they would have us possess is real For to believe a thing which is not a possession but a dream and an error 't is the heritage of the wicked to whom the wise man gives nothing for his possession but the winde Truth is ample and specious and can receive possession Error on the contrary is a nothing which cannot properly be said to be possessed by any Untill then they do shew us the truth of the things which they believe 't is in vain for them to boast of their possessing them That which is not is not possessed The feild of which one alledgeth the possession in the Court is a thing which appears and of whose existence no body can doubt Here the purgatory the Sacrifice of the mass the all powerfulness and infallibility of the Pope the transubstantiation of the eucharist and in short all their pretended possessions are things which our sense perceives not and which our reason cannot find out That very thing then of which they pretend a possession obliges them to shew the truth of it by the Scriptures since it doth not appear in nature For to alledg the possession of a thing which one cannot make out to any one is evidently to mock the world 't is to pay it with illusions and chimaeras So 't is clear notwithstanding this allegation that our adversaries are obliged to ground the Articles which they lay down upon good and clear doctrins of Scripture and for us who will not receive them t is sufficient for the justification of our refusal that no part of them can be found in that authentique instrument of the revelation of God which both parties acknowledg to conclude then it remains that to prove our faith by the Scriptures we are only obliged to shew that the things we lay down and firmly believe in religion are taught in the scriptures and that those which we do not believe are not taught there CHAP. V. That the new method was unknown to the Lord his Apostles and the holy fathers and that it is contrary to the procedure which the Lord and his Apostles took in disputing with their adversaries BUt it behoveth us now to consider in the second place what proofs we ought to furnish our selves with to ground our belief upon the Scriptures For these Methodists dedemand of us formall passages these are their terms where that which we would prove be expressed in so many words If you produce any thing of it where the same thing is signified but in other words and from whence with the light of discourse 't is very easie to conclude it they cry that these are dreams and Chimaeras and in short they will not acknowledge any thing for the Doctrines of Scripture but what they read precisely there for example they do not think that the belief of the holy Trinity is a doctrine of the Scripture because they do not meet with the very word there though the thing which signifies it be evidently set down there This is all the cunning of this brave Method with which they boast to gagg the Ministers and subdue all the enemies of the Church but if this pretended meanes of overcoming the heretiques be as lawful and as powerful as they seem to believe it how comes it that neither Jesus Christ nor his Apostles nor the ancient Doctors of the Church have ever taught it their disciples or imployed themselves against those of their adversaries who disputed by Scripture Matt. 4.6 When the Tempter alledged to our Lord that verse of the Psalmes he shall give his Angels charge over thee to perswade him to cast himself down from a high pinnacle how comes it to pass that he answered him not according to this abridged method that the passage was not formal Matt. 12.2 3 4 5 6. and when the Pharisies imployed the ordinance of the Sabbath against his disciples plucking the ears of corn why he give himself the trouble to justifie their Action by the example of David and the priests why did he not tell them in one word that the passage was not formal how happens it that his Apostles in so many books which they have left us have not not given us at least some notice of so wonderful a secret Why did not the holy fathers make use of this to resolve those infinite reasons that the heretiques pretended they had drawn from the Scriptures Sabellius alledged I and the father are one Arius the Father is greater then I Eutychis the word hath been made flesh the first to prove that the person of the son is the same with that of the father the second to shew that the substance is different the third to establish the mixture of these natures The ancients were so shallow as to write great books to explain these passages and to resolve the sophisms of these heretiques Where was their judgment if they could as they pretend make voyd all the difficulty in one word only by saying that the passages are not formal and that the consequences are nothing but Phantasies Read the Books of Irenaeus against the Gnostiques of Justin against the Jewes of Tertullian against Marcion Apelles Hermogenes and others of Athanasius Hilarius Basil Gregory Chrisostome and an infinite number of others against the Arians of Cyril against Nestorius of Theodoret and Gelaze against Eutychus of Hierome Augustine Prosper against Pelagius and in short all the writings which the Christians have composed against the Heretiques sixteen hundred years since you will find that none of them have ever answered to any of the arguments propounded by their adversaries that which the methodists now a days answer to ours that the conclusion is not in formal terms in Scripture Who will believe that the Church hath been ignorant for the space of so many ages for so excellent a means of gagging its enemies and that these honest men whom one may call without offence not the most accomplished and learned of our age should alone be advised of that in our dayes which the lights of the world have not yet been able to discover and that poor truth should have sighthed so long in the bonds of consequences expecting its liberty onely from the sword of these new Alexanders But the Lord and all his servants hath not only permitted that to their adversaries which ours deny us viz consequences and reasonings upon Texts of Scripture but made use of it themselves to establish truth as well as to refute errors The tempter promising the Son of God all the Glory of the world if he would worship him the Lord checked his impudence by that Scripture which saith Matt. 4.9 10 6 7. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely shalt thou serve and when he desired him to throw himself down from the pinnacle he answered as it is written thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God unusefully if you believe these methodists since neither the first of these passages denieth expressly in
which these two parties should be agreed it is clear that their debates will never be decided since it hath its birth from that same thing which this method wants to determine it For if in their common principle there should be found any such decision of their controversies they would not enter into contest about it for example the Methodists will not let any one make use of any one thing in Scripture to prove that the Pope is not the head of Church if there be not some passage which saith expresly that the Pope is not the head of the Church Who sees not that t is to flie the decision of the controversie and desire the continuation of it for ever for to demand of me to determine it is a condition according to all the appearance of reason impossible to be done it being not credible that the adversaries who acknowledge with me the Divinity and truth of the Scriptures should bare me down that the Pope is the head of the Church though it denies it formally and in so many words If we desire then to end our differences we must absolutely renounce this Method and proceed that very way which they so unjustly condemn by proving all our conclusions by the principles so well known to both parties and those are by the grace of God the oracle of the old and new Testament determining doubtful things by certain clearing the obscure by evident and perswading those things which they reject as false by the connexion and dependance which they have one with another that they confess them true This is the true Method which one ought to follow in all disputes and which indeed all masters of all Sciences have followed those of Philosophy Civil-law Physick and others St. Augustin defended it a long time against the calumnies of the Donatists who because he took it upon himself to dispute against them accused him of being a Logician †Aug. contr Crecon l. 1. c. 13. and under this pretence shunned him as a dangerous man He shewed at large that the Lord * The same chapt and 14 17 18. Aug. tom 6. l. ◠cont Circon Gramat c. 15. G. and his Apostles made use of this Method and were Logicians if this is to be a Logician to reason and from a clear thing to prove a thing that is obscure and willing to propose to us a Pattern of a wise Disputant see how he describes him First he endeavours saith he not to be cheated himself for want of discerning truth from falshood and this he cannot obtain without the help of God Then being willing to unfould for the instruction of others that which he hath in himself he first considers what it is they already know for certain to the end that from thence he might conduct them to the things they know not or would not believe shewing them these follow from those which they hold either by reasoning or faith so that by the truths which they consent to they may be constrained to confess and approve those which they had denied and by this means the truth which seemed false to them at first would be discerned from the false being found conformable to the truths which they knew before Hitherto St. Austin who could not more clearly Authorise the procedure which these new Disputants now condemn with so much injustice and passion CHAP. VII That the procedure of the methodists is the same which the Arians and other Heretiques held formerly against the antient Fathers ANd though it be a thing most unworthy those praises which they give ordinaryly to antiquity to expose a novelty to the view of the world and that on the other side t is not much honour to be thought to be esteemed the father of an invention so impertinent and so contrary as well to the practice of the Lord of his Apostles and of the holy fathers as to the common sence and reason of men nevertheless to take from them in this place all subject of vain glory I will farther advertise the readers that those of our adversaries which at this day make use of this method are not the first authors of it For I find at the bottom of it that t is an old and superannuated wrangling of the Arians and other antient heretiques who to flie the searching and decision of the truth demanded of the Catholiques of their times in the same manner formal passages where the consubstantiality of the son and other points may be expressly read this we learn by the books of the fathers In St. Athanasius the question being concerning the word consubstantial used by the Council of Nice to express the truth of the eternal divinity of the Son say the Arians is not writ And in a dialogue printed among his works though in my opinion t is none of his leave these Sylogisms say they and give us a Demonstration by writing that the Son is the true God a Atha Ep. de Synod-Arim Seleue. T. p. 911 Part. ultim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Dialog cont Arim. p. 126. In St. Austin the Count Pascentius an Arian by Religion pressed likewise this only Doctor with whom he had the presumption to enter into Conference to shew him the word consubstantial in the Scripture not suffering him to draw it from thence by reasonings b Ep. 174.178 Aug. St. Augustine having else where proved the Divinity of the Holy Ghost by these places of the Apostle which say that we are his temple so that if he were not God he would have no Temple Maximinus an Arian Bishop against whom he disputed answered that the truth is not concluded by arguments but proved by certain testimonies c Id con Mixim l. 1 6 fol. 444. G. and in a dialogue published under the name of S. Vigil but in my judgment t is certainly Pope Gelaz's the Arian who is brought in there disputes exactly as our Methodists do now He would have one shew him the word Consubstantial expresly and properly so writ and that it be proved not by any reasonings but by the naked and pure propriety of the words Let them read it to me saith he so properly laid down or let them depart from their Confession d Dial. inter Atha Sabell Arian inter Cassand opera p. 475. Eutichus the head of another Heresie who confounded the two natures of the Lord disputed in the same manner demanding in what Scripture t is set down that Jesus Christ hath two Natures e In Act. cont chalced p. 115. A. so that one ought not to wonder if Scholarius hath long since observed that many Heretiques made use of this praetext viz. desire that they would shew them all things expressly by the Scripture f Scholar orat Henet 3. concil flor p. 590 E. CHAP. VIII That the Fathers have rejected this pretended method as impertinent and that by their examples we can retort them upon our Adversaries WHat do the Holy Fathers
