A CLEAR PROOF OF THE CERTAINTY and USEFULNESS OF THE Protestant Rule of Faith, SCRIPTURE, After the Help of Ministerial Guides, Finally Interpreted by Each Man's Private Sense.  
Published with Allowance.  
LONDON, Printed by Henry Hills, Printer to the King's Most Excellent Majesty, for His Household and Chapel; And are to be sold at his Printing-house on the Ditch-side in Blackfriars. 1688.   

A Clear Proof of the Certainty and Usefulness of the Protestant Rule of Faith, Scripture, after the Help of Ministerial Guides, finally Interpreted by each Man's private Sense.  
THis proof is drawn from the Answer to the Address presented to the Ministers of the Church of England. The Author thereof had required that clear and plain Texts of Scripture be offered, which interpreted in the Protestant-way, by those who receive it thus expounded for their whole Rule of Faith, should so prove the two principal Articles of Christian Belief, the Trinity and the Incarnation of Christ; as also the Obligation of keeping holy the Sunday, and not Saturday, as one of the Commandments seems to require; and that so convincingly, that a Christian might ground on them his Faith. Interpreted, I say, in the Protestant-way, without any deciding Church-Authority when doubts arise about the sense of the Letter.  
The Addresser holds, (if he be a Catholic) That Scripture, rightly understood, is a Rule of Faith: That the Gospel revealed by Christ, preached by the Apostles, and preserved by the Catholic Church, is so much our whole Rule of Faith, that we own with Tertullian, 
De Presc.  we need not be curiously searching since Christ, nor further inquisitive since the Gospel was preached. No new Revelations, no new Articles, being received as of Catholic Faith; but those Truths only retained, which the Church proposes as delivered to her by the Apostles, her whole Authority being ever employed, as Pope Celestine delivers it to the Council of Ephesus, 
Ep. 7.  in providing that what was delivered, and preserved in a continual Succession from the Apostles, be retained: So that nothing is of Faith, but what God revealed by the Prophets and the Apostles, or what evidently follows from it; the Catholic Church ever handing it to us, and declaring it to be so.  
Scripture thus interpreted is a Catholic Rule of Faith: The Addresser therefore meant nothing less than to diminish its Divine Authority; his design was to preserve it, and that each man's private sense might not sacrilegiously pretend to be that Word of God, which, as St. Peter minds us, is not of private Interpretation: 'Tis not against the Authority or Use of Scripture he writ, but against the Protestants unjust and insignificant method of using it. I will here make good the Charge, (hoping that, when he thinks fit, he will much more fully perform it) by the very Answers given to his Questions, which I shall set down in that Order and Sense in which the Answerer construed them.  
Qu. 1. Whether all things necessary to Salvation are contained in Scripture?  
Ans. Scripture must contain these necessaries.  
All Catholics ever owned what St. Augustin teaches, 
De Doctr. Ch. l. 2. c. 9  That all things which concern Faith and Manners of Life are found in those things which are plainly contained in Scripture; So that, as St. Gregory expresses it, God needs speak to us no more by any new Revelation. For, as the same St. Augustin observes in the Question betwixt Him and the Donatists, about true Baptism, which he held absolutely necessary to Salvation, Tho' we have no proof in this case from holy Scripture, yet we follow the truth of holy Scripture even in this case, when we do what the Universal present Church approves of, which Church is commended by the Authority of the very Scripture. But the case in this first Question, as it appears stated by the Addresser, is, Whether all things necessary to Salvation are immediately and expressly contained in Scripture, or drawn thence by an evident Consequence? Our Answerer proves they are so by the three following Texts; his Proofs I will set in a due form, that their force may lie open to all.  
The first Text is taken out of John 20.31. where the Evangelist having premised, (v. 30.) Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his Disciples, which are not written in this Book; says, v. 31. These (which he had set down) are written that you may believe that Jesus is Christ the Son of God, and that believing you may have Life in his name. Now what Conclusion can be drawn from this Text to our present purpose, but one, in one of these two forms? First thus: The signs set down by St. John, ch. 20. are sufficient to make us believe that Jesus is Christ the Son of God; but precisely to believe that Jesus is Christ the Son of God, is all that is necessary to have Life in his name, or to Salvation; therefore the 20th. Chapter of St. John contains all things necessary to Salvation. Or else thus, in the Answerer's words: All that is as sufficient in its kind to beget Faith in us, as Faith is to save us, contains all things necessary to Salvation: But the 20th. Chapter of St. John 's Gospel, as it appears by ver. 31. is as sufficient to beget Faith in us; therefore that 20th. Chapter contains all things necessary to Salvation. A special piece of Logic! However his Conclusion eases the Members of his Congregation from the obligation of reading any part of Scripture besides the 20th. Chapter of St. John's Gospel.  
