the discourse it self I know in writing a Play to have Rank'd the plot in the Front of it and to make the whole design of the Prologue to be the Key to uncipher the plot of the Play though anciently in use had been now not only out of fashion but beside reason For the design of Plays aiming chiefly to please the senses they ought to be compounded and mixt with hopes and fears certainties and uncertainties expectations and delays of the event of the plot which being all so interwoven together creates the agreeableness of the Play for when once the whole plot is discovered the pleasure of the Play is ended like Hare-Hunting the sport lies not in presently taking the Hare but in following him in all his Rings and Doubles And those that love Plays and such Huntings resemble jealous men who eagerly pursue what they apprehend to overtake or as old Age which we all pray to attain but fear to approach But now I come to soar my discourse to a much higher pitch and a more Elevated Subject and to treat of the most noble part of man the Soul and of true Religion the only way to Heavenly felicity For without Holiness no man shall see the Lord. We must therefore now Madam change the Scene of sense for a spiritual one and climb where earthly nature can never follow us to the pure and high Region of Heaven which will inform us that the earlier discovering our plot of attaining Heaven will but better the play and the more speed the better success For the joys of Heaven are everlasting and admit of no increase or diminution not like the divertisements of Stage-plays or Hunting or any earthly delights which cannot last but for a season and decay in our very injoying them and must soon leave us or we them But Heavenly thoughts the more and longer we practice them the better we shall like them Heavenly joys so far exceeding all we can here leave as they are all we can ever aspire to have This we all know but few of us practice and we all love God but few love to keep his Commandments I shall therefore now Madam tell you as the Prologue to my insuing discourse that the grand Plot and whole design of it moves chiefly on these two hinges First in confirming you that the foundation of the Protestant Religion is built on God's holy Word the Scriptures which we Protestants esteem to be a perfect Rule of Faith and guide to our actions and true Touch-stone to try all matters by that relate to the good of our Souls as certainly containing in it all â—…hings necessary to our salvation The second thing I â—…hiefly design to prove is that neither the Pope or the Popish Church are infallible and these two shall make â—…p the principle stories in the little Model of this small â—…uilding The pretended infallibility of the Church of Rome is the grand perswasive Argument and lure to inâ—…ite men to it and the strongest commanding Garrison 〈…〉 all the Popes power and all other Arguments and â—…erswasions are but like the small open Villages about â—…his Garrison which must be servants to them that are â—…asters of it and if a Papist can be but once convinc'd â—…hat neither the Pope nor the Popish Church are inâ—…llible they will soon be brought to reason and our reâ—…aining differences will not be very considerable I â—…hall therefore only lightly discourse on them and shall â—…o further trouble you Madam than briefly to answer â—…hem in my own defence as I meet them or as they â—…ollow me and shall only do as the Wolf does when â—…ursued snap and bite in his own defence against all â—…pposers without altering his pace or changing his â—…oad I shall neither meddle with the Papists but as 〈…〉 meet them in the way or towards making of my way â—…o my two designed points which are as I said before â—…o prove the Scripture to be a perfect Rule of Faith and â—…uide to our actions and to answer as I go the Papists â—…ain Arguments and Objections against it Next that 't is against all Scripture and Reason that eiâ—…her the Pope or the Popish Church should be infallible which is the main design of this discourse and if I can by God's assistance make but the Papists believe reason when â—…gainst their own Church I doubt not but by this little Pigmie-discourse as very dwarfish as 't is not only to â—…inder many tottering Protestants from turning Papists â—…ut to bring some stubborn Papists to turn Protestants or â—…t least not to have such an infallible good opinion of their Church and so damnable a bad one of ours And now Madam 't is requisite that this my discourse â—…hould be ended as soon as your Patience and therefore â—…ll that I shall add either to the excusing my self or justifying Mr. Chillingworth is that thus far of this discourse being my own writing I confess deserves only my Apology and scarce your perusal but the following discourse being extracted out of Mr. Chillingworth deserves your reading but needs not any Apology And because I find the word Protestant is so badly and over-largely interpreted I shall first acquaint you that wâ—… are not to understand