his Apostleship If you will then have any to succeed him in the enjoyment of any or of all these Privileges you must bespeak him to succeed him in his Apostleship and not in his Bishoprick Besides as I said before this imaginary Episcopacy which limits and confines him unto a particular Church as it doth if it be an Episcopacy properly so called is destructive of his Apostolical Office and of his Duty in answering the Commission given him of preaching the Gospel to every Creature following the Guidance of Gods Providence and conduct of the Holy Ghost in his way Many of the Ancients I confess affirm that Peter sate Bishop of the Church of Rome but they all evidently use the word in a large sense to imply that during his abode there for that there he was they did suppose be took upon him the especial Care of that Church For the same Persons constantly affirm that Paul also was Bishop of the same Church at the same time which cannot be otherwise understood than in the large sense mentioned And Ruffinus Prafat Recog Clement ad Gâ—udent unriddles the mystery Linus saith he Clâ—tus fuerunt ante Clementem Episcopi in â—rbe Roma sed superstite Petro videlicet at illi Episcopatûs Curam gererent iste verò Apostolatûs simpleret officium Linus and Cletus were Bishops in the City of Rome before Clemens but whilest Peter was yet alive they performing the Duty of Bishops Peter attending unto his office Apostolical And hereby doth he utterly discard the present new plea of the foundation of your faith For though he assert that Peter the Apostle was at Rome yet he denies that he ever sate Bishop there but names two others that ruled that Church at Rome joyntly during his time either in one Assembly or in two the one of the Circumcision the other of the Gentile-Converts And if Peter were thus Bishop of Rome and entred as you say upon his Episcopacy at his first coming thither whence is it that you are forced to confess that he was so long absent from his charge Five years saith Bellarmine but that will by no means salve the Difficulty Seven saith Onuphrius at once and abiding at one place the most part of his time besides being spent in other places and yet allowing him no time at all for those places where he certainly was Eighteen saith Cortefius strange that he should be so long absent from his especiall Cure and never write one word to them for their instruction or consolation whereas in the mean time he wrote two Epistles unto them who it seems did not in any speciall manner belong unto his Charge I wish we could once find our way out of this maze of uncertainties This is but a sad disquisition after Principles of faith to settle men in Religion by them And yet if we should suppose this also wee are farre enough from our journeys end The present Bishop of Rome is as yet behind the curtain neither can he appear upon the stage untill hâ— be ushered in by one pretence more of the same nature with them that went before And this is V. That some one must needs succeed Peter in his Episcopacy But why so why was it not needfull that one should succeed him in his Apostleship Why was it not needfull that Paul should have a successor as well as Peter and John as well as either of them Because you say that was necessary for the Church not so these But who told you so where is the proof of what you averre who made you judges of what is necessary and what is not necessary for the Church of Christ when himself is silent And why is not the succession of an Apostle necessary as well as of such a Bishop as you fancie had it not been better to have had one still residing in the Church of whose Infallibility there could have been no doubt or question One that had the power of working Miracles that should have no need to scare the people by shaking fire out of his slieve as your Pope Gregory the 7 th was wont to do if Cardinall Benno may be believed But you have now carried us quite off from the Scripture and Story and probable conjectures to attend unto you whilest you give the Lord Jesus prudentiall advice about what is necessary for his Church It must needs be so it is meet it should be so is the best of your proof in this matter Only your fratres Walenburgici adde that never any man ordained the Government of a Community more weakly than Christ must be supposed to have done the Government of his Church if he have not appointed such a Successour to Peter as you imagin But it is easie for you to assert what you please of this nature and as easie for any one to reject what you so assert if he please These things are without the verge of Christian Religion 〈◊〉 Towers and Palaces in the ayr But what must S t Peter be succeeded in his Episcopacy and what therewithall his Authority Power and Jurisdiction over all Churches in the world with an unerring judgement in matters of faith But all these belonged unto Peter as far as ever they belonged unto him as he was an Apostle long before you fancie him to have been a Bishop As then his Episcopacy came without these things so for ought you know it might goe without it This is a matter of huge importance in that Systeme of Principles which you tender unto us to bring us unto settlement in Religion and the Unity of Faith would you would consider a little how you may give some tolerable appearance of proof unto that which the Scripture is so utterly silent in yea which lyes against the whole Oeconomy of the Lord Jesus Christ in his ordering of his Church as delivered unto us therein dic aliquem dic Quintiliane colorem But we come now to the Pope whom here we first find latentem post Priâ—cipia and coming forth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with his Claim For you say VI. That the Bishop of Rome is the man that thus suecceds Peter in his Episcopacy which though it were settled at Rome was over the whoee Catholick Church So you say and so you profess your selves to believe And we desire that you would not take it amiss if we desire to know upon what grounds you do so being unwilling to cast away all Consideration that we may embrace a fanatical Credo in this unlikely business We desire therefore to know who appointed that there should be any such succession who that the Bishop of Rome should be this Successor Did Jesus Christ do it we may justly expect you should say He did but if you do we desire to know when where how seeing the Scripture is utterly silent of say such thing Did S t Peter himself do it Pray manifest unto us that by the appointment of Jesus Christ he had power so to do and that
in a short time to take off from your keenness in the management of this Charge For I hope you will allow that a man may speak the truth without being a Fanatick truth may get hatred I see it hath done so but it will make no man hatefull Without looking back then to your Fiat Lux I shall out of this very Epistle give you to see that you have certainly failed on the one hand in writing about things which you do not at all understand and therefore discourse concerning them like a blind man about colours and as I fear greatly also on the other for I cannot suppose you so ignorant as not to know that some things in your discourse are otherwise than by you represented Nay and we shall find you at express contradictions which pretend what you please I know you cannot at the same time believe Instances of these things you will be minded of in our progress Now I must needs be very unhappy in discoursing of them if this be Logick and Law that for so doing I must be concluded a Fanatick Fourthly You adde Your pert Assertion so oft occurring in your Book that there is neither reason truth nor honesty in my words is but the overflowings of that former intemperate zeal whereunto may be added what in the last place you insist on to the same purpose namely that I charge you with fraud ignorance and wickedness when in my own heart I find you most clear from any such blemish I do not remember where any of those expressions are used by me that they are no where used thus altogether I know well enough neither shall I make any enquiry after them I shall therefore desire you only to produce the instances whereunto any of the censures intimated are annexed and if I do not prove evidently and plainly that to be wanting in your discourse which is charged so to be I will make you a publick acknowledgement of the wrong I have done you But if no more was by me expressed than your words as used to your purpose did justly deserve pray be pleased to take notice that it is lawfull for any man to speak the truth And for my part 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he said in Lucian I live in the Countrey where they call a Spade a Spade And if you can give any one instance where I have charged you with any failure where there is the least probability that I had in my heart other thoughts concerning what you said I will give up my whole interest in this cause unto you Mala mens malus animus You have manifested your conscience to be no just measure of other mens who reckon upon their giving an account of what they do or say So that you have but little advanced your Charge by these undue insinuations Neither have you any better success in that which in the next place you insist upon which yet were it not like the most of the rest destitute of truth would give more countenance unto your reflection than them all It is that I give you sharp and frequent menaces that if you write or speak again you shall hear more find more feel more more to your smart more than you imagine more than you would which relish much of that insulting humour which the Land groaned under I suppose no man reads this representation of my words with the addition of your own which makes up the greatest part of them but must needs thinks that you have been sorely threatned with some personall inconveniencies which I would cause to befall you did you not surcease from writing or that I would obtain some course to be taken with you to your prejudice Now this must needs savour of the spirit of our late dayes of trouble and mischief or at least of the former dayes of the prevalency of Popery amongst us when men were not wont in such cases to take up at bare threats and menaces If this be so all men that know the Author of the Animadversions and his condition must needs conclude him to be very foolish and wicked foolish for threatning any with that which is as far from his power to execute as the person threatned can possibly desire it to be wicked for designing that evil unto any individuall person which he abhorres in hypothesi to be inflicted on any upon the like account But what if there be nothing of all this in the pretended menaces What if the worst that is in them be only part of a desire that you would abstain from insisting on the personall miscarriages of some that profess the Protestant Religion lest he should be necessitated to make a diversion of your Charge or to shew the insufficiency of it to your purpose by recounting the more notorious failings of the Guides Heads and Leaders of your Church If this be so as it is in truth the whole intendment of any of those expressions that are used by me for the most part of them are your own figments whereever they occurre what Conclusion can any rationall man make from them Do they not rather intimate a desire of the use of moderation in these our contests and an abstinence from things personall for which cause also fruitlesly as I now perceive by this your new kind of ingenuity and moderation I prefixed not my Name to the Animadversions which you also take notice of than any evil intention or design This was my threatning you to which now I shall adde that though I may not say of these Papers what Catullus did of his Verses on Rufus Verum id non impunè feceres nam te omnia secla Noscent qui sis fama loquitur anus Yet I shall say that as many as take notice of this discourse will do no less of your disingenuity and manifold falshood in your vain attempt to relieve your dying Cause by casting odium upon him with whom you have to do like the Bonassus that Aristotle informs us of Hist. Animal lib. 9. cap. 24. which being as big as a Bull but having horns turned inward and unusefull for fight when he is persued casts out his excrements to defile his persuers and to stay them in their passage But what now is the End in all this heap of things which you would have mistaken for Reasons that you aym at it is all to shew how unfit I am to defend the Protestant Religion and that I am not such a Protestant as I would be thought to be But why so I embrace the Doctrine of the Church of England as declared in the 29 Articles and other approved publick writings of the most famous Bishops and other Divines thereof I avow her rejection of the pretended Authority and reall Errours of the Church to be her duty and justifiable The same is my judgment in reference unto all other Protestant Churches in the world in all things wherein they agree among themselves which is in all things necessary that
