Selected quad for the lemma: father_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
father_n holy_a son_n spirit_n 92,207 5 6.2343 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A45678 The popish proselyte the grand fanatick. Or an antidote against the poyson of Captain Robert Everard's Epistle to the several congregations of the non-conformists Harrison, Joseph. 1684 (1684) Wing H900; ESTC R216554 55,354 168

There are 8 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Queens Chapel come in time to get advancement For Secondly If seditions Schisms Heresies amongst Protestants and discourses with Lay-Gentlemen in their quarters could have overturned the faith of Captains never so like to have been done as during the late distractions but for all that while though we heard of some Popish Champions turning Sectaries yet of no Sectarian Captain that became a Romanist Thirdly The mans carriage all along makes manifest that the selfish wisdom of the Old wily Serpent is yet remaining with him he knows well enough that there 's nothing more inconsistent with Papal government than the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy nor any thing more opposite to Popish Doctrine than the 39 Ariticles and yet can he neither be content to say ill nor say nothing of our English Episcopacy but upon occasion is bowing down himself unto it in the days of yore doubtless he got to be a Captain by praying and preaching like some sort of a Saint and now time after time is crying up himself for a good Subject leaves the Episcopal Church out of his Catalogue of Sects and pretends a great deal of Reverence to any profession that shall be established by Law But above all the just judgment of God is most remarkable in sending him and such like strong delusion that they should believe a lie and that because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved but had pleasure in unrighteousness nor need I divine the no love this man had to the truth and the great pleasure he always had and now hath in unrighteousness is notoriously manifest by his First Blaspheming the Spirit Secondly Abusing Reason Thirdly Vilifying the Scriptures Fourthly Wronging the Church Catholick Fifthly Belying Protestants Sixthly Dissembling the Tenets of the Papists The spirit is blasphemed 1. by giving that glory of Infallibility which is peculiar to the Holy Ghost to the organs or instruments by which he is pleased to reveal the mind of God Men speaking from deliberation use free-will may speak or not speak speak truth or falshood and consequently for that time cannot but be fallible And when men speak divinely yet not deliberately it is not properly they that speak but the Holy Ghost that speaketh in them The word of the Lord came to me saying The mouth of the Lord hath spoken it And in this case 't is the word spoken that is infallible and not they that speak it It were not proper for such on that account to say It seemeth good to the Holy Ghost and to us but not we but the Holy Ghost not I but the Lord and hence the eternal God is said internally to demonstrate by his spirit and externally to confirm by miracles not the infallibility of the organ through which he speaks but the infallible truth of the word that is spoken And they went forth every where the Lord working with them and confirming the word with signs following Mark 16.20.2 The spirit expresly 1 John 4.2 3. makes the Doctrine Preached the Rule according to which we are to try the spirits Hereby know we the spirit of God Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God and every spirit that confesseth not c. And yet does the man wittingly conceal that and wrests verse 6. to the making of the hearing of the Apostle the only rule of trying of spirits without regard had to their Doctrine Nor does he 〈◊〉 here but supposing we verse 6. to denote the same persons as ye verse 4. confidently concludes hearing of Christs Apostles then was therefore hearing Popish Priests now is the only rule The Apostle doubtless saw this mystery of iniquity beginning then to work and therefore leaves us a general Rule without any exception 2 Joh. ● Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ hath not God He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ he hath the Father and the Son If there come any to you and bringeth not this doctrine receive him not into the House neither bid him God speed 3. The man reviles the Saints that have received the Holy anointing tells how they would have the world believe that they have the spirit without bringing Reason Evidence Testimony or Authority to evince it whenas yet if either Reason Evidence Testimony or Authority may be regarded the Tree is known by its fruits and their having the spirit manifest by Love Joy Peace Long-suffering Gentleness Goodness Faith Meekness Temperance Gal. 5.22 They confess that Jesus is come in the Flesh as aforesaid and that Jesus is the Lord which no man can but by the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. 12.3 Nor need he trouble himself with telling Page 21. that if it be the spirit of God they have he is infallible in his teaching and both they and all the world are obliged under pain of Damnation to believe what he delivers as matter of faith to be true For 1. Though they say they have the spirit of God and that he is infallible in his teaching yet they do not say Pope-like that they are thereby made infallible in theirs He teacheth all of them the whole truth as it is in Jesus for they shall all know me from the least of them to the greatest of them saith the Lord Jer. 31.34 but teaches not any all the points of Doctrine that be true for we know in part and prophesie in part 1 Cor. 13.9 according to the measure of the gift of Christ Eph. 4.7.2 Both they and all the world are obliged under pain of Damnation to believe whatsoever God says is true and so many as know that there is an Holy Ghost are obliged in like manner to believe whatsoever shall be delivered by that promised spirit of truth But as to the particulars he shall deliver the case is different The Saints are severally bound to believe whatsoever he shall conviningly deliver to any of them and the world bound to believe whatsoever he shall convincingly deliver to the World when he comes he shall convince Joh. 16.8 Nor yet 3. do they look as some would seem to suppose that others should believe what they say to be true either because they say or prove that they have the Spirit whether of Adoption or Prophecy but because when and so far as that same Spirit by undeniable reasons and testimonies shall make manifest in their consciences the truth of what they do assert by the manifestation of the truth commending our selves to every mans conscience in the sight of God 2 Cor. 4.2 Reason is a means whereby we come to know what is not what ought to be revealed a means whereby we judge of things Divine according to the Rule though yet it be not may not be called the Rule according to which we are to judge Reason I say that is thus useful and ought to be thus limited the man one while enslaves and then anon sets it up for an absolute Lord. When
