the faith conjeEltirefrcm whence and judgement of theChurch the f£u?M rs h*™ 6 of Rome 1 which they fay is their dottrtne of the the internal Scripture writ-light Within us. ten by the hand of God in

heart of the Church, before the Holy Scnp;nre..

9. It is the voice of 9. That the Scripture in the Laft giver and the which God himfelf fpeaketh Law is the Rule of life h not the voice of a Judge, and of judgement, but the matter of ft rife.

10. They

io. They actufc the Scri- i o. We confcfs (ok pturc ( which is the light to Peter faith of Pauls our fecr, and giveth under* JEpiftles ) that there ftanding to children) of too are fome things inthem much obfeurity. hard to be under flood ,

which the ignorant pervert as thej do the-other Scriptures , io their tr?n deftrnUion : But we maintaine that thej havefo much light as fptfficeth to their ends . that is^ to be the Rule of our faith and life.

11. They condemn it alio 11 .This is one of their of imperfection and infuffi- g^atejl errors. ciency.

12. They fay that even in matters of faith, and the worftiip of God, we cannot argue Negatively from Scripture (as thus: It is not in the Scripture: therefore it is not neceffary or lawful )

13, That the Scripture is not fufficientior the refuting of all hcrcfies ( as if there were any "herefie but what is againft Scripture.)

14. Thatherefieis not fo much to be defined by the Scripture authority as by the Churches determination.

15. That the authority of 15. The lafi clanfc the Catholike Church (that (that the Pepes autht-is, the Romane) is greater rity is greater then the then of the Scriptures : Churches) the French and th* Popes authority do not hold. And fe greater then the Church. they are divided in

their foundation**

i6.ThattheChurchisanci- 16. Theyjield thai enter thaa theScripture(chat the Doftrim is elder is, then the word of God then the Church, and which is now written becaufe toe yield that thi

Ge it

f}«)

it is ancientcr then the writing of ic. As if it were not the fame word of God,which was firft delivered by voice, That is now then in writ-iflg.

Church id elder then writings. But we affirms that the dottrine as fetcht from thefe Writings is noW before the prefent Church in order of nature t as the caufe of it, at leafi as to the generality of members*

17. That 'the Scripture dependeth on the Catholike Church ("that is the Romane) and not the Church on the

17. The Negative is their mafter error : but the Affirmative Pr ope fit ion u not deny-ed of us as to every ^ Scripture, kind of dependence ,

but of fomeffecialforts % of which I have ffokeninthe Frcf. to the Saints Pveft Part. 2. Edit. 2,&c.

13. The height of 18. Alfo that the fence of Rcmifi arrogancj the Scripture is to be fought

from the See of Rome , and that the Scripture is not the word of God, but as it is expounded according to the fence of the Church of Rome.

19- They make feven Principles of the Chriftian doftrine, which are all grounded in the authority of the See and Pope of Rome,

20. And jet I Would 20. They take the vulgar that vulgar Tranfla- Tranflation only for authen-ticai, preferring it before the originals (though it is fo manifeftly corrupt that the Copies lately publiftied fey the Popes tbemfeives,

thn tnioht but bed-lo&ed to be the decid' ing rule : for there '. is though in it againft

■

gtfc t

Sixtth die fifth and Clemtnt the eighth do in many places differ.

21. That either the holy 21. This error is an Scriptures ought not co be accufatien-ofthe wtf-Tranflated into vulgar dowof God, and con-tongues* or if ic be, yet it trarytoexprefs Scrip-muft neither be pubiikely ture , and deftrnEtive read in a known tongue, ndr to the progrefs ofkyow-permitted to be privately ledge and godtinefs ; read by the common people, and fuch a* the experience of gracious fouls fbould provoke them to detefl j and had thej but this one , thej could never *xpe£i that the Catholihc Church [hmld unite upon their principles.

§ 2 Of the Belief

0i. Of faith, 02 !\ things to hi

The Part, of Theology are j 2 ^Charity,

9 or things to be ri.OfGod&\ done,

x* ec *u ~J his works.

Matters of faith are< ^ ^ c

I Church. f 1. Of Creation and Govern- " The works of God j ment of the world. are fpecially \z. Of Redemption of man« - { kit '

"A

kind.

Bout the Creation i. As concupifcence the Papifts erre in is taken improperly fa Ccz fay-

(388)

the corrupted fenjitive tppetire j fo it Was of God: But as iifignifi-eth the appetite di-fiempered or corrupted, cr the corruption of the ypill 9 inclining

faying time concupiitence was then natural to man (though John faith that it is not of God if 0.2.16. and themfelves fomecime confefs it to be evil and contrary to nature. it to evil > it U not of God.

2. See Radars* firfi 2. In the denying that o-centrcverjie. riginal righteoufoefs was natural to man before the fall

(created after Gods Image in Righteoufnefs and holinefb.

3, A poffe mori, 3. In affirming *hat mor-anda poffe non mori tality was natural to man bc-whe not then Natu- fore the fall (which yet is ral: But a non poffe not from God the author of mori , x or an attual nature.) *

non mori Vcere to be

the reward of obedience • and u now given by Chriji* And anon poffe non mori , or an attualdeath 7 are the fruits of fin,

4,5.-' I would thej 4. In placing Paradifc would prove thisTra- where the waters of the dithn to be Apoftdical flood did not reach it (which yet covered all the earth,and were fifteen cubits higher then the higheft mountains.)

5. Forfcorb they would have that Paradife (of ien) yet untouched, thatitraay be a pleafent habitation to Henoch and Elias , yet living in mortal where they place them as behind the fhgc, v may be ready toad: their parts in the fable

(1*9)

lJnthUtktj no more

agree among them" J elves then with m.

To the Article of creation is annexed the Article of providence.

i. In this the Papifts erre, in making mans aftions not to depend on Gods Providence i but on mans Freewill , which they make the abfolute Lord of ks own aftions.

2. And that they are not determined of God (according to whofe determinate Council things come to pafs AB. 2. -J0/&4. 280- but that God rather(who work-eth all according to the Council of his will) doth follow the determination of the will of man.

2. Saith Dave-nant, the pint of Predetermination is a eentroverfee between the Dominicans and, fefuites , Schick Pro* tejiants have no mind to 'trouble themfelves with : Rut they that do are not of a mind in

it, no more then thej 3. And that he foreknows them from eternity only in mans will.

4. Alfo in (hat they 'inter* pret the adjon of God as judge , puniftiing fin with fin , hardening men , giving them over to their lufts, and to the temptations of Satan, to be naked permiffion fas if the judge or Magiftrate might not deliver a male-faftor to the hangman, as executioner of his judgement to be puniflied j but

4, God doth net caufe fin even Vehen it is a punijhment ; but onely permilttth it ; "But by fuck a fermijfiofr m proceed* eth from a pHnifbing intention, ^ndfe he Jtifilj ^ithholdeth his grace , and giveth men over to the poorer ffihe devil&their wn wfcs

Cc 3

fhould

(390)

ftiould not oncly permit him to be punifhed 1 , that is, not hinder it.

§ 3. Of Redemption.

INtheDo&rine of Redemption and Salvation we muftconfider.

j. Whence we are redeemed, to wit from fin, and a ftate of obftinaey

2. By whom, to wit, 6y Chrift, who is the author and foundation of our Salvation.

3. By what means the benefit of Redemption and Salvation is applyed to us: where, of the Covenant of God, thcMiniftry of the Word and Sacraments.

4. The effefts of Gods Grace in Chrift, or the degrees of Salvation , which are fruits of the Merits of Chrift applyed to us.

In all thefe the Papiftsdo filthily erre; for as to fin (which interceded) between the works of Creation and Redemption , as a medium) they teach.

1. That the blefled Virgin was free from all fin 0-riginal and a<ftual, as being conceived without Original fin , and having lived without aftual fin.

2. Under the name of the 2. The b$dy is not fielh which Jufteth againft to be mortified byfelf-the Spirit, and is to be mor- murder; but the cor* tified among other things, rupt inclinations and they mean the body of attiens of thefenfitive man. appetite are tobemor-

tifyed; and all its mothns fubjeffed to holy Reafon : And this iscalled'in Scripture the mortifying of the ficfl?i and cur corruption would never be called in Scri~ pturefe often £ Thcfcpj and the boh ]] if it Veere not

3. That

% f?sw)

that tbefiefily appetite is much of the feat ofit % atid tfa pleafingof that appetite and imagination, much of the end (that Ifaj not the Whole.)

3. That all fin is not a tranfgreffion of the Law (7^«dcfincthit, 1.J0. 3.4. '(?*/. 3.10 J nor all tranfgreffion of the Law is fin.

4. That there is no fin but what is voluntary (which is not onely falfe of concupi-fcence, habitual and adual which goes before the wills confcnt, but of other fins al-fo which are done of ignorance or infirmity , for though the aftions are voluntary by which they arc committed, yet the fin is not.)

4, Sins are called voluntary, either be-caufe they are in the Will , or from the Will. In the fir ftfence the virions habits of theVQill are voluntary in thefecond y the e/li* cite andimperate a£ls. Alfo they are voluntary, dire&ly, and formally, as are the wills

owne atts and habits; or participative, as are the aBs and habites of all the imperate faculties. &And there is nothing fin bat Vvhat is voluntary in one of thefe fenfes : nor any farther then voluntary*

Sin is original or aftual: The Papifts raarvailoufly extenuate original fin, and amplifie and fee forth the ftrength of nature.

5. For fonae of them would have original fin to be only the guilt of Adams tranfgreffion: moft will have it to be onely the want of O-riginal rigkeoufnefs : And fo that the ftate of tn«m after Adams fall, and in pure naturals, doth differ

Cc 4 onely

5. Neither they nor fte are agreed about the quiddity of origi* nal fin.

(39>) •"

oncly as a ftript man, and a naked man. - 6. Others would have iE to be a very fraall fin,and lefs then any venial fin; and therefore necdeth no repentance ; nor ispunifhcd with pain of fenfe, but onely with pain of lofs.

7. Others deny original fin to be properly fin, or that any thing is found in infants that properly hath the nature of fin.

8. Metaphors are 8. That we are not by na-mt ufua/ly the fittefi ture dead in fin but fick: nor terms to $ ate contro do they acknowledge in us an verftes in. We have impotency to fpiritual good, virions habits and the but a difficulty :nor thatFree-abfcence of Rectifying will to fpiritual good is whol-habits: call this what ly taken from us , but hind-you Will. Free mil is red and tyed.

either Phyfical (and

that all men horve as they are men) or moral ; which u i,Tobe free from a legalrefiraint from good (and this all have) or to be free from vicious Habitj : and this onelj the fan&'tfcd have \ and that but in part.

9. It is the wofi no- 9. That men are naturally ble contr over fie among inclined to love God above the Schoolemen : and all. Thomifis , and the

greatefi part feem rather nerre on the other extream: and the Scotifis that hold this to rettifie them , do give fuch explications of their dolhine , as are well Worth eur ftttdy , as you may fee in Rada's firfi contro-verjie.

1 o. CMans Will is 10, They attribute to man the Ruler of it felf un- a will that is the Ruler and derGod: and its fully Lord of it felf : fuch asbc-free from that neceffty longeth to no creature : Yea

they

Cm)

they fay that the will of man is as free from Necefiity as the Will of God.

ii. They deny the will of the unregenerate to be a fervant.

12. They deny alfo that all the worlft of the uaregeratc are fins: or that the unregenerate fin when they do the works that are commanded.

which is contrary to its natural ejjential Li-bertj.

ii It is a willful fervant onely.

12. The matter of their works u oft good i but becaufe their end. and manner is alwayet wrong , therefore they fin in alt : for bonum eft ex caufis integris.

13. The will is free and not free i^feveral fences. 1. It is not free from Gods Government. 2. Nor from its natural inclination to good in general; and therefore cannot will e-

vilds evil. For thefe were but flavery. 3. Nor is it free from the moral forceof a darke and twing]udg~ ment. 4. Nor from temptations. $. Nor from its own vicious diff option^ till grace free it. But its free\ 1. From any natural determination to evil , or to unknown good in particular. 2 And free from coaUion or violence. 3. And from a phyfical efficient immediate exteriordeterminer 9 %n ordinary natural\or fmful a&i* ens. 4. And its freefrom fmfulhabites in that measure as it isfanffified.

14. That there is in mans 14. No guefiionbfit freewill, not onely a pofti- the will is potentia bility or paliive power, but a&iva naturalis, or

alfo

13.They fay that before all grace a man hath freewill not onely to works natural and moral, but alfo to works of piety , and fupergatu-ral.

(594) :

hath fucfo an attive alfoan aftiYC power tofpiri

power : which is im- tural works.

ployed in fpirituals

Vvben it is inclined by a habit thereto ; but till then mil

not attfpiritually : not becau/e the natural faculty is

abfent , but btcaufe the inclination without which it

will not aU , is abfent •

15. No doubt but un- 15. That the unregenerate der the common grace can prepare and difpofe of Chrift , an nnre- themfelves to juftificacion. venerate man may do

that which hefballbe more difpofed to converfion by then elf* he would have been : as our practical Divines all teach , and we are fain daily to preach it to our peo* pie : or elfe ^ejhall make but til workycith them.

