but those things which as well the Prophets as Moses had foretold that they would come to pass that it behooveth that the Christ should suffer †Acts 26.22 23. and finally how could he in another place assure the * 1 Cor. 15 34. Corinthians that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures that he was buried and that he rose again the third Day according to the Scriptures since it is evident that none of these propositions is literally and expresly so written in any of the Books of the Old Testament but only are gathered from thence by consequence Now if that which is drawn from the Scriptures by good consequence is really in the Scriptures why do you reject it since you confess with me that there is nothing in the Scripture but what is Holy True and Divine conclusions of Truth are not formally in their principles but one cannot deny them to be there in Vertue and Power so that admitting of a principle one admits also all things that can be inferred from it by that very act as for instance he who saith that we have four gospels saith also that we have two and two of them these numbers being evidently contained in that which he hath expressed And the Scripture saying that Jesus Christ is a man saith also by those very words that he hath a soul and body the two parts of the nature of mans 'T is very true that a man may sometimes lay down things the consequences of which he will not allow of but this proceeds from the weakness of his understanding which doth not see all the Lawful consequences which may be drawn from them God whose Wisdom is infinite never affirms any thing without Knowing all the consequences which can be drawn from it so that we need not fear that he will go back from his word or deny any Doctrine to be his that can reasonably be concluded out of his word Since then that all things that can be lawfully inferred from the Holy Scripture are unavoidably true and Divine it is clear that one doth sufficiently prove the truth and holiness of a Creed when he shews that it follows from the positions expressed in the Holy Scripture without any need as formerly the Arians and now the new Methodists pretend to shew it in so many words This is the first principle which Scholarius a Greek indeed but of the side of the Latins laid down at the beginning of his Dispute against those of his own nation concerning the procession of the Holy Ghost first a Scholar orat Henet 3. part Act. Conc. Flor. p. 580. then we must not exspect saith he to find all the proofs expresly and in so many words in the Scripture for this is an excuse which many Hereticks used to save themselves but if there be any thing that may be deduced from what is said in the Scriptures we must Also receive it with the same honour as the Scriptures it self Cardinal Bellarmin who alone hath more desert and reputation in the Roman party then all the Authors and defenders of this new Method have put them all together acknowledgeth this same truth That which one inferreth evidently from the Scriptures saith he is evidently true the Scriptures presupposing it b Bellar. l. 4. de Ec. c. 3. Melchior Canus c Can. loc Theol. l. b. c. 8. Bishop of the Canaries Vega d Veg. l. 9. dê justificat c. 39. Gabril Vasques e Vasques Tom. 1 in Thom. dispute 5.6 3. and disput 12. art 8.6 ◠Alfons Salmeron f Salmer T. 1 prolegum de Canc. 91. all very famous amongst our adversaries make the same judgment of it and the last especially speaks thus of it We ought to hold for Doctrins of Divine Authority and worthy to be received by Faith not only the things which are expresly contained in the Scriptures but those also which are inferred from them by an necessary and evident consequence Certainly 't is enough for us to prove to our adversaries the truth of our beliefs either that we read them in the Scripture or that we infer them from thence since they agree with us that 't is a book Divinely inspired CHAP. X. That this pretended Method takes away certitude from all humane Knowledge and plungeth Religion the Sciences and all the life of men into a horrible confusion But these men demand of us here how we can assure our selves that the consequences which we draw from the Scripture are good and lawful for say they reason is sometimes abused concluding from a principle that which cannot truely be inferred from it Arians and Eutichians who demand formal Passages of the Chatholicks did not they pretend to conclude their false and pernicious opinions from divers places of Scripture where notwithstanding they were not Nestorius Palagius and before them all Origen were deceived in the same manner and there is not perhaps any Heresie which hath not endeavoured to ground it self upon the Scripture by false and abusive discourse Reason then being faulty how can we be assured of the truth of the things which by its means we have discovered in the Scripture for since it is often deceived who can tell us that it is not so now I do not think it strange that an Atheist should make this objection to us since his impiety obliges him to confound all knowledge in an infinite and remedisess incertitude But that men who make profession of the Christian Religion and whose interest t is to preserve Faith Assurance and Credulity in the world should propose to us a discourse which rums all these things from top to bottome in my opinion 't is either an impudence or an extream passion For consider I beseech you how far this fine discourse goeth reason say they is faulty therefore we cannot be assured of the conclusion which it draws from the Scripture But if this consequence be good what assurance can we have First what will