/ I -,x' PRINCETON, N. J. ^# Collection of Puritan Literature. Division Section ATnmber 9IR " SOLD BY THOMAS BAKER, 72 Newman Street, London, \H ., Eng. y PROTESTANCY WITHOVI Da PRI 1 P L E S, O R, SECTARIES VNHAPPY FALL FROM INFALLIBILITY TO FANCY. Laid forth in four Difcourfes by E. W; 57 rtww overturn eft Euangelium nojirum : in iis fit permit eft opertum, 2. Cor. 4. 3, / * / /) PRINTED AT ANTWERP, By Michaei Cnobbairt, in the Year 1668. \ JL THE PREFACE TO THE READER -T-* He 'Booh are almoft innumera- >0[ h<* occafiondby an unhappy He. x£ nfy » that in the la& a&e infe- tled Germany , and after like a Lepro/y, OT>erjpread the greateH part of our Notthen Countries. _- Too many are terit hy Tbofe, Teho fide themfebes Protejiants, or if the Reformed Reli- gion, not to [peak of the Subdfrifions as /irminians, %-o-tomfts, Anabapti/ls,orof their Followers, t»hieh crum. hie into as many Seels at men. OfTtefe Tee bate VVr'u ters, lebo feitb no little Animoftty inveigh bitterly one again ft an other . Yet ( becau/e Self interefl Tfc/7 hate it jo) All of them clofelyjoyn in a Foul dishonorable Lea- gue againfian Ancient Mother Church That made them and then frogenitors Chrisltans. * * This The Preface TI?is bathftirrd up the pen of many a learned nm, not fo much to confute their loeak ^Difccurfes , as pop* tfocly to /tjfert Truth tpbicb cannot he Jhahn , an i to Vndecetie a poor fort of [educed People, ^ho eafily gaind by fltek Words and the Specious fretenfts of fome (y>bo hsfte told untruth fo long, that at laft they almoft (Belieloe it Themfebes) infenftbly fall into er- rour. , To Vnbeguile thefe deluded Souls more , / ha- Toe here cafl my Mite alfo into 'the Trejfury of thefe learned labours , and *torit this Treatife. Wberin I both lay forth the Evidence of our%oman Catholick %?- ligion upon undoubted Grounds y and make it like^vife manifeU That froteflancy , as Reformed 7 "tohicb is dnly a fallible taught DoRrin , cannot be tf^efofoed into Cods Ihfdllible tf^ebelation , and the fore u no part of Chriflian %j ligion , either to impugn the%oman Catholick (Do&rin^or t > eflablijl? their OWu , They gfte you nothing that look* s like a jure oWned Principle , but quite contrary, tireyou out With long loos (Di/courJes> 'which driven on to the loery loft , at mojl come to no more but to Guefies only , Weak Conje&ures, and the unproved Thoughts of thofe Who make them. In a Word, They nel>er fall on Principles , nor can make their o'ton (Doftrin good upon any better Jygument then by only faying, Xt'uTrue, or caVtlltng at ours : As if't H?ere the yay for a man to Troty Hmfelf honeft , by faying his neighbour is not Jb\ or enough to Eftablijh I heir Hovfe built upon fand to Affert that ours, once certainly fet led on a %ock> is nnTtian* cientbutUing it 1pm but hath btmrepayrd, and otheftoi- Jfe Adorn d. If all this *toere true (as it is muftfalsfahat's their to the Reader! their Houfe the better , that's JIM upon [and ? Or, their Religion founder , that ft and' s VnprinctpFd without Scrip- ture , Qhurch y or %eafon ? I only fay thus much in a Preface , and proye it afterward in the folloWng Dtftour- Jis > Tohich I IbM adYifed to ^orite in Latin y bating no~fr more ufe ofthat (/ may thank my long Abfence from Eng- land for it ) then is allowed me of our Mother Tongue* ©wHapienribus&infipientibus debitor fum. I defer e to fatisfy all, and olfre as much to the Illiterate of my dear Qountiy a* to the Learned y and therfore JhallEx- pofe this Treatife in plain Engiifh ( for I can Jpeak no better ) and hope upon that Account to find the Readers eafier Tar don If I often Speak improperly , or nolo and then break Trifciam head in Engltjh. Sometimes as the matter requires , I am fared to ma- ke ufe of Coords that may feem harp? as Toyes 7 Fancies, Trifles not ^oorth the AnjY\>enng that can neither be Trowed evidently credible , cr manifellly jirgued of Faljhood. The Reafon is, Becauie the evident Credibility of tiue Religion (if one on- ly be true in the VVorld) takes off from the fals Religion zWTrudent credibility ,and leaves it uttely deftitute of Motives founding credibility. In a word , The euident credibility of Truth mzkesFa/fbood highly improbable. V\ hence I inferr, ]f true Religion be made thus manifeftly credible by Al- mighty God y Rarional Proofs cannot fail to countenance that which He will have manifeftly hioTPn. Comrarywife , fuch proofs muft of neceffity be wanting to a fals Religion, which God will have to appear both evidently Incredible, and Improbable to prudent %eafon. The Catholick therfore that hold's his Religion atleaft evidently Credible before He believes , and certainly true by his A& ©f Faith, cannot but have Proofs at hand whichDo notonly clearly evidence the undoub- ted Credibility (fit , but alfo DafhandDifcounte* b 2 nance A Necessary nance what ever can be faid in the Defence of a contrary Eriour • On the other fide, The Se&ary muft of neceffity want fuch grounded Pi oofs ; And confequently whether he Qefend's his own , or impugn's the true Religion , All He faith will end at laft in meer Cavils and wordy Fallacies. You have the Reafon Hereof mo- re largely laid forth Difc. it C. 8. Becaufe God cannot peimit in the Prelence (at it were) of his true Religion a fals$e& to appear fo much as (lightly Probable , which ever is and muft be inferiour to Truth ( or rather nothing) in the luftre and evidence of Credibility . Which is co fay in other Terms : An Erroneous Se£l cannot he made at all Qredibk to 'fi^eajorn 4. Cv hat chen is the Reafon, when theCa* tholick both luppofeth and proves His Reli- gion to be only true and Orthodox , that The- le ftnfes go endkfly on between us and a few Proteiiants ? Scarce any Book, though ne- ver fo lolid and learned , is Jet forth by an En- glifhCarholick, but presently a Thing called an Anfaer fallies out againii it. Exceptions are made by Se&aries, This , They fay , Proves not, ThatDUpleafes &c. In a word, if we believe them , All is Anfwered , when, it SanSl.fteati cap. 19. The wit of man cannot wreft them to a fen- fe contrary to our Catholick 1 olition. 4. You will have HisRcafons, and that one moft con- cluding : Good men laudably pray for us he- re on earth : Erw, much more the Saints in Heaven ( becaule in a better lxace)can do that Charity • \X hen the Catholick hath ended his Proofs grounded on thele and the like undenia- ble Principles. Caft your thoughts a little on the Se&aries Contrary proofs , And mark well his Principles. Hath He any Church reputed Orthodox either now, or fix hundred years agon , That exprefly and poHtively defended his Opinion ,rand condemned our Do<5trin ? No, moft evidently not any. Hath he fo much as one fyllablc of Scripture, that plainly and pofi- tively <* Advertisement. tively Denyes our Catholick pofition, and fpeak's for his ? Not a word is found in the whole Bible to that purpofe, much againft it. Hath he Fathers lb numerous and clear for his No- velty, as we produce for this one Truth , Saints can butb hear and help m ? Not one Father is ex. prefs againft ds, or plain for his contrary Opi- nion. Parallel r herfore a Church and no Church, Scripture and no Scripture, Fathers exprefs for us, and not one againft us : And judge you whether it be not evident to every difinterefled judgement , that Proteftants want found Prin- ciples to rely on in this Controverfy. And as you ie a Defeat of Principles here, fo you will find it in all other Difputes between us. Now if they fay, They value not much of our Church Authority. I anfwer, They fpeak without Prin- ciples, For the fole judgement of our Church (had we no more) will be thought in any jnft Tribunal a ftronger proof for ourDodrin, then their meer flighting of it can be without a like- lyhood of proof. If They fay again, They can either Deny or explicate the Fathers we produ- ce, I Anfwer, They are ftillout of Principles: For their Denial it ^eighties , unles They ground it upon a furer Principle, then that Authprityis, tvhich they c 2 Deny. A Necessary Deny. Obferve well. We have innume- rable Fathers Greek and Latin exprefs for the Invocation of Saints. Say therfore , What Avill it Avail the Se&ary barely to reject thefe Au- thoricies (becaufe they are the words of men and not of God) VnlesHe Give you the plain word of God, or the Authority of an Orthodox Church (in place of them ) Urberon hk denial bath fure footing ? If this be not don , He comes to nothing like a Principle , confequently the Fa- thers Authority ( moft agreable to the Churches Do<5irin) is a clear Demonftrationagainfthim. If He Pretend to allege Fathers contrary to ours: 1 Anfwer, He hath not one exprefs or plainly contrary. However, falfly fuppoie, He had one or two, The conteft would then be , whe- ther one that (lands, as it were, alone oppofit to the Churches Do<5trin , or many Fathers that fi- de with the Church deferve more credit ? Here I am lure He will ftand without footing on any certain Principle. If He tell you Third- ly, The Primitive Church prayed not to Saints: They are his own empty words. We prove the contrary , by the exprefs Teftimonies of moft ancient Fathers, and the Tradition of our Church, whilft He remains fpeechies and without a Prin- Advertisement, ciplc to ground his Aflertion on. If He Ob- jedt fourthly . His Rcafons , chiefly two yi% Prayers to Saints lejlens our Honor to Chrfil. And , Tfce cannot fay bolt our prayers come to the Saints Hear- ing &c. I Anfwer. Here is nothing pro- bable, for an Obje&ion ( as foon folved asfeen) is far off from the nature of a found Principle. We fay therfore , if to pray for one an other Here on Earth leffens not Cbrifts Honor, there is no danger of leflening it by our recours had to the Saints in Heaven , now in a moft Glorious and happy Condition . And thus, no lefsa Do<5tor then S.Hierom>Jdt>er/us Vigilantium,? avis print 1609. pag.590. Solves the Difficulty at chofe words. fDicis m U hello tuo &C Thou , Vigilantim , (aith in thy Book, that whilft we live we may pray for one another, but after Death no Prayer is heard fot Any. Here is the Obje&ion . Mark S. Hie* roms Anfwer. Si Jpoftoli ts Martyr es adbuc in cor pore conjlitutiypofjunt or are pro ceteris , quando pro fe debent efje foltcttt : quanto magispoft coronas , JtiSlorias ts trium- phos* If the A pottles and Martyrs yet living in a mortal body, can pray for others, when they are folicicous for themlelves : much more, can they do that Charity after their CroAvns, Victo- ries , and Triumphs ■ He goes on. Vim bo- c j wio A Necessary mo Moyfes &c. T hat one Moyfes obtained par- don for thoufands Exot/. 31. And thefirft Mar- tyr S. Stephen living t prayed for his Perfecutors ji£l. y. Btpojlquam cum Cbrijh ejje cceperint minut ^ale- bunt ? And what , ihall they be able co do lels now, when they are glorious wnhCbrift in Heaven ? Melior^erit Yigilantius cams Tttiens , quam tile leomortuus. And can thou, Vigilantius , a li- ving Dog, be better then that dead Lyon, (He alludes to S.Taul that prayed for ethers ahilfthc lived?) Tu Ttigilans dermis. 9 (y donrimn (cribis. I tell thee , Vigtlamiui y Soaking thou fletp s , and flee- ping Writ's tbefe things againft prayer to Saints. Thus S.Hierom. And not only S.Juftm lib.n. deLfi>it.c*%. (to omit innumerable others) Ap- proves the Dodrin , bat that worthy Biihop al- io, S.Greg Ny/fen in his Oration of S.Jhcodore Martyr, Paris print 16ij.page1011.and 1017, con* firms the Practice of it. To fay no more now of other fignal Marks wherwith it is made iltuftrious and vi- fible to all. When (I fay) I confider the- fe Truths. Methinks evident Beafon Tells roe, that a few flight Cavils cannot much an- ooy or hurt it . No. Either clear Demon, ftrations, or ( were it pofliblc ) more then Dc- monftratrons ought to enter here , and fluke this our ftrong Fortrefs \ Or, if they do not, Common Prudence obliges me to own this for Qbritts true Spoufc , or to Grant, (which is hideoufly Again ft the Grounds of Chnltianity) that there is no fuch Thing as an Orthodox Church in the world* 10. Now on the other fide, when I caft my Thoughts on a Few late rifen Company of Divided Sectaries , utterly Deftitute of all pru- A D V E R T I S E M E N T\ prudent Motives, without Atitiquity , Mira- cles, Conversions, or other Evidences of Crc* dibility j when again I ferioufly ponder how flightly they goc to work againft us , How weakly They attempt "with meet Trifles ( re- mote from Proofs and Principles) to Vnr°°t (as it^vere) this ftrong Building of our Catho- lick Society, Iftand aftonifhed, andmuft needs fay y They feem to be men not too thoughtful of Eternity, And never can wonder enough at Their boldnes, whilft They dare, as they do, to take pen in hand, and prefume to write a- gainft an Ancient Church, that made the world and their own Progenitors ChriRians. But what is Hitherto briefly hinted at, will be mo- re largely laid forth in the enfuing Difcour. fes. ii. Now it is high time to end an Adverti- fcment, and to tell our Adverfaries my abfolu- te Refolucion. It is thus. Let who will pre- tend to Anfwer this Trcatis cither in part or whole, Nothing {hall draw me to Reply, un- les He that Anfwers come more clolely to Principles, then I ever yet law in Protcftant Wri- ter, it is a (in to trifle our precious time d 3 away *e ... 'j A Necessary Advertisement. aw >n Cavils. I'll hardly thank any that may 4eas to Anfwer upon Grounded Principles : >ut if He fail Hetin , His labour will.be loft and mine herpafter fp^red. AH I fhall Dp ( if I do fo much) will pc to tell him were He miitern in the Mam point which i$ to come clo/cly to Principles. ..j -,%\ ■ . ., • - -i. •■> -*-* » I ; - ■ ... a ! (J . '"• • : f ? i. . • i -- \ J I J i -> , i J, -i M^ » i i 03 ' nil ^ ERRATA COTrIGENDA. . ■ • Page 4. line 5. oft Read of page 6* laft line retaur R. return, p. 11. I4. put R. but p. 17. 1. 24. retch R. reaches p. 19 l.io.asit R. as it is p. ii.l. 13- reaching R. teaching p 22. 1.13. trnc R.true p.24 L8.ltifalibility R.Infaliibility p.22. Title Teachere R, Tea- cher p.2j\l, i. trough R thcough p.26.1.1. foor R.for p.27.1.2. afterward R.afterward p.^o.Tit. futher R, further p«5p. (.24. te R#the p.40.Tic. Rdyes R.Replyes p. 41.1.16*. hvR.it -- p»43«l.n« affhtance R. aflurance p. 46. Title Relyes R. Replyes p.q.jA.2j. fundcmeetals R. fundamentals p. £3.1.14. dot FL doth p.58.l.'2. verities R.veritics P.69.I.4.M: if followcs dele if p.6yJ.9.praging spraying p.69.1.23.Realon R.Reajon p.7i.l.i7.whickR. which p.74.1.i.fo ritR. forit p.77.1,1 7. Father R, Fathers p*??&i$&i ftandingh R»ftanding p.81. Title dele certainty p.po.l.7. oaring R.owning p.93.Marg. \o€t RJoft p 94J.t2.is R, it p 94.1:1$. Prophet R.Prophets p.ioj.Marg. fe\r R.few p.iij.Tit. Prave R.Prove p.141. Marg. propofeR.piopofed p. i43*l»6.preteud R.pretend's < P.144J. rotte/rin ft* t©t«ering p.149. 1. ao. other R. others p.i58.Marg. te R.to pa59.1*2*Ghrift R.Chrifts p. 159, Marg. no Read |not p.175. 1. 6*.oppofit , oppofite Read oppo- (ite p.i78.1.e.ftead R.inftcad p.182.1.22. were /ent R. they were fent p 182. 1.27.cafting of R. calling out p. 184. Marg, unconi- polTible R.incompoffible p.186. I.5. buth R.but p.189.1.17. fee R.feem p.*$>5.Marg,an R.on P.209.L28. mterpred R. interpreted p it2.Marg.Siciety R.Society p.2i5.l4.PropecyingR.Prophecying p. 117.1. 24. iffelfR.it felf p.2i81.j yo R.you p.222. l^p.Objc- dtiouR.Objec't.ion p.2i8.1.9.of R.or p.25^.MKg.canfifts R.cor*- fills p. 250M.12.nosR.not p. 260.I.7. ptofed R. propofed p.261. Marg. datiful R. dutiful p.i$2. Marg, doclare R. declare p.269. l.io'caflefly R.cauflefly p.275.1.29.borh we delt both p.278.1.13. reclaim R. convert p>295« l.i 5. Chutch R. Church p-302.Marg. uacluding R.unconcluding p.3U,Marg.careftrR.care for p.313* Marg. \n\ndele in p.314. l.itf.flit R.fhs p.$i8. 1. 32. ditt R.durt p.329.1.26\unevidentccd R. unevidenced p.330.1.29. AnR. and p.342,l#3o.party R.parity p.344.1.5. An R.and p.346. l.io. ihefe JVtthofe p.jjo, Uo. Cutch R, Church p.3Jt,l.J3.foi long a time Ribr lLfor a longtime p^ji.l.i^.onvcyed R.conveyed p.35^J.i.infal- libily R.infajhbly p.358.1. 15. Argumen R. Argument p.3J9Marg. SoyR.Say p.362.1. 15. wales R. walles p.363.1.21, impioufly. dele funftum p.343. Mcrg. then, then R. then p.365.1. 31. licen'cencc licence p. 572. 1. 2, convmceth R, convince p. 375. Tit. Curch R. Church p.375 L14. ad R»and p.378.1,15 .chis R.this p. 381. 1.29.overtrowR,overthrow p.4oi.l.i8.that isRit p^c^.Marg, mareRmorc p.406 Marg, (inayR.fway p.4ti.1 14. conruthed R. confuted p. 417. 1. 10. toughtsR. thoughts p 420.1.7. ns R. us p.424.1.18. unworrhlyR. unworthy p. 425. 1. 30. and is Me and p.44i.Marg.,whacR.w!iat p. 44 3. V. 4. teachers R. teaches p. 448. J.18. Cathalick R. Catholick p.449.1.7. cxpreffingR. expiffing p.452.l.n.ttial R.crial p.453.1.17. Cutches R.Chuiches p.460. I.20. Ground R. Grounds p 50i.I.^,worft R.w ors p.516.1.15. Scripiture R. Scripture. After Page 431. is Page 332. R. 432. There are without doubt many more faults in Or- thography pafled over, to fay nothing of points ill pla- ced , of Capital letters to often, and comma's need- lefly multiplyed. What ever is found amifs impute it boldly to the Printer , or to the Author, and pleate to pardon both , for the firft knovwes not a word ot En- gli/h 1 and the other has not the language perfectly. THE INTRODVCTION- I Efore we enter upon the fol- lowing difcourfes, I muft need's have a word with Mr. Took , whoie Nullity , and Jppendix ( but chiefly the requeft of a friend ) induced me to write this Trcatife. It is very true , after one ferious perufal of this Nullity , I had enough ofic, and therfore judged it unne- ceflary, and indeed notworththepains toanfwer K#™niUs , or to follow the Author through his Mazes,andlongwandringparergons. I returnc him undoubted grounds of true Religion (they are undeniable)which at leaft deftroy his bed Prin- c:ples ; and if I rmftake not , this is fully as much as a Nullity deferves. However, if he delire more, he may probably have it in another Treatife.Novv, if you afk, why I took this way of anfvvering, if yet you 1 call it an Anfwer, Til tell you. My ayme is not fo much to meddle with this Nullity, as to fpeakforthe Cathoiik caufe,and prove fomething, which fhall not be anfwered. Again : A Is z The IntrodvctionC It is more then te Jious,cver to be encountring a few old worn-out Arguments (fet forth in new dreffes) which have been confuted a hundred ti- mes over. Thirdly : No finall part ofthi\Nw/- hty fcem's to be too trivial , while tar^rCarhelik writersare introduced fpeakng,as M Tonle thinks, difadvantagioufly , and againf* our Faith. Now SixmSenenfisfayts tiis\ now (Bttlarmin thkt , now StapktonSL third thing, &c. Andarethefe , think ye,doughty Doings Tor fuch an Antagonift, that offers to ftrike at the 1>ery root of the Roman Church? Alas , what he cites chus , Avere ail he cites true, isaN«//tfy indeed , andameernothmg; for Church DoSirin depends on no mans private opinion; But , when we make aninfpedion intothefc Au- thors (as I have done on feveral occafions, and find them quoted by halfs, weighed ouc of their circumftances, mangled, and traduced toafinifter fenfc ) we muft fpeak truth , That cheats will go on their way, and rather play at fmallga nne, then fit out , or feem to do nothing, Had Proteftants any thing like a good caufe in hand, or Truth on their fide, they would cer- tainly plead more manfully for it, ar*J never like poor people in harveft, go thus a gleaning up and down our Authors ( known for profefled Catho- liks) T he Introdvcti OM. .J liks) who little, God knows, intended to favour Sectaries by fuch fegments, as they are pleafcd to pick up , much lefs to furnil h Proteftants with ar- mour againft Catholik Do&rin. But what will ye ? Se&ariescan do no better. Yet I muft tell you what they ought to do, whilft they embrace ^ Novelty , and caft of the old Religion. They fhould make the ancient Canons to roar againft our Dodhin , they fhouldconfound and over- whelm us with undeniable proofs , drawn from plain Scripture, ancient Councils, ijniverfal Tra- dition, and the unanimous confent of Fathers: Of ihefc we hear no great noife. Next ( and this mod concerns them) They fhould aifo pofttiyely prove, and cftabliih every Article of ProteHant K eligion, astprotejlancy , by fuch plain, open, and illuftrious Authorities,then a ^ellarmin^St^letvn^ a Maldonate and others might well follow the rear ; But to va- pour with a few broken fragments , I'll efpyed in thefe Modern Authors ( and wprfe applycd) without attending to their whole drift , antecedent and confequent , and think to defeat an Ancient Church with fuch trivial Doings, is fo (light a way oflchirmiihing, that it deferves no counterblow, but piety and compafsion. That incomparable Author of the Trotejiants Jpolog^lewtis them ano- A 2 hjer 4 The jfM trodvc tion. ther way of arguing ,whtlft he doch not only (hew the endles clafhing of Se<5taries amongft them- fdves , but moreover folidly proves oi!r Catholik Do<5trin pofitfoely, and this by the mod fatisfa<5tory and undeniable Principles , that a lover oft Truth can wiih for. Thus thefenew men fhould defend their cau- fe , and it is no fault of ours that they trifle it out?, and do no better. We charge enough upon them, and could they well acquit themfelves, they would certainly go more clolely to work, and an fiver dire<5lly. We fay, and will prove it, That, that Do&rin which they believe as Protectants > contrary to the R oman Catholik Faith, is evidently no part of any Chriftian belief, but a meer Opinion grounded on fancy only. We fay,and will prove it, that this new Religion of Proteftancy hath all the marks and characters of herefy following ir, which can be thought on : not one is wanting; for, if Arm o{ old , whoquited the ancient Roman Church, and banded againft it, was, upon that account,both fchtjmatkk and heretick > our Sectaries are in eadem na)?eJ snd have done fo, their caufe and cafe, in other matters, is the very fame. t. As Arm flood all alone at his firft rife , oppofite to thereftofChriltians, and wasoppofed by all, fo were The jntro dvc tio n. 5 ivcic they alfo both oppofice, and oppofed by all. *. As he bepan without commi(Tion to broach his Novelties againft the ancient Faith , Co aretheyaswholyuncoinifsioned to preach Theirs: And here we give them matter enough to work on, and conjure them to produce theircommifc fion. 4. hs Arms ^ fupported by lecular power, vented what ever he pleafed without curb , or any fuperiour law to check him ,and therforefell into deiperate Extravagancies ,• fo are our new men lawles a]fo, and fubrnit to none but their own fancy and felf-judgement,Finaliy5as Arm^ without warrant of the Church, interpreted Scripture as his own weak reafon taught him 3 juft (o do our Sedaries: here only is the difference ^ That he had a plaufible found o£ Scripture-Morels for hisherefy-, Proteftants have neither found , nor fyllahle , nor fenfe through the whole Bible for one article of Proceftancy, zsTroteUaucy. This \ fhall make good hereafter. Here is charge enough drawn up againft them; but by what iatisfaitory known and received Principles, which force reafon to acquiefce(and we make a fearch atter thefe)they can acquit them- felves, or rationally anfwer, is a heavy difficulty. I'll tell you in a word (and remember itjthey 1 hall A 2 never v 6 The Introdvct ion. never anfwer by any thing that hath the look of & rational proof ^or a recefoedTrinciple. No; Their own fole proofles word, wheron the whole ma- chin of Proteftancy is built, upholds what ever they teach : They have no more. They fay, 'tis true, they left the ancient Roman Church,becaufe it left it felf, but yet flick clofetothe Primitive Do&rin. Obferveit * They arc here both Ac- cufcrs of us,and Iudges in their own caufe. Their proofles word doth all, without reducing it to any known or certain owned Principle. Not one Council,not one Canon, no ancient Tradition, no confent of Fathers can they produce , wherby par- ticular men arclycenfed torifeupagainft an An- cient Mother Church , and condemn it of falfe Do&riu, They will tell you , that they ftood all alone when Luther rofe up, yet.taught/orfooth ,thc trueGofpelof lefws CbriH • and we mult believe them. Here is the laft Tropofitio quie/cens. They fayfo : To what we charge againft their uncom- miffioncd Authority to preach as they did, you ha. ve the like uncommifsioned anfwer : The Lord fent them abroad , and the Truth they taught fe- cures them. But of thefe weak wordy replyes I have (aid to much in this fhort Digrefsion. Let us now re tour n to Mr. Toole : And Imuft fay, The Intpodvctioh. y Ay , all he hath vented in his Hullity or Appendix agamilus, corrcsto no more, buttoamoft weak ailault of a fleble Advetfary ,• for this man , who cn-cavorus to prove that both Church and Coun- cils,and what clfc you can mention,are falHblc,caft never aflume to himfelf,or tve to any Community hejoyns with the Spirit of Infallibility t For , if the infallibility of the Church of ^pme muftdown j down Jay I,alfo with the infallibility of the Prote- ftant Church, of the Grecian Church, and of all other focieties of Chr iftians. With fome of thefe M'JPook is lilted , and therfore I cannot but hold him, and his Adherents,men of no more, then of a fallible Religion. Hence I argue : Suppofe, which is utterly falfe, that the Church, or all Churches, all Councils, all Fathers are fallible, and that Chriftian Religion (as it is taught by thefe) islrkewifefalli. ble : Admit alia, that I were to embrace one of thefe many fallible Religions,(which I fhall never do) will not prudence di&ate , iflhaveno^other certainty then thefe meer uncertainties to rely on, that it is better to hold where I am, and ftick to my ancient R eligton^lorious with innumerable Mar- tyrs, Dodlors, Confeffors, &c« then togive up my Faith to Af'.yWf* poft-nate fallible Religion, and falie difcours ? How* therfore can this man fo much as -- .. 8, The Introdvction^ as once endeavour,to draw me,or any,ofmy more ancient and univerfal Religion (though fuppofed. fallible) to another new one , which lyes fick of the famedifeafe, totters , and reel's as much as mine (if not more) and in a word is fallible ? Of two evils the lefle is to be chofen. It is an evil without doubtjto have no Religion certain j yet,if I were to choofe one of two uncertain Religions , and could by no certain Teacher learn which of them is teorfe ( being both naught ) I would either pitch where I lift, and as my fancy lead's me 5 or rather choofe none at all , knowing wel , that a ruin of all Faith, folio wesche renouncing of certainty in Religion. But ofthis more hereafter. In theinterim, I would know otM'Toole , whether this ftran- ge and unheard of Propofition ; Chri/Han %eli«ion^ as it u taught and delivered by all V afters y (Doftors, &c. is fallible, hefubje£liT>ely in him that fpeak's it, an infalli* hie Ajjertmi) ov fallible i If the firft,we have an En- glifh Pope ( I mean M^^ede) who without either Scripture, Church, or Council , can fpeak infallibly in matters of Faith. If that formal Propofition be fallible, it fall's of it felf , without further proof, to nothing, and renders this fenfe ; L M. P. fry by a fallible Aflertion , that Chriftian Religion is fallible j which feeble Aflertion ( and the weaker it \ The Introdvctior 9 it i$,the worfe it is for him) cannot at all ftartle me, or any, who upon the Authority of thoufands more learned than he ( to fay no more ) hold one Religion, and but one only, certain and infal. lible. Perhaps he will fay, that though his Propo- rtion be fallible,yet it is highly probable againft the pretended Infallibility of the Roman Church, no other focicty of Chriftians laying claim to infallibility. Mark by the way what this Ad- verfary drives at. It is to tell the world a ivord of comfort ,viz. That thrift left* hath now no certain and infallible Religion taught or learned in the whole Chriftian world \ And to make this moft fallible and falfe PropoHtion good, he back's it by another of his own, as falfe and fallible, viz. It is at kdfl highly probable, that the Church of%pme is fallible. Pray you on what leggs doth this high fuppofed probability ftand ? Til tell you, it ftands only on )drJPooks weak thoughts, and unwarran- ted word, more you have not. For, never did any ancient Council, or univerfal Tradition, or the unanimous confcnt of Fathers hold it a thing highly probable, that either Chriftian Religion, or the Catholik Church of %ome is fallible. Doth the Scripture favour any where this wild Afler- tion ? No, not one fyllable is found to that pur- B pofe, xq The In t rod vct ton. pofe, we have texts enough to the contrary* lome I {hall quote on a fitter occasion. You will ask what then is it,that Mr. Toole s pro- ves againft us in the fourth Chapter of his Nullity? J anfwer , juft nothing. His whole lirain is thus: Ahcr much tampering with thofe convincing places of holy Scripture, ufually alledgedfor the Churches Infallibility, and fpoiling all with his fallible fancies , he goes negatively to work, and telPs us : Such and fuch texts (turned out of their genuine fenfe by his glofTes) come not home, nor prove any Church infallible • and it is no wonder, for,as perverted by him 3 they are none of Gods Scripture, but his own fcribled whimfies. Take here one inftance for many , that text ofS.TW, x.Ttm.yi*). u here the Church is ftiled the pillar and ground if "Truth , fcem's plain enough,open , and fi- gnificantfor the Catholik fenfe. Now comes Mt. Toole with his glofTes,/?^ 86. and faith perhaps, here may be an Ellipfis,of the word «v, ^Ao?may be writ for «* *&* j and if (b, Timothy was the pillar, not the Church. Again , The Church here fpoken of,may be that wherin Timothy was placed,not the Roman, j. The term ofpillar, notes the folidity, not the infallibility of the Church. 4. Itmay no- te the Churches Duty? not her praftife with a The Introdvct iom. ji fongj&c. Obferve wel. Vpon thefe wretched fal- lible fuppofitiens M'.Toole feem's to conclude, thac thofe words are unconcluding for the Infallibility ofany Chriftian feciety. Put I ask by what Au- thority muft I fuppofe his Ellfpfis , or thac the Church fpoken of was Timothy's Church, not the Vniverfal f That the term pillar notes not the Infallibility5&c? Doth God fpeakrhus in Scriptu- re, or rather doth not Mr.Toole vent thefe wild Fancies without Scripture or any uncjueftioned Authority? This later is moft evident \ Andean he think by fuch farfetcht glofles, either to rob the Apoftle of his plain obvious fenfe , or to make me believe that his guefles hit right on Cods true meaning, delivered in this text? If he reply , the meaning may be as he guefles. I anfwer , and it may not be as he guefles, Who is here to judge beta cen us? Who can tell me, chat Mr.Tools May be is a prop fure enough to build my faith upon ? He is cherforetofhowpofitively by a tPropofitio quie (certs ; that is i by fome cogent proof and undoubted Authority , that S. fault words muft be underftood as he gloffes , and con- fequentlyis obliged to make good fome one of thefe defperate Proportions. Cbrifi hfm hathnoTto no infallible Religion taught or learned in the Chriftian B 2 VorU. v ii The IntrodvctiomJ H>orlJ. Ml Chrijiian Societies dre fallible* That holy and HmT>erfalChurch,mentioried in the Creed, u fallible yZ?c. But to wave fuch proofs , to lay hold on a Text in Scripture ? and torture it as he plealeth , and after the mifufage to tell us , the Text proves nothing; is only to fport with Gods Word , and fay , thac Scripture made no Scripture by whole heaps of fal- lible glofles,is proofles. The foundation is good, but the fuperftru&ure is naught. Give me the flrongeft place in Scripture for any Article of Chriftian faith , lean by pidlingat the Text with unevidenced glofles , both fo pervert and poyfon the words , that at laft they Ipeak harrefy. Yet on fuch unproved con jedures Protectant Religion ftands, and can never have better footing, while Gods unwritten Word is rejc&ed,and no infallible Teacher \s allowed of, that lcat n's us Truth. One word more, and I end. Hadthofe two Gallants , Luther and CalVm, when they cook upon them to reform the darkned world of Popery, thus allarm'd their Hearers. My Mafters : \Xc Preach indeed a new Gofpel upon the beft con* je&ures we are able • but you muft know , that all we fay is fallible : How fick would fuch a faying have made the ftrongeft ftomack amongftthem* For? if fallible , if uncertain Doftrin , it was none , ' of The Introduction.^ 13 of Cbrijl lefut Do&rin , and therfore flood in need of a more pure refining. And how know our Proceftants , but that yet a new fort of People may ftart op , and make it their cask to reform aUthe failible Reformers, that have troubled the world f]nceL#f£ewdaye5? Had I no other juft exception againft: our Protcftants but thus much only; That they yec know not where about They are in their reformation, and becaufe fallible, can never know, whether for example the thing they have in hand, be yet a meer Embrio of Religion, ot of a more perfed fhape,a new layd egg,or a hatcht chicken $ whether they themfelves are yet only Novices, Proficients, or Matters in the trade of Reformation •, I fay, were there no more,This alo- ne would fright me from ever being Proteftant, Believe it, the Profeffors of an uncertain and endles reformable Religion fhall never come to iettlement, till they renounce the cheat and Be- lieve as the Apoftle teaches, ad Gal 1.8. Licet no$,&cc Altouv}) Tec, or Angel from hedben preach othtrlptfe to you then "toe ha^e preached to you, let him be accurfed) which is fully to fay : for by what I can learn by Mr. Toole and other Proteftants , They think all done when they tell us , That the ob]etl%\>e ® hadinitanyChnftians, who heard the it truly *i the Word of God , who ( effc- dually ) works in you that believe. Obferve well : He who receives the delivered Word of God, as it is truly Gods Word and not mans ; He that hath in his hart the in- fallible Word of God, and, by the cooperation of Grace, yeilds an affent to it ,^ to the infallible word of God, can- not but believe what Godfpeak^s, and as hefpeak^s : but God fpeak's infallibly, Therfore he believes infalli- bly ; or if he reach not fo high , but faulters with an affent that is fallible, he Believes not God , nor his Word (as it truly is Gods Weird ) who never did nor can fpeak any thing fallibly. Now , if on the other fide our Adverfaries grant , that Chriffrans heard rhe infal- lible Do&rirt 6£ Chtijl , and believed it infallibly, They alfomuft admit of a Subjeftm infallibility y at leaftin fuch Believers. And this truth Scripture clearly points at, in thefe and the like undeniable places, obvious to all : C / knot* 1.3 Diic. I C. I. Infallible Teachers. iknW 1»ho iMievt) and am certain. Let the honfe ofJJrael certainly kno7t>. Although T»e or t^dngel from heaven , &c. Belief!,hbf Faith is a convi&ion *Aeyx,0f > or a (trong argument of fHMofitb ' vbat appears /w/,&c. But thefe 1 wave >becauie known snfaUMe to every one. Let us now proceed to the Teachers Teschers. Q[ Chriftian Religion , and prove our Aflertion. i. To go on clearly ,1 would know whether there have not ahvayes been, now are, and ever will be among Thefe true and infallible Believers, fome Paftors, Do- lors, or Teachers, who, Authorised by Chriji , are by Duty, both to inftruft Chriftians, in cafe they fwerve from Truth, and alfo to reduce Aliens from thrift , to a true Belief of his facred Do&rin > Certainly , Mr. Poole will own fuch Paftors in the world ; \i nor, wuat are Mini- fters for in England \ Or, why doth He affume to him- felf this Office of teaching, whilft He endeavours to reclaim a feduced Captain from his Apoftacy, as he call's it ? And is it poflible > What } After fuch an ^/ri^/-acknowledgement, iKall we hear this unheard , harfti, Marie*, and moft Heretical AtTertion : That all thefe Paftors, who are to unbeguile foules, may be beguiled Them- felves, or teach falfe Do<3rin> And that not fo much as one, amongft them*//, is fo Highly priviU d, as to inftruft with certainty? If all are fallible, and none Teaches certainly , the Blind lead's the .blind , the Schollerisasgood asbisMafter ; at leaft, none can in prudence learn of any,if this perfwafion live in him. He that Teaches me% may as veil erre as /, vhoamto Learn. If an unskilful Traveller enquire the way to an unknown place of one, knowing it no better then he that asks, He travel's on with no fecurity , and This is our very cafe : Amongft To many By-ways , fo many mazes of oects Difc.t. C.I. InfaUibk Teachers. 19 Se&s and Schifms,as now fwarm in the world, and like cobwebs intricate thousands of fouls in their journey,we are porting on as fall as Time can drive us, to a place yet unknown, a long Eternity, The directing thread, that fafely drawes us out of thefe Labirinths , is Surc> Firm, and infallible Faith ; we ask to learn this of our new Doctors, and not one can certainly fay , Such is theWayi This infallibly is the Faith that winds us out of errour, and moft affuredly lead s to Heaven: or > if any fay fo much, he fpeaks only Fallibly. 3. And here is the fummary of Proteftants com- Protect*: forties Dodrin. They have Paftors that talk$but Teach JJjJJ^ nothing certainly : They have Infallible Ferities lock'd up in Scripture , but none can open that Book , or convey them with Affurance into mens harts: They hear God fpeak, but none of them certainly knows what he fayes: They have Chri/ls Promifesofa Spirit of Truth' abyding with fome Chriftian Teachers ( find them where they can)for ever, to theendofthe World; but now, They mult fay, becaufe all Paftors are fallible, That Chrtft keep's not his word , if all may deceive, and Teach both fallible and falfeDodrin. Finally, they muft own fuch Belie- vers,as S Paul mention eth , who receive the word of God , as it Truly is the Word of God ; but have not one Paftor, or Dodor, that dare fliow his face, and fay he Teaches this word infallibly. Yet infallible Believers and infalli- ble Teachers feerri neer Correlatives ; the one, if Faith come by Hearing , ftaggers without the other, and methmks w;,en the Apoftle faith, Rom. 10. 14. None h£^V tan hear Without a Treacher , he fuppofeth as well the Prea- Gods word cher . inftrudmg ) infallible, as the Hearer infdltbh in- fwtf -ftrafted. l*mu CHAP, Teachers* *o Difc.I. C II. ChAfr infuUibU Voclrlnt CHAP, rt The Infallible Dottrin of Chrift necefi farily requires infallible Teachers. I. TPHc proof of my AflTertion is more fully decla- JL red Chap 4. «.6. and relyes on this Principle In- fallible Doftrin taught only fallibly, under that notion of fallibly taught Doftrin i is not the Doclrin of Chrift. We are of God, faith Scripture, 2*/>«£f//?. i.cap 4 x6. Hethat kno^esGod, hears us i hethat is not of God , heareth us not. Hereby Tec knol* the Sprit of Truth , and the Spirit of errour. Which is to fay in other Terms. He that hear s an infallible Teacher, hath the Spirit of Truth ; and he that hear's not an infallible Teacher, wants this Spirit of Truth. Again , Epift.z. **>.<). Every one that recedes, p) piv*v , and remains not in the DoRrin of Chrift , hath trot Gody &c. But every one , that Hears only a fallible Teacher , eafily recedes, and remains not in the Do&rin of Chrift ; Ther- fore he hath not God, nor the Spirit of Truth in him. 2. Upon thefe grounds I Argue further. Chrift Do- drin, infallible in itfelf , is either now taught infallibly by fome Paftors lawfully Tent, or fallibly. If the firft; we mud own infallible Teachers of this infallible Do- Iftrin. If the fecond , That is, \iChrifts infallible Do- &rin be taught only Fallibly, ex parte Docentis9it followes evidently, firft, That though God fpeaks infallibly, yet no man hath certainty of what he faith. It followes iecondly, That fuch a fallible Teaching of Chrifts Do- #rin, Difc .1. CI I. Squires Infallible Teacheri. 1 1 ftrin , may be cavilled at, and difputed againft. For>Mfrfc all Do&rin taught fallibly , and which by force of its t?gl*¥& Propofel, or merit of the Do&rin, may deceive and beffieJ%j[ed falle, islyabletocavil , and difpute; Therfore this Do- at, and ti- dtrinmav be^lfo cavilled at, and difputed againft* ltftHted follovves thirdly, That really Chrifts Do&rin ( perchance "£"m"' perverted by a fallible and falfe Delivery ) may not be Taught at all. The reafon is : No other Do&rin is,or can be taught, but what is fallible, and may be falfe : but Chrifjts Do&rin is nor fallible, nor can be falfe > Therfore that Dodrin which is only Taught fallibly (as it is fo delive- red)^ none ofChriBs infallible Doflrw. Confequently, df any man would now utterly abjure all the taught Do- Ann of the Chriftian world, he might do it without being an Haeretick. I prove it : He who only abjures and Denies Fallible Do&rin which may be falfe , neither abjures nor denies Chrijls Doftrin nor any Chriftian Ve- rity, which cannot be falfe : But all Chriftian Doftrin, thatcanbe Taught (Seftaries fay) is Fallible and may be Falfe ; Therfore he who Denies fuch a fallible taught Doftrin, denies not Chrifts Do&rin, and cannot be upon that account an Haeretick. You wil) fay : He who Denies all Chriftian taught T>o8rin% certainly De- nies fome of thofe ObjecJfte Verities which are revealed in Gods Word, and therfore is an HxreticL Very true, if he be fure, That his Teacher delivers thofe Verities infallibly: But our Proteftants fay , Becaufe all Teachers lnfaiUbu are fallible , none can have that Affurance from them, d»*w or any ; Therfore their Doftrin , as it is taught fallibly, '£j$j JJ* may be cavilled at, yes, and denied alfo without the^^D^ guilt of Hacrefy. The reafon is. Whoever, only De- nUlof mes the fallible Teaching of infallible Doarin (yet not Jj^ C 3 known mum. %% Difc. I. C t 1. Qhtifls infallible Voihine known for fuch) Denies not the objecltve infallible Do- ftrin in it felf, but the Formal fallible Delivery of it ; and this, he may boldly fay,is none of Chnfls Dodiin. 3. Thefubftanceof what I would here exprefle, may **oavt4r*n- perhaps more plainly be reduced to Form thus : A fo- €e can be r t r J had from ciety or men , who can do no nore but only Teach ral- tnenthM jjble Do&rin , lohich may befalfe.can aflure none, that Chnfts they Teach Chrifts infallible Doffrin, vbicb cannot be fal/e 1 voarin But all focieties of Chriftians can do no more but Teach faiiibi). fallible Dodrin which maybe falfe, (for all Churches, all Councils, all Fathers, all Papifts, all Proteftants, and CMr.Poole with them, are (as they fay) Fallible in their Feaching ; ) Therfore not one amongft them can afiureany, that he Teaches or Delivers the infallible Doftrin of Chrijl. I fay, That he Teaches -,for, if we meet with a Simplician That ters[us, He builds his Faith and Religion, not upon any Preachers talk , but on the oh ' B\ve °fyett*ve Verixiei revealed in Scripture. I anfwer: Un- reveaied les he firfl learn of feme Infallible Oracle, what Scriptu- Veritiei no Xq exa&ly fpeak's in a hundred controverted places, he *"J£undof ^a^ nevet by his own poreing on a Bible either arrive fnfaUtbU to the depth of God trne meaning , or derive infalli- Faith ble Faith from thofe objefthe revealed Verities. The re- ply fuppofeth, That all Truth couched in Scripture, is as eafily understood , with the unclafping of a Bible, as the fun is feen at noon-day. If fo , Minifies here- after may ( for the moft of men ) ftut their books , flop their mouths , and preach no more. 4. Some yet perhaps will fay : One may preach the infallible Do&rin of Chrift , though himfelt be falli- ble in the Delivery of it. which feerh's manifeft ; for eve- ry Catechift, or Preacher, though he delivers the infal- lible Dlfc 1. C. I h'Qsjquires Infallible Teachers. * j lible Do&nnofC/>n]2, yet delivers knot infallibly \ why therfore may not Minifters in England teach , as thole do , infallible Doftrin , though , ex parts fuhjefti dvcentis, they Teach it falhbly > I ar.fwer firft : Minifters in England have no Infallible Church to recurre to, in cafe They crre ; f jr their whole Community is fallible. The Catholick Preacher hath a fure Oracle to rely on • an Infallible Church , that unbeguil's him if he fwerve from Truth, which is a mighty Advantage and a great The Ad~ Difparity in the prefent queftion. Now if you fay v*ntaie 'f Seftaries may as well rely on infallible Scripture for #* chunb. their Dire&ion, as we do on an Infallible Church ; I de- ny the Suppofttion , and fliall ihew hereafter, That not to much as one Article of Proteftancy can be proved by Scripture. Again : No man call's into qoubt the Objective ferities contained in Scripture, known as fuefcu But here is the difficulty, whether the new invented Interpretations made on Scripture by Se&aries be true orfalfe; and if falfe , They have no Infallible Ora- cle to amend the Errour as the Catholick Teacher hath* 5. I anfwer fecondly: S.Paul methinks > layes foun- dation enough to folve the Objection, jRom.io.i'). &0^ p)all They ft each utiles they be (em? Why therfore may we not afferr, That every Catechift , every Preacher that hath a lawful Mi/lion , and is fent by the Infallible Church to preach Chrijls facred Doftrin , if he preach that Doftrin which Chrijl and his Church approves of, is then, under that Notion of a Member conjoined with an Infallible Church , Infallible in his Teaching > Though all vulgar taught Do&rin is not fuch. Now Minifters , who are unfent men, and ther&re divorced from 14 Difc.1. CI I. Qhifis Infallible Voclrine from this infallible Moral Body, cannot but talk, as they do, Fallibly. 6. I would not have any to miftake my meaning. Know therfore firft : I do not fay , That this or that Paftor, purely confidered as a Paftor, is infallible in all he Teaches. Norfccondly, That either Councils af- fembled , or particular Biftops , are by any intrinfick in- herent qualify elevated to a date of Infallibility. But thirdly, I affirm : That God, who, according to Cbrip promife , will ever guide his Church in Truth, cannot permit All the Paftors and Teachers in it to fwerve from Carholick Doftrin : For, if fo , The whole Catholick Church might erre, which is contrary to UwfJay thrifts promife. Hence 1 fay, fourthly : Every Bi- ftnt teach ftop or Paftor , though not Verfonally infallible , yet ma!in w^en ^e is fent to preach Cbrifis Do&rin , and com- infamy, plies with his Duty , That is, when he Teaches No- thing , but what he hath commiflion to teach in the Name of God and his Church ; fuch a man , I fay, confidered as a vernier cenjoyned Tvitb an Infallible Church in the Delivery of ChriJIs Verities, may be fayd to teach infallibly ; For upon this fuppofition , he doth not on- ly fpeak Truth as it were by chance ( An Haererick may do fo;) But more, as he fpeak's in the name of God and his Church , He teaches as the Church teacheth, that is , infallibly. The Reafon is Manifeft in Catholick Principles ; fiecaufe the Holy Ghoft ever Affifts fome Paftors in the Catholick Church to teach true Cbrifiian Doclrin, and 'tis as certain thatThofe he Affifts teach it infallibly; Therfore a Paftor, Prelate or Bifhop that Delivers Cbrifis Doftrin , as is now declared , tea&hes Infallibly. You.will fay, This Pa- ftor, DifcJ. C.I I. Requires InfallikkTeacbere. 25 ftor, or that Bifhop may, trough malice, ignorance, objetthns or both , lwerve from Truth. I grant it ; but then *nfwered. he teaches not as one of Gods Minifters , nor com- plies with his Mifsion. You will fay again. Thus much at leaft followes out of this Principle , That a Bifhop when he Teaches as lawfully [em , is at that inftant as infallible as the Pope when he Defines in Council; or, to fpeak in M'.Pooles homely language, hath a Pope in his belly. I anfwer. Every faithful Bifhop may have as Infallible Faith, as the Pope : what wonder is it therfore if, when he Teaches as both Po- pe and the Church teach , he be then fayd to Teach infallibly > Yet there is a great Difparity between the Pope and particular Paftors ; Bifhops,&c. For no particular Biihop can make any new Declarations of Faith obligeing all Chriftians to believe ; The Pope with a Council can do fo. No particular Bifhop, pre- cifcly considered as fuch , is infallible > For he may Teach to day as one lawfully fent , and to morrow erre by ignorance, yea , and Malice alfo: But the Pope, confidered as Pope and Chip Vicar on Earth can never Define in Councils but Infallibly •, and ther- fore his Afliftance is in a higher meafure certain , and fupereminently Infallible. 7. The laft ground of this Do&rin( which great De- vines aflert ) is , That the whole Church of Chrijl, which coniifts of Paftors and Hearers , of Teachers »fv*ft«s and Learners , Antecedently to Pope and Council Con- t^m' ciliarily afiembled together, is infallible ,• For the Pro- '" '- mifes of Chrift ever Affifting the Church , Primarily belong to this whole moral Body ; which cannot erre: Againft thps Church Hell gates mall never prevail , with D it The iphok Church confining l6 Difc.I. CI I tyri/is infallible DoElrine it The Spirit of Truth shall re main foor eyer,8cc. Now this Infallibility cannoc but remain and ftand fall in tho members of this myftical Body ; not in Pallors only, for it avails little, thacThefe teach infallibly, if none learn their infallible Doftrin : nor in Hearers only , be- cause they learn not infallible Do&rin without a Teacher. Infallibility then accompanies both* Paftors and Hea- fimJd rers# As therfore, Thefe believing Hearers fconjoyned flwrm in Faith with this infallible Church ) are under That aretnfaiu- miion ? infallible, ( no Catholick can deny it:) fo li- kewife thefe Believing Paftors , as conjoynd in Bo* cirin with this unerring Church, and Teaching what the Church Teaches, under that notion , are infallible in their Dodrin. Yet, as. I now intimated , there is a great Difference between the Refrefematm Church of a Pope and Council lawfully and Conciliarily aflem- bled, and particular Paftors , Particular Chriftians, *%££** anc* Particular Churches; For, the Reprefentative mytrre, Church , becaufe of the powerful Afiiftance of the Holy Ghoft , cannot fwerve from Truth in its Defini- tions j but this Paftor , that Teacher , that Particu- lar Church may fwerve ( altogether cannot) though under the notion of a Paftor fent to teach the Infallible Dodrin of thrift and his Church, he Teaches infalli- bly. Separate him from this moral Body , he loo- feth Affiftancc, and cannot but teach Fallibly, though he fpeak Truth by chance ; confequently he is none of Chri/Is Teachers , for Chrisi never impowred any to teach Fallible Dotlrin, that may he falfe. You will fay, feparate a Minifter from the Truth of the Gofpel, and he is alfo no Teacher. Alas, he feparat's him- felf ; Fort he hath no Miffion to preach as. he doth, and Difc.I. Cll. Requires Infallible Teachers. ij and moreover Profefieth that he can teach nothing infallibly. But of this more afterward ; In the in- terim. 3. To cut of all reply to the Argument , I propofe it thus. No man that is by nature lyable to errour, or wants God's fpecial Divine Afliftance in his tea- ching, and Pofnively renounceth all infallible Socie- ties of Chriftian Teachers , can teach with certainty Chip Infallible Doftrin. But all men, now at leaft in being, are by nature lyable to errour, want this fpe- cial Affiftaoce in their Teaching , and mull ( as M'.Poo* U will have it ) pofitively renounce all infallible So- cieties of Chriftian Teachers ; Therfore no man can Teach with certainty, or deliver the Infallible T>o- &rin of Chrijl. The Major is evident : For he who by nature is lyable to errour , and hath not infallible Umim* Affiftance to Teach infallibly, or wants the Guidan- JJJ "&* ce of an infallible Society to Dired him , may as eafi- /?*»«/* ly erre and mifle in his teaching , as hit right on the te*ch> <"n- Infallible Doftrin of Chrift. The Minor is granted by %$?" LMr*?Q$k; For all Churches ; whether Roman or En- vottrmin- glifh, Arian or Grecian, are lyable to errour, want/*^« fpecial Affiftance in their Teaching, and ought pofi- tively to renounce all Societies of infallible Chriftian Teachers, Therfore, the conclufion undeniably fol- lowes , which is , That none can with certainty Teach the Infallible Do&rin of Chrijl. And from hen- ce alfo followes an utter ruin of Chriftian Religion ( yea and of Scripture too ) as I /hall hereafter De- monftrate. For if all Paftors, all Dodors, all Tea- chers of Chriftian Religion may erre in the Delivery of their Do&rin , all Learners of it , may likewile D 2 erre t% Difc. I. ClI. Qhrifts infiJhbk Do&rine &t. erre in Hearing it ; and if fo , we have no certainty, That God is now Adored in Spirit and Truth- by ei- ther , Teacher , or Hearer. 9. The ultimate reafon , why a Total ruin of Chri- ^ruinir ^ian Religion accompanieth the fallible Teaching of chiflim it , is thus proved. None can teach Chriftian Faith, Religion that doth not Propofe , or make Almighty God to ^htfitUibi* ^e t'ie Author of it, And therfore our Saviour, lohn 7.16. Teaching told the Iewes , That his Doftrin Too* not his , but his °f"*n* Father* that fern him, Yea, The Prophets alfo, and all chJch. ochet Evangelical Preachers, chiefly laboured in this, what ail to perfwade their Hearers > that God was the Author nvangeii- 0f fa^ D0#rjn they taught. Now fay I : None cLrs'u'* can Propofe or make God the Author of Chriftian tend fir. Faith, that doth not own it as a Doflrin affertedby his Eternal Veracity infallibly revealing Truth (for this is the Formal objeB of Chriftian Faith ; ) But He that only Teaches fallible Doftrin, which may be falfe, deferts ll this Formal object , and can neither own God for the Author of it , nor his infallible revealing Ferity: Ergo, he muft own a fallible Authority to uphold thisDo- ftrin, which is utterly Deftru&ive of Chriftian Faith. The reafon will be yet more evidenced , if you pro- pofe it after this manner. A Do&rine , which by for' ce of all the Principles it hath is meerly fallible and The Ufl n0 m0re, may be falfe; But Chriftian Dodrin, as it is f^Do- Taughtby all Paftors and Minifters of the Word, &c. 8rw. is thus fallible; Ergo it may be falfe : But, God never fent Chrijl our Lord , nor Cbnjl his Apoftles or any , to Teach a Doftrin that may be falfe ; Ergo he fent none to Teach a Do&rin or Religion that is fal- lible* I prove it. He fent none to Teach any other Do- V Difc.I.C.lI I. Further proofs. 29 Do&rin , but that which is founded , and intrinfecally re- lies on his Eternal infallible Verity revealing Truth : But fuch a Dj&rin can neither be falfe nor fallible. Ther- fore this t ught Dodrin is certain and infallible : For, to grant that God fent Paftors to teach a Doftrin which relies on his infallible Revelation , is to fay, He affift's them to teach it infallibly. CHAP. in. Other froofs for Teachers , and a Church Infallible. 1. T Argue again thus. Suppofirig, the promifes of X thrift made in Scripture, Gods Goodnes cannot oblige the whole moral Body of Chriftians to believe a falfity, or to contradict his certain revealed Verities. But if all Paftors and Doftors may erre in their Inftru- dion , whilft they teach Chriftian Doftrin , God would God cannot as indifferently oblige us to believe a falfity , and con- obljzeus t0 tradict his certain Verities , as to hear truth when by y,/^, chance it is taught, which is contrary to his Goodnes. The firft Proportion is evident , and confeffedly true; For our Adverfaries fay , it is repugnant to all conceptions of Gods Goodnes to require of men , under pain of Damnation , to Believe fomething as infallibly true, which is really falfe. The other alfo is as clear. For if all Paftors , all Do&ors ,^ho have the charge of fouls, may (becaufe fallible ) as well Teach falfe Doftrin as true , as eafily erre , as Deliver Chip pure Verities, D 3 Chri- Y jo Difc.LCIII. Futhzr proofs. Chriftians are, by virtue of Gods Command already intimated , bound both to hear and obey them. Mattk 18. 17. if he T»ill not hear the Church , that is, as S.Cbry- fifiome expounds, the Prelates and chief Paftors of it, Jet him be to thee as a Heathen, &c. Hehr. 13. 17. obey your Prelates , tyxptvoig vjmv , your Guides , your Leaders and Commanders , and be fubjed to thero ; For they T»atth 04 being , to render account of your fouls. Again , verf.j. The Apoftle command's us to imitate the Faith of thefe Paftors and Teachers* From thefe and other innume- rable places of Scripture, known to all, I argue. What is poftible may be reduced to Aft, but it is poffible, That all Paftors and Teachers may erre, and Deliver falfe Doftrin to the Chriftian world •, and in cafe they do fo , I am upon thefe plain expres Ordinances of God , obliged to Believe them. Therfore I muft Be- lieve them , al though they Teach falfe Doftrin. And if fo, God obligeth me to Believe a Falfity 5 or, which is a real Verity , I am forced to grant this undeniable' Truth , that his AU-feeing providence doth now , and ever will Preferve a Church, whofe Paftors and Tea- chers are infallible in the Delivery of Chriftian Do&rin. Without this certain eftabliflied Infallibility in fome one or other Society of Believers , Chriftianity is no more but a meer tottering, reeling, and uncertain Religion ; yet I muft liften to it , whether Thofe who teach it, (land or fall, that is , whether they erre or not, teach an impofture or Truth, 2. To confirm this proof, I ask whether God, after tie had delivered his own certain Verities infallibly, and made alfo (by his Divine Afliftance) Thofe firft Maftersof the Gofpel , his Bleffed Apoftles, infalli- ble, Difc.I. CI 1 1. Further proofs. j-i Me-, in their Delivery of thefe Verities; whether then, I fay , in the enfuing ages he divorced hi*nfelf from his A n>m Church , and withdrew all Special Ailiftance {torn pnpo fed ta it, or, yet continued that gracious favour tofome p$. *«&»•*«• ftors and Do&ors of a Chriilian fociety f If he con- tinued that care and providence for the Dire&ion of fome Pallors in Truth, Thofe, becaufe fo guided, are (till infallible in their Teaching, Contrary wife , if he abandoned that charge, and deprived all Paflors for the Future of infallible Affiftance, This woful con- fequence follovves. That Chriftian Religion , once ftrongly fupported by Gods unerring Spirit , ever fince the Apoftles Preaching , hath loft that Hold , and now ftands tottering on no more fteedy ground, then what the weak , mutable , and erring Sentiments of men can afford it. Now how unmeet thefe are for fo great a charge, Salomon Sap. 9. 15, fayes enough: : Cogttationes mortalium timida^ & incerta procidentia ttojlra. The cogitations of mortal men are fearful , and our Providence vncertain; yet fo it is , (and here mark the hideous crime of, Proteflants ) who firft Divorce Cbrijl from his Church , and violently pull Religion HowSeti*. from its center , which is Gods infallible dire&ing Spi- ™****$- rit; and then make all the taught Do&rin of Chriftia-*^ nity, to lean and rely only upon mans weak, timid, ftaggering, and errable conceptions . The proof 13 , evident; for either it relyes on God , and fo is infal- lible, or upon Humane reafon , and therfore as This is various, Religion cannot but be changeable* Let then the world judge (I appeal ta no, other Tribunal whether Chriftians can be fati$fied with this conp- fQrties Do$rin. All thy un now Iwn from my Chj- jltin ii Man too 2% Difc. L C. III. Further proofs. flian Ptftor touching Religion , hath only mam Wak^ Thought, and Reafon for it; but no certain Affurance that God fpeaks by thefe Paftors, Becaufe all, and every one of them ( left to themfelves ) are fallible. 3. I muft profecute this matter further, wherefore fiebi*to I fay this Truth boldly. It is above mans power and freferve policy ( weak and errable in his Conceptions) con- mafmin ftantly and unchangably to fupport, or carry on Age tis$Hrity, after Age the profound Do&rin of chrijl in its Primi- tive purity, without Divine Afsijlance. Wit alone (dazcled as we fee in the fearch of the moft obvious things in nature) is inefficient, either rightly to Pe- netrate thefe high Myfteries of grace , or with cer- tainty to conuey them unto us in that exaft fenfe, as God once delivered them. The reafon hereof is Becaufe of drawn from the ftthlime Excellency of Chriftian Religion, usfubUme which being (as all know) a Do&rin of Gods own ^"^'incomprehenfible Wifdom , a Communication of his deepeft Secrets , cannot but tranfeend the force of humane knowledge; it cannot but lye , as it were, in a region above the reach of weak Reafon only, and ftand at a great diftance from our fallible Dif- courfes. Whence I argue thus. All light and knowledge, which flow from a fallible Power and capacity, cannot but' be anfwerable to fuch a capa- city , id efl , Deficient , uncertain , and Fallible : But all the light and knowledge, which Chriftians now have from either Church or Paftors, concerning this fublime Doftrin of Chrijl and Gods revealed Verities in Scripture, flow, and are derived from no other, but from a fallible capacity, which is mans errable and weak underftanding ,• and not from Gods in- faili- Difc.I. CI 1 1 For an infallible Qhunh ft fallible Affiftance (who fay our Proteftants ) hath withdrawn infallibility from the Church: Ergo, This taught Doftrin cannot but be Deficient , uncertain, F^.^ and Falhhle. Grant this , and none can prudently Do£trjm rely on it, ndne can know by any Principle , whe- km ther it be true or falfe , none finally can own it for chnft*» Chrifts certain Dodrin. Rob therfore the Church of its proper Dote, which is Divine Affiftance; take from it the Spirit of infallibility , Cancel that Truth of the Gofpel , I have prayed for thee, Peter, that thy Faith fail not \ Deftroy that impregnable Rock , wheron Chriftianity is founded, Matt. 15. Tu es Petrm, &c. Though all the Paflors in the world were Salomons for wit , ^fnjlins for learning, Gregories for vigilancy , Chry* fofloms for eloquence 5 yet they would be too weak , fee- ble , and fallible Inftruments either rightly to illumina- 1** <&» te us ( by the force of wit or Learning only ) concer- *^*H ning thofe High Verities revealed in Scripture, or ex- with Re#m aftly to Preferve them in their firft candor, without *w>. change and Alteration. Alas 1 might wic alone tamper with Gods. Truths at pleafure, might it turn Religion into as many Forms or fhapes as weak Reafon oftea conceives , This too unskilful OWafter would , as Fancies and judgements are various , now build , now deftroy, now add , now fubtraft, now make , now marr , and brine; in more confufion into Chriftinianity, then the wifeft men are able to redrefle. And 4. Thus much we fe evidently, not only in the old utmndfr Philofophers , who, led on by their weak Difcours and tht <*«/* gueffes, grofly miftook in their Opinions concerning 0ferrmr*> Beatitude ; but in fome learned Fathers alfo ( witnes a Example* TertuUian and Vrigen, ) For t Thefe two great wits of the '/"• E world, V. Godsfpe ctal Affi- Jlance pre- fervcs hi* Curch from er- rcur. Gods Vro •vidence over bit Church, }4 Difc J. C.I II. Further proofs world , becaufe they left the Guidance of the Church, and relyed too much on their private Judgements , fell, as we know , into deplorable errours. But malt of all this mifery is vifible in all condemned Hsreticks, as Avians , Pelagians , and Nejlorians ( witty and learned enough) but Becaufe wit too boldly entred into Divine Myfteries, and meddled with matters above its ftrength, thefe men loft themfelves ; and here was the fole caufe of their Ruin and falling from Truth. Whence I con- clude contrary to Proteftants (who have nothing to fupport Religion but their own weak and errable Con- jectures) That unles Gods gracious Providence parti- cularly Protect his Church , and by fpecial Affiftance Preferve it from errour ; The very bed of us all (though never fo learned ) left to our weak conje&ures , and fal- lible Difcourfes , might moil eafily become Brians, Nejlorians , Pelagians, Proteftants , Socwians , now Chri- flians , now no Chriftians , or what you will. Pro- teftancy, and all Haerefy, which ftand topling on no fir- mer ground then meer conjectures are , lead the way to thefe Downfalls , to no Religion , or any Religion , as Fancy beft likes. 5. To prevent therfore this great Evil, the wife Pro- vidence of God (who well foreiaw mans weaknes and Inftability ) firft Delivered his own eternal Truths in- fallibly ; (none doubrs of this.) Next, he caufed thefe Truths to be taught infallibly by the firft Matters of the Gofpel , his chofen Difciples ; here of alfo there is no doubt with our modern men. Moreover , Becau- fe his real Intention was, That not only the Primitive Chriftians, fliou Id exactly receive thofe revealed Ve- rities from infallible Teachers ,* but others alfo in en- fuing Difc. I. C.I 1 1. For an infallible Qhunh. 3 J fuing ages (for All fouls were providently cared for) His infinite Goodnes eftabliihed a vifible CathoJick Church , whofe Head and Paftors , guided , not by hu- mane wit or Policy , but by Affiftance derived from the HoJy Ghoft, ihould , by virtue of fo fpecial grace, Teach Truth infallibly , and preferve poor fouls from errour to the end of the world. Without this Addi-Pw/"w* tion of a perpetuated Afsijlance , as well in order to the ^y^ Later, as firft Believers, providence would not havenm*/ done its work compleatly, Chriftianity ere this day (too unfteedily built) would have fallen to Ruin, and as often alrered from it felf in the fpace of 1667. yea- res, as our Sectaries have done in this laft hundred. A more fpiteful Blow therfore cannot be given to God , a greater Chimera cannot be thought on, then to grant, as Sectaries do, that his All feing wifdom firft founded a Church upon infallible Teachers , and next to fpoile all with this ungodly Aflertion , viz : k*A fter^o ard , "when Chrijluns J . m%. as hrme -and unihaken as now it is, which is a hor- rid, and an unheard of Hare/y. 5. A fourth reply : We cannot prove by good rea- fon (if we let afide fome ambiguous Paflages of Scri- pture , which only feemingly fay the contrary ) that the immediate Proponent of true certain Chriftian Faith (Catholiks fay 'Tis the Church) ought to be certain and infallible. It feems enough, fay fome, that this Faith be taught upon a rational Evidence, which Evidence, finally refolved , comes to no more but to a Moral certainty . Thefe ( as I am informed ) ground themfelves on this Principle , That all the Affurance we can have of Chriftian Religion , hath for its whole Foundation moral Certainty only , and it feems a prop firm enough to fupport it. More it cannot have. 6. The Objection contains two parts. To the firft Divine 1 anfwer : If Divine Faith be in the world, Reafon lave 7^ convinceth , that the objeft of it be propounded by a mfaUibie Certain and infallible teacher, and then moft , when Ti*cher. Points fundamental lye under Difpute , and ard in controverfy. Faith therfore requires two things efTen- tially, (to omit other NecefTaries) an Objeft, which is Gods Revelation , and a Propofition of this objed made by fome Teacher to Chriflians , which Do&rin the Apoftle ratifies, Rom. 10. 15. HoTt> shall they bear Without a Preacher. By virtue of this Propofition (whe- ther we call it Caufe, or an Effential Condition ) the Elicite Ad of Faith followes in a Believer, and in- tellectually layes , as it were hold, both on Gods Reve- D \fc J. C. I V. dnfyered. 4 1 Revelation and the Thing revealed. Obferve now well. Gods Revelation ( none doubts it) is certain and infallible. Divine Faith, which reftech on this Motive, and proceeds from Grace , is alfo certain and infallible. The only Difficulty remaining, con- cerns this Proponent of Faiths Objed, and it is, whe- ther He that Dire&s me, and endeavours rightly to fettle cay Faith upon Gods infallible Revelation , do his work with ailurance , fellibly, or infallibly, 7. I fay firft. Gods infallible Revelation avail's nothing m order to Faith, unles Chriftians by their Faith lay hold on the Certainty therof , or own it as infallible , and the aiTured ground of their Affent. The reafon is. Becaufe God fpeaks infallibly to Chriftians for this End, That his infallible Word may have influence into Faith , and fupport in with Cer- tainty. If therfore this revealed VVord be not Cer- tainly Propofed (as it is ) infallible, if it be not due- ly applyed to a Believers underftanding , under its own Notion of certainty, that ftrength of infallibility TteF°^ lyes as it were dead, without Operation, and profits Zu/Lin- Belief no more, then Food doth a Body into which fainbiy*f. it cannot enter. The (imilitude is fit : For as Food,^* though apt to ftrengthen a Body, is juft as if it were not, unles it be duely Applyed > fo Gods Certain Re- velation, though moil Proportionate to ftrengthen a Soul in Faith, yet in order to this EfTeft , it loofeth all Efficacy, while a due Application of its infallibility is wanting. 8. To illuftrate more this neceiTary Truth •, I fay fecondly. When a Revelation lyes darkly in Scriptu- re, as it often doth in High points of Controvcrfy , F accor- 41 Difc.I. C IV. %ef)lyes to Arguments according ro the meafure or degrees of Certitude, which the Proponent of Faith gives to the Revelation, and faith, God [peaks thus , An A (Tent anfwerably fol- lovves with like Certitude in the Hearer , and not a ftronger. If therfore the Proponent only fay Doubr- GodsRe- fu!)y, / thinly God [peak's as I preach , but am not Cer- veUiton is Uw . D0Ul,tful ajf0 fa t\je ^jjfint giyen to this Preaching. According If he fay, What I teach is Probable, The Affent can u'tispro- hi no more hut Probable. If finally He truely fay , I funded. UACj0 jnfallib/y ^hat is revealed, the Affent An fivers , and is Infallible . The reafon is clear. For, as no Eye can fee Colours in darknes before light makes them vifible,yea, and according to the meafure of light it fee's them : fo no Intelledual Eye can difcover a darh^ Revelation , before he borrow light from his Tea- cher, and as The light is telle or more, fo He fee's that object lelTe, or more perfe&ly. A dubious and uncertain Proposal therfore, made of a certain Revela- tion, when it doth not Clearly manifeft it felf, is like a glimmering light , And neither doth , nor can apply the Objecliye infallibility Therof with AfTurance to mans intellectual Faculty , which yet feek's after Certain- ty in matters of Belief. This needs no proof. For he who propofeth only Doubfu!!y a Revelation, which is Certain in it felf, both in aclu fgnato, and exercito, AtiwUe fanh no more but timidly thus much : Perhaps / decla- F°P0[*ltf re Tehat God [peak's , and perhaps / do not • Tor my De- veLtio* clatation cnly Doub fully gueyts at the Certainty of the Reve- hegenno Ution , hv\c\ it is againft the nature of all Doubt to but a ,Tu convey Certainty into any underftanding. As lone Faiih. tneifote as the infallibility of a Revelation itands remo- te from me, For wane of an undoubted Application made Se&aries DifcA.ClV.Anfwel 4? made by an infallible Proponent , it can no more trans- fufe Certainty into Faith, then fire, at a great diftan- ce , warm, That is , no more Then if it were not Cer- tain in it f elf, or not at dim Being. Whence I con- clude. That a certain Revelation (if obfcure in Scri- pture ) requires a Certain Propofition , Becaufe It little avail's me to know this truch, That if God [peak's, he fpeak^s infallibly , unles , hie & nunc, in thefe cir cum fian- ce when he freak's to me for my Saluation, 1 JtfiM my cer- tain Affent to the infallibility of bis Word, which cannot be done, unlcs 1 have Attn ranee from my Teacher, that he fpeak's (as 1 ought to believe ) infallibly. Upon thefe undeniable Principles I fay, thirdly. Our Se&aries can do no more but doubtfully gusfie at ™nD-™ne what they Believe, and confequently (as Protectants J Faith. never yet had, nor can have Divine, certain, and in- fallible Faith. I prove the Affertion. All Faich , which hath no other Certitude, then what is derived from Thofe , who propound the objeft of it (id eft , Gods Revelation) uncertainly and doubtfully, is no mo- re but layering , Opinative and doubtful. But the Faith of Proteftants is evidently fuch , Becaufe no man, or Society of men amongft them, can without doubt and fear infallibly fay : Godfceak^s as l preach, and I infallibly preach as God fpeal^s i For , if he averr thus much with Truth,.he Propounds the objeft of his Faith infallibly , and therfore is fo farre infallible . If he do They can: not, his preaching muft be finally refolved into his ™'. W/« own timid , weak , and wavering Opinion , which ^tibiy"* weighed, comes to no more but this Levity, l hope Well, and think I preach what God hath infallibly Repealed, yet am not certain y becaufe all I fay , ( for ought I knovv ) is fallible. F 2 9. If 44 Difc. I. CIV. tfijplyes to Arguments 9. If you will fe this Truth farther Evidenced, do no more but ask of any Proteftanc , Why , for exam- ple , He believes that all the Churches on earth are falli- ble ? That Cbrift is only figuratively in the Eucbarijl ? That Faith * only jujlijiesl That there are two Sacraments and no more , ejrc His firft refuge perhaps will be to Scri- pture. But demand again. Whether Scripture in flair/ and Expreff Terms, Delivers thefe fuppofed Do- drins? if he be not more then impudent, he mud fay , No. AH therfore he can reply, is, That the Minifters of his Church, after a perufal of Scriptu- re, find thefe Verities contained there, and Propofe all to him as things Certainly revealed, Therfore he be- lieves them. Here we come to the trial of Prote- ftants Faith , and mark well, How unavoydably 1 hey SeRaries are forced to grant, That when a pretended Revelation, wtuftown is mt manifejl for them. But lyes ( if at all) yery darty in TbieVropo- Scr^{ture » it wuft be brought to light , and made more clear mm, by jome Teacher. Some one or other (if it have in- fluence into Faith ) mud Apply it and Propofe it to a Hearer, as Gods certain Word. Without this Ap- plication made by a certain Teacher, no Chriftian can ( but mosi temerarionjly ) admit of the Revelation, as Divine , and Certain. 10. Demand therfore in the laft place, Whether all the Minifters in England are able to propound cer- tainly and infallibly the above mentioned Do&rins ("dark- ly at leaft, and indeed, not all contained in Scriptu- re) as Gods revealed Truths to any ? The antwer muft be Negative. They cannot (for if they pro- pofe them infallibly , Minifters are infallible ) Ergo, fay I, none can Believe thefe Dodrins for Gods cer- tain Difc. I. C. IV, AnfiomL 45 tain Revelation, Becaufe the Propojal of them (abso- lutely necefTury to apply the Revelation) is defetthc , >M^, *///tio«5 and uncertain. Tiie Faith therfore, which followes upon fo unfteedy a Teaching, cannot bur be anfwerably rowling, That is in one word, no Faith at all. \^dnd Proteflants halve no better. 11. Some perhaps may fay : Though Proteflants have no great Certainty of the Do&rins above fpeci- fied , becaufe they are neither exprefly in Scripture, nor Ailerted by any infallible Teacher, yet their Faith in Fundamentals ( univerfally held by all Christians) Hand 'sfure enough, and is infallible. Such Truths Ihall never fail, and fo far the Pallors of the Church may, it is likely, be held infallible. ix. Hereafter we ihall treat more largely of Funda- mental points , and Therfore at prefent will wave what is not pertinent to anfwer this Reply. And perti- whyDo. nent it is to fay firft : That not one Do&rin peculiar ?rweJf to Proteflants , (as Proteflants ) becaufe neither ex- ars°prote. preily found in Scripture, nor AfTerted by any in&l-jfawai lible Teacher , can certainly be believed upon Divine uncertam- Revelation. That thefe S^&aries teach nor their own Proteflant Tenents infallibly , is granted . That Scri- pture doth not in exprejj Terms , without intolerable glofling, deliver one of them, ihall be made, after a few pages, mofl evident; And thus , if this laft Reply be to any purpofe , it brings Ruin to that part oi Do&rin which is called Ptotejlancj. I fay fecondly, There is fcarce one Article of Cbrifii Sacred Doftrin , fo clearly exprefled in Scripture, which may not, would men take the liberty, as Sectaries do, by wilful GlofTes to alienate it from the Churches fenfe, be perverted. F 3 Arians 46 Difc. L G IV. Qtjfyes to Jrguments Avians have taught them this mode of Gloflirg, and vouhful they exaflly follow it. Separate therfore the words words of Qf scripture from the Senfe of an infallible Interpreter, we hwated can Believe nothing , we have no more but a body with- from the out a Soul , gueffes without certainty. And upon fuch ^"fliiiiT uncertainties the whole Faith of Proteftants doth and interpret*, muft rely , which is deplorable . And here ask them, ground not when They appeal (as They ever doe) to Scripture, latth, what they mean by Scripture , which needs Interpre- tation , even in Points mod Fundamental. Muft we admit of their Interpretation? Why fo , more then of others as learned as They ? Why not as well on the prefent Churches Interpretation? This is as good (ro fay no more) as their fallible Guefles are* The But of this Subject hereafter. I fay thirdly. Never 2^£. any Catholick Church hitherto held it feJf infallible in Brine a few Fundamental Doftrins , and not in others. equally Therfore Proteftants are more infolently bold, whilft tnfriube. triey attempt to make this Diftin&ion, then ever any Church yet was . What l That meer fallible Men fliall be my Doctors, and ex tripode define, So far the Church holds infallible Do6trin , But no further, T'would be well nigh eight Degrees of madnes in me , to believe them . Admit once of this : A new Haeretick may ftep out , and defend as ftoutly, yea, and upon as folid grounds, that Scripture it felf it not infallible , but only in a few Fundamental Mat- ters, yet unknown to the world. If you fay this ibunds too harfhly, and cannot be granted. Paral- lel I befeech you , your own wild Affertion with it, 'church is anc* & whether that runs much fmoother . Thus chrift's it is. Chrijl bath erefted a School , which is his Church , Schole* where Difc. I. G IV, Anfrvered. 47 Inhere Chrijlians are to learn his Sacred DoElrin : But ivhen tbeyxomtto it, They find more then the half of its Duct r in doubtful , fallible , unfound-, uncertain. Alas ! Arijlc tie's or Plato's School can cffbrd us Topicks, and uncertain- ties enough : I hope Chrifls School can learn us better. Fourthly, Were the Church fa'fiy fuppofed Fallible in the delivery of fome Doc^ri.; Life Funda- mental , it would be much fafer to believe it, then Pro- teftants, who may err in ail they fay , And then rr.oft, when being void of proofs, They itand trifling with a Diftincliori of Fundamentals , and not Fundamentals. He- rein as in ail other things > they are moil fallible, and mufti, think ye , credit men, that can fay nothing certainly ? 13. Fifthly , and I end: Admit once of a Church with this half infallibility in fundamentals; our Se- ctaries, who fo furiouily oppugn that whole infallibi- lity which we afcribe to the Roman Church , muft Anfwer their own Arguments againfl: us. For here we queftion them . as they do us. Where or in Tehat Subject is that partial infallibility lodged^, what Pallors de- ®mt fignable are ende'Wtd "frith it ? Hosv shall T»e makje our Ad- made a dnjjes to them in doubts and difficulties , if none know ?me^anti where , or who they arc ? What kjnd of infallibility is tbvi ? By Tthofe affurcd Tejlimony can Tve learn Tohat is de fide funaamentali , Tvbat notl What if thefe Paflors be deci- ded amongst themfelves in their Decifans of findameetals^ Tvhofe judgement is finally to he flood too , &c. ? Thefe and the like Queftions , moft eafily anfwer'd by Ca- tholicks', when They give an account of their Belief fas I fliall ftew in the Refolution of Faith) prefT fo ftrongly upon Proteftants , that not one of them fliall Rational ties 48 Dsfc I. C. IV. fRjplyes to Arguments Anf^oerea. vro'efiaun ftall ever have a fatisfa&ory Aniwer. Perhaps to pntence te fo\WQ them , fome will recurre to the private Spirit, spirit. and fay, This tell's them all Truth in chefe doubts. Contra. Ask only here : Whether this Spirit makes them or their Faffors infallible , or can dired others to find out fuch infallible Paftors > If they repfy : Tho- fe are fuch , as Teach Gods Word purely j the An- fwer is impertinent, for we ask whether it Affifts any to Teach Gods pure Word infallibly, And who they are f It may be others will fay , that thrift never had fince the Apoftles time, any infallible Church on earth even in fundamentals, All therfore we have now to DireA us, is only the book of Scripture (without other Proponent) and every mans private Reafon. Contra. It is Evident, That Scripture makes no man infallible, both Arians and Others read it, and yet grofly err in Points moft Effential. Deny therfore a Church unerrable in Eflentials, and fay boldly , that as Arians have already erred in fome Fundamentals, fo others might before this day have wholy erred , and outed both Chrijl and Creed , with every Article of Chriftian Religion. For Tveah^ Reafon alone , is jn- fufficient. to Preferve Chriftianity in its Purity, as I have fliewed above , wherof alfo more hereafter. CHAP. Difc.I. CV. Of Moral certainty. 49 CHAP- V. A word with form later Sectaries con* ccrning jMLord certainty. i. FTEre we come to examin the other part of the Moral Ctt' Objeftion propofed above, n. 5. And thus ^ ^ fome later men Difcours concerning the certainty of /^Mrf Chriftian Religion. They fay firft, (and mod true- ly ) That the ultimate Mot'm wheron Faith relyes, is Gods infallible Teftimony, with all, That none can queftion the fallibility of this Revealed Teftimony, when it is Sufficiently propofed , and made known to us. The only Queftion therfore is, How it comes to be made known, or, difcovered in order to thofe things VYQt€aAnn which are immediatly Revealed. They fay fecondly. DoBrin* Moral certainty may be a fufficient foundation Tor the moU about frm afjent , if the matter to be believed , be the infallible Truth **°r" of a DocJrin , upon futable Eyidence. Though Tve haye nolo but Moral Certainty of that Evidence , The Affent may yet be firm to fuch a DocJrin, as infallible. They fay thirdly: Moral Certainty may be as great as Mathematical and Thyjical, fuppojing as lutle reafon te doubt hi moral things as to their natures , as in Mathematical and Fbyfical, as to Theirs. Here briefly is their Do&rin. Some further Explications of it , will perhaps more opportunely ha- ve place, while we make our Exception againft it. And 2. My firft Exception is. Thefe Authors do not G fuffi. 50 Difc.I. CV. Of Moral Qrtainty. fufficiently explain what they would have here under* flood by Moral certainty, wherin there is a great Lati- Dcgrees of tude. One Degree ofic excludes all Rational doubt. Monlcer- ^nherof None ever doubted ; And to give us ***** m nothing of thii High Certitude for the other Part , Voh'tcb ^e^tm' Is in Controversy , and Specifically belongs to Prote ft ants > Had thefe men therfore come home to the DfTiculty, They would not have here mifpent time in Proving what needs no Proof, vi%. That the General Dodrin owned by all Chriflians (as is a Belief in one God, . or, of cbrijl a Redeemer &o ) Hath at leaft Moral certainty for it ; But They fliould have ihewed, That Arianifm, as ^Arianifm, or (which had been to the Pur- pofe ) That Protejiancy , as Protestancy , jlands fo firmly built on High Moral Certainty , That None can prudently doubt of it. Now this They fraudulently wave, And only put m ?Jn°^f^5 of, Tvitb a general Teord of the Certainty of Chriftinn Religion , gmtrtUa*> m if Protejiancy, bid under that Specious name, bad fafety and San- meofchri- Eluary enough; or, as iftt Vere all one to fay. Tbepart ofChri- t'"*}*"' Jtian taun umverjally agreed on ps certain. Ergo Protejiancy, tkmgfor us Protejiancy, goes along Tvitb it upon equal Certitude. Alas ! *>°tefi«*- G z This cy' J 52 Difc J. CV. Of Moral Certainty. This is that which only requires proof, and is the thing we Abfolutly deny. 4. Again, (And here is my fecond Exception) Thefe Authors cannot apply their Moral certainty to the Faith of any Religion , that beares the name of Chri- stian. At lead, it is neither appliable to Catholicks,nor TwoKefie Proteftants. For proof hereof, Note firft : That mo- deT Af" ra' ^ertainty taken in what Height you pleafe, is an r*i cer- " Aft of the Judicative Power in man , fubjecJrvely fetled tainy. in his Mind , who hath it , And ever falles on a De- terminate Objeft , (for in Objefts , ajparte rei, there is neither Probability, nor moral Certainty.) Every Thing imaginable being either in it felf Real and Stable , or not, independent of any Moral Affertion : As is clear, For fhould one fay now : h is morally certain , that there is fuch a Citty as Rome in the World ; Rome is, or is not , independent of what is aflerted morally Certain, No- Morai te fecondly. Though the greateft Moral certainty Ct""*ty ufually excludes a rational doubt in order to what is jalje0 aflerted certain ; yet in rigour it may hefalfe , And Ther- fore ever tmplyes fome Tveak^Degree of Fear , of anxiety, and fitfpicion to the contrary. Had anyone faid a few dayes before the Burning of London (little then fore- feeing that fad Difafter ) that, That Noble Citty would not in fo ftrange a manner be confumed with fire, He would have been thought to have uttered a Truth Mo- rally cettain , yet the contrary doleful Effeft proved it untrue. And the like may happen now, while we upon Moral Certainty Say , Rome or Constantinople are Citnes in Being . Thefe Grounds fuppofed , ' 5. I fay firft. Whoever , when he Affirm's , that Chriftian Religion is only Morally Certain , and hath for Difc I. G V. Of Moral Certainty* 5 j for the objeEl of bis affirmation, that which EfXentially Moral conftitutes Religion , i mean true Divine and Superna- Ce?"JntJ tural Faith , highly wrongs Chriftian Religion , yea, and po/!'tbe deftroyes the very Being and Efjence of it . I prove it. ^mgof The Certainty of Divine Faith, is as farre above , and ^r^'** diitant from all the Degrees of Moral Certitude (which e$gt°"' may be falfe ) as Heaven is from Earth, and more. Therfore he who allowes no greater Certainty to true Faith then Moral , which may be falfe , deftroyes both the Life and Efjence of Chriftian Religion . That the Certainty Certainty of Faith farre furpaiTeth all the Degrees of °LJea^houe Moral Certitude, isx DemonftraMe upon Principles ,aw "" granted as well by Orthodox Christians , as by our Certainty* Adverfaries , who fay, That true Faith dot not only affirm , That what God Reveales is rnoft Certain (for thus much, fuppofing a God, we know by Science, were there no Faith ) but by Faith we affirm without fear at all : God /peaks Thus and Thus. He reveaUs that the Divine Word took^ flesh* That Chrifl dfd for us. That there is a Trinity of Per fins in one Dhine efjence &c> Such Truths , we already own as Delivered by one , who neither can , nor will Deceive us. 6. Hence I argue . The Sole and Adequate Ob- ject of Divine and Supernatural Faith , is Gods infini- te Veracity , which Adually fpeak's to us , and is lya- ble to no errour . Faith then , if it be Divine , Tend's unto no other Objeft , neither is the now infofed Habit of it , though fortified with a thoufand llluftrations , inabled to Reft upon any other Motive in this prefent State . What therfore this Infinite Veracity a&'ially Reveals, that Faith /ayes hold on ; It cannot believe mo- re or lefle , Now I fubfume . But this Infinite Ve- G j racity 54 Difc* I C. V. Of Moral Qertainty. GodsVera- racity ( when it is duely Propofed ) Transfufeth more tfeTml Certainty into the Elicite Att of Faith , Then any Mo- n tertaw- ral Certainty derived from inferiour Motives can have; ty two For all Moral Certainty is at leatt capable olFaljity, then the an^ may deceive us i Gods infallible Veracity cannot be Fal- Motives of fe> nor deceive if Faith Reft upon that Motive; i^dnd if Moral it city is not Faith, Supernatu ral Faith more Cer- tain then Refl not there, it is no Faith at all. It is therfore c"ndo? abfolutely impoffible : if God fpeak^s , and , 1 Believe him as be Speaks , That all the Fo^er in Heaven can Falfify this refl not on ^ > or Separate a moft High infallibility from it. Contrary- ccdsv'era- wife , There is no Moral Certainty , but may > by all the Principles it hath, be falfe and fallible, yea, and cften is Jo, 7. From this undoubted Ground. I inferre alfo, That Supernatural Faith is more Certain and infallible , then all the Metaphyseal Science, lohich Nature can giie us . It is Metaphyft- true , Metaphyseal Science hath more of the Eviden- €a tcteme. cg ^ anj ^^fo^ cxc\uc\qs all indeliberate Fear or Doubt to the contrary (for no man can fo much as indelibera- tely Doubt, whether a whole Citty be greater then oneHoufe; ) But for Abfolute Certainty , and Infal- The Energy JibJe K^Adhefion , Faith yet furpaffeth it. The Reafon °MoUve! ls ' Becaufe tne Infinite Veracity of 6od, which only fupporteth Faith , Majori yi , with greater Force, Energy, and Necefity transfufeth into it a Supe.reminent Infallibility, fupereminent, I lay , and above all the Certainty, which Principles of nature can afford . As therfore this In- finite Veracity furpaffeth all Created certainty,fo Faith, which relyes on it, goes beyond all Natural and infe- riour certainty . Upon this Principle we fee firft, HowT Divinely the Apoftle fpoke : Licet nos &c. Al- though we or Angel from Heaven preach contrary &c. Let Difc.L C.V. Of Moral Qertainty. 55: Let him be accurfed. And , how wel S(. Cbryfojlome delivered himfelf, when He faith, Horn. n. ( ponde- ring thofe words ad Hebr. 1 1. Fides eji Argumentum <&c. ) That he held them more certain , then the Things he fan? ivith his Eyes . Thefe Truths ( and great Truths They are ) cannot fubfift , unles Faith be ftronger in Certitude , then all the Principles in Nature, and confequenrly farre more ftrong then Moral Certainty is, which may be falfe . Now with fuch an a (Tent the Roman Ca- tholick Church Believes, Iherfore a Faith only Mo- rally certain Belong's not to it . If Proteftants Difown it , They have no Faith , no , nor fo much as a Belief Morally certain , wherof more prefently . We fee fe- condly. How the very Ejfence of Chriflian Religion is deftroyed , if we make Faith no more but Morally cer- tain , which is , what 1 intended to Prove, 8, Perhaps, Thefe Authors will cell us : When they Religion Ailert Chriftian Religion to be founded on Moral cer*fiHmded tainty , Their Affertion fall's not immediatly upon the certainty Ajjent of Dh>ine Faith > which is firm and certain; But confuted. raiher upon the Objeft of it Antecedently apply ed to us Betore we believe; wherof we can have no greater AlTurance, then what is Moral. And it is no won- der ; For , fay They , There can be had no greater then Moral certainty of the main Foundations of all Religion , which are the Being of God, and the Soviet Im- mortality . To quarrel therfore with Moral certainty is Madges, when the Foudation of all Religion is ca- pable of no more . By the way, if this be Madnes , I fe very little Wifdom in fome, who , to oppugne the Churches infallibility ( proved as they fuppofe by motives of Credibility only morally certain) Ring out nothing j 6 Difc. I.C.V. Of Moral Ceruinty. nothing but Peaks of Impofibilities , and fay it cannot be That the Aflent to a matter Believed , Rife higher or (land firmer, then the Aflent , which is given to the Teftimony wheron we Believe ♦ But the Infal- libility of the Church is the thing Believed , upon the Teftimony of Motives , at moft but Morally certain ; Therfore we cannot Believe this with a ftronger De~ grce of certainty, then thofe Motives give us, which afford at moft but Moral certainty. If this Difcours be good, I argue thus, Ad hominem. No greater certain- ty have Chriftians now Antecedently to their A&ual Belief, that God fpeaks to them by either Scripture or Church , then that God is in Being ; But the very Being of God is only known by Moral certainty, Ergo, that he fpeaks to Chriftians cannot be known antecedent- ly to Belief, by any greater Certitude , then what is Moral, and may deceive them. How then, I be- feech you , comes the Elicite Aft of Supernatural Faith unto fuch a Height of Certainty, as not to Credit an Angel, if he Preach againft it > Upon what Motive ftands it fo firm, when no other Certainty fupports it , but only what is Moral, and may be falfe ? The Medium is fallible, Therfore the Belief founded on it is no better, but Moral and fallible. Mark well your own Argument. 'Tis thus. 9. The Motives of Credibility for Chriftian Faith, Becaufe only known by Moral Certainty , cannot ground a certain Belief of any Churches Infallibility : Ergo, I fay, The very Exiftency of God and his Re- velation, Becaufe only known by a Moral Certainty, cannot ground a firm Belief in God, or any Chriftian Verity, unles you fay, that Thefe Motives for Chri- ftian Difc. i C. V, Of Moral Certainly] 57 ftian Faith , far furpaffe in Certainty all the certain knowledge we can have of Gods Exiitency. I know not what thefe men can anfwer. ■ My thought is , They muft make Faith a meer Opinion, and allow it nothing of Certainty, or Supernatural infallibility , Though they feemingly fpeak otherwiTe , as if Moral Certainty might be a juffcient Foundation for the mojl frm ajfent. Would to God they would declare themfelves intelligi- bly , And fay plainly , whether this firm Aflent here mentioned be only of the like Nature with probable firm Opinions taught in Schools > Or contr lrywife (if this firm Aflent be Faith) whether it doth not Supereminently furpas the Certainty of All other ob- fcure intellectual Operations , which Chriftians now have on Earth .> This fhould be explicated , but is not. 10. Now to the Reply. Though an exaft Anfwer AnAtT- 1 1 < Jr • ■ 1 • (wet to the cannot be well returned, without entring upon an oJRe^ ther queftion (the Refolution of Faith) which here lyes out of the way, and Admit's not in this Place of a full and diligent Examination. I fay firft. No ob~ fcure intellectual Operation, Which precede DiVtne Faith , or is independent of it , can arife to thoje Degrees of Certainty which this Supernatural AEi requires. Admit then, that the Exiftency of God ( which is true ) can be Demonftra- ted by natural Reafon , Admit alfo, that thofe ftrong Motives for Chriftian Religion Antecedently known by Humane Difcours, demonltratively convince the Ve- '_. rity of it, yet becaufe Faith (as I now fayd ) Relyes upon a Super tour infallible Principle (Gods own unerrable Veracity) it far furmont's both thefe Certainties, and much more would it go beyond them , were they H known J 5& Difc. I. C V. Of Moral Certainty. known as Moral Truths only. Why > h natural Dif- cours , wheiby thefe Verities are known, is Science- No sdeme But no fcience gives the laft , or lead Degree of in- givesthe trmfich^ Certitude to Faith; and Therfore Divines fay: 'ifcvtTuZ Gods Supream Verity , which ever fupports Belief, to Faith, upholds it not as known by natural Re of on j For if it did , Faith would be at laft refolved into one natural principle thus . / believe God to be the Highefl Verity ima- ginable, not Becaufe be faith fo[, But becanfe 1 knolv this great Truth Scienttfcally , where you fe, the laft <^s4naly- Jts reft's on an extrinpeal Principle of knowledge, with which Faith , as Faith, meddles not. 11. Thus much therfore is clear. Although the Motives of Credibility manifeft (as they do) moft un- doubtedly, that God fpeak's to Chriftians , yet, when wc bring an A&. of Faith by a true Analyfis to its Home and Center , we find it ever Refting on Gods Veracity Motive* to only , as the laft Stay and moft certain Motive. Noc- Taithab- Withftanding , the Praeambulatory Motives avail in- grfSl? finitly to Faith, Becciufe they indubitably point out that Society of Chriftians, wherin Gods Verities are certainly taught, and make this Difcernable from all other Heretical Conventicles . In a word , They fliew Chriftian Religion to be either evidently Credi- ble, or as fome later Divines will have it, evidently True in Atteflante. And if this be fo, the formal Objed of Chriftian Faith is known, as it were Scienti- fically , either before , or when we A&ually Believe, which feems grounded on thofe words of the Apoftle: Scio cui credtdi , & tertm Jum : I knoTt , and then belteVt certainly. % 12. At prefent I waye this Dodlrin , and fay fecond- Difc I. C. V, Of Moral Certainty. 59 ly. Tt is one thng to know Scientifically , and another Difference to Believe certainly. Bah intervene hi the matter ***»«'* now handled. Faith Prcrequirts a Science, and %rf*rnani Moreover effhttiaUy includes Certainty. Thus it is. Whi- msuenttfi- le one of Prudence ponders thofe flrong and pre/Ting *& k»°w- Metives, which (as Light doth the Sun ) glorioufiy ledge* evidence true Chriftian Religion (fuch are Miracles the Jong continued Content ef Nations , Sanctity of life, Efficacy in DoSlrin , the ilood sheding ofCfrlartyrs &c. ) He knowes, that God canntat permit the world to be cheated into ^t^je errour by them. He knowes , that his goodnes can- Motives not proclaim, as it were, and publifh to Chriftians a,9onviHCe* Religion man Hefted by fuch evident convincing Marks and Signs of Truth, and afterward Signify a me er no- thing. It cannot be, that God fpeak's in lo powerful a Language , and deceives us ; For who can perfwa- dehimfelf, That all the Miracles done by Chrt si and his BletTed Apoftles , the eminent San&iry They ftowed,and admirable Cooverfion wrought by them, (open to mens eyes and fenfes ) were permitted like Charms to Delude the w- rid ? Yet this followes, if ei- ther no Religion anfwered to thefe great vifible won- ders, or, if fuch palpable convincing Signs could make a falfe Religion as Specioufly Credible, as Gods true Religion is . Therfore Rich, de S. Viftor, lib, I ♦ de Trin. c.z. with juft Reafon Exclaims. Si error eft quern ere. didimus a te decepti fumus. If it be Errour we Believe, it is you , O God , who have deceived us : and He gives this Reafon , lis enim fignis &c. For by fuch for- cible Signs , the Do&rin we believe is confirmed, which could not proceed from any , but from you alone. Obfcive now well. Two Judgements H z may 60 Difc. I. G V. Of Moral Certainty. lndtmntsWay enfue upon the Confederation of thefe exteriour xponthcfe Signs, which manifeft Chriftianitv. The one after *■*■ tHis manner. God certainly Delivered his Eternal Truths by the Preaching of Cbrijl, .and his BltiTed ApoflJes, who had no other Exteriour Teftimony for their Dodrin but Miracles, Sanflity, Conner/ions of Na- tions &.C. I now fee, faith this prudent Man, as evidently the like Miracles , the like Conversions with great Sanclity ike. in the Roman Catholick Church : If therfore it was Evident that God fpoke to the firft Chriftians by the wonderful works of Chrifi ; it is as Evident, that he Speaks now to me by the Still con- tinued Miracles of this Church. This Difcours, or Judgement, wherby he affirms 3 There are Thefe Tvon- Icilr* deYS> God fo*^* h hls churcb> is not Faith> but Scien* Tcn/drffe- ce ; Becaufe it Relyes on Motives , which Reafon 'miy. knows evidently enough* Now further. When He is thus difpofed and prepared to Believe by fo firm an Evidence , The other Judgement of Elicite Faith followes, w7hich tend's not into the Evidence of tho- fe Motives; for if it did fo, under that Notion it Would not be Faith \ For Faith , as Faith , totally Relyes on Gods Sole Revelation, and for this , as the only Formal ObjecJ^d. Chnfhan Believes whatever my ft ery is Re- vealed after a due Propofal ■, as is already Declared. 13. Some will fay. The Elicite Ad of Faith Scien- tifically knowes not the Objed wheron it Relyes, and therfore cannot be Certain. Anfwer. It is a Ca- techrejis, or an Abufe in Speech to fay, That either Faith , or any other intelledual operation knowes its Objed; The underftanding informed by thefe vital Ads kgoircs , if we fpeafc properly. Yet , if we D i fc.L C V. Of Moral Certainty, 6 i go on in that vulgar Language, figrificant enough. Faith can I fay Faith , as Faith , no more Scientifically knowcs ™ more or proves its Objeft , then Science, as Science, Be<^T^vtf lieves what it knowes ; This proves , That certain- or know its ly Believes , whilft it Rcfteth imraediatly upon Gods °ty?5^'» Revelation, which is mod amply proved by the Pre- *™nc*\ ** ambulatory Motives now touched on. Neither can can foiieve Faith Scientifically know or prove its Object, without its obJ'a- loofing an Ejfential Predicate y which is Objcurity . All therfore , who deftroy not the very Nature of Faith, muft allow it the greareft Certainty under heaven, and withall grant, as the Apoftle doth, that it \$¥*tthboth \ o ' , r obfcun and ^irgumentum non apparennum , oi a dark, and obicure W;„iw. Tendency. 14. You will reply again . The Mode then and Tendency of Faith unto its Objed is here fuppofed Obfcure, and that Previous judgement of Credibili* ty after all poffible weighing of thofe Motives, which do manifeft the Credibility of this Truth. God [peaks ly the Church , is no more but Morally certain > Ergo the Belief of that Truth (lands ftill wavering upon Uncertainties. I anfwer. Ii thefe Motives have an infallible Connexion with Divine Revelation, That is , If they clearly convince , that God cannot but de fatlo fpeak to Chriftians , after fo many Signs and wonders, The Judgement Previous to Faith , is Metaphyft- cally certain. However give it a lefler Certainty, we muft yet fay with the Prophet : TejUmoma tua tredi- btlia faffa fum nimis ; Thefe motives well conftdered , ^^/,fc bring Reafon to an invariable State of Believing, in fo Reafonto much, That none can Disbelieve without Sin , and «» inv*- Madnes.- Again \ye muft fay, That Judgement ^^ H. 3, which ihg% No rtal poof can Weaken this Ludge. went. Sedariec own a faith more then mo. rally cer- tain, lnftances how moral certainty help*s t» faith. 61 Difc I CV. Of Moral Q(rtnmtf. which throughly penetrans trnm , Eyacuars both Doubt and Fear to the Coniruyy , and far exceed s all Degrees of Probability , which gives ReafoM rhe Freedom to Al- ter an Opinion when Stronger Proofs come againft it. But no Real Proof whatever, is capable to Over- throw the Certainty of this Judgement, thougb Fal- lacies may puzzle it. Calf it then as you pleafe Mo- ral or CWetaphyfical Evidence , it hath proved irs own Stiength, for never Any without it, fi; ce Chrlftiani- ty began, either rightly believed in Cbrtfl \ ox Church. 15. This Judgement'therfore which like an Interiout voyce ( fuppofing the Lxteriour Propofition of the Church ) fummon's us to hear, or , like a Light that difcover's Gods own Language delivered by Revela- tion , makes the Linguage , once dark, clear enough to us . Now being thus manifested , we lay hold on it, and yeild A (Tent to the Revelation for it [elf, and not for the antecedent Motives. And becaufe this Re- velation is without Difpute more infallible then any Truth in Nature , it cannot but Anfwerably , as I faid above , import and contribute a Stronger Certainty to Faith , then the mod evident Ptinc pl^s do to any Science. Vfon this ftrong Fortreffe then C.brijlian Religion jlands firm, lehich undoubtedly imply es a greater Certainty then only Mo- raL And I think, our Adverfaries will fay fo tooj Who , though They take the Canon of Scripture upon Moral Certainty , yet they Believe the particular Re- vealed CMyfyeries contained in that Bock, with a far furer Affent then what is only moral . Moral Cer- tainty therfore necpjfarily help's to Faith , though Faith ultimately Rclys not on it . Thus , you know , the y>iU loves Good cither Real or Apparent, yet need's not to love Difc 1. C.V OfMoralQertainty. 6$ love the cognition which reprefcnrs goodnes. For that is only conditio applicants, a condition applying the Ob- ject to the Power, but no Caufe of Love . I may alfo adhere to a Doftrin in St, Anjlin for St. Aujlms Autho- rity , upon the Moral certain ^Word of one who tells, me, This great Doftor faith fo . Why therfore may I not, induced by far Stronger Motives to believe this Truth. God [peaks by hit Church, Adhere only to his Revelation without touching on the Motives,which ferve well as Conditions to Apply that objecl to the Po- wer , yet want the Strength of a formal Qbjeft to fup~ port Faith ? But more of this Subjeft in another Trea- tife, where we /hall Ihow that the Certainty of Faith ( at leaft unevident in refpefl of the material Obje£l) is not fo much a Speculative, as a Prudent fubmiffive and Praclical Certainty. CHAP. VI. Faith only morally certain, is no Faith. > Frotefiants haw* \no Moral cer- tainty ofFroteftant Religion. I. T Et us here fuppofe (contrary to Truth ) that JL/all Religion, brought to a juft Trial, comes to no more but to a High Moral certainty , which, Though it implyes no abfolute Impoffibility of being Falfe , yet is lo llrong , That none , conftdering the great Evidence we have for Chriftianity , can without madnes 64 Difc, I, C8 VI. Faith only Morally Qertain, madnes Pra&ically doubt or hold it ocherwife then it is; moft Morally certain . Put the cafe then, That we arrive to this Degree of Certitude only , you will ask, why is not fuch a Faith ftedfaft enough, and very fufficient to Saluation t Thus far, if I miftake not, fome Neoteriks make Faith certain , and ftrip it of all further infallibility. 1 anfwer. A Faith only CMorally certain is no Fatth , and prove my Aflertion . That wheron all Moral Certainty imaginable Effen- Th*t tially depend's, is fallible, and may Deceive us. That;, wheron wkeron true Faith Ejjentially defends , which is Divine Reyt- 1***1 7~ ^atlon » n infallible and cannot Deceive : Ergo , What eyer fallible, ground's a OHoral certainly only, which may deceiye, is as un- Tbat proportionate to uphold true Faith, as Reyelation owned as Zior'dcer. D*vlne> ts mfi* to ground a fallible Opinion- As long ther- tamtyde- fore, as the Objeft of pure Moral Certainty, becomes pend'sis not Gods Revelation , (which can never be) fo long {dime, Faith carjnot fejy on it. 0r> jf jt do refl- here> it Mi/lakes its objett and call's tbat Revelation , which is Two fare none . The ultimate Reafon of this Difcours ftands Vrmifies. grm UpQn fafe two prjncjp]es t T jfl moral Certainty may be Falfe . 2. Gods Rey elation, Becaufe it is Infallible as m God, Ejjentially excludes that Weaker Degree of Certitude, and cannot be falfe; which is to fay in plainer Terms : God neither doth nor can ftea\ any thing , only morally certain. 2. That all Moral certainty may be falfe is evident. For invent the ftrongeft imaginable (as This is diftin- guifhed from Phyfical, or Cfrtetaphyfical Certainty) and fay what you will within that compas , F%. toe and Conftantinople are now Citties in Being, Or , That when one in a large Citty fur's imprifoned at noon- day, and hears no body ; yet faith. Moft furrfy all Difc. I. C. VL h not Vulth. 65 ail the Inhabicants of this place are neither dead nor afleep. Such an Aflertion, though mod Morally cer- tain, is capable of Falfity ; For God may have de- stroyed all thofe men ; or given them over to aftran- ge unheard of drowfines j That's no impoffibility if it were fo-,- Why I Becaufe the AiTertion only ftands upon thefe Negatives , or fome like Foundations. Ne- ver yet was feen fuch an Effect as this, Secundary Cau- fes never yet concurred to fo Univerfal a Sleep or Mortality. Here is the beft Aflurance which can be had , and yet it may be falfe. Contrarywife. Sup- pofe that God Reveal's to the Irnprifoned party this Truth , duely propofed. i^iil the men tf this titty are *j££* not dead-, His Belief refting on this Revelation is fo alwAyi Certain, that no power in Heaven can falfify it. mojtcer* Where you fee a vaft Difparity in order to Infallibili- tam- /j, between Faith and Moral certainty. The one becaufe of its weak motive may be fals , [the other ?#*£" (trongly upheld by Revelation cannot be falfified. ^y^ Perhaps you will fay. At leaft we know not, that Moral God (peaks to us, but only upon Moral certainty, c«uimtj. Of this more prefently. Here the Reply is not to thepurpofe; For all we convince now, is, That Faith g (if any be in the World ) muft finally Reft on Gods infallible Revelation , and confequently ,That no Mo- tive of Moral certainty hath Strength enough to fup- port it. Now by what means it comes atlaft, to befetled in this Center of Gods infallible Veracity, is another queftion ; Thus it muft Reft, or, as our Ad- versaries confes , loofe the Ejjence of infallible Faith. 3. Briefly. We flial] now make good the other Af- fertion in the Title , and fhow , Though Moral cer- I tainty Religion hath not Moral Cer tainty. 66 Dilc. I. C. VI. Trote/tants hate not Moral Vrouflants tainty were ( as it is woi) a prop ftrong enough to fuppoit Chriflian Religion, yet Proteftants have no Degree of it for their Pretended Religion . I prove this Truth . By Proteftancy, we mull either un- derhand thofe Prudential Motives, which induce men to Believe the Specified and particular Do&rins of Pro- teftants (fuch are Miracles , Antiquity, great Conner* fions &c. ) Or rather the very Tenents and Po&rins actually believed by them. For example : That all Pajlors may err in delivering Christian Doftrtn. That there are Wo Sacraments only, or, what elfe you will. If we fpeak of Motives, this Religion is fo naked, that it cannot ihew you fo much as one, as is largely De- monftrated in the 8. 9. and 10. enfuing Chapters , whether to avoyd an unneceffary Repetition , the Rea- der is remitted . Waving therfore at prefent a fur- ther Proof hereof, I Argue thus againft the Moral cer- Vr°»HnT Umtl °^ C^eir Do&rin • A Dodtrin broached without wuh'cut1 devious rational Inducements , ( whofe very Profeflbrs were and are no more but Fallible ) and which at its firft Rife , or Appearance in the World feemed a meer Paradox to the far greater part of Chriflians , and yet throughly examined , is held (till by this far greater number ( mod knowing and learned ) falfe , and im- probable, cannot be a Doctrin morally certain. Pro- teftancy is thus confefledly fallible , and both at its Rife was , and is Still Oppofed, not only by the vaft number of Catholicks , But by all other Haere- ticks alfo, as fals and improbable • Ergo, it is not a Do- £\rin Morally Certaiu . That a Doclrin fo meanly thought of and univerfally Decryed , cannot be thus Certain , is proved out of the very Notion of Moral certainty, Rational induce- ments. A Connin ting Argu went. . Difc. I. C VI. Certainty of their Religion. 67 certainty, which though not abfolutely infallible, yer, when the Grounds and Motives of it are perfectly known , it paffeth for an uncontradicted Truth , and free's men from Doubt, destructive of fuch a degree of Cer- tainty* Thus we fay morally. Rome and Conftan- tinople are nol» Citties in heing . \^ll the inhabitants of China are not dead, Thefe, And the like Affertions paffe for current Moral Truths , without Oppofition , without Contradiction . If therfore Protectant Reli- The reafen eion were in fuch a meafure Morally certain ; That vaft °ftheAr- Multitude of Chrijuans, weroj innumerable are Pious , Con- fcientious and Learned , could neyer hold it , as they- do , falfe and improhable. No Verity Morally certain ever mett a verity with fuch a ftrong Contradiaion . If ye fay , This J^g Oppofition arifeth out of Malice, ye fpeak not proba- wa$ never bly, and more juftly draw on your felves the like Qen- fi long ***> fure, for beginning lb flrange a Religion . If you fay *™^/*f again* Thele Learned Men penetrate not too well the ?rotejt*ncy Depth of this new Dodrin, you talk at random. Their «• Knowledge is not inferiour to Yours j what you f e , they fe , and perhaps more. Charge not therfore Ignorance on them , wherof your felves are more likely guilty. 4. Yet fome Replyes may be here expected. One is. Proteftants have moral Affurance of their Bible, Becaufe all fay it is Gods Word j Ergo they have Aflu- ranee of their Religion alfo . The Antecedent is bad, Uoral AI~ and the Confequence worfe. Arians, Pelagians, and^™",/£ all Haereticks are as morally aflured of their Bible , as mAjfc any Proteftant . Have they, I pray you, as great r*»"*f ' Certainty of thofe peftilent Haerefies proved, as they ^ think , out of the Bible > You fay no , Becaufe they Ix Interpret Troteflant Glojfei no more Scri- pture then the Clojfes of At tans, StBaries can not be- lieve the actual Truth of Troteflan- y- 68 Difc.I. C.VL Troteftants bate not Moral Interpret amis , and you do not . Learnedly an- fwered. But who makes your Interpretation better then Theirs •? They have that Book, and fpend their pri- vate Judgement on it,- you have no more. Unles ther- fore your Book^ or Judgement be better then Theirs , You are Altogether as uncertain of your particular Do. drins, as They of Theirs . The Reafon is: Becaufe you have not one Sole Expres Text of Scripture for Proteftancy. You may add your own Glofles , and make it fpeak Proteftancy • But thefe Glofles are no more Scripture, nor more morally certain , then Thole of Brians, Pelagians &c Therfore a moral A^ur an- te of the Bible Tvhich is eajily abided , gives no man mo- ral certainty of found Doftrin . But of thps fuhjeB he- reafter. 5. A fecond Obje&ion. As what is Fals , may be by errour judged Morally certain, fo often what is True, may not be held Morally certain. Therfore though Proteftancy want's that High Moral certainty now required , yet it may be True. I anfwer. But if it want Moral certainty, it hath it not , which is aJJ we prove at prefent . Again. Though it may be true (which is impoftible ) fo alfo it may be fals. Now ProteftantS) I hope, do not believe a meer Poffu bility only, nor the May be of Truth (for many Things are not which may be ) but they Believe more , the Jclual fuppoied Truth of Proteftancy . And this they cannot do without Moral Certainty of that which they hold Adually true. 6. A third Objeftion , and , "Jis more to the pur- pofe. Our Argument now propofed proves too much, and Therfore proves nothing, For its beft For- ce Difc. L C VI Certainty oft hit fyjHgion. 6y ce lyes in this one AiTertion , vi%. That a VoElrtn or Religion, yphich is Oppofedhj the great eft part of Chriftians , as Falfe and Paradoxal , cannot be Morally certain. If this Principle hold good , ic if foHowes ,- That much, and very much too, of the Roman Catholick Do&rin, want's alfo moral Certainty, Becaufe a very great number of Chriftians oppugne it as fals. Some de- ny the Popes Supremacy, Others the Real Fr 't fence , Others Purgatory, Others Pragingfot the Dead &c. And Pro- tectants, after their long ftudy , deny all Thefe at on- ce: Therfore fuch Doftrins cannot be Moral! v certain. 