abstaining certain days from certain kinds of meats does oblige the Consciences of the Faithful And as to the Ministers of Religion in particular we do not believe as you do that they are obliged to abstain from Marriage which the Astle calls honorable believing that it is enough that they have the good qualities which is required in them in the first of Tim. and elsewhere Upon the Articles of the Sacraments we confess that Baptism and the Supper are sufficient for us not being able as you have ordained to receive for true and proper Sacraments of the Christian Religion your Confirmation Orders Extreme Unction Penitence nor Marriage nor do we believe as you do that the faithful are obliged before they communicate of the holy Eucharist to confess to a Priest all and every one of their sins in particular declaring to him the kinds and circumstances of them believing that it is sufficient that a man trie himself 1 Cor. 11.28 and so eat of that bread and drink of that wine of the Lord as the Apostle prescribes In a word we cannot believe that your Clerks ought to be exempted from the Jurisdiction and Subjection of Princes and States in the Country in which they live nor that Princes and States should be subject to your Pope or to any other Ecclesiastical Minister in his Temporal Concerns as the Court of Rome holds which you acknowledge as the Mother and Head of the Catholique Church These are the Principle Articles of the Faith of our Adversaries which we will not receive Let us consider now as briefly as 't is possible whether they are found in the Holy Scriptures If we will follow their Principles it will be very easie for us to finish all this Dispute in one word For since according to the Maximes of their Method we ought to hold for Doctrine of the Scriptures nothing but what we read there precisely in so many words the Consequences being faulty and discourse deceitful abusive who seeth not but by their own Confession all the Articles which we have excluded from our faith are out of the Scripture and cannot be proved by it it being clear that one cannot read there any one thing expresly formally and literally in the same terms as they believe them and expound them and upon this account I should be already at the end of my task For since that according to us the Scripture is the only Principal of faith so perfect that we do not think that it is permitted us to receive into our Religion any Article of Belief which is not taught by the Scriptures and since on the other side none of the Articles which those of Rome lay down can be read there which is according to these new Disputers the only Method to justifie a Belief by the Scripture it follows clearly that my faith is all intire and most agreeable to the Holy Scriptures which is all the designe of this Treatise since that which it believes is found there and that which it doth not believe is not found there But God forbid that we should take advantage by the wrangling of our Adversaries We shall always acknowledge for true Doctrine of the Scriptures that which can be clearly and necessarily drawn from thence all that which they charge upon Reason being false and not to the purpose as we have shewed here above Let us deal honestly then and examine whether their Beliefs which appear no where in formal and precise terms in the Scripture may notwithstanding be concluded from thence by some evident and necessary Consequences We will recite here only those which seem to them to be most strong passing by a great number of them which though used by their Authors are so weak and if I may be permitted to say it so extravagant that whoever hears them will think them the idle talk of a sleeping man rather than the discourse of one that is awake For to what purpose should I go about to spoil Paper and lose time to copy the Arguments of those who conclude the Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome from that which Jesus Christ said to St. Luke 5.4 Peter Duc in altum Go into the deep or the truth of Purgatory from that which David said Psal 129.1 Lat. 130.1 Hebr. De profundis clamavi ad te Domine Lord I have cried to thee from the deep places or that the Priests are obliged to a single life from that which St. Paul sayeth Rom. 8 8. that those who are in the flesh cannot please God or the worshipping of Images from that which is said the Lord made man after his own Image and the like Without lying if these Consequences and the works of our understandings were all of this nature these Gentlemen would have great reason to reject them We will produce as much as possible we can only those of their proofs which seem to have some colour and shadow of Reason although at the bottom any one may easily know in bearing but attention to them that they are nothing in effect CHAP. III. That the pretended Sacrifice of the Mass is not taught in the Scriptures FIrst To prove that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice truly propitiatory for the sins of men they alledge that Melchizedek the Type of Jesus Christ offered bread and wine Geu 14.18 But what appearance is there in this Consequence First the Sacred Text both in the * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Original and in their own †Proferens Version signifieth that Melchisedek produced bread and brought out wine and not that he offered it and all these circumstances lead us to believe that it was for the refreshment of Abraham and his men being weary with fighting 2 Kings Hebr. 2 Sam. 17.28 and with the Journey by a humanity like to that which Berzillai the Gileadite hath since used to David and those who were with him Secondly though Moses did say that Melchisedek offered bread and wine not to refresh Abraham but in Sacrifice to God how can they prove that it was a propitiatory Sacrifice and not rather an action of thanks since under the Old Testament all the propitiatory Sacrifices had with them an effusion of blood Heb. 9.22 And in a word suppose that this pretended Oblation of Melchisedek had been a Sacrifice realy propitiatory how can they prove that it figured the Eucharist which is never called Sacrifice in the New Testament and not rather the death of Jesus Christ acknowledged for a true Sacrifice through out all the Scriptures and by all Christians where the Lord the true bread of life descended from Heaven hath been offered to the Father for the expiation of the sins of humane-kinde Secondly They produce Malachy Mal. 1.11 who prophesying the times of the New Testament saith that in every place they shall offer to the Lord an oblation pure or clean that is say they the Eucharist But first although it should be so how
so many words the worshipping the Devil nor the second the casting himself down from the top of the Temple For in S. Matthew he alledgeth the law Mat. 15.4 honour thy Father and Mother and the ordinance he that curseth Father or Mother shall die the death against the traditions of the Scribes and Pharesies who hold that a child who is obliged by an oath or a rash vow not to give any assistance to its Father and Mother would not sin in refusing them the honour which is due to them And nevertheless neither of these two passages do formally and in so many words express what they would conclude from them To the Saduces who questioned him about the resurrection of the dead he produced that which God said in the Scriptures Mat. 22.32 I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob the Saduces remained confused and all the multitude admired the force and strength of this proofe Our methodists laugh at it and demand a formal passage and say that the consequences are faulty The Apostles follow faithfully the tracts of their Master they prove the truth of the gospel against the Jews not by formal passages of the old Testament but by consequences and reasoning which they drew from it In this manner holy Peter shewed the sending and comming of Christ to the world by the words of Moses Act. 3.22 Deut. 18.15 Act. 2.27.29 30 31. Ps 16 10. Rom. 4. Ps 32 1 2. Gen. 15.6 a prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren like to me his resurrection by that of the Psalms thou shalt not suffer thy holy one to see corruption so St. Paul concludes that a man is not justified by the law but by grace in those words of the Prophet blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven Rom. 9.8 and from that which is written that Abraham believed and t was imputed to him for righteousness Thus he proves in his epistles to the Romans and Galatians Gala. 4.28 that 't is by faith and not by workes that we are justified and by the word of the Lord to Abraham Gen. 21 12. Rom. 9.15.16 Ex. 33.19 in Isaac shall thy seed be called and that the calling of beleivers is not of him that willleth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy from that which God sayed to Moses I will be gracito whom I will be gracious and I will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy In the same manner he shewes the rejection of the Jews by these words of the Scripture Rom. 9.23.33 Hos 2 23. Rom. 14.10 11. Esai 45.25 behold I lay in Sion a stumbling stone and the calling of the Gentiles by this I will call them my people which were not my people and the last judgment by these other as I live saith the Lord every knee shall bow to me What shall I say of his Epistle to the Hebrews all interwoven with proofs of his nature as when he sheweth the excellency of Christ above the Angels by the words of David Heb. 1.5 Psal 2.7 Heb. 5.7 tot thou art my son this day have I begotten thee his eternal preisthood by the History of Melchisedeck in Genesis the advantage of his alliance above the ancients by the oath set down in Psalms 21.10 the Lord hath sworn and well not repert of it Heb. 7.21 I must wholy transcribe the Epistles of this divine man if I would deny here all the examples where he furnisheth us with these sorts of proofs for he disputes every where thus and draws from the holy Scriptures by the force of reasoning thousands of conclusions which cannot be read there expressly And if one cannot prove by the Scriptures except it speaks in so many words as the new method pretends how did the same Apostle dispute by the Scripture against the Jews of Thessalonica that it behoveth that Christ must suffer Act. 17.2.3 Act. 18.28 and that he should rise from the dead and that this Jesus viz. he who was crucified in Judea was the Christ and how did the Apostles demonstrate the same proposition by the same Scriptures certainly this proposition that Jesus is the Christ is found couched in these terms in no places of the old testament as every one confesseth How comes it then that Paul and the Apostles shewed it by this ancient Scripture it is be cause they shewed divers things in the Scripture from whence it necessarily followed for they gathered together all the marks of Christ contained in the books of the old Testament from whence they formed this proposition he who has such and such qualities who is born at such a time and in such a place who doth suffers and teaches such and such things is the Christ this being once so put they consequently apply to their Jesus all the marks and qualities of the Messias proveing by clear and irrefragable witneses that he had exactly in him all that the prophets had attributed to the Messias from whence the conclusion follows of it self that Jesus is then the Messias this is that which S. Luke calls to declare propose in the book of the Acts Acts. 17.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 useing two words most proper for this subject the first of which signifies to open the second to put one thing neer another to tell us that the Apostles prove these conclusions by the Scriptures first in making the prophecies appear clear and shewing the true sence of them and then in examining them with the events and comparing the figures with the things and the shadow with the body from whence the light of the truths of the Gospel shine forth of themselves Since the Lord and his Apostles used this way we must acknowledg that a proposition is lawfully and valuably proved by the Scriptures when one showeth that it evidently follows from the things which are contained in it although it be not there it self expressly except one were so desperate as to accuse the Soveraign Wisdome and his most faithful and intimate Ministers of having imployed vain and frivilous Sophisms instead of good and sollid deemonstrations But besides their examples they have authorized this way of proof by their command For our Lord according to the exposition of the most parts of the antient and modern Interpreters commanded the Jews in the fifth of St. Joh. 5.39 John to search the Scriptures Why should he command that we should search for other things then those which are directly expressed there all the circumstances of the passage shew that he wisheth them to learn who is truly the Christ But this cannot be drawn from antient Scriptures but only by consequences It follows then that the Lord expects that we should learn not only that which it tells us directly but also that which may be concluded from it by good and valid consequences Mat. 22.29 31 32. And in Matt. 22. disputing
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
the Son and the Holy Ghost are three it must of necessity be that they have in them three Substances For upon this account I can also reason more truely if the Father and the Son are one according to that which he saith himself I and the Father are one how is there more then one Substance but you have not been willing at all to enter into this way of Dispute in demanding of me a passage where the word Consubstantial was exactly and properly laid down 'T is then for you also by the same reason to read to us the three Substances properly and expresly set down in the Scriptures a Ibid. p. 476. infrmed And upon this debate of the manner of the proofs which should be used by both parties the Author of this Dialogue caused a good man whom they made arbitrator of their Disputes to pronounce this judgement In as much as it appears by your Dispute that you cannot shew formally and expresly in the Scriptures neither you the word Consubstantial nor you that of three Substances to the end then that we may not lose more time in a childish debate of superfluous things leave of demanding of one another a formal passage and gather from the authority of the Scriptures by the reason of consequences that there is either one or three Substances in the Trinity b Ibid. p. 477. ante med and at the beginning of the following Sessions repeating the result of the foregoing dispute he saith that they did agree to prove the confession of one or of three Substances by the consequence of Holy Letters passing by the demand of a passage where the word is found Properly and Nakedly laid down a Ibid. med Judge if this be not the very Image of the Disputes of our Methodists do not they demand of us as the Arians do of the Catholicks formal passages upon every point of our differences Do not they reject with the same importunity the consequence and conclusions drawn from the Scriptures Do not they reproach us with the same injustice that these are tricks in logick with which we endeavour to save our seves b Ibid. p. 475. fin Arius de Athan Do not they press us with the same opiniatrety either to read exactly what we believe or to quit the belief of it blessed be God that our cause is found to be like that of the ancient believers And the procedure of our adversaries like that of the old Hereticks Since they choose the method of the Arians let us keep our selves to the desence of the Holy Fathers and by their example let us put our Methodists upon their own rack You demand of us Gentlemen formal passages Let us then have the same liberty Shew us exactly and expresly in the Scriptures that the Pope of Rome is the spouse of the Church and the Monarch of the World that out of his communion there is neither Grace nor Salvation that his judgements are infallible oracles and that in matters of Faith 't is impossible he should err That 't is from his hand only that we ought to receive the Scriptures and that without the Testimony which he gives them they should have no more weight with us then Aesops sables or the Alcoran of Mahomet Shew us written in any one of the books of the Old and New Testament that there is a place bordering upon Hell where some souls sanctified by the blood of the Son of God are burned that there are Altars upon the earth where Jesus Christ is realy sacrificed by a mortal man for the remission of our sins Let us see a passage which saith expresly that we ought to render adoration to your Host which you Name Letrcia or that we ought to worship the Images of Saints departed and kneel down before them invoke their Spirits and acknowledge them for our Mediators I would not have you say that all this can be concluded from Scripture I demand according to your example precise and formal passages either permit me to prove my Faith by consequences or renounce yours full of so many things of which you cannot read one word in the Scriptures Here you have much more interest then I. For my Faith consisteth of less Articles then yours and the Articles which I believe are for the most part so clearly and expresly laid down in the Scriptures that I need no logick to draw them from it 'T is enough for our eyes to read them there In stead of which the beliefes which you and I contest about are so far from the words and sense of the Scriptures that the greatest logick in the world is not sufficient to draw them from it Here to unravel your selves from these straits you will not fail to alledge the authority of your Church But besides telling me of that you go about to perswade me doubtful things by that which is as much or rather more doubtful and by this you evidently renounce the procedure of them whom you call your Fathers for if the authority of the Church ought to decide matters here why did not they interpose it in their Disputes And if it be an ill proceeding to say either prove your Faith by express and formal passages of Scripture or suffer me to prove mine by consequences why did they use it against the Arians say what you please you cannot turn it so but it will manifestly appear to be a great precedent for me against you to prove that you Dispute like the Arians and I like the Holy Fathers CHAP. IX That that which is concluded evidently and necessarily from the Scriptures is veritable and Divine and is part of the Scripture NOw to come to the bottom what can one Imagine more unreasonable then this wilfulness of you the Arians Macedonians and and Eutichians not to receive for true and divine that which is concluded from the Scriptures For since from a truth nothing can be inferred but what is true confessing as you do the truth of the Scriptures is not this an intangling of your selves in an evident contradiction to make a doubt of what is drawn from the Scriptures is not this an offence either to the Scriptures in suspecting it to be alse in certain places or to the truth in accusing it to produce sometimes lyes and bring forth in a manner monsters That which one gathers out of the Divine Scriptures is there or not there if it be not there how could it be drawn from it since 't is not possible to draw from a subject any other thing but what is there nothing giving that which it hath not if it be not there why did our Lord say speaking of the Scriptures of the Old Testament that they bare witness of him †Joh. 5.3.6 and how could he declare by all the Scriptures biginning with Moses and so through all the Prophets the things concerning himself * Luke 24.27 and again how could his Apostles protest that he had said nothing
