utmost him and his factious Clergy So also they are disagreed among themselves whether the Bishops in a General Council are Judges with the Pope or onely the Popes Counsellors Yea or what a General Council is Though they all agree that it is not necessary that it be out of all the Christian world much less the Bishops of all Churches but onely some of those that adhere to the Pope of Rome yet they agree not whether it must be freely elected by all the Bishops of the Romish faction or onely so many and of such Countries as the Pope shall choose and whether the major part of the Council must concur with the Pope or the Pope and the Minor part may not serve turn 5. So also they are exceedingly disagreed about the nature and extent or pretended infallibility of the Church of the Pope in judging Some say that the Church judgeth de mediis discursive sed de conclusione per doctrinam propheticam Divinam And so these men may affirm agreeably to this principle that the Popes Definitions are part of the holy Canonical Scripture as Melchior Canus affirmeth he heard a most excellent Divine confess and citeth Gratian and Innocent also as of the same mind And thus all the most wicked Popes are made Prophets and speak by inspiration of the Holy Ghost But others of them do deny this Though yet they know not how it is that the Pope is infallible without declaring themselves Enthusiasts Also though saith Bellarm. l. 4. de Pontif. c. 2. all yield that the Pope may personally erre through Ignorance yet they are disagreed among themselves whether he may be a Hereticke Some say he may not and others that its most pious and probable to think he may not Others reject that as false and say he may And one would think it should have been out of question by long experience before this time And Bellarmine confesseth that three General Councils did believe that the Pope might be a Hereticke ubi sup c. 11. some say that when the Pope is consulted and giveth his judgement in matters of faith he cannot err though in matters of fact he may and that he is Infallible in his Courts and Councils though not as a private Doctor Others say that he cannot err when he intendeth to binde the whole Church to receive his sentence or when he teacheth the whole Church Others say that the Pope may err even defining in Council but not in errors manifest to the Church but onely in new or not manifest points Others come yet neerer the matter and tell us merrily that the Pope cannot so err in judgement about matter of Faith because when he first erreth thus he ceaseth to be Pope but this is a hard conclusion in the eyes of their brethren The like disagreements there are among them about the Infallibility of a General Council some will make it the proper seat of Infallibility and say that the Pope cannot err if he be guided by the Council else he may Others say that a Generall Council may err if it be not confirmed by the Pope yea though the Popes Legates did consent or if they do not follow the Popes instructions But that they cannot erre if they follow them or be confirmed by him So Bellarmine Canus and the late champions And if the Pope and Council differ as they have shrewdly done when Councils have deposed Popes for heresie and wickedness some say that we may more safely follow the Council then the Pope But others say the clean contrary and place the Infallibility in the Pope onely and make it his work to reclaim the Council Though they are thus all in pieces among themselves even about these their fundamentals yet is it the custome of their deceitful Writers to make the simple people believe that they are all agreed and to tell them that they have the Consent of the Universal Church and of all the Christian world and they have Universal Tradition c. that by the noise of these big words they may do that which they cannot do by argument Thus Doctor Vane their late proselite and divers others do in their writings overlooking all their own disagreements and passing on as confidently in their boasts of the Universal Consent as if they were either such Novices as understand not their own Religion or such hardened seducers as are not willing that others should understand it Here are in this our Question contained three of the greatest controversies between us and the Papists 1. Whether it belong to the Pope or Romane Church to be the Judge of Faith and Scriptures to all the world 2. Whether the Pope or his Clergy be inâ—llible in judging of matters of Faith 3. Whether our Faith must be resolved into this infallible judgement of theirs Our intent in this present Dispute is to deal most with the second yet so as it is connexed with the other two and therefore shall take them in on the by but say less to them distinctly and the rather because there is so much said already by our Divines as all the Papists on earth will never be able solidly to answer To let pass all those beyond Sea that have effectually confounded them we have Brittans enough to hold them perpetual work as Jewell Reignolds Whitaker White Field Vsher Camero Baronius Davenant Chillingworth to whom they have lately lost their cause by shewing in a vain and frivolous Reply how little they have to say against him with many more who will either remain unanswered or the answers will be worse to the adversaries cause then silence it self which we have sufficient ground already to foretell As to the first of these controversies to dispatch it in short as we distinguish between Judicium Descretionis Directionis Decisionis a Judgement of Discretion of Direction and of Decision so we knâ—w that it is onely the later that properly denominateth a Judge in the publike and ordinary sence Take our doctrine in these few Propositions 1. We say that every Christian hath a judgement of Discretion to know that the Christian Faith is true and Scripture is the word of God Or else he were no Christian or faith were not an act of judgement or Reason but a bruitish thing This therefore we confess the Pope either hath or ought to have 2. Every Pastor of the Church hath a judgement of direction that is it belongeth to him by office to be a Director of the people and to teach those the Christian Faith that yet receive it not and to confirm those in it that have received it And they ought to have abilities for the work of this office If therefore the Pope were a true Pastor Bishop or Preacher this power we should confess to be in him as in others 3. It belongeth to these Teachers also to be specially careful to preserve the sacred Scriptures from corruption and
the Determination of their Church he must presently not onely believe the contrary to what he believed before but do it also without doubting though they 'l confess millions are saved that believe Christ to be the Son of God though not without doubting Well but see what unity is procured by the addition of these new Articles to their Creed The French Doctors ascribe to his holiness that the said Articles may be taken in several sences The one sence is Heretical Lutheran or Calvinian but that is a sence That the words lawfully used will not hear but onely may malignantly be fastened to them say they The other sence which is genuine and proper they Defâ—nd themselves as true and as pertaining to the Belief of the Church as the Doctrine of Augustine and as defined by the Council of Trent and the contrary Opinion of Molina and the adversaries others maintain to be Pelagian or Semipelagian See here what the Papists themselves now do implicitely charge upon the Pope That he by his express unlimited condemnation doth malignantly fasten an Heretical sence on the words which properly they will not bear or else that he contradicteth Augustine and the Council of Trent and Anathematizeth the Christian faith and maintaineth the Semipelagian Heresie of Molina And yet must we judge either their Pope to be infallible or their Church to be at such unity in faith as they would make the ignorant vulgar believe More of the like contention about his holiness Determinations you may see in Tho. Whites Appendicula ad sonum Buccinae and Franscus Macedo his Lituus Lusitanus In all which you may see that all the comfort that the poor Dominicans have left them even their hope of salvation if they be Papists indeed consisteth in this that the Pope speaks one thing and means another and that as White so merrily saith in so sad a matter The wise father of the Church was necessitated for the appeasing of contentions to grant the more turbulent party their words and the more obedient party their sence so that when the Pope hath done all that he can to determine their controversies they will still say that he determineth but the words nay he doth but grant one party their words and not the meaning and so not onely sence but bare terms must be made Articles of faith And here you may see the great force of the Papists arguing for a necessity of a living Judge to determine of the sence of Scripture because the Scripture is so ambiguous that each one will else wrest it his own way And do we not see that the Pope cannot after so many years deliberation determine five short Articles so expresly and plainly even when he doth it of purpose to decide the controversie as to make his learned Doctors understand him but that each party doth take his words to be either for or not against their opinions and hold their opinions as fast since his determination as before And so they do by Augustine Thomas and the Council of Trent each party confidently perswading the world that they were of their side And may not God have the honor of speaking as plainly as the Pope or Thomas or the Council of Trent and cannot we well be without the Decision of such a Judge as cannot speak so as to be understood by his greatest Doctors himself So that the Principles and Practices of the Romanists do assure us that their faith is unfixed growing and mutable they may be one year of one Religion and another year of another as pleasâ— the Pope A Dominican might have been saved at any time since the creation till May 31. 