by the word Protestant the Doctrinâ—… of Luther or Calvin or Geneva or only the Articles oâ—… the Church of England but that wherein they all agreâ—… with perfect Harmony That the Bible is a perfect Rulâ—… of our Faith and guide to our Actions and this afteâ—… having made the most diligent and impartial search of thâ—… true way to Eternal happiness I fully believe and thaâ—… we can never find any convincing satisfaction but on thiâ—… Rock of God's word the Bible which I conceive to bâ—… the only true Religion of Protestants If the Pope were indeed what he unjustly says he is and the Papists unreasonably believe him to be an infallible guide then there needed no Bible but if the Bible be then there needs no Pope For if I were to go a Journey anâ—… had a guide that could not err what need I be taught thâ—… way and having such a guide what need I apply mâ—… self to another So that in a word let us inform ouâ—…selves the best we can and consider as much as we please 〈…〉 the more consideration we take the more confirmation we shall find that there is no other foundation foâ—… a considering Christian to build an assured dependency onâ—… than the Scriptures For I am fully assur'd that God doeâ—… not and therefore man ought not to require of anâ—… more than this to believe the Scripture to be the word 〈…〉 God to use our best indeavours to find the true sensâ—… of it and to live to our utmost according to it This I am sure in reason we ought to believe a wiser choice than if I should guide my self by the Romaâ—… Churches Authority and Infallibility when really they have nothing of certainty but their uncertainty
then 't is most evident that their Church was a most excellent keeper of Scripture for Fifteen hundred years together that had not all that time defin'd what was Scripture and what was not but if the Papists say they had then we demand Was that set forth by Pope Sixtus Quintus or was it set forth by Pope Clement or if by a third different from them both why do they not name him if it were that set forth by Pope Sixtus then 't is now condemn'd by Pope Clement if that of Clement 't was condemned by that of Sixtus So that error must necessarily be betwixt them let them chuse which side they please And for the Book of Maccabees I hope they will allow it defin'd Canonical before St. Gregorie's time though he would not allow it Canonical but only for the Edification of the Church We further desire to be satisfied of the Papists if the Books of Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom and the Epistle to St. James were by the holy Apostles approved Canonical or not if they were approved by the Apostles Canonical sure the Papists cannot deny but they had a sufficient difinition and authority not to question them and therefore err'd in doing so And if they were not approved Canonical by the Apostles with what impudence dare the Roman Church now approve them as Canonical and yet pretend that all their Doctrine is Apostolical And if they say these Books were not questioned they should do well to tell which Books they mean which were not always known to be Canonical but have afterwards been receiveed by the Roman Church to be such so that this Argument reaches those as well as these And further we are to consider that there is not the same reasons for the Churches absolute Infallibility as for the Apostles and Scriptures for if the Church falls into an error it may be reformed by comparing it with the Rules of the Apostles Doctrine in Scripture but if the Apostles have err'd in delivering the Doctrine of Christianity in Scripture then the Roman Church cannot be infallible For Apostles Prophets and Canonical Writers and the foundation of the Church as St. Paul says 't is built upon the foundation of Apostles and Prophets And now to conclude this part of my discourse in very few words let the Papists answer if they can but these five words All Scripture is Divinely inspired Let them shew us so much for the Roman Church and shew us if they can where 't is written in Scripture that all the decrees of the Popish Church are Divinely inspired and all our Controversies will be at an end but I believe they can never do that without another Transubstantiation-Miracle of words The Papists desire us to shew them an exact Catalogue of our fundamentals to which we answer That God may be sufficiently known to one and not sufficiently declared to another and consequently that may be fundamental and necessary to one which is not to another which variety of circumstances renders it impossible to set down an exact Catalogue of Fundamentals for God requires more of them to whom he gives more and less of those to whom he gives less more of a commander of a Kingdom than a poor simple Turnspit 'T is a plain revelation of God to us Protestants that the Sacrament of the Eucharist should be administred in both kinds 1 Cor. 11. 28. that the publick Hymns and Prayers of the Church should be in such a Language as is most for Edification 1 Cor. 14. 