quiver are these arrows taken Is this fair sober Candid Christian dealing have you no way to defend the Authority of your Church but by Questioning the Authority of the Scripture Did ever any of the Fathers of old or any in the world before your selves take this course to plead their interests in any thing they professed Is this Practice Catholick or like many of your Principles singular your own Donatisticall Is it any great sign that you have an interest in that living Child when you are so ready he should be destroyed rather than you would be cast in your Contest with Protestants 2. Do you think that this course of proclaiming to Atheists Turks and Pagans that the Scripture which all Christians maintain against them to be the Word of the Living GOD given by inspiration from Him and on which the Faith of all the Martyrs who have suffered from their opposition rage and cruelty and of all others that truly believe in Jesus Christ was and is founded and whereinto it is resolved hath no Arguments of its Divine Original implanted on it no lines of the Excellencies and Perfections of its Author drawn on it no power or efficacy towards the Consciences of men evidencing its Authority over them no ability of its self to comfort and support them in their tryals and sufferings with the hope of things that are not seen Is this think you an acceptable service unto the Lord Christ who will one day judg the secrets of all hearts according unto that Word or Is it not really to expose Christian Religion to scorn and contempt And do you find so much sweetness in Delus an Virtus quis in hoste requirat as to cast off all Reverence of God and his Word in the pursuit of the supposed Adversaries of your earthly Interests 3. If your Arguments and Objections are effectuall and privalent unto the end for which you intend them will not your direct issue be the utter overthrow of the very foundation of the whole Profession of Christians in the world And are you like Sampson content to pull down the house that must fall upon your selves also so that you may stifle Protestants with its sall It may be it were well you should do so were it an house of Dagon a Temple dedicated unto Idols but to deal so with that wherein dwels the Majesty of the Living GOD is not so justifiable It is true Evert this Principle and you overthrow the foundation on which the faith of Protestants is built but it is no less true that you do the same to the foundation of the Christian Faith in generall wherein wee hope your own concernment also lyes And this is the thing that I am declaring unto you namely that either you acknowledg the Principles on which Protestants build their Faith and Profession or by denying them you open a door unto Atheism at least to the extirpation of Christian Religion out of the world I confess you pretend a relief against the present instance in the Authority of your Church sufficient as you say to give a Credibility unto the Scriptures though its own self-evidencing Power and Efficacy with the Confirmation of it by Catholick Tradition exclusive to your present suffrage be rejected Now I suppose you will grant that the Prop you supply men withall upon your casting down the foundations on which they have laid the weight of their eternall Salvation had need be firm and immoveable And remember that you have to do with them who though they may be otherwise inclineable unto you Non tamen ignorant quid distent aera a lupinis and must use their own judgement in the Consideration of what you tender unto them And they Ask you 1. What will you do if it be as you say with them who absolutely reject the Authority of your Châ—â—ch which is the condition of more than a moyety of the Inhabitants of the world to speak sufficiently within compass And 2. What will you advise us to say to innumerable other Persons that are pious and rational who upon the meer consideration of the lives of many of the most of the guides of your Church your bloody inhumane practices your pursuit of worldly carnall designs your visible secular interest wherein you are combined and united cannot perswade themselves that the Testimony of your Church in and about things that are invisible spirituall heavenly and eternall is at all valuable much less that it is sufficient to bear the weight you would lay upon it 3. Was not this the way and method of Vaninus for the Introduction of his Atheism first to question sleight and sophistically except against the old approved Arguments and Evidences manifesting the beeing and existence of a Divine self-subsisting Power substituting in their room for the confirmation of it his own Sophisms which himself knew might be easily discussed and disproved Do you deal any better with us in decrying the Scripture's self-evidencing Efficacy with the Testimony given unto it by God himself substituting nothing in the room thereof but the Authority of your Church A man certainly can take up nothing upon the sole Authority of your Church untill contrary to the pretensions Reasons and Arguments of far a greater number of Christians than your selves he acknowledge you to be a true Church at least if not the only Church in the world Now how I pray will you bring him into that state and condition that he may rationally make any such judgement How will you prove unto him that there is any such thing as a Church in the World that a Church hath any Authority that its Testimony can make any thing credible or meet to be believed You must prove these things to him or whatever assent he gives unto what you say is from fanaticall credulity To suppose that he should believe you upon your word because you are the Church is to suppose that he believes that which you are yet but attempting to induce him to believe If you persist to press him without other proof not only to believe what you first said unto him but also even this that whatever you shall say to him hereafter that he must believe it because you say it Will not any rationall man nauseate at your unreasonable importunity and tell you that men who have a mind to be befooled may meer with such Alchymisticall pretenders all the world over Will you perswade him that you are the Church and that the Church is furnished with the Authority mentioned by rational Arguments I wish you would inform me of any one that you can make use of that doth not include a Supposition of something unproved by you and which can never be proved but by your own Authority which is the thing in Question or the immediate Authority of God which you reject A number indeed of pretences or it may be Probabilities you may heap together which yet upon examination will not be found so much neither unless a
man will swallow amongst them that which is destitute of all Probability but what is included in the evidence given unto it by Divine Revelation which is not yet pleaded unto him It may be then you will work Miracles to confirm your Assertions Let us see them For although very many things are requisite to manifest any works of wonder that may be wrought in the world to be reall Miracles and good Caution be required to judge unto what end Miracles are wrought yet if we may have any tolerable evidence of your working Miracles in Confirmation of this Assertion that you are the true and only Church of God with the other Inferences depending thereon which we are in the Consideration of you will find us very easie to be treated withall But herein also you fail You have then no way to deal with such a man as we first supposed but as you do with us and produce Testimonies of Scripture to prove and confirm the Authority of your Church and then you will quickly find where you are and what snares you have cast your selves into Will not a man who hears you proving the Authority of your Church by the Scripture ask you And whence hath this Scripture its Authority yea that is supposed to be the thing in Question which denying unto it an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you yet produce to confirm the Authority of that by whose Authority alone its self is evidenced to have any Authority at all Rest in the Authority of God manifesting its self in the Scripture witnessed unto by the Catholick Tradition of all Ages you will not But you will prove the Scripture to be the Word of God by the Testimony of your Church and you will prove your Châ—â—â—h to be enabled sufficiently to testifie the Scriptures to be of God by the Testimonies of the Scripture Would you knew where to begin and where to end But you are indeed in a Circle which hath neither beginning nor ending I know not when we shall be enabled to say Inventus Chrysippe tui finitor acervi Now do you think it reasonable that we should leave our stable and immoveable firm foundations to run round with you in this endless Circle untill through giddiness we fall into Unbelief or Atheism This is that which I told you before you must either acknowledge our Principle in this matter to be firm and certain or open a door to Atheism and the Contempt of Christian Religion seeing you are not able to substitute and thing in the room thereof that is able to bear the weight that must be laid upon it if we believe For how should you do so shall man be like unto God or equall unto him The Testimony we rest in is Divine fortified from all Objections by the strongest humane Testimony possible namely Catholick Tradition That which you would supply us with is meerly Humane and no more And 4. your Importunity in opposing this Principle is so much the more marvellous unto us because therein you openly oppose your selves to express Testimonies of Scripture and the full Suffrage of the Ancient Church I wish you would a little weigh what is affirmed 2 Pet. 1. 19 20. Psal. 119. 152. Joh. 5. 34 35 36 39. 1 Thess. 2. 13. Act. 17. 11. 1 Joh. 5. 6 10. 1 Joh. 2. 20. Heb. 11. 1 Tim. 1. 15. Act. 26. 22. And will you take with you the consent of the Ancients Clemens Alexand. Strom. 7. speaks fully to our purpose as he doth also lib. 4. where he plainly affirms that the Church proved the Scripture by its selfâ— and other things as the Unity of the Deity by the Scripture But his own words in the former place are worth the recital 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the beginning of Faith or Principle of what we teach we have the Lord who in sundry manners and by divers parts by the Prophets Gospel and holy Apostles leads us to knowledge And if any one suppose that a Principle stands in need of another to prove it he destroys the nature of a Principle or it is no longer preserved a Principle This is that we say The Scripture the Old and New Testament is the Principle of our Faith This is proved by its self to be of the Lord who is its Author and if we cause it to depend on any thing else it is no longer the Principle of our Faith and Profession And a little after where he hath shewed that a Principle ought not to be disputed nor to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of any debate he addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is meet then that receiving by Faith the most absolute Principle without other demonstration and taking demonstrations of the Principle from the Principle its self that we be instructed by the voice of the Lord unto the knowledge of the Truth That is we believe the Scripture for its own sake and the Testimony that God gives unto it in it and by it and do prove every thing else by it and so are confirmed in the faith or knowledge of the Truth So he further explains himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For we do not simply or absolutely attend or give heed unto men determining or defining against whom it is equall that we may define or declare our judgements So it is whilest the Authority of man or men any Society of men in the world is pleaded the Authority of others may be as good reason be objected against it as whilest you plead your Church and its definitions others may on as good grounds oppose theirs unto you therein And therefore Clemens proceeds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For if it be not sufficient meerly to declare or assert that which appears to be truth but also to make that Credible or fit to be believed which is spoken we seek not after the Testimony that is given by men but we confirm that which is proposed or enquired about with the voice of the Lord which is more full than any demonstration or rather is its self the only demonstration according to the knowledge whereof they that have tasted of the Scriptures are believers Into the voice the Word of God alone the Church then resolved their Faith this only they built upon acknowledging all humane Testimony to be too weak and infirm to be made a foundation for it And this voice of God in the Scripture evidencing its self so to be is the only Demonstration of Faith which they rested in whereupon a little after he addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so wee having perfect Demonstrations out of the Scriptures are by Faith demonstratively assured or perswaded of the Truth of the things proposed This was the Profession of the Church of old this the resolution of their faith This is that which Protestants in this Case adhere unto They proved the Scripture to be from God as he elswhere speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as