1653. when the Popes Determination was dated but now they must all be damned for heresie There is a new way to heaven made 1653. that never was before and for ought they know to the contrary before their Popes have done Determining there may be five hundred Articles more in their Creed So that for my part I desire not either to be shut out of heaven at the pleasure of every new Pope nor to be of so uncertain and changeable a Religion And I cannot think therefore that Popery is a safe way to salvation Arg. 8. That Doctrine which derogateth from the written Word of God and setteth the Decrees of men above it enabling them to contradict its most express institutions is no safe way to salvation But such is the Doctrine of Popery therefore it is no safe way to salvation The Major is unquestionably true among true Christians For the proof of the Minor I shall only give you three instances of the Popish Doctrine because I intend not to be too particular left I be too large The first is their affirming the Scripture both to be insufficient to discover the whole doctrine of faith as being but one part of Gods Word and Tradition the other part and also to be no Word of God at all to us till the Pope and his Clergy do authoritatively determine it so to be or that we cannot know the Scripture to be Gods word but upon the Authority of the Churches determination But of this I have spoken before and shall do more in another dispute The second instance that I give is Their changing Christs most express institution by withholding the Cup in the Lords Supper from the people and giving them but half the Sacrament I am not now disputing about the efficacy or inefficacy of one half so delivered but proving the intolerable Arrogancy of the Papists that dare set up the will of man above Gods Word and give power to the Pope to change Christs Institutions and not onely to adde but to diminish and expresly to contradict Christ and forbid what he commandeth I know they pretend that it was but to the twelve Apostles that Christ gave the Cup and not to the Laity True nor the bread neither but then if he intended that none but the Clergy have the Cup why may they not as well say so of the Bread But do not these deceivers know 1. That Christ gives this reason of his administring the Cup Drink yee All of it For this is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the Remission of sins So that if this reason hold to others if his blood be shed for the sins of others as well as for the Clergie then the command extendeth to others Drink ye all of it And do they not know that Luke further intimateth this in his narration of the words of Christ This Cup is the New Testament in my blood which is shed for you So that those whom it is shed for and we may discern to be Believers it may be applyed to 2. And do they not know that Paul delivereth the doctrine both of the Bread and Cup as from the Lord to the whole Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 11. and not onely to the Clergy Is it not all that he expresly commandeth to Examine themselves
that Christs body admitteth of augmentation and either daily or weekly receiveth new made parts or else that he hath new bodies made daily 15. Also it followeth that a creature either the Baker or the Priest may make God or make his Saviour at least instrumentally which is a horrid imagination 16. It followeth that either Christs body hath the accidents of colour taste dimension c. which are there sensible or else that those Accidents have no subject which is a contradiction 17. It followeth also that Christ hath not indeed a true humane body if it be such as is before implyed 18. And it followeth that the body of Christ is part of it condemned hated of God and tormented by the Devil Because his body was turned into the bodies of many millions of wicked men which must be so condemned hated and tormented 19. Also it followeth that the Scriptures are not true which tell us that the heavens must receive him in that humane nature which ascended from earth till the times of the restitution of all things Act. 3.21 and that he shall come again to judge the world 20. Lastly it will follow that a man must not trust his sences that though my eyes my smell my taste my feeling tell me that this is Bread and Wine yet they are all deceived and not mine only but all the senses in the world to which they are objected And if that be true 1. What reason have I to trust any Papist living For all my good opinion of him must be ultimately resolved into something that I see or hear of him And it seems I am uncertain whether I see or hear him indeed or not 2. And then how can I tell that I or any man is sure of any thing For if the senses of millions in perfect health may be all deceived in this why not in other things for ought we know 3. And then how can any Papist tell that the Bread is turned into Christs body If he say because the Church or the Scripture saith so How knoweth he that but by hearing or seeing and therefore for ought he knows his senses may be deceived when he thinketh he heareth or readeth such a thing as well as when he thinketh that he seeth feeleth smelleth and tasteth Bread and Wine And is there not need of very strangely cogent evidence now to impell them to believe against the concurrent vote of Scripture sense and reason And what is the ground of their contrary belief Not the Ancient Church unless they willfully or negligently deceive themselves for the stream of antiquity is full against them so full that its hard to believe that any of them that 's verst in antiquity can truly think that antiquity is for them if they have but the common reason of men to understand what they read What is it then that bringeth them to this belief Is it the Scriptures That 's not likely because they make so light of it and swear to take it in the sence of the Church or ancient Doctors in which last they are here and oft most desperately forsworn It must be then upon the Authority of the present Church that is the Pope and his Clergy that they entertain this hard belief That is The Pope and his Clergy believe it because they say it themselves and the rest believe it because the Pope saith it And is it truely possible that any man should have so good a conceit of himself yea or any other think so well of him as to believe unfeignedly so great a thing upon so weak a ground Can the Pope therefore believe it because he doth believe it Or is it not too probable that thousands of them are of that Belief which Melancthon sometime told them of very smartly You Italians saith he Believe Christ is in the Bread before you Believe that there is any Christ in heaven while they pretend to a faith above men that is to believe Impossibilities upon the Popes credit I wish they prove to have the common belief of Christians and that in heart they do not as once one of their Popes did account the Gospel but a commodious fable But let us suppose that indeed it is the word of God that is the ground of their strange belief and that Hoc est Corpus meum This is my body is the very word that doth convince them as some of them do pretend I would here be bold to aske them that say so a Question or two 1. What if the Ancient Church had intecpreted this Text as we do against your Transubstantiation would you then have believed it upon the bare Authority of this Text What need I ask this Your own Oaths and Profession saith No It is not then any evidence in this Text that compelleth your belief And let me adde that if I prove not in a fair debate upon a just call that the ancient Church for many hundred years after Christ was against Transubstantiation I will give all the Papists in England leave to spit in my face for all the high expressions of the Eucharist that some fathers have 2. What is there in those words This is my body that can perswade any sober Christian to their strange belief What is it because that they are properly and not figuratively to be understood And how is that proved Is it because we must not force the Scripture but take it in the plainest obvious sence I easily grant it But who knows not that both in Scripture and in all our common speech the figurative sence is oft the most plain and obvious and the literal the most improbable What three sentences do we use to speak together without some figurative expression I will appeal to any unprejudiced man of reason whether a Christian that should newly read those words of Christ and had never heard them or read them before would not sooner take them in our sence then in the Papists They may easily try this upon a new convert if they please and I dare make their own consciences judge if they have any left to befriend a common truth What is there more in This is my Body being a Sacramental business then for a man that is in a room among many Images to say This is Peter or Paul or this is Augustine or Hierom or Chrysostome And would not any unprejudiced stander by suppose that the most obvious sence of those words is This is the picture of Peter Paul c. Or would a man easily believe that it was the meaning of the speaker that this Picture was the very real flesh and blood of Peter and Paul and all other Pictures that ever should be made after the same exemplar should be so transubstantiated So what is the obvious signification of those words This is my body but This is the Sacrament or Representation of my Body Especially when his real body was distinctly there present and he expresly biddeth them Do this in remembrance of me