7. i anfwer firft . This Objection , without doubt, Proves too much and impugn's a Certain Truth of Chriftianity . For tell me , when the whole world , as S*4Hierom faith, growning under Arianifm, faw that Has- refy far and neer diffufed : Did that Oppofition wea- ken the Moral certainty which Orthodox Chriftians had then of a Trinity of Perfons in one FfFence ? (And we only fpeak now of Moral Evidence Ante' cedent to Faith.) lffo, the Motives morally V&tttivs dent for the Belief of that Myftery ceafed , or , at leaft nevtr u§fi loft their Ancient Vigor , which is fate . And one great then Font. Realon is ; Becaufe that true Do&rin of a Trinity had no jtrft Rtfe9 nor appeared like a new Paradox in c*thoiick the world as Protcftancy did , peeping out like an un- Mr« known Stranger, when Luther and Calvin firft broach'd JjJ.Jy^Sf it. No, That Catholick Dorflrin was univerfally be- vto^nm lieved by all faithful Chriftians, before Arians were y* born. The Motives therfore, which made it evi- dently Credible before Ariu4, continued firm (notwith- standing His Oppofition ) and (till induced Chriftians toBelieye as They h^d done formerly. Which Reafon I 3 alio 70 Difc.L C.V 1 1. Of Sectaries errour, of their alfo holds good co our prefent purpofe, And doth not only give an immenfe Difpariry between the Moral evident Certainty of Catholick Religion , And what ever Certainty Hasrefy can Pretend to; But alfo, De- monftratively makes both Proteftancy and all Haere- fy improbable. And this Truth 1 ihall evidence, ha- ving firft cleared the Fallacy which intricates the Re- ply now in hand. CHAP. vn. How Sectaries err in the fearch made af- ter Religion. Of their weak and Im- probable Offlofition. The Obfe- clion is more fully an frered. I, /"""\Vr Seftaries and all Haereticks err grofly in a V^main Principle , which breed's nothing but H&retich Confufion to themfelves , and Others, Thus it is. TheZfearchln their fearch after True Religion They run on, But cfTruiRe- how ? Extra vUm , in a wrong and miftaken way. lTQ*'t Some will find it out by the Book of Holy Scripture, scriftHu which few exaftly read , and none can underftand by only. his private judgemenr, Thefe err , not knowing Serif* turey And may , as St.Auflin notes Epifl. 40. ad Deogra- others fiy ttas * end their Lives, before they end Difficulties this totbe pri-ywy. Others fly to the Do&rin of the Primitive %ch*nk Church , and bote Themfelves. For, what private D*8rin9 man ?an now by his meer reading , Morally afcertain me, Difc.L C. V II. Improbable O^o/tng Catholicks. 7 1 me, or any, of the indubitable univerfal Senfe of that Doftrin ? Wherasall, whuh the Church held then, was not writ : Of what was writ , part is left , and much of what remains , is (as experience Teacheth) lyable to Cavils and Mifinterpretations. Others (and fo/^Jfon it is a Socman jogg ) Decide all by weak Humane Rea- <>*ty. fon, as, ifforfooth, Wit alone were able to Fathom Gods Incomer ehenjible Secrets. Others finally without ohers flay further Infpe&ion , Hand poering on the material Ob- ""^'ff jecls or Mylteries of Faith, and after many a miipent YHi0p Houre, ask at laft of a very unskilful Mafter ("their f«m* own Tveai Beafon) what it Judgeth of thefe Myfleries ? IfReafon, as it often fall's out, find's them difficilfj^" It Cafl's them away, as meer Improbabilities. Thus the K^Arian reje&'s a Trinity , The Pelagian Original Sin, The Proteftan t Clmfls Meal Frefence in the Eucharift, Be- caufe they run into Dark matters, whick only puzzle Reafon , and wave thofe further Confiderations, which clear all , And make Faith , if net evidently certain in Attejlante., at leajl evidently credible. 2. I fay therfore. The moft eafy way ro find out true Religion , or the firft unquestionable Evidence which points it out, lyes open, and is obvious to All, J^**J''*' Before we either examin particular Myfteries of Fairh, True Reii. or enter upon Proofs, Drawn from Scripture, Coun- iio^eafy cils, or Fathers. It is true , from thefe Grounds , we ™nl have irrefragable Arguments againft all Sectaries; But can They think , that the wife Providence of God hath put, as it were, Religion fo far out of fight, or fet it at fo great a Diflance from m , That none can come to the knowledge of it, Before Scripture, Fathers, and thofe large Volumes of Councils are exaftly exa- mined. tvu 7X Difc. I. C . V II. Of Sectaries Erronr, of their mined, whic few read , and fewer underftand > No T«*« Rrfi- certainly. True Religion evidenceth it felf, and is giomevt- wo(i Difcernabie from errour by an other clear and dMf!*hn confpicuous Light, which none" can but fe ( unles he wilfully iliuc his eyes) Antecedently to the Perufal of Scripture, Fathers ejrc . This Light or Evidence we may righdy call Gods own perforative Language , wher- by he Speaks to Reafon before we Elicit Faith, and rationally convinceth all of this general Truth. One So- (iety of Chnffians There is , wherin my Eternal Truths are Taught , this I make manifest by evident Signes , by the Light of dear and undeniable Motives , Wherof none can , hut moll unreafonably , doubt ♦ So it is, faith Origin Horn. 30. in Natth. Eccle/ia plena eft fulgore ah Oriente ufaue ad Occiden- tem . The Church , like a Refplendent Sun , casieth out Lu- flre from Eaft to Weft ; and They are blind , who fee not fo clear a Brightnes. Thus much premifed. seBarm ^ \ Anfwer to the Objeflion above , and fay. impu'Jng Though thoufmds more then Sectaries impugne part of the Ro- Cathriick man Catholick^DoElrin, yet as long as God demonstratively Evi- •Doftrin. d^ceth the abfolute Credibility of that Church which teaches it, By fuch rational prudent , and puffing Motives\ as have gau ned Millions of Soules to Believe , our Adverfaries in handing dgainft Church Doclrin , only betray Malice , Ignorance , or Both, And do no more hut caft dirt at a Sun , which provi- dence ( maugre Their weak Attempts) Will have to Shine, whilft Chriftiamty lafteth . So Urgent therfore , fo Illu- ftrious are thete Motives (as I ftial prefently declare) for the total Belief of what the Roman Catholict Church teaches, That they do not only fupprsjfe and fdence fuch Wea\ Opponents , But a/ft ma\e Proteflancy , and all other Seels improbable, and incredible. The reafon hereof (mod am.. Difc, I. G V II. Improbable OppofingCatholicks. 9% amply laid forth in the three next following Chap- ters ) (land's fure on thefe two undeniable Principles . Firft ; That Church which Cbrifi hfus founded , ( and £^ff his Bleffed Intention was to gain the whole World to n%^fQ it ) is fo Eminently Glorious , fo Clearly Marked with un- is his boubted Signs and moft Legible Characters of Truth , chmh* That the Simpleft Man , if he follow Reafon , may find it out, and Believe fecurely . No other but the Th&omcm Roman Catholick Church only is thus Evidenced. Se catkoiick Cha$. 8. 9. 10. Thefecond Principle. This Holy ^^ Church , which Age after Age (without any late rife , dencei like that of Proteftancy) hath flood conftantly ever c" was either on fet Purpofe raifed up by itwaswt Almighty God, and conferved in Being, for {0 long founded h a time, to Cheat the world into a falfe Belief (which ^^£ is Impious to think ) or mud be owned , as it deferves, worU. for the only undoubted moft manifetted , and glorioujly evidenced Chunk of thrift. Se Chaf. 8. w. 5. 6. 4. You will fay. Notwithftanding all the glorious Marks we can lay claim to, and grace our Church withal, very many Learned Men do oppofe it. If then the Argument above have force This very Oppofition offo many , Weakens much, and takes of no few De- grees of that Moral certainty we ftand for. Contra. Very many Learned men oppofed both Apoftolical and slight op. Primitive Dodrin , Atheifts band againft God , and^gjj lewes againft Chrift , the Arians yet impugn a Trinity. Are our Se#aries affrighted upon that Account , or weakned in their Moral Certainty of thar Myftery , whilft They Believe it > No. Every Trivial and flight Oppofition therfore , made againft a Verity K whicri y 74 Difc. I. C. V 1 1. Of Sectaries Erroury cf their which ftrongly Defends and powerfully plead's fo jit felf, can neither dant, nor difcouncenance it* The it ought to Oppofition then in our prefent Matter (if to the pur- fo. deeply pQfe ) ought to be well Grounded and deeply Rational; r*od*a grounded, I fay , not upon what , This or Thatpriva- houghtto te perfon by his fole fallible bofom Thoughts , holds certain Reasonable (for fo every Arian will make good his Hx- refy) But the Oppofition if rational muft go further, and reft at laft upon a Solid and jatisfacJory Frinciple, Sectaries which well laid forth , gently forceth every Prudent ^/andDifintercffed Man to Acquiefce and yeild to iu natvroof- But this cannot be done in our prefent cafe $ for Se&a- againjithe rjes are f0 utterly deftitute of what ever look's like a. church. Rational Proof or any received Principle, They are fo dtfinabled.to fpeak T»ith fenfe againft the known Evi- dence of the Roman Catholick Religion , That ( And. I do aflert it boldly ) They shall as foon turn Cbrijlianity out of the World , as rationally abate or lejfen the plain and undifp u table Evidence of this one Chriftian Society. fyHd&in- 5- This bleffed Society therfore, ftands thus upon firm tipieifor Ground, upon folid and undoubted Principles. I the .catho ^ew you, faith this Church , Thofe very Motives, church, which anciently countenanced the Preaching of Chrifl, and converted the world , And Thefe plead for me. With what urgent contrary Proofs can you , my good Pr« teitants, deface fuch Glorious Marks of Truth , or make them either Insignificant, or forceles Arguments? Varies Is this weightily done by drawing a few trivial Glofles trifi' out of miftaken Scripture I By telling us of Council contradiding Council, By quoting our Authors wrong- fully, By relating a ftory not worth the hearing of a £ops , or PreUtet Axe thefe Manly proofs, think ye, or DjTc.T. C. V 1 1. Improhahle Oppdfmg QathoUch. 7] or fufficient to Eclipfe the Glory of the Ancient Church J Toyes, Trifles, Frivolotu. 1 fliew you again , othtrZvi. faith this Church , That the mod Wife of the World, *£«J the moft Learned, the moft Holy (Their Number is tholickm numberles) notwithftanding the Oppofition m *de a- chunk. gainft me , have Age after Age (even before and after Thewofl your Haerefy began) Conftantly profeffed my Faith , wfttnd lived and dyed in it without Change and Alteration : ^^ Tel me, were Thefe Millions of Souls, learned and^WN unlearned for a thoufand years and more, All mad, Allwithjtan- befitted , all fiduced by Fooleries > It is worfe then Mad- ****£ nes to fay fo. Here then is a principle, in moral mat- madea_ ters, the Sureft imaginable , for our Church. This gainft this Nubes tejlium alone, and oijuch Teitnejfes ( which is ever ^hj to be reflected on J makes it evidently Credible . And dyedinit. by whit contrary rational Proof or received Principle , can our Adverfaries enervate , or make null the Tefti- ^7ke^ mony of thefe innumerable dyers in of Evidence , L£™d who led on by Motives, which They thought Ratio- cannot be nal ( and what pafled for Reafon amongft fo many fuPPjfed and fuch Qualified Perfons , ought to pafle for Reafon ^tUby with all) Believed this Church and dyed in it happi- Fooleries. ly? Til tell you, had our Sedaries Salomons Wifdom, They would yet be unable to fatisfy This one Argument f^y* probably, much lefs to Evidence it forceles, upon Anfmr either folid Proof or , any received Principle. TheThisoae reafon is. No proof can vainquiih an evident \/QmAr*"mnt» rity; But it ts an evident ferity, that God Cheated No proof not the World by means of fo numerous a multitude *&**& of Catholic^ Profefrors. It is an evident Verity, That ir%J*l all thofe Wife and Learned Catholicks were neither Mad, nor, for fo long a time, Deluded by Fooleries. Kx He 76 Difc. I. C V TL Of Semes Emur, of their if sectaries He therfore , who , when rational Proofs fail , cannot flight fuch fpeak a reafonable word againft thefe Millions of wit- "ty fig*** ne^es • But flights and undervalues them ; doth not themfdve* only flight the greateft Authority on Earth > But alio, much jj fj2 fa a protejlarlt % muj} fight protejlancy ; if an Avian , Jnanifm. For thefe Seels haye neither Authority 9 nor witnefjes comparable to thofe of the Cathclick Church. 6. For conclufion of this matter, be pleafed to no- te, That as our Adverfaries are deftitute of rational Proofs (reducible to received Principles) whilft They im- pugne the clear Evidence of our Church, fo they alfo want them in all other particular Controverfies . Smv*r'come * or > whether They go about to oppofe our Doftrin , tovrimi- or to prove their own , You can never draw from hles* them Proof brought to an undoubted Principle,^ I fhall mod amply fliow hereafter. They are Opponents (Tis true J when they tell us we have changed the Ancient Doftrin of the Church, brought in novelties, and I know not what. We hear fuch Talk, but where is the Propofuio qtnejeens , or grounded Proof to make this Charge good ? They Jay fo* And that is all. And yet, if poffible, They are worfe at it, in proving Their own Dodrin. Take here one Inftan- AquettionQQ^ you fhall havemore hereafter. We demand trowed. Upon what rational Proof can Thefe men Believe the Sacred Myftery of the Bkfjed Trinity, and deny the Catholick Doftrin of Chrijis Real Prefence m the Sacra- Trvteflan's ment > Are they forced to Admit of the one, and believe om Reject the other by clear and manifeft' Scripture ? rwJ^i- Evidently no. Scripture is without controverfy, otherwith more openly Significant, and Exprcffive for the Real out proof, Prefence, then for a Trinity. Doth the Difficulty of Difc.L CV H.Improhable Oppofing Qathotickf. 77 of the Sacrament rationally retard their Belief? The trinity is yet a more difficil Myftery to Reafon. O, but the Trinity w^s ever Believed by the True Church : So, fay I, was The other Myftery alfo. But fpeak Reafon now, And fay, what Church was it which ever believed the Trinity > The Roman Ca- tholick Church furely , For tortus and others impu- gned that Myftery. Now Proteftants fay this Ro- man Catholick Church erred in believing chrifts Red Prefence; and if fo , They are moft unreafonable in relying on it for the Belief of a Trinity, For, if it erred in the Belief of one Myftery, it may as well ^have erred in the other . They may fay , the beft and moft Ancient Fathers held a Trinity . Very true; ' And as evidently They believed chrifts Real Prefence in theEucharift. But what will you fay, if I in- fringe the Authority of thefe learned Father in this matter? I can do it (though not in Real Truth) mofteafily, being affifted by the Principles of Prote- ftants , who tell us , that the whole Roman church. That is , All the Fathers and Dodors of it, erred for a thoufand years together in believing the Catholick if the Dodrin of the BleiTed Sacrament ♦ Wherupon I chiirlh inferre Thofe Ancient Fathers , who both learnedly f^Xt defended, and pioufly believed a My^ertom Trinity, may more may more likely have erred in doing fo, then, thar/'*^*ww a whole Church-, for fo vaft a Time , hath patronifed erroneous Doftrin, and falfly believed the Real Prefen- ce. Moft undoubtedly, TheWifdom and ' Authority of this long flandingh Catholick^ Church , is , in true Prudence , of greater foay and value , then the fole Authority of thofe far fewer Ancient Fathers can be ( though moft K. y Ve* ' Sectaries who flight a whole learned Ghurch may more rationally flight the Ancient 'Fathers. 78 U\kl£milKo\eligion hath Mottoes Venerable, and worthy all Refpeft ) that writ of the Sured Trinity . Thofe men therfore , who have the Boldnes to flight fo great a Church , cannot wtih fo much as a colour of Rcafon Reverence more highly thofe Ancient Fathers. ' But enough of this Sub- je&. Let us now go on to a further confideration of thefe prudent Motives, and fe more particularly, what Religion gives us the bed Evidence .of Them. CHAP. VIII. Afl Chri- fiiansprrm feffe not Chrisls true Do firin. Bow God hatPs tis to the knowledge of true Re. Ugion, A few Reflexions made uf on thefe Moti- ves of credibility. No Religion hath JMoti^ves foundingmoral certainty but One onlji which is the Roman Cat ho lick Religion. I. VI Ote firft. If God ( as we now fuppofe) gui- jJNjdes us by his Providence, and hath eftablifhed true Religion in the world , it is as certain , that all who protes Chriftianity ( for example Arians , and Fe- lagians ) believe not intierly Cbrifis true Doftrin , as that fome , blefled by fo Angular a Favour , both rightly be- lieve , and profes it. It is again moft certain , That if this wife Providence draws us not to the knouwledge of true Religion by Euthufias'ms, private Illustration % or the mnijiery of Angels 5 it leads us on by extrinfecal Moti- ves, Difc.L C. VIII, but the %oman Cathokk. 7$ ves, fuitable to Reafon , by rational Inducements , or difcernable Evidence: And ,thefe we call known Signs* Cognisances of Truth , evident Marks , clear Characters , or plain j peaking Language, which plead as it "Were in Gods behalf and as clearly shew us where true Religion is, as Thefe yifthle Creatures manifejl a Deity , or , as that Star which brought, the Sages to Bethlem , pointed out the Sayiour of the World . None can Deny Thefe plain Inducements of Faith; But fuch as deny thofe firjl and mojl clear Manifestations of Truth , which Chrifi our Lord and his Bleffed Apoftles evidenced, when by Their admirable Miracles , f range Converfions , SancTny of life &c. They withdrew heguiled Sou- ks from Error , and "brought Faith in Them , Before one word of Scripture Was regijlred. 2. Note z. (And it is the Refle&ion of a learned Author. ) As no man enters on a Difpute with others, Go^ir but be hopes to get the better j fo God , when he pro- were>vif- poieth true Religion to Chriitians, engageth as it we-^F«/i- re in a Difpute with the Devil, and all thofe Sectaries fad with . who oppofe it, And therfore cannot hope, But is fur e to ™'^*' conquer and convince his Adverfaries; otherwife it menu., were foJly to begin a Difpute; which would not end to his Honor , Now , if he convince , he doth it, *«*jW*j by the Force and Efficacy of fuch powerful Argu- Z^^t ments , laid out to Reafon , as are able to filence all Truth, Opponents : For, jlrong rational Inducements perfaafiyely Work^on Reafon , And clear mans Intellectual poller from all OWiftruft and Doubt. 3. Note 3. It is impoffible (after the Eftablifliment of true Faith amongft Chriftians) That God, either will or can permit a falfe Religion to he more Speciously evident to Reafon hyjme of rational OWotives , then his true Religion, id,. So Difc.I.C VIIL No Religion hath Motives AfaifeRe-is # For were this poflible , He would oblige Reafon ^oTbew-ty rational Inducements to embrace a fals Religion, m^eaouf. which fS highly repugnant to his Goodnes . And, ijevidem upon cnjs ground I fay more. It is impoffible , That a ^hmGodlfafe R&gion equalise the true One 9 in the Evidence of ratio- trut Kelt- nal Cfrfonyes ; For , if the evidences for Falshood he equal gion h, -tyjff, tjj0j~e otfor 0f Truth, God Would jiand guilty of arguing Korean lefs ef fie actor fly , in behalf of his own Verities. We eqmiize it muft ^Gn conclude, That Gods true Religion, ever, "Lccof1' mo^ eminently furpafTeth fal/hood in the grace and credibility, luftre of thofe Motives which evidence it to Reafon- And from hence it followes , That no man can in faflice -Rational appropriate thofe rational Inducements , "which dralv reafon to belong not fi^^ out true Religion , to ally 'who go under the name of Chri- to ait cM ftians; For amongft thefe (whether Arians or others ) ckripam. yOU kave faife Religions ; but the CWarks, Motiyes and Cognifances of Truth cannot belong to a falfe Religion , unles God propofe error as Specioufly evident to Rea- fon , as his own Revealed Truth , which is now proved impoffhle. TZ*?' 4- Thefe few Refleaionspremifed. Let us look a- competi- bout us , and call: a ferious Thoughr on two Religions tion. only , which as it feem's , (land juftling with one an- other , yea , and will needs come into Competition for Truth . The one is , the Ancient and long Continued Roman Catholick Religion • The other , is that late Noyelty of FrotesJanifm . Let reafon , I fay , go here impartially to work , let it make a diligent enquiry after the Rational Motives , which , as it were , plead in be- Bothc™'e half of thefe two different Religions . Both are not Voth'have true > and Therfore both cannot be evidenced by the »ot the like \ikc Maris ande Cognifances of Truth, the Onemuft Evidwt, yeild Difc. I.CVril. Certainty, buttbe%pman Catbotkk 81 yeild to the Other . What do I fay yeild I The firft appears like a glorious Sun Procedens ejr crefcens ufaue adperfecJum diem , which , as Origen faith , cafteth luch luftre from Eaft to Weft , that all eyes Behold it. The other of Proteftancy , Reafon finds [0 na\edly Poor, [0 deftitute of Light , and Motives, That its mean Abearance makes it defficable , and not worth the looking at. 5. Briefly then I Argue for the moral Evidence of out Catholick Roman Religion. A Religion, which, af- ter the juft Condemnation of fo many undoubted and acknowledged Haereticks , hath permanently flood Vifihly victorious for 16, hundred years , And which never yet was Moraizvi- condemned by any known true Church of Error or Haerefy. denc* fof ^4 Religion , which hath draw thoufands of Infidels , and A- CathonCk hens ( from Chrifi ) to its Belief. And which hath had Age Religion after v^Age , Whole millions ofcwftant Profeffors , wherof in- numerable Were not only mojl Wtfe% Learned and Vertuous , But Willingly alfo loft their temporal fortunes , and couragioufly shed their Blood for it . Such a Religion , I fay , which hath it hath thus perfwafively wrought on the Reaion of fo many^**^ Wife, and Learned &c. And , gained to it whole mul- Believers. titudes of Believe rs , and Martyrs, ihewes by this one admirable JEffetl (had we no other Proof) Strength and Evidence enough to convince the moft obdurate Hart in the World . For, either ( as I noted above ) we muft fay , That all thefe Wife and Glorious Men were mad, as being induced by Fooleries to Believe , and dye as they dicl ; or grant , That They had clear and undenia- ble Evidence to warrant their Belief, for which we now plead. Nay , I fay more : So general a Miftake and De- cW;Fr#- lufion , is upon an other Account moft impoflible ; For, vJfee*"h that great Can and Providence which God had eyer of his Church, chunk L (ould 8x Difc.LG VIII. Ko Religion hath Mottoes couU net could not permit ( if true Faith were in the world from the permit [o g^ ^ tQ i^ntnir ) rQ Earned , /tf numerous , /- fcernihiltty from Error , before it be accepted of . And now , becaufe both Catholicks and all Sedaries fup- pofe , that the Religion , which Chrtft Jejus and his Blef- fed Apoftles taught, was indubitably and clearly evi- denced hy Marks , and convincing Signs of Truth. We are in the firft place to ponder well thofe Motives > which made evident that firft Chnftian and Apoftoli- cal Doclrin; and next to Confider, whether the very like Mottles have not evidenced the Roman Catholic^ faith Age after Age . Briefly. The greateft and moft vifible Evidences for that Apoftolical Dodrin , were ( to omit others ) firft , moft ktio'ton and unquefti&ned Mir*- cfo. ( The Vsai, rofe up to Ltfe, the Blwdjw, the Draf heard, * Difc.I. CV III. ) Yet thou- fands then were, and are Jlitl without debate , Innocent, Holy and Virtuous. 7. Again. Can Sectaries deny thofe prodigious Conversions of Nations , wrought by this Church upon Heathens and Aliens from Chrifl > If they do , All are upon Record , both Friends and Enemies attribute thefe Wonders to that CMother church . Tell me, I L z befeech 84 DiCclCyillNo^eligion bath Motives Evidence b-feech you , who converted our once moft Catbolick ofconvcr- EngLnd to the Faith it Anciently had , but Roman Ca- >"'• tholicks? Who reduced Germany, Polony, Spain, France, Denmark, Swedland , and the Low-Coun- tries to the fame Faith ? They Were CMen united in Be- liefwith the Roman Church . Who yet fend MiJJi oners to thofe remoter Parts of the world , to China , Iapony and other Places > This Church only doth God that Ser. vice, whilft our Minifters fit at home with eafe, tyed faft to their fine Wives , and fat Benefices . If Finally they doubt of our Miracles, They may as well doubt of the Suns light at noon Day, fo Confpicuous They have been ever in this Church , and are ftill to this prefent Age . Wherof more in the next Chapter. All I ask now is , Whether it be not morally certain , that the World had once in it fuch Men as were cal- led ^Alexander , Cue far , Pompey , Cicero ? yes . As great Evidence we have for moft eminent Miracles do* tvidenceofne by this Church : Conjlant Tradition , known Records, A>n!$UtiH m^ou^te^ Hifary , convey them to us; All which none Catboiuk can Deny, without wilful Perverfnes , And a High church, degree cflmpudency. Yet fuppofe Men fo imper- tinently bold , as to queftion fome Miracles ; whether for example, ever fince the primitive Age any were raifed from death to lifer* Whether Devils have been Caft out? Whether Sight weie reftored to the Blind, Ccnvtrfion Strength to the Lame (All ihefe are upon Record? ) Yet *f nations they cannot deny that grand and convincing Miracle of Cort»er- hUrade, Jms* which is Proof enough , as Sl. Aufiin Learnedly Confider's lib. 22. Cititat.Cap. 5. Chiefly at thofe words* vMourfi* s* rem crechbilem crediderunt. If men , faith he , Believed * a thing credible (he fpeaks of the Refurredion of the . dead Difc.T. C. V I H. htthe\omanQatholick. 8 J dead , and the like is of any other Myftery in Faith) videant quam Jtnt Holidi , fe what fools Thofe are, who will not believe . Si antem res incredibilis eft . If the thing be incredible. 1 his is mpft incredible, yea, and the firangcjl miracle of all , that, That v>hich Teas deem d Incredible , gained Belief the whole World over. The Argument is convincing , and proves as well, that thofe after Converfions wrought upon infidels by Roman Evangelical Preachers , were Admirable, and truely Miraculous. Millions have been converted by them . Thefe numerous mulcitudes therfore of Believers were either drawn on by fooleries. Iffo; They were mad, And here lyes the CWiracles. faith ShAu- IooIeries n • r- ~~i i • ; / • / r *~> could not Jtiny Vi^ That TooUrtes could induce jo many to Contemn -tH^uce the World , and become t>,ood Chriflians : Or, Qpn-MMtomt* trarywife , They believed this Roman CathoJIck^^ Church upon weighty rational Motives. If fo ; Why andbcco- are not our Proteftants obliged to believe as they did , upon the me good fame prudent Inducements. If They Tell us : The Church ck^km- Taught an other Do&rin, when thefe great Conver- sions were made , then it Teaches now; They do not only moft unlearnedly Suppofe what is to be Proved (yea cannot be proved becaufe utterly falfe/ But alfo fpeak not one Word to the Purpofe ; For, both our Progenitors in England and innumerable others, were drawn from Error by Popifli Preachers. And even in this prefent Age, the like glorious Converfions are,, and have been wrought byihefe Bleffed mens Labours, and Theirs only . Now if you ask upon what Ac- cow/' count fuch Converfions are to be efteemed Miracu->w are bus? This one Inftance anfwers you. Imagin ** &"ft«- youfaw a little Flock of Sheep or Lambs, fent into a^/p„f'r^ L3 De- 86 DifcX C. VEIL No Religion hdtb Mottoes Defert, full of ravenous Wolves, withall ? That thefe Lambs, though at firft many were devoured, yet at length render'd the Wolves fo Tame , and fo abated their Rage, that they became like Lambs , frrild and fubmiffive . Would you not fay, that fuch a work were prodigious, and above the force of nature? This is our very cafe. Behold faith our Saviour , Luc, 10. I fend you as Lambs amongfi Wolves, And the- fe you muft fubdue. It was done. Behold , faith the Roman Catholick Church, I fend my Preachers ftill abroad to the Remoteft parts of the World , and have changed Wolves into Lambs , 1 hat is , I have made Infidels, once Rebellious to Chrift , Subject to his lawes , the Vitious I have made Virtuous , and brought thoufands of them to no other Religion , but Popery. This work, with the Affiftance of Gods Grace is done, Et eft mirabile in oculis no/Iris , and 'tis admirable. Had our Proteftants made fuch Chan- ges, or drawn fo many Infidels to their new Faith x vpfy Pro- they would have talked of wonders; But becaufe Ca- uftaus tholicks gained them to the old Religion , all is No- f'*fa M& thing . So it is. They haye no Miracles , and therfore cenver- slight them : No Conversions 9 and therfore undervalue them. Jionsf a Strange proceeding . Thofe yery bonders Tvkich in- duced the Tforld to become Chriflian , Becaufe they yet emu nently appear in the Roman Catholick church , muft ly under Contempt; Thofe Ancient Proofs of Chriftianity are now proofles, Thofe Primitive Evidences of Miracles f converftons ejrc (the Church is in fault for fhewing them ) cannot be feen by thefe later Men, who yet have Eyes to difcern the Book of Scripture by its own Light and Majefty . And by the way mark the Para- Difc. I.C. Vni. but the%oman Qatholick* 87 Paradox. The exteriour words of a Bible (for of the- i^]f* fe we only (peak ) are Evidences enough for Scripru- y^,, re; yet thole glorious T»orks now mentioned are (for- fboth ) no Evidence of this Church . The very Ma- jetty cf the. ttyle Afcerrain's thefe men, that God S peak's by that Sacred Book > yet all the perceptible miraculous Majejly , which the Church fhewes us, cannot perfwade them, that he fpeaks by this vifible , audible, and moft known Oracle of Truth. A Bible ( well known , its true , upon other Grounds to be moft Sa- cred) difcouers its Diviniry, and immediatly proves who writ it, Tet a Church fo glorioufly marked, [ayes no- thing "toho Directs it. Is this Reafon, or Religion think ye ? Can Reafon produce this unreafonable Thought in any , That the wife Providence of God hath permitted fo eminent, fo numerous, fo pious, fo learned , and fo long (landing a Multitude of Chri- ftians , as Catholicks have been (and yet are ) to be Cheated into Errour, even whilft they evidence their Faith , by fuch Proofs and Motives , as Chrifl and his Apoftles manifefted Chriftian Religion ? What i8 Shall we think that Miracles, Conner fions of Souls, ca- jl'wg out of Devils , Sanclity of life &c. DphUh vere once convincing Arguments of Chriftianity , are mV> showed to coun- tenance a Tatfity ? To judge fo , is the moft impro- bable Thought that ever entred a Chriftians (HartjZJ^ yea, and impoflible, unles we hold , that God can lea-^w/y. ve of to be Goodnes h felf, or , make Fallhood more apparently evident then Truth the whole World over; which is proved to be a grofs errour* 8. Other Arguments, we have for a greater Certain- ty then moral , pnvwjly Evidencing the Roman Ca- tholick 88 VlCclC.VUWo^eligion hatbMotiVes tholick Religion before weBelitve; wherof more in the next Chapter. It is now fufficient to fay, That Trtte/iants our Pi'oteftants grant thus much. Firfl , becaufe grant tvi- the more learned of them allow Salvation to thofe, denctof who live and dye in this Faith; But mod fure it is, X5K That Saving Faith hath at leaft moral Evidence , and man c*. Certainty for it. 2. Whilft They talk of no man thtiickRi- knowes what Evidence manifesting Chriftian Reli- tItm' gion in General , They only plead Tor our Catholick Faith , and fpeak not a word in behalf of Proteftancy. Motives The Reafon is . If both thefe Religions are not True, """ISf* kut the One only , The Motives ivhkh Evidence true Re- gion infe- ligion infeparably follow That , and cannot htlong (as I have pMtabiyfiU already proved ) to the Other, vhich n fal/e. Therfore kw that. They, or We, are obliged to lhow them . But Prote- ftancy cannot lhow fo much as one prudent Motive for it felf > as will moft clearly appear in the io.Cha- pter ; Ergo, what Evidence there is for true Chriftian Faith, Catholicks have it , or there is none in the World for any Religion. C H A P. IX. A jhort Digrefiion concerning the Sha« fling of Proteftants in this mutter. 1. TTEre I cannot but refled on the flight endea- ?n'fr!ts JL JL vours of fome later Sedaries , who offer at waken- Much in an Empty Title called The Proteftants leay of dcavours. refolding Faith $ yet in profecuting the matter, They handle DifcLCJX. Offrotejlants shifting in this matter. 89 handle ic fo unluckily, that no man Hear's a word more fpoken in behalf of Proteftanifm , then of Aria- nifm , or of whatever other Hatrefy. Motives and Reafons they give none for Protectant Do&rin , as VroteHancy , As They ought to have done in the firft place , after fo glorious a Title. 2. To prove what is faid, have patience to hear fome few parergons. There are > lay They, in the queflion of revolving Faith thefe three quejiiom to be refolved. Firft , Why I believe xhoje things to he true , which are contained in the Book called Scripture > z. Why I believe the Doclrin contained in that Book^to he Divine ? 3. why I believe the Books them/elves to he of Divine Revelation t Mark here a Shufling, and remember once more the Title. The Frote/lants Way of revolving Faith . Is it fo? Is it the Proteftants way ? Yes* Surely rhen the Queftions here propofed , and the Anfwers re- turnea are moft Pertinent to help on Proteftants in their refolving Faith, That is, to make Proteftancy ^ evidently credible by clear and rational Motives . You thoiswave will fay, They are fo. And I fay, They are no »h*t they more to that purpofe (of Proteftants refolving fai&-f-fc2* or giving of prudent Motives for Proteftancy ) then if fuch a Religion had never been in the world. I pro- ve my Anertion. The Arum will fay. J believe Arians he- thofe Things to he True which are contained in Scripture. I IZrffu' believe the DoElrin in that Book^> to he Dhine . I lelieve muoha* the Books themfehes to be of Divine Revelation , and this I Proteftants do upon as good Grounds, as you Proteftants, if not on better . For if you admit of thefe Verities , upon the greateft Evidence , which things of that Nature are capable of , So do I too , But fay , I befeech M you 5>o Difc.I.CIX. Of Troteflants shuffling you , what more Advantage have you upon this Con- cdfion , for your particular Religion, then I have for wi- ne > For, Jet thcfe Books be True, let them contain Dhine Doftrin , let us believe the Revelation in them to be Sacred , yet both you and I are to feek which of us lurh the better Religion , and this cannot be de- cided by owing three Truths , wherof no Chriftian ever doubttd . Why therfore do you , when it is your particular Task to refolve Trotettants Faith , never meddle with the Queftion > But waft time in pro- ving that, which when it is proved, help's you no more then ail other Chriftians, who are contrary to you in Belief. Will you fe this clearly > 3. I freely grant , that thofe things in Scripture are True , They are Divine , the Books themfelves are of Divine Revelation. But next ask, What is this to Proteftant Religion ? Or, how, is the Refolution of Proteftants Faith advanced upon the owning Thefi Ve- rities > Nothing at all . And the Reafon is , for rhough all Chriftians acknowledge in general Scriptu- re to be moft Divine, yet they are at endles Difputes concerning the Dodrin of it. 2ioT*> , no Man, I hope , scripture in TwMfay , Becaufe he hath this Book in his hands , or owns it eur hand* as Gods Word , that therfore He rightly Believes the particular **%*m nccejjary Doclrin in it. For, were this true, known oftruT' Haeretiks would be as found in Faith as any* To faith. conclude then , 1 he Roman Catholick enquires not here after any general Proof of Scripture (He proved that vchat ca. before Proteftants were born ) But he urges for Moti- tkoi*cksre~y anj ratjonai Inducements, vvherby Proteftancy, as autre of n . .. . .' J tv 1 i J t Vrotejiants.Pretejtancy, is evidenced to have any reflemblance with the Primitive Doftrin of Cbrifi and his blefled Apoftles. Known D ifol. C.IX . In this matter of Mottoes. 9 1 Known Marks and Cognifances of Truth, mtft mani- feft this particular DocJrtn , And not a general talk, of the Divinity of Scripture, Tehith every Arian and Haretick ftould o°ton , were there 970 fitch thing as a Trotejfant in Being. 4. They hold on in this proofles drain , and tell us how Moral certainty is Affurance erough , that Chriftian Religion is infaiLbly true . Be it to, it is nothing to the purpofe ; For we enquire not in this place after the moral Evidence of Chriftian Religion in General , which , as it profefied by condemned Hare- vweflaney ticks , hath none ; But we ask for the moral Certain- »**vt We here ask, Why Proteftants believe as they do ? Why They adhere to their M x new pz DifcI.ClX.Of ProteStants Shifting new Faith , and preferr that Before all other Reli- gions ? Rational Motives Can be produced , or nor. We hitherto hear of none , And therfore fu- fpeft, yea, know very well , there are none for it, Trotejlants 6. They fay fourthly • Moral certainty yeilds us fuffi. altogether cient Jjfurance that Chrifiian Religion is infallibly true. 7aiuem* What Religion is infallibly true upon moral certainty. Is it Ariamfm or Tclagiamfrrii No . Is it the Ro- man Catholick Religion ? No . Is it Proteftancy? Yes. Then produce Rational Motives which may ground a moral certainty more of this Religion , then of any other Sed , and we acquiefce. But this you cannot do . jni prove 7. They fay fifthly. Where there is evident credibility in nothing for the matter propounded , there doth ar'ife upon Men an obltga- their Reii. tton t& belteye . Very good ! To believe, what. Gi- gi0n* ve us this evident Credibility of Proteftancy , and fo- mething is faid to the purpofe. Hereof yet we have no news , nor are like to have, and consequently Pro- tectants cannot be obliged to Believe as they do. Af- ter fome other Parergons, 8. They (ay fixthly. The lafi Refolution of Faith is not into the infallibility of the inftrument of conveyance 9 but in- to the infallibility of that Dottrin Tphich is therby conveyed to us. Shall we eternally have thefe Empty, words, ' and no Subftance ? You talk here of an infallibili* -- ty of Do&rin , and we would have the Riddle expoun- ded. Is it the Roman Catholick Doflrin? Or yours/3 , Or Arianifml What for Gods fake , avail's it to hear a noife of infallible Doftrin , and not to know, who rightly profefleth it? Your Doflrin therfore of Proteftancy is to be Evidenced , this is all we look for, 9, They Difc. I. C IX. In this Matter of Motives. 9^ 9. They fay feventhly. If the DocJrtn of Cbrijl be true and Divine , then all the promifs made ftere accomplished : NoTt> that Ttas one ofte greatest , that his Spirit should Lad his Apoftles into all Trut? . Very true. But what is this for Protectant Doitrin I We ask (till by what Signs and Marks of Truth, do thefe new Men prove their particular Faith to be Apoftolical > Here only lyes the Difficulty, never touched on by them. Ad- mit therfore at prefent, that they have in their hands the infallible Records of Gods Word , they are far of yet from proving their particular Doftrin of Prote- ftancy to be Scripture , or the infallible Word of God. This is the fole controverted Queftion between us . 10. They finally end. Thus much may fuffife in general concerning the Protejlant Tt>ay of refolding Faith. Very little, it feemSj ferves their turn, who hitherto never Lo^1^0^ medled with that Refolution ; But have loft their la- clripL bour, by a talking in General of Chriftian Religion , Reason in which no more concern's Proteftancy,. then it doth the Gemral' worft of Haereticks* And after this manner They hold on in another Chapter entituled. The fenfe of Fathers in this CoMro*perfy\ Where lujhn Martyr , hen ms , and Cle- Fathers th* mens of Alexandria are cited .. but to what purpofe God udiono only knows. Are they quoted to evidence any thing ^W*' like Proteftancy > No. • The whole Difcours of the- fe Learned Fathers look's another way , and never medles with this Novelty. Read them as they are, either in Thefe Authors ( with all the Advantages of their GlolTes on them ) or rather in the Originals, as I have don exactly , you will find them fo great Stran- gers to this new Haerefy, That they never thought ©fit* To tranferibe. again their whole Difcours, M. 3 would 94 Difcl. CIX. OfTrotettants Shuffling. would prove tedious, read luftins words in thefe Au- thors Part. I. Chap. 9. page z6q and add to them the refle&ion made page 265. what part ( fay they ) is there no^> of our Resolution of Faith which is not here in (that is in luftins Teftimony ) afferted> I anfwer , No- thing at all , as will appear by your own Queftions and Anfwers wholy irrelative to Proteftancy. Thus then you go on. umn m^ If yoti as& 'toty you belief then Were fuch men in the ke$ notbmg World o>s thefe Prophets wherof Iuftin fpeaks . Anfwer. fir trote- jjfe continuance of their Books and common Fame Efficiently attesl it. Be is fo , what is this to proteftancy ? Can any one probably inferr , Becaufe He believes there were fuch men in the world as Prophet , Apo/lles, Weak in* or ^uttgeUfit , Therfore he hath the true Do&rin of fcremes, thefe Prophets ? No. For both Arians and Pela- gians yeild Aflent to that general Truth , and fo do Ca- tholicks alfo ,• are all Thefe right in Faith upon that Account precifely ? Toyes . No more then are Proteftants . 3. Jf you as^fay you , Why you Belieye them to be true Prophets ? Anfw. The excellency of their Docjlrin joyned With the fulfilling of Prophecies , and Working CMiracles > abundantly prove it. Prove what for Gods fake ? No more but this, that thofe Prophets taught excellent Do&rin , and wrought Miracles; Doth it therfore follow that Proteftants, Arians, and other Hacreticks teach fuch Doftrin , or work Mira- cles ? No. Herein lyes the Difficulty , not fo Mr cu. much as glanced at , or touched on . And thus mtnsAUx. they run on to no purpofe for many pages 5 with Teftimonies drawn out of lrenaus , and Clemens Alexan- dnnmf which no more relate to Proteftancy then thofe Difc.I. CIX. In this Matter ofMotftts. 95 thofe firft Words of Genefis do : In the beginning God created Heaven and Earth. Nay more. Clemens cited by thefe Authors, fage 173. exprefly confutes our f"testTem. Sectaries, whilll he requires two things neceflfary to attain to the true knowledge 01 true Faith in cfoift, Zflwc , and iv^nrts : the Enquiry and Difcovery of it. The Enquiry is an imfulje of the mind (fay thefe men ) for finding Truth out, by Signs which are proper to it . Difcovery , it the End and Refl of this Enquiry , Which lyes in the comprehension of the things , which is pro- perly knowledge. A mo ft true and admirable Expref- fion . Clemens according to thefe Authors, proceds thus. NoW the Signs hy which Truth is Diftovered , we either Precedent , Concomitant , ot Subfequent . The pre- cedent Signs, wherby We dfcoyer Chrift to he the Son of God, are the Prophecies declaring his coming. The Con- comitant > Were the Testimonies concerning his Birth. The {ubfecjuent Signs, are thofe Miracles Which were published and manifejlly isheWed to the World after his K^dfcenfion , &c. Mod true and Divine Doftrin , which is entirely for the Roman Catholick Religion , and againft Prote- ftants. Why > We enquire after the precedent Signs , wherby their new Religion is difcovered ? We ask for fubfequent Signs, which were publick- Jy known to the world foon after the broaching of their new Faith, and yet cannot; hear of any fliew- ed by thefe new men in confirmation of their Faith. Finally , we urge for Miracles and other Prudential Motives Evidencing Proteftant Religion in the en- fuing Chapter (but find none.) Read it, and give an impartial judgement. CHAR $6 Difc. I. C. X. Sectaries baYe n6 Motives CHAP. X. Trot eft ants have no rational Motives, rvherbj their new Faith is evidenced to he Jo much at probable. i. TO prove the Aflertion , we here friendly de- mand , Whether, when Scripture, Fathers, and the bed Authority of former ages Aflert , That the Marks and Cognifances of Gods revealed Truth, are as follow. Antiquity , A Lawful mijfton , Vmty ^ Ef- ficacy of Doclrin , Vniyerjality , Miracles , Sncceffton of Bi- shop , Santlity , yes , and the very name of Catholth^ &c. My demand, I fay, is whether our new Men will own thefe old Signs as lawful and approved Mani- festations of Truth, or difown them ? If this la- ter ; They are Compelled to fliew them unfit or forceles Arguments for the evidencing of Truth, and confequently are obliged to produce others more clear and perfwafive for their fuppofed true Reli- gion , which is impoflible . On the other fide , if they fliall pleafe to own them as lawful Cognifances of Truth , My Task is to prove , That they have neither the complexum of all thefe Motives together; nor, fo much as one of them in particular for Fro- teftancy. Pntejiants x# Antiquity (granted to Popery , for at leaft a wam An- thoUfand years and upward ) Proteftants have nor. ■**■ ' Thofe DifcJ. C.X% To profy their Faith. 9? Thofe two Brethren of Iniquity Luther and Calvin, firft brought this Religion forth, as is evident by all known Hiftory. Before their dayes , no man can fiievv me , io much as one Town , Village , or Houiliold of Proteftants. 3. Lawful Million (mod jilftly and without dif« auM pute challeng'd by Catholick Doftors ) Thefe two wfumii wretched men had not, (no more have their fol- »mmz* lowers ) Enquire after it, you will find them all un- lent Preachers , contrary to the Apoftles Doftrin Rom.io, Hom> fba/I They preach unles they he fents They never had licence to talk as they did > But by their own Will and unknown Spine , which as well au- thorized lames Nailer to be Chrift , as them to be law- ful a#id Apoftolical Preachers. Say, I befeech you, when the blefted Apoftles firft taught the Do- drin of Chriji lefus , and by their preaching turn'd Idolatry out of the World , Did Tney only Word it, chrifl «■* or, without Commiffion talk of a new Gofpel ?^J^" No* As my Father fent me, faith our Saviour. ftnt,A»d loan. xo. fo 1 fend you; And They evidenced theit sh'*"d Calling to the great Work they had in hand, by ^ ''" clear and undoubted Miracles, wnich proved forcible perfwafive Arguments , and ftrongly wrought upon the moll: obdurate Harts . Yer , fifteen hundred years after , our Novellifts appear , broach a new Gofpel, aym at no les a matter then to pull down the Ido- latrous Babel of Popery, (fo they ftile our Ancient Church) and we muft take their Word for all They fay , though they neither fhew Letter-miflive, or Pa- tents to warrant their Do&rin, no, nor one mira- cle to confirm it. So deftitute they are both of N ordi- «^8 Dffc.LC.X SeSlaries bal?e no Motives ordinary and extraordinary Miffion. Some will fay. Though they preach without Million, they preach the Dudrin delivered in Scripture, and the Ancient MiraeJes ( without need of new ones ) were wrought Settles to confirm Scripture-do&rin , which is now purely Vtiimt raught in the Reformed Churches , and not in the mof. Church of Rome. Thus rnofl: pittifully M\ Poole fag. 19^. where you fe firft , an unlearned begging the Queftion . 1. Every Arian licenced to affert for himfelf, what M\ Poole too fimply affumes here without Proof. 3. This is molt falfs Do&rin, For no man yet ever lawfully preached true Chri- stian Do&rin (no not Chrift himfelf) without a Mif- fion : Stent mijit me Pater &c. For , when He Blef- fed Lord, firft eftabliflied the Doftrin of Chf-iftiani- ty contrary both to leaves and Infidels , He did it not by Words only without Commiilion , nor proved the Verity of his Gofpel by the Ancient and long Jince :>as't Miracles wrought amongft the J ewes , as the- e men do their Doclrin by the Primitive Miracles of Chriftianity ( which belong not to them, ) But He $ is ev^encec^ ft p and confirmed it , by new manifeft tbUgedt* Miracles, vifeble Signs and Wonders. And thus our show un- Proteftants fhould have don, when they firft publi- t^ksand^d their new unheard of learning , and by it at- $£ns,. tempted to throw down that long ftanding Church when they 0f Popery. Undoubted Miracles , unqueftioned £^A,/# Signs of Truth fhould , as we read of the primitive Apoftles Marl^ 16. xo. Have followed them alfo. But in lieu of thefe what have you ? Unwarran- ted talk, meer proofles Words of uncommijjioned men. Miraculous Words Meed , if able to fubvert an Ancient Church, Fe Difc. I. C. X. To pvolte their Faith 9p Church , to pull doton Popery , and build up ProteHancy. 4. Unity in Do&rin ( mod known and remarkable fJ^^ in the Catholick Church) thev have none, witnes thofe innumerable Sefts which now fwarm amongft them, and This new Faith hath produced of Armi- mans , Z^inglians , Brolonifis , Independents &c. And now our late Quakers are fprouted out of it , the laft fpring , perhaps , ( though no. body knows) of this Reformed Gofpel. I need not to fay much on this point. A ferious thought caft upon the different procedure of a Catholick: and Proteftant > will lay Th B/ . open the great Bleffing of Vnity in the one , and (mg»- a fiand no where , And this often fliifting hath un-^*7*'* don them. Once the 39. articles were points of Faith and Religion, now they are no more fo. On- ce the Pope was i^fntichrijl , now with many Pro- N 2 teftants ioo Difc.LC.X. SeRaries babe no Motbct teftants he is the firft Patriarch. Once he was a horned Beaft, now more then one of our New men take of his Homes, and make him Rational. On- ce Rome was the Whore of Bahilon,no\v with mod, it is purer, yes, and Orthodox in fundamentals. On- ce our Biihops were all Idolaters , unlawful Paftors-, now They are fo Legitimate , that our new men mufl either derive their Ordination from them , or have none at all . And thus unfteedily they dance up and down, fay and unfay , 7^>jeay now no, as the Fancy takes them , And they muft do fo , until they have a firmer ground of Vnity to fet footing on. ur.VooUt 5, M%PocU page 201. to impugn the Vnity of the ^1,2 Church cell's us .That both Pagans and Devils had veviis it j yet, in the very next page complains much of the *g*i»ftt want of Vnity in his Proiejiant Brethren. Methinks htpertt twreafonably enough , For if Vnity be fo proper to Pa- nent, g»*; lucky Comlatants. Popery holds dill its pofture, maugre their weak attempts againft it; And I never ^hMone. yet heard of good don upon Arians, or other Ancient eupd Hxreticks by thefe mens labour. Now touching the nt^Miw Converfion of Infidels, Strangers to chnfl , the Af-^T^ N 3 fertion^w, ... lot Difc.I. CX. SeBdrki halve no Motives fertion of Thomas' Bofm Tom. I. Be [ignis EccUfia lib. 6* cap.}. Signo 20. is Remarkable, y?%. That one Blef- fed man of our age, S*.Francis XMeriw, reduced more to the Catholick Faith in the fpace of eleven years only , Then all the Proteftants in the world ( add to them what gther Sc&aries foever ) have gained of Infidels to their Haerefies , fince the beginning of Chriftianity. My God! Had the Blefled Apoftles been as flow in rooting out Idolaty , as our late Matters yet are lazy about Co noble a Work , the dumb Idols of the Gentils would have preached agfinft them , and HI ill flood unlliaken. But, God gave Thefe firft powerful Preachers and their Ca- • tholick Followers , a vigorous Spirit , the Efficacy of DoElrin , an illuftrious Character or mark of Truth, which to this day the Church wear's , and mani- fefteth to the world . Se&aries never had it. ie inn 7* ^ou w^^ffc chey have yet gained many ro their /eUreduced Proteftant ProFeifioi?.v What Hiftory relates them, by Yrote- \ befeech you , If wtrlfoeak of reduced Jnfidds > If fimts. we mention others wht3fe Progenitors, at leaft, were Catholicks, you may boldly fay it. They, with the help of Secular power , have perverted many a poor Soul by preaching Liberty , which corrupted nature as eafily follows as a (lone fall's dl^nward. Faith only jujlifies* Good To or ks are of no value\ Faffing is fuperjlition . Mortification is Popery. The ufe tof Een- nace is needles. And yet worfe , might modefty fpeak it , if the Wife Tvill not &c. Tenents , more fit for Devils, then Dodors to preach i yet Chriflians ha- Howmr*-yc heard fuch Libertirvs talk. &JrtfJT 8- May * uPon this occafion % my Thought tower i* ton- - Difc. I.CX. To pro^e their Faith. 103 concerning thofe poor fouls drawn from us to Prote- ftanifm , (ince the unhappy bteach began in 'England? I conceive it thus. A certain indifferent caxeks Acartles Humor of having this or that Religion, Any or no- ^llff m ( Hserefy firft brought it in , and it tend's to by Htrtfy% Atheifm ) got them fome company. Home bred H°™*bud Education , that fees little abroad (As it muft needs Ed"catton- happen to thtm that live in an Ileland ) has brought ps„hi in more. The Penal Lawes , and the fear of Ico- L*»". fmg. a temporal Fortune , has forc'd in very many. limr«n" Ignorance, peeviinly perverie in borne, and deplo fome, deplo- rable in Others , greatly encreafed the number, ^atiem But, above all that Liberty, now mentioned, to Do, ^r;'^w and Bdieve'Vhat every man lifteth ( a Sauce that fu- au Liberty tes beft with unfetled Stomacks , we may call it Ln- wrta/ed* thers Ratsbain ) hath allured innumerable. In one^'www~ of thefe ClalTes, you will find them, except per- haps fome of the more Learned ( whofe consciences I touch not) God only knows , what Grypes they feel, for mifleading others, and wronging Themfelves. But, what will ye? 'Tis Intereft, Their fat Be- nefices , that timely follow the low fortune they we- re born ro, hold's them fad. It muft be a powerful Grace, that can fo much as ftirr them , much more that can draw them from their Hxrefy. 9. Set thefe Clajjes affide , the Churches in En- gland would, I think, be very Empty of company. s*» of the* There are few or none among the Abler fort , that more"ble 1 • 1 -i /> 1 . r**e m love nre much in love with Protejtancy upon the account of witbPrcte- .Religion . Yet more. We find by experience, ft*»gy. that when thofe Firft fort of men now named have fortag feeling of God , and Eternity , when the Second ftep io4 Qlk.lCX.Seftaries batenoMotfoes ftep out of England, and fe the Pra&ife of Catholick Religion in neighbouring Countries: When the Third, dare loos a little mammon for God : When the Fourth " Hot Spirits are fomewhat cooled, And the poor Be- guiled get open their eyes : When the Fifth have don with Youth and Liberty (of the Sixth I fay nothing but , God help them. ) Experience I fay learn's us, That all of them draw neerer to Catholick Religion, at fo far atleaft, as to judge well and Honorably of k, then death and we fe not a few turn good old Papifts , when bewpeCa-thzy come to dye (men deal then mod ferioufly) ^ww'iont Though I never yet heard of any , that had lived Ca- tZntobe tholick , defert his Faith upon Scruple, as not being Vrottflanti jn a right Belief, or dye a Trotetfant. VroteBa*' IO- Univerfality , which the very name of Cathlkk^ havtw implyes, and the Apoflles Creed allows of, is no miverfr- ^ark^oi Proteftant Religion. If we relate to time, of'rime, Not one Age, ever fince Ckrift came into the world, can produce fo much as one (lender Family of Prote- ftants before Luther. This point hath been often Nor viace. prefs*t ? but never yet had Anfwer. For place, it is as meanly poor; For take this Religion in the grea- teft Latitude , as it is made up of all thofe jarring and diffenting People, that go under the notion of the Reformed Churches, it only creep's up and down in fome few Corners of our Northren world , without Luflre or Glory. And if we fpeak more ftri&ly of : Proteftants in England (I mean the 39. articl'd men) I believe a good large Village would hold mod of them . Mr. ?ook hath no good liking to the long Du- ration and Amplitude of Religion , and therfore dif- dainfully kik's at both with his Pagan-injlance. Is it not Difc.I. CX.Toproyt their Faith* 10J not pittiful to mifpend time on fuch intolerable Tri- fles .> I'll do fo no more , And therfore am with good Reafon forced to wave raoft of CMt.PqqIs 2Vo- ohjettions. II. To the Amplitude of Catholick Religion, we may here well anex the continued Succeffion of Bifhops, the Sandity, and Purity of our Catholick ^f/5 Do&rin; both are marks of Truth and evident in fmcejfton the Roman Church. Proteftants can lay no claim ofwjko?*. to fucceflion , and therfore I challenge them as Ter- sullian did the Ancient Haereticks T>e prafcript. Cap.^z. Edant Origines Ecclejiarum Jiiarum , eVolvant ordinem Epifco- porum fuorum. Let them Ihow us the Origin of their Churches, and declare the order of their Bifhops* Let them fay who they were f Where they li- ved * Who knew them ? What good they did in the Church I Suttinete me , «sr ego loquar. Have ^°Jtr^' paaience, and '111 tell you. They ha^d not fo much fh0p or v*. as one Bifliop , one Paftor , one Doctor , or one Pxoa*rf*rkf"* cher, before the dayes of unfortunate Luther, vvheras, Lt4thcr* the Catholick Church demonftratively gives a Cata- logue of her fucceeding Popes , and Bifliops, from Bleffed S'.Feter , to this prefent Pope who now fitt's in that Chair . And if you will know of what ac- count this perpetuated Succeffion of Paftors is, read S^Aujiin Torrid, contra Epijlolam fundam. cap. 4. In Ca- Acontim tholita Ecekfia tenet me (faith the Saint ) ah ipfa Sede nutdfuc- Fetri t^poftoli^ cut pafcendas oves fuas pofi refurrettionem ce$on °f Dominus tommendavit > ufque ad prafentem Epifcopatum , fuc- f£J!i. • " cejjio Sacerdotum. The continued Succeffion ofPriefts until now \ from the feat of S*. Peter the Apoftle, to whom our Lord after his Refurre&ioa commended O his L fnrity cf Dcftrin Saintly E/ fefts folio w Holy Do- Brin, 10 6 Difc.1. C.X. Sttfarks hftie no Matties his Flock to be fed , holds me in the Catholick Church. And afterward. No Donatijl can flievw fuch a Succeflion, no more, fay I, can any Prote- ftant. Se more in his Book De militate credendi c.17. at thofe words: Dubitamtu nos ejus Ecclefia gremio cande* re &c. 11. San&ity and Purity of Do&rin (which neither Infidel , nor Se&ary could ever yet cavil at, But upon the account that there is too much of it in the Catholick Church ) is pittifully wanting ta Prote- ftants. I prove it. As the Tree is known by its Fruit , fo Holy Doftrin is bed known by the Holy li- fe of thofe who profefs it , and the Saintly effe&s that follow it. If we might infift on the firft, tell me, where have our Proteft3nts Their holy Hilarious , their retired Pauls and Anwmes, their Gregortes , thsir Bernards, their Malachies > Where have they Apoftles Like St.Aujiin of England? Biftiops of fuch Aufterityas a \ SK Charles Borom Where are their undefatigable Miflioners , fent fos Converfions to the remoteft parts of the world with a BlelXed S1 .Xaverius ? Where are their Mortified Re- ligious, their Solitary Monks, their Tencfer Virgins Hiut up in Cloyfters without hope of enioying the world, or Friends anymore? Sirch Hoi hies mani- feft's it felf in the Catholick Church ; Proreftants have nothing like ic, and yer thofe two impure Founders of the new Gofpel, Luther andCahin, bad far Les of Sanftity. Let every Confcience {peak its own ApataUti, Thought , and fay plainly, whether thefe Two now named , were Patterns of Vereue like a Renowned Sanctity mawfetf Difc. I. C. X. To pro^e their Faith. 1 07 &.Bcnet, a Glorious SKDommic^ an Humble S\frarx\s, a Prudent S'Jgnattus , who endeavored ( not to amend the Church ever found in Doftrin ) But only to bet- ter the world by their fnceflant labours, by their Cha« citable works , and Blefled example. Heaven now crowns thefe Saints with Glory, £nd earth yet cele- brates their Memory with immortal Praife, whilft Lu- ther and Calvin lye buried in Oblivion , only thought on for founding a Gofpel ufon Liberty, which makes all the Followers of it Liberties , and iherfore we muft acknowledge that Chriftianity hath been much wors Pntejtany for their once being cbrijiians. More Atheiftical Prin- rumi Mi ciples have been fetled in mens Harts , fince thefe two new Preachers came amcngft us , more Phantaftick Opinions vented , more Kingdoms undon , more Com- mon-wealths ruined , more innocent blood ihed , after this Tragical Gofpel got footing , than before were heard of for a thoufand years together in time of Po- pery. And 13. Here we may briefly touch fomething on tho- Sai# fe fad Effefts, which have followed Pxoteftant Doftrin, %lj^9 And (fetting Paffion afide) friendly ask of any Impar- tial man, what good hath this new Religion don in the world t What amendment hath it made in Life and Manners ? What Converfions hath it wrought amongft Heathens and Infidels ? What Sanftity hath it yet Ihewed us in the Profeflbrs of it > What Churches hath it built ? What Hofpitals hath it erefted? What Univerfnies hath it founded , either comparable to our Ancient or modern Catholicks ? All runn's on in a Contrary ftrain. Ruins, gaftly ruins follow thefe men where ever they go, to the O 2 Hot- Seilaria To8 Difc .1 C.X. Seclwks halve no Motfoes Horror of thofe who have Eyes to fe, and Harts tor deplore the fad Spe&acles yet left of their impious Sacriledge , and worfe then Barbarous Reformation, >/£ Otour Churches defaced , of our Cloyfters de- moliflied , of our Altars and Monuments pulled down ( whilft yet they live on our Revenues) as if the very Memory of Chrtsi and the Temples , where once he was Worfliiped , were grown abominable to thefe mk Spirits. And why all this Confufion for a neto nothing* hn fttty. O Strange and Prodigious Spirit ! what fliall I fay of thee > Thy Doings are only to undo, thy Build- ing to deftroy , thy Piety is to prophane San&ified Places . Thy Lighr is to bring in Horror and Dark- nes , thy Turning from Chrifl and his Church , hath Turned Kings out of their Thrones , Biftops out of their Sees > Religious out of their Cells, Nobles out of their Eftates, Senfe out of Scripture, Charity out of the World ? and Men out of their wits. This Turning from Chrifl and his Church , hath Turned Vni- ty into Schifm, Peace into War , Religion into Policy, Ver- tue into Hypocrify, Learning into Ignorance . Such are the known Effe&s of this late Dodrin, all upon Re- cord , referved to the final Sentence of our moft im- partial Judge in the Vale of lofaphat , where it will appear, whether I have wronged thefe men in draw- ing up this dreadfull Charge againft them, or They themfelves for fuch Impieties done before God and his Angels. flj&im. 14. Our Sectaries are wont to objeft againft the Churches San&ity , the Scandals , Pride and Luxury of Wicked men in it. S*.Auft$n long fince anfwered the Cavil. Araongft good Corne have Cockle , >ith Rebellion. Cfnfujion. Difc.I. C.X. To prcfte their Faith >W9f "bleat you have Chaff mingled , in aflorifliing Kingdom you find Trayton , amongft marryed women ( it is S'.Aufiim inftance ) fome you may have lesi Loyal . Are ther- fore all to be blamed upon the Account of fome > Tis open Unjuftice, Se S'.^Auftm in his fifth Book AUn9t againft Faufltps cap. ultimo^ and his 137. Epiftle . Blef- hUmabU fed be Almighty God (though the guilt of Sin \ycsHPonthe heavily on many) yet great SanAity is ftill eminent £^T in the Church amongft all Sorts of people , whether, Princes t Prelaets, Paflors , Religious ;, Seculars, Rich , or Poor. Great Converfions we fe dayly , not only made from Haerefy to Faith, but alfo from Vice to Vercue, from a loofer fenfual Life to great Aufterity. The Rich often voluntarily become Poory The Proud Humble t the Avaricious Liberal , the Riotous Frugal, the Impatient Mee1^t the Secular Religious , and quit all they have in this tumultuous World to ferve God in a quiet Cell.. Such changes from Worfe to Better are zvUm undeniably evident in the Catholick Church , which changes yet Erafmus his acute Eye could never fe amongft omfro£"£f* New men , Prefer mihi ( faith He in his Epiftle to Vul- turius Neoconws ) quern iftud Euangelium ex commefjatore fe- brium &c. Give me the Man , whom this Gofpel of a Gurmandizer hath made Sober, of Fierce and cruel hath made Tradable , of an Extortioner Liberal , of a filthy Speaker fair fpoken , and of an unchaft liver fha- mefaft , And I will Ihew you many , who are grown Wors , then they were before1* Thus Erafmus. 15. Miracles, the moft glorious marks of Truth, MirM^ manifefted in our Saviour hbn 15. 24. wrought by histh*mo# Apoftles Mark 1 6. 17, and amply promifed to thofe siorious who Belkvein cbriji > hkn 14. 12. The Roman Catho^;.* / O 3 lick 5^4 <* to Dili. I. G X. SeSimes baTie )io Mttfocs lick Church hath from Age to Age undeniably Evi- denced ( and ftie oniy ) if we fpeak of dear and undoubt- ed Miracles ; I mean of fuch as anfwer in Analogy and Proportion to our Saviours works. The Blind le, the Lame Tedk , The Lepers are cleanfed , the Deaf bear , the Dead rife &c. Thefe axe the Churches Miracles. Never had our Procefiants , or other Hacreticks any like them. Read Qwxiwi and Bellarrnin of Martin Lutbtrs and Calvins famous Miracles* The itory is noto- rioufly known- I wave if. Qf **cie*i 16. Of Ancient Miracles, fe Irentus adverfi Htret. Miracles.*. libtz%cap.$ j. S\Amhrof%Serm.()i. S\AuHin lib.x%.de Chit* iaf. 8. Theodaret in his 8. Books de curan. Grtc. Affett of Modern S*Mier em againft Vigilantius \ Ruffinus , ^Gregory with uirncits, others « And for the more Modern , be pleafed on- ly to read lujlus Lipfius (a man of Credit and Reputa- tion ) in his 3. Tome , Antwerp print anna 1637. towards the end with thefe Titles m ytrgo Hallenfis, Dba Stchemienfis . It is but time raft away to fay more on this Subjed, moft largely handled by our Writers, who produce their Proofs , anfwer to all contrary Ca- vils , and cite their Authors of unquejhoned ^Authority ^ Both for pafs't and prefent Miracles. 17. And here , becaufe we mention Cavils , read firft , I befeech you, thofe Sacred "Words of our Saviour lohn 14. I a. Amen, ^Amen9 1 [ay untoyou, he that Believes in me, the Mfl% that I do , shalll he do alfo% CavWs of and greater ivorh then thofi shall he do &c. Next he plea- seaarits jy co fay ^^her j,e Cavils not , that Afferts thefe great Works and Wonders to have ceafed after the ti- me of ChriH and his Apoftles. when not only approved Hiftory relates th&ai , but Reafoa alfo pleads ftrongty for *g*i*fh Mtwlts. Difc. I. ft X. To finite Mr FMi ill for their Continuance in enfuing Ages. For, had thefe Glorious marks of Troth failed in the Church as our Proteftants would have it (Becaufe they have none )&%*«: Chriftian Faith ere this day (believe it) would have f^w- grown cold in the Harts of thoufands and thoufands. ggjlf1 Therfote to prevent Incredulity , the Wife Providence of God, rowfeththem up, and quickens their Belief ^^L with thefe forcible Incitements , which neither Infidels y^, \ can Deny, nor Haereticks OVn. Again. Miracles were necelTary in the Beginning of the Church to de- monftrate the Verity of Chriftian Religion agamft I ewes and Infidels j But there is the like Neceffity of them ftill for thefe mens Converfion ; AH are not yet Reclaimed , nor will Believe Scripture without farther Evidence. 1 8. The Cavils of Seftaries againft Miracles arc 0^*0;** briefly reduced to thefe Heads. Some fay They are ffWWfi done by the help of the Devil • Firft, how Know they that? %. Such was the cours and untrue Laiv- guage of the Iewes againft chtfi , Luk^ 11. V. 15. He call out Devils, and Devils help'c him. 3. Why are not fuch Miracles wrought by Arsons or other Hx- reticks, who furely come neerer Devillifh Dodrin then Catholicks? They objeft again . We know not by Infallible and Certain Fa/th, that thefe Miracles, recounted in hiftory, were done, I artfwer, No mo- re did the Primitive Chriftians, who beheld Chrifis Mi- racles, know them by T either in \Z°U2' PoT»er, GreAtwes , Continuance , fplendor , or Majcfiy. The- HAretickt fe as far go beyond the other in Worth and Excel len- no\!cm\*? cy , as the rayfing of a dead man to life furpaffes the 'L/*^//£* taking a little water in a fieve, or cutting of a whet church. ftone afunder with a Rafor ; all fkight work fefible by Conjurers and the Devils help, and mucfi of that nature, of thofe Egyptian wonders done before CMoy- fes. Whence it is that Bleffed &*. <^4ufitn little efteem'd the Donatifts Miracles, and thofe of other Haeteticks. Aut falluntur , aut fallunt , faith the Saint, they either are deceived , or deceive . Se him in his Horn. 13* in loannem, and more de Chitat.lib. 10, c. \6. and in his Book de Vtilit. cred. c. 16. Concerning the name of Catholick which Proteftants never had, nor Thofe they Nick name Tafitts (a word newly coyned with their Gofpel ) ever yet loft, Read S*. 4uftin contra £- pi ft. fondam. cap. 4. and de mi lie cred* cap. 7. chrjfiianm mihi nomen eft (faid the Ancient Pdciantu( Catholicm co- gnomen , Hind me nuncupat , ijiud oflendit. Chriftian is my Name, and Catholick my Surname, that in- deed names me, but this declares what I am, And in both thefe we Catholicks Glory. ■ CHA- m 4 Dif cJ.C. XL Argument i dgmjl Se claries CHAP. XL Arguments drawn from Reafon again ft Froteftants , upon the confideration of Thefe declared Motives. *• \ir E have feen already both the Wcaknes and Si 2"' ™ Strength, the Obfcurity and Glory of two differeni different Churches, Proteftant and Catholick. The firft pittifully Naked , The other richly Adorned with fuel: Noble Marias of Truth, as force Reafon to give a final Sentence, and fay, If Religion be in the world, it muft be found amongft thofe Chriftians who de~ xnonftrate it Credible with moft urgent and convin- cing Motives ♦ But this Catholick Religion only doc's, and not Proteftancy : For Proteftants (I Aflert it boldly J have not fo much as one Rational Motive ( much les the comfiexum of all now related ) that works upon Prudence, and ( Antecedently to their new Faith ) makes them Believe as they do . ' If They have any fuch, my earneft petition is to hear of Them, or fe them clearly layd forth to the Reafon of other men $ or, if They fail in this (as of neceflity they muft) let them Speak the plain Truth, Vi^ That all They Write and Preach , is lofi labor , Hrhilft they go about to drop Rational men to a Religion , for which there is no Reafon. And x< Here I anfwer to the trivial Talk of Proteftants ( pretending to follow Reafon m all they Believe ) and once Difcl. CX I, S)r^n from tbtfe Mothes* i l J ©nee more Aflert . They have nothing like a /hadow ffHt^mi of Reafon previous to their Faith, either for their new*«ww Religion in General , or any particular Tenent in it. shad°» 9f To prove my Aflertion , We muft diftinguifli be- ^TSp tween the prudent Inducements that draw one to Be- RtHgim. lieve , and the Elicit Aft jf Faith it /elf. Thefe Indu- cement Precede Faith, and are properly the Obje Silence will prove the beft An- fwer, They can Shew no Motive at all. Perhaps we may hear them fay , They rejeft the Ancient Church becaufe of its Errors, and Novelties. If fot They firft lamentably beg thequeftion, and Suppofe that, which is yet to be Proved. 2. They anlwer not to the Difficulty, For grant (which is utterly fal- P % fe A]>oor Comfort, to learn that my Religion (S not good unies seti si- ll 6 DifcI.CXL sirguntentsagainH Sectaries fe ) that the Church hath erred , wc ask not here for Arguments to Refute thofe Errors, But inquire after Rational and perfwafive Motives , vvherby Truth is proved to Hand on the Proteftant fide > A poor Comfort, God know's, it is for me, To hear from a Protejlan! , $dt my Religion is not Right , utile* upon Weighty Reafons He convince me that his Pi better % For, fay I, if the old Religion he naught , This new one may he Worfe , and more erroneous . Se&aries are therfore oblig'd to rhs prove bring in palpable Evidences , whecby their Religion fejewr. *s pofaively demonftrated Credible and only the Bed, which A ill never be done. Recour/e to 4* 'f Yet » to anfwer the Difficulty , They take ppft Scripture to Scripture for Proof of their Religion , They are out clj"\Lmt ofche way, and at the Conclufion before they put \ulty. r^e P^emifes. For in this place we make no inquiry after their formal att of Faith , nor the immediate Ob- Vrotetiants jecfl therof , (we know well their Anfwer) But only MotiZ to As^ f°r l^e Rational Motive ( perceptible by all ) that believe preced's Faith , and Prudently obligeth them to belie- comrary to ye ■ contrary both to the Ancient Church and their own tlfonZt honeft Quakers; And this (if the Reply be pertinent) ryuthe muft be evidenced , Before they talk of a new 6H**kers. pajth grounded on Scripture. Hid the Primitive Chriftians, when they left of Judiifm and Belei^ ved Chri[l , been Ask't, Why they received Chritts Dodhin , and preferred thit before their old Religion, They would have anfwered : T->e bltnd fe, the lame Walk , the dead ari/e &c. We behold ftrange Wonders With our eyes , which powerfully WorJ^ upon Reafon , and cannot hut proceed from God. When therfore our Proteftants de- fer ted the Ancient Church f apd taught a new Faith con- Difc.L CXI. fDrttonfrom thefe Uotbesl I if contrary to it, certainly fome vifible Apparent won-/„,0x£ der, fome perfwafive Sign of Truth fliould have uflie- Ugimmufi red'i: in , and founded the Trumpet before thefe new ^Jf" Preachers. All , convinced by Reafon , ihould ha- *niweigh- ve cry'd out, Here {$ Antiquity , here is Vnity in Dottrin, V i**«*z here Toe fe the Pedigree of our Ancient Church Sbert d forth. mmh ?icfo, and not before , our Eyes behold moft glorious and un- do nhed Miracles, God certainly fpeal^s by thje nelxr men &c. But when we look about us , and find nothing to countenance this unknown Faith ( which like a Stran- ger came amongft us ) when we hear a Novelty preached without either Sign, Motive, or Inducement to ma- ke it Credible. When we fe a new Religion brought ^or4S m\^ in by uncom niffio ied men upon their bare parole , and *«*», unproved Fancies only : what can we think, But that both Arians , and Pelagians ( yea > and all condemned H&retic\s ) have evidenced as ftrongly their old Errors, by a verbal venting of them , as Proteftants do now their new Gofpel? For befide Words you have nothing to Warrant it. 5. Perhaps they will fay, They are a part of Chri- oU Moti* ftianity, and Therfore the old Motives belong to them.I^'p^* I anfwer. No more then to Arians or Pelagnns , who ftants then went as well under the name of Chnftians as Prote-forAfi**u ftants do . O , But their "Religion now profeflTed is the Faith of the Primitive Church. I dare fwear it , the Arians , and our modern Quakers will yet fay as boldly They believe exadly the very Doftrin A, cltmi^ which pure Scripture Teaches , But there is xurp* tiyeFauht l*iy<» , a vaft diftance between faying and proving »* recti- what is faid , by a Rational fatisfa&ory and received ™dPri^ Principle, I fay therfore, their bare Auction of hold- c,p ■■ P 3 *»& 1*. * 1 8 Difc. I.C.X I. Arguments dgtinjl SeHaries ing the Primitive Faith (which we utterly deny) is fo far from being either a probable or convincing Prin- j ciple for this Religion , That it mud be either further proved by Rational grounds, or,itiswholy Forceles and /*//'* to Toothing. hJs'^Pro ^ They fay again : They have three evident Prin- *uflmtt° ctfles t0 ground their new Faith on* Firft, What God *nfwered. f peak's is true . %% Gods pure and uncormpted Word is in their hands. 3. They l{noH> Tohat God fpeak^s in this Word. I anfwer, the firft Principle is certain. The fecond more then doubtful . The third, on which all Relies, and toucheth more upon their Faith f then on any Rational Antecedent Motive evidencing it, is demonftra- tivcly improbable 1 For, upon no Proof, upon no re- ceived Principle , By the light of no Rational Motive, can thefe men fo much as meanly fliow, That They are better at knowing what Cod fpeak's. in Scripture, then a whoje ample learned Church , or, then Their own Anceftors both knew of old and believed for a thoufand years together ♦ Thefe men long fince de- ceased, held ( and upon Scripture well underftood ) as firmly the Real Prefence of Chrifis Sacred Body in the Eucharifi, as a Trinity of Perlons in one Divine zroteflAnts Effence > The firft , Proteftants now Rejeft , the Mmi** other they Admit, And why. Upon what Convi- fea[Hte. ftion , upon what Rational Motive do they take and leave , affert and deny as they lift ? Prefs this and other like particulars home , inftead of Reafon or ra- tional Proofs , you fhall have Their own reeling fenti- $ftf*k*$ mnt* g*ven *n ^or Anfwer. And thus, forfooth , it iJgm' *s- They read Scripture, and verily it feem's to $r»ofi them, It ought to be interpreted as they will have Difc. IX. XI. and you will find Pro- teftancy reduced to Fancy only. CHAP. XII. ! Proteftants, for want of rational Mo* ti?ves cannot concert an Infidel to Chrifiian Faith, I T hath often occurred to me : If by a fuppofed thyhn$ impoflibility ( Schoolmen fometimes Argue fo, JJj5£ and profitably ) Popifh Religion were utterly extin-aH^k^ guilhed , or, the Proofs thereof quite rafed out of all mens Memory ; yet, that Proteftants with all they can in juftice lay claim to touching Religion, ihould ftill ftand in the world as now They do . This Thought, I fay , hath more then once feized on me , Vi%. How mean, how poor, how deftitute and naked a Thing Proteftancy would appear to be in the Eyes of either lew , or learned Heathen Philofopher ; For ail it hath ( if yet it have fo much ) is a borrowed Bible from others, But no Miracles t noundobted Marks of Truth , no certain Tradition , no Snccejpon of Ancient Biiliops, no Faftors , no DoElors , In fine , no Rational Motives ( if this Suppofition ftand ) can inable thefe new Owners of the Bible 3 to fay with Affurance : This ho^is Cods own Wird, / « *20 Difc.T. C.X I T. Trotettantsfor Temt of Motives Word, and in This or tins Scnfe God f peaks by it. 2, To clear the matter further , Imagin , That a MdTtt learned Philofopher (no Chriftian ) curious ro learn ^'»efri w^at Chriftian Religion is (as we now Suppofek on- vbiiofopberly among Proreftants and other Sectaries ) fliould for ™^J6' better fatisfa&ion, Addrefs himfetf to fo wife a man as Ms Poole, who I fuppofe will tell the Heathen, That God is to be Adored in a certain Religion, The Philofopher will Anfwer . I doe fo 5 For my Reli- gion is to follow Principles of nature, to live a nppral Life,, to fubmit to the Government I am under , to do as I would be done by, And here is All. O , faith CM* Poole : Sri you have yet greater matters to look ~ after, you muft believe in Cbrift , if you will be faved. Who was this Chrift , Demand's the Philofopher? Toole. He is God and Man , born of a Virgin , and one that manifefted himfelf by a mod Holy Life, wrought many Miracles, Dyed for us all, Arofe from Death to Life, and afterward Afcended to Heaven. Phil. A ftrange Story indeed : But can you make the Story credible to my Reafon > Poole. O Sr, it is un- doubted; For this , and much more v is writ in a Ho- ly Book we call Scripture , And you are bound to be- lieve it. Phil. In a Booh^ called Scripture ? Here * is no Reafon, for I ask upon what Motive cam you make All that is writ in this Book credible to me? And here (becaufe I (hall inftantly prefs the point farther) my Demand only is, From Whom you re- ceived Scripture , and how long fince it came to your Vehe».*n* hands? We had it, faith Ms Poole , about a hun- *s°ea"i$T dred years agon , partly from men that now are ( fup- bad their pos'd ) forgot, ( I think they were called tapiJIs) part- 9M± ly ■ Difcl. C.X 1 1. Cannot Concert an Infidel 12 1 jy from other Haereticks as Avians y Gracjans of no great Credit, (for they are contrary to us . ) Phil. And is it poflible > Dare you admit of this flrange and My- fterious Bible , upon no fhonger proof, then the Au- thority of H Poole . For a thoufand years at lealt we know not of any. The bed I can mention are the later Gtacians, and yet They highly diflent from us in points very fundamental , as 1 read in Leo Alatius againft Hotitnger , Arcudius , and other Authors. fhil. Tell me once more . Had you no Profeflbrs &* **$<**> of your Protetfancy before thefe lafl; hundred years, no^™% Proteftant Bilbops, no Paftors , no po&ors , that*™,, handed unto you this Bible? Took. None at all* Fhil. That is pittiful , and makes me fufpeft your Religion . However, fince thefe laft hundred years, have you made any known and notable Converfions upon Infidels by Preaching the Dodrin of your Bible , or have you wrought undoubted (Miracles in Confirmation of its Truth? Anjw. We muft Confefs the want of great Converfions, and of known Miracles alfo. Phil. Satisfy me yet further in one doubt ? When you are at variance amongft your felves , concerning the difficil paflages of this Book (which are many, mceru < for I have read it) who have you to Reconcile thofe l**&* differences , in whofe certain judgement do you final- ^^rl# ly Acquiefce \ Anfir . We acknowledge no infallibU Teacher , no certain Judge on Earth, every man gives his private fentiment f concerning thofe difficulties, \ Q^ though in Difci. C .X 1 1. Troteflantsfor ■# am of Motives though not infallibly , And 'tis not in our power to do more. Fhd. Here can be no unity in Doftrin. But Zfanto ^ay or* i * befeech you : Tell me who fent you to teach teach «»- thefe uncertain Sentiments of your Bible, from whom certain Do- hac) yOU Cornmiflion to preach fuch unfetled Do&rinf1 You know that in Civil affaires, if one umommijjiomA affurne to himfelf the Title of Legate , or any Dignity in a Commonwealth 5 he is either Traitor, Tyrant y 0% both i You call your felves Legates fent from God, you affume the Dignity of Prieft hood , give me war- rant for either , ftiow your letters Miffive > For if you cannot, I m jy as prudently believe Ann* old Hxrefy, as your new learning, Truely S*, teplyes Mr. Poole, my Anfwer is: The Lord , I hope, fenr us ; I can- not fay more. 3. Here the Philofopher bufies his thoughts , and Tb» Mfo- ftofiiitiy>V&djbn, vtfrtGtkket he may in prudence ground frphers n his Belief in Chrisl upon a Myfterious and yet mevi- pawn, jemj Book , which above thoufand years together 9 was never own'd by any true Proffeflbrs of Ch rifts, Dodrin ? Whether he may do fo upon the bare Word of thefe late men , who without MiJJton began their Preaching only a hundred years agon > Who have no unity t want Miracles , have made no Conner- [tons , nor are able to tell htm, what the Book faith in thofe difficil places that puzzle his underftanding> It is impoflible , faith he, toAcquiefce, without fur- ther Proofs drawn from Reafon . Tell ire therfore, good M' Poole, feeing Scripture f as you fay , contains ftrange Myfteries above my ReachV and no few feem- ing Contradi&ions, which, (landing in reafon > ra- ther affright j then inyite me to accept of it , can you Difc.LC.XIL Cannot convert an Infidel nj you give me Affurance by good Motives or Argu- vrotefUnts ments extrinfecal to the Book, That it is Divine , ot ****<>* p*- writ by the holy Gboft , and not by Chance of Igno-^^^ ranee or Ulufion ? ^Anfiv. I can . Firft the Pa- „m pifls once owned this Book as Gods own hand Wri- Not from ting. Phil O, never mention thefe men, They are P/,/^' now, as we fuppofe , forgotten. Surely you are able to evidence your Book , which is the foie Ground of your Faith , without Ayde or Arguments borrowed from Papifts. I'll do it therfore , faith Mr. Poole. The Sprit of God bears witnes with my ■Spirit , that this book is Divine , and Gods Sacred Word. I am yet an Infidel, anfwer's the Philofophei \ Korfrom and know little of Gods Spirit, much les of yours-. tk$s$iw. my fearch is only after Prudent Motives , to which Reafon ought to yeild and accept of this Book as Sa- cred and Divine . Which , Sr. you are oblig'd to produce , and not wink and fight it out with me , by an unknown Spirit, which in Real Truth, warrant's as well a Jew, to make good his Talmud 9 or a Turk his Alcoran , as you your Bible. There is yet one Ar- gument more , faith lM'.PqoIc , to prove the Divinity of Scripture independent of Popish Tradition . W^ N^^m The UWajefly cf the Stile , the Sublimity of the DoSlrin, jijofStui. the Purity of the Matter &c. Thefe , and the great Reverence all bear to Scripture feem powerful Induce- ments to admit of it, as Gods Word . Pbihfop. They are ftrong Fancies of your own head , and how void of all Reafon f I will evidently demonftrate. A ! Firft , no man can Afferc that Scripture is the Bri- mPlZ*the mam Cognitum , or , per fe Notum , a Thing known Im- firfl Printi- mediately by its own light, as the firft Principles tlesinii"- Qjl of 114 DifcLCXEL TroteUantsfor^ant of Matties of Nature are, (which yet this Majejly proves or no- thing;; for if fo, I Jhould fe it, yea , and All without difpute, would admit of buc hut Evidence your Faith by your Bible , Antecedently proved l^^S^ Divine to Reafon , by good Inducements. Hence I An- antecedent* , fwer to that weak Argument drawn from the Re- h owned ffc cl and Reverence , which all give to Scripture, And ^^ Ly , it carrieth not one grain of Weight with it. verenu For, even Chriftians (much more Infidels) muft f\tl\iht»tdt* know upon Prudent Inducements , That the Bible isw^Tj Sacred, before they Reverence it, and not prove it Sacred Becaufe they Reverence it. For none proves this man to be a Prince, or Prelate, becaufe he doth him Homage ; But therfore He complyes with that duty , becaufe he is Antecedently known or owned for a Perfon of fuch quality. Here, faith the Philofo- fher 9 are a few Exceptions againft )our Religion , and my Difficulties propofed. To folve them, 5. Believe it, old Papifts hitherto forgot, muft Cathoiich fliew themfelves and be remembred agaim They,*"™'*** and only they, though we Imagin no Scripture writ- *ig%on% ten , are able by an Oral and never interrupted Tradition to Affure a Heathen of thrift our Lord, of the Mira- cles he wrought, of the Jpoftles he called to Found a Q 3 Church filS Difc.L CX 1 1. Protectants for Vant of Mottoes And the Church, of the great Converfions they made. They, scrifwe. and they alone, can warrant Authentick written Scrip- ture , and fliow who writ it, and how it was handed down by continued Profeffers of their Faith Age after Age, to this prefent day. They, and only they., sbejptheir do ftiil preferve Vnity in Do#rin , Reclaim Infidels, fuu^ Pro^uce their Credentials for what they Preach , and teach. They ordy can ftevv to all the World their lopes , their Bishops, their Pafters, their Do&ors,who fucceflively have taught and governed Chrifis Flock, 'Anl gh- fince the Beginning of Chriflianity* They , and only fiMsM*if they, lhew you a Church , marked, and made glo- °p*nling rtm ty innumerable, known, and undoubted Mira- chmb. clcsy a Faith feal'd with the Blood of innumerable Bleffed Martyrs, Beautified with fuch eminent San&i- ty and Holynes of life in thoufands , as hath caufed Admiration to very Infidels , and drawn in no few to follow the like Aufterity* Such are the Inducements which plead flrongly for the Roman Catholick Reli- gion , and no other. They fully convince Reafon, and prove , That if God ( as 1 noted above ) can con- quer Infidelity and Haerefy by the force of prudential & God Motives , here they are feen •, If ever he fpoke by fiakeatt- the mouth of his Prophets, or Apoftles, he fpeak's tfm now ty the mouth of this one , and only Society of Vropket* Christians ,• yea , and he yet ufeth ( as I may fay ) midAfoft. the fame powerful Language : For if the miracles of faak'snow our Bkjjtd Lord, and of bis apoftles ; tf their efficacious hy the DoRrin , their Santtity of life , their Blood shedding Tvere church. Coffloiflion enough to Infidels in thofe days , They are now as forceable in the Church , and as manifeft to pur Senfes , Which caufed that Bleffed man Richardde S.Fifa*. Dtfc. I. C. X 1 1. Cannot concert an Infidel il? S.Viftore lib. I. de Trin. f. 2. to exclaim : Si error efl quern credidimm , and Tell us , that the Motives for Scripture are agreed on by all. I anfwered above. m' rimfc There neither are , nor can be Motives for Chnftian nforChri- 'Religion in general, if the word Chrijlian comprifeth P'l*n Reli- all pr< fefled Hjereticks ; For were it 10 , God would fmi^mT' deceive us, and make Falfhood as credibte as Truth* fir Script* No Motives can evidence Scripture, unles they firft rf ^LSb evidence a Church , that indubitably gives us certain Scripture; Which is to fay, in other Terms: All Motives , as well for the verity of Chrijlian Faith as Scripture , are only to be found in the Roman Ca- tholick Church, and in no other Society of Chriftians. If Proteftants can prove their Faith , or Scripture , by fo much as a likelyhood of either Thefe now Named, or any better Inducements, They are obliged in Con- jjf *IH* e4 fcience to m.?ke them known , that men at laft may in o>n- fe that clear Light of the Gofpel , wherof they end-/'"™* " lefty talk in their Pulpits. True Candor and Sin-Ztl™" gerity im* *i% Difc XCXII l.TroteJimydijhonorsCbrin}and cerity cannot but fpcak plainly to this Point without intricate Tergiverfation, if fo much as a fpark of zeal lives in their Harts, and Rational Motives do not fail them. We expeft a candid anfwer. CHAR XIII. Proteftancyfor want of Rational JMoti* you ihall plainly fc what an Eternal Difgrace, what At fronts Proteftants will needs put upon our Deareft Saviour ( do what we can to hinder them. ) He Blef- fed Lord founded a Church (it coft him dear, the EfFufion of his Sacred Blood ) and promifed us an In- deficient glorious Church to be railed out of all Na- tions ; yet after all thefe ample Promifes, he hath ^™«* given us a pittiful one indeed , no better a Thing then pr0mifedf Proteftancy, which is utterly di/graced , obfeurd; dtf- and anob- honor'd, and quite put* down by the UMajefty, the Mi-^T'Tu racks , the Antiquity > the Vntty , the Sanclity of that S0f"rote- Church which muft now, forfooth, be (tiled Falfe, /*» and hath been Univerfally fpread the wfyM whole World over, yours yet fee's little outoffome Vrotejiaws few corners in Europe. My Church hath had mod fptak learned General Councils , yours never any. Mine Truth. ill T -, r;_ - produceth a long continued Sttcctffton or Popes , of Bifhops , of Paftors ; yours noc a man before Luther. Mine is glorious with thofe very Ttytes and Mar\s of Truth, which you manifefted in )our own Sacred Perfon, and induced Infidels to Bvlieve you • Your late Congregation fhewes nothing like them. My falfe Church Fafteth , Prayeth , Cop template , Con- verts more then yours, it hath more Unity in Faith; Yours is Rent and torn apieces with Divifions. And Loe i great God ; Here is that Glorious Edifice which you, after all your perfeft Ideas of a Church, have erefted ; For this you dyed , and never fhed your Blood to Eflablifli my falfe erroneous Synagogue of Popery. Permit Reafon to judge in this cafe, and fay, whether the Devil be an ill advocate, ifPro- teftanrs avouch Truth , And fland to their profeifed Doftrin,- That the Church of Rome ( drowned in a ' Delude of Errors ) abandoned the firft Verities of Chriftian Religion for a thoufand years together, And that their Church , as it is now in Being, is the mod "choife , goodly, and only refined Religion in the world. iW*- ?# My laft Argument hinted at in the Tide is ^^{thus. A pew coyned Haerefy , without Motives of fa. Credibility, may be as well, or better defended by plain fpeaking Scripture, then Proieftancy. It is, believe Difc. I. C. X II I. Lay s Foundations for neto Hwefies. 131 believe me , the eafieft thing in the world to draw Hserefy out of the Words of Scripture* To make good my Affercion, Read firft S\Hierom in his Dia- S-Hi*' . logue Adverfut Luaferianos , Paris Print, anno 1509. aty^," the very end of the Dialogue, This great Doftor then , to reduce fome beguiled by the Luciferians* who held that a BiAop , or Prieft , once Deferring their Faith, could never again be admitted into the Qhurch , ( which they endeavored to prove by that text of S'MattheDo ta^. v. 1 3. You are the Salt of the earth ; but if the fait hath loft its favor , ffiber'Wth shall it be faked } \^d nibtlum valet ultra , it is good for no- thing hereafter &c. ) S'.Bierom, I fay, to refute the* fe, hath an excellent Reflexion. 2(ec fibi blandian* tur , fi de Scripture Capitidis videntur fibi ajjumere &c. Let them not flatter themfelves if they fern to affume out of Scrip- ture t»bat they fay; For the Devil hath fpoker> things 9f Errm out of Scripture ; Scripture ( God know's ) doth p™ not confifl in ^hat T#e read , hut in the fenfe of it. Other- Scripture; Tfife , faith the Saint , Pojfumus & nos 8cc. I am able to coin a new Opinion out of Scripture, and fay, That none are to be received into the Church that "bear shoos, or have fWt coats; For that is Scripture. 4. It were mod eafy to go on with this true Re- flection of S\ Hierom , and draw new Haerefies every ?articti^ hour from Scripture. One will fay : The Sab- Un. bath-day is to be kept Sacred in place of Sunday , and bring Scripture for it Exod. 20. 3. Another, That we are as well to abftain from Eating of Blood, or things Strangled , as from Fornication ; it is a De- cree of the Apoftolical Council, and Scripture * Attor. 1 5. i% A third : That Infants aae not to be R z Bapti- A ntm Sea cf tne» ri- png up. t|s Difc.LC.XH I. Proteftwcy dishonor sUmft Baptized, There is ground foi it Matth.iS. A fourth: That we are not to Contend in Law , but quit our Coat, if any man will take it, and Cloak alfo, Ulfatt. 5. A fifth: That no r.uangelical Preacher is to carry Gold or silver with him, or , have two Coats Matt. 10. 7. 5. Suppofe that a new Se& of men fliould rife up this year in whole Multitudes , and rigidly adhere to the exaft letter of Scripture in thefe Particulars, is it poflible to convince them by Scripture ? 1c is impofiible. And have they not , think ye , more plain Text's of Gods Word for thefe Tenents , then Pro- tectants have for pure Froteflancy > Yea p moft evi- dently ; For they produce nothing but exprefs Scrip- ture , without GloiTes. And do they not believe in Cbrifl , and admit of every jota in Scripture? Yea, and therfore are found in Fundamentals . Moreover. Do they not acknowledge both Chrzjl and Scripture upon the fame Tradition, or other Evidences , as Prote- ftantsdo? Yea, and are ready, perhaps, tojoyn in Belief with them , when they fe Scripture as plain for any Proteftant Dodrin. They only add a Superftru- fture of thefe Articles. And have They not as good Lmhcr " a Church as LmIm and Calvin had a year after their fr*4 new Preaching ? Yes, They fwarm with multitu- des of Followers , and multitudes make a Church, Why then is not the Belief of thefe men ( all ground - ed in Scripture ) as good as that of Proteftants ? I think it is ( of two Evils ) the Better, if more Words of Scripture can more advance the Worth of either Religion. But I tell you , and truly , 1 hat neither of them is good , becaufe uareafonable 5 and they ate Have m good a Difc.I. C XI ll.Lay's Foundation fornelp Htreftes. 13} are therfore unreafonable , Btcaufe no mans Rea- fon can in this paTent ftate of Chriftianiry (whilft God Governs us by the Light of prudence ) fail upon a Religion, or Believe a Church which evidently Ap* pears naked , and deftitute of all Rational motives,4*.*^'* induclive to True Belief, Now Scripture alone, ^j^ without the Interpretation of a Church evidenced by Motives is forcible Motives, is, Tvbat you pleafe to make of it. And mRelilif^ a Church not at all manifefled by rational motives , is no Church, and Therfore cannot interpret Scripture* If you ask why we fay , That Proteflancy is fo bare of Motives and consequently no Church ? I have anfwered above. Becaufe this Religion never had, nor fliall have any fuch perlwafive Inducements, or the like Signs of Truth for it , as cfaisi h\m and his Bleffed Apojiles manifefted when they firft taught the World , and by virtue of thofe Motives , gained in- numerable Souls to Chriftianity. Look then about you , and find me out a Society' of Chriftians , that is evidenced by fuch Signs as hold a jlritl Analogy with thofe of Ctrijl and his Apo(iles% and you have the True Church.' But this is the Roman Catholick Church Mat pro. only, and no other, as I have largely proved. Da^f^'* re you therfore own the true Chrift , and his Bleffed zntemfy, Apojiles who wrought Miracles , lived Holily*, preached Provei »<»» Efficacioutly upon fuch Motives > You muft alio own l^/fTT i • i 7 l »•* i I ta r i C*tkoltck this true Church, upon the like grounded Proofs. We-ck^ re Miracles, Sanftity, Efficacious Do&rin &c. Ra- tional inducements to Believe in chnjl ? They are now both powerful and perfwafive to Believe this Church. To Deny, as I faid above , all Miracles to this Church, even the greateft (as is the Raffing of K 3 dead I J4 .DifcI.C XIIL Trbteftxncy dishonors Cbrift. Theforua-dud ww to life ) is to Der y Strife, Reafon , Htftory] bU Motives and all Authority ; And to appropriate Thefe, and #/f^ other Motives ro Protcftants, is only an attempted PL* C"*mfrcm liary » which, cannot be done. Ic is true, Thefe men glory in a ftolen Bible , ( and 'tis all they can pretend to , befides the bare name of a fruitles and unevidenced Church) but the marks and Chara&ers of a true church They fliall never have , nor cake, from us. And thus much of infallible Teachers , and the Motives of true Faith. u cur Church,. THE JJ THE SECOND DISCOVRS OF SCRIPTVRE. THE FIRST CHAPTER. Scripture k ufeles , if none dedttre in- fallibly the fen fe of it. i. Hen on the one fide I confider the Sacred Book of Scripture , inrich't with the deep Secrets of Gods Divine Wifdom , I mean , the great Myfte- ries of our Chriftian Faith , which highly Tranfcend the Reach of human Reafon : And AMtfe" on the other fide, call my thoughts on a Thing that Z7dF*nu talks of thofe Myfteries all alone in an Englilh Pulpit, bure*. Profefling himfelf fallible in all he faith, fas He^*1* muft do having no other Oracle of Truth to teach y nK him but a Myjlerious Bible, and his own Weak^ Reafon) when , I fay, I confider the vaft Difproportion be- tween fucha fallible Mafter, and this infallible My- fterious Book, I cannot, for my life, Difcouer what either 1 5 6 Difc. IT. C T. Scripture ufeks either He , df his Bible (as tis ufed by him ) is good for. It is mod apparently ufeles ana unprofitable la his hands, at leaft in all points of Cor. trover fies now debated amongft Chnflians, And thus much I- will Demon (Irate. 2. To go on groundeJly . Do not we fee by too lamentable experience as many Strong Pretenders to Scripture, as there are or have been Se#s and RelU AUpretend g\om jn the world ? All acknowledge the Book for Secure. Gods gacred Word? But ^ hjgh|y di(Ient fr(}m one another, when they come to examen the particu- lar revealed Verities therin concerning Religion . 1 he Papifts fay this Book fpeaks for them : Proteftants fay 'tis on their Side : Arims deny all, and will have Scripture for them : The Donat'tjls fay it fpeak's Dona- tijm : The Quakers Quakerifin , the Puriuns Puritanifm, and fo do all other Se&s or Religions, even to the Bottom, call them yet as you pleafe. 3* It is moft evident, That Thefe Diflenting men fpeak not the Truth of Scripture; For they contradict one another, and in matters of High Importance. And, 'Tis as clear, They all fpeak not the Truths of AUdiUv* Scripture Infallibly. What fliall we do in this Com- Tmbiof fufi°n ar|d robbing Scripture of its Ferities ? Shall scrupture. every one be left to his own Spirit and Judgement of Difcerning? If fo , The Arian may be an Arian (till, the Socintan a Socman , the Donatitt a DonatiB , which is to fay : Haereticks may laudably Continue in Their Hzrefy , without Reftraint or Blame . Will you ha- ve an K^irun take CM'. Pooles icerA , that P rot eftants only exactly deliver God's Verities revealed in Scri- pture ? The Arian laughs at fo great a folly , and tell* Difc.TT.CI. InthehandsofHdtreiicks. Ij7 ~ tell's UWr. Poole -. Beca us we are both fallible Men, your Word, Sry is asforceles to perfwade me, That Scri- pture (peaks what you would have it, as mine is, to work in you my contrary Opinion ♦ What is next v* be done > Shall we have Recours to the very Let* ter of Scripture, and hope to find Debates clearly de-< cided between thefe two Difputants? It is impofll- ble. For, the Letter of Scripture is the very thing scriptm they quarrel about ; how then can it. when h occa- Us cle?r* fioneth the larrs, be a ufefol means to Reconcile them? Jpi'tToU For example . The Adrian ailegeth for his Hserefy ,a»dthrf>» that Text of $'- lohn c. 14. i8> My Father is greater then rec"n*ot 1, and concludes from thence that Cbrijl is les then his n l m' Father, and confequently not the High God. So the Artans fpeak. Mr. Poole , to prove the Verity of Chrijls Godhead , allegeth ( and thought it no robbery to he equal •Kith God) alfo that of SU John 1, 5. 20. This is the true God. Obferve. 4. Here are two feeming Antilogies {chrift is lefsTwofsem* then is Father, chrift is Equal to his Father) drawn inzAnf'- out of two certain revealed Verities , which yet Scriptu- °gt'U re reconciles not : For the whole Bible no where ex- prefly faith, That Chrift according to Humain nature is Infenourto his Father, and Equal to him in his God- head; which , though a Catholkh^ Truth , is not fo fully exprefled , as to gain an Arian to Believe it, who yet ftardsas much for Scripture as any Proteflant doth . That is his Imperrinency, faith M'. Poole, Becaus he will not fe Light put before his Eyes . Farvvell , Sr, if you talk fo idlely . The Arian will dorm as much at you , in not yeilding to the Exprefs letter of his Text, My Father is greater then J, as you do at him, S in I}8 Difc. II. C. I. Scripture ufeles TaiUbUin-\n not yeilding to yours , He thought it no robbery tjrc Ud!frT>fZ ° ' faith M'' Poole - ni explicate his Text . You exl 8oy. plicate ; And w ho are you ? What is your Fallible explication worth? The Arian explicats your Text al- Scriptttre fo . Se the wicked Volkeliw in his peftiferous Book explicated entirled De vera rehgione, lib. 5. cap. 10. where he large - IffAnam. j^ JifculTeth St. Pauls words : Qui cum tn forma Dei efjet, and faith firft , that particle f"$ whofe Latin (to conceil his impiety) I englifli not. In the 1 1. Chap, of his fifth book, He explicates thofe words: Verbum caro factum eft, and in other places conteffeth, that Chrijl is trueiy the Sod of God, Becaus God be- got him in a particular manner by the Operation of rhe Holy Ghoft in a Virgins womb , and Becaus he ho- nored him with a Permanent poTver of forking miracles, and Difc. F ?. C. I. In the hands ofHtreticks* IJ9 1 and other admirable Gifts above all other Creatures, Nay, he faith: He is true God, and Vnigemtui Patm (but not K^hipimm Deut Creator, of Heaven and Earth) Be- caus the name of God is common to creatures of a lower rank then Chrift was, who by reafon of his Sin- gular Dignity, and Supereminent Endowments , is to be Adored before all other creatures , whether in Hea- ven or Earth; And therfore merit's the Title of true God, yet not Dei Alttjfrni , of the High God. 5. I intend not , by giving you Theft impious Gloifesofan Hseretick, any way to favor his execra- ble Haerefy ( Though I prorefs ingenioufly they are as good , if not better, then the belt Interpretation that M*. Poole gives of Scripture, againft the Catholick Church J But only to fliew you, how ufeles a Book9Thefiir»2 file Scripture is, with Thefe men to end their Different*' Gj0A ces, yea , and what monfters are produced out of it, ZToJL by thofe that pretend moil to Gods Written Word. And toihovse- what is the reafon think ye ? That thefe Sole-Scriptu-a«rieshm rifts , Thefe Brians , Thefe Protejlants , Thefe {^nabap- %T£* tijls &c are fo various , fo oppofite in their Tenents, afofid. begot, as they think, out of the true written Word of God ? Is it for want of wit, learning , or langua JZL»th ges, They thus Differ > No . Is it for the want oiabufepo- Study and conferring one place of Scripture Clear asceeds* they think, with others Obfcure ? No, Both Arians, and Protejlants have done this long ago* Is it that all thefe Sectaries go againft their Confcience,or, wilfully draw Gods Word to a pervers fenfe He never fpake? (let the Innocent call the firft ftone at the Guilty ) Truly I fufpeft it in Some , yet cannot judge that All are Confiious of fo hideous an Impiety . Sz 6. The *40 Difc.II C.I. Scripture ufeks Tht trut 6. The true Reafon therfore is. Thefe Se&aries, tmfim is after the Rejecting of Gods infallible Church , the *** Oracle of Truth , will, by no more then half an Ey of Human Reafon , dive into the deep Secrets of Gods Eternal Wifdom Okfcurely reveahd in Scripture ( and herein rhey neither Jhew Judgement nor Learning:) With this pur-bJind Rye of weak Reafon They go to work, They fteer on their cours, they judge, They Deter- min, They Define, Tney Pronounce their fallible Sentiments on thefe High Myfleries, which never the leffe Reafon VchySefia. a*one ls uncapable to comprehend, or Mafter. Hence, ties v*ry They vary as they do. Hence it is , they weary them- tuthydo. felves out with oppofite frivolous Inteipreuttons of Gods Word ( which is but one , whilft they are fo di- vided in their Tenents. ) Hence it is , That almoft every year we have a new Religion broach'd in Eng- land . Such a jumbling we muft expeel , fuch enti- les DifTentions amongfl them ; And, tis a juft Jud- gement of God for their Pride , who truely are r.o mo- re but poor Schollers , yet Difdam to learn of a good Mafter , that's willing to teach them all Truth. 7. I call ir a Jumbling ; for, from Scripture ( by Rea- fon of its les clear fpeaking ) anfe thefe DifTentions, and though it be quoted a Thoufand times , fays no conflfion more now' Then it did fixceen hundred years agon, Abom' he And therfore cannot end them , They next fall finfi of upon a doubtful conferring one Paffage of the Bible jftym*. wjtj1 an0l[ier . Several Verfions and Languages are examined , much Adoe they make , And all is to know what God fpeaks in fuch Texts, but without fruit ,• For their Differences are as High as ever , And neither Party gaines or loofes the Victory, Since Scrip- Difc.ILC.T. hi the bands ofHdretlcfa. 141 ture alone , nor, the Comparing of Texts together, is able to draw either fide , from their Preconceived Opi- nion. After the Conferring of places , They are hard at it, with Fallible Explications, when behold, ex- prefs Scripture is caft away by thefe two Combatants-, And now either the One muft learn of the Other, what God fpeaks in Scripture by a human fallible Ex- plication ( which is no Scripture ) or nothing is conclu- ArUmand ded . Who is then to be held the Matter Interpre- *"*'#*»" ter , the Artan\&i Proteftant > Neither. And rfaey '^JJ^ have borh Reafon for it ; For, neither ought to yeild in their ofcn Principles : The quarrel Therfore goes on, and is endles. If after Their fallible Explica- tions of Scripture rhey proceed to Inferences : This follo^es, That follows &c. All is plain Sophijlry , for Vpm whikt. Scripture Vitiated with a fals Explication , can never mfoidy Support a true illation . And upon fuch unlleedy ?ouniia' Eoundations all Haereiy ltancl s. Scripture not under- rejy pMfot jhod is the Ground ; doubtfd Collations of places , fallible Bxplications , fals illations are the S»perfir/tc7ure 1 They have no more . And thus you fe how ufdes a Book of Scripture is in the hands of an Hgretick , who Jnifmfa neither can tell me fo much as Truely , much les In-iesinthe falhbly , what God fpeakfs in Thefe High controver- h*nd*°f ted Points of our Christian Faith. **& "'" 8. But you'l ask how then happens it, that Mr Poo- 4q**fiip9 le and Proreftants hit right in yeilding an AiTent to^f7>,*f* fome Catholick Verities? for Example to a Trinity of* e ' Perfoi s in one Divine Eflence , and Contrary to Aria- variants nifm Profefs the Son to be confubjlantial with his E ter- *'*»e»M- nal Father in one Divine Nature? I anfwer. They gt* T'mt" light upon theie Vermes by an Overpgbt , or , as I fight, S3. may Or by Chance, 4 belief They la, • hour in vain to 142 Difc.II.CI. Scripture ufeles may fay , meerly by Chance . By Oyer/tght - For be- lieve it, had Luter thought well Orii , He might with more eafe have denyed Thefe High Myfteries of our Faith , then the Real change of bread in the Holy Eucha- rift. By Chance : For, as by chance, They Stole a Bible from the old Catholick Church , fo cafually They took from her , Here and There ( as it pleafed Fancy )fomewhat of her Ancient Tradition alfo. And upon This ground of Tradition , or, the infallible v awares Doclrin of the Catholick Church, They Believe (as engaged in well as they can ) Thefe Sublime myfteries. Being thus unawares engaged in a Belief ', They weary their Heads, and wear out their Bible to find expres Scripture for it, ( which cannot be fourd 1 Becaus, forfooth , they find scrip- wj|] Believe nothing upon Tradition, or the Churches tare fr tt. ^jr^^ T)0clrin, 1 fay Expres Scripture cannot be founds that AiTert s Three diftind Perfons in one Divine Ef- fence , or, the Word to be Confubjlantial with his Eter- nal Father ; Therfore if they Believe thefe Verities , They muft Ground their Faith , not upon file Scripture, But on Scripture explicated by that never erring Oracle of Truth the Catholick Church : Or , on the Word of God not Written, which we call Tradition. You fe therfore, how our Proteftants, though in AcJuJtgnato^hey feemingly Rejeft Tradition, and the Churches Inter- thet inter- pretation upon Scripture , yet in Aciu excrato They own *reTT\ bol:k> and muft necetTarily do fo, or become plain Artans. Arums. Yet here they are pinch'd again : For, if they Be- lieve thefe Myfteries upon Tradition, or on Scripture in doing fo interpreted by the Church, They are neither Papi$is> They are nor Protejlants . No Papifts ; for Papifts hold Tradi- v^Jilh »or tlon anc* d* Churches Interpretation infallible. No frotefinnts, PrO- Seftaries m'-tft oven the Chur \: Difc.I I. CI. In hands c/Hcertticks. 14 j Proteftants • For They profefs to Believe no more then God hath expreiTed in his written Word , Though now they muft leave that Hold , and believe upon the Catholick Motive , or renounce the Faith of thefe Articles. 9. If Mr. Poole pretend expres Scripture for thefe High Ferities of Chriftian Faith , The fureft way will be to produce it, without Remitting me to other Au- thors, or, Adding his fallible Glofres to Gods Word; For every t^Arian knows well to Diftinguifh between exprefi Scripture, and the fuperadditions of Mens Glojfes, fallible Explications, Interpretations &c . Now , if#*"*«* in this particular Myftery of the Trinity, Mr. Poole l^- ^tslrT^' terpret's Scripture truely , it is not , God knows , His pture truety skill that doth it; No. The Reafon is, Becaus he bor- *% Ar- rows the Truth from the Churches Interpretation oirj™migJt Scripture, and fo fights againft an Arian with anothers church Weapon . Where , by the way obferve a ftrange ->&"*• proceeding of Proteftants , who, when They difpute out of Scripture againft an Avian, Theyl have the^fj*^£ Churches Interpretation good againft him, and Hs of ?rot*- naught againft them ; And , when they "Difpute by'?^- Scripture againft Catholicks , They will have the Churches Interpretation forceles againft themfelves, and Their own wretched Gloffes powerfully ftrong a- gainft the Church . Were there ever fuch Doings in the world before thefe dayes ? 10. But we have not yet faid all concerning Scriptu- re, Interpretations of Scripture, Inferences out of Scri- pture &c. W heifore Becaus we are gone fo far , Par- don a further trouble , .of giving you a few more Notes on this Subjeft . They will lhew you , if I miftake not*. 1 44 Difc II. CI I. Trotejianu Fallacies nor, upon whGlofs as they pleas interpret as they pleas, with- jtnjeofit. ouc Ljm-t or Reftraint . It had been much better, Mc- thinks , if fuch Sole-Scripturi&s had never read Scripture in thefe debated Points of Religion , then after their reading /to fe it made a Book that only begets Dif- fentions ; fo grofly wronged and abufed it is . Yet no Body is in fault ; Pure Scripture cryes the Arian, pu- re Scripture faith the Protejlant , nothing but Scripture faith the Puritan , And there is no Redrefs for thefe Evils, All run on in their wilful raifunderftanding Scri- ps Hire- ticks lay alike claim Difc.If.CIL Concerning Scripture. 145 Scripture, not one of them will yeild to another, nor (which is word of all, and plain Perverfnes ) Seek after a means ( which is yet offered them ) to come to a right underflanding of it. 2. Truely, I have often wondred at our Proteflants, ( men, as they fay , of a more Sober Temper then your Quakers and Puritans are) How ic is poflibie p'otefl*»ts ( arter chey know right well, with innumerable Holy \e0"j7rU Faibtrs, this Plea , or pleading file Scripture, to be>«r;. norhi ,g els but an old Trick of all condemned Haere- ticks) That; they can leflen themfelves fo much ( had th y no other motive to retard them ) as to tread the Footftepsof fuch unworthy Sectaries , and patronize a Doclnn which cannot but breed DifTentions to the Worlds end * Tnis it is : Sole Scripture is the Rule of Faith. Sole Scripture f peaks plainly in all things neceffary to Their falfi Saluation . On thefe two Hinges chiefly Proteftant Re- Do^m. ligion turns about, and will do fo , until God at his good pleafure , judge it time to turn it out of the World . Two Cheats they are , and great Ones, as I fliall Demonftrate. 3. M*. Poole to mend the matter , having fuppofed., MrVoo^ that fole Scriptute is the Rule of Faith; withall, That threeVofim there is enough faid in Scripture to end all Con trover- tiom> fies , were men humble and Studious &c. Seem's in the 7. Chap, of his Nullity page 226. to ground Pro- teftant Religion on thefe three Pofitions. The firft is. That the Books of Scripture are and way be proved to he the Word of God. z. That in the Suhftantiah of Faith , thoft Books are uncorr up ted , 3. That the Senfe of Scripture may he fufficiently under/food in neceffary Points . There is no ^Anan , but will moll eafily admit of thefe three Pro- T pofitions: 146 Difc.II. GIT. frotettants Fallacies pofitions. How then (were they all True) can they mare eftablifli Proteftant Religion then Arianifm > For, a Principle common to two Advers parties cannot ( confidered meetly as a Principle agreed on by both) more Advantage the caufe of One, then the Other. If therfore an Arian AfTent to thefe Proportions , they ground no more Proteftant Religion , then they do A- »m?* ttan'fm • The Truth is , M'. Toole is highly wanting- fourth Pro- in a fourth Propofttion, which, if proved , would have tofithn. done him more fervice then the other Three. And it fliould have been to this Senfe : Seing Scripture fpeak^s plainly all DocJrin neceffary to Saluation y Certainly it ought t* teach Protejiancy plainly . I mean the particular Tenents of Proteftants, as thefe (land in Opposition to Catho- lick Do&rin : For if thefe be neceffary to Saluation r Scripture hath delivered them plainly- or if it have not done fo , We mult Conclude > They are not neceffary to Saluation. Thus much premifed , we will lhew you in the enfuing Difcours how flippery and falla- cious Proteftant Dodrin is, as it Relates to Scripture, and Interpretation of Scripture. tfoinfaili- 4. The fir ft propofition . No infallible Church , no< nowZ'n- ^jfarance °f T™* ^d uncorrupt Scripture . To make* my ty of true Aftertion good againft Proteftants, I will only propo- Scripture. fe this plain Question. From what men of Credit and Integrity , had the firft Proteftants Their Bible? It whombad was not drop t down trom Heaven into their Pulpits, Troufiantt with AlTurance of its Purity, or Certainty , that no **"r&*te Change was made in it contrary to Truth fince the Apoftles Times . Were they Ielees , Infidels, 'Turks, Arians , or Grecian H*renks that gave them Scripture > Too perfidious to be trufted in a matter of fuch Con- fequence# Difc JT. GIL Concerning Scripture* 1 47 fequence. Too unfaithful either to preferve true Scri- pture by them, till Luther quit his Cell, or, then to put into his hands a Bible incorrupt in every Point . Were they Catholicks f Let our Adverfaries fliame the Devil , and fpeak Truth, 'Twas from them They had their Bible, together with the Originals . But thete Papifts , Thefe very Catholicks ( if we may credit CatboUek? Proceftants ) had not only Corrupted the Writings of JJ^JV. the Ancient Fathers ; Buc alfo through Malice , or Ig- '«/>/« can- nor .nee, Had grofly erred a thoufand years together , *" be re- and Changed the Ancient Doflrin of the Primitive Iti^/* Church* They had Secretly wrought; into mens harts a fals Belief of the Churches infallibility, of aa unbUody Sacrifice , of TranftihsJantiauon , Invocation of Saints, and fuch like errors . Admit of this Suppo- fition , who is there amongft" Proteftants , that ftali dare to look on his Bible with good Aflurance of its Purity, or fay , it is the Word of God, and not cor- JYUTin rupted by Thefe erring Papifts > For, Thefe menD^rw, who erred in Doftrin , might as well have infinuated Th.