abode of Peter there never once mentions him in any of the Epistles which from thence he wrote unto the Churches and his fellow labourers though he doth remember very many others that were with him in the City 7. He asserts that in one of his Epistles from thence which as I think sufficiently proves that Peter was not then there for he saies plainly that in his triall he was forsaken by all men that no man stood by him which he mentions as their sin and prays for pardon for them Now no man can reasonably think that Peter was amongst the number of them whom he complained of 8. The Story is not consistent with what is expresly written of Peter by Luke in the Acts and Paul in his Epistle to the Galatians Paul was converted unto the faith about the 38 th year of Christ or 5 th after his Ascension After this he continued 3 years preaching the Gospel about Damascus and in Arabia In the 40 th or 41 st year of Christ he came to Jerusalem to conferr with Peter Gal. 1. which was the first of Claudius As yet therefore Peter was not removed out of Judaea 14 years after that is either after his first going up to Jerusalem or rather 14 years after his first Conversion he went up again to Jerusalem and found Peter still there which was in the 52 d year of Christ and the 13 th of laudius Or if you should take the date of the 14 years mentioned by him shorter by 5 or 6 years and reckon their beginning from the passion and Resurrection of Christ which is not improbable then this going up of Paul to Hierusalem will be found to be the same with his going up to the Councel from Antioch about the 6 th or rather 7 th year of Claudius Peter was then yet certainly at Hierusalem That is about the 46 th year of Christ some while after you would have the Church to be founded by him at Rome After this when Paul had taken a long progress through many Countreys wherein he must needs spend some years returning unto Antioch Act. 18. 22. he there again met with Peter Gal. 2. 11. Peter being yet still in the East to wards the end of the Raign of Claudius At Antioch where Paul found him if any of your Witnesses may be believed he abode 7 years Besides he was now very old and ready to lay down his mortality as our Lord had shewed him and in all probability after his remove from Antioch spent the residue of his dayes in the Eastern Dispersion of the Jews For 9 ly much of the Apostles work in Palestine among the Jews was now drawing to an end the elect being gathered in troubles were growing upon the Nation and Peter had as we observed before agreed with Paul to take the Care of the Circumcision of whom the greatest number by far excepting only Judaea its self was in Babylon and the Eastern Nations about it Now whether these and the like observations out of the Scripture concerning the Course of S t Peters life be not sufficient to out-ballance the Testimony of your disagreeing Witnesses impartial and unprejudiced men may judge For my part I do not intend to conclude peremptorily from them that Peter was never at Rome or never preached the Gospel there but that your Assertion of it is improbable and built upon very Questionable grounds that I suppose I may safely conclude And God forbid that we should once imagine the present faith of Christians or their Profession of Christian Religion to be built upon such uncertain Conjectures or to be concerned in them whether they be true or false Nothing can be spoken with more reproach unto it than to say that it stands in need of such supportment And yet if this one Supposition fail you all your building falls to the ground in a moment Never was so stupendous a fabrick raised on such imaginary foundations But that we may proceed Let us suppose this also that Peter was at Rome and preached the Gospel there What will thence follow unto your advantage what towards the settlement of any man in Religion or bringing us unto the Unity of faith the things enquired after He was at he preached the Gospel at Hierusalem Samaria Joppa Antioch Babylon and sundry other places and yet we find no such Consequences pleaded from thence as you urge from his Coming to Rome Wherefore you adde 1 V. That St Peter was Bishop of the Roman Church that he fixed his seat there and there he died In gathering up your Principles I follow the footsteps of Bellarmine Baronius and other great Champions of your Church so that you cannot except against the method of our proposals of them Now this Conclusion is built on these three Suppositions 1. That Peter had an Episcopal Office distinct from his Apostolical 2. That he was at Rome 3. That he fixed his Episcopal Sea there whereof the Second is very Questionable the First and Last are absolutely false So that the Conclusion its self must needs be a notable fundamentall Principle of Faith It is true and I shewed it before that the Apostles when they came into any Church did exercise all the Power of Bishops in and over that Church but not as Bishops but as Apostles As a King may in any of the Cities of his dominions where he comes exercise all the Authority of the Mayor or particular Governour of that place where he is which yet doth not make him become the Mayor of the place which would be a diminution of his royall Dignity No more did the Apostles become Local Bishops because of their exercising Episcopal Power in any particular Church by virtue of their Authority Apostolical wherein that other was included as hath been declared And Cui Bono to what purpose serves this fictitious Episcopacy All the Priviledges that you contend for the Assignation of unto Peter were beâ—â—owed upon him as an Apostle or as a believing disciple of Christ. As such he had those peculiar grants made unto him The Keys of the Kingdome of heaven were given unto him as an Apostle or according to S t Austin as a believer as such was he commanded to feed the sheep of Christ. It was unto him as an Apostle or a professing believer that Christ promised to build the Church on the faith that he had professed You reckon all these things among the priviledges of Peter the Apostle who as such is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or first in order As an Apostle he had the Care of all Churches committed unto him As an Apostle he was divinely inspired and enabled infallibly to reveal the mind of Christ. All these things belonged unto him as an Apostle and what Priviledge he could have besides as a Bishop neither you nor I can tell no more than you can when how or by whom he was called and ordained unto any such office all which we know well enough concerning
it partly in a repetition in other words of what you had before insisted on The former I shall no further endeavour to disturb your contentment in It is a common error Neque est quisquam Quem non in aliquare videre Suffenum Possis I am not your Rivall in the admiration of it and shall therefore leave you quietly in the embracements of your Darling And for the latter we have had enough of it already and so by this time I hope you think also The close only of your Discourse is considerable and therefore I shall transcribe it for your second thoughts And it is this But Sir what you say here and so often up and down your book of Papists contempt of the Scripture I beseech you will please to abstain from it for the time to come I have conversed with the Roman Catholicks of France â—â—anders and Germany I have read more of your Books both Histories Contemptative and Scholastical Divines thâ—n I believe you have ever seen or heard of I have seen the Colledges of Sacred Priests and Religious houses I have communed with all sort of people and perused their Counsells And after all this I tell you and out of my love I tell you that their respect to Scripture is real absolute and cordial even to admiration Others may talk of it but they act it and would be ready to stone that man that should diminish Holy Writ Let us not wrong the innocent The Scripture is theirs and Jesus Christ is theirs who also will plead their Cause when he sees time What you mention of your own diligence and atchievements what you have done where you have been what you have seen and discoursed I shall not trouble you about It may be as to your souls health Tutior poter as esse domi But yet for all the report that you are pleased to make of your self it is not hard to discern that you and I Nec pondera rerum Nec momenta sumus And notwithstanding your Writings it would have been very difficult for any man to have guessed at your great reading had you not satisfied us by this your own information of it It may be if you had spared some of the time which you have spent in the reading of your Catholick Books unto the study of the Scripture it had not been unto your disadvantage In the mean time there is an Hyperbole in your confidence a little too evident For it is possable that I may and true that I have seen more of your Authors in half an hour then you can read I think in an hundred years unless you intend alwayes to give no other account of your reading then you have done in your Fiat and Epistola But we are weary of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quin tu alium quaer as quoi centones farcias But to pass by this boasting there are two parts of your Discourse the one concerning the faith the other expressing the Charity of Roman Catholicks The first contains what respect you would be thought to have for the Scripture the latter what you really have for all other Christians besides your selves As to the former you tell me that I speak of the Papists contempt of the Scripture and desire me to abstain from it for the time to come Whither I have used that expression anywhere of contempt of the Scripture well I know not But whereas I look upon you as my friend at least for the good advice I have frequently given you I have deserved that you should be so and therefore shall not deny you any thing that I can reasonably grant and whereas I cannot readily comply with you in your present request as to the alteration of my mind in reference unto the respect that Papists bear unto the Scriptures I esteem my self obliged to give you some account of the reasons why I persist in my former thoughts which I hope as is usual in such cases you will be pleased to take in friendly part For besides Sir that you back your request with nothing but some overconfident asseverations subscribed with teste meipso I have many reasons taken from the practice and Doctrine of your Church that strongly induce me to abide in my former perswasion As 1. You know that in these and the neighbouring Nations Papists have publickly burned the Scriptures and destroyed more Copies of them then ever Antiochus Epiphanes did of the Jewish Law And if you should go about to prove unto me that Protestants have no great regard to Sacred Images that have been worshipped because in these and the neighbouring Nations they brakes and burned a great number of them I should not readily know what to answer you Nor can I entertain any such confidence of your abilities as to expect from you a satisfactory answer unto my instance of the very same nature manifesting what respect Papists bear unto the Scriptures 2. You know that they have imprisoned and burned sundry persons for keeping the Scripture in their houses or some parts of them and reading them for their instruction and comfort Nor is this any great sign of respect unto them no more then it is of mens respect to treason or murder because they hang them up who are guilty of them And 3. Your Church prohibiteth the reading of them unto Lay-men unless in some special cases some few of them be licenced by you so to do and you study sweat for arguments to prove the reading of them needless and dangerous putting them as translated into the Catalogue of Books prohibited Now this is the very mark and stamp that your Church sets upon these books which she disapproves and discountenanceth as pernicious to the faithful 4. Your Councel of Trent hath decreed that your unwritten Traditions are to be received with the same faith and veneration as the Scripture constituting them to be one part of the Word of God and the Scriptures another then which nothing could be spoken more in contempt of it or in reproach unto it For I must assure you Protestants think you cannot possibly contract a greater guilt by any contempt of the Scripture then you do by reducing it into order with your unwritten Traditions 5. You have added Books not only written with an humane and fallible Spirit but farced with actual mistakes and falshoods unto the Canon of the Scripture giving just occasion unto them who receive it from you only to question the Authority of the whole And 6. You teach the Authority of the Scripture at least in respect of us which is all it hath for Authority is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and must regard some in relation unto whom it doth consist depends on the Authority of your Church the readiest way in the world to bring it into Contempt with them that know what your Church is and what it hath been And 7. You plead that it is very obscure and unintelligible of its self and that in things of the