THE Safe Religion OR THREE DISPUTATIONS For the Reformed CATHOLIKE RELIGION AGAINST POPERY Proving that Popery is against the Holy Scriptures the Unity of the Catholike Church the consent of the Antient Doctors the plainest Reason and common judgment of sense it self By Richard Baxter Contra Rationem nemo sobrius Contra Scripturas nemo Christianus Contra Ecclesiam nemo Pacificus Senserit August de Trinit l. 4. c. 6. fine London Printed by Abraham Miller for Thomas Vnderhill at the Anchor and Bible in Pauls Church-yard and Francis Tyton at the three Daggers in Fleet-street 1657. TO THE Protestant Reader WHen the motion was first made for the Publishing of these Papers it seemed to me to be as the Casting of water into the Sea so great is the Number of the Learned Writings of Protestant Divines against the Papists which will never be well answered that the most elaborate addition may seem superfluous much more these hasty Disputations prepared but for an exercise which is the Recreation of a few Countrey-Ministers at a monthly meeting when they ease themselves of their ordinary work But upon further consideration I saw it was The Casting of water upon a threatning fire which the Sea it self doth but restrain It 's more Engines than a few that are openly or secretly at work at this time to captivate these Nations again to the Romane Pope When so many hundreds if not thousands are night and day contriving our seduction under the name of Reconciling us to the Church if no body counterwork them what may they not do It 's not enough that we have had Defenders and that their Books are yet in the World Old Writings are laid by though much stronger than any new ones But new ones are sooner taken up and read The Papists have of late been very plentifull and yet very sparing in their Writings Plentiful of such as run among the simple injudicious people in secret so that the Countries swarm with them But sparing of such as may provoke any Learned man to a Confutation That so they may in time disuse us from those Studies and so disable the Ministry therein and catch us when we are secure through a seeming peace and fall upon us when we have lost our strength And I am much afraid that the generality of our people perhaps of the best are already so much disused from these studies as to be much unacquainted with the Nature of Popery and much more to seek for a preservative against it and a through confutation of them So that if Papists were once but as fully set out among us in their own likeness as they are under the names of Quakers and other Sects what work would you see in many places I doubt many would follow their pernicius wayes and fall like Sheep of a common rot or people in a raging pestilence especially if they had but the countenance of the times Not through their strength but because our people are naked and unmeet for a defence The work that now they are upon is 1. By Divisions and Reviling the Ministers to loosen the people from their Guides that they may be as a Masterless Dog that will follow any body that will whistle him 2. To take down the Ministers maintenance and encouragements that they may be disabled so vigorously to resist them 3. To hinder their union that they may abate their strength and find them work against each other 4. To procure a Liberty of seducing all they can under the name of Liberty of Conscience that so they may have as fair a game for it as we And ignorance and the common corruption of nature especially so heightened by a custome in sin doth befriend the Devils cause much more than Gods or else how comes it to pass that the Godly are so few and Error Idolatry and impiety doth so abound in all the earth 5. To break the common people into as many Sects and parties as they can that they may not onely employ them against one another but also may hence fetch matter of reproach against our profession in the eyes of the World 6. To plead under the name of Seekers against the certainty of all Religion that men may be brought to think that they must be either of the Popish profession or of none And indeed when all Sects have done their worst it is but two that we are in any great danger of And of those I think we are in more danger then the most are aware of And that is 1. Papists who plead not as other parties onely by the tongue but by exciting Princes and States against us and disputing with the Fagot or Hatchet in their hands And if we have not Arguments that will confute a Navy an Army or a Powder-plot we can do no good against them 2. Prophaneness animated by Apostate Infidels This is the Religion that men are born in And men that Naturally are so endeared to their lusts that they would not have the Scripture to be true will easily hearken to him that tells them it is false Yea so much doth Popery befriend men in a vicious course that some are apt to joyn these together thinking at the heart that Christianity is but a Fable but yet for fear it should prove true they will be Papists that they may have that easie remedy for a reserve If God will preserve us but from these two dangers Popery and Prophaneness animated by infidelitie it will goe well with England The most of my former Writings having been bent against the later I thought it not amiss to let go this one against the former That so I may entice the common professors to a little more serious Study of these points and furnish them with some familiar Arguments that are suited to their capacities that every deceiver may not find them unarmed And here I thought it best to defend our own profession and overthrow theirs in the main and not to stand long upon particular controversies except that one of the Resolution and Foundation of our Faith which is the great difference Yet that private unstudyed men may understand wherein the particular differences lie I have given them a Catalogue of them in other mens words in the end as resolving not to do it in my own In short I have here made it plain that Popery is against Scripture Reason Sense and against the Unity and Judgement of the Church 1. Either Scripture is True or not true If not Popery is not true which pleadeth its warrant from it And some of them argue as if they purposed to disprove the Scripture and to imitate Samson in pulling down the house on their own heads and ours in revenge for the dishonor they have suffered by the Scriture If it be true as nothing more true then Popery is not true which palpably contradicteth it as in the points of Latin service and denying the Cup in the Lords Supper and many other is most evident
2. Either the Catholike Church is one or not If not then Popery is deceitful which maketh this its principal pretence for the usurping the Universal Headship If it be One then Popery is deceitful which is renounced by the far greater part of the Catholike Church and again renounceth them and separateth from them because they will not be subject to the Pope who never yet in his greatest height had the actual Government of half the Christian world 3. Either the Judgement of the Antient Doctors is sound or not If not then the Church of Rome is unsound that is sworn to expound the Scripture onely according to their concent If it be sound then the Church of Rome is unsound that arrogate a Uiniversal Government and Infallibility and build upon a foundation that was never allowed by the Antient Doctors as in the third Disput I have fully proved and which most Christians in the world do still reject 4. Either Reason it self is to be renounced or not If it be then none can be Papists but mad men If not then Popery must be renounced which foundeth our very faith upon impossibilities and teacheth men of necessity to believe in the Pope as the Vicar of Christ before they believe in Christ with many the like which are afterwards laid open 5. Either our five Senses and the Judgement made upon them is certain and Infallible or not If not then the Church of Rome both Pope and Council are Fallible and not at all to be tâ—â—â—â—ed For when all their Tradition is by hearing or reading they are uncertain whether ever they heard or read any such thing and we must all be uncertain whether they speak or write it And then we must not onely subscribe to Fransc Sanchez Quod nihil scitur but also say that Nihil certo creditur But if sense be certain and Infallible then the Church of Rome even Pope and Council are not onely Fallible but certainly false deceivers and deceived For the Pope and his Council tell the Church that it is not Bread and Wine which they take eat and drink in the Eucharist But the senses of all sound men do tell them that it is I see that its Bread and Wine I smell it I feel it I taste it and somewhat I hear to further my assurance And yet if Popery be not false it s no such matter One would think the dullest Reader might be quickely here resolved whether Popery be true or false Look on the consecrated Bread and Wine touch it smell it taste it and if thou canst but be sure that it is indeed Bread and Wine thou maist be as sure that Popery is a delusion And if thou canst but be sure that it is not Bread and Wine yet thou maist be sure that the Pope or his Council nor any of his Doctors are not to be believed For if other mens senses be deceitful theirs and thine are so too But these things are urged in the following Disputations It s worth the observing how much they are at odds among themselves about the Resolution of their Faith and how neer some of them come to us of late as in White 's Sonus Buccinae and Doctor H. Holden de Resol fidei and in Cressy and Vane and others may be seen And their silly followers in England think verily that theirs is the common Doctrine of that Church And how solicitous Cressy and others are to take that Infallibility out of our way as a stumbling stone which the Italians and most of them make the Foundation and chief corner-stone What a task were it to Reconcile but Bellarmine and Holden Knot and Cressy both in English White had so much wit in his Defence of Rushworths Dialogues when he wrote in English to carry on the matter as smoothly as if they had been all of a mind But when he writes in Latin How many wayes of Resolution of Faith that are unsound can he find among the Papists as different from his own Vid. de fide Theolog Tract 1. Sect. 28.29 Reader Adhere to God and the Righteousness of Christ and the Teachings of the Holy Ghost by the Holy Scriptures and a faithful Ministry in the Communion of the Saints and as a member of the Catholike Church which arising at Jerusalem is dispersed over the world containing all that are Christians renounce not right Reason or thy senses and live according to the light which is vouchsafed thee and then thou shalt be safe from Popery and all other pernicious damning errors Marc. 10. 