The second Text of Scripture is, 2 Tim. 3.15, 16. where the Apostle having thus warned Timothy immediately before, v. 14. Continue in those things which thou hast learned, and are committed to thee, knowing of whom thou hast learned; by which words he renews the commands he had given him, 
1 Tim. 6.20. 2 Tim. 1.13.  O Timothy! keep the depositum; have a form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in Faith: The said Apostle minds him that in his Infancy he had read the Old Testament, which bears sufficiently witness that Christ was the Messiah, v. 15, 16. Because from thine infancy thou hast known the holy Scriptures, which can instruct thee (the Protestant Version hath, make thee wise) to Salvation by the Faith that is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach, to argue, to correct, to instruct in Justice, that the man of God may be perfect, instructed to every good work. Hence the Minister argues thus: The same Apostle that says all Scripture, (i. e. each part of Scripture) is given by Inspiration of God, says that the Scriptures are able to make us wise to Salvation: But men cannot be wise to Salvation, without knowing what is necessary to Salvation. Here he leaves us, but I will make up the Syllogism: Therefore the Old Testament alone, nay every part of Scripture, contains all things necessary to Salvation. Thus you see the Minister rests satisfied with the first Chapter of Genesis for his whole Rule of Faith. The truth is, that St. Paul only teaches there that the Testament, or any part of Scripture, is of good use, is profitable to instruct any one in the concerns of his Salvation. What's this to the containing of all necessaries to Salvation? Bread is of very good use to preserve Life, and enables a man to perform all the duties of it; is therefore nothing else necessary? What pitiful shifts are these!  
His third Proof is this: Christ sent the young man who put that Question to him, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal Life? 
Luc. 10.25. Luc. 16.29.  to the Commandments, Thou knowest the Commandments; and again declared that Moses and the Prophets were sufficient to dispose a sinner to repent. Behold another Logical Inference of great credit to the University this Answerer was brought up in! By reading Moses and the Prophets I am moved to repent from my sins; and if I will know what I must do to inherit eternal Life, I must know the Commandments; therefore all things necessary to Salvation are contained in Scripture. I may with Justice return to this man more than what he ungroundedly says to the Addresser, p. 1. That he takes up with such a sort of Arguments, which, tho' not useful to make any of his Religion, may very well make others of none. If such use only could be made of Scripture, it would be of no use at all to our Salvation; no senseless Heresy hath appeared these 1600 years, which was not backed by more seeming Proofs from Scripture than these.  
Q. 2. Whether all things necessary to Salvation are clearly contained in Scripture?  
Ans. From Scripture, not a word.  
However he condescends to deliver His sense and that of his Church on this Question: It is, That all persons cannot immediately learn all the necessaries to Salvation by mere reading of Scripture; that many other helps are necessary, to wit, attention, consideration, to be cleared from prejudices and prepossessions, from pride, love of the world, interest, obstinacy, partiality, sloth; and besides all this, the assistance of teaching Guides, and a dependency from God for the Wisdom he hath promised, (such promises I find made to the Church, but not any to particulars that shall refuse to be absolutely guided by the Church:) So that Scripture is plain in this sense only, that by these means it may be apprehended. Now by Guides he means not false ones, such as Christ bid us beware of, 
Mat. 7.15.  and consequently till a Protestant hath a reasonable conviction that his Church-Teachers, tho' divided from the Catholic Church, and condemned by General Councils, tho' Abettors of a Religion of not 150 years' settlement, tho' not in Communion with one Bishop in the whole World out of His Majesty's Dominions, yet still are true Guides; and till he be morally sure that he wants not himself any one of the ten other dispositions required, is to persuade himself that he may very well be one of those who wrist the Scripture to their perdition, and consequently hath no good ground for any one Act of Faith. This will create but small comfort to any Protestant. Less yet will he find in St. cyril's Sentence, 
In Jo. l. 1. c. 4.  The things that are easy are yet to Heretics hard to understand; especially if all those be Heretics, according to St. Augustin, 
L. 4. de Bapt. cont. D●n. c. 16.  who when the Doctrine of Catholic Faith is declared to them, choose to oppose it, and rather embrace what is their own sense; if the Catholic Faith be, 
L. 2. co●●. G●●d.  according to the same Dr. a Communion with the whole world, so that, according as his Scholar St. Prosper defines it, 
In ●im H.  a Christian when in Communion with this General Church, is a Catholic; when separated from her an Heretic. I wonder how this man was so confident as to name that word Heretic, which his Brethren are usually as much afraid to mention, as a Murderer to come up to the murdered Corpse, lest by its bleeding he be betrayed.  
