to draw them into a submission and therefore especially do they account the Greeks to be Hereticks and Schismaticks though I know they lay some other things to their charge But besides the Greek Church there are multitudes of other Christians in several parts of the world who submit not to the Bishop of Rome So that this boast of their vast numbers in comparison of others is as false as it is weak For according to the computation of many learned men if all the Christians in the world were divided into four parts those who belong to the Romish Church where ever they are scattered would not make one quarter of them With what face then can they pretend that they alone are the whole Catholick Church As if there were no Christians in the world but themselves all the rest being Hereticks or Infidels or what they please to call them L. But they say these Churches are not Protestants T. Whether that name be proper to them or not it 's enough that they joyn with us in the most substantial points against the Papists As to the name of Protestants I before told you we do commonly understand by it those who have reformed themselves from the errors of the Romish Church and have cast off her authority which before she unjustly usurped over them And in this sense there are a great many large and flourishing Churches of them in these Western parts of the world besides numerous Plantations in the East and West-Indies especially in the latter where many of the Native Heathens have been converted by them But as to the Greeks and those other Churches who never were enslaved to the Bishop of Rome though the name of Protestant may not so fitly belong to them yet do they agree with us in utterly disowning the Supremacy of that Bishop which is the very fundamental Doctrine of the Romish Church by which especially they are distinguished from those of all other communions As to other points wherein the Romanists and the Reformed differ in some of them the Greeks agree with us in others with them But that which is most material to my purpose is this that all these Churches do hold the same essential Articles of Christian Doctrine with us They receive the same holy Scriptures and the same ancient Creeds in which our faith is contain'd but then they reject many of those additions which in latter times have been made by pretended General Councils of the Roman Church Particularly I say they deny the Supremacy and Infallibility of that Church the chief of their new Doctrines By this therefore judg whose faith is most Catholick or Universal whilst many of their fundamental Articles as they esteem them are rejected by all Christian Churches besides themselves who are not a fourth part of Christendom whereas all the Articles of our Faith are embraced by all these Churches yea even by the Church of Rome it self for as I have often said the sum of our Faith and Religion is in the Apostles Creed and this hath been received by the whole Catholick Church in all times and places and the Roman Church also retains it though she has added new Articles to it But if she has any good pretence to the title of being part of the Catholick Church it must be upon account of her receiving and professing this same Christian Faith which we together with the whole Church of Christ do hold and not on account of those new Articles she has added which are so generally disown'd both by us and all other Christians in the world except their own party and which were utterly unknown to the Catholick Church for many ages after our Saviour Judge then I say whose faith is most Catholick theirs or ours L. I confess there seems little difficulty in the case but yet I have heard them oft object that ours is for the most part a Negative Religion made up of Negative Articles as that the Pope is not Head of the Church that there is no Purgatory no Transubstantiation c. Now they say we find no such Negative Doctrines in the Catholick Church of old and therefore we do herein differ from it T. To this the answer is exceeding easie that we hereby only reject those corrupt additions which the Romish Church hath made to the ancient Catholick Faith And their obtruding these falshoods on the world gave occasion for such Negative Articles as those you mention which we now look upon as very necessary to shew that we keep close to the ancient Rule of Faith delivered by Christ and his Apostles which Faith we keep entire and do express it most positively and plainly as we have it in the Creed But the Novelties which the Romish Church hath added to this we do utterly deny and reject As for instance when the Bishops of that Church many hundred years after our Saviour make a new claim of an Universal Jurisdiction over all Christian Churches we think it most just and necessary to disown all such his Supremacy as being no where taught in the Gospel nor mention'd in the Creed nor own'd by the Primitive Church The same we declare concerning their other Doctrines of Purgatory and Transubstantiation that we believe them nor So we also teach that there ought to be no worship of Images no Invocation of Saints or Angels c. and all this for the same reason because no where injoyn'd by our Saviour or his Apostles nor establish'd in any of the four first General Councils which we readily embrace but rather the contrary to these is either expressly taught or plainly enough insinuated And if the Church of Rome shall still go on to coin new Articles we shall as occasion is offered still be as ready to reject them declaring them to be no part of our Faith And by this means we do best manifest our conformity to the Catholick Church in all ages contenting our selves with that Faith which she hath ever profest and transmitted to posterity And here it is a most ridiculous thing for them to bid us shew where the Church of old held such Negative Articles as we now do since these were not like to be heard of before the errors that occasion'd them were introduced As when the Judaizing Christians taught the necessity of keeping Moses Law then the Apostles denied it and establish'd the contrary Now suppose this error had not been broach'd till some hundred years after had it not been sufficient for the Christians then to say that the Apostles never taught it who revealed the whole Counsel of God and therefore certainly it could be no part of their faith And so say we of the Doctrines before mention'd the Popes Supremacy the worship of the Blessed Virgin and the like if these had been so necessary as Papists hold we should hear of them in our Saviours Sermons or in some of the Epistles written by the Apostles to several Churches or sure we should meet with them in the writings
they may be eased there or released thence by the Masses that are said for them or by the alms that were either left by themselves or are given by their friends on their behalf L. But he attempts to prove both a Purgatory and praying for the Dead from 2 Mac. 12. where it 's said to be an holy and healthful cogitation to pray for the Dead that they may be freed from their sins that is says he from venial sins for of mortal no pardon can hereafter be obtain'd T. To let pass his distinction of venial and mortal sins is he not think you reduced to miserable straits when he is forced to run to the Apocrypha for a Text to a Book which was never own'd for Canonical by the Iewish Church no nor by the Christian Church in St. Ierome's time which was about four hundred years after our Saviour Neither yet will this Text serve their turn for if you look into the place you will find that when Iudas went to bury those that were slain he found under their coats things consecrated to Idols whereupon both he and the rest that were with him betook themselves to earnest prayer for the pardon of this great sin which prayer might respect the living rather than the dead that God would not punish the rest of the people for this their crime And for the very same reason might he send money to Ierusalem to offer a sin-offering as is after related And though another gloss is put upon it in the History as if all this were done for the dead yet may this be the Historians own opinion or perhaps rather his that abridged the History for Chap. 2. 23. he tells you that he abridged five Books of Iason and at the end begs pardon for what he may have done amiss which is not like the stile of an inspired Writer But what if Iudas's design was indeed such as the Historian relates Is his example a sufficient warrant for us when we have no rule for it in the Word of God Nay nor yet after all will this Text justifie their Doctrine of Purgatory since here 's nothing said of any pains they were in at present only he might hope to procure mercy for them at the Resurrection L. But pray was not this sin of Idolatry a mortal one for which according to their own Doctrine sinners go to Hell and not to Purgatory therefore by their principles this practice of Judas cannot be allow'd T. Very true but for this Bellarmine has a shift at hand that Iudas in charity hoped they might repent just when they were at the point of death and therefore in that hope offered those Sacrifices But I wonder how he came to know Judas's thoughts so well and 't is hard to imagine what time they should have for repentance who were slain in the battel Has your Author no better proof out of Scripture for his opinion than this comes to L. He names no more Texts but these T. And truly he might as well have named none at all Others do insist on some other places but to as little purpose which I shall not now take notice of since I suppose he took these for the strongest and you see what little strength there is in them L. I hear them speak much of the custom of the ancients in praying for the dead T. But herein they are guilty of great sophistry and foul dealing for the prayers anciently used were nothing like those that are now in the Romish Church nor do they in the least prove the ancient Christians belief of a Purgatory For they in their prayers made a commenmoration of the most eminently pious and holy persons even of Prophets Apostles and Martyrs as an honour to their memory blessing and praising God for them in some sort as we do in our Church at the end of the Prayer for the Church militant where we bless God for all his Saints and servants departed this life in his faith and fear c. Besides this they prayed for their joyful Resurrection and the consummation of their happiness which was in effect no more than to pray for the coming of Christ when all believers shall be advanced to the height of glory And not unlike this is an expression in our Liturgy in the Office for Burial where we pray That God would accomplish the number of his Elect and hasten his Kingdom that we with all those who are departed in the true faith of his holy name may have our perfect consummation and bliss both in body and soul in his eternal glory And yet it 's well known how far our Church is from acknowledging a Purgatory neither therefore from any such expressions used in their prayers can it rationally be concluded that the Church anciently own'd this opinion Of this you may find a full account in A. B. Usher's answer to the Jesuits Challenge But if among some of the Ancients there may be found expressions that go somewhat farther than what I have named yet for many ages there was nothing like to the present practice of the Church of Rome Neither doth it beseem us in such cases to be governed by any other authority than what is Divine Now we certainly know there is not one place of Scripture either in the Old Testament or the New where we have any command given us to offer up prayers for the dead nor any promise made that if we do so it shall any thing avail or help them Our Lord has taught us nothing of this in his most comprehensive form Nor do we find one example of it recorded in all the Bible How dare we then in so weighty a matter make such addresses to God when we have no manner of encouragement or allowance so to do wherefore for this very reason amongst others a man cannot lawfully joyn with the Romish Church in her prayers L. Since there is nothing from Scripture or the best antiquity to justifie this practice what is it that Papists most relye upon in this case T. Even upon pretended revelations and a company of ridiculous Monkish stories of Souls appearing after their decease begging help from their friends that they might be delivered out of the pains of Purgatory But whatever tales they tell in their fabulous Legends we that read the holy Scriptures can find nothing there of any such place or pains The wicked go into ever lasting punishment and the righteous into life eternal but not a word said of a Purgatory for either of these or of a middle state for some middle sort of men that are neither to be ranked amongst the wicked nor the righteous L. But is there not a middle state for souls commonly acknowledged by Protestant Divines T. This much I think they generally acknowledg that the souls of good men being separate from the body are not suddenly advanced to the utmost height of happiness nor will be till the Resurrection and great Judgment-day neither it 's
yea as an affront for any man to employ some Courtier for that purpose And in our Case it 's very unreasonable since we are fully assured that our Blessed Saviour knows our wants and desires and is both able and willing to assist us but as I have said we have no such assurance that this or that Saint hath any knowledge of us and our affairs or can afford us help and relief L. I see no manner of reason why we should make use of any other Mediators beside the Lord Iesus who alone is able to save to the uttermost all that come to God by him T. But beside all this however they pretend that they only pray to Saints to pray to God for them it is most evident that they do make some such Addresses to Saints especially to the Blessed Virgin as do import much more even such as are proper only to be used to Almighty God himself For instance they devote themselves to her Service and Honour resign themselves to her will and pleasure commend themselves and their affairs to her protection and guidance make Vows to her in their distress offer thanks and praise to her for their deliverance beg her assistance in all difficulties and dangers particularly at their last hour All this with much more to the same purpose frequently used in their devotions to her speaks somewhat more surely than to desire her barely to intercede for them Yea those expressions which may be thus interpreted are yet delivered in such a manner without any mention of her interceding that whatever notion the more knowing and learned may have yet most likely it is that common people take the words as they sound and seek assistance from her as they do from Almighty God and our Saviour And no wonder when their supplications are made to her as to the Queen of Heaven their Lady and Governess one who hath a mighty power in Heaven and Earth and is the very mother of Mercy and Pity What does all this serve for but to make her a kind of Goddess one invested with Divine Power and Glory This is done especially in that they call our Ladies Psalter wherein is applied to her all or most of that which is ascribed to God himself in the Book of Psalms Nay as is yet to be seen in some of their old Missals they give her still the power of a Mother over her Son in Heaven and desire her to command him to do this and that by virtue of that her power which one of their Writers excuses as a kind of Religious dalliance but others more modest and ingenuous have found fault with these things and acknowledge they ought to be reformed yea they have plainly exprest their fears that the common people amongst them do worship Saints and Angels in much-what the same manner as the Heathens of old did their Daemons and Heroes and inferiour Deities having particular Saints for particular cases and turns as the Heathens had their several Deities for several places and purposes Nor is it any wonder if the poor people give that worship to these which is due to God alone when their Learned men make such nice distinctions betwixt them as are not easie to be understood or remembred whilst they talk of Worship superiour and inferiour relative subordinate and the like To God they grant belongs the highest fort of Worship which they call Latria then to Angels and Saints they allow a lower kind which they call Dulia and to the Blessed Virgin Mary somewhat betwixt both which they call Hyper-dulia which they say is but little below what is to be given to God himself Now what subtil Doctor of them all can fix the just bounds and terms betwixt these Or if he could yet how easie is it for the people to mistake and transgress those bounds giving perhaps to a common Saint what is due to the Blessed Virgin and to her what belongs to God alone At best then the people are in great danger of Idolatry and utterly inexcusable are their Leaders who betray them into this danger L. And yet my Author very severely inveighs against us Protestants as having no good and sound belief because we pay not due honour and reverence to the Saints especially for that we will not pray to the Virgin-Mother whose authority he says doubtless must needs be very great T. But in the mean time what good authority has he for that which he asserts with so much confidence The Holy Scripture is utterly silent in this matter and so are the most Ancient Writers in the Christian Church They speak not one word of her Authority in Heaven nor of any Worship to be given her by those on Earth Nay when this Superstition began first to creep in amongst some silly Women one of those Writers about Four hundred years after our Saviour declaims against it and utterly disallows it Judge therefore what a wise and charitable censure this is that we Protestants have no good belief because forsooth we do not pray to the Blessed Virgin What! is our Belief not good because it is not strong enough to give credit to all the idle ridiculous stories which their fabulous Legends tell of her or any other Saint This it 's confest we cannot do but yet we readily believe all that the Holy Scriptures or any good and credible Authors relate And what a malicious slander is it that we give her no Honour Since though we do not worship her as a Goddess or the Queen of Heaven and the Mother of Mercy yet we give her all that honour which either God's Word requires or the Ancient Christians gave According to her own prediction and the Language of the Angel we do most justly stile her Blessed among Women Her name is precious and honourable and her memory sacred amongst us We bless God for the Graces he bestowed on her and most gratefully commemorate his Mercy to her in advancing her to that singular honour of being the Virgin-Mother of the ever-blessed Jesus the Son of God and Saviour of Mankind Yet all this while according to her own example Our souls do magnify the Lord and our spirit rejoyceth in God our Saviour And to do otherwise to give Divine Honour to any creature were to correct the Magnificat as we use to speak yea directly to contradict it Nay may I not add that such worshippers do offer the highest affront and dishonour to the Blessed Virgin whilst they imagine she can be well pleased with their Adorations and Prayers and with such fulsom flatteries and praises as their Devotions to her are commonly stuffed with As if now in Heaven she had lost all that humility which when on Earth made her so esteemed of God and Men. Certainly if we can guess any thing of the temper of Saints in Glory by what they were here in the World such Worship and Invocation must needs be very displeasing to them if they have any knowledge of