Revelation and though of two contraries one sense only can be true and he that refuseth that sense which he knows to be true does deserve Damnation yet that God will certainly damn him or that the not believing in case he had not known were a sin damnable is more I think than God ever told you 3. Such controversies as are necessary to be decided in the use of lawful means have been are and may be decided by Scripture without either compleating it by or introducing in the stead thereof any other Rule and for the rest a mutual forbearance of the Controvertors were far better than your Pretorial decision of the controversies Eighthly It is necessary to know what is purely and absolutely necessary to Salvation to be believed and what not that is as you say what is fundamental and what not fundamental and to be informed of this plainly lest we erre and be damned but in this the Scripture is silent 1. If it be necessary to know what is purely and absolutely necessary to Salvation to be believed and what not How comes it to pass that your Church only declares negatively what is not to be believed or what must not upon pain of Damnation be disbelieved and yet never tells affirmatively what is purely and absolutely necessary for us to believe True you will have all believe affirmatively implicitly what ever your Church believes but that is nothing to this business where knowledge of the what in an explicit Faith is necessarily required All your Doctors conclude Somewhat must be explicitly believed and you say It is necessary to know the Particulars and yet will not your Church ever be gotten to declare unto us which they be let her do it when it shall seem good unto her in the interim I shall tell you plainly That 2. So much of the what is fundamentally necessary to be believed as is needful to bring such or such a person to believe in the who and rest on the foundation Jesus Christ and consequently more may be necessary for one than another and not necessary at all that the particulars should be determined For 3. Saving and Damning depends not upon a precise knowing and believing just so many points and no more but upon a hearty believing or not believing in Jesus Christ He that believeth in the Son of God hath eternal life He that believeth not c. He that hath the Son hath life he that hath not the Son hath not life 1 John 5.12 Ninthly It is necessary to believe that God the Father is not begotten that God the Son is not made but begotten by the Father only that God the Holy Ghost is neither made nor begotten but doth proceed and that from the Father and the Son that Christ is of one substance with the Father and that these three are one and that one three I refer to consideration whether all these points be plainly and clearly to be found in Scripture If they were it had been almost impossible for so many divisions to have hapned about them as have done amongst persons on all sides admitting the Scripture to be the word of God 1. I refer it also to consideration Whether all these points be not plainly and clearly to be found in Scripture And wish you to consult with almost any large English Catechism or common Place book concerning it 2. The Heart of man is desperately wicked and many are possessed with a Spirit of blindness It is one question whether all these points be plainly and clearly to be found in Scripture and another whether all persons that admit the Scriptures to be the word of God can or will so search as to find them to be there Both Jews and Christians admit the Books of the Old Testament for Divine and yet differ about the weightiest and as we say the clearest point You say the Scriptures are plain and evident for the Churches Infallibility and yet the Protestants that admit the Scriptures for the Word of God as well as you do all deny it 3. Those so manifold divisions in the Primitive Church make more against the Churches being a Pretorial Judge than against Scripture being a perfect Rule It had been sure altogether impossible that such and so many points should have been so long controverted but that either the generality of Christians did not then judge a Pretorial decision of controversies necessary or that there was none then impowered so to decide them Howbeit 4. Is it necessary to believe these points implicitly or explicitly if but implicitly it is not necessary in order to the constituting of Scriptures an adequate object or rule of believing than these points should be plainly contained in them For plainness respects knowledge of the particulars to be believed which this kind of Faith supposeth not and if it be necessary to believe these points explicitly knowingly your own Doctors will not deny but that the Scriptures do plainly and perspicuously contain and teach them We deny not saith Costerus that those chief heads of the Faith which are to all Christians necessary to be known to Salvation are plainly and perspicuously comprehended in the Writings of the Apostles Enchirid. c. 4. p. 49. Cujusmodi sunt mysterium sanctissimae Trinitatis incarnationis Filii Dei Of which sort be the mystery of the Holy Trinity and Incarnation of the Son of God The Evangelical and Apostolical Books and the Oracles of the Antient Prophets planè instruunt nos do plainly instruct us what is to be thought concerning things Divine Therefore hostile discord laid aside let us take the explication of Questions from the words Divinely inspired says Constantine to the Council of Nice And now what think ye does Bellarmine reply why See Bellarmin de verbo Dei l. 4. c. 1. he takes occasion hence to suspect Constantine for a person unbaptized that as yet non noverit Arcana religionis had not been acquainted with the secrets of Religion howbeit better considering answers 2. That there be Testimonies extant in the Holy Scriptures of all the Doctrines which appertain to the nature of God and that concerning these Doctrines we may be plenè planè fully and plainly instructed out of the Holy Scriptures Tenthly It is necessary the Church of England saith that Infants should be Baptized and Women should receive the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist and Christians should observe the Lords-day and yet none of these points are clearly and particularly proved from Scriptures 1. It matters not much what you say elsewhere this passage sufficiently manifests what sort of Nonconformists you write against scil not Nonconformists to the Church of England but to the Chair of Rome for if otherwise wherefore should you urge them in this case with The Church of England saith c. And yet however 2. You must know that if the Church of England say It is necessary that Infants should be Baptized it is upon a supposition that the affirmative