become of this so much bragged of certainty of the Catholick Faith which they have alwaies in their mouths it will be accounted to them no other then a meer in discretion For whether they will or no 't is our understanding which receives the things of Faith which considers them and is lead to believe them by the reasons of truth which it seeth in them If our understanding by mistakes and abuses sometimes makes its aprehensions and conclusions uncertain our faith must necessarily be so too The consent of the people the ancient and uninterrupted successions of the Bishop of Rome the Majesty and brightness of the power Beauty Order and pomp of the ministers the light of the divine protection and such like considerations may perswade you that Rome is truely the Church of Jesus Christ but I say how can you be sure of it since this reason to whose report you give credit is false and if it may be faulty in other things why not in this and
in the earth and so you think to oblige them by that to hold this conclusion that the Body of Christ is not on the earth for a thing certainly and Divinety revealed they will tell you that it cannot pass for any more then for a humane doctrine since from two propositions from which one is drawn viz. The first is drawn from maxims of reason only and not from Scripture as the second is They triumph in this observation and put it upon all occasions amongst their gravest and most serious conference but I say first that if our particular interest were only concerned in it there were no need to consider it since that which is granted is sufficient for this dispute For it grants us that the propositions which are lawfully drawn from two truths one of which revelation teacheth and sense or reason the other are true at least to the same degree as the truths which we learn by reason and sense and that we may give at least the same kind of Faith to believe them in the same manner as we believe for example that Snow is white the Heavens round or that the whole is bigger then its part Now we demand no more for our designe for we imploy the most part of these discourses mixed with propositions of a different nature only to overthrow their belief and not to establish ours now to destroy a doctrine and render it unworthy of belief 't is enough to shew that t is contrary to some truth and then one ought to hold it for false of what condition or origine soever that truth be which it opposeth whither it be revealed or natural For truth is a simple thing and uniforme alwaies like to it self lies often wound themselves one falsity destroying another but all truth agree perfectly conspire together and t is impossible they should oppose or overthrow one another If it be found then that the Doctrines of our adversary are contrary to some truth be it to that which sense teacheth us to that which we learn in thescholof reason or to that which divine revelation tells us t is enough to justifie that they are by no means veritable far from being as they pretend the articles of the Christian Faith For the Author of Nature Grace Sense Reason and Faith is one and the same God who hath not destroyed in the school of grace what he hath taught in that of nature God forbid but hath polished and perfected in one what he had begun the rough drawn in the other So t is manifest that far from being obliged in this kind of discourse to imploy propositions contained in Scripture only I can use arguments drawn intirely from sense and reason without taking the propositions of which they consist from revelation As for example if I should conclude that the Eucharist is not a humane body because a humane body cannot be held intire in a mans mouth whereas the Eucharist may be held in an infants he would answer impertinently that should alledge that t is not Scripture but sense and reason which learns us these two propositions and therefore the conclusion is not a truth revealed For at this time we have concern about that the question is not about the Master who hath taught these propositions whither it be sense or Faith but about their quality whither they be true or not for if they are both true their conclusion is so of necessity and by consequence your opinion which opposeth its inevitable false it being absolutely impossible that two contradictory propositions should be both true as this the Eucharist is a humane body which is your opinion and this other the Eucharist is not a humane body which is the conclusion of my discourse But I say in the second place that their maxim is false that to infer a conclusion from authority and divine Faith it behoveth that the two propositions be drawn from the revelation of God it is enough that one be revealed and the other evident by the light of nature The Church discourseth thus against the fond imaginations of Apollinaris every man hath a foul indued with understanding Jesus Christ our Lord is a man therefore he hath Soul indued with understanding of the two propositions from whence this conclusion is drawn the second is in the Scriptures the first is not there but we have learned it in the school of reason would you say under this pretext that the conclusion viz. that Jesus Christ hath a soul endued with understanding is not a divine truth but a humane learned from earth and not from heaven but where is the infant that does not see that God revealing to us that his Son is a man doth not reveal by the same means that he hath a body a Soul understanding and in short all the essential parts of the nature signified by this word man Otherwise one must say that in teaching us that Jesus Christ is man it teacheth us nothing but