1656 7. R.B. To the Literate Romanists that will read this Book Men and Brethren A Writing that so much concerneth your cause I think should tender you some account of its publication especially when I know that not onely the divulging but the holding of the Doctrine contained therein is so hainous a matter in your eyes that if I were in your power the suspicion of it might bring me to the Rack and the Strappado and the confession of it would expose me to the flames I have many times considered that you could never sure endure to torment men in your Inquisition and consume them to ashes and so industriously to embroyle the Nations of the earth in blood and miseries to work them to your minds and set up your own way if you did not think it right and think them exceeding bad whom you thus destroy I find that my own heart would serve me to use Toads and Serpents and destroying Vermine half as bad as you do Protestants that is to put them to death though not to torment them so long but for gentler and more harmeless creatures I could not do it without a great reluctancy of my nature I must needs therefore by your works bear you record that you have a zeal for God but so had some before you that guided it not by knowledge Rom. 10.2 And I suppose your way is undoubtedly right in your own eyes or else you durst never prosecute it with such violence And yet one that was once as zealous in his way and shut up the Saints in prison and received authority from the high Priests to put them to death and compelled them to blaspheam did afterward call all this but madness Acts 26.9 10 11. But methinks I find my self obliged when I see men differ from me with such height of confidence to give them some Reason of my differing thoughts And yet it is no great matter of success that I can expect from this account To make any addition or alteration in your belief I have no great reason to expect while you read my words with this prejudice that they are damnable heresie and depend upon him whom you suppose infallible for the fashioning of your Faith And if I should say that I expect satisfaction from you with any great hope I should but dissemble For I have not been negligent in reading such writings of your own as might acquaint me both with
p. 29. l. 21 d. it p. 308 l. 18. r judicial p. 309 l. 28. r. confute p. 314. l. 28. r their 's p. 331. l 17. r. Montanus p 333. l. 8 r. Tatianuâ— p. 41. l â—2 r caeteri p 342. l. 1â— r. suburbi â—râ—â— l. 32. â— headed p. 34â— l â—6 r. to us p. 348 l. 2. r Râ—maâ—e l. 4. r. authors p. 355. l. â—0 r. word l. 23 r. proveâ—â— p. 356. l. 2. r. rather than p. 358. Marg. add de l. 28. r. literis p. 59. l. 31. r. secura p. 364 l. 11. d. i. e. p. 366. l. 8. r. Gloss p. 370. l. 8. r. fuâ—sse p. 371. l. 28. add in l 3. add other p. 377 l 5 r. knew l 28 r. these p. 380 l. 23. r. in p. 379 l. 12. r. â—ataloguâ— p. 217. l. â—2 after faith adde Or the object of faith even Christ himself which indeed is the true sence agreeable to 1 Cor. 10.4 And that Rock was Christ QUERY Whether the Reformed Catholike Christian Religion commonly called Protestant be a safe way to Salvation THE great business of the Divel the Enemy of Mankinde is to keep man from that Salvation which Christ hath so dearly purchased so graciously offered and hath appointed us such excellent helpes to attain To which end it is his first endeavor that men may not know or Believe that there is such a Felicity and what it is and how much to be desired and his next to keep them from knowing the way to it and the last is to keep them from walking in that way when they know it By the first means he keeps from Salvation all Atheists and Heathens that know not or believe not the life to come by the second all Infidels that Believe not Christ to be the way and all Hereticks that Believe not those Truths which are of absolute necessity in subordination to Christ and by the third all Hypocrites and unsanctified ungodly impenitent men in the visible Church that yet have a superficial Belief of these Truths Our Question in hand is for the escaping the second of these snares by discovering which is the safe way to Salvation The Policy of the Devil hath always endeavoured to hinder the world from knowing this way by these two means First if it be possible by keeping them in utter darkness that this way may not be revealed to them or being revealed may not be understood Secondly or if that will not do by making such a number of by-ways on every side that the true and onely way may hardly be discerned And this is his end in raising so many Heresies and this is the course he takes to mislead them that have escaped from the darkness of Infidelity He begun this trade betime even in the dayes of the Apostles They saw the multifarious off-spring of the Deceiver sprouting up apace in their own times yet did it never enter into their thoughts to tell the Church that by this all Heresies should be known That the Church of Rome should condemne them or to send it down to all posterity as the true touchstone to tell them which was the onely right way among all these Heresies to wit That which is believed by the Pâ—pe or Church of Rome This had been a ready and easie way for the Apostles to have prescribed and for us to have received if it had been true It might have saved them much labor in giving us that Body of sacred Doctrine which they have made indeed the Touchstone of the safe way and it might have spared us much more labor of searching and studying which is the way and we might all have sent to Rome and been resolved without any more ado Surely the Apostles were not so envious to our ease and safety as to have silenced this easie way if they had known it themselves But as every Heretick when he findeth out a New way doth condemne the Old as inconsistent with his New so do the Papists Since this new way hath been cryed up that No man can come to heaven but by Rome it is their business to deter people from any other way and to that end to tell them that there is no safe way but theirs As the Quakers tell us that there is no way to Heaven but theirs and some Anabaptists say there is no way to Heaven but by being Baptized again as they are so do the Papists tell us that there is no way to Heaven but by Believing in the Pope and Church of Rome and obeying him as the head of the Church I never saw the place but sure that Town hath some admirable excellency in it that the God of Heaven should so much set his heart upon it as to endow it with such a stupâ—ndious Prerogative that no man should be saved from everlasting Torment that doth not Believe in the Bishop of that City and obey him as the universal head It s a wonder to me that he that set not his heart so much on his Temple at Jerusalem or on that chosen people as not to forsake them for their sins and that hath the Heavens for his Throne and to whom the Sun it self is as Darkness should yet be so taken with a Town called Rome built and long inhabited by Idolaters defiled with the blood of thousands of Martyrs against which the fouls under the Altar cry out How long Lord Holy and true wilt thou not avenge our blood c. as to ordain that no man in the remotest parts of the world even the Antipodes that never heard of the name of Rome can be saved though he should never so much believe in Jesus Christ unless he Believe in the Bishop of this Town and obey him when yet with Andradius and other Papists it s a hard question whether a man may not be saved in those heathen Countries without believing in Christ himself Is it not a marvaile that we never read that Rome was once named by Christ himself and that it never was put into our Creed as one of the necessary Articles to salvation especially when we find there the Catholike Church and Communion of Saints which sure would have been some way intimated to be the Romane Church or that which is headed by their Bishop if it had been so indeed I find but three names strictly so called in the Creed and the Popes or Romane Churches is none of them One is Jesus Christ and the other is hers that bore him and the third is his that Judged him to death and this indeed was a Romane name and if the honor of it in the Creed will do them any service let them make their best of it But however this advantage the enemy of the Church hath got by it that the new Romane Title hath made the old Catholike Title seem questionable to many and now so great is the audacity of the usurping Pope that he not onely questioneth whether any Christians shall be saved that