may evidently be proved from Scripture for if you or any else shall evince that Infants-Baptism cannot be proved from the Scriptures the Church of England Article the sixth hath expresly declared against the necessity of it 2. You cannot but have heard of haec homo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let a Man examine himself c. 1 Cor. 11.28 Women as well as Men are there required self examination and not Auricular confession first had to receive the Eucharist Nor 3. Can you be ignorant that there is a difference betwixt the Lords-day being necessary to be observed and its being necessary that Christians should observe the Lords-day That would imply a Doctrinal This no more than an obediential necessity That if held by any the Church of England will tell you ought to be proved particularly from Scripture This needs no more but a general warrant Eleventhly It is a sin as the generality of Christians agree an heresie to re-baptize any one which hath been baptized by an Heretick where doth the Scripture say so 1. Those that hold it a sin and heresie to rebaptize any one Videtur quod Baptismus possit iterari sed contra est quod dicitur Eph 4. una fides unum baptisma Aquinas 3. quaest 66. Art 9. c. found their opinion upon Scripture One Faith one Baptism Eph. 4.5.2 Cyprian held such ought to be re-baptized dyed in that opinion and yet dyed a Saint and Martyr 3. The Thesis here laid down without restriction is apparently false contradicting the Nineteenth Canon of the Council of Nice Si quis confugit ad Ecclesiam Catholicam de Paulianist Cataphrygiis statutum est rebaptizari If any one of the Paulianists and Cataphrygians fly unto the Catholick Church it is Decreed That they ought to be re-baptized And now it being evident that neither your Argument nor instances make against but for the Scriptures being a sole sufficient Rule let us try what they 'll do on that account against or for your Romish Church Whatsoever is a sole sufficient Rule must be plain and clear in all necessary points at least which relate to Faith But the Roman Church is not plain and clear in all necessary points that relate to Faith Therefore the Roman Church is not the sole sufficent Rule The major is your own nor shall I need to trouble any body else for instances to prove the minor First then it is necessary you say to know how many Sacraments Christ ordained and yet your Church leaves it doubtful whether anointing with Oyl was ordained by Christ a Sacrament or not Insinuated she says it was Concil Trid. Sess 14. c. 1. Mark 6. but does not dare not say it was there or any where else instituted as such Secondly It is necessary to salvation you say to believe all the Books of the Holy Scriptures to be the Word of God and to believe nothing written to be the word of God which is Apocryphal And yet as to this Your Church is so dark and dubious See Bellarmin de verbo Dei l. 1. c. 7. that though Bellarmine contend that the Council of Trent did define the additaments to the Book of Hester to be canonical Sixtus Senensis believes otherwise and brings Arguments against it Nay if it be necessary to know which Books be the Word of God and which Apocryphal it is necessary sure to know which Traditions be Dominical or Apostolical which not and yet concerning this your Church is silent Thirdly It is necessary to know that the Scriptures are not corrupted it is necessary to know when a Text is to be understood literally when figuratively when Mystically it is necessary to know that the very Copies and Translations of the Scriptures which we have and upon which we ground our selves are certainly true it is necessary that the many manifest controversies about the true sense of Scripture should be decided it is necessary to know what is Fundamental what not and yet as to none of these your Church is plain and clear Fourthly It is necessary to believe that God the Father is not begotten that God the Son is not made but begotten by his Father only that God the Holy Ghost is neither made nor begotten but proceedeth from the Father and the Son that Christ is of one substance with the Father and that these Three are One and that One Three and yet suppose these points not plainly and clearly to be found in Scriptures how possibly could the Church for the first three hundred years be said to be plain and clear concerning them for during that time there was no General Council whereby she might explain her self and if she did explain her self in General Councils after that implyed her former darkness and deficiency with respect to those very points Fifthly It is a sin and heresie you say to re-baptize any one who hath been Baptized by an Heretick and yet as hath been said your Church that I mean you take the boldness to call your Church is so far from being plain and clear in this that she hath defined the contrary Nay plainness and clearness owned as it is and ought to be for an essential property of the Rule of Faith P. 54 56. the whole of what you have said in behalf of the Church if granted true will amount to as much as nothing For suppose Christ judge the Nations not by his Word and Spirit in the mouths of his Ministers but as you phrase it by his Churches Tribunal in passing of Acts and pronouncing Anathema's suppose the Church to be what you would have it and not only led if she will but so drawn that she follow the Spirit into all truth sic de caeteris yet what were all this to the purpose For it would not necessarily follow thence that she is plain and clear in all necessary points the Apostles sure if any might so judge and were so drawn Pag. 37. and yet you say that they in their Epistles are defective dark very subject and that in fundamentals desperately to be misunderstood Nor do you trouble us with telling that the Church is always in being Pag. 61. and capable upon demand to explain and declare its own sense For 1. If we cannot certainly understand the Apostles when explaining and declaring their sense and meaning how shall we be able certainly to understand your Church when explaining and declaring hers sith the Church hath no other way to explain her meaning save by words most intelligible which way the Apostles had and did make use of as is evident from 1 Cor. 14.2 The question is whether the Church be actually plain and clear in all necessary points not whether the Church be capable upon demand to explain and declare its own sense being plain and clear and capable upon demand to explain and declare be different things this belongs to an Interpreter of no concern here it 's that that is pertinent and the