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
Pâ—â—asch 2. p. 96 A. B and 98. B. and 102. D. and Paschal 3 p. 109 c. 110 B. Bibl. PP T. 3. and for the Hereticks in General Chrysost Hom. 87. in Mat. 7 9. D. and Hom. 59. lat 58. in John p. 298. A. Hierom. com 2. in Mich. p. 378. F. and comm in Agg. p. 506. F. Gregro Mvg. Moral in Job l. 18 c. 14. but nevertheless so let it be since they will have it so Shall their fond imagination wrong truth and that under the pretence of thinking to see that in the Scripture which is not there I cannot assure my self of having found there all that which is there divers men have all reasoned in Mathematicks and drawn from the principles of that Sience some conclusions which are not really there But shall it be denied me under the pretence of this to hold this consequence for good and assuredly veritable that the whole is greater then the part that a triangle is bigger then the basis and the Body of a man bigger then his finger but where is the man how stupid soever he be who notwithstanding the paralogisms of Brison and all the other doth not presently see that this arguing is most true and necessary so there are Authors found in natural Philosophy Astrology and Phisick who have discoursed ill phancying to find something in the principles of these Siences which is not there Would not this be not ony injustice but Sottishness or madness to endeavour to peswade us under this pretence that we cannot receive any of the consequences drawn from these principles as certain and necessary nor assure our selves that if a horse sees hears and runs he is then an animal or if a stone hath nothing of sence then it is no animal now we are exactly upon these terms in respect to the Scripture Many have a mind to draw from it by discourse things which it speaks nothing of Gen. 1.16 and the Roman doctors more then all the others who in the two Luminaries which it placeth in the heavens have pretended to find out the power of their Pope to be above the Emperour and his spiritual monarchies in the Faith and qualifications which it attributes to S. Peter and his power to interdict States to depose Princes among animals Act. 10.13 which it represents to us to have been signified to the Apostle in a vision 'T is by the same Logick that they conclude their purgatory from the parable which saith thou shalt not go out till thou hast Mat. 5.2 paid the last farthing and their Sacrifice from the words of the Lord 1 Cor. 11.24 Matt. 26.26 do this and their transubstantiation from the other this is my Body But if their consequences are false and even absurd doth it follow that I cannot assure my self that the Scripture teacheth us that Jesus Christ hath a Body and a soul since it saith that he is a man that it teacheth that he is the God of Israel since it saith he founded the earth in the beginning and that the heavens are the works of his hands and that he was tempted by Israel in the wilderness certainly neither sense nor reason ever offended without some reasons These are saculties naturally right and every one capable of their functions but sometimes they meet with perticular causes which hinders them from acting so For as to sense who knows not that its errors comes either from the indisposition of the Organs from the Scituation of the object or from the quality of the medium which is between them as for example 't is the bilis with which the tongue of a sick man is moistned which makes it taste all meats bitter and to those who have Jaundies 't is also the spreading of that humour which dieth all objects yellow but t is the too great distance from the sun which makes it appear to us much less then it is and which blunts the Angles of a Tower which we see a far off figuring it to us round when it is really square and which makes the two sides of the end of a long Gallery seem to be very neer each other in fine 't is the diversity of the medium through which we see which makes an oare appear to us in the water as if it were bent and crooked when it is really streight except in these and the like cases the eye alwaies to doth its duty faithfully and the other senses likewise do theirs so that it being most easie to know for a truth whether the functions of our senses are so well disposed or not 't is an insupportable error to conclude that we are not able to assure our selves of any one of their reports under pretence that it happens to deceive them when they fail of any one of the conditions necessary to perform their function well Now 't is the same in reason If she concludes wrong 't is certainly because she takes that for a true thing which is not so or that for clear and certain which is obscure and doubtful As when our adversaries conclude from that which the Lord said to St. Peter thou art Peter that their Pope is by right the Monarch of the Christian Church they conclude falsly because they take that for an evident truth in Scripture which doth not so much as appear there viz first that our Lord in these words promiseth the Monarchy of his Church to St. Peter and Secondly that their Pope is the successor of St. Peter in this quality But if these two things which they take for truth were truth then that which they conclude from them must necessarily be so too and he to must be out of his senses who denies the consequences of them And this necessary connexion of propositions with their conclusions is a work not of the mind and reasoning of man but of the will of God as S. Austin expresly remarkes The truth of consequences says he and connexions which propositions have one with another hath not been instituted but considered and remarked by men to be able either to learn or teach it for it is perpetual and divinely established in the reason of the things themselves for as he who counts the degrees of time doth not make them himself and he who shewes the scituation of places the nature of animals of plants or of Stones doth not shew the things instituted by men and he who shews us the stars and their motions shews us nothing made and established by any man in like manner he who saith when the consequence is false 't is not possible but the thing from whence it follows should be false also speaks most truly and doth not make the thing to be so but only demonstrates that it is so †Aug. T. 3. l. 2. de doctr clic c. 32. From whence it comes that he observes elsewhere that no man in disputeing is reduced to a false conclusion unless he has first granted something false from whence this conclusion
our selves than to consider the just value of that which is attributed to the Church in these places whether that this Infallibility and Sovereignty be pretended or real it is enough to resolve their Reasons to say that they can conclude nothing for themselves until they have proved that the Christians of Rome are the true Church of Jesus Christ which they can never prove by the Scriptures 6ly Now this Sovereign Authority which they give to the Pope and to the Church wch acknowledgeth him being impossible to be proved by the Scriptures it followeth that all the things which depend on it are not grounded there Such for Example is that distinction which they make between meats at certain days permitting the Christians to eat fish and not flesh in Lent and other-like times the establishing of Feasts the single life of the Ministers of their Religion the retrenchment of the Sacred Cup to all those who communicate except to him who hath consecrated the Eucharist and other-like things for which they alledge for the most part no other soundation than the Authority of the Pope and of the Church which depends upon him At least it is clear that they cannot prove by the Scriptures all that which any one of them affirm eth or useth for this purpose it being so slight and so far from their purpose that I do not think it worthy the relating CHAP. XII That the Scripture doth no where assert the five pretended Sacraments which Rome adds to Baptism and the Lords-Supper I Come now to the Sacraments the number of which they have increased adding five to the two which we allow of The first is the Ceremonie of the Confirmation where the Bishop anoints the person baptized with Oyl and Balm consecrated after a certain manner giving him a light box on the ear and making the signe of the Cross sayeth I signe thee with the Signe of the Cross and confirm thee with the Oyl or Chrysm of Salvation In the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost All this to strengthen him that he may be the better able to resist temptations Where is it that the Scriptures orders or commands us this Ceremony Certainly it so little agreeth with the Scripture that Alexandre and Bonaventure two of the first and most famous Authors of their School held that it was instituted neither by Jesus Christ Biel in 4. Sent. dist 7. nor by his Apostles as Gabriel Biel witnesnesseth writing upon these Sentences Others seeing that it cannot be a Sacrament of the Christian Church unless it had been ordained by the Lord they wrack the Scriptures to finde it there Dominic a Sot in 4. dist 7. art 1. They produce some Testimonies such according to their own confession which without the Authority of their Church who were not capable of shewing and concluding their Opinion And first they remark that which is written in the Acts Acts 8.17 that the Apostles laid their hands on those who had been baptized in Samaria But what hath this in common with the Roman Confirmation Where is it there spoken of the Oyl which is the matter of it From these words I signe thee c. which are the form of it of the increase of Justifying Grace which is the end of it for it doth not appear that the Apostles anointed with Oyl or consecrated with the Signe of the Crose those upon whom they layed their hands And as to the end for which they layed their hands upon them Acts 19.6 it appears from the nineteenth Chapter which was to communicate to them the extraordinary Grace of the Holy Ghost as the gift of Tongues and other the like things which are very different from justifying Grace Secondly The Imposition of hands Heb. 6.2 of which there is mention made in the Epistle to the Hebrews not being accompanied with any anointing or visible Consecration can serve for nothing to establish the pretended Sacrament of the Roman confirmation of which these things are the two essential parts Thirdly Concerning Repentance we agree that it is necessary and that the Pastors have Authority to forgive sins to those who repent and to retain them to the impenitent according to that which the Lord said to his Apostles John 29.23 To all those to whom you remit their sins they are remitted or rather shall be and to whomsoever you retain them they are retained Only we deny that such an action is a Sacrament and there appears nothing in the Scriptures which obligeth us to believe it Fourthly For the Confession which they make part of this wonderful Sacrament we believe that every faithful one is obliged to prove himself before he approacheth the Table of the Lord 1 Cor. 11.28 For St. Paul orders it expresly But none of the Divine Authors prescribes to any Christian to go and reveal to a Priest all his sins yea even his most secret ones before he communicates at the Table of the Lord. 'T is true they alledge the words of St. James James 5.16 Confess your faults one to another But how far is this from their Auricular Confession Cajetan upon this passage The Cardinal Cajetan one of their most subtle and most famous Writers and a great Adversary of Luthers being sent Legat against him into Germany answereth there for us I speak not here said he commenting upon this passage in the City of Rome when he was above threescore years of age of the Sacramental Confession as it appears in that which he sayeth Confess you one to the other For the Sacramental Confession is not done mutually from one to the other but to the Priests only But of the Confession by which we discover our selves mutually one to another that we are sinners to the end they may pray for us and of the confession of faults committed of the one part and the other to appease and reconcile us one to another 5ly This same Cardinal confesseth ingeniously also Eph. 5.32 Cajetan upon this passage That that passage which he alledgeth in the 5 Chap. of the Epistle to the Ephes to demonstrate that Marriage is a Sacrament is nothing to the purpose Wary Reader saith Cajetan upon these words St. Paul doth not furnish you with any thing in this place to prove that Marriage is a Sacrament For he saith not this Sacrament but this Mystery is great viz. of the words which St. Paul in the preceding Verse alledged of Moses For this a man shall leave his father and his mother shall cleave unto his wife and they two shall be one flesh Sixthly 1 Tim. 4.14 5.22 and 2 Tim. 1.6 As to the Orders we confess that the Apostles laid their hands upon those whom they established in charge and that this Ceremony is holy and praise-worthy and practised carefully amongst us in ordaining our Pastors But that this action is one of the common and properly-named Sacraments of the New Testament neither Scripture nor reason