believe not in him as well as in Christ but he flatly denyeth it and what he cannot get by Scripture and reason he would get by threatning and terrible words to affright the simple telling them that Protestants are not of the true Church or Religion nor in a safe way to salvation because they will not be the subjects of the Pope of Rome Well we shall briefly prove our way to be safe if not to the satisfaction of perverse ambitious or passionate and prejudiced men yet I doubt not to the satisfaction of all humble impartial diligent persons that are willing to know the truth and deny themselves that they may know it and do not stifle it by their lusts or imprison it in unrighteousness in their byassed resolutions And first we shall briefly open the termes By Religion here we mean the Doctrine de credendis agendis about matters to be believed and practised which we hold and profess as of Divine Revelation and injunction in order to Gods Glory and our salvation For though this be but the means towards those holy Affections and practices which are of neerer necessity to our salvation as being the necessary effects of the former yet is it not this later buâ— the former that we are now inquiring after Not of Subjective but Objective Religion not of the fides quâ but the fides quae â—creditur not whether we be true to our Religion and so truly Religious but whether we be of the True Religion or hold that Doctrine which will save them that are true to it in Belief and Practice I shall not much stop the plain Reader therefore with any further and unnecessary inquiry into the Etymology of the word Religion which some derive 1 a Relegendo some 2 a Religando and some 3 a Relegando Relinquendo But as long as we understand what is meant by the word we shall not stick at the Etymology or propriety By the Reformed Religion we mean the Christian Catholike Religion as it is separated from Popery and so by this word we do distinguish our Churches from the Romane Sectaries For it is not every Reformation much less every thing so called that here we have respect to but the Reformation by which we cast off Popery it self which because it was in one Countrey done by a solemn Protestation of certain Princes and Cities against Popery hath been since called the Protestant Reformation and our Churches the Protestant Churches and our Religion the Protestant Religion Our Religion is called Catholike because it is â—he Religion of the Catholicke Church which is so â—alled a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it is universal consisting not onely of Jews and their Proselites as heretofore nor of one Town like Rome and those that will be â—he subjects of the Bishop of that Town as the Papists dream but of all that Believe in the name of Christ through the whole world holding the Foundation or points of absolute necessity to salvation and not again denying them by any such contradicting Errors as will not consist with the practical belief of the said Fundamentals As that was called A Catholicke Epistle which was directed to the whole Church and not to any one person or people so is that the Catholike Church which containeth all Christians As Austin was wont to describe it against the Donatists who would have confined it to the adversaries of Caecilianus and followers of Donatus in Africke that the true Church was that which was spread over the world by the Gospel which was commanded to be preached to all Nations beginning at Jerusalem so do we By the Christian Religion I suppose we are agreed is meant the Religion of Believers in Christ or that whereof Christ is the Foundation and prescriber and faith in him the first act which must contain all the essential parts though it may possibly want many integrals or else it is not to be called the Christian Religion They that were called Christs Disciples were afterwards called Christians first at Antioch Act. 11.26 To be a Christian therefore and to be Christs Disciple is all one Note therefore that as the word Religion denoteth the sum of doctrines and way of salvation absolutely necessary so it is but One in all the worlâ— that 's true and saving and that is the Christian Religion So that if a Heathen Jew or Mahometane ask me what Religion I am of in opposition to theirs I will say I am a Christian and not onely that I am a Protestant But if a Christian aske me what Religion I am of I will say I am a Reformed Catholike Christian for such a question in the mouth of a Christian usually implieth that I am a Christian and intendeth the discovery of what sort or party of Christians I belong to But indeed Christianity is not many but one and therefore Christians as Christians are not of many Religions but of one No nor Christians at all that are truely such if by Religion you mean a systeme of doctrines in the main necessary or sufficient to salvation or conceited so to be For as there is no such Body of Doctrine but Christs so no man that is indeed a Christian can believe that there is seeing such a Belief contradicteth the essentia's of Christianity But among those that call themselves Christians there are some Hereticks that deny or plainly subvert some part of the essentials of Christian Religion And among those that are Christians some have such dangerous corruptions as do much hazard the salvation and tend to frustrate them of their benefits of the Christian Faith and these very corruptions they Entitle by the name of Part of their Religion as the Papists do In which sence I must say I am not of the same Religion with them though I hold the same Christian Doctrine as they because I hold not their mixture and add not those corruptioâ—s which they make a part of their Religion The name Protestant I reject not because it was taken up on a just occasion but I take it to be too extrinsecal and private to be the standing denomination of my Religion as being not taken from the nature of the thing but from an occasionall action of a few men in one Countrey though it intimateth that all of their judgement in all other Countries do virtually at least make the like Protestation in the maine I do therefore rather choose to say that I am a Reformed Catholike Christian and when I call my self a Protestant this is my meaning So that by the name Christian which expresseth all my Religion it self Positively considered I am differenced from Heathens Jews Mahometans and all Infidels and those by some called Hereticks who usurpe the name of Christians while they deny part of the very essentials of Christianity And by the name Catholike I adde nothing Positive to the former but onely intimate that I am of the Universal Church and negatively exclude my self from all divided
Baptisme pardoneth it by way of obsignation and solemne conveyance But what is all this to your error that Original sin is not onely remitted but quite extinct or done away out of our natures by Baptisme so that the new baptized Infant is perfectly without any Radical sin as well as without the Guilt of it 4. He saith They say that works do justifie with faith You not Repl. They say that we are not justified by the Merit of Works but by the alone Merit of Christ and so do we We deny not in every sence that we are Justified by Works and not by faith onely for in James his sence we maintain it else we should deny the Scripture The question is not therefore absolutely whether we are Justified by Works but In what sence we are and in what not We say that Christ is the onely Satisfier of Gods Justice and Meriter of Righteousness and that Faith is the onely Receiving Condition and that the Works of the Law that Paul excludeth have no hand in it and that the Works of Grace which James takes in are but conditions without which our Justification begun without them shall not be continued and of our finall Absolution or Justification in Judgement and so are but a Particular and not an Universall or Legall Righteousnesse Of which I have given a full account in my Confession 5. He saith They maintain Freewill even in the best actions You not Repl. Freewill is either 1. Natural which is but its self-determining power with spontaneity and this we deny not For who denyeth man to be man and to have the Facultatem Volendi Or it is 2. Moral and that is 1. Political when a Governor gives the subject leave to do a thing and so we maintain that God giveth our Wills Freedom to all good and to no evil Or 2. Ethical which is nothing but the right inclination and Habits of the will with the absence of the contrary Habits And so we say that the better men are the Freer that is the better are their Wills And the unconverted have not this Freewill nor the converted in perfection till they come to Glory For the Freedom is the Goodness And seeing the Will so far Free Ethically as it is Good Vertuous or Holy the Question then is Whether every mans Will be Good and Holy which I am conceited you will not dare to affirme A covetous man a drunkard â—â— ungodly man is as much or more denominated such from the habite as from the act he is most vicious that is Habitually so To say therefore that such a mans Will is Free in this Ethical sence is to say that he is habitually no covetous man no drunkard no ungodly man no sinner which being contrary to unquestionable experience me thinks should be easily deserted If you know of any thing else called Freewill besides these three before mentioned we should be glad to know it too The natural Essential Freedom viz. A spontaneous self-determining power we all confess The Political Freedome yea and obligation none denyeth The Ethical Freedome that is Vertuous or holy Inclinations in wicked men you will deny your selves where then is the difference between us and either the Greeks or you Why you 'l say perhaps that it s here That we deny the will to have that Indifferency which you affirme as to opposite objects But we are loath to sight with you in the Dark Do you mean by Indifferency an Indifferency of Natural Power or an indifferency of inclination or Habite The first we do not deny The will is a natural faculty that hath naturally no determination to One where many means are propounded but is undetermined and hath a natural Power to determine it self to either But yet you know the Wills Natural Power is exercised according to inclining Objects and Habits And you cannot expect that men who are Habitually inâ—ined earthwards should Will Heavenly things and â—â—nounce earthly things meerly because they have a â—atural Power of choosing for they want that inâ—â—ination which is called commonly the Moral â—ower And I should suppose that in regard of this â—oral Power you will not affirm your selves that he â—ath indifferentiam ad oppositum To say that a mans â—ill is indifferently inclined to Good and to Evil â— to say that the man is habitually neither good nor â—ad unless as privation of due inclinations denomiâ—ate him bad I say the more of this â—ecause I finde others of your party and â—ome that seem to disown both you and us as a late Treatise of Repentance among others can witness â—o