Cambridge in his Geographical History of Africa published Anno 1600. Pag. 410 413. commendeth Mr. Hartwel for publishing the aforesaid Miracles and acknowledgeth the same 1. The common people may must be deluded by lying Wonders but sith you are so sober as not to insist upon our English Popish Priests either throwing in or throwing out of Devils you did wisely when giving in your Catalogue of Miracles done by the Romish Church to leave out amongst us and yet suppose the Roman Church hath done these Miracles and done them amongst us it is little to the point for if she did them in her own name and power she is no more a Church but a God the Messias and if she did them in the name and power of Christ it will evince Christ in whose name and power the Miracles were wrought to be the Son of God and consequently infallible but leave your Church subject to mistakes as formerly she was However 2. It is one thing to say it is evident both by Testimonies of Holy Fathers and approved Historians and another thing to produce those Testimonies and yet if you had those Testimonies could be no more than Humane capable of mistake in a possibility of being erroneous and consequently the thing as to us be no more at your own account than probably true our belief or opinion rather no better founded than the perswasions of the Jews Turks or Pagans all upon a fallible certainty Nor yet 3. Can it be said either with truth or modesty that the Heathens and Atheists will be as justifiable in their denials of the Miracles revealed in the Old and New Testament as those Men will be that deny these For though the relation of the Miracles in the Old and New Testament be brouhgt down to us by humane means yet such as be in no wise morally questionable and besides all is ultimately resolved into Testimony Divine Whereas these reports of yours first and last have no firmer a Basis than the Testimony of Men blinded byassed by interest and that could not certainly know a true Miracle from a lying Wonder had they stood by at the working thereof 4. It may be true that the Magdeburgenses with some others writing the Churches general History recount as from your own Authors several Miracles to have been done by persons infected with Popery But it is as true that they themselves account of them all as no better than either illusions of Daemons or false narrations And well may we grant with Abraham Hartwell John Pory and some more of ours True Miracles to have been wrought by Popish persons and not conclude with you Popish but Christian Doctrine to have been confirmed by them For if they did Miracles it is apparent they did them as Christians and not as Papists in the name of Christ and not in the name of the Pope nor need you stumble at such a distinction Bellar. de Notis Eccles l. 4. c. 14. For Bellarmin unto the Miracle of Novatianus the Heretick answereth the Miracle to have been wrought not for the confirmation of the Faith of Novatianus but of Catholick Baptism And yet suppose Miracles wrought to confirm the truth of certain Popish Doctrines what is that to the infallibility of the Popish Church that learned Cardinal saw the non sequitur well enough and therefore labours by Miracles to prove the verity not the infallibility of that Church and to prove it by them credibly not certainly For saith he before the approbation of the Church it is not evident or certain with the certainty of Faith concerning any Miracle that it is a true Miracle However 5. The most antient Author you or your Index pretend to quote is Beda who flourished Anno 720. the most antient Miracle-Monger the Monk Austin who came into England about the Year 600. an evident sign that your Popish Doctrines if brought forth yet were not confirmed from Heaven for the first six hundred years after Christ Nor were those you instance in ratified on Earth by any General Council for a long time after that The first pretended for Image-Worship is the second of Nice Anno 705. condemned by that of Frankford Anno 794. And the first for Transubstantiation was that of Lateran 1215. For the most notorious of the rest you must come down as low as the Council of Trent begun since Luther's death And for a Miracle neither England France Italy nor Spain can furnish you with one but you are forced to run as far as Congo a Kingdom in the Region of Africa and there resolve your Faith into a Book said by John Brerely Anno 1664. to have been published Anno 1597. by Abraham Hartwell Servant to the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury without any leave from his Master which Book yet for ought appears neither mentions Miracles done to confirm the truth of any Popish Doctrine nor the Infallibility of the Roman Church Pag. 78. If any of you should chance to say That this Testimony of Miracles is nothing to you because you have never seen a Miracle I answer Either you grant what these Authors report to be true or you deny their Testimony refusing to believe what you have not seen If you grant the truth of these things and yet remain out of the Communion of the Holy Catholick Church upon which God hath conferred this Gift you have sin and hate God according to the argument framed by our Lord himself which I have before cited If you refuse to believe what you have not seen First You destroy Faith Which is an evidence of things not seen Secondly You take away all humane conversation no man must believe another Thirdly you make it unjust for Civil Magistrates to punish Transgressors or Felons for where there is no Law there can be no breach of a Law and if there be no Law to him who did not actually see the very Statute which was passed in Parliament and hear the King and both Houses agree unto it as in this case there is no Miracle to him who did not see it how can you with Justice condemn and execute a Malefactor who shall urge at the Barr that he never saw the Statute upon which he stands Indicted nor had any knowledge or notice thereof otherwise than by hear-say and the report of Authors and Books which since they are no sufficient proof of Gods setting his Hand and Seal to a Law by Miracles he sees no reason why they should be proofs for passing that Statute and consequently that as to him that Statute is not in force What you would reply to one who should give this for his Plea upon such an Indictment suppose as said unto your self in the case of Miracles not seen by you but reported by good Authority Lastly this would excuse all Infidels who have been since the Apostles times even those that lived in their times in case they saw no Miracles But if any of you shall further say after the learned
