sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures to others and it were to be wished that none had failed of their duty therein Qu. 12. Whether all that is mentioned in Scripture be not true according to the sense and meaning so delivered Ans All that is mentioned in Scripture is undoubtedly true according to the true sense and meaning thereof Qu. 13. Whether an obstinate Contradiction of any one truth thus delivered in Scripture though there appear no necessity it should have been mentioned in Scripture be not injurious to that divine Authority and veracity and which unrepented of shall bring damnation Ans An obstinate contradiction of any one plain truth delivered in holy Scripture is certainly a very great injury to divine authority and veracity Qu. 14. When difficulties did arise about the sense of Scriptures or matters of Faith whither the dicision of those controversies was carried and whether the present Church of every Age was not to decide it Ans It was undoubtedly the practice and is most rational that the present Church in every Age should decide such controversies For the Priest's Lips should preserve knowledge and they should enquire the Law at his mouth And no question the Church hath Authority to declare matters of Faith but not to make any new Articles of Faith Qu. 15. Whether every particular person was to have an Authoritative power in this decision or whether it was not universally left to the Heads and Governours of the Church Assembled together Ans Every particular person hath undoubtedly a Judgment of discretion allow'd him in matters of that nature but the Authoritative power of deciding and determining was in the Heads and Governours of the Church Assembled together for that end Qu. 16. Whether such a force of Hopes or Fears could possibly happen at once upon all the Heads of the universal Church Assembled together or after consenting to those that were Assembled as should make them declare that to be a truth revealed by Christ which was not so delivered to them to have been the ever esteemed sense of Scripture or perpetual tradition which was not so Ans Whilst men are men they will be liable to hopes and fears and subject to the power and force of them if therefore we consider the Heads and Governours of the Church as such we cannot allow them an Exemption therefrom and consequently there may be no impossibility in the things propounded We grant that in a General Council lawfully assembled we have great reason to hope for the presence direction and assistance of the Holy Ghost â—…t how far the passions and humours of men may frustrate our Hopes we know not This we certainly know that the Acts of one Council have been made void by another and therefore it is more than probable that one of them did declare something to be a truth revealed by Christ which was not so delivered unto them Qu. 17. Whether the Decisions of such Assemblies or general Councils were not always esteemed obligatory in the Church and whether particular Persons or Churches obstinately gainsaying such Decisions received by a much Major part of the Church diffused were not always esteemed to have incurred those Anathema's pronounced by such Councils Ans If those Assemblies or Councils be truly general we do very much reverence their Authority and think their decisions to be obligatory But we do not think all to be such that are called so As for instance The Council of Trent is by some sort of men looked upon as a general Council and all their Religion almost built upon the Authority thereof and yet the Church of England never received the decisions of that Council nor did the Galican Church for many years and yet neither the one nor the other did for all that esteem themselves to have incurred the Anathema's pronounced by that Council Qu. 18. Whether the universal Church did not in all Ages practice this way of deciding controversies and whether these be not as universal a tradition of this as the practice was universal without interruption Ans Universal practice will amount to an universal Tradition and that this hath been the practice of the Church in all Ages especially in matters of great weight we deny not nor should we oppose the same course now provided the Council were free and general But the Enquirer goes on Some will perhaps say that such Councils cannot Err in fundamentals but may in not fundamentals I ask these Qu. What are fundamentals and what not Ans Those things which are essentially necessary to the being of Religion may properly be called fundamental but those things which only respect order and decency therein and vary according to time and place and are alterable by the Governours of the Church when they see cause these are not fundamental Qu. Whether there be not some things fundamentals to the Church which are not to every particular Ans There may be some things fundamental to the Being of a Church which are not so to every particular member of that Church but whatsoever things are â—…ndamental to the Being of Religion are equally so to the whole Church and every member thereof Qu. Whether an obstinate denyal of what is fundamental or necessary to the universal Church or granting as I may say upon what is fundamental by a particular person be not in time a