15 16. yet the Church of Rome not seeing this by reason of the vail would be very angry if we told them 't would prejudice their supposed Infallibility We read in St. Matthew that the Gospel was to be Preacht to all Nations and this was a truth revealed before our Saviours Ascention yet if the Church had been asked before the conversion of Cornelius they would have certainly told you it had not been necessary to teach all Nations for 't is most apparent out of Acts 11. they all believed so until St. Peter was better informed by a vision from Heaven and the conversion of Cornelius and then they turn'd quite of a differing belief and esteemed it necessary to teach all Nations and yet were still a Church The Papists are pleased to say the Protestants differ in Fundamentals which indeed appears to us very irrational For if they say We Protestants differ in Fundamentals how then can they say We are members of the same Church one with another more than they are with ours or ours with theirs and why do they object our difference more with one another than with themselves and if we do not differ in Fundamentals why do they upbraid us with Fundamental differences amongst our selves We believe the Catholick Church cannot perish yet we believe she may and did err as I prov'd just before but thus much we Protestants declare in general That we esteem it sufficient for any mans salvation to believe God's Word the Scripture and that it contains all things necessary to our salvation and that we do our utmost endeavours to find believe and follow the true sense of it and being we are sure that all that is any way necessary is there believing all that is there we are sure we believe all that is necessary And therefore 't is but reasonable to say that any private person who truly believes the Scriptures and heartily endeavours to know the Will of God and to do it is as secure nay securer from the danger of erring in Fundamentals than the Roman Church for 't is impossible any man so qualified should fall into an error that can prove damnable to him for God requires no more of any man to his salvation but only his true and best endeavours to be saved And for the Papists Sacrament of Confession which they hold is so absolute and nenessary and so much upbraid us for the want of it we answer We know no such absolute necessity of it but yet we hold we must not only confess our sins but forsake them or we shall not find mercy And we Protestants farther believe that they that confess their sins shall find mercy though they only confess them to God and not to Man And more that they who confess them both to God and Man and do not in time forsake them shall not find mercy And so for the Papists Sacrament of Repentance for Remission of sins tho we Protestants know no such yet we allow observe the same Duty but publick before the Church which was the constant practice of the primitive Church and Rhenanus himself though so great a Champion for the Papists writes That the confession then used was before the Church and that Auricular confession was not then in the World. The Papists will tell you that our Bishops have not the true power of Ordination but that has been so clearly answered and so truly proved at large by so many already as I
him as Universal Bishop over the whole Catholick Church but his not doing so argued he esteemed him Bishop only of one Church And further St. Cyprian all know did resolutely oppose a Decree of the Roman Bishop and all that adhered â—…o him in that one point of Rebaptizing which the Popish Church at that time delivered as a necessary Tradition and Excommunicated the Bishops of Capadocia Galatia and all that were against that Tradition and would not so much as allow them lodging or entertainment in Rome Now since the Papists affirm that not to Rebaptize those whom Hereticks had Baptized to be a damnable Heresie 'T is well worth asking the Papists when this begun to be so for if they say from the beginning it was so then they must maintain a contradiction for then was St. Cypriaâ—… a Professor of damnable Heresie and yet the Papists esteeâ—… him a Saint and Martyr And on the other side if 't were not so from the beginning then did the Pope wrongfully Excommunicate those other Churches of Cappadocia and Galatia without sufficienâ—… ground of Excommunication and separation which by theiâ—… own Tenents is Schismatical So let them chuse which sidâ—… they please the Pope was in an error And tho Victor Bishop of Rome obtruded the Roman Tradition touching the time of Easter upon the Asian Biships under the pain of Excommunication and Damnation yet we read that Irenaeus and all the other Western Bishops though they did agree with the Bishop of Rome in his Observation of Easter yet they did sharply reprehenâ—… his Excommunicating the Asian Bishops for their disagreeing with him which most plainly argues that the Western Bishops thought that not a sufficient ground of Excommunication which the Bishop of Rome did and therefore it must necessarily