upon it and by leaving most if not all of it out of many of their Books of devotion written in any vulgar Tongue I suppose lest the Consciences of the people should take check when they see practices so directly contrary to the Divine Precept For the great business of these their Guides seems to be not so much to lead them into Truth as to make them follow with ease where-ever they lead them L. 'T is a wonder why they should thus hazard themselves and the people whilst there appears no plausible pretence for it either from Reason or Scripture nor can I see any advantage they can hope for equal to the hazard they run T. Some pretences they have though very slender ones viz. That their Images make for the honour of Christ and the Saints for the instruction of common people and the raising of their affections Pictures being stiled Lay-mens Books But on the contrary the great God is hereby dishonoured and his Commands disobey'd and consequently our Blessed Saviour is displeased and the Saints themselves disgraced and affronted by such perverse ways of doing them honour And whilst the people have their senses perhaps gratified and their fancies pleased with the beholding and worshipping of rich and beautiful Images their minds this while are corrupted and debased true spiritual devotion is in a manner extinguished their Consciences are defiled and their Souls endangered by such Idolatrous practices L. How great is their crime then who draw them into these snares T. Great it is indeed beyond expression God grant they themselves may in time consider of it how they shall ever be able to answer it when the Blood of Souls shall be required at their hands by him who died to save them And besides the mischief done to those within the Church how many thousands by this practice of theirs are kept out of it For both Turks and Iews look upon those Christians as Idolaters who are guilty of this Image-worship and on that account are prejudiced against Christianity it self Thus do they harden these men in their infidelity whilst they defile themselves and those in their Communion with Idolatry L. Yet after all the Papists take it very hainously to be accused of Idolatry and some amongst our selves think this to be too heavy a charge T. Let them take it as they will and let others mince the matter as they please most certainly they are guilty of violating the Second Commandment and this violation of it by worshipping of Images hath as I have said been heretofore accounted and called Idolatry both by the Ancient Iews and by the Primitive Christians who utterly detested the same And if now a softer name must be devised for it let any man call it as he pleases still it must be looked upon as a gross impiety and a notorious breach of God's Holy Law which is enough to work an abhorrence of it in the minds of all good Christians But I 'le enlarge no further on this subject rather I shall refer you to the elaborate Discourses of that incomparable person Dr. Stillingfleet Dean of St. Pauls where you will find it handled to your full satisfaction Or in the mean time I would recommend to you the Homilies of our Church concerning the peril of Idolatry where you will find this Churches opinion of Image-worship viz. that it is downright Idolatry and there you may learn how far the Ancient Christians in the first and purest Ages of the Church were from this corrupt practice how it was ordained by an ancient Council that nothing painted on the Walls should be worshipped and how one of the Fathers in great displeasure tore a Veil in a Church in which he found a Picture fearing it might be an occasion of worshipping it and wrote earnestly to the Bishop of the place about it There also you have a large account of the rise of this practice in the more corrupt and declining times about Six or Seven hundred years after our Saviour and what opposition was then made to it by the better sort of Christians by what weak Arguments it was defended by what ill arts in some places established what bad effects it produced and how by degrees the people were sunk into all that gross Superstition and Idolatry which had overspread the Roman Church and particularly this Kingdom at the time of the Reformation This with much more to the same purpose you will there find discovered and will see what great reason there was for reforming the Church from this as well as many other corruptions and abuses wherewith we were over-run L. I shall gladly peruse these Homilies when I have opportunity being already very sensible that the worship of Images is a most dangerous and unlawful Custom a meer innovation in the Church and a plain breach of the Second Commandment and therefore well deserves to be branded with the infamous name of Idolatry from which God preserve me T. So it has been reckoned and commonly stiled by our Church and by those of our Divines who were most instrumental in the Reforming it and have been most eminent for the defence of it Good Reason you have therefore stedfastly to resolve against it But let us now proceed to what remains CHAP. XIII Of Praying by Beads L. THE next thing my Author attempts to vindicate is their praying by Beads which serve to number their Pater Nosters and Ave-Maries of which as I perceive by him Sixty three Ave-Maries and Seven Pater-nosters and one Creed make a Bead-roll T. Very like and this number as I take it they call our Ladies Crown and an Hundred and Fifty Ave Maries and Fifteen Pater-nosters makes a Rosary of which there is a kind of Order in their Church called the Confraternity of the Rosary Into this Society all manner of people may be admitted and these as I find in one of their Authors who gives an account of it are obliged to say over the whole Rosary once in a week at least And these Prayers are to be offered up in a certain manner to Almighty God in honour of the Blessed Virgin Now lest this should be two burdensome there is provision made that if they have any lawful impediment they may get another to say their Prayers for them and it shall be accepted They who enter into this Society must solemnly devote themselves to the Honour Love and Service of the Blessed Virgin Even as solemnly as a Man can consecrate himself to the Service of Almighty God our Heavenly Father do they give up themselves to her as the Mother of all Christians For so they say she is to be esteemed because our Saviour said of her to St. Iohn Behold thy Mother To each of these Votaries is given by the Father who admits him a set of Beads which are Blest and Crost and Sprinkled with Holy-Water And most wonderful Priviledges are bestowed by sundry Popes upon those who devoutly recite this Rosary They may gain a
is far enough from being unanswerable Now let us hear the second L. It cannot be proved that the Religion and Faith of the Holy Roman Catholick Church hath been any way changed in any Article that belongs to the Religion by any Pope Council or Catholick Bishop nor can any of them be produced that have changed it But it is rather proved that the very same Faith hath remain'd entire and inviolate from the times of the Apostles to this very day and by continual succession or from hand to hand as it were is come to our hands Whence is manifestly gathered that it is the very same Faith which the Apostles taught and therefore the same that they learned from Christ their Master in his School T. The Answer which I have just now given to his first Proposition doth wholly take off the force of this second also For pray consider we do not charge those of the Church of Rome with directly changing the Articles of the Christian Faith for we grant they still retain the Apostles Creed wherein that Faith is briefly comprized and the Holy Scriptures where it is more largely taught But our great charge against them is their adding to this old Faith new Articles of their own devising some of them utterly uncertain some notoriously false which yet they impose as of absolute necessity to be believed in order to Salvation even as much as the Apostles Creed it self And for the vindication of these Novelties they give very corrupt and false interpretations of the ancient Articles and of the holy Scriptures themselves such as the first Christian Writers never gave Thus for instance they would have the Catholick Church mentioned in the Creed to signifie the Roman Church and so to comprehend only those who acknowledg the Bishop of Rome to be Head of the Church and Christ's Vicar upon Earth whereas none of the Ancients did ever thus explain this Article So that by their corrupt glosses they do in some instances very much change the Doctrine whilst they retain the Words But as to these novel additions which they would thrust upon us we do utterly deny that they were ever taught by Christ or his Apostles nor consequently could be delivered down from them successively to this present Age. Nay our Learned Writers shew as to many of them the very time when they were introduced by what Degrees and what Arts it was done and with what difficulties and oppositions they met They name the very Pope who first obtain'd the Title of Supreme Bishop of the Universal Church they name the Council where Image-worship was first established and after that when Transubstantiation and the Popes Power of Deposing Princes were Decreed c. Though as our Writers commonly urge it is a most foolish and ridiculous thing when we demonstrate the Errors of their Church for them to say there are none because we cannot shew the precise time when they were first brought in As if when the Tares were plainly seen in the field the Servant should have denied there were any because no body could exactly tell when they were Sown it being done while the Master slept It 's enough that we can tell the time long after the Apostles when their erroneous Doctrines were not received in the Church and that proves them to be no part of the Ancient Faith of Christians which has been always and every where received in the Catholick Church Nay as to one most corrupt custom of their Church that of taking the Cup from the Laity when they first established it by a Decree viz. in the Council of Constance not three hundred years ago they themselves do there acknowledg that it was permitted in the Primitive Church yet it now seem'd fit to the Church of Rome for what reason you must not enquire to order the contrary to that primitive practice But to conclude That faith which indeed the Apostles learn'd in Christs School and from him taught to their followers and which from them hath been transmitted from one age to another down to this present time this we do most readily own and imbrace even that faith which is delivered in the holy Scriptures and comprized in the Creed and so far as they of Rome do acknowledg this faith we have no quarrel with them But the new Articles decreed by late Councils of their own by no means can we admit not a syllable of them being mention'd in the ancient Creeds nor can they be proved by the Holy Scriptures but many of them are directly contrary thereto as hath been already shewn and will yet further appear in my answer to his following argument to which you may proceed L. His third Proposition is That it cannot be shew'd that either the Ceremonies Sacraments or any Doctrine of their Church contains any thing contrary to holy Scripture but rather their learned Doctors clearly teach and demonstrate all the foresaid things to be plainly consonant to Holy Writ Such be these Words This is my Body and others Whence it follows that Lutherans Calvinists and other Sectaries have ungroundedly and without reason separated themselves from the Roman Church That also they who withdraw themselves from the Catholick Churches bosom can give no reason why they turn rather to the Lutherans than to the Calvinists Anabaptists or such other Hereticks T. That the Church of Rome hath brought in Customs contrary to the Holy Scripture is very evident from that instance I gave under the last Head viz. their taking away the Cup from the people at the Communion contrary to our Saviours own institution and practice who gave the Cup as well as the Bread to his Apostles requiring them all to drink of it and this not as Apostles meerly but as they were his Disciples And he enjoyn'd them to do this hereafter in remembrance of him and consequently to give both the Bread and the Wine to all Christians that should come to the Lords Table And so the Apostle Paul expresly requires Let a man examine himself every man that is whether of the Clergy or Laity and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that Cup. According to the Apostle then every Man that is bound to examine and prepare himself for this Holy Sacrament ought to drink of the Cup as well as eat of the Bread And thus it was generally used in the Primitive Church by their own confession as you have heard And yet in these latter ages out of I know not what pretended reverence for the Cup no body must partake of it ordinarily but the Priest that consecrates which is I say most expresly contrary to the Scripture But for their excuse they have devised forsooth a fine Doctrine of Concomitancy which if you will do them the small favour to grant that of Transubstantiation to be true they think well enough solves all For they tell you that the Blood so accompanies the Flesh that he who receives one partakes of the other also and
which we are far from granting And even this much may well enough serve to shew the weakness of his argument L. Very weak it is indeed when though it should be granted yet makes little or nothing to his purpose T. But in the next place I would have you further consider what has often before been suggested and proved that the Church of Rome is at this day so degenerated and corrupted that supposing you lived under a Popish Government even in Rome it self where the Pope is in effect King as well as Bishop yet there it would be utterly unlawful for you to hold communion with that Church upon the terms now required by it For this Church I say is foully degenerated from its Primitive purity both in Doctrine Worship and Discipline and is thereby guilty in some sort of Apostasie Heresie and Schism even so far as to make her communion unlawful since it cannot be had without a most sinful compliance with her in gross errors and corruptions 1 I say she is guilty of Apostasie and have before made it evident in that she teaches such false Doctrines as were not own'd and uses such a corrupt way of worship as was not practised in the first ages of the Christian Church Hereby therefore she has Apostatized or departed from that purity and integrity which she was once honoured with when her faith was spoken of throughout the world Rom. 1. For pray consider a Church may be guilty of a great degree of Apostasie though she does not renounce the very name and title of Christianity Those Churches of Asia to which the Messages were sent in the second and third of the Revelation did not renounce the name of Christians but yet we read that they had faln from their first love and were so far declined that of some of them it s said they had only a name to live and were dead and are severely threatned that without repentance and reformation they should be destroy'd How the Church of Rome has vilely degenerated from the Primitive Church has already been shewn in many instances particularly as to their way of Worship whilst they pray to Angels and Saints make use of Images worship the Consecrated bread take away the Cup from the people in the Communion have their Service in an unknown Tongue c. Now because she is guilty of such Apostasie and corruption in her Worship every good Christian who makes conscience of worshipping God according to his will reveal'd in his Word may justly refuse to joyn with her therein 2 And not only in her Worship but in her Doctrine also she hath apostatized from the Primitive integrity even from the true rule of Faith the holy Word of God And on this account she may justly be reputed guilty of Heresie if by that word you understand very soul and gross errors apparently contrary to the holy Scriptures and to the Doctrines of the Primitive Church Such for instance are their Doctrines of the Popes Supremacy and power of deposing Princes for Heresie and of their Churches Infallibility be it in Pope Council people or where you will for they are not agreed amongst themselves about it Such also are their Doctrines of Transubstantiation Purgatory with others the like Now here it 's a vain thing to ask by what General Council were these Errors condemned what Fathers wrote against them c. since there never was any true General Council called since the Church of Rome broached and maintain'd these Errors And those who are commonly honoured with the title of Fathers viz. the Christian Writers for five or six hundred years after our Saviour were dead and gone before that time Though some of the most holy and learned men of those ages wherein these Errors were first published did with great zeal and diligence oppose and testifie against them as against Transubstantiation Image-worship c. But it 's enough for us that these Doctrines are contrary to Scripture and to the writings of the most ancient Fathers and were never established by those famous Councils of old which best deserve the name of General On account therefore of these false Doctrines also I reckon it utterly unlawful to hold communion with the Romish Church since we cannot be admitted to it without professing our consent to and approbation of them 3 And therefore lastly this Church is notoriously guilty of Schism that is of a groundless sinful separation from other faithful Christians whilst she makes such unlawful terms of Communion that no man well informed can with a good conscience comply with Now in order to our proving the Church of Rome guilty of Schism there 's no great need of answering his captious questions whose company did she leave where was the true Church which she forsook c. For though these questions are proper enough when we speak of the Schism of particular persons from the Church of which they were members yet the case is different when we are speaking of a whole Church its self becoming Schismatical this is to be shewn plainest by other methods to which I shall now apply my self and shall also as I go along give sufficient answer even to those questions so as shall abundantly serve to demonstrate the Church of Rome to be deeply guilty of this heinous sin of Schism and that on sundry accounts 1. If a particular Church shall advance her self above all other Churches and set up her Bishop as the Supreme Governour of all other Christian Bishops and Churches and will have no Communion with any but such as shall submit to her Supremacy this is a Schismatical Church For without any just ground she withdraws her self from her Sister-Churches and gives them just cause to renounce communion with her And this is the Case of the Romish Church who makes this proud claim and hath thereby divided her self from all other Churches that will not submit to her which they who do are themselves partakers with her in Schism whilst they set up a false head of the Church without any good warrant from Scripture Reason or Antiquity 2. When a particular Church on account of this unjust claim of Supremacy shall draw away the Members of other particular Churches perswading them to separate from their own Bishops and Pastors and to entertain such as she sets over them she is in this also plainly Schismatical as making horrid rents and divisions in neighbouring Churches which else might have lived in peace and union And those Members who are thus seduced and drawn away are also guilty of Schism in leaving their own proper Pastors to follow Usurpers and Intruders And this also is the case of the Romish Church and its adherents at this day 3. If any Church shall impose unlawful conditions upon her Members so that they cannot live in Communion with her without being guilty of wilfull sin then is that Church it self to be pronounced Schismatical and not those Members who for so good reason withdraw