% errors into the Book of Scripture : They had time Z'**/*"** enough to do it. Thefe men, who changed the have erred Ancient Primitive Faith of Chriftianity, might as pQt-'ncorrut fidioufly have Altered the Bible. They wrought fe-JJJJ/"" cretly a fals Belief into mens harts concerning an un- bloody Sacrifice , Tranfub Han nation &c. And why might rhey not as cunningly have foifted into Scripture Words and Sentences fuitable to fuch fuppofed errors ? Be- it k eafiet lieve it , it is much eafier to corrupt a dead BodeK*t§i™F* then to pervert fo many toning Chrifluns , and bring ^^^ them to a Belief of fo palpable , hideous t and crrr>**« ««** neous Novelties, *m*Wfc T* 5, Here "V 148 Difc.l I. C.I I. tprctettants Fallacies. a Dihm- 5* Here tr*en is my Dilemma. Either , the Ca- «»*. tholick Church had erred when Luther and Prote- ftancs took the Book of Scripture from it, or was pure in Doclrin . If pure, Mod wicked were They tor defining it . If the Church had then erred, or was corrupted in Do&rin, Neither Luther , nor any Proteftant can have Affurance, that they read yet True Scripture ; For all the Certainty They can ha- ve of this Book, is miferably uncertain , and at laft Comes to this doubtful ludgement : It may he "toe haye An man- true ScriPture : II maf be, and more likely , not. Godon- jwrdU ly knows ; All depends on an Erroneous Church \ Atguntm. that gave us scripture , which might as well (in the vaft compafs of a thoufand years ) have guilfully chan- ged this our Book from its Ancient Truth , as cheated Chriftianity into a fals Belief. 6. Some may yet fay • All now Agree , as well Catholicks as Proteitants , upon the Verity and In- tegrity of Scripture 5 Therfore its needles ( for many Vroteftants Books at leaft ) to Jgmfftfc* this point farther . I an- deftroy the fwer . Catholicks agree well , Becaus they take this Veiy »d Book uPon *^e Wart*nt of Chri/ls never erring Church, o/certain- which cannot Deceive them. Bur Protectants , who tjf. Ruin this Ground of Infallibility , deftroy with it all Certainty of scripture in order to themfefoes. Their Agreement therfore is no more but Verbal, whilft the Principle which fupports a Real one , is shaken a pieces Catholicks hold Scripture to be Tye the Word of God , Becaus the Infallible Church of Chrijl church Jijures them it is Gods Word, This infallible Teftimo- *■****; ny ot the Church CMr.Poole utterly Difowns, and Ther- monjinfd. fore he mu ft of neceffity by his oivn Principles, Rejed lible* Mr the Catholick Teftimony. p^* !em • ^ J . ' .ii/» f •-> i i o 1 eels this, 7. Other pei haps will fay , That God by ope- therfore he cial Providence ever preferved Scripture pure in all rn^ts null Effentials , Though He permitted the Church to deceive th.e ct£". oouJs, and lead them into Error. What an Anttfcriptu- mony to ral Affernon have we Here? How is God AfTron- himfeif. ted ? What a lame and half Providence is granted s*&mes him ? What, no more but only to have care of ^fr^God Book, to fecure That from falihood, and in the interim him .Z*"* to Permit his own immaculate Spoufe , his Church (which mo*e Thm Scripture fhould inftrudt ) to play the Harlot , to Deceive ^fjj"'- the World, and err Damnably > O, but. what er-'e becom's of the Church , we muft ( fay our Proteftants) tjave True and incorrupt Scripture, or, no man can T 3 " know ijo Difc ilXII. Protectants FaHades know what he is to Believe. I anfwer. And we mud either have a True and incorrupt Church , or none can be Allured of True and incorrupt Scripture* u*u"h*- Say t I befeech you, what doth it avail Chriftianityv Ve verir.es to have the Pure letter of Scripture closd up in a Bible, 5j^^atid preferved from Error, if Chiiftians Univerfally "htCbJcb had been, as it were Defertedby Almighty God, and erredinde- permitted ( before Proteftants appeared in the World ) Uvering to £rr fa the very Suh[}antiais of Faith delivered in them to , v ^ . J - _, r t it chrifiuns. Scripture ? Yet it was lo. For confeliediy, not fon!y thofe Antient condemned Haereticks, as Arians, fay**™ f'ltffMS , Donatijls , and the Later Grecians, but alfo chriftiam that great moral body of Catholicks ( if our Proreftarts '"t/rld^y true) Erred in the very Fundamentals of Faith, *LZ Since they Taught , as they do ftill , their Church to be Infallible, an mbloody Sacrifice &c. Grofs errors rherfore Reign'd amongft them, whether we fuppofe the Scripture lure y or corrupted. Imagin then (which is utterly Fals , Though Haereticks cannot prove it fals) That our Scripture had been corrupted , They had then Erred becaus the Book Tvasfaljified. Suppo- fe again ( which is True ) that Scripture is not cor- rupted , you have ftill the fame Ejfeti , which is Error in Doftrin drawn out of the very Words of pure Scripture. The Reafon furely is , Becaus the Church did not rightly underftand Scripture; if fo , you fe, how ztm Scripture not underftood, as eafily begett's Errors , as e £r- tysfrifi rer u £noT } m£ atfy Prejudicial in both cafes. 1 fay Church er faljified Scripture, therfore : It u as gnat an Eyil rt haye a Church ( that should Difc.I l.C) I. Concerning Scripture. * 5 1 should teach Truth ) to decern the World , in bringing in a Deluge cf Errors to the Ruin of t\ie Ancient Primitive Faith, as to baye a Bible corrupted. For, 'tis Error, and fals Dodrin wrought in mens Harts, That undoes them. Now whether Thar be caufed by a fals Church, orfal- fified Scripture, it imports little. Our Protectants j**? Sem Affirm the firft , and may juftly Fear the fecond. ~0£h"» God ( fay they) permitted the Church to Err , and he./W. may f fay I ) as well have permitted it to Vttiat Scrip- ture* They fay, Errors Infenfibly grew up in the Church ; And , I fay , they might as Infenfibly ha- ve crept into Scripture , Be it how you will, from thisOld erring Church, Our New men fuppofe, They received pure, fmcere, and uncorrupced Scripture , juft as the Holy Ghoft writ it. A meer ImpoiTIbility; For, never greater Chimara was fancied, then to couple a Fals Church and True scripture together , or, True Scripture And a Fnherfd fals erring Churchy 8. Some perhaps may (fay : The Arians, Donatifts, and other Hasreticks , had and have flill True Scrip- ture , though they erred in Do&rin . I anfwer, No God a mercy to theno; For, if They have True Scripture, They may thank an unerring Church that preferyed it un- corrupt, before Herefy began, and after. But grant me once, as our Proteftants do, that both Hxreticks, and n„'f"f Cathoheks likewife uniyerfally erred in Do&rin mofl true strip* fundamental , no man can now haye Affurance oftureifaU. rr- «. /"\1_ 1 t T XT' Eft id Unt- True scripture. O, but tne Unanimous Voice w,m* of all Chriftians , Affirming Scripture to be the Word of God, and pure without corruption, is a Weighty moral Proof for its Integrity . I anfwer none at all ; For , if no Society of Chriftians uneruhk and. 15V Difc.IT.CII. Trotejlants Fallacies and found in Do&rin had that book in Cuftody, The old Papifts might ( for ought Proteftants know ) have either by Chance or Fraud changed words in ScrN pture . For example, Tbofi Tvords , Matt. x6. This is my body, from what they once were, Thtsisaftgnofmy body, and the Cheat was to maintain their Doclrin of the Real Prefence . But you will ask how could this be done ? 1 have told you , By Cfrialice , or Inadver- cwtdSe- tency , But when could it be done ? I anfwer in that ffariisfo VeIy Age , Year , or Month, when thefe Papifts firft be- Zfu/rfi gan to be Idolaters , and worfhip a piece of Bread iot became God . Then it might well be don . Name that age idolaters £Xaclly9 and you have all. Our new men Anfwer, be?nfirt ' This Idolatry was brought in amongft us; But they medcon- knew not When; it began with fuch Secrecy and Silen- TuleQor ce ' This Text of Scripture therfore, 1 fay, might rations?' have been corrupted with like Secrecy , Though no man \nofts "when . And here by the way obierve a ftran- A strange ge Paradox of our Proteftants . So notorious a kno^n T*™??0 fs Novelty , a* this fuppofed Idolatry is , Tvhicb might mojl juftly haye Struc\Terror into all mens Harts, fifthly entreda Church diffujed the 7vbo/e World over, yet none , neither Friend nor Foe fare it , cryed out againjl it , or Has left it upon Re- cord . And one fingle Particle of Scripture cannot be changed , but all muft know it • How can thefe two Confift together > You will fay, The Primitive Church was Pure, and fo preferved true Scripture. How do our Proteftants know fo much , if it was Fal- lible ? Thus much of an Argument ad bomwem, which I defire Why is it better then the Arians ? No other Reafon can be ren- dted but a mod True one, Vt\. That the Church doth not only fully Exprefs the objettm Ferity darkly couch'd in Scripture, But alio Delivers this Full and dearer fcnfe Infallibly : For i fay, if the Churches In- jfthe terpretarion were as fallible as the Arians , Christians chunk* might indifferently Adhere to Either, yea, and chan- lwrP.r€t*~ geably now take one , then the other as they pleafe . MfJinu A greater Probability can ballance nothing in this otastheA- the like particulars, as I ihall largely prove hereafter • r%%f J In the mean while, by what is now faid , we may migbtfoU learn firft. Though Scripture in this and other io» either Myfteries hath its Darknes , yet by the good Providen- "£** ce of Almighty God we are provided of a Sure Inter- preter , which is abiolutely Necefjary : For if Every o- ne interpret according to fancy , Haerefy is eafily Drawn out of Gods Word,* And if none interpret Faith- fully , the Scripture (till lyes hid in Obfcurity, which makes it (for that part) a Ufeles Book to Chriftians. Themeffi. Learn farther, That None can ever know exaftly by 'f^L*^ Human Induilry , or his Sole pondering the Bible ( let inttrpwr. him be another Salomon for Wifdorn ) what God hath Revealed in thefe difficil Myfteries of our Faith , without an infallible Interpreter. To prove my Affertion I'll give you one Inftance. 3. Suppofe that two or three moil learned Heathen V z Phiiofo- An inftan- (eofVhilo- foohers reading the Bible,'" If They ask of none but Their ownlutye- mmt , er* rmrfol- . hwes 4 Their doubts would be "Lndles, ij6 Difc.II.CIIL jMSubJtantidls of Faith Philofopher , well verfed in Languages, and all Hu- man Literature , had this Book of Sciipture put into their Hands, and were perfwaded by the extrinfecal Authority of all Chriftians , that God here fpeak's his Eternal Ferities -. Withall , That if they read the Book , and by their Sole reading ( without Recours to any Interpreter) poffefs the True fenfe of it, They have True Saving Faith. Well : They read it, and with as much Humility as any Proteftant can do, yet Ask cf none , But their own judgement what it means, in the more difficil PalTages . Tell me, I befeech you, ( And here I appeal to the moderate Judgement of every Chriftian , whether Catholick, Arian , or Pro- teftant) What Faith or Religion would thefe Philofo- phers produce out of Sole Scripture, Solely Read, and pondered by them > My Thought is ('Tis no mo- re but a Thought ) That the Refult of their Reading would end in Coyning a Religion different from all Others now in Chriftendom . I am very confident, They would never pitch upon Proteftancy, no, nor upon any Seft now extant. Alas , they would Doubt and Stagger at every hard paflage in Scripture, yea, and by the very Injlinti of Nature ( if they own'd Scripture for Gods Book) would humbly Supplicate Thofe , who gave them the Book , to lay open the Myfteries therin, and Affure them of its meaning in a hu idred Places ; yet none can do this good office for them , Bun One only Society of Chriftians that layes cLim /©- Infallibility , and proves it Demonftra- tively, if Faith be in the World. 4. Be ic how you will : thus much I conclude. Our Proteftants are in the very fame Cafe without an Difc.II.C.III. are not plain in Scripture. 1J7 an infallible Interpreter, as the Philofophers are with ^HTnlL no Interpreter : Thefe make Scripture ipeak what They very fame think ir fpeaks , right, or wrong, And Prortftants do cafe mthm the like , whilftlhey give their fentimenton Myfte-^2r-Sh ries above their Reach without an Infallible Teacher, ureter. Pray you Reflect . Had Chri/llefrs, and his Apoft- les never Taught any thing by Word of N4outh, But only thrown the Book of Scripture amongft Cbri- %tY(inge ftians when They left the World , and commanded Confront them to make that ufe of it, which every Private lud*1!** gernent thought beft, what a Religion, think ye , Ihould htiApoft- we have had at this day in Chriftianity , any or none, les given to or a thoufand different ones as good as none ? God chrf!"m only knows, I do not ; Yet will fay, This is our without™ very prefent Condition , if an infallible Interpreter oi interpreter. Scripture be Rejected . We may wrangle to the vijfemions Worlds end, but agree in nothing; Difpute, but wmid ha. conclude nothing 5 we may raife Difficulties one vefcUoafed againft another, But allay none. And thus the I^T contefl mud run on , without Redres or Remedy. All *»*>». Appellation here to Antiquity , to Councils , Fathers Appellation and Tradition help's nothing, Becaus they are Falli* *° Jnti- hle , And were they otherwiie, we vary as highly about ^>reme- the Sentiments of Fathers in every delated pint of Contro- thin* being verfy , as we do about Scripture it fdf. f^bie 5. We fe thirdly : How utterly impoffible it is for wf Pr0' a Proteltant to draw , from the Objective Ferities re- vealed in Scripture, the True Senfe and meaning of Gods Word in any controverted point of Religion. The Reafon is. Scripture never fpeak's plainly and exprefly the Proteftants Senfe in thefe debated Con- troverfies, ( obferye it in All, and you'll find it fo. ) V 3 What jj8 Difc.H QUI. j/BSubJiantiaUofFM What do they the* tore to help tiieuifdvcs I They fir ft Kejed an Intallible Interpreter, and next ( as the Sectaries Brians do ) fuperadd their own Fallible glolTes to ma- wakescri. ke Scripture fpeak, not what it Truly fays , But what pure** They would have it [ay , And thus they think Scrip- (peakwhat J . , . _,' *' » %«'«-'! r They would ture cleared , and 1 heir Work don . Take here one have it Inftance for many. • Catholic ks and Proteftants ha- ^'f!, . ve been at Variai ce a hundred yvars and more about what (joa 11 /- *r* ■ fpeak- s thele Sacred Words Matt. 2,6. Tun ps my Body. The different Senfes drawn from them are Contradictory , And therfore cannot be True . This is my Body , Real- ly , faith the Catholick , and here is my internal Faith. No, faith the Proteftant : This is my Body figura- tively, or a Sign of my Body, And this is my Belief. Arlavro Mark I befeech. Juft as the Arian faith : / and uft ants' my Father are one , and fuperadds his Glofs, of one in vitiate Cdffeftion , fo the Proteftant here vitiates the Text by SCfulThe k,s Glofs , and adds to Scripture ( what God never fame man- fpoke ) a Trope, a Figure , a sign , and I know not ner. what. And after This Injury don to the Words, He Believes not for Gods Exprefs Word, But , for his 'own far fetcht and dear bought Interpretations , which are no more Scripture then if he fliould tell me , That, n xam- rp^at text of S*. Matthew cap. 3. verfi 17. This is my he- loyed Son, were to be forcibly ftript ot its Verity, and, misinterpreted Thus : This is only a sign or Figure of my Beloved Son. No more doth Scripture, through the whole Gofpel, warrant in the leaft , an Improperty of ipeech in the one Text now cited , then in the otber. I little Regard The Proteftant dfcourfes and gloiles contrary to this CMyflery of Faith , (let us have plain Scripture ) much les their Inferences , which are Difc. I ? . C.I I T. are not plain in Scripture. 159 a*e all Human and Fallible. O, but to fay, that Cbrijl BoJy is Really Pre fent under the Species of Bread, yea and in a thoufand places at Once, is an Vnintelligi* hie Myftery ! Why more Unintelligible then a Trinity of Perilous in one E (fence , or the unchangeable Divi- ne Word feemingly Changed when he took Fleih upon him , and became an Infant ? Thefe are Higher Myfteries and greater Difficulties, If Human Reafon might be judge, and give a final Sentence. But I'll tell you once for all. That man shall never be a Proficient in Cbrijis School , that will undertake to conquer, as I may fay, the great Difficulties of Faith , by Exami High My- ning the High Myfteries of it ; If he goe fo to work, hef/™L™j is caft into a Labyunth , and can find no Exit. All int0 by oat therfore he is to do , is , to Learn and Examin vvhe- weak ther God , the Infallible Truth , hath Revealed and dtfcourfes' taught us thefe Myiteries by any unerring Oracle : Next fi0JPwe He is to Captivate his undemanding, And humbly are to /«$, Submit to him ( without further fearch ) who neither mitir> can be Deceived , nor will Deceive us. But enough t*m* °' of this Digreffion. 6. We fe thirdly : Though Proteftants Anathema- tize all that Add to Gods Word, or Take from it, yet V>e..v^holer » iS.i' l- 1 ^ i Oft Or I'll tell you, Their whole Religion (as Proteftancy ) is Vrotefiant* either made up of no Scripture at all , or, is nothing*™'^* els but a meer Addition of their own Glofles to Scrip- f.biit*dm ture, or, finally a wiitul Subtraction from it, To scripture, the Words now cited , they add a fgn , a figure , and ^jubtra^ God knows what more . Is this Scripture ? When tmJrom' ST. lames z. cap. 24. Dogmatically teaches, tnat a man is Juftified by Works and not by Faith mly , out New men tell us , the Apoftle fpeak's net of j unification before l6o Difc.tI.CIII. All Suhftantials of Faith before God but before Men. Is this Scripture f When S*. Paul Bom. 2. 6. plainly Affirm VThac God will ren- der to everyone according to his Works. Cabin and Be%a Allure us , He will do fo indeed , if there were any fuck, Bur the Mifchiefis : None can do a Good Work before God. Is this Scripture? No. Thefe, and fuch like Interpretations Our Adverfaries do not own for Scripture , yet They muft own them ..as Tenents Effenttal to their Religion : Ergo I fay: Meer Fallible Glojfes , which are no Scripture , make Voftrmof up Proteftant Religion as Proteflancy . And hence the™ ay- jr |$ tjiac ttioir* Doftrin delivered in the 39. Articles Yrouflancy Hand's there with all Clearnes ( that is, you know what mt scnp. they fay) But when 'tis Brought to trie Teft y and is '*"• examined by Scripture , you may feek long , before ye find a word like it , as 'tis Profejhncy . 7. You fee laftly : That the Interpretations which ho setia- Proteftants give to thofe Texts of Scripture cited by riestbuje Catholicks ( for their DodtrinJ are meer Human Ex- scripture tra-fcriptttral and Anti-fcripural GloiTes of their own Fan- c&k c7- We cite the Apoftle %. Tbej[. 2. 15. For Tradi- vodrm. tion befide the Written Word : For the Real Prefen- ce , This is my Body tJMatt. 26. For Iuftifi ration by Good Works, that of S*. lames 2. 14. For a Sacrifice to be continued to the Worlds End , Ullalac. 1. 1 1. For Ex- tream-VnBion , lames the 5. 14. For the Verity and Infallibility of the Church , that of S*. Paul 1. Timot. 3. 15. And what, for Gods fake. have we from our New Men to thefe plain Padages ffeakhg Popery , But a Re- turn of meer Mock-fool GloiTes, Hatch't in their own Heads, which have fo little Shadow of Scripture in them, That with force they drive the very life and fcnfi Difc.I I. C I 'I are not plain in Scripture. 1 6 1 enfe out of Gods Word? And They proceed fo unlinki- Se%*™* . ly, That where Scripture is clear, They make it obfcure, ^7 Others the Proportion pro , Others the Pronoune , Vobis , Others finally the Verb Datur • Yet after all this pervert- ing and woful mangling of Gods Word, we muft Be- lieve that our Proteftants fpeak ( forfooth ) Scripture, and nothing but clear Scripture . On the. contrary fide, we have feen more then enough in the Beginning of this Chapter, how Vainly They cry up the Clarity of Scripture in Myfteries mod difficil , not fully exprefied in Gods Word. What man in his Wits can fay, That any Scripture through the whole Te- ftament Speaks half fo clearly of the Confubjiantiality of the Eternal Son with his Eternal Father, as the Text now quoted is for the Real Prefence? Yet thofe Scriptures muji U Char\ for that Chriftian Ferity , and this Obfcure , for the Real Prefer^* X 8. To 1 62 D i fc . 1 1 . C . I V. Scripture only 8. To conclude this point, Methinks it highly im- Nowtopro- ports, when we deal with our Adverfaries concerning ya*ths T,neir Explications of Scripture , That we do not fo wUn rhey nauch ( at lead in the firft place ) make it our Work ^plicate Pofitively to Dtfproye them by other Texts , and Au- tenpuire. thorities ( which our Writers ufually do , and lauda- bly ) as to put them to the Proof of their Tvild Gloffes, which feem's mod Reafonable: For Ajjerenti incumbU frolatio. When therfore They go about to ohfiun Scripture where it is plain, wita new Interpretations (the world never heard of J. bid them not only Inter- pret, but Trove Their Interpretations : For example ,. •That the words of our Saviour now cited muft be alienated from their genuin Senfe , and tortured as they are by Protectants . Proceed thus with them, put them to the Proof, and you'l foon fee them at a *Nonyluy. CHAP. IV. Sole Scripture without an infallible In- terpreter can he no Rule ofPaitk Prote/iants ha 1 - J 1 1 no Inter m them, ^fna if fet be deceived , it much imports not , whether preterm the Error proceed from Obfcure Scripture mifunderfiood , or mis- }"imsof interpreted by an other . An infallible Interpreter ther- Fmth* "fore is neceflary in this Weighty matter, that AlTures us of what God hathfpoken, offuchand fuch Parti- X z cular An Sc^- rtes fiffraid MwlChrift fpoke too fUin!j? They glofs to make Scripture clear. 2 heir glof- Jes regulate theit -Baithy pot the \lpords of GJuift. 1 64, Di fc. 1 1. C. IV. Scripture only cular Myfteries . And here Ke Reft fecurely , and barn a mojl certain Rule Tvhich Sectaries "Kant. z. Again I argue. If Sole Scripture be a clear Rule of Faith, it can Regulate without Gloffes, yea, and without a Preacher too . Why therfore do our Protectants charge that one Text above cited y This is my body (the like we may fay of many others ) with fo unneceflary a burden of their Interpretations > Are They affraid that cbrift fpoke too Plainly , and therfore Add their Gloffes to Obfcure his Words I None will own fuch an Impiety . Then I fay ; They are Ad- ded to Clear an Ob/cure FaJJage, confequently , They muft acknowledge an Obfcurity in this Scripture, be« fore their tampering with the Text , and glofling it. Well. But when They have gloffed all they can, I ask what is it that Regulates their Faith in this particu- lar? Do Chnfls Words as he fpoke them,, or, as They interpret, Regulate here/3 Not the firft : For 'tis mo ft evident , that Chrifls own Words without the Protectant Glofles, can never beget in any Underftand- ing that determinate Belief, which thefe men have of the BlefTed Sacrament; For, the words of thrift fay plainly, Tins is my Body that is giyen for you; Which pondered to the day of Judgement, can never yeild this forced, repugnant, and far --fetch' V Senfe , This is a sign , or a Figure of my Body. Yet fuch is the Be- lief of Protejiants drawn from this Sentence , by their Interpretations . Wherfore , we muft conclude that They Believe not for Chilis Sole Words, But for their Additional Glofes, which is to fay in plain Fnglifli," Their Overplus of Glojjcs Regulates Faith > not GoL Exprefs and mofi Jtgmfimt Word • Some will fay this Paflage now can- Difc.II.CIV. n&Qtnle of Faith 165 now cited , muft be interpreted as They will have it, Becaus Scripture in other places feem's to favor their Interpretation . I anfwer candidly . Let them They but produce fo much as one plain Text out of the not cut am whole Bible, for the Alienating of this Sentence from Tsecxrl°tuJYf its proper Senfe , without Glofles (which are no Scrip- ,»/lJ«, ture) and I'll proclaim them Conquer ours. Here \s of their plain dealing > but Remember well , / call for scripture Glo^eu only. 3. I told you juft now, That as thefe Glofles are ufeles, if fole Scripture be a clear Rule of Faith, fo are Preachers alfo , yea and all the large Commenta- ries which Luther and Calvin have writ on Scripture . Why/3 Gods Word fpeak's clearly without a Preacher: ifscriptun Aivay therfore with Preaching, and Commentaries . be c3lear> 5T is enough to thruft a Bible into mens Hands, And n^dof° bid them read it, For there is True Doflrin , mi plain Tochers* Doclrm , but more is not required to Regulate Faith , then Truth and ] Clarity ; Ergo, Minifters may hereafter well L'to" fpare their labor of Preaching, and 'tis better they did fo, Then to be in danger of perverting Gods true Word , by their fallible Talking, 4. To conclude this matter, we have already am- ply proved, That it is not the Bare Letter of Scripture which Regulates Faith, Buth the exaft and true Senfe of , it ( Ne putemus , faith S*. Hterom in cap. 1 . ad Ga/at. % n. Let us not think, that the Gofpel lyes in the Words of Scripture, but in their fenfe . Non in fnperfi. cie, fed in medulla , not in the Out fide , but in che in- ward Pith and Marrofr of it , non in fermonum foliis &c.) But , no Proteftant , with fo much as any colour of Reafon, can lay a more juft claim to the true Senfe X3 of 166 DifclI.CIV. Scripture only Vrotenams 0f Scripture , when He and the Church (land at Va* 7aiTofrtheriance'> Then ano/nW, a Pelagian, or a Donaust can uuesenfe do, when They draw Scripture to Their Senfe. All cfScri}tu- 0f them are alike , guided by meer Gueffes , and firfl "riZt &**d% next Thinks then ludge , and laftly Believe. are. Believe what > What Their Private Iudgemenc Mof TeJJ's them , and here is the laft Rule of their^ Faith, th™ £ui- wherof more in the next Chapter. In the interim, gueffe?. ):°u ma>7 Refolve a Proteftants Belief into thefe three Three parts broken Shreds , or Fragments . The firft part is that, cfVrcte- yeberin They bold ivith Catholicks : And I'ere they haye the Jiant Reltm $rue g^ Qjr scripture interpreted , yet no True Faith , for tyant of ' Suhrmffton in other Points. The other part is that, Tvberin They agree stith Ancient condemned Hareticksi And herein , They haye neither the True Jenfe of Scripture, nor true Faith • The laft part is proper to Themfel- ves as Protejlants ; And here they haye not fo much as the Letter, or a Word of Scripture for them : much les any true Senfe , or Faith grounded en Scripture. And Tkvttnt ^ Upon this occafion 1 come to mind Mr. Poole, lisfiurtb' °^ c^e Want of his fourth Propofition , viz. Tlut Propojttbn. scripture fpeak's plainly the particular Tenents of P rote fl ant Religion , as Proteflanifm. And muft Tell him : He /hall never find in the whole Bible, fo much as one Article of Protectant Religion ( as it (lands in Oppofi- tion to Catholick Doitrin ) grounded on Scripture. And, Becaus The man may not perhaps like of too great a burden , 1 11 only urge him to Prove thefe _. „ three Protectant Affertions. I. That there are n?o Sacra- JThree Yro- JJ . . i • i uflmt Af merits and no were ,• But let him not think to turn me fimovs for q£, as he doth the Captain , with meer empty and uVwt insignificant Words > Appendix page 34. Scripture is plain enough Pifc.IT.C.lV. no%ule of Faith. 167 enough in defcrihng the nature of tr>o Sacraments . He fliould have added ; And 'tis plain in describing the number aljo , and given good Scripture for both, which cannot be don. z. That Faith only Iuftifies . $4 That, after he hath better pondered the Text of S*. Peter 2.3. 16. He prove by Scripture , the Plainefs of it in all necejjary Points to sulfation . A fourth proof , concerning rhe Canon and Certainty of Scripture , would choak Mr.Poole : But I'll not give him fo undigeftible a pill, may He pleas to fatisfy the three former Demands by Scripture only > without GlolTes and ungrounded Inferences drawn from what he thinks to be Gods Word , But is not. 6. Some perhaps may ask why all this time, whilft we have Difcourfed of Scripture , of its certainty, of its Senfe, and Regulating Faith &c. None oiMWoo- fo Arguments againft us are taken notice of? Hath he none , or do I DilTemble them > I anfwer. The man hath nothing like an Objection. To prove Scripture to be the Word of God , He Relyes on the' Confeffion and Teftimony of Catholicks. This we have Refuted above. To prove it uncorrupt in j^/^/' the EfTentials of Faith, He Tell's us , that by looking thinglike into the Nature and quality of thofe Variom Lettions , Ari"~ which are pleaded as Evidences of Corruption , we mems*- fhall quickly find them to be in Matters of les Mo- ment. It feena's They are little , Becaus M'. Poole without Proof will have them fo . I could ihew him great ones in the Proteftant Bible , But let them pas* And be pleafed to note how poorly he ftifts of the Difficulty That Prefles. The Difficulty is concern* sng the beft Originals, which Proteftants have hi- therto j r68 Difc.lLC.IV. Sole Scripture therto met with (none of them I believe ever yet faw the Autograph, or Hand-writing of either an Euangelift or Apoftle ) Thefe Originals, I fay, cannot be proved Uncorrupt, if that Church which had them in Cuftody for a thoufand years , brought in a Delu- ge of Errors into the Chriftian World. Finally to prove , that a Proteftant hath a Sufficient Affurance of Underftanding the Senje of Scripture in things Ne- ceffary to SaJuation , He alkgeth Gods Promife, John 7. If any man Tvill do his "Will , he shall knov> of the Doclrin whether it be of God : But Proreftants do Gods Dotll ( thus much muft be added , or the Proof ftands on one Leg ) and Papifi Do not Gods will ; Ergo Thofe have Affurance of the true Senfe of Scripture , and Thefe have not. Here is the doughty Argument, and that which follows is as weightles. Proteftants , faith He, have the Affurance of Reafon (Papifts have no more J and if that will not do , They have the Affu- rance of the Sprit which God promifeth Luk n. Here is work enough for another Chapter : Yet in WVmU PaJffinS I cannot but refled on a mittaken quotation mi/quotes in UMr. Poole page xjo. where he | cites sixtus senenfis, sixtusSe- y\ncj both err>s jn the Annotation and Do&rin of ncnis' sixttts , concerning the Clarity of Scripture. sixtus Therfore libro 6. Annotat. 152. ( not 151. as C\ir. Poole ' S&otes > &• <£tL°d autem , Anfwering an Objection of S'.Chryfoflom^ plainly Afferts,that when Scripture is faid to be clear, 'tis not to be referred to the Whole Bi- ble , but to a Part of it only , wherfore , faith He S'XhtyfoJlom divides Scripture into f*o Clajfes >• The One contains the hidden and abftrufe Myfteries of Gods deep Wifdom , And this part is not char at all ( thus DifcJI. CIV. no %uleof Faith. 169 (thus much M\Poole coiiceil's. ) Altera feBio. The other seclion , or Part of it , comprneth the Firft and chiefeft Principles of all things to be Believed, and C^hief Precepts of living , And fo much is clear. Ob- ferve well. The firft and Chiefeft Principles of things to be Believed, infer no Clarity in every Particular revealed Myftery ; For He that believes this one Principle of Faith , That the Church is Holy and the Pil- lar of Truth , Hath a Firft great Principle , and may leara by it all Truth . if you pleafe to fe how M\Poole abufeth Sixtus, read him in the fage now cited. It were moft eafy to Take him tripping in other Cita- tions, But that is not my task at pretenc . This on- ly came in by Chance. C H A P. ■ V. The Reafon offri^vate men , and their private Sprit > cannot interpret Scripture. 1. A yf * Took told us above , That Proteftants have JLY J[the Afiurance of Reafon for the Senfe of Scri- pture . Happy They, if they were the only Rea- sonable men in the World. But why are not Pa- pifts as Reasonable > Why fliould the Pelagians, the Arians , or Honeft Quakers be left out of the lift of Rational men ? Or , if Thefe would Monopolize { the Ajfurance of Reafon to Themfehes for their Sence of Y Scriptu- l 17 o DifcJLGV. The private Spirit Scripture , Why are They not to be Credited upon their Parole , as well as Proteftants ? For their proof is to fay , They have it (crede quod hales & babes) TnlLweA anc* **° wi^ an Artan or Q^At* ^ay to° • Admit rfto fin therfore ( which is fals) that Reafon be allowed of as ten f the Judge , or an luftrument to fentence the Senfe of senfeof 5cr,pture, where it fpeaks obfcurely , We are no- *>emuft thing Advanced , nor one whic the wifer, unles we know mho. know fvbofe Reafon it is, that hitt's right on the Sen- %™!on ^e • Now , all of them , moft evidently do not fo tight. (unles we impioufly fay, that God hath revealed Contradictions in Scripture ) Becaus thefe mens Reafon M do mt draws contradictory Senfes out of Scripture , and in strtpture High Points of Faith alfo. Say then , good Mr. Poole , tmly* whofe Reafon muft yeild, and to whom > Muft •fyhofeXt*- an ^r^ans fubmit to yours , or yours to an Jrian ? fonmuji Muft mine bend to yours, or yours to Mine? Or yeild, *™*may we all hold on to the day of Doom, as Devided ^hiifiZe iri Fdd > as we are m lodgments concerning the Senfe vary about of Scripture ? Allow once of thefe Endles and Eter- mfenfei nai jarrs in Religion here on Earth (which this one Prin- ciple of Following private Reafon eftabliiheth) and you may feek for another Heaven then Chrift hath promi- fed to the Children of Peace Hereafter , That is , for none at all . God forgive thefe late Tumultuous Spi- rits, the True caufe of our wofull Diffentions. But let us go on . And x. Pray you tell me, when Proteftants fay They have the Affurance of Reafon for the Senfe of Scriptu- re in controverted Points of Faith, E. G. The Trinity $ whnt figmfics this word Reafon with them? Doth it im- port u lyrmd Difcours % much of that nature as School- mea 4 Difc. F J.C.V. no Interpreter of Scripture. 171 men ufe , when they eftabJifli their Tenents in Divi- s*0*ri## nity > Iffo; the Principle of this Difcours muft be ad- *££/$„ mitted of , and own'd by the two Ad vers parties, woriRe*. when by Reafon only They plead for the True knkfmteni* of Scripture, And the Conclufion of the Difcours muft^' be drawn from Fremi/es founded on This received Prin* J(T^ cijtle . Thus much fuppofed , I might here ask firft: two Advert Upon what known and admitted Principle Do our Pro-^™w teftants ground a lawful Syllogifm, wherby They pro- ™m$£m ve , That Their Reafon hath ever theg/*. gular Friviledge to fall right on the True fenfe, whilft N(?Pr.Wfi- Others as learned as They fwerve from it? If here dpie to They talk of the Vntlion teaching Truth, of the spirit prove that &c. They will be urged again for a Principle to prove, %££*"" That thefe Favors Angularly belong to Them, and not to'* to Others who Diflent from them. But we will'fc** wave this Argument, And only note, how in all tho- fe Difputes which our Proteftants hold either with Ca- tholicks or Se&aries (take for an Inftance the Arians) the True fenfe of Scripture is fo far of from being a T&*fi*fi received Principle by both thefe Litigious Parties, That^^- it is ever the Thing in Queftion, and muft be proved Two sett* by another own'd and admitted Principle , if the Difcours rm diftuu ftand upon folid ground. *§"* 3. One example will give you more Light* Mr. Poo- j^ueftkn: le AlTaults an Arian (a far weaker Adverfary then a Catholick) with a Scriptural Proof, for that High'^^ Myftery of our faith , the Sacred Trinity , and argues^***" thus . Scripture faith Tohn 1. c. 5. 7. There are Three, that hear record in Heaven , the Father , Word , and Holy Choft , and thefe three are one; But the Senfe of this Scrip- ture, faith M\ Poole , is, That God is ofie in Ejfence , Y x and ?7* Difc.H. C.V. The private Spirit and Three Difintt Perfons: The Father Vnfroductd, the Son Produced , and the Holy Ghoil: Proceeding from Both. Ergo we mud admit a Trinity. Obferve well. The Arian Admit's the fir ft Proportion , or the Words of Scripture , And here is the only Principle agreed only tbefe ftoo Dijputants ; But utterly denyes the fe- ThLwUo COnC* ' Vl^ T^ fi ^rdlM out °f ^efi Words, And cell's ^thtworl n's Adversary , that this Senfe is the very Thing in que- cfseTt?ture,J}ion; but no received Principle? And therfore muft be Myrtles Proye^> nozfoppofed againft him : Proved I fay, and by j~pt Sole Serif tare ■ which yet cannot be done, Though we turn to all the Texts in the Bible, Moft juftly ther- fore may the Arian tell Mr. Poole : If his Faith fall upon fuch a Determinate Senfe now given , He Believes it, either Becaus His private Judgement molds Scripture to that Meaning , or , Becaus He takes it upon the Authority of a Church, which he profefTedly Difowns, and will not Believe. 4. In reference to what is here faid, note firft. That as the True fenfe of Scripture is fuppofed ,. and not proved againfl an \^4rian by force of Scripture in thia particular My fiery, fo much more, it is ever fuppo- fed and not proved , when Proteflants difpute againft ?f°H ■ Catbolicks. The reafon is. Their private Judge- ]-o , ]{ merit firft makes what fenfe they pleafe ( which is no vesdsemfe received Principle) and afterward They vapor like cfenp-u- Ccnquerours , as \i fole Scripture did the deed, and de- "r'iutopb!" f"ared us. Upon the great AfTurance I have of This my Allertion, I chalenge CWr. Poole (or any Prote- w/iw*™ ^ant ) t0 Pr°duce one Text againft the Roman Catho- Texff lick Faith , which, without the CMixturt of Their scripture priyate judgements, or unadmitted Glofles, /peak's agamfi the r J ° 7 (q Di fc. I T . C V. no Interpreter of Scrip lure. 1 7 $ fo much as Probably againft it. The more plaufi- *"»*» bJc place rhcy infill on , is Thar of S'. John cap. 6. vn- C/J^ltck les yon eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drin\^ his Blood without &c. For communion under both kinds, which never- themixt"- theles muft have rvventy Glomes , and as many fe/fiud- [e^Th;trj . , c f4 ... . J I J r private lud. gements upon ir, betore it can put on a likelyhood ot a gements. proof againft: us . 5. Note 2. That whilft the Senfe of Scripture lyes under difpute , and is not agreed on by the two Par-^% Pi- ties at Difference , For example a Catholick and Pfo-/j5^X«r teftant , It is but Labour loft in the Protejlant } to Af- whenrky fault his Adverfary with Texts of Scripture : For,"'*?"^ the Catholick Anfwers, Olim pojjideo prior pojfdeo , I ha- er'^Hrc* ve ever believed the fenfe of Gods Word to beTuch as you know we Catholicks owt And can you my An-\*h"uhe~ ugonift, perfwade your felf to drive me out of the^jj?* Poffeffton of my Ancient Belief, by your Sole private Judgement, or, Thofe new GlofTes you father on scripture ? If fa : A worthy Gentleman , who by right of his Anceftors for a thoufand years and upward now quietly polTefleth his lands, May be turn'd out of Houfe and Harbor, upon the private Judgement: of fome New upttart Felloe, That Tell's him , He ve^ rily thinks the Ancient Writings for his Lands , are not wel Underftbod; Therfore he will firft do him the favor to explicate them according to his private Opi- nion {though contrary to the Senfe hitherto received) which done, he will drive him out a doors, and make him a Beggar. This is our very Cafe. 6. Contrarywife, when the Senfe of Scripture isHo»w agreed on , we may Argue as Schoolmen do, and draw ™ayarzU£ from it Theological Comlujions >• which though often Va-{^ cr'il Y. 3 rious , j^4 Di fell. C V. The private Spirit or Judgement nous amongft Divines , yet the Principle admitted (I mean the Senfe of Scripture) remain's unquestio- ned, and is maintain'd without Contradiction. With- out Such an agreed on fenfe , which either Scripture (as it often doth) Delivers plainly enough, or, The com- mon confentof Learned men makes Highly proba- ble, or, The Church of Chrifl declares certain . 'Tis to no more purpofe to Difpute out of Scripture , then to fpeak Arabick to an illiterate Peafant . Yet, theloofe Behavior of our Pioteftants is fuch , that it lead's them The Taney ( without the guidance of thefe Lights) firft to Fancy of series a Senfe of their own , and then draw ftrange Condit- ions from it. So Ms Poole. After he had by his own Interpretation, perverted that Text of $'. Paul, The Church is the Pillar and Ground of Truth \ might wel fay, The Church is not proved Infallible . Thus much is noted , if the word Reafon fignify a formal Dif- cours . Another jt perhaps Proteftants may reply (For in Truth it fftheword IS l^e hardeft thing in the world where to have them -Re*fo*,re- in their Anfwers ) That Reafon here imports not any futed. Difcours at all, But an immediate'r/^r Light Transfu- fed into their Mind, when they read Scripture (like a Beam fliot from the Sun ) wherby their Eyes as perfpicuoufly difcern the molt Abftrufe Senfe in it, as men do the Sun by its Light, or the firft known Prin- ciples of nature by Their own Indifputable Evidences. Is this Reply think you rational, that draws not fo much as a Dram of Reafon after it ? For, if their new Faith hath fet new Eyes in their head , It hath not, furely, pluck't out their Neighbours Eyes , who yet, 1 hope^ may fee what is dtfcernabfc hy All. None then Difc.IL G V, no Interpreter of Scripture* iyj then ever queftioned the Suns-fliining at Noon-day, or Writ Commentaries on the firft natural Principles ; Yet we fe Thefe new Sectaries not only highly at Va- riance about the Senfe of Scripture ; but alio Gods Churcn ( which hath Eyes as well as They ) as high- ly oppofite oppofite to them . However, the Church mull be Counted Pur-blind , and They only ftarp- fighted , though the Light they fancy may licence any Haeretick to (ay what he pleafes : For, as They Set tight [a up their Light, lb an Arian may fet up his againft it, uPa&ai»ft And fwear 'tis the Clearer of the two for his fenfe. Ug ' And who can gainfay him > 8. From this Difcours it follows , that the Affuran- ce of Reafon, wherof our Proteftants talk fo much, is a mod injipid Word; For it doe 's not fignify a Formal Difcours for want of a known and received Principle , Nor, That quicker immediate Light (of all Fooleries the word ) now refuted . I'll go farther, and fay, Nochri- That no Chriftian by the force of Re 'a j "on only, when fiianby he reads Thefe difficil Myfteries in Scripture , can fo feafono»- j % * i'j cptn dive much as once fatten a prudent certain I udgement, ei mothe ther upon the Thing revealed , or the Ratio credendi : a^wm Not upon the Thing revealed , For that Tranfiends the Capaci- r'fScr^iHz ty of Reafon ; nor upon the ^Motive , l»hy he Believes , For hy the force of Reafon only , he cannot know exaftly (Guefs be may and mifs ) that God fpeak^s exprefly in Juch a fenfe . Therfore, if upon his own Half-fighted and too da- ring Conceit, He will proceed to a fetled Iudgement, and fay poftively what God fpeak's , He tells the Story before he knows it, And confequcntly highly offends againft Reafon : For Reafon diftates , that we muft firft Learn, Befoie we undertake to Teach , or, raihly eater into the^ i?6 Difc.II. C V. J frigate Spirit or ludgement the deep Secrets of Gods Divine Wrfdom, without a certain and infallible Do&or. 9. Therfore before we come to the Affent of Divine Faith , A matter , an infallible Proponent is neceffa- ry , who without Ambiguity ajjures us that God Speak's, and in fuch a determinate senfe . This once admitted, Reafon hath no place at all in the very Elicite Acl of Faith , or , if it enter , it Jjtoiles Faith, as I fliall prefent- ly declare. The^Diffe- 10. I'll therfore Explicate my felf further , and .rerttopr** withall Ihew how Reafon goes to Work in a Prote- ge* w* ftant, And how differently it Proceeds in Catholicks. Cathaiicktl'he Proteftant hath no more but the bare Letter of *»din* a Bible before his eyes, And toyls hard with that 'one weak Inftrttment, his own Reafon, to find out Gods Senfe Therin . He Read's , he Humm's, He Pauf- fes , He Expound' s , He interpret 's > and afterward , Belie*. sgStaries yes what he thinks is True. Marck well. He khTthink ky°^s **hat He Thinks, but yet knoTvs not, upon any Ratio- bm knot* nal Inducement, or , [olid Motive Extrinfecal to his Thought, not why that Cod /peaks as He Things. Queftion him in any Par- ticular , and you will find , what I fay , mod True4 For example. Why, when He reads Thofe Words, *t\m is my Body, he believes Chrifts Senfe to be: This is a Sign or Figure of my Body. Ask him where is the Rational Inducement that lead's him to own this fenfe ? If Rational , He is able to give an Account of it to others ? If herein .he fliow lamfelf unacounu able , He doth not only expofe his Belief to the con- tempt of VnhheWrs , but to Thofe thoufands of be- lieving Chriftians that oppofe it, Nevertheles The poof >Tis fo . For he can render no other Reafon for this u*,vt*' new They be. iivjt. Difc.H.C.V. no Interpreter of Scripture. 177 netrcoyned Senfe, But that after the reading of Scri- pture , pondering the Words , examining the Difficul- ties, and conferring places together, He is wrought ii ro a Perfwafion , That God Speak's jufi a* be Thinks , and no otherwife ; where you firft fe, That all the Keaion he hath, walk's, round in the com- rfc*Ff*/&«- pas of his own weak Head , without Shewing fo much'f.^*™1 as a Refemblance of any futable Evidence of it to others , who notwuhftanding know Reafon as well as He. You fe fecondly, That fuch a man Afts ffw % m©re the Part of a Pope , then ever any did that^""^ Sate in fettrs Chair 5- For he pofitively Defines whac Scripture faith , without the Extrinfccal Help either of Ancient Tradition , or the Continued Senfe of the Church. Never Pope defined fo at Random. 11. And upon this Occafion I fay more. \Mhet\°f,hefi**. the very beft of Fathers, whether a St. Aujiin , a St.'™™"* Hierom (or who- you will ) differently ( as it often hip- expounding pens) expound and interpret Scripture by their Pri- ^rij>turet vate lodgement, grounded upon Vnevidtnwd Principte^ot upon rneer conje&ural Probabilities; Their private Sen- timents can Advance us no further , But to an Opi- nion only (which therfore i may , without offence, Reject) and never bring us to a fetled Acl of Faith . Yet, a far more Fnmdenced private Judgement in a Proteftant doth all , And (as the only Light he fee's by) ferves him both to apprehend that God Speak's, and in w^at Senfe he Speak*. Upon fo great a want of Evidence his whole Faith depends ♦ Hence we fe thirdly . If Faith; be a difcoutfive Acl , as feme of oup New men hold, That is, an A& founded on a Rational obfecTbyv Inducement-, which inclines the Z Mind 178 DifcIICV. J private Spirit tioVnii* Mind to Judge as they do, and Believe as They Judge y it 'fay why he iS impoffible for any Proteftant to Anfwer the queiHon Believes m why he believes ( that God fpeak's and in iuch a Senfe) hedcth. by the Strength and Light of his own Judgement : For He only flead of the Rational Objective Inducement , which ought ta return's incline him , and we inquire after ; He returns only the Sub- fubjjiv$ je^i*t Light of his oWn Internal Judgement ', which being on* Light of ly a fallible Ac~l9 Clear's nothing Without fome kjnd of fur- known ther Evidence > nor Aniwers the Question, why he Believes*. firAnfwcr. Unles this be the Why, That, becaus he thinks his own Thought true , He is pleafed to believe as he think's ♦ Where you find the reafon moft unrea- fonable , Becaus it is Phrefolvable into either Rational Motive , or any known and received Principle . : 12. We fe 4. Though we Allow to Proteftants: as much of the private Spirit as their Harts can wifii for, wherby They are , as it were, pufhed on to Judge fe^ir'T' anc* Bdieue : Yet this Spirit being only ( As They fay ): fitppofesM The Operation of Grace , chiefly fortifies the PoWer that Be- fropujeth neves ; But propvfeth no new , or further Rational Motive of Motheof Btfaf '• For it muft fuppofe the total motive, ^intece- Faith, dently propoft d , difcernable by more then one only, Before it can either pulli , or work to any purpofe. P"{«/fc»»And this is what fome Proteftants Affert, tiki That fttv ft the Oper.irion of the Spirit is more by way of Efficiency ( ex parte fubjecli credemis ) in order to the begetting Faith , thenfuppletory of the Rational Inducement , That objectively Trote/fams moves , and draWs men to Believe . Be it how you will €0nVtpf°y ( though indeed our Proteftants have an odd Spirit) "oftwln They "cannot fliew probably, That the Operation of fifrnacets Gods Divire Grace is more their peculiar Inheritance, TJmbTu l^n 0t^ers , who Believe contrary to them . But lance, UL Difc.I I. C V. no Interpreter of Scripture. 179 of this hereafter . In the Interim note , That in the Difcours hitherto , we inquire not fo much after the Reafon of Protectants for the Canon of Scripture , as for its Senfe in Points of Controverfy . Wherof you will fe more in the next Chapter . CHAP. VI. The new mode of Proteftants Mifmter* preting Scripture , which f rogues the Churches Infallibility , is more Amply Refuted. I, \V/k noted above , That it much Avail's, W when Se&aries take a liberty of glofimg Scripture as they pleafe , to urge them to a Proof of their Interpretations ♦ By this clofe Dealing , we ftall learn much of their Fallacious Spirit, and fe , How they both abufe their Readers , and (which is worfe) the Sacred Word of God. x. In the former Difcours we Handled that Con- *"$***. troverfy concerning the Infallibility of Paftors ttdSf-JS Teachers in the Catholick Church . To prove the infallible Verity , we allege fuch Exprefs Scripture , That I dare T Mode of 3. Fot the infallibility then of Living Teachers we cite what Chrtsi faid , Luk. 10. Ij& He that Hears you , hears me , &c. ( or , as the Greek read's, and perhaps more fignificantly , Hearing you, he Hears me ) and Ar- Argumenti gue thus. H? f^ho bears Chrtft [peak , Hears a Teacher fir in/alii- fubjetlively Infallible in DocJrin and Teaching , But He Tvho bleTeach- fjsaf>s t})0^ ^ -^\1Q att p0ln[ed at by fiat pat tide , You, Hears Cbri/l fpea\ (for hearing you, be hears we:) Ergo, he Hears Teachers fuhjetliye/y Infallible , in their Duclrtn and Teaching. Tfs^S 4' To l- a GranV amongll our Sectaries Anfwer's . •j e artes yj^ Saying of Chrijl , He that hears you &c. ivas Abfolu- tely true m the Apofiles , who kept themielves to that which was revealed by Chri/l > But it was only condi- tion ally true ( mark the Glofs ) in thtir Succeffors f%d ej?, So long and fo far , as you fpeak^ my Ttords, and not your ©>»-. Obferve, I fay , the injury done the Text by a Self conceited Gloffer , And he fpeak's peremptorily (it ^pm but conditionally true in then Sutcejjcrs ) Who faith fo Good Sr? Cbri/l r9 Or you I Prove your G/ofi, which Overreaches the Text, and All the Words which xcn> deft* Q0d everfpoke. Muft I therfore be fooled into a \trlengo fa!s Bellef » ^ hold ail the Pallors in Cmjls Church abom to Fallible, Becaus you a meer fallible CAim , arepleafed ptrjwadt to tell me They were fallible, or, that AH they had 7ajior's *r* was orr'y l^e Sm*tt allowance of a Conditional , but of no fallible. Abjolutz Infallibility} tvangelical Sincerity requires a proof of an AiTertion fo newly coyned. Produce it ally m,.) tn€n an^ tec it be plain Scripture . Unles this be fy ,'thfa the done, Any New Hsretick may give the quite contra- */¥*» ry Glofs to Cbrifts Words, And fay, That the Apofiles toJtoicLu ^€re only conditionally infallible , fthiljl hying **>nk Chrijl , lymfaUi. Toey might be rightly mjhucJed } in cafe they erred -7 But that Difc. 1 1. C. VT, frotefimts interpreting Scripture. \ 8 1 the following Paftors of the Church Mere made ^Abfolutely In- T^rSuc- fallible , Becaus they had not the Perianal Pre fence of fo rr r» i- ^i r 1 proof by les Succeiiors, But prove nothing . They lay, The hththefe Words were eonditimall in the Apoftles Themfelves, stftnm. But abfolute in their SucceiTors, And prove nothing. You are here both alike, unles Lathers proof help you out . Doclor OWartwm Lntherm yuit Jtc habere, fie volo fk jnbeo . You have not more. You re- ply , Where the Command is for preaching , Mattb. *8. the Reftraint- is added . What Reftrainr ? No- ne at all • When fenr as lawful MifJioners to preach Chrtjh Do&rin Then They could deliver no Other Do- £tri:i Jem by Htm , and as Members of the Church thon founded . ?: Herein they couid neither go ktyeni, nor full fliott of their Cornmijfwn. I fay as fent > For no uowf*r man , God knows, faith that the Apoftles or 70. Dif ^dtlw cipies, or the Paftors of the Catholick Church were, ?*fiorsare or are Infallible m every Ordinary matter, wherof they l»f«l cafually dffcQurfat!., Zy 5. Well i8x Difc.II.CVI. Tk neV> tnode of 5. Well . But the Medage , Thefe 70. Difciples were fent upon, required no Infallible Affiftance; For they were not to deliver fully Chrifis Do&rin, But only to prepare for it, By telling their Hearers, That the Kingdom of God is at hand. Here is alfo more then is probable ,or, can be proved : For, is it pro- bable, think ye , That thefe 70. tent to preach, reitera- ted nothing but thefe few words The Kingdom of Gad is at band ? Is it probable that They were fo Toung-tyed, as to fay nothing at all of this Kingdom , of drifts Sacred Virtues , or of his Miracles , wherby He founded this Kingdom &c. Be it how you will , They were Infallible at leaft in the delivery of that Meifage : For had Chrijt ( fent by his Eternal Fa- ther ) Perfonally delivered the Meffage , He had fpo- ken Infallibly ,• But, faith the Text, He who Hears you bear's me; Ergo thefe jo. were Infallible in the Mef- fage tney delivered. You reply again. Though the Apoftles andthofe jo.Difcifles Were fuppofed infallible Be* fore Chrisl Afcenfton^ yet nothing can be drawn from Hence for the Churches comtnuall Infallibility. EirH , Becam were Sent abroad by Chrisi , when there Were no Infallible Writing* , containing Chrifts DocJrin. x. They bad fuf* ficient Evidences of Miracles , in curing difeafes and cafttng Anfoertd ou* Dev^s^ to attejl that Infallibility. To this fecond * I anfwered above , That the Church hath the like Evidence of h fallibility by Miracles , Cafling of De« »fi* For, who fell's you, Sr, That this and no other isUtim "ndi the Abfolute fenfe of Orifts Words ? Why may They not as well import the Affiftance of Infallibility, as that of Confolation and Grace* Prove your Glofs, and by Scripture; This we urge for. We Catho- licks fay, without drawing fuither Proof from either Councils or Fathers, which you hold Fallible, That Cbrifts following words John 16 * 13. When that spirit ef Truth shall come , he Teill teach you all Truth , taken in their obvious fenfe , warrants this Infallible Affiftance for ever. Can your Fallible Spirit allure me of the. con- Grace, 184 DifcII.CVL The m^ mode of contrary I You fay , Yes : For thcfe laft Words are Retrained to ihe Apofties only. Here is an- other Glofs or Gutfs, as unlucky as the former: For who ReftraiiS here, Cbrift or You I if you do it, you may as well reftrain the Confolation ofGra« co to all the Apofties Succeilors , as Infallible Affi- jlance. 7. We prove bqth the One and the Other Blef- Ang granted to the Church by our Saviours own Words, CMttt. 1%. 20. I am "frith you always* to the end of the world ; and moreover Affirm, that the Con- ioLtian of Grace gtanted the Church ( whofe duty confoUthn is S3 Teach us Truth ) Benefit's little in order co that of grace End, unles. it be accompanied with the further Fuvi- notbij m fejgf of infallibility. Far , T»bat comfom hath Any \ W he- church ther Learned ox illiterate ) to Hear , that t'^e Pafion of C.hrifls without Church , hate much intenour Confolation and Grace , if this infaliibt- fow^fal though afflitt his hart > All and every one of theje Payors , no^uhjlanding the plenty of their Grace , may cheat him into damnable. Error 9 and teach , There it net- tle* God, Heaven >. nor HelL &. i might further fliow, How utterly inconfiftent The Con a this fuppofed, and yet ^explicated Canfolation of Gra- Lthncf ce is , with the Spirit of a whole Church which may Grace and j>eCeive us ♦ Bail the thing need's no Proof , for it divine IS evident , That God , who hath promifed to di- Affiiance reft us by his Paftors , cannot comfort them fo plen- uncompof tifully with Celeflial Infpiratims , and Permit all to de- whole™' *1 tide and cofenus with Pernicious Errors. Will he church, give them grace , Think ye , to Talk only , and not to teach his Ferkies certainly * To live holily { for his grace fecves for feme end) and Leave them to a PoflL DifcJ I. CIV. Troteftants interpreting Scrifttri 1 85 Poflibility of Corrupting his Spoufe , his own Sancti- fied Church with fals Dodrin > This in a word is Gc°*m to tell God, That he courts the Watchmen of his Church mthu With Heavenly Confolation , who neVertheles may Betray his c forth Cauft, and gm up his Cittj to the Devil W hen thy ph*fe faj,/l%£ For here in They are left to their own Wills and Fancies. ptrmitt\ God you know is Truth , and He loves Truth .*»' *»'"!? Truth is that which he firft eftablifhed in his Church,** imk'< And it Anfwers to that firft Operation of Chr Lilian, which is Divine Faith, the ground of all Sanftity. To tell me therfore, That He comforts a whole Church by AVaradott Grace , and yet leaves it fo tottering upon Vncertainties , That o/setta- none can With ahfolute t^fjfurance Jay f He either teaches , or rteSm bear's Truth delivered in any Article of Chrijlian Faith > is Worfe then a meer chim&ra, And makes our Bountifull Lord not only a very Niggard of his Graces, But alfo gives him a most high ^Affront . The Grace therfore of Confolation, The com- which he allowes his Church , as a church, ever iin*£* °f plyes , or fuppofeth that Arch-favour of Infallible Ajjtftan- fofabtke ce . Rob it of this Priviledge , and other Graces, favour of avail little. l»f«m- 9. And here by the way , I mud needs propole ^* one queftion to our Protectants . It is , whether God , Suppoling his Promifes already made, can Aquejih* according to their Principles, permit that the whole ProP°fi*> Church ( Vnaffifted by his infallible Spirit ) loofe, with- "£' ev Jland , and re) eft what ever Grace he gives or harh Church given it ? If they fay, Yes , It is Pofiible. Then '""J'J^ 1 Infer : God can permit that the 'Whole Church ^ au may turn Traitour , and become Impious ; For % grace? Church which withflands, loofeth , or reje&s all Gra- ce , is traiterous and impious . If they fay no , it A a is i 86 DifcJI.GVI. The nrv mode of is againfl: his Goodnes to permit fuch a Univerfal Inv piety. They nmft acknowledge, That he cannot but preferve a Church for ever (whether confiding of "^ Eled or no, we difpute not ) in his Grace and favour, necejf*ry au^ *^ infallibly . Ergo I fay , He cannot buth InfaUi- utht bly alio (fuppofing his Promifes) Preferve it in Trutbby ch^h M the fpecial Affiftance of his own Unerring Spirit, Truth being , as all know , as neceflary to the Church as Gra- ce is. And thus we fe in noronous great Sinners, who, although they have a thouiand Incitements of Grace to amend their lives , yea , better themfelves by it in fome particulars , yet as long as Divine Truth neceflary to Chriftians is wanting, Their ftate is De- plorable . To conclude then , Here is my Di- lemma. Either it is poffible , That the whole Church, That is , All the Teachers, and Hearers in it , may abandon all Gods Revealed Verities , and neither Teach nor Hear one Word of his Truth or 'tis impoffible* If the firft be granted : 'Tis not only poffible , that the whole Church may revolt from God and Truth, But may loofe all Grace likewife. Grant this, and fay next what will become of our Protectants Elefi people, who Becaus Predeftinated to , Eternal life, cannot but have Grace > Obferv^well •fuftarus rhe Paradox . They cannot Loofe grace, yet 'tis pof- fible never to hear a Word of Truth • For all their Minifters ore fallible . What kind of Eleft are thefe who have Certainty of Grace , but no certainty of Truth with it > Now , if on the other fide they hold it impofiibU , That the whole Church may defert Gods Truths , They grant w^hat we ask, And muft fay it hath the infallihk Affiance we plead for. The Reafon Difc. 1 1 . C. VII- TrCteft ant interpreting Scripture. 187 Rcafon hereof I have amply delivered in the former Difcours Chap. 3. Becaus al the Human science, wit, or Learning in Nature alone, can no more Secure a Church from rrror, Then give it Grace. God therfore doth , ^fl"1*9' and will ever gracioufly prevent it with both thefe Bfef- church a* ftngs , And as Infallibly keep it Sound in Truth , as *■■■**■ Holy aud Sanc?ified. IZLfiei by Grace* CHAP. VII. More of this Sublet, ' 1. T3 Y what is /aid in this fliort Digreilion , you fe Jjhow pittifully our new men mangle the Text now Cited : I am 7vito you Always to the End of the World. Heat their Glofs. Yes fay They . This Promife was made to the i^Apoftles and their snecejfors, But in a diffe- rent degree : For tt T*as of continual and infallible Jjjiflanct t(hthe Apcjlles ; but to their Succejfors of continual and fitting affiftance, hut not infallible* The like is repeated after- Vrotefttmtt ward, when They ask, what ft* fay to this > Marry, t^vtflDi} Sr , I fay , it's nothing to the Purpofe . For you nei- vittingani ther declare what thts fitting continual ajfijlance granted mfamu thefe Succeflbrs (as diftind from the other, allowed AfiP«nce- the Apoftles ) is, nor can you declare thefe different Degrees ± And though you did fo, contrary to the Theyftill Churches fenfe, you ortly vent your own feeble and ru»»»m fallible Sentiments without Proof , which 1 neither Gtrfer(dK ought , nor can in Prudence Believe* To be piairi v Therfore f be plea-fed to Anfwer . Hath God Reveal- A a 2 ed - j88 Difc. H. C. VF I. Then* Mode of ed to you what this fitting and continual Affiance grant- ed the ApofUes Succeffors is? No. Doth any An- cient Council or Unanimous confent of Fathers Mince Thefe Words, and Dogmatize here as you do, ort only mention a Prefence of the Spirit of conjolation and Grace, excluding irfiallihle i^Afiiflance I No, All is contrary, as I could demonftrate, were it here my task to prove Truth againft you ( but this is done by others) as 'tis to force you to prove l&hat your Fancy only vents a- gainfl it. And rnark how* Fancy goe's to work. Cbri/l laith , / am frith you always to the end of the World : That is , faith your Fancy , He is prefent by his Spirit ly a fitting Ajfiflance , But not by an Affiftance Infallible. Thisglofs, Not ly infallible Ajfiflance is your o^n 5 For neither Gods Word , nor Vniverfal Church , nor Ge- neral Council , nor the Confent of Fathers, nor Anti- quity ever uttered any Thing like it. Grant therfo- re it be Vnreafonable , as you fay, to put your Party to prove a Negative , Vi^. That any of the Fathers denyed this place to extend to infallibility , I am fure , it is mod Reafonable to force you to a Proof of your own Affirmative : For you do&rinally Teach , That Chrifl in this place Allows no certain Infallibility to his Church. This , becaufe pofitiyely afjertcd, is pofiti- vely to' be made good , by a more nrenuous Proof then Fancy only . You fay again . Thofe of your Party only delivered what they Conceived to be the Meanirg of this, and other Places of Fathers, which do no more, then prove the Perptuity of the Church. seBarks What They conceived weak fallible Men > Pray, ^It'-ilf w^atam * tnt better for their Conceiptsr* Muft I &»fi change my Ancient Faith , for the Rowling , and ne- ver Difc. IL C. Vr T TroteUanh interpreting Scripture* 1 8 fuppofeth a Church conftantly True and Holy, And the Conftant Truth of it implyes infallible Ailiftance , as is already proved. z. Proteftants may yet reply . They deliver what An0h^ they conceive to be the Senfe of Chrijls Words : I am Hhn. Kith you always &c . Catholicks can do no more t and Mark well . As the words do not explicitly exclude Infallible Afliftance from the Church always, fo nei- ther do They explicitly include it : For Cbrift faith not explicitly , I will be always with you to the End of the World by my Infallible ALfiiftance . Thus then the ca- fe (lands. They Reftrain Chrifts Promife,and We fee tb Extend it too far . They (ye /ay) come to short of the Sen- fe , by cutting of Infallible A finance . We Catholicks ( They fay ) go beyond the Bounds , and aid more to the Text than "chrift Spoke. Both of us therfore are GloflerSj and why is not Their Glofs as Orthodox as Ours? Here is a better Objeftion then any hitherto propoied; rh*sote And \ the Solution might eafily end all Controverfics, Hon of it would SeAaries pleas to wave a few Self-comeipts , and E^0di^v prudenrly Acquiefce to Reafon , whilft Truth plead 's/™'™ againfts their Errors. 3. Firft then (though I prefs not much this Point ) £**** 'tis evident , That we Catholicks are the Elder Brothers, ™l™nto as Numerous at ieaft as They, and (tofpeak modeft-^/*M/^> ly ) as Learned . Why therfore when both They '?"tf""*s- A a 3 and 190 DifcJI.C.VH. Thene^MoJeof and We interpret Scripture, and (lard as it were equally ballaixed , becaus 'tis yet feppofed uncertain , who gueifeth better, why is not, 1 fay, Our Inter- pretation (could we prove no more) as good as Theirs, contrary to us? If They prefer Their Glofs before Ours, fomething of Weight, befide meer Fancy, muft turn the Scales , and Ballance mort for them then Tp theft cfus > Wealwayes ask for this greater Poyfe in con- ctthcUcks. troverted matters , and can get no aafw-er . An unwor. 4, Secondly : I muft neceilarily here Note an un- thytrcceed worthy proceeding of Setfaries with us, when we 'fiiries. ' Produce Scripture, Fathers, or Councils for Catholick Do- ftrin. Their humor (and 'tis a a ftrange onej run's on thus. Firft They begin with their Glotles , and labor to pervert that Senfe which the Catholick owns. And if after much Trifling they can Dfgmfe this Senfe* or Tirint it of from the Catholick Meaning, They hold the Work done, and cry Vi#ory . Mark in our prefenf matter Their Frigid way of Arguing ( and it isalike in all other Controverfies ) That Text fay They ; The Holy Choft 1*8 teach you all Truth , may be Reft rained to the Apoftlcs only. That other, The Cbunb is the Pil- lar and ground of Faith , may have the Senfe They allow, of, and no more . This Promife of our Saviour , I jetlt he v>itb you always &c. U\Uy exclude Infallibility . And when They bring the Clofe of a Point debated , to their own Selffeeming, it may he ; They think all lafe . Wheras 'tis moft evident , that nothing is yet fo much as probably concluded : For , as They lay, Thibare j*t:e Senfe of t*fe Places nolv cited, May be as Protefiants un- s%Zif devftand ; (o , I fay , Toe contradictory Prop o futon 11 every ftavu'sfct Irbti as g&oi. T\>e Senfe May be 44 CaMtcks wderftand \ mpovf. Who Difcl I, C. VII. Troteftants interpreting Scripture. 191 Who muft Therfore , whilft we are Both yet fappofed to (land, as it were , on equal Terms, Determine what God hath abfolutdy Revealed in thefe Scriptures? I fay abfolutely, For the queftion here is not what a Parti- cular man may Imagin God to have Spoken , But what He hath de faao Spoken . The Reafon hereof is clear. Becaufe God Speak's not in fo weighty a Matter as this is to Try mens Wits , or to Hear Them tell him. Lord /itch may be the Senfe of your Words ; faith rem Though I cannot fay what it is; Nor can cur Faith /"f*"(!a Rely on what we only Think^Hc may have Spoken, But "J* mm on what He hath actually Revealed, And we have means think God (thanks be to God ) To know this AbfoUxe Senfe , as l^J//' fhali declare in the 9. Chapter where the Obje&ion is * " * fully folved. 5. In the mean time be pleafed to refleft firft : That VJ?'!?*MS when meer Fallible men feremptorily put upon Scriptu- tniHrtoui nam » re a Senfe , which They cannot fo much as probably to Gods prove ( But by their own Erring gueffesonly) to be®?rd"s the true meaning of the Holy Ghoft ( and this in a thelriL matter which Highly concerns Saluation ) They plain- ly Injure Gods Sacred Word. Protectants are thefe fallible men, and do fo; Ergo, they injure Gods Word. The firft Propofuion is clear in the Cafe of Artans, who , Becaus They peremptorily give a Senfe to tho- fe Scriptures which relate to the Real Vnity of Three Perfons in one Divine Effence ( the matter is of H^gh import; nee ) and cannot prove it , Bur by the force of Their Erring Gueffes only, They Wrong both God and his Word. The fecond Propofition is as Evident,- For r^< fnofi Proteftants abfolutely fay, The Scriptures now cited, include not (yea, pofitively exclude a perpetual infal- libility 191 Difc. II. C. VII. The mt» Mode of lihility allowed the Church) This fenfe (and'tisia Point of higheft Importance, For the clearing of it End's all Controverfies ) they cannot prove , But by their own Erring gueiTes only, And therfore injure Scriptu- re, in faying God hath fpoken that, which cannot be fo much as probably proved, was Spoken. 6. Refleft 2. It is not enough, that Sedaries tell SeSariet us upon their own fallible Parole, That our Places of comenct Scripture May be interpreted as they pleafe , or, co- difficuit/ me not home to prove the Churches Infallibility; For Admit thus much Gratis, They yet convince nothing : Becaufe it is one thing to fay (and God knows only to fay it) our alleged Scriptures (for example that of r#/f» we &' Paul > The Church is the pilar and ground of Truth) pro- prove not ve not a Church Infallible , and a quite other, pofuively curDotlrin f$ y^ ^ p f/ f$ fo ^fj^ ^^ moft ^ can *s not to fay . r i ; * . . J \\ They prove infer out ot this Negative : Such places prove not, were all the contra, granted they defire, is that They give the flip to fo ^# many Texts of Scripture, or infringe fo much force Thtif of our Proofs. Alas, This only is to pull, as it n»*ken- were, fo much of a Houfe down; But it doth not deavourii therfore follow , that They pofitively give in as good down not to ^x** to ^ contrary senfi , or, Build up the Strutfu- buildup the re of their new Dodrin concerning the Churches Fal- M*chinof lihility , To pulldown one Proof, is not to deflroy ^otirin. a^^e can fy ( we nave m°re Strings to our Bow then one) much les is it to build up an oppofite Do&rin. The Machin thefe Se&aries would fain build, lyes in this one poftive Ajfertion. The whole Church is Fallible. F*»9^This, fay I, Fancy only ErecTs; For it (lands un- ~fbZ"h Prop,t: ■ That is , it neither is , nor can , nor lhall ever be pofitively proved . - And hence 7. Re- DifcIIX. VII. Trotejlmts interpreting Scripture. 19J 7. RefLft 3. If Frotcftants , who rely totally on Scripture Proof, Pofitively Aifert, as They do , That the whole Church ts fxlltbfc, They are obliged both in Coifcience and all Law of Deputation, to prove what They fay : For Afjerenti incumbit probatio . Obferve my reafon . When Luther and Sectaries came am©ngft us , and troubled the world , They heard the voice of a who'e Ancient Church againft them , ownirfg frhe infallible Afliftance of Gods Directing Spirit, for which we now argue . The Church pleaded thus: Ohm pofideo , prior pofideo . This Spirit of infallibi- lity I long fince have had , and yet, upon Scripture proof do Belirve. Well. Now enter thefe Se- They jkM Varies, and firft Reject the Authority of this Ancient "/•« Church; next They fall abord with our Scriptures, ^X%. And becaus they are good at Guefling , They tell us: andtben * Verily , Thefe Scriptures feem not to trove a church Infallt* ***** Scvi- Me, Becaus They are able to interpret all to a contrary ^n'^s%eA„cT fe . To this we have Anfwered . Their feeming is pha/et. no proof. WithalL, That Catholicks as Many and Learned as They, both can and do interpret them otherwife . Hitherto therfore, their caufe is nothing Advanced . More then is neceflary , And it is , That whilft They - pofitively tjlablish a new coyned DoSlrin of a whole Chriftian Church fallible , contrary to what An- tiquity ever owned, / fay , 'tis neceflary, That they bring fome Pofitive proof, and make good Their un- heard of Aflertion . 8. And here we may have plain dealing if Setfa- *»£* ries pleafe . Turn then to your Bible, Gentlemen , Ttxt of and ftew me any Text like this. The Tebole Church ofseriptm thrift, is not the Pillar and ground of Truth, The Holy f^*- B b Ghojl chnrih. V 194 Difc.ILC.VII. TheneieModeof C'wfl Tvill not ever Teach it all Truth ♦ God hath placed Paftors and Doctors in his church, But /itch as may fujfer tu to be earned alvay Tvtth ever) nind of fals Doclrtn &C.Such Expreffions we read in our Bible for the contrary Ve- rity , Have you any thing like them in yours, to pro- ve your oppofite Afierted Doflrin ? I fay any like them; For I Prefs not to have from you the fame Formal words, But will be content with one plain fignificant Text (and we will ftand to Scripture, Or if Scripture pleafe you not , we will accompany you to Councils and Fathers ) which fo much as Meanly makes the whole Church of Cbrijl Fallible ? Such a Scripture , I tell you once more , you cannot produce. Zrg*, you ** only vent your Fancies , you talk and prove not ; you believe a Doftrin which you cannot fliow was ever Revealed in Gods Word. You may perhaps trifle it out , and Tell us , as you are wont to do, of our er- fr*«t»f rors de fatto , It is nothing to the purpofe : For tffaries weenclu*re not here after your poofles Ajjertions (They • ' are Anfvvered a hundred times over ) nor ask, what you fallible Teachers fay , but what God hath faid in Scripture concerning the fallibility of a whole chnjlian church . This we wifli to hear of, before we credit your Talk, ok Believe, for your faying, It hath erred i CHAP. ^ Difc.ILC.VlIL Their miJuiterpretingScripttire. 195; chap, vnt; The new Mode of Sectaries mifmterpe- ting Scripure dtftrojes Protejlant Religion. 1. r T Ere we give you a fourth Refle&ion confe- Jj quenc to the former Difcours , which follows upon our Se&aries mifinterpretation of Scripture ♦ Tis worth the Readers knowledge, and if I miftake not, totally Ruins Proteftant Religion. Thus it is. The whole Machin of Proteftancy , as Proteftancy, (lands ?mefi*ney tophng upon fuppofed Objective Negatives , built up by/jandJt0P- Fancy only , without fo much as one pofuive proof ^w™' of Scripture to fupportfit. If I evidence not this Truth ( and confequently do not convince ) That our Se&aries have no Faith , Deny me credit Hereaf- ter . x. Obferve well . No fooner do thefe Seftaries perfwade Themfelves , That they can Abate the force of our Scripture-proofs for Catholick Doftrin ; But They How Thy prefently lay hold on the quite contrary Do&rin, And 2^ make that an Article of their new Faith. They^JJ^ fay, we prove not a Church infallible ; Therfore the contrary Pofition ♦ The Church is fallible , is with them a certain Truth . They fay , we prove not a third place of Purgatory ; Therfore the Belief of no Mark Purgatory is an Article of Proteftants Faith . We prove **»)* b* Bbx not^^ / t$6 Difcl LC.VIIL Their mifiMerpretmg Scripture not Cbrijls Real Prefence in the Holy Eucharifl ; Therforc the Belief of his Not prefence constitutes part of Prote- flanrs Dofirin . We prove not the Popes Supremacy, Ergo, They Believe the Contrary &c.'lo (how their Nullity of Faith , rtiall we here condefctnd to what They fay, And contrary both to Conference and ma- nifeft Truth , fuppofe with then) , the Proofs for our Dodrins to be proofles > Be it fo fuppfed at present. Pray you fay next , What are They able to infer upon fuch a fals ConceJJion > Marry thus much. If we prove no Purgatory, There is furely no fuch Place. If we prove not the Church Infallible , it is certain- Th*fise~ ly Fallible, and fo of the reft. I anfwer. This quels are Sequele is Non-fenfe 9 and a pure Nonfquuur. We pro* fajj!Nm ' w not ; Ergo, The contrary DoBrin is true. For how many Things are there both Attual and Pojfible, which men prove not, and yet are fo > A young ftudent in Mathematicks cannot perhaps prove , that the Sun is greater then a Sieve • Is it therfore confequent That , that luminous body is not Greater ? The Proof is naught , And here is all that follows 4 One Vroofsway thing then it is in our prefent Cafe , To fay our Proofs *ndyetnotfor Catholic k DuBrin fall short , or % are forceles ; And a qui- fall upon te Other to fay they fall upon falfties . Ergo no ahfolute De* fatjities. njai 0y ty£e Catholic!^ Ferities is dedutible from our not pro- ywg them. Yet upon this fals fuppofed negative founda- tion , We proye not9 All Protef.ant Religion jlands tottering as it doth. 3. Be pleafed to hear more of this Stuff. Let us alfo falfly fuppofe, as our Sectaries will have it, that Thcfe may be objective Truths and Verities : No Church is infallible ; There is no Purgatory &c Doth it ' follow Difc.ILC.VIII. Ruin's Trote/lant Religion. 197 follow, think ye, That they can believe Thefe Negd- £Very fives with Divine and ftedfaft Faith, upon the Con-r»*«^* ceffion That they are now fuffo/ia Truths > No. It ™J ™* is a lame Confequence , and a wors Non (equitur Then je& 0f the other. Obferve my Reafon . No Objective Fail». Verity , Although fuppofed True in it felf> can he beheyed by A l*m* Diymc Faith , Vnles God hath pofitiyely Revealed it, or , is at ^°*{e' leasi clearly Deducible from Scripture ; So Sectaries Ai- ferc , anq upon this ground , That Divine Faith befi- Truths re* des a Material Object Believable , requires alfo ( and ™fdedJ] this eflentially) the weight of a Formal object, which oljesfof is Gods Veracity to reveal that which is believed by Fa*$km Faith. Seclude this Veracity iron) the Motive and For- mal object of our Aflent , Though we yeild to a thou- fand Verities , not one of them can be believed by Faith. 4. Now I AfTume : But the fallibility of Cbrists Tvbo- le Church , The not being of Purgatory , The not Ext- T'mt ^r5 stency of Chrifl Body in the Sacred Eucbanjl , and fo of the g™"r~m. reft, Are no where pofitively revealed by God ; no, Red?™. nor clearly deduced from any Text in Scripture. Er- fmce &c* go, Although thefe were Truths in themfelves , yet \ZZp1* they are not repealed Truths , or Truths fpoken by Al- tyG^ mighry God. Therfore they are infuflicient to found Divine Faith. The Major is granted byProteftants, The Minor, yi%> That thefe iuppofed Truths were never fpoken by Almighty God in Scripture , is fo cZnm u undeniably evident, That here I am forced to cha- *&* of len^e Sectaries to produce fo much as one Texr,*"'^-** vvherin God hath Pofitively faid : There is no Purgato* ry , 2(o real Prefence &c. This they cannot do by fo much as by a probable Deduction from Scripture , Bb 3 much An Zvi dent Con- clufien againft $e- ftartes. And the Ruin of VroteHant 'Religion, as Trottftun- An man- fwerabU Dilemma, 19$ Difc.H.C.VIlI, TbeiSmifinteYpretwgScripture much les by plain Scripture it felt'. The Conclu- fion therfore follows evidently. They Believe not ivhat God hath Revealed, and confequentlj leant Faith in the Articles thej ^Qint to as Protejlants. Nay , I fay mo- re ♦ They cannot Affect to I hefe Articles as evident Truth ; For no received Principle either in Nature or Grace can evidence fo much as the fuppofed objecli* vt Verity of T hefe Doftrins. Shall 1 yet add a word , and fay, That no Proof grounded upon Weighty moral Reafon , can evidence, thefe negative Afjertions to be Truths morally known > Therfore though hitherto we have fuppofed them to pafs for Verities , yet in real earneft They are unproved and no other , But the leeak^ Thoughts of our Adversaries ftrong Fancy > Now here, If I miftake not , Tou fe Ruin enough of Protejlant Religion, Ttbichjland's upon a Fancied Opinion only , and not upon ^hat God hath Revealed in his Sacred Word. No , nor can probably be made known by any received Principle. 5. To conclude this point, I Argue thus. Thefe Negative Articles , No purgatorj , No church infallible &c. Are either effential Pieces of Proteftant Religion, or nor. If not : There is no fuch thing as Proteftant Religion in the world ; For the Reformed part of it , is irholy made up of fuch Negatives , No Purgatory , 2^o Tranfuh- jlantiation , No unbloody Sacrifice , No Praying to Saints, No Church infallible &c. Caft then thefe , and the li- ke away, Protesiancy dwingles to nothing^. Now , if on the other fide, They hold thefe as Articles of Proteftancy , And fay , They ought to be believed by Divine Faith , They are obliged to lhew ( which is utterly irapoffible ) that God hath Pofitively reveal- ed them in Scripture . Therfore I fay ; Though *# admi Difc.l I.C VIII. Qji'ms TrotSant %digion. \ 99 Admit $f fitch Negatives as Objeclive Truths in ThemJ elves, ■ yet , jo long m they are not proved to be pofitive reVeahd Truths , or , Speken by Almighty God, ProteiUncy (lands like a Starveling , void and empty of all revealed Truths, And consequently , as it is, this New Religion , hath l"^Z?h no one part of its Do&cin warranted by him , who up- noompm holds all Chriftian Verities, I mean Gods certain Re-°fttiDo' . • ftriv. war* relation. ranted by 6. To fe this Aflertion more clearly Evidenced, God. Hear a little what our Sedaries Aofwer. Some tell us 2 They know right well, there is no Purgatory, Becaus God hath not revealed it in Scripture . There is no real Prefence for the fame Reaion , and fo they Ar- gue for the reft of their Negatives . / To this and whatever els can be propoted , we have anfwered. Though, Thefe Suppofitions are very Fals, yet Ad- mit of them as True. Vi% That a Purgatory , or Real Prefence are not mentioned in Scripture : All that fol- lows from hence , is, That God hath been, as it we- re , Silent , and omitted to [peak of fuch Obje&s. That ***&*** is, as we now/% fifpofi. He hath neither faid the- &£% re is a Purgatory nor Denyed it. Now this Negati- impnb*- ve , God hatb faid nothing of fuch a matter , as it cannot hle* Ground a pofitive Belief of a Purgatory , fo it cannot Ground apofitive Belief of the Contrary, or , No Purgatory. Whilft what Uth tnerfore the Catholiek Believes a Purgatory , He is cw*** obliged tofliow rtrat God hath Pofttivdy Revealed rt-]uj'™m And if the Prott flam Believe no Purgatory , He is alfo *%**/* Obliged to fliow that God hati fpoken Po/kively &"** thisObje&ive Truth, There is no fuch place. To fay then : God hath made no mention at all of a Pur- gatory in Scripture , and to infer from Thence a Be- lief 200 Ditc.I I. C V III. Their mi/interpreting Scripture lief of no Purgatory , is in plain Language to Say : Imaf ^dually Believe that by Divine Faith , T»bnb God neyer Spake. The mod therfore , That can be Deduced from this Negative , were it True, God hath Omitted td Repeal a Purgatory , is , That no man yet knows, nor can knelt upon Rey elation , whether there be jucb a Place or no. But to dra)» from it an At-flt*te Faith of no Pu>gatoryy is (and I can term it no better) then the la ft of Non- fenfi . For, how mary i'hings are there known to God , Which He hath omitted to Reveal? Can I Therfore , upon that Non-Reutlation , Rufh on them with my Faith i and Believe them for his not Speakjng Vroteflants At all > Yet thus Se&anes Proceed, They have BeUevetie- good ftore of Negatives, But not revealed negatives, iwGid' ^n^ r^ey ^ Believe them , Becaih God hath not Repealed bath not them.. Here briefly is my Difcours , if it Faulter, or Reveal* d feem Faulty to our Adverfaries , my humble Petition thm\ is , That they will Vouchfafe to unbeguil' me , and vlfrmrfe Friendly ^ew me where the Fallacy lyes. il' faulty, 7. Some perhaps will fay. We have Fought all this my wish h while with Shadows, And fuppofed Theje Negatives, *le fault?. No Purgatory , No Tntnfubjlantiation &c. To be Objcds of ' Proteftants Faith . But we err , not knowing Their oneneply Do&rin ; For, They are only Held Inferior Truths^ refuted. Approved by the English Church to mamain Vmon awongjt ProteJlantit And not o^ned as Articles of Faith . Thus Two later Men , whom you may fe largely Refuted Difcours 3. c. 6. n. 7. All I'll fay at prefect is ; Be- caufe Seftaries feldom Agree in, Doftrin , it is imr sestanes poffible to Confute them all at Once . To my aiue not in pUrp0fe then. There have b^en Certainly , And are yet Proteftants ( I think Thefe the more Numerous) That DifcJL CVIII ^umsfroteUant^jligton. loi That Hold the now named Negatives , Articles of Prate- ****** flams Faith , And Againtt fuch our Proofs have Force : £%; Others , that Deny the Doftrin , And exclude them desof from being Articles are in a worfe Condition ; Becaufe Faith* upon the Suppofition , They are Forced to grant, That p Proteftancy , as Proteftancy , contains not fo mnch as h"th J One Article of Divine Faith in it; For , the whole Reformed AmcUsof fart of it is made up of fure Negatives* Consequently , T""f* if Any fliould utterly Abjure that Religion, He would not Abjure one Truth Revealed by Almighty God . Se more of this fubjeft in the place now cited , And know, That our Adverfaries will have Much to do, ^fiuU To come ofHanfomly, whether They Grant Thefe Nega- tives To be Articles of their Faith , or Difow them as Artu cles . This is fairly fpoken , without Clamours , And ^'1'^^ Believe it . Some who tell us , They have not l"?preefZ Leifure Enough to kill flyes, may fweat at it (take tothtRcs- whether part They pleafe) before the Difficulty be4"- folved, 8* They may Reply fecondly , And Endeavor to Afecond Prove at leaft one of their Negatives Thus . There is EePly°f no Purgatory ; Becaus God hath Revealed in Scripture mm^ H^ two Places only , Heaven, and Hell, which feem's Ex- thing. clufive of a third Place. 1 anfwer, That word Only% is neither Scripture f nor Revelation . Caft therfore* that Panicle away , and Propofe the Argument as we ought to do, And it falls to nothing . Thus it is . God hath Revealed two Places , and thefe Eternal , it is moft True . Ergo he hath Revealed the not Being of a Purgatory is Fals , and a meer TS^on-fequitur. 9. They may Reply thirdly. Catholicks Believe f^hirda* many things upon as pure Negatives ; for Example* A C c Tri- lot Difc. 1 1. C. V II. Their mi/interpreting Scripture Trinity of Three Diftind Perfons in one Divine EiTen- ce, and 10 Quaternitj , or, no more Perfons then Three; yet this Negative is not Revealed in Scripture. To Help on this Worthies Argument I Grant more: That not Co much as a Trinity , of Diftinft Per- gftft* fons, is plainly Revealed in Scripture; Doth it Ther- tynNt&L ^t)re f°"ow ♦ rhat Catholicks Believe that Myftery and tive Deny a Quaternity upon Negative Grounds? No fuch pounds, matter . They Believe a Trinity and no Quaterni- ty , upon the folid Pofitive Grounds or. their Church Interpreting Scripture , upon a Univerfal Perpetuated Tradition, And the Infallible Word of God not Writ- ten . Proteftants are deftitute of fuch Proofs in the Articles they Hold. For, They neither have an Infal- lible Church, nor Tradition, Nor Written, nor Vn- Written Word to Rely on. Therfore 'I hey Believe upon Fancy only . MnQbje. io. To End This Matter, I will here Briefly ( Be- tiionan- caus it is Confequent) Anfwer to an old Trivial Ob- telZng0* Je&i°n made by Sectaries againft our Prefent Roman Kovd:ies Church, which They Accufe of Novelties introduced introduced flnCe the Firll Primitive Ages, And weakly, as They into th* _ r r \ is upon feVe- ral RefpecJs mter labor lott > But upon this Account Chiefly it Th faulters mojl , Tnat They cannot sho^o one Negative helieved by not shew them to be a Revealed Truth to any Chriflian Society in the one of Their world . It is pittiful to hear How they fumble in this rSIL Difcours . We Ask how they prove, that the Pri- mqAn- mitive Church held no Unbloody Sacrifice (put this^^* for ore example , it ferves for all.) Some Anfwer. 'chMb, They find no fuch thing as a Sacrifice regiftred in thofe Ancient Writirgs . Mark the Proof. They find it not , Ergo it is not to he found,. Catholicks zpTbeinft- clear Sighted as others, find chat Do&rin exprefly r'"f"tf* Alierted { But, becaus proteftants are pleafed to Deny unc7mL- all, They muft , and , upon their Olen T*W, be Thought ding. the Men of more Creoic. Well. Bur Suppofe the Doftrin was not Regrftred in thofe Ancient Records; Is this Confequence good? Jt T»as notmit , Ergo it f*as not Taught . No certainly i Vnles They shoTfi, all Taught Doclrtn Teas then Writ ^ or Regiftred. But , let us falfly Suppofe, that the Do&rin was neither Writ nor Taught ; Doth it follow , that the Contrary of no Sacri- fice, now believed by Proteftants, was a Truth Revealed to that Church , or taught by it > No . Therfore they are here driven again upon the old Negative, And thus it is. That Church faid nothing of an Vnbloo- dy Sacrifice , which is Hideoufly Vnirue\ Ergo Proteftants can no^f Believe no Sacrifice, "fthicb is Hideoufly f ah , and as un- lut\y a Sepele as This : That Churcli laid not , whe- ther the Moon be a watery Body full of Rocks , Ergo, Cci Prote- 204 Difc. IIC.VI1I. Their mi/interpretingScripture Proreftants can Believe the contrary "frith Drpwt Faith. You will Say we Trifle now? For, that Church was Perfect in Faith , and either held a Sacrifice or Denyed it* I anlwer in Real Truth, it Plainly and unde- niably Held a Sacrifice, yet mud withal Affirm, Though we Faifly fuppofe ( And this fais Supposition muft be vigilantly regarded ) that it only Negatively abftracjted from iuch Do&rin; yet, Protectants are far of from Proving it held Pofitively the Contrary , That is , no Sa* crifice 5 which yet is Neceffary to be Proved , if They believe no Sacrifice with Divine Faith. 1 1. They may yet Reply. They are Able at leafl: to Produce fome Ancient Fathers Clearly Enough Alter • ting no Unbloody Sacrifice; Therfore they prove this Negative, and fo they can do Others . I utterly De- ny that clearly Enough , and fay , They have not one WJn- Ancient Father, nor Council, nor any Approved Au- iitxtia- thority that pofitively Denyes a Sacrifice, ( All unani- *finvnbi«? rooufly Taught the contrary as Luther himfelf confef- dysnrifi. feth ) Much lefs have They Any , that makes this their f#.. Doftrin a Truth Revealed by Almighty God , or, ever taught ly any Vniwrjal Church . Were therfore thefe fuppofed Authorities of Sectaries ( which are none) and Reafons alfo for no Sacrifice , more Numerous and Strong then what the World hath Heard of hitherto; They cannot in Conference fuppofe them Proofs , weighty enough to Beat down the contrary Aflerted , And Vn- deniable Do&rin not only of Fathers, But 9 of a Whole Church. They cannot Suppofe Them powerful enough to Build up fuch a ne^ Negative of Protectant Religion, efpecially whilft They fee before their eyes the Tor- rent of Antiquity agmnft them, and our Anfwers re- turned Difc.H.CVHI ?^um\Trotenant\eligion. lOJ turned to every Trivial Obje&ion they nuke > O , But they can Solve all we Obj.d And, we muft lake their Word > Becaus They jay fo, \^e alfo cell them, \^'e Solve whar they O je&, and yet arc not Believed . Do you nor fe here moft pirtirui Doings \ and Contrcwrjies made Endles by this Proceeding , when each Party faith what it pleafeth , and Gain's no Credit from the Other ? A Judge , my good Friends, and an Intallible Judge is nere NeceiTary to Decide Matters between us : But , thus far evident Reafon judgeth , And Tell's you ; Though you could Solve all Tt>e jay for the Affirmative of a Sacrifice , you are to $ee\fot a Pofitive Proof of your Vnproved, yet Believed Negative. There is no Sacrifice. And the like I fay of your other Negatives . CHAP. IX. Of the Means left by Almighty God to Interpret Scripture Truely . One J* a fj age M.ore of Scripture, Fro* ould haye enly carelefly , as it were , Thrown Scripture amongft Chriftians , \^ind bid them Gmfs &> +ell 04 they can at the Senfe ofit; They having no other means to JknoW his Meaning. Thefe Things Premifed. 3. I fay fird. The Holy Book of Scripture 7 neitlxr doth, terpret m not cap fo Interpret it [elf as to bring Men Dijfentingw fattK filf. ft " t9 may derjiand Scripture, Vrivatt lUuftra* tions no njual visum. Scripture cannot in- Difc.I T. ClX. To interpret Scripture rightly. 207 to an Accord , or Acqutefcencj in High Points of Controvert fy. The Aflertion is Evident. For, could the Book clearly interpret its own Meaning . Catholicks, Arians , Proteftants and all Sectaries would as well Agree in one harmony of Doclrin, By force of that clear Intei pretation (none of Them Denies The clear Seine of Scripture interpreted by Scripture it Self) if an a- as they now agree in owning Scripture to he Divine. g"«n» They accord not in the firft, therfore Scripture is not lfSScerffttm its o^n interpreter. Or, if any yet, without Proof > re , There ftrongjy Aiiert fo much , Moft Evidently in order to wouU be thefe Dtfjenting men , it is as ufeles an Interpreter , ™ ^en ' as if it were none at all 5 For, it Compofcth no Dif- ferences* Take here one Inftance . Sectaries , to prove Scripture confpicuous and clear without an In- terpreter , quote thefe and the like Places . Thy toord is a Lantern to my feet. A Lantern shining in a darh^ place &c. We anfwer . Scnptures are truely a Light , when that outward cover of Ambiguous Words , wherin the Senfe often lyes Enclofed , is broken open by a Faithful Interpreter , And withall we add ,'Tis vainly frivolous to make Them fuch fliining JLarnps , as to fiience all Preaching and Interpretation: yet, this follows if Sectaries Glofs right : For it is ridiculous to interpret, or teach, that a Lantern shines, which I fe bright before my Eyes. Obferve well. The Pro- tectant mak^s scripture clear without a Teacher. The Catho- l»terpret*r lick^ faith, Interpretation is Absolutely Necejfary. Scripture tul^r it feli: Delivers not in Formal Words, either the One or fury t* Other Glofs : Therfore it doth not ever Interpret it $cr¥^u felf Home, or declare its own Meaning. Nay , it canoot do fo : For , ail Interpretation {Properly taken) is 208 DifcJ I. C I5T. The means left byGoi isai\fe*ft>, More Clear, and DtflinEl Light Superadded to the Formal Words of Scripture > But , no Hagio- grapber fays , This Sacred Book makes any fuch new Addition of GlolTes > Therfore it cannot Interpret it felf. And this is what the Apoftle ^^ Pent i. zot Seem's to reach, Scripture is not &**s 4m\v Diic. II. C IX. The means left by God we Rely on a Proteftants eafy, fallible > and erroneous Judgement in fo Weighty a marter ? At laft furely, lie will hit On't , And fay , he interprets as the Holy Ghoft Suggefteth. Happy rran cid He fo : But we /Kail find it otherwife Prefently. However, be- caus the Word is or' comfort f let him hear it on Gods The Holy name , For it is the Resolution of our Tvhole Qucttion. In*,'™!' 6* l % therfore 3. No other , But the Spirit of Secure Truth , the Holy Ghoft Interprets Scripture iertatnly . Cenatnlj/. John 16. xy when that spirit of Truth shall con* , be Tv 1 II Teach all Truth. But one and a meft neceflfary Truth is, to have Scripture faithfully Interpreted, Therfore this , the hoJy Ghoft Teaches, if he Teach ail Truth. Again, lohn 14. 16. He is called a Pa- raclete, or Comforter abydmg with us forever; But he is not a permanent Comforter, unles he Solace as well by his Spirit of Truth mentioned John 17. 19. as with other Interiour Confolation . To allege more Texts, obvious to all, is needles : The Affertion delivered in Thefe general Terms is undoubtedly True, and Ptctefiants , I think, who endlefly talk of Thediffi. their Interiour Spmt , will pot Deny it. €uhy,by 7. The only Difficulty which will trouble Them, is: whom the Seing this t^U teaching Spirit ufually Interprets not hy Prha- $erpret\ te lUuftrations , nw jjjumes every Private man to he the Ora- cle "tohe*by he fpea1(s and interprets : Seing alfoy He leaves Scripture Jlill as speech les in order to its o^n further Explica- tion , a* it ^as 16. hundred years agon. The Difficulty, I fay, is to find out that Oracle (And a Chriftian So- ciety it muft be , for Angels are not Interpreters ) wherin He P™fidesas CMashr^and by it internet's Scripture. Fr.d thi^ Speaking Oracle out, and- we have enough. Heat it ,and we hear Truth . To our purpofe then. \ Difc. II. C I X. To interpret Scripture rig h tty. 1 1 1 8. Doth this Spirit of Truth Refide in the late, and hardly yet well known Congregation of Protectants ? Doth he Teach and Interpret Scripture by this Socie- The spirit ty of men > No, Moft certainly, no : For, that «// infallibly ? Here is Light indeed clofely hid under a Bu/Kel, unfeen by All, Benefcid to 2{one . This fliort Difcours (can Pro- Ddi teftaars 2ix Difc.IT.CfX. TbemeamlefibyGod teftants difcover Sophiftry in it, lee them fpeak) to* tally Evert's rheir private $pmt , And evidences, That their Interpretation of Scripture finally comes to no more But to a Fallacy , or a j A f -imagined Fancy . All I would lay here, is fummoned up in theie few words. Protejlants confefi that they neither Teach , nor can Interpret Scripture infallibly ; Therfore by their crten ConfeJJion , They aro neither Oracles , nor InHruments , nor Interpreters of the Holy Ghojl , Tvho Teaches and Interprets by none , "when be de- livers Doilrin for a T»hok Church , But h jucb as do it In- fallibly . Hence c»e$nly 9. I fay 4, One only Society of Chriflians There is ( Hell ikUtj gates fliall not prevail againft it, or ftduce it by Er- \£t inhU ror ) 'tobtch Teaches and interprets the Word of God Infallibly, hbiy. ; This one Dove is Chaft, This one Spoufi is Loyal, This one Oracle is Infallible* He that Hear's n, hears Chri/l , He who flight's it, flight's Chrift, and draw's upon him the Maledi&ion of a Separated Heathen and "Publican, Matt. 1 8. 17. Si Ecdefiam non audierit &c. You do, I know, prevent my meaning; For, by this Spou- fe and Oracle , I underfland no other , But that long Which is filing, Ancient , Holy, and Catholic^Koman Church, ffibicb the Koma* eVcr taught the World in feregowg Ages , before our Sectaries church, fet footing in it . Befide this faithful Oracle ( I do de- mo; ■(Irate in the 1. Chap, of the next Di/cours ) There ne- ver was , is , or fliall be any thing like a Catboltci Holy Church. Now, as it is Ecdefk Docens , a Church Teaching, and confifts of Prelates united with one Head , Directed by the Holy Choft , it Teaches and inter- prett Scripture infallibly . As it is Ecelefia Difcens , or the Church Learning, it receives, and by virtue of the fame bleiTed Spirit > both Inftrudion and Interprets- tion infallibly. , 10. The Difc.I rC.TX- To interpret Scripture rightly. 21 j 10. The Truth of my Ailertion Hand's firm upon the undeniable Grounds already laid, no lefs well pro- ved , then prefuppofed . Here is the fumrne of All. Tin wife Providence of Cod hath left Sufficient means wherby A %**** We may know exaclly the Senfe of his Scripture, in matters precedent concerning Sah/alion , whilfi Learned men of different Seels proofs. are at endles Debates about tbi* senfe \ and perfjl mojl obfti- natly in what they baye once laid hold on, God th erf ore , mcjl ajjuredly , Will not have m run on thips in jarrs to the Worlds end, and conclude nothing . There h means then of a Recon- ciliation afforded, if Doe pleaje; But that's not Scripture alone > Which cannot interpret u (elf but lyes fill in that ancient darkne*y as it Wat frjl Writ ; nor can it be mans Private ludgement, for that is both Various and Fallible . Certainly it is not the Protejlants Spirit , For this We fe changes every year, And, con- fefjedly , is Destitute of the Holy Ghofts Infallible directing Spi- rit, It is no condemned Seti of Ancient Haretickj, acknowledged for fuck both by Qatiohcks -and Proteftants. BnthufiafnCs nt> man believes, Angels interpret not Scripture . what then Re- mains , but that We hai>e recours to that One , Ancient, Holy, and Vniverfal Roman church , as w el for Inftruffiion , as In- terpretation . By this fole Oracle the Holy Ghofiin- terpret's and teacherh, or we muft grant { which is lamentable) thai we are turned loos into an inexplica- ble Labyrinth of Gods deep Secrets revealed in his Word, without hope of finding any Bxh. 11. To prove my Altertion further pofrtivdy by Scri- pture, and the Authority of Fathers , would be both tedious to a Reader, and little avail with Sectaries (And I wave as much as may be the ufeles Repetition of fo often quoted Authorities) who turn of Scripture by far jfetcht Gioffes, aad undervalue Fathers as being D d 3 falli". 2*4 DifclT.CTX. The means left by God fallible : Yet while they do io , know well enough their own mifery at home , within thei** brefts, which is nothing but a tfirii of Fallibility. You find Proofs am- ply alleged out of Scripture, Councils, and Fathers to our prefenc matter, in our Polemical writers, chiefly when they treat of the Iudge of Controverfies. How- ever one Text , though often quoted , 1 will here give you. Sedaries may tamper long enough with it, be- fore they return a probable Anfwer. a find tx4 The great Apoftle of the Gentiles writing to s"fJtZ7. tlie Ephefians c^. 4. after he had warned them of keep- ing unity in Spirit , and Faith alfo, vers n. Add's: And be gave feme AfojlUs, and feme Prophets, and othn fome Eyangelijls, and other Paftors, and Dottors &c. And why gave he thefe Teachers > The following words An- fwer , for the conjummation of the Saints , unto the 'Vtorhjf the Minijlery , unto the edifying of the Body ofCbrift. How long are thefe to continue? To the Worlds end, until , faith Scripture , T»e meet into the unity of Faith> and knowledge of the Son of God &c* What intention had God in eftablifhing Thefe Apoftles9 Evange/tfts , and Tailors in his Church > That no* , *e be not Children flu- ctuating, and carried away *e$i$«$o/*evo# 9 that is , turned about utth every Kind of Doftrin , in the T»ic\edncs of men, in T&tfiiV traf tines to the circumvention of error. Thus the Hierar- ™i church C^y °f Chriffs Teaching Church is conftituted, And by no that other then Truth it felf . Now I fay : No Society Twkv. ofChnftians, fince S*. Paul writ Thefe words, can fo much as probably ihow it felf permanently bleffed with an Apoftohcal Teacher , but our Ancient Roman Church only, where the Prince of the Apoftles, SK P*m ur yet lives in every lawful fucceeding Pope . No Society Di fc.r T.C.IX To interpret Scripture rightly, n 7 Sociecy of Chriitians can lay claim to fuch continued iktKomm Prophets as this Church hah h;.d -n it Age after Age, c*tt>duk whether by prophets we underftand wiih scripture I. chuvch . Cor 14. \.HJy Men praying a o Proj> efywg, or iuch as athrongh Foretel Future things , our Church hath had abundance every Age. of tnefe, if undoubted Hiftory may gain credit. No ?rophett Society of Chnftians can flitw fo many laborious Evan- uhonou* gelijls as this one Church alone ; and SK Paul points at , *y*»g* 2. Timou 4 5, They are Thofe who have indefatiga- lilU* bly, through every Age without CeiTation, Preached, and carried Omjts Sacred Gofpel to Vnconverted, and moft remote Nations . Thus SK Aupn fent by 5*. Gre- gory Pope, Anciently was an Evangdift to our Englift, s*+ Boniface to the Germans, Bldled St. Francis Xayier and many other Evangelical men , were fo alfo to the furthelt part of the world . No Society of Chriftians But our Ancient Roman Church only , can reckon up fo long a perpetuated Hierarchy of lawful commiffion-^"**"*- ed Paftors , fo many profound and learned Do&ors >^{^ who labored unto Death in Cbrijls Sacred Vineyard, d*5*«. and innumerable flied their Blood in Defenfe of it. Thefe being undeniable Truths , 13. 1 Argue thus. This known , vifible , and ne- ver interrupted Society of El>angelijls>r Pastors, and Do- ctors, This Ecckfia Docens, or Teaching Church j confti- ^^«m tuted by Cmjl himfelf, was ever , and is dill Infalli- mm\ ble, and , Becaus Direfted by the Holy Ghoft, Teaches and Interprets Scripture infallibly :or, h can err, And che at that ample Flock of Chriftians , committed to its charge , into damnable Falfities. If the firft be granted, we have all we wift>,^. An infallible Hierarchy of living Paftors , Mtr shall Smejiiyelj inflrucl us infallibly Ii6 Difc.II.GIX. Tf>? means left by God infallibly to the worlds end . If contrary wife, this whole Hierarchy can Deceive and lead us n.ro damnable Er- Tearful $'- tor \ Thefe two worul Sequels Undeniably Follow. ^from The firft< Thac ^ Hoj Ghoft Direfts noc Teach^ frisDo- nor that living Hierarchy ot Paltois, which Chrift ap- #»*> pointed to Teach us here on tarth; For, both This and every other Society of Chriftian Teachers , ir,ay Beguile us with kh Doclrin , and mifmterprec Scripture? Grant fo much , and it followes, 2. That our Learned se. Paul Mi/loof^iimfelf, and Uttered not one word of Truth in the place now cited . For , if the- fe Paflors and Teachers appointed by Crift to Teach, and fo ftecijlcally here noted, c3n Delude us (yea, and have de facto erred as Protectant Aflert ) 'Tis pofiible. That They neither comply * hh the Wor\ of their Minifer/^ nor Edify the moral Body of C! rift ( but dettroy it) nor perfe- ver in teaching Truth , until \>c all meet together in a Vnitj of Faith (that happy day is not yet feenj nor , finally , after all Tueir Endeavours , afford means to perfeVer jlcd- faft in thrifts Stored DocJrin . They find yet a great Part of People called Chriffians , like wilful Children telling on Self opinion only : They fee them tofled and turned about with every wind of new Learning. Such is the Fault and unlucky fate of Noyelltfts, who will be fo wantonly Childifli , as to flight an Ora- cle Undeceivable . Here then is the Conclufion . The Con- The Apoftles Words are True , Tnerfore Seclaries vent a bi~ clHfim. jeoui yntruth , vbilft they fa j , thefe noT» named E*an?e lifts, Vafiors % and Dottors m&y Deceive , and lead us into Errour. CHAP. X. Difc.I I.C.X, To interpret Scripture rightly* 2x7 C.H A P. X. Ob'ieolions are ttnftpered. 1. T^Erhaps they will reply : We miftake Sr. Pauls J7 meaning ,• For , the JpoBles , Euange lifts , Pro- phets, and Dotiors &c. Wherof he fpeaks, arc long fince dead an gon 5 They were thofe, who Preached whilft Cbrifi lived on Earth , or foon after, and Teach us ftill by the written Word now in our Hands. Since thofe days we have had no Other Euange/ifts and Paftors continued in any Chriftian Society , that either taught , or interpreted Infallibly . Roundly fpoken , But without book , and as Faljly as fallihly. For, who fee's not the Obvious Senfe of S'.Pauls Te- ftimony plainly perverted, whilft He points at Tea- chers Succejjtvely abiding in the Church to the Confumma* tion w^off t KeflfipnrpQv , That is , to the coagmemation of Saints , or , until they be joyned together in one Faith , and all meet in a Unity of Belief, and know- ledge of the Son of God ? The Deceafed Apoftles ndw in Heaven will ( 'tis true ) fe this lad Day ; But are not now with us , nor , Teach until that Confum- mation be. Therfore Others Succeed and teach in their Place ffo God hath ordered ) to the End of all things. I haye Anfwer'd to what is added of their prefent Inftrudion by the Written Word . The Bi- ble , I faid , cannot ( Becaufe it interprets not if felf ) Reconcile our Differences, And no deceafed Euange- lift appear's now , either to Arian or Proteftant , to Ee inftrud Let &#*- ries prove thi* glofi contrary to the tXm prefs words, and bring theit proof to 4 received Princife, The writ- ten \\wrd infufficient to reconcile differen- ces. 218 Difc.l I.C.X. The means (eft by God inftrucl them when thev Fail , or miftake Gods Truesenfe. This ver^ Scripture therfore requires an Interpreter , in whom all mud Acc^mefce , or we may run on in endles Piirenrions to the day of Jud- gement. But yo will ask , Who is in fault , Seing no man blames himfelf nor the Bible He read's ? Cbrijl Anfwer's < He who hears not the Church , is both the accufed and faulty Pcrfon . And upon this Occa- fion I anfwer to a fecond Objection. 2. Our adverfaries may fay . All Appellation from a Lower Tribunal to a Higher is lawful . And they do fo : For , they Appeal from the Church ( which seHariei oniy confifts of men ) to God and his Word , the High- Ungfrom eft Tribunal imaginable,- therfore their Procedure is tbtchurch blameles . I anfwer , It were moft blameles, could to scrip- They know Infallibly what God certainly faith in his Word ,-, But this they cannot know incontroverted Points, But by the Infallible Oracle of his Church. i*re*l To this Tribunal Cbrijl fends us for Satisfaction in all ptoinot*'o our Difficulties > if we rejecl or forfake this Oracle scripfurty in real Truth , we appeal not to the undoubted Senfe of tut to Gods Word, But to our own unfteedy Sentiments , Inly? which are Fancies only, and nothing like Gods Word, Will you fe this clearly > Imagin only a new fort ofSe&aries, who will both Appeal from Church and Thti'm Scripture to Gods intcridur and eternall infallible ft*wpr°- knowledge of Truth: They Appeal from the Church, "jjfeuion Bec/tus it is made up of men ; from Scripture , becaufe They under ft and is not in a hundred Paffages. Ther- fore they will rely on what God knows to be True, and guefs at it as well as they can. Would you not erteem Jfuch Men mad, and upon this Account, Thac t,hey cannot certainly know without a Teacher, what fervf Difc. I I. CX To interpret Scripture rightly * 1 19 this Infinite Wifdom judgeth of the Truth they feek ohfix_ after ? This is the very cafe of Se&aries. 2\fo more tbepzooj do they certainly knofte in their Principles , what God hath al- ready Revealed in that one Text : This is my body ( and the like is of innumerable others) then if he had never Regi/lred thofe Words in Scripture. They may guefs at the Senfe and mifs, more they cannot do. Now if they tell me of no man knows what Moral Certainty , or of Fundamentals clearly enough made known in Scriptu- re , we Anfwer fully to both in the next Difcours. 3. They may thirdly objeft . If a Protcftant can- . not depofe his Judgement , nor, think that the Church and Scripture fay one thing , Becaus his Rea- fon finds them Oppofite to one another, He may Hand for Gods Word , againft the Church . To confirm this, He may tell us alfo, that the Church , which , ieem's to engrofs all Judicature and right' of Interpret- a?°c£m ing Scripture , is no more but a Party, and a Party tainingtht cannot in Reafon be Iudge for it Self, when the Pro- pound of teftant ftands out , and is in Controverfy with the * H*re»> Church . Here briefly is the Ground of all Harefy, and the old Plea of all Condemned Se£laries.0 4. To Anfwex the firft. I Ask what is this Prote- Isanrweri itant that cannot Submit his Iudgement f Is he an edm Angel from Heaven , or one immediatly Taught by the Holy Ghoft > No. He is a poor, fimple, falli- ble , and erring Man, Why then may not he yeild ro the Church , as well as his Anceftors have done be-; fore him , and the Wifeft part of Chriftianity doth now > The true Reafon is , Becaus he perverfly will not fubmit , And , though he palliates his Pertinacy "frith a Specious Pretence of Gods Word, yet he hath not one Syl- Ee % lable And of a whole Church left in Darknes, The Church no Ho Difc.II. C.X. The means left hy God lable in Scripture for him : The moft He can know (if yet fo much ) is, that what he reads is Scripture, but what God faith in that Scripture he cannot know at all but by Fancy only, when he judgeth contrary a paradox to the Church . O , but God Illuminates him about fllntl'iUti theSenfe. Why you, my Friend , more then an mmated. Arian, as Strong in Fancy as you are ? But , why you more then a whole Ancient Church ? Doth God tender you fo dearly, and not his Church? Will he Illuminate you , and leave his Church in Darknes ? will he give you the Spirit of Infallibility , and take it from his Church ? Away with thefe Trifles, not worth Refu- ting , neither God , nor Scripture , nor Church U here flood for , But a self-conceit only, 5. Now to what is Added of the Church being a Vany" but Patt , and therfore no ludge , I'll fay one Word , and Judge. firft ask what is the Sectary that oppofeth himfelfto the Church ? Is not he a Party alio ? Will He then take upon him to ludge and cenfure the Church, And cry out againfl it (as partial ) // it meddle Tehh himi The Ch fitch is already impound by Chrijl to ludge in spiritual Caufes, as I have proved 5 But no Particular man is more Authorised to ludge the Church , then a Vajjal is to ludge his soyereign after Treajon committed. And the Inftance is fit , as you may fe ; If fome in a Kingdom tumul- tuoufly rife up againft both King and Country, as Sectaries have done againfl: the Pope and Church. They are accufed and brought to a Trial, before their lawful Sovereign 5 the Faft is examined , whether Treafonable or no. Will thefe impeached Men, think ye , fly from the Judgement of their sovereign, or plead He is a Party, and therfore feek for Juftice to 'Tis pro _^ Difc.TI. C.X. To interpret Scripture rightly, n i to a Foneign Prince > No moft certainly. The King The and Country where they offend have Power to Iudge ^urhckh them; i^nd fo hath the Church in Spiritual matters , rJibJLi from which there can be no Appeal. And the Cafe/»w» is moft Evident for the Church : Becaus, whilft Se- "hhtch. diaries by their Schifm or new Doftrin contrary to it, a^eai. become Rebels , They have no Tribunal imaginable left them to appeal to , fecluding this ludge, But their olvn Self judoement , which is the Delinquent . The Church thus Se&"rtts * * f\ a *t • t " i-r r i „ • make the rejected ; Neither God Immediately , nor Scripture more ex- Delinquent plicitly , nor Angels Mimjleriallj judieth for them ; Tverfore indge, their lajl Appellation is to a very Friendly and too partial a fudge, Their own what they Pleafe % And this is moft evident °\ITZ* in every debated Controverfy , u here no other Judge is allowed of by them but Scripture ( and it were well would they (land to it) But it is Scripture , as They are pleafed to Interpret. 6. They may Objeft fourthly. Thofe Apoliles , Pro- phets, Euangelifts , Pa/tors, and Doctors mentioned in the Text, Though granted Infallible, are againft all Rea- fon fuppofed to be the Teachers of the Roman Th Church : For moft furely ■> There were other Ortho- / Mark the Objeaion which ac- gjjj1 knowledges a SuccelTion of other Orthodox Paftors and Teachers in the Chriftian World, Age after Age, shewed And take with it my plain Anfwer. If Sedaries lay mlL claim to fuch, They are obliged plainly to point them out, And fay where, or when they lived , who they Ec 3 taugJ^- 221 Difc.II.GX. The means kftiy God taught &c. But they are not defignable , Becaus, from Luthzrs d.:ys upward There were none (except the Ro- man Paftors) in the Chriftian world , But known con- felled and condemned Haereticks , And They were no Orthodox Teachers , as I largely prove in the firft Chap, of the next Difcours. Be pleafed to read it. They ARcfli may Reply fifthly. This Argument: Such Pajiors are not mnfwired. dejignable ^ tberf vre Tver e not , is purely negative and pro- ves nothing. Well. But I hope this Propofition Afferted by Proteflants. Such Pajiors and Doctors dijlwSl from the Roman clergy , Tfiere Succe (finely found to have been in the World , is Pofitiye , And therfore muft be proved . However , Negative Arguments in fuch matters, and of the like nature with this (That is, when things are of themfelves Perceptible, and yet not wbsnne- Seen ) Are both ftrong and Convincing. For Exam- KZltf' pk : ^ a company of quick fighted men fland up in h*vefone. a tower fet before a plain, and look roundabout them, yet fe nothing within the compas of the eye like a high Mountain; They may well conclude, The- re is no fuch Mountain within their fight . Now 1 fay: A Church confiding of fuch Suppofed Orthodox Paflors , as Proteflants imagin, Diflind from the Ro- man , is as vifibJe, and difcernabie as a Mountain in this prefent Cafe, Yet, were never ieenby Proteflants nor others . Therfore it follows They were not at all, unles we recurr to an Invifible Society of fuch men, now .as well exploded by later Proteflants, as Catho- licks. MrrStU. 