16. many by con- 16. That a wicke^ man by gruous merit do mean doing his bell may congru-no more then the fore- ouily merit the grace of faid Aptitude compara* juftificacion.

tive to others.

17. This alfo fame 17. God neceffarily gi-V rot efl ants hold: But veth grace to him that doth no wicked man ever hisbeft.

did hub eft.

18. There u a com- 18. That the efficacy of mon grace whofeeffica* preventing grace dependeth cy is laid on the will , on the freedome of the will. as Adams was ; And

a fpecial which (hall infallibly bote and change the will.

19. A felf-contra-> 19; That every tranfgref-diBionxto defcrve par- greffion of the Law ( which don. yet pronounceth every man

accurfed

accnrfcd that continueth not in all things commanded in the Law to do them) dcfervcth not death : Bat that there are many fins of themfelves, and of their own nature venial, and defcrving pardon.

20. That charity is not 20. Some fin is but violated by venial flns , and confequentiallj again[i that they are not aginftGods love ; and other fin di-precepts, but befides them. reQlj , but all is a-

gdinft Gods Laws.

21. That the blood of ?i« Who ever de*> Chrift is not neceflary to nyeth that fin maj be wafti thera away, but that done % away Vvithent they may be done away by Chrifis blood doth Holy Water, knocking the know little of fin or breft, Epifcopal benedi&ion, Chrift*

and other ridiculous means.

22. That fin is called mor- 22. Mortal fin , tal becaufe it brings death ly'As to merit, is all upon the foul, that is, de- fin\ 2. As to fignifi. priveth it of Gods grace. cation , fjmptomati*

cally it is all fin in-confifientwith regeneration. 3. Effc&ually it is all that eventually kills : which is in feveral degrees and forts.

23. And they teach that by every mortal fin, grace is loft and charity expe&oratcd.

24. That this mortal fin is any that (hall obtain the wills confent, though the a& be not performed.

25. That the fins of the regenerate are in the fame fence mortal, even thofe committed of ignorance and infimity.

26. And that it is fucb a 26. O unmerciful mortal fin to neglect or not men .1 that will dfgfo

many fits then to en- obferve any Eccleiiaftical trap foor fouls in law, or tradition of the Ronton al fin. mane Church.

27*28. Many of , -27. That the fin againfi the ancients alfo were the Holy Ghoft is not unpar-of this mind : of which donable. 1 fee my Treat, againft infidelity Tart.1.

28. Nor that its impofllble for him that commits that fin to* be renewed by Repentance.

§ 4. Of Chrift.

IN Chrift are confiderable, 1. His Perfon, 2. His Office. About his Perion he crreth who thinks not rightly of his Godhead, or of his Manhood,

1. About Chrifts Godhead thofe Papifts erre that deny Chrift to be eLylfam God of himfelf, for thats as much as to deny him to be Jehovah.

About the Humane Nature , both Soul and Body they erre.

2. Of this fee the 2. For they deny that the writings between Dr. foul of Chrift did incrcafein Hammond and Mr. wifdom and grace ( which f earns : many School- Luke exprefly affirmeth ) men fay otherwife. -L#k: 2. 52.

;, Or that he was ignorant of the day and hour of thelaft judgement (which yet himfelf confeffeth ? CMat. 13. 32.)

4. They fecm to give him a phantaftick body that neither confifteth of dimenfions,, nor occupieth a place, which when he was born did not open the

wombe

wombc of his mother, and when he rofe did penetrate the ftone of the fepulchre , and when he infli-tuted his Supper, lay hid under the Species of Bread and Wine. 5 .Yea that they mayftablifli that monftrous opinion of Tranfubftantiation,they feign him to have a body that can neither be ken, nor felt, nor circumfcribed, that is in innumerable places at once : which is not made of the fubftance of the bJcfied Virgin , but of bread (as wine of that water, fob. i. 9.) and which fuftaineth the accidents of bread (as their fubjeft) For they can devife no other fubjeft after the tran-fubftantiation of the bread: Whence it follows, that they aye no more accidents of bread but of Chrifts body.

6. And as to Chrifts 6,7. Saints on earth Office,they teach that Chrift mnft intercede tinder is Mediator onely according Chrift for others , ej-to his humane nature. pecullj Paftors rphofe

7. They deny Chrift to office it is. And w>e be the onely Mediator of in- ♦ may fray them to pray terceffion but joyn with him for m : But not the Angels and Saints. Saints departed.

8. They teach that we muft pray to Saints to intercede for us.

9. That we are heard by the Saints fufFrages and Merits.

10. They deny Chrift to 10. AH P afters ef be the onely Prophet, whofe the Church ; do hold voice onely muft be heard, their office in a fubor-fpiritual King , and Pricfl of dination to Chrifts theNewTeftament. 'Prophetical Office :

And many a Prophet there hath been under Chrifi : But none tht.t hath the

But

Office of being the univerfal infallible Teacher of the Church at the Tope would be.

But they make the Pope alfo the chief Prophet and Paftor, King and Monarch , and Prieft. Whence it follows that the Pope is not oneiy oppoiied to Chriit as his adverfary i but as his Rival.

ii. A11 Christians ix. And they make other are Priefts to God , to faerificing Priefts alfo of the offer up fpiritual fa- New Teftament, having an orifice, metaphorically external vifible Priefthood, fo called: And Paftors and that according to the or-offer up Chrtft Kepre- der of Melchizedecl^ : whofe fentatively, Comme- office it is to facrifice Chrift moratively and Sacra- again and offer him to his Fa-mentally , but not re- ther.

ally. The name Priefi is not worth contending a* bout.

12. That the (unchangeable) Priefthdod of Chrift the eternal Prieft , is made eternal by the fuccefiipn of fuch Priefts.

13. That an Eternal Priefthood requireth an E-ternal Sacrifice, but is not Eternal, unlefs it be often facrificed.

14. That this Eternal facrifice can be nothing elfe but the facrifice of the mafs.

15. No doubt but 15. That Chrift (whois Chrift merited theglo- God over all biefledfore-Mfyingof'his ownhw vei ) did merit for himfelf, mane nature »: *But *B ellarm.de Chrift olit'yxap**). that was but confequential to his meriting for us.

16. Some of them 16. That Chrifts merits prvfefs that bf merit , are not the onely meritori-thej mean but Re- ous caufe of falvation ; But

they

(3*9)

they hope to be favcd by wardablenefs by pro-their own and other mens mife: which we main-merits. tain.

§ 5. Of the eutward means.

LEt us now come to the external means, to wit, Gods Covenant, and the adminiftrationofthe Covenant in the Miniftry of the word and Sacraments. The Covenant is twofold, 1. Of works, or the Law. 2. Of Grace, ortheGofpel.

1. Thefe two the Papifts 1. Its no Covenant do almoft confound : for cf works in Pauls fence y they plainly make theGofpel or as Mofes Law wot; a Covenant of works, and Hut humane ABions call it the new Law , which are its condition. And prefcribes a more perfe A o- as all the Ancient* ufe bedience then the Law it felf, to call it the new Law, for the obtaining of juftifi* fo its juftlj , feeing cation and Salvation. Chrifi i* the King of

the Church and it hath the nature of a Law. But the fromife is the chief fart : and the moral precepts prefcribe no other ohedi* ence then they did before in nature : *But Pofitives are added.

2. That faith is ftirrcd up, and fo fins forgiven by the preaching of the word,they fay is a fiftion of the Hereticks of our Times,

3. That the Sacraments 3. In this thej have are not feals of the pro- fome new friends a* mifcsor Covenant of God , mongpurfelves.

nor

(4oo)

nor inftitutecf ro confirm the promifc. 4. Sofayfome An-

abaptij

fcr.

5. .Iwonldwecmld fee thU in the fruits andproof. But de o-pere operato tbej are not themfelv.es. agreed of the fence.

4. That Circumcifion was a feal of the Righteoufnefs of faith onely to Abraham.

5.. That Sacraments of the new Law da confer grace that makes us acceptable, or juftifying Grace, ex operc 0* perato % i. e. upon that very account, becaufe the external Sacrament is adminiftred, if they put not the Bar of mortal fin.

6. That grace is contained in the Sacraments as in a veffel, nay that the Sacraments are Phyficalinftru-raental caufes of Grace, and that they do work ho* linefs by a power put into them by God , as the heat of the fire is the caufe of the burning of the wood.

7. That there is neceffart-ly required the intention of the Adminiftrator to the truth of the Scramcnt, as leaft of doing what the

doing Church docs.

7. His real intention u necejfarj to make it * lawful adminiftr a-tion 04 to himfelf, but not to others : but his feemingintentionjrfW their own feeming intention isneceffary to the external being of the Sacra* went that it be no nullity : And the 'receivers real intention is neceffary to the effetts and well being of it to himfelf.

8. That there are feven Sacraments of the new Covenant inftituted by that,nei, ther fewer nor more,

It is not the name of a Sacrament that We contend about s but the nature and. definition.

9. That

(4°0

0. That io the Sacraments of Baptifm, Confirmation, and Order tfiere is imprinted in the Soul by God a Character or certain fpriricual and indeleble fign or rnarke, fo that they cannot be re-iterated-: In the other Sacraments there is oncly an ornament or drefs imprinted in (lead of a Charafter or

io. That the obfervacion of the Ceremonies which they ufe in the Adminiftrati-on of Sacrafflfnts (though invented by themfelves) through will-worfliip is meritorious and part of Divine worfhip.

9, They k^cW not Vohat to make of this Character thtmfelves many Schoolmen m#ke it to be but a Relation : And we confefs that B/iptijw ^Ordination jkC* do fix hs in a Relation to God.

mark.

lO.They that thinly it their duty to ferve God by fitch inventions , -will eajiij be drawn t§Winkj*o Vcell of their invented Work*.

§ 6. Of 'Baptifm.

T Hat all Infants before are pofTcffcdby the Divel.

2. They grant a power to women (even fueh as are ua-baptized therafclvcsj to baptize.)

3.That Baptifm is not only neeeffary, by neceffity of

1. My nature nil are Satans captives y which exorcifm will not deliver mfrom.

2. This error ( in cafe of Neceffity ) fame ancients and Councils held.

3. Some of them ex* cept thofe thai have

D i pre

the totum baptifmi : tfane can be javed

(401)

precept (which we confefs) but alfo to be limply neceffa-ry to falvation by neceflity of means : for none can be faved without Baptifm.

4. That the efficacy of Baptifm does not extend it felf to the future , but one-ly to that which is paft.

'without the thing fig" mfiedin 'Baptifm : but they maj without the

^.There u aground tyorkjaid for the pardon of future fins\but no aElxal pardon of them.

5. That the laver of Regeneration is not profitable tothofethat fall after Baptifm.

6. If the Pope were 6. That* there is in Baptifm a iiient and implicite oath of obedience to the Pope.

7. That no fin remaines or is left in the Baptized: for fin is wholly taken ivtAy by Baptifme , not onely fo that it is not imputed, biK being.

8, That Baptifme alfo does confer grace to the Baptized extpere operate by the work done, by which h^istruely and formally juilified.

9. In many things 9. TL \t the Baptifm of

they agree, andin ma- John was noc the fame Sacrament , nor had it the fame force and efficacy with the Baptifme which is inftitiued by Chrift ; as if Chrift were

the head of the Church we mufi needs be bap' ti^ed into him.

7. Hcnrf comes it

then to appear in *B, as

: d$ thej come to

fo as that has no o. what goes with it in mofi , before they ccmetoa*e.

tiy thej differ were all corfifs : Of h fee Z;uichy oft

av;-df\

(A°\ )

not jieAuthor of fufo/$ Baptifrne.

lJPThat after the Bap- lo.Srthe Antler.ts tifm of fohn they muft needs thought „ and I thinks receive the Biprifme c^ ttthefaftflwaj, Chrift.

n.ThattheBellsaretobe 11,12. Theres 'no Baptized by the Bifhops or end of humane inven-Suffragans with a foleam tions when once wen Rite. depart from the Scri*

12. They life atfd urge piure fuffickncj and fome unprofitable and faper- give Way to their own ftitious Ceremonies as if they felf conceitednefs and were neceflary both before arrogancy. Baptifm and after. For,

1. The Baptized are figned with thefigaof the Crofs on the forehead, on the breft, on the eyes, on the ears, onthenofe, and on the mouth; that all the fenfes of the body may be guarded with this fign; for by vertue of t\\isfigne, are the Sacraments compleated, and the Divels ftratagems fruftrated.

2. They give them hallowed Salt to eat, that being feafoned with wifdom , they might be free front the ftink of fin; and may not putrifie again.

3. They play the Conjurers about little children* as if they were fuch as were pulled out of the hands of the Divel, and they blow the wicked fpirit out by their breath, That one fpirit may be driven out with another.

4. They touch their neftrils and ears with fpitle^ * faying, Ephata, be opened.

5. They anoint them with confecrated oile in the breaft, that they may be fortified againft the adversary, and he may not be able to perfwade them unto unclean and hurtful things: They anoint them alfo

w

(404)

t*

between the (houldcrs,that they may receive fb^gth to bear the Lords burden.