LA FOY fondée sur les Saintes Escritures FAITH Grounded upon the Holy Scriptures Against the NEW METHODISTS by JOHN DAILLE Printed in French at Paris anno 1634. And now Englished by M. M. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God Rom. 10.18 LONDON Printed for Benj. Tooke at the sign of the Ship in S. Pauls Church-yard 1675. AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER ALthough the French translation of the Holy Bible made by the Doctors of Louvain can by no means be comparable to the neatness clearness and faithfulness of that which is read among us yet to fit my self to the gust of our Adversaries I have drawn from their Translations and not from ours the most part of the places of Scripture which I make use of in this little book namely in the second and third parts to the end they might not wrangle with us about words as many of them doe and perticularly these new Methodists against whom I have composed this Treatise Onely let me inform you that in three or four passages which are nothing to our controversie I have taken the liberty to correct that in the Greek and Latine texts which these Gentlemen had too evidently turned false by in advertency as I am willing to believe and ignorance and not by malice As for example in the second part Chap. 4.3 pag. 124. I produce the first verse of the Gospel of S. John in these words the word was God and not as these Doctors have expounded it God was the word whereof the two construction which these words are capable of Deus erat verbum they chuse to follow that which is less to purpose and which besides the consusion which it brings to the contexture of the Apostles thoughts does manifestly overturn the words of the Greek text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shews that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot of necessity be the predicate but the subject of the propâ—sition as those who have any knowledge in the Laws and use of the Greek tongue know well enough So in the Epistle to Titus see how they translate the words of S. Tit. 2.13 Paul expectantes beatam spem adventum gloriae magni Dei Servatoris nostri Jesu Christi expecting say they the blessed hope and the coming of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ separating this God whose advent we expect from our Saviour Jesus Christ as if the Apostle should say we expect the coming of God and we expect also the coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ an interpretation neither pertinent nor advantagious to the Church for first the Greek text cannot bear it which binds and ties up all these words great and our Saviour in the same bundle by means of the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Apostle put into their heads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obliging us necessarily to take them not as names of two persons one of which is called God and the other Jesus Christ but as two different qualities attributed to one onely and the same Jesus Christ which is altogether the same with the great God and the Saviour whose advent we expect but this same interpretation is also prejudicial for it takes away from the Catholicks a clear and invincible proof of the divinity of Jesus Christ for if you follow it suppose that Jesus Christ be our Saviour which the Samotosateniens and Arrians confess yet still he is not our God and this is that which they struggle for principally No body then can blame me for leaving the Louvain version in this place to follow the Greek Text in translating this passage Part 2. Chap. 4.3 pag. 124. where I produce against the hereticks expecting the blessed hope and the coming of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ That which I have changed part 2. Chap. 8. 1. pag. 106. in the second chapter of the first of S. Peter is less important Love the brotherhood instead of which our adversaries Bible saith Love brotherhood leaving out the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is in the Greek So in the first of S. Luke I read and therefore that which is born of thee holy shall be called the Son of God Part 2. Chap 4. Sect. 7. pag. 92. therefore the holy one that shall be born of thee as they of Louvain have translated it contrary to the Faith of the Greeks who say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Latine which saith likewise quod nascetur ex te Sanctum not qui nascetur ex te Sanctus As for the small change of words in the 2 Cor. chap. 5. verse 8. where we say we have a good will rather to be out of the body and to be with the Lord instead of that which is in the Louvain bible I have a good will better to be out of the body we have done this only to sweeten the manner of speaking avoir bonne volonte meiux estre is rough and unknown in our language and the Greek and Latine texts do no way oblige us to interpret it so These are if my memory doth not cheat me all the passages in which I have varied from the Louvain version in divers other places I bear with its faults because they do no great prejudice to the justice and truth of my cause although there are some of them which testifie in these Doctors a passion unworthy of the quality which they take of interpreting the Word of God as among others when in Pet. 1.5 3. alledged part 2. ch 8. 5. pag. 109. they read having dominion of the Clergy of the People of God instead of the plainness of the Greek and Latine having dominion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Cleris over the heritage being licensed to add the words and people of God and to hide by this means the sence which the Apostle gives in the word Clergy imployed to signifie the Christian people which is contrary to the use and pretence of those of Rome FAITH Grounded upon the Holy Scriptures Part I. CHAP. I. The Preface of the whole Work SOme years since certain Doctors started up who to render our Religion odious published that it could not be proved by the Scriptures which nevertheless according to us is the only thing capable to ground our Faith upon Their invention was found so plausible that many of our adversaries have reduced all their dialectiques to it thinking that to defeat us there needs no more but to demand some express and formal passages upon every Article of our Confession of Faith and whosoever can press that demand home he is the man that must overcome us This easie way of arguing hath increased Disputants among them and instead as at first of shunning conferences concerning Religion and not permitting any but Priests to discourse it now all sorts of people hunt after it even to the
them that we as well as our Doctors reject them formally and precisely and wish that they had never been spoken off and that they may be Aeternally buried in the cave of errors from whence they came For as Eating good meat is sufficient to preserve the life of man nor is it necessary for him to know Hemlock Aconite or Antimony or to know poysons 't is enough that he is not so unhappy as to eat of them even so 't is in Religion for to obtain salvation 't is sufficient for a man that he believe the holy and wholsome truths communicated to us by the Lord Jesus there is no need that he should know particularly the innumerable poysons which the enemy hath scattered in the World nor that he should know exactly to what degree every one of these false doctrines are poysonous 't is enough for him that he is so happy as to believe none of them To speak properly the express and formal rejection of an errour makes no part of Faith for then Faith would have been imperfect before the birth of the error Before Mahomet came into the World the Faith of Christians was intire and sufficient although it was ignorant of the seducements of that Impostor and though it knows nothing of Marcion of Manicheus of Arrius nor of Pelagius yet it is sufficient to salvation provided that it believes firmly that which Jesus Christ hath revealed There is then a great difference between those propositions which supposeth and affirmeth the truth and those which reject the error The reason why our Fathers have ranked them in the body of the same declaration was not because they were ignorant of this difference but another occasion obliged them to do it for being separated from the Church of Rome and afterwards having been calumniated of holding diverse very strange opinions vide Epist 10. the K. which is in the beginning of our Confession of the year 1559. in fine to make the King their master his subjects their fellow Citizens see clearly what their thoughts were about Religion they not onely declared the belief they had of Christianity and of every one of the articles of which it consisted but also what they thought of the doctrine and communion of the Pope from which they had withdrawn themselves We ought then to distinguish carefully these two sorts of articles which this reason joyns and mixeth together some affirmative and positive declaring that which we believe others negative and exclusive declaring that which we do not believe the first lays down that which is our Faith the second rejects that which is not so For example these are of the first sort that there is a God that he ought to be worshipped with all our affections that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and God Eternal that he was made man that he hath taken our nature in the womb of the holy Virgin that he dyed to expiate our crimes that his blood hath washed and purged our souls from all sin that he is risen and ascended into heaven and there reigns at the right hand of the Father that sins are pardoned to men by the grace of God when they believe in the Gospel that believers are obliged to live holily that Charity is necessary for salvation that the Lord hath ordained that we should be baptised in the name of the Father Son and holy Ghost for the remission of our sins and that he hath likewise commanded us to celebrate the memory of his death in taking eating and drinking the Sanctified bread and wine that this bread and this wine are the communication of his flesh and of his blood that those who believe and live according to the Gospel of Jesus Christ shall have Aeternal salvation and that those who believe not in him shall perish But these following are of the second sort That we ought not to adore the Host of the Church of Rome nor invoke their dead Saints that the mass is not an expiatory sacrifice for the sins of men that the Pope is not the head and spouse of the universal Church that he hath no power neither directly or indirectly over the temporals of Kings and States of the world that neither he nor the Church which adheres to him have the right of never erring in the Faith nor are they the reason and grounds of our Faith that it is not for the merits of our works that our sins are forgiven us or that grace or life is given to us that the bread which we break and the cup which we bless in the Church loseth not their substance that none of those who communicate at his table ought to be hindred from drinking of the Cup of the Lord that neither the chrism nor the penitence nor the ordainor the marriages nor the extream unction are Sacraments that believing souls departed this life are not burned in the fire of Purgatory Since we believe the first Articles and that we preach and recommend them to men we are obliged to shew the truth of them and since the most part of them are so obscure that we have not natural light enough to discover and perceive them it remains that we prove that God hath revealed them to humane kind For these are the three sources of all our knowledge sence reason and the revelation of God now 't is neither the sins nor reason of man that demonstrates to us that Jesus Christ is the son of God or that those who believe his Gospel shall have the happy Aeternity We cannot prove the truth of it then but onely by the means of revelation Now all Christians and namely those of the Church of Rome with whom we dispute in this Treatise confess that the writers of the Old and new Testaments were inspired by God and did write by the revelations of the Spirit now we cannot more clearly ground the Truth of the Articles upon which our Faith consists then by shewing that they are taught in these divine writings T is for this we acknowledg our selves obliged and of which 't is most easie to acquit our selves as we hope to make appear in this book And as for the other Articles which are of the second sort it belongs to us to justifie and make appear that the holy Scripture teacheth no where to believe what it self rejects as it teacheth no where that there is a Purgatory or that the Pope is the Monarch of the Church or that the Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice For having once shewed that we shall have clearly justified that we have been obliged to exclude such opinions of our Faith since we hold that all the things which we ought to believe as necessary to our salvation are taught in the Scriptures for that if these be not found there Rome is in the wrong to believe and preach it as necessary and have reason not to receive it in our belief T is an unjust cavilling to demand this of us further that we