that you may the easilier be quit of you never examine but only run on in your usual florishes about the use and excellency of Gods Word I told you in Fiat Lux what the Jew will reply to all such reasonings but you have the pregnant wit not to heed any thing that may hinder your florishes but if you were kept up in a Chamber with a learned Jew without bread water and fire till you had satisfied him in that objection I am still well enough assured for all your veryvaunts that if you do not make use of your Credo which here you contemn you might there stay till hunger and cold have made an end of you The meaning of this Discourse is that the Jews pretence of rejecting Christ upon the Authority and Tradition of their Church was not nor is to be satisfied by Testimonies given in the Scripture unto the Person Doctrine and Work of the Messias The sum of the Objection said down in your Fiat Lux is that which I have now mentioned It was the Plea of the Jews against Christ and his Doctrine managed from the Authority and Tradition of their Church That Christ and his Apostles gave the Answer unto this objection which I have now intimated namely the Testimony of God himself in the Scripture to the Truth of that which they objected against which was to be preferred unto the Authority and Testimony of their Church I have undeniably proved unto you in the Animadversions and it is manifest to every one that hath but read the New Testament with any Consideration or understanding The same way was persisted in by the Antient Fathers as all their writings against the Jews do testifie And I must now tell you that your calling the validity of this Answer into Question is highly injurious unto the honour of Christianity and blasphemous against Christ himself The best interpretation that I can give unto your words is that you are a person wholly ignorant of the Controversies that are between the Jews and Christians and the way that is to be taken for their satisfaction or confutation You tell us indeed in your Fiat that the Jews will reply to these Testimonies of Scripture which are alledged as giving witness to our Lord Jesus Christ and his Doctrine and contend about the interpretation of them and this you tell me I have the wit to take no notice of which by the way is unduly averred by you and contrary to your own Science and Conscience seeing you profess that you have read over my Animadversions and probably the very place wherein I do take notice of what you said to that purpose and replyed unto it was not far from your eye when you wrote the contrary And as I shewed you what was the opinion of the Antients of that reply of the Jews which you mention so I shall now add that nothing but gross ignorance in these things can give countenance to an imagination that there is any thing but folly and madness in the Rabbinical evasions of the Testimonies of the old Testament given unto our Lord Christ and his Gospel And your substitution of a naked fananical Credo not resolved into the Testimony of the Holy Writ in the room of that express Witness which is given in Holy Scripture unto the Person and Doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ to oppose therewith the Judaical Plea from their Church State Power and Authority is an Engine fit to undermine the very root of Christianity and to render the whole Gospel highly Questionable Besides it is so absurd as to the Conviction of the Jews such a mere petitio principii or begging of what is in Controversie between Christians and them that I challenge you to produce any one learned man that hath made use of it to that purpose To think that your Credo built on principles which he despiseth which you cannot prove unto him will convince another man of the Truth of what you believe can have no other ground but a magical fancy that the fixing of your imagination shall affect his and conform it unto your apprehension of things Such is your course in telling the Jews of the Authority of your Church and your Credo thereupon which cannot be supposed to have any existence in rerum natura unless it be first supposed that their Church was failed which supposal that it was not is the sole foundation of their objection What end you can propose herein but to expose your self and your profession unto their scorn and contempt I know not Sir the Lord Christ confirmed himself to be the Son of God and Saviour of the world by the Miracles which he wrought and the Doctrine which he taught was testified to be Divine by signs and express words from Heaven He proved it also by the Testimonies out of the Law and Prophets all which was confirmed by his Resurrection from the dead This coming of the promised Messiah the work that he was to perform and the characteristical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of him in application unto the person of Jesus of Nazareth the Apostles and Evangelists proved out of the Scripture to the conviction and conversion of thousands of the Jews and the confusion of the rest And if you know not that the Antients Fathers and learned men of succeeding Ages have undenyably proved against the Jews out the Scripture of the Old Testament and by the Testimony thereof that the promised Messiah was to be God and man in one Person that he was to come at the time of the appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ in the flesh that the work which he was to perform was the very same and no other then what was wrought and accomplished by him with all the other important concernments of his Person and office so that they have nothing left to countenance them in their obstinacy but meer senseless trifles you are exceedingly unmeet to make use of their objections or the condition of the controversie between them and Christians For what you add in reference unto my self I shall need only to mind you that the Question is not about any Personal ability of mine to satisfie a Jew which whatever it be when I have a mind to encrease it for somewhat that I know of and which I have learned out of their writings I will not come unto you for assistance but concerning the sufficiency of that Principle for the confronting of Judaical objections taken from the Authority of their Church which I have formerly proved unto you that our Lord Jesus Christ and his Apostles made use of unto that purpose And I will not say that it was from the pregnancy of your wit that whatever heed you took unto the stating of the Case between you and Protestants in the Animadversions parallel unto that between the Jews and the Apostles seeing a very little wit will suffice to direct a man to let that alone which he finds too heavy for him to remove
it if thy use the means by him appointed to come unto a right understanding of it They suppose that what is not taught therein or not taught so clearly as that men who humbly and heartily seek unto him may know his mind therein as to what he requireth of them cannot possibly be the necessary and indispensable Duty of any one to perform They suppose that it is the Duty of every man to search the Scriptures with all diligence by the help and assistance of the means that God hath appointed in his Church to come to the knowledg of his mind and will in all things concerning their Faith and Obedience and firmly to believe and adhere unto what they find revealed by him And they moreover suppose that those who deny any of these Suppositions are therein and so farre as they do so injurious to the Grace Wisedem Love and Care of God towards his Church to the Honour and perfection of the Scripture the Comfort and establishment of the Souls of men leaving them no assured Principles to build their Faith and Salvation upon Now from these Suppositions I hope you see that it will unavoidably follow that the Scripture is able every way to effect that which you deny unto it a sufficiency for For where I pray you lyes its defect I am afraid from the next part of your Question Has it ever done it that you run upon a great mistake The defect that follows the failings and miscarriages of men you would have imputed unto the want of sufficiency in the Scripture But wee cannot allow you herein The Scripture in its place and in that kind of Cause which it is is as sufficient to settle men all men in the Truth as the Sunne is to give light to all men to see by But the Sunne that giveth light doth not give eyes also The Scripture doth its work as a Morall Rule which men are not necessitated or compelled to attend unto or follow And if through their neglect of it or not attendance unto it or disability to discern the mind and will of God in it whether proceeding from their naturall impotency and blindness in their laps'd condition or some evil habit of mind contracted by their giving admission unto corrupt prejudices and Traditionall Principles the work be not effected this is no impeachment of the Scriptures sufficiency but a manifestation of their weakness and folly Besides all that unity in faith that hath been at any time or is in the world according to the mind of God every Decision that hath been made at any time of any difference in or about Religion in a right way and order hath been by the Scripture which God hath sanctified unto those ends and purposes And it is impossible that the miscarriages or defects of men can reflect the least blame upon it or make it esteemed insufficient for the end now enquired after The pursuit then of your Enquiry which now you insist upon is in part vain in part already answered In vain it is that you enquire whether the written Word can settle any man in a way that neither himself nor present adherents nor future Generations shall question For our enquiry is not after what may be or what shall be but what ought to be It is able to settle a man in a way that none ought to question unto the worlds end So it setled the first Christians But to secure us that none shall ever question the way whereinto it leads us that it is not designed for nor is it either needfull or possible that it should be so The Orall preaching of the Sonne of God and of his Apostles did not so secure them whom they taught The way that professed was every where questioned contradicted spoken against and many after the profession of it again renounced it And I wonder what feat you have to settle any one in a way that shall never be questioned The Authority of your Pope and Church will not do it Themselves are things as highly questioned and disputed about as any thing that was ever named with reference unto Religion If you shall say But yet they ought not to be so questioned and it is the fault of men that they are so You may well spare me the labour of answering your Question seeing you have done it your self And whereas you adde or with as much probability dissent from it either totally or in part as himself first set it when the very preceding words do not speak of a mans own setting but of the Scriptures setling the man only embracing what that setleth and determineth It is answered already that what is so setled by the Scripture and received as setled cannot justly be questioned by any And you insinuate a most irrationall Supposition on which your Assertion is built namely that Errour may have as much probability as Truth For I suppose you will grant that what is setled by the Scripture is true and therefore that which dissents from it must needs be an errour which that it may be as probable indeed as Truth for we speak not of appearances which have all their strength from our weaknesses is a new notion which may well be added to your many other of the like rarity and evidence But why is not the Scripture able to settle men in unquestionable Truth When the people of old doubted about the wayes of God wherein they ought to walk himself sends them to the Law and to the Testimony for their instruction and settlement Isa 8. 20. And we think the counsell of him who cannot deceive nor be deceived is to be hearkned unto as well as his command to be obeyed Our Saviour assures us that if men will not hear Moses and the Prophets and take direction from them for those wayes wherein they may please God they will not do it whatsoever they pretend from any other means which they rather approve of Luk. 16. 29 31. Yea and when the great Fundamental of Christian Religion concerning the Person of the Messiah was in question he sends men for their settlement unto the Scriptures Joh. 5. 39. And we suppose that that which is sufficient to settle us in the foundation is so to confirm us also in the whole superstructure Especially considering that it is able to make the man of God perfect and to be thoroughly furnished unto all good works 2 Tim. 3. 16 17. What more is required unto the settlement of any one in Religion wee know not nor what can rationally stand in competition with the Scripture to this purpose seeing that is expresly commended unto us for it by the Holy Ghost other wayes are built on the conjectures of men Yea the Assurance which we may have hereby is preferred by Peter before that which any may have by an immediate voyce from Heaven 2 Pet. 1. 19. And is it not an unreasonable thing now for you to come and tell us that the Scripture is not sufficient