Q. 3. What are the necessaries to Salvation?  
Here plain and full Scripture will be of great use, we may expect shoals of Texts: What answer from Scripture is given to this Question think you? Even the same as honest Bays returns to a hard one in the Rehearsal, Y Gad I won't tell you. No, he gives not one word of answer to it, tho' it be so material. Any one may guests at the reason without casting a figure.  
Q. 4. 'Tis in its whole extent this: By what Text of Scripture are we plainly taught that God is One in Substance, Three in Person? For as, John 10.50. Christ says, I and my Father are One; so 17.21. he prays, That all Believers may be One, as He and his Father are One: This second place may seem to expound the first, and then Christ and his Father will be One only morally, as all the Believer's be One. Or else, what Text declares the Three Persons to be One by identity of substance?  
Ans. Not one Text of Scripture, to give us the dubious sense of the two in question! And yet these men pretend to clear Scripture for each Fundamental Point! The Answerer supplies this want of Scripture with two Reasons. The first is this: Of the Three that bear record in Heaven, 'tis said they are One; but of the Three that bear witness on Earth, they agree in one. (I will admit this English Translation, tho' Apocryphal.) But what then? But if in both were meant only a Moral Union, it would have been as well said of the Three that bear record in Heaven, they agree in One; therefore they have more than a Moral Union. Is not this special Logic? Would not this way of arguing prove equally that the Believers are one with more than a Moral Union, because otherwise it might as well have been said, Jo. 17. May they agree in one. The Question is, Whether this second clear Text concerning the Three that bear witness on Earth, and which we know to be only Morally One, doth not expound what that Unity is that is found in the Three which bear record in Heaven? We ask a proof out of Scripture to decide this doubt; but our Answerer hath none to give us, or is grown churlish, and will not allow us any. Hath he any to expound the other Text? No, not any; but he offers at some insinuation from Scripture, and 'tis this: When Christ said, I and my Father are One, the Jews took up stones to stone him for blasphemy, because that thou being a Man (said they) makest thyself God: The Jews then under stood him to have spoken of a Natural Union, therefore he did so. Well, I will let my good Nature work upon me once, and for quiets sake I will let this Discourse pass as allowable: But in return of courtesy I hope each sober Protestant will own this following Argument to be of at least as good Alloy: When Christ said, Jo. 6. Unless you eat the Flesh of the Son of Man, you have no life in you; the Jews, who said how can this man give us his Flesh to eat? and his Disciples, who walked no more with him, understood that he spoke of his natural Body which they should corporally eat; therefore Christ did really mean they should corporally feed on his natural Flesh. This Popish Conclusion is in the same Form.  
Q. 5. Is the Mystery of the Incarnation of Christ clearly expressed in Scripture? Or can it be clearly made out by Scripture, that those words, John 1. The Word was made Flesh, owned by all Christians to be true, are to be understood in such sense that Both Natures were in One Person, so that what is said of the Man Christ Jesus be truly said of the Son of God; for example, that the B. Virgin was Mother of God; and not as the Nestorians understood them, to wit, that Christ was indeed a true man, made of the Seed of David; and that the Eternal Word, true God, was indeed in him, but not by a strict Personal Union?  
Ans. Not one word from Scripture. What indeed all the Nestorians supposed, he proves; but as to the Unity of One Person uniting these two Natures, not one word. This man (any one may see) is of those who take the Nestorians to be a part of the Catholic Church; and no one will grudge their Congregation the Title of such a part of the Cath. Church, that is a Member severed from the One Body of Christ.  
Q. 6. The first branch of this Question is, What Scripture hath absolved us from obeying one of the Commandments, which imposes the keeping of Saturday holy? The second, What Text of Scripture exacts of us the keeping holy (as the Lord's day) the Sunday?  
Ans. To the first part, not one word of Scripture; and for excuse he tells us, That here was no need of an express abrogation, because Sunday being set apart for the public and solemn Worship of God, the Sabboth-day, as well as the Holydays and New-moons of the Jews being a shadow, must surrender to the Sunday. Here is as little Reason as Scripture; for the Sabbath did appertain to the Law of Nature, and was not a shadow only of a thing to come, but a memory of the past and never-to-be-forgotten benefit of the Creation, 
Gen. 2.3.  from the work whereof God rested on that day, and blessed the seventh day. Here 'tis pity at what a loss the Answerer is to find the Chapter and Verse wherein the abrogation of Circumcision is clearly expressed: 'Tis a charitable condescendency to instruct him; let him look then in Gal. 5.2. where behold Paul tells you, that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.  