simply strikes the ear with the vain and unprofitable sound of the word for what is it to say that Jesus Christ is man unless he hath a body Soul understanding and the other things of which the nature of the subject consist signified by this word man In the same manner when the Scripture teacheth us that God hath created the earth it teacheth us by the same means that he hath created America and the Austral Countries China and the Isles of the Sound although it be sense and reason and not Scripture which teacheth us that these Countries are part of the Globe of the earth and he would be impertinent to the hight who should say that the Scripture hath not revealed to us that God hath created China or Taproban because it simply tells us that God hath created the earth without telling that these Countries are part of it And so of the rest for God in his Scripture presupposeth every where that those to whom he speaks are men and not beasts that they know if not subtily and Phylosophically that which is not necessary for his design at least grosly and in some measure the nature of those things of which he speaks to them and by consequence that they are capable of applying to every part of a subject what he hath told them in gross so that when he learns us some thing of a whole it is clear that t is as much as if he revealed all and every one of its parts to us perticularly as when he tells us that Jesus Christ is a man t is as much as if he should say he hath a Body formed like ours consisting of quantity occupying a space which is fit to it moving it selfe in time from one place to another in such manner that its parts are not altogether in the same place that he hath a Soul which reasoneth wills loves and in short indued with all the essential faculties of man This is so clear that no Body ever can put it in doubt
say then to this procedure of the Heretiques do they grant them that one ought to hold nothing but that for a doctrin of Scripture which we read there in so many words and not reading exactly there the words of which the question is have they recourse to the Church to defend by its authority that which they think cannot be proved by the formal words of the Scripture which is the point at which all the cheating blowes of our methodists aim They do nothing of all this They doe not put the infalibilitie of the Church in play They hold themselves to the Scriptures and use its authority but for the defence of their cause and confessing that the terms of their questions are not read there exactly they protest that t is enough that the thing it selfe is found there and that t is gathered and deduced lawfully from thence and prove upon discourse found upon diverse passages and after having so proved it conclude that they have demonstrated it by the Scripture T is no matter saith S. Athan. Ep. de Synod Arim. Seleuc. T. p. 913. D. Athanasius in one of his bookes above named whither the words which one makes use of be in the Scripture or not provided that the sense of them be Orthodox and in the treatise of the decrees of the Council of Nice c idem l. de decret Synod Nic. p. 270. B. although that the words saith he be not so laid down in Scripture t is no matter so long as they have a sence truly drawn from the Scripture as it hath been said before what can one call more contentious saith S. Austin answering to Pascentius then to dispute of the name when the thing is manifest a Aug. Ep. 17 T. 2. p. 150. F and a little after you see saith he to him that from those words which are not in the Scripture one may give such reason by which it may appear that they are truths b Ibid. O. Maximinus who pressed him to prove by express terms of the Scripture that one ought to adore the holy Ghost t is well said answered he as if from the things which we read there we could not learn certain other things which we do not read there c Id l. 3. contr Max. c. 3. and following this distinction he professeth elswhere to have said what he read in or understood by the Scriptures conforming himself to their authority and St. Chrysostome d Id. l. 15 de civit D. cap. 1. gives us this rule that we ought to hold those things for holy writ whose sence is found in the Scriptures although they are not found there in the same words e Chrysost Hom. 7. in 1 Cor. p. 380. S. Gregory of Nazianzen in his thirty seventh speech disputes against the Hereticks who denying the divinity of the Holy Ghost urged him with the same wrangling to produce them a passage of Scripture which testifieth it expresly a Greg Nazian c. col 37.599.605 edit paris an 1609. Our methodists would have yielded to this assault and would have granted them that there being no formal passage to shew this truth it could not be proved by the Scriptures But S. Gregory on the contrary makes to them this wise and judicious remarke with the Style and manner of the teaching of the holy Scriptures b p. 605. that there are things which are said there which notwithstanding are not there and there are other things which are not said there which nevertheless are not wanting there some others are not said there nor are they there in effect and in fine some others are there and are spoke there He puts in the first ranck sleeping wakeing and the motions of God in the second his impassibility and that he is without beginning for though the Scriptures say often that God sleepeth or that he awaketh or that he moves locally yet notwithstanding it doth not signifie so And though that be in these words 't is not in that sence And though it never sayes expresly that he is impassible or without beginning c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it