himself as that nothing more abominable can be invented The Devil of old being not able to give out certain Answers unto them that came to onquire about their Concernments at his Oracles put them off a long time with dubious aenigmaticall unintelligible Sophisms But when once the world had by experience study and observation improved its self into a Wisdome beyond the pitch of its first rudeness men began generally to despise what they saw could not be certainly understood This made the Devil pluck in his horns as not finding it for the interest of his kingdome to expose himself to be scoffed at by them with whose follies and fanaticall credulity in esteeming highly of that which could not be understood he had for many generations sported himself And do they not blasphemously expose the Oracles of the true holy and living God to no less contempt who for their own sinister ends would frighten men from them with the ugly scare-crow of obscurity or their not being intelligible unto every man by the use of means so far as he is concerned to know them and the mind of God in them And herein also Protestants stand as firmly as the fundamentals of Christianity will bear them 4. Protestants believe that it is the Duty of all men who desire to know the will of God and to worship him according unto his mind to use diligence in the improvement of the means appointed for that end to come unto a right and full understanding of all things in the Scripture wherein their faith and obedience are concerned This necessarily follows from the Principles before laid down Nor is it possible it should be otherwise It is doubtless incumbent on every man to study and know his Duty that cannot be a mans Duty which he is not bound to know especially not such a Duty as whereon his eternall welfare should depend And I suppose a man can take no better Course to come to the knowledge of his Duty than that which God hath appointed for that purpose The Commands and Exhortations which we have given us in the Scripture for our Diligence in this matter with the Explications and improvements of them in the Writings of the Fathers are so obvious trite and known that it were meer loss of time to insist on the Repetition of them I suppose I should speak within compass if I should say that one Chrysostome doth in a hundred places exhort Christians of all sorts to the diligent study and search of the Scriptures and especially of the Epistles of Paul not the most plain and easie part of them I know the practise of your Church lyes to the contrary and what you plead in the justification of that practise but I am sorry both for Her and you both for the contrivers of and consenters unto this abomination and I fear what your accounâ— will be as to this matter at the last day God having granted the inestimable benefit of his Word unto mankind revealing therein unto them the only way by which they may attain unto a blessed eternity Is it not the greatest ingratitude that any man can possibly contract the guilt of to neglect the use of it What then is your Condition who upon sleight and triviall pretences set up your own Wisdome and Authority against the Wisdome and Authority of God advising and commanding men upon the pain of your displeasure in this world not to attend unto that which God commands them to attend unto on pain of his displeasure in the world to come So that though I confess that you deny this Principle yet I cannot see but that you do so not only upon the hazard of your own souls and the souls of them that attend unto you seeing that if the blind lead the blind both must fall into the ditch but also that you do it to the great prejudice of Christian Religion in the very foundations of it For what can a man rationally conclude that shall see you driving all Persons and that on no small penalties excepting your selves who are concerned in the conspiracy and some few others whom you suppose sufficiently initiated in your Mysteries from the reading and study of those Books wherein the world knows and your selves confess that the Arcana of Christian Religion are contained but that there are some things in them like the hidden Sacra of the old Pagan Hierophants which may not be disclosed because however countenanced by a remote veneration yet are indeed turpia or ridicula things to be ashamed of or scorned And the Truth is some of your Doctors have spoken very suspiciously this way whilest they justifie your practise in driving the people from the study of the Scripture by intimations of things and expressions not so pure and chast as to be fit for the knowledge of the promiscuous multitude when in the mean time Themselves or their Associates do publish unto all the world in their rules and directions for Confession such abominable filth and ribaldry as I think was never by any other means vented amongst mankind 5. Protestants say that the Lord Christ hath instituted his Church and therein appointed a Ministry to preside over the rest of his Disciples in his Name and to unfold un to them his mind and will as recorded in his Word for which end he hath promised his presence with them by his Spirit unto the end of the World to enable them in an humble dependance on his assistance to find out and declare his Commands and Appointments unto their brethren This Position I suppose you will not contend with us about although I know that you put another sense upon most of the terms of it than the Scripture will allow or wee can admit of These are the Principles of Protestants this is the Progress of their Faith in coming unto settlement and assurance These are their Foundations which are as unquestionable as any thing in Christianity the most of them your selves being judges And from them one of these two things will necessarily follow Either that all men unto whom the Word of God doth come will come to an agreement in the Truth or the Unity of Faith or Secondly That it is their own fault if they do not so do For what upon these Principles should hinder them from so doing All saving Truth is revealed by God in the Scripture unto the end that men may come to the knowledge of it It is so revealed by Him that it is possible and with his assistance easie formen to know aright his Mind and Will about the things so revealed and be hath appointed regular wayes and means for men to wait upon him in and by for the obtaining of his assistance Now pray revive your Question that gave occasion unto this discourse however men may differ in Religion why is not the Scripture sufficient to bring them unto an agreement and settlement Take heed that in your Answer you deny not some Principle that will
And that A man once rid of his Authority may as easily deride and as solidly confute the Incarnation as the Sprinkling of Holy water so resolving our faith of the Incarnation of Christ into his Authority or Testimony Yea and in the same page That if it had not been for the Pope Christ himself had not been taken in the world for any such Person as he is believed this day And p. 378. to the same purpose The first great fundamental of Christian Religion which is the Truth and Divinity of Christ had it not been for him had failed long ago in the world with much more to the same purpose Hence it is evident that in your judgment all Truth and Certainty in Region depends on the Popes Anthority and Infallibility or as you express it his unerring guidance This is your Principle this you propose as the only medium to bring us unto that Settlement in Religion which you suppose the Scripture is not able to do What course should we now take would you have us believe you at the first word without further triall or examination would you have a man to do so who never before heard of Pope or Church We are commanded to try all things and to hold fast that which is good to try pretending Spirits and the Beraeans are commended for examining by the Scripture what Paul himself preached unto them An implicit Credulity given up to such Dictates is the height of Fanaticism Have wee not reason then to call you and your copartners in this design to an accoun â—how you prove that which you so strenuously assert and suppose and to examine the Principles of that Authority whereunto you resolve all your faith and Religion If upon mature consideration these prove Solid and the Inferences you make from them Cogent it is good Reason that you should be attended unto If they prove otherwise if the first be false and the latter Sophistical you cannot justly take it ill of him that shall advise you to take heed that whilest you are gloriously displaying your Colours the ground that you stand upon do not sink under your feet And here you are forced to go many a step backward to fix your first footing untill you leave your Pope quite out of sight from whence you advance towards him by severall degrees and so arive at his Supremacie and Infallibility and so we shall have Reditum Diomedis ab interitu Meleagri 1. Your first Principle to this purpose is That Peter was the Prince of the Apostles and that in him the Lord Jesus founded a Monarchy in his Church So pag. 360. you call him the head and Prince of the whole Congregation Now this wee think no meet Principle for any one to begin withall in asserting the foundation of Faith and Religion Nor do we think that if it were meet so to be used that it is any way subservient unto your design and purpose 1. A Principle fundamental or first entrance into any way of Settlement in Faith or Religion it cannot possibly be because it presupposeth the knowledg of and assent unto many other great fundamental Articles of Christian Religion yea upon the matter all that are so For before you can rationally talk with a man about Peters Principality and the Monarchical state of the Church hereon depending you must suppose that he believes the Scripture 〈◊〉 be the Word of God and all things that are taught therein concerning Jesus Christ his Person Nature Offices Work and Gospell to be certainly and infallibly true for they are all supposed in your Assertion which without the knowledg of them is uncouth horrid insignificant and forraign to all notions that a man can rationally entertain of God or Religion Nay no attempt of proof or confirmation can be given unto it but by and from Scripture whereby you fall directly into the Principle which you seek so carefully to avoid namely that the Scripture is the only way and means of setling us in the Truth since you cannot settle any man in the very first proposition which you make to lead him into another way but by the Scripture So powerfull is Truth that those who will not follow it willingly it will lead them captive in Triumph whether they will or no. 2. It is unmeet for any purpose because it is not true No one word from the Scripture can you produce in its confirmation wherein yet if it be not revealed it must pass as a very uncertain and frivolous conjecture You can produce no suffrage of the Ancient Church unto your purpose which yet if you could would not presently render any Assertion so confirmed infallibly certain much less fundamental Some indeed of the 4 th Century call Peter Principem Apostolorum but explain themselves to intend thereby 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first or Leader not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Prince or Ruler And when the ambiguity of that word began to be abused unto pretensions of Preeminence the Council of Carthage expresly condemned it allowing none to be termed Princeps Sacerdotum Many in those dayes thought Peter to be among the Apostles like the Princeps Senatus or Princeps Civi atis the chief in their Assemblies or Principall in dignity how truly I know not but that he should be amongst them and over them a Prince in Office a Monarch as to Rule and Power is a thing that they never once dreamed of and the Asseveration of it is an open untruth The Apostles were equall in their Call Office Place Dignity Employments All the difference between them was in their Labours Sufferings and Success wherein Paul seems to have had the pre-eminence who as Peter and all the rest of the Apostles every one singly and for himself had the care of all the Churches committed unto him thought it may be for the better discharge of their Duty ordinarily they divided their work as they found it necessary for them to apply themselves unto it in particular See 2 Cor. 11. And this equality between the Apostles is more than once insinuated by Paul and that with speciall reference unto Peter 1 Cor. 1. Gal. 1. 18 19. ch 2. 9. And is it not wonderfull that if this Assertion should not only be true but such a Truth as on which the whole faith of the Church was to be built that the Scripture should be utterly silent of it that it should give us no Rules about it no directions to use and improve it afford us no one instance of the exercise of the Power and Authority intimated no not one but that on the contrary it should lay down Principles exclusive of it Matth. 22. 25 26. Luk. 22. 26. And when it comes to make an enumeration of all the Offices appointed by Christ in his Church Eph. 4. 11. should pass over the Prince and his Office in silence on which all the rest were to depend You see what a Foundation you begin to build upon a meer