harp so much on this string and confusedly talke â—f Freewill before they tell us what they mean and â—o perswade the world that we teach that God hath â—aid such a natural necessity on man to sin as he hath â—o eat and drink and sleep and that God might as well damne men for being hungry or sleepy as for being sinful in our sence As if there were no more faultiness in a vicious disposition of the Will it selfe then in a necessary natural inclination or Appetite of those faculties which were never made to rule themselves but to be moderated by the Will of Reason It may be these men will either deny the truth of the words of the Holy Ghost that They that are accustomed to do evil cannot learn to do well no more then a Leopard can change his spots or a Blackamore his skin or else they will think such men excusable because they are so strongly enclined to evil and so if a man habituated to Lust shall vitiate their wives or a man habituated to malice shall beat them often or maim them or kill their friends they may think that he deserveth 〈◊〉 punishment but pity because he is so bad that 〈◊〉 could not morally that is he would not 〈◊〉 it But they say we teach that mens Wills have a â—â—cessity of sinning imposed on them But we hâ—â—â— learnt that Habites do not determine the Will natâ—â—â—ally nor alway infallibly but leave it free to a â—â—tural self-determination But yet we know that 〈◊〉 ordinarily determineth it self according to predominant habits And there must be somewhat extraâ—â—dinary to procure the Will to determine it self 〈◊〉 good where it is habitually inclined to evil So much may serve to vindicate our Doctrine about Freewill And as for the cause of its captivity it belongs noâ— to this subject to speak of it but to that of Original sin where the said Doctor so notably playes his part to which we shall not now digress The next instance of the Papist is this They iâ—â— the Greeks maintain seven Sacraments you not Repl. 1. This is another very immodest untruth I wonder that men dare venture their souls upon a Religion that must be thus upheld by falshoods Your own Writers before alledged witness that the Greeks deny the very use of confirmation and extreame Unction and how then can they account them Sacraments Nor
speculatively may yet hold the contrary truthes practically not discerning the contradiction I would gladly have shewed the vainty of the rest of that Pamphlet because I see he hath contracted most of their common cavils into a narrow room but the rest is less to our present purpose and the same things are already answered by many and therefore I shall no further Digress in the pursuit of this Confuter having already said so much against the chief of their objections as may leave the impartial Reader confirmed in it That notwithstanding the Popish cavils to the contrary it is apparent that the Christian Catholike Reformed Religion commonly called Protestant is a safe way to Salvation Query Whether Popery be a safe way to Salvation Neg. IT is not as other mens Judges that we determine this Question to their own master do they stand or fall but it is to render an account of our own Belief and practice and for our further confirmation in the truth for the defence of it against gain-sayers and for the establishing of our people against the sophistry and seduction of Deceivers For the explication of the terms I shall tell you 1. What I mean by Popery 2. What I mean by Salvation 3. What by the way to it 4. What by the word Safe 1. Popery is a certain farrago a mixture of many grievous errors in the doctrine of Faith Government and Worship expressed in their Authorized writings especially in their decretals and Councils corrupting the Christian Religion which they profess the whole being denominated from that one falshood that the Pope of Rome is the Universall Bishop and Visible Head of the Universal Church and Christs Vicar-General on earth and that only is the Catholike Church and those only Catholiks that so believe Where note 1. That the Papists professing to be Christians do first own the substance of Christian doctrine and then corrupt it and contradict it by this fardle of their own inventions superadded They profess to believe the holy Scriptures to be the word of God and to be true every Book that we believe and more They profess to believe all the Articles of the ancient Creeds commonly called the Apostles the Nicene or Constantinopolitane It is not the Christianity or true doctrine which they profess which we call Popery 2. It is therefore onely their own invented corruptions by which they contradict the Christian verity which they profess which we call Popery 3. Note That the common denominating corruption is the forementioned doctrine of the Popes Universal Episcopacy and Headship or a supreamacy at least if not Infallibility and that the Catholike Church and the Romane Church is all one and the Pope is the visible center of its Unity 4. Note also that as to the rest of their corruptions they agree not among themselves what is to be esteemed of their faith or Religion and what not and therefore it cannot be expected that we should give you an exact enumeration of the points of their faith and so a compleat description of Popery which is such a self-contradicting unreconcileable hodg podge But their errors may be distributed into these three rankes 1 Those that are established by the Pope and his supposed general Councel These they all receive and own 2. Those that are established by the Popes Decretals without a Council These some own as points of their faith and some reject them I will not adde as the third those that are established by a Council without the Pope not because there never was a Council that dissented from him in Good but because it is a difficult matter at least to find any Council that did go beyond or without him in Evil or erred without his Approbation 3. The third sort therefore shall be those opinions that are commonly maintained by their most Approved Writers which are published in books that are licensed and commended by the Popes Authorized agents but are not determined by the Pope or his Council These though they contend for and lay great weight on them in their disputations yet dare they not own them as any part of the matter of their faith lest they seem to be what they are divided and mutable A man would think that those volumnious hot disputes about Divine things did intimate that the Authors did fide divinâ— believe those points which they do so zealously dispute of But if it be their pleasure that we should so distinguish we will call the rest the Popish faith or Religion and these last the Popish opinions because we would fasten on them nothing but their own If you ask me which be those doctrines which they take for points of faith which we call Popery I must refer you to their Decretals and Councils on one side and Gods word on the other and all the Doctrines in those their Canons or determinations that are against the word of God are the doctrines which we mean by this name If they do lay greater stress upon any one point than others its likely to be on those that are put into their Creeds and Vows and therefore I shall onely recite the latter half of their Tridentine Creed seeing they will own that or â—othing When they have begun with the ancient Constantinopolitane Creed containing the true Principles of Christian Religion and have ended that they proceed thus as followeth The Apostolical and Ecclesiastical traditions and the rest of the Observations and constitutions of the same Church I do most firmely admit and embrace I admit also the sacred Scripture according to that sence which the Holy Mother the Church hath held and doth hold to whom it belongeth to judge of the true sence and interpretation of the Holy Scriptures and I will never take and interpret it but according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers I do profess also that there are seven truely and properly Sacraments of the new Law instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord and necessary to the salvation of mankind â—hough not all to every one to wit Baptisme Confirmation the Eucharist Pennance extreame Vnctiâ—n Order and Matrimony and that they confer â—race and that of these Baptisme Confirmation and Order cannot be reiterated without Sacriledge I do also receive and admit the received and approved Rites of the Catholike Church in the solemne Administration of all the aforesaid Sacraments I do embrace and receive all and singular things which in the Holy Council of Trent were defined and declared about Original sin and Justification In like manner I do profess that in the Mass there is offered to God a true pâ—per and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and fâ— the dead and that in the most holy Srcrament of â— Eucharist there is Truely Really and Substantiâ—â—y the body and blood together with the soul and Diâ—â—nity of our Lord Jesus Christ and that there 〈◊〉 change made of the whole substance of Bread â— the Body and of the whole substance of Wine 〈◊〉 blood which change