in Religion amongst our selves by proposing Articles of peace suppressing disputes about obscure and unnecessary matters and by determining of things indifferent in the worship of God according to the general rules of Scripture which principles being heartily embraced and honestly practised will procure as much peace and union in every Church as can be expected in this state of imperfection And by this means thanks be to God there is more true Christian unity to be found in our Church than amongst Papists themselves notwithstanding their Infallible Judg Pope or Council or they know not well who And what appearance of union there is amongst them is to be ascribed rather to the peoples ignorance than to the Popes knowledg yea to the Inquisition much rather than to his Infallibility L. I am well satisfied in this matter But before I proceed to the next mark pray tell me what is that unity which is required in a particular Church to make it lawful for a man to hold communion with it T. Plainly it is this that it be in union with the Catholick Church by holding the same faith which it has always held and using the same worship in all things substantial which it has always used And thus doth the Church of England whilst it owns the Holy Scripture as the Rule of Faith and receives the ancient Creeds wherein this Faith is briefly comprized which Scripture and Creeds have been generally received by the Catholick Church in former ages as well as this And in our Church is established the solemn Worship of the true God in the name of Jesus Christ and here the holy Sacraments are administred according to this rule of Holy Scripture and after the pattern of the Catholick Church in all ages from which the Church of Rome is most grossly degenerated as you may anon be more fully informed L. But does not the Church of Rome receive the Holy Scriptures and the ancient Creeds that we have and worship the true God in the name of Iesus Christ T. Yes they do so and thereby they do plainly approve of and confirm what we hold But then they have made additions of their own to this Faith and have brought many corruptions into this worship and thereby have occasion'd one of the greatest schisms that ever happened in the Church and are themselves the Schismaticks because they make unlawful terms of communion and exclude those who comply not with these terms So far as they are One with the Catholick Church we are One with them So far as they retain that Faith and Worship which has ever been approved of in the Church since the days of Christ and his Apostles we are ready to joyn in communion with them but the errors and corruptions which in latter times have been added and imposed these we utterly reject In these we must dissent from them that it may appear we are one with the ancient Catholick Church which never own'd many of those things which they now impose and we renounce as I shall after shew But let us proceed if you please to the other marks CHAP. II. Of the second mark of the true Church viz. Holiness L. THE next mark of the true Church is that it 's Holy which they say agrees to their Church not to ours Their Doctrine they pretend is holy not ours in their Church are multitudes of holy persons to be found whole Orders of them but out of it they say there is no true holiness no holy people nay nor can be T. It is a matter to be sadly lamented by all good men that among Christians of what profession or Church soever there is no more true piety and holiness to be found and that generally they are more zealous for promoting their own party and private opinions than holiness and righteousness without which we cannot be saved let the Church we are of be never so true and our opinions never so sound and orthodox But in this respect I do verily think there is no Church in the world more guilty than the Church of Rome nor any that less deserves to be stiled an Holy Church For proof of this I intend not to insist on that general loosness and impiety which abounds in Popish Countries and no where perhaps more than in Italy and Rome it self the Seat of his Holiness as they stile the Pope and yet a very sink of all sensuality and profaneness But that which I would have you chiefly to consider is this that several of those Doctrines of their Church which are properly stiled Popish and in which they differ from us do manifestly tend to the prejudice and hindrance of an holy life and do rather serve for an encouragement to sin and wickedness As for instance whilst they abuse the people with idle stories of Purgatory where they may make satisfaction for their sins and where they shall sometimes find much ease and at last be delivered out by the prayers that are said for them by Priests after their death to whom good store of money must be left for that end How does this tend to harden men in their sins and to prevent their timely reformation whilst the hope of a Purgatory takes off the fear of Hell Thus also they teach that Attrition that is being sorry for their sins for fear of punishment will procure their pardon if they make confession and are absolved by a Priest And at most easie rates do they grant Absolutions and Indulgences which must needs make men much more careless of their lives more bold to venture upon wickedness for which they have a pardon so ready at hand But besides these and other hurtful opinions we may plainly discern that in the several branches of Religion their gross corruptions have done much to destroy all true piety and goodness For instance instead of a serious spiritual affectionate worship of God which might help to conform the souls of men to the holiness of that God whom they worship they have invented a world of useless ridiculous Ceremonies which turn it into a kind of bodily exercise that little profits the soul. They have publick prayers in an unknown Tongue where it s enough for the people to be present though they scarce understand a word and what benefit can this afford to their minds Here also contrary to Gods express command they have brought in the worship of Images the Invocation of Saints and Angels especially of the Blessed Virgin as also the adoration of the Host that is of the consecrated Bread in their Mass all which are horrid impieties And even a great part of their private Devotions consists in saying over their Pater Nosters and Ave Maries so many times by rote of which they keep count by a sett of Beads And is this a due worship of God in spirit and truth with affection and reverence such as our Blessed Saviour enjoyns and as the very nature of God requires from all reasonable creatures Moreover as
Romish Church But for the Papist the happy man that has had the good luck to hit into this true Church they have so many tricks and quirks to secure him in his life at his death and after it that let his faults be what they will it s very strange if he miss of Heaven at least after he has taken Purgatory in his way if he was very poor for rich men may easily escape that too or get soon out of it if they 'l follow the Priests directions Such fine devices they have to give men a lift to Heaven without putting them to the trouble of walking in that narrow way of serious holiness which alone leads thither So that I cannot but say and without any prejudice or partiality I speak it notwithstanding all that noise and talk of holiness in the Church of Rome nothing but Holy Mother Church Holy Father the Pope Holy Altars Holy Images Holy Water Holy Crosses Beads Agnus Dei's Reliques and a thousand holy trinkets more yet I think there is as little true holiness of life and conversation to be found amongst them as in any Church of the world Yea we shall often find that when those of that way are told of the holy Lives of many Protestants or are themselves exhorted to strictness and piety of life as that wherein true Religion chiefly consists they will be ready presently to make a puff at it as if this was of no value in comparison of being of the true Church of the infallible Catholick Church as they fondly call their own Sect as if being in a good Church would secure a bad man when we are so plainly taught that without holiness no man shall see God let him be of what Church he will Wherefore to conclude this remember that since in the Church of England the holy Gospel is most purely taught and the holy Sacraments duly administred according to our Saviours own institution and the members of it are neither required to profess any falshood or practise any evil in order to their communion with it but on the contrary are most strictly enjoyned to be holy in all their conversation and do here enjoy all manner of helps and advantages thereto therefore I say this is such an Holy Church as that you may and ought to hold communion with it Proceed we now to the following Marks of the true Church CHAP. III. Of the third mark of the true Church that it's Catholick L. THE next mark he lays down of the true Church is that its Catholick And here they make great boasting and triumphing for they say none else call themselves Catholicks but they nor as they pretend have any reason so to do since they tell of vast numbers belonging to their Church in all places of the world far and near and how they convert Heathens whilst Protestants they say are but a little handful here and there in corners amongst a multitude of Catholicks T. As to what they call themselves it matters little for be sure they 'l give themselves good words Neither is it true that none but they lay claim to that name for we of this Church do esteem our selves true Catholick Christians as professing the ancient Catholick faith of Christ and so do frequently stile both our selves and our Doctrine and with good reason as I doubt not to demonstrate As to their great numbers compared to other Christians suppose what they alledge were true as it is most false yet is this no sufficient argument of their being true Catholicks for that 's to be judged by the truth of their Doctrines and not by the number of Professors For if we should at this rate go to the Poll and judg of truth by most votes then might the Mahometans carry it from Christians And heretofore the number of the Arrians was said to be greater than of the Orthodox But that 's to be accounted a true part of the Catholick Church which professes the Catholick faith even the same Christian Religion which all good Christians in all ages former as well as latter and of all Nations have ever constantly profest And by this rule you will find that the Church of England is a most true and sound part of the Catholick Church as professing this same Christian faith contain'd in the Gospel and summ'd up in the Apostles Creed Here you may remember what I have before told you that it is most vain and unreasonable for any one particular Church to stile her self the whole Catholick Church as if there were no Christians in the world but themselves And yet in this sense doth the Church of Rome stile her self Catholick the absurdity of which I have before shewed And there needs nothing more to manifest it than this single consideration that there are thousands and millions of Christians in several parts of the world who neither now do nor ever did own the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome which is the great fundamental article of their faith to pass by all others at present and yet all these whilst they embrace the whole Christian Doctrine taught in the holy Scriptures are to be lookt on as true Catholick Christians though they do not believe the Bishop of Rome to be Christs Vicar upon earth invested with Supremacy over all Christian Churches for this is a Doctrine which our Saviour never taught his Disciples Now without owning this false Doctrine a man cannot be of the Church of Rome according to the Decrees of their Popes and Councils and yet without this I say a man may receive the whole Christian Religion as it was delivered by Christ and his Apostles and therefore he may be a true Catholick Christian though he be not of the Romish Church nor yields subjection to it L. This seems to me very plain and clear T. But it will appear yet more plain if you consider what is a most certain truth that there can be no manner of good evidence given that the Church of Christ for some hundred years after our blessed Saviours time did ever receive this Doctrine of the Popes Supremacy or his Infallibility Nay our learned men assert that there is not so much as any one Christian Writer for at least three hundred years after that time some say four or five that did ever so much as teach any such strange Doctrine as this How then I beseech you can the owning of it now be necessary to make a man a Catholick when the whole Catholick Church for some ages after its first Plantation was a meer stranger to it L. I think there is no appearance of reason for it T. To this add that the whole Greek which was much larger than the Romish before it was over-run by the Turks ever disown'd these same new opinions of the Popes Supremacy and Infallibility with many others of the same stamp neither do they generally embrace them to this day though sometimes the Romanists have used all manner of arts and devices
means he then by saying that none of the Ancients consent with us in all things In every little oppinion it 's scarce likely there were or ever will be two men in the World that do exactly agree No such agreement I am sure is to be found amongst the Divines of the Roman Church But as sure it is that we agree with the Apostles and Ancient Churches in all things material and substantial in all points of Faith necessary to Salvation For we embrace the same Holy Scriptures and the same Creeds which they did What means he again by saying that the Apostles were not of the Lutheran or Calvinistical Sect What that they were not followers of Luther or Calvin They were not like indeed but it 's enough I hope if Luther and Calvin were followers of the Apostles Thus what if he should say that the Apostles were not of the Church of England Is it not sufficient that our Church embraces the same Faith which the Apostles planted in all places where they came Wherefore we may with great reason conclude contrary to his extravagant and most uncharitable inferences that we have the true Christian Faith in our Church and not any new-fangled invention c. If the Apostles Creed be a Summary of the true Faith I am sure we have it since we do most heartily embrace this Creed and those Holy Scriptures whence it 's taken and therefore we are none of those false Prophets foretold in Scripture For whilst we keep close to God's Word as the rule of our Faith we are safe enough from deserving any such charge But how will they of the Romish Church acquit themselves from it whilst they have brought in many devices of their own to which the Apostles and Primitive Christians were meer strangers and therefore cannot be said to consent with Papists therein Such are their Doctrines of Purgatory Transubstantiation c. Such are their customs of praying in an unknown Tongue having private Masses where the Priest only receives in their publick Assemblies their half-Communions giving only the Bread to the people when they do Communicate c. None of these things were anciently taught or used in the Church and some of them but lately established amongst themselves These therefore we may justly say are new-fangled inventions devised of their own Brain contrary to Holy Scriptures And they who broach and maintain them are in this respect false Teachers and probably some of those who are foretold in Scripture at least they and their false Doctrines are condemned by it and that 's enough for our purpose L. It is so indeed and enough have you said to weaken and refute this his first Proposition If the rest have no more strength they are far from deserving that great title he gives them I shall rehearse the next if you please T. Presently you shall only take notice from what hath been said how plain the Answer is to that captious Question of theirs Where was your Religion before Luther Where was it Even there whereever the Gospel was received whereever the Christian Doctrine was own'd for that is our Religion and nothing but that It was therefore in the Primitive Church that was planted by the Apostles and in the whole Catholick Church in all succeeding Ages Our Religion was both in the East and the West even in the Roman Church it self For we grant they still retain'd the Christian Faith they kept and do still keep the Apostles Creed though they have added several new Articles to it and that especially in their Council of Trent which appear'd not in the World quite so soon as Luther Now the truly Catholick Ancient Christian Faith we receive but their new-coin'd Articles we reject So that before the Reformation our Religion was in their Church as Gold in a heap of Dirt or as one long since exprest it as the pure Flower amongst the Bran or as Corn among Tares And by the Reformation we only wash'd away this Dirt sifted out the Bran and plucked up the Tares But the old Religion the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles remains pure and entire L. But say they where did the Apostles teach that there is no Purgatory no Transubstantiation c Yet thus the Protestants teach and therefore they consent not with the Apostles T. Yes certainly but they do for as I have formerly told you we therefore say there is no Purgatory c. because the Apostles say no such things which be sure they would have done had they been true since they are such weighty and material points as the Church of Rome now accounts them What the Apostles taught that we receive what they taught not we refuse as knowing they were faithful in delivering all that they received of the Lord. Judge then which of us consents most with the Apostles we who receive all their Doctrines but reject what they never taught of they who teach these new Doctrines which neither the Apostles nor any of their first followers ever delivered nor were they for some Hundred years after generally profest so much as in their own Church Yea these Novelties were never directly and formally established as Articles of Faith and made necessary for all men of their Communion to believe till in these latter Ages some of them as I take it not till the very Council of Trent not yet an Hundred and fifty years since which they call a General Council though packt up of Bishops of their own Sect and the major part the Popes own creatures who used all the foul arts imaginable to carry things according to his humour as is plainly to be seen in the History of that Council written by some of their own Church Now in respect of these Articles in which Popery chiefly consists we may with great reason retort the question and demand Where was your Religion before the Council of Trent And were the Apostles of the same opinion with these Trent Fathers Compare their Creeds together and it will easily appear Yea compare that of Trent with any other of the old Creeds such as the Nicene or Constantinopolitan and it will easily appear what additions they have made to the ancient Faith whereas our Church receives those very same Creeds without addition or diminution To conclude this though we readily grant their Popish Errors to have been before our Reformation from them for they could not be cast out before they were brought in yet the great truths of our Religion were taught and received in the Church some Ages before those Errors were ever heard of Our Religion then did not first appear in Luther's days when the Reformation was wrought but is as old as since the time of Christ and his Apostles being nothing else but pure Christianity resormed from the errors and abuses of Popery These things I have already oft mentioned but could not well avoid the repetition of them on occasion of this his first Proposition which by this time you see
either by Apostasie Heresie or Schism 1 Apostasie is a renouncing not only the Faith of Christ but the very name and title to Christianity No man will say that ever the Church of Rome fell thus 2 Heresie is an adhesion to some private or singular opinion or error in Faith contrary to the general approved Doctrine of the Church If the Church of Rome did ever adhere to any singular or new opinion disagreeable to the common received Doctrine of the Christian world I pray you satisfie me to these particulars 1. By what General Council was she condemn'd 2. Or which of the Fathers wrote against her 3. Or by what authority was she otherwise reproved for it seems to me a thing very incongruous that so great a Church should be condemn'd by every one that has a mind to condemn her 3 Schism is a departure or a division from the unity of the Church whereby that bond and communion held with some former Church is broken and dissolved If ever the Church of Rome divided it self by schism from any other body of faithful Christians brake communion or went forth from the society of any Elder Church I pray satisfie me to these particulars whose company did she leave From whom did she go forth Where was the true Church which she did forsake For it appears a little strange to me that a Church should be accounted Schismatical when there cannot be assign'd another Church different from her which from age to age hath continued visible from which she departed Hence he infers That the Church of Rome is the only true Church that leads to an eternity of bliss T. This indeed they commonly boast of as an unanswerable demonstration which they often scatter abroad in papers for the deluding of silly people Now though I see nothing in it but what has already been answered again and again yet for your fuller satisfaction Consider 1 suppose that we should grant his whole argument and every word in it to be true yet will it do little service to their cause nor will by any means yield that inference he would draw from it viz. that the Church of Rome is the only true Church and therefore to her communion we must betake our selves leaving the Church of England if ever we hope for salvation For pray what if we shou'd grant which yet he will never be able to prove that the Church of Rome is at this day as true and sound and flourishing a Church as we own it once to have been and should yield that it never fell by Apostasie Heresie or Schism what follows hence I beseech you What that she is the only true Church and the whole Catholick Church No by no means but only that she ought to be look'd upon as a sound part of the Catholick Church and therefore that her members viz. the Christians of that Diocess ought to live in strict fellowship with her and all other neighbouring Churches ought to give her due respect in maintaining such communion with her as sister-Churches are capable of holding one with another But it does not I say in the least follow that she is the supreme Mistress and Governess of all other Churches and therefore that all Christians in the world must render subjection to her and her Bishop otherwise they are to be look'd upon as no members of the Catholick Church nor at present in a capacity of salvation For such a supreme Mistress as this she never was when in her best and purest state nor therefore ought she to be esteemed so at this day neither do we of this Church owe obedience to her nor ought we to leave our own Church for her sake or at her command L. I cannot see how his argument proves us at all obliged thereto nor consequently how it reaches his purpose T. That it does not will still appear plainer if instead of Rome you name any other ancient Church suppose that of Ierusalem which was once very glorious and flourishing and deserved above all others to be stiled a Mother-Church now suppose that at this day it remain'd as sound and good as ever it was and to use his language that it never fell by Apostasie Heresie or Schism pray would it hence follow that all other Churches and particularly this of England must therefore yield subjection to the Church of Ierusalem That our Bishops must pay homage to the Bishop of that Church owning their dependance upon him and living in obedience to him And if they should refuse to do thus must our people therefore forsake their own Bishops and Clergy and withdraw from the Churches where they officiate and entertain Bishops or Priests that are sent over to us from Ierusalem and run into corners with them for the worship of God Surely there is not the least reason for any of this and not a whit more is there for our being thus subject to the Bishop of Rome or for our receiving and joyning with the Priests which are sent over to us by his authority There never was nor is now any reason why we should be thus enslaved to the Romish Church For in the very days of the Apostles and some hundred years after when that Church was in its best and purest state we of the Church of England rendred no such obedience to it own'd no such dependance upon it Neither indeed did the Bishops of that Church then claim any such power and Supremacy over us and other foreign Churches Wherefore as our ancestors the British Christians did not subject themselves to the Bishop of Rome nor ever thought such a subjection necessary to their salvation no more have we reason to do Whatever power or precedency the Bishops of Rome might afterwards have in these Western parts either by favour of the Emperor or by consent of the Bishops amongst themselves or most of all by their own daily encroachments by the meer advantage of their Seat without either law or reason this I say nothing at all concerns us at this day since all his power here is utterly abrogated and taken away by just and lawful authority in a most mature and deliberate manner as you before heard And I then told you how in Henry the Eighth's time before our happy Reformation it was generally own'd and declared by the Popish Clergy themselves that the Bishop of Rome had no more authority over us in England than the Bishop of Ierusalem Antioch or any other foreign Bishop And long before that our Laws limited and restrain'd the Popes power as it seem'd good to our Rulers And so do Popish Princes themselves at this day suffering him to have no more power or priviledg amongst them than themselves think fit Since then the Church of Rome in the very days of its primitive purity and glory had no power over us in this Church no more hath it at this day nor ought to have though it were still as pure and good as at first it was