faith of men is formally and ultimately resolved into so that what ever Propositions that are made unto them they may reject unless they do it with a non obstante for its supposed Revelation the whole Revelation abides unshaken and their saith founded thereon But as to the Persons who first bring unto any the tidings of the Gospel seeing the faith of them that receive it is not resolved into their Authority or Infallibility they may they ought to examine their proposals by that unerring word which they ultimately rest upon as did the Beraeans and receive or reject them at first or afterwards as they see cause and this without the least impeachment of the truth or Authority of the Gospel its self which under this formal consideration as revealed of God they absolutely believe Let us now see what you except hereunto First you ask What love of Christs dictates what commission of Christ allows you to choose and reject at your own pleasure Ans. None nor was that at all in question nor do you speak like a man that durst look upon the true state of the Controversie between us You proclaim your cause desperate by this perpetual tergiversation The Question is whither when men preach the Gospel unto others as a Revelation from God and bring along the Scripture with them wherein they say that Revelation is comprized when that is received as such and hath its authority confirmed in the minds of them that receive it whither are they not bound to try all the teaching in particular of them that first bring it unto them or afterwards continue the preaching of it whither it be consonant to that Rule or Word wherein they believe the whole Revelation of the will of God relating to the Gospel declared unto them to be contained and to embrace what is suitable thereunto and to reject any thing that in particular may be by the mistakes of the teachers imposed upon them Instead of believing what the Scripture teacheth and rejecting what it condemns you substitute choosing or rejecting at your own pleasure a thing wherein our discourse is not at all concerned You adde What Heretick was ever so much a fool as not to pretend the Love of Christ and Commission of Christ for what he did What then I pray may not others do a thing really upon such grounds as some pretend to do them on falsly may not a Judge have his Commission from the King because some have counterfeited the great Seal May not you sincerely seek the good and peace of your Country upon the Principles of your Religion though some pretending the same Principles have sought its disturbance and ruine If there be any force in this exception it overthrows the Authority and Efficacy of every thing that any man may falsly pretend unto which is to shut out all order Rule Government and vertue out of the world You proceed How shall any one know you do it out of any such Love or Commission sith those who delivered the Articles of saith now rejected pretended equal love to Christ and Commission of Christ for the delivery of them as any other I wonder you should proceed with such impertinent enquiries How can any man manifest that he doth any thing by the Commission of another but by his producing and manifesting his Commission to be his and how can be prove that the doth it out of Love to him but by his diligence care and conscience in the discharge of his Duty as our Saviour tells us saying if you love me keep my Commandments which is the proper effect of love unto him and open evidence or manifestation of it Now how should a man prove that he doth any thing by the Commission of Christ but by producing that Commission that is in the things about whâ—ch we treat by declaring and evidencing that the things he proposeth to be believed are revealed by his spirit in his word and that things which he rejects are contrary thereunto And what ever men may pretend Christ gives out no adverse Commissions his word is every way and everywhere the same at perfect harmony and consistency with its self so that if it come to that that several Persons do teach contrary doctrines either before or after one another or together under the same pretence of receiving them from Christ as was the case between the Pharises of old that believed and the Apostles they that attend unto them have a perfect guide to direct them in their choice a perfect Rule to judge of the things proposed As in the Church of the Jews the Pharises had taught the people many things as from God for their Traditions or Oral Law they pretended to be from God Our Saviour comes really a teacher from God and he disproves their false Doctrines which they had prepossessed the people withall and all this he doth by the Scripture the Word of Truth which they had before received And this Example hath he left unto his Church unto the end of the world But you yet proceed Why may we not at length reject all the rest for love of something else when this Love of Christ which is now crept into the very out side of our lips is slipt off from thence Do you think men cannot find a cavil against him as well as his Law delivered unto us with the first news of him and as easily dig up the root as cut up the branches You are the pleasantest man at a disputation that ever I met withal haud ulli veterum virtute secundus you outgo your masters in palpable Sophistry If we may and ought for the Love of Christ reject errours and untruths taught by fallible men then we may reject him also for the love of other things Who doubts it but men may if they will if they have a mind to do so they may do so Physically but may they do so Morally may they do so upon the same or as good grounds and reasons as they reject errours and false worship for the sake of Christ With such kind of arguing is the Roman Cause supported Again you suppose the Law of Christ to be rejected and therefore say that his Person may be so also But this contains an application of the general Thesis unto your particular case and thereupon the begging of the thing in Question Our enquiry was general Whither things at first delivered by any Persons that preach the Gospel may not be rejected without any impeachment of the Authority of the Gospel it self Here that you may insinuate that to be the case between you and us you suppose the things rejected to be the Law of Christ when indeed they are things rejected because they are contrary to the Law of Christ and so affirmed in the Assertion which you seek to oppose For nothing may be rejected by the Commission of Christ but what is contrary to his Law The truth is he that rejects the Law of Christ as it is his
greatly desire to give some countenance unto that is an universal visible Pastor over the whole Catholick Church in the place and room of Christ himself First You tell us that the Apostles expected one to be chosen to succeed Christ in his care But to have one succeed another in his care infers that that other â—â—â—sâ—â— o take and exercise the Care which formerly he haâ— and exercised which in this case is highly blasphemous once to imagine I wish you would â—ake more Care of what you say in things of this nature aâ—d not suffer the impetuous 〈…〉 your interest to cast you upon expressions so 〈◊〉 to thâ— honour oâ— Christ and safety of his Churâ—â— And how do you prove that the Apostles had any such expectations as that which you mention Our Saviour gave them equal commission to teach all Nations told them that as his father had sent him so he sent them that he had chosen them twelve but that one of them was a Devil never that one of them should be Pope Their Institution Instruction Priviledges Charge Calling were all equal How then should they come to have this expectation that one of them should be chosen to succeed Christ in his Care when they were all chosen to serve under him in the continuance of his care towards his Church That which you obscurely intimate from whence this expectation of yours might arise is the contest that was amongst them aâ—â—â—t preheminence Luk. 22. 24. There was a strife â—mongst them which of them should be the greatest 〈◊〉 you suppose was upon their perswasion that one should be chosen in particular to succeed the Lord Christ in his Care whereupon they fell into difference about the place But 1. Is it not somewhat strange unto your self how they should contest about a succession unto Christ in his absence who had not once thought that he would ever be absent from them nor could bear the mention of it without great sorrow of heart when afterwards he began to acquaint them with it 2. How should they come in your apprehension to quarrel about that which as you suppose and contend was somewhile before determined For this contest of yours was somewhile after the promise of the Keys to Peter and the saying of Christ that he would build his Church on the Rock Were the Apostles think you as stupid as Protestants that they could not see the Supremacy of Peter in those passages but must yet fall at variance who should be Pope 3. How doth it appear that this strife of theirs who should be greatest did not arise from their apprehension of an earthly Kingdom a hope whereof according to the then current perswasion of the Judaical Church to be erected by their master whom they believed in as the true Messiah they were not delivered from until after his Resurrection when they were filled with the Spirit of the New Testament Act. 1. Certainly from that root sprang the ambitious desire of the Sons of Zebedee after preheminence in his Kingdom and the designing of the rest of them in this place from the manner of its management by strife seems to have had no better a spring 4. The stop put by our Lord Jesus unto the strife that was amongst them makes it manifest that it arose from no such expectation as you imagine or that at least if it did yet your expectation was irregular vain and groundless For 1. He tells them that there should be no such greatness in his Church as that which they contended about being like to the Soveraignty exercised by and in the Nations of the earth from which he that can shew a difference in your Papal Rule erit mihi magnus Apollo 2. He tells them that his Father had equally provided a Kingdom that is heavenly and eternal for all them that believed which was the only greatness that they ought to look or enquire after 3. That as to their Priviledge in his Kingdom it should be equal unto them all for they should all fit on Thrones judging the twelves tribes of Israel so ascribing equal power Authority and dignity unto them all which utterly overthrows the figment of the supremacy of any one of them over the rest Luk. 22. 30. Matth. 19. 28. And 4. Yet further to prevent any such conceit as that which you suppose them to have had concerning the prelation of any one of them he tells them that one was their Master even Christ and that all they were brethren Mat. 23. 8. so giving them to understand that he had designed them to be perfectly every way equal among themselves So ill have you layed the foundation of your Plea as that it guides us to a full determination of the contrary to your pretence and that given by our Saviour himself with many reasons perswading his Disciples of the equity of it and unto an acquiescency in it And what you add that he presently appointed one to the preheminence you imagine is altogether inconsistent with what you would conclude from the striâ—e about it For the appointment you fancy preceded this contention and had it been real and to any such purpose would certainly have prevented it Thus you do neither prove from the Gospel what you pretend unto namely that Bishops are above Ministers so well do you plead your Cause nor what you intend namely that the Pope is appointed over them all Only you wisely add a caution about what a Bishop ought to be and do de jure and what any one of them may â—o or be de facto because it is impossible for any â—an to find the least difference between the domination which our Saviour expresly condemns and that which your Pope doth exercise Although I know not whither you would think meet to have him devested of that Authority on the pretence whereof he so domineers in the world Finding your self destitute of any countenance from the Gospel you proceed to the Laws of the Land To what purpose to prove that Christ appointed one amongst his Apostles to preside with plenitude of Power over all the rest of them and consequently over the whole Catholick Church succeeding him in his care certainly you will find little countenance in our Laws to this purpose But let us hear your own words again As for the Laws of the Land say you it is there most strongly decreed by the consent and Authority of the whole Kingdom not only that Bishops are our Ministers but that the Kings Majesty is head of the Bishops also in the line of Hierarchy from whose hand they receive both their places and jurisdiction This was established not only by one but by several Parliament Acts both in the reign of King Edward and Queen Elizabeth What will hence follow that there is one universal Bishop appointed to succeed Christ in his Care over the Church Catholick the thing you attempted to prove in the words immediately foregoing Do not the same Laws which assert