signifies it notwithstanding in divers places in other words Which the Divine made his adversaries confess who held that God was not begotten and without beginning and yet they could not produce any one passage which said it formally from whence he concludes that since by their own confession own may very well prove by the Scriptures that God is without beginning although it saith no where so expresly their procedure is altogether ridiculous for concluding that the divinity of the Holy Spirit cannot be proved by Scripture under pretext that t is not expressed there Shew me these things saith he that God is not begotten and without begining written in so many words or else we will reject them because they are not written a p. 606. And a little after how saith he dost thou keep thy self so closely to the letter and how dost thou side with the Judaical wisdome tying thy self to syllables and leaving the things if thou shouldst name twice five or twice seven and I should come and conclude from thence ten or fourteen or conclude that this thing which you call a mortal and rational animal is a man should I talk idly in thy opinion in discoursing after this manner but how canst thou think so fince I say but the very same things which thou saidst before For the determination is not more from who saith it then from him who doth oblidge necessarily to speak it b p. 606. D. viz. in saying things from whence it necessarily and inevitably follows See how this great man clearly establisheth the consequences which are drawn from Scripture Theodoret in a Dialogue printed with the works of S. Athanasius brings in one of these Hereticks which they call Macedonians from Macedonius their Author who alledged likewise that t is no where writ that the holy Ghost is God a Dialog contr Macedon tom 2. operum Athan p. 276 B. edit Paris An. 1627. To which the Orthodox Divine answered let us suppose that the name of God is not attributed to him in the Scriptures do but acknowledge that he hath the nature and operations of God and that satisfies me for the confession of his divinity But saith the other why do you say that which is not written 't is sufficient answers the Orthodox if you but only acknowledge his nature for though it were not written his nature of it selfe would consequenly draw this name from it For if once one confesseth that the holy Ghost is a person subsisting sanctifying and uncreated he of necessity is God though thou will not confess it Where is it that t is written saith the Macedonian that the Spirit is God even there answers the Orthodox where it is written that he is of the same essence And upon this Groand the Heretick having replyed that the Fathers had called the Son consubstantial
in the word of doctrine For the Scripture saith thou shalt not tie the throat of the Ox that treadeth out the corn and the work man is worthy of his hire 1 Cor. 9.13 14. Do you not know that those who do Sacrifices Gal. 6.6 eat the things which are sacrificed and they who are busied at the altar partake with the altar so likewise our Lord hath ordained that those who preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel See the verses 7 8 9 10. Of the same Chapter 8. That the Faithful ought to reject the Ministers who preach any other thing then the Gospel of Jesus Christ Gal. 1.8 If we our selves or an an Angel from Heaven should preach other wise then we have preached to you let him be accursed So as we have said before now also I say again if any one preach to you any thing but that which you have received let him be accursed 1 John 4.1 Beloved believe not all spirits but try the spirit whether they are of God For many false Prophets are come into the World 2 John verse 10. If any one comes to you and brings not this Doctrine do not receive him into your house nor salute him CHAP. IX Of the holy Sacraments Baptism and the Eucharist 1. That Christians ought to be baptized in the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost MAt Mark 16.16 28.19 Go and teach all men baptizing them in the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Examples of this are common in the books of the New Testamentperticularly in the Acts of the Apostles where we read that those who believed the Doctrine of Jesus Christ and received it were baptized Acts 2.38 41. and 8.12 13. and 9.10 and 10.47 and 16.15 2. That Baptism gives remission of sins and the Grace of the Holy Ghost Acts 2.38 Peter said to them repent and be every one baptized and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost Rom. 6.3 Mar 6.16 1 Pet. 3.21 Ehh. 6.26 Know you not brethren that all of us who have been baptized in Jesus Christ have been baptized in his death for we are buried with him in death by baptisme so that as Christ is risen from the dead by the glory of the Father we also should walk in newness of life Gal. 3.27 You all who were baptized in Christ have put on Christ Col. 2.11 12. You being circumcised with a circumcision made without hands by putting off the body of Flesh viz. by the circumcision of Jesus Christ being buried with him by baptism in which also you are risen together by the Faith of the operation of God who hath raised him from the dead 3. That the Faithful ought to eat the bread and drink the sanctified wine in commemoration of the death of the Lord. 1 Cor. 11.23 c. I have received from the Lord that which also I give you that the Lord Jesus in the night in which he was betrayed took bread and having given thanks he brake it and said take eat this here is my Body which shall be given for you Mat 26 26 27 28. Mar. 14.22 23 24. Luk. 22 17 18 