from it This also is the practice of the Romish Church whilst she requires men to profess their belief of that which by God's Word they know to be most false and to practise that which from the same word they are assured is unlawful and abominable By all this it appears then that the Church of Rome whilst she cries out against all others as Schismaticks is her self most Schismatical in that she sets up her self above all other Churches and will hold Communion with none but those who enslave themselves to her draws away people from their own Pastours and imposes unlawful terms of Communion upon all her Members Now by this means she hath departed from the way of the Ancient Catholick Church which never allow'd any such Usurpation but strictly forbade it in the Canons of the most Ancient most general and orthodox Councils By this means she broke off from the Eastern Church which would not submit to this her Usurpation And by this means she made it necessary for the Western Churches to withdraw from her that they might not be defiled with her Errors and Corruptions and to reform themselves so far as they had been defiled and most unjust it is in her to refuse Communion with them on account of their Reformation Yea by this means lastly she hath in some sort departed from her self I mean from that integrity and purity of Faith and Worship which once was in the Church of Rome and did for some Ages continue in it But by degrees she did more and more degenerate till at length she became so polluted that it was altogether unlawful and unsafe to retain Communion with her lest partaking in her Sins we should also partake in the Plagues that were due to them The gradual Apostasie of their Church is so evident that few of their own most famous Historians have the impudence to deny it Even Baronius himself as well as many others makes heavy complaints of that corrupt state it was faln into about Nine hundred or a thousand years after our Saviour when he confesses that impudent Strumpets had got such an interest in Rome that Church preferments were disposed of at their pleasure yea the Popedom it self So that he says our Lord seem'd to be a sleep in the Ship which was in danger of being overwhelmed with waves with much more to the same purpose And what sort of creatures were then made Popes appears full plain by the History of their Lives written by their own Followers Many of them such Monsters of men for all manner of villany and lewdness that they seem to exceed the very worst of the Heathen Emperors And can we think it impossible or unlikely for these men to fall into error and superstition who wallowed in all vice and wickedness Can their Infallibility be secured when their virtue is lost Will the Spirit of Truth whom the wicked World cannot receive dwell in such impure defiled minds No certainly this Blessed Spirit is only promised to those who love our Saviour and keep his Commandments Some of these Popes are accused not only of the most bruitish sensuality but of Blasphemy Infidelity and even Atheism it self And what a Clergy was the Church like to be filled with when the very Heads of it were thus corrupt And alas what a sad influence was this like to have on the minds and manners of the people How like would their state be to that of the Jewish Church Isa 1. 4 5 6. The head sick and the heart faint from the soal of the foot even to the head no soundness in it but wounds and bruises and putrifying sores Or as in Ier. 5. last The Prophets prophesy falsly the Priests bear rule by their means and the people love to have it so No wonder then if whilst the Watchmen slept the enemy came and sowed Tares Plainly it 's no wonder in such times of ignorance and profaneness that manifold errors and abuses both in Doctrine and Worship should creep into the Church especially such as made for the interest and reputation of the Clergy who having little of sanctity and true worth left they take other methods to recommend themselves to the people and having an ignorant credulous people to deal with their chief business was to gratify their fond superstitious humour and to advance themselves in their esteem And most of those things in difference betwixt us and the Church of Rome do plainly serve to this purpose either to promote the wealth and honour of the Clergy or to please the senses and amuse the fancies of a carnal superstitious people to keep them in ignorance and indulge them in their sins rather than to bring them to sound knowledge and true repentance and godliness as the instances oft before given do plainly shew You see then into what a corrupt state the Church of Rome hath degenerated in these latter Ages and therefore how great Reason there was to Reform our Church from Popish corruptions and how little reason you have to desert this well-reformed Church whereof by God's Mercy you are a Member to run over to Rome which abhors all thoughts of a Reformation Nay you would have no reason to betake your self thither though that Church was at this day as pure and orthodox as when it was first planted by the Apostles L. So little reason do I see for my going over to the Romish Church that had I till now lived in communion with it I durst not for a world continue any longer therein And by what you have said I plainly find that this Evident Demonstration my Author so boasts of is a piece of as meer sophistry as any other of his Pregnant Arguments and Unanswerable Propositions of which he has mustered up a great number to little purpose And whilst there is no more strength in his Reasons I give little need to his censures how bitter soever For he uses much what the same harsh and uncharitable language in the conclusion of his Book that he did at the beginning That no Salvation is to be had out of the Church of Rome that if we will not have her for our Mother we must not expect to have God for our Father quoting St. Austin for it T. But without all Reason whilst he applies to their particular Church what is said of the Catholick Church of Christ. But nothing more common in their mouths than the Roman Catholick Church as if there were no true Christians or Catholicks in the World but those of their own party which how unreasonable as well as uncharitable it is we have before seen L. Certainly it is both in a very high degree whilst he dare boldly doom all men to damnation except his Roman Catholicks whom he looks upon as the only favourites of God and heirs of Heaven For he says they cannot be in the least danger of missing the inheritance of God's Children in the next Life if they have lived as they believed T. What
we call them not Sacraments yet we do not in the least deny whatever of goodness or usefulness is to be found in them but do our selves I say embrace them and make use of them all but one to such good ends and purposes as they serve for which will easily appear by a brief survey of them First As to Confirmation you may see in what esteem it is in our Church by the Office appointed for it in the Liturgy where it is expresly ordered that those who are come to years of discretion and well instructed in the Principles of Religion so that they are capable of taking upon themselves the vow that was made for them in Baptism that they should openly before the Bishop and the Congregation make profession of their Faith and ratify and confirm their Baptismal Vow whereupon the Bishop lays his hands upon them according to the most ancient usage in blessing and praying for a person and begs of God to strengthen and increase in them the Graces of his holy Spirit that they may continue for ever in his Service And this practice of Confirmation many of our Divines who have written about it do highly commend as a very Iaudable useful and ancient constitution and which if the Rules of our Church about it were more duly observed mightily tends to the promoting of knowledge and godliness even much more than as it is practised in the Church of Rome where it 's administred to Infants not long after Baptism whereas it seems plainly designed in our Church for those who are of a competent Age that they may take their Baptismal Vow upon themselves which if they do seriously and understandingly it must needs make the deeper impression on their minds more firmly oblige them to the observance of it and better qualify them for the assistance of God's Grace and render them more fit for the Holy Communion where again they solemnly renew the same Vow Yet all this while we do not reckon Confirmation to be a Sacrament in the sense our Church uses that word nor do we equal it with Baptism and the Lords-Supper since we find no such express institution of it by our Saviour in the Gospel nor such promises of Grace made upon the use of it Nor therefore does our Church think that the want of it will be any hindrance to the Salvation of baptized Infants who dye before they are confirmed As for Holy Orders there is much less reason to give the name of Sacrament to them since they belong to only one sort of men who are thereby devoted not to Christianity that was done at Baptism but to the work of the Ministry In the mean time no body sure can be ignorant of the practice of our Church in this matter how careful she is in conferring holy Orders on all those whom she admits to minister in holy things And with what gravity and solemnity this Office is performed may be seen in those publick forms that are appointed in our Liturgy for the ordaining of Bishops Priests and Deacons As for Marriage though we grant that in it is signified the Mystical Union betwixt Christ and his Church yet do we not call it a Sacrament nor see any reason so to do considering the definition of a Sacrament given before But yet we believe it to be an honourable state instituted by God in the time of Man's innocency yea with the Apostle we judge it to be honourable in all men Priests as well as others St. Peter himself having been a Married Man Whilst the Church of Rome forbids her Clergy to Marry thereby seeming to have no great esteem for it She extols a single life more highly above it than there seems good reason for and reckons them a more holy sort of persons than others who abstain from Marriage whilst yet they call it a Sacrament it 's well if they be not more unholy But I hasten to that of Penance Here indeed we do not with the Church of Rome exact from men a particular confession of all their private faults nor send them on long Pilgrimages to this or that Saint nor make them go so far barefoot or barehead nor oblige them to give themselves so many lashes or to say over so many Pater-nosters and Ave-maries but rather we press upon them the great duty of Repentance and Reformation without which they cannot be pardoned that they should confess their sins to God with shame and sorrow speedily and thorowly forsaking the same In some Cases also there is a publick Penance enjoyn'd by the discipline of the Church that notorious offenders should openly acknowledge their crimes beg pardon of God and the Congregation profess their sorrow and purposes of amendment requesting the prayers of Minister and People on their behalf But this while we see no Reason to give the name of Sacrament to mens expressing their repentance As to any bodily austerities that may tend to the mortification of sin or to a sort of holy Revenge on our selves for it our Church gives no particular precept about them but leaves every man to his own discretion as the Gospel has done but she most earnestly calls them to break off their sins by righteousness and their iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor and very useful it is for them to advise oft with their spiritual Guide You see then as to these four which Papists call Sacraments that our Church cannot in the least be charged with any defect for not having the things themselves for we both use them all and give them due esteem though we do not think the title of Sacraments in our sense of the word properly to belong to them As for the last thing mention'd that of Extreme Unction which is an anointing of â—ying persons with Oil consecrated for that purpose we are so far from accounting it a Sacrament that we do not at all use it in our Church nor see any reason why we should That which Papists chiefly alledge for it is from St. Iames Chap. 5. 14 15. Is any man sick among you let him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray over him anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord and the prayer of faith shall save the sick and the Lord shall raise him up Now it seems most probable that this custom was to last but during the time of miraculous Cures in which sometimes Oil was made use of as Mark 6. 13. though some think there might be a medicinal virtue in the Oil it self But however it be it affords not a sufficient ground for what is now practised in the Church of Rome For in those times you see it was intended for the health of the body whereas the anointing amongst Papists is pretended to be for the benefit of their Souls and is commonly used when they perceive no hopes of recovery which is a meer device of their own there being no command of God for it nor any
Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead and Indulgences p. 65 CHAP. VII Of Transubstantiation p. 75 CHAP. VIII Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mass. p. 102 CHAP. IX Of having Prayers in an unknown Tongue p. 105 CHAP. X. Concerning Confession of Sins to the Priest in order to his forgiveness of them p. 109 CHAP. XI Of Invocation of Saints p. 119 CHAP. XII Of the Worship of Images p. 129 CHAP. XIII Of Praying by Beads p. 142 CHAP. XIV Of Distinction of Meats p. 148 CHAP. XV. Of withholding the Scriptures from the Common-People p. 152 PART II. CHAP. I. COntaining an Answer to some Arguments against Protestants p. 167 CHAP. II. A Resolution of some Doubts and Questions proposed to Protestants 190 CHAP. III. An Answer to some Propositions said to be unanswerable by Protestants p. 200 CHAP. IV. An Answer to a pretended Demonstration That the Roman Church is the True Catholick Church p. 225 CHAP. V. Of the number of Sacraments with some other things briefly discust and the conclusion of the whole p. 239 A DIALOGUE BETWIXT TWO PROTESTANTS In Answer to a Popish Catechism CALLED A Short Catechism against all Sectaries PART I. A DIALOGUE BETWIXT A Teacher and a Learner CHAP. I. Concerning the true Church and the marks of it and first of its Unity Learner SIR I live in a place where there are many of those who call themselves Roman Catholicks and though I care not much for disputing with them for I seldom find any thing comes of it but anger and ill words yet I cannot always avoid it For some of them are my near Relations and they sometimes put Books into my hands and sometimes bring their Priest along with them to convince me and are still earnestly urging me to change my Religion and to forsake the Church of England telling me plainly that no Salvation is to be had out of the Church of Rome Teacher That I know is their common Doctrine but it is so very unreasonable and so horridly uncharitable that this alone were enough to keep a man from becoming a Papist since if he thorowly embrace their principles he must condemn all but those of their own way And believe it they had need to consider well how they can hope for mercy themselves who pass so severe a sentence upon others But thanks be to God whatever they talk of St. Peters Keys they are not hereafter to be our Judges nor are salvation and damnation at their disposing That God who will judg both us and them according to his own Gospel will one day justifie and acquit thousands whom they have condemned And therefore never be daunted by their insolent language and heavy censures The very same you may sometimes hear from Quakers and others of the vilest Sects For still the less reason the more wrath and considence that by bold and threatning talk they may fright people into their way when they want good Arguments to perswade them L. I believe it is so yet I 'le confess to you I am sometimes a little puzled with some of their subtle discourses and therefore I would desire you to furnish me with plain answers to the chief of those arguments which they commonly insist on These I think I can pretty well remember having heard them so often but to help my memory I have brought with me a little Book wherein they are contained and from thence shall propose them T. I shall readily give you my assistance herein Let me hear then how do they use to assault you L. Those I have met with do commonly begin with telling me as I find it here also in some of the first pages of this their book That there is but one Lâ—rd and one Faith one Religion and one Church wherein a man can be saved as there was but one Ark of Noah wherein he and his family were preserved T. We easily grant that there is one true Religion even that which Christ hath revealed and is therefore called the Christian Religion and there is one Catholick Church viz. the whole body of Christian people who embrace this Religion But there are many particular Churches which hold this same Faith as of old the Church of Ierusalem of Antioch c. so now of England of Scotland c. What then can they infer hence to their purpose L. That as Turks and Jews cannot be saved so no more can Hereticks T. It still beseems us to be more careful for the saving of our own souls than hasty in condemning of others Wherefore let us leave the condition of such who never heard the Gospel nor had any opportunity of hearing it to the wise and just Judg of all the Earth who will do right to all As for Hereticks they are such as deny some essential part of the Christian Faith and therefore properly speaking are not Christians But what 's all this to us L. They say that we of the Church of England are Hereticks out of the Catholick Church and therefore cannot be saved T. Say it they commonly do but are never able to prove it since we believe the whole Religion of our blessed Saviour contained in the holy Scriptures We receive the ancient Creeds of the Church wherein is contained the summ of this Religion How then are we Hereticks L. Because we are not of the Roman Church which is the congregation of those who own the Bishop of Rome to be Christs Vicar and the visible Head of his Church upon earth which congregation they say is the Catholick Church and the only true way to salvation and they who are not of this communion are Hereticks and Sectaries T. This is the current Popish Doctrine but had it been the opinion of the Primitive Church in the Apostles days or soon after surely they would have given some such a definition as this of the Catholick Church or at least have call'd it the Roman Catholick Church as Papists now do but it s neither so called in the Creed nor this Article so explained by any Christian Writer in those days or long after L. Who then are to be reckoned as members of the Catholick Church T. Even all good Christians through the whole world that do sincerely believe and obey the Gospel of our blessed Saviour These are the true members of his Church and all who profess to do so are the outward visible members of this Catholick Church And in this sense we acknowledg with your Author that Christ hath always had a visible Church on Earth and will be with it to the end of the world nor shâ—â—â— the Gates of Hell be able to prevail against it Nor do we say as he charges us that the whole Church has been lost or put out but particular Churches in this place or that as at Ierusalem at Rome or any otherwhere may fall into great decay and at length into utter ruin Yet still Christ will have a Church upon earth still there will be men professing Christianity to whom