THE Popish Proselyte THE GRAND FANATICK OR AN ANTIDOTE AGAINST The Poyson of Captain Robert Everard's Epistle to the several Congregations of the Non-conformists And many other Signs and Wonders truly did Jesus in the presence of his Disciples which are not written in this Book But these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that in believing you might have life through his name John 20.30 31. London Printed for Samuel Tidmarsh at the Kings Head in Cornhill next House to the Royal Exchange MDCLXXXIV TO THE READER AN exact answering of the whole Epistle by Paragraphs would have swelled my intended little Book into a great Volume nor did I conceive it needful and that because the Captain himself hath contracted the pith of all that is pertinent into his sixth reason against the Scriptures being a Rule His Argument from Heaven for the Roman Church being Judge and Guide and his six Queries supposed utterly destructive to and altogether unanswerable upon the grounds of Protestants and now all these be at large transcribed examined and solved And yet lest the less intelligent Reader should stumble or the Adversary insult I have in an admonitory prefatory discourse so far taken notice of all his mostly seeming important conclusions and objections as to make it apparent that they have nought else save ignorance inadvertency selfishness and strong delusion to support and give rise unto them Nor yet have I made it my only business to pull down though that must needs be their great work that have to do with Babel-builders but have all along ascertained what I would or should establish from such common principles of Religion and Reason as are assented to by Papists Protestants and the Vniversality at least of Christians As for reviling had not his own guilt put him on to caution against it I should never have thought of it what is of personal concern is occasioned by his own writings circumstant to the matter under debate and all contained in one single Page the whole is closed with a vindication of the Great Saint Augustin from favouring the proceedings of so grand an Apostate as Robert Everard Joseph Harrison An Answer to Robert Everard's Epistle to the several Congregations of the Nonconformists I Shall at present suppose Robert Everard to be no Romish Jesuited Priest Pag. 91. but Quondam Captain to a Troop of Rebellious Souldiers and do conclude from his own Printed papers attended with some obvious circumstances that four things did chiefly concur to the shipwracking of his Faith First Ignorance Secondly Inadvertency or Imprudence Thirdly Self-interest Fourthly A just judgment of God in sending such strong delusions that they should believe a lie The mans ignorance appears First in that he cannot construe credo Sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam I believe the Being but renders as if he had read credo Sanctae c. I believe the saying of the Holy Catholick Church sets hence in the front of his Book and urges all a-long the Churches and in the issue the Roman Churches pretended infallible declaration for the foundation of Faith When yet the very Creed teacheth him First To confess I believe in God the Father in the Son and in the Holy Ghost as that which must necessarily forego and found his believing first that there is a Holy Catholick Church as well as that there is a Communion of Saints nor doth it give any more ground to conclude the one than the other for to be infallible Secondly Though the Captain before the closure of the Book be so well taught as to prove the Roman Church infallible in teaching from certain stories about Miracles no more than pointed at out of Breerleys Index no more than surmised to be done by S. Francis S. Dominick and the Monk Austin with such like to confirm and that but some few of her superstitious Doctrins Nay can chide such as Persons destroying Faith Pag. 78. taking away all humane converse c. that shall refuse upon such fallible Testimonies to believe stories so extreamly improbable yet is he such a Novice in the beginning that he cannot so much as offer an argument for the truth of Christianity from all the undoubted Miracles wrought by Christ and his Apostles Pag. 6. for no other end save the confirming thereof Heb. 2.3 4. recorded in Sacred Writ that we might believe John 20.31 not denyed by the Adversaries of our Faith and most celebriously attested by the unanimous consent of all Christians in all succeeding Ages Nor has he a word to say to the Gentleman that in opposition to the Evangelist calls Faith thus founded an opinion an humour But instead of that gratis grants that unless we know what ex parte rei is impossible to be known our selves or those that teach us to be infallible Christianity as to us can be no more than probably not most probably true Jews Turks and Pagans may be as well perswaded of their several ways as we can be of ours both upon a fallible certainty Not knowing sure that the Christians certainty hath no fallible save that they may the Jews Turks and Pagans fallible no certainty save that they do imagine it And secondly that it is irrational thus to argue à Doctore ad Doctrinam from the Person to the thing from what may be to what is Euclid may be fallible and yet his demonstrations not deceive we may know our selves and those that teach us to be subject to mistake and yet know too that in this or that particular neither they nor we are mistaken Christianity as to us may be certainly true certainly so demonstrated to Jews Turks and Pagans and yet every Man confessed to be a liar every Church ex parte sui in a possibility to commit an error in this thing But 3dly The man cannot distinguish betwixt the internal testimony of the spirit vouchsafed sometimes unto some and that constant historical evidence which is afforded unto all When he was a Quaker it 's like he confounded the original Cause and the original Language and now he cannot make a difference betwixt the efficient cause of our believing and the formal object ground or Reason of Faith He discourses with a man sensual as if he had the spirit and imagines that the Holy Ghost which is sent to witness with our spirits that we are the children of God should in the same manner and measure witness the Divine truth of every particular Book and Text of Scripture And hence instead of Firstly telling the sensual Lay Gentleman that he believed the Scriptures to be the word of God fide Historica by an Historical Faith upon the account of universal Tradition He talks with him about an inward infallible Testimony of the Spirit and makes that spiritual sense and feeling which is peculiar to Gods Elect sealing up their interest in Christ to be the common convincing ground of that being indeed the Spirits