fundamental Errour especially after an universal declaration of it as truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles Ans This Query as it is here worded is hardly reconcileable to sense but I suppose his meaning is Whether for any particular person obstinately to deny what is fundamental or necessary to the universal Church and declared to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles be not a fundamental Errour To which I answer That every particular Christian ought with all deference to submit his own private Judgment to the publick Judgment of the Church and though it do not appear so plain to him yet he ought rather to suspect his own than that of the Church But if in some things he cannot be satisfied and therein happen to differ from the Church provided he do not thereby break the peace and unity of the Church it will hardly amount to a fundamental Errour But what if it be declared by the Church to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles will not that make it so To this I answer That no declaration of the Church how universal soever it be can make that to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles which really is not so And therefore in that case we must have recourse to their Writings and if it be not either in express words contained therein or by sound consequence drawn therefrom we ought not to comply with it nor is it a fundamental Errour to differ therein Qu. Whether the universal Church assembled in a General Council ought not to be justly esteemed the decider of what is fundamental and what
1. This Inference doth plainly imply a necessity of a visible Judge of Controversies to whom in all matters in difference there should be an Appeal and whose decision should be final Now if this be really so Then 1. It is mighty strange that Christ and his Apostles who pretended faithfully to deliver the whole mind and will of God to mankind should never once mention such an Officer in the Church Or 2. If they should omit to mention so necessary a thing in their writings and only deliver it by word of mouth to their immediate Successors it is no less strange that they should either not know or never make use of such an Expedient for the ending of those Controversies that arose in their days 3. We must conclude that either the Church hath been mighty careless of her own peace or that this Judge hath been very negligent in his business to suffer so great and so fatal Controversies to continue so long in the Church of God when there was so ready a way to put an end to them 2. Our Explainer in this Inference acquaints us with the great ends for the sake of which such a Judge is necessary viz. The ending of all controversies in our Religion and settling of peace in our Consciences These indeed are great things and greatly to be desired But whether there be any such Expedient or if there be whether it be sufficient for these ends are the things in question Now that from the first foundation of the Christian Church to this very day these great ends have not been universally attained is very plain and evident which to me is a very great Argument that either God never instituted any such expedient or if he did that it was not sufficient for these ends which would be a mighty reflection upon the power and wisedom of God But because some things in Scripture are hard to be understood doth it therefore necessarily follow that there must be a visible Judge of Controversies to deliver the sense of those places to us without whom we can never attain thereunto and from whose decision there lies no appeal I confess I cannot see the necessity of this consequence For if it be granted as it is on all hands that the Scriptures which we now have are the Word of God revealed by him and of infallible Authority we must believe that either God would not or could not explain his mind to the sons of men in words as plain and intelligible as any such Judge will or can do or else there can be no such necessity of any such Judge upon that account If there be no other way to attain the sense of Scripture but only the decision of such a Judge then what way or means is left us to understand the sense of the declaration of that Judge will there not want another Judge to determine that and another to explain his and so in infinitum But let us for once suppose though we do not grant it that there ought to be a Judge of Controversies in order to the attaining of these great ends let us see how he ought to be qualified and where we shall find him This Judge must be a person or number of people who must have a superiority not only of order but influence over all others to whose decisions and determinations all Christian people ought to conform their judgments and practices Nor must that influence be precarious but authoritative for nothing can warrant their Impositions but the Authority by which they are imposed Nor can any Authority suffice to oblige mankind to believe that which is neither necessary as to its matter nor evident as to its proof antecedently to the definition of such an Authority but only such an one as is infallible Now where shall we und such an one seeing there are so many pretenders to it If we believe the Popes themselves the Jesuits and the rest of