the Apostles The third is That which is kept in the universal Church and through all times past is deservedly judged to have been instituted by the Apostles though it be such a thing as the Church might institute The fourth is When all the Doctors of the Church do with one consent teach that such a thing descended by Apostolical Tradition either Congregate in a General Councel or writing it apart in books this is to be believed to be an Apostolike Tradition The fifth Rule is this That is without doubt to be believed to descend from Apostolical Tradition which is held for such in those Churches where the succession from the Apostles is entire and continued These are Bellarmines five Rules But 1. What the particular Apostolical Traditions are which are Gods Word according to these Rules he had more wit or less honesty then to let us understand Is it because the word of God is indeed yet unknown or cannot be known or because it is not fit to make it known or because the Pope must pretend to the keeping of these hidden Laws that so the world may receive them at his mouth 2. And I would fain know whether these Rules of Bellarmines to know the unwritten word by are themselves the Word of God or not If they be are they written or unwritten and how known to be so If not then it seems we may have Rules and means which are not the word of God by which we may infallibly know which is the true word of God And then there needs no unwritten word to deliver or prove the written word 3. And why may not another Doctor by these Rules know the unwritten word as well as the Pope and another Church as well as the Romane 4. And why may not the Christian people through the world procure from some one charitable Pope through so many hundred years a Catalogue of those unwritten verities that the word of God may be once commonly known and men may know when they have all without uncertain dependencies on the Pope or travailing in vain to Rome to know 5. And for those few that Bellarmine hath instanced in viz. The perpetual Virginity of the Virgin Mary The Baptisme of Infants the validity of Hereticks Baptism the fast of Lent the inferior orders of the Clergy the veneration of Images To the first I say It is no Article of Divine Faith but of humane Ecclesiastical The second is proved fully out of Scripture And so is the third if you take it of such Hereticks in a larger sence as expresly exclude nothing essential to baptism but expresly include it all But for the rest Bellarmine should remember how elswhere he defendeth the Council that required the rebaptizing of those that were baptized by the Paulinists because they were Anti-trinitarians For Lent I say no more can be proved of it but onely that it is an ancient Ecclesiastical constitution And the inferior orders are apparently novelties introduced after the first age if not the second too and not mentioned in any of the first writers but the sum of Church Officers enumerated without them Much more novel is the unlawful use of Images in Churches or as immediate instruments to excite devotion in prayer and for other lawful use we deny it not 6. But principally I would intreat Bellarmine and the Pope that hereafter they would obtrude no unwritten word upon us but what is proved to be such at least by his own Rules Let us have some proof that it proceedeth from the universal Church and not their naked word without evidences And then we must intreat them to be so honest as not to unchurch the Greeks Abassines Armenians Protestants and all the Christians in the world except Romanists that so they may be the whole Catholike Church and then prove any thing to be the word of God by their own Testimony alone Nor yet to perswade us that such a Council as theirs at Trent conteined the whole Catholike Church real or representative nor yet to bring us two or three Fathers and say that those were all the Doctors of the Church More particularly I answer to his Rules in order To the first I say 1. That prove if you can that ever the whole Church embraced any thing as a point of Divine faith which is not contained in the Written Word 2. If the whole Church embrace it then it is no secret and therefore we all may know it yea and actually do know it as well as the Pope To the second Rule I say You may prove a mistaken observance of rites by the greater part of the Church but prove that the whole Church kept any thing unwritten which none could constitute but God But if they did still it must needs be known to all and therefore not controvertible or lockt up in the Popes closet Prove also that the universal Church may not erre in some lesser matters about Christs supposed constitutions To the third I say If by all times past you include the Apostles then we grant your Rule but meer Ecclesiastical Canons may be observed through all times shortly after the Apostles and yet not as Apostolical but Ecclesiastical Yet when you come to try your Traditions by this Rule I am not out of doubt that you will but disgrace them and fail your Readers just expectations To the fourth I say 1. I will believe you if you speak of all the Doctors of the Church next to the Apostles or so neer as that the danger of mistaking was not great 2. But I do not believe that you will find any of your Traditions asserted to be Gods Word by all the Doctors of the Church not neer all in any one age unless you make your faction to be all The last Rule is but a meer trick of wit to get the key into the Popes hand alone To which I say 1. A Church that hath had an interrupted succession of true Pastors from the Apostles may fall into many errors in process of time which in Tertullians and Irenaeus dayes when the memory of all the Apostles practices were so fresh they could not fall into so easily 2. Those Churches have received their unwritten verities either by writings from their predecessors or without If by writings why cannot others find it there as well as they If without it must be an uncertain and mutable means or by a means so publike still that all as well as they may know of it 3. And we undertake to prove that the succession of true Pastors of the Romish See hath been long ago and often interrupted And therefore this Rule will not serve your turns But though I have been long upon this principle of the Papists to prove the uncertainty of their faith yet the next is the chief that I intended which also proveth the mutability of it 2. The Papists ordinarily hold that as to us that is Gods Word which the Pope with his Clergy say is Gods Word
that They will never take and interpret the Holy Scriptures but according to the unaniomous consent of the Fathers When as 1. The Fathers do not unanimously consent among themselves concerning the sence of the greatest part of Scripture and so they are sworn to take it in no sence because the fathers are not unanimous 2. He that knows not the unanimous sence of the Fathers where they are unanimous is sworn hereby to take and interpret the Scripture in No sence 3. If by The Church whose sence they also swear to admit be meant the present Romane Church then that Church and the Fathers do differ in the Interpretation of many Scriptures so that in one Article they must needs be forsworn 4. Nay there are divers particulars of the Popish faith yea which in this oath they swear to which are against much more without the unanimous consent of the Fathers The Fathers never consented to this very Article that we must take and interpret the Scripture onely in the unanimous sence of the Fathers They never consented that the Bread and Wine are truely really and substantially the whole Body and Blood of Christ by Transubstantiation Nay the consent of the Fathers is against these And yet these wretches swear not to take and interpret Scripture but in the unanimous sence of the Fathers and withal swear the contrary in particulars even that they believe that which the Fathers never consented to but against Never did the Fathers consent that There are seven truely and properly Sacraments Instituted by Christ Never did the Fathers consent who lived a thousand or fourteen hundred years before that the Council of Trent did not erre or could not erre Nor That in the Mass is offered a true proper propitiatory Sacrifice for the living and dead Nor that the Eucharist may be taken under one kind and the Cup withheld nor That there is a Purgatory or the souls there holpen by the suffrages of the faithful nor that the Saints with Christ are to be prayed to Nor that Images were to be worshiped nor the power of Popish indulgencies left by Christ in the Church and the use of them wholsome Never did the Fathers consent that the Romane Church is the Mistris of all Churches or that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ over them nor that all Christians or Bishops or Pastors should swear true obedience to the Pope as Christs Vicar Let these proud deceivers shew us if they can when the Fathers or any one of the Ancients did ever take any such oath himself or perswade others to it Yea or that they have consented to any one of these Articles of the Romish faith and Trent oath What more evident to any man that hath any acquaintance with the Fathers then that these wretches do here most palpably forswear themselves Even as if they should swear to believe nothing but according to the Ancient Creed and withal swear to believe that Christ never dyed rose or ascended or that there is no resurrection or everlasting life Certainly if the very faith of Papists be contradiction and the profession of it plain perjury then Popery is not a safe way to Salvation I would here have added as the fourteenth Argument That Popery is a mixture of old condemned errors formerly called Heresies which the ancient Church hath testified against and therefore it is no safe way to Salvation And here I should have tryed their particular errors not yet mentioned or insisted on as their Doctrine of Merits and Justification thereby Satisfactions and many Semipelagian errors Image-worship with many the like But that this is beyond my present intended scope and purposed brevity and is so fully performed already by so many unanswerable Treatises of our Divines Let us next here what is said of most moment to prove Popery to be a safe way to Salvation Obj. 1. That Religion which hath been delivered down from the Apostles to this day without interruption is a safe way to Salvation For it is the same that the Apostles and all the ancient Christians were saved in But the Religion of the Church of Rome is that which hath been delivered down from the Apostles Therefore c. Ans 1. There is a change of the very subject of the question It is Popery that we are disputing of and this argument instead of Popery speaks of The Religion of the Church of Rome The Religion of the Church of Rome hath two parts First the Christian Faith Secondly their