his Successors may be added 3. Protestants reach unanimously that it is incumbent on Kings to find out receive embrace and promote the Truth of the Gospel and the Worship of God appointed therein confirming protecting and defending of it by their Regal Power and Authority as also that in their so doing they are to use the Liberty of their own judgements informed by the wayes that God hath appointed for that end independently on the dictates determinations and orders of any other Person or Persons in the world unto whose Authority they should be obnoxious Heathen Kings made Laws for God Dan. 3. chap. 6. Jona 3. And the great thing that we find any of the Good Kings of Judah commended for is that they commanded the worship of God to be observed and performed according unto his own appointment For this end were they then bound to write out a Copy of the Law with their own hands Deut. 14. 18. and to study in it continually To this purpose were they warned charged exhorted and excited by the Prophets that is that they should serve God as Kings And to this purpose are there innumerable Laws of the best Christian Kings and Emperours still extant in the world In these things consists that Supremacy or Headship of Kings which Protestants unanimously ascribe unto them especially those in England to his Royal Majesty And from hence you may see the frivolousness of sundry things you object unto them As first of the Scheme or Series of Ecclesiastical Power which you ascribe to Prelate Protestants and the Laws of the Land from which you say the Presbyterians dissent which you thus express By the Laws of our Land our Series of Government Ecclesiastical stands thus God Christ King Bishop Ministers People The Presbyterian Predicament is thus God Christ Minister People So that the Ministers head in the Presbyterian Predicament toucheth Christs feet immediately and nothing intervenes You Pretend indeed that hereby you do exalt Christ but this is a meer cheat as all men may see with their eyes For Christ is but where he was but the Minister indeed is exalted being now set in the Kings place one degree higher then the Bishops who by Law is under King and Bishops too If I mistake not in my guess you greatly pleased your self with your Scheme wherein you pretend to make forsooth an ocular Demonstration of what you undertook to prove whereas indeed it is as trivial a fancy as a man can ordinarily meet withal For 1. Neither the Law nor Prelates nor Presbyterians ascribe any place at all unto the Kings Majesty in the Series of Spiritual Order he is neither Bishop nor Minister nor Deacon or any way authorized by Christ to convey or communicate power meerly spiritual unto any others No such thing is claimed by our Kings or declared in Law or asserted by Protestants of any sort But in the series of exteriour Government both Prelate Protestants and Presbyterians assign a Supremacy over all Persons in his Dominions and that in all Causes that are inquirable and determinable by or in any Court exercising Jurisdiction and Authority unto his Majesty All sorts assign unto him the Supreme place under Christ in external Government and Jurisdiction None assign him any place in Spiritual Order and meerly Spiritual Power Secondly If you place Bishops on the Series of exterior Government as appointed by the King and confirmed by the Law of the Land there is yet no difference with respect unto them 3. The Question then is solely about the Series of Spiritual order and thereabout it is confessed there are various apprehensions of Protestants which is all you prove and so do magno conatu nugas agere who knows it not I wish there were any need to prove it But Sir this difference about the Superiority of Bishops to Presbyters or their equality or Identity was agitated in the Church many and many a hundred year before you or I were born and will be so probably when we are both dead and forgotten So that what it makes in this dispute is very hard for a sober man to conjecture 4. Who they are that pretend to exalt Christ by a meer asserting Ministers not to be by his institution subject to Bishops which you call a cheat I know not nor shall be their advocate they exalt Christ who love him and keep his Commandments and no other 2. You may also as easily discern the frivolousness of your exclamation against Protestants for not giving up their differences in Religion to the Vmpirage of Kings upon the assignment of that Supremacy unto them which hath been declared When we make the King such an Head of the Catholick Church as you make the Pope we shall seek unto him as the fountain of our faith as you pretend to do unto the Pope For the present we give that honour to none but Christ himself and for what we assign in profession unto the King we answer it wholly in our practical submission Protestants never thought nor said that any King was appointed by Christ to be supreme infallible Proposer of all things to be believed and done in the Worship of God no King ever assumed that power unto himself It is Jesus Christ alone who is the Supreme and absolute Lawgiver of his Church the Author and finisher of our Faith and it is the honour of Kings to serve him in the promotion of his Interest by the exercise of that Authority and duty which we have before declared What unto the dethroning and dishonour as much as in you lyeth of Christ himself and of Kings also you assign unto the Pope in making him the Supreme head and fountain of their faith hath been already considered This is the substance of what you except against Protestants either as to Opinion or Practice in this matter of deference unto Kingly Authority in things Ecclesiastical What is the sense of your Church which you prefer unto your sentiments herein I shall after I have a little examined your present pretensions manifest unto you seeing you will have it so from those who are full well able to inform us of it Fas mihi Pontificum sacrata resolvere jura atque omnia ferre sub auras â—Siqua tegunt tenear Romaenec ligebus ullis For your own part you have expressed you seâ—f in this matter so loosely generally and ambiguously that it is very hard for any man to collect from your words what it is that you assert or what you deny I shall endeavour to draw out your sense by a few enâ—quiries As 1. Do you think the King hath any An â—ority vested in him as King in Ecclesiastical affairs and over Ecclesiastical Persons You tell us That Catholicks observe the King in all things as well Eeclesiastick as Civil pag. 59. that in the line of Corporal power and Authority the King is immediately under God p. 61. with other words to the same purpose if they are to any purpose at all
and righteousness of his wayes against their proud repinings Pray be as angry with me as you please but take heed of justifying any against God The task will prove too hard for you And yet to this purpose are your following contemptuous expressions For unto my observation that after these times the Goths and Vandals with others overflowed the Christian world you subjoyn either to punish them we may believe or to teach them how to mend their manners Sir I know not what you believe or do not believe or whither you believe any thing of this kind or no. But I will tell you what I am perswaded all the world believes who know the story of those times and are not Atheists and it is that though the Goths and Vandals Saxons Huns Francks and Longobards with the rest of the barbarous Nations who divided the Provinces of the Western Empire amongst them had it may be no more thoughts to punish the Nations professing Christianity for their sins wickedness and superstition though one of their Chief Leaders proclaimed himself the Scourge of God against them then had the King of Babylon to punish Judah for her sins and Idolatry in especial yet that God ordered them no less then he did him in his Providence for those ends which you so scorn and despise that is either to punish them for their sins or to provoke them to leave them by repentance Take heed of being a scoffer in these things least your bands be made strong God is not unrighteous who exerciseth judgement The Judge of all the world will do right Nor doth he afflict any people much less extirpate them from the face of the earth without a Cause Many wicked provoking sinful Idolatrous Nations he spareth in his patience and forbearance and will yet do so but he destroyes none without a Cause And all that I intended by the remembrance of the sins of those Nations which were exposed unto devastation was but to shew that their destruction was of themselves You leap unto another clause which you rend out of mydiscourse that these Pagans took at last unto Christianity and say happily because it was a more loose and wicked life then their own Pagan Profession But are you not ashamed of this trifling doth this disprove my Assertion Is it not true Did they not do so Did not the above mentioned Nations when they had settled themselves in the Provinces of the Empire take upon them the Profession of the Christian Religion Did not the Saxons do so in Brittany the Francks in Gaule the Goths and Longobards in Italy the Vandals in Africk the Huns in Bannonia I cannot believe you are so ignorant in these things as your exceptions bespeak you Nor do I well understand what you intend by them they are so frivolous and useless nor surely can any man in his right wits suppose them of any validity to impeach the evidence of the known stories which my discourse relates unto But you lay more weight on what you cull out in the next place which as you have layed it down is That these now Christened Pagans advanced the Popes authority when Christian Religion Was now grown degenerate and say now we come to know how the Roman Bishop became a Patriarch above the rest by means namely of the new converted Pagans But I wonder you speak so nicely in their chief affair As though that were the Question whether the Bishop of Rome according unto some Ecclesiastical constitutions were made a Patriarch or no and that whither he were not esteemed to have some kind of preheminence in respect of those other Bishops who upon the same account were so stiled When we have occasion to speak of this Question we shall not be backward to declare our thoughts in it For the present you represent the Pope unto us as the absolute Head of the Church Catholick the supream Judge of all controversies in Religion the sole fountain of Unity and spring of all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction c. Nor did I say that your Pope was by these Nations after their conversion advanced unto the height you labour now to fix him in but only that his Authority was signally advanced by them which is so certain a Truth that your own Historians and Annalists openly proclaim it and you cannot deny it unless you would be esteemed the most ungrateful Person in the world But this is your way and manner all that is done for you is meer duty which when it is done you will thank no man for Are all the Grants of Power Priviledges and Possessions made unto your Papal See by the Kings of this Nation both before and since the Conquest by the Kings of France and Emperours of the Posterity of Charles the Great by the Kings of Poland Denmark and Sweden by the Longobards in Italy not worth your thanks It is well you have got your ends the net may be cast away when the fish is caught But an odd chance you say it was that they should think of advancing him to what they never heard either himself or any other advanced unto before among Christians but yet this was done and no such odd chance neither Your Popes had for a season before been aspiring to greater heights then formerly they had attained unto and used all wayes possible to commend themselves and their Authority not what truly it was but what they would have it to be unto all with whom they had to do and thereupon by sundry means and artifices imposed upon the nations some undue conceits of it though it was not fully nor so easily admitted of as it may be you may imagine But in many things they were willing to gratifie him in his pretensions little knowing the tendency of them many things he took the advantage of their streights and divisions to impose upon them many things he obtained from them by flattery and carnal compliances untill by sundry serpentine advances he had brought them all unto his bow and some of the greatest of them to his stirrup It was yet more odd say you and strange that all Christendome should calmly submit unto a power set up anew by young converted Pagans no Prince or Bishop either here or of any either Christian Kingdom either then or ever after to this day excepting against it Had not all the Bishops and Priests of Africa Egypt Syria Thrace Greece and all the Christian world acknowledged by an hundred experiments the supream Spiritual Authority of the Roman Patriarch in all times before this deluge of Goths and Vandals But why do I expostulate with you who write these things not to judicious Readers but to fools and children who are not more apt to tell a truth then to believe a lye But Sir you shall quickly see whose discourse yours or mine stand in need of week and credulous Reader That which you have in this place to oppose is only this that your Papal Authority received a signal advancement