the high Papalins then his holiness will carry away the Bell but if we believe General Councils and those who defend their Supremacy then they will carry it from the Pope and if we believe others of equal credit then the Catholick Church diffusive will carry it from both So that if there ought to be such a Judge you see it is not agreed upon among themselves who he is But 3. Our Explainer determines this Controversie telling us that it is the Judgment of the Church in a free General Council that we ought to submit to And in this we heartily joyn with him for we profess to have as great a deference for the Judgment of the Church in a free General Council as they have or can have and to have as great a regard to the sense of the whole Christian Church in all Ages since the Apostles as they nay it may be greater than they will pretend to have for we are so far from declining it that as to the matters in difference between them and us we appeal thereunto and are willing to be concluded thereby being as well assured as the Records of those Ages still remaining can assure us that it is on our side But if by Church here he mean the present Church of Rome as it stands divided from other Communions we deny that she hath any more authority to impose a sense of Scripture upon us than we upon her or any other particular Church upon either of us Or if by Councils he mean those Western Councils which have been held in these parts of the World in latter Ages we cannot allow them either to be free or general and consequently cannot grant nor have they any reason to claim any such authority over us But if by Councils he mean those primitive Councils which indeed were the most free and general and best deserved to be styled the Church Representative we have so great a veneration for their Opinion and Judgment that we shall not decline to submit the Umpirage of our Cause to them But what is all this to the present Church of Rome which at this day so arrogantly claims a right and authority to interpret Scripture and impose her sense upon us For unless she can prove her self infallible all her pretended authority in this case will fall to the ground If she be indeed infallible she would do well to let the world know whence she had her Infallibility She must have it either immediately from God or by delegation from the Catholick Church diffusive If from God let her produce her Charter If from the Catholick Church diffusive then it depends upon her authority and by the same authority she may recall it again when she pleaseth So that upon this ground it will prove but a very Fallible Infallibility We know she challenges it by virtue of those promises of the Spirit in the Scriptures which promises they themselves do confess to have been made only to the Catholick Church and therefore though an Infallibility even in Judgment were
member is guilty of a sinful and dangerous Schism and whilst he continues therein can have no roason to expect the blessing of those promises 3. That there may be sometimes a just cause of Separation as when a Church makes the conditions of her Communion such as a man cannot communicate with her without sin and danger But in this case particular members ought to be mighty wary and cautious for it is not every dissatisfaction of their own or every irregularity of that Church that will be a sufficient cause of Separation unless the terms of her Communion be manifestly and apparently sinful 4. That the great end and design of Excommunication is the repentance and amendment of the person excommunicated It doth not therefore make void the promises of God nor utterly deprive the sentenced person of the benefits thereof but onely by a temporary correction shews him his folly and danger and calls upon him by a timely repentance and amendment to recover himself out of the one and prevent the other But it must be acknowledged that if a man obstinately continue in that condition and live and die under that sentence his condition will be very dangerous These may serve as general Answers to this Query but if by the Separation or Excommunication here mentioned be meant as no question it is a Separation of Excommunication from the Society and Unity of the Church of Rome Then we have this further to say 1. That the present Church of Rome hath separated her self from the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church by setting up such Doctrines and practices as were never taught practised nor allowed either by Christ or his Apostles or their Successors in the Primitive Church 2. That the present Church of Rome hath made the conditions of her Communion such as none without sin and danger can Communicate with her and by that means hath justified a Separation from her 3. That the Church of Rome hath not nor ever had any lawful Power or Authority over the Church of England nor are we Subject to the Jurisdiction of that See whether we consider it as Episcopal or as Metropolitan or as Patriarchal and therefore we cannot be justly charged with a Separation therefrom It is true indeed that for some time she had Tyrannically usurped an unjust power over us and kept us in Bondage and Slavery to her but God be thanked we at last found an opportunity to shake off those Chains and deliver our selves