for the work of the Ministery for the edification of the body of Christ Eph. 4.11 12. God hath set some in the Church First Apostles 1. Cor. 12.18 and by the way some in the Church not one over the Church for the whole respect had to its organical frame form or Government is divided into several Churches several Congregations if you will as well as the world into several Kingdoms To the angel of the Church of Ephesus Rev. 2.1 We have no such custom neither the Churches of God 1 Cor. 11.16 Nor did Paul treating 1 Cor. 12. concerning spiritual gifts relate to a chief in governing but the choicest for Prophesying when he said nor again the Head to the Feet I have no need of you Thirdly Although the Bishops of Rome in that very thing as Gregory well notes forerunners of Antichrist did frequently challenge an Universal Jurisdiction yet was it never owned nor submitted to by the Catholick Church as it is evident from S. Cyprian opposing Stephanus Irenaeus reproving of Victor Jerom's Eugubium and the sixth Council of Carthage in which was Augustin and Aurelius as also from the Acts of three of the four first General Councils Nice Constantinople and Chalcedon Fourthly The man in the Close restrains the Church Catholick to a Church of one denomination called the Roman meaning though thereby not what Paul meant the Saints at Rome Rom. 1.7 but all that vastly extended community of Christians which live in communion with and in subjection to the Bishop of Rome as to their supream Pastor and Governour on Earth in all things appertaining unto faith next under Christ when as yet the Arguments and Texts all along produced seemingly militate for the infallibility of the Church not this or that Church though never so vastly extended and above all not for the old Roman and therefore he did wisely to frame a new one for it 's expresly declared fallible Rom. 11.22 And yet again pag. 61. we are presented with a General Council of Prelates as this Church this infallible Rule which can by no means be identified with all that vastly extended community c. And yet let him take which he will he 'l be still at a loss For such an Assembly of Prelates is not now in being nor like to be nor has there been any such for a Century of years last past And as for all the Christians of that vast community they are to be judged ruled guided and consequently not the Rule Judge and Guide If exempted from error personal it were well Judicial infallibility concerns not them In the beginning he 's for submission to the Holy Catholick Church and now as if by Holy Catholick Church he did not mean the Holy Catholick Church his Mother nor any thing else save the Pope his Father he 's for submission and obedience to the Bishop of Rome The matter and marvel is that the man has been tewing and tugging and troubling himself and us all this while about an universal infallible visible Authoritative Church and now in the issue can neither tell who where or what it is However sith the Church is such an one which is truly appointed by God to be this infallible Judge must needs as he saith have this condition Pag. 72. that she doth own her infallibility It is incumbent upon the Captain in the first place to make it out that the present Roman visible Church doth plainly own her infallibility for his owning and inferences we shall not regard or else confess that in his own account she is not the Church he tells of truly appointed of God to be this infallible Judge nor let him thus think to put us off and say unless he evidently prove that she does that by the Pope her mouth for the Pope will not be content to be the Churches but Christs own mouth and Vicar Peter's successor the Rock upon which the Church is built at least next unto Christ Of Protestants he saith All that I ever met with seemed to grant Pag. 18. There must be a way or Rule there must be a means appointed there must be a Governing Power to judge and decide all doubts and teach us the true way to Heaven with certainty but who this Judge is that is the difficulty Whenas 1. though Protestants generally conclude that the Scripture is the rule according to which every Christian may and ought to judge of doubts with a judgment of discretion and Pastors joyntly or severally with a judgment of direction Yet none affirm that any who on Earth is or can be either Rule or Judge much less both Rule and Judge Infallible Universal Praetorial such as he under the notion of his Governing Power is at present seeking for Pag. 60. Dr. Fern's expression indeed such a Judge and Umpire in Christendom if to be had would be a ready means to compose all differences and to restore truth and Peace comes next to any that he can pitch upon and yet has Dr Fern neither wish nor word of any whosoever being a Rule nor is he so sawcy as to say there must be a Judge or Umpire appointed But such a Judge or Umpire would if to be had be a ready neither the best nor the only means to compose all differences Of the Infallibility of the Church of Rome p. 6. §. 19. 2. Sith in those things in which before a General Council hath defined it is lawful to hold either way and damnable to do so after The Lord Falkland desire to know how it agreeth with the Charity of the Church to define any thing and so bestow upon the Devil one path more for us to walk in to him Against Knot part 1. c. 2. pag. 84. And although sayes Chillingworth we wish heartily that all controversies were ended as we do that all sin were abolished yet have we little hope of the one or of the other till the World be ended in the mean while think it best to content our selves with and perswade other to an unity of charity and mutual toleration seeing God hath authorised no man to force all to the unity of opinion Neither do we think it fit to argue thus To us it seems convenient there should be one Judge for the whole world therefore God hath appointed one but more modest and more reasonable to collect thus God hath appointed no such judge of controversies therefore though to us it seems convenient there should be one yet it is not so And yet 3. We who can distinguish betwixt the scriptural way to Heaven and the Churches Rule of ●…ith betwixt an external infallible Governour and an internal infallible Teacher betwixt an unnecessary decision of all doubts and a full satisfaction of the heart about the one thing needful We I say which have learned thus to distinguish do humbly and thankfully acknowledge that there is a means appointed to teach us the true way to Heaven with certainty Jesus is the true way