After Baptifm, they anoint the top of the head of him who is newly Baptized with Crifme or Oyle. After this facred Un&ionthey cover his head with a holy veil, that he may know himfelf to en joy a Kingly and Prieftly Diademe. They give him a lighted Taper, that he may be taught thereby to fulfill that Evangelical command, So let jour light fhine^ &c

§ 7. Of Confirmation.

1 .^T^HE Sacrament of Confirmation is more wor-JL thy then the Sacrament of Baptifm, for as it is done by greater Priefts (t/;VBiftiop») which cannot be done by lefs, foalfoitis to be had and held with greater veneration and reverence.

2. That Confirmation does excel Baptifm in regard of its effeding grace to well doing.

%* That the Sacrament of Confirmation does conkr Grace making us acceptable , ex of ere operato, 4nd indeed more then Baptifm does

4. In which the fulnefs of the Holy Ghoft is conferred, viz,, ex open operate.

5 The matter of this Sacrament is Chrifme, or unftion, which they call the Chrifme oi Sajva-vation.

6. That by this holy Chrifme made of Oyle and Balforn, and fmeered on the forehead in form of £ Crofs, the fevenfold Spirit of Grace is given.

7. For that the holy Spirit is given to us by Oylc, as it was given to the Apoftles in the form of fire.

8. That

(405)

8. ThathewillncvcrbeaChriftian, that is not by. Epifcopal Confirmation Chrifmated.

9 Inftead of Impofition of hands, the Bifho.p, gives him that is confirmed a boxe on tbeeare, to confirm him forfooth , and to drive away the Divel.

§ 8. Of tkeSacharifi.

i, TN the Sacrament of the Eucharift they teach JL and urge the corporal prefence of the flefli of Chrift. As if that Sacrament were inftituted to nourifti bodies and not fouls.

2.And that the body and blood of Chrift is made really prefenc in the Sacrament byTranfubftantiation,or convcrfion of the whole fubftance of the bread iqto the very body of Chrift, and of the whole fubftance of the wine into his very blood.

3. That this Tranfubftantiation is made by reciting the Sacramental words, Uqc eft corfmmwm^ This is my body. And therefore they call thefc operative words.

4. That thefe words are to be muttered with a low murmuring : as if Chrift had fpoken them Magically toinchant the Bread, and not to inftrufthis Difciples.

5. Thus they expound them, This ( I e. under thefe figures) is my body, and yet they urge the lit* teral fence, or ?* t*?*r.

6. That the body of Chrift is made of the Bread in the Eucharift as Wine was made of water.

(4o5)

7. And yet that the Priefts when they make the Body of Chrift of the Bread, do not produce it (04 feme will have it) but do change the fubftancc of the Bread into the very pre exifting body.

8. That after the words of confecration, the meer accidents, and indeed all the accidents of the bread and wine do remaia.

9. That not fo much as the firft matter doth remain after the change of the bread.

ra That the fubitance of the bread is confumed andceafeth to be and yet is not anihilated.

11. That the fubftance of the bread ceafing, the fubftance of the body of Chrift fucceeds, and is contained under the accidents of the bread.

12. That thofe accidents are not in any fubje& t nor do they fubfift of themfelves, but are upheld by God after a fiipernacural manner.

13. That they are in fomewhat elfe, but do not in •♦ herein it.

14. That the body of Chrift does remain in the hoft, as long as the accidents of bread remain un-corrupted.

15. That as long as the body of Chrift is in the hoft, It is accompanied with Angels.

16. That in the corruption of the fpecie?, there is matter fubftituted by God, in that veryinffynt in which thofe fpecies ceafe to be, and in which fome-thing elfe is Generated.

17. That the fubjeft of thefe Accidents is quantity , which alfo it, felf is an accident, and which they feign to fubfift without a quantum that hath di • menfions.

18. That the Elements of the Sacrament of the I arift do not nourifh if taken in a great quantity,

with-

(4&?>

without a Divine Miracle . And therefore neither do they MHriJbthe mice that take a [mull quantity without 0 miracle.

19. But as they take .away the fubftancc of the < Bread and Wine , and lo with'that the fubftanceof the Sacrament: fo they rob die Body of Chrift of almoft aii the effential properties of a true body by this i ;f Tranfubftantiation.

20." And as they feign the Accidents of bread in the Sacrament without the fubftancc of it• fothcy mnft needs feign the fubftance of Chrifts body without the Accidents of it.

21. Many do teach the prefence of Chrifts b(jdy., affirming that one and the fame body of Chrift undivided does exift uponinnumrncrabie Altars, and every where whole.

22. That the body of Chrift being in many places at once, and yet not in the fpace between , is not difcontinuedordividedfrom it felf in refpeft of its proper fubftancc'or quantity,but only is divided from it felf in refpeft of place.

23. That one and the fame body of Chrift being in heaven and on earth, yea in innumerable places on ear*!i at once is indeed vifible and palpable in heaven, but on earth invifible, and beyond all our fen-ks : There it is limited and circumfcribed; here tis unlimited, thereit has its Dimenfions, here tis free from all dimensions.

24. Moreover they teach an Oral and Capernaiti-cal Manducatioh of the flefh of Chrift, for they fay the body of Chrift in the Eucharift is really and fen* fually touched, broken, and eaten.

25. Yea that wicked men receiving- the Sacrament of the Altar, do chew the body of

Dd 4 Chrift,

Chrift , and break it with their Teeth.

26. And upon the fame account, is the very body of Chrift devoured by Mice and Doggs,if they chance to eat the hoft,

27. By reafonof this Myftery of Tranfubftanti-ation, they call the Sacrament or confecrated hoft , their Lordan&God.

28. That theMafs Prieft when he makes the S?cra« meut, or (as they themfelves fpeak) the Body of Chrift, he is the Maker of his Maker.

29. The Prieft does adore the confecrated Hoft 5 and does offer it to others by lifting it up to be ado-

30. And for the fame end they keep it and carry it in folemn Proceilion, that it may be publikcly a-dored.

31. That the Eucharift when it is carryed to the fickis to be adored by all thofe that meet it,thofe that do adore it are to have indulgences, thofe that don't #dore it are to be counted Hereticks, and are to be perfecuted with fire and fvvord.

32. By this Bread-worftiip they commit great idolatry ^ whilft that they adore a peice of Bread, with the worfliip of LatrU, which is oneiy due to God.

3 3. In honor of this Breaden-God they celebrate thefeaft of the body of Chrift.

34. Although they confefs Chrift did adminifter this venerable Sacrament with both Elements of Bread and Wine, and though they acknowledge this Sacrament was received of the faithful in the Primitive Church with both Elements : Yet they determine that it is to be communicated to the Laity in. anejrindor Element oneiy , and forbid the Priefts

gtv-

(4°?)

ingit to the people in both kinds, upon pain of ex-communication.

35,. They teach that whole Chrift is in either of the Elements, and that the wholp Nature of the Sacraipent is to be found in one of them, neither is any more profit reaped from communion in both kinds then in one.

36. Nay that he gets more who communicates in one, in obedience to the Church, then he that communicates in both without that huge fruit of 0-bedience.

37. But this taking away of the Cup from the people may feem a fmall matter; for it is done but once. every year, at which time the Sacrament is given to the people: For in all the reft of the MafTes which are continual and daily , they deprive both the people and the Clergy that do not confecrate it of both kinds. For in private Maffes it is held forth to be feen by the people and Clergy, and to be adored, not to be received but onely by the Prieft that makes it.

38. They urge a mixture 38. 7'his the anti-of Water with the Wine in tnt Church ufed^nd I the Cup as moft nccefTary. fhould net refufe it either way.

39. And theyafTert that the Body of the Lord cannot be rightly taken , but of thofe that faft.

40. They have converted the Sacrament of the Eucharift by which God communicates Chrift f o us, into a real Sacrifice in which they do offer up Chrift to God.

41. Alfo the Table into an Altar and the admini-ftraror of the Sacrament into a Prieft after the order of Mekhizjtdeki 42. They

42. They fay th ; s new Sacrificing is required J that Chrifts Body may begin to be an oblation.

- 43. That Chrift in thelaft Supper did offer his body and blood m both kinds of Bread and Wine, to God tfae Father as an oblation.

44. That Chrift did once offer up himfclf for us upon the Crofs 5 in the Mafs often by the hands of the Prieib.

45.That tis one and the fame facrifice which is done in the Mafs, and which is offered on the Crofs, one-ly they differ in the manner of oblation being without blood.

46. Every Mafs Prieft offering Chrift to God the Father, prayes God to accept that Sacrifice, and to command that it may be carried by the hands of an Angel unto the high Altar of God.

47. And therefore they make the Prieft Mediator between God and Chrift. m^

48. The Prieft in offering that Sacrifice to God for thers, is a Mediator between God and the men for whom he celebrates the fcfafs.

49. That Chrift, whenhefaid in the Supper, "Dq this y commanded the Apoftles and their Succeffors, that they fhouid Sacrifice him and offer him up to God the Father-

50. That by the fame words Chrift did appoint his Apoftles to be Priefts.

51. That one never to be repeated offering of Chrift, by which he hath confecrated thofe that are fanftified for ever, They do offer thoufands al-moft infinite times,

52. Nei-

(4»)

52. Neither do they do it onely at divers times and in divcr9 places, but in the fame Temple they celebrate divers Maffes at divers Altars.

53. They alfo celebrate Ma(% (i e they offer Cbrifthirafelf to God) for the honor of the Saints, to obtain their interceffion with God.

54. That the facrifice of the Mafs,which they con-fefs is without Blood t istruely propitiatory for the living and for the dead.

55. That the fame facrifice is impetratory not only of Spiritual but Temporal blcffings: hence they are wont to celebrate Mafs, i. e. offer Chrift to God, for the obtaining of health, for defence, foraprof-perous journey, for vidory in war, and all ofber fuch Temporal benefits ; yea for Horfes and Hoggs, &c.

56. By the MafSj which being hired they are wont to celebrate for others: They fay,they can apply to them the vertue of Chrifts death to take away their fins, and to obtain all manner of benefits.

57. By Maffes are fouls delivered out of Purgatory.

58. To conclude, They have moft filthily polluted the Sacrament of the Eucharift with a multitude of foolifh Ceremonies, which were too long to re-hearfe; And yet in the obfervation of them they place the worfhip of God, and merited urge them as moft necefTary, and not to be omitted without rjiortalfin.

§ 9.

§ 9' Of their Sacrament of Penance.

i. The word (Sacrament) is not fit matter for much (on-nation.

2» There isfome difference in the terminus a quo attd&d quem as the Law dijfercth: but not fnch as to make one a Sacrament anh the other none.

Publike pr&fejfion of Repentance for open fcandalous fins , is a needful duty y fin fully negleUed by us, as it ps brought to a Sacrament and ceremony With them.

3. This is a certain truth : but that freewill is enabled and moved by Gods grace.

4. CMany of them by merit mean but that ex pado, it is the

qualification of thefe to vat ion.

1. *npflat Repentance QPe-A nance^is a Sacrament properly fo called.

2. That Repentance in the New Teftament is another thing from that wkiA was in the old, and alfo that in the new Teftament which is after Baptifme is a-nother thing from that which is before : For that Repentance which is in the Old Teftament , or before Baptifra , is not a Sacrament. That faying of Luther is herefie, A new Life is thebeft Penance.

3. They fay contrition is an Aft of the Will, done by the power of Freewill, or a forrow voluntarily affum-ed.

4. That contrition does deferve forgivenefs of fins.

whom God hath promt fed Sal* 5,6,7,

(4«3>

5. That its neceffary to 5,6,7,&c. Jnfiy-juftifkation thatfin9 all and ing from their inven-cvery one (as far as may be) ted way of Ccrfeffxn, be confefTcd to thePrieftas we*have Umexiably to a judge. wronged the fouls of

men , by difufing fa much 4U Chrijl hath made our duty and neceffary, And the ancient Churches ufed, and we mttfi ufe before it will be well with hs.

6. That this confeffion i* meritorious of remiffi-on of the fault, the leffening of the punrlhment, the opening of Paradife, and of confidence of falva-vation.

7. Without Sacramental (which they call Auricular) Confeffion or the vow of it, fins cannot be forgiven. ,

8. That fin which was declared under the Seal of Confeffion is by no meanes to be difclofed (though it were the Crime of Treafon or Rebellion.

9. By the doftrine of fa- 9, 10. Some of them tisfa&ion, they do facrilegi* by fatufying god , oufly , and blafpheraoufly wean no more then the derogate from the fatisfa fti- anfwering of hu wiB 9 on of Chrift. concerning f$ much of

dnty or fftjftring a* he hath laid upon us* But others worfe.

io They teach indeed the fatisfadion ofChrift to be full for all, both in refpeft of the fault and al-(o the punifhment • but by way of fufficiency ; not by way of efficiency; but fatisfa&ion by way of fufficiency onely deferves not the name of fatisfa&ion.