from the servitude under which we had so long groaned And this we have done and are still ready to justifie to the whole world to be no sinful Separation 4. That an Excommunication thundered out by the Church of Rome against us of the Church of England is but only Brutum fulmen an insignicant Scare-Crow which upon mature consideration we have no cause to be afraid of for she having no power over us we are not accountable to her nor subject to any sentence pronounced by her And therefore notwithstanding that pretended Separation or Excommunication from the Society and Unity of that Church which they make so much noise with we are in no apprehension of losing the benefits of those promises which God hath made to his One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church of Grace here and Eternal Happiness hereafter Qu. 3. Doth Christian Religion consist in matters of Morality or Ceremony of indifferency to be accepted or rejected and altered at the Choice Judgment and well liking of private Persons Corporations or States Ans Religion in general may be considered either in its Essentials or as it is cloathed with Circumstantials The former of which are unalterable but the latter may be subject to change The Christian Religion in particular falls under the same consideration the Being whereof consists indeed in matters of Morality which being innituted and ordained by Christ are not alterable by Men. But the order and decency which are things necessary to the well being of that Religion consists in Ceremonies and things indifferent which are in their own nature alterable and being the institutions of Men may be altered by Men but not by any private Persons For whatsoever hath been established by the whole Body cannot be altered by any particular member or any number of Men who are members of that Body nor by any Authority less than that by which at first it was established And here the Church of Rome may do well to consider by what power and authority she hath made so bold with the very Essentials of the Christian Religion altering some and adding others making new Articles of Faith which were never taught by Christ nor his Apostles and imposing them as necessary to be believed by all those of her Communion Qu. 4. Or doth it consist in the Laws and Rules of Faith and life of Christians so important and binding as that by the contempt thereof one must lose Eternal Happiness Ans This Query is very little different from the former and hath I think received a sufficient answer in the solution of that For by matters of Morality there wherein I say the Being of the Christian Religion doth consist I mean Moral and unchangeable truths which are to be received and believed by all Christians and Moral actions which are to be done by them and for our belief and performance of these things we have such laws and rules delivered by Christ and his Apostles as are binding unto all the contempt wherof may very much endanger and without a serious and seasonable repentance and amendment will certainly forfeit eternal happiness And therefore it will highly concern the Church of Rome to consider whether she be not guilty of such contempt whether in some of her publick Orders and Decrees she have not apparently contradicted some of these important Laws and Rules Qu. 5. Whether those Laws and Rules taught by Christ and his Apostles bind as well the Christians of succeeding Ages who could not be present to see and hear them as they bound those who were present heard them taught and saw their Original Writings Ans That these Laws and Rules are as binding to me now as they were to any of the Disciples in our Saviour's or his Apostles time I willingly grant And if this concession will do this Enquirer any service much good may do him with it For if the seeing of the Original Writings of Christ and his Apostles or being present to hear them deliver those Laws and Rules were necessary to make them obligatory then ought we to have Christ and his Apostles come down from Heaven and write and preach the same things over again not only in every Age but in every year every day of that year and in all places of the world too But let us proceed and see what mighty use this Enquirer will make of this wire drawing this Query Qu. 6. Whether after the death of Christ and his Apostles and Disciples by his institution other persons successively
King may with impunity be deposed or killed by any one saith Suarez Desens Fid. l. 6. c. 6. Sect. 24. The Pope can make that he who is a King shall be no King and then you are disobliged saith Bellarm. contr Barcl c. 7. The Secular power is subject to the Spiritual The Pope hath a sovereign power over Christian Kings and Princes to correct depose and appoint others in their places If a King be guilty of Heresie Schism or any intolerable crime against his People if he be guilty of negligence or sloth in his government if he fail in the performance of his Oaths and Promises or oppress the Church the Pope may divest him of his Royal Dignity saith Abrah Brovius de Pontif. Roman c. 46. p. 621. Col. 2. Which Book was printed at Cologne Anno 1619. and solemnly recommended and approved by his Superiours and Licensed by the Apostolick Inquisitor I might be infinite in instances of this