both Heathens Jews and all Infidels ought to joyn themselves L. Since then the Catholick Church signifies the whole society of Christian people where ever scattered over the face of the earth it hence appears that they who assert the Church of Rome to be this Catholick Church do thereby declare that there are no true Christians in the world but the Papists as we use to call them which seems to me very strange Doctrine But yet may not a particular Church be in some sense stiled Catholick T. Yes pâ—operly enough as it is a part of the Catholick Church holding the same faith with it and not schismatically dividing from it And thus of old the Church of Rome might be stiled Catholick and so might the Church of Ephesus of Antioch or any other place to distinguish them from Hereticks and Schismaticks that made factions and parties in their several Churches and separated from their own lawful Bishops and Pastors L. Are not those Christian Churches which are commonly callâ—d Reformed Churches parts of the Catholick Church T. Yes they are the best and soundest parts of it L. But why are they called Protestant and Reformed T. Not to trouble you with the first particular occasion of the name Protestant they are now generally stiled so because they protest against the errors and corruptions of the Roman Church and have Reformed themselves from the same according to the primitive pattern laid down in holy Scripture So that when you hear tell of the Protestant Religion or Reformed Religion you are not to understand thereby any new Religion distinct from Christianity but only the old Christian Religion in its native simplicity and purity separate from all Popish additions Nor do we say as I have told you that the Church was lost and now lately found out but this we say that it was greatly corrupted especially in these Western parts of the world over which the Bishops of Rome had by ill arts usurped an authority From which Usurpation our Rulers most justly and regularly delivered themselves and afterwards with great care and consideration reformed our Church from those corruptions which were chiefly introduced and supported by that authority L. But they of that Church use to tell us and so does my Author here that all who are not of their communion are Sectaries to whom by no means do agree the marks of the true Church which yet they say are all of them evidently to be found in theirs T. Nothing more common than for adversaries to give one another very ill names and that shall serve for half a confutation amongst ignorant people But names alter not the nature of things And as zealously as they of Rome do affect the name of Catholicks I doubt not but upon search they will be found as notorious Sectaries as any in Christendom whilst many of those whom they brand with that infamous title will appear to be true Catholick Christians if there now be or ever were any such in the world And in order to the proof of this pray let me hear what are those marks of the true Church L. They are said to be chiefly four that it is One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church and this say they cannot be said of any Protestant Church and therefore not of our Church of England which is by them reckoned among Sectaries T. By these marks let us be tried Only take notice that no one particular Church can be stiled the Catholick Church as if a part was the whole But I say the Church of England which we are now chiefly concern'd to vindicate is a true and sound part of this One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church and all the marks of a true Church do much more clearly and fully agree to it than to the Church of Rome But let me hear what they object to the contrary L. First they say it is not One that is it is not united because there are so many divisions in it Some will be Protestants some Presbyterians others Independents Anabaptists Quakers c. Nor can they be one whilst they acknowledg not one Head to determine controversies Whilst on the other hand the Papists pretend that they have this one Head one Faith the same Sacraments and so are all of one Religion and therefore having so much unity are to be own'd by this mark for the true Church c. T. In answer to this consider 1 That it cannot with any pretence of reason or Scripture be made the mark of a true Church that there shall be no divisions in it For were there not some to be found in the best and purest Churches immediately planted by the Apostles themselves As particularly in the Church of Corinth for which they are severely reproved 1 Cor. 1. 10 11 c. 2 Much less doth it become those of the Church of Rome to accuse others of divisions who have more and greater amongst themselves than can be found I believe in any other Church in Christendom They talk of one Head but sometimes they have had two or three Popes at once and that for several years together They are divided in points fundamental to their own Church as whether the Pope be above a General Council or the Council above the Pope Nor are they any more agreed where the Infallibility of which they boast so much is seated than about the Supremacy whether it be in the Pope or in a General Council or in both together Yea some say 't is neither in one or the other nor in both united as considered apart from the rest but in the whole body of the faithful as by them Religion is convey'd from one generation to another And are they not much better for an Infallible Judg of controversies whilst they are not yet agreed who he is and where this Infallibility is to be found In a multitude of other points are they divided as learned Writers of our Church have shewn at large and with great probability have some asserted that they hardly agree universally amongst themselves in any Doctrines but those wherein they agree with us 3 But again were they never so well united amongst themselves yet is this but the agreement of a Sect with it self and is far from proving them to be therefore the Catholick Church or any sound part of it As if suppose all the Quâ—kers were perfectly agreed together in all opinions and imagin their number was as great as the Papists are they therefore to be reckoned the Catholick Church because forsooth they are One amongst themselves Surely no since by their errors and their schism they divide themselves from all other Christians Thus whilst Papists are united in owning the Pope to be Christs Vicar on earth and the supreme visible Head over the whole Christian Church they do hereby only make a sect or faction let their number be never so great And by this means as well as many other ill opinions and practices which are imposed on the
of the most ancient Fathers or in the Decrees of the first Councils but since we find no such thing we may firmly conclude them to be no essential Articles of the Christian Faith As if now that party in the Roman Church which asserts the freedom of the Blessed Virgin from Original sin should so far prevail as to get a Council like that packt up at Trent to establish this new opinion as an Article of Faith would it not be enough for us to reply that this is no where to be found in Scripture or in the Creed and therefore whether true or false yet certainly is no article of faith And thus we shew our selves to be of the same faith with the Catholick Church of old whilst we embrace the very same Articles which she did and what more is obtruded upon us as part of the faith we do constantly reject it either as false or as unnecessary Though as to all or most of the points which we thus reject you will find sufficient evidence against them in holy Scripture as I shall afterward shew L. But they commonly say that they have only established these new Doctrines in opposition to new Heresies with which the Church in former times was not troubled and therefore did not so fully and expresly determine against them as they now have done yet they pretend that these their new Articles were plainly implied and contain'd under some head or other of ancient Doctrine T. All this is most false and frivolous since if these new coin'd Articles of theirs had been true there was the same reason why they should have been taught anciently as well as now and occasion enough was frequently offered To instance in one for all If Saint Peter was indeed to have been made supreme Governour of the Christian Church and the Bishops of Rome after him would not our Saviour have told his Apostles so when they were contending who should be greatest And after this in the Primitive times when there were often hot contentions amongst Bishops and Churches would they not all have appeal'd to the Pope for the decision of their controversies and have yielded submission to his sentence if this had been the current Doctrine of the Church that he was their Supreme Governour and Infallible Judg But alas we find no such matter And consider further that when Heresies arose the ancient Fathers who wrote against them plainly shew'd how they contradicted the Holy Scripture and the common Doctrine contain'd in the Creed as explain'd by those who went before them Thus when the Arrians denied the Divinity of our Saviour the Orthodox both proved it by Scripture and urged that Article of the Creed that Jesus is the Son of God which they shew'd was still interpreted of his partaking of a Divine nature as was afterward therefore more fully exprest in the Nicene Creed But now where can Papists shew Scripture in proof of their Novelties Or in what Article of the Creed will they prove them to be virtually contain'd and shew that the Article was so understood by those Ancients who have written Comments on the Creed How will they by this method make out that the Pope is Christs Vicar on Earth not surely because Christ is the Son of God Or what because there is mention made of the Catholick Church must that be meant only of the Roman Church so that none must belong to it but those who yield subjection to the Pope But what ancient Writer did ever thus explain this or the other Article And to what Articles I beseech you must we reduce those other peculiar Doctrines of theirs Transubstantiation Purgatory c. with the rest of their gross Errors and Innovations These therefore do we most justly reject as being corrupt additions to the ancient Christian Faith the common Faith of Gods Holy Catholick Church which we retain firm and entire without adding or diminishing CHAP. IV. Of the fourth Mark of the true Church that it is Apostolick L. BY your last discourse I am fully satisfied how little reason Papists have to assume and engross to themselves the title of Catholicks and that our Church of England is a true and sound part of the Catholick Church And at the same time I do also perceive that the last mark of a true Church doth as properly belong to it viz. that it is Apostolick T. This is indeed so very plain from what hath been said under the former head that I reckon there is little need to spend much time in speaking particularly to it For as I have often inculcated our Church receives all those Doctrines which we are certain were taught by the Apostles that faith which was delivered by them to the Churches which they planted as it is to be found at large in their writings and which is summ'd up in that which we call the Apostles Creed as being the Summary of their Doctrine All the Articles of this Creed we do stedfastly embrace and profess and that in the plain sense of the words according to the commonly received interpretation of the Church of Christ in the first and purest ages And thus our Doctrine is Apostolical so also is our Government our Worship and Administration of the holy Sacraments and therefore our Church doth most justly deserve the title of an Apostolical Church For according to the precepts and example of the Apostles we worship the true God in the name of his Son Jesus our only Mediator and that in a language understood by the people We baptize with water In the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost And in the Lords-Supper do give both Bread and Wine to the people according to our Saviours own institution In a word we preach the very same Faith the same holiness and righteousness of life which the Apostles did But on the other hand it 's most certain that as to the chief points wherein the Church of Rome and we differ the Apostles never delivered those Doctrines nor enjoyn'd those practices which are obtruded upon us by that corrupt Church They never taught that the Bishop of Rome is the supreme and infallible Head of the Church They never taught us to pray to Angels or Saints no not to the Blessed Virgin her self nor to make Prayers for the Dead that they might be delivered out of Purgatory nor to take away the Cup from the Laity nor to worship the consecrated Host to adore Images or to make any use of them in Religious service These things with many others now used in the Church of Rome were never taught or practised by the Holy Apostles and therefore so far that Church is not Apostolical L. I do verily believe it deserves not that name with respect to those Doctrines and practices wherein it differs from us But I hear them often making great boasts that theirs must certainly be an Apostolical Church because an Apostle himself was once their Bishop even St. Peter and he ordained another
is this no more than what we find said of the rest of the Apostles Ephes. 2. 20. where Christians are said to be built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Christ himself being the chief corner-stone that is plainly that these Christians were establisht in the belief of that Doctrine which had been more obscurely revealed by the Prophets and of which the Apostles were the chief Preachers being the founders of the Christian Church having received their authority from Jesus Christ the Supreme Ruler and only Head of this his Church To the same purpose you may see Rev. 21. 14. where the twelve Apostles are expresly called twelve foundations So that as St. Peter made his confession in the name of the rest in like manner what was said to him belongs to the rest also which is most plain from Ioh. 20. 23. where the power of the Keys is given to them all that their just sentence delivered on Earth shall be ratified in Heaven and the same doubtless belongs to all their Successors the Bishops and Pastors of the Church whilst they proceed according to the rules of the Gospel L. If the former Text be not sufficient they have another ready to produce for the same purpose viz. Ioh. 21. 15 16 17. where Saint Peter is commanded by our Blessed Saviour to feed his lambs and sheep that is they say to rule over all Christians every where both small and great high and low T. They may say what they please but the Text is very far from saying or intimating any such thing With such corrupt glosses they may force any Text to serve their turn as from those words of our Saviour to St. Peter Luk. 22. 32. I have pray'd for thee that thy faith fail not that he should not utterly fall away from Christ notwithstanding his denial of him hence they would collect that St. Peter had a promise of Infallibility and this too must belong to the Pope in all ages as his Successor But as to the Text you last named would any honest impartial Reader ever imagin that because St. Peter is so earnestly charged as the rest of the Apostles in other places are to be very diligent in Preaching the Gospel in gathering and feeding the flock of Christ that he is thereby made Ruler over the Christian world and the Bishops of Rome after him invested in the same power and jurisdiction whilst there is not a syllable said of any such power nor any mention of Successors Or if these had been concern'd yet is there any intimation given that those at Rome should have this priviledg rather than the Bishops of Antioch where they will grant St. Peter to have been Bishop long before he was at Rome L. These things I confess will very hardly be drawn from that Text. T. So little countenance doth either that or any other Text give to their pretences that it would seem more reasonable and modest for them to wave all talk of Scripture in this case and depend barely upon tradition with which they use to make much noise and yet this if truly searched into will do them little service as I may after shew At present let it suffice to add that these Texts they quote were not understood in that sense they put upon them either by St. Peter himself or the rest of the Apostles no nor by the Christian Church for many hundred years after Whatever precedency St. Peter might have by way of honour yet do we no where find him claiming any power over his Brethren the Apostles nor does he once mention any such matter in either of his Epistles but stiles himself as the rest did a Servant and Apostle of Jesus Christ. And when he speaks to the Elders or Bishops of the Church he does not command them as the Supreme Ruler of all Bishops but with great meekness exhorts them as a brother stiling himself an Elder 1 Pet. 5. 1. and his exhortation to them is at the third vers that they should not carry themselves as Lords over Gods heritage not proudly affect any undue superiority over them but make themselves examples to the flock that so they might receive their reward from the Lord Jesus whom he stiles the chief Shepherd never adding that under Christ he himself was to be reckoned chief Shepherd here upon Earth And if it should be lookt upon as only a piece of modesty in St. Peter a vertue which his pretended Successors have had little share of that he would say nothing of his own great power let it be further considered that as no such power was given him by our blessed Saviour when there was a contention amongst the Apostles who should be greatest so neither was it ever ascribed to him by any Apostle either before Christs death or after it There is no appearance of it in that assembly of the Apostles and Elders Act. 15. 6. when St. Paul writes to the Romans he says nothing of this great priviledg belonging to that See And when he writes to the Corinthians and reproves them for their factions and sidings whilst some were for Cephas others for Apollos c. by which Cephas it's plain must be meant St. Peter yet he says not a word on this so fair an occasion to enjoyn their preferring Cephas before all others but exhorts them to peace and quietness in their subjection to Christ and his Ministers without being puft up for one against another yea writing to the Galatians he tells them that upon a just occasion he withstood Saint Peter to the face saying nothing by way of Salvo to his supreme jurisdiction To conclude no where do we read in all the New Testament of any other Head of the whole Church but Jesus Christ himself as he is expresly stiled Col. 1. 18. Ephes. 1. 22. and in many other places Nor would I have named any but that I remember I once met with an ignorant Papist who quoting 1 Cor. 12. 21. The head cannot say to the feet I have no need of you would thence prove that Christ could not be the Head of the Church because he may say he has no need of us as if because that place was not meant of him no other was But it 's no great wonder to hear a Papist arguing so weakly out of Scripture in which they are so little conversant L. And no greater wonder is it that they have so little regard for that which does them so little service and particularly I perceive they have no help from it for the confirming this great article of the Popes Supremacy But though the Holy Scripture does so little befriend their cause yet I have often heard them brag much of Councils and Fathers how these do all with one consent acknowledg and assert this his Supremacy which though I am not able to disprove yet I am very backward to take it on their bare word because I find such ill dealing in their quotation of Scripture and