suffer Heb. 9. 26. And the Sacrifice of Christ without his passion his offering without suffering evacuates both the one and the other But what of all this if the Apostles used the Sacrifice you talk of that of the Mass is it meet we should do so also Hereof you say were not the Apostles according to this rite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacrificing to our great Lord God when Paul was by imposiâ—ion of hands segregated from the Layity to his Divine Service as I clearly in my Paragraph 〈◊〉 out of the History of the Acts of the Apostles 〈◊〉 you the Apostles were not then about any Sacrifice but only preaching Gods word or some such thing to the people in the name and behalf of God But Sir is this to be in earnest or jest the sacred text says they were Sacrificing to our Lord liturgying and ministring unto him you say they were not Sacrificing to God but only preaching to the people And now the Question is whither you or I more rightly understand that Apostolical Book for my sense and meaning I have all Antiquity as well as the plain words of the sacred Text You have neither How empty and vain this Discourse of yours is wherein you seem greatly to triumph will quickly be discovered And you are a merry man if you think by such arguments as these to perswade us that the Apostles Sacrificed to God according to the rite of your Mass as though we did not know by whom the chief parts of it particularly those wherein you place your Sacrifice were invented many hundreds of years after they fell asleep 1. You say they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacrificing to our great Lord God as though it were God the Father or God absolutely that is intended in that expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Lord. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord is Sir peculiarly donotative of the Person of the Mediator Jesus Christ God and Man according to that Rule given us â—y the Apostle 1 Cor. 8. 6. To us there is one God the Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and one Lord Jesus Christ. And this is the constant denotation of the word whâ—â— used absolutely as here it is throughout the whâ—â—â— New Testament To Christ the Mediator were 〈◊〉 Churches ministring Act. 13. That is in his naâ—â—â— and Authority according to his appointment and unto his service And this one observation sufficâ—ently discovers the vanity of your Argument for you will not say that they offered Sacrifice to the Lord Christ emphatically and reduplicatively seeing if you may be believed it is he whom they offered in Sacrifice Of such force is the Sophism wherein you boast And 2. You wisely observe that Paul by the imposition of hands there mentioned was segregated from the Layity whereas he tells you that he was an Apostle wherein certainly he was segregated from the Layity neither of men nor by men but by Jesus Christ and God the Father Gal. 1. 1. that is there was no intimation or interposition of the Ministry or Authority of any man in his call to that office which he had for sundry years exercised before this his peculiar separation to the work of preaching anew to the Gentiles So well are you skilled in the sense of that Apostolical Book 3. And not to insist on the repetition of my former Answer which in your wonted manner you lamely and unduly represent could you by other Arguments and on other testimonies prove that the Sacrifice you plead for was instituted by Christ and offered by the Apostles there might possibly be some colour for a man to think that they performed that duty also when they were said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the service of God But from that general expression intimating any kind of publick Ministery whatever and never used in any Author sacred or Prophane precisely and absolutely to signifie sacrificing to conclude that they were offering Sacrifice and to use no other testimony to prove they had any such Sacrifice is such a fondness as nothing but insuperable prejudice can perswade a man in his right wits to give countenance unto St. Paul tells us that the Magistrate is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth he mean that he is Gods Sacrificer or his Minister And he sayes of himself that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth he intend that he was Christs Sacrificer or his Servant Rom. 15. 16. v. 27. he sayes that it was the duty of the Gentiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth he mean to Sacrifice in your carnal things or to minister of them to the Jews 1. But you will it may be except that they were not said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as those here that is the Prophets of the Church of Antioch and not the Apostles as you mistake are said to do to liturgie to the Lord it must needs be Sacrificing because it was to the Lord. But 1. I have shewed you how this pretence is perfectly destructive of your own intendment in that it is the Lord Christ that is especially meant unto whom distinctly you will not say they were sacrificing And 2. Were it â—ot so yet the expression would not give you the least colour of advantage What think you of 1 Sam. 3. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the child Samuel was Liturgying seeing you will have it so unto the Lord before Eli. Do you think that the child which was not of the family of Aaron nor yet called to be a Prophet was offering Sacrifice to God and the high Priest looking on Do you not see the fondness of your pretension 3. I told you before but now begin to fear that you are too old to learn what you do not like that the 70. never translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacrifice or to Sacrifice by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor intimate any Sacrifice anywhere by that word And you may if you please now learn by the Instance of Samuel that what men perform in the worship of God according to his command they may be said therein to Minister unto or before the Lord in 4. The note of your own Cajetan upon the place is worth your Consideration non explicatur species Ministerii sed ex to quâ—d diâ—â—rant prophetae doctores insinuatur 〈…〉 Domino docendo prophetando 〈…〉 Ministery is spoken of is not explained but 〈◊〉 they were Prophets and Teachers that 〈…〉 in it it is insinuated that they ministred 〈…〉 Lord by teaching and prophesying What have 〈◊〉 phets and Teachers to do with Sacrifice if as 〈…〉 they administred unto the Lord they did it by prophesying and teaching which were accompanied by prayer Here is no mention of Sacrifiâ—e nor work for Priests so that the context excludes your sense The same is the interpretation of Erasmus 5. Your vulgar Latine reads the words administrantibus Domino as they were ministring unto the Lord excluding their notion of Sacrificing And 6. The
to your Question What it is that can settle any man in the Truth of Religion and unite all men therein And then because you object this unto us as if we were at some loss and incertainty therein and your selves very secure I shall consider what are the grounds and principles that you proceed upon for the same ends and purposes namely to settle any man in the Truth of Religion and to bring all men to an harmony and consent therein Now I shall herein manifest unto you these two things I. That the Principles which the Protestants proceed upon in the improvement whereof they obtain themselves assured and infallible settlement in the Truth and labour to reduce others unto the Unity of Faith are such as are both suited unto and sufficient for the end and work which they design to effect by them and also in themselves of such unquestionable Truth Certainty and Evidence that either they are all granted by your selves or cannot be denied without shaking the very Foundations of Christianity 2. That those which you proceed upon are some of them untrue and most of them dubious and questionable none of them able to bear the weight that you lay upon them and some of them such as the admission of would give just cause to question the whole Truth of Christian Religion And both these S r I crave leave to manifest unto you whereby you may the better judg whether the Scripture or your Church be the best way to bring men unto settlement in Religion which is the thing enquired after 1. Protestants lay down this as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the very beginning and first Principle of their confidence and Confession that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God as the Holy Ghost teacheth them 2 Tim. 3. 16. That is that the Books of the Old and New Testament were all of them written by the immediate guidance direction and inspiration of God the hand of the Lord as David speaks 1 Chron. 28. 19. being upon the Penmen thereof in writing and his Spirit as Peter informs us speaking in them 1 Pâ—t 1. 11. So that whatever is contained and delivered in them is given out from God and is received on his Authority This Principle I suppose you grant to be true do you not if you will deny it say so and we will proceed no farther untill we have proved it I know you have various wayes laboured to undermine the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Holy Scriptures many Queries you put unto men How they can know it to be from God to be true from Heaven and not of men many scruples you indeavour to possess them with against its Authority it is not my present business to remove them It is sufficient unto mee 1. That you your selves who differ from us in other things and with whom our contest about the best way of coming to settlement in the Truth alone is do acknowledg this Principle were proceed upon to be true And 2. That yee cannot oppose it without setting your selves to digge up the very foundations of Christian Religion and to open a way to let in an inundation of Atheism on the world So our first step is fixed on the grand fundamentall Principle of all the Religion and acceptable worship of God that is in the world 2. They affirm that this Scripture evidenceth it self by many infallible 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be so given by Inspiration from God and besides is witnessed so to be by the Testimony of the Church of God from the dayes of Moses wherein it began to be written to the dayes wherein we live our Lord Christ and his Apostles asserting and confirming the same Testimony which Testimony is conveyed unto us by uninterrupted Catholick Tradition The first part of this Position I confess some of you deny and the latter part of it you generally all of you pervert confining the Testimony mentioned unto that of your present Church which is a very inconsiderable part of it if any part at all But how groundlesly how prejudicially to the verity and honour of Christian Religion in generall you do these things I shall briefly shew you Some of you I say deny the first part of this Assertion so doth Andradius Defens Concil Trident. Lib. 3. Neque enim saith he in ipsis Libris quibus Sacra Mysteria conscripta sunt quicquam inest Divinitatis quod nos ad Credendum qua illis continentur religione aliqua constring at Neither is there in the Books themselves wherein the holy Mysteries are written any thing of Divinity that should constrain us by vertue of any religious respect thereunto to believe the things that are contained in them Hence Cocleus Lib. 2. de Authoritate Eccles. Script gathers up a many instances out of the Book of the Scripture which he declares to be altogether incredible were it not for the Authority of the Church I need not mention any more of your Leaders concurring with them you know who is of the same mind with them if the Author of Fiat Lux be not unknown to you Your resolving Vniversal Tradition into the Authority of your present Church to which end there is a Book written not long since by a Jesuit under the name of Vincentius Severinus is no less notorious Some of you I confess are more modest and otherwise minded as to both parts of our Assertion See Malderus Episcop Antwerp de Object Fidei qu. 1. Vaselius Groningen de Potestat Eccles. Epist. ad Jacob. Hock Alliacens in Lib. 1. Sentent Artic. 3. Gerson Exam. dos part 2. Consid. 1. Tom. 1. sol 105. and in twenty other places But when you come to deal with Protestants and consider well the Tendency of this Assertion you use I consess an hundred rergiversations and are most unwilling to come to the acknowledgment of it and rather then suffer from it deny it downwright and that with Scurrilous reflections and Comparisons likening it as to any characters of Gods truth and Holiness upon it unto Livy's Story yea Aesops Fables or a Piece of Poetry And when you have done so you apply your selves to the canvasing of Stories in the Old Testament and to find out appearing Contradictions and tell us of the uncertainty of the Authors of some particular Books that the whole is of its self a dead letter which can prove nothing at all enquiring Who told us that the Penmen of it were divinely inspired seeing they testify no such things of themselves and if they should yet others may do and have done so who notwithstanding were not so inspired and ask us Why we receive the Gospel of Luke who was not an Apostle and reject that of Thomas who one with many the like Cavilling Exceptions But 1. That must needs be a bad Cause which stands in need of such a Defence Is this the voice of Jacob or Esau Are these the expressions of Christians or Pagans from whose