to be instituted by Christ and no more and sure then the man may count two and need not complain for want of the number numbring Secondly It 's necessary to Salvation to believe all the Books of Holy Scripture to be the word of God and to believe nothing written to be the word of God which is Apocryphal but by the Scripture it cannot be made out plainly and clearly which Books are the word of God and which are Apocryphal First Your own Doctors distinguish betwixt an affirmative believing and a negative disbelief and though they make it damnable to disbelieve any one point when sufficiently represented to the understanding as revealed by God yet do they not make it necessary positively and expresly to believe all or any of the Books of Holy Scriptures to be so revealed and suppose they did it matters not sith it 's evident that the Scriptures themselves make believing in the Lord Jesus Christ and not believing all the Books of Holy Scripture to be the word of God to be that Vnum necessarium that one thing necessary to Salvation And the Fathers in the Primitive times had differences and doubts about several Books of Scripture now commonly received for Canonical and yet were saved by the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ even as we 2. Christians convinced by any means whatsoever that such and such Books in themselves Apocryphal be the word of God ought during that conviction believe them to be so and it is so far from being necessary to Salvation for them rebus sic stantibus to believ otherwise that it were obstinacy and interpretatively a denying of Gods veracity for them not so to believe formally as Chillingworth though not materially an Heresie 3. True it is that it cannot be made out by Scripture as by a Testimony or Argumentum inartificiale which Books are the Word of God and which be Apocryphal yet may this be made out plainly and clearly by Scripture Tanquam per Argumentum artificiale scilicet The Divine Characters that God himself hath imprinted on those Books that be indeed the Word of God nor need we trouble your Churches Authority though we confess our selves much beholding to the Churches ministry for the finding of them out Thirdly It is necessary to believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God but there is no Text or Texts of Scripture to prove that the Scriptures which we have are Gods Word 1. It is necessary for you and me to believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God because we are perswaded though upon several grounds that they be so but that it is necessary for all persons so to believe will not be granted till you further explain your necessary and add proof for the evincing of it And yet however 2. There is a Text of Scripture to prove that the Scriptures which we have are Gods Word For if there be a Text that expresly declares that the Scriptures which the Jews and Christians had in the Primitive times were the Word of God there is a Text to prove that the Scriptures which we have are Gods Word But there is a Text which expresly declares that the Scriptures which the Jews and Christians had in the Primitive times were the Word of God ergo There is a Text to prove that the Scriptures which we have are Gods Word The major is evident from universal Tradition assuring us that the Scriptures we now have be the same that the Jews and Christians had then The minor is evinced from that of Paul to Timothy whose Mother was a Jewess and Father a Greek all Scripture is divinely inspired 2 Tim. 3. Fourthly It is necessary to know that the Scriptures are not corrupted for if they be corrupted they cease to be the Word of God and then they cannot be any rule or sure guide to us But of this we have no assurance in Scripture 1. It is not necessary as hath been said to know the Scriptures to be the Word of God and therefore not necessary sure to know they are not corrupted Scripture or Writing is no more than one special means whereby God is pleased to make known and preserve in the World the knowledge of his Will if he do it any where by another Medium that will suffice Nay suppose as the man seems to do all along that the Scriptures be corrupted it cannot be necessary to know that they are not corrupted unless it be necessary to know that which is not possible to be known and so all men be necessarily damned 2. When we say the Scripture is the Rule whereby to judge of Controversies it is usually restrained to such controversies as do not concern the Scripture You will not allow us to argue the Church is no infallible Judge or Rule because the Church is forced to seek for other and higher proof than her own words to prove her self to be Infallible and if so why should we argue the Scripture to be no Rule because we cannot have assurance in Scripture that it is not corrupted it will be sufficient that we have assurance some other way 3. Scripture may be said to be corrupted in Essentials or Accidentals in whole or in part It may be corrupted in Accidentals the Words mis-spelled Sentences misplaced Words or Letters inserted or omitted and yet the mind and meaning of God what it is all that notwithstanding be evident from thence Every Book almost after its most perfect Edition hath Errata's and yet the Authors meaning may be plain enough Nay further Scripture may be corrupted in some parts and yet remaining pure in others Scriptura per Scripturam Scripture may be corrected by Scripture as a Jesuit of your own hath well observed Fifthly It is necessary in order to the knowing of the true mind meaning and will of God and what he intended by such and such a Text that we know when a Text is to be understood literally when figuratively when mystically but this cannot be understood from Scripture as daily experience informs us 1. The Scripture supposes men to have the use of sense and reason and if so they may easily conclude as sure as God is truth the Spirit spake by the Prophets and Apostles accordingly as he meant the Prophets and Apostles writ according as the Spirit spake and writ for that end that the true mind meaning and will of God might be known and understood which could not be without perpetuated new Revelation except we might and ought to take that for his mind and meaning which the words in their literal construction hold out unto us Eum sensum qui ex verbis immediate colligitur De verbo Dei l. 3. c. 3 certum est esse sensum Spiritus Sancti That says Bellarmin which is immediately gathered from the words is certain to be the sense of the Holy Ghost And therefore 2. vainly does he enquire and fondly distinguish of several senses of this or that Text whenas it is