in other cases T. Good reason you have to be so wary since the boast they make of antiquity being on their side is notoriously vain and false and in nothing more palpably than in the present case about the Popes Universal Supremacy For in none of the ancient Councils is any such priviledge given him any more than in holy Scripture which Councils our Church most readily embraces especially the four first Yea the direct contrary is decreed in the very first and most famous General Council that of Nice For therein it was determined as to the Jurisdiction of Bishops that ancient customs should be retain'd and that such eminent Bishops as of Alexandria and Antioch should have the same priviledges in their Precincts that the Bishop of Rome had in his By which decree they within their several limits were made as absolute as he and were not in the least subject to his power nor responsible to him for their proceedings And not to trouble you with many instances in the next age after this there was a great Council in Carthage where St. Austin himself was present in which it was expresly decreed that there should be no appeals to any foreign Bishop after matters had been determined amongst themselves This indeed gave offence to the Pope that then was who pretended that this power of receiving appeals was granted him by the Council of Nice To which the African Bishops answered they had never heard any such matter but would send purposely to Nice it self or some other neighboring Bishops to make enquiry they did so and found all to be meer fraud and forgery Such wicked arts did they of Rome use from the beginning for the justifying and promoting their proud Usurpations Something of a precedency we grant there was very anciently allow'd to the Bishop of Rome which had nothing in it of jurisdiction and power over the rest of his brethren but only was an honour granted him chiefly on account of Rome's being the Seat of the Emperour Hereupon he had many advantages above other Bishops and was capable of doing them good Offices at Court and on that account frequent application was made to him by such as needed his assistance and very often in point of meer prudence matters were brought to him from other Churches and referred to his arbitration Hither also many of the Eastern Bishops were forced to fly for refuge and succour when opprest by the Arrians By these and such like means especially by the Emperour's removal more and more into the East the Bishop of Rome strangely encreased in honour and power and at length in pride and insolence So that in succeeding times as a secular spirit of ambition and covetousness began to infect the greatest Churchmen there were most vehement contests betwixt the Bishops of Rome and of Constantinople for the preheminence For in one General Council it had been determined that because the Emperour had his residence at Constantinople the Bishop of that City should have the same priviledges which the Bishop of Rome had formerly enjoy'd for the same reason And one of the Bishops of Constantinople at length took upon him to stile himself Universal Bishop thereby say learned men claiming rather honour than any jurisdiction over his brethren Yet Gregory then Bishop of Rome was so incensed at it that he positively declared that whoever should assume such a proud title was a certain forerunner of Antichrist This was about six hundred years after our Saviour And not long after it Boniface the third Bishop of Rome by means of the wicked Phocas who had murdered his Master Mauricius and was chosen Emperour in his stead got his Church to be stiled the Supreme of all other Churches though with much ado as their own Historian expresses it But this Supremacy the body of the Greek Church utterly refused to acknowledg and so does to this day though they of Rome have several times used all manner of arts and tricks to draw them into a compliance still persisting in the same methods of fraud and violence for the confirming and securing their arrogant usurpations which at first they made use of to introduce them L. But they say it 's necessary to the unity of the Church that there should be one Supreme Head and Governour T. Very true and so I have told you there is namely the Lord Jesus Christ the only Head of the Catholick Church the Unity whereof consists in the subjection of the members to this same Head by their belief of the same Doctrine and obedience to the same holy Laws and by living in mutual love and charity and Christian communion one with another And herein most plainly doth the Apostle place the unity of the Christian Church Ephes. 4. that they have one Lord one Faith c. but not in their having one chief Ruler under Christ here on Earth whether Pope or Council only they are bound to live in obedience to their own Princes and Bishops in the respective Dominions and Churches where they reside L. They say that Christ alone is the invisible Head but the Pope is the visible Head of the Church T. This is a distinction we no where meet with in holy Scripture and therefore do justly reject it as the fond imagination of their own brain coin'd only to serve a turn But instead of detaining you with any further discourse on this subject I shall refer you to the Learned Dr. Barrow's excellent Treatise which handles it at large if you have leisure to peruse it wherein this pretence of the Popes Supremacy is so shamefully exposed and so fully confuted as cannot but give abundant satisfaction to any intelligent and impartial Reader And this is done with such strength of reason and such full proof from all antiquity that I am apt to think there will scarce be found any of the Champions for the Romish cause as bold men as they be so hardy and impudent as to attempt the returning any answer to that his most solid and impregnable Discourse L. Yet it 's wonder if they do not for they seem most zealous in contending for this above all other Doctrines T. And will you blame them since if this be disown'd the whole fabrick of Popery falls to the ground For if the Pope be not Head of the Church then all Princes in their own Dominions will be found to be Supreme Moderators and Governours in all causes and over all persons as well Ecclesiastical as Civil which is our meaning when we stile the King Head of our Church and then what reformation they with their Clergy have made according to the Holy Scriptures will appear justifiable Yea then these Princes may confer all manner of Church-preferments in their own Kingdoms without asking the Popes leave or expecting his confirmation and all Ecclesiastical causes may be determined without any appeals to Rome And if the King of England may do this in his Dominions as most certainly he may then
confirming their belief of his Doctrine The Doctrine was to be believed but the miracle was to be seen which confirm'd that Doctrine To instance in one for all When the water was turn'd into wine Ioh. 2. it was now seen and tasted to be true wine only it was much better than common wine Otherwise do you think if it had still had the colour the smell and the taste of water that the people would have been perswaded it was turned into wine Would they have been satisfied with an odd story that the substance was wine though the accidents of water still remain'd or with any such idle unintelligible talk Would such a sort of miracle as this that could no way be perceived ever have been believed Or would the pretence to such miracles ever have gain'd Disciples to our Saviour And yet such a one is this of Transubstantiation L. So very strange and unaccountable it is that it never ought to be admitted without very good proof T. And is it not then almost as strange that ever any man should believe so absurd a Doctrine not only without good proof but even against the express words of Scripture as well as against his reason and senses L. No matter for sense and reason they cry but how do you prove it to be against Scripture T. It may be proved from those places which tell us of our Saviours being received into Heaven as Act. 3. 21. and he cannot at the same time be corporally present upon earth and in heaven too L. But did he not appear to St. Paul and others after his Ascension T. Yes he did so yet does not this prove him to be then corporally present for he might render himself visible to them without descending as he did to St. Stephen or he might appear to them in a Vision and make himself present to their imagination Or he might be said to appear to them by his Angel whom he sent For thus in Scripture it 's commonly said God appear'd to this or that man when he sent his Angel to him with some message But besides this the plain words of the Evangelists when they relate the institution of this Holy Sacrament do directly contradict this Doctrine of Transubstantiation For they tell us that our Saviour took bread and blessed it and brake it even the very same that he took that he blest and what he blest that he broke and what is this but true bread as to its natural substance Only in a mystical and spiritual sense it was made the Body of Christ by Consecration And thus also St. Paul calls it Bread after Consecration no less than three times in three verses together 1 Cor. 11. 26 c. L. This my Author grants but says it 's called so because the external accidents of bread do still remain T. That is because the colour shape and taste of bread do still remain with all other qualities of common bread Now I beseech you can there be any better or surer way to discover what is the substance or nature of a thing than by such accidents such outward sensible appearances as these How can we distinguish bread from a stone or water from wine but by the colour the smell the taste or the like And thus do we here distinguish bread from flesh and wine from blood and do believe that to be bread which is both call'd so in Scripture and which our own eyes discern to be indeed so L. But he says faith will teach us otherwise from the Word of God T. Nay on the contrary you see Gods word calls it bread after the Consecration and therefore both our faith and our senses assure us that it is bread Nor does this in the least contradict our Saviours words when he says This is my body for so it is in a spiritual sense whilst yet the substance of bread remains unchanged and therefore most properly is it called bread which it could in no wise be if no such substance was there Yet still we say that by partaking of these holy Elements of bread and wine we do really partake of Christs body and blood though in a spiritual manner according to St. Pauls expression 1 Cor. 10. 16. Do you judge then who keeps closest to Scripture in this point they or we L. To me it seems plain that the Doctrine and language of our Church is no less agreeable to Scripture than to reason And I still discover what injury they do us whilst they charge us with holding that the Sacrament is only the figure of Christs body T. It is as I have already said a most false charge for though it be the figure of his body and expresly called so by some ancient Writers yet we own it to be much more than so For in this holy Sacrament are given to us Christs body and blood whilst the blessings and benefits of his Death and Passion are made over to and bestow'd upon the worthy receiver And so our Church expresses it in the Office at the Communion We do spiritually eat the flesh of Christ and drink his blood Christ dwelleth in us and we in him we are one with Christ and he with us L. Yet they say we make the Sacraments of the New Testament in effect no better than the old since the Passover and such like were figures of Christ whereas in the New Testament is to be given the real verity T. A most plain difference we make whatever they say to the contrary for besides that our Sacraments are few and easie clear and intelligible it is to be considered that under the Law were used types and shadows which prefigured Christ to come and that somewhat obscurely whereas the Sacraments now used do most plainly shew him to be already come and to have died for our sins and risen again according to the Scriptures Herein moreover is made to us a more plenteous communication of grace and comfort as the fruit of his Death and Resurrection according to that of the Evangelist The Law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ Joh. 1. 17. Yet after all we assert that the Elements made use of in these Sacraments of the New Testament are no more changed as to their natural substance than those of the Old that is they are still Sacraments outward visible signs and representations of Spiritual things and are not changed into those very things themselves which they are designed to represent and hold forth to us And this is granted by the Papists themselves as to one of the Sacraments viz. that of Baptism For the water herein made use of still remains water It is not turned into the natural blood of Christ and yet by virtue of that blood which this water represents are our sins washt away in this Laver of Regeneration Hence then it is most evident that the efficacy of a Sacrament consists not in having the natural substance of the Elements altered for then
their not discerning the Lords body vers 29. And to receive these Holy Elements without reverence thankfulness and true devotion was to be guilty of dishonouring the Body and Blood of Christ which were here represented and exhibited to Believers But all this while we have no reason hence to fancy that the natural substance of Christ's Body and Blood are present in the Sacrament Had the Apostle thought of any such thing surely he would have exprest himself in another manner and have said somewhat to explain so Mysterious a Doctrine And had he and his Brethren taught the same as the Church of Rome now does surely the unbelieving Iews or Gentiles would have poured forth their Objections against it whereas we hear not a word of that nature neither in the Apostles Days or the next Ages after In all the Apologies that the first Christian Writers set forth in defence of our Religion we find nothing said in vindication of any such Opinion as this whilst they give large Answers to many other Objections for which there was nothing like so good a pretence Nor do we read of any controversy amongst Christians themselves about this matter for many Ages whereas in latter times since this Opinion was first broached there have been many Volumes written for and against it L. But they pretend that this was the Ancient Opinion of the Fathers and first Christians T. Pretend it they do but as in other points of Controversy betwixt them and us so here it is a very vain and false pretence For we read nothing of it in the old Creeds or the Canons of General Councils or in the genuine works of any Father for many hundred years after our Saviour L. Yet they alledge that the Fathers commonly stile the Holy Elements the Body and Blood of Christ and will frequently quote places to that purpose T. No doubt but they may easily do that though without any advantage to their Cause since its plain enough in what sense those expressions are to be understood from other places of the same Fathers For they themselves do sometimes tell us that Christ's Words of eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood are to be taken Spiritually that in the Communion there is a commemoration of his Death and a representation of his Body and Blood yea sometimes they expresly call the Bread and Wine the Figures thereof Now these and such like sayings cannot possibly be reconciled with the Popish opinion of Transubstantiation Therefore when they speak of Christ's Body and Blood in the Sacrament we may most reasonably understand them in the very same sense that I have told you our Church frequently uses the like expressions So do our Writers very commonly in their Books of devotion and in practical discourses on the Communion speak at the same rate whilst they intend nothing more but that these Holy Elements are made Christ's Body and Blood Mystically and Spiritually But how far this opinion of Transubstantiation is from being an Ancient Doctrine of the Christian Church hath been made sufficiently evident amongst many others by the Learned Bishop Cozens who in his History of it gives us an account about what time it was first publickly taught what opposition was then made to it by sundry Learned men of that Age and how long it was before it could be established by any Council even amongst Papists themselves or could obtain to be the general avowed Doctrine of their Church Nay to this very day their chief Writers are strangely divided in the accounts they give of it setting their Wits upon the rack to explain and defend it some this way and some that having so very little help from Holy Scripture in the Case as some of them are so ingenuous as to acknowledg L. Methinks its strange that they should with so much eagerness maintain and with so much violence impose a Doctrine which to me seems impossible to be understood or firmly believed T. Strange it is and very unreasonable but yet some account may be given of it for beside that natural pride which inclines men to defend the opinion which they have once espoused especially a Church which boasts of Infallibility besides this I say we may consider how mightily the admitting of this opinion makes for the Honour of the Priest who can thus with four words speaking work one of the most wonderful Miracles that ever was known in the World indeed such a one as can neither be seen felt nor understood But the people who can be perswaded to believe it must needs have a mighty veneration for the Priest that works it and be almost ready to make a god of him who can so easily make a god for them by turning the Bread into the very person of our Saviour his Divinity and Humanity whom therefore they worship and adore as God though after that they eat him L. This may seem indeed to make for the Honour of the Priest that he can work such wonders but surely it makes little for the honour either of Priest or people to be guilty of such false and absurd opinions and of such corrupt practices which are the natural consequence of them For are they not guilty of Idolatry in Worshipping the Bread as God though I know they say there is no Bread there after Consecration pray let me know your judgement because I find my Author endeavouring to vindicate their Church from this heavy censure T. I do not see how they can possibly excuse themselves from this charge if the Bread still remains Bread in its natural substance as we may most certainly conclude it does from what hath been alledged both from Scripture Reason and our Senses Wherefore whilst they worship that for God which is not God giving to the creature what is due alone to the Creator they may justly be reckoned guilty of Idolatry L. But will it not serve to excuse them that they worship that which they take to be God and therefore do design and direct their Worship to God and not to the Bread which they believe not to be there after Consecration though they see it before them T. What allowances it may please our good God to make for the ignorance and mistakes of honest well-meaning men I still say it doth not beseem us to determine But as to the thing it self for my own part I cannot see how this pretence will any more excuse a Papist from Idolatry than it would excuse an Heathen for his Worship of the Sun that he did verily believe the Sun to be God or that God did in some extraordinary manner dwell in the Sun the substance of it being turned into God whilst only the accidents of Light and Heat and the like do still remain Nay one would think the Heathen in some respect more excusable of the two since the Sun looks much liker a God than does a Wafer or bit of Bread But ' there is no great need of disputing against them in this