11. They fay the fault be* 11. The everlafi* ing remitted, there remains ing punifhment being

a

(4M)

remitted, the temporal a debt of punifhment to be

funifhwcnt of God by paid, for which fatisfaftion

the Magifirate, or by muft be made.

fatherly cajiigaHon

may remain. And fart of it doth remain on us all For

he chafieneth whom he loveth.

12. Thatrfacisfa&ion is required for thecompen-fation of the wrong done to God, and the fatisfying of divine juflice.

13. That a juftifledman may truely and properly make fatisfation , not onely to the Church, but even to God himfelf, namely for the guilt of punifh-ment; which remains to be expiated after the fault is remitted.

14. That it is unbecoming Divine Clemency to remit fin without our own fatisfaftion.

Three waves \\*c arefaidtofatkfe the Lord. 1.5. As fatufjipg 15. Firft, By patiently God y fgnifieth but a bearing the fcourges andpu-fine ere doing our duty, nifhments laid on us by God. we may be [aid to fa

ti*fie him: Bm to make him reparation for the wrong we have done him, or fat & fie hi* Law by perfetl obedience, or hU Vindictive f#ftice by ourfufferings here, U impoffibh.

16. Secondly, By voluntary undertaking laborious works.

17. Thirdly, By undergoing the punifhmentim-pofed bv the difcrecion of the Prieft.

18. Chafiifcment is 18. That all the afflictions a.true and proper f]??~ of the faithful are to be ac-cies of punifhment a* . co#ttwd for true and proper greed on. puni(hfnents of fin,

i9.Tha£

(4*5)

i9- That the calamities , which are laid upon the juft after converfion, are to be born in fome fence to compenfate their offence.

20. That it is not fuffici- 20f 2% % &c. As fa* ent that we repent except we tisfjing God u but alfo fatisfie God by painful f leafing him , all our and fatisfa&ory works. duties fatisfie.

21. Amongft thofe painful works, they reckon their Whippings of themfelves, and Pilgrimages unto the places of the Saints,^.

21. Prayer they reckon 22. Prayer and a amongft penal works. holy life u a delight

and great benefit * y but accidentally may be treublefomc fo far as we are carnal, and therefore requirethfome felfdenyaL

2 3. Fading alfo and Almes deeds they teach to be fatisfadory works.

24. That one man may ft- 24. One wan may ttsfie for another, but lefs do a duty that emdue-fuffering is required of him eth to another-s fpiritu-that fatisfies for another. algood, but not by me'

rit.

25. That the fatisfaftory and penal works of the Saints may be communicated and applyed to o-thers.

26. That the vertuc of 26. The Right ufe Chrifts l^pod is applyed to of Abfo[utiQn apply us by the Pryfts abfolution. eth Chrifts blood de-

claratively. And is too much laid by in mojl Churches.

27. That by vertue of the Priefts abfolution', eternal punifhment is turned into temporal , which alfo the Pricft impofes according to his difcretion.

28. That

(4i6)

28. That the words of abfolution arc not onely a fign but alfo a caufe of remiffion of fin , or that they do effect juftificatiomfor by the Priefts abfolution is fin driven away removed ex of en operato as a cloud by the wind.

29. That a man cannot be reconciled to God without a Sacramental abfolution.

30. That Sacerdotal abfolution hath that force of juftifying; becaufe many defiring reconciliation and believing in Chrift are damned, onely becaufe they died before they could be abfolved by a Prieft: or (as they otherwife exprefs their meaning ) do perifh for that onely they could not have a reconciling Prieft,

31. To Papal abfolution we refer the Jubilees and their fale of indulgences.

32. Alfo in the year of Jubilee (which they have reduced from the hundredth to the fiftyeth , and thence to the twenty fifth) they promife full re* mifiion of all fins to thofe that vifit the Temples of Teter and Tanl, and the Lateran Church.

33. They affcrt that there is a treafureof overflowing fatisfadions in the Church not onely of Chrift, but alfo of the Saints which the Pope by indulgences can apply both to the living and dead, by which they are delivered from the guilt of punifli-ment before God.

34. That # fouls are freed from Purgatory by indulgence?.

3,5. They confefs there is no need to adde the fatis-fe&ion of the Saints to the fatisfadion of Chrift (which they cannot deny to be" infinite and alwayes overflowing) yet they (to whom gain is godlinefs) thiak meet to add them.

36. Net/

36. Neither do they beftow indulgences for a few dayes or years, but for many thouiands of years : from whence it is raanifeft they do but maki a jeft of the Article of the day of judgement which according to their own opinion will put an end to Purgatory , and all temporal punifhments.

37. To conclude in all their Sacramental penance they make no mention of faith at all, and of Chrift fcarce any.

38. For Repentance (Penance) which they will have to be a plank after '(hip wrack' they fay confifls (on the penicents part) in contrition; auricular con-feffion,and fatisfa&ion < on the Prieits part in Sacramental abfolution, as the aft of a Judge, vvhofc words are, Idoablblvetheefromall thy fins in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghoft.

59. That that is a pious prayer which fome are wont to ufe in Monafteries after abfolution given for fin : let the merit of tfie pailion of our Lord Jefus Chrift , and the blefled Virgin LMarj , and of all Saints, the Merit of Order, and the burthen of Rc« ligion, thehiimility of Confefiion, the contrition of heart, the good wotks which thou haft done, and wilt do for the love of our Lord Jefus Chrift, be-ftead thee for remiffion of fin, and increafe of merit and grace, and for the reward of Eternal Life, Amen.

EV §10,

§ 10. Of extreamVnttion*

i, fTpHat the extrearn Unftion is truely and pro-X perly a Sacrament of the New Teftameat,and indeed an ordinary one,

:• That this Sacrament doth confer grace, making us acceptable ex epere opcrato : doth reftorc health to the lick , and blot out fins if any remains

3. That by this Un&ion (which they apply to the eyes, to the ears, to the mouth, to theloynes, and to the hands) God doth grant to the lick whatfoever is wanting by that fault of the fences.

4. That by this Sacrament a man may fome-times be faved, who (hould otherwife plainly be damned.

1. That Ordination is truely and properly a Sacrament of the new Law, conferring to the Ordained Grace making him acceptable ex epere operato. .

2. There are feven,or rather eight Sacraments of Order,all whieh are truely, or properly called Sacraments, viz. The Oit'rrox Porters, of Readers, of Exorfifts,of Servitors of Sub-Deacons, of Deacons

• and Presbyters,and Biftiops.

3. In every one of is given to the Ordained, the ftven fold Grace of the Spirit, yea Grace making them acceptable, and that ex opere operato.

4. That anointing is required in Ordination.

of

^ (4lp)

Of Marriage*

i. That Matrimony, though it were iaftitutedin Paradifc , is tru^ly and properly a Sacrament of the new Law.

2. And therefore does confer grace upon the married, making them acceptable , ex opere ope*

3. That the Church has power to conftitute im« pediments chat (hail hinder marriage.

4 # That the Church has power to difpenfe with the degrees of Confanguinity forbidden of God, and to make more degrees which (hall not onely hinder marriage, but break it.

5. That marriage confirmed, not confummated^ is alfo diftolved, in refpeft of the Bond , by the entrance of one of the parties into a vow without the confent of the other.

6. That the folemn Vow of Chaftity, and holy Orders, are an impediment both hindring marriage to be made, and breaking it being made.

7. Aifo difference of Religion docs not onely hinder marriage to be made, but alfo break it being made.

8. That marriage contrafted between Infidels, when either is converted to the faith, is broken, viz,. bccaufc that marriage was not a Sacrament.

9. That the Church of Rome did rightly prohibit marriage of old to the fcventh, but afterwards to the fourth degree of Confanguinity , according to the Canonical rule of reckoning ( but the fourth degree of Canonical reckoning is the feventh and eighth in the Civil Law.)

( 4*°)

io. The Spiritual kindred (which arifeth forfooth from ttapufm and Confirmation) may hinder marriage to be made, aud break it being made.

§ II. Of the Efttts of Grace.

NOvv follow the Effeds of Grace or the degrees of Salvation, fuch are vocation, juftifica-tion, &c.

i. Geds love or fa- i. Where firft the Papifts vor U our Radicall do egregioufly erre in ex-Grace , from Which pounding rife word Cgrace] flow both Relative ef- for when the holy Spirit, fetts in fxrdon, jufii- fpcaking of thefe effe&s of fication^doptiov, and Divine grace, faith we are Ph^fical in onr Reno* juftiikd by grace, and faved vMhn : all Which are by grace,^. By grace they called alfo Grace. underftand not the free fav-

our of God in.Chrift, buc the gift of grace inherent in us : as if the Scripture did not fay we are caiied, juitified , and faved by the fame grace we are eledted and redeemed by.

2. And then when they divide the grace of God into eternal grace, which they call the cverlafting love of God: and temporary fuch as the benefit of vocation and juftification are: again they divide this temporary grace into grace freely given, and grace making acceptable, both which they will have to be a quality inherent in us, as if either all grace which they call' temporary , did inhere in vs , or that which doth inhere in as were not all freely given.

3. Grace

(4»)

3. Grace making us. ac 3. To deny cither ceptablc they will not have Relative or'Inherent to be the grace of God, by Grace , u to deny that which he loves us and makes without which there is us acceptable to him, accord no falvation. The ing to that, wherein he hath neceffity of Pardon tit made m accented in the btlov Icajt, many of them ed: but to be grace by way confefs.

of habit remaining in us, by which we love God, therefore they, call charity a grace making us acceptable, as if by rcafonof its force and merit men were faved of God.

4. Moreover when they 4. No doubt but divide grace into fufficient till have fo much grace and efficacious grace they fay that they may believe fufficient grace is given to all and be faved , if they and every man even without will (fincerely) Be-theChurch, by which they caufe though vzWtcxt-' have a power to will, and dere be not credere, as they can if they will,believe, Dottor Twifs anfWcrs and by believing be faved. *7, yet credere eft voluntatis,^ Auftin an-

fwers it. But the tpapifls, effeeially the Dominicans affirm not,fufficient grace to belief to be given to thtfe that hear not the Gofpel : but enely fufficient grace to do that Vehicjitendcth to this further trace.

5. If any want fufficient grace to avoid fin, they do not truely fin, neither are they guilty of fiq before God.

6 That in the firft aft of 6. The will is firfi converfion, the will is not fqjfive in receiving paffive. the "Divine influx,but

attive in the eliciting its 0 vena. •' •Ee 5 7. That

(4n)

j.The will hath na* 7. That it is in the power turalPower or faculty of mans free will to refift or to refift or yield jvhich yeild to efticacioui grace.* will not be brought in-

to all for yielding, becaufe it wanteth moral powerJhat is ft is dlj-inclined, "But to refift it hath too much moral Power ^hich is impotencyjetfuch as grace can heal.

§ 12- Ofjuftiftcathn.

BUt now the do&rine of Juftification they utterly overthrow.

1. perverting the 1. For firft they con* term , thej caufe a found juftification which ft rife about a^ or d. is an aft of God* without

us, as Redemption, Reconciliation, Adoption, with Sanftification and Inherent Righteoufnefs : and (6 confound not onely the Goipel with the Law, but quite take away Juftification it felf, the chief benefit wc have by Chrift in this life.

2. Some of them 2. They teach men to lay muke merit of ccngrH- the caufe of juftification and ity ( which they fay , the merit of falvation in prectdeth fnfticati- thcmfelvcs.

en) to be properly no

merit. And feme of them*deny that there is any proper merit of condignity at all: 73 ut others aregrofs in this

3. The term Re- 3. They will have remif-mifjicn alfo they abufe, fion of fin to be a blotting of meaning by it , ths tlieiji out,by which not only

the

(4*3)

the guilt butalfothe irregularity it felf is aboiifhed.

givenefs they take in with it. verbal centroverfies.

4. As in warming,the cold is expelled by the conning of the heat: (o in juftification fin is aboiifhed by the infufi-on of rightcoufnefs.

change of ctir tjtml** ties , or pitting < ( fin it felf\ though for-Andfo thej make many

4. This is true of S } anttifi* cation , which is the thing they mean h Juftification : But by this abufe of the terms 9 they mifinter-fret Scripture* And alfo they fo much hide the very being of pardon by perverting the Words that fignifieit, that its hard to find in fome of them, whether they con* fefs any fitch thing as pardon.

5. Neither will they underftand juftification in the Scripture , as a Law-terra to be oppofed to condemnation, and San&ification to pollution.

6. The Scripture teaches 6. As to the AH f fandificacion to be an aftion they make it their.own of God : they make the fe- by merited grace : but cond juftification, as they call it, not Gods adion but their own.

7. Whereas the Scripture teacheth that we are juftified by the grace of God intimating the inward moving caufe of juftification , which is the free favor of God in

the habits and the grace affifting , they fa j it of God, and the aUJay mofi.

7. This is their verbal error: no doubt that Which they mean by juftification J hat is, Santlification , con-fifteth in Inherent grace. inherent in us: which

Chrift : the Papifts under-ftand grace, or rather graces yet in the Queftion of juftification (wherein the holy

Ee4 Ghoft

8.. This they fay of juftification taken for fanilifcation^ but not as taken for Pardon* But they are led full to mifinterpret Scrip tures by mijunder-/landing tkp word.