should furnish them with texts in which the second sort of Articles are contained where for example it is said expresly that there is no fire of Purgatory and that the Pope of Rome is not the head nor spouse of the universal Church and to say for want of this the holy Scriptures as we have it is not perfect is an impertinence fit onely to dazle the eyes of children for the Perfection of the Scriptures according to our supposition consists in that it teacheth all things that ought to be done and believed for salvation as the perfection of a book consists in containing all the Truths necessary to the science of which it treats Will you say that the bookes which Aristotle hath left us of Philosophy are imperfect because they do not expresly reject that which the Masters of the sciences have since his time opened or that the treatises of the antient writers upon eloquence are imperfect because they did not expresly contradict these new lights which the phantasie of our moderns boast of having discovered Error is an infinite thing for which the sciences cannot nor ought not to have a good esteem T is enough for their perfection to have shewed all the truth of the things of which they treat otherwise there would never be any thing perfect in this matter For upon this account the Mussilman will reproach our Scripiure because it hath not expresly anathematized his Mahomet Mareion and the Manicheans the David Georgists and all the other impostors will impute to it as an imperfection not to have made an inventory of all their follies What need was there that it should black its paper with their names and dotages so many ages before their birth 'T is sufficient to keep me from it that she hath said nothing of them The surest and shortest means to keep the right way amongst so many confuted ones is to dispise all that which the Scripture does not recommend and not to disdain to examine what she doth not disdain to teach us It speaks to me of God and of his Christ what he hath done for me and what he requireth of me It instructs and fills my soul with that wisdome which is necessary to Salvation It is enough for me to be saved I am contented with knowing so much As for what the Pope dogmatizes besides this let him shew it me in the Scripture and I will believe it as I do the rest but if it be not to be found there who can imagine but I must be ignorant of it and cannot believe it without danger faith coming by hearing and hearing by the word of God Rom. 10.17 of which the Scripture is the first the most clear most certain and in my judgment the only infallible Doctrine CHAP. IV An answer to what our adversaries alledge that they are in possession of them BUt these new disputants make another stop here to oblige us to their pretended method saying that they have had them in possession many ages since thinking that sufficient for them without being obliged to produce any other titles or Doctrins of their Religion that it belongs to us who contest with them to make their wrongs appear by clear and inviolable proofs It is a word which they alwaies have in their mouths and which they believe cannot be answered But in truth we can say nothing more vain nor less pertinent for if this possession as they call it might be alledged in the case the Apostles of Christ would have wronged the Heathens about their Religion seeing they possessed it far long before the Jesuits would do wrong to the Chineses if they should endeavour to drive from their hearts the idolatry and worshiping of Pagods which they have possessed time out of minde truth and vertue should leave in mankind the error and vice which they found established there for fear of violating unjustly the right of their long possession The old man will have little to maintain himself against the new and philosophy ought not to yield to the Gospel upon this account we also ought to return under their yoak as that of our first and most ancient Masters But God forbid that a little word ill understood should ever make so enormous a prejudice to the right of God of his Christ and of his truth we confess clearly that where there is a question made about lands or houses or any one thing which is and which is seen in nature the possession may be alledged and that it belongs to him who turns out the possessor to shew that he held it unjustly and to make it appear by good titles that the things belongs to him in our contest with the Doctors of Rome there is nothing like this they press us to believe with them the Purgatory the Mass and other articles We desire them to shew us the truth of them of which we can yet see but little Instead of satisfying so just a request they alledge that they have them in possession and so consequently are not obliged to prove any of them certainly if they think to make the world believe things mearly upon their saying them without demonstrating the truth of them they propound to us a position evidently unjust and tyrannical For a man cannot believe before he knowes the thing to be veritable and he cannot without denying his nature yield an intire faith to that which is to him either sall or doubtful Those who will perswade him to any thing are necessarily obliged by the right of nature to demonstrate to him that it is true either by sense or reason and if the thing be above sense and reason let it be done by divine revelations it remains then that these gentlemen renounce this possession which they alledge to us since t is so contrary to the rights of our nature and that they make it their endeavour to demonstrate to us that which they desire to perswade us to They are in possession to demand belief of things doubtful and incertain and as for me I am in possession to believe nothing but those things the truth is of which they make appear to me My possession is evidently more antlent then theirs 'T is but reason then that they yield to my right and not that I submit to their usurpation Moreover in civil causes where this maxim hath place the possessor is sued and pressed to forsake that which he holds Here quite contrary there are pretended possessors which contend with us and press us to enter into possession with them for they would havee us believe what they believe and 't is this belief which they call their possession who sees not not then that Fundamentally 't is they properly who have begun this action with us and who ought by onsequence to shew us by good and lawful Doctrin that we have right to enter into this possession to which they call us we are ready to yield to them if they can make us see that that which
against the Pharises who denyed the resurrection from the dead you err said he to them not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God c. Have you never read that which was spoken to you by God I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. God is not the God of the dead but of the living He blames them for not having learned the resurrection of the dead in this sentence of Scripture Certainly then they ought to have learned it there for he is too good to blame him who hath done his duty Now the sentence which he produceth saith nothing of the Resurrection of the dead expresly and directly he draws it only by the consequences of that which he layeth down We must confess then that t is our duty not only to learn and believe the things which we read in the Scriptures but also to draw from them and conclude those things which may be deduced from them although they are not read there in so many words and to embrace them with the same faith as we do the others and that without this weare ignorant of the Scriptures and are in danger of erring CHAP. VI. That the new method is contrary to the procedure and maximes of the holy Fathers in their disputes and favourable to the Heretiques and Infidels THe Holy Fathers following the command and example of Christ and his Apostles make use every where of this sort of proofs without any scruple esteeming they have sufficiently shewed their belief by the Scripture when they had drawn them from thence by good and clear consequences Those whom we have above named do not dispute otherwise injoying freely that right which they give their adversaries I should be too long should I here repeat all the examples of them as when they prove by the Scripture against the Sabellions that God the Father is not begotten and is without beginning * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and against the Arians that the Son is consubstantial with the Father †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and against the Nestorians that the Holy Virgin is mother of God * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and against the Eutichians that Jesus Christ hath two natures †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all propositions which are not found in the Scripture exactly set down in the same words and which nevertheless they profess to demonstrate by the Scripture as every one may see in their books are an evident sign that they have believed that t is a good and sufficient way to prove a belief by the Scriptures when one draws from it by reasoning although one cannot alledge any passage where it is formally and expresly set down In a word you must either forsake the cause of God and instructions and convictions of the Heretiques or proceed in this manner For otherwise how could the fathers dispute against them Let us give an Arian to one of our Methodists to be instructed or convinced which way will he take how will he prove the consubstantiality of the Son he cannot alledg one exact text for it for it is clear that in the whole Bible there is not one of that nature and he cannot take advantage of the texts which shew this truth since they do not exactly express it for the law of his Method forbids him the use of this sort of proofs Will he use the Authority of the council of Nice or of the Church which he pretends is Catholique but this would be to deceive himself and not to dispute this would be to alledge for proofe of the question the same thing which is directly in question For if the Arian should appeal either to the Nicean faith or to the authority of the Catholique Church he would not be an Arian That which made him renounce both these is the beleif that you will prove it to him You must necessarily then leave him in an error because your pretended Method hath divested you of all the means of drawing him out of it You can prevail no better against a Sabellion an Eutichian or in general against any of the Heretiques who denie the Church any of her positive beliefs not expressed in so many words in the Scripture Even the Jew will take advantage of your maximes and laugh by your example at all which you produce from the Old Testament to make him believe the New and will say as you do that the consequences are Chimeras and phancies and will protest not to yield unless that he hath a formal passage which saith expresly that Jesus Son of Mary born in Bâ—thlehem under Augustus Caesar is the Christ promised by the antient Oracles Concil Lateran sub 4. lex 3 cap. 24 Concil Lateran sub Innoc. 3. exped pro recup terr sanct p. 63. col 1.8 So he will find when all is done that your fine Method is the gagg of the Church and not Heresie and that it fortifies it instead of subdueing it And acquires to the Church nothing but losses and Funerals instead of victories and Triumphs which it promised her But if formally one hath judged them worthy of an Anathema and of the loss of liberty by the Council who should furnish these infidels with sword poinyard and cordage What thunderbolt and ex-Communication do the Fathers of this Method merit who as much as in them lies arme the Jews and Heretiques with a buckler Shot-proof and take from the Church the only arms which God hath put into her hands to scatter all sorts of enemies to wit his Holy word But this method doth not only deprive us of the use of the Scriptures against those who receive them either all or in part It renders likewise all truths unuseful to us the knowledge of which God hath imprinted in the nature of men taking from us discourse or reasoning without which it is not possible to explain them to be useful either for the instruction or conviction of the ignorant For according to these new maxims every one will demand formal proofs of that which one would perswade them and will hold himselelf obliged not to believe any thing beyond those very things which nature hath taught him The Pagans will reject the unity of the Divinity because it cannot be drawn but by consequences from our General notions he will receive none of the arguments which you will use to establish the Justice goodness and Power of God the truth of the Scriptures the Authority of the Church and other such like grounds of Christianity because you have taught him that these reasonings are but meer dreames and none of their conclusions is worthy of an assured beleif Briefly there was never any method so perplexing and troublesome as this which renders all the differences of philosophy and Religion Aeternal without leaving us any means to determine them For since that to make them agree it will not suffer us to imploy any other that an express and formaldecision by the Authority of
is that saith the Orthodox the sense and intention of the Scripture which hath moved them to use that word which is not writ or have they said it of their own Authority it is saith the Macedonian the sence of the Scripture which hath moved them to it Now answered the Orhodox this is also the sence and intention of the Scripture which teacheth that the Spirit being uncreated and subsistant of God inlivening and sanctifying is a divine Spirit Thus far Theodoret who knew not how to maintain more clearly that one could ground the articles of our Faith upon the consequences of Scripture and not upon words onely But this same Authour in two pieces which Photius warants us to be his although by some error they have printed them also amongst the works of St. Athanasius shews us that the Spirit of our Methodists reigned at his time in certain Hereticks whom he names not Pho. biblioth cod 46. P. 31 but who in my judgment were the Eutichians He saith that they would have every one receive the words of the Scripture simply without considering the things which they signifie under pretence that they surpass the understanding of all men b Theod. tract 16. secund Phot. T. 2. Op. Athan p. 308. that they be constrained to hear some words of the Gospel those which they think favourable to them but they will not suffer them to understand and interpret them religiously that one hear the words but not search the truth and convenient sence of them that they call Faith and inconsiderate not belief which without any examen imbraceth to its own ruin things not established by any demonstration e Id. tract 23. p. 325. d. that they command to believe without reason a Ibid. to believe simply that which is said without considering what is convenient and what is not so b Ibid Tit. tract 23. without examining whither the thing be possible useful seemly agreeable to God or convenient to nature whither it agreeth with the truth whether it hath any connexion with the design of the Author whether it doth not contradict the mystery whether it be not agreeable to Godliness c Ibid. D. that they would have c Ibid. their words believed without permiting any one to examine their Doctrine for fear they should be convinced d p 326. A. Are not these the same fancies with our Methodists who receive nothing but formal words who reject all expositions evidences and reasonings but now Theodoreâ— Dispates sharply against these men accusing them of overthrowing by this means all humane affairs and of making men irrationale e p. 903. of changing them into bruit beasts making them take their nature and habitudes of making all the intentions of the Prophets and Apostles unuseful who according to this reckoning of theirs beat our ears in vain with the sound of their words the hearers not carrying away any fruit from them nor profit in the Treasury of their hearts f Ibid. D. that their procedure confounds every thing and that he who follows this Method knows not how to make those things agree which seem to clash nor answer those who desire to ask him as we are all obliged to do to them a Ibid. 3. which he verifieth at large by the induction of divers passages of eternity and of the temporal birth of Christ which seems contrary b p. 310. D. so they expose the Scriptures to the mockery of the Infidels c p. 326.327.328 and for these and such like reasons he declares at the beginning of one of these Treatises that this invention is the worst of all the Doctrines which the Devils have introduced among men d 327. D. and give us a rule quite contrary wishing that in the interpretation of the Scriptures in stead of being tied to the words made naked by their sense they should seriously consider what belongs to God what is convenient for our purpose that which the truth carries that which agreeth with the Law that which hath a just correspondence with nature the Purity and the Liveliness of Faith the firmness of Hope the sincerity of Charity that which doth no wrong to Esteem that which is above Envy that which is worthy of Grace e Ibid. p. 325. A. and that he ought not to believe without reason nor speak without Faith Let them take the pains to read these two Treatises through for they are very short and most excellent Athanasius