follow they did not esteem the Roman Bishop infallible nor the separation from the Church of Rome an Heresie And this I am sure is true and undeniable reason The Popish Story tells us That Optatus Bishop of Rome upbraided the Donatists as Schismaticks because they held no Communion with the Church of Rome by adding afterwards that they were Schismaticks for they held no Communion with the Seven Churches of Asia which occasions this Question of the Papists Whether a separation from these seven Apostolick Churches was a mark of Heresie or not If they say it was not how comes it that the Pope's Authority is a stronger Argument for the Popish Church than the Asian Authority for the Asian Churches And if the Papists say a separation from those seven Asian Churches was a mark of Heresie then they must confesâ—… their Church was for many years Heretical as separating many years from the Asian Churches And Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus and Metropolitan of Asia despised the Pope's Vniversal Supremacy and Authority and kept contrary to the Pope Easter-day the Fourteenth of March. And indeed tho the Papists do so much quote the authority of the Fathers yet I find they as little befriend their Churches Infallibility as the Asian Bishops themselves have done for tho the Papists say St. Hierome conceived it nenessary to conform in matters of Faith to the Church of Rome yet before the Papists brag of that let them answer us this How came it then to pass that St. Hierome chose to believe the Epistle to the Hebrews Canonical upon the authority of the Eastern Church and to reject it from the Canon of the Roman Churches Authority And how comes it also that he dissented from the Roman Church touching the Canon of the Old Testament Let the Papists take heed of losing their Fort by endeavouring to maintain their out-works And now to conclude this point and excuse the Papists mistake concerning their universal Bishop we read in Scripture of the Prophet Elias who thought there was none â—…eft beside himself in the whole Ringdom of Israel who had not revolted from God and yet God himself is pleased to assure us he was deceived And if a Prophet and one of the greatest err'd in his judgment touching his own time Country why may not the Papists subject to the same passions err in their opinion and judgment about the Popes being Vniversal Bishop when plain reason tells them as well as us that there were other Bishops as much Vniversal as the Pope I now come to examine this infallible Pope whether he cannot make his infallible Church more infallible than he has made himself and free the Popish Church from error tho he could not the Pope from Heresie Now towards the disproving the pretended Infallibility of the Roman Church I lay this as the foundation of my Discourse That the whole Roman Church can be no better than a Cengregation of Men whereof every particular not one excepted and consequently the generality is nothing but a collection of men and if every one be polluted as who dare say he is free from sin how can the whole but be defiled with error As reasonably may a man brag he is in perfect health and strength and yet at the same time confess he hath not one sound part about him And truly it very much creats my wonder but does not in the least satisfie my reason what the Papists can pretend by the Infallibility of their Church for if they will allow their Pope to be no better than St. Peter was their Church to bâ—… composed of no better men than the Holy Apostles were 〈…〉 shall desire no more and I am sure they can never provâ—… so much for they that pretend to it declare as great aâ—… ignorance as St. Peter did a sin in denying his Lord anâ—… Master and there are many other known circumstances which made St. Paul prove him blame-worthy to hiâ—… face And for the Apostles being in error we have not only the examples of the Apostles themselves who in the time of our Saviours Passion being scandalized lost their Faith in him and I believe the Papists will not say they could lose their faith in our blessed Saviour Christ without error and therefore our Saviour after his Resurrection upbraided them with their Incredulity and called Thomas incredulous for denying the Resurrection in the Twentieth oâ—… St. John. And further 't is most apparent that the very Apostleâ—… themselves even after the sending the Holy Ghost did through Inadvertency or Prejudice continue some time in an error contrary to a revealed Truth And if the Papists will not own to know this Truth they may be fully satisfied of it in the Story of the Acts of the Apostles where they may plainly read that notwithstanding our Saviours express warrant and injunction to the Apostles to go and preach to all Nations Yet notwithstanding till St. Peter was better informed by a Vision from Heaven and by the Conversion of Cornelius both St. Peter and the rest of the Church held it unlawful for them to go and Preach the Gospel to any but the Jews Now since we can prove that St. Peter did err