7. A fifth Obje&iou flow's from the pen of a Late Untflett. Writer after this manner . Cannot yon conceive that there should he a Numler of mm jjfroftjpng Chrijlianit-y, Tvith- cut Difc.II, C.Xi To interpret Scripture rightly. 22$ cut Infallibility > If not (faith he ) V 11 help your Vnder- ftanding a little 9 Sappofe (And it's only a Suppofition ) That all the members of the Romam Church should be dejlroyed in ons Age , do net you think khat there "Would be fall a num- ber remaining, who profefs Cbrijliamty of the Greek^and Fro* tejlant Churches , found at leaft in the Belief of Funda- mentals , without Infallibility ? I have anfwered alrea- dy, No. And given my Reafon : Becaus ,a Church a church divorced from the Infallible <^4fiftance of the Holy Ghoft, I'f"™^ ; is pulled from the Center of Truth , which fupporrs it ; nl^jfijuZ and confequently the Doftrin of it mufl needs reel and «. cannot totter ( now as is fuppofedj to rely on-no firmer a^f/^" Hold then on mans unfteedy , fallible Reafon, or on a Teftimony meerly Humane , and therfore Uncertain . Neither have we without this ^Afpfiance , more Securi-^^ ty of true Belief in Matters called Fundamental then inf*mbie others, As is clear \h condemned Arians , who noA$$m:e fooner left the Church directed by this Spirit of^uS^ Truth , But Errours followed them in points mod mmtd$. Fundamental. And yet, like black Ghofisdo, and willhaunt them without Repentance , to the Worlds End , 8. Before we end this matter, I have one. Quefiion to propofe. It is. Whether , If all the Ancient Fathers Jjgu*- tba^ eyer lived, Had plainly interpreted Scriptures as tb* %£**£** Roman Ce means left hy God TheAutbo- And fay boldly : The Authority of The whole Antecedent rtt?°fa and this ^refent Roman CatholUk Church 3 is in true prudence church, of greater Force to withdraw Seel dries from their new inyenf- n>o*e ed Gloffes% contrary to it, Then if ail the Fathers To- VhentLt gefher Had plainly interpreted Scripture as the Church of Fathm, interprets. Why? Nothing on earth can Parallel this Churches Authority , much les make it Inferiour to Tj°'V*, the uniyerfal confent of Fathers . The Reafon is. Thefe ^artofiL Fathers were only a part of it, particular men , and cktttch. singly ccnfidered , Fallible . Bur a whole Church Em- braceth a greater number, and cannot be milled into Were the Errour . Nay I fay : Though we Impioufly fuppo- church f That this whole Church might fvverve from Truth, jHppofe* * n . r . . ° , ri — Tuiubu yet the Teitimony of it is as great as that or the Pa- theAutho. thers, who, as Protefianrs fay, may all err, and fwer- ntyofuts ye w eafily . This Reafon is Reinforced , if we re- at great as no J ' , ,, , i • t_ « n the ia- fleet -on one undeniable Truth , which is .: In all con- thers. troverfies now between us, Sectaries can pretend no more, But thus much only : That the fenfe offome few Fathers only (They never pretended all ) whilft they interpret Scripture, is , (though often obfeure) more againft the Churches interpretation, then for it. Here is the moft they can fay with any Confidence f Though we grant not fo much , when the whole Do- &rin of a Father is well examined . However Gratis Admit of the Suppofition at prefect, And fe what fol- Tejllmony ^S ' ThuS WUci}- °nly : Jhe Senfe °f fuch and Though ' fuch Fathers is doubtful , and Se&aries fay, Fallible; Taiiibie, ^e Churches Senfe is clear (That is, you know wighuhen what it Teaches ) and Though falfly fuppofed fallible , is another yet far more firm then the other Teflimony , That's confejjedly that's ob. both ohrmn md fallM^ (cure ana J , . iMbk. 9. This Difc.ILC.X. To interpret Scripture rightly, 215 9. ThisDifcours convinceth that Se&aries cannoc ifs&*rut impugn the Churches fenfe given of Scripture by any {f/^^" thing that hath the look of a probable Principle . For, church the Church Defend's it felf upon wo undeniable Grounds. Dcclr"> is> The firft, Pofitiyei And 'Tis The Churches own ufu- tZJ^k thority ( nothing can be greater,) The other Negative . its Err our, Vi%. ' Never any of \noWn credit , neither fathers generally, Thy /peak nor Oecumenical Councils, much lefs , Scripture Probably, pJ^Sk', clearly contradi&ed that fenfe which the Roman Ca- andfuppofi tholick Church Gives of Scripture. And here by »*«*«'* the way , You may fe to what an Exigency our new e^rove " men are Driven for want of Principles . They fay, ^o°jbui The Roman Catbolick^ Church is Fallible, The Fathers arefaU cnditEvit lible , All condemned Ha-re ticks are fallible . They them- clearly co*- felves are fallible . Thus much iuppofed , Tell me , ''^h'L I befeech you , by what probable Principle , can They chesfmfe fo much as feemingly fliovv , That either They inter- */Sw^ pret Scripture better then Tee, or, That Any of us all"' ever yet arrived to the True fenfe of it in controverted 7/^fr', matters? Which yet is abfolutely neceffary ; For, we ^p^ can have no true Faith without the true fenfe ofscriptu- ci*u can re. You know, if the blind lead the blind, There Seclari'sheir is nofafe conduft ; And if the Fallible man Guides ^«*«w- the Fallible , both may miftake Their way, and eir thn to be grofly . You will haye no Anfwer returned to this th'befi* Difficulty, But Sectaries Fancy, and Fancy only, orshe* 10. Some may Reply . Protectants have the words that AnJ of Scripture as clear as the Holy Ghoft was pleafed \^l^nrt to Write them in Fundamentals ; As alfo the confent 9f$<*ipu^ of Fathers , at lead for thufe Fundamentals : They wave Te? other By-Paffages of Scripture, and care not much Aiapfy of whether their Interpretations be right or Wrong . I An- s«fl«r»«. F F fwer 1*6 Difc. II. C.X. The means left by God Thtycan. {Verfirft, (To fay nothing of many Others) They nUDiffi. cannot wave one Difficulty concerning the Real pre- tuhin, fence of Chrift in the Sacred Euchanji, Tvhich is either a Fundamental DocJrin , or none is • Both Scripture and Fathers are in this particular mod exprefly againft them , as is proved Hereafter . 1 1. But ler this pafs . I Anfwer 2. We have as good Scripture as Se&aries can lay claim to in every ln Vundam Point , which they call Fundamental, And with it the miMtUsft co"fent of Fathers alfo. In other controverted mat- eai}«nd ters we own the fame Scripture they own, And mo- int9*T' re°ver have the fenfe of it Declared by this long ftand- t»atterfar *ng Church, wherin we infinitly furpafs them. Speak^ {Honour, ih erf ore of matters out of controverfy , or, wherin all Agree, we are at leaft equal with them , And, for others m WoAuthom controverfy , Becaufe the Church ftand's for us, there vitjMe- can ke no Competition, Unles They render our Churches geable con- ^ n. r L / / 7 <-, • • J j tray to the dejttwony of no Force by jubstituting a greater in its place, church, For their fenfe , Ttbich is impojjihle . Alas , They want 'com hi Pr'nc^P^es to g° about fuch a work, And Therfore u$$. 'muft Reduce all they talk againft us to Fancy only. iz. What 1 would fay here, may perhaps be more clearly iixpreffed Thus . If Sectaries have plain Scri-* pture for Fundamentals, we have it alfo, and take judgement along with it Thofe Fathers They Admit of. If in ngsmft other Matters now in Controverfy, They rely on lodgement; their private judgement when they interpret Scripture, Jgtwjt our judgement That's oppofit, is ( to fay no more ) sprif. j as good as Theirs . If they plead by the Spirit of Truth , working in them , we might fet our spirit againft Theirs , And Ask whether's better > Thus far we (land mod evidently upon equal Terms with them . Now Difc. II. C X. To interpret Scripture rightly. 117 Now be pleafed to obferve what I fay. They have not one plain text of Scripture , nor one plain Testi- mony of any Council or Ancient Father , wherby they can fo much as Probably offer to Prove, That the fenfe of Scripture owned oy Catholicks is Erroneous ^r^cflann in points debated between us, And Befide the judge- ty™^ ment of innumerable Fathers, We have alfo The Au-r^r/^ thority of a whole learned Church that Approves our fenfe ; 0fs^ipmr6 They have neither Church , nor Scripture, nor Coun- HtFmV* cils , nor Fathers for Theirs . Let therfore the world Judge, How far they are from convincing our fenfe of Scripture, to be erroneous by any known or received Principle, unles their Fancy enter in, and pafs for a Proof, which we utterly Reject . You will fay : If in all controverted matters we make fo much of Church \\>hy Authority, There is no Difputing Again ft us; For, the c^ch Church will ever ftand for its own. Doftrin : I anfwer: £?ob?* And, if we Value not of it fo Highly, But Admit of highly cur Sectaries Glomes upon Their hare Word, Wc are worfe •$«*< then mad 5 when Tis evident, They cannot prove that fenfe to be erroneous by a (Ironger PrincipleTben our Church Authority is , that denies the Errour ♦ The Church Therfore fortified with mod folid proofs , drawn from Scripture, Councils, Fathers , and Tradition , moft juft 1/1 ?»/*•• _- All •/"» ly {land's for it s own Interpretation . And hence I fay: Whatever Though Cavils may be raifed , There is no Rational Difpu- l^Z'th ting againft it . You have the Reafon hereof already: *gJn(ift > Because yvhat eyer Seclaries can lay hold on like a Principle , or, *M*kow That, wherby They may Attempt to prove the Catho- ^%£ lick Interpretations fals, will Appear more then feeble new?. to ftand againft The long (landing Authority of this one Holy and Catholick Church , But of this fubje& Ffa more n% Difc.U. C.X. The means left by God more afterward in the following Difcours. 13* And thus much of our Proreftants ftrange un> fetled Religion, And Vndemable Lsfpojlafy , both from Church and Scripture . We fliall fe in the next Difcours, How They recede from Re of on alio, in palling , be plealed to take thefe few Confiderations along with you. futehnlf X4* A Region dejlitute of all Abearance of any Ancient tbsewrmi- Church to fide and fymboli%e. with, As Proteftants mod tie$ of p™- evidently are : (Their Recours to the third of fourth J5^£ Rem firft Ages , is Ignotum per ignotm , and no lefs and Vn- proved, then a Suppofed whimfy ) K^i Religion which bath not one fyllable of Scripture for it , as 'tis evident men of this Profejjton have not , And becaufe they ever glory in Scripture- proof, I am forced to tell them, They can- not produce one text for Protejlancy without Their fal- lible Glades ( if I wrong their caufe let them fpeak out, and ftame me, HI fuffer the Affront , yet fear it not: But Remember I call for plain Scripture. ) A Religion which never yet bad one General Council to Confirm it , no Vniver* fal Tradition to Warrant it , not one Profeffour before Luther to OWn it . A Religion which holds the Belief of all Christians to have been Fals for a thoufand years together , And the Pre* lates mtjled by Err our , who taught Christians for fo vaft a time. A Religion, Whofi Profeffour s take upon them to Reform cthersy Before They fnd Their oWn pretended Reformation arrived to any Shadow of Perfection ; Who efpy errors in a Church never DifcoVered Erroneous , By Thoufands more Ancient and Learned then They . A Religion which bath the very look of Harejy ( turn it which Way you Will) Which oppofeth all men, Andps oppofed by the Rejl of Chrijlians ; which is fetled on no other Ground , But the bare Fvproved Word of thofi Vncommijfio- ned DifclLCX. To interpret Scripture rightly. 129 ned CMen that Teach it ; which Changes every year , and hath no feeming Principle for a Ground of Conftancy ; not one Mo- tive to make it Rationally credihle . Such a ReVioion , I Jay , Dishonors God , Injures lefus chri/l , feduceth poor Souls, and as unworthily \ fo three dayes before Luther deferted the m ^hL Roman Faith-. My humble fute is, redtopinr That our New Men will pleas by %*yU%*\ plain Defignation ( 1 ask not for a Definition of the church Church) to point me out the True Church, which h*fore E«- then 7»as ( or now is) Holy, and Catholic^. Prote- thcr% ftants, as 1 here fuppofe, were not then vifible in the world. There were ( 'Tis true ) Arians , Pelagians , AbyJJins , Graci/tns , And perhaps fome Remainder of Donatifts with other Hasreticks ( whether more or fewer k import's not to our prefent Queftion. ) Notwithftan- ^ow^ ding it is Evident, That fome Chriftians then living, eomutmli unanimoufly Profefled Their Belief in a Holy Catho- notthec*. lick church. . My demand therfore is, whether, That '^Jv Believed Article was then True or Fab ? Iffals, for^^^. want of a true Catholick Church , Speak out plainly, tideofw And fay that Chriftians Believed a Church , which ^tf1' then Really was not in Being. If True. The rhen r ** Holy Catholic^ Church i, which Verified the Belief of that «' £. ter Gr&m Sectaries, but grofs erring men 2jl Difc. III. CI. Offroteflants that Article , can be plainly and without fumbling De- figncd ♦ Say then, on Gods name , what Chriftians HorV*- had we, who conftituted the Holy Catholick Church Pjfcmur- m Thofe Daves ? Papifts , you fay, were all in a TnuflMM, Deluge of Errour, which made Luther to leave them . nor the U- Our later Grecians held , and hold ftill, a True Mafs, Sacrifice, the Real Frefence , Fraying to Saints, Frayers for the bead &c . They therfore , contrary to our Se- daries , were neither the Holy nor Vniveifal Church; Much les were Arians , LAbyjfins , Pelagians , OWonothc- lits , or all of them together. Now befides fucher- wereinthe ring men* There were no other in the "World . If world beft. Therfore the Vniverfal Church be EiTentially made up reim cr. 0jf particular Churches , as truely it is (For there is no Vniverfxle a parterei) And all Particular Churches Na- meahle in thofe dayes, grofly Erred; it follows evident- ly , Thar then no Holy Catholick^Churcb could be Belie* Troteftxnu veJ m Since Thofe times Our Protectants came in $ ™li*Zno% And wil1 They ' (if That Article of our Creed was vniverfal Fals in the laft Age ) verify it now , and ftile Them- cimsK felves the only Vniverfal Church > I am Confident They will not Donative fo far , or dare to do fo . The Que- ftion Therfore Propofed deferves an exaA Anfwer . Thtjgue- y\^ Where, cr arnongft^vhat chriftians shall to* find the {eTdrfrves H°b ^'n^erfa^ church , Then free from notMe Errour} a dear z. Can our Novellifts Rationally fay, That All tho- Anfwer. fe who rightly Believed in Chrt/i conftituted the Holy jtnabjiraa Vniverfal Church \ If fo , The Reply is too general; belief in and we ask again, Who Thofe were, and urge to Gbnftfe- have the Particular Communities Specified , That Ca- mp™tl* tholickly Believed in Chrift ? We demand moreover , trmCmtko. ^bait they mean by that Belief in Chrij?, W;as it enough lick F«ithf v {q -J Difc.iri.CI. Vmeafonahle Proceeding. 2jj to Confes Him to be the True tJMeJpM, Our Redeemer, our Matter , or, to acknowledge his Death , his Refur-V region , without Belteying wore of bis Dottrin? Surely Umis no . For, firft God never fpake thofe other Excel- ZlTmcef- lent Verities regiftred in Scripture ( whether Dogmati-ftryto They may fay : who eyer Belieyes in chrijl and Scripture , and ioyns in that Belief \ 'Which Was yniwfally owned by the whole cbrifiian World be- fore Luther , is right in Faith , and a Member of the Holy Vniverfal Church , Though , perhaps , He Belieyes , with Thefivft his tainted Church, fome Errours . A mod wret- tfmel ched and unproved Affertion. For , who, ever yet maintain'd , That a Society of Chriftians > owning fome Doftrin True ( as all have don ) and more perhaps Pals, is a part of the True Holy Catholick Church? We fey , Bonum tx Integra causa , malum ex quolibet defe* Difc.7II.Gf, Vnreafonahle Proceeding, ijy $k : A Faith Therfore Truely good , is Intierly good, Any Ftlpty Spoil's it, And then mofl, when Tis vitia- ted with notable Enours. TeJl me , if Scripture ^^ch were Corrupted in fome Points of Confequence , would ^tlgnfi you own the whole Bible for Gods Word ? No cer- enours is tainly. How then can we own That for drifts ™™r'h* True Church, which is corrupted with Fals Dodlrin ? Themht You will fay : We muft take the Good without the BibUnota- Bad , And Believe as much as is neceffary to the Ef-^X fential Being of a Churchy And that makes us Catho-^^, licks , Though "fre ioyntly Belieye feme errors "frith it. An- £wer . This is wors then before , And more confu- fed fluff. Who are thofe We, that can chufe thus ; n«m**» Or, Tell me, if I live in an Erring Church, where f£"hfrom Fals Doftrinis Secretly mingled with Truth , what lfaubood,*f am to chufe, or, what is Good or Bad > If a poor //«««■«» fimple man, Deceived by his Pallor , fall into an Er- J^f^ rour, There are others ready to unbeguile him , But^4 JtHe here are none to do this Service, Becaus none can p^wfe*. certainly Iudge of the right or wrong. Will you 'w*«w lay, That Scripture is to decide in fuch Dou6ts?j£*J Pray you Tell me, if (by a fuppofed Impoffibility ) thin mat Scripture it felf were Corrupted in certain great mat- *rrhimfeif. ters, And no Body knew where, on Tpho/e Judgement should "toe Rely to Jingle out tho/e Corruptions ? This Cafe only fuppofed , is a Real one in the Churches Before Luther (if the Roman fail us; ) For all other were cor-N«vw rupted , and no Protellant can certainly fay in what. Sert^g However, Take Scripture, as it is moll pure, And 0Jt,npriva- plead with it againlt an Arian , He laughs at you, *«*«'#- and fays he hath more clear Scripture for his Particu-^"'.^ lar Tenents , then Proteftants have for Theirs . What j4/*» Ggx thenf*i«^ Mr.StiU hng fleet. *;& DifcJIL CIL Ofalate Writen DoEtrin. then is next ? Every Private man mud in fuch Exi- gencies Judge for himfelf. The Arian Anfwers He dothfo, And thinks his Judgement as good as yours,, yet (till remain's in his Errour. Well, at laft you ihaJl hear the right Solution. CHAP. It Of a lau Writers Doftrin. 1. y\[7H No . They hold thefe Dochins as Efiential, as to Believe a Trinity, Do you Think that Brians , Pelagians , and other H#- reticks, will fo far Difown their Particular Tenents , as to' lay them down, or grant They make not up a Church \ No certainly. This Confent of Judge- ments DifcIILCIL OfalateV^ersDoclrm. i\f. ments Therfore , in all Christians Societies , for the The fop*: owning of fo much precifely as is Neceffary to the /^ «»/«»< Ellential Bern? of a Church , is a mod unlearned Specu- *f lHdge' lation* Neither do we mend the matter, in- faying owning p> as fome do, That nothing is EfTential to a Church, much pre^ But 'What may he Evidently propounded to all Berfons , as a "f If you an- T"™d*Zt fwer, 'Tis fo much as The Catholick Church in all Ages preci/e Do- received, you ftill lurck in Darknes, And prove igno-arin^herm turn per ignotius ; For you never yet told us , nor can °^r°es r*~m tell us, where this Catholick Church is, or what xipiuite Be- Taught. You will fay it is That Church, or the a-"tf greed on Doftrin , which all, who went under the No- tion of Chriflians , owned as Holy and catholic^* Anfw. There never was any fuch Church, nor fuch Do&rin owned by all in the World : For chrifts True Dodrin always met with oppofition , and had Fais Do&rin againft it. You will fay the Primitive . Church and Doiftrin was pure, let us ftick to That,^T^~ And all is well . I anfwer firft : It was mod: pure, much the yet both Brians and others oppofed it; They therfore An:imt> will not Agree to it. And here by the way I might Ask, Why their Authority was not then every whit as good, to Vmatholic\ that firft Church , as Sedmcs AsVtof^ is now to Uncatholick the Roman I 2* It is a J25J&* meer Subterfuge , Thus to run up ta the Primitive Qhurch* Church , whilft you and we Agree not ( though 'tis your Fault) what that Ancient Church Taught in ma- ny Particulars. if you fay , We muft read , and Gg 3 judge. *j8 DifcIF I. C .1 I. Of a late Writers DoStruC judge . Alas ! We have All been Reading chefe hundred years , And yet are at Variance about that Do&rin. You fe then how Controversies are made Endles , by this Proceeding. But what will ye? It is an old Fallacy of our New men , who firft Sup- pofe , And then go on to Prove. They fuppofe the Primitive Dodrin to be known and agreed on by Themfelves and Us, and then Appeal to it. There tyhy s*n«- js n0 fuch thing . The Real Truth therfore is , They ""the pi- take up flielter here, Becaus Controverfies that are mitive now moft handled, were in Ihofe days the leaft exa- church. miata0 2. Some of our Later men may perhaps pretend, That we have not been able hitherto to underftand their meaning, or to dive into the Speculative Con- AtM cejts 0f the church Catholic^ And therfore teach us thus, refund. That Doclrm Tvberin all chunks have Agreed on , tver fince cbrifts time, can be no matter of Difcord ; for where all Agree , there can be no Difagreement, Take ther- fore that Precife and Vniform Voclrin Tvbicb all chriftUns haye ( Antecedently to particular errors ) Vniyerfally owned , as unqueftioned Chriftian Doftrin, Therin confifts the EfTencials of Saving Faith, or the very Quintcffence of the catholich^church , and in no more. 3. Mark well a ftrong Speculation about nothing. The *b- You rnujl Prefcind one Vniform , Vnfaocd , True Religion , from patting a[i fjs Religions in the World , And then you haye the True %™%nfem Religion. That is, you mufl cut of from Arianifm^ fals^a from Pelagianifmy from Donatifm, from Proteftanifm , from /peculation p0pery ( For here is alfo fome thing fuppofed Amifs) Hint* °' what is Errour s And the Remainder of Do&rin, wherin all Agree, conflitutes the Effence of Saving . Fait Difc.III. Gil OfalattWfitvs Prote- *****?** flants ? Toyes. Let them on Gods name, who ^ttjt* are fo much upon Reformation, firft lead the way, and thZJm? lay down their own Errors , next we fhall fe who foU&mr* lows them. I am fure Catholicks will not Difown the leaft Article of their Belief; For they, as 1 told you „t "£„ juftnow, Aflent with equal AJJnrance , to all Points olttothingof Faith. And fo do alfo , I think , The Avians and^">JB'- other Sectaries to their Particular Errours. But fup- "*' pofe , That we mentally conceive one agreed-on Har- tkemru°pp^ monious Doftrin , Vniverfally held by all Chriftians, y//*v»»<>. who can A fibre me, that fo much precifely is enough thinz * for Saving Faith X You may fay , that , That Do- tmMt^ ftrin wherin all Chriftians Agree, cannot but be True, Becaus all own it : But , you shall never foo much as pro- hably sthtfw, That Saving Faith requires no more , or , jland's fafe upon futh a Generality. The Arians believed in Cbrift, that is General Do&rin , But denyed his God- head. Cerimbm and Ehion Believed in Chrijl , But held that he was Man only . The Monothelhs Belie- That Ved in Chrijl , But denyed his tiw Natures , his two B'^^1 \i::IL tr. l -i^-:„. tL-. au-V: * _ n t- Pridian tarn Wills Humane, and Divine. The AfoSinarians Belie- , ved in Chrijl , and held that the Word affumed True though Fleih , But without a Created Soul. Tell me now , can trne> * mt you Abftraa a Belief from thefe Erring Chriftians, ^J^- Common to all other, That is,fafe ,fujficient, and enough faith. to conftitute Saving and Catholich Faith ? Is it enough to fay, I do Believe in Chrijl , without defend- ing Tilth my faith , to an explicit Belief of his Divinity alfo > Hath one that faith , I belieye in chrifti But 1 willab- Ptain H*. rfy fellow \ romthej 'Sectaries Vcftrin. UP DifcIII.CH. C fahteVV 'titers Mrm. flracl from a Belief of his ftoo Natures, from his having a Rational Soul , from His Being God and Man> And Be- caus others have poficively Disbelieved thefe Articles, I will only Prefcind from the Verity of them ( to pre- feind is les , then exprefly to deny them ) hath fuch an one, I fay, Saving Faith enough to make' him a 7tfTefi Member of the Holy Catholick Church > No . For ■-' ' if fo, He needs not to believe at all the Divinity ofCbnft, or his two Natures ; after Scripture is Red , and Propofed uuto him, which obiigeth him, if He own it for Gods Word, not to AbftracT: from the Belief of thefe Articles , But pofitively to yeild an Affent to them with True Faith , as moft Fundamental Ferities of Chrijlian Religion, You fe Therfore, how Impoffible it is to draw one true Vniform , vnherfal Docirin , From all erring Cmftians , And to hold that, on the one fide fufficienc for Catholick Faith , And on the other, to comply with that ftrid Obli- gation which exprefs Scripture (clearly propofedj for- ceth us to Believe. 4. This Point I infift on , Becaus I know , Prote- ctants cannot fo much as probably Name any Thing like a Holy united catholick Church before Luther-, unles , They fir ft Anfwer ( as fome of them feem to do ) by the Abftraft Doctrin of all Chriftians , now evidenced no Faith, And fay, That particular Errors did Vn- catholick none « Or, Secondly run to an invifible vrotefiants church, not at all Defignable. Or , thirdly (as They Ztnpwied? ought to do ) Acknowledge that the Roman Catholick the Koman Church was then , and now is, not only a Church , Catholick gut tne sole, Holy y and Catholick^Cburch of Chrift through "' the nhole World. "With this Catholick Society, I could fliow ( were it not amply don by others ) How all Church as 1 rt*e &c. BifcJILGlL OfalateVVriters Who made you judge in this Cafe ? Name the injured Parties . Were the Brians , Pelagians , 2{eftorians , Donatisls wrong- ed, when they left Communion with this Church > TheGr&. No. But the Waldenfes , the Alhigenfes , the Hujftts t^/'^f" And moft of all, The later Grecians had Injury Don Elmore '* them . And why fo more Then Pelagians > Is your wronged bare AfTertion Proof enough to Declare Thofe Guilty, thenAm and Thefe Innocent ? When you , your felves, asrM much condemn them as Catholicks Do, For You ut- terly Difavow Their Do&rin . Was ever General Council Convened, That did more Patronize the Er- rour of thefe Waldenfes, Then thofe other of the Arians, or , That blamed the Roman church , forujling them out of Met Communion > No.. Why therfore do you Plead fo much, for a Bad caufe, when you have no more to Defend it , Then your own Proofles Talk ; which Had you fpentin an Apology For any Old Condem- ned Haeretick, would have Help't as much (That's nothing at all ) as now you Advantage Thefe later Men H] And Obferve f I Befeech you , How weakly Hh you H* Difc.IIL ClL Of a late Writers ftoStrin. toldfmmi am* Others were good Cathoticks . We deny it , Hduneks And Demonftrate their Xncatho\ic\Do6irin . To what without Tribunal fhall we Appeal for a juft Sentence to your dphluT Saying, /; or to our, No. To None > And Thus their own you Proceed with us in all your Controverfies. ^e Tdk. mufl; either take your Word for your AfTertion , or Dif- Andm*ke Pute wich°uc end upon nothing that hath the Appea- controver. ranee of a received Principle. fin mdUs. 5, You Say Again. The Later Grdrians were C&- tholicks, Before they Recanted their Errours in the Council of Florence* How Prove you That > By a glorious Empty Title : A Defence of the Greek, Chnrch, By Far fetch' d, Uncertain Conjectures, And meet Negative At- gumtn&S) which are fo flight, That if all were put to- gether in a Iuft Ballance, They would not weigh one Straw, much les Outweigh the Definition of a mod Learned General Council againft the Greeks. Yetfuch Talk, and Talk only lengthen's thefe new Books 0 ?Td!" And nnakes them fo Voluminous as They are. And arindl- by the way Note here a Pretty Humour. The Greeks ryedby the wufl be Defended in that Point of the Holy Ghofts Frocejpon *Chwh frm the Father 0n^ r ^HJl- the Church of England Anathematize th the DoBrin . Is not this Right, think ye , And well done by a Froteftant ? GvAeiant, 6. Well • You fhall fe my plain Dealing with JjJjS1 you . I Licence you to take Thefe Grecians , Thofe mdtmt Hujpts, Thofe waldenfes &c. to make up a Church be- mke the fore Luther 9 yet mud Tell you, They Do not the deed SjjJJiJ* without more Company , which cannot be found ♦ ' " That Thefe we have named, make not the Church Cacholick, is Evident ; For , fir ft they were never Vniyer-f Difc.II LCI I. Of a late Writers DoSlrm. 143 Vniverfal , either in Time or Place . Their late Be- ginnings, and little Extent, are known and upon Record, a. They were never United in one Do&rin , But mo- re at variance with One another, Then you and Ca- tholicks are , This they only Agreed in to Oppofe the Catholick Faith 5 And if fo much made them Prote- Jiants, or good Catholicks , You may call in Turks. and lewes to bear them Company. 3. They were moft contrary to Proteft ant Religion , and not in Trifles on- ly . Why therfore have you recours to a People fo Blafted, Scattered, and almoft now Forgotten > Alas, Vnufiam "The Reafon is clear : Becaus without them you haye nothing ^Jj^JJ to mak$ a Church ofy And yet With them you are churchles. 1 fay therfore . No Roman Catholick^ Church , no Church n Yea moft affuredly , And y™™t *' a Glorious Church too. It is therfore Evident , have * That the Roman Catholick Society , was not only Ne- &fM"lk ceffary to makf* V-p -the Church 9 But was Moreover the Hhi Sole, 944 . t>nc.IlI.CIIf. MoreofProtetfant? Sole, and only Effential Church of Chrifr, as I have alre£ dy Proved. C H A P. III. The Fret ended Reformation of Frote* fiants is Vnreafonnhle , // Paith in Chriffc Only Suffice for Situation. A more Explicit Faith is grooved Neceffary • I. ¥ M-uft Needs have a Word more with our Ad- f verfaries upon this Subjeft, and Note : Thac if a General Belief in chrifis Sacred Ferfon, Office , and Dignity , be Saving Faith enough for a Chriftian, which fome endeavour to Prove by that Text of Sk John 20. 3 x . And thefe Things are Written , That ye might Believe that Iefa is the cbrift the Son of God, And that believing ye might have life in bis Name. Iffueh a General Faith, I fay, makes us all, as well Catholicks, as Chrrftians, without more > Our Proteftants need not to ftorm at us as They do , for ^ ant of True Faith-, For we Ca- tholicks Agree and Believe inCbriJl, God, and~'i#fotf, as firmly as They do ,• And in this one Article only ( may we credit them ) All Neceffary Ejjemials of Chri- ftian Faith are included . It is true , Catholicks fay , a more Explicit Faith is required, as I lhall prefent- 1* Dlfc.I I.C.HI. Vmeafonabte Proceeding. 2/45 jy Declare-; But Protectants, who do not, May reft contented ; And withall confefs , That the great Coyle JgJ^J They have kept in Reforming Catholick Doflrin co- «fo»t mes to no more, But to a flight Pidling about Non-thin2s™* Ejjentials, which, for ought is yet known , Hath done*"9*"*"' more hurt then gtod , And made Things Mors then Iky Mm km t&ere Before . dm more %. To Drive the Difficulty home ; I Ask ferioufly, ******* i Whether any one Article Peculiar to this Religion , as $° * , c Protefiancy (That is befide the General Belief in Cbrijt,^^^ and owning Scripture &e. ) Be neceffary to Sal.ua- /W;***- tion/' If yes; Then will Arians , PeUgians, Donatifis9c"lfDo-\ and other Sectaries fay alfo; what they hold Particu-y^y,*^ lar is alfo Neceflary . And Therfore Do&rin Abo- vation, ve , or Beyond the Belief in Chrijt, or, not Fnfoerfal iotberH*: is of like Necejfity. If Protectants anfwer , N8s or,^//^^e Affert that nothing Particularly held by them ( be- tike. caufe not Vniverfal Catholick Doftrin ) implyes this Neceffity , But a Relief in Chnfi only . Two rhings f*$%£ follow. The One is,- as- 1 have now Noted , That, seqmistm- Without Fruit at all , They have made a lhamfull Q:\tdenkbiy t J with their stfnpn in Bluftering all this while about non^^' JEJJentials and petty Differences, which may be Believed or Not, without Danger of loofingSaluation. 2. It follows , Thar, as Proteflrants here Acknowledge, a Church fo Vniverfal, wherin alt may be Saved that Believe in Chnfi, in like manner, Any one, and upon as good Reafon, May make it Wider, and allow Satuation Afo^e. to all, whether lews or Turks, that Believe in God only, J^T^f Without Explicit Faith in Chrifi , Vnut Dew , Vn* Fides. auawedof Therfore, in Place of chrifis Church we may have a Gods b Prot8z tbunh} more large and ample £re&ed in the world.- Bm** Hh; 3, You- >w. cejfary to Salvation 246 DifcIIlGIlI. MoreofTmenants 3. You will fay, Scripture is mod Evident for a Belief in chrijl ; Might a Defender of the now large Imagined Church ( which affords Salvation to all that Believe in God ) Anfwer , He would tell you, That the Explicit Belief in God implycs feme kind of Implicit* Belief in chrijl , And that is enough , which He is ready to Make good t when you have proved your Absiufl Faith in chrijl s sacred Per fen to be Sufficient to Salva- tion . A better Anfwer is. Scripture mod Certain- ly Obligeth us to Believe in chrijl Explicitly ; But doth it leave of there , and not joyntly oblige us to Believe other Articles alfo Explicitly , when they are rtenBeiuf plain in Scripture , And fufficiently propofed ? Such in cfaifi are the Sacraments of Baptifm and the Holy Eucbarijl &c, *^*J Can we therfore , after we Own thefe Truths Delive- red in Gods Word , hope for Salvation without an explicit Belief of them ? If fo , S'.hhn c.6. 53. faith not True ■;. Vnles ye eat the Flesh of the Son of and dririk^ his Blood , you have no Life in you . Surely .. ,wc cannot do this like cbriftiansy Unles we believe it. cfLfl*' .If no 5 The Belief of ehefe Sacraments conftitute the wntsnt- Eflentials of Saving Faith , and fo doth alfo the Be- *'Jf*y. lief" of much Moral Doclriu fet down in Scripture. Read what S'.Paul Writes Cor.i.6. 9. concerning the ynrigbteoM , Idolaters , and Fornicators &c. And tell me, if you Own Gods Word, -whether the Apoftle doth tlt'ito. not Difinherit all Vnbelievers of his Do&rin > Ther- TAiD$m fore fomething more ,is "NecefTary for Chriftians, uni- *to ted in one Faith 3 to Allen t to, Then only to Believe in 4. The true Fundamental Ground of my Afiertion is This . Wbat eyerGod speak^ in Serif tun ( who never fpake • Difc.lILC.IIL Vnreafonable froceding. 14? fpake Idle word ) Tehetfer the Matter may feem to our *toe&k> Capacities little or great , is , after a Sufficient Propofal , of the fame Weight and Authority. To Believe rher- fore in christs'is a Fundamental Article, and ( in one Sence Known to every One) mojl Fundamental % But to Rejecft , or Abftraft from His other Verities Revealed in Scripture , or to make les Reckoning of them > Becaus they Appear little to us, is to Affront God, And Tell him , That we will Believe him fo far as we pleas, Buc no farther , VVheras on the contrary fide he Allures us, That his Word is equally engaged in all He Sairh , 'And AttTruths that his Eternal Truths , whether little or great, are ^sJrript^ not to be Valued of by what is fpoken , But by the certain r!q"aiAt*> Authority of him that Speaks them. Hence Divins Af- thoritj. fert , and moft Truely, That no man can Believe fo much as one Article of Chriftian Faith upon the Mo* tiveofGW* Revealed Teftimony , unles He readily Em- brace All other alike, as equally Propofed , upon the fame Authority. For where we have the Same Mo- tive, we muft yeild the Same Affent , and with like Reverence. Upon this Motive of Gods Repealing Word, Meant* True Chriftian Faith Relies , CMtlle clypei pendent ex e£y °fUith* ' omnps drmatura fortium , Here they meet together , Con- centred, as it were , in This One Vndecetycd, and Vn- deceiving Verity,, Do I therfore Believe chrijl to be w* **/;«* the True LMeJpas , Becaus God faith it ? I muft alfo f£k* Believe Baptifm , the Eucharift, and other Revealed ^tf. Truths, when after a fufficient Propofal, I know, * That the fame God Spokes them. For if his Word Pre- vail with me to Credit him in the one , It is as Power- ful and preffing to force, as I may fay, Faith from sae in the Other. A further Reafon is; Becaufe a a***& right ztafi^ ,248 Difc III.C III. UoreofTroteflants right A5f of Faith , fetled qn this Motive 9 is a virtual and Implicit Belief ', not of one Article , But of all other which the Motiye Owns , or Fphold's, You «fe therfore , none can truly Believe in chrijl , who Denies the lead Ve- rity ( Sufficiently propoied ) that God Reveals : For, "Believe *U> ^ t\)e and moil Obfcure. seemingly * ' Clear m Vwrdst l i CHAP. IV. a;C DifcJII.ClV. Trotejiants as forne Divines hold of Cbriji alfo , After the Promulgation of the Gofpel ) Be Primary Fundamental Points of Faith , Becaus ( NeceJJttate me- dij ) Every one is obliged ro Believe Them Explicitly ; Yet withall we fay , That the Leaft Article Revealed by Almighty God, when it is Sufficiently Propofed , grows to be fofar Fundamental , That none can Deny or Doubt of it, without Damnable Sin. And in this Senfe there is no Diftin&ion between Points Fun- damental, and not Fundamental. The reafon here- Vrhdrever of (Already given ) Relies upon this Certain Principle. CodKs- wl)at God Speak' s whether the Material ohjeel belittle or V'udiu £>mt > 4ft*r t^ Charge laid on m to Believe , /; to he Ad- tholick Do ecj h&foliev'd. mnted Di fc J T I. C IV. Fundamentals, Vnreafonable. 251 muted of Kith equal Certitude and Reverence : For , it is not The lefs or more Weight of Things Repealed , That distinguishes our Faith , or makes it lefs or more Valuable ; But , that Su^fiC^ Tvbich fet's the true Trice upon it , is the Submijfton "toeyetld VeYaiUy by it to Cods Veracity. Now becaufe this Veracity is gives tras one and equally the fame in what ever is Revealed, vFai"tehi0 By confequence we Say , That Faith upon the Ac- count of that Sulmtffton is equally Good , Solid , and Valuable . This I Note in Oppofition to Se&aries, Who , For ought 1 can yet learn , CMeajure their Faith, f'jf**, not fo much By the Excellency of the Formal Object , as fwedby by tue'i different Nature of Things Revealed : Which, Be- the Dtver' caus confidered in themftlves, They often vary iny£wj£ rt, worth; Proteftants Think, that the Degrees of their veaUd. Faith may anfwerably be lefs or more various , ac- cording as the Object requires. It is an Errour.Th^g For , as it is certain , To at Tvhen God speaks to us , The pn% Higlejl Truth imaginable speaks ,• fo it is at certain , That He is to he Heard by us 101th Highefi Refpett and Reference, whether the Matter be great or Small. 3. What is here faid , fuppofeth a Sufficient Pro- portion of Revealed Verities , which without doubt are not equally Clear to all Capacities , if we Defcend to the Explicit Belief of particular Myfteries • But this is no hindrance to Catholick Faith in the mod How the unlearned man in the World ; For fuch an one Belie- »*&**»** ves Explicitly as much as he knows is Propofed , "h1"™ ■ And is not only in Praparatione animi ready to embrace revealed* more , when more is Propofed , But even now in eve- ry Ad of Faith He Elicit's ( as I noted above ) Impli- citly , and Virtually Submits to All That God hath explicitly Revealed . That Diftinftion therfore \i 2 which 2ji DifcHI. C.I V. tproteftants difcour/e* of A vifiin- which fome of our New men here Introduce , vi%. Bhn of of Things Neceffary to Salvation, r effectively to fucb as are scabies, cj <%>eaj^r capacities , and of Things Neceffary to he oivned in [Aty% order to Salvation by chrijlian Societies , as Bonds of Eccle* fiaflical Communion , is to no Purpofe ( unles we Speak of a lefs or more Explicit Belief, which may be Various according to a Dark, or Clearer Proposition . ) The Reafon is ; Becaus All that God Reveals ( and nei- ther more nor lefs ) is One , and the fame Refpe cJiyely to All, to the Learned , to the Unlearned , to weak and Strong Capacities ; Yea , And to the whole Church alfo, and this All Acknowedge in eveiyAd of Faith They have , Though , perhaps , it be lefs The worth extended to particular Articles . But know , as is cf Faith now noted , That the true Worth of Faith Confifts not ft much ™tmx * in the Extenfive Reach of it to more Material Obieffs , i^4s in Extension J ' . Z, • • i i bmiuub- dnlntenjilpe ana E^ualSnbmijJion to Gods Veracity in the things wiijfion. j]e Speaks , Which now I yeild to hy the explicit Faith I have. And am ready to do more when a Clearer Propo/ition, and How far Q0ds commar/d Require it . Whence you fe, Though a ihJlTlt Ruftick hath lets of the Explicit Belief Then a Learned Uameats Clerk -, Yet , He want's not thertore One Gram or Su- extmded. pernatura) Faith that Saves all Chriftians : For His Faith is, virtually, as far Extended as any Doftors, And his Infufid Habit , Kvery whit as Good . if any one cavil at the Diftindion of Explicit and Implicit Faith , He may Correct his Errour by this one Exam- ple. Give me One that hath read over Holy Scrip- ture? and Defcend's by Explicit Faith to every Verity in it: He Believes well. Another far from That Ex- tenjhe knowledge , knows fome Verities Revealed There, and Believes them : neYerthelefs, He Owns All and every Difc I1I.CIV. Fundamentals, Vweafonahle. 25 \ every lota in the Book for Gods Sacred Word , Tell Saving me , I Beleech you ; Harh not this more Ignorant Fait has Man with his lels Rxplicir Afler.r, As true Saving Faith ?f/n°™d as the Other? Yes, mod Aflfuredly , And in the pue7t 'asm Senfe now Dtclarcd , as Far Extended . This is our ** Explicit very Cafe. Could we Therfore once Agree about Behef' the Proponent of Faith, molt Difficulties were ended. Thefe tew Confiderations Premised. 4. My firft AflTettion is. The Difttnffion uf tally ma* Protectants de by Pyotejlants of Points more or lefs Fundamental in order DiP»3t°» to Chn/tians , is net only fnreajonable , but alfo very Fals , if ij^]^ T»e confider the Articles of Faith Jubjisiina, as it Deere , or , Funda- J Effent tally Depending upon Godi Eternal Revealing Verity ; me*t*l" For as They are Here, All fland firm alike, And equally fure upon this Verity. If therfore I Anfwer Ml Faith With my Faith to what this Motive firmly requires , fiand>sJrm I 11 II 1- 1' 1, m J /I A (T UP0n F>tVl- And as undoubtedly Believe , as God Speak^s, I muit Anent neReveU* to all wirh equal Affurance ; nor , can 1 Believe fome **<>*• and Disbelieve others, when all 'are Propofed alike: No, nor make Lets , or more Degrees of Certitude in my Faith . From whence I Infer , That n > man , by any Means or Search whatever , can find out what Articles are Fundamental, what not , Be- caufe There is no Means po/fible to find that which is not to be Found , But Fundamentals and not Fun- ^'" damentals are not to befuund, And I prove the Minor, oft ^ Lefs Every Revealed Article, is Afferred by an Infinit Vert- oy mor* ty\ But an Infinit Veriry Dehver's all it S peak's W*A^^G^ one and the fame Infimt Certainty (where no Degrees of peak's, more or lefs Certitude can have Place ) Ergo , All Ar- ah reveal- tides of Faith have one a? d the fame like Infinit hi-UTfHth* furance, as They are Spoken by an infinit Veriry. *ffi£™ I i 3 Con fe- ww/0, It dhho noun God tj4 Difc.lII.CIV. TroteftanisfDif courses of Confequently one is as Ponderous as another, And Equally Fundamental, if We (which is only to be Regarded ) do Refpeft the Motive . Again . If fome Articles be Fundamental and others not , it is either Becaus the Fundamentals Rely on a Greater Verity, and the Non-Fundamentals on a Lefs ( which is utterly Fals, for the fame Infir.it Truth Speak's them all;) Or, Becaus, though He delivers all , yet His Plea- fure is , That we fcfteem of fome more Fundamental Then others, And this is Impofiible, V%. That an In fin it Ferity takes , as it Tvere , the fains to Sjpeak^ to tn and for our Eternal Saluation , And yet doth not Oblige us to Believe Him in what He faith, with the whole mmn.mm forces of our Soul. It is, as I bavelhewed, Highly nottoBe. againft the Dignity of God, To engage his Eternal Truth Ueve All tn speaking to us , L^ind yet have Thofe He fpeak^s to , evilly, $ Talk y as if it Matter 'd not , whether He be Heard or no. 5. You may Reply. Some Things Revealed to us feem light in regard of the Material Objeft : For who can Own it as Fundamental an Article of Faith to Believe that S*. Paul left his cloak at Troas, as to Believe the Proceffion of the Holy Ghoft from the ^cannot father and Son alfo > I Anfwer . God ( as we IreatV e now Suppofe) Speak's both thefe Verities, Therfore Matter, both are Equally True ; And if equally True, I cannot tmiDisbe. Believe the one upon the Motive of Gods Veracity, and hfferwith- Disbelieve The other ( when Propounded ) without a oMForfet. Forfeiture of all Faith . The Difparity therfore, which tureof Anfe'hhere From the Mat ta Repealed , Imports nothing to the prefent Queftion. 6. You may fay Again • The Necejjlty of Things , Tfhich ly in Gods great Dejign , and are AbfUttely to be Believed, mult be • Difc.I ll.Gi V. Fundamentals yi^nreafoiiable. iff be taken from the Reference They have to our lafl End^hich is Eternal Salutation . Anfw . I fay lb too* But General This is only general Talk , and comes not Home to Talk- the Qaeftion; For, the Qaeftion rightly dated Drives at particulars , and Ask's how many of thofe Preci/ely have Reference to this lali End , or , are Neceflary to Sal- vation Refpeflively to All, after a Sufficient Propofition, Nt Article Catholicks Say, the Belief of all is fo far Neceflary, f^foif. That not one of All thofe revealed Articles can be Dtf believed. ' believed . Protejlants make their Exceptions , Yet hitherto never Dared to give in a Catalogue of ^ hat They except , nor cean^a can fay , That the Belief of fuch and (uch Articles , are to be whatAni- excluded as Vnneceffary to Saluation, cles are ** 7. Nay I Affirm more. It is Impoffible for Them by ^Znltt their own Principles to Exclude any . To prove my fay to s*i. Alfertion . Obfejve Firft . They can no more fay v^ion. by a true general Propofition : This Tfrhole Bible , / have noTt> Sectaries tn my Hands , is Gods o^n Word , and exclude the leajl Ve- cannot by rityin it from being Gods true Word) Then, They can fay by \u£eifif' a true general Propofuion : Allmsn are by nature Mortal, and ftinguiiK exclude any particular CMan from being Mortal . For , as bet^ee^' the Mortality of every particular man makes fo far ^muis forth This Propofition True , That if One be by natu- and other:. re Immortal , it is Fals; fo the Truth of every particu- lar Article in Scripture Verifies fo far the other Propo- fition , That if one Article be not Gods true Word , slrilmre the General Propofition is Fals alfo. Now I AlTume. inmgem- But Proteftants fay , to Believe Scripture to be the true f«L*>ay> Word of God , at leafl in a General 7»ay (which implyes^*/^" the Covenant of Grace and Faith in ChriH ) is Jndifpenfably covenant necejfary to Saltation, Therfore They mufl alfo Say , To belie- °f Grac'* Ve every particular Article contained in Scripture. , as being £7^£*^ truely don, 2j6 Difc. If I CIV. Yes moft afluredly . For by Ptt4rem*- Denying That to be True , which He knows God hauucL Saith is True, He pertinacioujly Offiofith himfelf to an Infinit Veracity . Ergo\ The True Ad of Faith contrary That to this Infidelity cfNeceJJity makes him a Faithful Believer . mh&kms* But that which necelfarily makes him a Faithful Be- k»«™« liever hath not only Reference to his laft End , But %$££, is alfo neceflary to Saluation (for as Infidelity loofeth hathrefe- Heaven , fo True Faith is Neceflary to gain it) Ther- fence t0 fore the Belief of every little Article is not of little, But, in this Senfe,of as main Confequence,as theGreateft. TheBeiuf And here by The way you may well Reflect upon the of Every Dei'perate Talk of fome Later Men, who Tell us: mUm"J- >-r are not jo NeceJJary tn ftnftnm order to our End, fome being at fo great a Remove from this explicated End, That the only Reafon of Believing them, is Becaus they "notUitU are Contained in scripture . A moft unworthy faying, Mr.stiL which makes God to have Spoken a Thoufand idle ^^rV Words in Scripture ,• For , there They ftand ufelcflyy^. in the Book, without Benefit, without subjeryiency or Relation to any further good , But only to be looked on . You may Read them , and pafs by them as Things wholy Vnneceflary to our Final End • A ftrange Conceipt They frame of Scripture , that make it up (as III Apothecaries do fometimes Phyfick) of VnneceJJary Ingredients. 9. You may Reply . Some Catholicks feem to rhefenfeof Divide the Object of Faith into that which is Per fe, v^nes By it Self NeceJJary , And By Accident or, Secondarily ^™* K k fJe- Ktcejjhry, 158 IDifc.I II. CI V. Protectants Thiey Acknowledge Fundamental 9 tohghy, and n°t Fundamental Do&rins in the Senfe of the Que* ■ ftion now Propofed . I Deny the Confequence:For> They only hold fome Verities to be fo Principally Ne- ceffary to the Effence of Chriftian Faith, That it They had not been Revealed at All, or, Now were unknown, Chriftian Religion would abfolutly Perifh ; But ir is not fo in Others. Fonexample : Had God never Reveal- ed any thing Touching Christ our Lord , the Sacred My- VrhycAlltdjlery 0j- the Incarnation , or a Trinity &c. The very Lf- objlaLf fcnce of our Religion would not have been, And ther- ifiitb. fore Thefe are called Primary ohjetts ( Ratione materia; ) Becaus if we have no knowledge or Faith in chrift , we have no; Chriftian Religion. Contrarywife. Had the j Holy Ghoft not at all Infpired the Hagiograp hers to write I much of the Hiftorical part in Scripture (which is writ) ] or never Told us that Abraham had two Sons , yet we in^lTof "*$* ^a^e Kmlvn ckrift) and perfecJly Believed in Him : S u c h the Matter Verities then , Becaus of the Matter , are not Per fe fo we mi ne- Neceffary . However , Being nolb 'Writ, They are True €*(*r?) OhjecJs of Faith, Becaus God Speaks Them . It is Ther- being Wrii fore one thing to fay : Thefe Itjjer matters M not Writ at become Ne- 4// ) had not been > neceffdry to constitute Religion And another cttt*rh thing to fay , AW 7b hen They are "Writ , andfpoken hy Almigh* They lead ;? ^> They'd* not integrate the total Ohjecl of Faith, But matter in may he looked on as Par ergons > or, as Things yoid of all Re- Scripture* ference to our Eternal Happmes ♦ It is , I fay, ImpofTibie *f Faith. t0 own rhem with fo poor a Belief, which, if it be Re- folved , Proves No Faith at all . And therfore it is Im- pofTible, Becaus, when I fay by a General Propofition, I am bound to Believe firmly All that God Speak's , I cannot but Believe alfo every Particular compnfd under that DifcIIL CIV ' . FrnJamentals^Vmeafondble. 1^9 that General it leaft implicitly as is Already bqth Declared and Proved. 10. My fecond Proportion is : Although contrary to Sefiarhs, Truth, Tve gratis Permit Protectants to JDiftinauisb between thATgbwl « • 1 ° 1 / r 1 I J J-r r Admit of Points Fundamental , ana not 'Fundamental , jet Tbej are Jo tbeWm- unprovided of all means to make good the Viftinclion, or to faonbt- Seytr the Fundamentals from the Other , That They tfallneyer XZntlh fpeakjo much as one Ward probably on tins Subjecl* and others, 11. Some fraudulently ijittffling all of v$j^fe Afr,S(ik I am bound to Believe it hi Fiuue of §o^ls Veracity. Firft*' lt^'m Why am I bound to Believe twenty Verities in Scri- wIJ^x pture, when the Belief of them hath, as you Say, m Reference to Eternal Saluation ? Why ftould God oblige me to Believe that now , which will do me no good Hereafter? Yet farther. You Talk of Enquiry. Tell ^ /end's me of whom muft we Enquire 5 of qur pwn Fancies > *%fE~ Thefe lead us , as we fe in the Quakers , to a Thou- £itf fand Fooleries. Of an Vnerring Church? You own, ***■* pqnt to Enquire of. Of Scripture > This Qcca- lion's Errour upon £rrour, And, as Appear's by the Endles Riflentions of H^reticks , may as 'Well lead us to Deny Fundamentals , as rightly to acknowledge them . They define Pope-like . Secondly : All things, not equal* \y appearing to all Per fops to he revealed by God, the fame meafure of \necefsity cannot he extended to all Per fins . The M have AtTertion only fhow's what is Evident, That all Per-*?"/;*fl fons cannot have alike the fame Explicit Faith; But^pu™ *tis far of from Proving, That all Gods Verities, When pro- E*itb. founded , $ave not Relation to Belief , and Saluation Alfo . K k 2 Yet *6o Difc.Ul.CAV.TrotepntsVifcourfesof Yet this is the true State of the Queftion concerning Fundamentals, as Appears by Thefe men, who put a TrueFaith ^,^erence between fome Revealed Points and Others. believes all Thofe, upon ikt General Account of Dtyine Revelation are imfimtly. 2{ecejfary > Thefe , of lefser Reckoning ♦ /land at a great di- Jiance from abfelute Necejfity , We fay all are Neceflary when Ptopofed , yea, and all are Implicitly Believed in every True Acl •/ Supernatural Faith. 3. They fay: An unmrfal A/sent to the Will of God , and Vnherfal obedience to it , are abfolutely and indijpenfably Necejsary to all Per/ons, cltdfencc t0 ^0m Gocts Worc* ls tew*hd 4 The Affertion ( though isrefihed moft true ) run's on in Terms too Vniverfal, And muft, wtoparti- if iC fpeak of an Efficacious Obedience, be Refolved plZce!™ int0 particular Compliances with Gods Will, Otherwife ic with Gods Deftroyes ic felf : For no Man can fay ; I now Pur- *|A pofe to yeild Obedience to Gods Will, And, in senfa otherwife Compoftto of this Volition, Refift his Will in any parti- ti deftroyes cular. Therfore if it be his Will (as moft certain ic *f$ is ) That I Hear Him and Obey Him in every Particu- lar He Speaks; my Purpofe alfo of Compliance with his Will, cannot but joyntly Embrace , and Extend ic felf to thofe Particulars, either Implicitly , which is don in every due SubmiJJion to God , Or , more Explu titly , when I Hear his Will Propounded in fuch and fuch particular Matters . XoGsnera- ixt 1 have already given the Reafon hereof. Be- l%snThe' caus> there is no Generality in Objects, The total Ob- objeft jed Therfore of my Faith, as condiftinguished from my therfireof jicl of Believing, includes a parte rei , nothing els, But S2«/T f° many Particulars as God hath Revealed. In like many ?ar- manner the Objeft of my Obedience, implies a Sub- pchhrs. miflion to fo many Particular Commands ♦ He Therfo- re, Difc. TIL C .IV. Fundamentals iVnrea finable. 161 re, who faith by a General A&, I Believe all that God Jndad*. Speaks, I Obey him in alt He Command's, Fallen's upon $"j°^J nothing a parte rei, But on Particular Revealed Veri- tend'uojo ties, and Particular Intimated commands, nor can He, m*»y by a General Aft, more Believe All, and exclude So- Commands me , then exclude All and believe Some. For want of well Pondering this Truth , our Protcftants (whilft they own an Vniverfal Belief of Scriprure neceflary to Hetbst Saluation ) fliall fumble as long as they live in Their Bel^ve's Specifying Particular Fundamentals , Becaus the Vniver- ™ g*»*™/, fal owning of Scripture, owns likewife all Particulars Believes in it . Exclude Particulars, And you make Null the everJ ?"rm- Vniverfal Propofition . 13. Others Lay this charge on us, to Believe All that God ReveaPs in Scripture , and there we fliall furely meet with the Fundamentals of Faith. Anfw. Though we Gratis admit, That all Neceffary Points are contained in Scripture, yet it is too great a Task, Yea, and impoffible alfo, for every Simple Man to read the Book over. But Suppofe this be don, He may not only fall into twenty fcrrours concerning Scri- pture. But alfo moft eafily judge that to be Fun- damental which is not , and that not to be Funda- mental which is ; And if He do fo , He hath nei- ther Doftor, nor Prompter at hand t to Vnbeguile him.. Kk3 CHAP. 2 6% Difc. II L C.V. One %eply Anftortl CHAR V. An Anfaer to one Reply. Move of this SHtyeft. I. "flJKre briefly I Anfwer to a trivia! Objection of jfjour Adverfaries , who efteem us Catho licks, An obit- Though we own an Infallible Church , as far of from a%on knowing the Fundamentals of it ( or giving in £ Di- *n«mijia- ftin& Catalogue of them ) as They are after their Red- k: ing Scripture . The Objection (grouped on a Mi- ftake} is Forceles : For, with one Unanimous and The ^qual Submiffion We Believe all That the Church chmch Propofeth , which, when Doubts occurr, is Ready, ^^"" Able, and Sufficient to Declare it felf. Scripture farther, -cannot do fo , As is Manifeft by the endles Diflentions when of Proteftants in this very Queftion of Fundamentals. imlVrt'. Now * He That believes A11 tfiat the church Propo- iZl'cZT feth as Points of Faith, Admits likewife of every Par- m$. ticular , and with the fame Certitude , Though , Per- haps , He clearly Diftinguifhes not between Matters of Faith, and Others; But this Diftinguilhing (when exa&ly don) only Perfects Explicit Faith , And therfo- re , as it Gives no Addition of more Faith abfolutely Necejjary to Salvation , fo the Want of it Deprives us not of any thing neceffary to that End of Happines. The Reafon hereof is clear out of the Precedent Dif- cours : For , He who by an Univerfal Aflent Admits of all that the Church Teaches *ts faith , cannot but tcit* . DilcJlLCV. More of thisSubjetl. 16} «»*%_ implicitly Believe This Particular, if it be of Faith , th* tit " Though He yet know's not fo muth , yea, and maychurch fometimes rationally Doubt , whether the Church Pro-^Jj^'* pofeth it or no, as a Matter of Faith . So Schoolmen, matter as of different Judgements, often Difpute whether fuch *aith> and and fuch Points are de Fide , And becaus They are"?"- '£]* contrary in their Pofitions , either Thefe or Thofe iy if it be Contendents ( light where it will) err Materially; yet, \°f *""*>. fay, The Erring Party, who Admits of All that the^»'¥**- Church Propofes , as Faith , to be de Fide , Believes "' Implicitly ( upon his Univerfal AfTent to ^11) T»e very>A ma" iMatter , fvhich He by Error Explicitly Denyes , yea , and ^im^u' bath as True Faith as the Other "That Hitts on Truth. Nei- citfy what ther is there fo much as a feemmg Conrradiftion be-^Err(7r^ tween Thefe two Judgements, oiTrue Implicit Faitb »^^» and an Untrue Material Explicit Error : For the one is No Cor}t fo far from Oppofmg the other, That the Erroneous traduiion- Judgement in ^Attu exercito ytilds to Truth , and re- betwfeen lolved into all the ftrength it Hath, faith no more *™t p3/" but This, by a conditional Tendency . If What I Affirm and Mr** be not contrary to the Churches Dvcfrin . And hence it is, mat*!iai that Catholicks (God be ever BleiTed ) do not only £*f/"' eafily lay down their material Errors, when the The R Church Decern again ft them, But moft ufually alfo,/e»# in Their learned Volumes , fubmit All They write to Learned the Judgement of the Church, which Implyes a ta- catboiick* cite Retractation , or an unfaying of whatever fhall bc^bm^'t0 Cenfured , or, Sentenced to be Amifs. O , would ches our Proteftants Acknowledge fuch a Living Judge of ctnfur*. Controverfies, They might make excellent good Vfe $'*&#&* of Their Bible j. But to fnatch that Pure Book from{*^/j/* Catholicks (as they have Don) And afterward to De- *«* f**?. bafe i64 Difc.III.CV. One^jply more of bafeit, to Proftitute it ro every Wild Fancy, That. 4hall pleas to meddle with it, is plainly to Abjure and Rer ounce all Poflibility of either knowing what Fun. damentals are •, Or, of ever Arriving to better Settle- ment in Faith, then now we fe , which indeed is no- ne at all ♦ Therfore though they Proteft a Thou- fand times , That they Believe every Thing in Scrip- ture with the like Implicit Faith , as Toe do the Church , it Avail's nothing, whil ft every Private man makes that Book to fpeak what he would have it, That is , what his Fancy Pleafes. 2. Others finally have Recours to the Apoftles The Belief Creed, and fay All things there ( as They Relate to of the a- Scripture ) and no more , are Fundamencal Points of cf«i*tf Faitk ' Firft •' Admit of the AiTertion, without any sufficient likelyhood of Proof, Protectants have little to glory in; jor saiv*- For , There is not fo much as One Article of their Religion , uon. ^ Protejlancy ( Obferve it well) contained in the Apoftles v°rotefU»( Creed , Therfore nothing of their Religian , as Protejlancy , can c? in the he Accounted Fundamentally Necejjaryto Salvation. x. One Aprf1" ,may Admit of All thofe Exprefs Words in the Creed. 1 Believe in lefts chrijl His only Son, and be an Haere- tick ; For the Arians grant this , and yer are Haere- ticks ; Becaus They Deny the High Godhead of chrijl, and confuh/lantiality likewife with his Father, which are not evidently deduced out of thofe Words. And Here, Letitpu** I would gladly know of Proteftants, when either Arian fiseanriet or any Sedary That doth not only Abftraft from M%t. chriP fuPream Divinity, But Pofitively alfo Abjures /ttonpUw-it i yet in fome manner frigidly oTvns Chrijl for the only lfr Son of his Father, whether , 1 fay, fuch an One may be Reckoned of as a True Believer in Fundamentals ? 3. Though DifcIILCV. Tits SutjeSUnfin'l 265 3. Though the Creed Comprifeth much in that One Article, / believe the Holy Catholic/: Church ( And ther- fore feme Ancient Fathers moft Defervedly Magnify the vrotefiantt compleatnes of it , as an Excellent summary of Chnilian ***** Faith ) yet Proteftants for their lives, cannot fay.* what^w^ ^ or where this Catholick Church is, And it is very hard to church oblige me to the Belief of a church , which is neither which the known nor can be Pointed out, Now were it known, £^c a great Difficulty yet remain's to be Examined, Vi\. thdick. Whether God will ever Preferve this Church Infallible in the Delivery of Fundamental Vocirin , or (fuppofing His prefent Decree ) Whether He can fo leave it to a Pojjibility of Erring in Fundamentals , That Chrijitans may abfolutely loos all Faith, both of Chnft and Creed > if This Second be Sectaries Granted , We have no AlTurance, after all Chrtfts Pro- "reh &*&* mifes to the contrary, But that Chriftianity may totally T^ey grMt Perish before the Worlds End. If they Say , God will or Deny a ever Preferve a Church Infallible in Fundamentals,^^*" They muft joy ntly Acknowledge a Continued Vnextin Fund** guished Society of Chriftians, wherof fome are Paftors, mtm*ls. and Teach Infallibly thefe Fundamentals , and fome Hear them alfo Infallibly. I would have thefe plainly s^rler'lv$ Marked out, And withall have Seftaries know, That tk&Jw* All their Difficulties Propofed againft an Infallible nffiui- Church muft be folved by them , if they grant fuch In- ttes' fallible Teachers of Fundamentals , as is largely Baptijm Proved Above. 4. To Omit, that the Creed De-J£j'*e livers no Explicit Doftrin concerning Baptifm and the njtnotm Eucharift (Though the Belief of thefe are alfo Necef- the Creed* fary to Salvation ) Thus much I obferve, That Catho- CathoUch licks , without Glofles and Interpretations , own the 4dmit °f candid and plain Obvious Expreffions of the Creed in 'wl'£™ LJ All, Glofis, 266 DifcJII. CV. One %e\>ly more of All, and Every particular Article of it i Therfbre They are at lead ( if uot more ) as gooJ Believers of the creeds Fundamentals as Sedaries, And, if (which we Deny J They Err by Ignorance in JefTer Matters, as Proteftants May, and Do Err in Greater, They muft yetg?ant, that the Belief of Fundamentals is Faith enough to fave both Patties. This Suppofed, j. I muft Needs have a word with my long forgot - Avori ten Friend Mr. Poole, and Ask why He Deem s it fuch w«h Mr. a Strift piece of Juftice , to chafe, as He Doth , at a f9ole' converted Captain, upon the Account of his changing Religion , as if he were a Loft and Periflied Soul ? An Inftrument (forfooth) He will Prove (Append, p. 2.) if not of Gods Mercy to reduce him to the Truth , from which he is revoked, At leaft of Gods luftice , And a Witnes on Gods Behalf \ to leave him without Excufe. What needed , I fay, fo much Ado about Nothing ? For both the Captain and all Catholicks , whilft they Be- lieve the Creed Relating to Scripture , are very fecu- re , and Confeffedly right in Fundamentals; Which being Suppofed , It is more then Impertinent in the ?me?lants Proteftant , to Keep fuch a Coyl about lefler Matters,- c?yi*onoov> to Reduce the main Controverfy between us, to vurpofe a Trial of That which leaft Concern's us, and cannor, abemmst- as they think, be Decided by any Received Principle. zhntial. ^iZt whether They or Ire, are better fitted in non-Fundamen~ tals , which imports fo little (if our Proteftantd fay true) That the Knowing of them isfcarce worth our Know- ledge, Becaus They are Jvholy Vnneceffary to Salvation , and Make m neither more, nor les> Ejfential Members ofChrijls my* fiical Body, The Catholick Church. 4. From this Conceflion of our Adversaries I infer, That DiTc.II IC.V. This SutjeSt,4nf*erel t67 That no Proteftant can probably go about to Draw any Jf*he Be* Intelligent Catholick from his Religion . Firft : Be- £wV& caus He is as Firm in the Belief of Fundamentals as sufficient, Any Se&ary whoever , And that will fave his Soul . Vroteftanu Now , If they fay we Want no Fundamentals , but c™m abound in Superfluities , It is only faid, and not Proved : ,J/X*f*" However grant all, though contrary to Truth , Thefe/r^w thw Redundancies Hinder not Salvation, and may well be Rdi&ion- Lifted amongft Non-Heceffhries . z. No Catholick fgg^ voluntarily Oppofeth Himfelf to fo much as to one '£#%* lota, of Gods Word Sufficiently Propofed , nor , can hinder not] He, and Remain Catholick. $. He cannot Thwart ******' his Judgement of Difcerning, or, go Againft his Con- HfZ?*m fcience in Believing Catholick Religion ; For by Doing ^^J either, He loofeth Faith. 4, As long as He is A from being Cordial and Sincere Believer of the Roman Catholick c«Mie*h Faith, He can have no Evident Demonstrations againft it, Or Tax this Church of Errour, or, if in confcience He Do fo , eo ipfo, He ceafe's to be a Member of This Church, And is no longer Orthodox. 5. Yet I fay More* It is impoflible for a Prudent * irudm Man ( fecluding Grofs And moft culpable Ignorance, *^££ which makes him Imprudent,) to Shut his Eyes, QT> I go no mor* againft my Judgement , or confetence (nor perhaps jo much) as you Do. Wherin then am 1 faulty ? Nay, I muft yet Tell you More. Though (by a Suppofed Lmpoffibility ) The Church wherof I am a Member fliould err, a-nd I idyntly be in Errour with it, Yet as long as the Errour is unavoydab '■-: And in- vincible in me ( wherof my Confcience Reproves me not) it is, in your own Principles 9 no matter of Dam- nation, Difc.I I I.C. V. This SuhjeB, Jnfaerel 269 nation , Becaus Ignorance excufes me . Therfore , a* TheCatho. 1 am every Way Without blame in my Belief, fo £ cannot be re- ^*v^jf. claimed fiOm it by you. oulbUme. 7. But , faith the Catholick : Give me a company of men who Admit of C brill , and fo far Deny His church , That They cannot jay Cohere it is ; That Will Reform Their Eider dtnt!yCon. Brethren , Before T'oey haye Certainty of Their cWn Half Well ' vimes se- made Reformation ; That thin)^ Themselves wifer then all the ^1™'^ now Living , And the Ancient deceafed Defenders of the Ro- ror$ m/ man catholick Church; That have cauflejlj/ Separated Them- moft un- fehes from an Ancient Church , And Yet are not ioyned to Any ^tyJ°!^ Society ofchrijlians, Which Be ares the Refemblance of a Catho- Ancient lick^ Community : who , neyer yet had fo much as one General Church. Council to Direcl Them , no Infallible Oracle to Teach them , No Motives , No Miracles , to Evidence their new Faith : who 48rcrty/^ make every private Ferfn a Church, Every mans Reafon Iud Mitts. ge of High CMy fleries , that tr an fend Reafon : Who Take and Leave what Thy Itfl in Matters of faith upon no other War- rant , But their own Wilful Choife : who feemingly o^n an Vniverfal Church , But yeild Obedience to None : Who are Al- ways Jeekingfor Truth without Hope of finding it ■> Always Teaching more Learned Then Themfdves , x^And yet to this day9 fotoW not what they Teach : Who Too unluckdy fpend the few Days of Their Life in Scibling Controterfies ) Though they ji it is to no Purpofe { For bejtdes a high Offence given to God) All The Credit They gain in the Chriftian World Abroad , ( And their Repute at hotfte, a^jongff intelligent Ferfons is no better) y^An.oums to This Ignominy, That unfort anally They Patr«fii%e a late indent i HpXtjy. A)ich at lafl They muji q-m , or quite Deft ak of Salumon . Give me , I fay, iuch a fori of the\ ire net only battered and Bailed, BtH t^ilfij ky mop frtjfing Arguments (Drawn L J 3 both- 170 Difclri.CV. Oneftjply more An fared. both from Authority and Reafon ) May be evidently convinced ; yea, And ( if Gods Grace want not J eafi- ly Reclaimed from Their Errors , If Perttrfnes in fome t and Ignorance in others ( I mean the Ignorance of Pride ) Hinder not Their Converfion* But to Withdraw a Knowing Carhoiick, upon Rational Inducements From ibwThty h^ Religion , is Impoflible . It is true , They have rtfim* Gained fome Profylits ( Vnnatural Children to Their Vrofiius. Ancient Mother Church ) But how? Alas Too in- dulgent to Flefli and Blood , they were allured by Sen- fual , not Rational Motives. The Truth is Evident , I fay no more . Three 8. To End this Chapter of Fundamentals , Be 'noZdin *' ple*red to Obferve thefe Three Things . i . If we tbts^ue- Confider the Motive of Faith , which is Gods Veraci- jiitnof ty ; what ever He Speaks little or great , is with one ^mntdi an^ c^e ^ame ^e^Pe(^ an^ Profound Reverence to be Aflented to , And here is no Difference between Fun- °Tnll damentals, and Others. 2. If we fpeak of the Pro* tomd pojttion of Faith ; Herein alio There is no Difference : objeciof For, no man can Believe a Fundamental, Dodlrin Soo- T*Ub. ner Then fsjot Fundamental, unles the one as well as The other the Other be Sufficiently Propofed . 3. If we relates tv Speak of the Matter Revealed , I have fliewed Above, «WM That fome Points in Themfelves,or Ftrfe, More ElTen- tially Conftitute, Yea, And more Conduce to Piety ThtThird Then others : But, This makes no Diftin&ion between te the mat. Fundamentals , and not Fundamentals in the true fen- wd. fe of our Queftion , Becaufe the leffer as well as the greater , Are upon Gods Teflimony Equally Believed, in every true Vniverfal Aft of Supernatural Faith, wherby we fay , All is to be Afjented to , That God RMds . CHAP. iTi CHAP. VI. Some Few Profofitions of A late Wrl ter are Briefly Examined. His D iff ours of Fundamentals Deftroys Proteftant Religion . i» I Say Briefly : For, 1 leave much to be Anfwer- ed by more Learned Adverfaries. One Pro- u^fims pofition is. The very Being of a church , doth fuppofe the Vnp&fuhmt NeceJJtty oflfhat is required to he Belieyed in order to Salua- refuted, tion. Very good, but what then* Marry This fol- loweSr if't Was a church, it Believed all Things Neceffary he- fore it Defined) HoW comes it Tier fore to ma\e more Things Tieceffary by its Definition > Firfl , A word ad Hominem, Vntejlant* Proteftants, Have now a Church Ejftntiatly Conjtituted, Afidt0 or Have not : If not, Proteftancy is no Chrittian Reli- ££* gion . If They have fuch a Church, why do They zfrntidn Add to that which They Conceive to be the Eflentials aCht4rch> of it , A Clufter of new Articles never owned by any "fCJZ*Z> Orthodox Society/5 For example : No sacrifice, no proved &. Purgatory , no Tranfubjiantiaiion &c. Could they pro***'"" At~ ceed Confequently to their Principles, they fliauld nei- jhly^. ther Deny a Sacrifice , a Purgatory &c, nor Aflert them, tad not But hold them meer Pamgons , Becaufe Mey have a "f^™** h " Church Principles; iyt^ Difc, III.C. VI. fropo/itions examined €hurcb Ejpntially founded without them . Why therfore , Do They cither Deny or Affirm? Why medle They at all with thefe Articles ? Why load They Pio- teftancy with the Vnr, eceflary Burden of To many un- proved negatives , when their Church hath its whole Being, before tbefe Negatives can be thought of? 2. In Catholick Principles , both the Propofition inCatho- and Queftion are mod Simple : For, we own more Ef ltckV\tnct' fcntials then Sectaries Do, and Therfore fay : As there vlltXhn ^as a Cklircb in Being before any Word of Serif ture to as Writ , undone- and confequently the Writing of Scripture \^4dded no new Being fitm art f0jf Tbouqh it declared Things more Explicitly- Co in like wore then P r ^ r . . & r , . * , J A ]J , . finale, manner , The frejent Definitions of the Church Alter nothing of the Ancient Foundations of Faith , But only declare more re when exflicitlj chrijls ferities contained in Scripture and Tradition* firfiwrit, And this Power the Church ever Had in all Ages. IhJliZl ^ark weI1 what is faid hcre 5 For k Clear's Al1 che dinl' following Fallacies of our Adverfaries Difcours. churchy 3. A Sec- >nd Propofition . what ever Church owns, f°fhtn' fe tl)in& ^tch are Antecedently Ntcejjary to the Being of a Church churcb , cannot fo long ceaje to be a true Church . And no» Alters here, They fay, we mull: Diftinguifli thofe Things in mthingof the Catholick Church which give it Seine , from thofc theAncunt ^,. L! , _ Tn •> - ^1^1 •Eaith. lnings w7hich are the Froper Acts of it , as the Catho- Theyrpave^ Church. Very true. But the only Queftion the Dijn. jS, How much frecife Doclrin That is, which gives Being to the cultJ' QatholickjChurch ? This our Adverfaries ( Content with Catholics a general Word of a Churches Being) wave, whilil Catho- %m God licks % P'wfe A'* tliat God ReveaPs,and is taught by neve*?* is the Church as Revealed, is fo Eflentially neceilary to the Kecep.ry very Betnq^ of it, That not one Article can be rejeded af- yheBemg tQr a Su£cient propofai . Dare Proteftants fay thus Omtb. much Difc.KLC.VI. fDi/lrn8heof fo long as it doth fo . Here is little faid , lefs explicated, and lead of all Proved. Firft, they cttkoiieks ^ not:How much Do&rin precifely makes up the exttnd not Churches Being, nor fhall ever tell us by their Prin- theunity ciples . 2. They name not the guilty Perfons that ihurch ^xte^d the Fnhn of the Church beyond its Founda- hyond its tions . Are they Catholicks who Believe all that fZffo'r ^°^ Revea's> anc* is declared by the Church to be TbeyUe- R^ealed > Or Sectaries , That have neither Church , nor Uevefo Scripture for any Article of their Protejlancy ? $. if they GHfhMh Hold themfelves to be the Prefe ryers of the churches Vni- reveaied, *)' » They muft prove it by ftrong Principles , And firfl: tndmmo- fhew PofitiveJy by Scripture, That they have juft fo Ta '■ much as *s NeceiTary and fufficient to Valuation, Be- wlohave iotG they make us Guilty of any Breach of the Chur- neither ches Vnity. This will be a hard Task : For if they cbHrtbmrfay YVe Break the Churches Vntty in believing a Sa- Scripture f-1 I . ., © for omvoord orifice , a Purgatory &c. They are obliged to prove, efProte- and by plain Scripture , That either their contrary Ne- iaHftun &ati*es are to ^ Believed, or, That neither our Pofimis, reafenably nor their Negatives merit an A& of Faith , which is Im- prettndto pojlible . For , what Scripture faith we are neither to ^l^f Believe a Sacrifice , nor the Contrary, thechur- 5. In the next place they come to Solve the Enig- chesvmty. ma j t0 explicate the main Subjeft of the prefent Dif- Tbeitcwn pute, And 'tis to Tell us what thofe Things are, Sillily '*hich ou&ht t0 be Owned by all Orijlian Societies m Neceffary Vroof, tO Difc.IH.CVl. fDeflmSlbeoffroteJiancy. l;j ro Saluation , on which the Being of the Catholick^ church De- mi's Happy were they could they Unridle the My- V"tefla»» * ,S * J i ^-,1 • Lik.T rr r>. cannot fiery, And fay what Things are thus Neceflary ; But shtwwUat our Author ftill run's on in Generals, and Determin's things are nothing. Be pieafed to hear his Refolution. ^ Neceffarh 6. Nothing ought to be opened as necejjary to Saluation by Chr'iflian Societies y But fuch things T» hi ch by t'e lodgement of all thofe Societies ; are Antecedently neceffary to the Being of the catholic k church \ No man , I think, knows to what that Word, Antecedently , relates, nor can this Author make fenfe of it . One may Guefs what he would be at. He will Perhaps Say : When all Chri- They fall jhan Societies /land firmly united in one ludgement concerning "^]j^a the Being and the Ejjenttals of a church , then B>e are right in Thefe Ejjentials . Anfw< But this was never yet teen, nor will be ken as is more largely declared Chap. %. n. l. whither I remit the Reader for further Satisfaction. He Adds two Things more. One is, There cannot be any Reafon given , why any Thing els ftould be judged Neceflary to the churches communion ( He means n$wM m Neceflary Articles of Faith ) But T»hat all thofe cbur- ludgebim ehes f Who do not manifestly Difjent from the Catholickjchurch thatfa)es ^ of the firfi Ages are agreed in , as Necejjary to be Believed by Jt> all. My God ! What Confufion Have we here > Where is the Proteftant that can Aflure us , without ?ro"ftants Difpute , what the Catholick Church of the firft Ages csZwwhat pofitively Believed and pofitively Rejected? Could this **» Fr#«i- one Point be cleared without tndles Debate, A better SLdbfc. Vnion might be Hoped for; But herein both We and ueved. Sectaries DilTent, as is Proved above. Therfore by so Appeal. their appealing to the Ancient Church, ( whilft They «? tothe Abftraa from the Tradition of a prefent Catholick S,T M m z Church) wuhm 2p6 Difc. If I. C. VI. Tropofttiom Examined theTradi. Church) They go about to Prove, linotumperivnotius j t ion of the a_j ' • ^ ° 1. d * o * prefem And convince nothing. church. 7. They Add a fecond Confederation which may be Memorable rcAe$ed on , Ad perpetuam ret memoriam , And :tis to D»tirin. this Senfe . After Their Teliing us, That in Cafe of great Divifions in the Chriftian World , any National Menu* church may Reform it felf (as is Suppofed , England certain tn T T i j < ir^i • r r i r A , • a aiirhey Hath don ) and Declare its senfe of thoje ^Abu/es in Ar- fay,takeon tides of Religion -, yea, and Require of Chien a Subscription Zherin* ag*inft dofe AMes &c- They go on : We are to conji- Taithis der that there is a great Difference between the Owning fome Ahvfed. Prof options in order to Peace , and the Believing of them as Kootho Neceffary to Salvation. Now Mark what Followes. dox church The Church of Rome Impofeth neW Articles of Faith to he he- zverexcep- lieved ( A moft unproved Affertion ) which Articles au tedagamft excep(ej aaainfl by other Churches ( name the Orthodox eurChurch „/r,L6-'w/ i • n i ■ i vocirin. Church that ever excepted againlt them , it cannot be Mark the ^on ) ^Ht l^e Church of England makes no Articles of Faith, Dctlrin, But fucb as baVe the Teflimony and Approbation of the whole Chriflian World of ail Ages , and are acknowledged to be Jitch Yroteflant j^ Rome it felf , and in other things she requires Subfeription to reducHte them , Not as Articles of Faith, but as inferiour Truths, inferiour which she expecls Submiffton to in order to Her peace and Truths tranquillity. And thus much the late primate of Ire- land expreflethto be the Senfe of the Church of fcn- gland as to her thirtynine Articles. 8. Be it known to all men by Thefe Prefents , That t^e». tke church of England , fo far, as it maintains thefe lchunh IXegatiue Proteflant Articles of No Sacrifice , No Real Pre fen- conjifi'mg ce , No Purgatory , is here confefledly owned to have no °lfivnT Arc,cles °f Faith Revealed by Almighty God , And "church, therfore fo far , Tis neither any Chriftian or CathoJick Church, Difc.IFT.CVI. QiftruStfa offrotefiancy. 177 Church, Becaufe thefe Negatives ( the very marrow of Proteftancy ) are naw Degraded, And Thrown down from their Ancient Height of Snicks > to the low Rank, of afe^ httmb/e, and infer tour Truths, 9. But let us go on . Who Affures you , Sir, oVnferioHr Their being Truths at all? God, you fay, that^-*" Reveal's nothing but moft Supream Truths , Own's Gods none of Them . No Orthodox Church, no Ancient TrHths. Council, no Vnanimous Confent of Fathers, no, nor your own Synods in England, (Though without Proof TheySuppofe them to be Truths ) ever yet Defined them , as you Two yong Popes do ( Doflor Bramhal and your Self) to be Truths of an Inferiour Ranh^and Order. Be it how you will , I am fure> the Declaration be- fore thefe Articles fays , they are Articles of Religion , TktfeAn. and contain the true Doftrin of the Church of England thorsd^ Agreahle to Gods Word . If fo, Gods Word is Agrea- ^Ant- ble to thefe Articles , and Proves them . Again . */«. Some of your own Co$t, and perhaps as Learned as you , Call them Articles of Faith . Certainly they Thefexe- are none of our Faith , Ergo they are yours, or no Bo zativeiof dies. Vpon whom then ilia Jl we Rely for the te& &£,*£*- Definition ? I'll teJl you. Both the Affertions of nmherAr- their being either Articles of Faith, or Inferiour Truths, ftand tideiof tottering without Proof or Principle, upon the foJe f^w Fancy of thofe who fay fo. tmhs^. 10. 3. if thefe Dull Negatives be only Voted for Peace among you, without Reference to your Faith, your Church is Ejfenttally Hypocritical, which may Be-TktSmlisb lieve one Thing , And muft Profefs an Other. 1 now P**w»» fay no more, having Told you enough to this Senfe^^ in another place • Though all the Proteftmts in England cat, M m 3 do A hard .Question propofed to Sectaries, 278 Difcl I L C VI. Tropofitions Examined frotejlants do no% only Dtffent in Judgement from the owning ofToefe Tbeulll Negatives -y Though they are plain Pap tfts tn Hart , yea, and g*tive At- Inter lonrly curfe and Anathematize all your ne'ft Articles (if the ticies}a»d exteriour Demeanour be fairly good, All is Fine) Tbey 'Inzfitk mV be ft til looked on, a* BleJJed Children of your nelv Negative Church. The fequel is undeniable; For, Toey may Beheve all that Scripture faith ( And this is Faith enough toSaluation) And yet Anathematize your Negatives, not at all contained in Scripture , And wholy unneceflfary to Saluation . 11. Yet farther. You Proteftants Endlefly Talk of Reforming us Papifis by Scripture. Speak once plainly and Tell us. How can you go about fuch a work as to reclaim us by Scripture , To a Belif of your Tiegatives, Tvhenyou have not one Syllable of Gods Word for Them} For, if you have Scripture, They are Supc- nour Truths Revealed by God, and confequently Arti- cles of Faith : If you have no Scripture , why Preach you fals Do&rin , why Teach you that you can draw Vs from our old Faith to your New Negative Religion, by plain Scripture? No Proteftant shall Anfwer to this fhort Demand. 4. You cheat the World when you Offer to Refolve Proteftants Faith, which Vroteftantsis no more Refolvable into Divine Revelation then A- rephing riatufm is, Becaufe you muft now confefs that God never fpake Word of Proteftancy, as Protettancy, in the yvhoh Bible . Let therfore the world Iudge , whether it be not a pure Cheat to give a Title of the Proteflants Jpay of Refohing Faith , and then Leave that, which the Title Promifes , To talk^of Refohing a Faith in Communis Itbich ft and' s in no need of jour Refolution . 12. To fee this more Evidenced, And to end with thefe It cannot be An- swered. 7aitk> a meet Cheat. Difc J II. C. VI. DeJtruElfte offroteftancy. ty9 thefe meer Nothings of Sectaries . Our new Author TelPs us, That the English church , makes no Articles of Faith, But fuih as ha*pe the Teftimony and Approbation of the whole Chri- ftian Ivor Id of all Ages i yet, And are Acknowledged by Rome it [elf '• If this be fo , it is no more an English , then a 5^?*' Church of Arians , of Pelagians , And of all condemned Hare* mire a ticks. For, this man would fay, That a Faith common church to All called christians , without Believing more, is the ^** English Faith, and Sufficient to acquire Heaven. Mark the Propofition ; And ash^firB, "what is now become of the The Avian Protejlants Way of RefolvingProteftants Faith* Next , (and "ndEnll>h moft juftly ) call it a meer Fancy, A new coyned Hsere- gra%e[-t^ fy contrary to the whole Chrifban World ; For, neither Docinn Scripture, nor Councils \ nor Fathers, nor any particular cT™?n.tJ Orthodox or Heretical Church,much Jefs the confent of the ^^ whole Chriftian World, Owned the Belief of that Abftracl DocJrin , wherin all Hare ticks Agree to be fajficient to Sal- a ne& yjtton . The whole Chrift tan World never yet faid x.QC0J»edH*- Believe in chrift, A bftr acting from His Gdbead, and Two tri^t0 Natures, is Sufficient . Catholicks hold the Belief ah. of a sacrifice and Tr an fubH an nation &c. Neceflary toSal- varion j And all condemned Haereticks as Arians, Mo- }i°ks™ch notbelits and Others, as firmly Adhere to their Particu- lejsCatho- lar Haarefies, as to the AbftraA Doftrin of all Chri-/,''*'Et*J ftians . Otherwife, they had been wors then mad, ^ Jl% ' to have Abandoned an Ancient Church for a few fup- t i 1 1 been H*r9» Heaven : For, were this true, There bad never been f)tnthc ' Hareticks or Schtfmaticks in the World, whiljl Chrijl only world, ( Tough his Divinity be denyed ) is owned in a general Way . "%%eomm VVherof more in the 3. Chap. monto*u 14. Here I'll onlv propofe one Queftion to our Ad- befujjitient verfaries . When they pofirively 1 each , That , that j£^ which our Saviour gave his Apoftles in his laft Sup- per , and Pr iefts now confecrate Dayly , was , and is no more But a Sign , a Figure only of cfrrifts Body, My x Queftion , I fay , is . Whether, Their Pofuive own- ing of a Sign, or Figure only , Be an Article of their Faith, or no more , But One of their Infer iour < fuppofed Truths > If this later; They never Had nor can have any deter- ADiUm: minate Faith of this Sacred Myftery , which yet God matkat hath moft certainly Revealed unto us in Holy Scriptu- c«*mhf re ; ^ind confidently They believe nothing of the Bkffed Sa ,m'm crament by Divine Faith , For , Inferiour Truths are no Arti- mferiour ties of Belief with Them. Contrarywife , if They fay Truths or* the Belief of a Sign, or Figure only, is one of their Ar- JJitf** tides of Faith, And the ThingBelieved an ObjecJ of Faith: faith, Xhey mufi certainly eat their oWn Words , and confefs, That the English Church makes new Articles of Faith, And fuch, as never Had the Approbation of the whole Cbriftian World, much lefs of Rome it Self; For the whole Chriftian World of all Ages never Believed fo. Some perhaps N n will Seme 5#- Haries hi- litve they know not what. Their in. eonfeqwn- cet. They are in a \\>ors Condition Then A- rhns. Chvifi Church Can only propofe laith unto U4. Another Proportion too Gene- ral and in- fignijicant* %%% DifcAU.GVlPropoJttionsBxmintd ^will Anfwer : They Believe in General ChriTts o^« Words to be true , Though They kyoto not Veil what he meant , when he faid . This is my Body . Anfwer . If they know not what he fpoke , why do They chan- ge Idolatry on us , By she force of their Inferiour fuppo*. Jed Truths, for Adoring chrift in she Sacrament > I am fure Arm of old was an H«retick> For Denying the High Godhead of our Saviour , upon the Vncertainty of bis fuppo- fed Superiour Truth 5 And Se&aries are now in a wors Cafe , whilft they contradift all Orthodox Churches in the Belief of this Sacrament, And make us Ido- laters , Meerly upon the Uncertainty of their imagined In- feriour Truths. 15. Another Propofition is Thus. Nothing ought to he impofed as a neceffari] Article of faith to he believed by all, but lebat may he evidently propounded to all Per/ins , as a Thing tohich God did require the explkite belief of Ob- ferve the ^explicated words , Evidently Propounded to all Perfons. Who muft propound thefe Articles of Faith /'Muft God, Angels, or mens private Fancies Do it ? No . The Oracle of Truth Chrifts own Church ( find it where you can ) is both to Propo- fe Faith to us, and to Decide all Difficulties when they Arife among us, as is Already Proved. Sub- mit to This , and all Controverfies are Ended . He- re is alfo another loos Propofition. Nothing ought to be required as a necejjary Article of Faith , but T»hat hath been believed and received for fuch by the Catholick Church of all Aqes. Sr , fay you plainly where this Catholick Church was in all Ages , and tell us exa&ly How many Articles it Held Neceffary, and fufficient to Sal- vation, And we iliall Drive you out oi your Generalities, which Difc.HI.CVI. MrutttieofProteftancy. iSj which Prove juft nothing , To a more open and Plain ^*? J?" .Doftrin , wherof you are as much afraid , as the Divei mrt^u * of Holy water . We know not what you mean by the Catholick Church. 1 6. Well . But the next Affertion will clear all . It is fuffcient Evidence , that ^as not looked on as a ne- cejfary Article of Faith , ithich tots not admitted into the An* cunt creeds. Pray you , prove This jufficient Evidence , by a clear Principle. Vport what Ground doth the The Belief Affertion (land, DiftinA fromi your own Fancy? The '€g£m Baptising of Infants , The Admitting of Jo many Books for the Supim exa£l Canon of Scripture , The Belief , all ought to baye &c. of the Holy Eucharifl , Are not Explicitly ftt down in Nt€e^ the Ancient Creeps > Therfore we muft have Recours varttcJ ro^ the Catholick Church both for the Faith of the- Urs,mt fe* And many other Articles. But we have faid ?**"fw enough of this SubjeA. creed. 17. You go on. Nothing ought to be judged a necef fary Article of Faith , hut what Was unherfaUy helieved by the Catholick^ Church to he delivered as fuch by chrift and his t^sfpoftles. St , Before this Propofition be cleared you rhefe An- are to Declare , what you Mean by thofe Terms , tborsfip Believed by the catholick Church . For , if Rightly Sup- ■**** r 'x _. >** £* ■■ ■+ - K 1* meant by pole , There was never any True Church, But the rhefe dark Roman catholick^ only continued Age after Age , And r-w.Be- upon This Suppofition Reply ( which is eafy ) to your JjjJcL/* Affertion , and the Ten following Points . You'l thoiick- fay , I miftake your Meaning concerning the very 7\[p- chweh. tion of that Church , which your Fancy makes Catho- lick. And, if I licence you to Enlarge The Catho- lick Church as far as you Pleas , or, To comprife in it All who have had the Name of Chriftians, Though N n x other* / - They are tofptcify 284 Difc. Ill G VI. fropojitions examined othcrwife known Hxreticks, your, Propoficion to us, is de Subjeclo non fupponente , of a Subject not Suppo- fablc, And the annexed Points are highly Imperti- nent . Name Therfore Exactly The Catholick vhatand Church upon grounded Principles , and all is don . whtftTkh jg A£cer t^e ending thefe iNT^rmi, They inquire chwch «. what we ought Fofnively to Believe as Neceuary to Saluation , And remit us (without any further Proof but their own faying ) to the Articles of the Ancient ff^fST Creeds • This ,s largely refuted already . Next they propofe a queftion , whether any thing , which wm not Necejfary to Saluation , may by any Means what/ocyer afterwards become Necejfary , Jo that the not Believing it becomes Damnable. The Queftion , if I miftake not, Drives at This , To lhew that the' Church can make many ' " no new Definitions of Faith Necejjary to Saluation , Becau- Thinga* fe all Faith Necejjary is Antecedently fuppofed , as it newmcef were? \a\^ jn j*be Very Churches Foundation before it Defi- vatton , fi n€s > Which Foundations were both Fully and Solidly thtt'the laid, when Chrift and his Apoftles Taught the World; "in'rfit ^°r' £ar^ ^** fU^ rf^** Knowledge . He taught bit hebms Dijciples all things be bad beard efbis Father . The Mcf Damnable? jias when be came Would tell them all things &c . Ther- The uafin fore a Church folidly Founded, and, before it Defi- That the Church may make new Laws mt tons jf in order to obedience; fo none can but mod Vnreafonably anywen, Doubt of its Power in Setting forth new Definitions bdilled. *C iS Very TrUe : ^ere may be M^ch Of a £u&ftio Nomine , whether They are to be called Old or Neft, Becaufe rpondifc- °f their different Refpe&s . Relating to the firft fet- rentrejpetis led Foundations of Chriftian Do&rin, from whence They thefe Defr- proceed, They may take a Denomination and be called XbZiiZ^ old% Becaufe Radicated in Thofe old certain Principles* eithemew But > if we confider them as more Ample , Exprefs, and or old, fignificant Declarations of Gods Eternal Truths, They may, without Offence , or Clafliing, in the leaft with church DoBrin, be called New Definitions . Thus much is Briefly faid , to /how how groundles our Adversaries Grounds are. xi. But we will not leave the Difficulty Thus. To Anfwer therfore with more fatisfaftion, Be pleafed Two things to note. It is one Thing to o^n a Cturcb perfectly Founded) to bt noted. an^ ju[\y j^jlrucJed in all things Nectffary to Salvation : And an Other, to fuppofe that all kno* explicitly yph at That Terfecl founded Dottxin is , which God ^ill have to be belie- led, as Nefejfary to Salvation. This later Requues a clear Pro- Difc.II I.C. VI. QeJlruSlbeofProteftancy. 187 Proposition made by fome Oracle of Truth of the necef- fary Doflrin, As is evident in Scripture it felf : Tor 9 though 1 oTtn ail that Scripture faith to be True in the Senfe intended by the Holy Gholi , yet , / mufi learn by a fure Tea- cher, %hat it faith in a hundred difficil Faff ages. n* Now to Queftion , Whether any thing which lets not Hetfjary to Sal nation, may Afterwards become Jo Necef far), that the not Believing it is Damnable &t. I Anfwer , Tbejgue- Nothing is nolo Necejjary to Saluation , After the churches fiim *»• Definition , 'which Was not Necejjary Before , yea , and Be^wsred' lieved by the apoftles Themfebes . The ground of my Aflertion is : Becaufe the Apoftles immediatly Illu-r^^_ minated by Chrifi our Lord, were made Partakers of Usthefirji His Divine Myfteries; They had Primitias Spiritu* , thef***^ Firft Fruits of the Spirit ; Believed as we believe , Majlen»f Taught as we Teach , and never Delivered Doftrin Divine contrary to the Church in After-Ages . Hence Di- Myihries- vines commonly Hold , That the Church properly JpeaJ^ Thchwch kg makes no new Articles of Faith, But only Decla- makes no res more Significantly and Exprefly what Thofe well In- ***>*"*' ftrufted Mailers of the Church {Cbrifls own Difciples) ^J/hM Both Belfeved, and upon feveral Occafions Taught oniydeda- others. And here , one Grand Cheat is to be taken J"^' Notice of. Seftaries Think that All thofe Chriftian ZITJm Truths which the Apoftles JBelieved Explicitly, are Anciently now Explicitly enough upon Record in Holy Writ.^*^* It is an Errour . Our Saviour, as S*. hbn Teftjfies ^'** Cap. xi. v. 25. Did many Things , which if writen in ]^b^Jd particular, the whole 'World would not contain. Might Initio not then the Apoftles alfo Believe many Things, K%tUcitbin a sacrifice ofCMafs, Tranfubflantiation , Turgatory &c. yea, senjes the Definitions of the Church , Denies not only churches the neiv Declared , But the old Believed Articles , And con- "Dejimt iom fe que ntly is lyaUe to Damnation, ^f/r th*j x4. You fe moreover. It is not only fuitable to old believed ~* * _ r- Ariuus. Rcafon DlCcAll.C. VI Di/lruRbeo/Trote/iancy: 289 Reafon, But necefTary alfo for the very Prefervation of Chriflian Religion , That the church to Woom the tMyfiertes mcef*y of our Faith ^ere committed, Though it makes no new F°rChri' Articles, nor Suppofeth any other Foundation then^,*"* what was laid by Chrijl and his Apoftles , May yet as Th*at th$ Neceffity requires, Declare more Explicitly the Primi- chmchde: ur£ wre tive Doftrin of Chriftianity : For , by what better ^ Means can we pofiibly arrive to the Knowledge 0{ '**""'• thofe Neceflary Truths which the A pottles either Be-**]™" lieved or Taught, Then by their Heirs and Succef- Th]Suc^ fors ? I mean The vigilant Watchmen , who were, nffmof and Still are fubftituted in the Place of thofe Firft »*• 4W*- Infallible Deceafed Mafters. They, Bleffed Men, *'?*??, ran up and down the world from Country to Goun* <,/»/< try, from Houfe to Houfe, Teftifying the Faith of dtaafed our Lord Iefhs ChriH , yet neither committed all the Ma^ers' Truths Delivered by them, to Holy Writ, nor fup- "ibtMm pofed the Ignorant and Vnlearned nt Inftruments to hswritmt Teaeh , as They had Taught. The Legacies Ther-^1*? fore of our Chriftian Truths were left in furer Hands, tfiUg '* I mean, Chiefly in the Cuftody of the Succeflors of thofe firft great Mafters . Whence it is , That the Deposed Apoftle commends to Timothy more then once the DoSirin Keeping of a Depofitum of mighty Value . which the ZT^t* Fathers, ancj none more exprefly then Vincentm Liri- thy. penjis call , the Commov catbolick^ Doflrin : Or , to fpeak Talcntum in this worthy Authors words upon the Text i. Tim. 6. Cathoh- ao. lib. contr. prof. Ha. 2(oyit. Bibliotb. Patrum, Tom. 4. cumfi*!b tap. 27. Talentum Catbolicum Fidei, The Catholick Ta- lent of our Faith . Aurum accepiftis , Add's Vmcentim aurnm redde . Thou O Bishop, Paftor , and Do&or, haft received Gold , render as,pure Gold again &c. O o what 290 Difc. HI.G VI. fropofiiions Examined What things thou hath learned f fo Teach , Adorn , and lliu- AftirtUr (irate (and mark Here a further Declaration of the De- Declare pofited Dq&rin Allowed of ) ut cum diea* T^oye non di~ ^IfitedDo- cas Noya 1 That when Thou propofeft Things anew , arinattow Tfau Teach not new Things , but the old Doclrm . And edof. hence it alfo is , That the Church of Chri/i is ftiled by Thechu h ai0^ Ancient Fathers Depofitortum Dhes , a Rich Trea- taUedby' fur7 » wherin the Vepojitum of Apoftolical Do&rin is moHAn. Kept , And not only once Kept, and then loft , But ( as a thns dT ®eMltum °ught to be ) its Handed down from Age to Age, poflto from Church to church, Succejfmly continued /• the Worlds End. riumDi- If therfore you look for the Apoflolical Depofitum , Leap ycs* not, I Befcech you, over the Heads of all thofe Chri- rfYrT*' ftians i wh° have been betwixt Us and the firft 3. or pofitum* 4* Ages ♦ As if lt were to be found There, and no whe- inthe x§ els, But Demand of this prefent Church now in Being, 'Tis cbwch'' she that Kjiows fatter , And Inform's us more exa&ly of an K Apoftolical Do&rin, Then all the loft Writings of the ™i2nhkft AnciefU Church could have done , or, thofc that are infowSsu* hitherto preferv'd can do; Becaufe they are all lyable cfApoftoit to endles Difputes , and Confequently can abfolmely Deci- tdDodrm je nQ con(;rQ,verfy . jy[ow jf any one Boggles at this indent ^^ert*on » $$ if we could not have fuffcient Certitude of writings what the Ancient Church Delivered , by the Tcftiroo- orsiyMe ny, or Tradition of the Prefent Church, But further toDtfpHte, ReqUir'S EXprefs Records to be Produced of all that wa$ ever Taught; Let him correft his Errour and know , That , what is Carved in Brafs , or Writ in Velume cannot be more fecurely Kept , then Apofto- T$h*d lical Doftrin » Depofited in the Hands and writ in the letter ^ Harts of thrifts faithful Paftors, is now Preferved. fervid i* Foj y what'& i» Brafs ox Pamfomem, Time may wear the hands ■ ^^ DifcTILCVL fiipuSlbeofProte/iancy. 291 out and blemifli; But that which God hath committed 'f£j£f* to his Church and Chief Paftors therof, who are to f5»^ Teach Chriftians Age after Age , ffcall never Perifli , hadbcen never Pafs, or be put out of Remembrance. And c*™*%* this Do&rin the Church Delivers more Explicitly in her Definitions , chiefly when flie Declares Truth a- gainft Hsereticks. CHAP. VII. More of this Sftfyecl. Qh\mi6K$ au Anftetred. 1. 'T* O go on with our Difcours, I would wil- X ^ng^y &n°w, when theApoftle Exhort's the Galatians cap. i. verf 8. 9. Not to BelieVe an Angel, Preach- ing contrary to Tvhat He bad Preached . and They had for- merly Received ; As alfo the Thejjabnians z.c. z. 14. to Hold the Traditions learned by Word or EpiBle. Whe- **#* ther we can Imagin , that, all the Apoftlep Orally De- '££& livered Has Either Exprefly Regiflrcd in Scripture, or the taught mi whole Subftance of that Divine Doftriri (of equal Cer- »eithef titude with Gods written Word) is M* Totally loH> Nei- ^£faZ ther is Probable. The Effentials thertore of that &f*iUfi. ' Do&rin , laid up fure in the rich Treafury of the Church, ftill Remain with chrifts own Faithfuli Paftofs. f^ffi And this is the Depojttum mentioned in Scripture, wher- - remain m by the Church ( Affifted by the Holy Ghoft ) Regu- thtOmr- lates Her felf when She Defines. Therfore great Di- ^rwI>'* vines Affert, That the Church, never Teackcs, or , T*ill ***** O 0 z Teach Th Do- ftrin of Vivwes. What is meant by the Ana- logy of faith. AferfeH VuUof "Faith, be- fore scri- pture was Scripture fnves si. 291 Difc.HI. C V} I. More of this SubjefL Teach any mT» Ferity that was unknown to the Apoftles. Se Greg, de Valentia, De Ftde Dtft. l. Qua}1 \.Pnn£io 6. §. Ittud vero . And §. Hinc quoque. Suare^ Difp. z. Be Ftde Seel. 6.n. 18. Tanner. Di/p. 1. de Tide Jguaft- 1. Dub. 7. n. 2 1 1 . 2* s>. Paul Methinks confirm's this Do&rin, Roman. 12,. 6. According to the Rule of Faith-, Wherupon our Seftaries , Becaufe the Greek reads **** w dvuhoylccv tJc wfee*tt Endlefly talk of the Analogy of Faith . Lee us bring Words to Senfe , and Senfe to Principles. What is This Analogy , This Meafure, or Prof onion of Faith > Is that, which every Mans private Fancy fall's upon to be Fakh , the Ulleafure and Analogy of it ? God forbid . Iffo,- Faith would be as Various, as Fan- cy is Changeable in Haereticks . We muft therfore find out a better Analogy. And if yen fay it is Scri- pture . I Anfwer . Before the writing of Scriptu- re, There was a true and perfeft Rule of Faith, Othe*- wife Thefe words of S*. Paul, Prefuppofing the Rule He mentions before he writ This Epiftle,are insignificant. Again. When He Tell's the Tkejfalomans Epift.i. c. i. of Their being a Pattern to all that Believed in Macedonia and Achat a : Of the Word of our Lord founded out hy them in every place : Of their Faith Spread abroad ejre. What Think ye, was this not yet written Word of our Lord, or the true Analogy of the Tbejfalonians Faith , As well Di- lated as Approved of? What Finally was that Form of Dottrin commended in the Romans cap. 6. 17? Why Did the Apoftle blame the unfetled Galatians for Being fo foon Transferred into another Gofpel , and De- nounce Anathema , cap. 1. 6. if they believed an Angel Preaching contrary to his former Do&rin 1 All thefe _ arad DifcIII. C.VH. ObjeSltons Anffperel i9j and many other Paffages of Holy Writ manifeflly De- **fontht dare, That there was Divine Do&rin Taught by the *"?'***/ very Founders of Chnftianity before the Writing of/w^ was a Sciipture . There was a Plat- form of Chriflun Re-^*'/"™ ply Faith, Bleffed S\ Paul, Though full of the Holy Ghoft, went to confer with S\ Peter and the reft Gal z. 2.^461. 15. 36. Upon it, The Apoftles Held Councils, yea , Ccumiu and as fome Grave and Learned Doftors Affirm by the '<«'* «/><>» Meafure therof, the Holy Scriptures were written .that?l*r' r 1 l_r»i in. « jorm, and Se the noces on the Rhems leitament, Rom. cap. iz.scnpur* V. 6. writ, 3. Be it how Sectaries will : There was Faith in the World before written Scripture . The Apoftles who taught it, Had their Rule of Doftrin prescribed by a%^. good Matter the Holy Ghoft, for they Taught not/wW Chriftian Doftrin upon their own frail ludgemcnts ^S^ (confidered as Men .) No, they had ever the Guy from* dance and Direction of this Blelled Spirit With them * "***** and as His Inftruments Delivered fo much as this Ma- ^^ iter (according to chn&s Promife) gave Affiftance ta, and neither more nor lefs . Now , thofe Pious Chri- ***/fyfr ftianswho heard this Apoftolical Learning, m^de b^mc%*? moil certainly Their Rule , Their UWeafurs of Faith rtk*$rRub Then An a fogy % and Form of DoElrin . Whence I ar^ue f#»thtA» This Form or Rule of Oral VDo&rin Firft laid up in^/w- the Brefts of the Apoftles, and afterward Delivered to different Nations, was neither AH let down in Holy- Scripture (for Volumes would not contain it ) nor All intierly loft , 'Tis pitty fuch a rich Depofnm fhould Pe- ooj m> 2^4 Difc.IIL C. VII. More of this SubjeSl. j ThatVo- rifh, Therfore it yet Remains fomewhere in fafe Cu- £fin£mAodX ' But n° PlaCe iS fitter for k ■ thetl that Which tbeChunh. the Fathers call Thefaurarium dives, the Rich Treafury of the Church : where 'Tis ftill Preferved, and Thofe Timothies ( I mean thofe Evangelt/ls, Thofe Pafiors, Tho- fe Doclors mentioned Ephef. 4. 11. ) Appointed by Pro- vidence to Edify the My/lical Body of Chrijl , The Chief Prefrrvers of this Legacy and Noble Depofiium , are as Neceflity Requires, to impart it and make it known to the World by their Definitions , Leaft like Children The We he carried a^ay Tvitb every Wind offals Doflrin . And Ground of herein ly€S t\}€ yery Ground of all Apofiolicdl Tradition. This Tra itm* js aoc rT1j[ne) but the Great Vincentius Lirinenfis own Do- drin now cited. Where pondering that of the A- poftle : O Timothy Keep thy Depofiium ; He Asks , gufs Eft hodie Timothem , nifx vel univerfa Ecclefia , Vel fpecialiter The whele totum corpus Prtpofnorum &ct ? who is noK , or , at this KuUrs of &ay 0Ur Timothy , But either the Fniverfd church , or more, itpreferve fpecially the whole Body of thofe Guides and Rulers fet oVerity tbh De- tfaat are Tbernfehes to have the intire knowledge of Divine Wor- p0 ltum# ship , or > to infufe it into others &c t Afterward : Quid ejl hoc Depofetum? what is this Deputed Doclrin> He Anfwers : Id quod tibi credipum esJ : yTp$ that Mrhich is com- mitted to Thee, not that Thou Invent' s, that fetich thou b*fl Received t not Tvhdt Thou hath Fancied of thy cTton Head . It is a thing not of wit^ hut of Doclrin . Non ufurpationis The propria, not of thy Private Vfe , Fashion, or Fra£life;Sed church »# publiae Traditionis , But of puUick and \no*vn Tradition > Author but fogpfo tQ ^hee , handed to Thee , if her of thou art not to bt Keeper of » j vivint Author , \ed Cnftos , But a Heeper and Preferver. Then z>00ri». he goes on 2 Depojimm Cujiodi Catholic*) Fidei Talen- turn &c. 4. And Difc.II LC.VII. ObjeEiiqns Jnfwrel ltf 4. And thus you Se, we have a Church, a Catho- Vrmcipk* hk^ Talent of Faith committed to it. A Depofitum o£"lj£*h* Apoflolical Do&rin laid up in its Treafury. We^d';, have a Moial body of Timothies , of Teachers , united Tfiitb one Supream Head and Pajhr, That Aflures us mo- re Explicitly by its Definitions what the Ancient Dc- pofited Do&rin is , And Reclaim's us if we fwerve From it . We have Exprefs Scripture , that both AUyfikal Proves and Approves the Churches Proceeding in Doing H? °f fo , And this Sacred written 'Word faithfully Inter- ™c m\ preted, And the unwritten Depofited Word al/o mod In- ten An(i fallihly Propojed , is our Form, our Rule and perfect An* unwritten logy of Faith. O, Had Sectaries but Half as much J** For what They boldly AfTert contrary to us. ( And ^"£ becaufe every Man is a Church with them , They Define more then our Church Defines. ) The Con- fecrated Hoft is Bread only , a Figure of Christs Body only . There are AJ*o Sacraments only . Wor\s lujlify not , hut Faith only &c. Had, I fay, Thefe men but half fo much Authority for rheir Definitions, How would l%f£** they warble out the Notes of rheir Novelties ? But Amhonty God bath silenced them; For they have neither Church, / nor Analogy , r.or Rule of Faith , nor Mothes to Make irkat They Define probable, nor Any other Thing to f^"^ talk of, But of a meer Nut'ing , I mean the Nullity ofij »ndan Thar unproved Negative Religion . unproved 5. V\ hat hitherto is faid of Catholick Definitions^'™ made by Pope and Cour.cils , C hit fly Relates to fucb Uttatters as balpe been Anciently viihont Difpute Revtaled , yea, ^nd believed alfo, Though not pernpps in or- der to atiio Explicitly . And this way of Defining , #£$. fonie ing, ' "W-orA-cf equ.iil An thority with bU feriitin Word. i96 DifcIlL C.VII. More of this SubjeSI. fome Divines call Propofitionem : That is , a Repropefing Godsun- of Mjfteries formerly Believed t whecher clearly Deduced written out of Gods Word , or drawn from undoubted Tradi- tion , 'Tis the very fame : For, as the Oral Taught Doftrin of the Apoftles was, and is certain as Doftrin Regijhed in Scripture \ fo all that really is Gods VriKrit- ten Word , when propofed to us by the Church as fuch , is in Subjlance of equal Authority and Credit with the Written ; For , it is not the jetting down of Truths in relume or Fauchmem that Aad's more Weight to them , or makes them higher Verities . And here by the way, I cannot but Refled on the inconfequent Pro- ceeding of Proteftants , who mud: Truft our Church for the Handing down to them Gods Written Word , whilft mofl Vnreafonably They Reject Her Authority, when ftie Declares what the unwritten Word is . 1 fay, mojl Vmeafonavle , For if it can Deceive in this later , it may as well have deceived Chriftians in the firft , and giv^en them fals Scripture. Wherof fe more in the fecond Difcours. 6. 'Tis true , There is Another way of Defining f*£-"f^ called by fome Divines Affeveratio , or, The Afferting iffever*. of a Truth , not fo Explicitly at leafi Believed before ( as thn. when the Church Defines againft open Hasreticks what was Antecedently of Faith . ) And Herein the Church Proceeds, not fo much upon a Previous Known Ad. of Faith, as upon the General Owned Principles of Catholick Belief, wherunto Theological Difcourfes drawn from found Divinity , And other Principles , partly Evident, and partly in a high Meafure Moral- ly Certain , have Accefs , And are mod Prudently loined , Nat That the Definition in itfelf, Relies fin thofi lowr SeBariei illGmfe- yuencif. Another DifcIILCVII. Objections Anfoerel 297 lo^er Principles , But on Gods Gracious Afiftance ever fetth his church in the Deliver) of Truth . However , Providence wiJJ have this way followed , as a Vfual and Necelfary Condition , Becaufe men of Reafon , in fo weighty Matters are not (as Sectaries do) to Define at random , but induftrioufly to ufe Reafon , And Pro- ceed on rational Principles . But This belongs rrore to Divinity , then to Controverfy : For 1 think the Church never yet Defined any thing againft Hae- reticks*, that was not Antecedently a known and own- ed Truth of Faith, Though not fo fully exprefled, as it otten is , by the Churches clearer Propofition . Thus we fay : The Real Do&rin of Tranfubftantia- Tk*f*l tion is as old as the Do&rin of The Trinity , or the r/J^, Confuhjlantialny of the Son with His Eternal Father , jiamtatm Though the Words Ex freeing thefe Mysteries more Jignific ant- mSJf* , ly and clearly , are of a later Date. TrhL 7. Now to the Obje&ions ♦ And one Hinted at £*, above is. The Church was folidly Founded in the Apoftles time in all Things neceffary to Salvation . %ion J'~ Thetfore T-efe Pojl-nate Definitions of it are to no Purpo- fe. To confirm This, Our young Antagonist Ask's; Whether the Afofloltcal Declarations of the Ancient Primitive °fp°fi°- Faith Te ere lofl in the intermediate Ages , or no ? If not fat^&m loft, Sheie them , faith He , And There is no Need of neTe Definitions , If they were loft in their Paffage down , the Church now wants them , And therfore can Define nothing. Were the Play worth the can- dle , I might here Demand of Protectants whether Their Declared Senfe, This is a Sign of my Body Added uretontd. to Chrifts Words , This is my Body , which Senfe They fuppofe to be Apoftolical , was loft in the intermediate P P Ages, 298 Difc. III.CVF I More of ihisSubjeil. Ages, or no? If not loft, fliew us thit Apoftolic J declaration, and 'Tis enough . ( But this is impof- fcJMty. I If t was loft (or rather never in Being.) Ho7» dare Sef/arus make fuch a Declaration on their o>w Heads without Producing the Apostles Warrant ? I rtnfwer fair." briefly to the Obje&ion. The Church then was fo- Tht Jidly Founded juft as 1 is now , the Doctrin is one ChHrCfoidi anc^ l^e ^am(^ » ^nc* every Article of it was ever , J'owli £ z^d is now ftill either explicitly , or implicitly Belie- > Us new. ved ; Yet , Thefe new Declarations are NecetTary , Thy*L ■ Becaufi tt*e Proportion of a Doclrtn fufficient in one Time, or Jufficien 4& * Serves not for all Times, and Ages , T»ben NeTt> Diffi* in em Age culms occurr , And Harefies rife up againji it . The Church s™e$"ot therfcre ever vigilant, and Defirous to quiet all,fpeak's Again more clearly the old Received Ferities , Caufldly too often Bogled at by Sectaries . I fay , more clear. ly , For , 'tis one rhing ro Affert : Such a Ferity is not at *# contained in Scripture , or in the Ancient Depofited J*?* Dofirtn of the church : And another , To fay it is fo Circum- ii~, i tin ■ a flames re- warty There , That m order to tt* and different Ctr cum/Ian- quire dea. us . it needs not at all a further Declaration . Sectaries ™™*m ^continually Declare Their Senfe of Scripture ( For incur*- They have no other Depofitcd Apoftolical Dodrin to thm. Talk of) And why may not the Church, authorized by cbrijl, with Better Reafon do fo too > To what Depofited is Added to Help on the Obje&ion , I have anfwer- noarin, ed . The Depofited DocSrin Orally Delivered without {feCburch vvr'r*ng is riot loft, But ftill remain's in the Churches through'^ Treafury : Tis, as it were, Handed down from Age w%« , « to Age , and Inseparably accompanies the Church through all fecurtiy AgSm yea, and is.kept there (Though not in Chifts frejervt . ^ Coffers ) as fecnrely as if 'c Had been engraven in Brafs DifcTFLCVII. Objections An fared. 299 Brafs or Marble • And Sedaries muft fay thus much , UB«rU% if They own Scripture for Gods Word. For, are must grant not They now as well Affured upon the Churches Thu- Teftimony , or Vri^rntzn Tradition , That st.Iohns Gofpel was Indited by the Holy Ghoft,As if the Church pro- duced a Hand-writing to Evidence that Verity > Yes moft Aflurcdly . Whoever therfore Dare call intoT^"-^- Queft ion the Churches Authority Alfertir.g a Ho6iih,|^f|^ Though it Produce no Manual Writing For it, May as ungofA- eafily Doubt (if it ftiow7 you One ) Whe^er that yery Ex- pjtdkd hibited Evidence be Authentical , or no. Let us only l~?^edfri magin that the Apoftle, that writ the laft Part of the v*b»t. New Teftamenr, had exaflly fet down the whole Ca- non of Scripture, which the Church now Receives. Let us Suppofe again , Thar very copy to be left in the Hands of forne Pious Chriftians Living in thofe Days, n* w. and fo long Preferved , Vntil After Haereticks excluded ^^9 from the Canon fuch and fuch Books of Holy Scriptu- fimscri- re, as Luther lately Did St. lames Epiftle . Both they yftmeU and Luther might more Rationally have doubted of that very eomP*r*bk Written Jnfirument , then any can nolv Doubt of a TPbole Chur- churches ches Authority, owning the Canon of Scripture to be as it is . owhAh.) No charter Therfore , no written Injirument, Though on- thoritJh ce truly made , when the Author is gon , can Parallel the Churches Teftimony in what it AiTerts . Ther^K**. Reafon is: Becaufe a Manufcript only T ell's you \»hatfi»* it Contains, but, not whofe it is , and though it didfo, Men might yet quefhon the Forgery of it, unles an Authority beyond Exception (extrinfecal to the writ- ing) take away all Fear of Cozenage, and make it Vn- Tradition doubted. T\m Reafon proves Tradition Nueffary in the church furerthen as Treujor the owning of Scripture , as other Ferities. j^ P p x 8. I 300 Difc.TTT.GVlI. More of this SuhjeSl. 