whom the Author of the Dialogue published under the Name of S. Vigil made to Dispute against the Arians follow exactly the precedure of Gregory and Theodoret against the Macedonians For he constrained the Arians to confess that one may prove by the Scriptures many things which are not expressed there alledging to him the words which the Arians held although they were not expressed in the Scripture as when they said against the Sabellians that the Father is impassible and against the Ennomians that the Son is like the Father and against Fotinus that the Son is the Light of the Light shew me said he to him where it is written Purely Nakedly Properly and in so many words that the Father is impassible or not begotten that the Son is God of God Light of Light or like the Father It is not enough that you say that the reason of Faith requireth it piety teacheth it the inference or consequence from the Scriptures obligeth me to the profession of this Name I desire that you would not alledge these things to me since you will not suffer me to alledge them for the proof of the word consubstantial Behold at this juncture of time the volume of Divine Books in my Hand read there the Names of the Words above said in so many syllables and in the same sences either shew us where it is written that the Son is like the Father or confess that he is unlike him there is no way for you to draw your selves out of this evil path being wraped up in your own objections 't is not in your power to unty the knots of this Proposition Give me leave then to prove the consubstantiality that is to say the belief of the one Substance of God by consequences where if you will not agree with me you must also renounce those things which you confess your self since you find them no where directly set down in any place in the Scriptures a Dialog in t Sabel Photar Athan. liter opera Cassandri p. 475. med then beating him with his own weapons he pressed him to bring him some passage which speaks formally the belief of the Arians viz. that there is three Substances in the Trinity Here saith he the arguments serve for nothing where one concludes the truth by the consequence of reason they demand proper and express passages read to us three Substances expresly so laid down in the Scripture do not come hither to argue that if the Father
of necessity and whither he will or no form it self * Id contr Crescon-Gram l. c. 20. Now every man who is in his right senses may know certainly if he gives a convenient attention whither the propositions which one first layes down to conclude something from whither I say those propositions be in the Scripture or not For as to the consequence of things themselves it is of necessity so evidently inevitable that no body can contradict it as for example since every man is composed of soul and Body if you grant that Jesus Christ is a man t is not possible but you must confess also that he hath a Soul and Body so if you know that the Scripture puts this proposition as 't is very easie to know whither it doth or not you cannot without renouncingsense and reason deny that the conclusion is also in the Scripture So all this fear which they give us of the incertitude of conclusions drawn from Scripture by reasoning is but a vain Chimera which passion alone hath made them produce to Authorise this redicule Method by which they pretend to reduce men not to discourse and without which they know well enough t is not possible for them to defend their Faith Dial. inter Sab. Pbot. ar and Athon p. 476. For to apply to them that which one of the Fathers above named said of the Arian they know very certainly that if rejecting their Method we would once prove our belief by consequence from Scripture t is very easie to overcome them and so the defiance and fears of this danger carries them to demand of us proofs consisting in Nude and formal words Shall I repeat hear the impertinent objections which they make to us upon this subject that if we believe that which our reason concludes from the Scriptures our Faith will then begrounded upon reason as if our reason in this dispute should declare the proposition from which we draw a conclusion and not the faculty of the spirit with which we draw it certainly upon this account one might say also that our Faith is grounded upon the sense of hearing since the Apostle teacheth us that Faith comes by hearing But where is there a child that doth not see that it is grounded upon the divine word which we hear and not upon the ear with which we hear the ear is the Organ which receiveth this word but the cause which moves us to believe it is the truth which is there and not the ear CHAP. XII That the faith which we add to the truths drawn from Scripture by reasoning is grounded upon Scriptures and not upon reason Rom. 10.17 REason in like manner or to use another tearm less equivocal understanding seeth in Scripture that which is there that conceives discerns and believes it But that which makes it believe it is the Authority of the Scripture in which it hath seen it and not the action which it hath made use of to see it As when the Apostle saith that Jesus Christ is a man you conclude then that he hath a Soul the ground of your conclusion is the saying of the Apostle and not the faculty or act of your reason All that your reason hath done is that it hath found in the Apostles words that which is really so Now this is not to give us Faith but to receive it and to do that which is not onely permitted but commanded If it teacheth any thing of its own growth if it makes its inventions pass for Oracles t is but just to be condemned For usurping that which belongs to God onely but if that which reason believes and perswades others to hath been taught by the word of God if that was there before she believed it that which she hath seen there and that which she hath done to the end that others might see it there cannot be imputed as a crime to her as if she attributed to her self in doing this to be the foundation of our Faith This is all which we require for her in this place that she may have leave to open her eyes to mind and see that which God hath propounded in his word We do not pretend to the gift of revealing new secrets to humane kind nor the priviledge of making articles of Faith We only beg that they would not take from us that which nature hath given to all men the faculty of seeing that which is exposed to our eyes and to understanding that which is said plainly to us and from thence conclude that which evidently follows Rom. 3.10 11 12. Hebr. 4.15 John 3.16.18 It seemeth to us that one may very well judge though he be not altogether a prophet that the Scriptures which tells us that all men have sinned except our Lord saith also that John James and Peter have sinned and that which tells us that all those who believe in Jesus Christ shall not perrish hath also said to us that Paul and Peter presupposing that they believe shall not perish Gal. 3.10 Deut. 27.26 Exod. 20.14 and that which sayeth that cursed is he that confirmeth not all the words written in the law sayeth also to us that he who commits adultery is cursed by the law since 't is written thou shalt not commit adultery Our adversaries will pardon us if we say that to deprive us of the judgment of such consequences t is to endeavour to take from us not onely the light of the Prophesie or the Spirit of perticular revelation things to which we never pretended any thing but the sense and nature of men and to transform us into Geese CHAP. XIII That t is sufficient that one of the propositions be in Scripture to infer a conclusion of divine truth BUt they produce another difficulty upon this point let it be so say they let the consequences take place then when that is done we can receive no conclusions for divine but those which one draws from two propositions both of which are layed down in Scripture if one be not drawn from the word of God but from sense or humane reason we cannot receive that which follows from it unless it be for a humane truth that is to say doubtful and uncertain because in arguing the conclusion alwaies follows the weakest part as Logicions have observed for example if you dispute thus he who hath created the heavens and the earth is the true and eternal God worshiped heretofore by the Isrealites Now Jesus Christ hath created the heavens and the Earth he is then the true God worshiped heretofore in Israel they will make no difficulty perhaps to receive this conclusion for a Divine truth and worthy of an intire and certain belief because the two propositions from which it follows are both of them in the Scripture as we shall see hereafter But if you reason thus a Body which is in heaven is not at that time in the earth now the Body of Christ is in heaven therefore it is not
Religion which he hath given us to obtain this consists in Faith and Charity that the Father appeased by his Obedience receives to mercy all those who knowing their misery and repenting of their Sins do confide in his bounty and believe in his promises that he pardons them gratis all their faults and treats them as if they had never offended and these being animated and enlivened by Faith live afterwards holily and Christianly in Piety towards God and Charity towards their Neighbours according to the Gospel of Christ For he wills that all his Faithful love and serve God with one love and soveraign adoration and that they have a true Charity towards all men carefully keeping themselves from violating their dignity Life Chastity Estates or Honour neither in Deed Word nor Thought every one subjecting themselves to their Order and Laws of their Civil Societies and to the state of the Country where they live but that they entertain a particular amity with the rest of the Faithful cherishing them as their own Brethren uniting themselves to them that so there may be but one Body in Religion and that for this end there be amongst them Pastors and Supervisers who have the overlooking of their Communion administring to them as well the divine Doctrine as the holy Sacraments which the Lord hath left as tokens of his grace and marks and seals of his Covenant having commanded that his faithful Servants should be baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost for the remission of their sins and that they should eat the Bread and drink the sanctified Wine in commemoration of his Death and communication of his Flesh and Blood We believe that although the truth of these things is most clear yet men are so blinded by the Passion of their malice that they would never understand them if the HOLYSPIRIT true God eternally blessed with the FATHER and the SON did not inlighten their understanding opening their hearts that the light of this heavenly Doctrine may enter in and that God affords them this grace of his own good pleasure giving it when to whom and in what measure it seemeth good to him We believe that to those who shall have believed and lived according to this holy doctrine God will give his Salvation preserving them and taking care of them and when they depart this Life gather their Souls into his repose expecting the last day in which having raised their Bodies will lift them up with Jesus Christ their Head into an incorruptable Heaven there to live eternally in his Glory but the Wicked and incredulous shall perish being punished with the Devil and his Angels in the torments of Hell Reader if thou art conversant in reading the Holy Bible say in thy Conscience whether it be not too great a boldness to deny that these things are clearly contained there onely hearing them named do you not as soon perceive that these Divine Books and especially those of the New Testament are full of them How hard is it to find one verse which layes not down some of these instructions Nevertheless because they will have it so we verifie them Article by Article and to the end that they should not as t is their custome wrangle with us about words we will produce passages of Scripture in those very words into which the Interpreter of our Adversaries hath translated them and then say a little upon every point contenting our selves to mark the rest in the Margint For if we should gather together all the places of Scripture where these Doctrines are positively laid down or hinted we must transcribe almost all of them and as to the Scripture it self we suppose the truth of it without disputing it in this Treatise where the business is only to prove that the Articles whose belief we esteem necessary to Salvation are all found in the Book which we hold for the Rule and principle of our Faith For that is sufficient to bring to nothing the calumny of these new Disputants who to convince the Scripture of imperfection and constrain us by the same means to have recourse to the Authority of their Church crying incessantly that we our selves who make so much account of Scripture cannot prove by it all the things which we believe necessary to Salvation CHAP. II. Of the Essence and Nature of God Of his Qualities and Works 1. FIrst then as to the Article of the Essence and Divine Nature the Scripture layes down at the first word that there is one God in saying that he created the Heaven and the Earth in the beginning and speaks of him every where as of a thing whose being and subsistance every one knows and understands holding them not only for impious and irreligious but for meer fools and sense-less creatures who think there is none Psal 13. Heb. 14. 1. The Scripture makes him Act and speak in infinite wayes and manners from the beginning to the very end teaching not onely that he is but that there is none besides him who truly is all the rest not being but in him and by him So long then as there are passages in Scripture which attribute to God some quality action or word and of this kind there are an infinite number they are so much the stronger and evident proofes of this truth See Duet 4.39 6.4 â—sa 45.5.6.21 John 17.3 and many other places Heb. 11.6 It behoveth him that comes to God to believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of those who diligently seek him Act. 17.27 28. God is not far from any one of us for in him we live move and are 1 Cor. 8.6 We have one God who is the Father from whom are all things and we in him Exod. 3.14 The Lord said to Moses I am that I am then he said thou shalt tell the Children of Israel he that is hath sent me to you Esaiah 37.16 Lord of Armies the God of Israel who art set upon the Cherubims thou art alone God of all the Kingdoms of the earth thou hast made the Heaven and the earth Esaiab 43.10 11. There was no God formed before me nor shall be after me I am I am the Lord and there is none other Saviour but me Psal 89. Heb. 90. 2. Before the Mountaines were made and the earth and world were formed from age to age thou art God 2. That Godis Eternal Gen. 21.33 See Ex. 15.19 Job 36.26 Psal 9. Heb. 10 8.37 38. Heb. 90.2 Abraham c. called upon the name of God Eternal Psalm 101. Heb. 102. 27 28. The heavens shall perish but thou shalt be permanent and all of them shall wax old as a garment and thou shalt change them as a vesture and they shall be changed but thou art the same thou art and thy years fail not Rom. 16.26 Esai 41.4.43.10.44.6 and 48.12 1 Tim. 1.17 Re. 1.8 By the commandment of the Eternal God 1 Tim. 6.16 God onely hath immortality 3.