For the second part, he produces a Text, Rev. 1.10. I was in spirit on the Lord's day; then he flourishes to teach us ignorant people, that 'tis usual in Scripture, after that Times, Places, Things and Persons were set apart for the service of God by Divine Institution, to have his Name as a mark of propriety given to them. But in the name of sense and reason what means all this? There is a Lord's day, no doubt; St. John was in spirit that day, 'tis certain: But the question is, What day of the week was it? or was it only some peculiar day of the year, as Easter-day, or Good-friday? Hath he Scripture for this? Not one word. I find forty Texts that call the day of general Judgement, or that of each man's death, the Lord's day, but not one that mentions Sunday under that name. I find, Act. 2.46. how they that believed were daily continuing with one accord in the Temple, or breaking Bread from house to house, but not a word of a day appointed for stated Assemblies.  
Scripture failing our Adversary, he seeks supplies from Reason; but the misfortune is, that the first and chiefest he offers at stands against him: The Moral Sabbath (says he) in the Patriarchal Church, and the Ceremonial in the Jewish Church, were on the days following the Creation and Deliverance from the Slavery of Egypt. True, but what follows? Therefore 'tis not to be kept by Christians on the day in which Christ rested after he had accomplished our Redemption on the Cross by a solemn Consummatum est, and his precious Death? Not on Saturday? Raillery aside, what can be (I will not say more dull, but) spoken more directly in spite of sense and reason?  
Q. 7. Am I bound to believe (the sense given to a doubtful Text) because my Guides tell me I must do so?  
Ans. No, plainly No: And he hath two Texts for it; the first, 2 Cor. 1.24. Not for that we have dominion over your Faith, but are helpers, says St. Paul; and Mat. 23.8. Call no man Master on earth, for one is your Master. Here not only the Walls of the City of God are broken down, but the very Foundations (of Prophets and Apostles) are digged up; is it all St. Paul could do, all you allow him, to give some light, some helps, when his Proselytes had any doubt about the sense of Scripture? Were they not obliged to believe the Sense and Interpretation He gave to the Text? Then that Faith is vain which was founded on the Apostles Preaching, and all Christianity stands on a wrong bottom.  
Now our Answerer takes his turn to ask Questions. He tells us that for the first he has a pinching one: 'Tis this: If I must know the Church by some Marks or Notes, than I must find those Marks first; and where must I seek them? This is pinching indeed! Suppose in a Gazette I should find some marks of a man that is sought for, were it not a severe objection against the man who gave them, and a pinching Question, I must find these Marks before I find the man, and where shall I find them? I conceive such pinching would force a smile, and this Answer, Why Friend the Marks and the Man are found at once, for they are to be seen in his face. At the same time as one takes a view of the Catholic Church, he sees therein a continual Succession of Bishops and Teachers from the Apostles; he discovers her in all parts of the World, and finds her thus Catholic; he sees in her an undivided Faith, Union under one Pastor in the use of the same Sacraments, and finds her One; he observes her Rule is, Let nothing be altered of what was received from the Apostles by a constant Universal Tradition in the Churches which they founded, and is convinced she is Apostolical: he finds God favours her with the Gift of Miracles, promised Matt. 10. and Joh. 14. that she hath fulfilled the Prophecies concerning the Conversion of Nations, converted to Christianity by her Children only; and he concludes this is she.  
'Tis also observable at what a distance these men are from the true Church, who conceive it so hard to find her out. All holy Fathers ever judged it a most easy thing to each person, insomuch that the holy Doctor St. Augustin thus delivers his sense of it: 
CC. 2. in Psal. 30.  I tell you with truth, Brethren, the Prophets have spoken more obscurely of Christ, than of the Church: I believe because they saw in spirit that men would make Sects against the Church, but would not be so much divided about Christ. But 'tis natural for a Criminal to question the Power of his Judge; and these men know it hath ever been the sense of all Christians, which St. Augustin expressed in the following words: There is no Salvation out of the Church, who doubts of it? 
De Vnit. Eccl. l. 4. c. 18.  therefore whatever you have from the Church (Scripture, Creed, Sacraments, etc.) help you not to Salvation out of the Church, whether you believe contrary to the Truth, or being divided from the Unity, gather not with Christ; whence St. Paul says to Heretics, Those who do such things, shall not possess the Kingdom of Heaven. 
Gal. 5.   
His other Quaere's have no difficulty, and withal so little of sense, that I shall not offer to force my Readers attention on them.  
All wellmeaning Protestants finding that Scripture interpreted the Protestant-way is so far from being an easy and clear Rule of Faith, that a Protestant in the Answer to an Address made to the Ministers of the Church of England, approved by a Chaplain to the highest Ecclesiastical Authority under the King, cannot as much as teach by it the first Principles of Christian Religion; will seek a better method of using that Divine Rule, and not be hereafter so easily imposed upon by those Guides who give them but their own private fancies under the Veil and Name of the Word of God. I was (I confess) surprised to find Guil. Needham, etc. approving this Answer; but God and Truth are of our side: Et inimici nostri sunt Judices; the weakness of our Opposers Arguments bear a proof to it.  Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam. 
FINIS.