kind but having almost wearied my self with raking in such a Dunghill I am not willing to tire my Reader too I shall therefore only produce one unexceptionable Witness more and that shall be their great and renowned Champion Bellarmine out of whose 5th Book De Romano Pontifice I shall take the pains to transcribe some passages and having subjoyned thereunto some instances of their practices suitable to their declared principles I shall then leave it to the judgment of any indifferent person what kind of Loyalty and Fidelity Sovereign Princes especially those who are of a different persuasion may hope to find from their Roman Catholick Subjects Bellarmine in the first Chapter of his fifth Book De Romano Pontifice having rejected two extreme Opinions concerning the Pope's power the one taught and maintained by Augustinus Triumphus Alvarus Pelagius Hostiensis and others of his own Communion viz. That the Pope by a Divine Right hath a most plenary power over all the World as well in Political as Ecclesiastical affairs And the other delivered by Calvin Peter Martyr Brentius and others whom he calls Hereticks viz. That the Pope as Pope hath not by Divine Right any Temporal power at all nor upon any account can command Secular Princes much less deprive them of their Kingdoms and Principalities and that Spiritual persons ought not to exercise Temporal Dominion He at last lays down a middle Opinion between both which he tells us is the common Opinion of Catholick Divines viz. That the Pope as Pope hath not directly and immediately any Temporal power but only a spiritual yet by virtue of that Spiritual power he hath indirectly at least a supreme power in Temporals This Opinion he undertakes to explain in his Sixth Chapter where he tells us That in Order to a Spiritual good he hath a Supreme Power of disposing all the Temporal things of all Christian People Which Power is just such over Princes as the Soul hath over the Body or sensitive Appetite by Virtue of this Power he may change Kingdoms and take them from one and give them to another he may make and alter suspend and abrogate Civil Laws as the Chief Spiritual Prince if it be for the safety of Souls In his Seventh Chapter he endeavours to prove this Exorbitant Power of the Pope by reasons all which are founded in the Subordination and Subjection of the Temporal to the Spiritual Sword which is a Foundation that will certainly fail him However upon this Foundation he thus builds The Ecclesiastical Republick can command and compel the Temporal which is indeed its Subject to change the Administration and to depose Princes and to appoint others when it cannot otherwise defend the Spiritual good And again it is not lawfull for Christians to suffer an Infidel or Heretical King if he endeavour to draw his Subjects to his Heresie or Unbelief But to judge whether a King do draw to Heresie or not belongeth to the Pope to whom the Care of Religion is committed therefore it belongs to the Pope to judge whether a King be to be deposed or not And if any one ask why the Christians of old did not depose Nero and Diocletian and Julian the Apostate and Valens the Arian He roundly answers it was not because they wanted Right but because they wanted Power to do it But lest any scrupulous Christian should boggle at those horrid things which these declared Principles must of necessity lead them to as Rebellion Murder Breach of Faith Violation of Oaths c. He will tell them that they are not answerable for any of these things For if the Pope should mistake and command Vice and forbid Vertue yet it were a sin against Conscience for the Church not to believe those Vices to be good and those Vertues to be evil All these instances that I have now laid before you were of men who lived and died in the Communion of the Church of Rome and most of them men of great Eminency both for their Parts and Places and therefore very likely to understand the Religion they professed Now either these men or our Explainer must be very much out and strangely unacquainted with the Principles of their Religion or else the Explainer must industriously design to put a chear upon those Persons of Quality to whom he presents his Scheme For nothing can be more different than his Explanation and this Declaration which these men have left upon Record But I think the choice is very easie which of these ought to be believed in this case and if this Cloud of Witnesses carry it as undoubtedly they will against one single unauthorized Explainer then certainly he was in the wrong box when the so much boasted of the Loyalty of the Roman Catholicks And now I shall only subjoyn an account of some few of their Practices correspondent to these Principles and they being put together will I suppose sufficiently discover the mistake of our Explainer Leo Isaurus Emperour of Constantinople was excommunicated by Pope Gregory the II d. his Country given away to the Lombards by which means he and his Successors lost all the Western Empire which the Pope and the French King afterwards shared between them Henry the IV th Emperour of Germany was excommunicated by Pope Gregory the VII th his Subjects absolved from their Obedience Rodulph Duke of Sueden and Burgundy set up against him to whom a Crown was sent by the