19 20. do this in remembrance of me Likewise also he took the chalice after he had supped saying this chalice is the New Testament in my blood I do this every time that you drink of it in remembrance of me For every time that you shall eat this bread and drink this chalice you will shew forth the Lords death till he comes c. Let a man then try himself and so eat of this bread and drink of this chalice 4. That the bread and wine of the Eucharist are the communication of the Body and blood of Jesus Christ 1 Cor. 10.16 The cup of blessing which we bless is it not the communication of the blood of Christ and the bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of the Lord. CHAP. X. Of the Holy Ghost Of the necessity of his light to have Faith Of his Nature and Person 1. That the malice of man is so great that of himself he neither understands nor believes the heavenly Doctrine preached by the Apostles of Jesus Christ nor can he live in piety according to the Gospel JOhn 3.3 Verily verily I say unto thee that who is not born again cannot see the Kingdome of God John 6.44 No one can come to me except the Father who hath sent me draw him Rom 8 7. The wisdome of the flesh is an enemy to God for it is not subject to the Law of God nor in truth can it be 1 Cor. 2.14 The Animal man doth not comprehend the things which are of the Spirit God for they are to him folly and he cannot understand them in as much as they are discerned spiritually 2. That the Spirit of God which gives to men the graceof understanding believing the Gospel and of living according to the Doctrine of the Lord. 1 Cor. 2.7 8 9 10. We speak the Wisdome of God which is a mistery which is hid c. Which none of the Princes of this World hath known for if they had known if they had never crucified the Lord of glory but as it is written the things which the eye hath not seen nor the ear heard and which are not entered into the heart of man are those which God hath prepared for those which love him but God hath revealed them to us by his Spirit Matth. 11.25 At that time Jesus answered and said O Father Lord of Heaven and Earth I thank thee that thou hast hid these things from the wise and understanding and hast revealed them to little Children Matth. 11.17 Thou art blessed Simon Son of Jonas for flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee viz. That Jesus Christ is the Son of the living God but my Father which is in heaven John 1.12 13. Those who believe in the name of God are not born of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but are born of God Acts 16.14 The Lord opened the heart of Lydia to understand the things which Paul said Phil. 1.29 It is given to you for Christ not onely to believe in him but also to indure for him Phil. 2.13 'T is God that worketh in you to do and to will according to his good will Ezech. Jer. 31.33 and 32.39 11.19 20. And I will give them a heart and will put into them a new spirit and I will take away the heart of stone from their flesh and will give them a heart of flesh that they may walkin my commandments and keep my judgments and do them and that they be my people and that I be their God 3. That the Holy Ghost is a person distinct from the Father and the Son John 14.16 17. I will pray the Father saith our Lord Jesus Christ and he shall give you another comforter to
present in the Eucharist now they may be present there and yet the bread and wine not lose their Substance And 't is very unlikely that these Propositions of the Apostles infer that that which he calls bread and Chalice should be in Substance one and the same thing with the body and blood of the Lord that contrarily they evidently presuppose that they are different Subjects For if the bread which one eats unworthily were the very body of Christ this language would be cold and impertinent he who eats of this bread unworthily is guilty of the body of Christ and doth not discern the body of Christ since upon this account it would be to say that he who eats the body of Christ unworthily is guilty of the body of Christ and doth not discern the body of Christ Secondly I say that that which they draw from this Text besides it s not being the Question cannot be concluded from thence For he who receives the Baptism unworthily as Simon the Magitian did doth wrong to Christ and is guilty of it and nevertheless no body can conclude from thence that the Substance of Jesus Christ is really present in the Baptism They who sin voluntarily after they have received the knowledge of the Truth Heb. 10.26 put the Son of God under their feet and hold the blood of the Testament for a prophane thing And no body can conclude from hence that the Son of God or his blood is really present under the feet of these wicked wretches Luke 10.12 John 13.20 He who despiseth the Apostles despiseth him that sent them and who receiveth him that he hath sent receiveth the same that sent him and nevertheless every one confesseth that the Substance of Jesus Christ was not really because of this present in the Apostles nor in those whom he sent They who sin against their Brethren Mat. 18.5 and wound their weak Consciences sin against Christ 1 Cor. 8.12 And nevertheless every one avoweth that the Substance of Christ is not for all this really present in their Consciences or in their persons And then why should one any more infer that the body and the blood of the Lord are really present in the Eucharist because they who take it unworthily are guilty of his body and do not discern it who seeth not that this is an abusing of the Lord to reject those who appertain to him or to despise that which he hath instituted