clean though it might give him liberty to go into the Congregation so when an hypocrite is absolved though this may give him liberty of external communion with the Church yet will it not be of any value to procure the favour of God and the forgiveness of his sins For pray consider what is it to have our sins forgiven but to be freed from the punishment due to them Now who is it that can keep off this punishment but God alone who has power to inflict it most certainly no mortal man be he Priest or Pope or what he will can save an impenitent sinner from the wrath of God 'T is God alone then that properly forgives the penitent in removing his displeasure from him and preventing that punishment which was due to him and Gods Minister s they only pronounce absolution and remission to the penitent Indeed so far as the Church inflicted punishment so far she may be said to forgive a man by taking off that punishment So the Criminal that was under Excommunication may be absolved by the Minister from that censure but 't is God alone who gives pardon of sin by saving men from that misery which they had deserved and this pardon his Ministers do in his name pronounce to the penitent and can assure it only to those who are truly so L. I am satisfied with your Discourse and the rather for that I hereby perceive that whatever real advantage is to be had by the peoples private application to their Spiritual Guide for direction and comfort this they may have from the Ministers of our own Church T. No doubt but they may if it be not their own fault for we do not only allow but earnestly invite them to come to us for that purpose and are ready to give them all the assistance we are capable And according to that power which Christ hath given to his Ministers to pronounce absolution to those that are penitent we are ready to do the same both in publick and private for the satisfaction and comfort of the pious and humble whose consciences are burdened with the sense of their sins L. I was the more willing to have you insist on this because I have heard some Papists much exclaiming against our Church for not having confession used amongst us and boasting what great advantage they received from it T. Where the Priest is judicious and faithful and the people truly devout I doubt not but they may get much benefit by a free opening of their minds to him and receiving such directions as may be suitable to their particular case And may true piety be promoted whether in this place or that by this or the other method for my part I shall rejoyce in it And perhaps the abuse of private confessions in the Church of Rome may have driven others into the contrary extreme and made them too much disused amongst us But in the mean time it 's most unreasonable to rack and torture mens consciences by obliging them to tell every particular fault they can think of which instead of giving ease may often occasion more perplexity and disquiet to their minds on more accounts than one Besides whatever they boast I doubt this practice is generally turned into a meer formality and by the carelesness both of Priest and people though I will not condemn all tends rather to encourage and harden men in sin than to reform them from it whilst they conceit they have a pardon so near at hand and can upon easie terms wipe off their former guilt and so go on to sin upon a new score This while I doubt they come to confession for a pardon rather than a cure and are pleased with it as a fine device to keep them from Hell though they go on in their sins Especially considering that current Doctrine of their Church before mention'd that bare â—â—trition that is being sorry for sin only from fear of Hell may suffice to procure pardon if they are but absolved by the Priest And may not the most wicked man on earth sometimes feel this kind of sorrow whilst yet he has no real love for God and goodness Moreover notwithstanding their great pretences of Religion and the good of souls there is I fear a great deal of carnal policy in their urging this Auricular confession as they call it upon the people with so much strictness for the Priest by this means knowing so much the secrets of their minds and their private faults it gives him more dominion over them and makes them have more awe and reverence for him And whilst they often discover the secrets of families of Statesmen and persons of greatest quality they know how to make their advantage of these discoveries for their own interest as occasion shall serve Other abuses also there may be and I doubt often are made of this custom by the worser sort of men such as I am not willing to mention Rather let us proceed with your Author CHAP. XI Of Invocation of Saints L. IN the next place he pleads for praying to Saints which he reckons we may as lawfully do as St. Paul when living desired others to pray for him as he also did for them and so he supposes that both Angels and Saints do pray for us in heaven and therefore we may pray to them to do it for us T. By this he would insinuate that our Prayers to them are only to desire them to pray to God for us which is not so as we shall shew anon But for the present let us suppose this to be all they argue for that we are to pray to the Saints departed that they would intercede with God for us Now for this we have no warrant from the holy Scripture no such precept either in the Old Testament or the New nor yet the example of any pious person recorded in either Nor was it the practice of the Primitive Church for some hundred years after our Saviour and therefore surely we are very excusable for refusing to comply with so bold an innovation The argument he makes use of is far from the purpose For does it follow that because I may desire any good man now living to pray for me that therefore I may desire those that are dead and in another world to do it surely no. Especially if you consider how much danger at least there is of Idolatry in this custom of praying to the Saints departed For these prayers to them are offered up in a solemn manner when people are upon their knees and with all the signs of devotion and reverence which they use in the worship of Almighty God and commonly they are mingled with their prayers to God What wonder then if ignorant people by this means be drawn to worship Saints with the same devotion that they do God himself but there 's no such danger in my desiring the prayers of some living friend to whom I am speaking or writing Besides I know
mans right and yet will not allow him the benefit of having the Will to plead on his own behalf And this is plainly the course of the Roman Church in the present case for the Rulers withhold the Scripture from the people that they may the more easily detain them in a blind obedience to those Doctrines and commands of their own which are contrary to it and which they will not have examined by it And you may well suspect the man has bad wares to put off who will expose them no where but in a dark shop It 's much to be feared that Guide means not well who would have my eyes put out or fast closed that I may follow him blindfold He that teaches falshood as well as he that does evil is afraid of the light that will discover his error But to conclude this whatever Papists may talk of the obscurity of Scripture the true reason why they keep it out of the peoples hands is because it is too plain I mean because it so plainly contradicts several Doctrines and practices that are now current in their Church So plainly does the second Commandment forbid all worship of Images that by their good will they would not have it come into the peoples sight And as plainly doth the holy Scripture in other places forbid the worship of Angels or Saints having Prayers in an unknown tongue the taking away the Cup from the Laity plainly it confutes their Doctrine of Transubstantiation whilst it calls the holy Elements bread after Consecration In these and several other instances doth Scripture so plainly make against them that no wonder if therefore they are so much against the Scripture as that they will not commonly permit the people to read it but keep back from them this key of knowledg L. This seems to be the true reason but so bad a one that they are ashamed to own it And now I return you unseigned thanks for the pains you have taken to confirm me in the truth and to shew me the vanity and weakness of those arguings wherewith they of the Church of Rome do endeavour to excuse and palliate their gross errors and to impose upon common people who are sometimes easily misled T. No great wonder if with their subtilties they impose upon such as cannot well distinguish betwixt specious pretences and solid reasonings And indeed they do in some measure deserve to be imposed upon who will so far trust to their own weak judgments as not to seek direction and assistance from those who are able to give it but do presently conclude that if they themselves cannot answer a cunning Priest no body esse can and thereupon without more ado become his easie proselytes especially when some worldly interest draws them to it which is an argument quickly discerned but not easily resisted Yet it 's strange to see how these same persons when they are gone off from our Church presently seem so humble and modest as to suspect their own judgments they commonly refuse to discourse with our Ministers pretending they are not fit to meddle with controversies nor hold disputes They now refer themselves wholly to the Church their own Sect the Romish Church that must be their Judge and their Guide They might before dispute and yield and be Judges for themselves when they left our Church but now forsooth they are got as the Priest tells them whose word they must take for it into an infallible Church whose Doctrines and commands must never be questioned or examined nor any thing heard that can be objected against them All must be swallow'd without chewing they must believe as the Church believes though what that is they do not well know This is the way that Romish Priests commonly take with them and a cunning way it is for securing of the Converts they have once made but so grosly partial that a man of ordinary discretion may readily discern it and no sincere lover of truth will be drawn to comply with it For how can any man answer it to God or his own conscience to depart from that Church wherein he has been baptized and educated without a fair hearing what can be said for it and when he is drawn away into another Church becomes so fixed and resolute that he 'l hear nothing that can be said against it But you I confess have acted at another rate and I cannot but commend your ingenuity and diligence herein which I pray God to succeed for your establishment in that holy Religion in which you have hitherto been instructed and from which I hope you 'l never be perverted For it is the very truth of God taught by his Son Jesus in his holy Gospel the only infallible rule of Faith and Manners L. I do stedfastly believe that it is so and by the grace of God will never depart from it T. Does your Author meddle with no other points of controversie betwixt us and the Church of Rome L. He mentions no more that I find looking upon these I suppose as most material but toward the end of this Chapter he heaps up many bitter invectives against our Ministers as if they spoke ill of the Romish Church out of meer malice against their consciences only to make Papists envied and hated and that they often cite the holy Scripture to no purpose or to an ill one and do also falsifie and cut off what is not to their liking yea and have put whole Books out of the number of Canonical Scriptures in fine that they do all as the toy takes them without thinking of any judgment or hell to come after T. This is very severe indeed but so grosly false and spiteful that it deserves no more notice or answer than the revilings of an angry scold Only to the last heavy charge of putting out whole Books of Holy Scripture I shall answer a few words and leave you to judge of the rest by what truth you shall find in this accusation Know then that as to the New Testament we receive for Canonical all the same Books which the Church of Rome it self does and all other Christian Churches in the world so far as ever I have heard And as to the Old Testament we receive all those Books which were acknowledged for Canonical by the Iewish Church who are very competent witnesses in this case or by the Christian Church for four hundred years after our Saviour as learned Writers of our Church have demonstrated and particularly Bishop Cozens before named in his History of the Canon of Scripture As to those Books which are called Apocryphal though we have them not in the same esteem with the Sacred Writings of the Old and New Testament yet we have a just value for them as the works of pious men and of great antiquity and our Church appoints Lessons out of them to be publickly read though not on the Lords days thereby recommending them to the people who have them in their
of some dangerous Disease and seeking to an able Physician for advice which when he has received and is about to follow it in comes a bold Mountebank and tells the Man it 's utterly impossible he should ever recover by hearkning to his Physician but if he will be guided by him all shall be well for he has an infallible Cure at hand that will certainly do the work Now suppose the Physician be so modest that he will not answer this impudent Quack in his own language nor say it 's impossible for his Medicines to do any good only he deals honestly with his patient and tells him of the danger of trusting himself in such a Mans hands who takes very desperate courses and where he cures one kills Twenty but for himself he shall prescribe nothing but what he can demonstrate to be safe and good and which through God's blessing hath often been very effectual Now in point of prudence what ought the patient to do in this case What must he reject a skilful and safe Physician because he speaks with modesty and caution and chuse the daring ignorant Mountebank because he talks big and boldly and boasts of Infallible Receipts of a certain and speedy Cure L. No surely by no means T. Yet so he should do by this Authors Argument for the choice of their Church because forsooth she condemns all others and commends her self talking as much of Infallibility as the most cheating Mountebank is used to do and with much what the same reason and truth The Case is so like that I need not trouble you with applying it L. No you need not For I understand it well enough and as well do I discern the weakness of his Argument T. And yet for your fuller satisfaction if need be I would have you read that Sermon I formerly told you of on 1 Cor. 3. 13. by a Reverend Divine of the Church of England where you will find this piece of sophistry so shamefully bafled and exposed that he must be a very silly and shameless Priest that will ever offer to make use of it more Wherefore to all that hath been said on this subject I shall only suggest one thing more to your consideration viz. that so far as this Argument hath any force in it it may with great advantage be retorted on Papists themselves For if that way be safest to be chosen in which both parties are agreed then are we Protestants clearly on the safer side For they themselves own the Scriptures which we embrace they approve of the Creeds which we hold they cannot but allow of the Worship of God in the name of Jesus Christ with all other the substantials of our Religion which as I have often said is nothing else but Christianity it self But now we do utterly disown the additions which the Romish Church has made to the Ancient Creeds many of their traditions we also reject as being plainly repugnant to the Holy Scriptures we condemn their worship of Images of Angels and Saints as being neither commanded by God nor practised by the Church of Christ in the Primitive times Hence then you may be informed what is safest to chuse and follow whether the plain and pure Religion of Jesus Christ profest in our Church and acknowledged by all Christians in the World even by the Papists themselves or to swallow down all those new Articles which their Church has added to the Christian Faith and defile our selves with those superstitions with which they have corrupted the Worship of God Many of which Doctrines and Practices are disapproved by all Christians but those of their own Sect and which upon good grounds we believe to be so utterly unlawful and pernicious that they make the condition of those in the Romish Church very hazardous and for our selves should we embrace them we could have no hopes of Salvation Judge then upon the whole what is safest to be chosen L. I confess I see little or no difficulty in the Case wherefore pray proceed to the second Argument T. I shall repeat to you what he calls so though for my part I find nothing in it that may deserve the name of an Argument Thus it runs That Church is not to be heard whose Authors and chief Doctors are meer Cozeners and Impostors and such he says are all but those of the Roman Church and therefore are not to be heard L. I deny that the Authors and Doctors of our Church are Cozeners and Impostors T. Thus he goes about to prove it They all say that they will reform the Roman Church with the pure Word of God and yet they have never done it nor will ever be able and therefore they are all meer Cozeners and Impostors This is all the proof he gives L. This all seems to me just nothing for I reckon that the Author of our Religion was no other than our Blessed Saviour and the first Teachers of it were the holy Apostles and Evangelists who taught it by their Preaching and then committed it to Writing in the Holy Word of God which we most readily embrace and in which our Religion is wholly contained And surely these were no Cozeners or Impostors but rather they who have corrupted Religion by their own novel inventions contrary to this Holy Word T. This is very true that you say but here by the Authors of our Church he means those Learned men who were instrumental for the reforming it from those inventions which he pleads for as a part of Religion L. This I believe to be his meaning But since these good men by Gods assistance did actually reform our Church by the pure Word of God from those Popish corruptions wherewith it was before polluted I admire why he should say they were Cozeners and Impostors for not doing what they pretended they would when as they have really done it T. And admire you still may For I cannot guess at his reason except by the Roman Church he means that particular Church which is at Rome or else the whole Sect of Papists all who own the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome and so stile themselves the Romish Church Take it in either of these senses and I confess this Romish Church is not yet reformed But this rather shews their obstinacy than any thing of deceitfulness in those who have attempted their Reformation If the Prophets and pious people of old would have healed Babylon and she would not be healed was this any dishonour to the Prophets Neither surely were any of the first Reformers so vain as to say that they would certainly reform the whole Church of Rome though they might heartily desire it and in their several places diligently endeavour it And thanks be to God through his assistance and blessing these their endeavours have been most happily successful in many Nations of the World and particularly in this our Kingdom of England for the delivering of our Church from the Usurpation of the Pope and
presses all men to endeavour after perfection in every grace and vertue and especially to be much in works of mercy and charity but yet she does not fright people with stories of Purgatory to bring in their wealth to the Church nor teach them that there is any great perfection in leaving their honest callings to run into a Monastery bringing their riches along with them thither She requires constant temperance and sobriety and sometimes imposes fasting and abstinence but then whether men eat a little flesh or fish oyl or butter she thinks it not a matter of the least moment but leaves all men to their own choice and prudence In a word she does not with the Pharisee teach for doctrines the commands of men but diligently inculcates the express commandments of Almighty God delivered to us in his holy Word And tho' she would not have us so foolish and proud as to think of meriting Heaven by our own good works yet she teaches that upon our patient continuance in well doing we shall through the mercies of God and the merits of Christ certainly obtain eternal life but upon no others terms does she encourage any man to hope for it And thus you see how our Church teaches us to take that same safe and narrow but sweet and pleasant way to salvation which is proposed to us in the Gospel L. I am fully perswaded she does so God grant me grace ever to walk in this holy way and then I shall not doubt of an happy end Pray proceed to his last argument T. I shall so and this it is That Church is not to be heard which has no solid reason for her keeping the Sabbath-day on the day she does keep it but no Church or Congregation of Sectaries has this and therefore none of them ought to be heard What say you to this L. I say that we of the Church of England whom he unjustly calls Sectaries have good reason for our keeping the Sabbath on that day we do keep it even as good reason as the Church of Rome it self has T. He goes on to prove the contrary thus No Church of Sectaries has Scripture for keeping the Sabbath-day on Sunday and no longer on Saturday as God commanded it and yet they reject tradition upon which ground the Roman Church keeps the Sunday in lieu of Saturday and therefore they have no solid reason for what they do c. L. I answer we have Scripture for keeping one day in seven viz. the fourth Commandment And we read that after our Saviours Resurrection the Apostles and Disciples commonly assembled together on the first day of the week which is called the Lords-day Revel 1. 10. And then we have tradition to assure us that this day was observed by the Christian Church ever since which tradition we may plead for our practice I trow as well as the Church of Rome T. Yes certainly we may for though we reject a great many ill things which they would thrust upon us for old traditions many of them being meer novelties of their own devising yet we do by no means reject such traditions as have sufficient evidence of their having been generally received by all Christian Churches from the very times of the Apostles down to our days and of this nature do learned men generally affirm the observation of the Lords-day to be And what you alledg from Scripture may very well serve to recommend to us so ancient and general a practice To all this besides the great equity and reasonableness of the thing in it self you may add the authority of those whom God hath set over us in Church and State all which being put together leaving the nice disputes that have been about this matter is a sufficient ground for our observation of the first day of the week as a Christian Sabbath a day of rest from our common employments devoted to the more solemn worship and service of God both in publick and private As solid reason therefore do we give for our practice herein as the Church of Rome it self can do or any other Church in the world And thus we have done with his five mighty arguments in which upon a little examination there appears nothing of strength or solidity He next musters up some weighty objections as he reckons them against those whom he calls Sectaries which he says ought to make them very much doubt whether they be secure in the way they are in And here according to his usual vain way of bragging he makes this large offer which yet he will never make good that all Priests Jesuits and Catholicks over all the world will turn to their way if they can but get from their Ministers a clear and satisfactory resolution of the following doubts L. It was cunningly done of him to call for a satisfactory resolution since though it be as clear as the light at noon-day yet they may still pretend that it is not satisfactory T. They may so though I question not but it will appear such to all that are impartial and judicious These doubts I shall propose to you in order and hear what you your self can say for the resolving of them L. I shall give in the best answers I am able and where I am at a loss shall still desire your help CHAP. II. A resolution of some doubts and questions proposed to Protestants T. FIrst he demands whether it can be clearly shewn that our Ministers were sent by Almighty God to preach and to reform the Roman Catholick Church or whether they are not some of the false Prophets who say The Lord saith when the Lord hath not sent them Ezek. 13. 6. L. There seems no great difficulty in resolving this doubt since our Ministers had lawful Ordination and thereby had authority to preach the Word of God And by the light of this word they discovered many errors and abuses in the Roman Church wherewith we were foully polluted and by Gods blessing and the assistance of lawful authority they were very instrumental in reforming us from the same Now whilst they proved their Doctrine by this Word of God they are not to be compared to those false Prophets who taught the people lyes and vanity as we have it Ezek. 13. 7 8. T. Your answer is sufficient and very clear For since our first Reformers did not publish a new Religion but rather restored the old by removing those corrupt additions that had been made to it they did not need any extraordinary commission from Heaven such as Moses had from God when he delivered the Law and as the Apostles had from Jesus Christ when they were first sent to preach the Gospel But it was sufficient that they were duly qualified by Gods Spirit for the work of the Ministry and were lawfully called to it by those who had authority in the Church to ordain them to that Office Such as these are truly said to be sent of God and are therefore