any one of them Nor is it reasonable to believe that St. Peter having authority over all the Apostles for above 25 years together should never shew the least power over any of them all that time nor so much as receive the lest subjection from them sure any one must think this as strange unreasonable as if a King of England for 25 years together should not do one act of Regality among his Subjects nor receive any one acknowledgment from them Nor sure is it less strange unreasonable that the Papists should so many Ages after know this so certainly as they pretend they do and yet that the Apostles themselves after that these words were spoak in their hearing by vertue whereof St. Peter is pretended to be made their head should still be so ignorant of it as to question our Saviour which of them should be the greatest By which sure we may rationally conclude they did not then know for if they did their question had been needless and superfluous in desiring to be taught what they already knew And what yet appears more strange than all is that our Saviour should not have helped them out of their error by telling them St. Peter was the man but rather confirmed them in the contrary by saying The Kings of the Gentiles exercise Authority over them but it should not be so among them And again it is as strange and unreasonable that St. Paul should so far forget both St. Peter and himself as in mentioning so often St. Peter he should still do it without ascribing him any title of Honour Nor does it stand with reason that St. Paul speaking of the several degrees of men in the Church should omit giving St. Peter the highest if it had been his due but place him in the same rank and equipage with the rest of the Apostles for St. Paul says God hath appointed not first St. Peter then the rest of the Apostles but first Apostles secondly Prophets now certainly if Apostles were all first that is all equal how could one be in greater power than the other But besides all this though we should grant against all these probabilities and many more that Optatus Bishop of Rome meant that St. Peter was Head of the Apostles yet sure the Papists are still very far from proving the Bishop of Rome was to be so at all much less by Divine right Successor to St. Peter in his Headship and Authority For what incongruity is there if we say that Optatus might succeed St. Peter as his Heir and Successor in that part of his Government of that particular Church of Rome as sure he did even whilst St. Peter was living and yet that neither he nor any man was to succeed him in his Apostleship nor in the Government of the Church Vniversal as tho a Bishop should leave his Son Heir to all he died possessed of I hope you will not conclude therefore he must necessarily succeed him in the Bishoprick he died seized of The Apostles were men all called and Divinely inspired by the Holy Ghost which was the immediate gift of God and therefore could not be left as a Legary by man for though it be in any mans power to leave his Estate yet 't is in no mans power to leave to his Son his acquir'd parts at his death 'T is further worth your observing and special notice that St. Peter himself and the rest of the Apostles by laying the Foundation of the Church were to be themselves the Foundation of it and are accordingly so called in Scripture And therefore as in a building 't is incongruous that foundations should succeed foundations so it may be in the Church that Apostles should succeed Apostles the Church being built upon Apostles and Prophets Nor indeed does the grand argument of the Papists for their Pope extend any further in reallity then the particular See of Rome for thus goes their main argument St. Peter was first Bishop of Rome and the Apostles did not then attribute to themselves each one his particular Chair understand in that City of Rome for in other places others had Chairs besides St. Peter and therefore says the Papists he is a Schismatick who against that one single Chair erects another understand still in the same place and this this the Ground and the Authority the Papists say the Pope has to be Successor to St. Peter and to exercise Authority over the Universal Church But sure the Protestants urge more rationally in arguing thus That St. Peter wrote Two Catholick Epistles in which he mentions his own departure and writes to preserve the Christians in the Faith but yet in neither of these Two Epistles does he commend the Christians to the guidance authority to his pretended Successor the Bishop of Rome which sure if St. Peter had intended he would never have forgot to have named it And since the Papists so reverence and adore the Popes power let us Protestants also admire his way and means of attaining this power For though the Papists say that as soon as he is made Pope he has his authority immediately from Christ yet at the very same time the Papists all know that he cannot be made Pope but by authority and Election of the Cardinals so that I am sure