(4*4)

•Ghoft oppofes works to grace) are not moreoppof* ed to works then their firft juftification is to the fe-cond.

8. When the Scripture teacheth that we are juftifi* ed by the righteoufnefs of God, and the blood of God i. r. of Chrift who is God (for by his obedience and blood, we are juftified, and he is our righteoufnefs) I fay by a righteoufnefs which is

not revealed in the Law, and therefore not inherent, but which is revealed in the Gofpel without the Law. They underfland a righteoufnefs infufed by God and inherent in us.

9. When the § Scripture teaches that we are made the righteoufnefs of God in Chrift, as he is made fin for us, and fo that the obedience of Chrift is communicated to us for juftification, as the difobedience of Adam for condemnation namely by imputation; But they fay we are ;uftified not by the imputation of the righteoufnefs of Chrift, but partly by

the infufion of habitual righteoufnefs, viz,, in the firft juftifieation, partly by our own performance of aftual righteoufnefs or good works in the fecond juftification.

9 Still they wean frxttiftcation , When they/peak^ efffiftifica-tion, 'But they con-fefs that Chrift sfuf ferities and obedience are the werito-ri&tu vaufe of our Pardon and Renovation , both Which they nfeto com* prize in the BWdfJuftification.

jo. What

(4*5)

io. For they contend for 16. They may as 2l doable juftifieation; the well talh^ of a third firft which confifts in the in- and jonrth juftificati* fufed habit of charity , the on , for fanUif cation other in meritorious works, hath more degrees then

two. But donb^ejfe there is fitch a thing as that which thej mean by a fe-cond juftifieation / if thej leave cm merit: for there is aBual obedience andincreafe of grace.

Whenas the Scripture The Scripture faith teacheth that we are juftified we are juftified by be-by faith without works i. e. not by inherent righteouf-nefs, but by the righteouf-nefs of Chrift apprehended Gofpel, and^accepting by'faith, and therefore that him entirely as Chrift, we are not juftified by faithas it is a part of inherent righ-teoufnefs, for fo with other graces it fan&ifies us Jnor by any other faith, then that which apprehends the righte-oufnefs of Chrift , or by any other grace(becaufe there is no other befide faith that apprehends Chrifts righteoufnefs) and therefore by faith alone.

ii. The Papifts on the contraryteach faith tojuftifie as it is a part of inherent 'righteoufnefs.

Jieving in the Lord fefus Chrift, that is, By a(Jenting to his

that is , by becoming true Chrtftians 9 or Chrifts Difciples. For a believer and a Difciplein theGofpel ufnally fignifie the fame thing,

12. And not fo much to juftifie , as to-difpofe us for

juftifieation , by obtain-

II. Itdethfantiifie 04 a part of inherent righteoufnefs : and it

is the receptive condi « tion of Pardon.

12. / would they

fa id no move but that

it dijpofeth to it , for

(4%6)

then they would not ing remiffion, and deferving fay it deferveth it. juftification.

13. For, fay they, faith and Repcntaace do jufti* fie as difpofitions, and meritorious caufes ex con-gruo.

14. Still they mem 14. Bat that charity is Sandhfying. properly the juftifying grace.

15. An abfurd 15. And the form of jufti-fpeech: but thej adds fying faith. that its not the form of

faith at faith,but of faith and all othergr'aces\as faving or 04 a ftrifr Life. And we agree that faith i& "principally in the will: and the Velle u bj the Schoolmen called the Diligere.

16. Its unreafon- 16. And yet that true jufti-abh for thtm to call fying faith may be feparated that jufiifjing faith , from charity.

fthich Hants' that

which they take to bt the form of it.

17. And therefore that a man having true faith may be damned.

18. Neither do they ac« knowledge any fpecial faith which apprehends the righ-teoufnefs of Gh-rift, but they fay that is fufficient , which confifts in a general confent, without all affiance(yea even without knowledge ) which ^ they call implicite faith.

19 For they fay faith is better defined by ignorance then knowledge.

18. They fay it mufi be explicite in fome points, which We call effential) and that * we muH believe in Chrifi 04 fat isfling juftice and meriting for tu pardon and fanElifcation.

19. Thats but fome of them.

20. Nei--

20. Neither can they in- 20. Thej manage dure by any means that we this eontroverfie in the fay faith only juftifiei. dark. , not agreeing

tvitb m in the fence of the termes of the £^ueftien.

21. When as the Scrip- 21. Neither faith ture plainly excludes works nor works are proptr as caufes from the aft of caufes, juftification, though it require them in the fubjed: or perfon juftified, as ne-ceffary fruits of juftifying faith, by which believers are iuftified that is declared to be juft; but they afTert that we are not juftified before God by faith onely but alfo by works as the caufes of juftification.

22. And in this matter they make fames plainly to contradift Pattl.

23. And they invert the difpatation of Paul, as if the Queftion he difputes were, whether faith jufti-fies without works, but whether works juftifie without faich.

24. That men are juftified by the obfervation of Gods, and the Churches commands.

25. That mendeferveremiffion of mortal fins by repentance, Almes deeds, forgiving injuries, converting an offending Brother, and other duties of piety and charity by which we do not deny but our belief of the pardon of fin is'confirmed.

26. And that venial fins are purged away by the repetition of the Lords prayer , by ftriking the breft, by fprinklingof Holy Water, and the Bifhops blefling,c£r.

27. That a wicked man may defervc juftifyfng grace > ex congrm , arid that this merit of con-

• i gruity

fruity is when the firmer doth his utmoft.

28. They deny juftifica-on be to proper to the Eled;.

29. That no 'man in this life ought certainly to determine that he is of the number of the cleft.

30. That every one mufl doubt of the remiffion of their fins.

2S. So did the An-cltnts>tven Auguftine himfelf , and too many Protcftaxts.

29. This alfo Was too common With the Ancients f and is now with the [aid P rot eft-ants.

30 Some of them yield a certainty cf prefent Rtmiffion and justification, and mo-ralco'/ijellural certainty of Salvation.

31. No man can be certain of his juftification without a fpecial revelation.

32. That no man in this world ought to feek an infallible certainty of his falvation or juftification.

5 3, That doubting of the pardon of fin is not an infirmity but a vertue.

34, For any one certainly to believe that his fins are forgiven him throughChrift, is abominable preemption.

34. To be certain of it. is a great mer -cy : but to believe thzt it is a thing Written in Scripture, that 1 am pardoned , is not a duty : for it is not there

35. About this they differ: See Magro in fent. that faith hath xertaine evidence , which Ariminenfis tnd* others confute , 'aying it hath evidence of credibility , "but not of ccr-

35, That faith which the Apoftlc calls the fubftance,& evidence, and full affurance, they will have to be doubtful and uncertain.

^ainty*

36. Alfohope, which yet the Apoftle commends as an Anchor fure and ftcdfaft, arid that makcth not him^hat hopes,a(hamed.

§ *3« Of SanHif cation and good fVorkj*

i. *"TpHat concupifcencein i. The meer appetite A the regenerate is no is no Jin , but the cor-

fin. rnption and rebellion

of it #. z. That the regenerate 2. I maid We could or baptized may perfectly fee one of them do it fulfill the Law. ' once. Its a fhamefal

arguing for perfection bj bare words\ when none of them will give h* a proof §f it by their ewn example.

.3. That the works of the 3. They that be-righteous are limply and ab- lieve this 9 knoy* mt folutely righteous. themfelves.

4. That fins are expiated by good works .according to the proverb, forfooth, he that fteals much and gives a little, (hall efcape.

5. That good Works do 5. Pifcator and 0-concur by way of efficiency ther of wrs main-to falvation, or are necefTa- tain this. Though ry not onely for their pie- a meritorious efficient fence,but for their efficiency. ' cy we all deny,

6. And that good works are not onely fuch as are commanded by God : but fuch as are voluntarily undertaken by men wich a good intention.

% 7. That the gpod works of 7. The Scctifts and the righteous not onely jufti- many mere of them dc-

fie

ny this : but fo do not fie, but &lfo by way of con-Bellarminc and many dignity deferve eternal life, others. both for the Covenant* fake

and alfo the works them-

felves. 8. Waldenfis uni 8. And that that is merit ethers of them deny mil of condignity by which a merit , but thuts not man indued with grace and common^ fee inftances the holy Spirit after he hath in mj Confejfion. deferved the habit of love

by former merit doth by his good works and their condignity deferve eternal life.

% 9. To the merit of condign ty there is required an equality of proportion in the merit to the reward.'

1 o. To the good works of the righteous eternal happin^fs is as well due as eternal fufferings to the fins of the wicked,

21, That in every Chriftian work, proceeding from grace the merit of Ch:ifts blood is applyed.

12,. That Chrift by his death merited that our works might be fatisfaftory for fins, and meritorious of eternal life, or thus, Chrifc merited that by our own merits we might attain falvation.

13. That every aft of charity ,or every good work proceeding from Charity, doth abfolutely deferve eternal life.

14. That good works are meritorious of three tilings, viz,, of remitting the punifhment, of incrcafe of grace, and of eternal Life.

15. That a righteous man may deferve for himfelf an increafe of righceoufnefs by way of condignity*

16. Nei-

( 4$0

16. Neither do they think th«y muft truft to their own, but to other mens merits alfo.

17. That one believer may merit grace fe&ano-ther by way of congruity. <

1. That a juftified and fan&ified man may fall from the grace of God both tcrtally and finally , and perilh for evet\

2. That the grace of juftification received, is left by every mortal fin.

3. The grace of juftification being loft by fin, yet faith is not loft.

4. That faith is loft by every aft of unbe-liefe.

14.0/ geod mrkj particularly , of fafling.

%■ 1. /^\F Fafting I have fpoken already ,^hatthe V-/ Papifcs place Rafting in the choice of meats. 2. That their fafts arc hypocritical.

3. And fuperftitious.

4. That fafting even as it is obferved by them (which indeed is the meer mockery of atruefaft) is a work fatisfaftory for fin , and meritorious of eternal life, they impioufly and blafphemoufly teach.

5, Their prayers they pour out not onely to God but to Angels and Saints.

6. That .we may lawfully and mcriiorioufly be-. feech and pray theSaints both to inte rcedc for us with Ged f and to give afiiftance to us.

7. They

(430

7- They teach men toconfcfs their fins to the Saints that are dead.

8j> That God reveals our prayers to the Saints which we put up to them, and yec that we muft go to them as Mediators betwixt God and us.

9. They call upon God reprefented under fome figure or ftiape. •

10. They mutter their prayers before images fay* ing, fometimes the Lords prayer before a pidureof the Virgin Marj t or of fome other Saint, and Ave Maries before a crucifix.

11 They pray not onely in the name of Chrift, but alfo they believe they fhall be heard for the prayers and interceffion of the Saints.

12. Neither do they pray for the living onely, but alio for the dead.

13. That a general intention of worfhipping God is fuffirient when they pray, though they neither understand nor mark what they fay.

14. They teach their Difciples to pray in an unknown tongue, and fo without faith t without under Handing, without feeling like Parrots.

15. They teach them to number their prayers upon certain Beads, and to pay God , as it were a task of numbred prayers,

16. In which alfo they teach them mightily to tautologize, and to hope they (hall be heard for their much fpeaking.

17. They not onely reckon the Salutation of the bleiTcd Virgin, and the Apoftles Creed amongil their prayers, but alfo teach them to fay a hundred and fifty /Ae UWaries, and after every ten tAve Maries , one Tater Nojlzr , and after fifty, one treed.

18. And

13. And that prayer (even fuch as they are wont to bablc before piftures in an unknown tongue, either for the dead or to the dead, without faith, vjfch* outunderftanding , without feeling) is afatisfacto-ry work for fin , and meri-orious of eternal Life.

19. Alfo Aimcs-deeds to be m£ritoriotis and fatif-faftory.

§ 15. Of Glorification.

1. A S to the ftatc of Believers after this life, they J\. teach, thac Heaven was (hut, till Ghrifts paflion.

2. That the thief converted on the Crofs, was the firft of all believers that eiitred into the heavenly Paradke.

3. They make three receptacles of Souls after death, befides heaven and the place of the damned, viz. limbm patrvm, limbm infantum , and Purgatory, to which they alfo adde a certain kind of flour-ifhing, light, fvveet, and pleafant Meadow, in which they place certain fouls who fuffer nothing , but re-maine there for a white, becaufe they are not yet fit for the beatifical vifion.

4. That the fouls of the faithful before Chrifts re-furre&ion were in a fubtcrraneous pit, which they call limbm Patruw.

5. That the fathers dead before Chrifts afcenfion were not happy.

6. All little ones dying 6. Some of them, before Baptifm , they thruft fay they are f unified Into limbm infant tim > to be alfo With the pMti if

F f puniftied

(4H)

fenfes. See Concius . puniftied with eternal pun-Traftat. in the end of jlhment of lofs, not ©f fence. JmTenii Auguftin.

* The faithful which deparr, either with venial fins upon them, or with the guilt of punifhment(the fin being before remitted) tbeycaft into Purgatory, to be burnt there with corporeal fire,till they be fully purged.