and that which hath relation to himself As 't is an abuse to a Prince to despise his Embassadors his Seal his Arms or his Essigies And it is not sufficient that the Eucharist be the Sacrament of Christ the communication of his body and of his blood the memorial of his death that which all confess to render this Proposition true whosoever receives it unworthily is guilty of the body of the Lord and doth not discern it without affirming as our Adversaries do that this body and this blood are really present there 5. Finally They produce the meaning of the Lord in the 6th of St. John John 6.51 and so on I am the living bread which came down from Heaven if any one eats of this bread he shall live eternally and the bread which I shall give is my flesh for the life of the world and that which followeth to the 59 Verse presupposing that the Lord spake of the Eucharist they conclude from thence that the Eucharist is not then bread and wine in Substance but the body and blood of the Lord. But this Argument is so weak that it hardly deserves to be considered For it supposeth a dubious thing and concludes wrong which are the most irregular faults that can be in reasoning First then he supposeth that the Lord speaks of the Eucharist in the 6th of St. John which appears in no place in that Text where the Evangelist makes no mention any where of the Holy Sacrament it seemeth rather that one might induce the contrary from it For the eating upon which the Question is is necessarily efficacious to Salvation if any one eats of this bread he shall live eternally Joh. 6.50 He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood he hath eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day He dwells in me and I in him Vers 54. Vers 56. As the living Father hath sent me so I live because of my Father and he whr shall eat me shall live also because of me Now the eating of the Eucharist is not necessarily efficacious to Salvation many eating it to their judgment and condemnation Vers 57. 1 Cor. 11.29 This is not that then about which the Question is in the 6th of St. John Moreover the eating which the Lord means was necessary to those to whom he spoke for the obtaining Salvation Joh. 6.53 if you eat not the flesh of the Son of man and drink not his blood you have no life in you now the eating of the Eucharist was not necessary to those to whom he spoke for the obtaining Salvation it being clear that according to the Doctrine even of our Adversaries Baptism Faith and good Works are sufficient for them for the obtaining Salvation It is not then the eating of the Sacrament which our Lord spoke of in the 6 of St. John as many very famous Interpreters have considered both Antient and Modern and even amongst our * Aen. Syl. since Pius II. Epist 130. Cusan ep 7. ad Boh. John de Ragus Orat. cor Concil Bazil Cajet in Joh. part 3. q. 80. art 8. Gabriel in Can. John Hesseltus l. de commun sub una specie Jansen concord Evang c. 59. Ruard Tapper Art 15. Vald. T. 2. de Sacram c. 91. Armac l. 9. c. 8. Adversaries and understand it a spiritual eating of the Body and Blood of Christ Jesus which is done by Faith And indeed the Lord shewed evidently that by eating his flesh and drinking his blood he signified coming to him believing in him and meditating on him since in his own discourse he ascribes the same effects to these actions as to those of eating his flesh drinking his blood Who comes to me saith he shall not hunger John 7.35.41 47. and who believes in me shall never thirst Whosoever seeth the Son and believeth in him hath eternal life and therefore I will raise him up at the last day But although that which they presuppose viz. that the Lord in the 6 of St. John spake of the Sacrament of the Eucharist were as clear and true as it is obscure and doubtful I always say that they do not argue pertinently First they do not conclude that which is in Question For the Question is not whether the body and blood of Christ are present in the Eucharist which is that which they conclude but whether the bread and the wine lose their nature there and are there changed into the substance of the body and blood of the Lord
are Divine and Apostolique Since then that the Articles of our faith are in the Scriptures and those of Rome are not there it is clear that our Religion is certain and assured as founded upon the most authentick Instructions of Christianity and that it cannot be rejected without denying Christianity it self and that of Rome on the contrary in that wherein it differs from ours is doubtful and uncertain and cannot be imbraced with a full and intire faith 11. But I say in the second place that all this Dispute is out of our way For my designe is only to shew that our Beliefs are in the Scriptures and that those of Rome which we reject are not there to destroy the accusations of the Methodists who pretend that to establish our faith we are obliged to have recourse to other Principles than Scripture Whether the Beliefs of Rome be found in other Documents of Christianity as in Books of the Fathers or no 't is another Question 'T is sufficient at present for me that they are not found in Scripture Now this being so it is clear that I have had reason to reject them from my Confession since I receive nothing into it but what is taught in Scripture And this is sufficient as all may see to justifie our Faith by the Scriptures CHAP. XV. That the Articles of the Belief of Rome which we receive not into ours are contrary to the Scriptures and very far from being taught there BUt to fill up the measure of our proofs I will add in the last place that the Doctrines believed by the Church