by the very same reason any man that is chosen a Magistrate in any Town under the Pope's Territories may claim his Authority as immediately received from Christ as well as the Pope And further that the proving his being made Pope does not render him infallible I could give a hundred instances out of the History of Popes but that will not suit well with my designed brevity but let 's ask the Papists if Liberius Bishop of Rome after Two years Banishment did not by the sollicitation of Fortunatianus Bishop of Aquileia subscribe to Heresie and consequently could not be infallible And though the Papists rely so much on the Authority of the Fathers to support and justifie the Infallibility of their Church yet upon true Examination we shall find they make no more for their Universal Bishop than St. Peter's Two Catholick Epistles do And for their arguing out of St. Cyprian's 55 Epistles that sure makes rather against than for them for there St. Cyprian writes to Cornelius Bishop of Rome but writes not so much to him as of himself who was Bishop of Carthage against whom a Faction of Schismaticks had set up another Bishop Now though the Papists say reasonably that 't is a mark of the Vniversal Bishop that other Bishops should make their Addresses unto the Bishop of Rome yet sure 't were better Reasoning to conclude thus If the Bishop of Rome had been acknowledged Universal Bishop and his Authority and Supremacy had been believ'd and own'd sure St. Cyprian had not been satisfied with only barely writing him his sad story for he did no more but doubtless would have made his complaint to him and desired and expected redress from
mouth and his own certain Knowledge and Experience A Gentleman of the Religion whose Wife was one of the Popish Frie sends for his own Pastor to discourse with him being upon his last bed of Sickness and ready to depart she likewise appoints a Jesuit to be there who appears accordingly and both meet at the Bed's-side both plead for their own different Religion and perswade the Man to come over to their Party but after two hours smart Disputation at the Bar before these Judges the Gentleman was very well satisfied with the Religion that he had hitherto embraced and his Consort also by the prevalence of the Protestants Arguments began to incline to his Judgement The Jesuit finding himself foil'd went away discontented but returns a few hours after when the storm was blown over and the Coast clear desiring a private Conference with the Gentlewoman which was granted and her Garden was the Scene appointed for the ensuing Tragedy where they took a turn or two together and the Jesuit very earnestly expostulated with her and used all the perswasive and inclining Arguments imaginable to keep her from that supposed and falsely termed Defection from the Truth viz. the change of Religion and in the close of all his Discourse did very much importune her to do him that signal Favour as to accept of a little Box like Pandor'as as it fell out which he then and there presented to her and to wear it constantly about her for his sake which she received as innocently as courteously little dreaming of the ensuing mischief that after befell her for she no sooner had followed his direction but she fell into so great and absolute a Detestation of her Husband that she could never endure the sight of him afterwards and within two days died in this miserable condition an Act fitter for the sharp Sword of revenging Justice than the Pen of an Historian They are a People disesteemed and ill thought of in most Places where-ever they get footing for their Impieties and and wicked Practices They have been banisht France Hungary Germany Venice nay the Grand Turk upon the relation of their Vileness by Queen Elizabeth's Ambassador exiled them out of Pera near Constantinople They are hated by the common People in Spain tho the Subjects of the most Catholick King as appears by this Libel Los mandamientes de los Teatinos Mas humanos son que Divinos The Precepts of the Jesuits Teatine Are much more Humane than Divine And after the enumeration of their Decalogue or ten Commandments as to grow Rich feed well c. it concludes thus Estos diez mandamièntes se encierrian en das Todo para mi y nada para vos These ten are compris'd in two All for me and nothing for you I did not promise you as I remember to give you an Essay of Jesuitical Piquancy but yet if you please take this as an Argument of their pregnant Wit related by the deceased Author of the Holy State who speaking of Queen Elizabeth stiles her deservedly the Paragon of spotless Chastity whatever some Popish Priests who count all Virginity hid under a Nun's Veile have feigned to the contrary He proceeds farther and says One Jesuit made this false Anagram on her Edmund Campian by name Elizabeth Jezabel false both in matter and manner for allow it the abatement of the H as all Anagrams must Sue in Chancery for moderate favour which proved tho no Letter a guttural aspiration to the Composer yet was it