Pope with this Inscription The Rock gave the Crown to Peter and Peter gives it to Rodulph Childericus King of France by the Advice and Authority of Pope Zachary the I st had his Head shaven was thrust into a Monastery and Pipinus Son of Carolus Martellus who was but a Subject and Servant to the King was anointed King in his stead Henry the III d. King of France was killed at the Siege of Paris with an empoysoned Knife by a Jacobine Fryar called Jaques Clement Which Murther Pope Sixtus the V th by a solemn Oration in the Consistory September the 2d 1589. commended to the Skies as Rarum insigne memorablile facinus So publickly was the King killing Doctrine owned by them at that time And what effect this Papal approbation did produce is evident for upon this encouragement King Henry the IV th Successor to Henry the III d. was also stabbed with a consecrated Dagger by a Jesuite named Ravilliac How frequent the excommunicating and deposing of Princes the absolving of Subjects from their Duty and Obedience and the stirring up of Tumults and Seditions against them by Popes and Papalins hath heretofore been History is so full that it would be an Herculean labour to transcribe all the instances thereof Now these declared Principles and avowed Practices of Roman Catholicks being put together and compared with our Explainer's profession may sufficiently evince how much he hath abused those Persons of Quality and how unfairly and dishonestly he hath dealt with them in his Explanation of the Roman Catholick's Belief in this Point But one would think he durst not deal thus considering what a solemn Protestation he makes in the Close of his Explanation For thus he concludes These we sincerely and solemnly profess as in the sight of God the searcher of all Hearts taking the words plainly and simply in their usual and familiar sense without any Equivocation or Mental Reservation whatsoever Were we not so well acquainted with the Power of Dispensations and the force of Mental Reservation among them did we not know that by these Artifices they can elude the most solemn Protestations make void all Oaths and Promises and dissolve any the most sacred Bonds which can be invented to oblige men it would look very uncharitably to suspect any man after such a solemn Protestation But that they can do all this and think they can do it with a safe Conscience notwithstanding their Protestation to the contrary is a ruled Case among their Casuists I shall only at present trouble you with one instance which is very applicable to the case in hand and with that conclude On occasion of the Powder-plot here in England an Oath of Allegiance was thought necessary to prevent such horrid attempts in time to come which a Roman Doctor cited by Arch-Bpishop Usher under this Character B. P. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epistol I. R. Impres An. 1609. taking notice of laughs aloud at the simplicity of it His words are worth remembring Sed vide in tanta astutia quanta simplicitas c. But see what simplicity here is in so great Craft When he had placed all his security in that Oath he thought he had framed such a manner of Oath with so many Circumstances which no man could any way dissolve with a safe Conscience But he could not see that if the Pope dissolve the Oath all its Knots whether of being faithfull to the King or of admitting no Dispensation are accordingly dissolved Yea I will say a thing more admirable you know I believe that an unjust Oath if it be evidently known to be such or openly declared such it obligeth no man That the King's Oath is unâ—… is sufficiently declared by the Pastor of the Church himself You see now that the Obligatian of it is vanished into smoke and that the â—…nd which so many wise men thought was made of Iron was 〈…〉 Straw FINIS
granted to belong to the Catholick Church yet that can signifie nothing to her till she hath proved her self to be that Catholick Church to which alone those promises confessedly belong Thus you see how candid and faithfull our Explainer hath been in this first Point and now let us examine whether he acquit himself any better in the next The EXPLAINER 2. We humbly believe the Sacred Mystery of the blessed Trinity One Eternal Almighty and Incomprehensible God whom onely we adore and worship as alone having Sovereign Dominion over all things to whom alone 1 Tim. 1.17 we acknowledge as due from Men and Angels all Glory Service and Obedience abhorring from our Hearts as a most detesta bld Sacrilege to give our Creator's Honour to any Creatures whatsoever And therefore we solemnly protest That by the Prayers we address to Angels ane Saints we intend no other than humbly to solicit their assistance before the Throne of God as we desire the Prayers of one another here upon Earth not that we hope any thing from them as Original Authours thereof but from God the Fountain of all Goodness through Jesus Christ our onely Mediator and Redeemer Neither do we believe any divinity or vertue to be in Images for which they ought to be worshipped as the Gentiles did their Idols but we retain them with due and decent respect in our Churches as Instruments which we find by experience do often assist our memories and excite our affections The ANIMADVERTER Our Explainer