abide with you eternally viz. The Spirit of truth which the world cannot receive because it neither seeth him nor knows him but you know him for he shalld well with you and be in you and verse the 26. The Comforter which is the Holy Ghost whom the Father will send in my name shall teach you all things and shall inspire into you all things which I have said Matt. 28.19 Teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost This appears because he proceeds from the Father and is sent by the Son When the Comforter shall come saith the Lord which I will send to you from my Father the Spirit of truth which proceedeth from my Father that shall witness of me John 15.26 If I go I will send to you the Comforter Joh. 16.7 and ver 13 14. When the Spirit of truth shall come he will teach you all truth for he will not speak of himself but will say all which he shall have heard and will tell you things to come he shall gloryfie me for he shall take of mine and shew it unto you 4. That the Holy Ghost is God Acts. 5.3 4. Peter said to Ananias Ananias why hath Satan filled thy heart to lie to the Holy Ghost c. Thou hast not lied unto men but God This is proved evidently because the proprieties and works of the true God are attributed to him in the Scripture as first His presence in all places Psal 138 Heb 139. 7 8. Where shall I go back from thy Spirit or where shall I flee back from thy face if I go into heaven thou art there if I descend into hell thou art present there Secondly his presence in the persons of all the faithful Rom. 8.9 You are not in the flesh but in the Spirit if the Spirit of God dwells in you 1 Cor. 6.19 1 Cor. 3.16 Know you not that you are the Temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you 2 Tim. 1.14 The Holy Ghost dwells in us Thirdly His knowing all things 1 Cor. 2.10 11. The Spirit searcheth all things yea even the deep things of God for what is it in men which knows the things of man except the Spirit of man which is in him likewise no man hath known the things of God except the Spirit of God John 14.26 The Comforter which is the Holy Ghost which the Father will send in my Name shall teach you all things see also John 14.13 Fourthly His knowledge and prediction of things to come 1 Tim. 4.1 The Spirit saith expresly that in the last times some shall revolt from the Faith Fifthly His all powerfulness 1 Cor. 12.11 One and the same Spirit doth all things distributing to every one particularly according as he will Sixthly His right of having a Temple an evident sign of his Divinity 1 Cor. 6.19 Do not you know that your body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you the which you have of God Seventhly His vertue of creating Job 26.13 His Spirit hath adorned the heavens Job 33.4 The Spirit of God hath made me and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life Luk. 1.35 The Angel answered and said to Mary The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the Vertue of the Soveraign shall over shadow thee and therefore the Saint which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God Eighthly That t is he which teacheth the faithful of Jesus Christ which is a work of God as it appears by Isai 54.13 alledged by the Lord John 6.45 They shall be all taught of God 1 Cor. 2.10 God hath revealed to us heavenly things by his Spirit and verse 12. and in John 16.13 The Spirit of truth shall teach you all truth Ninthly That he subsisted before the creation of all things Gen. 1 2. The Spirit of God moved upon the waters 5. That the Holy Ghost is that same God which is called the Lord or Eternal in Scripture This appears clearly For since there is no other God but the Lord Eternal as we have already proved by Scripture the Holy Ghost being God as we have shown it must necessarily be concluded that he is the same Lord eternal since otherwise he would not be God Moreover this is proved most evidently thus he who hath instructed sent and inspired the ancient Prophets of the Old Testament is the true eternal God worshipped heretofore in Israel as it appears through all their prophecies now it is the holy Spirit which hath instructed sent and inspired them 2 Pet. 1.21 The holy men of God being inspired by the holy Spirit have spoken 'T is he perticularly Acts. 1.16 who hath foretold that which we read in David Psal 40. Heb. 41. 10. 'T is he who spake by Isai Acts. 28.25 and commanded him to say that which we read in the 6 Chap. verse 9. of his prophecy 'T is he Heb. 9.1 8. who gave to Moses the ordinance which we read Levit. 16.2 'T is he Heb. 10.15 who spake in the 31 Chap. verse 32. of Jeremy 'T is he lastly Heb. 3.7 who saith in the 94 Psal Heb. 95. 8. that which we read there it follows then of necessity that he is the same Lord Eternal whom the Faithful under the Old Testament adored Thus have we clearly proved the Doctrine of the Trinity That there is three of them the Scripture teacheth it expresly 1 John 5.7 There are three which gives witness in heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit and these three are one Matt. 28.19 Teaching all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father of the Son and of the holy Ghost 2 Cor. 13.13 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the Communion of the Spirit be with you all Amen And when the Lord Jesus was baptized these three persons were manifested distinctly the Father crying from heaven this is my beloved Son in whom I have taken delight the Son receiving the baptism in his humanity the Holy Ghost descending from heaven upon hm in form of a dove Matth. 3.16 17. And that these three persons are one and the same divinity appears by what we have all ready said Now that the Father is the true eternal God adored by the Israelites all the Scripture saith it and the words alone of Jesus Christ John 17.3 sufficiently teacheth it were speaking to the Father this is life eternal saith he that they should know the only true God That Jesus Christ is likewise the true eternal God and that the Holy Spirit is so also we have proved here above Since then that all the Scripture professeth that this eternal Lord is one only God as we have also justified one must then of necessity conclude that these three blessed and glorious persons the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are but one and the same God which is that which the Church nameth the doctrine of the
receive us into eternal habitations where the Scripture saith that he doth a thing which is the reason for which he doth it although to speak properly and exactly he doth not do it Secondly They abuse also the words of the Lord where he saith that the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven Matt. 12.32 neither in this age nor in the other that is to say add they neither in this life nor in Purgatory But why should not we rather say that by the age to come the Lord according to the Style of the Scriptures understands the Age which shall follow after the Resurrection from the dead and that it signifieth that God will never pardon this crime to the men who are guilty of it neither now nor at the last Judgment that he will never give them absolution for it neither in this life by the voice of his Spirit in their hearts nor in the other by the mouth of his Son Or why do not we say that he means that this sin shall be grievously and irresistably punished as well in this Age with temporal pains as in the other with eternal For as remitting or pardoning a sin signifieth not to punish so the not pardoning it signifieth to punish it yea to punish it grievously and certainly In that great day the Lord will also remit the sins to the faithful but not to impenitent sinners and besides what the thing saith of its self St. Paul testifieth it expresly where he prays God to have mercy on the house of Onesiphorus in that day 2 Tim. 1.18 Acts 1.19 20. and St. Peter where he exhorts the Jews to believe to the end that their sins might be blotted out in the time of the refreshment of the Lord. Thirdly 1 Cor 3.15 The most part of the Adversaries turn to the Service of their Purgatory that which St. Paul writes in the first to the Corinthians If the work of any one be burnt he shall suffer loss but he shall be saved yet as amidst the fire or rather by the fire pretending that this fire is that of Purgatory But first this passage by the common consent of Ancients and Moderns is reckoned amongst the obscure and Allegorical and by Consequence not proper to ground an Article of Faith upon Secondly I say that nothing can force us to take it for Purgatory For to leave the Expositions of Chrysostom of St. Augustin and of many others which take it otherwise why shall we not rather understand it of the Judgment which God shall make at the last day of the Doctrine of those Preachers who having retained the foundation of the Gospel have built upon it vain Beliefs which shall be reprehended by the light of the Advent of Jesus Christ but in such manner Amos 4.11 that losing the liking and praise of their own works they themselves shall not perish their works shall perish and not their persons which shall be saved but nevertheless as plucked out of the fire that is to say very hardly Paraphrase upon the Epistles of St. Paul to the Corinth Gal. Eph. Printed by Touss du Bray An. 1632. with Priviledge and Approbation as if they escaped from a fire as a fire-brand rescued from the burning as Amos saith and in such manner that they shall hold their Souls for a prey being obliged only to the bounty and Divine mercy for not having been devoured together with their works by the heat of that consuming fire which shall trie all men as many Learned men expound it and even the Author of the French Paraphrase upon the Epistle to the Corinthians Published lately at Paris and approved by three Doctors of Sorbonne Fourthly They have also-recourse to the Old Testament and alledge that the Lord in Zechary promised Zech. 9.11 That he would draw his prisoners out of the lake in which there is no water These are say they the Spirits which suffer in Purgatory But this is to play and not to reason For what is there in the Text of the Prophet which obligeth us to take this Lake for Purgatory I leave the literal Interpretation which understands it to be the Captivity and calamity of the Jews deprived of the refreshments of the Divine word and of the exercises of their Religion If we must Allegorize why should not we rather bring this passage to the eternal redemption which the Lord Jesus hath acquired to us by his blood drawing his mystical Israel that is to say his Church from the sad and pitiful condition where it was naturally being a prisoner of the Devil a slave of sin and guilty of the wrath of God the true Lake where there is no water since in that state there is no confolation whereas the Souls which they shut up in their Purgatory notwithstanding their griefs have according to what they say Bellar. of Purgl 2. c. 4. an incredible consolation because of the certain hope of their Salvation CHAP. VII That Justification by Works is not taught in the Scriptures FIrst To the validity of the good works which the regenerate do such as they pretend as merit the remission of sins and life eternal it can no more be proved by the Scriptures than the precedent Doctrines It is true that the Lord said of the penitent sinner Luke 7.47 Many sins are forgiven her for she hath loved much But it is also clear both by the precedent similitude and by the opposition which the Lord adds in saying Ver. 41 42. that to him to whom less is forgiven loves less that he sheweth her love which she bare to him not as the meritorious cause but as the signe and argument of the Grace which he had done her So we say very often Ver. 47. the Sun is risen for it is high day to signifie that the clearness of the day is not the cause but the effect and signe of the rising of the Sun And so it is that the Jesuit Villalpandus understands this passage in his Commentaries upon Ezech. Villalp in Ezech. 19.10 where having remarked that quoniam because is taken very often in the Scripture to signifie therefore and he alledgeth this passage for an example of it Many sins are forgiven her for she hath loved much that is to say Behold why she hath loved much saith he for the Argument of the Lord drawn from the Parable of the Creditor required such an epiphonema as is evident to the Reader As to the rest that faith was the cause of the remission of the sins of this woman the Lord shews it clear enough saying to her in the two Verses following Thy faith hath saved thee go in peace and that love to God Charity to our Neighbours and good works are the effects of the Grace which God doth us in pardoning us all the Scriptures teacheth clearly and namely Saint Paul Eph. 2.10 where he saith That we are the work of God created in Jesus