8. That thefuffrages of the Church fuch as the fa-crifice of the Mafsand prayer , penal and fatisfafto-ry works, as Almes-Deeds, Falling, Pilgrimages, and the like, do profit the dead in Purgatory : and e-fpeciaily indulgences by which the fatisfaftory works of others are applyed to them.

9. For the Pope can communicate the prayers and good works of believers to them; whence it follows, as Albatus laid , the condition of the rich in this cafe is better then the poor, becaufe he hajth wherewithal to get fuflfragesforhim.

10. That the Saints in Heaven do not onely pray for the living on earth in particular, but alfo for the dead in Purgatory.

11. That the Saints are our mediators and advocates with God , underflanding our prayers and neceffities, and therefore to be called upon to pray for us.

12. That the Saints after death do obtain whatfo-ever they defireof God, becaufe chey deferred it in this life.

13. That their merits do profit us for falva-tion.

14. That the Saints are helpers and coworkersof our falvatioa

Ljjf, That the faithful living, are ruled and governed

(451;

verncd by the Spirits of blefTed men

1 6. That the Saints arc to be Caaonized by the Pope, and betqg Canonized eq be worfhiped.

16. Bcllarmine confejfeth^tkat inftt$h cafes of faff and particular judgement thereon the Pope may %And fe no ^papifts living can be certain* but that they praj to the damned fouls in hell f whom the Pope mifiakjngly canonized.

17. Therefore we muft fly to the Saints in our mifery.

erre

§16. Of the Chunk

i. HpHat the holy Catho-X like Church that we believe, is vifible.

2. And alwayes is vifible.

3. That it depends not on Gods eleftion ^ nor on true

I, 2t Tet we con* fefs a Catholike vifible continued Church.

3. Some of our own fay as much of /ate; but they mean it of the vifible Church bnely.

faith and Charity , that one belongs to this Church. But even wicked and reprobate men are members of the Ca-tholikc Church.

4. That the Catholike Church is no other than the Roman, or tfaat which the Roman Pope is over.

5. That the Catholike Church, and the Pope of Rome are the fame terms.

4. This is the heart of Popery.

tiz

(4S<5)

6 Neither are there any Catholicks,but thofe of the Romifli Church.

• 7. That he is a Catholike who believes all that the Roman Church delivers, whether it be writren in the Bible or not.

8. That there is no falvation out of the Roman Church.

9 That the notes of univerfality, antiquity, unity, and fucceflion in the Apoftles doftrine do agree unto it.

10 That the fincere preaching of the Gofpel, and lawful adminiftration of the Sacrament^ are not a certain no:e of the Church.

11. To acknowledge the Roman Pope, and to be under him as the Vicar ofChrift, the onely Paftor, the head of the whole Church, is a note of the true Church.

12. That the particular Reman Church is the Mother, Miftris, and Lady of all Churches : yea the Mother of Faith.

13. Thar the Roman Church did obtain the primacy from our Lord and Saviour himfdf

14. That the Roman Church hath power of judging all, neither is ic lawful for any to judge her judg-menr.

15. That the Reman Church hath authority to deliver doftrines of faith, without or befide the Scriptures.

16. That the Roman Church cannot erre in faith, much lefs fail.

17. That the Romjn Church cannot erre, in interpreting Scripture.

§ I-

(43* )

&• *7-

CThe Head, vU. Of the Reman Church 2 The Pope. ^The Members.

i. >TpHat the Roman Pope i. Hence Pcpery ,

J, is the head, founda- and Papifts are deno-tion, husband , Monarch of minated. the whole univerfal Church, the univerfal Bifhop , or the Bifhop of the whole world.

2. That the Reman Pope is the rock upon whom the Church is built.

3. The names which are given to Chrift in the Scriptures, from whence it appears he is above the Church , all of them are given to the Pope. Vnto this ts4ntichriftian throne he afcends by a gradation of moft impudent lies, fnch a* thefe.

4. That the univerfal Church cannot confift, un-lefs there* be one in it, as a vifible head with chief power.

5. Therefore the external regiment of the univerfal Church is Monarchical.

6. That the Monarchy of the Church was infti-tuted in Veter.

7. That "Peter in proper fpeech , was Bifhop of Rome , and rem ained Bifiiop there untill death.

8. That the Pope fucceded Peter in the Ecclefia-ftical Monarchy.

Ff 3 9- Nei-

(4*8)

g. Neither do they give the Monarchy of Ecclefi-aftical power, but of temporal alfo to the Pope.

i o. Neither do they make the Pope Chrifts General Vicap on earth, but Gods alfo.

11. They give a certain omnipotency to him.

12. They give him power of depofing Kings and Emperors, and abfolving their fubje&s from the oath of fidelity.

13. Moreover,without fhame they defend,thattlhe Pope teaching frofti his chair cannot erre.

14. That his words when he teacheth from his chair, are in a fort the word of God.

15. That the Pope cannot erre, even in thofe things which belong to good manners, or in the commands of morality f as well as in matters of Faith.

16. We muft pioufly believe,that as the Pope can* not erre as Pope ; foas a private perfon he cannot be a heretick.

17. Mmhofthtfe 17. That the chief autho-by tbt French is afcri rity of interpreting Scrip-bed to a Generate oxn- ture is in him.

rttfj and denjedtothe

J*opt : fo weU are they agreed in their fundatnen-

tab.

18. That the Pope is the chief judge in controversies of Religion.

19. We muft appeal from all Churches to him.

20. They give him authority to difpenfc with humane and Divine Laws.

21. They give him power of abfolving men not onely from fin, but from punifhments, cenfures, jaws, vows, and oaths.

22. Alfo of delivering men from Purgatory.

(459)

23. Of Canonizing Saints, and giving them ho-nors,that they may be prayed to in the Pubiike Prayers of the Church, that Churches and Altars rftay be built for their honor, that Maffes and Canonical hours be offered publikely for their honor, and feaft-dayes be celebrated, That their Pi&ures be drawn with a certain fplendor, that their Reliques be put into precious boxes, and publikely honored.

24. We muft believe that the Pope (Vphofomtinte J)fits Murderers , Traitors, King-killers , and ether Capital offenders into the Calendar of Saints and Martyrs) never errs in the Canonizing of Saints,

§ 18.

The Members of the ChurchS C ™§ re ef ed in r* j - u „ K Councils, or are confidered,either as ^Severally.

1. T^He office of convoeating General Councils, X properly belongs to the Pope.

2, That in no cafe a true and perfeft Council can be called, without the Popes authority, no not if it be neceflary for the Church, and yet the Pope will not, or cannot call one,nor if the Pope be a heretick. And therefore that a Council held without the Popes Authority is an unlawful meeting or Conventiclc,not a Council.

3. That J tis the proper office of the Pope, that by himfelf or his Legates, he be prefident of theuni-verfal Council, and as the fupreme judge do moderate all. j

F f 4 "4. That

(44°)

4- That the decree of a General Council made without the confent of the Pope, or his Legatees unlawful.

5. The French a- 5. That the Power of con*

gree not te thefe. firming or rejc&ing General

Councils is in the Pope of

Rome , neither are-the Councils authentical, unlefs

they be confirmed by the Pope

6. Tbat the diftin&ion of lawful and unlawful Councils does depend upon his oneiy will.

7. That the fentence of a General Council in a matter of faith is the laft judgement of the Church, from which it cannot appeal: yet that we may appeal from a General Council to the Pope.

8. That the Pope can neither be judged nor pun-idled by a Council or by any mortals.

9. That the Pope cannot fubmit himfclf to the co-aftive judgement of Councils.

1 o That the Pope is abfolutely over the univerfal Church, and above a General Council, fo that he can acknowledge no judgement above him,

11. Wcmuft believe with Cacholike faith , that General Councils confirmed by the Pope cannot erre Hcitfcer in faith nor manners.

12. That particular Councils approved by the Pope cannot erre.

13. That the power of the Pope and Council to-gether, is not greater then the Popes alone. Tut-r.scrim. /. 3.*. 41.

w

(440

§ 19. Of % the Members by themfelves.

I. np Hat to make a mem 1. Of the vifible

X berofthcCatholikc Church we fiaj the Church, there is not rcquir- fame. ed grace, or any internal virtue , but a profeffion of faith is fufficient.

The Members of the Church confidercd feverally, are, The Clergy. The Laity. 2.|That Clergy men are not held under civil Laws, by an^coaftivejbutonely dirc&ive bond.

3. That Clergy men breaking the Civil Law , can* not yet be punifhed by any civil Judge, nor be brought before the Tribunal of Secular Magi-ftrates.

4. That the goods of the Clergy , both Ecclefi-aftical and Secular, are free from the Tribute and Taxe of Secular Princes.

5. That men are to be prepared for receiving Orders, by the firft fliaving.

6. By how much the higher degree of Order any one is in, by fo much the larger (having is he to be crowned with.

7.That fingle life is alwayes joyncd to holy Orders, by Divine right.

The

(44*)

' Seculars ( Of the loweft Order.** Th» !efs as The Popifli \and thofe * Of the higher OrderA PrcsVy*cr$«

Clergy are <( either ^ which they call <^The great-eras Bi-fliops.

1 he tfopiln \and tflote ^tntae Higher Order.A

Clergy are < either «^ which they call<f"

either ) ) Priefh J

tRegulars * and are bo.h 7

8. That the Clergy men of the higheft Order are Priefts, properly fo called , which they Jay are in-ftituted co offer an external and real facrifice.

9, The choice of Bifhops does belong to the Pope by Divine right.

10. The Spaniards That all the Bifhops re-hlncired the faffing of ceive jurifdi&ion from ,the that in the Council of Pope. Trent.

11 The Rcmaxe Church hath Cardinals for fidef-men to the Pope, upon whom the univerlal Qhurch is curn#d as upon hinges.

12. Thefearetobe joyned with the Pope in the Government of the univerfai Church.

13. That thofe, whether they be Bifhops or Pref-byters \ or Deacons are not only to be preferred before other Bifhops, Archbifliops,Primate$,Patriarchs, but to be equalled even with Kings.

§ 20. Of Councils and LMonafiical vows.

1. *"TpHey teach tfiat there are Evangelical Councils A diftinft from commands, which no man is bound to perform, but they who profefs perfe&ion, and would deferve more and greater things than eternal life.

2. That the ftudy of perfection is not of command but Councils. 3* Such

(440

3. Such Councils arc thofe, of not fecking revenge , of loving our adverfaries, of not fwear-ing,&c.

4. Not to obey a Council is no fin.

5. That fome perfection 5. 6. Have the is necefiary to falvation, and fakers learn't this that eonfifts in the full obfer- diftinEliw of perfefti-vation of the commands. on , yet ?

6. That fome other perfe&ion is greater and is neeefTary, not limply for falvation, but for a more excellent degree of glory : and that eonfifts in the obfervation of Council?.

7. By obedience to Councils, men do fuperero-gate.

8. That vowed Virginity and fingle life, are mofl acceptable war (hip to God.

9. Yea, and the greateft fatisfadion for fin , and merit of eternal life.

1 o. A Monaftick life is a ftate of Perfe&ion.

11. All that's done by vow , is a worfhip of God.

12. Monaftical vows do fatisfiefor fin, and de-fervc eternal life.

13. Our entrance into Religion, is a fecond Bap-tifm, orinfteadof a new Baptifm, by which fatif-fa&ion is made for all former fins.

14. That perfection is to be placed in true Monaftick vows, as the vow of voluntary poverty , the vow of perpetual chaftity, the vow of Monaftical 0-bedience.

15. That voluntary poverty is rightly vovvcdto God.

16. That its lawful; Lawful ? yea a meritorious work, a worlcof perfe&ion and fupererogarion in Monks to live on begging. 17. ic

17. It is lawful, yea meritorious, for the younger men to vow fingle life for ever.

18. The vow of fingle life, is to he kept by them who have the gift of continency.

19. There is none, but mayjilwayes contain, if he will.

20. That 'tis lawful for children to enter into a vow, againft their parents content.

21. They a: -wo; ^,^ r n : variety of vows, which have various rules of he, invented by men, befide the holy Scripture. A id as if there were greater perfeftion in thofe rule:- then in the do&rine of the Gofpel , and a more compendious way toperfc&i-on and falvation : they teach , by the obfervation of them, eternal life and a more excellent degree of glory is obtained.

22. They give the obedience which is due onely to God, unto the men that live after the Rules of the Franc'fcan, Domincan order, Qrc.

23. That the Apollles were the firft Chriftian Monks.

2 4. To them who are buried in the Cowls of the Monkes, efpecially of the Francifcans they promife remi/fion of fin in fome part.

25. In all caufes 25. That Princes are not materially, they are: the fupream Governors of ha not in all formally, their fub je&s on earth, in all for they are not thefu- caufes fpiritual and temporal. fremc in every fart of

Government (that is, in Minifterial Dtreffive) hut in their o^nfort, that u coaBive.

26. They make Princes fubjeft to the people as well as to the Pope.

§.21.

(445)

§. 21. Of the LaVo.

Of Charity, or things to be done, thefum of which are in the Decalogue.

i. TPHat regenerate and. baptized perfons may 1 perfe&ly fulfill the Law, fo far as they are bound to fulfill ic in this life.