here in behalf of the Roman Catholicks makes a very good confession of Faith telling us That they humbly believe the sacred mystery of the blessed Trinity One Eternal Almighty and Incomprehensible God whom only they adore and worship as alone having Sovereign Dominion over all things to whom alone 1 Tim. 1.17 they acknowledge as due from Men and Angels all glory service and obedience abhorring from their hearts as a most detestable Sacrilege to give their Creator's honour to any Creatures whatsoever This is true Primitive Christianity good Catholick Divinity without any mixture of Popery and is it not great pity that any thing should be added thereto or mixed therewith to spoil so good a Confession Thus far we can readily and heartily joyn with them but when they superadd Articles of their own such as were never delivered by Christ or his Apostles nor owned by the primitive Catholick Church and set them in equal place with those of Divine Revelation and primitive practice then we cannot keep pace with them but are forced to stay behind and sit down contented with primitive Christianity so that in truth it is not we that leave them but they that leave us and consequently are guilty of the Separation And this is the case here between us and our Explainer For after all this glorious profession of adoring and worshipping the One Eternal Almighty and Incomprehensible God and him only and abhorring the giving of his glory to any Creatures as a most detestable Sacrilege he introduceth Prayers to Saints and Angels and the Worship of or beofre images as things equally necessary to be performed by Christians Now if Prayers and Adoration be acts of religious worship and the Objects to which they are offered be Creatures then it must needs follow that either all Religious Worship is not due to God alone or else that they do give part of his honour to something that is not God It is true indeed that he endeavours to palliate these practices with some pretended qualifications thereby to shift off the weight of this charge which lieth so heavy upon them but they are so thin and threedbare so empty and insignificant and have been so miserably baffled of late especially in the Answer to A Papist Misrepresented and Represented as also in two other little Treatises the one intituled A Discourse concerning Invocation of Saints printed in the year 1684 and the other intituled A Discourse concerning the Object of Religious Worship c. printed 1685 that I cannot but admire at our Explainer's confidence to produce them at this time These Treatises are or upon easie terms may be in every man's hands and there is therein so much said upon this Subject and so much to the purpose as may very well spare me the labour of enlarging thereupon to them therefore I shall refer the Reader for further satisfaction But by these short Remarques which I have made upon this part of our Explainer's Confession it is plain that he hath been no more candid and ingenuous in this than in the former Let us therefore try him in the next The EXPLAINER 3. We firmly believe that no force of Nature or dignity of our best Works can merit our Justification but we are Justified freely by Grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ Rom. 3.24 And though we should by the grace of God persevere unto the end in a godly life and holy obedience to the Commandments yet our hopes of eternal glory are still built upon the mercy of God and the merits of Christ Jesus All other Merits according to our sense of the word signifie no more than Actions done by the assistance of God's Grace to which it hath pleased his goodness to promise a Reward A Doctrine so far from being unsuitable to the sense of the Holy Scriptures that it is their principal design to invite and provoke us to a diligent observance of the Commandments by promising Heaven as a reward of our obedience 1 Tim. 4.8 Rom. 2.6 Rom. 8.13 Hebr. 6.10 Nothing being so frequently repeated in the word of God as his gracious promises to recompence with everlasting glory the Faith and Obedience of his Servants Nor is the bounty of God barely according to our Works but high and plentifull even beyond our Capacities giving full measure heaped up and pressed down and running over into the bosomes of all that love him Luke 6.38 Thus we believe the merit or rewardableness of holy living both which signifie the same thing with us arise not from the self value even of our best actions as they are curs but from the grace and bounty of God And for our selves we sincerely profess when we have done all those things which are commanded us we are unprofitable Servants Luke 17.10 having done nothing but that which was our Duty so that our boasting is not in our selves but all our Glory is in Christ The ANIMADVERTER If this be really the Faith of Roman Catholicks we shall not stick to acknowledge it is ours too and then we shall have no occasion to differ in this point But I am afraid our so near an Agreement is too good news to be true Our Explainer I doubt hath either mistaken or to gain a Proselyte or for some other end which might be serviceable to Holy Church hath very much misrepresented the Doctrine of his own Church in this point For sure I am the Council of Trent which they so much magnifie and