of Rome and rejected by ours besides their not being found in any part of the Scripture shake it divers ways destroying certain things which the Scripture lays down and laying down other things which it destroys This is so clear that whoever will consider the whole without passion and prejudice will incontinently perceive it 1. Vpon the Point of Sacrifice 1. ROme saith that Jesus Christ is and will be every day crucified in an infinite of places even to the end of the world The Scripture saith Heb. 9. â—5 26 27 28 7.27 That he hath not offered himself more than once and that he hath been once offered to take away the sins of many So as 't is ordained for men once to die Secondly Rome saith That Christ is now offered for our sins without suffering The Scripture saith Heb. 9.26 that if he hath been offered many times he must have suffered more than once Thirdly Rome saith That the remission of sins is obtained in his pretended Sacrifice Heb. 9.22 John 19.30 Heb. 1.3 9 26. without the effusion of blood The Scripture saith that without shedding of blood there is no remission Fourthly The Scripture saith that Christ dying on the Cross all was accomplished and before his Ascension into Heaven he himself hath purged away our sins and abolished them How then ought he still as Rome saith to be every day sacrificed for the same thing Fifthly The Scripture saith That none takes the honour of High Priest Heb. 5.4 and possesseth it but he who is called of God as was Aaron How is it then that the Priests of the Roman Church pretend this Dignity since they cannot make appear that God hath called them to it Sixthly The Scripture saith that Jesus Christ is eternal High Priest Psal 110.4 Heb. 5.6 7.3.24 25 28. that he lives eternally that he hath a perpetual Priesthood that he is consecrated for ever that he always lives a High Priest according to the Order of Melchisedec who remains a Priest for ever Why then doth Rome give Successors to him in this Office Seventhly Rome holds That the Priests bless and consecrate the body of the Son of God How doth this agree with that which the Scripture layeth down Heb. 7.7 That without all contradiction that which is least is blessed by that which is greater Are then the Priests of the Church of Rome greater than the Lord 2. Vpon the Transubstantiation and the real Presence 1. ROme sayeth that that which the faithful eat in the Eucharist is not bread The Scripture saith that it is bread 1 Cor. 11.26 27 28. Every time that you eat this bread and drink this Chalice you shew forth the Lords death till he come Wherefore whosoever shall eat of this bread c. unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man then examine himself and so eat of this bread and drink of this Cup. 1 Cor. 10.16 The bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of the Lord 2. Rome saith that that which the Lord made his Disciples drink in the consecrated Chalice was not wine The Scripture saith that it was the fruit of the Vine Mat. 26.27 28 29. Taking the Cup he gave thanks and gave it to them saying Drink all of this For this is my blood of the New Testament which shall be shed for many for the remission of sins And I say unto you that from this time I will not drink of this fruit of the vine till that day that I shall drink it new with you in my Fathers Kingdom 3. The Scripture saith that we shall not have the Lord always with us here on the earth Mat. 26.11 John 12.9 Acts 3.21 and that the Heaven must receive him until the time of restitution of all things How so if that which Rome holds is true that his body is yet perpetually kept here below upon their Altars and in their Pixes Fourthly The Scripture saith that the Lord is above sitting at the right hand of God his Father in a Sovereign Glory Rome saith that his holy Body is under the Species of a mean Creature inanimate and insensible that it enters into the Stomachs of mortal men yea sometimes of the most wicked and is subject to many other indignities which we hardly dare think on Is this to be in a state of Glory Fifthly Rome believes that the body of the Lord is entire under every crum of bread and in every drop of the wine of the Eucharist and that his head his feet and all the parts of his body are in one and the same place and that his body is altogether above in Heaven and here below in a thousand and a thousand places of the earth above visible here invisible Is this that which the Scripture saith that except in sin Heb. 2.17 he is like his brethren in all things that is to say to the faithful as every one confesseth is there ever a Believer whose body is capable of such accidents the flesh of the Believers is a true body and hath all the properties of it Now there was never seen a body of this nature which is held in a place much lesser than its proper quantity 3. Vpon the Adoration of the Eucharist THere is no need to add any thing to what I have