2. The fulfilling of the 2. what need yon Law in this life, is not onely anfefs fin, that can poffible but eafie. fulfill the Lawfo eafi-

ly ? tnt of jour c\V» nseuthes are yon judged now, that d& net thtt which you thinks fo eafie.

3. That every degree of Grace is Efficient to fulfill the commandments and expel all fins.

4. That we are not bound 4. Others of them in this life to love God with fay the contrary.

ail our hearts.

5. And all our fouls, and all our ftrength; Neither are we bound,not to have evil concupifcence.

6. That venial fins, as they call them, do not hinder that perfed obedience which is required in this life.

7. That the regenerate cau do more then the Law requires.

8. They teach their Difciples to worfhip God under a humane fhape or figure.

9. That Angels are to be wor(hiped and called upon.

10. Alfo

(44$)

io. Alfo Saints that are dead, are to be wor* fhiped and called upon.

11. That a more than ordinary worftiip is due to the blefled Virgin : fuch as they teach Chrifts humanity vvas to be worfhiped with j but to the reft of the Saint^ordinary worftiip.

12. That the members of the Blefled Virgin arc to be adored, for fo they touch them [1 worftiip and Blefs thy feet, with which choudidft tread down the Old Serpents head: I worfliip and blcfsthy comely eyes,eH*.3

23. That according to the five letters of her name MarU^ (lie is the Mediatrix of God and men , the Auxiliatrix or helper of God and men , the repairer of the weak, theilluminaterdf the blind- the Advocate for all fin.

14.. They name her the Queen of heaven, our Lady and Goddefs; the Lady of Angels, the fountain of all graces. Orau Stepb. Patracen. in Concil.Later. SeJJ. 1 c. 666.6.f.

15. Foi her honor and worfliip they have compo-fed, Duties, Letanies, Rofaries, and a Pfaltcry all full of Idolatry.

16. Ir: the Pfaltcry of Mary, whatfoever almeft Davit, ! us fpoken of God and Chrift , they blafphe-moufly give to her j as for example ,

O Lady in thee have I put my truft, deliver my foul from mine enemies. In Pfal. 7. And I will praife" thee, O Lady with my whole heart, Pfal. 9.1 put my truft in thee OLady,P/10.Save me O-Lady, Pfal. 1 1. Keep me O Lady, becaufe I have hoped in thee, *Pfal. 15. The heavens declare thy Glory, OVirgin Mary ! Pfal. 19. To thee O Lady have I lifted up my foul, Pfal. 25 Have mercy on ifte, O Lady,whtf

art

(44?;

art the mother of mercies, and according to the bowels of thy mercy cleanfe me from all my fins, Pf. 51. And pour out thy Grace upon me. O Lady,Save mc by thy name, and free mc from all my mifdeeds, pfitl. 54. Deliver mc from mine enemies, O Queen of the world/ c PfaL$9. Praife waiteth for our Lady in Sion, 7>fal.6$ . Make a joyful noife unto our Lady all ye lands, Pfal. 66. Let Mary arife and let all her enemies be fcattcred, Pfal. 68. In thee O Lady,do I put my truft, let me never be pat to confufion, DelU ver me in thy mercy ^Pfal.ji. Make a joyful noife unto our Lady all ye lands,ferve her with gladnefs, Pfal. 100. And foin the reft , all which they fay nre to be fpoken out of a pious affe&ion to the Blefled Virgin. 17. They prefer the Saints to the rule of the world, and the Government of the Church, as if they were the worlds Presidents, and the Churches Reftors. Yea they fet them in the fame place, as the Heathens of old did their titular Gods and prefervers: and aC fign unto them fevcral Provinces, Offices, and jurjfc didions ( becaufe it would be a vaft burden for every one to look to alt ) For, every Region, e * very Parifh^cvcry Fraternity of Artificers have their \ titular Gods and Patrons. So P. fovius calls them, Hiftor- lu 24. in the end. And there came forth lately a Commentary of Philip the 39. Bifhop of the Church at Eiftreet , of the titular Gods of that Church, S c Richard ^Wumbald^Wdfurg. And we may as truely affirm of the Papilts what Cjreaorj de valentia faies of the Heathens^ For that very thing fayes he, we may apprehend them to be idolaters,be-caufe they diftribute their fcveral Provinces of offices to feveral creatures,as to Gods, &c. There are certain Saints for the cure of every diC

eafe

(448)

cafe almoft, and for curing of evils: as Sebaftian and Rochm for the plague : Apollonia for the tooth-ache ; *Antony for the Wildfire or Gangrene : Ottilia for fore eyes: Quiriniu for Fiftula's, Sigifmondzxti Pc-trcnella for a Feavcr , zApollinaru for the Privities (as Triapm of oid) Liberia* for the Stone, and alfo Benedict. Wolfangm cures Convalfions, Romantu the poffefled, Valentinm the Epilcpticks (as Hercules oi: old) Anajlatius fuch as are mad.

The work of delivering Captives is committed to Leonard, of aflifting in war to George (as of old to UVtars. ) Nicholas, and Cbrifiopber are Patrons to Seamen : the three Kings, viz,, of Calien to Travelers : \JMargaret to women in childbirth(as Juno Lw cinaoi old.) Gregory and Katharine to Students (as Appotto and Minerva of old.)To Merchants Erafmns, to Painters Lm*$. to Smiths Sufogius, to Shoo-mak-ers Crifpin^ to Taylers-£?#ft!»40, to Potters Goactu,to Weavers Severing* % to Carpenters fofeph, to horfe-men GW^if, to Hunters Eufiaebim,to Whores ^/ra and Maudlin (as Venwt and P/cra of old.)

They appoint ,4#/?*» for Divines, ^#0 for Lawyers, Cofman and DamUn tor Phificians (as of old <zs£fcti-lapim )

fohnkzzps men from Poifotv, Laurentim and F/a-ri<z*/ft from fire and burning (as Veftx of old.,) Ser-vatim from difeafes, fob frocn the Scab, Barbaca from dangers, Paul and ^A* from Ternpefts, C&ri-fiopber from fuddaiij death, Hubert from the biting of a mad dog.

Eraftmu and /f*»e (us fan* of old) make men rich. Prctafiw and Gervafiui difcover thieves, Vin* centius and Hicrom reftore things loft, FeltcitM give* Boyes in child- bearing.

They

(44?)

They fee Urbane over the Vines (as Bacchtu of old) S c Lupus over Corn ( as Ctres of old) G'allus over the Geefc, WendlUne over Sheep, Pelagiw over Oxen , Eulegim over Horfes, •sfnthtwj over the Swine; Lfrledardus has the care of Wine, Ludovictu Minor if a of Ale, efo

They worfhip fourteen whom they call Afliftants or Helpers,</W£f, #**/*/, Erafmns ,7 J antaleon,Vititi , Chtiftopher, ^Dionifius , Cytuicp*\zAchwins , £tt(la-chms, ^£gidim J Margarefi > Darbary , and Katharine. 18* The Reliques alfo of the Saints they worfliip and reverence r of which I will relate twe{ve 4 errors and abufes of the Papifts, as they are noted by y Chemnitins. ,

i. That the bodies, afties, or bones of the Saints are to be taken out of their graves , and placed in fome high place, as upon the high Altar , or fome other confpicuous place, and to be drefled with gold and filver, and filk,e£r.

2- That thofe Reliques ought to be carried in pub» like proceffions and prayers, and to be (liewed and offered for Chriftian people to fee, and touch, and

3. That fuch Reliques are to be approved by the Pope ; and that approbation is to be by canonizing them.

4. Thattis a Angular and meritorious worfliip of God, if the people to obtain help by it, {hall touch, kifs,or walk before with an adoring raiiid and gefture, or (hall do reverence to thefe Reliques, by candles, filke coverings, garlands or other tire like ornaments.

5. That the grace and power of God (which they fay is in them or prefent by them) is to be fought for

ll in thefe Reliques : and th;i£ they are made partakers

of it, who do touch them or behold thcra.

6. That \\s an acceptable facrifkc to God, to offer up precious gifts to thefe Reliques.

7. Many indulgences for fin, are promifed to fucb as touch and kifs them, &c.

8. That our prayer is the better, worthver, and more acceptable to God , if it be done by or before the Saints Reliques, by whofe merits we may obtain help : A.d therefore in our neceilities we muft make Vows, and take Pilgrimages unto thofe places,where the Reliques of Saints arc held to be, chat we may call upon them for their help.

9. That it adds much to the holinefs of the Sacra-mentof theEucharift, if the Saints Reliques are fet inclofcd upon the Altar, pay that the Altar is confe-crated by their touching it.

10. That the Saints Reliques may be lawfully laid over one, or carried about or,cs neck in devotion and faith to God, and the Saints whofe Reliques they are.

11. Oaths among the Papift* are taken by touching the Saints ReHques that T<> th* dbfigation of the oath may be d'^ided bewxt God and the Saints.

12. All places among the Papiftsare full of uncertain, counterfeit, and falfe Reliques, to which without difference the ff.mevcneiaiiun and honor is given

19. Tfaey make tbem Pi&ures to worfhip them.

20« Tne^difpute, that Images of God are noc forbidden.

21 That Images are properly and per fc to be worfhtped.

23. That Images are to be worshiped with the fame worftup, as is due to the Perfon, or Exemplar.

24. They

(4V)

24. They defend Pilgrimages to holy places, and Reliqucs and Saints Pifturcs: and chey promife large indulgences to Pilgrims.

25 That the Crofs of Chrift is to be worshiped withthe\vor(liip Latria.

26. That they are in fome fort fan&ifkd who touch the Reliques or the Crofs.

27. That fome hoiinefs accrues to things that are figned with she Crofs.

28. That the Sacrament of the Alcar, orthehofl: confecrated, is to be worshiped with Latria.

29. They adore the Pope as a kind of Deity.

30. The greateft part of the Popifli Religion is raeer fuperftition, and wil-worfhip: yea meerhyr pocrific, or a form of godlincfs, refting in external works and obfervations.

31. They worlhip God after the commandments of men.

3 2. they defend the ceremonies invented by them-felves or taken from JieWs or Heathens to be a part of worfhip pieafing to God.

j?. Andtobcobferved , as the Law of God.

34- That their obfervation deferves remifiion of fi*

35 That no ceremonies 35. I veouU thej

appointed by the Church can hxd kq companj in tlm be omitted without mortal error. fin, nor without fcar.dal.

36. That things confecrated by themfelves, a* holy Water, Agnus £>a's,£fc. have fpiritu.ai effe&s, to drive away divels,to blot out fi^&c.

37. They conjure fait (yea and herbs) andcor.fe-crate it, that it may be healthful to the mind and body of thofe that take it.

G g 2 38. They

(45* )

38. They Baptize and confecrate the Bels,making them Godfathers, to fright away divels, and drive a-way Tempefts.

39. That their ringing.does profit the dead,

40. The Chrifm being confecrared the Bifhop and Presbyters faiute it, in thefe words, GodfaveSt. Ckrifma Ave S. Chrifma.

41. They give it a power to confer upon the a-nointed health to the body , and holinefs to the foul, and fo the Holy Ghoft htmfelf

42. That every Church fotemnely confecratcd , is indued with a divine vertuc:

43. The many abufcs of fafting and prayer I touched before.

44. They teach men to fwear by the creatures.

45. They deny oaths to be fit for the perfeft.

46. Vows made to the Saints they defend.

47. That the Pope can abfolve from the bond of vows and oaths.

48. They confecrate feaft dayes to the worftiip of Saints.

49. And fbme they confecrate to patronize their own errors as the feaft of Conception, the feaft of Affumption of the Biefled Virgin, the feaft of Chrifts body, and of Peters chair, 3nd of all fou\$,&c.

50. That feaft dayes are in truth more holy then others.

51 They exempt the Clergy from the fecular yoke, i.e. they exempt Ecclefiaftrcks , both perfons and goods from the obedience of Temporal Lords, and from their jurifdiftion in perfonals and reals,' in civil things and criminal^and therefore that the civil judge cannot punifh Clergy-men.

52. That the Clergy is not bound to pay tribute to Fringes. 5 3.That

(4« )

53. That the Rebellion of a Clergy-man againft the King, is not Treafon.

54. That the Pope can forbid fubjeds to keep the oath of fidelity, to Chnflian Kings, if they be fuch as acknowledge not the Re?nan fea.

55. That the Pope can abfolve fubjeds from the oath of fidelity.

56. That the Pope has power to depofe Princes.

57. That the fubjeds of fuch Princes are bound to obey fuch a fentence, if it be published.

58. That if grave and learned men (fuch as the Jejtktes tfpuiaSj are) frail judge any Prince to be a Tyrant, it is lawful for their fubjeds to overthrow them, and if they want power to poifon them.

59 That the fubjeds of the moft Chriftian Kings, whom they call Lutherans and Sacramentarians, are free from all bonds, and that they may lawfully de-flroy their Kings.