8. I have faid thus much to ihow How neer to a Piece of Non-fenfe our Adverfaries Draw, when , To Cancel the later Definitions of the Church , They ur- ge us to produce the old Apoftolical Declarations, whereby thefe later Definitions are proved Authentick. The ft men Qan you imaprjn what They would be at ? Would They know z"ty have an Authentick Atteitation , to prove what not what, the Church hath Defined ever fince the Apoftles Time, is the Ancient Apoftolical Do&rin? The Church Tell's Them it is fo, but That's not enough. Would they have a Regifter Diftinft from the Churches Decla- ration containing the Summof all Apoftolical Do#rin ? Yes fure this They feek for , if their Demand of baying the . Apojlles Declarations shewed them carry Senfe Tvitb tt . For example, we muft (hew them by fome written Record more Ancient then all the Definitions of the Church are , That the Apoftles held a Purgatory, Tranfubftantia- tton, a Sacrifice &c. Or , at leaft Prove thefe Do&rins to be grounded on undoubted Received Tradition. I The? are have anfwered. Suppofe the Roman Catholick eteariy cm- Church (And here we fpeak of no other, For I hope futcd. Sedaries will not urge us to fliew Them writings Re- ceived from Ancient HaereticksJ fhould Produce a Re- cord containing a Summary of Apoftolical Doftrin > Our Adverfaries might more jnjlly except again fl that as an eld unproved Legend, then They are now able Rationally to ex- cept againfl the churches Definitions : Becaufe fuch an Ima- gined Record muft either be Approved by as great an Authority as the Churches is to gain it Credit, or by a Greater. There cannot be a greater in this prefertt State ot Things, then the Churches own Authority; But Sedaries Rejeft this Authority when the Churck De- fines, Difc! IT. C. VIL Objections Jn fared. 301 fines, Th rfore they frould much more eafrty Reject that fop*. pofed Written hiHrument, though ft told them exacl/y 'tohat She nov> Defines is Apo/Iolica/ Docltin . As much Thcr TbeOhunk fore as the Church can be fuppofed to do by the Help can do at of fuch an Imagined Writing, it can do without it : 0mthe For if it have Authority to Legitimate, as it were, tn>*&mtd fuv.h a Writing, its own Authority is as worthy of Hand' Credit, when it Dehnes without the writing . You ***** fe Therfore how Unreafonably thefe men require a Co- dicil containing the old Apoftolical Do&nn , which ought, Forfooth, robe Exhibited ;,nd fliewed them, Before they can be perfwaded that the Church fail h- fully Propofeth , or Defines a Doftrin to be Apoftoli- cal. - 9. Now if They be convinced, that, to Require fuch a CMarwfcript from us is as Vnreafonable , as if *Voe should Frefs them to produce one for Their late T^oyeities , And ther- fore urge the Church to prove her Defined Dodrin by undoubted Tradirion. lanfwer, The Church doth So, whilft They, God knows , Allege nothing like Tradition , for lo much as or.e of their New Articles. And here becaufe we have a fi; Occajfion, I'll Difco- ATatiacy ver in a Word the Fallacy of Sedaries in this matter'^7*"" C <-r- j • 1 r ■ n^, r 1 t- , • about Tra- or Tradition . I lav in a Word , For t is not fotion. my Task now to Handle that Queftiqn largely. Thus it is. St claries ever fuppofe , when the Church De- fines a Dodnn upon the Tr dition of former Ages , it is obliged tofliewthem, the very Doclrin, in ex~ prefs Terms (Antecedently to the Definitions) own- ed, and writ down in the VTolumes oc fome one or more Learned Fathers. Whence it is They Argue: No man heard of a Purgatory he fore #. Auftim Time , and He Ho^Seaa. Pp3 *»&"""*"-■ }Oi Difc. III.C VIF. More of this SubjeSl. only bints at it flight/y ; nor of Tranfubjiantiation before the Lateran Council &c. Therfore thofe DoElrins are Novelties la- tely introduced. 1 Anfwer. Were all this True , Byunrfud- The Argument is an unconc luding Negative , and run's ing NeS«. limping thus : Antiquity , or the Ancient Fathers have not Ex pre fled every Defined Dotfrin of the Church in the li\e Ex- plicit Terms us the church ufeth, Therfore fetch Docirtns ^ere not really Received by the Church. Obferve well, From the ivant of an Exfreffion fuitable to Sectaries Fancy , They In- The Fa. jer (j?e Duclrin Tvas never Taught by Antiquity . Alas , presilingsthe Fathers had their Expreffions one way, and the jometimes Church, after mature Deliberation , another (often aZTtZ' more fignificant ) Yet i Both Aymed at the fame Ve- church xny* though differently fet forth in Words, as is clear in twktr. the Doflrin oiTranfubftantiation , called by the Fathers a Real Change of Bread into Chrifls Body y By the Lateran Council, as you here fe , otherwife. 1 fay yet Farther. Had the Fathers not at all fo much as Hinted at a Doftrin Defined by the Church, the Ar- <* n . gument is yet Purely Negative, and worth nothing. Sectaries £ . J ,, J °t-i • r^r vigours out is here all? No. Their Dilcours upon an- highiyim- other Account is highly Improbable. To prove what probable, j fay < pQ no more < Dut on]y imagin , That Three or Four of the moft Ancient and Learned Fathers, Had in exprefs Terms Owned and Regiftred in Their Writ- ings the Lateran Councils Definition ^concerning Tranfub- flantiation , as received , Orthodox , and Catholick Do- &rin , jujl m that council defines it ; would Sectaries then TkeDefi- have °wned it as Ancient, and Orthodox , upon thofe nitionofa Fathers Teftimony? If they fay, Yes, They are General Evidently convinced : For the fole Authority of a mojl vnZ'Jr'i- ^m^e Learned Council) is in true Prudence a Firmer Principle, y. and Difc.II I.C. VII. Objections Anfitoered. ]o ] and a better Proof to Rely on, If we enquire after known and received Orthodox Doftrin ever held in the Church, Then the very belt Affurance, That one or more Fathers can give Vs of n . For, who fee's not , But that the very Definitions of the Nicent , of the Council of Ephe- fm , or chalcedon &c, Are more weighty to beget in us a Belief, That , what Thofe Councils Defined (to be received Truths) were fo indeed, Then if twenty o- ther Fathers had Antecedently writ them in their learned Volumes? The Reafon is : Becaufe Gene- c°unci!* ral Councils Reprefenting a whole Church , Spread fag" whole all the World over, cannot but know more Exadly chunk what Tradition , aid rhe Received Do&rin of Chn- k™» more ftianity is, Then Private Men can be Suppofed to cuiarFa- know, mho lived in jeveral Parts of the World, And bad no then. Obligation to Regi/ler intierly the Churches D>%rin in eyery Particular . Thus much is faid , if the Church at any time Defines upon Tradition >nlyv: For 'Tis mod cer- tain, that befide Tradition, it Rely^s on Scripture al- fo; and Hitherto never wanted the Authority ofmojl Worthy Fathers that undubitably Taught us it Defined , Though not always perhaps in fuch ::xprefsand (ig'iificaat Words. 10. Now on the other fide , If Sectaries will neither 7/***** Allow of the Fathers Do&rin , Sufipoftng it $w* Exp>efs cZnt'** for our Catholic^ Venues (as moft evidently 'ris in twen- wf*. ty Controverfies ) nor, of the Churches Definitions Al- thers>"he» ready Declared in Eighteen General Councils , we &*nu«mMt cut of the. Reach of all Principles , And muji leave them to their of Scripture unfteedy Fancies, or wilful Obftinacy, And pitty Their forthem> Deplorable Condition, They are 1 1. One word now to a Tedious Harange of leers, woreto he 'Tis a mile long at leaft, and Wearies one out, be-^^w fore agtanfl. 304 Difc.IILCVII. MoreofttisSubjeEl* AHfwer to f°re He run's it half Over. After our Adverfary had ourAdver- Talked ofMiiftones hung about our Necks, of the jArtes leert p0pes Supremacy, Ti anfnbftanimion &c> He Tell's us: °Lnet~ Wnen tht ^*t 0ftks iwrefent to Preach all that ckrtft Command- ed , This mutt he Vnderfiood , that the Church had Power to Teach more if She p/eafed. Alas, the Apofiles it>ere only Tutors to the Church in its Minority , But the great Di- vine 'JMyjhries of t!>e Seven Sacraments, Indulgences , Sacri- fice of the Mafs , ^ere not Jit to he Declared till the church 7v What not a Syllable Usftrange- Through the whole Bible of tv>o Sacraments only , of no tftrlt"? Purgatory, of no Sacrifice , Nor, of a Sore of New Men jttnuDe- that were to Peep out fixteen Ages after, and Reform &rin. jhe World*? O , were They alive Again, how would Seftaries ftorm at their Silence, And utter Forgetfulnes of Thefe 2{eT» Nothings, which yet are the very beft Ef- fentials of Proteftancy , or it hath no Effence. Thus men might Talk . But, Ad Rem. ii. This whole wordy Argument , is jufl lihf proteflant Religion , purely Negative , And brought to its beft Senfe Draws apace towards Non-fenfe Thus : Chi ft Difc.HI. G VII. Objections Anfaered. 305 thrift and his Apoflles Declared not to the World Thefe Do- tfrins of the Popes Supremac^oi the Sacrifice of the Mafs, of Purgatory &c. Therfore they are no Foundations of faith. I firft Deny the Antecedent. How will you prove it? Marry Thus. Scripture faith no- sscr^e thing of them . I Deny that alfo : It fpeaks more more tx- Exprefly of the Popes Supremacy , And of a sacrifice, Then p-efyoftht of a Trinity of Perfons in One Divine EiTence, or of*0^sj"- Infant Baptifin . But let us Gratis fuppofe , it* do not ikmof* fa. Here lyes the Strength of yuutObjeftion^ which Trimy. is Improbably Negative. Scripture faith not, that the Apo files Believed, and Taught a Sacrifice , the Popes supremacy &c. aieonl£~ Ergo, They neither Believed, nor Taught them* 0WW- frtkafy ve well your Negztiyte. Prom the not Bdgifiring of dl in Keg*t'™> Scripture that the Apofiles kneto , Believed r and Taught, you infer : They . kneHft. no More, or, at l&tjt Believed, and Taught no More . Which is as. Vnlucky a Sequel as this . You , Sir , have not Writ Down in your Ratio* ml Account of Proteftancy All that your Learirtied Head hath in it „ All you, Believe, and Teach Others'. Ther* fore yon KnoTe Nothing, Believe Nothing, Teach Nothing, But Jfihat is Bxprejjedin that Book. In a Word I have An- fwered above n. %%. The Church of Chrijt, that is=. T^sw,t The Heirs and SuccelTors of the Apoftles with whom %frjp°L the Myfteries of Faith were Depofited , Teach us what /« t*** Scriptm<% t^4nd all K^intiauity , hatk more Weight in it , $${£d Then twenty of your weak Negative Difcourfes • 13. But; wemuft not Part thus. ifaid juft now. Your Objection Againft us is an Itoprohable Negative • And 1 Appeal to your own Confcience f whether ic be npt fa ? For , can You or any Fmdent Man Imagin^ i Qjl that jo6 DifcJlI C.VI1. More of this SuhjeEl. itisimpr*- that all the exaSl Words, or Express Doclrin Delivered ly UbUu the Apojlles in their laborious Sermons, when They Preached {feApoftUs to tewes and Gentils, are Recorded in Holy Scripm- t*ughttti re > No . 1 may well fay in S*. Johns Senfe, fpeak- regtiired ing of our Saviours Works , rhe whole World , or whole m^cripm. y0iumes ^^oyjj not contain them , - Therfore All They taught cannot be Suppofed to be either loft, or Shut up in Scripture. Take here your own Inftan- ce of S\ Paul , it Vndoes you . He Bleffed Man ASl. ao. 20. ii. fypt nothing back that was profitable to them, Bui skewed them ana taught them public kly from Houfe to Houfe, Ttfifiying to the IeWes and Gentils Penance towards God , and latth tn our Lord Ieftts Chrijl ♦ You, upon this Tefti* mony too fimply Demand . what not one Word alltbn yrhtle of the Necejary Points , nothing of the church of Rome ', nor Chrijl Vicar on Earth ? I might Ask you , No- thing all this while of Infant Baptifm, of the Eternal Confubllantiality of the Son with God His Father? Good , Sir, Refteft, whilft the Apoftle fpak of Faith in cur Lord lefts chrtft r He might well have Declared both thefe now named and many other Particular Chriftian Verities 1 I do not fay He did fo at that Pre- fent, But This Til Defend Againft you. Becaufe Awak Scripture only relates in a General Way what S\ Paul Preached^ inference j^ou can neither Probably nor pojttively Infer , That he omitted Adveriary. %0 fteaKtf Thefe, and other Necejjary Dottrins . I fay in a General Way . For , Do you think that S*. Luke Re- counts in Particular all the Doftrinal Points, that the Apoftle Delivered, when he went Preaching From Hou* fe to Houfe I Or, can You Perfwade your Self that All the Hagiographers put together, have Recounted all the Doftrinal Matters ( not one omitted ) That Chnfi Difc.II I.C.VIT. Objections Jn fared. J07 Cbrifl our Lord ever Spoke, and the Apoftles Taught upon feveral Occasions? Pray you ask your Con- ference, whether you can Iudge this Probable > |f"A«* not; The Argument- Scripture Relates not thofe par- £j£ ^rt ticular Doftrins , wherat you Cavil , (which is yet un- pm*tH tes notM true) Ergo They W ere neither Believed nor Taught, is not mly a Negative, But an improbable Negative. TJilvld, 14. To conclude, Let me Friendly ask you, whe- ther this your Pofaive Ajfertion. The Apoftles never Be- Ueved nor taught a Sacrifice , or the Popes Supremacy , Be an Article of your new faith*, or only one of jour Lferiour Truths} If you Affirm the firft ,• You are Obliged to produce Pojitive Scripture for it , And then it will be a ADiUm- Superiour Truth Rev* aleA by God , Thoueh, perhaps [nmatha[ rr.-l *r 7r « a v- • K *l cannot be your Principles , not Necejjarj to Saluatton . Grant thus Anfaerei. much , And you too Clearly own Revealed Articles over and above Thofe, which the whole Chrijlian World , and Rome it Self Believes 4 Now if it be only an Infe- riour Truth , And not in Gods written Word : with what Se^ries Conscience, or Countenance can you Proteflants , who Always offer tore- Pretend to Reclaim us from our Errors by pure Scripture, Ven- clairnm ty ture probably on fucb a Wor\, when you baVe not fo much m ^Thlvl one VVord of Scripture that inables you to advance a Proof not one againft us> Relying on thefe Grounds, and firmPrin- ******* ciples, 'v ' 15. We cafily Solve another trivial Obje&ion of Seclaries \ which is. Scripture contains all Things Neceffary a™**** to Saluation, Tberfore We need no new Definitions made bj tht \^v^t Chunk. ] might fay, much lefs do we Stand in need of smfture Proteftants new Declarations,forced on Scripture, with- "»'««'»* out a Church . But y'le Anfwer in a Word. Though NfeeffM. Scripture contained all the Oral taught, Jpoftolical Do- Qji * ttrin, Htreticks It may be doubted whether An Angel could write 308 Difc J II.C. VIL Mere oftbh SubjeS. ttnn , and, what ever els is Neceflary to Sanation (which is Fak) yet, tvhen we fe with our Eyes, that Sacred Book pittifully Abufed by Haereticks , not on- ^utkeScli. v *n ^€Her M fitters ( as They account of Them ) But in pwe ufeki the y>{rj Higheji Myjhries of our Chnfiian Faith ; itmufl needs be a ujeles Book in Their Hands without fin infallible Interpre- ter , And therfore cannot Decide Controverts , nor Tell ui Tvhat ts Necefjary to Saluation , as I have largely proved r &i/c. 2. Nay farther. Some may juftly Queftion , Whether, if a very Angel writ a Book as full of other High Myfteries, yet unknown to the World , as the Bible now Contains, And ufed his beft Skill to Ex* *Bortfi" frejs Tbofe vertties in the moft Clear and fignificant Languor* plain of ^Imaginable; Some, I fay, may Doubt, whether iKR**** Written Book, left only to the Private judge- mhichthe ments oiThofe whole Multitudes , who now read Scriptu- vuigar re> would not be mifunderftood in a hundred Pafla- wijundll S€s ' *£ n0 After-Teacher Regulated the weak Readers ft*nd. of it in Their Difficulties , or did not comply with the Duty of an Infallible Interpreter . Therfore the Bible which is now Extant* And contains the High Myfteries of our Faith (often lefs clearly exprefled) much more need's an Interpreter. And, perhaps, the wife Providence of God would have it writ fo on fet Purpofe , that Chriftians ftiould have Recours to a Living Oracle of Truth, and Learn of it , what They cannot Reach to by their own fimple Reading. You will fay an Angel can write a ifopj^as clear to all Ca- »g*mand pacities t as the Chwtbes Definimns are. Very True. j9gaw,No. What then ? That Book only once writ, is left, as Tnoram vre now Suppofe , to the Sentiments of private Igno* ,fj. rant Men ( as the Bible noy is in Their Hands) But God hath Church Doftrin is repeated Difc.T[I.CVII. Ohjetlions Anfyered. 309 ftath provided that the Churches Dodtin be not only once Delivered . No. It is Laid forth anew, it is im- planted anew,- it is repeated and call , like good feed , <^4gam and Again into m et\ s Harts and Memories by Fairhinl Pafturs and Teachers , Wo shall never fail the church to the End of the World. 16 A third objeflion . The Churches Definitions, Becaufe Men declare them (and all Men are Lyars) cannot be Infallible , and Therfort Ground no Faith . Contra 1 . Ergo , Neither Se&aries Novelties , Nor the General Doftrin owned by. all Chriftians ( of one Cod and one thrift , Be- convZhn caus men Teach them , And all are Lyars ) may yet ofsefa* be Fallible, and Fals alfo . Grant , or Deny the Sequel, "«♦ you are Silenced . Contra 2. If Ail are Fallible, and confequently may be Lyars in what they Teach , why Vent you , my good Friends , So many Negative T>o- clrins , which may all be fals? Truely , if There be no Infallibility in the World, you neither ought to Vapor , as you do, with your Inferiour Nega/iyes, nor Blame our Th Con Contrary Pojitives y- For in Doitig fo , You condemn your ttom own Judgement , and Advance* no Proof againft us •Themfelves Your Fallible Cenfure (were our Church Fallible) fttyjjjfft not me step above a tottering Fallibility, And therfore is FaMHt. too faint to Oppofe the Churches Contrary Doflrin , Though falfly Suppofed Fallible. -Mark well. I muft fay it once more. You Fallibie men tell me That f^sD^" my cUtrcbes Duftrin is Fallible . AdVnjt of the Fals Sup- fam, pofirion , it is ytt, upon a$ Accounts as Good as yours rT'"*«gk or as This Very fallible Affirmation is , That fays it's Fallible ,$$££% And, if in real Truth it be Infallible , it is much Better . atseodas 1 7. One word more, if Any People on Earth ought to /land **w** for the InfaUihthty of a ne^ Invented Religion , The Abetters ^{ifie" Qq 3 - ofDeclrifh fd ^xo Difc III.C VII. More of this Suhjetl. of Proteftancj ( could they Proceed confequently) should Do it. Why f They Deprive Men of their Efta- tes , cad them into Prifon, Bannilh fome , Hang up alriesptr. others , And^iU tis is Don , Becaas poor Catholicks can- fuute Cm. not in Confcience confirm to a Religion that is Profejfsdly Falli- thoiicks^ yie • and Uncertain. Now, if fach Crueltly can be ^Vare' praftized on Chriftians (whilft IeWes , And the worft tolerated, of Haerericks are Tolerated to live quietly ) For a Thing, TbeReafon that's only Fallible , and may as TPell be Fals m True% Tve arc is, hecaufe jnrely at an End of all good Dtfeours , grounded on Christian idievT Principles. What t To Bannilh us, to Confifcate Keiigwn, Mens Eftates , To Shed our Blood , For a Religion That That may maybePalsy n>hen ^>e Believe our Creed , <^And Profefi as ?auL '* muck ** tfofe newer Sectaries make Eflential to any Reli- Trw. -g'on °f Chriftians, is, to fj>eaJ{ moderately , an unheard of severity. Yet fo it is ♦ They Do not Harrafs us as they do, Becaufe we Believe in one God , and one thrift, ot own a Do6hin common to all Chriftians; Mark mil jor tbewfefoes Beliew fo much . But Here is our fuppo- %lirime. ^ Crime. We cannot Ajfent to a Religion that may be Fals , fpe cannot Subfcribe to a Company of new Negative No- things , And Tberfore Tt>e are lashed and Perfecuttd. Nay A ivonder ( ancj j»u tell you a Wonder ) our Guilt goes not fo High: Much to For % though We Were in our 'very Harts Arians , or , As We he admi- are Catholicks , yet , if in the Exteriour We do as Sectaries do, rid. jk are ft til lovely Children of the church of England. Learn Therforexhis Truth ; it is Undeniable < All the Storms in real of Persecution Raifed againft us, Ace not upon any Tmhwe Account of want of True Faith; But , for this Sole Vdluaufe Reafori , That J»e Kill not Believe one Tting, and Force our wiwMwt Confiiences to Profefs an Other , Which is to lay : We &re be plain handled thus rouohly , Becaufe Tee vill mt Diffmble wh hypocrtts. * *\ * God Difc \\ I C.VTT. Objections Anfipered. j 1 1 God and Man , and become pUin Hypoctml Herein only Lies our Trefpas. htflu* es Domine, & reVxa luiicia tua . Judge you, my G>d > Whether that no-cffence CWerifs Tbefe Scourges. 18. By what is now faid , You may eafily Perceive, That, when Se&aries fcemingly Bemoan our Blind- nes ( God knows how much of The Grief lies at *heir Harts; And Tell us, They have Done what is poflible to Convert us, to Drive us from Superftition, And Draw us to the Purity of Their ?(ew Gofpel , They on- SeSark* , • i « in r ,{,, J , , cannot fay> ly gtVe Words Wttbout Sub/tame : For, to What would to what they Convert us t- Will They have us Believe the they «»"w General Received Do&rin of all Chriftians \ We were cmvmHi» Converted to this before Proteftants Appeared in the World . Do they defire to Convert us to a Belief of their New Negatives > Thefe are, at mod, uncertain Jnferiom Truths , no Way EJJential to Chri/lian Religion. Put 0urP°fti; the cafe, by a fuppofed lmpoffibility, that our Contra- Jejghed ry pojitives, were only Infer tour Truths like Proteftants with se- Negatives , They might notwithftanding moft juftly aarttsNe* hang in the Ballance with Them, and would certain-**"*5* Jy outweigh Them, Becaufe a more Ample and Vniverfal Church owns Them . All rherfore They can Drive at, when They Pretend to convert us , is , That We carry They only about Vs, The Exterkur form of ProteRancy in our Demea- care/er1h* nour9 Though We full remain Catbolicks in Hart, They c^ve/ormof not . That is , as 1 faid now , They Would Concert m Protejiamy to he plain Hypocrits. 19* From this and the precedent Difcours it follows, ATaiiibk That whofoever Embraceth a Fallible Religion, which may ReU#o» be Fals , can neither Defend his own , nor impugn another Cfn?*dreZ »( That a Pelagian and a Prqteftant a,rq hard at a hot Uorn. Difpute : ThcQucftion propofed is, Whether of the- fetwo Religions (we fuppofe them both Fallible) is the bettei*? With what Proof, or Principle can this fallible Proteftant Aflault his Fallible Adversary , when He knows he cannot go one Step further then to what is purely Fallible i If he interpret Scripture, that's Fallible , if he Quote Fathers , both They and He are Fallible, if He cite Councils, the Definitions (with him ) are Fallible, if He cry up his own Religion as ha- ving the Vpperhand in Probability , He only throws his fingle vote into the Vrn, which when 'tis examined, comes to no more But his Own Sic videeur , or Self Fal- '»'<»«*- libk concern . And Hence it follows, That , as He vmcehis cannot Prove his Religion againit \\\s Aqyerfary, 1q He Advetfary, cannot, but muft unjuftly Perfecute him , if he Refufc ZlimXn to Embrace that which cannot be Proved . But mod wft m- certainly hi§ Proof? go npt beyond the Bounds of Vn- JHjUy- certainty. Difc J II. CV£J. ObjeSliom Anfarel ] i j certainty, and Therfore cannot oblige his Adverfary to Believe him . And Thus thefe two Combatants may wink, and fight to the day of Iudgement , without end- ing one Controverfy, or falling on any Thing like a certain Principle . xo. 1*11 fay here a ftrange Word, And think it very True . Would A Learned Atheift write a large Vol u- AnAtktifl me againft the Exigency of God> or, A Learned \eyrmizhtP9 againft lefus chrijl ; They might prove as much , by a Zmkifi Roving , fallible Talk , Grounded on no Principles, againft God Thefe great verities of Chriftian Faith, as ever Proteftant hath yet Proved againft the Roman Catholick Church. For, Their new Mode of writing is a long, loos, Veari- *ro*efl*nU font Difcours , without Reducing either Proof for their oD>n agniljltht Religion, or Oppofttion made againft Catholick DocHrin,to Any ^omnn Thing like a received Principle. Mark this in all par- £f^* ticular Controverfies > you will find meer uncertain Conje&ures to be the laft ground, wheron, either Their Proofs or Arguments Againft us ftand , moft unfetled . Yet it fliould be Otherwife: For, whoever will venture to impugn a Religion That's Held by the greateft part of Chriftians infallible , muft ftrike Home , and Reach to found Principles Before He Touch it , much lefs break it a Pieces. Se&aries may fay, They are able at leaft to Defend Chriftian Religion in General, owned Their ne- by all the World; For the reft of Proteftancy it may fi'fi'f go whether you will, Nee femur net rnetitur. They are ^Tfi?w* not iohcitous . My God are we come to this Pafs ingaumi now? What muft all the Difturbance of Se&aries , *"»* their Schifm and Rebellion made Againft a Church, W'* their Gloffes on Scripture, And the whole Machin of Proteftancy End thus in a Non ?robatur , it cannot be R r proved t j 14 Difc.HL C.VII. More of this SuhjeSl. proved > Is that only , now auerted Defenfible (to wic the common Do&rinof all Chriftians) That preci- feiy taken is no mans Religion , And Needs no Defen- fe> 21. Some other Objections yet remain, But are all Solved upon the Principles now eftabliflied . One is. If every Doftrin Defined by the church he Fundamental , the Church layes its oT»n Foundations . Contra : There was Fundamental Faith in the Church before Scripture was scripture wrjt . djj Scripture Therfore lay New Foundations of «« /£ Faith, Becaufe it Declared anew that Antecedent own- anew fw* ' Antecedent ed Doctrin > Thus we Say, the Church Declares **% vU /• c^e Ancient obje&ive Faith of foregoing Chriftians,ever fhlchlnh implicitly at leaft Believed, And not otherwife. A fecond Objection Jcfs to the Purpofe. The Teaching Church either Believes in that Injiant Sht Defines a thing Ne- seffary to Saluation , or doth not . If She doth , // y»as Ne- cejjary before the Definition neTtly made. If not, she Defines fometbing NeceJJary to saluation 7vhich Teas not before Neceffary. To anfwer the Obje&ion ,1 might ask whether #. lohn when he writ this Propofition. The Word is made Flesh, Believed that Article of Chriftian Faith before he writ it, or no > If yes , it was of Neceflity to be Believed before. If not , He delivered fomething Neceflary to Saluation which was not fo before # In one fliort Word, Here is the foliation to No Real Difficulty. Thechnrck The Church at leaft Implicitly Believed before, what Beiiev's jt Defines, yet may and doth more Explicitly Believe tflrlfl the fame Myftery in that very Inftant She Defines , vefinesMt Becaufe God Speak's that Truth more clearly by Her morezxpn- definition. So &*. hhn Believed the Incarnation of fo%nZn the Divine Word for His Definition . Ferhm Carofa- Definition. Bum \ DifcllLGVII. ObjeUhnt Anfwerel W (turn eft . The Word is made Flelh , Though with- out Doubt He Aflented to the Myftery, (andbyDi- vine Faith alfo ) Before He writ His Gofpei. But enough of thefe Forceles Arguments , long fince Pro- pofed and folved , which only give a Teftimony of Se- daries ready will ( to offer at fomething ) and weak- nes with it (to do nothing.) For, you fe clearly, They cannot prefs us with a real Difficulty . CHAP. VIII. Proteftmts are Vnreafonabk in the De- ftnfe of Their lute JManifeft and Vndouhted Schifm. I. Q E&anes Are no where more unluckily out of the ^JCompafs of Reafon , Then in Their Difcourfes of Schifm . I lhall endeavor to make The Affertion good in the enfuing Chapters. z. To Proceed clearly. Firft, it is mod certain, Martin That Martin Luther , And His Aflbciats , once Roman Vjj1^ - Catholicks, Separated Themfelves from the Commu- ^Jf*" nion of that Ancient Church , which gave rhem Ba- ptifm About the Year 15 17 . 2. It is as Evident, that our following Se&aries Vphold ftill , And Stifly Defend that Aftual Separation made by Lather, as a Ne- stSmes cellar y I w full FuEl, And W/ Don* 3. It is no lefs Menle9f clear , That as Luther, when He firft began his Revolt *• from the Church, flood all Alone , Without ioyning Rrx Himfelf }i6 DifcULCVlII. Protejiants are Scbifmatickh Himfelf to any vifible Society of Chriftians then ex- tant in the Chriftian World ; So, it is now as Mani- srtarm feft That our proteftants t0 xhis very Day. ftaad yet ft And yr r , . n , . Jn i- foiitartiy all° a loluary Society alone, owning no PelloDPsmp, Vnion, Mone, not 01 Communication of Lyturgtts , Rites , or Sacraments y»ith "JindQhliany Ctlurch Through the Vnivtrfal World. They for/ah ca- aim so. Micks , They forfake Grecians , Brians , Abyffms , Ne- ciety. Hvrians , Socinians , and All the reft of Chriftians. 3. My firft Propofition . If ever Scbijfn Teas in the The fit ft World , or, can Pojjtbly be conceived, Prot eft ants are moft tropoftthn. Evidently guilty of a Formal Seperation from all other Chriftian Churches , vbich Denominates them Formal separates , or, in plain bnglifti 9Scbifmaticks . The Affertion is fo clear that it needs no Proof : For , fay , 1 befeech Yoir ; If any man in England (now Starting up with a kw Followers at his heels ) fliould utterly Deny our Gra- cious Sovereign to be Supream Head of that Kingdom, asalfo Abjure the Salutary Laws there in Cours ; Or Finally , fliould So make Himfelf and Aflociats a The cafe of Body a part, That all Obedience and Submiflion we- Kxngilm* re &aken of , Refpe&ivefy , to both King and Gouvern- compared ment &c. Would not this Man , Think ye , Highly VftalT Merit the Title of a ^^l ' or ^in Civil A^airs ) of a schX!. mod Uncivil and ungracious Schifmatick ? Yes, moft undoubtedly. This is our very Cafe. Eng- land , All the World Know's, Once owned The F And not Theirs , Tvho make the Aclual Breach upon a Ground- ed And moji jufi Caufe, at We have Don. Thus our new Doftors Difcours, But how Vnreafonably , We ihall Declare prefently. In the mean while , You fe one wretched Lutber, And a mean Handful of Fol- B$J^ ifft lowers fo pertly Bold r fo Audacioufly Impertinent , As Luther not only to Accufe a whole Ample , Ancient , and m They fll0uld have Laid forth the fuP- "o fuppoft poled Evidences of their Charge againft our Church without to a Third Impartial Judge (They Talk of an Vniver- The°fl h*A^[ church Diftind from the Roman) why did They •Reajonfor not Appeal to This , And then Acquiefce in fome other their Re- Sentence and Judgement Better then Their own? Mm* guc t0 jccufefi Vaft a Society of Ancient chriflians as J^e are, And hno^f not Why ; To Condemn it of Errour , and JsnoVP not Wherfore ; Ani , This before no other Tribunal but Thtvtry Themfehes , M>bo were the Rebels, Say or s fo flrongly ofSalv- Method cine$ anc{ Selfconceipted Fride, That the very Method Held VrotefUms in the Condemnation , Makes all to look upon it as tondemna- Ttyught , Foul , Illegal \ and Contemptible. ***? d 5. To Profecute further this moft Neceffary Point, lonumptl Thus much I will Say , and wifli All may well Con- bie. fider it . It is moft Evident, That This Attual Breach The For- wjth Rome f This Rupture, This Rent, This Rebellion, This md Sep*. Qiyme frm an Ancient church , This Formal scbifm ( Cover s#£ift#i all as much as is poffible under the fmoother Term of from an an Adual Separation ) is as clear on our FrotejlantsSide,t^4s chZThu *b* ®Q* shining at Noonday , like Dirt it lyes at their Evident. DoOrS D\CcAll£y\lLTrote/tantsareScbifmatich. $19 Doors , and They will never be Able to Sweep it away. But to Say , That Catholicks laid fuch Naftines The- But to fay re , or , That Rome catifed This Schifm , neither is , nor that Rome fhall be any more, then a meer Suppofed Whimfy, An *" c™£ Vnproved Calumny, As long as Truth is in the World, mllr%u*n- 6. Say therfore , I Befeech you , Good Dear Coun- proved c*- trymen, Why was the Roman Catholick Church the UmnU' Caufe of your Schifm ,• Why Separated you your Sel- ves from it ? You Anfvver . A multitude of Corrupt Jj- Se ttons , of Super jlhions , of new Forged Articles in Faith, of a aria aim Innovations , and I know not what more , made you leave this leze> *s church , fi Far as it had receded from its Ancient Purity. '*"£ Very good. The Charge Drawn up, goes High, breach. And is evidently Hainous . But Say on : Are your The jgue- Proojfs Anfaerahly as Strong , or Equally Evident To ma-^ " ke the charge good Againji this church , Both Accufed , and pjl condemned by you ? Or, which Comes much to one, a»f»erto Are fhefe Proofs as Mznifefl To jujlify your Formal Schifm , as the char- 3Tis evident, that jou Made it > Such an Evident char-*'* ge againft a Church, and fo Tragical a Separation m\Z}eftto froim it, Afted hi you , OHufl both in Law and conscience Be jujiif/jhat Supported and Born up hy Evidence. The Weightines Formal of the Matter Requires it. \^eak feeming Probabi- 'juev'l lities, meer crazy and Conjectural Arguments (Atheifts den$Mw** Vent fuch againft God and Jewes againft chrifl) are w**f Here, too Slight, and Forceles, Either to Acquit you of your Weaker*, mofl finful Formal Schifm , or, To make us Guilty of the*?^™' CaufaL prove N<* 7. Come therfore , Let us not word it Longer , **»*• But go clofely to Work. We Appeal to Reafon and undoubted Principles in this Controverfy. Thefe ( and not Talk, nor meer Conjedures ) muft Vphold your Proofs 320 Difc.ULC.VlIL frbteftanUdreSchifmatick. Proofs , if you have any Againft our Ancient Church. To Proceed Therfore clearly, ErT/i 8# Note ^r^ ■ That ihe Stttt&* •**■■ > charged on wcLnh *k Roman Catholic!^ church by Protefiants , are not like the AtensiE- firjl Princples in Nature , Evident ex Ter minis , By their o>» tjjimrcx Ltght. Their Evidence Therfore , if any be , muft be cmtmis. j^.j ^^ jn a Solid and Convincing Drfcours, And This Difcours , if Convincing, is to be Driven on by a Me- Therfort jtum ? which either by it Jclf is , or doth at UH Rtjl on font c "Zldby KnoTtn and OTvned Principle ,• Opened , I fay , and Admit- Dtfcours ted of, not by the One or Other Dtjjenting Party , But recced to Common to them Both . If fuch Principles Fail , or the Ttmtfiei. Difcours, which is carried on, Derives not Strength and Certitude from Them , The Force of Arguing (tur- ned either into a Roving Talk, or Clamours) is Loft, Becomes Lame, Deficient, and Vnconcluding. 9. Note 2. Whilft Sectaries, by Imputing Errour 37* Self- to the Roman Catholick Church , make it the Caufe ft^tfsk °f Their Formal Schifm , They are not to Suppofe , excluded That Their oTvn bare ^dffirtion, or , saying, We have Er- frombeini rej9 can be either Proof ftrong enough, Or any Thing rfPrw/. j^e a fatjsfa(^ory Rcafon in This matter : For their Say- tng is no Received Principle . I Note thus much on fet Purpofe , Becaus I really Perceive a ftrange Humour Vrotejitnti [r\ our Proteflant Writers. You have in their Books *ri!k? ( 'Tis true ) Difficulties now and then hinted at , comnvtr. Words multiplied, Much Talk in General , Intricate M Difcourfes carried on in Darknes ( And This to Amu- fe a vulgar Reader} weak Conjeftures Enough , now Drawn from This , ruw from That Vnevidenced Au- thority , Margents charged with Greek and Latin , And Learned Margents They are ,or muft be Thought fa pifclILCVHL^ Fo . But after All , you fe the main Difficulties 1»ayed, . you Find Noxhing Browed , Nothing clearly Reduced to They bring any other OVned Principle, But Their o**n Troops Ttord, mt^J '* and Bare Ajjertion : In fo much, that I am Apt to TrtncifL. Believe (if I think Amifs God forgive me ) All that Proteftants Aym at in their Polemical Writings , is only to Keep up Talk in the World, And Glory when They have the lad Word in a Controverfy , whether a Proved Word , or no , it Imports nor, fo it can he /aid, They have Anptoered. 10. Note ?. If, As we Both muft and will exclu- de the self faying and Oton-yoting of Proteftants from the 2j^jjj Nature of a Rational Proof, whilft They Accufe and Ar* to Illy Condemn our Church of Errours, They are Necefli- on>vhiiji tated to have Recours to other Principles , And, I^*£ think , There can be none better, nor more Free from chunk of all Exception, Then Thefe 1 now Name. i. Plain Err<"»- /peaking Scripture . z. The Vnantmow Confent of Fathers, Add to Thefe, if you Pleas, the Indubitable Definitions of An- cient Councils . 3. Vniverfal Tradition. Proofs, which run on in good Form , and Finally Reft on Thefe , or the like Foundations , are Solid, Undeniable, and con- cluding . If They fwerve from fuch Grounds , They Become both Faint, and Force les, And cannot But Participate much of Fancy , T»hich toe utterly RejeB. 1 1. By the Recours to Plain Scripture^ We Exclude All weak and unproved Glofles of Seftaries . By Recur- ring to the Vnanimous Confent of Fathers, we High-j^^S* ly Except Again ft an VnTvorthy Proceeding of Vrotejlams , Againft who, if by Chance They meet with a Patch , or mai- *""/*«»". med Sentence of a Father, which, becaufe Dubious, feemingly Makes for Them, They Triumph , as if the Sf Vitfory 322 Difc. I II. GVHL Trote/lants m Schifmatich. Victory were Theirs. Soft and fair, Say 1, There is no luch matter : For no Doftrin Doubtfully Delive- red by a Father ( and 'Tis then doubtful, when it juft- \y may Admit of Different Interpretations ) Can Pafs For a Received Principle ( Principles are clear) Much lefs hath it force to Blemifh the Purity of an Ancient TheDu- learned Church, whofe fole Authority is greater Then mm/Tl' can ^e C^e Dubious Sentiment of any one Father. And TrtkerUp, Thus much our Adverfaries muft Acknowledge; For, themhs Though a whole Torrent of Fathers undeniably Comes fememtf againft The™ ( As fo moft evident in Twenty Contro- thschmch verfies, Take for Example that one of an Vnbloody Sa- crifice Dayly Offered up in the Church , Or the Real Rri** Prefence ) They Anfwer ( Forfooth ) the Fathers were Evident ' men ancl Had Their Errours &c. Why then , 1 Be- Tejiimony feech you , when One or Two of Them Speak only °f\atherl'n Doubtfully in a Controverfy ( I Grant no more ) fhould %*ra* Their Authority have force to weaken our Churches gainft Do&rin > Nothing Therfore lefs , Then The Clear and Vi\a- iken),and njnms Confent ofTbefe Ancient Worthies , truly Pillars of our Jadubfo»!J Church , can be Admitted of as a Received Principle . We Tejiimony ftand ro this , and the other now named Principles. of on or Thus much premifed, we pafs on to the Trial of Pro- then*, teitants Proofs . gainfl the Chunk, CHAP. DtfcIILCIX, ^menotQwfeofQrot&.Schifm. 323 CHAP. IX. protejiants Cannot make Good Their Charge Againft the Roman Ca- tholick Church, Concerning Caitfal Schifm. 1. HP* He AfTercion faich thus Much. There nei- JL tier is , nor can be Proof again ft the Roman cat bo- lick church , f»herby it is made Guilty of Err our, AndTber- fore none can Rationally say , That this church loos r or is , The cmfe of Schifm in Protejlants . The Reafqn Hereof is bell laid forth in thefe Few Words . Proofs againft this Church cannot But Fail , when Received Principles j^SJJ, are wanting to Support Them : But Received Princi- dpksar*' pies are Here evidently wanting To Se&aries in Their wmmg, Charge Againft our Church . Therfore Their Proofs muft Fail, and Confequently, when they are Refol- ved , can come to no more, but to meer Proofles Ca- lumnies . x. To Show you, That all Principles Fail them in This Matter , You fhall Se how Ingenioufly we Pro- ceed . We Licence our Adverfaries to ma\e Vfe of all the ompldin Principles, Tfhich the tobole chrijiian World OWn's, as Vn- Dealing doubted. Will They Pleafe to have Recours to well J*** Grounded Reafon , to plain fpeakjng-Scriffture without Glojfes9 ' to the VnanimQUs confent of Fathers, or Definitions of Coun- S f z cils 3*4 DifcA]l.CAX.9j>minotCaufeof cils, and Vniverfal Tradition? We arc contented,. And will Acquiefce . All we feek For , is to Ex- clude Their own Proofles Word from entringw, 04 a Recei- TfaUbtu V€ci principle t You Se here is Liberty Enough , And ThZ'* we Allow it , wrthall Petition Them for Almighty Gods fake, That they will Vouchfafe to Deal caadidly with us, And take to any One, or More of Thefe now na- tb7wia' mec* Principles, and Difpute clofely in Form , Either vi"utei» by Sjllogifms, or, That known fhorter way of Enthy- iom, mems. By this Procedure we fliall fe the Rife, and Progrefs of their Difcours, the Validity of Their Ar- guing , whether it be Convincing, and Finally reft on a Received Principle, or contrarywife Lame, and Defi- cient. Reafon is reafon to all forts of men , and Though we are Papifts, we yet know well what Rea- fon and Evidence is. May it therfore Pleas our new Doctors to Begin with that Common Principle to us both, of Holy Scripture : Their Argument (if to the Purpofe ) cannot Bur be much to this Senfe. what scripture faith is true ; But scripture faith , The Roman Ca- ThYtrAr- tholitkchurcb is at leaft , Ijahle to Errour : Ergo , it may lament err . We deny the CMinor , And Expeft a Second pZSt Syliogifm to Prove it, which Shall be more Fumbling, sftertbe and Proofles Then this very CMinor , that is Fals. I TirjiSjtto- am fo confident of this my Aflertion, That I intreat S'fi** our Adverfanes to Go on in Form, And Prove Their Mi- nor, (if Their Caufe be good the Labour is not great) And kt us have the Honor to Anftver Them . Again. , They may Argue : What Ancient Councils Define , And b*(u?QT- Holy Fathers unanimoufly Teach is True; But Thefe Say the teles if Catholick^ Church of Rome Hath Erred , or can err : Ergo . £2*4- We here Deny The Minor Alfo, which ft all never be thm. ■ Pro- DifcilLCIX. Sdifm. $25 Proved by a fecond Syllogifm either Evidently , or Proba- bly . In the mean while (And let Them Remember fomuch) Their Formal Schifm is not only probable, But Evident, Though the Proofs fall short to Evidence the Pretended cauje of it . 3. Some Perhaps will Say : This way of Arguing doth not the Deed. No. They will go Other- ///%*;* wife to work, and Defcend to Particular ControVerfies , co™to And fliew us hi* Council hath Contradicted Council , Rcfo clmovlr- Tranfubftantiation , Purgatory, Praying to saints , Worshiping pes, of Images Sic ate late Novelties Introduced into our church. Here, They Hope to have us upon an Advantage , And With fuch Doughty Doings, They are able to make our Church Guilty of Caufal schifm, And Acquit Themfelves of the Formal Crime , Obferve a Shuffling , And Know ; Before Tee Catholickj are like to get a sight of our Evidenced Errours , We muft Travel far y And run over All thofe long Worn out Controverfies which have Troubled the world , And to no Purpofe , For a Hun- dred years and More. However we are Content, ^ear^ May it Pleas our Adverfaries firfl: to begin with one »Mngt particular Controversy , And fo clofely to follow the m*y%t Matter by a continued Arguing in torm> 1 hat at lair, t0 oifpme They bring their Difcours to a fure O^ned Principle JnFcrm, But , I weli Forefee f Becaufe Confcious of their want **dhrn% or Principles to ground a Convincing Difcours on )^fr/»«- They'l not Hear to this Propofition . Therfcre to^"- leave Them without Excufe, I'll Propofe another way, Which every man fliall judge mod Reafonabld , Let J%f^m them vouchfafe at leaft , to Set down Plainly one of/^. Their Proteftant Tenents conrrary to our Catholick Doftrin , Fox Example . Tranfui/lantiathn is a Neft Sfj In- 326 Difc.IEI.CIX. %pmenotCaufeof Invented Opinion lately brought into the Roman church . And then So clofely to Give us the laft and ftrongeft Grounds They have for the AfTertion , without long tedious , Dilcourfes that nothing Appear fuperfluous , ( Much may be faid in a little compas .) Their vn- douhted scriptures , if any be at Hand , Their Ancient Coun- cils , Tueir confent of Fathers , Their Ancient Tradition > And, Tohicb I highly Value of , Come Ancient Orthodox Church Autho- riryjMuft of Neceflity enter here, to Vphold their Afler- TbeAu- tfqn Iff ^e Defenfible . This Don . Til Engage to thorshn- Place againft what ever Sectaries Allege, The contra- Wmnt. ry pr0pfs of our Catholick Religion, for Tranfuhftantia- uon\ And Add to them, the Teftimony of our Learned Church , And , if Thefe put in jufl Ballance, or , compa- red with the Other , Do not (in the Judgement of eve- ry Difinterefled Scholler) Quite Outweigh all that Protectants can fay Againft us, I'll here Promife, never to Trouble them more with Controverfies . But > if on the Other fide you evidently find Thefe men, after all their Noife of introduced Novelties, fo cut of from ****»f Proofs, fo profoundly filenced , That, They cannot TkTway bring to light fo much as one ?af[age of Scripture , nor 9ftri»i. one Ancient Council, nor, the Vnanimous confent of Fathers (no , nor one clear Sentence of a Father ) And, leaft of All , Any Ancient Orthodox Church contrary to our Do&rin , or , that plainly and vofnhely Defends Theirs, You will , I Hope , Bear with me, if I fay once mo- re. Their nelfi Opinion Relies on Fancy , And , that I Mijlooh^ not when I called this Treatife* Trotefancy without Prin- ciples . I fay that Fofttively Defends their Dottrin : For , I would have Them Know, Their Negative way of Ar- guing We Read not ( forfooth ) of the Word Tranfubftan- 1 1 at ion, Difcll LC.IX. Troteflants Schtfn. y.7 nation, will, if it Appear once more on Paper, look ****** like an old cafl: Garment, no lefs out of Falhion,Then JJJfc, quite worn out to nothing. When this Controver- gmng^m (y is Ended by Clofe Proofs and Principles, without wan- */***»"• dring into long dark Difcourfes, We, on our part, are Ready to Engage in Any Other , as fliall belt like our Adverfaries , And will Endeavour, to make this Great Truth known to the world . That Sectaries , are m Vn- fortunate in Preying their OWn , Kyis unlucky, in Oppofing our CatholicJ^Doclrin . 4. Befide what is faid, Here is another Proof, that Af"rthJr ftowes They can convince nothing unles Hereafter, §]££ They manage Their Caufe better then is Don Hither- not pro- to. In All Delated Controverts , We Have no more vw2- But our Adverfaries objections , And the Catholick An- fwers. The evidence of our Errours cannot Appear in our Anfwers , For The ft All along , go on in Charing u* from Their Cavils . Neither can the Evidence Arife , like a Beam of light, out of the Objections of Prote- ftants , Vnles They luftily Vainquisb ut with a Demon- Jlration in good Form , Supported by' an o^ped Principle , and Force us , and other Intelligent Perfons to Acknow- ledge, That thefe Objections are plain conviclions of our Errours; wherof there is no great Danger, for We Catholicks Profefs , And fay it with all candor, That we look on Thefe Objections againft us as slight , Trt- MiUm yial, Defeated and Worn-out to Nothing, Be ir hpw rgm™ + you will ; Tey cannot be Suppofed o^ned principles Between ^£*% us, funics We are mad, And Grant, That, what our vrote- Th*ir Ar- flants Vent and Vote apainll us , is Vnanfaerable . As lono- &Hments T< C • ° J • 1 ' n t } 1 • 6 Recede Iberjore, as ve give a Rational Reply to Their A>guments tS0Tnaiiiim ( And let us have an Indifferent Judge to Decide the keiyia*ds xhtjs- wljat Scripture Exfrtflp contains not. , is an Brrour ; Scripture Exfrejly contains not Tranfubflantiation, Ergo it is an Errour. We Deny the CMajor , and give you Twenty Inftances to blunt and Dead the Force of it. Go on Therfore to prove That , yet Vnproved scBaries Major. It is Impoffible. Here , you will have Them are urged at a Stand , They cannot Advance. However, Grant •^SE* They Offer at it,- Our Anfwers (till clofely Follow Them , And Enervate Their Proofs , as They are Driven on in the Cours of Arguing. Believe it, They Shall be fooner out in Arguing , Then we in Anfwering : And to Shew you, That I do not vainly Vaunt in Saying Thus much, Let it Pleas our Ad- irmgTheir verfaries to come to ajuftTrial of Difputing in Form Vroofst&an upon this particular Matter of Tranfubftantiation , or, of ^deniable any otker where They Think to have moft Advanta- irmcitu. ge> Anci Prefs on us Proof after Proof, Till at laft They bring us to a Propofitio quiefcens , That is , to an Intelle- ctual Light, which by its own Clarity Evidenced it felf So- lid (not To you, or to me, Mr. Poole) But to All Rational men, Ivho know ft>bat Evidence is , An now we need not go to School and learn That, For nature with a little Logick, Teaches fufficiently what Evidence is. This Evidence Ther- fore , drawn out in a clofe continued Afguing in Form will Difc.J II.GI3C. froteftmts Schifm. ? ] i will Do the Deed , and Show whether we are Foyled, or you Fight Vnluckily. VnlesThis way be taken to rkeim (whilft }OU run on in a loos Vnconcluding Talk , And yj* *»''*- Own No Infallible Iudge to Decide between us) We 0JgJ£Lg may flay till Dooms day (which is pittiful) And End inSeti*. our Lives Before we end fo much as one Controverfy . ""* ? Study Therfbre well For this Propofitio quiefcens, which ^ ^J* by the Evidence of its enen Light, Apparent to all, makes BUmabie, us to Yeild up the Caufe. If you can do this, you are Gallant men ; if not, Know That your shifm is Evi- dent (This is the burden of the Song) But the Pretended caufe of it laid on us , lyes yet in Darknes Vnevidcnced^ And Tberfore is Vnjuftifiabk. 9. What will you fay, if a new Zelote of Our En- glilli Schifm Argues Thus? Mod furely , Protectants wife and learned men , cannot All (fo numerous as They are) Be Suppofed to have made a Buftle in the World about Nothing. They cannot be Suppofed to have left an Ancient Church, But, upon the Sight of great Difficulties , which frighted many , and Finally withdrew Them from Holding Communion with it lon- ger. I fliall Anfwer the Obje&ion largely Hereafter; Now I only Say : When a Rebellion is mantfefl, and Decry ed a known by all Indifferent and Vnconcerned men , The fole Authority of **kBim Tbofc fx>bo Began it, can never make it Iujiifiable. The Cafe %£%-m is clear in Civil Affairs: For example, In that ungod- dear ly Rebellion raifed in England Againft our lawful So- schijmw vereign ; as alfo in Ecckfaflical , Witnes , the Arians tQhmcht Schiim Againft the Church. Thefe Partifans Autho- canmtU city alone , it is well known was Too Weak, and Infuf- l«MyM! ficient to luftify either of thefe tapious Fads. JK'r . ,10. T«> that Talk of a Sight of difficulties , I Anfwer: Abbm**. Ttz He, l\i DifcJILCJX ^omenotCaufeoffrote/t.Scbifm. Whoever &s > ^o for faming Difficulties T» ill le aye an Ancient Churchy Uavts an shall at laji be forced to Abandon all chriftian Religion , "to hub cbunhfcrcer'a*nly ^; tts DiffiCuhies- (And * are tnere none, Think feeming you , againft our Proteftants Novelties?) I fay therfore, difficulties, fuppofing we once Digeft the hard Myfteries of Chri- ™*j.™ ftian Faith common to us all : So Fe^, So slight, fo Vn~ -Relinquish Valuable are the Difficulties Againfl our Church, That when aiichrt- One ferioufly Refle&s on this Churches long Conti- ^ ReU" nuance , on the feveral Councils convened in it , on the different Judgements of learned men , on the various Difpofitions of People and Nations , which make it up &c. (All apt enough according to nature itU Ajhe. to breed Endles Diflenfions) He muft fay, if a frark^of tudVrroi- Reafin live in him : Digttics Dei eft hie. The work of denceThat God and a Special Providence oyer his church Appears in m*L"$ r^ls a'onei That Difficulties are no more, nor greater Greyer in fo long (landing a Moral Body , Than thofe flight in the ones are ^ which caufelefly Affright our Adverfaries* Do not then , I fay, Defert Chriftian Religion Totally, upon the Account of thofe difficil Myfteries, it Teach- es : You can never in prudence Relinquish this An- cient Church,For Pretended Contradictions in Councils, for fuppofed Su^erftruclurs , Innovations and foch Hie Trifles , which (Though {tumbling Blocks to Se&aries ) are na fooner look't on , then removed , And put away By Moft Satisfa&ory Anfwers.. Church. CHAP. 1)1 CHAP, I The Roman Catholick Church , whilft 'Evidence comes not Again jl it ^Stands Firm Vpn Its Ancient Pojfepd Right. This long Poffefiion Proves the Church Orthodox. I. £ Ome perhaps may Objed again ft the former i^Difcours. We Catholicks do not fo dearJy Acquit our felves of Errour, Nor confequendy of the ^m _je' Charge in being Cau/e of Protectants Schifm , as we Rigou- roufly Exaft of them to have thefe Errours laid evi- dently Forth againft us . For , if One fliould Ask: How we Prove our Church to be free from Errour, and this clearly t Or, That by our Errours we Occa- sioned not Proteftants Separation from us, what fhall we fay ? I Anfwer. Though we have De- monftrations for the Truth of our Religion ( fuppofing Cbrift once Eftablilhed a Church in the World ) And Can Aew This Truth , by a clofe Order of Ar- guing in Right Form , Yea, And we will Do it, when Seftaries have Satisfyed our Difficulties * Yet , to Solve This prefint Argument , We are mt Obliged by the LaH> of JDifpHWion to Proye any Thing, NrTo do more Then only Tt3 ~ " to 3^4 Dtlc I ILC.X. No Evidence againft the Church, to Stand upon our Guard and Defen/e . The Reafon is. Tnteflants Our Proteftants are here the Aftours, the AggrelTors; hecautgrs 'Tis Therfore Their Task to Prove , ours only to De- wltipd fend , which is Eafy ; if you Mark How ftrangely in to prove Vain They make Their Attempts Againft us ♦ Ob- thetrchar. ferye jt ^ ^m our q^^ ^ faj p00(i a Jko#/W years ge% . and mo^e in the quiet Pofjejpon of Truth , They Accufe it of Attempts. Err our : i^After , fo many TiiouJ'ands of Learned and Vvrtuous men , that lite A Holdy , And DyeA Happily in it ; Yesf And Had Eyes as Quiik , Judgements as Deep , and Wills as good to Find out Thefe Err ours (Had any been) as the befl ofSe- TheChur- Varies, yet found none; They , forfooth , Efpy Them -.After ckesVuriiy This church had its Pwity and Innocency signed and Sealed by and mm- t^e y^d of innumerable Martys , Evidenced by undoubted Mi- '' racles, UPlanifejled by Jo many Glorious Conyerfions brought on Aliens , Vralvn to Chrijl , And Finally Demonjirathely Proved by All Tho/e llluflrioiM Marks of Truth , wherof we Treated Above , Our Proceftants Rife up, And Calum- niate This great Society of Chriftians, Lay a foul Af* pertion of Herefy on it. Are not They , Think ye , as At~lors , Obliged in Juftice to make Their Charge Vrovedbv %00^ Ala?nft m fy Evident Proofs} And , are not We * long Exempted from all Further Obligation of Pleading , Then only Vojfejfwn, t0 ftancl ujj0n our Ancient , Blamles9 And Quiet PoJJeffion * Believe it » This Olim Possideo , Prior Possideo, is Warrant fufficient, And our Wall of Defenfe againft fueh weak Aggreftbrs : And yet we Strengthen our Hold with Canon Proof (it is Evident Reafon alfo) AndEvi- ^mo prafumitur malm nifi probetur, No Man , upon vain dentRea- fufumption , ought to U accounted Naught , unles Reafon ProW fmtlfi, lm A delinquent. 2. Far Example . Give me a Loyal Subject That hath DifcjILCX. No loofing its Jncient ® Examined , are no Sooner feen then slighttd-, no Sooner Weighed, then cajl alvay as Weig^tles . , 3. Take one inftancc more ( Though none of the lnffMc* Beit , it may yer beft ferve for Proteftants. ) Suppo- AdHo- fe, That another Kind of Luther »ith afeiv Followers, on- minem. ce rrotejants 9 as Thefe were Anciently Catholicks, fhould now Separate from the Church of England, and Open- ly Accufe all the Minifters within that Hand of Errour inDoftrin, of Injuftice, ofSchifm, of Their Forcing Scripture by Vn proved Glofies, to fay what God ne- ver Spake, &c. The Accufation certainly would be looked on by Minifters As a Hainous Calumny. What is to be Done > Would not they , After a fa- tisfaftory Anfwer returned to the Obje&ions of thefe su^ofei Calumniators, Hold Themfelves Vnblemiflied, upon the Account of their fuppofed Ancient good Fa- Thustnucb me ^ And (we mud now Imagin it) of Their Vnqueflioned Me/tip. Integrity both in life and Dettrin , Tvherof They baye.^hadPof- ve force to fefjion in mens Opinion for a hundred years Together! Would theinjiAn- ^y not All Vnanimoufly fay, That, by this very Maxim grounded in Nature : Nemo prafumitur malus , nifi prole* tur9 None, who had the Repute of an Honed man is to Loos it, Vnles Evidence corn's againfl: Him, And Blemifli his Honefty? Yes, All of them would fwear it. They need not Therfore to Preach to Thefe Thiiisaifi Accufers , or, To fhow By Pofitive Arguments , How vniyfuppo- purely They Teach Chrijls Do&rin, How Innocently fh?h«iueiY They have lived ' How free from a11 InJuftice, How tbolgbnot Their Hearers have hithertho Reverenced them as Trw. Saints , And Laborious Workmen in Chrifls Vineyard. No. This (were it fo) Proves it Self . The very ha* ving Don Well in the Eyes of All, And fo long , Carries with DifcKLCX. Noloofingits Anclent%ight. %p it its obn Eyidence , wfnd it Argument Enough . Wafh Theyaft then Away the Obje&ed Calumnies (ifyec Calumnies) JJJjJJSn. And the Work is don , They are Sound in Do&rin, clear, lumnui, Innocent, And Blamles, upon this Fals Suppofition. butverU 4. The Application of this Inftance to our Prefent""' u Cafe, is eafy. The firft Luther accompanied with a ^J^*"1 handful of Men Accufed not only A Few Ilanders of the mjtath Errour, But a Church of a far larger Extent , Renowned the "• Tohole world oyer . We have Anfwered to all Their Calumnies, not one Objedion is Omitted,* If there be Any new Ones , For Gods fake f let us Hear them • This Don, we ftand ftill upon our ^Ancient Poffefionol Truth , and Prepojjejfed good Fame in Teaching it . Thefe VekatEvL Evidence Them/elves , And need no further Proof ; For This t^tis Argument is Good. Once we were Honeft men , m Tanker And therfore are fo now > Once Right in Faith , and Evident. we are Right ftill, Fnles Evidence Drive m out of our An- Nolefs . cient Right , and Honefty . Solve then a few Objected }m$ P™^ Calumnies, The Work is don , Ave ftand upon Clear c*nDrive Ground, which is, The yet Vnlhaken Hold of our""*"/ long Olim Pojfideo , prior Pojjideo. &»tpof> 5. You will fay. The whole force of this In-ftan- /<#>»• ce Comes to one Trial . Vi^ whether T»e Cathoiick* ^hatse-" i&aye Already Solved, or can Solve as T»ett the Objections hf &"***# vroteflants Againft our Church , As They are able to Vanquish *?* ^phat eyer This note Suppofed SeB Propofeth Againjl their ml9 Voclrin. If The Parity Hold here, the Inftance -Preffes ,- If no y It is -Forceles • Anfwer . Here , were it worth the While , We might have Sport , and fe How our Adversaries Either Pitrifully Beg the Que- stion in what They fay, Or Licence Every Man to be His own, Judge , Though he Vent Plain Hierefy , Vv or 3 > I £)ifc.l 1 1. CX. No Evidence agamjl the Churchy or Finally Draw Controverfies into cndles Cavilling . Obferve it . They fay , They can better Solve the Arguments of Thele new Se&aries againft Themfelves, Tty beg i hen we ate Able to folve Theirs againft us . Is not 'jiio^'' c^s a m^er Proofles Petitio Principi > Moft AfTured- ly, Yes. And Mark how It Goes on. Iufi as pro- Jw'feT tefiants Telia* catholicks, That ^efobenot their Arguments, settaries fo tkefc NeT*> men Jland Jliffly to it , And Tell Pro tenants They Argue Sobe not Theirs : And They Inftance ftrongly Thus . agmmjl ^oti Tb*n« )our Selves fafe , And all clear For you , ^ ben you Pmejlants fay , Papifls Anflrer not to Tvhat you Objett Againft Them, And our Reply is the Same . We are asjafe in faying Boldly, you Anfacr not Our Ohjeflions Againjlyou. . You* fay , you Solve our Arguments, We fay, No. "Will you be Iudges in your own Caufe for the Affirmative ? Per- mit us then to be Iudges in Ours , for the Negative. If you Say Again , you give a Probable folution to our Obje&ions 5 SoCatholicks Anfweryou . If you fay, our Objedions do not fo Evidently conclude Againft you , But, That ftill you are Able to Solve Them Ne- gatively , That is to fliow , They do not force your Vn- derftanding tojeild to Them; So Catholicks Anfwer you, T»ith this Advantage, That They can Enervate All you Objeft Pofuively by contrary Valid Proofs , And when This is don , Have Twenty for one as learned againft you [ Befides the Infallible Church They Pretend to) That Vote and Voice for Them, and Pitty your FoJly in Objefting. Now , if After all ( Say Thefe new Sectaries ) you Proteftants Blame us for our late Sepa- ration made from the Englifh Church, And therfore Charge Schifm on us, know, That Clodm accufat mce- chos , Yon Led the Danfe , And ft rji Scbijmati^d from a more Ancient Difc.III.CX. Noloojtngits Ancient %ight. 339 Ancient Church then Tve have don . You yet , Though Formal Separates, to ere not the Scbifmatickj , But Rome that Gave you Caufe t ) And jnfi fo toe fay . We are indeed the Formal Separatijls from you , But your Errours gave us jujl Caufe to Part from you, And therfore the Jin of Schifm is on your fide. And thus, Thefe Two Difienting Parties That Dif- may Difpute until They both are Breathles, And Hand *!"?■ , • r ^ *>. \J • 1 r \ r\ r Endles, be. gazing on One an Other without further Progreis, Vn- CAUfe Nei_ les The] bring Their Difeours to Vndubi table Principles, or ha- ther own'* ye Recours tofome Third Eaual ludge between them , or , Fi- **T*f"* naUy Grant , to>hich Evidently follows ^ That without a ludge, ca/coZ't* or Certain Principles , The to or ft of Harejies may be Defended ', ***** if every one may jirfi Accufe his Adverfary , And then give ?rmcif1^ fentencefor him [elf : For there is no Arian , no Nettorian, But Everyone Thinks toell of his Errours , And toill, at lea/l , Pretend ( as Thinks our Protejlants do ) that his Arguments for them Are not folved. JJ^J^J) J will pretend *s Vrote- CHAP. XI. **>*. th*t his Arguments Of pi> lute Writers Exceptions Againji "Zmfol~ our F leading Foffefiion* 1. I T is very True , Did not I fe the Strain of Se&a- **• s"''- 1 ries Arguing to be Every where like it felf, weak, **&**• and deficient , I ftould fcarfly have thought, that a man of parts could Have miffed fo enormoufly , as one doth in this Controverfy , whilft He gives you hints, of hitting the nail on the Head , and laying much to thePurpofe. Thus it is. V v 2 We 34© DifcKLCXI. Anfoers to Cavils 2. We Plead a lawful Succeflion from the Apoftles times, And a quiet PolTeflion of Truth with it, by vertue of an Immemorial Tradition . Our Adverfary Tell's us . The obligation of Proving lyes upon us. Of Vyrc w- proving what for Gods fake? Marry that, which w'wktth Immemorial Tradition moft Evidently Proves; in fo by itjeif, much that we are now urged to prove that Proof, which an Evident \s aione jts Own moft clear Light , and unaeniable t"0"'4 Evidence. They Proceed here , juft as if One fliould ^f^ bid me Prove, that All Mankind Defcended From A- not.tm- dam (Had we no other Argument to Convince the dotted Truth but immemorial Tradition) Bccaufe , fome (for- JmUpZ f°oth) may Imagin , without proof, that God in One v.e,weaU Age or other (though they cannot fay when ) broke came from of this lineal Defcent, By creating a new fort of men - m' from whom we come, and not from Adam, which is Seniles ♦ For the Very Tradition alone has more weight in it to convince the Affirmative . We all came from Adam% then, A pure Imagination without proof, to perfwade the contrary Negative . Take one Inftance, perhaps more prefsing, and fignificant .. A Kingdom, or, Commonwealth Proves the Succeflion of its Ma- narchs, or Princes, for fa long a time, by a Conftant Tradition , never called into Doubt , or queftioned by Any. Suppofe, fome Zelots fhould begin to Quar- rel with the ftates of the Kingdom , And Tell them. Aninfian* Gentlemen , you are all Miftaken . Believe us. In (e' one Age or other, ( though we know not when it hap- pened) The lineal Race of your fuppofed Kings, Fail- ed . A Vfurper Got to the Throne , by force, fraud, or both , And it was He ( it's true we cannot name the man ) that brought in Novelties, ftrange Opinions, Dange- t Difc.HI. CXI. AgmftourWea&ingPoffefion. 341 Dangerous Maxims, contrary to your Ancient Lawcs and Cuftomes, Imagin , I fay, thus much, would not thefe Novellifts, thinkye, after no Smal contempt, be put to their Proof, or be fcornfully. laughed at, fliould they urge the Kingdom to Prove what is proved by certain Tradition? This is our very cafe- We pro- Reprove ve the lawful fucceflion of our Popes , of our Prelates, «* dearly of our Paftors, and People, by Vndeniable Tradition theiM»i from S\ Peter to this preient Age, And we are now caI-„yP^Wj led on , To prove that, which the very ftrength and*»^c*fto- Efficacy of Tradition Proves by itfelf, without more Mek?*mA Adoe. A moft impertinent Demand ♦ For, if He nyxbg/ that Denies the lawful lineal fucceflion of Monarchs domthe in a Kingdom, warranted by undubitable Tradition ,JTf£™ muft , if He ftand to it, be put to His Proof (th? Mcmrchs. Kingdom Proves enough by its immemorial Tradition) Much more are thefe rr en forced to Prove in our Ca- fe , if they Oppugn the Tradition of a whole Vniverfal The chur* Church : For the Church gives in Her la ft ar\d clcfflr-**»{f^ eft Evidence, when fhe Pleads undeniable Tradition , Evtdeme- No man can require more. 3. You May fay FirfK Befide Tradition, wher>- by the lawful Defcent of Monarchs is Proved , There ate alfo Records at hand, to Confirm the Truth of the Tradition. IAnfwer, The Church hath as Good r^cW: Records , wherby (he marnfefteth the lawful fucceflion c^jR*- of Her Popes, Prelates , and Paftors , as any Kingdom ZmpiT^ on Earth produceth for the lineal Defcent of its Mo- awym\ narchs . Therfore.it is you, that .n:uft.-ihow ( And K«i*». by found Principles ) as well thefe Records to be for- ged, or Vnauthentick , as Or^l Tradition ("which is a OiftinA Proof) to be Fals , and Fallible, Both are V v 3 above > k- -. mr- 341 Difc. ITI.C XI. Anfaer toCaVtls above your Power, Skill, and Learning . Be it other. wife , the Proof Certainly lies on your fide. And Tis all I Intend at prefent. _ . 4. You may Reply fecondly. The Inftance of contrary to Monarchs fucceedihgin a Kingdom, Vpheld by Tradi- thechnrck tion is Forceles , if Contrary Records be produced, ar*d C**Ttll Prove that a Vfurper Got in, and interrupted the right line of Succeflion . The like , may have been in the Church, when Her Popes and Prelates became Vfur* pers , and changed the Primitive Doftrin of it. Mark a Suppofition For a Proof , and,withall Obferve How Tbt obit. y0U ca^ t|le obligation of Proving on your Self. For, p^X/«N0wit's your Task to Produce Thcfe fuppofed Re- incHmbenv cords Contrary to the lawful Succeflion we Plead for. on our Ad. shew them therfore, And Argue by them, or, if you verjarus, ^ .^ ^^ ^ ^^ muft Fail , The Tradition from our Anceftours Hand s (till in its Ancient vigour unfhaken, againft meer unproved Cavils, and Calumnies. f 5. You may Thirdly Reply. That Inftance of Monarchs lawful Succeflion in Their refpeftive King- doms, when warranted by undoubted Tradition, feem's good and convincing , becaufe no Man Queftions the Right, no Man within the Kingdom Doubts of the Acknowledged Succeflion. But all is contrary in our prefent Controverfy ; For, innumerable called Chriftians, do not only Doubt, But, exprefly Deny that Right f and lawfulnes of Succeflion which we At- tribute ro our Chutch, to our Popes, and Catholick Paftors ; Therfore , becaufe the party Fails , The in- ftance is forceles. Firft a Word Ad Hominem. Let it Pleas our Adverfaries to Declare plainly the Succef- fion of Their Church , of Their Bilhops, of Their Pa- ftors Difc.IILCXI. Againft our f Heading Tofiefiion. }4$ ftors,by virtue of any Immemorial Tradition. Let s*&*rit* them alfo Vouchsafe to give in that Title , wherby ^f/'JZ They lay claim to a Poffejjton of Truth . What ever Argument. is Allegeable for the One, or Other, whether it be Tra- dition, Scripture, or Fathers, will fuffer more Contra- diction from innumerable Called chrtfiians , then ihe leaft Article (if any were little) of our Catholiek Faith, Therfore they muft Solve their own Argument. The Reafon is. If they plead Tradition for a continued Succeflion of a Proteftant Church ever fince Chrift, the whole Chriftian World , yea, even Protectants them- feJves, Oppofe the Paradox. If Their Flea for Pure Proteftancy, be Scripture., They') meet with as many Adverfaries, Having not one Syllable for it in Gods Word. If finally They make a Belief Common to all Chriftians to be Their Effentul faith , None likes the Dodrin. Both Friends and Emmies , catholtc\s and Hitretichs, fiand againfl them, b Therfore I fay once mo- re, They muft iolve Their own Objection, 6. Now you fliall have my Anfwer , And I fay, m'nt -f" An Argument, That Drawes all the Force it has fromMW. the Ofpofnion of Enemies , ( And They were all known * . Haereticks , that Oppofed our Catholick Tradition ) 0fHen-* Deftroys; not only Evident Truths , but alfo impugn's ticks m Chrijl , and Chriftian Religion- Atheifts make Ob-^f ^ je&ions Againft God, Jewes Againft Cbrift, yea, And /■ the very Inftance now allowed o£ fuppofeth fbme wil- ful Zelots contrary to the common received Tradition, of fo many Monarchs undoubted Succeffion ♦ You fc Therfore , How weak this way of Arguing is. Be- TrufhT lieve it, There is no one Chriftian Verity , but hath its met with Adverferies,Therfore}theMan that will Side with fuch **"/+ Op-""' m 344 DifcFILCXT. JnftoerstoCaYils that wiu Opponents, and Cavil alfo , Becaufe a Company of Inchon Difmembred , and jarring Seclaries Do fo, muft look Jnents,sh*nho\v He ftriks , left he cut to deep, and Wound tbofe, atlafide- #e ^rould not hurt . For at lajl , He shall he forced to sba- fiUm^' & °f ^e **rl> nam *n Notion of a chnjlun . Ill fay in a word, what is more amply laid forth Difc. i. chap. 7. m. 4. 5. We have an Ancient Church againft the- fe Scattered Companies of Novellifts, A Church uni- red in Dodrin , Againft their larrsand Endles Diffen- tions. A Glorious Church manifefted by fuch Marks and Motives, as mace the world Chriftian , And thefe plead againft Their Fnevidenced Opinions. Finally we have molt certain Tradition ., againjl their uncertain Guef- fes. Vpon fuch Proofs, which cannot be fliaken, we ftand; Therfore / unles our Adverfaries , befide the Multitude of Opponents, bring rational Proofs againft our vofjeffion , which Reft at laft upon undeniable Prin- ciples, We arefafe, and cannot be Danted. Alas, clamours j^ n)eer Number of known Enemies, without Evi- smwi«! dence to warrant what is Pretended , Seem's much like without a unjuft Clamours in a Difordered Common- wealth f rational loucj tjs true 9 but as Senfles as Loud , when Reafon 'iwfiis. ought to have place , and plead the Caufe , by Proofs and Principles. Therfore, we Appeal to Principles; may They bear Sway, we are content , if not , We told you Above , Though as many Hereticks rife up againft us, As there are Atheifts oppofiteto God, And lewes to Chritt , We Regard them not , if they come Vnarmed, and only Fight by the Votes of their own Scattered and Devided Companies. But enough isfaid of this Subject, in the Difcours now Cited. 7. Here, I'll only Add one Confideration more, And Difc.IILC.XL JgainttcurTkadingTcJpfiiM. ]45 And ic is to Aflure our Adverfaries Though , They run to pafs't Ages, that is, the whole world Over, and Gather all the Votes of Enemies , either againft the Pojfefiion, or, the Ancient Tradition of our Church, They only give us a Number of jarring Suffrages, which bound up together, cannot Amount to a ^eak Probability . A »'** However, Let Truth fuffer ; Suppofe them weakly JJjJJJjT* Probable, is this enough, think you , to Warrant seElanes granted, Foule Scbifm > Is here Ground enough to Iujlifi an Evident <*£«&" Divorce made from an Ancient church, T&berin Their Ance- rtom flours Lived peaceably time out of mind y Age after Age , lvitb- Schijm. out Trouble, and Difturbance? No. All is impro- bable, For, what ever is lefs, then Evidence Ground- ed on fure Principles , will (hew it felf to be, as it is, a Proofles Cavil Againft fo long prefcription , and immemorial PojJeJJton of our Ancient Faith. 8. Some may yet Reply . All that's Said hither- A*obj<* to, Shows only a Perfonal Succejjton of Popes , Prelates, fa- a,m* Jlors , and People in foregoing Ages , But is far from Proving the main point in Controverfy , {They mean) a full and quiet PojJeJJton of Truth, T»hicb we make *fo Hereditary to Theie Popes, and £*V6ojtfDefcendingfrora &* Peter, That it was never loft . This, They fay , is to be Proved. I Anfwer, We are yet obliged to prove nothing : For, the yery TejUmony , the Vnanimous tyhmth Confent , the Conjlant Tradition of our united and learned church Church without more, are moB pregnant Arguments, as well SHnEvi. for the PolTeffion of Apojlolical Truth laid claim to, as, For dence.st. the Perfonal Succejfton of our Catholick Paftors. Ther- **£i*^ fore , unles Sectaries can ^>ea\en this Plea by a Contrary £ Evidence , more Jlrong then our churches Tradition is ( and then the Proving is incumbent on them ) we Hand firm X x upon H6 D\klUX.XL Jn/ber to C*T>& upon our olim Pofitdeo, which cannot be fhaken. T J^y by a contrary Evidence , Stronger then our churches Tejiu wony and Tradition . Speak now, it's your time ©f fZlifus I>roving i What have you to Allcdge againft This fo- makesSe. ^e Confent and Tradition? is it Scripture? Produce fariesCa- it, And we are filenced, if not , Vouchsafe to> Hold M™*"' y°ur Peace Hereafter. Have you the Confent of Fathers, or Ancient Councils to make your caufe Good againft our Pleading Tradition, and the Ancient Pof feflion of Truth with it?. No. Examen Thefe learned Volums you'J not find one clear fentence, fa- voring your unjuft Procefs Againft a Church, That $*a*rw made your Progenitors Chriftians . What then Re- *m!%. mains to-Scaie us with , But your own-felf Simple Vo- Us>MStke tes> and if thefe Caft, as it were, in A ballance Againft AriAm. our Ancient Pofleflion, can out weigh it , and fo De- prive us of our Right, The Arians long fince had De- stroyed us all,- For, Their Votes were as weighty, as .united- as, yours, Yes, and more numerous. a Ft* 9. Well . Though we are not Obliged to prove , hrhfi W^a c ^^ Tuition and our Ancient Poffeffton Convince , I'll hinted mt Yet Hint, mod briefly, at a few Proofs in Behalf of thoughwe our Juft Pofleflion. Firft, it is an undeniable Verity, SrS^.SW founded a Catholick Church, And Tis as vi. Evident (Sedaties Confefs jfcj that He invefted the Roman CathoLck Church in an Ancient Pofleflion of chiift Truth . z. It is an undoubted Verity , that Cbrift f*!. never abandoned the Church He founded , For He Church He told us : Hell gate* should not Prevail againjl it. He gave funded. Affu ranee of his being with us to the end of tie Ttorld. The Church is the Pillar and ground of Truth &c. If ther- efore Cbrift Hood to his Word , and once eftablilhed the Roman Difc.f HCXl tyanft ourThading Toffifien. 3 47 Roman Catholick Church in Truth , it is Orthodox (till, and Preferved in Truth by His fpecial Afliftance. 3. It is an Evident Verity, that God, whole Providen- ce never Failed his Church , could not permit this Ample , and Ancient Moral Body of Catholicks to Cheat the world by its pleading a Poflefiion of Truth; if't had none, for a thoufand years together , v>hw , i which is deeply to be Pondered ) there Tvas not any A Truth ether found church on Earth , for fo vajl a time , to Teach well to bt Chnjltans the Orthodox Faith of Iefos Cbritl. 4. We ha- Vondere*- ve our quiet Pofleflion Acknowledged by innumerable Votes of mod: learned Fathers. 5. And 'Tis a Grea- ter Proof (For nothing, Scripture excepted , can Pa- rallel it. ) The Teftimony and warrant of this Ample Catholick Society carries ivttb it our Evidence , no lefs , for an a&ual Prefcription , Then for the Right , and Title of our long pleaded, and enioyed Pofleflion. And who can fuppofe that all thofe Innumerable Profeflbrs of this learned Church , by whom this Evidence was conveyed Age after Age, were all befotted or deluded with Errour i 6. And 'Tis an Evident Demonftra- tion J No Ancient or modern Church reputed Or- thodox by the Chriftian World, ever fo much as Quar- relled with xhe Roman Catholick Church , or once *& orth*. Qu£ftioned the Right of HerPoflefling Ancient Truths, ^cw delivered by chrift and bis Apoftles, none Cenfured it, f™JZ}of none Condemned it, upon any fuppofed want of a moft ;*«»«»;orld . If Fin all f, The Authority vf our Church , And the Teftimonies of moji Ancient Fathers may fpeak^in ourCaufe, And this Convincing Proof alfo ba- te place . None Ever Gain/aid our ^Ancient Pojjefion But knoTv and condemned Hereticks. We may well Hope to fi- lence our Adverfaries atprefent, or, if thefePerfwa- five Reafons , with many other, Infilled on Hereafter, Become infignificant to Their Obdurate Harts , when They can not fpeak a Reafonable word Againft our Evidences, what fhall we Do ,But Commiferate Their seBarUs Condition ? You fe , How roundly 1 deal with cannot An Them , And fay , They cannot fpeak a probable Word vllofs] Againft Thefe Pofitive Proofs, Though, ( whilft we plead Pofleffion) it is their Task to Prove, who are the Accufers, And Charge Herefy on us. 5^J27 io. Obferve therfore. If they fay, our Saviour once fetled not the Roman Catholick Church in Truth, They are to Prove it. If they fay, He violated His Promife, And preserved not the Church , He founded in Perpetual Truth, They are to prove it . If They lay, "We mifunderftand the Scriptures now cited, They are to Prove . If They fay our Catholick Church cheated the world for ten whole Ages together by pretending PofTeflion of Apoftolical Verities when it had none , They are to Prove. If they fay our Church was once Sound in Faith, but failed After- ward, They are to Prove , And withal, Diftin&ly to point atfmi other Orthdos ChrijlUn Society, that Sue* tukd ttre to Pro Difc.II I.C.XI. Agdinft our f leading fvffe/Sion. $49 ceededin the place of the Roman Church, nolv (falfly ) suppo- fed Fallen into Err our , And This will give Sectaries work enough. Again: If They Slight The Authority , and Teftimony of our Church , Evidenced by mod glorious Miracles, And other llluftrious Marks of Truth, They are to give, in Lieu of that , a more Valid Teftimony, a ftronger Authority For Their Pretenfes, which is impoffible . If Finally , They Talk of any Orthodox Church, That plainly Cenfured, or, Condemned the Roman of Errour and Herefy, (And Herein we Vrge Them to fpeak to the CaufeJ the Proof lies (till on their fide: or, if they Prove not. w Believe it, our Olim Possideo, is impregnable; The Prefciption , and clear Evidence of a long quiet Pofleffion , are our wall of Defence, not to be battered , or Beaten down by Ca- lumnies. 1 1. Thus much premifed. You fliall fe in Brief, How T^obje. all comes to Nothing, Wherwith This late Writer too fu°rmAfver weakly Oppugn's our Ancient Pofleffion , who, After fmy,,ht»m His Telling us Tart 3. r. 5. Page 627. That the Proof •dfmtks, lyes upon tw , He gives this Reafon , And let it be His nrft Objedion. 12. They who Challenge full and quiet Pojfejf on, by venue of immemorial Tradition ,. and fuccepon from Their Ancejlours^ ought to produce the Conveyance of that Tradition from him , fufho alone could inyejl them in that Vofjejpon . Mark thefe Myfterious Words . Ought to produce the Con- veyance of that Tradition from him &c. What fignifies This > Had H^ faid . They ought to Produce a Con- yeyance , warranting the Poffejjion of Truth to be in their Church, we would have fent Him back to the Proofs Already Alledged, And Here only Infifted on our Tra- X x 3 dition: 35o Difc. I ri. C. Xf . MfreertoCaft'tls Thetffifa- dition; But to Demand for a Conveyance of our very lerfTrsdL tradition , which is either by it felf, its own mod ma- tim, niteft and clear conveyance , or mufl be proved by ano- ther clearer Tradition , ( And fo in Infinitum ) Tend's , Merhinks, a little towards Non-fenfe • Truely I know not what the man would be at . Would He Have us, Think ye, to Produce a Letter written by Chrift No charter iefM (for , Conueyance Here mull Signify , Charta, or, '(turner Inflwmtntum} w her by it may Appear, that the Tradi- thtnTr*di. tion of our Chutch is Sound and Orthodox > This um. would fignify juft Nothing. Becaus Sedaries might more juftly Cavil at fuch a writing, And fay it is For- ged , Then they can now Except, again ft the greateft Teftimony Imaginable of a whole Learned Church that mufi Give Credit to this Writing, \i\ have Any, ThtRea- Therfore, He who can Doubt of this Atteftation of a M far Extended Church , May more Rationally Doubt of the Writing it felf \ Though it were now a&ually laid before our Eyes to Read . Se more of This Subjed Above chap. 7. n. 7. 8. Perhaps, our Adverfary will fay we are to produce Scripture , if not for The Convey- ance of our Tradition, at leaft for the Poffeflion of ■em Proofs Truth we pretend to . I Anfwer , This is now Don, mvJktady ^ 9. 10. where I Tell you that chrift founded the * * Roman Catholick Church in Truth , And promifed to be with the Church He Founded to the End of the World : Withal , that no Orthodox Church Ever op- pofed this juft Poffeflion &c. It therfore lyes on our Adverfaries to Difprove 7 hefe Scriptures , And to Weaken thofe Realons by found Principles , or , at leaft to Offer at an Anfwer, which, I Think, will be Diflkii to Do by Any Proof, That's weakly Probable, 15. In DifcIRC.XI. Againft our

i%. Of Prefcription, or Pofleflion) The foil Right depends not upon meer Occupancy , But, a Title mult be pleaded, to Shew that the Pofleflion is Bon&fdei\ fo that the Queftion Comes from The Tojjejpon , to the Goodnes of the Title. Anfw. By This Word, Right , or , Title, I underftand a juft and meet Reafon , Allegeable For that's that, wherunto a man layes Claim, And, wherof me*»tm* He had Pofleflion for long a Time . As if One fhould JJJf Ask an Ancient Gentleman by what Right He Hold's Wwfc, His 3 jz Difc. II I. C. XI. Jnfooer to CaVds His lands , And How long He hath Had Them ? He Anfwers. They were fetled on Him by His An- ceftours , ( And here is His Title. ) Both they And cavils He , have quietly Poffeffed Them , without Cavils t "known f°r a rhoufand years &c. Suppofe now , A wran- sugfc gling Lawer fhould Tell the Gentleman. Sir , what- froofies. ever becomes of your long Poffeffion, I Queftion your Right, or Title, And therfore fay, your Polleffion is not Bonafidei, But a m?er Occupancy. Would not This bufy Fellow, think ye, if He faid no more, be put to His Proof , when the Gentleman fliewes His Right, and juftly plead's his long Poffeffion ? Yes, Tht mod Affuredly. Here is Our very Cafe. It is more Right and certain, that ths Roman Catholick Church was Once chunks mofl- lawfully inverted in the poffeffion of Truth by the Gracious Goodnes of Him that founded it , ( Then ever Any was lawfully fetled in Right of His lands) For fo much the whole World, and Se&aries alfo Acknowledge, as undoubted : And Here is The Chur- ches Firft Right , or Title. It is Again moft Evident, That Innumerable of unfpotted Fame, of Great Lear- ning, San Aity, and Vertue Have not only Avouched This Bleffing to be once Conferred on the Church, TmHein gut Moreover, have profeffed Themfelves, to be SKjfc Heirs of this Ancient Right , And fo Far, the Profefr fors of Thofe Primitive Verities , That They on- veyed them Age after Age to Pofterity (I fay No more yet, hut only "tohat they Profeffed. ) Now Starts up a it'sTacitly Minifter , And Tell's the Church (juft as the Lawer {Tldi^ Doth the Gentleman ) She bath no Right nor Title , But fatyanoc. a meer Occupancy, That's no Poffeffion . The Church I2$*mf' ProYes r^s Ri&ht fir^ t0 ^aYe ^en Conferred by one frfivtd, c"a* DifcJII.CXL Jgaihfl cm Pleading Qoffefiiori. Jjj that could give it . Then She ftewes it, to have Re- mained with Her in Every Age By fure Witnefles of Vertue and Integrity, Muft not therfore this Minifter, Think you, that Contrail's with fuch Witneffes, And Encounters fuch an Army of old Tryed Souldiers be put to His Proof, and Fight luftily by Evidence , And, if poflible , with Stronger Proofs ? Is All manfully Don (Pray you Judge) when He wholy fuppofeth, what Should be proved , And is pleafed to Mifcal our Ancient undoubted Right , our juft T///p,and Vnque- ftioned Poffeffion by a new Coyned word of Occ upan- ry, Let him Keep the Occupancy to Himfelf, and Apply it to His Proteftant Religion , That Hath neither Right to plead by , nor Title , nor any Ancient Pof- feffion. 15. A Third Obje&ion. If we plead Pofleflion byimr memorial Tradition from Anceftours , many things are to be Contefted, and this is one, That no Antecedent Law hath determin'd Contrary to what we challenge by vertue of Pofleflion . Very Good . When you, Sir , Shew us this Antecedent Law , Contrary i$ Teb&t Qur Aim ffie Challenge by Vertue of our Poffeffion, wee'l yeild. But ver/ary it you are to make this Evident, And , Confequently the ******** Proof Lies on you , which will be a hard Task , For £%£?■ we Know, There is no fuch Law againft us. u*ry t& 16. A fourth Obje&ion. chrifts Law hath Deter- •?' *W- min'd Matters of Difference between us one way or *' other : For Example , Whether the prefent Church be Infallible, or no. If the Law has Determined A- gainft us; Pofleflion , And Prefcription fignify No. thing , If for us, The Queftion muft be wholy Re- moved from the ?lea of Pojjefsion , And be tryed on This Vy Iffue, ?54 The Legis- lators Dr- termtxa- tton. Vet like our Adverj.%. ties Offer. \ Seftviei Have no Scripture Jlgxinfl the Chiif- ches Infal. iibility. The j£«#- /lien ought not to be removed from the Pie* of fojfefsion. Jin Injlan (c* Difc. IFI.C XI. Anfoer toWth' hiue, whether Chrifi by his Law hath determined $n your Jide or Ours , I Aniwer. The Legator hath moil pliinly Determined for the Infallibility of chat Church \vh £h He founded , And though you flight thofe Sa- cred Texts, Super bar/C Petram . Pafie Oves. Ero Vohf- cum, or what Els you pleas, They are yet Vigorous Proofs Againft your meer Cavils. Therfore, Bee a li- fe you Offrr to be Tryed upon this Ijjue . Whether Cbrijl hath Determined for you or tu&e Accept of the Challenge, And are ready to Difpute by Scripture only. Produce then your Texts , as plain and fignificant for the /*/- Iibility of the Roman Catholick Church , Once Confef- fedly Tiue , As thefe now Hinted at, and rna.^y more Cited Above , are for Her Infallibility. This don you may Vapour as much as yoa Pleas, And Offer to be tryed by Law , &c. But we know your Want; you have not, after All this Talk, a Syllable of Scripture Againft our Churches Infallibility. Now, to the other Horn of the Dilemma where you Say , (if Chrtjls Law has Determined on our fide, the Queftion muft be re- moved from the Plea of Pofleffion, and be tryed by the Law.) I Anfwer, It's a ftrange Piece of an Argument, And fay, it muft not be removed , Vnles you can Show by your Logick , T^hat , when A Man hath two Good Proofs for a Verity, He ought not to make ufe of both ,but , is to Content Himfelf with the one only. Thus it is . We prove the Churches Infallibility by fignificant Scripture , as a Pojftffor Bona Fidei proves the Right to His Lands by his Ancient Writings. And, as He Add's to His Writings, a juft Poffeffioa : So we plead Alfo Pofleffion in our Cafe, vVhy therfore ibould we throw Away this fecond proof taken from Pofleffion, Difc.III.CXI. AgmJlourWeadingVofiefion. }tf Pofleflion, unles An Evident Lai* Come Againft it, which we expert from you, but Fear it not. Sir, you Poffefs a Benefice , And can , if need be , fliow How you came by it; whether it be a Writing, or , fome Thing equivalent , it Imports not ; You have befi- de, the Pofleflion of it. Suppofe now, Any One would Endeavour to Difturbe you , or Doubt of your fuppo- fed Right, You would Plead both Thefe Titles > Would you not ? Anfwer This and , your Obje&ion is folved. 17. A Fifth Objetfion page 618. Lyes I know-not How, wrap't up in twenry Obfcurities. It is much to This fenfe. We muft prove,that there is no other way to Interpret the Law of Chrift, but by our Church. With- all, That the Church cannot come into a Pofleflion of Any Thing , but what was Originally Given Her by the Legislator. Mark upon what Duties we are Put. We mu}\ prove , And by the La^ ( For Here is ^ the laft Trial with Thefe men ) that our Church Inter- Duties pret's faithfully, whilft They fit Down fpeechlcs, as »hieh f / . ^ V * j n. they cannot it were, in their own Came, And mult not prove, Com\u That their Church Interprets better. Moreover -, with. Note alfo by the way , kHow the whole Queftion is rhejtue- now removed from the Lat», and comes to This Iflue, ftion is rem whether Our Interpretation or Theirs, be more Confor- ^°vtd. mable to Gods Word . Moft certainly, Their In-^J^J,,. terpretation is worth little , becaus confcfledly fallible , terpnith AndTherfore, Proceeds not from the Infallible Afli-"™'* fiance of the Holy Ghoft, As is Amply Declared Tb*tr«f Difc. z. c. 9. ». 7. 8. 9. where we propofe the Difficul- liesonmf ty , And Prove , That One Only Oracle, Chrifts own ^t *" Spoufe, which is Aflifted by the Holy Ghoft, Inter- Yy z pret's Sefttrhs us on 1)6 Difc.III.CXl. AnfoertoCaYth pret's Scripture Infallibily. Now, if our Adverfary Exempt's Againft our Sciiptures And Reafons there Al- leged, The Task of Proving will ly on Him; For Hc mull: either Prove , That our Proofs are Protfles , or That His, Far furpafs them in worth, And a clearer Evidence , And He will find an Infuperable Difficul- ty in Both. All 1 fay now , is. Though the In- terpretation of our Church were Fallible , it is as good as yours y And if we refpeft its Age , which gives fa- me Preheminence, it may be Accounted much better. We have largely Anfwered to the other part of the Obje&ion, in the whole firft Difcours , And Proved, that the Church canmt Come into the VoffiJJion of Any Doflrin, Ac£h!cI* ^ut ^** " A^^ °f h *f* Legijlator. It's otherwife, may "boldly * am fufe » with your Church , which , becaus Fallible, Err. may Alter , when , and «as often As Sectaries Pleas. To end, Our Adverfary Should have known that the Matter now Debated, Depend *s not ImmedUtly on the Churches Infallibility, for Here is our Immediate Plea. The Church was Once true, And ever fince its firfl: Foundation , Pleaded Conftantly this quiet Pofleflion of Truth. Ergo unles that firu ground be lhaken , And this Pleading Pofleflion be Evidently Difproved , it ought to be fuppofed true ft ill : And thus You fe how the obligation of Proving, lyes irre- movably on our Adverfaries. 19. There yet Remain fome other wordy Obje- ctions, but I wave them , becaus They are folved , And in real Truth, are meer Suffojitions , and no Proofs. Sometimes , They will Have Tradition to he Proved, Tthicb is its OT»n manfaB Proof. Sometimes They tell us, that 4 lm Pojjeffion in matters of Religion is a fenfles Difc.HI. C.XI. Jga\nftouY Or, Who muft Judge here? And, if Again, They Yy j hold 3 5 8 Difc; 1 1 1. C X {I. By what ltrong moral Proot, ground- trmcyU. ed on an undubitable moral Principle, can They con- vince-us of Errours , and clear Themfelves of Schifm? wejw'd in Teii you (and 'tis a Truth). They have neither He*rof Proof nor Principle to rely on, But their o^n Proof es Troteftants y>0YCl . If I wrong them, They can Right Themfel- laMZ, felves> and convince me hy good Arguments in Form. To reduced to what is Added of the Vnevidence of Faith, I Anfwer; (ottndvrin- Thbuglv the Principles Therof , For example , the Worit (tt1'5, of Smpture , or the Definitions of Councils want Me- Trindpies taphyfical Evidence in themfelves ( Becaus only reveal- cftsith ed Truths) Yet They are certain, And, once Admitted '"itud'of °f a$ Cma*n , can Ground a Difcours, which (if well may ground Deduced ) need's no more to Faulter , or Deviate from scerttin good Form , then if we Argued out of Euclid's Principles, comiufion. Tkus muck per tranfennam . Now to anfwer the Argu- men Home , Here is 2. My Third Propofition . Proteftants cannot fo tnmh as Probably Acquit Themfelves of Schifm , nor Probably imfeacb the Raman Catholick, Church of Errour Caufal of Their fchtfm . I prove the firft part of my Affertion . No Probability can Acquit them of Schifm, when Eviden- ce layes That crime on them , But this is True j And to ■ DifcIILGXIT* TbemfefoesfifScbifm. J 59 to prove the Affumption , I will not Here Tell Them, MJm* How Improbable it is, That This Schifm, which took JjJJj*: its Rife from one Difcontented Luther , and a Dijgnfied uhfmon Prince, can have any Good in it ; The caufe from when- Protejiants% ce it came look's like naught, And the Doleful Effeft which Followed , vvors. Nor, will I urge Again How Improbable it is, That this one Prince , and one Fryar ( of lives confefledly Vicious ) can be Suppofed to ha- ve gon About any Worl^of God or piety, when meer Pafsion Hurried them on to firuggle Again ft Their oivn Conferences, Againjl a whole church , And the Faith of their Deceafed An- cejhurs . Thefe Confiderations I'll wave. 3. Yet, I cannot But Note how improbable it is, To Suppofe , That All thofe learned Councils which Anciently Taught Chriftianity j All thofe Learned Bis- hops , Thofe Do&ors , Thofe Religious , who like Stars Beautified the Terreftrial Heaven of the Roman Catho- fJ^T*" lick Church for a Thoufand years Together, Had, not- fvy that Vritbflanding. Their Pi* lUntyi fitch a 'Mtfi - eafi he fore Their Eyes, Octanes as not to DifcoVer Thofe Palpable Grofs Errours T»bn:b our Pro* ^{feovered Ujlants have no* fo lately Effted . Say Therrore ( the the chunk Queftion is worth An fwering ) How came it to pafs , unfeen b That our Proteftants fifft faw -thefe Errours ; And upon *£$?* _ ' • r more learn- Chat Monftruous Sight Quitted Rome , whilft Ochers:As Umdn** Sharp-fighted, as Numerous, And learned as They, mera™ Saw none of them for many Ages Before ? Speak tkmTh^* probably. Why , for example, Did not fo 1 mi- nent a Saint and Dodor , -as &i Gregory the Great was, or his Clergy , fo many following Innocents, fo many - Clements, fo many Frhans fe thefe Errours, and upon the Difcovery, Separate themfelves long fince from this fuppofed Erring Cfouich ? 1 would hear their An- fwer. 3^0 Difc.iri.CX} L Protectants cannot Acquit fwer . If they except Againft Thefe, Becaus They we- re Popes, I Ask , Why at lead Did not fo many Ber- nards , fo many Maladies, fo many Bennets, fo many An- felms , fo many Kings , fo many Princes (whofe Tempo- ral inrereft , God knows , lay not in Adoring Rome) with innumerable Others long Agoe Defert ThisSup- pofed Erring Church, and Revolt from it as Luther did* Tke/e Is it not a Degree of Madnes to Suppofe t That All L**md Thefe Worthy, Powerful, and Learned Profeilbrs of 'mer'XL the Catholick Faith , Kere either fo stupidly Blind , nmadi p&ins , But innumerable more in the Chriftian World hiiywinfi abroad Stand up Againft it , and Oppofe it on its firft thss schijm Appearance, as a moft Pernicious Novelty? All thefe fr$Ve(ifuom Condemned it as Heretical, and Held the Broachers m of it for Heretic ks . Now , had either Goodnes , Rea- fon, or Religion, accompanied this Schiim , it iLould have rather Gained an Vniverfal Applaus from Others, more numerous and learned then thofe were, who Be- gan it . But all was contrary, it Appeared like an- other Di(cm.CXll.Tkmfh>esbfScbifm.! 361 t)ther IfmaeL M anus em contra omnes, & tnantts omnium contra eum> as Oppefit to All, fo Vniverfally Oppofed by All; And how could thefe few Abbetoers of it , When 2fg£ this foul Work firft Began , without in tolerable Pride, ofsefarus Tlrink^ Themfehes Wifer in patronizing it , Then the Reft of the Chilian World in Condemning it ? 5. Here then is my firft Argument Againft this Schifm. A n*K> St£l , Schifm , or Here/y ( call it what £*»*>*- you will) Tfbub Was never Heard of before in the World ,%™Jrf" And on its firft appearance , met "pith w fniverfal Qppofition before , and wade by All other cbriftians , l»bo then Lived , Cannot be from foV»iver* God, or Satmd and Approved Doftrin. But thus the Schifm fe/tJ^t of Proteftants was , at its firft Rife, Vniverfally Oppo- be found fed, And is fo yet : Ergo, it cannot he from God, or jound*ndc*lh** Doflrin . The Major is Evident in the cafes of Ariut, " ' Pelagtus , and other Hereticks : For the univerfal Vijli- a$ is cU» ke and Qppofition Raifed Againft Thefe Schifms and He- *,%£" refies were, even Antecedent fy to Their Condemnation iitre7ickf. in Councils, Proof enough againft them. And if our Adverfajies Require more ; to wit a Council f fondemnajion, We have it Alfo . They cannot in Juftice make Any more Exception Againft the Council of Trent, Then Arius made againft the Nkene Council . . The Mi- nor is as clear ; for all Chriftians, who then were in being , Condemned the Englifii Here/y and Schifm. Grecians Difliked it , and do fo to this Day : Arians , Jhyfsins, Neftorians &c. And, moft of all Catholicks oppofe it lo'fer, That nor one will Believe as Proteftants Do . So True it is ; CManm omnium contra turn, All banded againft this Novelty; Therfore it cannot le from God or approved Dottrin . Now, That our Proteftants fince xheir firft Rife , have Gain- Zz ed $62 Difc. FII. GXIII. SechriesCaYils of ed the company of fome few Iarring and Diflenting Brethren , Proves Nothing ; For Arms in time Got more, and 1 believe, had them better united in Do^ ftrin, Then Thefe ever will be. CHAP. XIII. A Second Argument Again/} this Schifm . Of Sett arks Catf */> to the end, That we be highly Dif. not carried Away ky eyery Tftnd ofDoarw &c ; Now grace that \ AtTume . But , with our Proteftants leave, All S5* the Watchmen, all the Paftors, all the Teachers of church this Ample and far Extended Church , were fo Careles- whkh ly afleep,' fo Negligent apd Forgetful of their Duty f They own, o . "3 For Difc I (LC.X 1 £ 1. Errours entrlng the Church. 3 6 } For the vaft interval of a Thoufand years Together , That they took no notice ofThefe (now Imagined) Roman Errours by any Publick cenfure , or Condemnation ; But contrarywife Permitted Rome to Revel , to Coun- tenance Errour , Yea, and to be quite carried Away with the Slight Dodrin (as They fuppofe) of an Vn- bloody Sacrifice of the Real Fre fence , of Purgatory &c. On- ly , Forfooth , one Martin Luther, and our Proteftants, had fuch quick eyes as to Se Them, and upon the fight to Hold themfelves Obliged in confcience , to make an eternal Divorce from this Church, wherin they were Baptized . Obferve here not only Para- dox upon Paradox , But alfo a whole Heap of Impojji- bilitiss packet together. Our Nelv men fal* The/i too plain and vijible Errours ; But this large Vigilant church fab Them « not . They Tvere jo Senfible of the Honour of chrifttan Faith „"[,' as to Condemn Them ; But this great Church toas fo Senjles as rhemfelvts to Diflemble All . They m^ Separate, Spurn , and KJK*t this more wife. Church As Anticbrijiian , But That Ample Catholic!^ Society v^^om did neyer fo much as put a Mark,, of Dishonour on Rome , For then then Tt>am of true Dottrin . If ever fuch a Mark, Note? '*■*&■*■ Cenfure , Private or Publick Ad , Iffued out from an cSS, Vniverfal Church Againft the Church of Rome , Let themfpeak^, K^ind fllbe filent Hereafter : If not, it is A Strange Boldnes To make Themfelves more Wife , Zealous , and Vigilant , then that Vniverfal Church was ( which Here to their Prejudice They own ) Be- caus, forfooth, Rome muft loos the Title of the churcb Vniverfal. x. Our Proteftants therfore muft grant (there is no Denying it) That, Either This Vniverfal Church had loft Her Eyes , or was more then Impioufly. Negli- Zz % gent gent over the Charge committed to Her , which was toTeucb, to InflrhcJ , to Reprehend > and Crush Herejies as They Appeared; Or (which is the Real Truth) That They find Fault with Errours which never were. Now Here Obferve, an Othfer great Advantage given againfl: Themfelves, And How They Honor Rome , and The Dili- Difgrace Their o'Xvn imagined and mere Vniverfal church. gZCmltht The church of Rome was Vigilant, And (as the World chunk knows) Ever Ready, Age after Age, to SupprefsHe- cewpAted refies as they Rofe up, and Declare Againft Them ( Wit- with the nes t^e Condemned Arians, Nefiorians , Momxhelits &c. ) ofThfir*" %u* this imagined Vniverjal church Teas fo Sleepy and Vncon* great ima- cerned , as to permit one Particular Church ( For Rome,They *'*&**' ^' was nomore) T0 ®Wn '• anc* ftfo^gly to Foment church. Thofe wry Errours (And this without fo much as a word of Reproof) which Caufed our Confcionabk , and tender Hearted Frorejlants to Schifmati^e as they did, and Bid Adieu The tender to Rome For ever . A ftrange Tendernes of Confcien- cfvll'T* ce ■'n^ce^» which (to take of the Guilt ofSchifmfrom ii*ntl*m Themfelves) doth not only caft an Eternal Ignominy upon this Vaft Imagined Church , But makes it alfo Sinful and Damnable, For Diffemlling fo long "frith Errours r fetich caufed at loft our Pmejlants Scbtfm.. 3. What can they reply to this Argument? Will they fay, This Great Society of Chriftians had not power to contrail with the Roman Church? The whole is greater then a Part>and Rome, They fay ( If Yet fo much ) Was only Part of that Vniverfai Socie- Ava/ti ly • However, If Power was wanting , where was proZbiii?,] the zeal of this Church ? Can one Luther , and His fey Th*tons Jijociats Be Suppofed to fraye had more qeal , Then flamed in Lut£" the Hans offo many Ftfors and Dottors For un Ages To- Difc.III. Ct XIII. Errours entring the Church. } 6*5 gather} They may Reply. The Church of Rome veha^ was ever Held found in Fundamentals, Though nor ^*"7" every way Right in Faith, Therfore this great Church ztaitken Thought it better patiently to wink at thefe lefler Faults, *b"whoU then to raife a Tempeft in the Chriftian World, not Q™rch- eafily calmed. Obferve firft : How Thefe men , '^ when They have faid much, and Proved nothing, know every Thing without new Revelations* Firft, They know where this va ft Church was, Though no body ever yet Heard of it. x. What it Thought. 3. Vpon what Motives it Diflembled fo long &c. But let all this Pafs . My Anfwer is . Ex ore tuo te iuJi« co. Did this Church Prudently wink at thefe lefs **?<**> r . J . _ ought to Suppojed Errours, Becaus not Fundamental, nor Dear uctj- h*™ pro- ve oFSaluation ? Why did not our good Proteftants "«***** do fo alfo > Did it Hold it fafer to fit down Quietly, T^lnmm 1 hen to raife a Tempeft amongft Chriftians? Why chunk did not our Proteftants take to"the fame Cours alfo t Did- In Doing fo , They bad made Themfelves as Tvell Inheritors of their Fore fathers Peace and Wifdom , as Thej noTv are of their Lands. But to Difown the better Inheritance , to Con- demn their Anceftours, and a whole Church befide of Ecrour, To make a violent Buftle, a hideous Tumult in the Chriftian World, upon Little Caufes, is in a word open Injuftice , And flat Rebellion . 1 fay up- TheircP^ on Little Caufes : For in Kingdoms and Common- J£tem wealths, where the Laws are without Exception goody n+timk it is hard to find the Practical Government fo free Mndt"»*i$, from all Mifdemeanours, But that you will have Eyes enough to Ejpy Them, and Harts ready, upon very Little Feeling, to Clamour againft Them : Yet Licen- cenee once thefe Malcontents to Rebel ft fan they feel a Z z j little 566 DifcJII.CXIII. SeStaries CaVth of Licence Intle Smart , and Adieu , fay I , to all Loyalty; Civil Go- uaUon- vernmenc is Deftroyed , both Regal , and Other . Tdufon'' Admit therfore, That, there Had been Abufes in the linu a- Church of Rome, as alfo (which is Fals) it hadFail- grisvances,^ -m jjonm fundamentals of Faith, Yet Evident Reafon wnwent ftiewes the Schifm made by Proteflants to be Vnex- udejiroyed cufable. For, as that man Commit's an Vnexcufable Crime, who for little Agrievances in a Kingdom wher- in He is born, Openly Rebels againft it, So He Com- mits a higher Offence, if for petty Faults, He Rebell's againft an Ancient Church , wherin he was Baptized. Now it was as Clear to the Firft Schifmatizing Pro- teflants, That the Church of Rome was the Mother Church that gave them Baptifm, as it is clear to any Subjeft in the World , That fuch a Kingdom firft gave Schifm i him Life . Vnpardonable Therfore is the Crime of cannot ftp- schifm in Every one, which can never Suppofe a juft cwJ"* Caufe. And thus much not only the Holy Fathers do, but our Proteftants alfo, Muft Confefs : For , to AVaradox. Tell me on the one fide. That the Church of Rome hath All TheChwch 77, j,,^ MceJJary to Saluation, And yet on the Other , to wanTsSa- AlTert , It is Neceffary to Saluation to leave it ("when it thing me- want's nothing NecclTary) is Implicatory in Terms, Yea, ttjftyf ancj Gives Liberty to Proteftants to Leave their oltn yttitu ' Church ^ohen thej Ujl ; where there is Danger enough of Ntcejfary more then little Err ours , lohicb Prejudice Saluation. ttsaina- ^ Ancj here js proof enough of the other Part of iwV roy Aflertion , which was : Proteftants cannot probably Impeach the Roman Catholtck^ church of Err ours , caufal of thetr Schifm. You have already the Reafon . For if Faults , lefs or more Ufually feen, even in well ordered Commonwealths , can not give jujl Caufe of publick. Re- bellion, Difc.II I.C.XIII. Errours entring the Church, ffi | UUiw , much lefs could Thefe Suppofed Faults i^ind unproved Se#*ri" Errours , not Fundamental in the church of. Rome , gtve jujl™£v',tker C&ufe to our Proteflants of Their shameful Scjhifm againjl it, usofEr- Therfore They ought to convince us of Errours highly rours %*- Fundamental , And fo make us no True Chriftian^JjJ^J Church, or, They muft fit Down Branded »#f* the They Je black Note of both c aufal and Formal schifmaticks. There ^"'* s^'/- is no avoiding it. 5. Again 1 Argue. If Errours Caufal of Prote- flants Schifm Invaded the Church of Rome, They en- tred After the firft 4. or 5. Hundred years ,* For foJong. u *> ( fay They) That Church was Orthodox: But it is more then Improbable , That fuch a Deluge of them, as our Adverfaries Charge on us , Invaded that Church, arrd Diffufed Themfelves all Over. I prove the Mi-Thehigh nor . They could not Enter this Church without Publicity De- improbttt- fenfe , and Publtck Reftihnce . Defenfe>in Thofe Who firflliV°fEr' Jrr - 11 «- J £* J r> r/i ' 1 ; ^ r roars, En^ Heretically Vented Tnem ; Rejijtance in others, who Catho-tringthe lickjj Oppofed Them . But there was never fin ce cbrifts Church , , Time, Any fuch firft Publick Heretical Defenfe , nor ^d firth. firit Publtck^ Catholick^ Opposition of Thefe Suppofed Errours. The 'Real Prefence ; The Sacrifice of the (Jlfafs , Prayers for the Dead, Prayer to Saints &c. Only Hereticks Con- demned for their Pains Oppofed them, But no others. Let us therfore Appeal to Reafon, and Ask. How it^c!gar^ was Poffible,That fuch lowd Clamorous Novelties could conviftim fo filently , And as it Were by night , creep into a church , and efSe&"* no Body Difiovet Them on their firft Appearance ? How " "&*$ it Pofpbky rhat they could become Puhlick Owned ObjecJs of mens Fairh , and Gain an Vniverfal Belief through a whole Ample church, i^And no B>dy yet know when this new Belief Cor, Unheard of Profeffed Faith) firjl began > N.o- ^ tkjng rtcs. .. j $68 DifcJ II. C.XIII. SeSlarksOMs of Dram thing can be more Improbable , Paradoxal , and moral- d. »y m°--e Impoffible . And pofsibiHty 6. To fliew you further the Impoflibility of this of the En. Clandeftine Entrance of publick Errours into a *th!fijup. Church , without Publick Notice or Clamours againft pofidEr. Them , Be pleafed to Reflect here upon one Inftance, **»"* Suppofe , That a new fort of men fhould now begin to Broach an Impious Do&rin , And openly Teach cenrfrm*] *}*** t'"lc water 'n Baptifm , which waftieth away fin, all that i$ i* as Really the True Blood of thrift, And Therfore worthy fiti. of Adoration, as Catholicks Hold aconfecrated Holt to be his Sacred Body, and upon that Acount Adorable. Would not fuch a Novelty ( Think ye ) where it Pu- blickly Begins, be Publickly alfo Clamor'd againft by Sound and Orthodox chriftians > Yes. And if ic Gra- dually got ground > or more Followers in Time ( not eafily Supprefled) Would it not, as well As all other Herefies , which have troubled the World , Remain upon Clear and Undoubted Record for Pofterity to read > Certainly yes. Yet more : Can this Per- fuajton the in any rational Man , That fuch a Noyelty might in time be fo Held an Article of Faith by a CMoft Ample and Learned church , That The Profeffors Ther of Tvould Dy for iU The Seven Wonders of the Teorld are not comparable to this one* rJ%ic*p0f' Obferve the Application. There was a time (fay th"injLh Proteftants ) to wit For the 4. or 5. firft Ages after u, Chrift , When the yohole pure Primitive Church , no more Be- lieved Chrift Sacred Body to be Really and Subftantiaflj under the Species of Bread , Then noi» T»e Believe His Sacred Blood to be under the Species of Water in Baftifm. There Teas a Ttme f^hen the One as little Deferved Worship 9 or Adoration as tU Other. For, both Tvere only Holy Signs , and no xJMore. There Difc I II. C.XII. Enours entring the Chunk $69 There Was a Time when this Whole chutch grew CMad , and Brought in the moft Palpable and Erroneous Novelty that eyer the World Heard of, or Record Preferred , What > A pie- ce of bread before not chrijls Body, was then ( O Strange Time! ) Believed to be his Body s A whole Ample Learned Church' was then Cheated into that Belief; And wheras, it once Deferred no Worftip (fay our Protectants ) All at loft fell down and Adored it in the Open Viety of the World ; And to Tejtify that They did fi in Earnejl, Inn timer aUe have shed their blood in Defenfe of what they Believed. Yet (and here is the Wonder of Won- Evident<* ders) no man can fay: Who thofe were that firft in-sefams, trodueed this fuppofed Monfter of Novelties. No man can (ay in What Age , under what Pope This Errour Fir f got Growth* and Patrons for it • No man can Tell me, what Orthodox Chriftians firft flood up in Gods caufe , and Oppofed it. No man can Tell me, when this Vifihle and Pub/kk Adoration of an Hofl Be- gan. No man can Tell me, How, or when this new fuppofed Coyne d Doflrin ( Serpent like ) firft crep't into mens bans , And at laft Poy fined A whole Vniyerfal church. Hideous were thefe Novelties , Prodigious thefe Vifi* N<> Author b!e fuppofed Changes , Yet Hufh ! k^aII pajfed in fi- "ZIZ lence , no Body faW them , No body mention' s them , Not one fe Noto- Author ( neither Friend nor Enemy ) Writ them , or left them rious> vifi- upon Record, Is not this, Think ye, ( whilfl all^^J other Herefies are mofl exa&ly RegiftredJ more then get. a Pythagorean and Prodigious Silence ? segues 7. It is Pittiful to fe with what petty Trifles > our %*$L Adverfaries Oppugn the Strength of this mofl Convin- i%^a cing Argument. Some tell U6 of a Beard growing gray the Imperceptibly, of the Index of a cloc\ moving In fen fib ly , o/^5mf A a a Tares mem. 5?o Difc.III.C.Xlf. Sectaries CaYtls of Tares peeping up in a Field 1»hen men Are ajleep. And who can Queftion (faith one very Profoundly) the birth of An Infant , Becaus He knoTts not the time of its Conception ? Errours Thrfore might grow up with like fiience in a Church , and as Infenfibly. Obferve this Trifling. We [peak in the In/lance n&Vp given of a vifible Mountain , and our Adver janes Send us to feekfor Invifible Moaths in an old Rafted Garment. Say , I Befeech you : Can they fup- pofe That all Obiefts are alike Difcernable by our Senfes? Or, is it as eafy to find a needle in a Bundle of ftraw , As to fe Towers and Caftles before our eyes sectaries in a fair Sun fliin day ? The Suppofed Novelty now Thfaief menti°ned, the Suppojed change of a whole Church into their own another Belief, the Imagined New Publick^Adoration of A nature not Sacrament , were more Difcernable and Vifible then *7thoU' Mountains and Caftles , And cannot be Para/lell'd M>ith the lm- tbtrsmofl perceptible Grajnes of a beard , Mth Tares peeping up &c, vifibUand However This we can fay. Certainly fo many years amfeft. fince, the beard was not gray, now it is , So many Months fince , Tares were not, now they are. Let our Adverfaries Proceed with like Evidence aginft us , and fay Certainly {not doubtfully) fucb Suppofed Errours Then Were not in the Church, but afterward Began, and with- in the precife Compafs of fo many years. But This They cannot probably Hint at . The laft Inftance of a childs Conception is the word of All 5 For if you know its Birth, you know the conception was nine Months before, according to the ordinary cours of na- ture,- Though if both were hid from us, it is a Forceles inftance , Vnles we fuppofe that all Trivial Matters mud as well be known, and ftand upon Record , as Things of greateft Concernment* The late woful Burning Difc. III. C X I J I. Errours entrlng the Church, y? i Burning of London, will ( 111 warrant it ) be Exaftly Recorded , when the birth of twenty Infants is never thought on, and fo fhould the General Ruin of Faith in a whole Church , have flood Regiftred. 8. One word more. Though Thefe Examples we- CouId S6m re to the Purpofe (as indeed They are not) at mod they turies would only lhew , and Pittifully enough, How fuch '*'» j** fuppofed changes might perhaps be made : But are far ^Jjj£" from Proving , They Were made fo De faclo : For this enter the carries no likeiy-hood ot an Argument with ir. rll c^rfh Shew you how Thefe Errours might Enter the Church infenfihly, ^£- How thefe changes might get in with Silence. Ergo it was entred. fo , Thus they Were made , De facJo, A Potentia ad aBum non valet Confequentia. No man can Argue from a ^^etmm meer Poffibility of their Clancular Entrance , that in real [meerFof- Truth They entred in Such a manner. ' Se&aries may fay, fibtiityto They Suppofe thefe changes made upon other Princi-™^A " pies , And now only fliew by In/lance* , How They might get in without Noife , and publick Notice. Here, we may have plain Dealing, if it pleafe our Ad- verfaries. Snewyou Therfore , My Good Friends , by any Thing like a Solid Proof oz Principle , That the chan- ge we now fpeak of was Actually made in the Church: Say plainly , This suppofed Novelty Teas not in fuch an Age, hut afterward , And let a folid Proof make good both Their Affertions ; And then Your Inftances of Tares and^SS'- Beards growing gray will be to no purpofe , Becaufe the Vrovethefi Changes which you fay were made , are now upon WW your Suppojition ftrongly proved aliunde , That is , By ZZfated other folid Grounds, and this without the help of thefe mrfuppofi weak inftances . Here therfore is an Vnanfwerable themPro- Dilemma for you . You either endeavour to show that the ™nJn any A a a 2 Suppofed ErincipU, 171 DifcJ il.C.XUI. SeSiaries Ca%ls of Suppofed Novelty of the Real Prefence entred the church , Bt~ caufi your Examples of Tares, And a clock^index convinced) the Jftual Entrance of it, And This Inference , as I faid 6w , is Non-fenfe , Thus it might Enter , Ergo thus it did Enter. Or, Contrary wife, Tou can clearly Prove that the churh far/an fuch a Novelty hy undeniable Grounds , 'with- tolkrtht* out dependt7tg of theft Inflances . If you do this folidly, own in.'' your inflances are worth nothing ♦ For, if you con- flames im. yince hy an undeniable Principle , that the church brought in Knl7orca t]'u ne* ®°ftrm tn «n) 4ge > you need not at all to tAik^of a Us, gray beard , or , of T Ares peeping up infenfib/y , Becaufeyou mufl now iuppofe the pretended innovation clearly Proved , by other far better and undeniable Grounds. Do this, and you make your own Inflances , Eo ipfo, Aninfian Nutl , and as impertinent, asForceles. For, Mod ceajamji furely , No man in his wits will go about to prove that Proteftancy, for Example, came into the world in- fenfibly as a beard grows Gray , when he can evident- ly Demonftrate by other undeniable Principles the Pal- pable Beginning of it. And thus it is in the prefent Controverfy. 