the Iewish Church by the solemn rite of Circumcision and since our Saviour hath no where given the least intimation that this priviledg should be taken from them I can see no reason why the children of Christian Parents may not be solemnly consecrated to God by Baptism and so admitted members of the Christian Church And to omit many other Texts which speak in favour of infants this without any wresting of the words may be fairly drawn from that commission given to the Apostles and their Successors Mat. 28. 19. Go ye therefore and teach or disciple all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost They were to make Disciples of whole Nations which surely comprehends both Parents and Children First the Parents were to be instructed in the Christian Faith and upon their profession of it to be baptized And then they themselves being devoted to God and entred into Covenant with him since Parents have power over their children to dispose of them for their good and to lay engagements on them for that end surely it was lawful for them to devote their children also to God and to enter them into Covenant with him by Baptism thereby laying a strict obligation upon them when they come to years of discretion to perform their part of this holy Covenant if ever they hope for any benefit by it the Parents also being bound to acquaint their children with their duty so soon as they are capable of learning it Thus when any one from among the heathens became a proselyte to the Iews when he himself was circumcised so were his children also Yea learned men tell us that it was also the custom to wash these proselytes in pure water and that very probably our Saviour was pleased to accommodate himself to this same usage of theirs in his instituting of Baptism for the more solemn admission of members into his Church Now as an excellent Writer argues suppose that our Blessed Saviour instead of the word Baptizing should have used that of circumcising and have said Go teach all Nations circumcising them in the name c. would not all men have been apt to think that the same priviledg which the Iews had of admitting their children into Covenant by Circumcision that Christian Parents also should have the like why then may not the same be reasonably argued from the words though Baptism be here named and not Circumcision Very probable it is that the Apostles thus understood it and that they practised accordingly when we read of their Baptizing such and such persons and their housholds as Act. 16. 15 33. amongst whom there might be some children for any thing that can be shewn to the contrary And certain we are that very early in the Christian Church insants were admitted to Baptism and thence hath it continued to this day to be the general custom of all Churches throughout the world And pray take good notice that though our Church allows nothing to be imposed upon our belief or practice as necessary to salvation but what is contain'd in Gods holy Word yet she hath great regard to antiquity to the customs of the truly Catholick Church and the current Doctrine of the Fathers and requires Ministers to have due respect thereto in their Exposition of Scripture And therefore without any contradiction to her self may very well admit the observation of such customs that having so much ground from Scripture are recommended also by the early and general practice of the Christian Church This I say she may very well do but is by no means thereby obliged to receive all the traditions and customs of the Roman Church for many of which nothing can be truly pleaded either from Scripture or antiquity but very much against them from both L. This is very plain and satisfactory Pray let us have his next question T. It is this Can you make it appear to me how your Sectaries can with reason and sufficient ground condemn all the Catholicks that were so many ages before Luther and Calvin for being no better than heathens and convince me that by adhering to you I shall be more secure of my salvation than if I joyn my self to them that have been held time out of mind in most parts of the world for the men that have the true and only saving Religion What answer give you to this L. First I know no body that does thus condemn all Catholicks before Luther and Calvin For as to those Christians in the first ages of the Church who truly deserve the name of Catholicks whether of the Roman Church or any other we are so far from condemning that we admire and applaud them we approve of their Doctrine contain'd in the ancient Creeds and do imbrace and profess it we honour their memory and endeavour to imitate their example But as those of the Roman Church in latter ages whom he means I suppose by his Catholicks though we do not say they are as bad as heathens yet we do truly say that they have very much corrupted Christian Religion by false Doctrines and Superstitious usages and therefore we think it a much safer way to salvation to adhere to the ancient certain truths of Christianity every where received and to worship God in that pure and holy manner which our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles both taught and used than to embrace those additions made by the Roman Church which are no parts of true and saving Religion nor have ever been so accounted by the generality of Christians And though our ancestors might have some excuse from the state of this Church in their days yet we their posterity should be utterly inexcusable if now that our Church has so justly reformed her self from Popish corruptions we should break off from her communion and go over to the Church of Rome that hates to be reformed This were to add the guilt of Schism to that of Superstition T. Your answer is very clear and full and may well enough serve for the solution of his fifth Query which is to the same purpose with the former viz. Can you make evident at least that in your little flock or in Luther and Calvin their guides more holiness and virtue was to be found than in the Catholicks And that it is this little flock of yours not the Catholicks that go the narrow way that leads to life L. To this may easily be answered as you have formerly instructed me that though Luther and Calvin were learned and good men who in their own times and places did much service for the Reformation of Religion yet they never had authority in our Church nor do we own them as our guides The blessed Iesus is the Author of our Religion and after him the holy Apostles were the teachers of it being no other than Christianity it self and consequently the true way to eternal happiness even that narrow way of truth and holiness which the whole flock of Christ
in all ages hath acknowledged and walked in But the Church of Rome which may well enough be stiled the Popes little flock hath peculiar Doctrines of its own which she hath added to the common truths of Christianity many of which Doctrines do apparently lead men to the broad way even to loosness of life and manners as hath been already shewn T. There needs nothing more be added to what you say and therefore I shall proceed to his sixth and last question viz. Can you shew me any miracles that ever were wrought in testionony of the truth of your Religion Or that all the miracles which Catholicks shew to have been done in confirmation of their Religion have been false or were wrought be Beelzebub any more than those which Christ did work in his life time L. I do well remember the answer that long since you gave to this the summ of which was that since our Religion is that same holy Christian Religion which was taught by our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles all those miracles which they anciently wrought in confirmation of their Doctrine do at this day confirm ours also which being the same with theirs needs no new miracles for that purpose For by those miracles of theirs besides other weighty arguments we are fully assured that Iesus Christ is the Son of God that he died for our sins and rose again from the dead with the rest of the Creed wherein is briefly comprized the summ of our Belief the chief articles of our Religion And when our first Reformers rejected those Popish errors which had been added to these ancient Christian Doctrines as they needed no extraordinary commission for this their reformation no more did they need any miracles to confirm their commission It was enough that they had authority from God from the Church and from their Prince to preach the truths of the Gospel and to reject all errors contrary thereto and to remove those abuses which in later times had crept into the Church But whilst they only preach'd that same Gospel which had been abundantly confirmed already by mighty signs and wonders they no more needed any new miracles than if such errors and abuses had never been brought in And as to those false Doctrines wherein Popery consists such as the Popes Supremacy Transubstantiation c. we do utterly deny that ever any true miracles were wrought in confirmation of them whatever fine tales their Monks may tell us in their Legends And for any to compare these their lying Legends so full of most ridiculous and prodigious stories with the account that is given of the miracles done by our Saviour and his followers in the New Testament is to be guilty of notorious impudence and blasphemy and plainly tends to promote infidelity and Atheism T. Your censure is very just and your answer solid and satisfactory as are the rest you have given By all which it appears that your Author had little cause to say that they who ask the resolution of these doubts from their Ministers if they have any light of reason will find how much they are deluded For blessed be God I hope many of our people are so well instructed that they will not be imposed upon nor much puzled with such captious Questions as these Especially whilst they seek to their Ministers for a resolution of their doubts by the grace of God they shall be secured from the delusions of Popish Emissaries who go about seeking whom they may deceive CHAP. III. An answer to some Propositions said to be unanswerable by Protestants T. IN the next place I find your Author at his Scholars request furnishing him with some unanswerable Propositions as he vainly stiles them against Protestants Of these he names eight taken as he says from Costerus the Jesuit who therewith if we may believe him put all the ablest Ministers of Germany and the Low-countries to their wits ends Which if it were so one would wonder that there were any Protestant Ministers or people left in those Countries and that they were not all long since driven out of their wits and their Religion into Popery But had they never used those terrible arguments of fire and sword Prisons and Inquisition no body would much fear their pregnant arguments difficult questions or unanswerable Propositions The two former we have already dispatched let us now survey the last in which I am apt to think we shall still find a tedious repetition of many the same things that we have already often heard which if it be so we shall more briefly pass over them L. Probably you will find it so However I think we shall sooner have finished if you please to give the answer your self to these his Propositions which I shall exactly recite to you T. That shall be as you will But I hope you are not moved with his formidable title of Unanswerable Propositions L. I have no reason I am sure if they be like his unanswerable Questions in which there proved little or no difficulty T. Their common way is to make up the want of good Reason with great words and loud noise producing only thin fallacies and empty sophistry whilst they talk big of Infallible Evidence and clear Demonstration But let us hear these dreadful Propositions I beseech you L. His first is this Never since the Apostles times till Luther began his new Doctrine in the year 1517 was any man found in the whole World who did in all things consent with either Lutherans Calvinists Anabaptists or other Sectaries opinions Nor shall ever any of the Sectaries prove the Apostles or Evangelists to have been of the Lutheran Calvinistical or any other new Sect. Whence follows that Luther and the rest have no Faith at all but only a new fancied invention which they adorn with the name of Faith and that they are the men of whom the Scripture in several places affirms that there will come in the latter times false Prophets T. As to Lutherans or Calvinists we own neither one name or other as has been often said nor are we concerned to vindicate any particular opinion of this Man or that though I reckon the Doctrine of both as to the substance of it to be sound and good at least so far as it agrees with that of our Church which only we are obliged to answer for and easily we may though he revile us also as Sectaries since it is no other than the same Christian Doctrine which is contain'd in the Gospel and summ'd up in the Creed and this let him confute if he can or attempt it if he dare And in this Doctrine we are sure both the Apostles of old with the Catholick Church in their Age and in all Ages since do fully consent with us Nor was it any new Doctrine that our Reformers brought in No but whilst they rejected Popish Novelties they retain'd those truths of Christianity which were as old as the first institution of Religion What
more fit to be so than bare tradition which they of the Church of Rome so vainly boast of But for your further satisfaction in this point I shall refer you to a most solid and rational discourse concerning the Rule of Faith done by a Reverend Divine of our Church and shall now hasten to what remains L. His seventh Argument is this It cannot be shewn that for these 1500 years there hath been any Catholick who held that the Pope of Rome was Antichrist or that did revile and rail at the holy Sacrifice of the Mass or lastly that did blame Invocation of Saints the usual praying for the Dead and such like works of piety belonging to Faith and Religion which the whole world hath laudably practised and reverenced for 1500 years Wherefore it is most evident that Lutherans Calvinists c. do most wickedly when they dare revile such things T. These points have all of them been sufficiently discust already I have told you how one of their Popes did assert him to be the forerunner of Antichrist who should assume the title of Universal Bishop which his Successors have now a long time done whilst they claim a Supremacy over the Universal Church But which is more material I have she-wn how contrary the Doctrines and practices wherein Popery consists are to the nature and design of true Christianity and therefore may well enough be stiled Antichristian I have shewn that there is not properly a Sacrifice in the Communion but a commemoration of Christs Sacrifice only once offered and have also manifested that there is neither Scripture Reason nor good Antiquity to be pleaded on behalf of that Invocation of Saints and praying for the Dead which are now used in the Church of Rome As for railing and reviling I would not be guilty of it 'T is enough to disprove their errors and renounce them to shew the falshood and mischiefs of them and this I hope is not to be accounted railing In a word whatever he pretends no Christian Writers for four or five hundred years after our Saviour did assert the Bishop of Rome to be Christs Vicar on Earth and under him supreme Governour of the whole Christian Church Nor did they teach or practise such Invocation of Saints and praying for the Dead as are now in use amongst Papists And upon this account our Church hath with great reason and religion reformed her self from these and the like corrupt innovations L. Doubtless she has so and the weakness of his Arguments do the more assure me of it His last is nothing else but a repetition of what he has often said viz. That the first Authors of Christian faith in Germany Spain England c. have acknowledged and brought in no other faith nor have our forefathers received any other Faith than the Holy Catholick Roman which self-same we have received from our forefathers and have hitherto conserved Whence he concludes that Sectaries his common name for all Protestants have invented new opinions of their own and presented them to the people as a certain rule of Faith and the pure word of God and that consequently they are liable to the curse denounced against those who preach a new Gospel nor can ever hope to please God and attain eternal happiness being destitute of the right faith whereupon he advises his Scholar considering the nearness of death and the eternity of Hell torments to prefer the salvation of his Soul before all sublunary things T. So far his advice is good but 't is a wonder that any man who pretends to have a regard to his own or others souls and believe there is an Hell provided for such as make and love a lye dare be guilty of such notorious forgeries and calumnies as are contain'd in this his charge against Protestants as if they had proposed some new opinion of their own devising for a rule of Faith whilst it 's well known that we make the holy Word of God to be the only certain rule of it And even he himself a little before accused us for saying that nothing is to be believed but what is contained in Gods Word that is nothing as necessary to salvation as I have before granted and proved This he calls the ground-work of the Reformation and we do not deny it And that same Christian Faith which is contain'd in these holy Scriptures at large and briefly summ'd up in the Creed is that same Faith which the first planters of Christian Religion taught and established in our own and other Countries and this self-same do we retain to this day If then the Apostles Creed or the Nicene Creed as we commonly call it be a new invention so is our faith but if these contain an Abridgement of the truly ancient Catholick Faith then his charging us with new inventions is a most false and malicious slander so far are we from it that a great reason why we reject their Doctrines of the Supremacy and Infallibility of their Pope or Church with the rest of their Errors is because these are new inventions of their own and no part of the ancient Faith Wherefore instead of pronouncing the heavy sentence of damnation upon others which is true Popish charity it behoves them well to consider how they can exempt themselves from the curse threatned to those who preach another Gospel than the Apostles did which in some sort they do whilst they impose the Traditions of their Church of which the Apostles never spoke a syllable as of equal certainty and authority with the Holy Scriptures themselves But I am tired with his Arguments which still lead me so oft to repeat the same things Though I shall not repent it if it any way tend to give you more satisfaction L. I thank God I am well satisfied with your discourse and am now fully convinced that there is small strength in these his Arguments which he pretends to be such pregnant and unanswerable things But after all there remains something which he calls an evident demonstration that the Roman Catholick Church hath been and still is the true Church which I shall desire you to take into examination T. Yes very willingly and I doubt not but we shall soon find how little it deserves the name of a demonstration Though if it be possible for him to produce any thing that has an appearance of truth and reason sure he will now do it in the last place that it may leave the greater impression upon his Reader Let us hear then what he says CHAP. IV. An Answer to a pretended Demonstration That the Roman Church is the true Catholick Church L. THIS Demonstration which he so much boasts of is taken he says from one Dr. Baily who it seems revolted from our Church to that of Rome and thus it runs It will not be denied but that the Church of Rome was once a most excellent flourishing Mother-Church This Church could not cease to be such but she must fall