'■60. That 'tis not lawful for Chriftians to tolerate a King that is an Infidel or a heretick indeavoring to draw men to his Sed , but they arc bound to depofe him,,

61. That the ancient Chriftians did not depofe fuch becaufethey wanted power.

62. That the Pope may give the Kingdoms and Principalities, and Lordihips of ali thofe whom he judges hereticks unto his Rowan Catholikes , or may adjudge them to thofe that can lay hold of them.

63. That 'tis not oncly lawful, but meritorious to kill Princes that are excommunicated by the Pope;

64. They fuffcr Stews, and ftouily defend their toleration.

65. They forbid the Clergy to mary.

66. That Prieft does better , fay they, that keeps

Gg 3 a

(454)

a Concubine, then fee that marries a wife.

67. That marriage after the vow of Chaftity, is worfe then Adultery.

68. That fingle life ("even as it is vowed and prafti• fed in the Roman Church ) is a w orftiip mod acceptable to God, and fatisfa&ory for fin , and meritorious of eternal life.

69. That the Pope with a whorifh intention, makes gain (as Leno did ) by the proftitinion of Wborcs.

70. That all faults are fold at a certain price, ic the Popes Taxe. *

71. An officious lye they allow of.

72. They approve and teach the Miftery of equivocation.

72,73. ThU may 73. The aft of counter-give m fome light into feitingand diflembling with the ]ugllngs of iur greattsen, they commend,as times. good and profitable.

74. They fay Faith is not to be kept with Here-ticks.

75. That the defires of the will going beforeaf-fent, are not fins.

i 76. Neither is concupifcence a fin ia the Baptized.

77. That in concupifccoce there is onely the evil of punifhment not ©f fin.

78. By that command, thou (hale not covet, it is not forbidden , that we have no eviL de-fires.

I have recited a huge Catalogue of errors t to which I doubt not but many more may be heaped up: Asthofe (which we are refuting in this book)

about

f (4)5) "

about Antichrifl : By all which it appears, that the oppofition of tke Pope to Chrifb truth, is not a particular oppofition, as in feme heretitks hut «ni-verfal, fuch as we may look for from Antichrifl:, Thus far Bilhop G. Dowttame.

F 1 N^l S.

M^M-^MMM

>3&

An Alphebitical

TABLE,

Made and annexed by the

S'TATION E R,

-A

ABajfws notfubjeft to the Pope p.72

^/W/W^ofthePopifh Religion p.4. iza$-Afrte y Wherein the Churches not fubjed unto Rocne*-^™? p. 7 5

The Papifts agree not about their fundamentals

p, 104 ^ffy/wVjontheProteftant fide, 16. 35,36,37. See

Fathers.

Apofiles ignorant of the fundamentals which Rome

holds forth p. 2

Were very injurious to the world ( if ihePopifh

Bo&rine be true) in not (hewing us the ncereft

way to Heaven p. 3

Arguments for theProteftant Religion p 11 .14,1 6,

7

Hh Atmnh.

An Alphabetical Table*

jfrntAh. The Bifhop of Armah defended againft Paulw VeridicHs p. j 2

B

BEfore. Where our Religion was, before Luther ^ p. 3448 Belief. Of belief due to Paftors p. 197

c

CAfe flated between the Papifls and us p.48.52 Catholicke what p.7

Papifts make a new Catholike Church that was not known for many hundred years after Chrift p. 116

Ceremonies p. 161

ChriftUn Religion what p. 7

— but one p. 7.

Chrift, the extent of his death p 6$

Church. That the Catholike Church alwayes held the pofitive part of our Religion p, 17

In what fence the Romanifts are a Church f p. 177 They are Metaphyfically a true Church , but morally a falfe Church +> p. 278 Churche/not fub jeft to the Pope, and how far they differ from him p. 53. to 55.121 Of a larger extent and greater inumber then the Ch of Rome rP-S8,5T9

Circle

FAn Alphabetical Table.

Circle of Vtpi&s p. 284.213

Communion with Rome promifed upon Termes

• P- 115. 126

Contradiction of Popery to it felf ^ P 93

CeunceloiTrent it's new Articles n 81.172

How hard to know which is a true General Cc<J.

j p- 102

And whether there hath been any one m the

world this thoufand years w p. 2 8o

Councils have erred p. 2^4

OWHath but three names in ir ,and Pilate a RomLs

is one of them , not the Pope or Roman*

Church Cruelty of the Papifts p T ^ 0

Cup denied to theLaity, contrary to Scripture and

Antiquity ^ p. 143

D

DEcifive power in' the Paftors of the Church about what n T n g'

No proper judicial 2W/J™ power in any man or men in matters of the Chriftian faith n 1 9 S &c *iffere*ceta*ybc in thofc of the fame Religion a-bout letter points p. 274* fJ.

ifagreemtnt of Pjpifts with themfelves p 1*2191 tvels great defigne to keep men from Salvation

p. 1

'- /

As Alphabetical Tabta

• E

ERror. No Church nor good Chriftian can err in fundamentals p. 44

Errors and corruptions of the Church of Rome

p. 257. Experience proveth the Pope fallible

F

FAith y Whether to be refolded into the Pope or Church of Rome p,278,279,280

Fathers. The Infallibility of the Pope or Church of Rome, never acknowledged by the Ancient Fathers , for fix hundred years after Chrift

p. 277. Z9f; Their judgement in the cafe of Infallibility

p. 298.3 5 7 : Fergerles of the Papifts p. 1 69

Freewill p. 29.61 ,&c

Cjr eater.

An Alphabetical "Table,

GReater. The greater part of the Catholike Church againft the Popifh infallibility

— p. ^73

GreekChmch not fubjed: to the Pope p. 5 3

Holds the farqg Doftrine for fubftance with the

Proteftants p.54.60.

Grace. Whether all ha ve grace given themfufficient

to falvation ^ p. 66

H

HE'rctlcki. Bellarmine confefies that three General Councils did believe that the Pope may be zheretick^ p. 192.

Fpurty Popes charged with error and herefie by HtUarmines confeflion p. 248.

hindrances of Salvation chiefly three p. 2

1

An Alphabetical Table,

Jmfentiencj and incurablenefs of the Church of

Rome p. 171

Infallibility. Of infallibility p. 351

Diftinftions about ic P-44*

Ocher Churches as good a pica for it as the Church

of Rcme p. 27

Of the infallibility of a true believer and Church

p.44.209 The Papifts not agreed, where the feat of it is

p. 103 The Pope not infallible, proved fy many Arguments *> p. 211. to 278 loan. Of Pops 7^0 p-293 Judge. Of Faith and Scripture whom * p. 195 'judgement Of difcretion p. 1 65.206 Of Direction p. 196 Jttftification. Oijuftification p. 30

L

/W» Service p. 145

j Lying Legends p. 165

M

MA/k^s. Popifh warkes of a true Church examined. Means by which Popery is upheld p. 164

Merits

* An Alphabetical Tabic.

Merites. p. jq

Miracles. Popery not fealed by miracles p, 225

Popifli miracles , what ones p. 227

—- not to be believed p. 228

N

NSgatives of the Proteftants are the confequen-ces of their Affirmatives p. 37.

Juftified from Scripture and Fathers p. 3 8

Novelty of Popery p. 112

Proved by Popifh Authors p. 118, r 19

o

OAth. The impoflibilities and contradidions that the Pop/ih oath ingageth men unto

'? P- l 7 z Objections of 'Papifts anfwercd p. i6 f 29. 32, 33, 34 .

40,41,42,43,44,45,4(5,47'. 175, 177, i 79 ]

180, 181,605. One Religion in all that are faved p zj

Protcftants Religion cne notwkhfhnding; then

differences p. 42

Other Churches have as fair a plea for Infallibility

zsRome v. z~o

H h 4 ^ frf&lf

An Alphabetical Table*

P

PApjbs own al! our Do&rine for fubftance p. 79 Millions of tbem do not cordially imbrace the PopifhDo&nne p. 85

Or know wfiat Popery is ibid.

That many fuch may be faved p 86

Yec not by Popery but from it by the Chriftian faith p. 88

This acknowledgement is no prejudice to our caufe

p.89 Are not agreed about their Fundamentals

p. 104 The great-eft Schifmatickes en earth p. 120

Their idolatry p. 153

Their Traditions difproved p. 20.131

Their Sandity compared with Proteftants

P- 237

Their difagreement p.93

The Doctrines wherein tfoey differ fromProcett-

ants p. 19-24. 142, 143. 189, 190

Their faith uncertain, p.125. and mutable, p. 13 5.

141

'Penitence p. 31

Terjury. Popery plungeth men into perjury p. 172

. Perfeverance p. 30

Peter. Of the promife made to Peter p. 100.216,

217

Pope. Popes may ^rr P-9 1 -

• --have erred p. 2 5 7.248

Some

Some have been very wicked p. 269

How unpofiible to know who is the true Pope, fuppofing there (hould be one p. 97.102

How much is neceffary for all to know that believe upon his authority p. 97. to ido The wickednefs of fome Topes p. 101. 184 The firft Pope that procured the title of head or u-niverfal Bifiiop was Boniface p. 117 The prefent Pope Inmcent , his new Articles of faith, or his determinations for the Moliniits a-gainit thejanfenians p. 138 Pepijb Dodrine, the abfurdity of it p. 4. 39 Makes it neceffary to believe in the Pope as well as inChrift p. 4 Pcperj what p. 78,^. 142. 162. *74 Is a newdevifed way to heaven p. 106 No fafe way to falvation, Arguments p.9i.to 172 Very changeable p. 137 Power of Decifion p. 198 Predeftination p. 29 Primitive Church received not the Scripture up-00 the credit of the Romane Pope or Church

p 295

• - Its judgement in that point p.298

Troteftant Church,where before Luther p.32

Is onenotwithftanding their divisions p. 54

Proteftants their Religion a fafe way to falvation,

Arguments r. i'i. 14.16

Take the Scripture for their rufe and judge

p. 13

Have a promife of CUvation p. 17.

Whence they denominate their Religion

No feparates from the true Church p. 41

gucftions

Q

An Alphabetical Table,

. Q

Veftions about the Popes or General Councils judgement p. 280

REal prefence in the Sacrament p. 154

Reformed Religion f whac p. 6

Religion, that term explained p. 6

Refolved. Into what the true Proteftants belief is refolved p. 186

Rome. How highly advanced by God (if we will believe the Papifts) above Jerufalem and all other Cities P-3,4

Romanifts make a new word of God p. 12

Deny the Scripture to be the whole word of God

p. 12 Tell us unwritten traditions are another p. 12 Keep the Scripture from the people,and why,p.is See Papifts.

Salva^

An Alphabetical Table,

S

SAlvation, Save. Hindrances of it p. z

True Religion will not Save him that is not true to it p. ii

Salvation what p. 83

Proteftant Religion a fafe way to Salvation

Arg. 1. p. 11

All that arefaved,are favcd by one Religion p» 17

27. not Popery p. 89

What fort of Papifts may be Saved, and what not

p. 179

Safe way what p. 84

Whether Popery be a Safe way to Salvation

p. 78

Schifmatickc The Papifts the greateft upon the

earth p. 120,^.

How any man may know, that they were delivered

by the Writers of them to the Churches

p. 130.186 Of expounding Serif ture p. 206

Serif ture kept from the common people by the Papifts p. 24,147 Seuce, It's infallibility that the Pope is fallible

p. 242

Separation of the Proteftants p. 41

Smalnefs of the Rcmane Church to the Catholike

Church P-273

Subjett. The Greek Church not fubjett to the Pope

P- S3

Sticceflion of Bifhops in the Church of Rome examined p. 183

) An Alphabetical Table.

Succefs and victory of the Papifts as a mark examined p.238

Sufferings df Papifts how little to others, p. 237. no true mark.

T

TErwesof Religion Reformed, Catholike, Chri-ftian, Proteftant, Salvation, Safe way explained

p.5,6,7>8,9 Testimony of the Paftors of the Church to the Scripture, of what credit p. 197 Tr editions of the Papifts p. 20.13 1 The Protcftants acknowledged, neceflary Tradition is not another part of the rule of Divine faith as the Papifts make their Traditions to be

p 131 Tranfubfeantiation, againft it p 154. 245,246,247 Trent , It's Councils new. Articles p. 51

Trent Articles p. 173

u

U

Niverfd Church, not the Church of Rome , which is far lefs then all the reft that hold not communion with her p, 58.182

An Alphabetical Table.

W

WAj to Salvation what p. 83

wicked Popes. p. 269

Werd of God, the Popifh do&rine about it p. 142

Writings 9 kigaed p. 169

Writings of the Aneidnt3 corrupted p. 169

F 1 3^1 S.

More Emu's* p»}8&Marg.l.i.r.nwMT*ptan. 1$. Marg. dele trap. $90.1, t. d. n^ p.400.I. penult r. C'fov/f p.4oa.Marg.r.vo**«l. zi.r.iJta* rt p % +i8Xi6.r. one of tbefc p.4zi.l.u!r. Marg.r. rnnaH p. 427.1, 17. addflttp.4iM.z*,Ma:g.r. Afcjwp. 44^*1.8. v.fortbusibey teach their foHomnto adtreln.v % 0fficej^4^7^i9M 24.6:17. r. tuUltrj p. 448.1,27.1:. Barbara.

f •

'

sXr

H