9. One may yet fay* They cannot, Tis true, Demonftratively Evidence the fuppofed change now rheirpre. in Controverfy , yet are able , upon ftrong Moral tenfeto Proofs , to make it highly Probable . Contra 1. If you vdtLin make it highly Probable, Talk no more of Tares and the church Beards ,• For one Proof of this nature will be of more to be highly Advantage to your caufe , then the fecret peeping up *mor*eth\n °f a Thoufand weeds in a garden . ContrA 2. If this improbable, your Affertion be made probable, it mud (land upon a ftrong Moral certain Principle , Teberof none can but mofi imprudently Doubt. Deal Candidly, Give us in plain Ian- / Difc.in.C.XUI. Errctin entring the Church, 373 language this High Moral certain Principle , wheron your AfFertion hath Footing, and you'l Gain much. But if after the Offer ; you Turn us of with words, or lead us by a loos Difcours to what you may fay is Morally Certain, Though thoufands more learned vow the Con- trary , you'l only Firft Difcredit your felf, and next your Caufe much more * Speak plainly on Gods Name, Here is place for it. Make your undoubted Principle known, wherby your AlTertion is proved, And you will do more then tver Proteftant did yet, or, (hall do Hereafter. Contra 3. It is ameer whimfy , to fuppofe Proofs highly probable againft This ever Taught and unchangeable Do thin of the Cathdick^ Church , which (land's Firm , Firft , upon Chrifts own Exprefs words , This is my Body. 2. On the Irrefragable Authority of Nop[00f 10 many molt Ancient Fathers , that ipeak not only Du- yaueth*t bioujly of the Myftery , But as clearly Defend it , as the ft****** Council of Trent Define* it, wherof more largely Here- £*tnn"n' r r \ 1 a ° * *f dan table after. To Tnete Principles, We Add the Tefomo- rrimipi*, ny and Exprefs Belief of our whole Learned , both pafs't and prefent Roman Catholick Church, Too ftrong a Proof, to be Battered or fhaken by Empty words. Wher- fore Every one may Confider what a hard 7«j/' Sectaries have in hand , if They go about to make Their Contrary Jjjertion highly Probable. Firft , They are Obliged to Prove , and by zfure Principle, That Chnft fpakf im- ££»jw properly, or, according to Their ienfe, 2. That all, monho- or at leaft mod of the^Fathers Erred in their Dodrin of *°*chn- the BlelTed Sacrament. 3. That They quite Over- JjJJ throw the Roman Catholick^Doclrm by the Authority of /owe Authority ether church , that Tvas ever Held by chrijlians more Ortho-ihenth% dox, and Apoflolical then our Roman church is. All this is \)Zhdtck A a a 3 to Church. 3 74 Difcll I.CXIIL SeStmet Cabih of to be don not by Talk > But by Sober , Solid, and Vndeniable moral Principles , which, both Friends and Enemies ought, if They be Rational, to acknow- ledge as Principles Morally certain . When Sectaries (hafi pleas to do what is here plainly required (And it muft be performed if they fpeak pertinently) Then I ft all begin to think, That, They men Fallible men may fpeak^ more boldly and Say . Oar church is Fallible , and hath brought in , both this nelv mentioned , and many other In- The Con novations . Therfore, I deeply Charge their Con- faencesof fcjences as They will Anfwer it at the day of Iudge- Sectartfs ^ J. n . n r • r^to aretreftd ment , not to Trifle in a molt lenous matter ; But, to prove without Ambiguity , plainly to touch the Difficulty, And Miftbtf9 t0 ma^e known to the whole World, what thac own- ErroHtsin ed Principle is, wheron this Their Propofition (land's: theChurch, j-y ^hole church is Fallible , and hath introduced This Hovelty °f ciW/?J Real Tre fence in the Blefjed Sacrament . I fpeak Empty boldly, And dare fay : Jt is a Flat Herejy , And , tber. words M* fore Sectaries have nothing like a Principle tMorally certain , wherby the ftrength of thereon trary Ferity , mantained by Scripture 9 church, and Fathers , can be meanly Quar- relled with , much les folidly Reproved , unles the too fimple talk of a Few Novellifts be able to Evert, and Over- turn what God hath Revealed , And a whole ample Church Defends upon Revelation . io. Perhaps it will be faid firft . The Fathers that VfhttSec- Defend the Real prefence were fallible and might Err. tariesmay j anfwer . Our Protectants who Deny it, are Fal- ^riimre Hble alfo, and may Err more . By what undoubted then highly Principle Therfore, can They Convince , that Their fallible improbable. rejefting the Fathers Hath height enough , to make Null the Teftimony of fo many Blefled Saints , againft Their Doftriiu' certain FrincipUs, Difc .1 II. CXI II. Errours entrtng the Curch. 375 Doflrin > We call here for Principles , and are not content with Kmpty words . They may Reply z. They can Explicate both Scriprure and Fathers contrary to the Churches Senfe , And fo ridd chem- felves of that Burden. I anfwer , This Riddance is none , Unles , when they have explicated , They prove by a more fure Principle , Then the Exprefs Words of thefe Fathers are, That Tneir Glofjes hit right, and that the Fathers Ttere Deceived , which Jliali never be fo much as Probably Convinced . If They laftly talk of Citing Fathers lor their Herefy : I anfwer, They have not one, As will be amply Proved hereafter. In the mean while let them know, it will be the fafeft Cours to talk no more of Changes ad lS[o*vehies introduced into our Church without proof and Principles, to up- hold Tneir ill Suppofed, and mors Proved Calummes . But enough of this Digreffion . We return now to other Objedions . 1 1. Some again Tell us . The corruptions of our church came in , in time of vreatefl ivnoranee , !x>hen little notice Upm S/#/?£«#jr 1 1 r n J \ „ T J r ' tt Talk wit hm taken , and fel» Records Kere Pnjerved of tvem . Here js eM proofs more Talk without Principles . For, where Read or Prwi- They of fo great Ignorance in the Church that Difina- ?les- bled all Writers to Regifter fuch vaft Changes > Or, ^berejind they Records ofthofe lojl and Vnprefcrved Records ? This is only Proofles talk ; if They have Records , let them be produced 3 if they have none , let them seftarhs Hereafter Wave fuch blind Gueffes, whilft Proofs are Oueffesru Expe&ed . It would anger our Proteftants, if I flioulcP'^' tell them without Proof or unqueftioned Records, that the Beard of Their Religion is Infenfibly Grown gray fince their new Faith came in, Or,that Tares were call into y,6 Di fciriC XI 11. Sctlarks toils of into Their Church, vvhilft They Slept &c. Yet They, it feems, Are liccnfed to run on with fuch poor Gueffes, And no body muft Check Them. Werethere T1. Next they Argue. We cannot shoT», leben the TkoZnitn Neceffity of communicating Infants , and the Rebaptizing of foUowinot Here ticks > or , That Doclrin of Souls not feing God before the thsitoiher j)ay of ludgement First entred the Church : Yet ihefe Tvere mmenlZre Er™urs> dnd their Beginning is unknown „ Here I anfwer unknown briefly. The Communicating Infants was enly To- «ll°. lerated for a time, But never was held a neceflary Do- 6lnn of the Church; Much lefs were thofe Two other amili * Points (condemned by the Church) ever Owned as tench not Her Doftrin . Such Examples therfore (no Church- theDtffi. Dodrin) are to no Purpofe, in this place. ***** 13. Laftly they Tell us. Scotus thought Tranfub- fiantiation to be of no elder Date , then the Council of Lateran , And Bifhop Fisher faith the Doctrin of Pur- gatory was not much heard of in the Primitive Church. 1 would willingly fe in Scotus his own works the Diftin. and Tet , from this Oracle of Truth , fte mujl Learn , and not from particular Do- ttors ( who may err ) Tohat Church Doclrin is . A nd , for this Reafon 1 told you above, of much foul Play in Proteflants, Who ( Becaus they want Antiquity ) take no little Pains to run up and down our Authors, and if Difc.IIlCXlII. Errms mtring the Church. p7 if by chance a Word be found tej? Jta'ily Jfeken , They tri- fle Tehb it, and prefently make chat Popish DocJrin : It is an Err our . Caiho'lick Doflrin is not one Mans Jingular Ops- C*the>Vck nion , But the Vntverfd received Dotlrin of the Church. And ^f^ thus much our Adverfaries tnuft aflert for Themfelves;y^«kr Otherwife ( when one of great Renown amongft them ofm*. Tell's Proteftants Plainly) It is but labour in vain to talk of union with One Another , Vnles They ioyn a- gain to that moral Body , from which they once Sepa- rated , that is to thole , who are in union with the Sea Apoftolick ; The whole Englifli Church muft here Subfcribe , and fay it is Proteftant Dodtrin. Will they Do fo? The Voice therfore of One, is not the voice of All, nor one mans Opinion more mens Opi- nion , Much lefs the sentiment of a Tvhole Church. 14. it is but time loft to follow thefe Men , whilfi: MM They Blindly run on Guefling at the Rife and Origin p^fo* of our Suppofed Errours, and Tell us* All our Corru- ntvttkt, pions came not in en a fudden. They It ere Jfr [i prattijed faugh* in* freely, and then urged as i{eceffarj . Per fins of great ejieem |Jj£^ fir ft held them, and Others foon followed their Example. If one Ttould ta\e the Pains and trace it 9 He might find the Head of thefe Corruptions at lajl <2c. Pittiful flight Talk, un- worthy a Schotter, And vented at random againft the Primitive Church , would even Blemifli that as much as any Other, yea, And Proteftancy more. I wa- ve fuch fluff, Becaufe nothing like a proof follows it. 1 5. My laft Propofition is. Though Proteftant s should con- ™"*rf . Vince (which is impoflible) Tnat the Roman catholick church ttxrefaify hath Swerved from the Primitive Doclrin, yet, They cannot fifFfi*" 0 mtrf) as Probably sbe> , That Tbey have mended the Matter; \Zchunt B b b or yet Profs- }7* Difcl II. CXIII. SeStanes Cavils of **%n* °rfc* C^fi^an &&k Y%&% Ala*n on i,s °M Foundations, as it ThatrZy once flood ?we% It is tnerfore a moft Difcomfortable k*vefet Reformation , which only Tell's us of our being Out tfeZto of the hi6h Rode of Trut" » Vnles the Reformers lead *u*ohh" us (ar,d this with Aflurance) into the unerring way, torn*, from whence we Strayed. If This be not Don, it Their pre- follows ( upon the Suppofition) That both They , and unded Re. We are jet pittifully Out , and T her fore both of us . mu/l look formation .r. r *• . f A . ' , J J ' J ^ moft dtf. *)Ur lme ™trd Guide to Reduce us. eemfort*. 16. Now , that Proteftants are utterly unable to per- hlt* fwade any Rational man , That they have exaclly brought series Chnjlian Faith to its Ancient Purity, is more then Evident: ebZtikt* F°r , befide Their o^n bare Word ( which is worth little ) VrindpU They have nothing like a Principle ( neither scripture, nkerby Councils, nor Fathers ) to Ground a probable Difcours mints' Pertinent to that Purpofe; For None of Tkele ever K»e» froved Tthat a Proteflant T»as . It is True , Tney Pretend VroUhic. ( Though God knows to little Purpofe) That Scriptu- shtngtofay re » Councils , and Fathers are againft our Errours; But we have' it is one Thing , flight ly to tell us T*e bate Erred, and an ^"ohni °^€r fihfy to Prove , that They are Right , and have /r" J, /L# broughr Chriftian Faith, hitherto much Tainted to its tkeytre Ancient Purity . This lafl is the only Difficulty . And Bgfe. j Conjure Them , as They will give an Account of their Religion to Almighty God , without Ter giver fation, or Far-fetch't Difcourfes, Direfllyand Clearly to Solve 2J22? ic • T^e ProP°fitiori t0 ^e Proved , and Pofitively Vprovel ls Thus . Protejlants ( Becaus they will be Reformers) are every "toay Right in Their Faith , from "frhicb Faith , Cat bo- Theyean lids have Swerved . Obferve it. You shall never havt give no di a jjreg Anfaer to chis Difficulty. They may tell you, rlerJtbt Catholic}^ have Erred: They follow Scripture : Their Rule of vifficHhj. Faith Difc.II LC.XIIL Errours entring the Ckrch. j 79 Faith is what was Delivered in the frfi Primitive Ages , and They know that better, then Papifts Do . Tuey Hope all is T»ell with Them &c. And thus They 1 put you of, with Empty Words : But to Prove Solidly that Proposition is im- foffible. Believe it, Thofe Bonzies of Japan had more Plaufible Proofs to defend their Pagods, and Impugn Chriftianity , Then our Adverfaries have to Eviden- ce Protefiancy to be the Primitive Faith, and impugn, the Now-ftanding Catholick Roman Religion. CHAP. XIV. A Word to a Few Stt^fofed and Vn~ f>ro "Where are the Equitable and infallible pfedvn-* ludges appointed* by Almighty God to Decide in fo reafombk ^ighty a UMatter> Are they Proteftants .> No. It is vTotejiZtl iffipoflible. Hear my Realbn. If the church hath Erred Vrofi;s by impojing fnch Vnreafonable Conditions , Proteftants , Itika fliu? Proffls thmfelv*s Foible m sM They fay , may Err More, aliThey ** Yea ? And Jpoil all, milft They go about to fit Things straight* twh. However DifcIIT. CXI V. Themfebes ofSchifm. 5 8 1 However, if They dare Venture-on fo difficile a Work, A»d th«- They are Firft obliged to Prove (And this not by Talk) fi, «& But by undeniable Principles , That juft Jo Far our church fpoU Then Errs , fo Far it requires VnreafonMe Conditions of Commu- ******** won , And next, That They, the Illuminated men J&**' of the World, have don no more, But exaftly Can- Amifi. celled the Errours of our Church, leaving all untouched^ that is , not Veflruflhe to the ends ofchrijlian Society ; For9 we rouft believe, They are the skilful Otiafters that always hit Right, Though confejfedly Fallible . You Aall fooner draw pure Gold out of meer drofs , Then get any Thing like a Tolerable Proof from thefe men , to countenance One of thefe Defperate Aflertions. Alas, They only Word it without Proof, As Arians and Afe- ftorians Do. And here is All you Have from Them. 3. The 3. Propofition. Nothing can he more un- Th* W* reasonable , then that the Society impofing fuch conditions offy™ fy* Communion , should he judge , whether thfe conditions he juft ts to b* and equitable , or no . I Anfvver. And nothing can be Pr°vt Paflion ftill foments ir, Sophiftry -vdvancerh it, but All will ThtMff not Do. M0ft truely, That Talk of unjufi Conditions ™J»dinons is Meerly a mask to Cover an Unjuftifiable Schifm, only* a Pretenfe to Defend what cannot be Defended. Pull Maskofan^Q yifard of, which is don by putting you to tfo uisctifm. Proof of your Talk, and the Propofition Appears in its own Likenes, Ugly, and Deformed. 4. The fourth Propofition . When there it fufficient evidence from Serif cure , Reafon , and Tradition , Tuat fucb things , t»hich are impofedy are unreafonable conditions of ckri- jlian Communion ; The not communicating Tvith that Society, which requires thoje things , cannot incurr the guilt of Schifm* Here wants a UMinor , which I fhall fupply with a con- tradictory Propofition thus . But there is no fuffcient Evi- dence from Scripture, Reafon and Tradition, That/itch Things lmpofed on Protejlants \j the church of Rome , are Vnreafonahle a General Conditions of chriftian communion ; Thrfore Protejlants not ^eafotabie Communicating Kith that Ancient Society , which juftly requi- condithns, res thofe Thing* , cannot but ma\t them Guilty of Schifm. imps, who muft now judge between us ? Or, Finally fay, whether that Major, or, This contrary CMinor carries ftferSr- the greater weight of Truth with it ? The firft is fj^tof^ocily a Suppofed and an unproved Affertion , That fofition, both Brians and all condemned Heretic\s may vent Any Hen againft us . The Minor is Grounded upon the ac- jjj&Zm* knowledged Ancient Purity of our Church , which, Vn- *s probably les clear Evidence Overtrow it , cannot but Defend it felf as ftrongly Againft fuch Calumnies ( upon its own Prepojjfejfed Right and Innocency) As the beft of King- doms doth againft a company of known Rebels. When art to tort Difc.Il I.C.X IV. Tkmfbes c/Sdifm. $ 8j When lherfore Thefe Novellifts Pretend to have fufficient Evidence from Scripture, Reafon , and Tradi-^atSt. tion for Vnreafonable Conditions impofrd, They are Obli- om" to Depend to Particulars , And make the Charge dtjkym Good hydatid Proofs, reducible at laft to Owned, and allow- *h*TM ed of Principles amongft Chriftians ♦ If this be not only' Don, They may Vapour againft our Church, as the lews Do againft chrtfl , But AaJi never Advance fo far, a% t»*kt as to a yytak^ Probability , or make an End of one fole con- f^ntJ°]fr' troverjy. And mark what Doings we have Here. They yy ill bay e no Judge en Earth; clear Principles Fail Them in eyery controversy And yet we muft Hear ( and only in a General way) Of fufficient Eyidence Drawn from Serif turfy Reafon , and Tradition , Againft our Vnreafonable Conditions . If there be fuch Evidence, Shew it , And Jet us fe the Owned Principles, wheron it laftJy Relies. But truely , So much III luck Follow's them, That Their you never find a Controverfy folidly handled , oc *>****f brought ( when They go about to Prove their own Do- j^^'* &rin Pofitively) to any thing like a Proof , or Principle, fethvrol- And Tliey are as unfortunate, when They Oppugn ft*T«tt. Ours. 5. The fifth Propofition. By boiomucb the Societies are greater , frhicb are agreed in not Communicating "With a Church impofing fuch conditions , By hoy? much the po&er of thofevho rule thofe Societies fo agreeing is larger 5 By fo much Suppofithns the more jujiifable is the Reformation of any church from t ho ■""£%* fi Abufesy and the fit ling the bonds of cbriUian Communion Mat are Without them. Here is the Thefts, And a Thing, like an th4S lawful and jujitfiabk not only to redrefithofe Abufes, hut to fettle the church upon in proper and true Foundations . so that the church of Rome's Thnpr** impofng unlawful conditions of communion , is the reafon loiy^e un&tofett. fa nol communicate Kith Her ; and the church of Englands po- no Ground *& t0 govern and *^f care of her felf, is the Reafon of our tohuitden. inning together in the ferYice of God, upon the Principles cf our hat u Reformation* Did you ever Hear men Vapour much, tkefeVnn. Talk much , Suppoiemuch, and Prove juft nothing? dpies? n^- Here you have them. Obferve it. We Hear a Noife of Vnlafrful impofed Conditions , of great abufes in our Church, of the Englilh Churches Power to Redrefs the- fe Abufes, Yet, no man Knows, nor fhall ever know by any folid Proof, what thefe conditions and Abufes are\ were the- Much lefs , That a few Proteftants have power to Re- drefs them , were there any fuch in the Church, wher- of more Hereafter. 6. At prefent , to Anfwer the Difficulty , I will fay two Things. Thefirft. If the Power, Number, or Largenes of thefe pretended Reformers juftify Their Reformation , it's more then evident , That a Far greater PoKer , Number , and Largenes of tbofe nho Oppofe it , makes it Vnjujfifiable . Now not only Catholicks , But all the Chriftians in the World ( Altogether more Powerfull, Larger, and Learneder then a kw Proteftants) Stifly Oppofe this late Reformation , as an Heretical and ^bifmatkal Noyelty. Therfore, that little J uftification , which their own Power and Largenes Gain's to Proteftancy, is not only much weakened, But made Null, by a greater Po^er, that Kithftands it. I fay 2. This Proportion is utterly Fals , and Becaus Fals , cannot be re Abufes in the Church, "Brot cfl ants have not "Principles toredrefs them. More Op- pofe thefe Sectaries Reforma- tion, then epprovtit. ■Difc.III.CXIV, 7%emfehes*fSchifm. 385 be Proved : Vi%. That , by ho* much Societies are greater, * »"" and their Po^er larger in Agreeing , not to Communicate Win ^ ^m an Ancient Church , wherin They were Baptised ; Bjfo much much Se. more Iuflifable, is then Pretented Reformation. For, the jjj£jjj Society of Aruns > which Agreed in not Communica- mmM«ni ting with the Church of Rome , was more Numerous, greater, by Greater, and Powerful then ever Ptoteftants were in ^J"^ \f fcngland ; They had their Emperours, Their Bifiiops, schifmh Their Councils, Their Churches, and a World oi lupfiab^ Followers . Say therfore, I Befeech you , did their , Number, Power, or Grcatnes Iuftify either their He- Js£j£ refy or Schifm? Or, doth the greater Power , and *^Arians, Number , of Agreeing Rebels in a Kingdom againft Their lawful Sovereign , Juftify that Treafon ? You Af™*': will Say . The i^rms Erred , But Proteftants hit h^*JZn. right on the Roman Abufes, and this makes their Re- wutK formation Iuftifiable . Meer Proofles, empty Words; For, do you not fe ( and evidently ) That all you Speak xaikrf to this fenfe , is a wretched Suppofition , and a pure s#«*r*#*. Begging of the Queftion? And Becaus it is fo, can either We , or any third Indifferent Judge Believe you fooner, fpeaking in your own Caufe, then credit an Arian that will iay the very fame For his Herefy? O, But ConfeiTedly both Catholicks and Proteftants ac- knowledge the Avians to be Hereticks. And as Con- feiTedly both Catholicks and Avians , yes , And all other Se&anes Say alfo , you are Hereticks . What Ther- fore get you by this Reply > Will you Tell us nexty That you are Better at your Proofs againft us, then the yjkrians are ? The Arians laugh at you , And fay, with Truth, This very Ajjertion is Proofles. Belie- ve it. Though the Arguments of Arians againft our C c c Ancient 386 Difc. II I.C XIV. proteftants cannot clear The Argu- Ancient Church , wherof they were once Members , Aiitns «r*are both Deficient and Strengthles; yet They go far moredtfficU deeper into Difficulties , yyhich bok^ more manly Out , then le Th*n ever yyiat fjl{[jmo any pr0fe(lant hath Propofcd a which they Rejeff . ^^ Neither Ca- Uh inter- tholicks nor any, can folve them Otherwife (then on- frttathn of\y Negatively ) That is by fhewing they do not Con- scrywe, vjncej But to Infringe their Force Bofitively, Or, To TheKea/cn Evidence them fals, Abftra&ing from Tradition and ^^"^the Authority of the Church ( which is more the Proof anhardll of Catholick Do&rin, then a Dired Solution to diffi- themhofi of culties ) is Impoffible. Now, on the Other fide , V^ft^i' Proteftants can Propofe no Difficulty Againft us for wdVoJtl Proteftancy; But we will firft Shew it Negatively Vn- wijVrote. concluding, And next by Pofitive Proofs break in pieces i"menZrAQ Seeming Force of it. For example. They solved. Argue Difc.JII.CXIV. ThemfebesofSdifm. %%7 Argue againft the Real Prefence : A body cannot be in two places at Once . We Show firft Negatively , that am^e their Argument concludes not , and then Introduce nmof. Fofitiye Proofs , partly drawn from Gods Omnipotency , partly from other Undeniable Grounds , Which both weaken and Dead the Argument. And thus we Pro- ceed with them in Other Controverfies , Concerning the Popes Supremacy , Praying to Saints , Purgatory &c. 7. I have Complained all along , of our Adverfaries Averting much, and Proving Nothing , You will yet fe more of this Proceeding infome, who Think They ftrongly Vindicate the Church of England from the Guilt of Schifm. CHAP. XV. More of Thtfe Authors Cottfufed Do- firm, is Refuted. I. 1 N a Chapter Intituled : Protejlants not Guilty ofMr.stil-] I Scbijm. The Catholick Opponent Argues, jf^fleet/ the Roman Church Tete corrupted in Doffrin, it Follows, that for many Ages before Lutber , there Was not one yifible and Orthodox Church throughout tbe Ttbole World . And confe- quently , during that Time , Every good Chrijlian Tvas ohliged in feme point or other to Contradicl the DoSlrin , and Dejert the communion of all Vifille churches in the World . Which iftlbarti: I fay cannot but Imply a Leaving of , And alfo a ftrong *&*Gh*m Oppofuion Againft the church Catholic^ , what ever this %££&& CCCl Catho- Do8ri»,th* 3^8 Difc.UI.CXV. Of a late Authors whole ca. Catbolick^cburcb be ; For, this Catholick Society is not ctmch a Chimasra in the Ayr, Bat is Eflentially Conilituted wcmdft of either Pure , or Particular tainted churches . Now our corrupted, Adverfaries fay , All particular Churches throughout the whole World, were tainted; Ergo, what ever is meant by the Catholick Church, was alfo corrupt and Tupmthe Tainted. LuYet more. I am Obliged to Defert all suppojiiion Corrupted churches, Therfore I am obliged to Abandon the mm are Communion of the church catholic!^. After much Talk and °de% /L QuibHng about the Meaning of one yifibU church %znc\ the Comma- Errours of particular Churches , whether Several, or c°ni?rht ^e ^ame *n Part*cu'ar Societies of Chriftians , &c.The- chmeb. & men Grant , That there Tvas not One church , of any Di< tie jlintl Communion fi om others, free from Errours, The Arians, Grafc]l m C'le Nejlorians , the Eutjchians , the Greeks , the Ahjffws, clunh" Hujjtts, And finally Catholicks Had Erred. Therfo- n>a$free re all the Churches in the World , confequently the fromEr- Catholick Church, had erred before Luther: But it is Ne- TJoey/kytaB ceffary to Separate from the Communion of all Erring churches, Churches Therfore, 'Tts as T^eceffary to Separate from the Communion of M«nd the hu catboltck chunk. Ittsnecef- ^ . N . r T farytofi- 2. To This Argument They Anfwer. There can paratefrom he no Separation from the fthole churchy But in fuch Things, "churl fas yyberm the Vnity of the whole church lyes &c. Now, thtrforeal when men Separate from the Errours of all particular chur- necejptry to ches , They do not Separate from the whole , Becaus thofi iromtL things, which one Separates from thofe particular churches whole Ca. for, are not fuch as make them, all put together, to he the tholick whole, or catholtck^ church ♦ For a further Explanation wZ'L Tnt7 tel1 us : Two Things may be Confidered in all tiamsRe- particular Churches; One, that Belongs to them as a &• Church9 The other, that belongs to them as a particu- lar s DifclELGXV. Co>fufedun- vvholc church, But in fuch Things wherin the Vnity op™***** the 7* hole Church lyes, They ftould Declare Exprefly , and Particularly , wherin that Vnity of the >hok Church Conjijls: But to leave us in Darknes Concerning no man knows Tty'fieak -tohat Ligaments, and Pretended Vnity of a Strange Tma- c™f"My gtned catholic}^ church , without Saying How far thefe l£*J!m* Ligaments reach , or , Wherin trecifety This exad Vnity wdofas lyes , is only to Turn U4 of Wh Tai\s and Teach jufi no- *y*™wn thing. If T hey Anfwer : The Vnity of this Doflrin *'** is found in the Fundamentals of Faith, we are yet as no man far to feek as Before; For, who Knows what thefe MW/W^ «*> Frotefiants will make Fundamental , and Vnfunda- xhsyjm mental Dodrin > They may fay one thing to day is make Fun. Fundamental , and change it to morrow. However, damo1al» Admit that They Declare Themfelves , and Tell us Punctually, fo much and no More is the Fundamental kn^i{. and Necefjary DocJrin of the Cathohck Church, it will be on- could it ly their Own Suppofed , and Vnproved AfTertion , and ^uidoniy Occafion anew as hot a Difpute , as Any other Con-^'J C C C 3 trOVerfy vU Fancy' tfo DifcIH.C.XV. Of a late Authors troverfy between us. So Vn fortunate are Thefe Men in every Thing they Say (and it cannot beotherwife) for wanting Ground to Build on, and a Church to regulate Their Faith, Whatever They Vent againft our Catholick Doftrin , muft of Neceflity be as Much Their own Stippefed and ynproved Fancy , As if an Adrian Difputed Againft us. j 4. Obferve Yec, How They Still run on with the- fe unproved Suppofitions . when men, Say They, feparate Themfebesfrom the Errours of all Particular churches t rrotefiants They do not Separate from the Tvhole &c. Blelfed are fuch separated Men, But who are They for Gods Hike ? Prote- mi voorly ftams p Yes . And I mud take their Word for it, that they \vc have no other proof. Pray you Tell me , When run**>*y that firft Proteftant Gyant , Martin Luther , flood up, "TalT anc* Separated from all the Societies of Chriftians UftaUthe Throughout the whole World , from catholick^, from ■Erroursbe. Ariani, Abyjfns , Gracians &c. Who Affured him ( And btndthem. ^QXQ we UY^e for a satisfa&ory Principle ) or, Who VvkoAf- can yet Alture our Proteftants , That both He and fur's them They are not More Plunged into Grofs Errours , by jo muchr this wilful Divorce, Then if They had remained, as 7hty'*remi once They were, Honeft Catholicks f Can I, in moredeefiy Reafon , Suppofe That All , and every One of thefe %n Errour Societies that Quitted Rome were Corrupted in Do- /Jn'wiifui &tin * And without fo much as a feeming Probability, station? Hold Luther and his Followers, the only Pure and Vn- tainted chrifiians of the World ? Thefe are Paradoxes, and vaft improbabilities; For if All Thefe Erred, when They left the Roman Catholick Church (As evidently They did ) ^hat God , or Angel, ^oas it , That Directed Pro- teftantt to hit right every tyay , and to Avoid all Errour > Thefe Difc.IILC.XV. ConfiifeJ Dcdrini 391 Thefe Hereticks , when They Separated, were Falli- ble men, and actually Erred; our Proteftants are as Fallible , and may have don wors . Thefe - , « followed their own fell: Judgement in making separation that Divorce, Yet Milled of Truth; Proteftants can ParaUe!le{i only Say lb much , And therfore very likely may have Xl'r*' Milled more. How then fhall we know ( and by a Hereticks. Satisfactory Proof) That this rare Reformation, Tphich Op- *™eft*nn pofed all Religions , is Vntainted, and Orthodox} i'lj telljj^^ you. Proteftants (after an Infamy caft on all the worded Churches in the world ) Say fo , And what They hynJth'a£ ( Though Tvhole Armies of Christians , more learned and nume- whether r 0 us Stand again jl them) mujl be thought True. Is not Proteftants this a Jolly Proof ? In a word, Here is my Dilern- d*reafert ma. Either They muft AfTert , that Their whole Pro- reformed* teftant Do&rin now Eftabliflied, is without Blemish? Pure, iyoteji*ncy and Orthodoxy or, yet Hath its hrrours : if this laft, ^oRMht it needs another Reformation : If they make it fo Pure notye m™ that it cannot be ftfade better , Thy only fay "without proof de better? Tvhat All the Condemned Hereticks in chnflendom Affert for l^iy Themfelves , and Moreover will have Chriflians Believe urge for"* The greateft Paradox ever Heard of, viz. That They Principles Only had the good Lucl^to hit Right, whilft All Foregoing *$fi£it\ Se&aries, who Abandoned the Roman Church, Were, formerly and, yet Are tainted with grofs Corruptions. The & fated the Reafon why both They , and All other Hereticks that c^ick left the Mother-Church, are in Errour , is drawn from church er- the ImpoiTibility of doing the Work They have gon re^pon about : For , it is not in mans power to change or Re- "„%„/// form Religion. No. Only one High Priefi ( God jhnts e*1 and man J Once made a change , who was Holy , Innocent, emPte^ Vnde fled, Separated from [inner s 9 and made Higher then the^™^"' Heaycns. renn can ma- j 9Z Difc J II. C.XV. Of a late Mthors one only Heavens . Men Therfore wicked, as Luther was , Guil- T/dvlZr ly °^igh Crimes, Born and Brought up in fin , and nKefirm n°w buried in Contempt , Are unfit Inttruments for Religion, fuch a work : They may marr Religion , but to mend it , is Impoffible. 5. Again. That Diftin&ion( made Above) between the Common Ligaments of a Church , and particular Er- rors in all churches, Which yet do not VncnurchThem, is Frivolous , Fnproved , and niofl Fals . For, firft the- re neither are, nor can be any Common Tyes , or Grounds of Vnion amongfl: all Chriftians now in Being, which confidered by an Abftrad: Notion , fufliciently Conftitute the Hecejjary DoBrin of the True Catholick •DoBrm Church. My Reafon is : No Do&rin Common common to ^rtam % Nejlorians , Catholicks, and Protejlants , or fitMsiswt Vniverfally held by all Chriftians, can be more Proved sufficient to to be faving Faith enough for Chriftians, Then if we sanation, Qra('is Afiert , That a belief in one God only , common t$ Turks , Wires and chriftians , is full Faith enough for us all ♦ Scripture, as I have largely proved in a foregoing Chap- ter, Requires yet more Explicit Faith of many Particu- TbeTrue lars . z. It is utterly Fals, That the True Catholic^ Cch°llhU Churcb may be found amongjl all Particular Erring churches. not found The Primitive Chriftians were a Body apart , and as nmongfl Diftinci from the Arians in thofe Days , as We are now ThtaJ^t *l0m Protectants. And therfore no Doftrin Common to nFakhj that church and Arians , Teas ever Thought fujficient Catholick^ . Dotrtrtn* Otherwife , Arius might have Told the 2\£i. Arius ce/tf Fathers : (yes, And Thefe ftiould have Aflented would not to him ) You unjuftly Condemn me, For Admit, That h*Vm*tw% * ^ave wy Part*cular Errours , you may have Yours Alfo, 7fF«ith. We are all yet of One Church, and Need not to break of DifcjrT.C.XV7. Confufed DoElrin. ?$>} of any Catholick Unity , Becaus, though both you , and 1, err, We may yet retain the EiTence of a Ca- tholick Churck. Heretiaks hitherto Never Plead- ed thus for thek Caufe , But as Pertinucioufly Deiend- ed their Private Opinions, as They did the Com- H™}*\ mon Dcctrin of all Chriftians. Only our Prote- defend ftarts , now Prefled with Vnanfwerable Arguments, theirpani- concerning the plain Naming of a Catholic k Church befo- wJ2*tAi re Luther ( like men Jiving by fluffing) Seek out a common wofuJ Subterfuge, and make all Erring Churches part- Dotirmof ly good , and Catholick , in the Common Ligaments of ^J**' Chriftianity • And partly Naught and Heretical, in Their particular Errours, Wheras the Spoufe of chrift , is but One Immaculate moral Body, and can be no More Tainted with Errour, then the pure Primitive Church vwas; No, nor more Corrupted then the whole bible new** now is , and yet remain Purely Gods Word. 3. Grant r^W (which is the greateft Chimxra Imaginable ) That the ^^T -Common Ligaments and Grounds of Catholick Faith, are to be found amongfl all the erring Societies of Chriftians , Proteftants have yet an endles Task in hand , Which is to Perfwade All men Oppofit to them , That They , by their Difctrning S^nt , Have juft *»"#*«** hit the nail on the Head , Andta^cnfo much to ThmfiL ^Z/^' *ves as u Purely Catholick Doclrin , without Mixture of 1 hey have Errour with it. Believe me, it will be hard to pro- **k<»fi ve fo much done 5 And if They Prove it not by rnde- f^nt0°' mable Principles , Farwell Proteftants fay I : For They tbemfihu may be more in Errour by Their late Reformation ", *"'/*"'* Then allthofe Erring Churches together, Which They c*thcli{k* have gon about to Reform. 6. In another Chapter Intituled the Reformation of the D d d church 1 394 DifcIILCXV. OfdlateJuthors Chinch of England jupfied . Thefe very men (after they had made the Catholick Church like a Common feld layd open to all thofe Inhabitants ( ^ho o^on the Funda- mentals of chrijlian Faith) Tell m , 7 hat the Roman church flands Guilt j of the violation of Public^ Right , and Aid's ^Toofnor manl P*ri?c#l** DocJrins , mmj Superfitious PraElifes Tthich inference have no Foundation in Scripture , or Con/ent of the Primitive Go0*' Church ,• Therfore this Roman church is Separated from the Communion of the Catholick church , And jo is become Schif- matical. But their Church of England hath hit Right , and is only fo far Separated from Rome, as Rome hath Devided Her felf from the Belief of the Vniverfal Church . What have we here f A Cluftar of meer ^ fuperfluous Words J I am Aftoniftied to Se men run on, with fuch proofles Generalities . However , We ~wili have Patience, and friendly Ask : Ho^ far is that large field of the Catholick church to he extended*. Point Not one of out the Limits of it > Name tbofe Chriflians and Them on- tkuUrTZn h* ^o Inhabit* that large feld > What are thofe Fundamen- be proved tals of Faith ? Ho& many are there of Them, nimy nine, or by certain a Hundred > Specify, Ttitb a Proof at the end of it (hut rwcip es. prQQjs aye no^ mt ep faSyon -j^rf vroteftants ) Thofi parti- cular Fals DocJrins of the Roman church fo contrary to scri- pture. Say once Plainly , Tphat that Catholick church is, From Tvhtch Rome Separated, and fimething is Don ? But abo- ve ally make good your ^ild Ajjertion , That jufl Jo far you are Devided from Rome, ( not one Inch more or lefs ) as Rome is Separated from the VniVerfal Catholick church . To do thus , juftice Requir's an exaft Proof of thefe three Thnein- Things. Firft , That you particularly Shew us, portions to what, or hoTv much the Precife Dotlrin of that imagined ca- keprovid. tjwijc^ Qiurci js f yfab dwell' $ in jour Fancy . 2. Wherin the Difc.III.CXV. Confufedfjotlrbi. 397 the Roman church bath swerved from that true DoFlrin . 3. And this Will cofl you fome pains , make good upon any Re* ceiled cbriflian Principle, That you are right in jour Faith , And hate juft Divided your [elves fo far from the Roman church, as this is from Another churchy more Vniverfal and Catholic^ Could thefe men live to Matiufalems Age, They would never come neer to the likelyhood of a rational Proof for any one of thefe Particulars. / fay of a Proof, For, I would have Them know, That to talk at random, and vent their own fancies as They do here, will weigh but little, when Reafon comes to Ballance all with a clofe Arguing in good Form. 7. When again They are Told in the fame Chapter, That the Separation of Proteftants was not only from the Church of Rome , But, as cahin Confeffeth, from the whole cbriflian World* "which necefjarily Implyes a Sepa- ration from the True catholich^Church. They Anfwer. We have not fe par ate d from the wfalechrijlian World in anything, wherin the whole Cbriflian World is Agreed* Is this fo great No Here. a matter to be Praifed for? Nor to Separate from what '«■*&?*• men cannot Separate, if they Own chrijl, and Deferve ™^w- the name of Chriftians ? Mark well , I befeech you ,/aiDoarm Neither the Arians , nor Neflorians , nor Donanjts , Nor bt&v** h any other condemned Hereticks Separated from any Jj^# '" Thing, wherin the whole Chriftian World Agreed in; For They Believed in Chrijl a Saviour and Redeemer , and Thus much all Chriftians Hold : But is This Faith enough to fave us without Believing more ? Pray you Anfwer.. Again . Thefe Hereticks Added fomething tokAtpt to that General owned Belief of All, And this got them T^J^ the name of Separatifls , or Hereticks ,not Becausthey 4**|ty Deferted the Common Do&rin of the whole Chriftian <*#«"- Pdd* World, **'• $Xi°n** Catbolick Church within their own Bounds of Africa ; Yet, by Their good leave, Thefe yery Donattfts DiJJented in nothing that v>as held all oyer Common chrifltan Doclrin ; For, they Acknowledged the fame chrifl as we Dot tMsDo**' yet were Hereticks Vpon the Account of their particu- schifml- ^ajr Doftrin > Though They dallied with nothing held ticks m Vniverfally, You will fay, But They did dash; For Ktor" wichout a]1 Proof They Confined the Church to one place Only, contra. And you, my good Friends, without all Likelyhood of Proof ', make the church a migh- ty Mde One; You give it Arms which embrace all called . Chriftians, Though Her etic\s in their particular Tenents. Did therfore the particular Do&rin of the Donatifls (confining The vma- the Church to one place) VnchurchThem;BeIieveit,your *2J Particular Do&rin in making it too Large,will Vnchurch tick fir you alfo. I call both thefe Doftrins Particular, and He- makingthe retical. For, as neyer men before the Donatijls, made the Catho- ^bHah-t lick Church Co llrait as They did, fo neyer Chnflians before thefe too Jrratt , J J i ■ •» i i a • • n r and fo are later Protejiants , made it Jo large as to hold in it all we Here- Proteftants tckis in the World . I fay exprefly : This Doftrin of the %»wd? Donatifls' vrzs only their particular Errwr, and not Then Vniver- Difciri.GXV. ConfufedVotlrbu 597 Vniverfal, or, Common to all Chriftians; For, Their tery Denying the church to be Spread the h-hole Tborld oyer, ma- de that Doclrin not Fnuniyerfal , or, not Held by All . And thus much Proteftantsmuft Say; For, whilft The) (or any other Se&aries ) Maintain Tenents particular to themfelves (for example two Sacraments only) A Do- ^ firm (o limitated , cannot be called Vniverfal . Out of vrmapUs what is hitherto Said, we muft conclude : If no Do&rin rfPmt- can make a man an Heretick, but the Denial of That , fiJ^^nd T»bich the Vthvle chrijlian World Oms , The Brians , and Ne- xeporUm Jlorians were not Hereticks. **** not 8. Thefe Novellifts go on Trifling in a moft ferious Hmticks- Matter , And firft Tell us. Though a man Differ's Af"™i°"* from all other in Accidents , for Example in Feature , Everyone yet he leases not of to be EjfentiaUy a mart; Therfore, though knows what Protejlants Differ from all other Chriftians in Doffrin Acciden- ** effentt(& tal,ory wherin thefe Diffenting Socieries Difagreefrom B**pr#«- one another , Yet, as long as They ftick to the Com-M^»^ inon o^ned Faith of all Chriftians, fo long they areSa- mt>i!0^ fe, and Members of the Church Catholick. A mife- Z7misEf table Put of. It Seem's , a very Vnherfal Dottrin fuf- [mndto fifeth Proteftants to be good Catbolukj . All we Defire, chri(ian i is, That they will exadlly fay , How much Precifely CoLmuX of this Doftrin will Serve the turn (as both JNeceffaryand itmwiy Sufficient ) to make us all Catholicks ? Or , whether Accide»tal. the Artam , Nestorians or Dtnatifts Had enough of it , to be goodcathohcks> If res. They were both Good Ca- tholicks and Hereticks at once i catholicks , upon the 0^^ Account of Common Chriftian Dodrin owned by them; Vroien*m and Heretic\s , for their particular Erroneous Tenents *slmboln€t And it's more then probable , that Proteftants are like Them : Secundum quid , Catholicks; Becaufe of Their D d d 3 Common 398 DifcJIL CXV. Of a late Jmhors tommon VoBrin\ But, Siwpliciter, H ere ticks , by Rea- fon of Their late introduced Novelties. 9. They tell us Again ; The communion of the church Catholic^, is not to he meafured by the particular Opinions ei- ther of All, or any particular church, But hy fitch things, Which are the proper Foundations of the Catholick^ church; For there can he no Separation from the true Catholick church , hut in juch things , ytberin it is Catholickj And it is not ca- tholich^in any thing , But in tohat Properly relates to its Being, and conjlitution . Let the World Iudge, whether *<**'«* this be notmeer Confufed Talk? For the only Dif- "rtjDtffi- ficulty in this Matter is , to know of thefe new Do- ra/^, dors, How much Precife Doftrin is Necejjary and Suffi- "mnJh* c*em t0 be believed , How much of it Conftitut's The llicathn, Being and Foundation of the catholic^ Church , And what is Accidental, or Vnneceffary > You fe They wave This, And content Themfelves with relling us of no man knows what Being , of no man knows what Founda* tion of a Church, without Defcending to Particulars, or Proving what thefe Bffentials are ; Or, Finally who Thole Chnftians were, that were Right in the Effen- tials of Faith before Luther, or , had the Being of a Trotefiants Church amongfl them . They Proceed here , as if ToUartT a Rafter fliouki tell a young Beginner with Grammer: ihMDo- You mull karn your Rules well, and underftandthem &t in which perfectly ; But you fhall have neither Book, nor Precepts "^from any, wherby to Learn them . I Profefs before chwch, Almighty God ( and I think Thoufands not only Ca- imd*Uov, tholicks, But others, are of my opinion) I am yet M»1ernor as whofy Ignorant of what Thefe Newer Prvteftants ■Rule* to will make the Bffentials of Faith, the Neceffary and fujfi- Uamithj,tCim f0mdations and Being of a Church, as ever Boy was Difc.III.GXV. Confufed HoStriii. 399 was of Grammer Rules , when he firft went to School* i may perhaps Guefs better at their DocSrin , And my Thought is : They Hold All the Hereticks in the T^*j"g world , whether Avians or Others , to be good Catho- sbmaffr lick Chriftians,* Yet, dare not Publifli fo much in tbeyExpu* Writing. And this is the true Reafon why they^'^"' Schulk in Generalities , And hide Themfelves under -^ thefe univerfal Vnexflicated Terms of the Effentials of Faith , of the Being of a church , the Foundations of it &c . Well, I will fay it once more . If the Do- drin common to all Chriftians, be the Ejjential, 7{ecefNoHere' fary , and Sufficient DoSlrin of the Church tritely Catldick^J™? it Follows evidently, That no Heretick was ever yet Doftrm Unchurched by His particular Herefy. But, ^aTZs 10. Woe be to Catholicks , what. ever becomes ofdemu! Others , They muft be Unchurched. For , Thefe men saiH*iioa. Aflert ( and very wifely , as they Think ) Although nothing Separates a Church properly from the Catholick, But what is contrary to the Being of it; yet a Church (And this is the Roman ) may Separate Her [elf from the Commu- nion of the Catholic^ Society , By taking upon Her , to mafy fuch things Neceffary Conditions of Communion , which never Were the conditions of communion of the Catholic^ church. Obferve firft. A Suppofition for a Proof, of ft ran- ge impofed Conditions. Obferve 2. A Suppofition MterSup. for a Proof, of no man knows what Catholic\ Church, t°f"hm Wider and larger, then the Roman. But above p*w/iw«A all , Se ft aria, 11. Obferve 3. Their unlearned Difcours. The Roman Church (fay They ) Draws the Bounds of Catholic k Commu- nion Within Her /elf, and Jo Viyides from the true catholick^ Church. 400 Difc.ITT.CXV. Of a late Authors They cMn- church. I Ask, From what true Catholick Church did not mme fa Divide Her felft Speak out, And name that church,D& \'x°nho fign it Plainly, which was A&ually Orthodox, and in cbunh, Being when Luther Apoftated , and fomething is faid to fromwhhh the Purpofe. If you fail to Shew us that Imagined clurcih** Church, from Tohicb you Suppofe the Roman separated , AH Seamed, you Aflert is a meer Calumny. We fay, and can Ju- ftify it, There was no fuch True Church in the whole World to Separate from, Vnles Arians, Nejlorians , Eutycbians, Gracians&c. constituted that great Imagined moral Bo- dy. But Thefe , as is Evident, ( once Catholicks ) Se- parated from the Roman Church, not She from them; Therfore this fuppofed Separation, is only an unproved Fancy. Cfantt ix. Yet more • And this is to Show you the (Iran- »b*t se- ge weaknes of our Adverfaries whole Difcours . Let Bariel h Msfuppofe, this falfity of a true catholich^churcb in Lu- wtfitkinfthM Days much wider Then the Roman ; withal, that is Proved, the Roman was only a corrupted Fart of that more Ample Church. Believe it , Thefe men are yet far enough from Proving their Intent: For Admit, upon the Suppofition, That the Church of Rome Draws the bounds of Catholick Communion within Herfelf, and Confin's all Truth within Her efon Community : This is only Her o^n particular Opinion, "tobich Drafts no more , VroteHmts ConfneS n0 more » Then Protefiants do noiv. For , do fret^d as not They Profefs , that the Doftrin of Omfl is mo- much , to re Purely > and lefs Erroneoujly taught in England at Cbnfts thivDay, Then in any other Society of chriftians , That verities DifTent's from Them > Yes . Here then is as much Thfmby Dra*'wl of Truth to Themfelves, and this Drawing con- clZuch ~~ "" fequently Difc 1 1 U.X V. Confufed »f" that the Goffel of chrift is Preached mojl purely and without zZeyDivi- Err our , among ft a few English Proteftants . Meer Opi- deThcm- nions Therfore of particular Churches (as long as the Jelv!sfrom General Do&rin of all Chriftians Stand's unihaken ) ^X**" Cannot, in thefe mens Principles , Vnchurch any church* Chriftian Society; or, if They can, both They (I mean our Proteftants) And all other Sectaries are Vn- churched, Becaus all of them Believe more, then the General Effentials of Paith Exaft of any Chriftian. 15. It may be Anfwered . Though they believe more , Yea , And particularly hold , That chnjls Do- ftrin is more purely Taught and believed in England, Then in other places, Yet this is not a Necejfary Condi- tion of Communion 'With them. No? Thope it is a Tohav^- Neceflary condition of communion with Proteftants , ^™m"'h Though Vnneceffary for Communion with that other pro«/i«»ts Fancied Vniverfal Church , and the General Do&rin **» without Therof. The Reafon is. No man can be more a Pro- Do»bt>ne- n 1 7 • n • 1 1 s> t cejjary to tejtant , unles He Believe All particular oWnea Articles of lhat Believe fi. Religion as Pure, and Orthodox , Then a good Papijl9 and^ not methmg of Believe frbat that church particularly Teacheth. *£"*"*'" 14. Now, Becaus we are got thus far into a Matter, .\ wherin I Hold our Adverfaries much Overfeen; I would gladly have a clear Anfwer to this one Queflion, vi^, A^5efl^ Whether (after a due Propofal) it be abfolutely Ne- nT^n" cefiary to Saluation to Communicate with Proteftants ,{wtredby That is , Firmly to Believe any one Article of our Trote- Se^anes- jlants Reformed Faith, 45 it is ?roteflancy> For example: Tuo Sacraments only , no Real Pre 'fence , no Sacrifice , or , what els you will? If they Anfwer , Yes. Then Eee I Infer: ton dnot 4oi Dlfc.lILCXV. OfalateJuthors I Infer : The Belief of that Do#rin Vniverfal and common* o Common to iill Chriftians, is not Enough to Salua- dlbenot tion ; For noTt> They require more , Vi^, a Belief of fame fuffiaem, Doflrtn peculiar to Protejiancy , as it ts reformed. Con- oferote* trarywife, if they Grant, nothing within the Bounds flamy mufi of pure Protrftancy to be a Do&rin oifuch abfolutcNe- be owned ceptty {0 saluation , it follows Evidently : Though a ■^ Proteftant, after a perfect knowledge had of bis Religion, a* jf Notbtng Reformed, doth both Abjure, and Anathematize that par ticu- cfVrote. lar BoElrin , And Beliefs only with a General faith, Com- vaunted mon t0 Brians an^ 4M 6ther Hereticks , He may yet be efasNe- faved, Becaus the Belief of no one Article Within the Compafi "JP*ry> one 0f protejiancy , Avail's him one whit to Saluation . It fo: y^*" Tell me, I beftech you, what a Religion have we Religion, Her£ f Shall we fay, That the Authors and Profejjors of undyetbe protejiancy have made a ftiameful Buftle to bring in a Sjfew Novelty , which muji he called the true Reformed Religion , And now Hear them Teach , That is Teaches nothing T^ecelTary f,lh?mre" to Saluation* Grant thus much , and Throw Prote- Abomvro- itancy out of the World, Men may be faved without teftamy, it. ttoJhinf J5- Some> Perhaps, will Reply. Proteftants, at necefaryto leaft , judge , That amongjl the many Religions 2 which Sabatim. now fvarm in the World , Their reformed Noyelty is one of the bejl, and the Secureft Way to Heaven. Alas, We *^p™' enquire not what They, Meer fallible Men , Judge tejiana ( Every Heretick fpeaks favorably in his own Caufe ) i*dge,but Buc we go further, and Ask into what Undoubted Prin- fi?TLofc¥e t,liat Judgement is finally Refilved, or , Whether of that Thefe men , withall the Judgement and Learning iHdgemmt. They have, are able, Solidly , and Rationally to Prove, that Their particular Articles of Protejiancy rejl firmly , and Rely DifcIIL CXV. Co? fifed all Chrijlians OTvn.de$into The Reafon is clear : Becaus, the Teftimony , the D'v'"' Re* Authority of the lame God and the fame Eternal Vcri- J^^J ty (as now we muft Suppofe) Warrant's as well the nvejfary Cne , as the Other. Again . If They fay ( And They t0 Uh*- muft fay it J God hath not revealed in the whole Bible one Article of Proteftancy , and therfore the Be- lief of not one reformed Article is Neceffary to Salua- tion 5 It follows, That this Religion, Thus Separated V™***'*' from the true center of Divine Faith (Gods infallible Re- ^ pan of velation ) is no Chrijlian Religion at all, But jlands tottering ckriftkm on Fancy , and fancy only; Witch is a great Ferity. Religion. 16. Occafionally , i here Anfwer to a Trivial Obje- ction of others, that much Extol the clemency of Pro- teftants , who ( like Papifts ) do not Excommunicate ail that believe not as They Believe . Good Reafon ( fay 1 ; ) For why fliould they Excommunicate any, for not Believing a Religion , which is built on Fan- cy ? Could they judge in Confcience , or Affure us, That, what they hold , as Sectaries, were Revealed by God, Neceffary to Saluation, or noorth Believing, They Jj££f£ fliould fo far ftand for Gods Caufe , and fet fo great a s*?*w« Value on it, as to Induce all, even by fpiritual Me-/"Pww* naces ( it is a Sweeter way Then to Deprive Men^*^1 of their Lives and Fortunes ) to embrace Their Novel- ties. But Alas, The real Guilt ofSchifm, which lyes like lead at their Harts , makes them moft frigid in Advancing a Religion , laid hold on by meet chan- Eeei ce, 40 4 Difc.I II.GX V.Ofa late Autbovs Confufd TtoSlritu ce , and a mod: unfortunate CafualTty. Almighty God foften thefe concealed Harts by forrowful Repen- tance ? and Forgive all Sectaries Their double great fin, both of S chifm and Herefy. THE 4o? THE FOVRTH D1SCOVRS THE CHVRCHES EVIDENCE. OF THE IMPROBABILITY OF PROTESTANT RELIGION. THE FIRST CHAPTER. Chrifis Church is V rowed to be no Other, But the Roman Cat ho lick. Sectaries are Convinced. E have often made a juft Exception againfl Sectaries in the fore-going Di- . fcourfes, And you Shall have it here ceptfnU' Again in plain Language . Proteflams, a^w/i _ as They Prove not their olvn Religion cfSe^rt" Proteftancy , fo , They never Impugn the Roman CatlolicbJ^" ' £"£ Faith by Rational Arguments % at laft reducible to Vndmbu *d Principles. Catholicks Contrary wife , Make good Eee 3 Their 406 Difc.IV.C.I. Chri/ls Church proved Their Churches Doelrin by undeniable Principles , And , hy nia- nifejl Proofs Evidence the 2{ulhty of Protefiants Faith. Though both thefe Aflertions are already Demonftra- ted in the precedent Treatife , Yet, Becaus of the Weightines of the Matter, it will be neceffary to Epi- tomize fome Points , largely Declared above , And bring much to a Clearer view , and a more Compen- dious Form. x. To do this we may Suppofe. If True Reli- towl. S'on be in the World, the wife Providence of God iigionwitb hath made it fo Manifefl to Reafon by force of Ratio- inumimto na[ Motives, That All may know it'; For certainly hkmln!m God never eftabliiKed Religion amongft Chriftians to hide it with Intention to Hide it from Them , or to put it out fromiu. Qf l}icjr Sight, if men WtU follow Reafon. Proofs ther- f roofs £ore for jt ^ can no moYe pai^ ^hen Religion it felf \ Vnles | \t c*nnot' an Infinite Goodnes ( which is impoffible) obliges us fati. Vnder pain of Damnation to Embrace a Religion, which no man, after a diligent Search made by all the reafon He hath , can find out. KcrdyCa- 3. Vpon this Principle let me tell our Proteftants, viisend'no jnat They and We, are not (in fo important a matter) afrft!' to ^^pend our time, or to wrangle it out with Words. No. Proofs muft enter , if They Hold their Religion True and ours Fals ; And fo" They muft alfo, if We fay the Con- trary. Again : Neither of us can here proceed as Sclidpmf$ Schoolmen Do, when They Oppugn One an Other, wji and Defend their Different Opinions upon weak and {may here, Doubtful Grounds i For, if the Proofs for chrifts Reli- vL"con- 6*on ^e not ftrongerthen Schoolmens often are for jeSures, meer Vncertain Opinions , We may as well , and without Offence, Reject a Weak Ft wed Religion , as We do a wea\ fra- yed Difc.IV.G.L To he the %oman Catholick* 407 Ved Opinion. The Arguments therfore for Religion, wheron Saluation D^pend's , Are to Stand firm upon Fnden/alk Principles, Or, This follows : That , though God hath molt clearly evidenced Religion, yet proofs are %ant» ing to mahe it kn^n , And this , whilft He "frill have it Kno^n, And manifejl to All. Thus much Suppofed , 4. We will Firft briefly Touch on a few Arguments for the Roman Catholick Faith, which are amply laid forth upon feveral occafions in this Treatife (I cannot Afaef Repeat AH in a fliort Compendium*, yet, you Shall have Repetition Enough tofilence Sectaries) . And Remember, VFe fpea\°fjomef*w noit> of the Antecedent Evidence , which clearly fliews us rgHmen - Chrijls True Church, and makesit indubitably credible; For no Religion, As I noted above, is, Ex Terminis, with- out convincing Proofs, either Evidently Credible , True , or Fals. 5. I Say then , Firft. A church . or Religion , Ohick tSManifejteth h Self, and Proves the Doclrin it Profeffeth by the fame Signs , Notes , and Characters of Truth ,. toherby the TheRoman ApoHolical and Primitive church Tvas Marked and Evidenced , ctnfchh is Undoubtedly True: Or, if this Proof be not Valid^e may ea- Evidenced fly Deny Truth to that ApoHolical and Primitive church. No^?, asTheA^ the only Church in the VPorld thus Marked and Evidenced, is ^ Pr^. no Other , but the Roman Catholick Throughout all Ages. 1 his ve church Principle is undeniable* D?ny tbefe Jtfarl^s and Signi to was. the Roman Catholick^ church , you Deny 7»hat is Evident, Grant them, And you Admit of Popery . St Difc. i.e. 9. 10. 6. 2. a church , or Religion , Vehich in every Age after chrijl , Hath had a mosl dear , Aflured , and Vnduhitable E- c^"' Vidence of Truth , Tvhich is tie Glory of CMiracles {chrifls olm own Marks Mar^s and eognifances ) makes knoivn the Abfolute Poorer 0fEvtdenc* Cod Cooperating tyith it, And therfore cannot but be True, Vn- ^atkoliek ks Church. 4c8 Difc.1 V£.l Qln'Ms Church Trowed les we Think that his power Alone Divorced , as it we- re , from Goodnes , Did fet his H^w^and Seal to meet Forged signs , and wrought thefe Wonders to Deceive the World, But the Roman catholtck church , And She only \ clearly Demonflrai s Fnparallelled Miracles, not in One, But They are in eyery Age, As is without Controvcrfy Proyed by undoubted Re- undeniable. cor^9 (which Truth I engage to make Good, if any Doubc of it) Tberfore, either This church9or Nonejs Cbri/ls True church* 1 call Miracles rhe mod Forceable , and Perfwafive , And above Arguments of Truth , rhat can be Propofed. All other ati other Proofs , Though clear and Convincing to Difwtereffed convin* ludgements, being lyable to Cavils : For, cite Scriptu- re^, re againft Sectaries > wilful CMifinterpretations Abufe it „ Produce Fathers and Councils , They are either Reje- rloofsmo- ^ec' ^ thefe men, as Fallible, or Drawn to a Sinijler senfe, re lyable to m Fancy will haye it . Tell Them of the Sanctity of c*vtis. our Church ; They Anfwer , Much of it may be Hy- pocrify . Infift upon that great Work of Converfions, ibme reply , Policy and Humane Induftry had a ftrong hand in Them . But, when we Come to the Proof cf Proofs , And plead our Caufe by J^noWn and mofl Evidenced CMiracles , all Mouths are (lop fed , EnVy it felf is Silenced, None can ^nd cannot fpeak a Probable word againft us: Vnles ILtAU Perhaps fome require (and mod unreafonably) That eve- and Every ry One within this Moral body should worh^M trades, which is *chuHh meer'y to cavil j For, in the Primitive times, All had wrk Mi. no fuch Priviledgev- 7/ is Therfore fuffcient , That there rack}, be feme chois and SeleSed Perfons , Vnited in Faith with this Church , to whom God Communicates the Grace , and Do The- fe Wonders . Se more of this Subjed , Difc. i. r. 10. w. 15* 16. 17. 7. 3. A Church, which hath Converted whole Kingdoms and Difc.I V.C L To he the Qjman Catholkh 4°9 and Nations from Infidelity to Chrijl , And Drawn Innumerable Aimlrahh Souls from a Tepid life to Pennance and Aujlerity , From the convex Contents of the World to a Contempt of it , From Self4oveto^ughtby a PerfeB Self- Abnegation y Mufl either be defrVedly named the the Roman True church of ' Cbrifl , Or, the Apflolical church proved not Catholic k its Truth,hyfuch Admirable and ^Miraculous Conyerfions. The w^\r\^t Church of Rome only, Hath , by the Afliftance of God itonhodox Don thefe Wonders; Therfore , it is the True Church, *,/*-ftf^ or , there Was never any true upon Earth . Deny thefe ^( Conversions made by our Catbolick^ Society , you Deny what is mofl Evident -y Grant Them , You fuhfcrtke to Popery. Se The Ro- Dtjcours i . c. 7. and chap. 9. n. 1 o. SS*1 8. 4. A Chun ft which Oppofed ^All the Sectaries in the church World Jince chriflianitj Began , And was never Oppofed h) any oppofed aU Author of credit , or , Orthodox Society of chriflians , But on- k™»* Sc~ ly by Knoton condemned Hereticks , moft Evidently FrofeJJeth An^ „'„ True Religion : Tne Roman church only bath , To judge. fo, is an Improbable Paradox , And here you have an Ocher mod evident Proof, and Principle, For the Truth- , of Cacholick Religion. Difi.i. c.j. n. 8. demServL l0' & A church , w\nch hath manifejlly Don or eat Ser- ce don for ykt for God, by defeating Its Enemies, And gaining him Friends, Cod ty the jxj y€t Labour t0 Do J7im more Service : A church , which Reman i * - t r *■■ • r GathoUck m^er nad Note or Mark of Dishonor put on it , cen]uret Priya- church, u or Public}^, ifjuingfrom any Vniverfal church , ts Blame- N«?of **s > Fure ' Holy > ^ Vncorrupt in Doclrin . In all , The Dishonor Roman catholic\ Society juflly Glories, which, 7S(o other pitonitly Sett called chriflian can Do . And , 'Tis an Vndenia- 2^' ble Proof For its Integrity . Difc. 3.*. 8.», x. 3. ty proves U* 7- -A Catholic k church Established by Almighty God, it Pure and ^_yfnd therfre Once True , mujl ( ityon the fame Grounds whicjj A°chr L,d)en Proved it Orthodox) ever after be Acknowledged as True, once True Hear my Reafons , i. That infinite wifdom which Founded iifiili this Once True church , made it a School, not to Teach a Few Tru'- firfl chrijlians, Or For a Time only , But to Jnftrucl All , And it taught for ever. The Word of our Lord Remains for ever , And nnChri. tfc js tfc \y0rd^ that is Evangelised among you , i. Pet. i. time only! ' v- 25* Jhat Word then, which Thofe Primitive chrijlians and then learned yet Remains, And is now Taught by the fame true, bftoftobe and Indeficient church , Founded by drift . 2. The Gifts of Rutins of G°d, Rom. II. 29. are without Repentance (Thatisunchan- the Aget- geab/e-y ) what ever Therfore OHoyed an Infinite Wifdom to tionUid mj^ 4 church once True , or, for a time , Evidently *ort * Shews that cMercy farther Extended , and Continued to the end of the World . 3. The Necefity of Having chri- jlians Inftrufted in Truth , ( Souls are now as Dear to God, and as well Provided of means to Attain Sal- vation, Difc IV. CJL To be the %pmdn Catbohch 411 vation, as the Primitive Chriftians werej Requires the continuance of Truth in that Church , Which Chrijl firji Founded. He VVifts All to he fayed , and come to the knowledge of Truth , 1. Tim. 2. 3. If All; None at this very Day , are Excluded from the Means of learning thrift's Verities , Taught only in that Church, which He ejlabUshed. Grace R*- 4. The confolation of Grace ( Sedaries fay it; Perma- ™^.; nently Remains "Kith chrifis church For Even Therfore , church, Truth alfo is as Permanent , And as Infeparahle from %$-9 T^rfire Truth being as NecefJary to a Church as Grace is. <$.The Tmh»lfr- Roc\whicb is chrijl, Stand's Immoyahle and Vnsha\en ; Ther- fore the true Church Built up on this Rockland Ccrner-Jlone , I. cor, 10. Can no mere F/til > or fall from Truth , Then Chrijl can leave of to he an Indeficient Ferity. , To fay then, That God once Founded his true Church up- on the Rock lefts chrijl , And grant , That after- ward He Permitted either Men or Devils to Pull it down , to Deface it with Errour and fals Dodrin , is fo Defperate a Paradox, That , I think, no Chri- ftian dare Avouch it in fuch Terms. i2. Now mark my Inferences, upon Thefe pre- infinmn mifed Confiderations, The Roman Catholick^chrch was ftZlfed Once the True church ( Sedaries Confefs it ) Once it was Conjidera- Built on Chrijl , Once it Taught chijlian Verities Without Er- tiom> * ' four, Once it was Owned by < cfoiflians for chrifis School , On- ce it Euangeli^d the Word of God purely. Therfore if God he jet as favorable unto Souls as He Was Anciently , If He SubtraH not Chileans from u* Necejfary to Salvation , if his Gifts be unchangeable, If his Intention of Jetting Truth for eyer amongfl cbriflians Aim not , If He Blefs his own So- cietj as well With Truth , as with the Confolation of Grace ; Fffz This 4*1 Difc.IV.GL Chrifts Church pitted This Catholic\ Roman Church , ^nd no Other, Once True i s Was , /i, and Shall eyer be Jo , for the Future. Ecclefia invifta res ejl, They are known words of a great Do&or, etfi infemus ipfe commoveatur . The Church is invincible And continues the fame , Although Hell it /elf he moved , and Struggle Againjl it. We may Thank Eternally our BlelFed Lord tor that great Verity regiftred in the Gof- Ko ether Pe^ : ?ort# irtferni non pr&yalebunt adverfus earn. Vpon churchbm this, we Ground our Faith, And Therfore you Have the Rowan here Vndeniable Principles. Difc. i. c. 3. n. 2. 3. and cttkoiuk. DigZt c ^ n ^ Now> if tQ Weaken thefe Argu- ments , Se&aries will pretend to another Catholick salaries Church more Ample then the Roman , Se them clear- cannotpro. ]y Confuthed . Difc. 3 . C. I. M tOtUm. when our lV 8. ^ Church or Religion, which Was once confejfed- chunh lj Orthodox , And no man can probably [ay , when it ceafed brought in to be fi ^ Or, When it brought in fuch VtfibU and Percep- ti*s [J™ t'0tib!e Novelties , m Sectaries charge on it by meet Vnprovei its charge. Calumnies , is Evidently a True Church jlill. The foie The An. Voice of this Ample, learned, Roman Society ( Had tiemPoj. we no more) which cryes out againft Thefe Fancied feJTionof Cavils , And the Ancient Pofjefion of Truth Allowed it lowed "this *n Foregoing i*s4ges , toill be Judged in any Tribunal of the Church, is World , a more convincing Proof, An incomparable greater * ftronger Te/iimony For its Verfeyerance in Cbrifls Doclrin , Then a ThenSe. fe^ blind Gueffes of Sectaries can he to the Contrary , Which Baries con- ifr hen they are Refolved, come to no more, but to Ca- traryCa. lumn\es ? 0Y Strong Fancies. Difc 3. c. 9. n. 5. Antiquity x4- 9* A Church T»hofe Doclrin , when you read Anti- cwm the quity , whether Councils , Fathers , or Hiftory , you find fi Doclrin of mdeniayiy owned and Vnfterfally Vrofcffed , That the man cLmcT v I Mind , Who Se(s not ropfry maintained all along Thofe Chmh. learned Difc.I V. C.L To be the %oman Catbolick- 4 1 j learned Volums : For example-, Who fee's not, But, That a Sacrifice Daily Offered upon the Altar , Praying t» Saints, Frayers for the Dead, The Real Prefence And the like, are DocJr ins plainly Delivered by Antiquity} Now, Such a Church , which upon its own Authority alfi , Defend's Thefe Verities ( Tis the greateft on fcarth ) cannot be Vanquished by a fe^o Tveaks Cavils of our lately Fn\no^n, and Unauthorized Sectaries . The Principle is Vndeniable* Difc 1. c. 6. 15. 10. A church, That hath had , Age after Age , The both Ttbole multitudes of Wife , Learned, and mojl Holy Profejfors^^¥andl (the Number of them is numberles) That, without Fright ^IZfes or Fear of any jyelufion 3 lived toy fully and dyed Happily in their mojiLeam- Ancient Profeffed Faith , Cannot , But upon the very Tefii- ed md H*- r 1 r - /y r / i r 1 r\ i r \ ly,amofi mony of theje WiweJJes, jo many (And Jo rarely Qualified ) fltong?roof be Iudged Evidently Credible, True, Pure, and Holy. Other- f<» the Do- ^ife toe mufl Say, That, all Thefe learned men for a thou/and ctrmofthe years and mere toere Mad, Be jot ted, and Seduced T»ith Foole- Catholick ties , which is fo Befperate a Proportion , That None shall church. Dare to Vent it , and fpeaJ^ Probably. The Roman Catho- lic\church Alone , Produceth fuch Chois , Learned , and Con- tinued Witneffes for its Truth , ?io other Seel comes neer it , None can Parallel it. A moft convincing Proof , An un- °cu^Zk* deniable Principle. Difc. i.c.6.». i%. church 1 6. II. A church yThat Evidently Demonflrat's all Other Serves called cbrijlians From Luther Fp^ard , to Have been Schifma- \XerCal- tic\s, Hereticks,orhtb, is either to be Olonedfor the true Or* kdchri. thodox church of chrift , or Tve mufl Grant , That chrifi lad fanfom no ii ue church on Earth for fo long a time of a Tnou- ^^{l find Years . The Roman CatholickchiiYch Demonjlrats this cr fifth Age, clearly , ^And it is an Vndentabk Principle . Difc. 3. c. 1. *™f*tk 17* H. A churchy T^hieh Confeffedly Demwftrtfs its An- V^™*^ F f f 3 tiquity^Utrmcks, ^74H Difc.IV.CI. drifts Church proTnd only De- ttijutt] , Troyes its Miff on , Evidenced its Vnity in Doclrin, monf!r«rs ^yfnd Shores a continued Succeffon of Popes , Prelates, Pa- quity* ' ftorsi and Innumerable Trofeffns, eyer fince chrifianity began lawful Without Interruption, Hath fo great Evidence for the Truth it vlt?s^ Caches, That ,aU the Caytls of Sectaries , Pretending achan- Vnityof ge of Doclrin made in this Society, are Weak^, Proofles , and votirw, Highly improbable. The Roman Catholick Church Pro- Miacon- ves c[ie^e partjculars. nifci. c. o. n. 8. 14. tinned Sue- . r ' J ,7 ^ . tejfiottof io. To end, I (ay three J hings . I. NoCavilscan VopeitPre- Evert an Evident Ferity , But it is an Evident Ferity , That Utes^ni ffa[ (effentially Goo dues it felf) could not Permit fo Learned, bleProfef. J° Numerous y Jo Exc client , and Preciow a part of Cbrijtians, fon. as the Roman Pajlors , and Doctors were, from the fifth Age ?>o7otT' t0 Lf'tJ)er t0 k A-1 Beguile^ T»id> Fals Do51rin : Neither could twnan He Suffer Thofe Innumerable chriftians , T#ho "tecre Taught by Evident fuch wife and Learned Pajlors for a Thoufand years , to be all VQn!verity rifled by means ofTmrfals Doclrin, or Cheated into Err our. is,th*tGcdThis is impoffible, Vnles we grant ( which is a Blaf- coiiUmt phemy ) That an infinite Goodnes utterly Deferted his church, learned a *nd Prefer ved None True on Earth, for fo long a time, churchy 19. 2. This is an undeniable Verity . If the Ro- ******"* man catholick^cburch erred , *s SeftarieS Aflert, Thefe men gHtUdwithcmnot h Their oTtn Diferning Spirit, much lefs by an fooleries fir craned Principle probably fay , How far , or wherin it jo van a Erred , For example ( And I urge them to Anfwer the jtotthtr Difficulty) why fay They, That our Church more veriiy. Erred in believing the Real Prefence of Christ in the Sa- jftheRo- cratnent Then in Believing a Trinity of Perfons in one church h Eflence? They cannot by any Proof but Fancy on- fiifyfupp* ly , more Efpy Errour in the One, Then in the Other . wW Therfore , whilft They believe a Trinity , and other vroteiitnu Do&rins Common with This fuppofed Erring Ourch fand c*nnot$rQ~ indeed, Di fc . I V . C L To & the %pman Cathoikh 4 1 J indeed, They muft hold them oruhis Churches Au~ fafyfo thority only , or cannot Believe TRem) They may be \£j££ as well Plunged inro Krrour by owning a Trinity , as erred. They think this Church is Deceived , in Holding the *** Ue> other Myftery of the Sacrament . Se thefe two ™d°hfi! Points further explicated Di/c. i> c. 6. n. 12. ij, UdVrmU 2.0. 3, /r is an Undeniable Ferity, that chrijl once pro- *les' mifed to be -frith the church He Founded to the end of the VeHtyt World , which Wu the Roman catholicl^chttrcb . Now Pro- Chiift/w. teftants muft fay that drift Srood not to his Word; ™f£^ht For certainly when He made this Promife, He well c birch he Forefaw, That, the Roman Catholick Church would fonndedto ( if Proteftants fpeak Truth ) at laft , about the fifth or '£%£ fixth Age, Become Erroneous, and confequently for ret pM/*' fake the Good Mafter that founded it . With thisfiMtiMttfi Church then, Which Abandoned Truth, Cbrift, who{^o/ is Truth , Remained not; nor , with any other Society ofhis\\ord. Christians for Ten & hole ^Ages , Becaufe All thefi Were Pro- fe/Jed Here ticks, and chriji never Taught Herefy , Or a/fi- fted Hereticks in their Doctrin . Tjberfore , He did not only promife whdt be Were Intended to Perform , But more; ey>en now Glorious, as He is, in Hearven , He Wink's at Yea and thefe Hideous fuppojed Err ours of his (once) own founded Ca- now^ks tholick^ Church , And Remedies none , voor fouls are Be- fu^0fed guiled to this Day , with the fals DocJrin of that church which errmn of He Efiablisbed in Truth, And Promife d to a (lift for eyer .hlSQnrce i Are Thefe, Think ye, Probabilities ? No. They are edCatbo- the moji Pernicious ' Doclrins That ever entred into a Cbrijlians &* Hm, or Tongue £#/ gfi xi. It Proteitants ihall Pleas to make any Exception probMU againft thefe Proofs , Give me leave to AiTure them *•»• firfl: . I will not take their bare Word for any Thing They fay not to 4i6 Difc.IV.CI. Qhnjls Church frcfted fay againft us . x. To Fore- warn Them of a ufual Fal- lacy , And it is , That They run not here into te- dious Generalities and Talk in the Ayr, which on- ly confound's a Reader, and leaves him at laft as much Diffatisfied , as when He firft Began to Read. And hence I Tell them , 3. They are obliged to An- fwer dire&ly without Ambages , 1,0V, No. Let them fay Plainly , Thefe Proofs are Good , or, ifeow them to be Fallacious; and if they Hold them Fallacies, Let this he Evidenced by Contrary clear Br oofs , grounded en Recehed Principles . Thus We Proceed. Vroofsani 22 for Example we fay : This is an Undoubted Principle yZliieLdX^z are here forced Again to Parallel Proof with Proof and Principle with Principle) that the AposJolical Church Evidenced by Miracles, great Santtity of life, Efficacy of DocJrin, Admirable Converfons &c. Proyed it Jelf by thefe very Marks and Signs , to be no counterfeit , But a True Orthodox church. And Here is an Other fure Principle Laid by it. The Roman Catholick^cfwrcb ( And no other Society of chrifians) Hatb Age, after Age, Evidenced it Self by the yery like Signs of undoubted Miracles, of Admirable Conyerfions, of Efficacy in Doclrin , of DifyoJJeJfing Devils &c This "Whole learned So- ciety Olvris thefe Winders , They baye been , and yet are UMa- f roofs for nifejl to mens eyes andfenfes. The Ancient CM.tr acles and Con* Mtrsdes verfms Stand upon certain Record : Authors of unquestionable ■%erfiom\ Fidelity Recount the later , Not only Friends , but Enemies al- wrought by Jq aUqUp them fo much credit , That they jujlly Deem the Man cltlZT neer a De&yee °f Madnes, That shall Offer to Deny All That Church, are on Record . Therfore The Church , ivbich Hatb Ever CManifefled , And yet Doth ManifeH Thefe Wonders , Proyes its Doclrin m that Manner As the Apoftles and Primitive Church Proved Theirs . Obferye noV ^>ell% If Sectaries Difc.I V.C.I. To be the %pman Catholich 4 *7 go about to Infringe the Validity of this One Proof, or will ^hat s'- yet Deny thefe Miracles and Conyerfwns wrought by our church, 0ynge(ito They are obliged to Ground that Denial on a Proof m Strong (if u0 if thy not Stronger) as is This cloud of Witnejfes produced by catho- ^yThlfi licks , For the contrary Affirmative : And this is not only Im* probable , But vvholy Impoflible . It is therfore meet Talk at Random , to Tell us> As They are wont: Many Miracles haye been Tained : Senfes may be Deceived'. Papifts are too credulom : Hifiorians fometimes Recount Things upon too flight credit. All are weightles Words, unpro- ved Gueifes, Toughts of Fancy, and Fancy only, As ^r^ed wide from Proofs and Principles , as Truth is from ^0fjsn9 Herefy . Difc. i. c. 9. 23* A$>a*n n l* an Evident Truth, That the Roman Catho- seftaries lic\churcb bath Don God Great Service , And never Was Cen- without fired by any Vmverfal church . Say Therfore, upon what ^//r*/-" Oftned Principle can Protejlants Deny this Good fervice Don mm c«- for God? Vpon elicit undoubted Proof Dare they Co freely tMtck J^ r J J ■ •', 7'/; // 1 - i i • Church, Cenfure and condemn it > 1 11 tell you , their oWn Saying nevercen- Doth All. They have no Better Proof. juredby 24. 3. It is a mofl Evident Truth, That all thofe Wife an> l/»iver: and Learned DoBors, That Taught chriflians Popery for a Thou-'" f and years and more 9 Were neither Fools nor mad men, nor Two other Vnherfally blinded with Errow. If this be not Evident, mo^ cerm thus Much certainly is. The wife Providence of God ne- 2>wfc«. ver fuffered thofe whole CMillions of chriflians lnflrutted by thefe reacbers to be cheated fo long , and Abufed with Foole- ries . Now my harty wish is, That our Adverfaries frill On- ce plainly Tell nt by frhat Proof- or Received Principle they are AnVn*n. able to convince, That all Thefe Learned Doclors (no tejUwe™bl* Wife then They) were Befot ted Jo long ; or, that God for fo ^L/u yajl a time , Owed fo much ill Kill to Innumerable poor s*8mus, G g g Cbn- 418 Difc.IV.C.I. thrifts Church proved They Are /# Chrifiians , 4; not only to Se them cheated and Milled ; Ba* prove tnot by 7 . / , . . . . 1 >U , Talk, but mre-> MM") to 'Withdraw his Providence, And jufjer them fiireVrmci. to Grown under fo lasting a Mijery of Fa/sbood ; CAnd this *&rl That ^ w'1*c'1 IS ever to be Noted ) whtljl There w.vs no Other ill tL Chrtftian Society in the world to afford them true Inftritcli0n in Learned the Pure chrijitan Faith* May it pleafe Sectaries candidly, theZmin ^° c^ear *^s one Difficulty n$on a Rational Principle , They Catholtik rill much oblige me. This Don : Let Them alfo Vouch- Church, fafe tQ ^4 dd a Word more , for mj Satisfaction : It is : If ZTjhb'' They DiSeft Thefe Hafl]l PropofitionS : All thofe Do- Fooleries cl§rs Here Fooled : God Defer ted his church for fo long a for ten time, That , They next come to a Soltd Principle and Prove, Secondly, That Protestants among fo many other Sectaries , were the That &od Onlj Elecl people appointed by Providence to Mend what They permuted conceived Amifi in an old Decayed church-, And They muH lnnnmera- _. r. _ J . r . r _ ••■'•'«■/» lleChri- S°W* this Don without mixture of Errour m their Refor- ftians to be mation , Yea, and without Danger of Marring more Then cheated for ^y yyen; a^QUt t0 ^fend . They tell us, of their fet- iin"f" ling Chriftianity Right Again on its Ancient Founda- Thirdiy , tions , Here is place to make that Talk good , let us ha- That Vro- ye a Strenuous Proof for it* if they fay , they do it by tt/iants ha. . J . J ' •> . . J veExaftij Scripture; not one clear Text can be quoted without fetied Twenty Glofles and Fancies added to it, And yet all will chrtH?L not Do, If again they will need's fhake Hands with ntty Right \ r 1 11 r^. 11 on us An- us , And lay , We , and They, are all One and right cunt Foun- in Fundamentals, It is an unproved Aflertion : But, datum, mjghc jt pafs . \0 Aflurance can be given That they have fc tied all ft raight in T$m fundamentals . Se Difc. y. c. 10. n. 2. and c. 9. n. 3. 2. Afourti* 25. 4. Amongft the many other Evidences of our Evidence our Roman Catholick Religion , This is none of the ilckReii- leaft; That God , hj fpecial Providence, hath Preferred it loth gion draspn HI Difc.I V.CL To be th%oman CatholuL 4*9 in Being and Honor , for 1 6. whole Ages . This church fi™ Godi bath Stood fo long Invincible and Glorious tn the beat of all s^mim fcrfautions. It Refitted the Violence of lews and Heathen Frinces : It Encountred knoTon Hereticks and Defeated ifom : No Counfel, or Wit of Man, nor Power of Devils have been hitherto Able to Diffohe it , Tvbilft whole Kingdoms, and com- mon wealths loft their Ancient Glory , And were Subverted . Whence 1 Argue, as the Learned Gamaliel once did, Act. 5. 39. If this Counfel and WorJ^ be of men , // 'Will be Dijfilved, But if it be of God , you ( Sectaries who fo vi- goroufly Oppofe it) cannot Diffolve it . Nowhere is AConvin- my Dilemma. Either this Church Subfified for foyafi a ciHAnu\ time by meer cheats and Humane Policy , or Teas , and is Pro- tected by Gods fyecial Proyidence. If the firfl: be granted , It would have Perifhed long Ago, and come to no- thing : And if God by Special Providence Preferved it in Being , It is Vndubitably the Orthodox Church of Chrifl , And cannot be Argued of Difloyalty. To con- firm this Truth , I ask . whether the Reafons noTv Alleged whatever^ Proye True Chrifiian Religion { taken under that General irg"™nt' Notion ) to have been Preferred in fo many Storms of Perfecu- ckrijtt** tion by Gods fpecial Affttance >. If Sectaries Anfwer , 'Religion in Yes ; The very fame Arguments apply ed to the Roman Ca- ?^^ tholtck^ Church , Prove that alfo Gracioufly upheld by preferved Providence. The Reafon is : Becaus , as I have^G**» largely Proved, True Chrifiian Religion (Though never f^R^ fo Generally taken ) And the Roman c at holtc\ Religion chriftUn i are Sjnonimas, and the yerj Same 9 There is no Difference be- Region Ween Them. Now, if Sedaries fay, That as wll the Chri- %!£$ Jlian , as the Roman Cathlick^ Religion , have fubfitted fo rhe Re*-\ long vyithut fpecial a ffi fiance by Mans meer Indufiry , and fon* Humane Policy , They do not only Enervate Old G g g x Gi- ** 4io Difc.IV.CH. Troteftancy proved Improbable. if Settles Gamaliels Argument, But more, Vent a Paradox Tvhicl can *V*h*th mW ^ Proyed » 0r Brought to any known Principle , But to been fi long ^ncy Only . preferved z6. And thus much briefly of fonie Few Arguments Kr^for tlu? Roman Catholick Religion , which if reduced They vent to Form ( And 'tis eafy to do it ) are VnanfweralU , You *nit»pro- have more jn the Treatife. Let ns nowfe in the next 7ox, ara" place, what Se&aries can Say for their Novelties, or, upon what Proofs Antecedent to their Faith , They are able fo far to Evidence the Credibility of Proteftancyj As to make it , in a Poor CMeafure 9 Probable. CHAP. II. Frotejiancy is an Vne^uidencedy And a mofi Improbable Religion; Or, ra- ther no Religion , but a meer Handed Opinion. i. T T is Vnevidenced , For , the Profefforsofit,can X ( by no Rational Arguments Previous to Belief) more Prove, That Their Owned Novelties ought to Vrtefancyte Admitted of, as prudently Credible, Then the word as much ofHerefies, Take for an Inltance , Arianifm . Hear *™viden* my reafon. The very Grounds wheron Rational Proofs nwifm' ought to ftand , Fail them . They have no Antiquity , no Vnfoerfality , no SucceJJion ofProteftant Bishops and Paflors* They Want lawful Jdifion , UWiracks , and all other prudential Signs DifcIV.CJI. (Proteftancy proved hnprohable. 421 Signs of Truth, as is largely Declared in the firft Difcours c. 9. Yet from Thefe and the like Motives , Previous ra- tional Proofs manifefting the Credibility of Religion muft be Drawn , Or, The Religion which is AiTmed Rational to be True , or Credible, "iw// Appear leaked and Vneviden- Motives ^ ced, having nothing to Fphold it t But the bare Word of Him, X^/X" who Sayes it is True , And Therfore is no Religion. \ Credibility need not to Vrge this Point further, Becaus Sectaries of Religion, tacitly Suppofe the Credibility of their Religion to be w2£%£ Fndemonfirable by outward Signs , and Marks of Truth, For, bare word Inquire of Them , Why They rather Embrace Pro-**?/*?"* tcftancy then Popery , or any other Do&rin of Here- ""Trt"' ticks ? You never Hear a word of the long Continuan- Se^arigs ce of Their church , of their lawful Mifton , of the Succeffton feem to of Their Protejlant Bishops from Chrijls time, Nor of ph~ wakem doubted Miracles &c. No. But they presently run to fQemlnL Scripture, and Tell you , That both their Faith and cedent u*. the Motives of it (internal to the Book) Stand there tlV€i- fufficientiy Evidenced . Shall we fe a little the Va- nity of this Aflfertion ? 2. Methinks, I enter into a study where a learned Proteftant Sir's with a Bible before Him , And much DilTatisfied with his Novelties; I Allure him, Ther^F^, very want of rational Proofs Grounded on Objective Mo- Alone pro- tives Drawes me from His Religion, which is neither vesNo. evidently , nor So much as Probably , made Credible t^/ni to Any. The man Points at his Bible, And faith; y. This Bool^ both Proves Proteftant Religion , and Gives yon Mo- tivesforit. Make, Sir, fay I, this your AfTertion Good , Viz,. The Bible Delivers Proteflant Religion. He Argues : The Bible Teaches that Iefus is the Chrift , the Eternal Son of Cod, the Redeemer of the world > L^nd thus Ggg3 much or an* 412 DJfc.IV.CIT. Troteftctncy proved Improbable. To prove much Froteftancy Teaches aljo . Ergo Scripture Proves Pro* felt"™ trf^y- lAnfwer : The Argument a Genere adfpeciem, Common ProVes jufl nothing 5 For , tbeje Docfrins Common both to Ca- toiilickri- tloucks and other Sectaries , are no fpectfcal Articles of prote- *^"§mtfl*ncy> as it is Reformed . Now , Thefe , Sir , you Vroiejia*- mutt Show Contained in Scripture . For Example : As 9* a Proteftant , you Believe no Sacrifice Offered upon the Ahar 9 No Purgatory , No Tranfubftantiaticn , &c. Pray you Warrant thefe Negative believed Articles by Scripture-proof. He Replyes : After his long Reading Scripture , He Find's no Mention made at all of a Sacrifice, ofTranfub- fiantiation, And the like. I Anfwer : Others, as learned as He , find Them , And Prove all by Scriptu- re. Here , rherfore is no Opened Principle to Ground bis Denial on , But let this Pafs . 3. I Argue againft my Do&or. Though you find not a Sacrifice, or Purgatory in Scripture , nay more ; sectaries Though, we falfly Suppoie, both to be unrevealed %T'of" Myfteries> Yet» y°u cannot pofitiyely fay, by an A& Arguing* of faith : A Sacrifice is not : Purgatory is not . i prove it. Demon. Nothing can be Believed by Divine Faith, But what Vwjies. God Pofuively Reveal's : But God hath not faid any where Pofitively . There is no Purgatory , no Sacrifice, no Tranfubjiantiation ; Ergo Thefe Negatives cannot be Believed by Divine Faith. Sectaries Grant the Major. The Minor is as Evident , For They fliall as foon Pro- ve , That God now Pofitively Reveal's who fliall be the lad man alive in the World, as Prove that Scri- pture Pofitively Teaches , Purgatory is not, a Sacrifice is not &c . Whence I Inferr : If Proteftants Believe no Purgatory ( For Example ) It is not enough to fay We Read of no fuch Place in Scripture > For (yere this True ) It is only Difc I V, CJI. Trnteflancy proved Improbable. 425 Only a bare Negative, And at moft Showes , That G0A M** ***- hath Omitted to Speak at all of Purgatory , Which filence, "fl*}^** can Ground no Alt of Faith , Vnles this Confequence be The belie, good. Becaus an infinite Verity, neither Affirm" s nor De- w an3°f nyes That Third Place, Therfore I T»iU Believe no Purga- £Jl^es tory . To Believe then no Purgatory, or 7{o Sacrifice,' It is Necefjary not only to Say, God faith nothing in Scripture of thefe Myfleries , But more is required, Fi&. to Prove, That His infallible Revelation Pofitiyely Denies Them : For, Before 1 Pofitively Deny a Purgatory by my Faith , I muft stariesp0fim prove it pofitiyely Denjed by an Infinite Verity , Which is *«*& *>«- utterly Impoflible. Se this Point more amply De- J?, £"'*'" . J ■ r r J lick Do- Clared , Difc. 2. C. 8. n.4. 5. Brm} They 4. Perhaps the Dodor will Tell me. Thefe Nega- aretopro. thes of No Sacrifice, Up Purgatory , &c. Are no Efjentials ^J^th of VrotefUnt Religion , But certain By-articles, fthich may as pofitheiy feell be Rejecled as maintained, "tohiljl the Common, and All- Demedit ovtr C&ned Doclrin of Christianity is firmly Believed. 'f^r^ He Anfwer Thus : Firft, Protefhnt Religion comes to Nothing ;for all, or the moft part of it is made up of thefe Negatives . 2. This Reformed Part is no chrijlian Reli- H Se^a- gion : For , chrijlian Religion ( at laft Refolvable into tZ^nI- Gods certain Revelation ) cannot be Teilded to, and Denied gatives net as men Pleas, Vnles ^e grant, That, that may be Denied, £JFen**lt* Which God faith is True . 3. It follows , Though a Prote- cy'rhlir flant Curfe , and Anathematize the fyecifical Articles of his Re- Reformed formed Religion , as Reformed , He may yet be a good Protejlant, ?*%'» ** and gain Salvation , by the General Faith Common to Arians jnan R^,-. and otber Hetcredox chriflians . I would gladly hear of gun. a good Solution to thefe Difficulties, more largely laid Forth, Difc.T,. c. u. #.13.14. In the mean while, you fe , How Vmvidenced a Thing Protejlant Religion is, Tvbicb 424 Difc.1V. CJ I. Troteflancy proved Improbable, troupa* ^fc/cj hath Neither rational Motives to make it credible , not 'hither fo much as one Favorable Word of Scripture to wake it pro ha- Motives to ne , You fe moreover , Hole Scripture Alone without a Credible Church , and a naked church , not mamfejled by Prudent Mo- nor y* word, tives Leaves m m Darknes, Lead's into Labyrinths , Yea, And of scripture utteriy jmpoffiVilitaf s no lefs the Search. Then the Findini to make it r {, 1 • 6 trobM. out of true Religion. 5. From the Evident Vnevidence of this new Religion, the Tr°evtLnce Improbability of it follows m a Property doth to its EJjence : of Vrote. For , an Vnproved Religion , is Improbable , And , an lm- jiatuy, the proyUe Religion is no chrijlian Religion . Pray you Tell /Tylnf" me : tf one Pretend t0 ^e a Wlfe mAn-> and never Gives follows. Sign or Proof of his Wifdom; to be Learned, and fliewes Himfelf a Dunfi in all Company ; to be Liberal , And Anln^tm" Relieves none in Necefity y Will you Admit of all with- out Proof upon the bare Word of him , who Sayes , He is Wife, Learned y and Liberal > No, you will Slight fuch Talk as Vnworthly of Credit, and Hold it Im- probable . Tbis is the real Cafe of Proteflants^ho Vapour much , Talkjmuch of the Truth of their Pure Reformed Go/pel, &o Vrfoci- But, when Things come to the Tejl , and Proofs are jufily CaU Ples>wher~ led for to make words good , Tbey can neither Sayy by force Vrotefan- of any Received Principle , i»hy They Believe Protekancy in Ge- cj probable. neral to be chnjls True Religion, Nor, T»hy They give AJfent hy Divine Faith to fo much , As to one Article 'within the compas of Protefiancy , as it is Reformed. ttrmAjfer. 6. You will Say this Charge goes High; K^And ted, the fbtrfore jujlly Require of me to Declare further , wberin chiefly fr°ifoppo' 0ur ddvsrfanes Speak^ fo Improbably > I Anfwer : They futon made do it not m One Particular only , But in every Thing they ngainft s*j . The DoZlrin i^djjerted by them is Improbable : The CnUh*h Proofi °fThir ne» Religion are Improbable. Tk Oppofition made Difc.IV.CJI. Trcteflancy proved Improbable; 417 made againji our Roman catholkk Faith , is Improbable : The hd(i.tn Af„ Very CMethod Held in ^Arguing againft m is Improbable . guin gM All Fail's All is Deficient, And it Cannot be Otherwi-^^^ fe: For, who is able to Perfwade Himfeif without Aflenting to a mod Venerate Improbability , That in this Old Age of the World , toben all rather ExpeB the Bay of Iud« gement Then a settlement of a new Religion $ a Little Knot of men itboly Vnkno^n a Hundred Years Agon Should no* Start up And Speaks to the Furpofe, Tfken They go about not only to Cajl DoT»n a long Standing church , But More , To makf a Novelty credible , wherof the world had no Knowledge at all, For fiften Ages Before } This I fay is Highly Improbable But Ad Rem, 7. I fay Firfl, Their DoElrin is Improbable, And Prove it. A'o DoBrin Falltbly Taught can be Vhimatly Refolved into Gods **°"f**' Infallible Revelation , But , into Fallible Gueffes Or Fancy On- fifosbk ly : The frofeffed Dottrin of Protefiancy , as Reformed, is Fal- «*• G*<1* libly Taught, And cannot be Refohed into Gods infallible Re- f£jfj%' vdation > Thsrfore , it Finally Reftetb on meer Gueffes iancy,ani or Fancy , And Confe^uently is Improbable. Se Difc l. c. 1. thnfin n. 6. ffi"**' 8. 2. It is Improbable to fay, That Scripture Alone, \»xtb- Proteff*nts out an Infalltble Interpreter makes any man Certain in fthat Glo^,as he Gloffes, or at all Infallible,- For both Arians , And Fe- gjjj lagians Read it , and Glofi it Yet Err Grojly in Points moH Aiians. Ejfential. Protectants ,-fe bo On-n No infallible Interpreter, both Read and Glofi As Thefe Do by their olon uncertain Guef- fes , And therfore Gloji as Improbably. Difc. 1. f.4. w.7.8. vnherfal 9. 3. A DoElrin Drhich at Its firfl Rife And after Alfo, oppofubn V»as% and is If til as much Oppofed by Other chrifttans the ™f^n* VVboJe World over , As Ever Arianifm yvas , and is Improbable, improba. Protefiancy Had , and hath ftill This Vniverfal Opfofitton hit- H h h made a 4:6 Difc.I V.C1 I. froteftancy probed Improbable. made.againft it, And /her fore upon that fole Acount is Impro- bable. Difc.i.c,6.n.y Vrottfltm. 10. 4. To Say on tU one fide That Protefiancy is the true 'y D't% 0Ytbodox Religion ; And, on the Other to Grant, That the Ro- *ani air*. mm Catholuk church ( which Se&aries Condemn of Er- forets im- ror ) Hath Infinitely Objured Prote/lancy Kith the splendor of probable. moji (jlorious rj\ur\s of Truth manifeftly known to the World, as Cteiracles, Conversions &C. is Highly Improbable , Becaus Dishonorable to chriA and Injurious to Cod, J»ho cannot wake a Fals Religion more clear to Reafon or more Prudently Credi- ble then his o^nTtutbs and Ferities are* D/fc. 1. c. 12. A new ri. 1.2* coyned rj. ^. J neT» Coyned Herefy without CMothes of Credi- foTeft™^ ^ltJ may aS ^e^ b* Invented and better Defended by the ba- Befended re Words of Scripture, Then Protejlancy Can be Defended, then rrote- gut f^}, an Herefy is Improbable ; Therfore Protesiancj upon *anV' %\ut Account is LMuch more Improbable. Difc. 1. c. 12, Sea arm #. j . 4. ^ ^Uowt^od I2' 6- T° fo> That G°d had Wb UU °fa BtUe> dnd no more Preferved that free from Corruption , But TvitbaU, Permitted but a La- His crton Immaculate Spoufe the Church ( Tt>hicb He Founded TaHvto Pure ) r° P^'V (^e HarlQt i An^ *fterft*rd to Deceive Cbriflians vidtnee. with Damnable Err ours, Is not only to aUotp him a Lame and They muft H^i Providence , But alfo to Vent a Dottrin more then impro- j*y that a bable ( That is ) Enormoujlj Impious . Sectaries fay fb, And ifrn'un ^fore speak improbably . Dsfc. 2. c. 2. n. 7. entltl"* !]• 7. */«? Proreflants Aflert And Therfore muft maintain the Truth Other , Which is Heretical, And more then Improbable Do- tit. ~ 14- & Difc.IV.GlI. Troteftancy probed Improbable. 417 14. 8. Though contrary to both Truth and Con^ fcience it were Suppofed , Tvat we Prove not our Catbo~ lick„ Verities , Yet no Abfolute Denial of thefe Ferities follows 7hel j** from our not Proving Them : But Protectants upon this Fals f^dThtir Suppofed Negative, We Prove Hot , Without the leaji Appea- Dotfrm ranee of any infallible Revelation for them Ground their Faith. ufon v*\* f ' 1 - n r -r T T -1' - T r. JUppOjed Which is a mojl Dejperate Improbability , Dijc. i. c. 8. n. 2. 3. negatives. 15. 9, It is Improbable to Say , That rrotejlants T*>hilft BemgfaUi. they Teach their Novelties or Interpret Scripture , Do either hU> *"* the One, or Other as Faithful Oracles or Injtruments ^fj- Aftjledby ji/led by the Holy Ghofl : For Thefe men, whether They the Holy Teach or Interpret Profefi Them/elves Fallible in ^llTbey^^ Say^ Therfore are not ajjified Inflruments of "this Bleffed Spirit imp,obMy who Teaches by none The Necefftry DoElrin of a Fni- *'?'*<» verbal church, Interpret s by None but fuch as doit ^falltbly.^^ Difc. X. C. 9. «. 8. tvuhCer. 16. 10. To fay, That that Article of our Creed: I Be- ****&* lieve the Holy Cathc-lick, church, Upm not True in all Ages befo- re Luther, is more Then Improbable. Proteftants ,♦ who They make can name no other CathoJick Church, but the Roman, improbably which They Hold Erroneous, mud both Vow and "l*&e'eiL Vote the Creed Fals fox £0 vaft a time . Difc^ 3. c, 1. %&. ne 77. A. ToT u 17. II. It is highly improbable [fa Say, That either the that a Do. true church ofchrijl can be corrupted in Doclrin , or , that Rrincm- a Doclrin common to All Hereticks is enough for Saving f^ts^ Faith . Proteftants Affirm both. Difc. 3. c. 2. enough fir 18. ix. A Church E(Tentially Hypocritical That may Be- Valuation, liefre One. thing. And mufl Profe/s a® other, is unworthy of ' baUe Credit, And cannot be judged to Hold probable Doclrin* Pro- a Religion tejlants o^n fuch a church. , Difc 3, c. 6. n. 10. ejfemiaUy 19. 13. A, church j or Religion , that hath not one Ar- ^H^. H h h 2, tide b*ikh 4*8 DifcIV.CJI. Tm eft amy proved Improbahle. *b* frit 0f fA'n\j Gr0Unded on Scripture (is it is Reformed) set wit bout a Pretends to Draw all to tt By Force of Scripture , Delrpers vcrief mojl improbable DocJrin , Proiejianiy is [neb a Relmon. lbi~ jnothtr 20- 14- Proteflants that Pretend to fubmit to the Autho- imprcbabi- rity of one , Wo or three of the Ancient Fathers, And Scorn- )2jQ*~ falb -X*je& the Authority of the Roman church , proceed Improbably. Difc. 3, r. 7. ». 9. And thus much Briefly of a few Do&rinai Improbabilities Taught by Prote- ctants , The Treatife afford's you more, Touching the Liberty, The Vnconftancy, The fcndles DilTen- tions of Sectaries , with other fad Effeds that follow This new Gofpel. Thefe I wave in this place. And s*9arie$ ^ Say 2. The proofs of Sectaries for Their new Religion their own are Improbable . The x^ffertion is consequential, and Stand's -Religion Firm, ypon what is faid already, For a Doclrin Proved lm- art ^M- probable by undoubted Principles cannot be made Evidently The ken. Credible by any rational Arguments , Vnlts Truth be contrary fin- to Truth : But , The Doclrin of Protefiancy is Demonfirated Improbable ; Therfore no Rational Proofs can make it Evidently credible ; nor fo much as Weakly Probable. To confirm this* Do no More > but Demand of any Se&ary (the Que- Afrott- ftjon halh been often Propofed) Vf on what Rational Proof *M?faZonor received Principle Antecedent to bis Faith, He Believes m rawnal Protefiancy (I do not fay cbriflian Religion ) taken in What Vnncipic General way you » ill To be the Beft and Purefi Religion, now ?M%"li$ P^ofejjed ? He cannot Pretend that this Novelty is ex Ter- Reiigi.n mints Evidently True, or credible ( for no Religion is fo ) ££*"£> Much lefs , That He Believes Without Reafon , or , Becaus Jh'J*U He Will Believe } Therfore after he hath Declared what He Be- lieyes , He mutt alfo Satisfy the Doubt , \jii\i> Tell us. why H* Di(c.IV\C.TT, fProteftancy proved Improbable. 429 ft Be/ieves And 9 Ground his Anfwer upon a Rational Prin- iple . But it is as impoffible to Satisfy This one De- mand , as to Remove the Pyrxnean Mountains from he place they Stand in. The Reafon is. It is it it highly Highly Avainh all Reafon to Embrace am Reliqion, whether fz*">ft %ew or old ittbout Rational Proofs Grounded on jure Moti- Embrace* W , which Plead as it Were in Gods behalf and wake Religion Religion fyidently credible Before w Yttli A /lent to it . But , Prote %'tho.m }ams have no rational Mottles Antecedent to their Belief- of mthtk Jrotefiancy , which Hold a JlricJ Analogy with Thofe cf Chrijl &**'&$*$ nd his Apofiles , as is Amply Trowed Difc. 1. c. 9. 10. 1 1. JjjJjJ 2. therfore their Religion , as Vrotejlancy , is without Proof Vn- Motives. ridenced. If they can Gain/ay my Ajjenion let them Speak^ tfthejh*. ind Bring their Motives to Light. We would gladly j^*1^ iear what can be Anfwered plainly to this one plain canbeUid )emand. [ forth te X2. After a General View Taken of Proteftancy , ******* Vq may Defcend to Particulars , and enquire in the ext Place Why the Profejfors of it Believe Jo much as one Article of this Novelty > For example : Two Sacraments vly, no Sacrifice, no Church Infallible. Why They telieve ( And 'Tis the Worft of all , Yea, and a Para- AJfrange ox beyond Exprejjion) that chrift Abandoned the yery ******* »f :hurcb he Founded in the greatejl Need and Danger that can " ***** wcern a churchy which foot and is to Defend it from He- ?fy. Here We may jafily ft and afionished and Ask ; How it ame to Pajithatou Careful Lord It fut, ( like one Drowfy, r forgetful of bis Charge J withdrew his providence From hat Church He Founded ? what I Hath He been ajleef 1 long > >Tis True , when He Entred a little Boat, Matt. 8. It was a Type of the Church ) a great Tempejl arifing9 U feemed re gar dies of his Dtfciples Jeares And Slept a Hhh3 While; 4?o Difc.lV.Cri. Vrbteflancy proved Improbable*. Chiift Mobile y But to Say , He hath no^ Slept on For a Thousand fZnJlttU Years^ and ltk-e one Retcf>les, Suffer ed t}m Arke He Built not Catbohch only to be Tofjed "frith the "ftorft of Tempefs , But to he over- cbunb^et turned iritih a. Deluge of Err ours and Fals DocJrin , is a No- fay'X'pff. ye^y ftm for ?rotefiams to Broach then Any Chrifiian in the ftred it to Tvorld to Hear or Think^of. Mother fore nhat scripture, perish. y,bat vnanimous Confent of Fathers, or Councils, haye They for this long Suppofed Negligent of our Vigilant Lord} III tellyou4 They can Allege jujl fo much proof for this Vnbeard of Paradox as They Do For Their other T^oyelties, chichi* Vtoteflancy purely Nothing . Protejlancy tberfore , whether Tve conjider unprlveZ lt tn a General Way , or Depend to the particular Tenents Therof is meerly Fancy , An Vnproyed and Confeauently, An Improbable Religion, series 23. And Hence it is {Mark it , you will find what I fay 5SJ5| moft True ) rhat SeBmes chiefly Bufy Thmfehes infind- ifrotefian- ing Fault and Carping at Catholici Religion ( As if, Forjooth, cy, make it Theirs were made %ood Becaus They C awl at Ours) But thinly Tm1kttcSlnot °f An 0ther T*SK> Vhicb moft of all Concern's T$em\ And viia? our 'Tis Pofitiyely to Prove, That Protejlancy ought to be' O^ned Religion. as cbriji'i only True and Orthodox Religion , This they ivholy Tvaye, and the Reafonis, Becaus an Improbability , cannot fo Proyed. Vntefttms 24. Pray you Tell me. Did you ever yet Hear prove not from p^oteftant Any Thing like a convincing Princi- Reiijm. P^e • ^en ^e %oes About to Prove Wo Sacraments and no mo- re , or, Tbat Faith only juflifes without charity ? Or (to be brief) That Protejlancy ought to he Valued of as the on- ly pure and Orthodox Religion ofchrijlianity} No . I ha- ve Perufed fome of Their Authors, an No. What then doth rhe Proteflant fpeak here to the Purpofe ? x. It is more then Improbable to prove any one Do&rinof the Ro- man Catholick Religion Fals . The Reafon I give in itisimpof- this place (to omit Others ) is, Becaufe an undubitahle flblet° P0' Principle fohich cannot he shaken , Stand's Firmly againfll)a/J2J" Thefe fuppofed Proofs , And is thus Hinted at Already* thohckDo. Chrijl Iefti* Founded a Catholick^ Church frhich should never an*Fals* Fail, and Therfore could never he defer ted hj him . For, No Monarch that lay es the Foundations of a Kjngdom and oh TbeRga* liges bimfelf to ta\e care of \it , can without injustice Abandon ion% it , unles a Contrary power, or great Negligence Deprive him of his Right. Now f none can he more powerful then thrift , And I hope our AdverfarteyyviU not make him Guilty *f Negligence or Injuftice. Theffpre He fiill Defends the . ^Militant church {a titoft Dear Kjingdom) which he EJlaJtlished. Perhaps fome lefs Goufideiate will fay. We here Tacit- h That Ch $ )i Difc J V. CI L tproteftancy proved Improbable. V?e fappoft fyfeppofe , chrijl to have foundd the Roman Catholic k Church bMamofi °W' I Anfwer firft . If this were Suppofed we fuppfe tm*wve- no more hut Truth , when it is clear That fir a Thou/and uty* years before Luther , There was no other Orthodox Church in the World But the Roman Catbelick, as is proved in the fecund Difcours. I Anfwer x. We Suppofe Nothing hut an E- vident Ferity . V% That Chrijl founded a Church which "ft ic- **** permanentlj to continue to the worlds End . But this fus Found- Church (find it where jou will) Protef ants fay , Chrijl A- tdaChunbhandoned , Buaufe lefore Luther s Dayes , Theresas no True Z^dL cburch on Emh for ten *boU Ages. Or if they Admit fend. offuch a Church, Let them pleafe to name ic, But This will be impoffible if They Exclude the Roman. You fe Therfore , How pittifully Weightles Protejlants Proofs tnujl needs be, when They Talh^of a Vniverfal Deluge ofErrours Overrunning the Roman church , yea , and all other churches tlnceRea. he fore Luther . You fe alfo ("may Reafon have place) fingives whether it is not much more prudent to Hold K^ill thofe petty TonfidfL Cav^s °f Seftar*es> t0 h > as Tbey Really are, moft prodigioufjy thns. Eorcelesy Then to he Wrought in this perverfe rerfoafion. That Chrijl lefus Defer ted the church He founded, and Permitted not only the Roman But all other churches wtb it , to be Mijled ?r^L into Hideous Errour. could Sectaries vive Demonfirations $f Itjs then . . i r i • i * t r l *n Evident our Errours tn good Form, \K^4m believe %t Nothing UJs then Vet* monies, And Thus They Hold on in a flighter Way of nightie" skirmifliing Fnable > God knows, to do more Againjl aTheRomm Church which Divine Providence Fphol^s , And theffore It ^oi!ck Hath not only Tvithjlood Harder Shocks from former Here ticks hatbwith- (Then now are in Being) But alfo Defeated nM\i] So ftoedfiro»s- it is. Ecclefta in villa res eft &c. This Ancient church 'is, """££ And Trill be conquer ant , Though Hell and Here fy Band again ft ft *nt$*re' it. Iii CHAP. 4^4 Difc.IV.CIIL Exceptions JgainTl Sectaries CHAP- III. A Word more of Seftttries new Mode of Arguing btft Layd $orth , By Touching briefly on one Con- tronjerfy. i. ^UVHat I would fay now of this Subject, As alfo W of the jufl Exceptions one might make againft our Se&aries writing Controverfies , Can roc be Ex- " prefled in few words : Their Faults and Failings being faults ef a§ they are, no lefs numerous then looking different Sift*ri What has that Dea Syharum , or Hunting- Goddefs to do with Purgatory, or Purgatory with Her? Well, but this Diana, He fayes, befides cafuahties and Beodanis , brings great Revenues into the Church, in fo much that ftie's groVn fat by the fins of the People, And (which Kill's all; Spalatenfis ( whofe Au- thority is as good as Luthers ) Confirms the Do&rin. Is not this think ye a piece of Profound Divinity, with the reft that follows of Hell's Suburbs", and bidding Adieu to Indulgences and years of lubily ? But, 'TlS Thje&is enough : you fe how little the jeft is worth , 1 leave (ndtdm it. Surely, You'll have him more in earned now. 4. He tell's ustherfore, After his quoting the Coun- Mistake* cil of Trent , that the Guilt of Mortal fin being remitted foUow- by the merits ofchrift, The Punishment is Juppofed fttll to remain. Here is cither a Miftake, ignorance, or both. For, All know, when the guilt of a mortal Sin is remitted , which is an exigency or an intrinftckjeon- Godcanw! dignity to Eternal punifliment, that punishment , eo jpfo, 0rdi»a"i!i is remitted with the guilt, unles you fay, that God can/*""'* « punifli a fin which is not, and this for ever. ^tisfW"'vT^ true , an exchange from the eternal, to a temporal pu- ioTJnafi- nifliment is madefy Almighty God through the me-w*D*»y« rits of chrifl \ejus , when the due means prefcribed fot{°^hlede 11 * Ream- jtyfttoi. 4]6 Difc. IV. CHI. Exceptions Jgd'mH Sectaries Remiffion is ufed by the Penitent, And this temporal punifliment is to be fatisfied For here , or in Pur. gatory. 5. He dates next the Controverfy between the Greeks and Latin Church upon thisfubjed, and faith, The maw thing ob]eBed by the Greeks againfl the Latins Was this temporary punishment for fin in a future ft ate. Sir, I muft now fpeak to you , and fay your Affertion is an uifttkes, unproved fuppofition, And very untrue as will prefent- in st*twg ly appear. Neither doth the Apo'ogy you fo blindly the *>ue- qUQte Ed. Salm. fo much as Probably favour it . Mark '1 *ton' your own Tranflation. We own no Purgatory fire, W nor any temporal punilLment by fire. The conteft therfore was not concerning a temporal punifliment precifely Confidered , For The Greek Church never de- nyed a punifliment, but about the particular Pain by fire, Ar^d this purgation by fire , fome of them perhaps obfcHnty, might think ( though moft weakly ) flackned the endeavours cf the Diligent if your quotation be ko man true , for I wonder why you run to Ed. Salmas when you w*s have at hand the Parifian , the Venetian , the Cullen »h*t u. Editions, with others. Now, that which i Affert is salm* without Difpute molt certain, as Appears by the -very Aw- Definition of the Council of Florence under Eugeniut the Fourth, where the Greeks with their Emperour, and Patriarch of Constantinople met , and Confent- ThiCoun- jng £0 the Latins Defined thus. Item definimus fi ve- nitun re P(*nttentes in Vet daritate decefferint &c. Alfo we De- fine , ifthofe who are truly Penitent and depart this life in the love of God , and yet have omitted the worthy fruits of pennance for thieir fins committed, eo- rum arimas pants Purgatortis jfttrgari , that fuch foules are pur- ro ex- Difcl V. 0 i I. Way cfjrgumg. 457 purged by the pains of Purgatory. Thus much you might have read in Alfonfa a Caftro , whom you cire lib. 12. Tit. Purgat. at the end of the Title. And therfore when Aifotfu* at the Beginning therof , attri- . butes the Denial of Purgatory to the Greeks, He muft ctftn. either mean (if he contradict not himielf) that fame pitched. of them only denyed it , or that moft denyed a place of torment by Fire-/ For, How can He fay, that the Greeks Denyed all future punishment in Purgatory, when He exprefly Grants they Defined the contrary. Nay, He faith more , that the Greeks then afiembled in that Council, publifhed a book Ad prohandum Furga- tori] locum to prove the place of Purgatory , which book was printed at Bafil both in Greek and Latin. And here by the way you may Obferve another fraud of Sectaries , who if they find a piece of a fcntence feemingly favorable for them , that's layd hold on , and whatever dear's the Expreffion or makes againft their Diftm- miftaking it, That's waved and diflembled. But hlinz°f let us go on. You Oppofc againft the Councils De-^/f5 finition Marcus Eugenius utterly refufing to fubfcribe it. sectaries. What is it to the purpofe whether He did or no > Was his fole vote Enough to unvote, or make null the fentiment of a whole Council ? O, fay you, He would never have don fo . Had all the Controverly Thea^0' been whether the Fire was real or Metaphorical. How ruJCUs know you that but by your proofles Guefles only ? Eugenius Befides , that was not the Controverfy, wightUs, 6. You (till go on a Guefling. The Greeks indeed, fay you , Do not Believe that any Souls enjoy the Beatifical *v'ifion before the tfai of lodgement ; And on that account they Alio^ of prayer for the Dead, not with any refpett i ' I i i 3 to 4j 8 Difc.I V. C.l 1 1. Exceptions Agamjl Sectaries to a Deliverance ef Souls out of Purgatory, hut to the partici- UoreMi- pat ion of their lappines at the great Day. Anfwer. jtakesand you have here as many foul miftakes and Errours as Ermrs. ^^ are worcJs . Ancj ^ pirfl. te][ me . w}10 jhofe Greeks were that Denyed fouls the Beatifical Vifion before the Day of Judgement > Your Indefinite Pro- pofition , The Greeks do not Believe &c, Seem's to include all, And this you muft intend, if you fpeakto thepur- pofe; for to fay, that fome few, here and there, we- re of that Opinion is no Advantage to your Caufe , Afewef Now to ftiew you how untrue this part of your After. that oft- tjon js ^ as a|r0 the left that followes ; withall, to con- A°dv*ntL fifm what is alleged out of the Council of Florence , gt. Ill give you the Teftimony of a moft Erudite Author I AUtil4S Leo AUttu4 a Grecian born, and one better vcrfed in nmft the knowledge of the Greek Church, then we Uanders Learned can be> f0 remote from it4 Sir, Believe it, had you Author. recj one on|y boQ^ of this Author (I'll now quote it,) to fay nothing of his other works, Chiefly Contra Hottin- gerum , you would never have writ this 6. Chapter a- gainft Purgatory ; For, He doth not only ridd out of the way thofe vulgar Obje&ions you Propofe ( not o- ne 1 am fure is omitted ) but alfo acquit's himfelf of far Greater, And , (as behoves a Scholler) fo ftrong- ly maintains our Catholick Verity by undeniable Prin- ciples , that none ftiall Hereafter fpeak probably agai» ft it. 7. To the matter therfore now in hand f LeoAlatitu in his Book entituled : De utriufque EccUjta Occidental & Orientate perpetua in Dogmate de Purgatorio , Conftnfione Printed at Rome Anno 1655. and Dedicated to Pope Alexander the VII. page z^. n. 34. which begin' s, Hie vero Difc.IV.C.l II. Way of Arguing. 479 veto paululum immorandum, Declares out of the Ads of the Council of Florence what the Greeks thought of fMt^f^^ gatory fire , what perfwafion they were wrought into p2"ZyS after much Difpute had with the Latins , And finally fa between with what judgement they returned into Greece, cum th^ftZeks Ferrara ( faith He) adbuc Sy nodus efjet &c. when the Sy-uti»$. nod was yet at Ferrara the 4. of June, The Queftion of Purgatory fire , was propounded . The Latins Ihew- ed firu , that fiich foules as have venial Sins are pur- ged by a Purgatory fire, receive help, And are freed From thofe pains by the prayers of Priefts , by the Sa- ^hatthe crifice of the Mafs, Almes giving , and other pious Latins jf- works. 2. That the fouls of Saints are in Hea- /«"**. ven prefent to the blefled Trinity, and there enjoy all Happines * Therfore They diftinguillied three different places . 0/ the jufl in Heayen , of the Damned in Hell , and of a third fort , jufftr'wg in Purgatory till all he fatisfied for. The Greeks, faith Alat'ws, Hearing what was alleged by the Latins out of the Holy Scripture and Fathers, faid they would return an Anfwer ro eve- ry- particular. Therfore on the 14. of iune , Bejfario the Nicene Metropolitan gave in writing the Greeks what the Qpinion , and expounded that PatTage of the Apoftle (6reeki contrary to the fentiment of the Latins , yet, Confeffed, m * Tfte Greek* held a temporal punishmevt , due to fouls not per- fectly purged, And, that thefe go in locum tenehricofum %The Greeks locum mcerorhy into a dark place of Grief, of Sorrow, acknowied. and Pain , yea , and are freed from that torment by gf/f^ the Sacrifices of Priefts and Charitable Alms deeds, But/LT" {till, He faid the torment is not by fin . The DirTeren- though mt ce therfore between the Greeks and Latins was, that^rff* thofe Confefs a place of Pain and Sorrow, fed non per ignem^ 440 Difc.lV.CIII. Exceptions Again/} SeBaries ignem, not by fire: The Latins contrary flood for a Pur- gatory by Fire. All this parted before the Definition of the Council , And therfore you fe how untrue your Aflertion, is ^. That the Greeks AlloTv not of prater for the Dead ^iib an) refpecl to a Deliverance of fouls out of Purgato- ry pains*, For, here the contrary is profelTed by them . MoreMt- Again , wheras you fay , the Greek* helieve not, that any cerning"he f0f'ls en)oy the beatifical yfion in Heaven before the T>aj of Greeks. judge m en t , Alatiu* , page 245. fine, plainly contradi&'s you, Affirming , that the Greek^church believes the con- The opt. trary . Although He Adds, nonnulles effi There are form won offo- r / 1 . UP 1 1 r r r 1 i me is not ol that Opinion, but the voice of jome feV , I hope, theiudge- gives us not the fentiment of their whole Church. mToh* Ac 'a^> faith my Author, page 146. After much con- church, tention and Delay made by the Greeks a whole day long from morning till Six at night, They met again the zj. of Iulij , and debates being ended , Ftrmarunt , r^T*5,they eftabliiTied this Truth. SanBorum animas , ut ani- beatifical ™as , ad perfeflam pervenifje heatitudinem , in refurreclione itifion to tatnen perfeBiorem confecuturas , cum propriis corporiha fulge* {°h!dlefoT hurit urS°l &c' That the Souls of Saints come t0 Per" iu%eientt feft happines , yet in the Refurreftion they are to en- joy a more perfeft felicity becaufe of their bodies', when thefe fhall ihine like the Sun &c. Finally, in the 25. and laft Seffion , Three things were conclud- ed . The firft, that the fouls of Saints are perfectly happy auvad Animas. The fecond : Souls of great finners are Endlefly miferable. Now for the third Theiafi ftate of fouls , which they called Media* , They voted, Vecifi°»°f fuch to be in a place of Torment, but contended not, snities! whether it was fire , Darknes, or any like grievous tor- ment , and Thefe They faid (after a perieft purga- tion) Difc.IV.C.III. VVayofJrguing. 441 tion ) Vvcre to enter in the Society ej- the Bleffed , and fe the 'very ejjence of Gd, fine uflo medio , that is, immediatly . To confirm both thefe Verities He produceth the laft profeffion of Faith which hfefh the Patriarch of Con- rhtVn- ftantinople made of this fubjeft in thefe Few , but pithy fijfa"f words. ojuoAyw t»v ^v%wv to x^S-^tk^ov . 1 confefs a foL™' a Purgatory of fouls . And He Added, that the Greek Vamarcb and Latin Church were not Devided upon any account ofConjim- of Purgatory. Finally, page 249. LaImus recounts unote- with what judgement the Greeks returned concerning w«fc»£«* Purgatory, which appears , faith He , by their Rituals. /^^'"/ It was , that fouls not perfectly cleanfed, are purged in a place returned of Torment , and teceirpe benefit by the prayers of the liYtng^as Hom* is nolv Declared. 