teacheth us Seventhly There remains now the Extreme Unction which with a visible Oyl accompanied with certain words pronounced by the mouth of the Priest in form of Prayer remits sins to a sick person who is in extremity And it is here that the Disciples of the Methodists commonly triumph alledging a passage of St. James upon this Subject very express as they pretend and they begin the most part of their Disputes by this last piece of their Devotion Jam. 5.14 Is there any amongst you that is sick saith St. James let him call for the Priests of the Church and let them pray over him and anoint him with Oyl in the Name of the Lord the prayer of faith shall save the sick and the Lord shall heal him and if he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him But let Cardinal Cajet Cajetan upon this passage answer once more for us It appears saith he by these words of the Apostles and by the effects that these words were not spoken of the Sacramental Vnction nor of the Extreme Vnction but rather of the Vnction which the Lord Jesus instituted in the Gospel for the use of the diseased For the Text sayeth not Is any one sick unto death but plainly Is any one sick and sayeth that the healing of the sick is an effect of it and speaks not of forgiveness of sins but conditionally whereas this Extreme Vnction is not given but at the point of death and tends directly as its form signifieth to the remission of sins And besides St. James ordains that for one sick body they should call many Priests as well to pray for as to anoint them which is different from the Extreme Vnction CHAP. XIII The Scriptures doth not teach that Ministers should be exempted from the Subjection of Civil Powers nor that the Bishop of Rome hath any right over them in respect of Tempoporals I Do not see that they can reasonably draw from the Scriptures the exemption of their Clergy nor the Temporal Power of their Pope over the estates of Christians First That which they alledge the Lord said to St. Peter Mat. 17.25 26. Of whom do the Kings of the earth take Tribute and Imposts is it of their Children or of Strangers and St. Peter having answered of Strangers Jesus saith then are their Children free This I say doth not prove that the Clerks are of divine right exempted from paying Tribute to the Magistrates For first 't is not evident that the Tribute of the Drachmas of which the Question is was payed to the Magistrate and there is much more likelihood that it was the half Shekel which every Israelite at above twenty years of Age payed to God for the use of the Sanctuary according to the Ordinance of Moses in the 30th of Exodus Exod. 30.11 12 13 14 15 16. which is nothing like these Tributes which the Magistrates raised But although the same Question should be of a Civil Tribute 't is clear that the Lord exempted none from it not so much as himself Now since the Son of God even as he was Man was not of right subject to any Magistrate this is not to say that the Ministers of the Church have the same right seeing the great and infinite difference which is between their persons and his In a word although the Apostles ought to rejoyce in this liberty by the beneficence of their Master so long as he was on the earth it doth not follow that they since his Ascention into Heaven nor those who succeeded them in the Ministry of the Word ought always to enjoy the same exemption For so long as he was upon the earth they were his Family according to Civil Law following and serving him and as Domestiques had part in this his priviledge But since he is retired from the earth as to his humanity neither they nor we are any more of his Family according to Civil Law For as we are his Spiritual and Mystical Family in respect of Religion he gives us not this Priviledge For then one might say that all Christians must enjoy it since every one in this sense is of the Family of the Lord. Secondly As to this power let it be direct or indirect which those of the Court of Rome attribute to the Pope over the Estates of Christians even in respect of Temporals I think it not necessary to consider that which they alledge from the Scriptures to ground it upon since they are things so weak and so far from their purpose that the greatest and best part of our Adversaries themselves have rejected their Consequences and reject with us this pretended Authority of the Roman Seat namely in this Kingdom France where thanks be to God it hath not yet been established CHAP. XIV Resolution of that which the Adversaries pretend that the above-mentioned Articles have been taught by the Apostles although they are not contained in the Scriptures SO evident is it that none of the Articles of the Belief of Rome which we reject from ours can be shewen by Scripture First To which they will answer it may be that although it be so they have nevertheless been revealed by the Lord and taught by word of mouth by his Apostles the Scriptures not containing all the Articles of the Christian Doctrines of which many have been as they say given and preserved from hand to hand by a Tradition not written But I say first that to consider the thing exactly it seemeth to me that the silence of the Scriptures upon these Articles is sufficient to prove that they have been revealed neither by Jesus Christ nor received and believed by his Apostles nor by them given and commanded to their Disciples for Doctrines necessary to faith and Salvation For if at that time they had been kept in the list which Rome at this time gives them if they had been esteemed the principal Fundamentals of Religion and the most exquisite and important parts of the service of God why should not these holy men have made some mention of them in the many Books which they have purposely writ upon Divine things and which by the Providence of the Lord are come to us Why did the four Evangelists conceal them the Acts make no mention of them How comes it that St. Peter St. John St. James St. Jude and above all St. Paul in his fourteen admirable Epistles so full and so abounding every where in Christian Doctrine have not said one word of them I do not now urge that these Books are the Cannon of Faith that they have been set down in writing to the end the Doctrine of Religion should be preserved entirely there Let us suppose since Rome will have it so that they were written by chance and without the designe of giving to us the whole body of faith Yet one cannot deny but they have been written the most part of them upon matters of faith Now who will believe that so many
her Judgment Mat. 18.15 6 17. If thy brother hath sinned against thee c. tell it to the Church and if he disdain to hear the Church let him be to to thee as a Heathan man and a Publican And elsewhere all it saith 1 Cor. 31.21 22. that all things belong to the Church and namely Paul Apollos and Cephas and in another place speaking of the Apostles in general it calls the Servants of the Church for the love of Jesus 3. Rome esteemeth St. Peter the Master and Sovereign Lord over the other Apostles How comes it then that the Scripture speaking of him doth not name in the first place or rank 2 Cor. 4.5 but in the second only James Cephas and John having known the Grace which was given to me How comes it that the other Apostles sent him to preach in Samaria Gal. 2.9 How comes it that St. Paul preached three years without communicating any thing of his designe to him How comes it that even Paul himself said boldly Acts 8.14 Gal. 1.17 18. that those who were in esteem added nothing to him and recounts very freely that he resisted St. Peter in Antioch to his face Gal. 2.6 Gal. 2.11 because he was to be blamed Are these the terms of a Subject to his Prince And would they suffer now adays that the Bishop of Hostia should treat so with the Pope or from him 10. Vpon the distinction of Meats Rome teacheth that the use of flesh is wicked and unlawful two or three days in a week and during all Lent 1 Tim. 4.1 2 3 4. The Scripture saith that every Creature of God is good that nothing is to be rejected when it is taken with thanksgivin and that God hath created food for the faithful and for those who have known the truth to use it with thanksgiving and calls the Commandment of abstaining from it a Doctrine of Devils and qualifies them who assert it with the terms of teachers of Lyes and deserters of the faith abusing themselves with lying Spirits telling us particularly that such will come in the last days 11. Of the unmarried state of the Ministers of the Religion Rome teacheth that for the Ministers of the Christian Religion to marry is an impure and unlawful thing The Scripture testifieth that some of the Aopstles were married as amongst the rest St. Peter Mat. 8.14 and where it propounds conditions necessary for a Bishop 1 Tim. 3.2 it requireth not that he be not married at all but only that he be the husband of one wife 12. Vpon the retrenching of the Holy Cup. Rome suffers none but him only who hath consecrated the Eucharist to drink of the Cup of the Lord denying the Communion of it to all others The Scripture saith to those who Communicate Mat. 26.27 1 Cor. 11.28 Drink all of it and St. Paul Let a man prove himself and so let him eat of this bread and drink of this Cup. 13. Vpon the Exemption of the Ministers of Religion The Scripture saith in general Rom. 13.1 Let every man be subject to the Higher Powers c. For the Prince is a Servant of God for thy good but if thou doest evil fear for he weareth not the Sword in vain 1. Pet. 2.13 14. Be subject to every order of man for the love of God be it to the King as Supreme be it to Governours as to them who are sent by him for the punishment of evil doers and for praise to those who do well The Apostle Paul knowing this order submitted himself to it Acts 25.10.11 appearing before the Officers of the Emperorour and appealing to him Rome holds that all her Clerks even the least of them are exempted from this Subjection CHAP. XVI A Refutation of that which the Adversaries pretend to elude the passages of the Scripture contrary to their Beliefs by certain distinctions of their Invention WHosoever will diligently read the Scriptures will finde many other things there incompatible with the Doctrine of the Church of Rome But this little proof is sufficient for our designe I know our Adversaries endeavour to shun these blows and to that purpose use many distictions But for the most part so strange that 't is not possible to comprehend them they wrap up things in inexplicaple contradictions as 't is easie to be seen particularly upon the Subject of Transubstantiaon of the Sacrifice of the Mass of the service to Saints and their Images Secondly All of them presuppose their Opinion and live by the passion wch they have for it For example before ever they had established Transubstantiation the world never heard speak of a body which hath its quantity and not the manner of its quantity which should be in many places at a time which penetrates the dimensions of another body which hath all its parts confounded under one point and not distinctly extended the one out of the place of the other neither of Accidents which subsist without subject a roundness without any thing of a Circle a whiteness without any thing of white neither a changing of Substances where the terms in which they were confined was in its full and entire being fifteen or sixteen years before the change arrived So before they had established the Service and Prayers to the Saints humane-kinde had never heard that the Religious Services of God were distinguished into Latria Doulia and Hyperdoulia from whence it follows that before they imploy these distinctions they are necessarily oblig'd first to ground the Opinion which they have produced and out of which they cannot finde for them neither in Nature nor in Scripture any stay where they may be able to subsist I shew that the Eucharist is not a humane body because it hath not the quantity of it that it is not the body of the Lord because the body of the Lord is in Heaven To that these Gentlemen answer that the Eucharist hath the quantity of a humane body but it hath not the manner of it that is to say it is five or 6 foot long although all its length is not extended more than two fingers that the body of Christ is in Heaven indeed but according to its manner of natural existence and that it is in the same time substantially elsewhere in a certain manner of existence the which though it can hardly be expressed by words is nevertheless possible to God Now what light doth these distinctions carry to the Subjects where they are imployed Do not they confound all our thoughts Do not they redouble the darkness instead of dissipating it And indeed what other things do they except to repeat the same thing that is in Question for when a body hath its quantity and not the manner of it and that he should subsist in one place in one manner and in the same moment should be in an infinite other places in another manner this I say is not grounded but upon the Doctrine of Transubstantiation without which never any of them would have thought to affirm things so inconsistent One ought then to begin by the proof of this pretended Doctrine For till they have grounded this well their distinctions are unuseful and our proofs clear and solid Now we have shew'd here above that they cannot prove by the Scriptures any of the places which they use to this end nor infer any thing like it There is then no need to examine their distinctions Since 't is thus 't is an injustice in them to make use of them and it would be lost time to me to stay to consider confute them In a word we have imployed this second means for the abundance of proofs and not by any necessity that obligeth us to it For although the Doctrines of Rome should not oppose as they do visibly so many truths of the Holy Scriptures it should be always enough for us not to receive them since they cannot be proved by Scripture Thus have we sufficiently in my Opinion justified our faith by the Scriptures having shewed that they teach clearly the Articles which we believe and that they assert neither directly nor indirectly but rather shake and destroy those of the Doctrine of Rome which we reject From whence it appears that it is against all reason and truth which some of our adversaries reproach us with that we cannot prove by the Scriptures no not one Article of our controversed faith instead of acknowledging that it is upon them that the blame falls Being evident that of all the Beliefs which they press us to believe with them they have not been able hitherto nor will they ever be able to ground any of them upon the Scriptures Pray God enlighten them and confirm us in the knowledge of his truth and give to both of us the spirit of Peace and Charity to treat our Differences with sweetness convenient to the Profession which we make of being Christians FINIS