had that gift bestowed upon them as well as the Apostles these signs shall follow them that believe c. Mark 16.17 Nor did the Apostles work Miracles by virtue of their Authority but by Faith If ye have Faith as a grain of Mustard-seed c. Matt. 17.20 And though I have all Faith c. 1. Cor. 13.2 And when Peter saw it he answered unto the People Ye men of Israel why marvel ye at this or why look ye so earnestly on us as though we by our own Power and Holiness had made this man to walk His name through Faith in his name hath made this man strong c. yea the faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all Act. 3.12 16. And hence sure it is that in your Minor you leave out Authority mention neither Seal nor Gift but barely urge and assume Now the Roman Catholick Church hath done c. not now God hath set his hand and seal to the Authority of the Roman Catholick Church by bestowing upon it the gift of Miracles Nor is it any marvel that you do so for if that gift were bestowed upon that Authority the Pope and Council that are invested with it should work Miracles which yet they do not nor do you insist on any such a thing and yet if that gift be not bestowed upon that Authority it cannot bestow ●t upon inferiour Officers it wants Gods Hand and Seal and may according to the tenor of your own Argument be disbelieved be disobeyed without either committing sin or shewing hatred against God However 5. If a Church may properly be said to work Miracles when yet indeed it is not the Church but some particular believer that works them and that not in the name of the Church but in the name of Christ Other Christian Churches have done as great Works or Miracles in former Ages as the Roman Church ever did witness the Church of Corinth that came behind in no gift 1 Cor. 1.7 and yet were not they reputed thereupon either Judges of controversies or infallible nor does the present Roman Church do any greater Works or Miracles than other Christian Churches now on earth What does she what can she do here amongst us more than our Protestant Church doth amongst you save make louder lying boasts of what she has done elsewhere And therefore shall not we refuse to believe them or resolve to give credit unto her upon any such account and conclude our so doing to be warrantable and well enough consistent with the love we owe unto the Lord wishing you yet withal to remember That the Question is not solely or chiefly whether this or that Church ought to be believed or disbelieved in their Doctrinal teaching but whether the Roman Church be the infallible Rule Judge and Guide of Faith Doctrinal certainty will not infer Judicial Authority nor è contra Nay suppose your Church were Doctrinally infallible and had universal Jurisdiction yet would it not necessarily follow that she is the Rule of Faith The Prophets of old you will say were infallible and the High Priests had judicial power and yet to the Law and to the Testimony Isaiah 8.20 It was therefore prudently done of you to alter the Question First leave out Rule and undertake to prove no more by your Argument from Heaven but that the Roman Church was Judge and Guide and then finding after a while that that would not do neither you leave out Judge or Authority and tell us of believing and disbelieving as if it would follow The Roman Church ought to be believed in all that she says and therefore has she plainly said all that we ought to believe is a Rule of Faith compleat and evident howbeit indeed had she authoritatively and infallibly so said not she but her sayings in propriety of Speech were to be owned for the Rule Now that the Roman Church hath done these works or Miracles P. 76. is a thing so evident both by the testimonies of the Holy Fathers and authorities of approved Historians that those who deny it must shew themselves either not to be Men or Men who purposely shut their Eyes against the truth yea Heathens and Atheists will be as justifiable in their denial of the Miracles related in the Old and New Testament as those will be who deny these The Magdeburgenses who were all professed and known Lutherans do almost in every one of their Centuries recount multitudes of Miracles wrought by persons whom they affirm to have been infected with what they call Popery Namely S. Bernard S. Malachy S. Dominick S. Francis and the like as you may particularly see in Brerely if you examine the several places to which his Index at the word Miracles will refer you By which it will appear That most of those Miracles were done not in confirmation of those Points and Articles of Faith which you hold with us but even of those Points and Doctrines which you call Popish Superstitions and Idolatries as the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass the respect and veneration which is given to Saints Reliques Images c. Certainly there are few amongst you but have heard and read how and what Christian Faith was first brought into England amongst our Progenitors the Saxons and by whom brought in It was by S. Austin a Monk of S. Benets Order and his fellow Monks sent hither by S. Gregory the then Pope of Rome and it was the same Faith that Catholicks now teach which was then confirmed by wonderful Miracles from Heaven as is testified by our own Writers Venerable Bede and others yea and by our Protestant Chronologies Holingshead's Chronicle the last Edition Vol. 1. Book 5. Cap. 21. Page 100 102. Fox's Acts and Monuments Printed Anno 1576. Pag. 117. Stow's Annals Printed 1592. Pag. 66. Goodwin in his Catalogue of the Bishops of England Pag. 4. Also Fox in his aforesaid Book at the Word Miracles in the Index To this I shall add the Authorities of our own late Protestant Writers for proof of undoubted Miracles wrought in this latter Age. In the Book entituled A report of the Kingdom of Congo a Region of Africa Printed Anno 1597. Published by Mr. Abraham Hartwel Servant to the Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury mention is made Lib. 1. Cap. 1. of the discovery of that Kingdom 1587. by Odoardo Lopez and of the conversion thereof to the Christian Faith Lib. 2. Cap. 2. and of the great and undoubted Miracles shewed by God in the presence of a whole Army Lib. 2. Cap. 3. Insomuch that the said Hartwell in his Epistle there to the Reader confesseth That this conversion of Congo was accomplished by Massing Priests after the Romish manner and saith he this action which tendeth to the glory of God shall it be concealed and not committed to memory because it was performed by Popish Priests and Popish means God forbid In like manner Mr. John Pory of Gonvile and Cajus Colledge in