8. It would be a long work, to profecute All that our Learned Author hath of this Subjeft. Whoever defires more, may read him chiefly from the firfl: pa- ge to the 41. where He fliewes firft the miflakes of fame Writers, that thought the Greeks abfolutely De- nyed Purgatory, And with thefe, Sir , youmay ranck uowfimt your unquoted Authors , fag. 640. But Alatius Difrank's JjJJ^rf them all , Declares the ground of their Errour , And that fay, fliewes how they were deceived by tie yyritings of fotne the Greeks Scbifmmcal Grecians , whofe Authority, faith He, Avail's %^$fm as little to prove that the Greek Church Denyed Purgatory , Satory, As if one iliould now cite Luther, Calvin, or Ochinm , and believe them , when they go about to recount the fuppofed Errours of the Roman Church . Smite enim argurnemaremur ( They are his words p*ge $.) The man woul^ Difcours fooliflily, that ftould- conclude , the Greek^church Held no place of Purgatory :• Becauk Mar- cus Ephofimr Barlaam Momchus, Niltu Thejjalonicenjis, hfefhtu Kkk Brjtti* 44* Dtfc.lV.C.tU. Exceptions dga'mH Sectaries Bryenniui , And other SchiCmaticks have Falfly related mat- ters fo , which way of Argui-g is as weak, as if one TheEr- fhould fay, That, that whole Church is now infe&ed rows of \x'\t\\ Ariamfm . Macedonian/ fm , Eutychiamfm , or Nellorian- not to be ijm ', Became fome among them P rote Is thefe Herefies. wputedto Alas, The Errours of fome that receded from that Church clunk as WKMM'BityMitt* cited page 4. well obferves , cannot in luftice be imputed to their whole Church, ^htcheyer • defended a place of Pwgatory , And therfore He Tell's the B'"^1U$ Chief o{ the Armenians of his unhandfom Plea, when Principcm He pretended, that the Church left the Schtfmatical o- Armcnio- pinion of fome few . No fuch matter , faith 2(icetasi mm» dftsol pafaw Tdto&ig 4nr£vt Jp& i | ^w v .. But the contrary is true, 'tis you the far lefs number, /^r/ deferted us. Page the ix. ^yilatiut cites Manuel Cakca lib. 4. adyerfut Gr£Cos, who doth not only Admit of a place of Purgatory for Tmtls Souls not perfedly Cleanfed, but moreover Delivers e/iabitshed thefe three particular Truths according to the Sentiment by Manuel Qf that Church. The firft, // is not T^eceJJary to pray for tbofe T»ho nolv enjoy Beatitude , For although, faith He, we offer Sacrifice for the Saints , it is not don that they may Obtain mercy Having it already, But it is offered up for this End , that by Honoring Saints we may make them, through the mercy of God, to be Mediators for us. The fecond Verity is. The Church never Pwyes for the Damned. The laft. There is therfore a third place of Punilliment called Purgatory , where fouls, not perfectly Cleanfed, muft by the juft judgement of God, fuffer for lefs Offences, and fo pafs into glory. This learned Author has much more to this Purpofe, But, it is iaapoffible to touch on all. <). Let us return to AImm, that in every page re- futes C alec a. Difc I V. CI 1 1. Way of Arguing. 4 ft futes your Doftrin . Page 74. He Tell's us, that the whole Greek Church, taught by Apoftolical Tradition, TGr\e" °e ever prayed for the departed who were neither cafl: in church to HeJl , nor are Glorious in Heaven. And Httmtihth proves this even by the Confeflion of innumerable thatT^//», are of the Schifm, Here he gives us the judgement oiprayedfor Gabriel Severus Philadelphienfis in the book He writ a- SohU m gainft the Latins of Purgatory , where He ihowes how UYgcitory' far the Greek Church agrees with the Latin , and wherin it Differs \ We Agree , faith He , .that fouls pioujfy departed this life receive t£is* tW 4/^X*JV T* £*'*» 3. Saith , This is the Do hefides Affirms , They recehe remifiion and relaxation of their punishment . The like Seyerus Fhiladelphienfs , ^Cott; though a Schifmatick, Con feffeth That the Creek Priefis Scbifma- pray every Saturday , that , theje departed Souls may Jina God tvk. Merciful, gain remiffion of their fins , and he freed from the punishment , yphich torments tbem3 11. I am Difc.IV.GIR Way of Arguing. 44J 11. I am forced to wave a world of other Teftimo- nies molt pertinently produced by this learned Au- thor for our Catholck Verity. Page 56. He fhowes, that as well the Ancient as Modern Greeks acknow- ledge the continued pradife of praying for the Dead to t^re{°J J have come from the Apoftles , And in confirmation of an Jpofto- it cites Gennadms the Patriarch ; S. Cbryfojhm Horn, 69. ad tic"fTra' > populum exprefly Approving the Doclrin , who alfo Hton' faith mud? hip is affrded the Dead by Prayer. This is again confirmed pag.6]. by the Ancient Teftimony of S.DionyJius ( frte quis alius ) Ecclefiafl. Hier. c. 3. by Holy Ephrems lad will and Teftament , and others. Pa- ge q$. and 94. He proves more amply that thefe Prayers were made for a Delivery of fouls from paw, from Grief, Mourning , Affliction , and Torment , as is now declared. Page 104. He ihowes , the fufTeran- ce of thefe Departed in Purgatory not to be a flight2?^***' Kqkoum, as iome vSectaries would nave it, but a hideous my is penal torment , true, real, and not Imaginary. And to this realb purpofe Nicolatu Cabafda in Expofit. Mijpe cap. 45. and^X* loannes Engemcu* are quoted page 147. and 149. The imagi firft Affirm's : Souls are purged and receive remiilion 7- of Their fins by the Prayers of Prints, The other: The Tthole Greeks Church acknowledgeth this Purgation of fouls after Death , and that releafment of their fuf- ferance is obtained by the Sacrifice of the Map , by pious Prayer , and other good works acceptable to God* Alatius therfore moft juftly deplores the pertinacy of Tbe Thinz fome , who read fo often Kd^a^v, and YL*fyAt2Vis«/- Greek Authors , and yet cauflefly doubt of Purgato ^latomflt ry. Rem habent , ejr de nomine contendunt > They ha-****"**, ve the Thing and yet boggle at the Name, Confefs f Kkk 3 then. / not or ma* 44<$ DifclV.GIJI. Exceptions Againfl Seflaries then , faith He, which is undeniable, that fouls have relief in a place of puniihment by the Prayers of the faithful, And call it Purgatory, or what els you plea- fe , it imports nothing* i 12. Sir, by thefe Teftimonies alone (befides in- numerable others omitted ) which none can either ex- cept againft , or, probably explicate, you fe , how wide both parts of your Affertion are from Truth . The ^oJTd one *s * T^e Gye*k* do not believe (you mod mean the verfaries Greek Church) any fouls to enjoy the beatifical vifion before the Ajferuon Day of judgement, "^htch is noiv proved ah folutly untme. The proved w. other# They a/ioto indeed of prayer for the Dead, but Tvith- true, r n i • r i i r out any rejpect to a Deliverance of Souls out of- a place of pu- nishment: And this fecond, if there be a latitude in Fal- Vrayer for flty) is more untrue. You fe moreover How forcea- mmeMe'd b'e t'iat u^u^ Argument is for Purgatory. -The with a Greek and Latin Church ( yes and the Amitnt church of the temporal £efyes alf0 9 & / shall prefently Declare ) Prayed for the me™ ' Dead , Ergo there is a Purgatory , or, which is the fame, Evidently Turgatory is as certain , as it is certain that thefe Churches proves* pray for the Dead tormented ^ith a Temporal punishment. 1 7* Now , if after all, you Anfwer. They only prayed for a joyful Refurre&ion , or, meerly for a folace of madefo*?* ^°^s dwelling > as you feem to fuppofe , in dark Re- joyfui Receptacles, or finally, that they may Efcape the fla- furreftion mes 0f fire vvhich feal be at the Day of Judgment, you my c' do not only Vent your own Fancy without Proof, but moreover Contradict the Authorities now cited , wher- by it is Evident, that Prayers were made to free fouls from a temporal punishment , during this our time of Exi- le , to acquit them of Debts Contra&ed in this life (fo S.AuJlin prayed for His Mother lib. 9, CoifciT. c. 13.) and Difc .1 V.C.EI I Way tfJrgumg. 447 and Finally toTransferr Them from a prefent doleful State, to Blifs and Happines before the Day of Doom* And , Hence it is, that the Greeks in Their Paracleti* ca cited by Alatius page 144. Petition Almighty God, i when the foul, is departed , for its fpetdy paff*ge into Parad/fe without let or tmpedment. Hence alfo S.chrjfoftom s- c%/'* ( quoted page 145. ) Orat. 5. de Pcenttentia , Lxhort s this Purgation will be made in Hell fire, and for a determinate time. Catholicks own no fuch Doftrin. Finally , He held that not only Great tin- ners And the Damned , bur the Devils alfo were to be Purged in Hell, which Expiation Ended, all of them are to return to a ftate of Happines. Catholicks Ab- jure theErrour, and Hold no redemption poflible for either the Damned or Devils. Thus much of a meer Calumny. 14. You fe fourthly, no little fwerving from Truth, when you , Sir, Tell us in your Preface to the Reader, That you haye been Jo far from dijjemblwg the force of any of the Cathalick^ Arguments^ that if you Could add Greater height to them you laould have Done it, being v> FnVcilling to abufe your felf as the Tvorla. All is Contrary in the prefent Contro- verfy (and you mifs as much in others) For , you have A^ neither dated the Queftion rightly between the Latins *erfay and the Greeks (And Herein Jyes no little fraud) nor difrmbies have fo much as (lightly touched on any one Material p«JM- thing now fpoken of, And judge you, whether this be not a Biffembling of Difficulties. If you fay, youne- Ms too ver read Alatiiu , you have certainly in your Excellent much For- Libraries more then one of thofe Authors He Quo- de7iJh£n tes' an^ why were not they better Searched into beib- »h*t ut re you writ of Purgatory ? The Truth is (There is know not.. no Denying it) you were too forward in Declaring your Judgement concerning the Greek Church, before you Well DtiU v *CJ 1 1. Way cfjrguing* 449 well knew what it Teaches. Would one rake the pains (and perhaps it may be don ) ro Tranflate your whole fixtli Chapter into a known language,and fend it to Alatim (He is yet alive , and can Ar iVer to the Ca'u- fe) with what Difdain think ye , wouid He look on't? How undigefted a piece would he judge it to be? How far from Expreffing what the Greeks Teach? *££tu*1 And, Do not (light the man, for, He has the tcpu~ ifiumtd teofa moft learned Scholler the whole world -Over./"** However, if you Sec light by his Perlon , anfwer his Li4rm**m Arguments , His Reafons , and mod Convincing Au- thonties. 14. If any one defire to know more of what the X^xeek Church hold's concerning the Fire of Purgatory* He may read Alarms page 200. where He cites S.Bafil and others for a purgation by fire. You have much alfo ****** of this whole fubjed in His Book againft Hottinger, y^m% where He proves, page 130. Chap. 10. that the Greeks pray for the rcleafment of Souis,from their tears and Torments, And , that after the Ending of fuch punifli- A»ip*[. ments they may pafs to eternal Happines. In Ecclefia^ lnu Gracorum, laith He , pagina 1 5 5, cap. I 1. Vnut fere eji con- *fter pUm fenfut omnium Grtcorum &c. Almoft all the Greeks, mshmtm. even thofe who are againft the Pope agree fo far with The bU fid him , that the BleffiA, after This life, enjoy the beatifical vifion «fi»^:' ii>ith the Angels, and fe God facie ad facie m. Now, Sir,/^^ if you would have an Anfwer ( Though it merits no- faaivifi ne ) to the pretty jeer you begin with , Concerning the vaft Incomes of the Church by Indulgences ( Riyet call's^them Pontificias emulgemias ) Read Alatius page 22$. Chap. ix. where He waftes away the Calumny , and ftewes how feverely the Church proceeds in this par- L ! 1 ticular ■ this en]oy beati- rz 4J0 Difc.I V.C\ IT. Exceptions Ag&mft Sectaries N*s*Uy ticular charging All Officers of the Court not to take Jmni. U *"° much as lhs lead Salary for the very Parchment, for the writings or any other labour belonging to the Indulgence , And to avoyd all Deceit , this Super- fcription goes with the indulgence. Gratis etiam quoad Scripturam . All is frankly don , without reward or recompence. 1 5. You may return once more to His Book de Vtriufy Ecclefa Confenfione , and page 171. find the Doclrin of Purgatory Profefied and believed as well by the Syrians, Armenians and other Haftern Nations that Profefs Chriftianity , as by the Greeks themfelves . Abraham Thetajiern Ecchtlenfn a Maronit ( faith Matins) And one no lefs skil- btfitUtbe ^ m Sciie^a^ital Affairs then in the Oriental Langua- Greeksfa.ges in His Notes upon Hebedieufu Bifliop of Sob* ex- Hew « prefly mantains the DoSrin of Purgatory, and faith, ri*toy. ^e j^oman Church Innovates Nothing in this parti- cular, Teaches Nothing, but what is read in S.Ephrems otfceM* Office , Siyejbeflet id ad Purgatorium ignem , five ad remif nrd's with fionetn deliSlorum , whether that relates to the f re of Purga- the m#A» t0Yy^ or to tke remijjton of fins after Death. Much mo- church. re -s t^ere alleged to ^jg pUrp0fe % but tne work would be Endles , fhould we tranfcribe the half of his Quotations. Yet one Thing is not to be omitted wFTichHe as largely as learnedly proves Chiefly from The An- page 268. to page 300. And Tis that the Ancient church "T h f°f^e lews believed a Turgatorj. He firft urgeth that tktumn. '-known Paffage of Scripture Machab. lib, z. c. 12. which btlhved though it were not Scripture, as Se&aries pretend , yet ?urt*toty. the book is of great Authority, and was never taxed sof Errour by cbnjl and His Apoftles or any Orthodox Writer fince chrijt , and therfore cannot but be recko- ned Difc.I V.GI II. Way cjArgun.g. 451 ned of as an undoubted Hiftcry. Next He Prcduceth the Teftimonies of no kw learned Rabbirs from page 178.. whetby we have aflmance that the Hebrew^'*' Church indubitably believed i ot only a Purgatory, but,/",. the Fire of Purgatory alfo: And here, were it worth the labour , I could charge my margents with Hebrew enough ( borrowed from Alatius) as Sedaries ufually Do Theirs with Greek and Latin , (I know a Little, and Tis little enough of that language,) but I Slight fuch Pedantry, too manifeft a bragging of Nothing. Good ofttm* Apparel needs no Ribands , nor a folid Difcours (6 U™JZZ much Margent-Bravery of Hebrew, Greek and Latin. pni% If any particular Emphajis lie in a Greek^or Hehrei* word, it is worth the while to Search into it , but too much of the florifhing ( when every Boy Can tran- fcribe a Greek or Latin fentence, if He have a book be- fore him ) relifteth not, For it only ferves to ftow how vainly Affeflation creep's in under -a colour of Learning. Yet if this be the new Mode of Se&aries Let it pafs, it is one of their leaft Tranf- greffions. 16. Wei, Not to forget: Alatius page 277, cites you R. Menachm Calomiti , whofe Writings are yet preferved in the Vatican Library , And This Rabbi niUml'ht tell's us what the Judgement of the Hebrew Church TlbhLl ' was t much ro this fenje : That if any foul be infetled ^ipith pride or Errour , it tyas neceffary before its entrance into Paradifs to be wafted., and cleanfed by fire in a f lace ah we Hell . You have yet a clearer Teftimony taken out The, u"" of the ThaJmud Maflecher quoted page 2.92. where a ^w, triple State of Souls is diftinguifted : Of perfe&ly f«>/# s%- juft , of impioufly wicked , and of a third fort who are u 9fW*> Lll 2 firft G 4J2 DifcIV.C.I V. "Proofs TaralleWd. firfl: to defcend to a place of Toraent , to be tryed by Fire as Gold is: And for the relief of fuch imptifo- ned Captives , luJas Maccbahdus fent twelve thoufand Drachmas of filver to Hierufalem as an Oblation. The Conclufion therfore is , Santt* & Salutaris &c. It is a Holy and wholfom cogitation to pray for the Dead , that they may he freed from their fins . But enough of this iubjed, if you defire further Inftru- #ions from the Rabbins concerning Purgatory, read K^iUtms now cited. chap. rv. I A Parallel of Proofs for , and Again ft the Doftrin of Purgatory. Ablu- tion to our Ad*verfaries late Objections. \s VV/E come now to a juft trial of the eaufe , to W proofs and Principles. Pray you obferve. We will ballance all without partiality , and make ^J'the Parallel as it truely is. The Queft ion rightly statld"* Stated is. Whether there be a third place ( diftinft from Heaven and Hell) Ttberin Souls departed this life fuffer a temporal punishment i From T»hich punishment they are freed de norni- h ^e ^TAyers tf the Hiving , Call it Purgatory, or otherwi- se, fe , it matter's nothing , we difpute de re} not de No- mine. 2 m v m Dilc.IVC.1V, ObjtttmsJobeJ. 45$' mine . Sectaries hold the Negative , Catholicks the Affirmative.' And here is our firft Principle, x. What chrijis true Church , and all other Chur- ches in the world denominated chriftians Profefs and be- The/rJh 1. ,, it* ' n r n mad mop heve, cannot but be an undoubted verity. But chrijis C9r>vin- true Church and all other Churches with it Profefs /><#«** Proof, and to deny the Fathers Authority. Therfore I am bound much more , to yeild my AlTent now when all Churches Affirm the Do&rin , and not one Father Denies it . And our very Adverfaries muft fay as much as I prove. For, do not they own the L 1 1 3 Holy f454 Difcl V.C1V. Proofs parallel? d. seBtriis rHoly^Book of Scripture to be Gods Word ( how con- migrant feqUent]y they proced I Difpute not ) becaufe all Chri- nffvt. flian Churches in the world do fo l If therfore that noip *\ "J* .Authority be warrant enough for a Bible, it is as weighty for the Do&rin we ftand for. And this An objt-* was my Condufion . Perhaps you will fay. Very Wm.\ many among the Schifmatical Churches Deny a Pur- gatory. Contra. And very many alfo Deny the Canon of Scripture you Admit of. Doth this make the Bible of lefs efteem among you ? Know ther- sihifma* fore, We fpeak Here of Church-Authority , and not of ilfkir€Tom Schifmatical Parties receding from thofe Refpe&ive J church™ Churches wherof they were once members; Know alfo, pptaixnnot that the felf-Opinion of fuch Partifans is not to becom- *t« i^T" Parc(i w^k l^e SMtMM* o( a whole Church againfl: $Tm. them . You may Reply Again . We are now for- ced to make ufe of Schifmatical Churches to Defend our Do&rin of Purgatory. Anfwer. No fuch mat- ter , We need not their Heip , but fay, Salutem ex im- micis noflris, when Adverfanes agree with us in a Truth it is an Advantage to our caufe, witneffes upon The num. this account are multiplyed, Et yox pofulivox Dei, if leroj {^11 teach as 1»e do , it is certain t*e profefs no Erroneous Do- withntjfes flrin. At lead the Argument (Adbominem ) Againfl Tru"h,p. Sectaries hath place, who value fo much of the Greeks ves/ome and other Heterodox cbriflians , We care not for more. Mvama. gef1(jeS | the Greek Church, when it was mod Orrho- ge* dox, prayed for the Dead in a ftate of fufferanre, as is already proved. x**fi*i> 3. Weigh now wrell the Reafons Fro , and, Con. Po^ Trt ^H x^e Chunkcs in the ^orld Defend a Purgatory , that is a wight*, pltce ^ her in fouls are temporally punished ; No Church refuted Qrtho- Di'fcl V- CIV. ObjeSliom fobel 455 Orthodox ever dewed it. I fay more: 7^o Scbifmatical Church, under the l^otion of a Church contradicled that DoBrin , Ther- fore our profefied Faith is undoubtedly certain upon this very ground, or if it be not , one may call the primary Arcicles of our Faith into Queftion . Andr^*W- thus you have the firft Parallel . All Churches {land for w>Al1"^ m r t r J> r J J none. our ^Affirmative : 2{o Church Defend s the contrary Negati- a dear ve of Seflaries. A mod hvident Conviction: A Cow*- powerful Proof againft this Herefy. m'fecond 4. The fecond Principle is S.Anftim known Doftrin Vrwcyu. De Baptifmo contra Donatifias lib. <\.c. 14. Quod unherfa tenet Ecclejia , nee Conftltis &c. What the whole univerfal Church hold's and was not firft inftituted by Councils, but ever in ufe and retained , Fecle Creditnr , ts rightly be{teve is helieyed to he no other hut an Apojiolical Tradition. But it ApOdM is moft certain , that the whole Vniverfal Church Tradt:te»* prayed for fouls departed, with intention to free them from a temporal Punifhment: The Greeks , the La- tins , and the Ancient H^bre^s Prayed fo, as is already proved , And this had no firft Rife from any Decree N(,s ere instituted by th Hoi Gbojl, Tvbo Tvilts that Toe endeavour to help one an other. Be mofi affured the Dead have much brofit by our Orisons . The Saint hath more to this purpofe in his 41. Horn, upon the firfl: of the Corr. Theodoret (cited by ^latins page 71.) lib. 5. Hijlor. cap. 36.Tel?s us, that Tbeodofius the younger, lay proftrate at the Reliques of .S.CbryfoJiom, praing for the Souls of his deceafed Parents Arcadtus and Eudoxia, that God would grant them pardon for their Offenfes &c. Alatius befides Thefe , cites Theophjlaff, S.Cyril of Ale- xandria, Metaphafles and other Greek Authors ♦ You have the Latin Fathers Largely quoted by Bellarmin fupra cap.io. And their words are (o plain for our Do- Arin (Specially s.Auftins) that none without violence can draw them to any other fenfe then what the Church Teaches, Mod furefy , you will now ex- pect that Sectaries Anfwer us with like meafure, And give in lieu of thefe Teftimonies ( briefly hinted at ) others as clear and fignificant for their Opinion. And this They are obliged to, when befides the alleged Autho- rities,we have an Ample , ancient, and learned Church that fpeaks in the language of the Fathers , and Tea- ches the very Dp&rin They Deliver. But all is Con- trary. 7. I'll tell you a great Truth, and 'tis worth a fe- rious reflexion. Sectaries have not fo much as one Ancient Father Greek or Latin , not one Ancient Wri- ter reputed Orthodox, not one Council new or old , not one word of Scripture that either Pofitivcly and Ex- . prefly Difc.IV.CjV. OljettomfcheJ. ^59 prefly Denies a Purgatory , or Prayers for the Dead , cr the relief we now plead foi , afforded them in a place of Punishment. What not one r No. Parallel r^p*. therfore many with None and you will fe whar foun- rM' dations Our Adverfaries Novelties Stand on. I fay Exfrejly and Pofitively, being well acquainted with Se- ctaries Proceding, as well in this as in orher Con trover- SeiUrm fies. Here They will fir it be upon you with their ™p*f Negative way ot Arguing . We read no juch 7>ord as Purgatory in the Ancient Fathers. 2. You may ha- ve a Company of blind inferences drawn from Scrip- ture and Fathers before the fenfe of either be Agreed ^V^**6 on . 3. As far as Conjectures can reach, they willyy^Vr^- fet Glorfes enough upon the beft Teftimonies allege- ture before able out of Scriptire or Fathers &c. But mark it, all this feJe^resfs while you have Nothing Exfrefs , nothing Pofaive and knlwn*^ fignificant againft us. And Do they think that a meer Negative Argument hath force enough to overthrow a Doftrin Pofuively Profeffed by a whole Church > and fo many- Learned Fathers ? Can they perfwade Themfelves that Their Inferences Forced from Scrip- ture or Fathers, are of any validity, whilft the very fen- fe of both lye under Difpute 1 Take for an iriftan- Aninfim- ce that of S.Iohn Apocal. 14. BleJJed are the Dead that Djt in e*% our Lord, Amodo , from hence forth they reft from Their labours . The Queftion is, what Amodo relates to , whether to the day of every mans Death , or to the laft Judgement Day > whether the Scripture fpeak's there of perfect Souls only, or of others > what is meant by that word labours; For if it fignify the fuf- ferances and perfections of this prefent life , the Text Proves nothing for our Adverfaries. Notwithftanding Mmm % all 4s xhefe and the like paflages as his own Fancy fuggefteth> And if this Fancy hit not right, He is undon.hr He hath no furer Principle to rely on, either in this or any other Controverfy, but His own felf con- Difc.IV.GIV. Objections fcfoed* 461 :onceipted Glofs. The Reafon is : He hath no in-^fl, :allible Church , no clear scripture , no undoubted Principles :onfent of Fathers , no Vniverfal Tradition diftind /*#$<#*• irom his Glofs that can fo much as make it probable/'"' rherfore his own unproved interpretation Doth all; it s his laft Principle and Strongeft Hold, He never goes higher, nor can advance one ftep further. 1 am b confident of this AiTertion, that I challenge our Ad- 'erfary to come to a juft trial in this one Controverfy; -*/*«• ind if He can Anfwer to our Authorities now quoted, °^er- ipon the Aflurance of plain Scripture , undoubted rradition, or the plain Confent of Fathers, I'll cry Jeccavi, and Ask forgivenes of my raflines. Thus hey proceed. 9. On the Other fide, when the Catholick inter- nets Scripture or Fathers alleged by Sectaries againft lis Faith, He never makes hit interpretation to hetheTheU^ reateft light or Jure jl Pro$f of His DocJrin : but moft pru- Prw/ */* lently Anfwers , 1 am bound to interpret your lefs Q/tthol*ck dear Authority brought Againft me , becaus , I am "^llprL \ffured aliunde by the ftrongeft Principles Imagina- wqp, >le (whether my Glofs hit right or no) that my r your unproved Conje&ures? It is impoflible. fou will fe this more clearly by one Example. The ^"J1*** Catholick Believes a Purgatory. The Se&ary faith riis belief is againft Scripture. ( wifdom 3 . The fouls of Mmm 3 ~ the 4& Difc.IV.ClV. Proofs faraM'd. the righteous are in tie bands of God , and no torment shall touch tbm.) No fuch matter, Anfwers the fCatho- lick , for if the word Righteous point at fuch as arc perfectly juft and need no Purgatory, your proof is proofles , or if the word Torments particularly fignifies (as it doth ) a racking or torturing forced on Malefa- ctors, to confefs the Truth before a Judge, the Text is wide enough from your purpofe ; For no fuch pu- The o- niftiment {hall touch the juft departed . Now mark, tboiicks ^1^ the Catholick : Will you , Sir , have me to part ***«*&*' ^rom c'ear an<^ cerr^>n Principles wheron my Faith re- lies for a Scripture, whilft the very fenfe of that Scrip- ture is at leaft doubtful and obfcure, and therfo -Exchange ciples of my Faith for your uncertain GloflTes and Principles you kave no more > Though you read the Text now forumer- cited till your eyes be weary, uinGiof- IO# Upon the Occafion now offered, givemelea- bu ve to Tell you one great Truth , v% All of us muft A great ( rnayoidib/y ) either firmly Adhere to the Doclrin of our Ca- Vh%%Ve^ dohcK Church, in thefe points of Controyerfy , Or ( may Se- pmon. Varies Glofles fway with us ) we shall be fure to Affem to that which is not only an Hsrefy , hut according to Ordinary Prudence and clear Principles a thoufand times more improbable and Difficil. Obferve it in our prefent Controverfy. Sectaries hold it no improbability to fay, That the Souls of good men do not enjoy compleat Happines till the Day of Judgement (Any thing may paji but Po- Difc.IVeC.IV. ObjeSiions fobed. 463 Popery ) yet this very Affertion , if we refpccl: Autho- r*"*- rity and reafon alfo ( abftra&ing from Faith) is Jefs£^£w probable then our Church Do&rin is. Thofe quo- 0/Sdfe- ted Scriptures prove Nothing to this purpofe , as we rics* (hall fliow prefently ; for to find mercy at that great Day, inferos not, that all Souls muft ftay out of Heaven till the fecond Coming of Cbrifl to judgement. No- te the like (train in other Controverfies . They will have me to Deny the Infallibility of my Church, and will give me in Place of it their own fallible Tvord , which I am fure cannot Stand in Competition with the fole Humane Authority of my Church . They will have us to deny the Popes Supremacy , And what Do they inforce on us in lieu of that ? Nothing, but rheir own jarring heads that agree in Nothing , And :hefe muft Teach and Govern us in place of a Pope, rhey will have me to Disbelieve my Scripture inter- preted by the Church , and to believe their Interpo- lations , who are both Cburchles and Scriptureles . Vtark well, and judge you, whether that which Se- ThywuU Varies would Drive us upon, be not in a high mea- f?™ re- tire more improbable and difficile , then what we now urimpro- >elieve, and it muft needs be fo , for, as I told you, labilities. he only fupport of their whole Religion, as Prote- K Uncy , is neither Scripture nor the Content of Fa- hers , but their own Glofles forced on both , without iirther warrant. Follow them clofely through all Controverfies, you will find I fpeak Truth. Contra- ThtCa. y wife • when the Catholick Interprets , He hath ever J*jj|jj*| tt hand a certain Principle difiincJ from bis Interpretation^ whmu* tfhich is his fecurity; For, faith He , I muft either Inter- mefprfct. Dretaa Authority when it is Dubious,ordefert thofe Con« vincing 4^4 DTcIV.CIV. Proofs ParalklTd Vincing Principles wheron my Faith is grounded, which are without Conrroverfy tncft certain : But to do fo is madnes , and a notorious fin againfl: Prudence Thus much by way of a Tiotandnm. om Ad- r l^ ^/e come now to Combate a little with our Ad- ol^lms. verfaries Objections , but the Quarrel will not be long; For befides wThat is refuted Already, and fome other Parergons, not much (as I think) to the Purpofc, the remainder may be eafily difpatched. 12. He faith fit ft : Nothing ought to be looked on as an Article of Faith among the Fathers , but "tirhat They declare , that they believe on the account of Diyim Revelation. Mark Ahard the word Declare , and fe, Sir, what a law you lay on •RuUgiven tke pathers , they mufl tell their Readers wtien they then? write : CMy Maflers , fo much you are to believe on the account of Divine Revelation, and fomuch not : or if They fail in this Declaration , they tnay , as you teem to fay afterwards, fpeak only their own fancies and Imaginations. Contra. S*. Auflins writes of Purgato- ry and holds it, as weihall fe prefently, But Decla- res not Explicitly that the Do&rin is of Divine Revela- tion , nor Explicitly that it is his own fancy . If ther- ThtArgu- fore He Declares neither Explicitly , upon what Princi- urud"' P*e can you A^erc • ckat he rather makes it a thought of his own fancy, then an Article of Faith. All you fay, is : He declares it not to be of Divine Revelation. And I Anfwer, He Declares it not to be a thought of His own fancy. If then you f uppofe it to be his Fan- cy, becaufe He declares it not to be of Dbine Revelation, I may as lawfully fuppofeit to be of Divine Revelation^ The Mi. lecauje He declares it not to be his own fancy; In fi*k'* a word yotu: Principle is a Miftake. For , the Fathers in Difc.IVX.IV. ObjeSltons fohel 465 in their Learned Volumes often fpeak of matters of Faith, yet ever fay not exprdly it is fo , and they of- ten alfo touch on Opinative Doftrin, yet Cry not always out, rhis is opinion only . No , but fuppofe both known by other Principles without their cxprefi Declaration . You cite S'.Auftinin the next page, Aliening in Seve- ral places , That all things necejjary to be believed are clear- ly repealed in Scripture. I doubt much of that word clearly , and of the feveral places too ; but this is not what 1 aym at . My Queftion is , whether S', Aujlin St: Auftin declares himfelf^te/y in thofe feveral places, that His^,Xr# Affertion is of Divine Revelation > If He do not ac- *remany cording to your Rule, it is a Thought of his ^AncfhJ^rv? only, and therfore makes nothing for your purpofe.^^/ Well after All, here is a better Rule. When the Fa- *'» Smo- thers Deliver a Do&rin Conformable to the Belief of £dc F,dc the Vniverfal Church , you may rightly fuppofe ittocith fo much fear and hefitancy , that any one mayfe He ypM far from making it an Article of Faith. To prove this hefitancy you quote two Places , de Fide & tperibus c. 1 6. And Enchir. c. 69. I Anfwer firft. You have not ma- St- Auftl,n de a Diligent enquiry into the Fathers, if you think *r#XV St. Auftin was the firft that held a fire of Purgation be- held?™- fore the day of Iudgement. The contrary is manifeft **"*• N n n by \ 466 Difc/ V. CIV. Troofs parallel? d. m!b$Mby *e AuthoricLs cited above ■ l fay x- This Lcarn- Doftrwof e^ Father Delivers no doubtful Judgement of Purgato- Vurgatory, rj \ but plainly AflTerts it. I fay 3. Your two Places prove not that He doubts of it. And to make this clear, you know the whole Drift of S\ AuJIin,both in this 16. Chapter and the precedent, was only to deliver his St Auftins 0P'™on concerning the fenfe of the Apoflles dark Drift ex- words iiCor. 3. And not to Define whether there be }tit*ted. a Purgatory or no. This therfore being his main in- tent, He nrft reject's the Opinion of others, and In- clines much to the Affirmative, Vv^% That the place Proves Purgatory , but not certainly . Hereupon fol- lows what you cite : Sive ergo in bac vitatantum homines Hiswrds. jjfa patiumur &c- whether therfore men fufler thefe thingi in this life , or fuch Judgements follow them af- ter this life, non abhorret , quantum arbitror , a rations W- ritatis iHe InteUeclus hujus fententia. That is in plain Hethi Englilh* Swh an undemanding of this paflage is no way, fuchapJ. as * conceive, contrary to the true meaning of£. vauls niihmmtit Words , which is to fay : 1 think^a -punishment is proved ^thcTixt ^ f^n Scripture, either m^ or hereafter, jet am not certain. And therfore thofe next words follow > Verumtamen etiamfi eft alius qui mihi non occurrit . Tet there may perhaps t d b ^ mother fenje of them , which now occurr's not tome *f*wg*u- &c* Now , Sir, be pleafed to refleft. It is one thing yandto to doubt of a Purgatory in it felf ', and another to Doubt tlv'/Uch w^ccher it can be ^e 11 proved out of this place of Scripture. aZripture $'• Anflins : Quantum arhitror, or hefitancy , as is ma- prwesit, nifeft by the words , Ijle InttlUElus hujus Scntentm, And, fffim Etiamfi Jit alius &c. makes only His Pn?o/Doubtful, with- out giving the lead hint of any doubt relating to the Do&rin of Purgatory it felf. It often fall's out inPhi- lofophy are nnt. DifclV.GIV. Objections fobed. 467 lofophy and Divinity that a Doftrin is certain, yet fa- me Arguments wheiby it is proved are excepted againft as prcofles , or lefs valid. 14. Tofolvetbe ciher place, Inchir c. 69. Note firft AVriwi- a Principle of 5'. Aufiin, who, as we read Tom, *o.fermJlJ°£^'t0 41. de Sanclis thought that fome Jeffer fins, as too be noted. much love of the wotld ard fuch like , are fo ufually purged by Tribulation in this world , Vt in futmo ille ignis Purgatorius , aut ncn irftemat , aut certe parum imeniat quod exurat , That in the next life the fire of Purgatory will find either Nothing, or very little to punish. But faith the Saint, Si nee in trihulatione &c. If in our Tribula- tion we neither give God thanks, nor redeem our fins by Good works , Ipfi tamdiu in illo igne Purgatorio moras hahlimus. We fhall flay in Purgatory till thofie leffer fins he ccnfumed likf Hay ard nubble . And by the way no- te here alfo what Judgement Sl. Aufiin had of Purgato- ry. In the fccond place corfider well the Connexion ofTheCon: S\ Mfhns words in the precedent chap. 68. Quia urtteum st.Auftins return dolor &c. Becaufe the Grief he hath for the things »<**** he loved , torments him^ And what follows cap. 69. Tale aliquid etiam fieri poH ham *vitam imredibik non eji. It is not incredible that fuch alike punifliment be after this life. What is not incredible > Thus much . solves the That as fome are puniflied in this life by a prefent Grief vi^CHUy- for their too much affeftion to worldly commodities, jo it is not incredible , that fomefalfo fuffer a torment in the future purging flames upon that account . Et utrum it a Jit quari potefl. And we may enquire, faith He, whe- ther fuch a particular punishment be found ip Purgatory, Vi%> That by how much more or lefs men loved the- fe tranfitory Goods of the world ; Tamo urdius cit'tufam Nnni JJuari; 468 DifcJ V.CIV. f roofs TaraM'd faluari; So much fooner or later they come to Heaven. Which laft words plainly give us S*. Auftins meaning, and prove that He doubted not of turgatory (for He fup- nlfdllbt- P°feth it here) but only calls luch a particular pain into tdofone Queftion as is expiatory of leiler faults, becaufe , as I fanicuiar t0\£ y0U ^ He held Thefe lefler tranfgreflions ufually punn mm tajcen avvay by fufferances endured in this life. Con- clude therfore, unles this Inference be Good, $\ Aujliu doubted whether fome faults were puni&ed in Purga- ThtTtjit- tovy; Ergo He thought none were Expiated there, which shtwed *s not probable , The alleged Teftimony is of no firceUs force againft us, yet proves that you read not5?. Aujim *t*i*fi w- t00 well. Now if you fay my Glofs upon this Autho- rity is not certain : I anfwer , No more will yours be, when you have Interpreted all you can . Therfore neither of us yet come to a certain Principle, And confe- quentiy , you muft produce a far clearer Authority be- fore you Ask again , whether any man in his frtts can thinly that S^Auslinf pake this of a matter of Faith , Sup- posing all fure for your Interpretation , which to me, And I think to others aifo that know Latin and fenfe, will not appear probable. It is not my Task to quo- Aptraiei te [iere at ]arge thofe moft clear Teflimonies of S*. Au- 'LiZubuftnl°z our Catholick Verity, yet 111 give you one r fitipaff*- And wilh you to parallel that with all your dubious !" places, lib. 2. de Genefi contra Mantcb pain DifclV.GIV. Objections fobed. 469 pain for ever. Thus the Do&or . And every man tbmmtf in his wits (it's your own phrafe ) cannot but think dw ones, he fpake of a matter of Faith, when his Do&rin agrees *** the with the Belief of a whole Church. See more i//*^, lib.zi.de Chit.c.16. Where He fpeaks of a Purging tor- chunk. ment after Death? as alfo in P/i/.37» But enough of this point. 1 5. You fay 3. where Any of the Fathers build any Do- cJrin upon the fenfe of doubtful places of Scripture , ^e have no further reafon to belieye that DoBrin , then Tve have to belieye , that it is the meaning- of thofe places* So that in this Tw§?,e' cafe the enquiry is tal^en off from the judgement of the Fathers, m0Ye un„ and fixed upon the fenfe of Scriptures , Tehicb They and *toe both*™™*. rely on. And you give this reafon. For fince the Fathers pretend to no greater Evidence of the Truth of the Do&rin , then fuch places do afford : it is the greateft reafon , that the argument to perfwade us be not the tefiimony of the Father , but the Evidence of the pla- ce it felf. Anfw. If here be not a piece of mod confujed confufed Learning, I never read any. Obferve well D*arm* your own propofitions as they lye in order . Firft the Fathers are fuppofed to buiid a Dodrin upon the fenfe of doubtful Scrip me -, and then you fay, you have no further reafon to believe that Doftrin, then you ha- ve to believe that it is the meaning of thofe places. Very Good, But 1 ask, by what light can you bet- ter come to the true meaning of a doubtful place of Scrip- ture , then the Fathers Did > If the meaning was how se.. doubtful to them, it is as doubtful to you ; And '^BmksT!l that fenfe which you draw out of a doubtful place be con-$/^fwr£ trary to the Fathers, you wrong both Them and the"»^«- Text ; Themy becaufe you Oppofe their judgement ther$- N n n 3 upon 470 Difcl V. 61 V. f roofs TaraMl upon a meer uncertainty ; The Text, becaus you will make it fpeak your fenfe which it doth not certainly, for it is doubtful to you. Perhaps you'l fay, When the fenfe is doubtful, Neither you nor the Fathers can tell what to make of it, and Therfore without further enquiry it will be beft to let it alone, and remain in its obfeurity. May this Dcctrin pafs : you need not to iheycan- believe a great part of Scripture , for it is very obfeu- notccn. re. 2. You are bound in Confcience never to con- tradttt the tracjjft the Fathers interpreting a doubtful paffage,For fathers \ - . , , r fc> ,„ f o ' explicating ( and it is very good reafon ) it you will nave the Fa- rt doubtful thers filent in fuch a cafe, ycu are to hold your Pea- &"'• ce , and to fay nothing againft them. Your fecond Propofition . In this cafe , the enquiry is taken iff from tie judgement of the Fathers , andfxed upon the fenfe of Scripture, Tvbicb they and J»e both rely on, Seems not to be too full of fenfe : For moft afluredly, when the Fathers ex- plicate a dubious paffage, Their judgement tend's to declare the hidden fenfe of it. Why therfore will fxUv'n * you take their judgement off from fuch a fenfe, and "doubtful put yours in room of it ? Or to what purpofe do M* you talk here of fixing upon the fenfe , when a place is dubious , and neither Church nor Fathers muft be believed ? What is your Fixing good for, when you fuppofe the thing you Fix on to be doubtful, and your felves Fallible > if you fay you muft come to a cer- tainty of the fenfe by Tradition or fome other way, know that the Church and Fathers had better reafon to be acquainted with fuch lights , then any Senary can have . In a word , A doubtful place remaining (till doubtful , or dubioufly explicated can never be- get a certain belief in you or any : Yet we fay, when the Dilb.IV/C.IV, Ohjeftiws jofoeJ. 4^1 the Church of chrifi and Fathers alfo agree in an Ex- tenths plication the doubt ceafeth , and the delivered fenfe church is moft certain. In your reafon , For Jince ihj &c. a"dF"- you leap from the fenfe of a Doubtful paffage to the Evi-^f>^ " dence of the place it felfi which feems not pertinent: For doubt what hath Evidence to do here, when your Difcours is eeafeth* only of a doubtful fenfe? When a place is evident we fe that as well as you, And have with it the fcntiment of a whole Church, and Confent of Fathers alfo. 16* You fay 4. (After fome Talk of two Reverend Primates which I much heed not) That S*. Amhofe and others prayed for the BlelTed in Heaven , Ergo Ori- oidobje- 20ns for the Dead prove not a Purgatory . 1 wonder at0HSr'* you weary mens Eares again, with iuch old worn out fHr$ofe. Objeftions. You , or your Brethren have been told many and many a time , that no Father , no Church Greek or Latin ever prayed that the Saints in Heaven J^Ce^rotch may be freed from any temporal pain , or for the Remijjion for the ofjins; yet «ot only the Fathers , but thefe Churches saints in -alfo pray for both, and fuch a prayer Evidently proves l^lVed a Purgatory. BelUrmin cited cap. 9. n. Neque yidetur, fromum- tells you, S\ Ambrofe hoped well of Theodoftus , andW/J*'"» Therfore rejoyced in his behalf, yet becaufe He wasJJ^™ not certain of his pofleffing happines , He prayed for t*d. him. And the like praftile is yet in the Church, when men of great vertue depart this life. We pray for them if they ftand in need, though we verily think they need no prayer. You know what diftinftion S*. Aufiin makes Serm. 1% de verbis Apoft. between Martyrs and others. Fro cateris defunttis , faith He, Oratur , We pray for the faithful fouls departed , but not for Martyrs. Injuria $ enim&.c. For it is a wrong to pray for a Martyr c*- J* 4n Difcl V. C. IV. Proofs TaraltelTd. St. Auftins/^ ms dekmus orationibus commendari, to whofe prayers viftintiton we are to commend ourfelves. This had noc been itMrTrs we*1 *P°ken> ^ad s*' Auftin thought that the Blefiedin *ZTtLt. Heaven need our prayers as much as others do. If you defire more of this fubjed , or would know, how the Greek Church prayes for Saints , read Leo AUtius Alatius. de Confevf. page 105. n. 1 5. where He taxes his Adverfary of more then Childish ignorance in the Greek Affaires, be- Bow the caus he thought the Ancient Church interceded for oteek Saints juft as it Did for others. No fuch matter, faith church Alatim. Torment or um ac pxnarum nulla eft mentio &c. That fi?s*mts. Church in her Orizons for Saints makes no mention of any releafment from pain and torment, but prayes that the Sacrifice offered up to God may be to his glo- ry in the name of thofe Ble/fed for the celejlial gifts of Grace be- llowed on them : Or, that God may receive moft large and ample thanks from them for the great glory St. Auftin they enjoy, Wherfore s*. Auftin inEnchir. c. no. fpeak's is confr- properly. Pro valde Sanctis grmarum aciiones jwzr,Thankf- giving is for great Saints. Alatius moreover cites not only . the Orthodox Greek Fathers, S*. Djonyjius, Sf. Epiphanm, memlfthe S'Xhrjfiftomi but alfo later Authors asCMamtelca/eca, yea Greek Fa- and thofe of the Schifm very pertinently to this pur- *j*Qb\ P0^' Some perhaps will fay : We may pray alo*, )e' as well for our Saviour as for Saints, if the fupplj- cations for them co be nothing els but a giving of thanks and offering up of fuch a Sacrifice as is now explicated. If any one , I fay, cavil thus. $'. Ef>i- StEpipha- phamus coma Aerium , prefently after thofe words T^trs^he K*' y*Z Sixuiav votipib* &c. We make a commemoration* of -Difficulty, the juft , craving the mere) of God for feme rs &c. Anfwers the Difficulty , And faith we are to feparate our Lordlefus Chrifi DifclV.C.jV* Objections febed. 47 3 Chriflfrom the order of other men , htcaufe of the fpethl bm*t and Worship due to him, knowing that he is both God and man, and therforc cannot be rancked with other mor- tals, though mod high in glory. Whence it is, we No prayer pray not for chri/l no more then for God , becaufe o{w*defcr his fupream Excellency and Dignity above all other toh)lm' Hi whether Saints or Angels , but offer up to him a Sa- crifice of thanksgiving asalfo to his eternal Father and the Holy Ghofl, as Bellarmin now cited wellobferves#. Separamus. 17. You fay 5. The fupplications of the Church for the Dead refpe&ed mercy and forgivenes to be fliewed the juft at the day of Judgement, and confequently were intended for Gods final Juflification of them by his fentence at that great AfTembly. To prove this you cite many places of Holy Scripture, x. Ttm. 1. 16. 1. cor. 1.8.&C Anfwer. The Church in the Mafs for the Dead, vvhilft Ihe reprefent's the terrour of that n&church dreadful Judgement, fpeaks mod Conformably to the fteafs fenfe of thefe Scriptures; And, as if that Day were ^tls^rl to be the firfl Trial, doth not only make her Children pure. Solicitous ( Quid [urn mifir &c What then miferable men shall I fay ? what Patron shall I ask for ? When the juft will hardly befecure;) But moreover teaches them to petition for mercy. Nemeperdas. Dejlroy me not in that Day, call me "frith the Blejfed &c. Yet, this Inferen* ce is not Good. The church and Scripture fpeak^of mercy and forgivenes to he found at the da) of Iudgement. Ergo there is no third place of punishment "tohtrin mem is shewed he- «'*(?" fore lu&gement . I lay therrore the Supplications mm of the of the Church for mercy at the day of Judgement re- churfa fpeft the Mercies Don us before hand , when we ]f/*^$ O o o are d*j. 474 Difc. \ V CIV. Proofs Tarallelfd. are releafed from ihe pains of Purgatory , and fupra Condignum, receive a crown of glory above our De- ferts . And in this fenfe I undcrftand S\ Aufiin Ub. 9, Corf. c. ri. Va etiam hudabilt vitce &c. Wo be to the worthy commendable life of man, if you , O God , re- move pitty and difcufs it toofeverely. On the other fide. The Supplications for thefe intermedial mer- cies have a neceflary reference to the Judgement ^JJFJ* ^ay realJy obtained before ; but when the Judge SjHfiiiUh fics > T^eX W^' ^e Publickly Declared , and made pubiuki^ known before God and the whole world , to the d Who may fay with joyful hearts : Mifericordias Domini &c. We will fing the Mercies of our Lord for Ever. And Sectaries cannot Deny this Do&rin, For Stories do not they hold that God, through the mer its of Christ, cAnnot pardons the guilt of fin , and takes offall puniftiment vTfirw" fr°m the Elecl before they Dy > What Forgivenes is there then anew to be Expected for them at the Day of Judgement, when bothfinand puniftiment are ante- cedently remitted > Yet more. Suppofe that the fouls of juft men do not enjoy a compleat felicity before the great Day , I ask whether They fit in that ftate with their fins on their Confciences, or without them f If ^&K„x T^ey remain in fin,al! fins being mortal with Sectaries, petted at they ftiall never be pardoned for the future: if without theiudge- all fin, They need neither forgivenes nor pardon at the 7e7mortal general Day » But on'y a publication , a confirmation /its, °r " of that mercy as is now explicated. 18. You fay 6: Since we Confefs that many of the Fathers held erroneous opinions concerning the State of the Dead, Wc ought not to prefs you with their Tefti- Difc.IV.GiV. OtjeElionsfobel 475 Teftimonies. Anfwer* We go not about it , but Seaarits urge you to prove your erroneous Opinion Contrary to *«*> the greateft part of Fathers, and all Church Dc&rin" '• And you are to do this not by talk , but by folid prcofs ^J?* and Principles, To what you add or your own head , that none of the Fathers hit upon a State of Purgation till S.Auflins time, I have anfwered , and pro- ved it to be a flat Calumny, Again , wheras you fay , the Apparitions and Viftons of fouls departed are on- ly pretended , and not real , Contrary to received Hi- Aff*ri' ftory, we expecl: a flronger proof for the Aflertion^;^ then your Word is, which is worthies , and moft un- fighty meet to make all null that has been writ of thefe Ap-reiea'*' paritions. 19. In the laft place you come to examin the Te- ftimonies of Some Fathers made to fpeak as you would have them. But Belhrmm before you were born, Ben*rmin, and Leo Matins more lately have Anfwered , and pro- uo Ma* ved all you fay to beProofles. I'll here only take"*4. Notice of your lefs candid proceeding , where s% Cyprian Ad Antonianum de Cornelw & Novauano is quoted for Pur* gatory : Aliud eft ad veniam &c. Aliud miffum in carte- rem &c. It is one thing to flay for pardon , and another to come prefentlj to Glory . It is one thing f© be caff into prifon, scyPr**®* And not to come cut thsnce till you haye paid the laft farthing " &c. The Words , you know , are the fame with thofe of Scripture, wherby Catholicks , following the Inter- pretation of Fathers , endeavour to prove Purgatory. Now you Tell us, st.Cyprian fpeak's here of the Seve- rities of Pennance , which the lapfed Perfons under- went in order to Pardon, and no doubt, as is eafily gathered by the Context, His Epiftle treat's mainly on O 00 2 that 4? 6 DifcJ V.C.I V. Tt'oofi TatalhQ'd. that fubjeft \ But , that occasionally rie fpake not of Purgatory, or That this mutter was wholy unthoughc of in this place, is more then cither you or any can „. u . make probable. You f.iy RiuUim and Gabriel Albafog- Aibajp. n&ns underitand the Pailage ot Fen Weighles, Ooo 3 and 478 Difc.IVXV. Another ■ ControJterfy if setia. arl^ inftgnifcant. To anfwer rhis Difficulty home it ties think would be Neceflary , To run over All the Difputed Tkev cau- Controverfies berween us , And to fhew their weak Ij^lfiH' Ground in every particular matter of Difference. But ded. this is not Suitable now , nor can be Complyed with, when you fe a Treatife Grown to long Already. The veci x' ^Ct to ^atisfy ^z Reader , I will briefly Touch [ion of one on one Controvcrfy more (it may ferve as an Inftan- Dtfficuiy ce for Many) which hath been matter of Contention ThJrTr. thefe laft Hundred YearS- In a WOrd : ItJS> T!>** t0° row, long Debated Queflicn concerning tie Real Vrefence of cbriji our Lord in the holy Eucharist. And to Gain what time we can , it will be bcft to Wave a Needles Sta- ting of the Queftion ,• For, all know what Catholicks Believe of this Myftery , and Sectaries Do not , what Thofe Affirm , and Thefe Deny. Twwayes 3. Now in Handlrng this Matter, We might Pro- m hand. cee(j cwo Different Wayes > And firft , not only Bring *]iitejiion t0 Light again the large Teftimonies of Scripture , Coun- o[theBie[ cils , and Fathers in Behalf of our Catholick Verity ; But fed sacra. a]f0 draw Arguments at length from their clear Ex- mm' preffions, for a greater Evidence of Truth : But This would be K^iclum agere , to Do what Hath been of- ten Don by Others and very compleatly* The other VctfiUow way is Shorter , which Suppofeth thefe Authorities tht shorter Faithfully Quoted by our Catholick Writers : You Ha- 7' ve them largely in Bellarmin, Through every Age fince Chrifl , lib. z. de Eucbar. cap* 1. u(que ad 29. Exdujive \ And if the Reader know not Latin , He may find mod of them , in that Excellent Englifh book cal- led, A Vifputatim of the Church , by E. S. F. Prin- ted at Doway 1640. Chiefly in His 5. Bookie, 6. Sectaries Acknow- Difc.IV.C.V. Examined. 479 Acknowledge thefe Authorities, whcrac I /hall briefly &£«*« hint Herafter . So far Therfore , There can be no c,annbotf Difficulty; The only Strife will be How They'l co- ZliLho. me off in their Anfwers, And, Whether They are able riuahere to Satisfy Two or Three Arguments, Which I ihall^^- Propofe upon mod grounded Sufpofitions . if I be not much Deceived , We fliall fe how Fancy allalong, or iomething wors , Vphold's Their new Opinion, You muft here Expeft plain Language, For Truth is never better ieen , Then when plain Words fet it forth. 4. To proceed clearly . We may firft Suppofe, Tj»°ne"}' That as God hath Certainly Revealed the Truth of this^^T'" Myftery of the Blefjed Sacrament in Holy Scripture, fo He hath alio Taught us , What we are Truely to Be- lieve concerning it . We Suppofe x. That his real Intention, was, and is, That we (land to his Word , and Believe Him as he Speaks, Vnies, we can Learn by fome clear and Vndoubced Prmiple , That he fpak Refervedly, or, That his words bear another Senfe then what they plainly Signify. Vpon thefe Suppo* fitions I Argue* Wnen God Reveals a Truth in Holy acUmy Scripture, which concerns the General Belief of all Argument And really Intends to Teach Chriftians what They are to v"?£dt Believe oi that Revealed Truth : He cannot Deliver awUst mere figntficantl) , clearly, and exprejly , that Do&rin which He would not have Chriftians to Believe , Then He Doth the Doftrin which He Would have them to Be- lieve : For , if He did fo , ( whilft Wre cannot Learn by any known Principle, That He fpeak's othervvife then He Thinks) He would not only Equivocate, and Deal refervedly with us in a Weighty matter of Faith (And this Godin 4 430 Difc.I V\C. V. Another Qomrfoerfy Maun of fhis as 111 befeem's his Goodnes as to Speak an Vntrgth; Faithcun. But more-, if we Rely on Scripture only, He would notdtitver jncjuce the whole world to Believe a Falftty. Now I Ty'thrtDo. Subfume. But, iris mod Evident, (if Sectaries Say fain, right) That God, in fpeaking of this Myftery, Deli- tphichHt vers t^t £)odrin more clearly, And fignificantly,Which Xave n° He would not have Chriftians to Believe, Then He chrifiiam doth the other, which He would Have th-tn to Believe, Th^he'* And, there is no Imaginable Principle, wherby we can voththe learn that he Spake otherwife then He Thought, or his other plain Words Signify, Therfoie he fpeak's not only E- wh'uidha- qU'Vocally , and Refervedly in a weighty matter of vcthim to Faith ( tobich is i^dlvajes to he Rejlecled on) But, He Indu- beitevc. cech alio the whole Chriftian World, if Scripture gui- JfGod de us, to Believe a Falfity by His too plain Speaking. m*keafais 5. Before I Prove the Minor, And give you this Clearer -Religion Language of Almighty God , For ivhatHe Kill mtUave ZTtoKel' us t0 #^m &c- Be pleafed to call to mind , one Truth fonbyout- Explicated more largely Life. i. cap. 8. For it is the vwduo- Ground of my Prefent Difcours. Vpon that Principle tiuruihin therfore, 1 fay now Again. As God cannot (if True Reiigio»is, Faith be in the world ) make a Fals Religion more Pru- Hectnnot dently Credible to Reafon by the force of rational Mo- elrourmt t{wes » Then His True Religion is Evidenced and made tobezdie- Credible (For, if he did fo , He Ttould oblige Reafon to vedinmo £mhraCe a Falfity, and Defert Irutb) So alfo, when He De- a'ndfignh livers a Doftrin Concerning Chriftian Faith (And, in fic*nt the mod ferious Circumftances imaginable) He cannot words then Deliver an Errout in more Emphatical and Plainer words when he Thin He fpeak^s a Truth, which yet , You Shall fe , is fpe*ks» Don, if Se&anes be Believed. The Parity Holds Ex- feitev!dh a^'y' ^or, ^s *hote more Pcrfwalive Motives, Ante- AJL ' cedent * Difc.IV.GV. Examined. 481 cedent to Belief, wherby we are, as it were,fumnionedTfr#M»*y to fettle our Faith right, Would, If They Countenan- Jjjf i mm ced a Fals Religion Prudently Induce Rational men to embrace that, and Leave the Difcountenanced true Religion, fo, This very clearer Language of God Wher- on our Faith immediately Relies, Would Alfo, if it be more Exprefs and Significant For Errour ., then Truth, Force All to Embrace the Errour and Abandon Truth, Becausthe Errour is mod fignificantly Exprefled in Ho- ly Writ, And the Truth not at All : And This is Don, when there is no excogitable Grounded Principle tOFiw;,^ Draw us of the fuppofed Errour, if we be Beguiled,1*'*** or, to work this fuppofed Falfityout ofour Harts, But X£iL the meer Fancy , And the bare Word of a few Se&a- cannot ries,who fay we are Deceived. workout 6. Now to prove the CMinor, Aid Demonftrate thatjjf^^ God delivers more Fully, and fignificantly the Doftrin, the open Which He would not have Chriftians to Believe, then/'"/'*/ he doth the other : Ponder thefe two things. Firft, ^rjf* what Eternal Truth Speak's in this Matter, And we Ho*>chrijt Catholicks Believe. 2. What Se&ariesfay He fpeak,s,//***,'>*»'* And They Believe. Thefe are Chrijts words. This ii£££*. my Body. This is my Body , which is Given for yon* This Believe. is my Blood of the neTv Tejlament that shall he Shed for many. Take heed , fay Se#aries, Read warily, Thefe words Se**r"s Taken in Their Plain , literal , and mofl obvious (enfe are That Fals, and Therfore Exprefs not the Doflrin we are to cw Believe . Again Cbrijt Speak's Thus. This is the cba- ***?***- liceof the ne^o Tejlament in my hlood,Hohich (chalice to nor^iov tl^piain to iK%v¥OfAtvov ) is, or shall be Shed for you. Vnlesyou eat literal [enfe the flesh of the Son of man , and drim\ his blood, you shall not *refals> haye life in you. My flesh is meat indeed , and my blood is P p p drink^ 4*k Difc. IV. CV. Another Contr (ft erfy drin\indeed. No fuch Matter, fay Se&aries, This is not the Do&rin we are to Believe , For,thefe words Vnderftood in TheirPlain Obvious fenfe are Fall That Chalice Shed For us, wot not bis blood f But Vp'we of the grape . We eat not tie flesh of the Son of man, nor drinh^his Blood, Sedaties ^ut ' on'y eat Bakers Bread, and Drink Natural wine. make the His flesh is not really meat, nor His blood DrinJ^. Obfer- contrary ve I pray you : Sedaries fo Abhor The plain andPro- w'chrifts Per Senle of Chrifts own Words, that they make the words, contradictory Proportion to Him , Abfolutely True in True. Every Particular , And his Fals;Therfore they muft at leafl confefs, that he Speaks too clearly and exprefly that Do&rin, which They fay we ought not to Believe; Otherwife, Why do They not Admit of his Words in Their open, and mod candid Signification/3 7. Shall we next Confider, what Se&aries Believe of this Myftery , and withall Learn, whether Chrijl Deli- vers as plainly Their Doftrin in Scripture, As ours? ££} Hear Their Profeffion of Faith : We Believe, Say They, tbh My- That, that which Chrijl gave to his Difciples was Na- fi*% tural Breads Deputed to a Holy Vfe , And no More : We Believe it to be a Sign Only , a Figure Only, a Seal, &Token , a Type Only of ChriftsBody, That is , We Believe , it to be His Body by Refemhlance, Symbolically, Tropically, Meto- Scrtpme, ^mieally and significantly , Which is to Say > it Hath the no v JjhthZ nar°e of cbri/is Body, But Really is no fuch Thing. which And is This your Belief? Yes', Out with your chriftX4- Bible Therfore , And Shew me as Many clear Texts ^///^" of Holy Writ, where , That which cbrijl gave to His turai Difciples in his laft Supper, is called Natural Bread, a Ti^ori * Sl&n 0n^ ' d Ff2>t4re* ?°hn or TJPe onb °* his Body , (For, f/£L B* This is the Do&rin , you fay ? we ought to Believe ) ij. As Difc.IV.CV. Examined, 48} As I have now Quoted for the Contrary, where it is called Chrijl Body and Blood : Though you Suppoje This to be the Do&rin VVe mufl not Believe. Believe it, The- fe exprejjions. This is my Body which is given for you. This Tfo words is the Chalice in my Blood , ^hich shall be shed for you , are °fmr Sa~ moH Of en And significant Language . Ar.fwer Me with Jiain Mnd Other Texts as Significant For your Faith, or to this mojisigm- Senfe. This is not my Body , But a Sign Only o£fr"nt- my Body, which is given For you. Speak Plainly, was it a Sign , or a Figure Only of Chrijl , That He , blefled Lord , Sacrificed on the Crofs ? Was it a Sign or Figure only of Him, That Judas Betrayed, or that Suffered For our fins f No. It was his /*<**&- very real Body, and this Body Truth that cannot "J*™ Err, faith He gave to his Difciples. Once more, chrifiBo- ( I have right to Demand ) Give me Text for Text, or dy » *«* Caft your Scriptures in a Pair of Scales for a Trope, Ft- fimfiif. gure , and Sign Only, and Lay mine now Quoted By Them , for the Reality of Chip Body Prefent, And Let that Side of the Ballance Fall, where you find moft Weight of Gods Word, You will foon Perceive, nothing in How Light your Herefy is , Compared with Truth; s*frm And that without further Difpute, it Flyes up to Fan- *£$?lrei cy : For , There is not in the whole Bible , fo much only. as one Syllable of thefe Signes Only, of thefe Figures, of thefe Metonymies , or any fuch Language. 8. We fe Moreover. If Sectaries Speak Truth, TheConclufion Fall's on Them with a greater Weight, then They Imagined . For it Followes". That Chrijl our Lord Hath not only Spoken more Significantly and Exprefly the Doftrin He would not have to be Be- lieved, Then the other, which, They fay, is to be Ppp 2 Belie- other terms* 484 DifcIV. t.V. Jnotbtr ControJ>r-/y $t8«m Believed; But alio, That He obligeth us to Believe a would k*. Doftrin , And by force of Scripture, Which Clear ZZm***' Scripture is fo far from 1 xprefiing , That it Exprejlj Mum Teaches the Contrary to what They Say, All Ought ttntrapt$ to Believe . I might yet Propofe this Argument in 'scrtyurt. ot^er Terms , and Perhaps with greater Force after this TheArL banner. U c^rtf Delivered that Doftrin more Plain- mmtu ly which Se&aries Suppofe to be Fals, and Left dearly, fropofed *»Yea, not at All; The contrary Doftrin , which They Suppofe to be True , They , who ground All Their Be- lief on Scripture , muft either Interpret the plainer Scripture by the more Obfcure , yes (and I fay) by no Scripture at All, And this is pure Fancy ; Or, will be forced, not fo much to Mifinterpret , as plainly to Deny the Obvious and Open Senfe of thrifts own Words, And This is Ivors then Fancy. And here by pi[Jd*fm-' C^e way you may gatfier- ?• 'f Catholicks, who Be- foftJuty lieve the Real Prefence of drift in the Holy Eucharift, catholicks Be Deceived in their Faith , They may, without Bla- ledfn"' me' "mPuce the Errour to no other caufe But to the Their plain Speaking of our Saviour, and mod Juftly fay: Si lAhh. error eft quern credimus , a te decepti fumus . If*** m* De- Theymightceiyed^Tis youy Bleffed Lord , n>hoha*r>e don it \ Tou Tell SmechrMs us% T^s ** mJ B°^J ' ^u^ # ghm-fir jou . This is my fUm Bloodshed for many &c. Tou never tittered the leaflfy liable in words. yot4r scripture of a sign Only, of a Trope, Figure or fymbol Only. Saytherfore, mod impartial Judge, VVherin Tofaytb* mq vve guilty, whilft We Exprelly Believe what you ^■f^Exprefly Teach % And Rejed a Novelty, which None tbatwe'are But Hereticks Brought into the World? To Affirm, beguiled by that Chri/l intended to Beguile us by his too Plain BUbhtm Speaking of thi§ Myftery, is open Blafphemy ; And my. to Difc.IV.GV. Examined. 487 to Say we are beguiled by him , is no Lefs An Im- piety . c;. All that Sedaries can Pretend for Their ■Caufe^'?;1 Againlt this Dilcours , is , That we yet Arrive not to cUriespre. the True meaning of Chrifts facred Words And Ther- "»''.»«*'* fore They are ready to Teach us. Very Good. We J^T™* are content to learn what is Truth. But B* fore they chrim Begin Their Teaching ; it will be belt for Them To*"""'*- RefleA, that we have here a Propofition: This is my Bo- dy &c. And becaufe ChriB Delivered It, 'lis mod True. Therfore , we have a SubjeSl alfo , This , (fchool terms are neceflary in the prefent occafion ) we have a copula Est, is, And a Predicate, or Attribute, My Body. Now, If our Adverfaries will Vouchfafe to Teach , Let Them firft Pleafe to Give us Plainly, the Total Object of Chrifts Propofition , And Say what that The total Predicate was , which He then Connected with the °h'ea °f Subjecl Hoc, or T H 1 s . Did He fay natural Bread, %%¥Lm remaining bread, was his Body > No, 'Tis moft «***«#*«. Fals . Did he fay by an Identical Enunciation. His '***<*. Body lea* bis Body > No . Did He Say , that what He pointed at , was , By the Energy cf his Words, made Really bk Body ? No , it is too plain Popery, and Chrifts Say they, never Spoke it. How then fliall we Learn what he truely Aflerted, or find a SubjeB, Co- pula , and Predicate in this Propofition > They An- canfinlm fwer ( And here is their beft Inftru&ion ) it is Impofli-i>«^*» ble to find either Truth , or theft three Things in it, Un- ihePr<>P*- les They firft Abufe the Words And Say, Hoc eft: He-ft^T re Sitts Chrifts Body , or, That this Bread , Per commu* *bufihu mumcationem fdiomatum > is Chrifls Body, or, That this^r'j* Bread was made a natural Body by the Omnipotent Ppp 3 Word r/fi6 Difc.I V. G V. Another Contrcfterfy Word of Chrift, or, Finally Say, (To Omit other Gloffes, And This fenfe beft Pleafeth Modern Secta- ries ) That the Word, Eft, Imports not, /*, or any Identity between Hoc , and Corpus, But Renders an other Senfe , and only Availes as much , As if you fayd , Sigmficat , This Signifies Chrifts Body. Read therfore the Gofpel thus. This is my Body; id eft: This Natural bread Signifies, or, is a Sign, zFtgureoi my Body, And we are Right , We have the Genui- ne Senfe of his Propofition. Thus they Teach us. a mrk of lQ pjere y0U fhall fe a Powerful work of Fancy , ^And** And the Greatefl: Wrong Don , 1 think, to Chrift, mighty in. that ever entred into a Chriftians Hart. To lay open ]chJfin f° This fin ofSe#aries> l will not Infift much on their High Contempt of Thefe facred Words, Which, in a vulgar and Obvious Senfe are as Fals, as if I fliould now fay , Holding a Paper in my Hands , This ps my Body : But This I muft urge to their Confufion , And wifh All to take Notice of it . If the Interpretation now made of the Propofition be true Doftrin, it Evi- S'afr dently Followes , That Chrijl fpoke fo contrary to his Thatchrift mind » That He Hath beguiled the whole Orthodox beguiUdtbe Chriftian World By the raoft ferious Words He ever uttered ^hd!x°r' in ^ Mortal Life • * 'H tow you how. Cbrift , fay chriftian Se&aries , Before He fpake thofe words, t his is my bo- mrUhy dy &c. Had only this internal Ad or Judgement in tlrhuf kis mind. That which I will now give to my Difci- wrds ke pies, Shall be nothing hut Bread only, or a bare Sign and tver/ftk. Figure of my Body ( for Seftaries Suppofe He never in- tended to make bread his Body)yet hear how They ma- ke Chrijt to fpeak, As it were , contrary to his Thought, I will, Saith Eternal Truth, Though 1 know That, that fhall Difc.IV.CV. Examined. 48? ftall be Bread only which I am to give my Difciples , w*>* *hi So Unluckily Exprefs my fclf by Outward Words, as to^">^c Mifcal the Sign by the name of the Thing signified and chriji to Avouch that to be my Body 9 7»bicb Really shall not be myjv* T^ Body. But is here all ? No. Cbrift intended £1*" more in thefe mens Opinion , and Sayd in Effed whkh thus much. Though I now Forefce, That an uni-w^ *"s verfal Errour will Follow Through all the reputed 0r*™^u tbodox Churches of Christendom , upon my Dark and Im- Things proper Language, yet I will fpeak, as I do obfcurely , **&**•* And Beguile Them ( 1 know all will be Beguiled ) %]""": Becaufe all will Miftake my Meaning And Believe a*rie$. That to be my Body , which Really is not . Thus T^'f .* I forefee They will: err, And the very Empbafis of my ^ke -^ Tford* will Caufe this ( now pretended ) Vniverfal;r^fr/y. Errour among Them. Therfore They cannot But^*/^ leave off to be Orthodox,- For, a Church Erring in Mcment * fo weighty a Matter , Or , Thac Adores a Piece of bread He/pak for God, is Abfolutely Vnorthodox , and Hideoufly %eJ°reu'. Fals. Se&aries, you fe , grant, that Chrift fpakjj^^" thus Darkly, And, that by Doing fo, He hath Drawn "»w Er~ all the Reputed true Churches on earth into This Pct-^Jf^ fuafion, is a mod Evident Truth ; For, there was ne-«# o/fL. ver Any Church Acknowledged True in the world , &>* chm- But fuch as litrerally Vnderftood his Propofition in its x^Thd Plain and obvious Senfe , And , confequently All that this* Churches Believed the Real Prefence of his facred «"M'v«/*J Body, in the boly Eucbanjl, Though Sedaries fay all ^w Erred in that Belief. I Say All, for fo Lanframus „mu jw„ Speaks in his laft book againit Berengarius . Ontnes qui ceed from Cbriflianos fe & efk & did Utantur. All , who are Glad qJJJJ^ of the Reality and Name of Chriftians , Glory in tbis,frmhh That 488 Difc.IV. C.V. Another ControJ^erfy Examined. improper That they Receive in the Sacrament the True Flesh and IfMcLr M*od of Chrifl , which was born of the Virgin • Ask cheiortho. of all , whether Grecians, Armenians or of what other doxbelie- Nation foever , Vno ore banc fidem fe teflantur labere. All Rw//r«-* of Them, with Vnanimous content , openly Witnes, feme. That they have this Faith. Now, if our Adverfaries Slight fo Worthy an Author, ler them produce but one as Ancient and learned as Lanfrancus was, That faith as much for the owning of Their novelty of a Trope , Sign, Figure only &c. And I will be Satisfied. 1 1. And Here we come to the laft Triall of our Se- ctaries Caufe , Which is to fliew you the High Impro- bability of their new Fancied Opinion. And ther- fore we are in the next Place, to Drive Them of All ^rilufoHt poffible Ground to ^an<^ on , And Demonftrate That slaaries They have not fo much as a likelyhood of any undoub- €Aufet ted Principle, wherby , we may Learn, That Chrifl our 7hivmb° k°rc* spake improperly in the Paflages now Quoted, theimpro-ot, That his Words have any other Senfe then what b*biiity *f they Exprefly Signify, Which is our Catholick Do* their new n. •_, Opinion. ctnn' ' . CHAP. 4$? CHAP, V L Sectaries without either Proofs or Prin* cities , VVrefi Chrifts Words to an Improper Senfe% And went an Herefy upon meer Hancy . $. ^T Ote fifft, when Chrifl our Lord faid : Tis is JL \l mJ body&c. And ufed the like y or more fig- nificant Expreffions (Regiftred by the other Evangelifts) He did not only Inftitute the Nobleft of Sacraments , But made alfo his Will and Tejlamem, He Publiihed a La^ Themtu^ gave a Command-. Hoc facite, Do this. At leaft, all Ack- reofano. nowledge, That He Delivered a Dogmatical Verity Con- blt Sacr«- cerning our Chriftian Faith, And did This in fuch gra- chnfts ve Circum&ances , And to fuch Pt rf on s (His own Dear own mil,* Difciples) That the Time, Place , and Per fins to whom Djv>*ti- He Spak, Required no Dark > But rood Plain and Pro- r,';' per Language. As therfore no Man makes his laft Andotht* Will, Publiflieth a Lato , Layes an Exprefs Command on &r*vgcif- any , or Delivers a Truth which All are to Learn Vn-^7" der Tropes, Figures , UHetonymies , or fuch Obfcurities />/*/»«»<* (Thefe have place in the Dark Speaking of Prophets, ProPer and ferve well to fet forth an Oration) But contrarywi- l*»i**v* fe, in obvious Vulgar >and Intelligible Words : So much Oil % Lefs 490 Difc'V.CVJ. SeElayk$ Yet in other Paflages of Holy Writ, f%\**rmg*iL He dear's all Thefe dark Expreflions by a contrary lan- in other guage , And Speak's more Significantly for thefe Signet ufmb oi Varies Then He doth for our Catholick Doarin. Vnles, I fay, fuch Texts be at Hand Nothing can Force us from that Exprefi Senfe, which the Gofpel mod Significantly Deliver's , concerning this Myfte- ry. 2. Note x. Se&aries Advance their Caufe nothing rhoughtbe at all, when They tell us that the word, Est, fometi- S^«lfEft mes ImPorts as much as if We faid (Signifies) As when Proptfthnsyou &v& Pifture of Caefar on a wall, and Say : This may be in- is Ca/ar . The feed is {Signifies) the Word of God &c. sTo'Ism" Could *h's be proved , it is not enough , More is requi- 8 redi for They are Obliged to Show > And by an Vn- That's not deniable Principle ( if my Faith Rely on their Glofs) inmost- That the Word Est in our Saviours Propofition hath ffvwTit decerminatly that *enfe, and no Other i You know Bearesthat Scripture faith. Hie eft flius mens dileSfns. This is my s'nfeherg beloved fon&c. Now , no Man can Inferr Becaus £»W"-EsT> fometiraes is Rendred (Signifies) That Here , it loofes its Proper fenfe, And only Avail's as much , as if you Said : Chrifl only Signifies , or , is nor otherwife the Son of his Father, Then a material Pifture Hang'd on a Wall is a Sign , or Figure of the frotoiypon, This cannot be admitted of, VWs j 1 fay, a Srronger Prin- ciple DifcIV. C VI. am ftm Words. 491 ciple (which is Impoflible) Force us to Approve of fuch an Heretical fenfe . And thus Wc Difcours in our Prefent Matter. $. Norej. Al! the Principles which can be Thought on , to Force Catholicks from the Received Senfe of chrijis Own Words , or , to Favour our Adverfaries Caufe, muft be Reduced to one rf thefe Heads. to n«*»«w* Plain Jpeaking Scripture . To Vniverfal Tradition . To the ?JX!d*th% Catholick fenfe of chrijis Oithodox Church in former Doitnn Ages, or, Finally to tin Gtneral Confent of Fathers . \{of>e8*Yit$. none of thefe Punciples Vphold Proteftants Do6lrin,it Fall's of it (elf, And wholy Relics on Fancy* Thus much fuppofed. 4. Here is rny Proportion , and an Inference alfo . St claries cannot by virtue of am one of thefe no^ Named Prin- A*»}9P~ aples , Withdraw CatholtcKs from the Plain Recsftea Sen- s fe of Chrijis FVords. They cannot Prove that Est, in our Saviours Affirmation, Imports only as much , as if you faid, it Signifies. Therfore tne Doftrin which Denies the real Prefence of Chrijis Body in the Sacra- ment, is wholy Vnwarrantable, and Built on Fancy Only. 5. The Proofs of my Aficrtion are as Vndeniably J£,J^ Evident as the very Affertion it felfi For it is Manifeft, Ufi'tUm, No Scripture plainly Teaches (I fay no More now) That Then thi the Verb Est , in Chritts Propofition Beares only this ]ftfuon fenfe, it Signifies : And it is as Clear , no Vniverfal Tradition Approves of this new Fancied Senfe. What then Remains, But that our Adverfaries take Recours to fome Ancient Orthodox Church, or, To the Gene- ral Confent of Fathers ? I fay therfore. If they AFair cf- can Name any Vniverfal Church , Nay any particular £jfi£t1§ Qjl SI * Church 49* Difc IV, CVl. Sechrus Vertert Church Reputed OriLrdox the whole world Over, That Interpreted thefe Words as They do, or, Clearly De- nied chrijls true Body and Blood To be under the For- mes of Bread and Wine after Confecration , or, Belie- ved that Natural bread only hath the Name of Chrijls Body, Though it be Really no more But a Sign only, froteRtnts a Figure only, a RefembUnce only of his Body ; If, I fay, y3t!u never' any one °^ tnefe things can be proved, They'l Come An/wer of Glorioufly , And Gain Thoufands to their Opinion. vtrediy, But I know, all is in a high Meafure Impoilible. I Z"hp"t %» *Slln only > a #g«"<>nly; For > NVe Catholicks pd. both fpeak with the Fathers, and Truely Believe The Eucharift to be a Sacrament, And consequently a Sign of Invifible Grace , Yea, and a Figure alio, a Memo- rial of chrift Himfelf and his Sacred Paflion ; But this is not the Controverfy between us , The fole Queftion What They therfore is , Whether it be fo purely a Sign or Figure , that foc'rTo! tne *&***& Sonified is not in tae Sign, And the ferity in the Figure , That is . "Whether Cbrijh Sacred Body and Blood, be not Truely mdSub/Untially within the out- ward Sign , and really Prefent There > This We Af- firm, and Seel Aries Deny , Though never Orthodox Church Denyed it with Them. 6. To clear this Point, And Add , If PoffibJe, more "Weight to our AiTeition : "We Have an Ample, Holy, and Learned Catholick Roman Church (whofe fole The file Authority , fet Scripture afide, is the Greateft on Earth) Authority Which confrlfedly hath believed and taught this Do- ofourRo- £rjn of theReal Prefencefor at leaft aThoufand Years chlrch,is (I fay Ever fince Chriflianity began ) And, can any sufficient one prudently Perfwade Himfelf > ThatfoChois, and "£***, Learned a Society , That yet tywdty in cknfis ovvnLan* o/Errour, ^l** Difc.IV.CVJ. ChtjtsftmVPwis. 49$ guage , And Literally believes his words as They are in the Gofpel , Hath , for Co long a time lived in a cheat, and taught Millions of Soules amoft Damnable Errour? Admit of this Vaft improbability, We have yet a De- np monftration againft Sedaries : And 'tis : No Or- other or- thodox Crmrch can be named that ever Oppofed , c^°ll^ Found fault , or Blamed the Belief of the Roman Church oppofedour Concerning this Mjftery. Therfore the Do&rin of cmh&k this Learned Society is undoubtedly certain , upon a Do'irm* double Account) that thrift Taught it , And no Vniverfal Church ever condemned ifr# 7. In the laft Place we are to Say a Word of the o- TheUft ther Principle , Which is the Vnanimous confent, not Vr^"h^ of a fmalj Number, but of Many -mod Ancient, Learn- ,*, confent ed, and Holy Fathers, Thefe can well Declare what tf **'**'• Scripture Teaches of This Myftery , And what Chip Orthodox Church ever Believed. If All Readers Ha- ve not the Originals at hand, They may fee them in the Authors Cited above, I (hall only Hint at a few, For to Tranfcribe All, or Half of them , And Quote the Places Exa&ly, Would Needlefly lengthen a Digreflion, which I Intended to make fliort. In parting 111 only fay thus much . If Seftaries , with all the Skill Fathers They have, can Interpret Thefe few Teflimonies , exprefsfer Which I fliall briefly Glance at , They may with the Q^olick fame Eafe , Yea, And far lefs labour, Explicate the 'Words of the Council of Trent , and make that to fpeak Proteftancy , Or to Deny the Real Prefen- ce. 8. Some Fathers therfore Dogmatically Teach : What we take into our mouths, is not that which na-Tf*fc F*- me made, But what the Blefling hath Confecrated , *%£" Q5 q. 3 And «M 494 Difcl V.C. V I SeBaries Terpen TU*ughu> And that by Cor.fecration the very Nature of bread is mvoidJe'in changed. Thou haft learned that of bread , is made f£!nv!L the "Body of Ctbrt/l, and the wine and water is put into grtjjiMj the Chalice, But by the confecration of the Heayenlj Wordy it W?mu* is waie *M< The bread and Wineofthetutha- tivetht rift, before the Sacred Invocation of the Adored Tt in ityf Re*dtr were fimple bread and Ivine , But the Invocation hung cnce 7"ke»t *»• d'Brc*t indeed is wait the Flesh of Chrijl , and tie nerejf*ryt V yine bis Blood. The Bread which our Lord pave to hy quoting his Difciples , being changed not in shape, but in Nature, pUces?' h the omnipotency of the Word, is made Flesh, Chrtft, by his own Will , once changed Tvater into "n ine , and is He not Ttorthy to be Believed , t,,at He changed wine int) llocd ? Mark a fubflantial change. Wherfore, with all Cer- tainty let us take this Body and Blood of ChnH : For his Body is gi*< fciences , And ask whether They can ContradiA me? If they Do \ I muft Tell them , they cannot Think it9 or, if They Serioufly Judge fo, Their Judgement, Be* caus Contrary to the greateft Part of the Chriftian world, isWetghtles , And (finally refolved) comes to no more but Fancy. I have told them often in thisTrea- ^f*™^ tis, That, any Heterodox May with greater Eafe,and^#^TrE^ leffer Violence Offered, either to Scripture or themoft/'D'*v Primitive Fathers, Turn off all that can be Said for thej^^ Proof of any Chriftian Verity Then They are able to then this Enervate the plain Words of Chxifi and Fathers, now Mjfl»y- alleged for this Myftery. *$%f 10. Be it How you will, Our Adverfaries > if They'l^r* yet Wilfully run on in an Herefy 3 Are at leaft Obliged Mat^ ** to (land on Equal Term's with us, To give us Proof for ££,'**** Proof, Weight for Weight, Meafure for Meafure. Here n$ c*. are our Principles . We have Plain and ExprefsScri- Mick pturefor our Catholick' Verity, They have not a Word. 2j?** We V«!*r;& *4?6 DilC.I V. C. V I Si Varies Terpen We Plead our Caufe by a Cpnften* and never Inter- rupted Tradition , They have None. We have a Renowned , Ample , and mod Learned Catholick Church, which both Believed and taught this Catho- lick Doftrin , They have neither Orthodox Church nor Chappel, that Taught or Talked , feven hundred years agon > of Their Tropes , and Figures only. We have the General Confent of Fathers, They have only Patches and Fragments weighed out of their Circumftances, for Their Condemned Opinion. We have Miracles, Sectaries Clear and Undeniable CWiratUs , which confirm our Do- vantaii &rin : Both Ancient Fathers and Modern Doftors 'JrtBr!*? Recount Them, who cannot be Suppofed , to have cipkst wilfully Damned Their Soules by Obliging Pofterity to Believe Impoflures upon Mifmformation. They have neither Miracle no;- Sign, But the Empty Sign of a Piece of Bread , For their too long ki.own, And as long fince Dec ryed Herefy* j Finally (And here is a facl Afad, Thought for Se&aries ) If ever Herefy was in the fr'satl- World , This of Theirs is , or never any Qeferved rks. " That Name. At leaft, All the tjMarks, All the Signs, All the characters of Herefy follow it, That can be Ima- Vchat gined. It is a late Found our and a new Invented X"*SMd Opinion. The Chief Author of it, Berengarius ( no tempmy Saint I'll promis you) is Known , The time when, Ths Here* And the Place where* \t Began, ibe feT* Followers it then ft* Had , the Trouble it Caufed among Orthodox Believers, the Opposition made Against it, The Trial, r bt Examina- tion, the sentence and Condemnation of it, Are Known, And All upon Record. Almoft every Catholick Au- thor that Handles this Subjeft, Aflert's and Proves what 1 fay, by Vndeniable Hiftory , Could our new Men . D\k\V^mXbylJiiplainVVords. 4# Men Allege But half as Much Againft our Catholic js: c'*;^*- Doftrin j Could They Point ^^^^^m^^fi this Popery ; Could They name the Place , the Ti- much a. me of its firft -Rife, Or, Tell us what Orthodox Church, z*lfho™ After a Severe Examination pmdemned it , They might D%^t take courage, Speak Boldly, And well Hope to Drive conidThty us of our Principles . But , when we find them Vnac- "'*<**« countable in Thefe Particulars , and fee Evidently jQl They cannot look one of thefe Difficulties in the face, Vwfs. nor Hint Probably at the leaft sign of any Novelty in our Dodrin. When Again we Refleft , How eafy Thv „ *tm • r b i ^ T^-r might C*. Their lenent is to Senle, and Ours contrary very Pit v,imore ficil , (And therfore could snot hiddenly Creep into the jufliy. world without Clamours Againft it. ) When we fe- rioufly Confider, That both the Latin and Greek Church, though now at Variance in other Points , yet well Agree B"1 n*~s in one Profeffion of Faith concerning this Myftery . c^enps- Finally , When we know > that the Greateft part ofbabij. the Chriftian world '(^herof many were > and are, no lefs Profoundly Learned, then Fminent in Sanflity) Hath notwithstanding the Oppofition made by Secta- ries , believed as We Do to this Day, and Dyed. in QtberC.w- that Belief. We may Hope to Silence thefe Men fi"»atiw Hereafter , and Well Conclude : That our Do&rin , J#S Ve. which Stands fure on chrijis plain Words , Which ruy. the ftrongeft Pillars of the Ancient Church Vphold, which the Roman Catholick Church yet Defends , And no Orthodox Church ever Oppofed , Which Indu- bitable Miracles have Confirmed, and none Denyed, But Known and Profeffed Enemies of Truth; We may, 1 fay, rightly conclude, That our Faith is Anciently Ca~ tholick, And therfore True; 4nd That the contrary Rrr Opi- 498 Difc.IV.CVI. SeSlarits pervert Opinion of Se&aries is a mter Fanned Novelty , And Therfore Fals , and Heretical. ir# We might yet Goon (And to clear all) Anfwer now to a few Fals Suppofed Grounds of Se&aries, But the Learned Bellarmin Harh done the work to our w/"f Hands , and Contributed more then Enough to Their scripture utter Overthrow. Truly , is very pittiful to Se, How, w#lww&- after all their Braggs of Scripture, Scripture is Here stsuries!' ^° ScarCe with them , That they cannot Find a Word through the whole Bible ,fo much as remotely Favour- able for this Herefy. Obferve wel what Straits They are put to. ix. Firft, the Particle, Est , in our Saviours Pro- Ho fa pofition , muft either Sound as much as sigmficat , Tri/u m a ( Signifies ) or Seftaries are undon . And who Tell's mofl Them fo but Fancy > O , It often Hath .that fente. weighty janfwer no fuch matter. For, Est, ever retains its own fimple and proper Signification in every true Propo- fition , and doth no more but joyn's the Predicate with the Subjeft , what ever it be. The reafon is. If any Trope , or, Metaphor , lie hidden in the Copu- TkeyZrrin fa j£ST ^ jc may certainly be Refohed into an other Word \tffr%uL or pi&tfa °f a more Simple , Clear, and Open Signifi- tiomof cation Then j Est, by its own force Expreffeth. chnfts But this is Impoffible, For, no Word can be clearer rhen the clearejl, more Open, then what is moft openly No Trope fianificant: This copula is Always fo,and therfore can. fiundin not ^e ^ef°l ved into any clearer Diffion. Andhence it is, the verb That when your Rhetoricians Treat of Figurative Speec- St4eb{an!k ^es' or Locutions, They never Placethe Trope or Figure •funinth* on ^ Ver^ Subjlantive , But either on the Attribute or Sub- Attribute jeft. 'Tis true , the Predicate, or S ubjett in many Propofi- *,/*bj*. - tion3 Difc.l V. C.VI Chrtfis flam Words. 499 tions, known {Aliunde) or by other clear Grounds, to be Metaphors , mud be Explicated by clearer Terms > whilft yet the copula Est, Holds its moft Simple, and Proper Signification. Take one Inftance. Semen Jn Jmm eft verbum Dei, The feed is the word of God. The ftana. Wotd Seed, as it is a Sign, made by In ftitution effentially to Signify; fo, in this place , it is a Trop, or UMetapbor alfo , ( For certainly chrift faid not That material Seed call into the Earth is really his Word: ) if Ther- fore it be here both a Sign, and Metaphor , you muft ul- timatly Refolve the Proportion into a clearer SenfeThus. The very Effence of a Sign is to Signify, Th^s Word n I Seed, is a Sign Ad placitum , Metaphorically Reprefenting lHfMtv] the Word of God , Therfore , as well as a Metaphor Vropefitim can Do, it Signifies this Divine Word where you fe, Jjjjjj Est, keeps its proper Signification : And Therfore, The whole Propofition finally Refolved , Renders this Senfe ♦ This Metaphor Seed , is a Sign fignifymg Gods wword . Now if you fay We Grant at laft , That the Copula May here be Expounded , significat ; I An- fwer, moft True, Yet without any Trope in Est, For , in fuch Enunciations , praiicatur Signum de Signo, (as Bellarmin notes ) The Sign is Predicated on the Sign ; As in this Propofition. Amare , Eft 9 diligere . That is : Amare , is a fynonimal sign, or fignifies the fame as DiltQere, And therfore is Explicated by sitnificat, Be- . a . caufe the eiience of a Sign ts to figniry . But it is not lo explicit in other Propofirions, where that which is predicated is chrifts neither formally a sign Only, nor any (Metaphor at all. P*f*f%ti*** 13. You fliall fe what I fay now Evidenced in our "uJng Se&aries Opinion : For , whilft they Explicate Chrtfis **>* T*°p Propofition. This is mj Body, theCepuU, Est, Re- sJlS^t Rrr x tain's vc, JOO Difc.IV.CVI. SetlariesTerlwt tain's purely its own proper Signification , without any Trope. I prove it. When we find a Trope in a Propofition, it mud lief There, or in that Part of it , into Tvhofi place , when the whole Propofition is /?e/J/- Ved, We put an other more plain and Significant Word to explicate the Trope clearly (by this Refolving of a whole Propofition into its Parcels we eafily judge whe- re the Trope is.) Now Obferve. Our Sedaries refolve chrifts Propofition Thus . This is my Body. Hoc eH fignum corporis met . This is a sign of my Body. The toords Mark well. The words Subrogated ^o Explicate the tllxpiicMtTiope , arethefeTwo, signum corporis-, But thefe two theTrop* Words, which belong to the Attribute or Predicate are witbSeeia- not ^ as js mofl. evident, Subftituted in the place of the To the aL Copd* 9 Est , Therfore the Trope lies not in the Copula, tribute. which Keep's ftill its proper Signification, But accor- ding to this Refolution in the word corptts , or Body. Now How Fals it is, That any Trope lyes in the word Body, Andconfequently no where in the whole Propofi- tion, is Evidently Convinced by our Saviours true Af- fertion . This is my Body , Tt>hich shall be given for yon. Believe it. No fign of his Body was given for us, But his Real Body. Be it how you will. Thus much is Clear, That the Verb subjlantive , even here Retain's its Simple, Proper, and mod Common figmficatioi. 14. You may fe more of this fubjed in BdUrminltb. I. de Euchar. c. 10. §.fecundo, and cap. 1 1. per mum, Whe- re He Learnedly Explicates oth^r Propofuions Alle- ged by Sedaries, as Petra erat Chriftus, Agnus eH Pafcha All Tie now fay , And 'Tis what I noted Above. Although.it were granted that the Copula, Est , fometi- mes found'S as much as, fynificat , Yet J unles this fenfe Difc.1 V-C. VI. Qmjts m» as you Eat this Bread and drwk^this Clalk^ , Ton shall shel» R™em°.tH the Death of our Lord until He Come, m\t the Death of bname of me. our Saviour is long fince Past and not Prefent, Ther fore we may wel Commemorate his Death and Paf-^,,"™" fton, as Priefls do in every MafTe they fay. In Ri- the Sacra- ment is on gour therfore, Thefe Words Freafsly force not on us any Memory of his facred Body, or Blood Prefent , But;£^£„. only Mind us of his Aftion of Sacrificing in his lafl Sup- ceof per. However , ro Satisfy our Adverfaries , be plea- chllft> fed only to put this fuppofition : Thar a Prince were ffflgHtm With his Nobles in a Difguifed weed, And Would not ma)beRe. appear to their Senfes but Difguifed ; Might they !ior mrmbred, well, Although they knew or'herwife He were their '*'*** 1 " J . pre lent Conceited Prince , and Prefent , not Only Reverence w„h hit and ^dore him, But alfo make a Commemoration oi^obUu Him ? Moft certainly yes. This is ojj Cafe. Rrr 3 ' A; Jbi Difc.lV. C. VI. Sectaries Tertert ASlgn n- As therfore that which we call a sign , requires not quim not the Abfence of the thing fignifod , For, the Ark of the 'f'h^i?* Covenant was a Sign of God Prefent, and the Dove %Um!* Defcending on Chrijl , was a Sign of the Hcly Ghcfi Pre- fect : So , likewife a Remembrance or Commemoration Implyes no Neceffity of his Abfence, that is Remem- bred . Finally, We may Remember our Lord and Saviour , as He is in Heaven abfent, whilft He Feed's and feaft's us here on Earth with his precious Body and . Bioodon the Altar. The Obje&ion therfore is For- celes every way. 16. They Objeft 3. This Sacrament is called Bread. Anfw. But, never Bakers Bread after the mm ii not Words of Confecration , Fancy only fay's fo, and no tailed Ba- Proof . Again . 'Tis called Bread becaus it's made **"*"** of Bread, as Man is called Duft becaufe made of Dull. Such Objections are Trivial. Calvin 1 7. They Ot>je<$ 4. The Breaking of Bread flrong- fastb, ly argues, 'Tis plain Bread, Though Deputed to a Holy 3rtsd^s ?$* Anfw. The Breaking here is Sacrificing, as sacrificing. Calvin Himfclf confefTeth . The Argument , though it Proves juft nothing, is feemingly more for Luthers Opinion of Bread, and Fleili together, then for our Sectaries . 18. They Obje& 5. Chiftis called a Vine, a Rock, and a Doore . Anfw. What then > Put a Minor m* ProP0^c'on t0 thefe Words , and Se How weak a Con- inference clufion Follovvcs . Is it any Confequence, that be- ofstcis- caufe figurative Speeches are in Scripture fometimes, " Therfore all we Read there , mud be Tropes, and Mt~ uphors ? We know , and the whole world knowes alfo by other Principles, that Thefe are Tropes, And we n«. DKcXV. CmXkiftsTlmWards. joj we evidently know by as aflured Principles, that, Mr Body Given For You. My Blood shed For Ma- ny. Are no figurative Locutions. 19. They Obje&. 6. The cup is called the Fruit of the Vine, therfore it is not Blood. Anfw. 1. lr ^'j*. may be called Heavenly Wine, as thrift calied him- mintta felf Heavenly Bread &c. But the true Solution is. Ct*h There were two Cupps on the Table that night be- 2£5t fore our Saviour fuffered, the Legal, and the Euckarifti- caly or sacramental Cup, That's called the Fruit of the Vine, This not. 20. They Objeft 7. Some places of Scripture. The words which I have fpokento you are spirit and Life, rhe flesh Profiteth nothing. All did eat the fame Spiritual Food, and all dran\the fame Spiritual Drink. Anfw. Nothing But meer Fancy , or fomething Wors , can Draw thele Texts to the fenfe of Se&aries. The open and plain Meaning of Ckrifls words without Violence offered to them , ( eafily Gathered By the whole Context ) is Thus. I have fpoken to you of Divine and Spiri- '*J*£j£ tual Matters, conducing ro Eternal Happines , But your °;wn J0lrds£ Thoughts are (till on Earth, As, if I were to cut off is dear, ty certain Pieces of my Body, and give them you to Eat thevholi ,r „ M «. , . J \ -J r\\ ?• • rJ r • i context of (to Sj.AuJUn explicates this Place) it is nut (o, faim our t^t q^i Saviour, I fpak of that more Hidden My/firry jef the Sacra- . ment , which Being Believed and Spiritedly Vnderftood , Ca» prove will Quicken you and Give you Eternal life : The thecontra- Fie fh therfore , That is , a Carnal Vndet Handing of my r*> Ut *"* Words Propt s lS[otbtng occ. This is the Genuin and can- by* for* did fenfe of Cbrijls Expre/Iion , For , it were a Blafphe- Prwnffe. my to fay, that his facred Body Profit's none . I AnfwerToThe other Pafiage of S.Paul, I;*,an Errour to ~ Judge9 504 1 Dtfc.I V. C.V. Seclaries Terpen The/n>c(i Jllfige> That the Jewe$, Received no kfs the Subftavce Us words "*!^P'flOT5^ Then We tmfinder- c|0 \n our Sacraments * The Apoitle Intimaces no $£*%$. fuch Thing , Bat only. Sairh . They all (the He- brewes ), among Thernfelves, good and bad , Eat the fame Meat, and Drank of the fame Rock, which was ^Figure of cjbrijl, Now , Pray you Tell me, Do all Calvinijh, Good and Bad , when They Receive cbnftby the Mouth of their Faith , Equally participate of his Graces f Or , were There any fuch Ample Promi- fes Annexed to the Eating of Manna in the Defert , and Drinking the Watber lffuing out of that Rock, as are * now made to the Sacraments of the New Law I No. They were Fgena elemema , Barren Elements for fo Scripture fpeak's. You'l Ask , Why Then doth h the the Apoftle call the Manna , and water , Spiritual Food jipojile and Drink/5 I Anfvver, They are called fo , not Be- eaifsMan- caus they Produced Grace as our Sacraments Do, But ^uJP7o'od.^eC2XiS They had a Spiritual signification, And were caufedby a Special fupernaturai Providence, contrary to the Ordinary Cours of nature. 21. They Obje& 8. Such ought to be the Way of Receiving this Food of the blefled Sacrament, as is alnTn- Anfwerable to the Quality of tbe Food and End, for which utmnixhe we take it. Bat , both the Food it felf ( to wit Divi- w*v*»* ne Grace) and the Final end of it , which is a Union Z*"!ivin °f ^e f°u' witn cbri&> are purely Spiritual ; Therfore shswtd the Way, or Mode of Receiving it , mull be Propor- »»#. tionably Spiritual: But , no Mode or Way of Taking it, can be more Fit, or Spiritual then.fW/,6; Therfore we are to Receive it by Faith Only as the meeteft Inftru- ment, Anfw. The Obje&ion ( no Jefs improperin Speech, Difc.IV. C.VL CbriftsTtmyroris. joj Speech then fimply Fallacious) DiftinguifKeth not right- ly Between the Immediate Caufe of Grace, the tffrtt of %&#%*% Grace , and the Difptjitfo* nectfary to Receive this Efim ^fyL Fruitfully. The immediate caufe ot grace, is.ciri/fr^J^ fac'red Body' under the Forms of Bread and wme^*»«# Now to fay, That his Body is the Waj or Manner of f^Efi Receiving our Spiritual Nutriment, is an Impropriety fiiflMmitk$ in Speech. And to fay Again, That , this Body viftofitio* ought to be Ejufdem plane rationis , of the [elf fame Na- JJ^sS* ture with the Spiritual Food it Caufeth , or , That a Corporal thing cannot be Ordained to Produce a spiritual Effett , is mofl untrue , For, the water in Baptifm A m*u' produceth grace in the Baptised, yet is Corporeal^ the f**J ™*re Corporeal vifible Effufion of Chrifls jacred Blood in his spiritual Paflion, Freed us from a spiritual Death , and brought Gr4Ct* us to a Spiritual Life. And do not Seftaries Hold, that the very Material Hearing of the Word of God is a fit Means to Beget Faith both Spiritual , and Supernatu- ral in the Hearers Soul ? The Difficulty therfore Propofed comes to nothing but Fancy. Finally, if we fpeak of the Difpofition requifite to Receive the E& fed of this Sacrament (you may call it , if you plea- fe, the Mode, Waj , or Manner neceffary to a due Re- ceiving ) All Catholicks Profefs , that not only Faith, ^j^f" at leajl Habitual, but Charity Alfo , per fe loquendo , Are necef*rj> Prtrequired as neceffary Difpofitions to the Effitf ther- of , Becaufe it is sacramentum Vrvorum the Sacrament of Thofe , who now Live by Faith, Hope, and Charity, Sss CHAP. jo6 Difc.IV.CVTI. Catbolkh and S&ariet CHAP. VII. How differently VVe mdSettaries proceed in this Con tro --verfy. V Vhitt they are to Pro^ue. I. QOme other Slight Obje&ions yet remain Drawn other ob^ ^from Fathers Mifinterpretcd , and the weak Rea- *jjvT fon of Sectaries . It is not worth the while, to Bring touched on. all to Light Again, They are Solved, ; nd Vndenia- bly Solved, by our Catholick Writers. A few ihall he- re fuffife . Some Fathers feem to fay, That this Sa- crament is a Sign , a Figure, an Image, a Type of Cbrifis 1teF*r~ Body. Very true* But not one fay's it is a Si?n then [ay .J _. J y i-. . ; _ » o ^ Vi i * nowhere, Only, a Figure Only, a Memorial Only &c. Now know. It is one Thing to call it a sign , and an Other a Sign Only, Exclufive of cbrifis Real Prefence , As it is One that the it is one Thing to call it a sign , and an Other a Sign 1****7 Qnb: Exclufive of cbrifis Real Prefence , As it is One n^Figmw Thing to fay, Faith Juftifies , And Faith only Jufti- only of fies j excluding Charity. Read therfore Thole words chhfi, of Sf.Aufiin Lib. contra Adimmtum cap.\z. Till your Eyes be Weary. Non duhitavit dicere &c. Our Lord Doub- ted not to fay. This is my Body , Cum darct fignum Corpo- ris fux, When He gave a Sign of his Body. All you s^uft,m. can Force out of Them , is this Obvious and Genuine "Serife. Our Lord, When He gave His Difciples the Confecrated Species , Accidents , or Forms of Bread, which were a sign , and Figure of his Body There con- tained; Doubted not to Say, That, that which He then »*/. DifclV.GVII. Proceed Differently. 507 then gave them under thofe species , was Really His Body . If Sectaries can Inforce more out of the Words, let them do it without Fancy, And prove their Glofs , by a Clearer Principle then s\ Aujlins Words are. 2,. Again. When fome Fathers Say, There is not, Mat the Plane idem corpus , The fame Body Altogether in theEu- Fathers charifl , which was Faftned to the Crofs, But after a wkenTbe/ UWanner the same ; To which Senfe S*. Aujlin Comment- fit** is ** ine in Pfalmum 98. Introduced^ our Saviour fpeaking -J?Cj*r L J # 1 • / • 1 • r# ' ^ the jam* thus. Non hoc corpus quod tideus, mandncaturt estH &c. Body, Tou are not to eat this Body you fe ( Grofly He Means, as the Capharnaits Underftood ) And to Drink that Blood, which my Enemies will Poure Out : I have r^ Commended to you a Sacrament, which spiritually Under- ,/,„, end. flood, will Give you Life &c. When, I fay , The Fa- favour, to thers Exprefs Themfelves by fuch Terms, And Did fo, f''mv* \ /\s well to Remove trom us all Thick, and Carnal Con grop con- ceptions of this fubltme Myfiery, as to Beget in us (fo hx cepiiom of as we can reach to) a Right undcrftanding of the sptri- l^tsM^e' tual Manner , of Chrijl fc sifting in the Sacrament We r^w muft Diftinguifh , with the Apoflle 1. Cot 15. TwoMesof* States of a Body, Natural, and spiritual, Whofe Dotes fj^/^ and Qualities, Though Different, Change rot the Bo- spiritual, dy Subftantiatly. Diftinguifh I fay Thus , And then *h*»se not Speak boldlv with the Fathers . It is not Altogether ^"^ the larn^e Body , But after a Manner; For , fo we Speak the Body, in a Vfual Language, When we feone Notably Altered k And Ours with Theirs , As well in this as in Other Contro- verfies, You may fee How Faintly Fancy plead'sagainfl j^!^ Obferveir. What fitunob* ^ver They Allege out of Gods Word for their Errour, Vcf!h>£"^ VVeStand to the Plain, Obvious, and Literal Senfe of ilu"*nd t'ie Text i And yet Deny Their Hcrefy Drawn from it} scripture Which therfore muft of Neceffity bean Additional Glofs *&. of Fancy. For Example. Doth Scripture fry , Do this in Remembrance of me} We admit of the Open Senfe of the Words, without further Commentaries^, . or Glofles. Doth it fay The Flesh Profit's Nothing? We fay fo too , But muft learn, by other Principles, Examples what Flesh Signifies in that Place. Doth it fay, That ww'# All the Ancient He breves eat of the fame Bread, Drank^ of the fame water} We, without VVrefting the Text fay fo too. Dot it fay, that God Inhabits not Temples made by Hands} So fay We, And Give this Reafori , Be- caufe Gods Divinity infinitly Immenfe, Ctrcumfiribed in no Particular Place (as if he wanted Lodging) is Every where. Doth it fay that Chrijl Rtfen, from the Dead, was not Thetr fire in the Sepulchre? We Anfwer, the Illation is good 1 " in Difc.IV.CVIL Proceed differently. 509 in thofe Circumftances , whilft Thofe virtuous Wo- men Sought the Living Among the Dead . Do the Fathers fay that the Holy Sacrament of the Altar is t&*Mm Sign, a Figure , a Type of Ckrift even There PrefentJ^J^ We Acquiefce, and fpeak alio as They Do, But with- *sigm, « all Add , Thai no Father makes it a Sign% a Figure, a figHrel°'fm ^Memorial Only , as. if the Reality of his Bodylvere Exclud- £?QWb ed from the Omioard Spuies of Bread and wine . Thus /»-*/;»<*. we Proceed with all Candor. 4. Now let us caft a few Thoughts upon our Sefta- seaarU$ ries Dealing with us Catholicks , And Se how Fancy fg&SR only Vphold's every Thing they Afiert . We Allege Zfdw?$ our saviours own Words. This is my Body which is Catho. Given for you . They Anfwer, No . It was not'"*5'4** his Body, hut a Sign Only of His Body Given for us . J^/JboL Obferve well. This Interpretation of a Sign Only , is a scripture Glofs of Fancy , For, neither the Word, sign, i$.in**'F*- Scripture , Nor a Sign Only is any Ancient Father. We ExJmUs Cite Ag^in that Unanfwerable Text of S*. Luke • This Hendf, is tie Chalice , the ne& Teflament in my Blood > yohich Qbali- ce is she^ for you. And mark the word U%\nh\t.vw y that Relates to wo-nj^ov of the fame Cafe, and not to *tp*ri of a Different Cafe. What Anfwer our Sedaries. &Sfra» ry Beqt Tell's us S\ Luke Here , either fpak a Solacifm, or a Marginal Note Cre'pt by chance into the Text; HereisHis beft Solution , And who Tell's Mr. Bez,a(o> But his own Fancy > We Produce moreover Thofe Teftimoniesof Ancient Fathers, Briefly Hinted at Abo- ve, And fay no Wic of Man can folve Them , Chiefly That Authority of S*. Cjrtl , Of wine changed into Blood , as TtaterjToai Once > changed into wine. They Anfwer. Tb$ Ch^Pge was only M*ra\ of Wine Deputed to a Holy Sff3 Ufe„ 5io Difc.lV.CVII. Catbokh and Sectaries Ufe, which is Againft the very Nature of thelnftan* ce , Andconfequently a Strong Thought of Fancy. We fay No Univerfal Tradition, No Ancient Church, ever Oppofed the Do&rin of the Roman Catholick Church concerning this Myftery. Herein, our Ad- verfaries are Silenced , And cannot Dcfign the Ortho- dox Church that oppofed our Doftrin , as both We , and the whole world befide, nowoppofe their Novelty* AT*r*iiei Parallel therfore the Proceedings of Sectaries Againft us, tbiirVro. w**k ours Againft them, And you will find them to cudingA»d ftand upon Quickfand , without Principles : The very 7!a r$ Straits They are putto , Demonftrat this Evidently, mJ'gulni whilft , as you have feen , They Mangle, Pervert, Mif- ftri,ert confirue , and Glofs Every clear Authority cited againft AutblrT Them' And We on the other fide' candidly Admit tits. m both of Scripture and Fathers Quoted by Them, with- out Any other Glofs but what the very Text , and Con- text of the Teftimonies Allow of. , < ilfd'lnlr 5* An^ Hence it is, that you Always havecourAd- itrthtgMt verfaries bold in Afferting, But Cold, Fnmanly,\nd Weak^ w*k*$ at their Proofs. Befides what is now faid , the tfue *™. Reafon is. No Proof can touch, much lefs Vainquift a Verity , that Stands firm upon uhdeniahle Principles. Wfc***r Plain Scripture, the Vnanimous Concern of fathers , undema- VrotfsM ^e rfi*di*i*#9 the Authority of a Holy and Vniverfal Church , and this Negative , No Church ever blamed our Dottrin are Strong Supports for the Faith we Profefs . And can our Se&aries,whoareas Scriptureles as Fatherlesy as Fatherleszs Churchles^nd Finally Defticute of All other SeHMrits Principles, Think to Dant us with a few Gleancwgs \ Ga- cannotdt. thered now out of This , now out of that Ancient Writ- er Tbtm. ter } when They Evidently fe with their Eyes the who- le Difc I V.G VII. Proceed differently. 51 1 le Torrent of Antiquity contrary to Them? Can they Perfwade Themfelves,that Becaufe one Theodora For ex- o/Thco- ample Saith, the Myfttcal signs after tie Sanclification>Rt- J'jL cede not from Their Nature , but Remain in their firft Sub- fiance, Figure, and Form, are Seen, and Touched as Before (which words are literally True, if we Speak, as ^eAdmh this Author Doth, of the vifible Accidents of Bread and of his Wine) Can we, I fay, Think that this one Authority, ®or*St Though it were a Hundred times more Difficil , Hath Weight enough to turn the Scales , Force Enough to Drive us from the Faith , which Scripture, Church, and Fathers mod manifeftly Deliver < It is impcfli- rheohfcu- ble. All know, when Divines Explicate Scripture "f^f" or Fathers, They Interpret the obfcurer Paflage by the^^F*-" Clearer, And never make the Darker Place to give Light therstareto to the more Evident. Obferve Now. r^eo^orei telT/bi faith the Myftical Signs Recede not from their Natu- thedearer. re, But Remain as before. I fay fo too. The only Difficulty is what he Meanes by the Word signs, and Sela . T^ature} Sectaries Tell us : The Senfe is . Bread Gujjt! and wine Recede not from Their True Sub (lance. Firft, whhm This is their Glofs without Proof; For , the vifible Signs Vro9f* of bread and wine, are not the Invifible Subftance p{ ™]J^ Bread and Wine*. 2. Thodoret in all law of Arguing, Ufrppu when His plain Words Force not on us this fcnfe of Se-/^'0 ''fr- iaries, ought to be Catholickly Interpreted : And Had tr0^tfmon we no orher Reafoa but this, That it cannot be Reafon, Learned To make fo Learned a Father (Though onceheftray'd F<*thfcn to Draw thcfe Fathers from their Open and Manifeft Senfe to His, it it be fuppofed Obfcurc , as in Truth, well Pondered , it is not . Let Reafon Judge Here, i 6. By what is faid Already, We may well pitcy the defperate Condition of Sectaries, who Pertinacjoufly Defend an Herefy, without fo much as a colour of w*nt\rin- Scripture , Church, or the General Confent of Fathers; cipUs, For, thefe Principles (and none can Parallel them ) Moll evidently Fail our Adverfaries. Urge them A~ gain ;;nd Again tofpeak more Pertinently to their Cau- fe, then is Don hitherto : You get nothing but the Old Story told over again, And it will never be Better, for 1 fe too Plainly Their Humor. It is, God knows, To fpend, or rather to Mifpend their whole Life and Labour in Trifles. They- Think , to Cavil at the Proofs of our Do&rin Eftabliflieth Theirs, As if it were fufficient , to make their Novelty good , Becaufe they can Talk againft our Ancient Faith, Juftas if One, to Prove Himfelf an Honeft Man, might do it Pithily, by calling his Neighbour a Knave. 7. 1 muft yet Add one Significant Word more, And 'Tis very Neceffary to lay forth our Adverfaries Weak- nes, as well in 7 his as in All other Conrroverfies. Ob- Sff*davl'fs ferve it . When Proofs of a Dotlrin Stand onfoldCrotwd^ thmj}*»dAnd Principles, the Objections Againft it are like F*5* firmed thers caft Againft the Wind , torceles , And return ^^^upontho Opponents .to their Confufion , wherof, I oppmnu. think, you Flave Already feen Enough in this Prefent Controvcrfy . But conrrarywife. When the Proofs are Meagre, Barren ,and Void of Strength (They are ever fo with Se&aries) The Very Oppofite Principles for Truth, Dash Trifling* and whir in it Af* Hm*t* DiklV. CVll Proceed Differently. 51} Da>h Ally Difcountename All; and Evidently Shew tho- fe Arguments to be Feeble. And Truely, would our vmsc- Adverfaries once Deal Ingeniously, Candor would For- #*««P"- ce them to Acknowledge what I fay to be mod True; "-^^ when they can allege nothing probably for their No- wouu veltyagaimt our Plain Scripture, Againft the Ancient y*1^- Doftrin of a Vniverfal Learned Church , And the Au- {ggf** thority of fo many Fathers now Cited. 8. We might yet entertain you with Ore or Two Difficult;* Difficulties more Drawn from Reafon , Wherat our %£*hg Adverfaries, Meafuring Gods Power by their own Wit JJHrm- or Fancy Stumble not a Little. One is : A Body /&»•/$«- cannot be in two Places at Once. Juft fothe Pcafant ^*™s,fo1* Thinks the fun cannot be bigger then a Brond Sieve , Becaufe ( never learning Mathematiks ) He Meafures All by his filly Imagination; And fp the Se&ary Doth Here , Becaufe He is no Scholler in chip School . But ad Rem. Who Tell's Him that a Body cannot be in two Places at once t Hath God Revealed this in Scri- Nheher pture ? No, But Philofophy Teaches it : What Phi- *gjf lofophy > Arijiotles ? No , For the Received Do- mgJnpt{\ drin of his School is , That a Body (to fay nothing of btingof* a Soule That is in two places, Head and Feet at On- ^jfe, ce) Individually Confidered by it Self, is no more Aftual- ly Its own Local Prefence or Place Then the Organ of the Eye is of it Self its own Aclual Vifton , Or Fire rf .§ by it felf Adually Heat. This is common VhWo- "mt by tt fophy , if That of Sectaries be Better, let them Vouch- fiifiitsown fafe to Learn us Otherwife, Not by Saying it is Bet-^/"* ter, But by fome Clear and Vndeniable Principle. Another 9. An other Argument is Drawn from the Great In- ^umm dignities, wherunto Cbrifis Sacred Body is lyable , if it f^S T 1 1 be id. j 14 Difc. I . V. C. V 1 1 Qathotkh and St claries be in the Holy Sacrament : As That a Moufe ; or Wors Creacure may tat it Vp&c. Here we may Juftly Exclame with S\ Aujlin upon another Oecafion lib. iz.de Chit. c. 1 1. Ecce qualibus argument is Omnipotenti* Dei bumana contradicit infirmitas ejrc. Se, with what Slight Arguments Mans weak Wit Oppofeth Gods Omni- The pre. potency. Speak therfore Truth. Isit notagrea- tenUedin- tcr Indignity, that cbrift Permitt's a dinner to Receive ^^^himwich a* filthy confeience , Ihen'That He lies in shewed the Stomach of a Rat or Moufe? Say yet. Had wrivel***. a worm Suk't his Precious Blood when it was ILedon the Ground in his Paflion, or, a Spider bit his Sacred flefh in the Crib of Bethlem , Would that Indignity, think ye , Have Forced'men from a Belief of bis Red true Body? Thefe are childifh Arguments, not worth the Anfwering. And here you have almoft an End of a Digrefiion which I Think cannot be well Anfwtr- Briefy'"*' 10- 1 Exceed not in faying : It cannot be Anfaered . uuchedon, And therfore Tell our Adverfariesjfit fliall pleafe them wherunto to Rep]y They are firft to Prove , and by certain Frin- S*re7efiSred ct$c » triat cbrtjls Sacred 'Words now Alleged for our Ca- st dnfmer, tholick Verity are UMifunderftood by us , And ought to have Tbeir Determinate Jen ft of a Sign, Figure, OHetenjmy, and no Other,. What we here Require is moftRea- fonable -, For , if my Faith fall upon Their fenfe They are obliged to Prove it Revealed by Almighty God, Other- Kinfipie*? w'k Contrary to all Reafon They'l Vrgeme to Believe what an infinit Verity never Spak. 2. They are to Prove And by a clear Principle alfo , That in fuch an Age after Chrift, There was an Orthodox Church that Bdtiyed tbeir Doff tin of a Sign, Figure. Metonymy Only &c. And Difc.IV.CVlI. TrcceeJT)iferent?y. 515 And Fuhliklj Oppc fed ours of drifts Real Pre fence in the Eu- chtrtfl. To do this , More is required then to ciie a few broken Sentences of Fathers , halt Abu fed and frholy hi*m$d weighed out of Their Circumflnnces. All which put s*»**k" together Come not neer to a Probable, much lefs,to^r^^' a Certain Principle That's able to Evert the undeniable clear Catholick Doftrin of other Fathers , And the Au- thority of our whole learned Church with Them . 3. They are not only to Interpret the Fathers now Alleged (For, Fancy without Proof may pervert the cleared Words God ever Spak) But , when Their interprets- Vehmu. tion is made They mull Shew it grounded upon a contra- 8*™$ in- ry Received Principle as Strong, as the Fxprefs Words irf/2w,t thofe Fathers are. 4. They are to Show , That Cbrijl They^e our Lord when He uttered thofe facred words to His ■*%*** Difciples. T is is my Body, And then forefaw theuni- Z^L^. verfal fuppofed Errourof Believing his Real Preience '"». in the Eucharift would follow in all Orthodox Churches. \nd from no other Caufe but His own Exprefs and fig- nificant Speaking , They are , 1 fay. Obliged to Prove \nd by an undeniable Principle,/^ Be shut up in the dear- fH Proportion He eyn uttered, that Darh^fenfe Schick They dra* from it, And, that He did fo to Deceive the World. Sectaries grant Chvittiansto have been umverfallv De \\h*!S*. :eived in their Belief of the Real Prefence : And that **rki he fuppofed Errour Arofe from Chtfls plain words, is Evident . For, the r.-bcle Catholic!^ Church that Belieyrs hisaMjjlery doth fo, Becanfe Truth it felf [aid plainly 'without Rejerye : This is my Body. Finally, That Cbrijl our Lord vould fpeakas He did is Manifefl by the Gofpel ; And :hat He then forefaw the Suppofed Vmyerfal Errour, would )e alfo Believed by force of His words in the greateft T 1 1 % part ji6 Drfc.IV.CVII. Catbohcks and Sectaries (ire. part of Chriftendom is moft Vndubitable, Becaule of the perfect Knowledge He had of Future Things . 5. May it pleafe Se&anes to Proceed candidly, They are to cad a ferious Refle&ion onpafs't Ages and Pon- der well, who thofe were that Patronized Their Doclrin, and Oppofid ours. They are to compare and juftly to Ballance their Ohfcure Scripture with our clear Texts : The weak Testimonies of Their mifconftrued Fathers , with our contrary now Quoted Authorities ,• Their Kovettj with our Ancient Believed Faith , The fentiment of their little late Congregation concerning this Myftery with the Judgement and Belief of our long ftanding Roman Church &c. And, if when All is Don , They can come to ft found Principle Wherby it may Appear Co every Ratio nal man , That their Scripiure , Fathers , and Church au thoritj Outweigh as it were Ours Or have more for ce to eftabliih their Novelty, then what is now Alle ged to make our Catholick Doftrin moft ftably fure ; VVe will begin to Think They may more laudably write Controverfies Hereafter* But if contrary wi- fe , you find Them Gravelled at every Difficulty now Propofed, and hear nothing diftin&ly Replyed to (upon undoubted Principles ) or Further confuted , then a loos wandring Difcours will carry on a Weak Caufe, I'll once more crave Their Pardon , and Plainly Say : Our Arguments and Reafons cannot be Anjyperci^ CHAP, 5* CHAP. VJIL The Conclttfion. The Churches Evidence. i. SSI/ £ have feen Enough in the Precedent Dif- W courfes That True Religion is not ( as Se- ctaries make Proteftancy ) Like a Dark Lanthorn, But One of the nooft Morally Manifefted and Evidenced Things in the World : And Reafon Teaches it ihould be fo. For, if TrueWorth ever Shewes it felf by RealTrvtmmh Signs and Kjiovvn EjfeBs: (So Faith is Difcovered by £ K"w,r good Wer\s, Life by its Vital Operations, The Exiftency %£***' ofaDeity by the Emanations of Creatures) None can Doubt; But That God who Defires all to be Saved, Hath Made Thar Religion wherin Saluation is Had, vn*fic*n> moft Known and Difcernable by Outward Signs and notbe. Vndubitable Marks of Truth. Therfore, as we faid „"£!!