been speaking concerning the precedent Article For since the Eucharist is truly bread in substance every one seeth enough how much this Sovereign service which they give it in the Roman Church is contrary to all Scripture which from the beginning to the end forbids us nothing more expresly oftner and under more grievous threatnings than the adoration of any Creature of what nature and dignity soever Exâ—d 20.3 Mat. 4.10 Thou shalt have no other God before me Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve 4. Vpon Purgatory ROme saith that it often happens that those who die in the faith of Jesus Christ are burnt in a fire as hot as that of Hell The Scriptures saith Apoc. 14.13 Rom. 8.1 2 Cor. 5.6 8. That they are happy that they rest from their labours that there is no condemnation for them that their earthly habitaion of this house being dissolved they have a building of God an eternal house not made with hands in the Heavens That so long as they are in this body they are strangers to the Lord and when they are strangers to the body which is when they quit it they shall be with the Lord Luke 23.23 and tells us that the repenting Thief was with the Lord in Paradise the same day he died 2. Rome sayeth that this subterranean fire purgeth us from some of our sins 1 John 1.7 The Scripture saith that the blood of Jesus Christ purgeth us from all sin 5. Vpon Justification ROme teacheth that we are justified partly by faith and partly by good works How agreeth this with that Scripture which saith Gal. 2.16 Tit. 3.5 that man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the faith of Jesus Christ and that God hath saved us not for the righteous works which we have done but according to his mercy with that which is asserted in so many places Rom. 11.6 that we are saved and justified by Grace since that if it be by Grace 't is not by works otherwise Grace would be no more Grace Rom. 4.4 and that to him that worketh the hire is not reckoned of Grace but of debt and with that which is said that we have not whereof to glory Eph. 2.9 Rom. 4.2 since that he who is justified by his works hath according to the same whereof to glory 6. Vpon the Merit of Works ROme teacheth that we do by our good works so much merit eternal life that if God should not give it to us he would do unjustly How can this agree with the Language which the Scriptures teacheth us Luke 17.10 when you have done all the things which are commanded you to do say we are unprofitable Servants we have done that which we ought to have done 2. Rome holds that eternal life is to speak properly a reward due to the value of our works Rom. 6.23 2 Tim 1.18 The Scripture saith that it is a gift or a grace of God and a mercy and that although we should have kept his Commandments that which we fail much in yet he useth gratuity and mercy towards us in well-doing Exo. 20.6 3. Rome holds that between the vertue of the faithful and eternal life there is a proportion and the Scripture saith Rom. 8.18 That the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come which shall be revealed in us 4. Rome holds that the Lord oweth him who hath lived well and holily eternal life The Scripture Scripture teacheth us that God oweth no body any thing Who is he that hath given him first and it shall be rendered to him again Rom. 11.35 7. Vpon the Worshipping of Saints 1. The Scripture condems those men who worship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those which by nature are no Gods Gal. 4.8 Rome worshippeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Saints which are no Gods by nature 2. The Scripture saith 1 King 8.39 that God only knows the hearts of all men that the dead know no more any thing that they understand not whether their Sons are noble or ignoble Eccl 9.5 6 Job 14.20 21. 2 Kin. 22.20 that their eyes do not see the evils which God brings upon the places where they have lived Rome teacheth that deceased Saints know all that is done upon the earth and that they know the most secret thoughts of our hearts 8. Vpon the Worshipping of Images Rome fills her Temples and Streets with the Images of God Father Son Holy Ghost and of the most Blessed Virgin and of all the Saints represented as well by flat painting as in all sorts of Sculpture She will have one render to them an adoration and veneration analogical prostrate before them kiss them offer them Bougies or Tapers go a Pilgrimage to the places which are consecrated to them How agreeth this with what the Scripture saith Deut. 4.12 15 16. You saw no similitude in the day that the Lord your God spoke to you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire lest perhaps being deceived you should make you any graven Image in the likenes of male or female Thou shalt make thee no graven Image Exod. 20. nor the likeness of any that is in Heaven above or in the earth beneath or in the waters under the earth Thou shalt not bow down to them nor worship them The Hebrew saith thou shalt not prostrate before them and serve them Lev. 26.1 You shall make you no Idol nor graven Image nor rear up any Image nor set up any Image of stone in your Land to adore it It is also in the Hebrew to prostrate before it 9. Vpon the Monarchy of the Pope of Rome 1. Rome teacheth that the Pope is the Sovereign Judge of the world a Monarch assisted by the Princes of his Court who governs Kings who makes the greatest of the earth kiss his slippers who wears three Crowns upon his head who can chastise the States of Christianity with pains not only spiritual but temporal How agreeth this pretended Power and the manner with which he hath exercised it many years since before the face of Heaven and earth with that which the Lord commanded his Apostles The Kings of the earth exercise Lordship over them Luke 25.22 and those who use authority over them are called Benefactors But it is not so with you but he that is greatest amongst you let him be the least and he that governs as he that serveth And with that which St. Peter commands 1 Pet. 5.3 Feed the flock of God which is committed to you c. not as having Lordship over the Clergy and people of God but as being examples to the flock by your charity 2. Rome holds that the Pope is above the Church The Scripture sends back him and every Believer having quarrelled with his Brother to the Tribunal of the Church and obligeth him to submit to