both unequal and ominous that T a solid Letter should be omitted the Presage of the Gallows whereon the Anagrammatist was afterwards justly executed When Flies grow once so blind as to play with the Candle they either sindge their wings or burn themselves and when ill-boading Ravens dare be so haughty and proud as to fly at the Eagle the King of Birds may they all have the same fate as the Brother of this Jesuitical breed before mentioned Now let us anatomize and diffect the Members of this Catholick and Universal Head of the Church and see how they stand affected whether they are fit for Physick or Amputation Of their Priests Friars Nuns and Laymen WE will still continue our Method and begin with the Blasphemies Oaths and Execrations of the inferiour Clergy the Monks and Friars those Cannibals of the Crucifix Italy abounds in Blasphemies more than any other Country and therein the Clergy are far better Proficients than the Laity or else He swears like an Abbot would not be Proverbial Nor do I think as it is that is to be matcht that was belch'd out by a Priest at Rome Al dispetto di quel Can che pendeva nella croce I forbear the English of it because 't is so horrid an Expression and what should move him to this think you Nothing as he confess'd but that his Strumpet had played him a slippery Trick as if there were no way to be even with his Whore but to revile his God. A ghostly Father Preaching at Tours in France said These Hugonots are so impudently wicked as to renounce the Pope and his Authority but I 'll be bold to tell you that if Christ and the Pope were both here upon Earth and the one should command me to do a Thing and the other forbid me I would sooner obey the Pope than Christ An Italian Preacher broacht this blasphemous Doctrine in the Pulpit before a great Auditory that the Virgin Mary would have crucified our Saviour rather than he should go without Crucifixion strengthning his blasphemous Discourse with this strange Allegation that it did proceed from the longing desire that his blessed Mother had to hasten the Salvation of Mankind There is another story related by the same Priest much of the same nature That the Apostles drew up Articles of Impeachment against Christ and presented them to his Mother complaining that he was not as good as his word in sending the Holy Ghost upon them and that there was a Dissention between the Father and the Holy Ghost who feared to descend from Heaven and come into the World lest he should have the same course Entertainment as our Saviour had from the murthering Jews Another Priest by relating the Agony that our Saviour endured at his painful and shameful Death on the Cross drew Rivulets of Tears from the Eyes of his compassionate Auditory but he dried up all their Sorrow with this point of Consolation Weep not my Beloved for perhaps it is not true But the Devil himself with all his Hellish Assistance could never invent such Blasphemies as are found in the Book of Conformities printed at Milain by Gotard Pontice Anno 1510. As that Christ changed Water into Wine but once St. Francis thrice Christ felt the Pain of his Wounds but a small time St. Francis two whole Years compleat As for Miracles Christ did nothing comparatively to St. Francis for he cured a 1000 Blind and as many Lame both Beasts and Men cast
witnesâ—… Pope against Pope Councils against Councils some of their Fathers against others and rather then fail some against themselves new Traditions inrolled and old ones Cashiered in a word one Church against another and if â—…hat be not enough the Church of one Age against the Church of another whereas the Scripture being true and â—…nalterable and containing all things necessary to our Salvation I am secure that by believing nothing else I shall â—…elieve no falshood in matter of Faith and if I mistake the â—…rue sense of Scripture and so fall into error yet I am secured â—…rom any dangerous error because whilst I am truly endeaâ—…ouring to find the true ground of Scripture I cannot but â—…old my error without obstinacy and be ready to forsake â—…t when more probable and true sense shall appear unto me and then being assur'd that all necessary truths are plainly â—…et down in Scripture I am certain by believing the Scripture â—…o believe all necessary truth and he that does so if his life be â—…nswerable to his Faith how is it possible he should fail of Salvation And tho the Roman Church pretend to be a perfect guide of Faith and teacher of all Divine Truths yet sure that â—…itle might much better and more justly be given to the â—…cirptures as their Teacher and Master The Roman Church brags how ancient their Church is but doubtless they cannot deny but the Scripture is more ancient â—…f they will but allow the Mother to be older than the Child The Papists say their Church is a means of keeping Chriâ—…tians at unity so are also the Scriptures to those that be â—…ieve them in unity of belief in matters necessary The Papists say their Church is Catholick certainly the