/&*' above, clear Proofs cannot be Wanting Wherby That ;*** is Manifefted which God fciff haue Kjioivn . Audiftis churcbi ejusyocem manifeftijfmam . They arc Words of S*. au- saiuatio* fiinde Vnit. Ecclejiacap. zj. You have Heard the Mod is ube Manifeft Voyce of God, Not only by the La* *> Prophets J^ ft. and Pfilms., But by His OV>n Sacred Mouth Commtndantis confirms Ecdejtamjuam futuram. Commending his Future Church tkk d&. to us All. This Church you bate Dtflufed Every T#t>ere: You HrtJK fee it like a Citty, wherof He who Built it, Saich : A Citty u^ona Mountain, cannot be Hid. This is the Churchs T 1 1 3 which 5 1 8 Difc. IV. C. VII I. The Condujlcn. which is not in one Parr of the World , as the Dona- tifts were in the South , And our Se&aries now arc in Thefe Northen Climates, fed ubique eft notijjima, But ^tii Andihtw. {jwanifeji e*perj Inhere. And, if you Ask by what Signs M«"h*' lt is Kn°wn ? The Saint Anfwers, lib. de Vtiltt. Cred. Chrifts c. 17. Hocfaftum eft Divina Vrovidentia . This is Don by church i* Providence y By the Oracles und Fore telling of Prophets y by the m 'Humanity and Doffrin of Chrifi >by the ~bearifome Travails of his Apeftles , bj the Reproaches and Contumelies of Martyrs, St.Auftins by their Gibhets Blood shedding and Bleffed Deaths , By the Fa- cndiMi? mous Krl0^n Lives of saints , and <^sfmong Thefe fo Vnherfal great Virtues , By mo ft Worthy Miracles, Meetly and upon fit Cccajion Shewed us • Mark the Signs . He Goes on . Cum igitur tantum Auxilium &c. When Therfo- re "toe fefo great Ayde and Help Afforded by Almighty God, fo The)f$ra much Fruit and Encreafe . Dubnamus nos ejus EccUfu gre- Resfrnto m'lQ condcre &c. Shall Tve Doubt to Hide our Selves in the Tahbif £aP °f x^ut Church whtch from the Apoftolical Sea , Even to that this vublic\ confejjton of Mankind, Hath got tofuch a Height c^rchk> of Authority, by a Conttnual succejjlon of Bishops ; condemned shemes Hereticks yainly snarling at it . Partly alfo by the Judgement them. of the People , Partly by the Gravity and Weight of Councils, U%&*im*ie- ^artb fy t^e ^ory An^ Majejly of Miracles . Cut nolle pri- ty,rft u w*s dare, yelfumma profeclo impietatis eft, vel pracipitis arr*- liveVre- gantia . And not to Give to this Church theChiefcft tt/fe?« Prccr™nenee is in Good Earnefl , either a Mighty church h- Wickednes, or a Stubborn and Headftrong Pride. foreothen. ponder thefe Words well with the Following Alfo, and p#/^fin Ask your Own Confciences, what Church that was *;* Re/»- For Which S\ Auftin Pleaded fo Strongly? Did He ttoneom- Speak For All who Go under the Name of Chriftians? Zkrljtim. No : The Impugned Mamcbies were Such , And fo we- re Difc.IV.GVIH. TbeChurchesEVidenci. W re alfo the Arians , Pelagians, and Others : But Thtffe Becaufe of Their Vnevidenced Religion (utterly Defti- tute of Marks and Motives) He Reje&s as Schifrna- cicks and Hereticks . Did He Argue, Think ye, For MmhUfs, our little late Rifen Congregation of Protejlants > No tJnkJtn God Knows, They have lefs of this Evidence Then Novelties the very Arians Had,- And, Befides were never Thought °f?rotg- ot in S'% Auflins Dayes . 2. The Church Therfore, For which our Profound T^YT Doftor Speak's and Plead's, is an Other Society Known t^*r, to the World before Herefy Began . I Mean the Ever then for Vifible , Holy, Continued and CatholickRoman Church T»her- f^.ver . into Herejy , jujlly condemned , never Entred . ( August. fy>a»dcZ TraEl. 1 8. in Ioannem ) And, B> her of the Prophets Spak mere tbelUkR*. figni/cantly then of Chrijl Himfelf (Aug. in Pfal. 30.) This jjjj. Church , And This Only, Hath been Manifefted Ageaf- mt * ter Age by Eminent San&ity, By Glorious Miracles, i&kzifc By the Bloodflieding of Martyrs , By a never Interrup- dde*btllyfrtm ted Succefljon of Prelates , Pallors , and People from unfouUei S\ Peters Dayes to Ours, And finally By moft Learn- M*rks«»4 ed and Approved Councils . This, and This Only is sign$* the Church Diffufed the Whole World Over, which Keeps perfed Vnity in Faith with one Supream Head, And fo Demonftratively Evidenceth its Antiquity, That the Word of Sectaries are filenced When They offer to Cavil at it. 3. If you Ponder well Thefe Vndeniable Truths, You fte»l*cJ*a muft needs Condude Againft Sectaries, as Bleffed S1. Ah- slacks! ftin Once did Againft the Manichans . Read him lib. de mil. creden. cap. 14. Vos autem tam pauci, et tam TURBULENTI, ET TAM NOVI , NEMINl DUBIUM EST , QUIN HIH1L DIGNUM AUTHORITATE PRAFERATIS . There isno Doubr, Jio Difc. TV, C. VII 1, The Com!/:, k. St.Aullins Doubt, Saith the Sunt, But that You Sectaries fo pithy £*~ meanly Few, who Evidence nothing Credible in your fflfc Religion , You fo Turbulent and Confufed in your Opi- greutoSe- nions concerning Faith; You fo newly strangers to the *"*". Chriftian World ; There is, I fay , no Doubt But That fimm** ^ou °f° Sma^ Authority can Allege Nothing worth number, the Hearing , or Worthy of Credit when you Oppugn T§^SS our Ancient Church , or Defend Your Own folatein- JnLf* ve**ted Novelties. Confider every Word Serioufly. nevFaith, Vos tam pauci . What > You fo Few . You , StAuftins Whose, to Your Eternal Difcomfort, fo Many Na- tiered with •***■» fo many Peopk , fo MmyfVtrthj Prelates, Co Ma* XefltBson ny Glorious Martyrs , fo Many Penitent Sinners Believing #» ua*~ Our Ancient Faith Dying in it , and for it : You, who itnwmtra-te & Many Miracles Confirm it, fo Many Conversions hUwitmf- Wrought by it, fo Many Churches Erected, fo many fit tgainfl yniverfit'm founded , fo Many Prifons SanBified , fo Many "*'*' Dangers run Through , fo Many works of Piety Don by the Profeffours of this Ancient Church : -All is Evi- dent to Your Eyes and Senfes : Vos aytem tam Pavci. Kyind 'to bat can Tou fo Inconftderably FeT»9 not the Hun- dred part in Number , who Have Don Nothing like thefe Zelous Chriftians Say for a Novelty, or Probably Plead Againft fo Learned , fo Holy and fo DifFufed a Chriftian Society? Moreover. Vos tam Tvrbv- lenti. Toufi Turbulent , Se in This Ample Moral Ca- tholick Body Innumerable Seculars , Though of Dif- ferent Nations, of Different Tempers and Education , Ymty Km Together in One Ancient Belief: You Se Innume- fandsM. rable Profound Doftors , All over Chriftianity , Innu- wfiw?1' rcerable Learned Religious, (Though Various in Mat- ters meerly Opinative ) Yet fo Highly Tender of the Churches D i fc. I V . C V 1 1 1. The Churches Evidence'. 51 1 Churches Fnity % That They would rather Dy then Break or Blemish it. All thefe well Agreeing Harts in one Faith , Evidence , That This Church, is Made up of Members who Glory in Vnion amongfi Tbemfehes, and Teftify it By a due Submiflion to one Supream Head fet over this Blefied Society : Vos avtem tam Turbulen- ti* And what can You, late Troublefome People, Who Yeild Submiffion to None, But to your wn Fancies , You, Who within the Compafs of one Narrow King- dom , are fo turbulently Divided in Faith , fo Hor- ridly Rent and Torn a Pieces with Schifm 5 What can You , I fay, Allege For Your Breach of Vnion , or Ra- tionally Pretend Againft this long Standing and An- cient Agreting Body of Catholirics > 4. Finally. You So New Men Behold ( And it may lay Sorrow at your Harts ) Innumerable of your own long fince Deceafed Anceftors , Profeffed Chil- dren of this Mother Church, Their Monuments , Emit in England (S^d Spedacles Tis true , But ) Vifible Enough ^5 to Your Eyes, Plead Strongly for the Ancient Faith, Rowley. which You now Vnfortunately Rejeft : > You Se , The Very Churches built by Thofe your Fore-fathers, Though in. part Defaced, Are not yet fo much Spoiled, But, That ftill a memory is preferved of Catholick Religion in the very Altars half Pulled Down , In the Croffes, And other Remembrances of their Ancient Renowned Pie- ty : You Se withall , Whole Volumes writ in Defen- fcofour Catholick Doftrin, the very Velume and Cha- racters wherof (much elder then your Faith) lament your late Change, And tell many a fad Story of your new rifen Gofpel. Vos ergo tam Novi, And Hw . Dare you fo \a\% Majlers , without Confufion and ior- Vuu mem jii Difc.IV.CVHL The Conclu/ion. went of Conference , refled on Thefe Ante/lors, Look on Thefe Monuments , Read thefe Writings , And after all, Speak , as you do Irreverently of an Ancient Faith, meerly to Countenance a 7S[oyelty Wherof the World never Heard , before you Preach' t it. Say once Plain- ly , 'Tis High time to Speak , what Have you for x This Proteftancy \ Any Prudent Motives That make it Credible ? Not One. Have you Scripture > Not Kothmg a Word. Do Ancient Councils , or, the VnantmousCm- v?otefllncyfm o£ Fathers Favour it > No. All Band againft but Fancy it , And leave both you, and the Novelty profefled by you To no better a Ground, then what Vphold's all He- rejy, which is Fancy, or fome Thing wors then Fancy. Therfore Nemini dubium ejl quin nihil dignurn aucJoritttc praferatis. 5. Some Perhaps will fay. If Proteftancy be thus Highly Improbable, And the Roman Cathplick Reli- ve s«?«. gion 10 Manifeftly Credible As is now Declared, From T fnHe° Whence 1S lZ That Se&aries Stay fo long in Herefy , nfcwhiijt And Embrace not a Faith, which is without vifputexxn- the'ehurch doubted ly Clear to All > To Anfwer the Queflion, ujomani- -lt wou|j be enough to Propofe an Other, And 'Tis •^ i0* '. tfot to Ask, Why All Embrace not Proteftancy That it U ah- hath Nothing to induce men to it, But Why, after %rTb *m ^ rhQfe m°ft signal Mmifeft Miracles y and Cony erfiom in/Lmelf wrought by chrtjlout Lord and His Apoftles the who- Qbrtjinnd \$ world, Both J ewes and Gentils came not Then in, ul futv- ^JKtfl ^uc^ ftW* Motives , Why Did they not Forth- vmmg with Profefs Chriftianity ? Moil Certainly the Attra* •& * ft ion was Forceable : They wanted no Inducements. Vc7fonl ^UC Education And a contrary cuftojn of Living Giv™. .y Hindred rauchj and Senfc too flrong with the Moft or men, Difc.IV. C VIII. The Churches ETndencel 5x5 men , Perhaps More. For as Senfe and Senfual Plea- fures, Ever Make Vertue Injipid to the will, So They often Dull the Eye of Reafon alfo in Order to Truth , And Either Withdraw the Attention from a Serious Cw|fr4iy Confederation of what moft Concern's our Good , or , Education, which is Wors, totally averts the tDindfrom it. We M«*r./«- Se this mifery Dayly, For the More that men are (£„£*/ Lulled a Sleep in fenfe and worldly Delights, The pita/ur$ Lefs they Liften to what God fpeak's, Though He calls titnder< lo*>d on Them, And Vfeth a Language , as He doth by His Church , moft clear , Audible , and significant. 6. Add hereunto an Other Verity Delivered by One That could not but Speak Truth, i.Cor. 15. 19. Oportet He"f"s Harefes ejje . There rnuft be Herefies , and the Rea~ fon Followes in the Text • That ihofe T»bo are Approved may be made Manifejl Among you. Manifeft , How? Til Tell you . It is Herefy that hath brought Thou- ™eRe*m fands of Martyrs ( and this in the open View of the world ) to Their Gibbets and Torments, without it Mufh They Had not Dyed for chrift , nor Manifefted fo Goo*~fi!- clearly their RenoTench Conftancy* It is Herefy that ***'£** bath Evidenced the fuffering Patience of Innumerable^^" Confeflors , who Though fliut up in Vrifons and Dun- geons for their Faith, Have yet Their Memory Living, and it will Remain upon Record to future Ages. // is Here- fy , That both Proves and Shewes you where True Faith %hewed im { much wore precious then Gold tryedby the Fire\ is Found, iin-partictiUr, toPraifeand Glory. It is Herefy, That Brings toLight Gods pure Revealed Verities , never more fpread a-, broad, nor, better Known then when NovelliJIs endea- vor* to Supprefs Them. ItisHereJy, that hath fet Forth fo many learned Volumsof Ancient Fathers , Sent In- Vuu a nume- 524 Difc.1 V.C.VI FT. TbeConckfion. numerable Miflioners Up and Down the World , And yet Gives you Plenty of painfull Preachers in the Church , who Ceafe not to Speak in Gods Gaufe , ft omneos ohflruatur , that the Mouths of Seftaries beinUtnd. jij otSyrach Ecc/ef 33. 15, And Look with Him, uponall Te»thu*y the Works of the Higheft. Youfi rft> to Vertuous Good Men . Atque it* in or- dincm fecuiorum tanquam pulcherrimum Carmen, etiani ex qui- Itifdam quaji Antithtis honeftaret , And How that in the Cours of Ages , He might Commend and fet Forth all We Se , like a well made Vers wkh certain Contrarie- E-viigr*. ties. Evil Therfore Hath its Good, and GivesaGr*- c"^ftu\ ce to Virtue. Errour Add^s a Comiinefs to Truth , And ^ves ™H* the more Ugly Herefy U , the More it Sett's forth the 'Wren- ' Luftre of chrifis Orthodox Church , And makes it glo- Truih* rious . Viftor novit ( They are Words of S. Auftin serm. SAufi* De Diverjis c. $*Jthe) ubiponat nigrum colorem ut fit decora '^dJ ficlura , &mfcif-Deus ubi ponat peccatores , at fit ordinata crea* fain, tura. A Painter Knowes well where to lay Darker Colours, That his Piece ppay be Fair to the eye, And Shall not God Know where to Place Sinners ( the like is of Hereticks ) That His Creatures may Therby Ap- . pear Seemly, and in Order > - Yes mo(l Afluredly. This 9^J^ great Doo'or Saith yet More lib.de Vera Beligione c. 6. Hac ufeemng tnim Catholic* Ecclefia , per totum orhern yalide Uteque diffusa, ™en*r* omnibm errmibfis ad frofeftus fuos , & ad eomm Comflio- chunk V u u j nffl jxrj DIfc. t V, C. VII L The Conchficn. nem cum Evigilare Volutrtnt &c This Catholick Church fofarandneer Diffufed, makes Benefit of all Poor erring Souls, Yea, and Doth fo for their Amendment , when They Shalt Pleafe to Awake out of their Drow fines. It makes Vfe of Gentils to let them Se the Wonders it Works, of Heieticks to Prove its Holy VoBrin , of Schifmatich to give them a Leffon of better stability , of Ie^es to shew them the Beauty of Cbrifiian Religion &c. So it is. All the Blindnes in the world , faith s. Auftin , els Were, Ad aliquem ufum s&nftorum ordinate , is Ordained for fo- JSSjf* me Profit and Service , of Gods tied and Chofen utht People. Church, g. Conclude therfore. As there will be Deluded Souls , whether lewes or Gentils : As There will be Sin , Opprejfton , and Open Injupce to the End of Ages. Sic oportet Harefes efit . So there will be Herefies alio, tfffim/ And Thofe ■ who Wilfully Shut their Eyes to the Evi- tpiifuiiy dence of a Glorious Mother church. And wonder not at shut their jt# fof yOU Know , That the Son of God Himfelf, zvtdlncT ^ame into the World, Bt mmdm eum non cognovit, And tfthe the World would not know Hiro,His facred Do&rin was church, pfeach't All over, But Seemed, Iudais scanda/um , Gen- v?hentht *&*** stuhitia, A Scandal to the lewes > and a Foolery SonofGod to the Gentils. What Marvel is it then, that His »at mt own Holy Church , Be lefs Regarded by Difpirited %"nt* Souls, and the Dodrin theroffet Light by? Ha- ve Patience. Wait on Gods Good Leifure. No Hart is fo Hard but Grace can Soften ir. Thefe Dimm Eyes of Deceived Men Will at laft be Ope- ned. Et videbit omnis caro Salutare Dei. And all fhall Scand Know* That, as There is no Other Sty tour hut One, Difcl V.C. VII I The Churches Etidencf. 517 *gj» One , Cbrift our Lord , So There is no other church but #*#"#„ One , wlerin salvation ( long Sought for) can be Found, *** But in the One only Ancient , Apo&olscal , Catholic^ and fjl£f%j Holy Roman church . Credo Sanctam Ecclesiam Ca- rJHH, THOLJCAM. Cttholkk Qhurthi F I N IS. . THE vij THE •. C HAP TERS IN ORDER. THE FIRST DISCOVRS. * Of an Infallible Church and Infalli- ble Teachers^ CHap. I. There are Infallible Teachers of true chriftian Religion. Page 16. Chap. II. The Infallible Doclrin ofChrifl Netejjarily requi- res Infallible Teachers. 20 Chap. III. Other Proofs for Teachers , and a Church infalli- ble. 29 Chap. IV. Replyes to tht fe Arguments are Anfwered. 36 Chap- V. A Contrtrperfywithfome later SeEUries concerning Moral certainty* 49 Chap. VI. Faith only morally certain , is no Faith. Prote- jlants have no Moral certainty of Protejlant Religion. 6$ Chap. VII. How Sectaries err in the fearch made after Reli- gion. Of their weak and improbable Oppojition. The Objection is more fully Anfwered. 70 CHAP. VIII. A few Reflections made upon tbefe Motives of Credibility. No Religion hath UWotives founding moral certainty hut One only , which is the Roman Catholick Religion* - 78 Chap. IX. The Chapters in Order. Chap. IX. A short Digrejfwn concerning the shufling of Pro- tejlants in this matter. 88 Chap* X- Protejlants have no rational Motives , Voberby their ne7» Faith is evidenced to be fo much as Probable. 96 Chap. &!♦ Arguments dra^n from Reafon againfl Protejlants^ upon the confederation of Thefe declared Motives. 114 CEAP. XII. Protejlants , for Vtant of rational Motives cannot convert an Infidel to Chriflian Faith. 1 1 9 Chap Xlil. Protefiancy for Kant of Rational Motives dis- honor's Chrijl, and makes loay for any nelv coyned H re- ft- 128 THE SECOND DISCOVRS. Of Scripture. CHap. I. Scripture is ufeles , if none declare infallibly the fen fe of it. 135 Chap. II. The Fallacy of Protejlants concerning Scripture, and the Interpretation of Scripture , is discovered. 144 Chap* HI- Alljuhjlantials of Faith are not plain in Scriptu- re without an infallible Teacher* \ti Chap. IV. Sole Scripture without an infallible Interpreter can \ be no Rule of Fait ft. Protejlants have no Scripture for their Religion , as it is Protefiancy. I fa Chap. V. The Reafon of private men , and their private fpirit , cannot interpret Scripture, 169 Chap. VI. The rur* mode of Protejlants MifinurpretingScri- pture , "ft? hich proves the Churches Infallibility , is more Amply Refuted, 179 Xxx Chap. The Chapters in Ordbr. Chap. VII. More ofthisfubjecl. _ 187 Chap. VIlI. Tbenelfi Mode of Sectaries mifmterpreting Scri- pture dejlrcyes Protejlant Religion. 19c; Chap. IX. Of the Means left by Almighty God to interpret Scripture True/y. One Pajjage more of Scripture Proving Infallible Teachers , is quoted. 203 Chap. X. Objections are Anfaered. x\j THE THIRD DISCOVRS. Of Sectaries Vnreafonable Pro- ceeding, CHap. I. Protectants are Vnreafonable , IvkilH They feemingly bold a Catholic!^ Church Dijlinttfrom the i?e- man.neither kgolvn nor Defignable lj an], 23 1 Chap. II. Of a late Writers Doelr in. 236 Chap. III. The Pretended Reformation of Protejlants is un- reafonab/e, if Faith in Chrifi Only fiffice for Salvation. A more Explicit Faith is proved Necejfary. 244 Chap. IV. The Ambiguous Difceurfes of Protejlants , con- cerning Fundamentals in Faith , are V roved unreafona- lie. zjq Chap. V. An Anffter to one Reply. Moieof this fubjett. 161 Chap. VI. Some Few Propositions of a late Writer are briefly Examined. His Difcours of Fundamentals Deftro/s pro- tejlant Religion. 271 Chap. VII. More of this fubjeft. Objections are Anjvver- ed. 291 Chap. Villi, Brotejlants are unreafonable in the Defenfe of Their The Chapters in Order. Their Ute Manifejt and undoubted Schifm. 3 1 5 Chap. IX. Prcteftants cannot rnakf Good Their Charge A- gainti the Roman Catbolict Qburch > concerning caufal Schifijt, 323 Chap. X. The Roman Catholic^ Church , Tbfci'/i? Evidence comes not Againft it , (lands Firm upon its Ancient Pof- fejfed Right, This long Pojfejfun Proves the Church Or- thodox. 3J3 Chap. XL Of a Ute Writers Exceptions Againft our pleading Poffefiion. 339 Chap. XII. Another Ohjetlion. And whether j >rot eft 'ants can Acquit themfelves ofSchifm. 357 Chap. XIII. Afecond Argument i^Againjl this Schi/m. Of Sectaries Cavils concerning Emms % Entring the Church infenfibl). 362 Chap. XIV. 0/ Word to a FeT*> fuppofed and unproved Ap- fertions . Wherhj fome Endeavour to clear Protectants of Schifm, 379 Chap. XV. CMore of Thefe Authors tonfufed Doc~lriny is Refuted, 387 THE FOVRTH DISCOVRS. Of the Churches Evident Credi- bility. Of the Improbability of Proteftancy. CHap. I. Cbri/ls Church is Proved to he no Other, But the Roman Catholic^. Seftaries are convinced of er- rour. 405 ( X x x s Chap. II. The Chapters in Order. Chap. II. Protejlancy is an uneyidenced, And a mofi impro- vable Religion, or , rather no Religion, hut a meer Fan- cied opinion. 4x0 Chap. JJI. A Word more of Sectaries ne*& Mode of Arguing laid forth , by Touching on one Controversy concerning the Doftrin of Purgatory, 434 Chap. IV. A Parallel of Proof for , and Again ft t e Do- fir in of Purgatory. Afolution to a late Adver far ies Ob- jections. 4 1 2, Chap. V. An objection propofed , and folvedin a Difcours of another Controverjy. Which is the Real prefence. 477 Chap. VI. Seflaries without either Proof or principles, TPrejl Chrijls Words to an improper fenfe , and yent an Herefy upon meer Fancy. 489 Chap. VII. Htity differently We and Sectaries proceed in this Cintnyerfy. What they are to Prove. 506 Chap, VIII. The Conclufion. The Churches Evidence. 517 SOME SOME FEW OF THE MORE CHIEF CONTENTS OF THIS TREATISE. THE FIRST DISCOVRS. Of Infallible Teachers , and the Mottoes of Credibility. CHriJls Church hath infallible Teachers of true Chriftian Religion. Cbrifli infallible Doctrin requires infallible Teachers. A Doctrin that is fallible may be fals. Chrifh fent none to teach any other Doctrin but that which may be refolved into Gods certain Reve- lation, but fuch a Doctrin can neither be fals nor fallible. Sectaries preach no otjier Doctrin but what is fallible and may be fals. The Objective infal- libility of Gods Word in Scripture is not ex tttminh Evident , and no Church (as They fay) Ever yet toH them or can tell them infallibly , that it is infalli- ble. If all Paftors and Doctors may err in their delivery of Chriftian Do- ctrin, God would as indifferently oblige us to believe alye, as his certain verities. If God deprive all Paftors of infallible Afiiftance , Chriftian Reli- gion nowftandson no more firm ground then mans weak, mutable and er- ring opinion. Gods infallible Revelation avails nothing in order to Faith, unles Chriftians lay hold on the certainty therof by Faith which cannot be doti, unlcs that Oracle which propofeth the Revelation to all be infallible^ If the Proponent of a Revelation only hy doubtfully. T think God fpcaksasl preach , but am not certain , the Aflent given to his Preaching is alfo doubtful, and no Faith. Faith furpafleth in its ftrength and Tendency, all moral and Metaphyseal certainty. Though Moral certainty were fufficient for Faith, yet Sectaries have not fo much for Proteftancy, as it is reformed. How Sectaries err in their fearch made after Religion , and both weakly and improbably op- pugn the Doctrin of the Catholick Roman Church. Reflections upon the mo- tives of credibility. It is impoflible (after the eftabliftiment of true Faith in the world) that God permit a fals Religion to be more clearly evidenced to reafon by force of rational Motives , then true Religion is manifefted. A fals Reli- gion cannot equalize Gods true Religion in the evidence of prudent motives, in- ducing to Faith. No Religion hath motives founding moral certainty (prere- fluirtd to Faith) but tftc Roman Catholick Religion only* Ptoteftonts have Xxxj nothing Some oftJx nothing like rational motives, wherby Protcftancy , as Protefttncy , is proved to be fo much as probable, "where Mr, Stillutgflt'et Treats of refolving Piote- ftants Faith , He waves the Queftion wholy , and fpeak's no more in behalf of Protcftancy, then Ananifm , or another Herefy. Arguments drawn from Reafon againft Protectants upon the confederation of tuc Churches motives. St claries cannot for want of prudent motives (inducing to Faith) convert an infidel to Chriflian Religion. TheirReligion Diflionors Chrifi and makes way to any new coyued Herefy. THE SECOND DISCOVRS. Of Scripture. SCripture is a ufeles book in the hands of Sectaries , if none, as they confefs, Declare infallibly the fenfe of it in high points of Controverfies. Arians in- terpret Sciipture as probably as Protcftants , when they oppofe the fenfe recei- ved by the Church. Sectaries make Scripture a book, that proves all Reli- gions, and more fignifkant for A rianifm then Protcftancy. The fallacy of Pro- teftants.concerning the Interpretation of Scripture , is difcovered. Grant no in- fallible Chuich, we have no A fTuranee of true and interrupted Scripture. Scri- pture might be more eafily corrupted then a whole Church cheated into fals Doctrin. No man can prudently fuppofe , that God had more care to prcfer- ve Scripture uncorrupt, then a Church free fiom errour. All Subftantiab of Faith are not in Scripture. A Learned Philofopher by his own reading Scri- pture cannot judge whatit meanes in a hundred Paflages without an Interpreter. Sectaries now are in the very fame cafe without an infallible Interpreter. Secta- ries in their Glofjes on Scripture do nothing but add , and fubftract from Gods \Tord , "when They Oppofe the Churches fenfe of Scripture. Sole Scriptu- re without an infallible Interpreter , can be no Rule of Faith. Proteftants ha- ve not one word of Scripture for their Religion , as it is Proteftancy* The Reafon of private men, or of a private fpirit cannot interpret Scripture. The new mode of Proteftants mifinterpreting Scripture is amply refuted. All our Sectaries endeavour is to turn Scripture off from the Catholick fenfe by their own fancies, and then think the work don. It is one thing to fay (and only to fay it) that Scriptures alleged by us prove not what we intend, and another pofitively to prove the Doctrin contrary to us to be grounded on Scripture , In this Sectaries always fail. The new mode of Sectaries interpreting Scriptuic deftroyes Proteftant Religion. Here is the fequel of Sectaries. "We Catho. licks Prove not yyhat we afiert , therfoie they make the contrary Doctrin an Ar- ticle of their new Faith. Faith cannot rely on fuch Negatives. Of the means left by Almighry God to interpret Senpturc. The Holy Ghoft only , fpeaking by the Oracle of thc.Chuich , Interpret^ Scripture infallibly , in thofe matters which Qbief Contents. which concern the genera! belief of all. Proteftants , who profcfs themfclvcs to be fallible in v hat ever they teach , are no Inftruments aflumed by the Holy Ghoft to teach anal interpret infallibly Gods 'Word. No Sectary can judge the Church , but the Chuich is to judge all Sectaries. THE THIRD DISCOVRS. Of the unreafonable proceeding of Protectants in fome Chief matters of QonUoloerfy. PRotefhnts , who feemingly hold a Catholick Church before Luther larger then the Roman Catholick Church , and cannot defign it, Proceed unrea- fon bly , and muft falfif y that Article ofour Creed. I believe the Holy Catholick Church. Before Luther there were no Chriftians in the vvorld for a thoufand years, at leaft, but Roman Catholicks, and known Hereticks , neither thofc Ca- tholicks alone fas Proteftants fay) nor the known Hereticks (nor both together) conftituted the true Catholick Church , therfore there was no true Catholick Church on earth for fo vaft a time. No abftratl: Do£bin common to all , who are named Chriftians , is fufficient toconftitute Catholick Doctrin. Mr. StiU Itngfitet is confuted, and his Doctrin fhewed improbable. Faith in Chrifl only, as a Redeemer , is inefficient to Saluation : A more cxplicite Faith of other particulars is proved NecefTaiy, If Catholicks and Sectaries are light in the fundamentals of Faith , all the pretended Reformation of Protectants comes to a flight work about Non -EffentUls , which may have made Things wors then before. It is not the lefs 01 more weight of things revealed that makes Faith lefs or more valued of , but the Submiflion we yeild to Gods Veracity , which is one, and of equal Authority in what ever he Reveal's, Though a Distin- ction weie granted brt ecn Fundamentals and not Fundamentals I Yet Prote- ftants cannot fo much as probab.y fever the Fundamentals from tbe others by any known Principle. If there be no Catholick Church owned (at leaft) infalli- ble in Fundamentals, all Faith both of Chrtfl and Creed may perifh before the world end's. And if there be fuch an Infallible Chuich in Fundamentals , Se- ctaries ought to defign it , and fay , to whom that Spirit is granted , in what fubjeetit refines &c. A Proteftant, who fo far Denies Chrijls true Church , That he cannot fay where it is , and endeavour's to reform others before he have certainty of his own half well made Reformation , cannot probably go a- bout to withdraw a prudent Catholick from his Religion. Some Proportions of Mr .Stilling fleet arc examined. His Difcours of Fundamentals deftroy's Proteftant Religion. He Speaks of the Being of a Church and faith not precifcly how much Doclrin conftitutes that Being. He cannot name any Orthodox Church that ever Excepted againft the Articles belmed by the Church of Rome. He ma- kes the Negative Articles of the Enghfli Church not to be Articles of Faith, but only Some of the only infer iourTruths-heid only in order to peace and tranquillity. His Church therfore iseflentially Hypocritical, which may believe one thing and rauft profefi another. Though Prot» ftants were veiy i apifts in hart , yea, and Anathema- tized all Thefe Negative Articles , They may be looked on asBleiTcd Children of this new Negative Church, if their Exteriour be fairly Proteftant-like. He makes his Chureh no more an Englifli Church then a Church of Arians , and of aH condemned Hercticks. He faith the Enghfh Church makes no Articles of Faith , bur fuch as have the Approbation of the whole Chriftian world and of Rome itfelf. The AflJ rtion is Evidently Vntrue , For no Orthodox Church, no Heretical Society, no Confrntt.f the whole Chriftian World Ever taught, That a Doctrin wherin all Chrftians agree is fufficient to Saluation. \rhen Sectaries Say. Chrifts gave to his Difciples a Sign only of his Body. This very Doctrin is either an Article of Their Faith, or one of their Inferiour Truths. If the firftj They believe tie at w'hich never had the appiobation of the whole Chriftian World, much lefs of Rome it felf If rhe fecond be granted : They have no Divine Faith at all of the Bleifed Sacrament. The Nullity of our Ad- verfaries ground's is declared , though the Church made new Articles of Faith. If we fpeak rigouroufly, The Church makes nonew Articles, but only declares more Explicitly what was anciently believed The Fathers call the Church a jich Treafury wherin the Depefitutriof ApoftolicalDoc*bin is fecurely prefeived. The Analogy of Faith is explicated. There was a Platform of Chriftian Reli- gion before Scripture was >JTrit, and the Apoftles feparated Themfelves and Preach'tto fcveral Nations. Sectaries who feemingly acquiefce in the Judge • ment of one or two Ancient Fathers , moft inconfequently reject the Authority of a Learned General Council that is of greater weight and Eftimation. If the Churches Definitions are therfore to be thought fallible, becaufe men declare them, and all men arelyarsj much more are our Sectaries Novelties andGlof- fes on Scripture to be valued of as Fallible upon the fame ground. Thefe falli- ble men tell me my Churches Doftrin is fallible , fuppofe falfly it were fo , it is altogether as good as this very fallible Propofition is that fayes *TisFalibIe;aud if (which is true) it be infallible,it is much better. No man that holds His Re - ligion fallible , can probably endeavour to convert an other, though the con. trary Religion Profeffed by this other be acknowledged to be no more but fal- lible. Much lefs can he perfecute Him for not yeilding AlTent to a fallible Re- ligion. All the Storms of perfecution raifed againft Catholicks are not upon any account of want of Faith , but for this fole caufe, that we will not believe one thing and force our Confciencesto Profefs an other : \T hich is to fay, we arc pcifecutedbecaus we will not beHypocrits. the Qhief Contents. The Vnreafonablents of Troteflants Schifm laid forth , from the VllLChap. of the third Dtfcours to the XV. THe Separation of Protectants from the Roman Catholick Church, is as plain and manifeft a finful Schifm ^ as ever was Decryed Rebellion in a Kingdom, or any Violation of a Countries Right. The formal Sehifm of Sec1:anes,is evi- denr,but the Caufal charged on Catholicks, is no mote but an unproved Calum- ny. Proofs brought to received Principles fail Se£raries,whilft they make the Ro- man Church to be the caufe of their Formal Schifm. The fuppofed errours char- ged on the Roman Catholick Church by Sectaries are not like th»: firft Principles in nacure,Evident ex terminis,*nd therfore muft be proved by a D.fcours ground- ed on certain Principles. "Wc Licence Se&arics in their Difcours againft us, to make ufc of ail Imaginable found Principles , Scripture . Fathers, Tradition, or what They pleas , and only exclude Their own felf- voting from the nature of a rational Proof and Principle. When a Rebellion is manifeft in a Kingdom, the fole Authority.of them who began it,is inefficient to make it Juftifiable : And the Authority of Sectaries is as forceles to Juftify their Evident Schifm againft: the Church. Ajphilft Evidence comes not againft ourChurcbjitftand's raoft firm upon its ancient poflcfled right. This long PofTcffion proves our Church Orthodox. Examples Hereof. Mr. St Ming fleets Exceptions againft our plead- ing PofTcffion , are proved to be weak, forceles, and meer ungrounded Suppo- sitions. Though the Obligation of proving Evidently lies on our Adverfaries, who are the AggrclTors , yet we prore not only a perfonal Succeflion of our Popes an3 Prelates in forgoing Ages , cbut alfo manifeft a Quiet PofTeffion of Truth that defcended with thefe continued Pope* and Bifhops from the dayes of S. Piter to this very Age. No juft Exception can be made againft our Tra- dition.whichis Evidently its one Proof, for there cannot be a clearer. Mr. Stilling' fUtt fuppofcth that our Right of pleading Truth is a meer Occupancy. He is to prove this becaus he is the Accufer. No Antecedent Law hath determined Contrary to what we Challenge by vertueof our PoiTeflion. We have both the Law for us, and ancient PolTeffion,befides; And there is no Reafonwhen we allege two Proofs, Law and PofTeffion, that we Quite the one, which is Pofl feffion , as Mr, Stillingfleet pretend's we mould do , which is againft all ratio* nal Difcours of this fubject. It is improbable to fay , that Proceftants firft fa w thefe fuppofed errours imputed to our Church, when others as Quick- lighted, mote numerours and Learned then They , faw them not for ten whole Ages before Luther. It is a degree of madncs to fuppofe , that all thofe worthy and Learned ProfcfTors of the Catholick Faith were either fo ftupidly blind , as not to have feen fuch fuppofed errours, or fo Wickedly Hypocritical as to have wincked at them , after their plain pifcovcry. It is a Paradox to fay , t.hat our Vyy nevr Some of the new men faw thefe too plain and vifiblc errours , when that great Catholick Church (which Sectaries make more large then the Roman) faw them not , but permitted Rome to countenance thefe fuppofed errouis , without check or re- prehenilon. Of the Impofilbility oferrours entring the Church after the fit ft 4. or f . hundied years. Though Sectaries mould convince (which is impoflible) the Roman Catholick Church to be guilty of errour , yet they cannot mow that they have let Crvtiftian Faith right again on its old Foundations, as it once ftood pure. All Principles fail them in this particular. Fancy only, and nothing like a rational Proof,uphold*s this charge of errour agairft our Church. Mr ^tilling, jteets AiTcitions are refuted. If the Roman Catno lick Church has erred by im- polling unreafonable conditions, Sr&anes who Profek themfelves fallible in all they fay, may have erred more and fpoil'd all they went about to mend No- thing can be more unreafonable , then to make a few Rebellious people rece- ding from an ancient Church firft to accufe it , and then to fit Judges in their own caufe, and condemn it. None can probably mow, that the fe late Refor- mers of PTOteftants , who oppofed all other Religions > arc untainted , or pu- rely Orthodox. As no men before the Donatifts made the Church fo ftrait as they did : fo never Chriftians before thefe later Sectaries made it fowide, as to hold in itallthcHereticks in the world. Proteftancy , as Proteftancy , is no Chriftian Religion at all, if the belief of that DocTrin which is common to all Chriftians be amply fufficient to Salvation. Protectants may Anathematize all the Do&rin within the compafs of their reformed Religion, and yet be faved. THE FOVRTH DISCOV&S. Of the Churches Evidence , and Improbability of Tro* tefiant %eligton. PRoteftants , as they make not good their own Do&rin , by Proofs ground- ed on certain Principles : fo they never impugn the Roman Catholkk Faith by rational Arguments. Catholicks contrary wife prove their Churches Do&rin by undeniable Principles. The Grounds of Catholick Religion are briefly laid forth. As it is an evident Principle , that all thofe "W ife and Learn- ed DoSors who taught Chriftians Popery for a thou fa nd years, were neither fools nor perverfly blind. So it is more evident , that God fufitred not tbofc millions of Chriftians , inftru&ed by thefe Teachers , tooe grofty abufed with fals Doftrin , whilft there was rto other Catholick Society in the world to un- beguile them. All other Sectaries , who defer ted the Roman Catholfck Church erred grofly : and it is improbable to think , that Proteftants only among fo many ftraying Teachers , were the only priviredged people , elccled by Godto mend (had any thing been amjfS| in a old decayed Church , withotrt mi*tiwe of Qhief Contents. errour , or marring mote then they mended. Proteftancy is unevidenced, and 'an improbable Religion , that is , no Religion, but afancied opinion. No Do. ftf in fallibly taught, as Protcftancy is , can be ultimately refolved into Gods infallible Revelation. Scripture alone without an infallible Interpreter makes no man infallible. A Doctrin which at its firft rife was , and is ftill oppofed by all Chriftians (excepting the Se&aries who broach it) is as improbable, as Arian- ifm. A Church eflfentially enable , may lo»$ all Truth , and confequently aU grace , and fo become divorced from Chrili. A Doctrin proved improbable by undoubted Principles»cannot be made credible by tational Arguments , unles Truth be contrary to Truth. Of the flight way ofSectaries Arguing againft Ca» thohek Doctrin. Mr, Sttllingfleet, like his other Brethren, in a Difcours of Pur- gatory , begins with leers , with Miftakes , and diiTembhng of Difficulties. IJe nates not the Queftion rightly between the Latin and Gtecks. The Diiputc be- tween the Latins and Greeks is clearly laid forth by Leo Alatius a Grecian. What paffed in the Council of Florence concerning This Difpute. The Greeks moft certainly,both before and after the Council held,a place of puniiTiment for fouls departed, from which place they are freed bv the Prayers of the Living. They alfo hold that fouls enioy the beatifical Vifion before the day of Judge- ment. The weaknes of our Adrerfarics caufe is h«A Ceen by a Parallel of Proofs for Purgatory and againft it. The Catholick Principles fojJPurga.tory. S„ Aujlins was not the firft that held Purgatory. Mr, tiilliogfleet mifunderftanJjs twopafiages in S.Aujim. The Sectary when He Explicates Scripture or FaUxex*, makes his own Glofs the f ireft ground of his Interpretation. \Tthcn the Catho- lick explicates a dubious palTage , He relies on a fure Principle diftinct from his Interpretation. Objections are Anfwered. Hovv the Supplications of the Church reipect mercy and Forgivenes to be fbewed thejuft at the Day of Jud- gement. An Objection is propofed in behalf of Sectaries, and folved in another Difcours concerning the BleiTed Sacrament. The Grounds of our Catholick Doctrin for the Real Prefence. The contrary Opinion of Sectaries is proved to bemeer Fancy. Sectaries cannot by vertue of any one received Principle re- move the Catholick from the plain and Obvious fenfe of Chrtfts moft fignificant words. The Teftimonies of Fathers are as clear for our Catholick Doctrin, as the words of the Council of Trent. A Parallel of Proofs for and againft the Doctnn of the Real Prefence. The way of Sectaries is,chiefly to loos Them- felves in proposing difficulties againft us, without cafting a (crious thought on fure Principles that folvc them. They find the Myftery of the BleiTed Sacra- ment uneafy to fenfe, but reflect not, that They believe two or three other Myftenes fully as hard, if not more difficile, for Example, a Trinity, the In- carnation, and Original fin. It is moft Evident , what Ever Principle (whether it be Scripture , Church Authority , or confent of rnhers) that mo- ves to believe thefe Verities, that very Principle is as preffing, forceable and urging , yea and often more cxprefs for the Belief of our Sacrament wherat they boggle. What the Sectary is obliged to prove,if He except againft our grounds Yyyz i» Some of the Chief Contents. in this Controverfy I We admit of Chrijh plain Words, according to their moft ob/ious fenfc : wc find them fo underftood by a number of the mod ve- nerable ancient Fathers, as we underftand them , and moreover have a Learned Cliuich rhatfpeak*s as both Scripture and Fathers fpeak. Can Sectaries now cxacl: of us that wc leave thefe ftrong Principles , and rely on their vvord becau. fcThey yj\\\ have us do fo? It is impoifible , unlcsThey give us in lieu ofthe- fc, as plain Scriptuie , as plain Tcftimonies of Fathers, and produce the war- rant of fome other Church more ancient and Orthodox then ours is, that once Patronized their Novelty. If they fay, They can explicate our Scripture and ancient Fathers. I have Anfwered above. Their explication is worth nothing, unles it be grounded on more cxprefs Teftimonics that favour thrir Novelty , then out contrary authorities are for Catholkk Do£fcnn. If again they reply: As we muft explicate their Authorities brought againft us , fo They can expli- cate ours alleged againft them. I Anfwer , if a ftop be made here, neither t^cy nor we yet come to the laft Principles. But here vvill be the final Decifion of all. We appeal to the clear Words of Scripture, They have Evidently none fo cxprefs. Wc appeal to the moft manifeft Tcftimonies of Fathers delivered in this Controverfy (The Council of Trent fpeaks not more clearly) They Oppofc a few dark Sentences help't on with their Gl«fTes,contrary to the Fathers fenie ,as is largely proved. Laftly, we appeal to the Judgement of our Ancient and far extended Church , Herein they arc forced to ycild , for they have no Church comparable to it that Defends their Novelty, The Churches Evidence, Why God permits Herefy to be in the World) A FEW NOTES 3 i UPON MR.POOLES APPENDIX, , AGAINST CATTAIN IVERARD. E.WorsleV Say a few for I muft be brief, fin- ding very little to flay trie in the Ap- pendix which is not dire&ly folved in the foregoing Treatis. And therfore wonder not, it I often remit the Reader to the former Difcourfes as occafion requires, it being impoflible to reply to an Adverfary upon this fubjed of Infallibility, without touching on what is fayd already , where the Dtredt Anfwer is given to His objections. I would not indeed have writ thus much againft M'.Poole, but only to hinder a little vanity in rhe man , for if no no- tice had bin taken of his Appendix, He might perhaps have thought too well of his work, and judged it fo | learned a piece that none would Dareto meddle with I it. To gain what time is poffible , I pafs by all His jeers , his har flier language, and Calumnies caft on Ca- tholick &c Thofe Perfonal exceptions alfo uniuftly made againft the Converted Captain , and fome vulgar Difficulties folved a hundred times , fhall give me no work at prefent , who will only fall (and clofely ) upon a th^t % Notes upon that which M'.Poolc ( its likely ) may think moft mate- rial,and to the pu pofe. And becaufe the beft ftrength He huh, lies in the beginning of the Appendix, lie examin that moft , and make his errours manifeft by found proofs and Principles. Briefly. K Tlie occafion of M^E^rards Converfion was a Difcourslield w;th a Catholick Gentleman. who Af \ed me ( faith the Captain) whether 1 Tva* fo certainly infal- libly ajjurcd of the Truth of the Chrijiian Religion , that it Was not pojjtble for ms , or thofe that taught me Chriftianity to he miftak*n therin $ and He gave me this reafonfor his queftion, thatotherwife x as to me , cbrijlianity could be no more then fro- bably true \ And We could not condemn the lew or Turk^ or Pa- gan , fince they Were as well perfyaded of \t heir fever al Wayes, as We could he of ours upon a fallible certainty , Cyind for ought We knew (not haying any infallible certainty for our Chrifliani- ty ) feme of them might be in the rightyandwe in the "Wrong way, for it is pofflble, you may he miftaken. Thus M\?oo\e Ap- pendix page 8. who flight's the Difcours, as filly, weak, and ungrounded. 3. I fay Contrary. TheDifcours is ftrong, rational, and moll convincing. The ground of my Aflertion further declared. Difc. I. c. 1. 2. is thus. A Doftrin which by vertue of all the Principles it hath (or can re- ly on,) cannot hut he fallihly taught by all Teachers now within the bounds of Chritlianity , it 4 by force of its Proportion % and< merit of the Dottrin ( precifely confide- red ) moft certainly faklihle , and may be fals . But fuch a taught Do&rin, which by vertue of all the Prin- ciples ft hath, (or can rely on) and merit alfo of the Doftrin, or force of its Propofition , is fallible and may be fals , is not the certain Doftrin of chrifl , which can- Lnot N. fc Mr&ooles Appendix, j not by the vertue of any Principle it hath or me- rit of the Doftrin, and force of its propofition , be either fallible or fats , Ergo fuch a taught Do&rin is not Chrifis certain Do&rin , which neither is , nor can be fallible or fals. Now further. A Doftrin which is not Chrifis cerrain Doftrin ( becaufe removed from certain Principles) can be no other but the Do- arin of mans errdble judgement or Taney > And conlequenq- ly gives as little Aflurance to him that teaches \t faUi* bly, or thofe that hear it, as that of the Jewes gives to them. Obferve my reafon, equally Convincing in both cafes. Therfore we fay , the Dodrin of a Jew gives no Aflurance to Him that Teaches, and thofe who H^ffi hear it , becaufe it is removed from all infallible Princi- arinof*a pies, and relies only on his errable judgement or Fan- Jew ii not cythatteachesit,but the Fallible Doarin of thefeSe- £jncIy£aUi' Aaries now mentioned, is alfo removed from all Infalli. fa!Saifo He ' ' ■ " M ' ' Doa rable m confequence,is none of chrifis infallible Doarin. But if agai&ft it be none oichriUs Doflrin, it gives no more Aflurance hi* to them that Hear it , than the Doarin af a Jew gives to any of his Sea , Ergo. Here briefly is my Gtouild ^nd I would fe it Anfwered* 4. Some perhaps willfay,the Doarin of thefe SeAa- ries relies on Gods Word, and that alone is afure and infallible Principle. I anfwer, if we fpeak of SeAaries particular Doarin as reformed, They have not one At* tide clearly, no nor fo much as probably grounded on Godsexprefs word, for Scripture faith no where that Faith only jujlifies , that all Churches are falltUe , that there is a 2 m 4 . % Notes upon no purgatory, no Sacrifice of the Altar, &C- Ergo thefe Do drins wane certain Principles. Now if they Reply, Though thefe particular Doftrins are not exprefs in n Scripture, yet the general Truths of Chriftianity are, And They rely on thefe, not careing for more. . I Anfwer, Though thefe Verities as revealed be infallible in themfelves, yea and infallible alfo to the Catholick thatadmit's of them as infallible, for the certain Tefti- mony of his Church , yet no man, no Church , no Ora- cle of Truth , ever hitherto aflured the Proteftant infallibly, that they are infallible ( for all thefe with him are falli- ble ) therfore They are removed from the nature of being certain Principles in order to his Faith and Do- & in alfo, unles He (<\y that the Obje&ive infallibility * ;. of Scripture is evident/* terminh to the very eyes that read the book, which is proved improbable Difc.i.c.12. n.4. Wherof more presently. I Anfwer. 2. If the Obje&ive infallibility of thefe great Verities be a cer- tain Principle to the Proteftant , it either Derives into his undei (landing that teaches them a Subjettive infall- biltty in order to his Dodrin; or leaves him as He was before lyable to m<(Lke and errour , if the firft be granted; He is Sulje&hely infallible when He teaches, and this He will not hear of. Grant the fecond viz. That He is lyable to miftake and errour in his teaching, [ He may well nnfs of the objective Truth , becaufe He I only faith fallibly what God fpeaks infallibly, and con- I fequently his Co&rin ultimatly refobed, faith no more bur timidly thus much : Perhaps I declare what God fpeaks, and it may be not , for my Declaration is faU IthU and, may be fals , Therfore you Chriftians who hear me , can believe nothing infallibly, becaus my very Teach- Mr* The other, a necef- fary Determination to Truth by Principles not liable* to errour, And Sectaries alwaies want thefe Principles, whilft They teach a Do&tmfallibly. If here they ta- ke recourfe to moral certainty only and think that fuf- ficient, turn to the fur Chapter of the firft Difcoursand you will fe them evidently confuted. It is loft labour to repeat again what is fayd in that place. 5. Thefe grounds fuppofed, you fliall fe how Mr. Peop- les Exceptions againft them comes to nothing. Let us faith He P. 9 n, 2. examin a little the ftrength of this pretty Propofition viz. That if Tve be not infallibly affu- redoftbe Truth of Christianity , lefres , Turks and Pagans are as vdlperfyadedofthtr '# ayes , as ve ( Chriftians ) of ours, what a mad Afjertion ( Faith He ) is this , that nothing is cre~ dthle , hut 19 bat is infallibly certain , and that there is no diffe- rence bet $>t en Probabilities and Improbabilities &c. To this I anfwer in a word , (you fliall have the Reafon hereaf- ter) Nothing in true Chiiftianity is credible, bur what both may, and muftbe believed by mod certain faith, a 3 in 6 ' Notes u^dn in other moral matters things are morally credible I though we arrive not to certainty, but Faith hath its ex- ceptions. UM'.Poole goes on. / am not infallibly cer- tain , that there isfuch a place as Jamaica \for it is pofiibte that all Geographers may miftake , and Travellers may Lye ) Therfori 1 am as uncertain that there is a fea pajjage to China by the T^ortb &c. I am not certain, if I find a Calf in a field , but that it may ( as fome time it was ) droft from the clouds, but Tvill any fober man thinly that it came not from a coT» > He hath other inftances to this purpofe, And the man ( if I miftake not) would here liken thecettainty of that Truth we have of tbriflianitj , to the certainty we have oi Jamaica and a calf coming from a Cow , and the Do- ftrinof Judaifro He would have fo improbable,asif one fhould fay, the Calf was dropt from the Clouds. In a word if Hedifpute with a Jew , He will hear that his whole Difcours is Tetitioprindpij, and that his Inftances of Iamaicaand a calf are nothing to the purpofe, becau- se he fuppofeth what fhould be proved viz. That the Doftrin of a lew is fo improbable to that Se<3, as this Antagonist makes it , And that the taught Do&rin of Sectaries is fo highly Probable in order to them , as is here fuppofed. Alas , the lew wil utterly filence UW.Poole with this convincing Reafon. What ever becomes of my Do&rin , I tell you , your Protectant taught Doftrin which may be fals, is no better than mi- ne, becaufe it is not ultimately refolvable into Gocte infallible Revelation which cannot be fals. That it cannot be thus refoived is evident, becaufe a Dotfrin that isfallibleand may be fals (though true in it fe!f)as falltble and lyable tofalfity, cannot be, as it were,caft or laid on Gods tnfaUibU Veracity i that effentially Difowns and re- M.fooh 'ooies appendix. 7 rejefts all Doftrin that's fallible , and may be fals. Therfore , as Fallible , ultimately refolved , it muft be brought to its one home , which is not Gods infallible Revelation , but to meer fancy, or fome other uncertain- ty. For exarpple : Put the cafe , that an EngliihSy - node truely Defines ; Chrijt lefa is God and man , yet fo that the Definition by vertue of all the Principles it hath, or its own intrinfick merit, is fallibly Delivered. One reflefts on this Definition and confider's the Truth of it, which is a conformity with its objeft , as alfo the Weaknes of it, which is Fallibility for want of Princi- ples that Determin it to Truth. I Ask now why Do Seftaries believe chrijt to be God and man by this Fal- lible Definition ( T is one of your Afts of Faith is it not >) You muft Anfwer ; you Believe fo becaufe God hath faid it in Scripture. Very good. But I Ask again ? Hath he faid this Falliblj by a Revelation that's capable of falfity ? No muft evidently, His Revela- 'tion is infinidy certain, Ergo I fay your Definition or Aft of Faith , Qua fallibilis , or as meerly fallible, cannot under that Notion of Fallibility, reft upon an infallible Veracity, for this infallible Veracity hath neither m*&~ fure nor Proportion with a fallible Afient , nor can a fallible AfTent have any mea/ure or Vroportion with an infallible Revelation. Mark therfore well the Refo- lution of this whole AfTent • J believe Cbrijl to be God and man by a fallible Aft Ttbicb may be fals, becaufe Gods in* fallible Revelation Jvbicb can neither be fallible or fals, (JMoyes me to believe fi , And moft juftly call it no Faith at all, for an infallible Revelation Moves none to believe falli- blj, therfore the tendency of this Aft, as it is Fallible, Moves forward without a Vivim Uoxm to rely on , and hitt's 8 Notes npon hitt's not upon the Strength ef Gods certain Revelation , but leaves that, and runn's no man knows whither,or (lands without any motive. You fe therfore that Gods Re- velation which is infallihle cannot fupport a fallible Af- fenr, and confequently the very bcft Ads of our Secta- ries Belief are no Faith, wherof more Difc. i. chap. 5. and 6. I fry the y>ery bejl Alls. For you may diftin- -guilh two forts of them in Se&aries . The firft tend to their own particular ' Novelties , and thefe are both fals-and Fallible. The other Ads adhere to the ge- neral Truths of Chriftianity, And all thefe though con- formable to their objefts, arejyet Jubje&hely falubley2X\& confequently have not the ftrength of any firm or fuper- natural Principle to uphold them , as you may fe in places now cired. 6. But we have not yet don with Mr. Poole, there are more exceptions againfl Him. Mark his words. If faith He, we be not infallibly allured of the Truth of Chriftianity, lewes and Turks are as well perfwaded • of their waies, as we are of ours, And then Ask's what a mad Ajjertion is this , that wakes no difference between Pro- labilities and Imp ob abilities . Now here his Inftances follow of Jamaica and a Calf, and I think He would fay , That the Truth of Chriftianity is probable, and fo highly Probable , as that there is alamaica, And that Iudaifm is fo improbable as that a Calfe found in •■a field , fliould be thought to be droptfrom the Clouds. 7. In the firft place, we are to explicate more fully what Mr. Poole huddles up in thefe general Terms. The truth of Chriftianity. Three Things therfore may be here reflected on \ which effentially confticute Chnftian Religion. The firft is the Objeft of it, which is Gods Mr fooles Jppendix. 9 Gods infallible Revelation. The fecond is the matter believed by vertue of this infallible Revelation. Tae third is a firm aft of Faith, that tends imo the Revela- tion and the matter Revealed , upon that Devme moti- ve Infallibly Propofed , And this firm AlTent of Faith, intrinfecally Denominates all good Chriftians Faithjull Believers . I fay infallibly Propofed : For if a Revelation lie as it fometime doth dark in H< ly Scripture, a Pro- ponent is neceilary, that brings it to more light, And as I noted Difc. i. C. 4. According to the meafure or de- gres of certitude which the Proponent gives ro an ob- fcure Revelation , An Aflent in the Hearer followes and no ftronger. If He only fay probably God f peaks thus, The aflent can be no more but probable, if with truth he fay certainly , it is certain. Thefe things fuppofed be plea fed to reflect once more on Mi. Pooler words . what a mad coffer tioxi is This I That nothing is Credible (He means concerning the Truth of Chriitia- nityj but ^hat is infallibly certain , and that there is no diffe- rence IttTveen Probab Itt'ies , and Improbabilities. He would fay , it is madnes to judge fo, and Wifdom to make the Truth of Chriftianity highly Probable , and Judaifm improbable. 8. Now I fay* Nothing that ejjentially Constitutes the truth of Chnflianity pi lefs then certain , Nothing in it can be fi meanly thought of, as to be called only probable. And firfl if we fpeak of the Material Obje&s believed , Thefe Solely and Objectively confidered (may we ufe proper Terms ) are neither Probable nor improbable , for there is no Probability in Objeds , every thing being what it is in itsfdf, independent of my Probable or Improbable Af- fwtion. No man when He fee's the fun fo darkly b through io . Notes upon through a Cloud , that he cannot fay whether it be the fun or no, yet thinks it is , Call's it a Frebattc fun , the Probability is in his ad that makes a judgement of ir, and not in the objed. Again , if we fpeak of Gods Revelation that Affures thefe Material Objeds to be as they are fpoken , That very Revelation becaufe it pro- ceeds from an Infinit intelledual power, is properly not only infallible, but infinitly more infallible then all the words of men and Angels are, put together. And here is no place for meer probability only, though we think of the greateft Imaginable. He therfore that Parifies the moral Certainty one hath of Jamaica, with the more then Metaphyfical certainty of Gods Revela- tion , Doth not only hideoufly err , but wrongs God and his eternal verity. 3. If we fpeak of rhe internal Affent of Faith, which Denominates us true Chriftian Believers , and tend's into Gods infallible Revelation upon the perfection of its infallibility, as alfo into the Ma- terial Objed infallibly revealed, This very Ad goes far beyond the ftrongeft probability , and is more cer- tain then that judgement is which men have of Iamai- ca. The Reafon is. That which uphold's this ad of Faith (to fay nothing here of other principles which ftedfaflly fix it on Truth) is an infinite Vxrity , an In- finit Objedive Certitude , Contrary wife , that which upholds an Affent given to the Being of Iamaica, is only moral Certitude and may be fals , For the Ad ultimately refolved comes to no more but this. Men fay fo : Thofe are living that have feen the place , let- ters are conveyed thither &c. But all thefe proofs, though mod morally certain , equalize not the Infalli- bility of an Affent that relies on an Infinite verity, that Mr. Tooles appendix. x i that can neither deceive nor be deceived. 9. Perhaps you will fay : Though this Veracity of God be mfinitly infallible in it felf, yet one may rely on it with an Ad only Morally certain , and you re- quire no more for Faith. I grant the cafe is poffible, but withall fay fuch an Ad is no Faith (as is largely proved Dift. I. r. 5. and 6. becaufe it is not ultimately refolvable into Gods infallible veracity as thelaft Motive to reft on, but into fome other inferiour Motive extnn- fick, and Diflind (torn -Gods Revelation. Put the cafe, that three or four Learned Heathen Philofophers of good repute, A fibre one of their fed upon then Credit and humane Authority, They cannot but judge, all things confidered , that God hath revealed the Incar- nation of the Divine word in Holy Scripture. Admit alfo that the Hearer , becaufe he efieems them knowing, upright, and fincere, yeilds his affent to that Revela- tion meerly for their Authority : The Formal ofyeff or Motive of his Aflent is not (if the fuppofition ftand) Di- vine Revelation, for this is only yet the Material Objed Believed upon humane Authority, confequently it can- not be an Ad of Faith, For Faith as Faith , precifely reft'S akvaies on Gods Revelation as the laft and ulti- mate Motive, without the mixture of any other. See Difc. 1. c. 5. v. 5. 6. as alfo Chap. 6. Now if you de- sire to know more concerning the certainty of him that Propofeth the Objed of Faith darkly revealed in Holy Scripture , read rhe4 Chap, of the firft Difcours. 10. By what is faid hitherto , you fe (Good Mr. Poole) that tri*e Chriftian Religion muft either fignify the Objedive Infallibility of Gods Revelation, or the Af- fent of Faith wherby we Captivate our understanding, bi and fas Notes upon and fubmit to an Infallible Veracity, both the one and o her goe farr beyond the mean meature of meer Pro- babilities, or the higheft moral certainty. Therfoie jour Inftaiices of lamaica and a Calf are here ufeles and infigr.ificant* I fay True Chrijhan Religion, or to fpeak in your words , The Truth of Chrifiianity , For if by the ejjintid Truth of Chrtjlianity , you will under- ftaud the prudent Motives or Inducements that pre- c de Faith , and fliew us where True Chriftianity is profeifed , and call thefe the Ejjmtiah of Chnftian Re- ligion; know firft you have none of them, as is proved Difc. i. C. 8. 9. and 10. Know fecondly, that thefe Mo- tives previouily pondered before we believe , though moil requifit to belief, are not the Eflentials of Faith (whether you take Faith olietUvely For the matter be- lieved or fuhiettively for the Aft of Belief) But objefts of Science, as you may read in Chapters now Quo- ted : For Faith, which eiTentially constitutes Religion, follows in every good Chriftian after the Confideration of thefe Motives, and fuh Notione fidei, or as Divine Faith, ultimately relies not on them. 1 1. Vpon thefe Grounds all comes to nothing that you have P. 10. and 1 1. where you fay : If befides the In- fallibility of the Thing, there be required Certitado fob- jetfi the Infallibility of the perfon , you will bring this fox out of his hole by a notable Dilemma. A word only in parting. Pray you , Sir, what's here under- ftood by the InfzlliUlitj of the Thing} You either mean Gods certain ReveLcion and this certainly moft infal- libly, is not to be called a Thing but ought to be fpoken of with greater Reve:ence,or you mean (and your context bears .,0 oJier ferae) the material Objefts of. our Chri- ftian belief, mow thefe folely confidered can no more pro- Mr.Tooles Appendix, ij perly be called fallible or infallible , then probable and /w- probable. No man faith that a ftone which he fees in the high way, is either fallible or infallible, probable or improbable. TheReafonis, Becaufe rhefe Terms, certain, fallible , infallible, probable, improbable, &c. note ever the tendency of vital Acls proceeding from an intel- lectual power , And therfore moft improperly belong to obje&s, neither vital, nor intelle&ual. Thus much only by the Bye. Now to your foxing it andfeacful Dilemma. Either ( fay you ) a Jubjeclive certainty or infallibility of Belief , (mark your own words) of the Truth of Christianity is necejjary for particular Chriftians , or it is not. If it jbe not necefjary , then Papifts too Vainly boaft of it , and muft Confefs probable evidence fufficient for particular chriftians, and infallibility necejjary only for the Pope and Councel : // a fubjeSiive infallibility be necejjary for particular chriftians, then every Papift in England hath a Pope in his belly , &c. Here is the fubftance of your Dilemma , and it is a ftrange piece of confufed Stuff Obferve well. You begin with the Sulje£live infallibility of the Belief of the Truth of Chriftianity, and then run further then to Iamaica , to talk of that which you call the probable evidence of iu Good Sir, the evidence of credibility belonging to true Chriftia- nity, is totally diftinft from the infallible belief of it. That,* if we make a fight Analyfis , precedes Faith; Faith followes, and is far more certain then the judge- ment is, all have of the Evidence of Credibility. See Difc. i.e. 7. 8.9. 10. Briefly I fay firft . The belief of true Chriftianity is fubjethvely infallible in every faith- ful Chrift an , who therfore may have as found Faith as the Pope himfelf,orany that fitt's in Councel. The Reafon , already given and further declared Difc.i. c.i* b3 ^ 14 ttottt upon is thus, God an infinite Verity fpeaks to US for this end that we believe him , He (peaks infallibly ; Faith- ful Chriftians believe both what He fpeaks, and (anfwe- rably to their power) as He fpeaks , Ergo they believe infallibly. Again. A fallible Belief cannot be ulti- mately refolved into an infallible Revelation,nonether- fore that holds himfelf obliged to Believe an hfinit Ve- rity owned as infallible, can proceed doubtfully upon that Motive, for he knowes, An infn>it Verity fpeaks not doubtfully, or opinatively. I fay fecondly. In- fallible Faith of the Truth oiChriftianity is mifcalled, if you flyle it probable Evidence : it is not probable , but certain, becaufe it telies on an infinit Verity. It is not Evident , but vbfture, becaufe, jQrgumentam non appa- rentium. Thus much is undoubtedly true, if we fpeak of the Afjm of Divine Faith . Now', if when you talk of particular Papifts haveing a Pope in their belly , you grofly Imagin that every one can Define , or Declare in- fallibly Chriftian Doftrin in order to the whole Church f as the Pope and Councel Doe,you fight with fliadowes, no Papift hold's fuch fooleries* And by this you fe the laft ftrength of your weak Dilemma brought to no- thing* 12. You are alfo as unlucky in your next Affaulr, where you Chalenge the whole Club of Jefuits toAnf- wer folidly. By the Grace of God you /hall have an Anfwerthat will make you filent hereafter. Thus you go on. Were the Popifli opinion of the Chur- ches infallibility true in it felf certitud'tne O'bjeHi ; fo alfo is the Protectants opinion concerning the infAlhbility of Scripture true in it fe f , and artitudine Objeffi, as the muft defperate Papifts Grant. For they fay the Scrip- ture Mr. Tooks appendix. Ijr tureis Divine, true, and certain in it felf, but not quoad nosy therfore hitherto there is no difference. It is roc worth the while to infift here upon a Catacrefis or abufe of words, or to (ay how incoinpoflible thefe two ter-nes combined together are in the Papift, Opinion, and certain- ty of the objecl : For Catholicks in Matters of Faich content not themfelves with a bare opinion, where the- re is certitudo Objecli or Gods certain Revelation duely propofed, that exa&s from them no Opinion, but a lu- re Affent of Faith , And fo we fay that the infallibility of the Church is a matter believed by us, becaufe God hath revealed it , confequently its no Opinion. But Sir, this is not what I ayme at. We will hear you fay all, And come to the fhength of the Difficulty . If fay you , it be a fujfcient foundation for a Romanift , that He bath fuch probable evidence of this DocJrin of the churches infallibility , %bj should it not be as fuffcient a fun da t ion for a Protejlant\ that He bath fuch ( nay injinitly more) probable evidence of the Doclrin of the Scriftures infallibility ? Since the evidence of the later is granted by the Papijls ihemfehes , and the evidence of the former (that is of the Churches in- fallibility ) mt only denyed and Dtfputed dcrtvn h Protectants, but alfo quel/ioned by their oTtn Authors, You End. this Queflion I chdenge the ftbole club ofhfuits folidly to Anfoer. I Anfwer very catagorically without Clubbing it , and fay firft. The Cathoiick hath more then meer pro- bable Evidence of the Doftrm of the Curches infallibi- lity. The Senary by his own Principles, hath not fo much as probable evidence of the Do$rin of the Scriptures infallibility , Independent of the Church. I fay 2. Though the Se&ary had probable evidence of the Scriptures infallibility, yet it is a ufeles book in his hands. i3*The 1 6 Notes upon 13. The firfl Afiertion contain^ two parts I prove thefirft. The Catholick haih a Church evidenced by Vnparallel'd Miracles , by converfions of whole Na- tions, from Infidelity, to our Chriftian Verities. He hatha Church manifefted by all thofe other Glorious Cognitances of Truth , which the Apoftolical Church fliewed to the world (not one is excepted) as is proved T>t\c. i.e. 9. 10. If therfore that Apoftolical Church, was prudently believed to deliver infallible Doftrin (and this before Scripture was writ) by the inducements of thofe illuftrious marks and Characters of Truth w her- with it was adorned , our Roman Catholick Church , that undeniably evidenceth the very like figns , is pro- ved upon that Reafon to deliver alfo infallible Do&rin: For where there are the fame efTe&s and figns of infal- lible Doftrin , the Infallibility of it is, as it were, wit- neiTed by them, otherwife fuch Motives wxmldbe both inefficacious and ufeies, whilft God lliewes them for this end , that all may give AiTent to his infallible Ve- rities, taught by that Oracle where they evidently ap- pear, and I believe led on by the inducements, yet muft forfooth , only believe uncertainties, or fallible Dodrin that may be fals. 14. The Dodrin therfore of the Roman Catholick Church is now as well made immediately Credible by vercue of thefe Motives, as the Apoftolical Church was, before the writing of Scripture. And Thefe Motives in order to the Learned , and thofe who prudently feek for Truth, firft and molt immediatly Demonftrate the Church, or Thofe perfons that teach infallible Do£trin,l?y tcbofe Authority toe learn, ^>hat and ^here infallible Truth is pofejfid. That thefe marks and figns immediatly be- long My. Pooles appendix. I? long to the Perfons that Teach infallibly and not to Scripture, is undoubted. Mark 16. 17. Thefe figns shall folio* > in my name they shall cajl out Divels &c. Again not only the Dodor of the Gentils. 2. cor. 12. ix. call's the wonders He wrought ,Signa Apojlolatus Jui, the marks of his Apoftleftip , but a greater Do&or alfo, Truth it felf lohn 10. 25. (when the Jewes would not believe him) remitted them to the evidence of his Miracles. The "tooris ^hich I do in the name of my father , thefe ght Tejtimonj of me. And verf. 38. If you n>ill not believe me, helieye the Korks. Works therfore and wonders An- nexed to the perfons, or Church that Teaches, For- ceably induce prudent men to believe the certain Do- ftrin Delivered by them , who (hew fuch wonders. In a word , here is all I would fay. No Religion is evi- dently true or fals ex Terminis, upon the bare Affirma- tion of Him that fayes its true or fals, Therfore it mult have the Evidence of its Credibility manifefted, before Chriflians admit of the Do&rin, But this Evidence is firft manifelted by fuch figns and Miracles, as Chrifl and the Apofttes personally ihewed to the world , and by vertue of them induced Aliens from Truth, to believe it as Infallible Doflrin , Therfore whatever, Church fliewes fuch Miracles, the* like figns and wonders as Cbrift and his Apoftles manifested, plead'sas well for the Infallibility of its Dodrin witnefled by fuch Miracles, as the Apoftolical Church Drd. But the Roman Catho- lick Church only and no? other , ihewes thefe Miracles, Efficacy of Voffrw, Vnh>erfaltty,ftnnge Conver fions and other moll Convincing Motives , Therfore if the firft Chri- flians induced by fuch evidence , firmly believed the Apoftolical Do&rin to be infallible (wlndi was not ex c urmi- lS Notes upon teminis) evidently infallible) we may now upon the very like Inducements (not for the inducements as the lait Motive,) Believe as fecurely upon our Churches Authority the Doftrin taught by it, to be infallible. Deny this Evidence of our Motives f and we force Seftaries to prove the Denial by as fure Principle, as we Aflert them : Grant them and our Argument is concluding* And here you have more them a meer probable Evi- dence of the Chutchfes infallibility. 15. An Other Argument for it, befides thofe Scriptu- res cited Diji. %'i C.6. n. ft is not only probable, but un- anfwerably Convincing, hinted at Difc. U C. 2. w. 9. chrifi as is confeffedly granted both by Catholicks and Se- ctaries, fenc Paftors up and down the world to teach Chriftian Doftrin , But he never fent any to teach falli- ble Doftrin which may be fals, Ergo He fent them to teach his own infallible Doftrin, and Infalbbly. I pro- ve it. He fent rione to teach any other Doftrin then that, which may be ultimately refolved into Gods infal- lible veracity revealing Truth 1 But that which is ul- timatly refolved into an infallible Veracity, can neither be fals nor fallible Doftrin, becaufe God as I now faid, ownes no fallible Doftrin that may be fals , Therfore, this Refolution of an Aft tending fallibly into Devine Revelation, is rather Non-fenfe then Faith. J in- fallible belieye cbrtjl to be God and Man , becauje Gods in- fallible Revelation Drill have me t$ believe fb : For No Infallible Motive applyed to my vnderftahding, as it # infallible ,. can draw from me a fallible belief of a Doftrin that's meerly fallible. But All Sectaries, whether Jrians, DonatiftsyOt Protejlants Teach only falli- ble Doftrin, zndfalhbty Ex parte Dotenm, Ergo they Teach not that Doftria which Cftiff fent his Ministers to teach, Mr* Tooks appendix. i 9 or that can be refolved into Gods infallible Veraci- ty revealing Truth. Yer moft certainly, fome Chri- stian Paftors by vertue of Chris! Mijfton , teach his infal- lible Doclrin Infallibly, and thefe are the Paftors of the Roman Catholick Church , who only lay claim to In- fallibility and prove it alio , as the Apoftles Did by the Antecedent Evidence of thofe Motives , which the Church fliewes and rnanifeflcth to the world , as is now Declared. I chalenge Mr. foole, di redly and Ca- tagorically to Anfwer this my Reafon (without talking any more of Clubbs , or running into Generalities) and in as few clear words as I Deliver it. 16. Now to prove the other part of my Affertipn. Viz . Sectaries ly their oT»n principles have.nvtfo much as a prohahte Evidence of tie Scriptures infallibility, fythout Church Authority* Here is my principle. The infallibility of Scripture which contains many Difficulties, tell's ftrange ftories, and feemingly often fpeak's contradiftions, is not by it [elf or oupa light , fo evidently Credible to the Eyes of a Reader , as the, infallibility of the Apoftoli- cal Church was evident by CMiracles, and Cvnverjions to the Primitive Chrift.ians , who believed it infallibly: At leaft S. Auftin judged it not fo Evidently Credible, .when He faith , He yooutt \ not hlteye the Gofyel unlet the Authority of the Chrch .moved him to lelieve it. The Infallibility of it therfore,muft by proved by fome good Principles extrinfick to Scripture , but the Senary hath not one found. Principle, Diftind from the Tradition and Authority of the Church wherby this Infallibility is proved , Therfore Scripture in order to Him is not fo Infallible , as the Church is to the Catholick. If any Deny my principle,and make the Scriptures InfM- c x Ulitj lo Notes upon lility Difcernable by its own Ugh , by the Majejij , of the ftyle , purity of its Doftrin , or efficacy it works in the minds of thofe who read it &c. I think there are evi- dent Demonftrations againft the Paradox : For as I noted Dife. i. C. 2. 12. w. 4. Two things are to be con- fidered in Scripture, firft, the exteriour Syntax or Con- nexion of the words, and fo much precisely is not the Scriptures total Infallibility, which fayes more befides that exteriour language, and neceflanly implies A Di- yine Acl a Volition , or Decree of God , wherby the Ha- giographers that writ the words, were infallibly affifted, and determined ro record truth, and nothing but Truth, Now this Divine Volition ox. Decree becaus it is eflential to God , and therfore no other but God Himfelf , can be no ObjeA of our fenfes, when we hear or read Scrip- ture : Confequently it is to be Difcovered by a Dif- cours grounded on Principles , diftinft from the out- ward letter of Scripture, wherby we may come to a Aire Evidence of its Infallibility, not at all yet within the reach of our fenfes, And this no Seftary can do, as I fliall prelently make Evident, 17. I fay Therfore , if the Motives now alleged for the Churches Infallibility, as Converftons, {Miracles Vni- Verfality &c. induce not immediatly to believe that Church they demonftrate to be Infallible, much lefs can the exteriour words or fintax of Scripture , be a fit Me- dium to Convince any of its Infallibility. And to prove this, befides what is often noted in the Treatife, Chiefly Dife. 1. C. 8. n. 7. HI here only Propofe two Questions, The firft : Whether if SK lohn , who was in- fallibly Affifted , had not recorded that ihort fentence in His Gofpel s The Word U made flesh , but forae other not infallibly Mr. Toole s Appendix. 2 1 infallibly Afljfted by the Spirit of God , had written the very fame Verity , as it were by Chance : My Que- ftion I fay is, wnether the Se&ary that now reads this fentence in S. lohn Gofpel, can more Difcover an InfaU libility in it by force of the outward words, then if they had been Cafually written by one without Infallible Afliftance > I think He will not dare to fay yes , or if He Do, I'll urge Him to prove it by Principles, when the outward words are the Very fame in both Cafes, and in like manner clear to all that read them. My fecond Demand may yet perhaps better evidence what I aymeat, and is thus. Suppofe that our Sectaries fhould put the book of EcUfiaftes, which they hold Cano- nical, into the hands of twelve learned Gentile Philofo- phers, and with it the book olwifdome or Eclefiajlicvs al- io , not held Canonical by them i Suppofe again, They defire thefe learned and difinterrefled men, fe- rioufly to read thefe three books , and after the reading Sincerely to tell them, which of them hath Gods Spirit in it , or contains his infallible Ferities , For , this may be eafily gathered by the very natural evidence of what they read, by the Maje/fy of the ftyle, Efficacy of fpea- king which appears Clearly enough in the outward let- ter. ^ Thus much don, feperate thefe Philofophers, by four and four , into three Companies, put them in- to three different cells , much after that manner , as fo- me fay, the fevently Interpreters were feparated. Let them with all fincerity read, examin, and perufe thefe Books , and if when the work is ended , they unani- moufly accord, that a greater Divinity, a ftronger wfalli- W/f/appear's in the fong of Salomon, then in the other two books, we will fay fomething is proved, and hold c i it %% tZotes upon ic as fkangea Miracle, as that which S.AuJiin recounts of the 70. Interpreters* Now if Any tell us , this light of Scripture, though fufficient in it felf , is not evident to every .one that looks on it, becaufe the blittdnes or perverfnes of mens minds may keep them frdfcn the Difcovery of it : The Reply hath no place here, for we fuppofe firft, thefe Philofophers to be dif. interreffed, learned, upright and fincere, as well in their reading, as in the judgement they give of it , And fe- condly we will fuppofe , that all thofe are not blind whom Se&aries make blind , nor only thofe quick fighted ( I mean themfelves ) whom they will ha- ve fo* 18. To thefe Queftions I add one more , it may pafs for an Argument Ad hominem againft Se&arjes, who hold all the Definitions of our Church,even when they are true , to be yet fallible • I Ask, whether thefe Quick fighted men are able to Difcern the tFajliWitjoi thefe Definitions, by force of'the outward As /«- fallibility neceflarily implyes Divine Affijiance in. ojder to the Truths* Delivered in holy Scripture , ,fa the fuppo- fed Fallibility of the Churches Definitionsjimplyes awant or that Afliftance in order to thofe Definitions. I Ask therfore, whether as the firft is Difcernable- and vififele enough to their Eyes, by -die very context of the out- ward letter, They will confequently grant, that*he other alfo is as clearly viftble, and Difcernable by *he very words of the Definition ? If They Anfwer, yes, Firft they need not hereafter to impugn thakiwclies Defi- Mr. IPooles appendix. i j Definitions by any other Medium but this, that they are without further proof by themfelves evidently fallible : So much is faid by themr and it proof enough. 2. They may as well fay, They know when a man tells a lye, and this by force of his very fpeaking, as that they know the fuppofedf^W/^ofthe Churches Definitions by h^r fpeaking : For, if their eyes can Difcern the want of Divine Affiftancein the one cafe (which reaU ly is not wanting) they may more eafily Difcern the want of Truth in the other (which really is wanting.^ And if this be not a Paradox, there was never any in the world. Now contrary wife , if they cannot Dif- cover the Churches fuppofed Fallibility in her Defini- tions meerly by her Exteriour words, becaufe that is a thing invifible > I would gladly learn how They come to know the Infallibility of Scripture by the words Therof, for that is as much (if not more) invifible, and as far removed from our eyes and fenfes. 19. Some, who pittifully fuppofe, Scriptures to be proved Divine and Infallible by the very light which is in them Objeft firft. When we fee the fun, and the vaft extent of the light it has, we may well infer it comes from that luminous body, And may we not (fay Thefe) proportionably inferr, from the c/earnes^GreameSy UWajejty, and Coherency of thofe Truths revealed in Scripture , that they muft certainly come from none but God > Anfw* What will not men fay at laft,who dare Propofe fuch evident improbabilities ? Why , the whole world a* grees in this that the light comes from the fun, for it is evident to our fenfes , but do all unanimoufly^ agree about the very Canon of Scripture, or the clearnes of thofe books ail admit of, which are evidently obfeure in - J 14 Notes upon in a hundred pa(Tages,and fo feemingly incoherent in many other places , that it is mighty Difficile to recon- cile chem ? Again. What more Greatnes or exteriour tjiujtfly, can any Difcover in Salomons Proverbs, then in tne books of Wifdom and Ecclefiafticus, or in tho- fe two pious Hymns Te Deum , and Gloria in Exceljis} fuch arguments therforc are not or.ly flight, but im- probable. xo. They Objeft 2. The works of Creation Evi- dence Gods Wifdom Power, and Greatnes. Ergo God can give as great evidence of a Revelation. Anfw. I grant He can do fo, But What then ? Doth it fol- low that He hath don it de faSlo by the words internal to Scripture (which is here only to the purpofe? ) with- out the light of orher Motives, as Miracles, Conver- fions and the like, which as I now faid, immediately manifeft. the Church , and not the book of Scripture. zi. They obje& 3* No other way is conceivable, that it fliould be evident that a Do&rin comes from God- (and confequently is infallible) but that it con- tains things highly /unable to tb* Dfoine nature, things above the finding out of human reafon, things only tending to Advance Holmes and Goodnes in .the world , Andthis Dodrin to be Delivered by perfons, who wrought Vn- parrallel'd Miracles. And They ask, whether alLthefe be not in the moft evident manner Imaginable contained in the Doftrin of chrijlianity and in thciotk* of Scripture} I Anfwer firft : The Opponent is far from Conceiving any thing like a probability in this Objection . For, if it be evident that a Do&rin comes from* God , and therfore is infallible , becaufe it contains Things fyi- tabJe to the Devine Nature-, the very. Gentils without other Mr. Took s appendix. If other Motives fliould as well fee this Evidence , as we fe the light of the Sun. Now if you fay its an E- vidence, but not perceptible by all you runn into Dark- nes , Deftroy the Nature of Evidence , and make ic now evident now unevident , when , and to whom you pleafe. If again you fay its an Evidence fufficienc to breed Faith, you beg the Queftion and fpeak impro- bably for nothing can beget Faith but what is owned for Gods infallible Word upon prudent Motives, and the Teftimony of fome Infallible Oracle. To con- firm what is here faid , I Ask whether xicbrift and his Apoftles had appeared in the World , and only preach- ed the high Myfteries of our Faith as a Trinity , the In- carnation. Original Jin, with other Dodrins now regiftred in Scripture that advance Holines of life &c. But all this without doing one Miracle, Converting one Nation, or fliewing any the lead wonder, that they were fentfrorn God, to teach as they did. My Queftion I fay is, whether upon this fuppofition, either Jewes or Gen- tils would then have believed them or could have dif- covered an Infallibility in a Do&rin thus Orally Deli- vered , or writ in patchment meerly by the force of the words. If Seftaries fay Yes, They do not only fpeak a Paradox which no Chriftian ever uttered > and make our Saviours Argument Againft the Jewes (Si opera &c. If I had not don works amongft them which no other did they would not have fin ) rull and inefficacious , but moreover are convinced by this clear proof. Sup- pofe, (And it implies no impoffibility) that God, who hath yet within the vaft reach of His Ommfaency, a Thoufand other Verities unknown to the world , and not at all revealed in Scripture, or Delivered by the d Church 16 Kdtes upon Church (for certainly He hath not revealed all He knowes) (honld now both infpire, and Affift twelve poore Filhermen, to preach infallibly thefe Truth never heard of before, yet io, that they Teach only , bur do no Miracles, work no Converfions , (hew no wonders, and give no other Tedimony of iheir being fent from God , but by their own bare word* Would any men in the world , think ye, prudently believe them meer- ly for their preaching, or would Sectaries as well Dis- cover the Infallibility of thefe Verities taught by theie preaching, as they now Difcern the Scriptures infalli- bility? No , the whole world would prudently fet light by fuch Doftrin, though in it felf, both Divine and Infallible for want of prudent Motives to make it evidently Credible , and fo all would have don, had the Apodles only preached the Divine Truths already regidred in Scripture , without further Motives. Ther- fore more is required to prove that a Do&rin comes from God > then thus much only, that it contains in it felf 'things highly fuitable to the Divine nature , things above the finding out of humane reafon, and condu- ceing to piety. I fay in it felf for if we goe to a drift Analyfis of tiie Scriptures Verkies, we are not to fup- pafe , as the Opponent doth, but ro> prove » that all thefe Verities are fuitable to the Divine nature, which boch Jewes and Gentils Do Deny , And therfore mud be further proved. zi. Now if on the other fids They grant, ar*d mod trudy, that none would have Discovered any Infalli- bility in Apoflolicai Qoftrin without further evidence of Miracles, of figns , and wonders, we have our In- tent ; For it followes inevitably , that Script uue cannot be My rooks Appendix. 27 be Difcovered to be Divine by it felf, nor Inf&l- Ible , by vertue of any light contained in the words , or Sintax there f. It toliowes 2. that Mr. StiSingflcet is more then a little out, in his feventh Interrogatory part. I. Chap. 7. p. 230. fine , where He Ask's whether it be not the light ft Difparagement of this Dhr/je Do6lr?n to tna\t it ftand in need of an Infallible Testimony of any , that call thern- felves the Catholick Church? Good Sir reflect. The- fe Motives of Credibility manifefted by drift K and his Apoftles, their Miracles, Converfions , Sandfly &c. taken purely as Motives previous to the Faith, oftho- fe who believed , were either fallible or Infallible ( take, whether fide you will: j If Infallible ; you evidently fee that moft cerrain Dodrin ftood (without,, Disparage- ment) fo far in need of thofe Inducements, that it would never have been believed without them ( as i$ already proved) though mod infallible in it felf. If you hold thofe previous Inducements to be only Fallible , you ir.uft yet Grant, that the belief of that Apoftolical Dodrin flood (till in need of them without any^Difparagemenr. Therfore much lefs doth the Teftimony of an Infallible Church Evidenced by the like Motives, Difparage it. I fay the Teftimony of the Church Evidenced by clear Motives: For as the learned Suaref Obferves 3. Par. Tom. z, Difp. 31. Sed.2. n. Dico prwo. The very Miracles of Chrift precisely and folely confi- ' dered, ( or feparated from all other certain Principles ) would not have proved Him to be the eternal Son of God , becaufe God might have wrought Miracles by one that was purely Man, and not Omnipotent , and He did fo de faBoy by his Difciples, as He for told them, lohni^Ai. Majora horum facient, that they fliould do d i greater *8 Notes upon greater wonders. Therfore other Principles ( and no- ne could be more ftrong then Cbrifts own Teftimony) befides His Miracles , were neceffary to beget certain Faith of his Godhead in Believers : And fo we fay, The Teftimony of the Church , Evidenced by fignes and wonders , is alfo neceffary to beget a full AlTuran- ce of the Scriptures Infallibility, without it we have no Divine certainty of Gods Word. 23. Now I return a fecond Anfwer to the Obje&ion, and fay: A perfon that is not infallible can fpeak of things fuitable to the Divine Nature, and above the reach of humane reafon, of vertue and Godlines &c. For not only the book of Herman , or Hermes Called the Paftor, highly valued of by fome Ancient Fathers, but other writings alfo, though untruely afcribed to theApoftles, often fpeak Divinely ; yet never were admitted by the Church as Canonical, or Gods Infallible word . Nay more. Some parts of the Gofpel, and the Epiftlcs of S. fames and S. lude alfo, were not for a time recei- ved as Canonical by the Ancient Church , though they fpak then as Divinely , and were as Infallibly Gods word7 as they are now, the Ancient Church, that had eyes as good as Sectaries red them, yet Difcove- red no Infallibility or Divinity in them upon this ac- count, that they fpak of things fuitable to the Divine nature . And who fees not , but that the books of Wifiom and Eclefiajlicw , contain as high Doftrin , as Divine Precepts, as are in Salomons Proverbs , or Ecle- Jiajles , yet the later are Divine with Sectaries , and the former not > And here I would willingly learn , whe- ther the firft Protectants that admitted of the later, and rejeded the Other as Apocryphal, did fo , becaufe they fmel't,as ic were, a Divinity in thofethey received by Mr.Toohs Appendix. 2^ the very reading, and not in the former? I am lure, the more learned Proteftants give other Reafons. For thefe grounds therfore 1 fay, the Argument above is fo unreasonable, that I wonder men of judgement Ventu- red to propofe it . Now if they believe the Scriprure to be Infallible , becaufe of the Miracles and other wonders , internal to the look , wrought in confirmation of its Doflrin . Make a right Analyfity and Ask, why they believe thefe Miracles to be Infalli- ble Scripture , and follow them clofely till they come to a Fropofitio Qujefcens , or an undoubted Principle \ And you'l find the very Reafon returned you , to be the thing in Que(lion\ Although we granted (which is not ttue) that Scripture it felf faid , all things contai- ned in the book are infallibly Gods Word , For it would be demanded a new , How They know, that very Af- fertioa to be Scripture. 24. For thefe Reafons feme Sectaries will fay, The Scriptures infallibility is to be proved by Difcours , not grounded on the meer light, or Majefty therof, but by probable Principles extrinfick to it. And here is one Argument. We know by humane Authority Mo- rally certain, that Scripture was writ by holy men, Prophets, Euangelifts , and Apoftles, Ianfwer, we know not fo much of all the books in Scripture, with- out the Churches Teftimony . For it is doubtful who writ the books of Iofue and Judges , and it is (till in Co/troverfy , whether Salomon writ the Proverbs , and therfore, fome, not only Catholicks but Sectaries alfo, are of opinion , that if we rely on humane and hiftorical Authority only, we have greater and more particular Aflurance, that s. Tfonut* , for example, writ his fumm ; d 3 of ^o Notes upon of Divinity then we h^ve Aaurance of the particular Authors , of no ft w books in Holy ^cnptnre . A- gain , though we tad this ccrcairty grounded on Hi- ftory , yet no man among Seftarhfs (who fay all Chur- ches erred before Luther) car. tell us, upon moral cer- tainty, whether the firft Authentic!*: Originals, were afterward Corrupted or no , by Ancient Hereticks, and the Juffofed erring Church of Home. Se more of this fubieft tiift. z. C. 2. n. 7. 8. Others again may Argue, from the Miracles wrought by Scripture immediatly, And one was , as Baronius recounts 9 that this facted book in DiocUtians tim being caft into the fire, the flames were forthwith extinguifted . I Aniwer firft, both this and other Miracles, were only wrought in the true Church , and at moft prove (which is to be noted) that the book is true , pious , and holy , but is far from Convincing that (we now only inquire after) which is its ixfalhfoUty. For , God might have don the like Miracle for a true Chriftian Carechifme, Had Diocletian , who defired to rale out all memory of Chri- ftianity , caft that into the Fire alfo. Others argue from the Accornplifhmenr of Prophefies, which proves little , without the Teftimony of the Church . Firft becaufe the very Prophefies , and the fulfilling of them, muft be proved to be Divine Scripture, and this ca'r.not be don , abftrafting from Church Authority. 2. The- fe two things are to be diftinguilhed : A powt'r to Frophefy , and to write, as Hagiographers Did , Canonical books . One may prophefy , who only heares from a Prophet what was told him , upon the Prophets own Authority, but none can write infallibly Canonical books of Scripture , but fuch as have immediately the A.fli- ftance Mr. Tooles jfppendix. 3 I fiance of the Holy Ghoft to dired him. In a word, here is the laft and mod true Refolution of all thefe Difficulties. Unles Se&aries rely on our Chuches Teftimony for the Infallibility of Scripture, they are evi- dently beaten out of all likelihood of other Principles, wherby to prove it is infallible. Yet this very Princi- ple of theChurch inorderto them, doth little or nothing, for reafons clearly alleged Difc. x. C. z. n. 6.7. It is needles to repeat them in this place. 25. And it is as needles ro prove my fecond Affer- tion above n. 12. Which is. Though Sectaries bad Pro- babU Evidence of the Scriptures infallibility in general , yet that doth them no fervice , becaufe it is a ufeles book in their hands. This Propofition rs fo Copioufly pro- ved, in the fecond Difcours C.i. and 2. Where much is faid oi Se&aries endles ditlentions-, concerning the fen- fe ot Scripture ( though admitted of as Divine) that no Unorthodox man fliall acquit Himfelf of the Difficul- ties , there propofed. All I'll do now ( Though it hath not been my Cuftome to tire the Reader, with long Authorities of Ancient Fathers ) is to mind him of one only Tm////*<*0jTeftimony,in his book de Piafiriptio,- nibtPi adverfk* Hareticos cap. 19. His words are. Ergo non ac Scrip turas provocandum efc : nee in bit conjlituendum cer- tamen , in quibu* aut nulla , aut incerta v'tEloria eft. ( Ri- galrius read's , par incerta^ aut parum certa) Nam etji non etaderet collatio Script ttramm, ut utramque partem fifteret^ or do rerum difiderabat illud prim proponi quod mine Jolum difnu- tandum ejl , quibiu competat fides ijfa tmm fint Scriptura , a quo , dr per quos , ejr quando , & qmhus , fit Difciplina , qua fiunt C brilliant. Vbi enhn apparuerit ej]e verhatem Aijciptin*, & fidei Cfrrijliana, illk erit 'Veritas Scriptmarum , & expojt- tionum jfc Kotes upon tiomm & omnium tradttionum Cbrijlianorunt. The fenfe of this whole fentence is this, We are not therfore to appeal to Scriptures , nor are our debates to be deter- mined here , wherin there is no viftory , or a very un- certain one. For although there were no Collation, or comparing of places together , that might (lay the two Advers parts , yet the order of things requires this to be firft propofed , which is now only to be di- fputed yi%. To whom the Faith appertains , wherof the Scriptures are. From whom, and by whom, when, and by what Perfons, that Difcipline is , wherby they were made Chriftians. For where there appeares the Truth of Difcipline ( that is as tJMacereus and Patne- Urn interpret ,tjie Rule) and of Chriftian Faith, there you fliall have the Truth of Scriptures , the Interpre- tation of it likewife, and of all Chriftian Tradition* Obferve well* The whole context of thefe words faith firft, that debates can never be ended by Scriptu- re only. 2. That before we Difpute by Scripture, we ought to know , and by other Reafons , who thofe are to whom Scripture belong's . 3. That where the Difcipline , or Rule of Chriftian Faith is previoufly known,by other grounds diftind from Scripture, there you have the True Interpretation of Scripture , and all Chriftian Tradition. After a full ponderation of the- fe words, I leave any man to Judge that loves Trurh, whether that Doftrin be not here mod remarkably ex- prefled , which is taught and mantained , by the Roman Catholick Church. 26. Mr. Poole from his 1 2, page to his 37. hath no work for me , for his vvhoie ftrain is to run on in ca- vils and finding fault with fuch Arguments of Catho- licks, \ Mr. Pocks Jftendix. $} licks, as He forfooth, judges inefficacious to prove the Churches Infallibility , whereas God knows , Had He had where withall to do it , He fliould have gon a contrary way, and proved positively by Scripture , f*- thers , and Tradition the Churches Fallibility, but Herein He is filent , becaufe in real Truth He hath nothing to fay. The ground of the Churches Infallibility, which CMr. Toole never toucheth on , is briefly hinted at abo- ve n. 15. and further laid forth Dtfc. i# c. 1. andx. and I defire an exprefs Anfwer to it. Now and then He hath fomething againft the Writings of the Ancient Fathers , who with him are fallible, becaufe they fpeak of the Churches Infallibility , and the good man never refle&'s , that he and his little book, are far more fal- lible. I wave fuch trifles. 27. Page 37. He begins with his Diftin&ions of the Judge and rule of Fairh, and faith firft : The fu- pream and truely Infallible Judge of all Controverfies is God and Chritt. Very Good, but nothing is yet Done, unles you fallible man can fay, in all the Diffe- rences between us, what God and Chritt fpeak, what is judged for you , and againft us , which is fo far from being a Truth proved , that in Every Controverfy it is the very thing in Queftion , and meerly fuppofed by you , without either Proof or Principle. You fay again. The External and political Judges , to wit the Gover- nors of the Church , are fubordinate to the fupream Judge. Anfw. Very true. But what then? Mar- ry this followes , that if they really contradict the fu- f>reme Judges fentence , They mull give their fubjefls eave to argue , whether it be right in the fight of God. Hold Sir a little. If you rationally contradict them, e you j 4 Notes upon you mud firft prove your fclf wifer then thefe fubordi- nate Judges are, and Evidence their Errours by un- doubted Principles, which is impoffible. For either thefe Judges are Infallible, or fallible , if you errant the firft, you cannot rationally contradift them. And if they be fallible : How dare you a private fallible man fpeak contrary, when your very Contradi&ion is no bet- ter then their oppofite Affcrtion is, I mean purely and poorlj Fallible? In a word without any certain Princi- ple to rely on (which )ou ftiall never have) you too boldly take leave to oppofe your Judges , and make your felf a Rebel by it. You fay 3. There is in Eve- ry particular Perfon a Tecret Judge, which is called Reafon , or Confcience. I muft Ask once more, what then? Have not Arians, Pelagians , Quaauers , and all other Sectaries reafon, as well as you f What ther- fore this Inftrument of reafon can apprehend , judge, and work in you after yourfafhion, it doth the like in thf fe other , after Their fafliion . Do you not therfore fe how little you advance your caufe by talking ofyojr Reafon, which, unles it be Evidenced by fure Princi- ples to be better then that of your Adverfaries, proves juft nothing ; And add what private Sprit you pleas to help your Reafon out, They will talk as much of their contrary Spirit, to help theirs. Thefe two points are fo largely declared, and proved Difc. z. c. 5. that I be- lieve your Anfwer to them will prove unreafonable. 28. Page 40. You gbe firft very warily to work for. no man knowes what you would fay. Then you are manly refolute in your Dfecifions. We Tellingly ack- nowledge (fay you) and reverently efteem the true and right- ful Governors of the Church, orderly ajfemhled and proceeding regularly in Counsels, ybofi decifwn are to bt highly ydued ■ A/r. Vooles appendix. . 3 J &c. Here is no man knowes what. Pray you fpeak out, and name more clearly the Church you reve- rently efleem of, Tell us who thefe true and rightful Governors, of it are (and do not put us of with an old piece of a long fince rejected Do&rin* They art thofi, Teho bold clofely to the Trutbsof Scripture , for we muft know ivhotbefe are.) Finally fay when Councels are regularly aflembled, not according to your Fancy., but* (which will be along work for you) lee us have Iawes pre* (bribed, wherby we may know by fure Principles more particularly , without this general talk, when Coun- cels are orderly affembled , or unorderly . A word now to your refolute Definitions . You fay firft, this Judge of the Church is not infallible, but fubjeft toer- rour. Anfwer. And fo are you, Sir, alio fallible when you oppofe your felf to the J udgement of a Church, whether it be your own Englilh Church , or the Roman Catholick : If therfore the Judgement of both Chur- ches were fuppofed fallible (as the one is not J your Angular Judgement is no more but fallible alfo , and what gain you by that ? Thus much only : You Contraaift the Church fallibly , and the Church again Contradifts you fallibly, and thus you may remain Con- tradicting one another to the Worlds End, without the Decifion of one Controverfy, unles you make itEvident by undoubted Principles, that you are to judge the 'Church when you pleafe, and tjie Church is not to niedle with you , or your ludgement . You fay x. this judge of the Church being fubjeft to hi- gher Authority, and tyed to a higher rule, if its De- cifions be Manifeftly repugnant to that Snperiour Rule^ they at£ not to be obeyed. Anfw., You purely e 2 (up- 3 6 Notes upon fuppofe what fhould he proved. V\% That the Deci- sions of the true Carholick Church, which is ever afii- fted by the Holy Ghoft, can be repugnant to any Su- periour Rule, and therfore touch not Cacholicks in the lead manner. But if you fpeak of the Deci- sions of your Englifli Church, which (becaqfe falli- ble^ may be repugnant, you licenfe your feif by your own Principles , to difobey it , And look you to that. You fay. 3. The judge is Conflicted by God in the Churchy mt for tht Command of mem Confidences , but for the regulation of their Attions , and Prefer^ation of peace in the Church % »kkb it not Violated by mens iritoard and unknown Sentiments , but by their External demeanour , and fenfible Effetts of them. Anfa. Mod pittiful Dodrin . What, is all the pre- aching of Seftaries Come to no more, but only to teach how the Exteriour A&ions of men are to be regulated, and peace may be preferved ? This Truely more be longs to the Iuftieies of Peace in their Several Diftrifts, then to Minifters, if therfore they goe no deeper into Confciences by their Do&rin, they certainly preach not the Word of God , for I read Heb. 4. 12. the Word of God is Ihely and forcible, and more perjing, then any two Edged Sword: and reaching unto the Divifion of the foule and Spirit , of the ioynts alfo and the Marrows &c. And thefe men go no further, then only to give inflruftions concerning the Exteriour Regulation of A&ions, or pre- ferving of Peace . If therfore their Hearers were very Hypotrits, Iewes or Arians in hart , and only demea- ned themfelves fairly in the Exteriour like Proteftants, Mmifters are not to medle with them but leave them to their own Confciences , without Check or reproof, wherof fe more Dili. 5. Cr 7. *♦ 17. 18. Now ii Mr. fool* will M. Tooles appendix. J 7 will find fomfc Myftery in the words he ufeth Command of mens confciences , let him read S Paul to Titus %. 15. Hacloqucre. Speak theie things, and rebuke Cum omni Imperio, with all Command, and Authority : And fo Paftors fliould Speak to Conferences Cum Imperio in Gods cau- fe , and people (hould obey them . The Apoftle gives the reafon. Hebr. ij. 17. Obey your Prelates, your Guides , or Commanders, for they watch, as being to render an account for your Souls. And if they muft render an account of Souls , they may certainly fpeak like Prelates to their very interiour Confciences. 29. Page 41. you fay the Scriptures of the old and now Teftament , are the Infallible rule and ground of Faith . <^«/»>. They are fo , Faithfully interpreted. Se Vifi. 2. c. 4. where you have your Errours Difcove- red, and the Objection fully Anlwered . You fay a- gain , Vniverfal Tradition rightly underftood is of great ufe, and like a channel, wherby Scripture (which alone is our rule) is conveyed to us . Anfo. the Parenthe- fis ( 'tobich alone ) is refuted in the Difcdurs now cited, the reft of your Affertion hath no hurt in it. But you add a Myiterious piece of Divinity , where you diftin- guifli between , Rem Traditam the thing Delivered , & Tra- ditionem , and the Tradition or Delivery of it , and fay Pa- pifts by Tradition underftand thefirft that is res tradit*. Anfo. either I underftand not you, or you (whichvis more likely) mifconceive the Do&rinof Catholicks,For they diftinguifli between Tradition and the thing Deli- vered: For example. The Baptizing of Infants , the keeping of Sunday in place of the Sabbath, are Objefti- Vely Do&rins delivered, and the Teftimony , Content, and Acknowledgment of the whole Univerfal Church ej Wit- 3 8 Notes upon witne/Iing thefe Verities , are rightly called the formal Tradition , therfore you miftake our Do&rin . it is true as this word Faith, fometimes Signifies the matter revealed by Almighty God , And moil properly the internal Ajjint we yeild to the Revelation , fo this word Tradition may alfo fignify , either the Do&rin delivered, or the formal Delivery of it , but this makes not to your purpofe ♦ You fay again , Tradition taken for the vehicle or conveyance of the books of Scripture, is in fome fort nccelTary to bring the Rule to you , yet is no more a part of the Rule, then a Bafquet is Nourifhment wherin bread is brought to feed on* Here is your learned inflance. Believe it, Sir, if you take the Basket, and iind Nothing but a ftone in it, you will have a poore dinner, Aad ifyou make Tradition minutely Jike theBasket ( in fome fort neceffary ) you may well ha- ve a ftone for bread, that is , no Scripture given you, •for Scripture . Tradition therfore , whether pare of the, Rule or no , is abfolutely a neceflary conveyan- ce, and muft be Infallible. ?o. Page 44. you tell us. Scripture is the ObjeSl, mly rule , and flaudard of Faith, by which all Contro- verfies of Faith are to be decided and judged. Anfwer. The Propofition is only your own bare word : Scriptu- re alone can be no rule without an Infallible Interpre- ter, as is proved Djfi. z.c.^. And had we no more to fay, but thus much , that Scripture proves nor it felf*0 be Infallible it were enough. But granr, which you yet Convince not , that it is infallibly Gods: Word, -an infuperable difficulty remains to be decided , And it is, whether you SeAaries know fo exadly the fenfe of Scripture, in all controverted natters, chat your falli- ble Mr. Toole $ Jppendix. 5 9 bleGlofles are to be flood to, contrary to the judge- ment of a learned Ancient Church ? Hence I fay, you talk at random, when page 48. you tell us* The- re is enough delivered in Scripture by which all Con- troverfies might be ended , would men be humble, ltudious, and Self denying. Lay your hand on your hart, and fpeakyour confcience , can you judge this to be true? Or can you perfwade your felf, that no- ne are to be found within the limits of this Ancient Church as humble , as learned, and ftudious as a few Minifters are in England ? Why vent you fuch Paradoxes without proof, or fo much as a proba- bility > You fay again page 48. after fome parergons of conditional , and abfolute power, That if the Church be fufficient to end all Controverfies , becaufe all muft fubmit to its decrees and Doclrin, the Scripture in li- ke manner , may be faid to be fufficient , becaufe all are obliged to fubmit to the Decrees and Do&rin ther- of. I Anfvver all are to do fo , when they know by an infallible lnrerpreter what the Scriptures Teaches, but this in controverted matters, is ever the difficulty. You fay it fpeak's one thing, and we fay the contrary, therfore Scripture alone , which is as filent now, as it was Sixteene ages fince, is a lefs meet Meanes to end thele Contentions. Contrari wife , the Church propofeth all ftee teaches with the greateft clarity, and if any doubt occurr , is ready , able , and fufficient' to declare it felf further , Scripture that hitherto never ended any difference between us, cannot do fo. For a further latisfaftion read the ^.Ch. of the y.Difceurs. * 31. We return now to your 44. page wnere you tell us . Firfi \ Tradition is the Vehicle to conveiglv the 40 Notes upon the rule of Scripture to us. x. Reafon is the inftru- ment or Eye, wherby you apprehend and fe the Rule. 3. The Spirit of God is the Eye-falve that annoints your Eyes , and inables you to fee the Rule* 4* The Church is the Interpreter ( but not infallible and Au- thentick ) the witnels , or guardian of this Rule. Ob- ferve well. We have here a number of words, but No- thing proved , Nothing fo much as cleared. Say ther- fore plainly : What tradition is it, that conveyed to you the books of Scripture? Moft furely, it is the tradi- tion of the Roman Catholick Church, for you have no other. If therfore , you dare truft this Church in a matter of fo weighly importance , as to hand to you Gods Sacred Word , you may as well , and witn as good Confcience , believe what ever other Doftrin it Teaches by Tradition. See Dijc. x. C. 2. w. 4.5. You talk fecondly of Reafon , that fee's this Rule of Scri- pture, and you certainly mean the true fenfe of it, or you fay nothing . Now I would willingly learn, how your Reafon comes to have the priviledge, or preemi- nence of knowing fuch Secrets , before your elder Brethren the Papifts , or your more neerer Allies the Quaquers, or the old Arians .> The like doubt I mo- ve about the Eyc-falve , that annoints your Eyes , you call it the Spirit of God , And I am lure there is no Eovatijt, or PtUgian%but will fay as much of his contra- ry Spirit. But above all Satisfy me in one doubt, and plainly point me out the Church that interprets Scripture as you do in all thofe matters of Con trover fy now between us > I tell you Sir : There was never any fuch Church in the world fallible or infallible, that favours your giofles and interpretations of Scripture. 3 x.Page Mr. T cotes appendix. 41 31. Page 46. You have a Fling at the Captains Argu- ments againft the judgment of Reafon , who , if you relate truely , (for I have not now his Epiftle by me) faith firft . Reafon mud fubmit to the judge , therfore it is not the judge . You Anfwer . It is not the Juprewe judge , but fubordinate , and tyed to Rule. Contra . fcvery judgement with you is fallible, and may eafily Swerve from the rule , or miftake the fupreme judges Senten- ce : if it do fo, it is erroneous and not to be followed. Say therfore , who ties your judgement that is fallible, and may be fals, to any certain Ruk> This fhouldbe Anfwered. 33. He Obje&s again . The judge muft bq Infal- lible, but reafon is fallible, Ergo. You Anfwer; The Mawr is a pittiful Petitio princtpy . Contra . Your Re- ply is more pittiful. Obferve well. All judge- ments, you fay, are fallible, and many are nop only fallible , but fals alfo. Moft furely , you will not have us tQ follow any fals judgement, and yet we muft follow a fallible judgement. Vouchfafe , to tell us, whofe fallible judgement we are to truft to , in thefe weighty matters of Controver/y? And 1 have all rea- fon to be fatisfied in the doubt, becaufe it avail's me Nothing , to know that I muft rely on a fallible judge- ment which may be fals, Vnles you teach me ^bofe fallible judgement it #, I am to rely on. For example : When you interpret a paffage of Scripture contrary to the Churches Senfe, your explication is fallible , Anfwer therfore , why will you rather have me to reft on your judgement that is fallible, then on the Churches con- trary fenfe , though it were falfly Suppofed fallible f If you fay , All things confidered, your explication is F more 4* Notes upon more probable, you are the very man , that pittifuhy begg s the Queftion , and fpeak's without any proba- ble Principle. 34. Now, if wearied with thofe Interrogatories, you fay roundly (and this mud be anfwered in your Prin- ciple) that every rran is to follow his own judgement, inchefe debated matters : The Ononis to follow his private judgement, the Socinian his, the Qnaquer his, the Donattft his &c. you do not only licenfe all rheHe- reticks in the world , to remain flill in their Herefies , But moreover Counfel them to believe Falfities, for you know , or fliould know , that thefe private judge- ments are all fals . If finally you Anfwer : We mud reft on a judgement that is True, although it be fallible, I know not what you mean, for no man amon^ft you, can aflure me in thefe high points of Controverfy, when a judgement is to be reckoned of as true, that is falli- ble, becaufe Truth is moft eafily feparated from an Acl% that is really Fallible. 35. In a word, Sir, your whole Miftake lies in this. You found not to the bottome , the fignification of the- fe words . The ludgement of Re*fin . For Reafin in this place, cannot be taken, for a weak Difcours, or thr private Sentiment of every erring man, after He hath humm'd over, orpaus'd on Scripture (the Arian or So- cinian, will make his Religion good this way) but the Judgement of Reason Goes further , and ought to be deeply rational indeed, that is : It muft reft at laft upon afolid and Jatisfaclory Principle, fphich througMy pondered, work's powerfully upon every prudent difinterefled Vnderftan- ding , and gently forceth the man , that layes prejudi- ce afide , to ac I end , wifliing you much Good , and eter- nal happines. ■ FINIS. Be fides other faults noted in the begmnhigyouhalpethefe. In the Advemfment. pag, 18. 1. n. Invocations R. Innovations p. 19.1. 16. of long (tending Church our R. of our long (tending Church p. 22. 1. 5. were R.. where in the Trcatife p. 49. 1. 7. Fallibility R. infallibility p. 158.1. *S. improperty R. improprie- ty p. 176.L18. Marck R. majk p. i^A, 3. above R. abour. #4 ■ « ft