Scripture is more Catholick for all true Christians in the universal world do now and ever did believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God so much at least as to contain all things necessary to salvation whereas the Papists say They only are the true Church and all other Christians tho more than they give them the lye for saying so By following the Scriptures I follow that whereby the Papists prove their Churches Infallibility For were it not for Scripture what pretence could the Papists have for it or what true Notion could they receive of it So that by so dong the Papists must plainly confess That they themselves are surer of the Truth of Scripture than of their Churches Authority for we must be surer of the proof than of the thing proved or else 't is no proof So that following Scripture I follow that which must be true if the Papists Church be true for their Church allows it's truth Whereas if I follow the Roman Church I must follow that which tho the Scripture be true may be false nay more must be false if the Scripture be true because the Scipture is against it Following the Papists Church I must be a servant to my Saviour and a subject to my King only at the pleasure of the Pope and renounce my Allegiance when the Popes will is to declare him an Heretick nay I must believe Vertue Vice and Vice Vertue if he pleases for he both makes and unmakes Scripture as he thinks convenient witness the Apocripha which hath not past for Canonical but of late years in the Papistâ—… Church who interpret Scripture according to their Doctrine but will not judge their Doctrine according to Scripture for none like to weigh light Mony in true scales In short the Pope adds and lessen and interprets Divine Laws as he pleases and they must stand for Laws and be obeyed as such so that in effect he rules his people by his own Laws and his own Laws by his own Lawyers his Clergy who dare not speak nor uphold them other than just such as the Pope would have them and indeed Cardinal Richelieu gave the reason why more hold the Pope above the Councils than the Councils above the Pope Because the Pope gave Archbishopricks and Bishopricks but the Councils had none to give And tho the Papists say his Holiness cannot err yet let not the Papists forget what God says in the Scripture if not only the Pope but if angel from Heaven shall preach any thing against the Gospel of Christ let him be accursed In following the Scripture we have God's express command and no colour of any prohibition but to believe the Papish Church infallible we have no Scripture-command at all much less an express one Following the Popish Church we must believe many things not only above reason but against reason witness Transubstantiation whereas following the Scripture we shall believe Many mysteries but no impossibilities many things above our reason but nothing against it Nay we need not believe any thing which reason will not convince us we ought to believe for reason will convince any sober Christian that the Scripture is the Word of God and there 's no reason can be greater than this That God says it therefore it must be true In a word we Protestants believe that all things necessary to our salvation are evidently contain'd in Scripture what is not there evidently contained cannot be necessary to be believed and our reason is just and clear Because nothing can challenge our Belief as to salvation but what hath descended to us from our Blessed Saviour Christ Jesus by original and universal Tradition Now nothing but Scripture hath thus descended to us therefore nothing but Scripture can challenge our Belief Now the grand difference between the Papists and us concerning the Scripture is this We hold the Scripture to be the only perfect rule whereby to judge of controversies The Papists say That they acknowledge the Scuriptures to be a perfect rule only they deny that it excludes unwritten Tradition which in effect is this they say 'T is as perfect a Rule as a Writing can be only they deny it to be as perfect a Rule as a Writing may be Either they must revoke their acknowledgment or retract their contradiction of it for both cannot possibly stand together For if they will but stand to what they have granted That Scripture is as perfect a Rule of Faith as a Writing can be they must then grant it so compleat as it needs no addition and so evident that it needs no interpretation for both these properties are requisite to a perfect Rule And that a writing is capable of both these properties and perfections is most plain for he that denies it must say that something may be spoken which cannot be written for if such a compleat evident rule of Faith may be delivered by word of mouth as the Papists pretend may is and whatsoever is delivered by word of mouth may also be written then such a compleat and evident rule of Faith may also be written For the Argument is most plain Whatsoever may be spoken may be written a perfect rule of Faith has been spoken therefore a perfect