own corruptions depraving and contradicting this Faith The first as it standeth alone uncontradicted in the Religion which â—e profess The second is it that we call Popery and â—ay It is no safe way to salvation 2. And of this I deny the Minor and say that Popery is not the ancient Religion the Apostles and Primitive Church never knew it There was no such creature as a Papist known in all the world till six hundred years after the birth of Christ It was about 606. when Pope Boniface did first claim his universal Papacy and Headship and after that it was not till about one thousand years that the usurpation and Tyranny was consented to any thing generally in thâ— West And even the multitudes still dissented and some opposition was still made against it and all the Esterne Churches and the rest of the Christian world did dissent Of these things there is enough said to silence all the Papists on earth in Bishop Vsher de contin successione slatu Eccles Occident and his Answer to the Jesuites Challenge and by Bishop Jewell and Doctor Field and in many of the old Treatises against the Pope published together by Goldastus which shew us that he setled not his Kingdom without continnual opposition and contradiction We affirm that Popery is a meer novelty and challenge all the Papists in the world to prove the Antiquity of it When they have once arrogated to themselves the name of the Catholike Church and taught the people to believe as the Church believes that is to believe that all is true which the Pope and his Clergy will report of themselves it is then an easie matter for them to prove any thing to be true which makes for their turn then they may say The Fathers are for them and that they have their Papal sovereignty from St Peter when there is never a true word in it Then they may frame and forge new Decretals and cut out of the Ancient Writers thâ— which is against them and bring forth spurious writings under their names and tell the people that our Religion begun with Luther for its easie to prove any thing where themselves are the Judges and no witnesses but their own must be heard But if they dare leave that hold and come into the light its easie to evince the novelty of Popery though not of every particular error they hold Obj. 2. If the Church of Rome be a true Church then Popery is a safe way to salvation
Ground of our Belief of the Christian Doctrine or of our Receiving the Holy Scriptures as the Word of God N. HAving already enquired whether the Romanists or the Reformed Churches are in the safe way to Salvation we shall now more particularly enquire whether their faith or ours be built on the surer grounds Our Belief is thus resolved we believe the Christian Doctrine to be True because the True God is the Author of it We discern that God is the Author of it both by his Intrinsicke and Extrinsicke Seals or attestations of it in that it beareth his image and superscription and is confirmed by his undoubted uncontroled Miracles and other effects which lead us to the cause The revealing containing signs or characters are the the holy Scriptures That these Books were written by the Prophets Apostles and Evangelists and were confirmed by Miracles and are uncorrupted in the main we are infallibly assured of by the evident certainty of the historical attestation and Tradition For we depend not barely on the credit of a deceivable or deceitful man such as is the Pope of Rome or of any fallible society of men but on such History as we can prove by plain reason to be infallible containing in it besides the Testimony of the Pope and all his party the same Testimony also of all the rest of the Christians in the world yea and of the very Hereticks who were enemies to much of the truth and enough also even from the mouths of Infidels to confirm us so that by this infallible history and universal Tradition we have a fuller discovery that these Books are the same that were written by the Apostles c. then we have that the Statutes of Parliaments in the Reign of King James or Queen Elizabeth are the same that they pretend to be And to a man that heareth not God himself or the Lord Jesus or the Apostles and hath not their immediate inspirations we know not how the Laws of heaven should be more fitly delivered in an ordinary rational way nor what surer other means such as we can expect who live at such a distance from the first receivers of it unless we would have God to speak to every man as he did to Moses or have Christ or Apostles still among us or unless God must make us all Prophets by his extraordinary inspirations And lastly the true meaning of this word we understand as we do the meaning of other Laws or writings having moreover the assistance of the spirit which is necessary because of the sublimity and spirituality of the matter and the necessity of the great effects upon our hearts Our Teachers by Translation and further instructions are our helpers as they must be in other things that we would learn and by the help of them without and of the spirit within we are able to understand the meaning of the words especially comparing text with text and so receive the sanctifying impress upon our hearts And thus is the Faith of the Reformed Catholike Resolved He receiveth the Bible from the hands or mouth of his Teachers and perhaps first believeth them fide humana that it is Gods Word He knoweth that this Book was written in Hebrew and Greeke by the Prophets and Apostles by Infallible Hystory or Universal Tradition He knoweth that they did it by Inspiration of the Holy Ghost by the Image of God which he findeth on it and by the uncontroled Miracles by which they sealed it He believeth it to be True because it thus proceeded from the Holy Ghost and so is the Word of God who is most True Of the Resolution of our Faith according to the Protestant Doctrine See L. du Plessis of the Church cap. 4. Translat pag. 121.122 123. and Conradus Bergius Prax. Cathol Can. p. 208.209 210. Disp 2. § 125 126. To this same sence Vid. Sibrand Lubbert Princip Christ Dogm li. 1. pag. 20 c. What the Resolution of the Romane faith is the Question which we are now to discuss doth intimate in part for it cannot be laid down in one proposition because they are of so many minds themselves Indeed we may see in this their foundation that Popery is a very maze and dungeon for the builders of this Babel are all in confusion at the laying of their first stone Yet this much they seem to be mostly agreed in That the Scripture is the word of God and part of the Rule of faith and duty but not the whole Rule nor the whole Word of God but that unwritten Traditions are the other part and the judgement of the present Church is Gods Word after a sort as they speak That the Scripture hath its Authority in it self from God the prime truth but quoad nos as to us it hath its Authority from the Church That it is the act of Tradition or the unwritten part of Gods word to tell us that the Scriptures are the word of God or a Divine Revelation And that it is the Office of the Church to judge both of this Tradition and the Scripture as also to decide all controversies in Religion and to judge which is the true sence of Scripture and that this Church must be one only visible infallible authorized thus to judge by Christ and this is onely the Romane Church Thus far the most of them seem to be agreed But when these mysteries of iniquity come to be opened they fall all to pieces For 1. Sometimes they say that the judgement of the Church is Gods word after a sort sometime that it is some middle thing between a Testimony Divine and Humane 2. And what the formal object of faith is they are not all of a mind whether it be only the Prime Truth or whether the Revelation of the Material object be any part of the formal But I confess this controversie is more verbal then real 3. And what place here to assign to the Testimony of the Church they are not agreed neither 4. Especially they are divided in the main viz. what this Church is which is the infallible Judge and into whose judgement their faith is resolved whether it be the present Church or the former Church Whether it be the Pope only at least in case of difference between him and his Council or whether it be a General Council though the Pope agree not as the French and Venetians say Yea whether it be the Clergy only or the Laity also that are this Church Nay some of them plead Universal Tradition as Holden White Vane and divers other Englishmen of late as if that were the same with the Romane Tradition or as if it were the point in controversie between us and them And ordinarily they use to tell us of All the Church and All the Christian world and to mouth it in such swelling words that the simple hearer would little think that by All the Church they meant but one man or at the
keep him from This is to make Gods Commissions to be impious and his Grace to the Pope onely to hinder the execution of them in an impious way Who dare say openly that God hath given authority to the Pope to judge decisively and obligatorily that there is no God Christ or Scripture though he will graciously hinder him from so doing If the Papists say that they do not say so I would know then what their judicial power in these matters is Is it onely this that the Pope hath Power to judge that there is a God a Christ a word of God c. Why so have others as well he If they shall dare to say that matters of faith are not such to us that is we be not obliged to believe them till the Pope have determined them I answer What! is no Heathen or Infidel bound to Believe that there is a God a Christ a Scripture till the Pope tell him so Shall all Infidels be excused in judgement that had the Gospel preached to them by any other Christians except the Pope or others in his name Is no man on earth bound to believe in Christ that knows not the Popes mind in the matter And must men believe in the Pope before they believe in Christ And must they believe in Christ onely because the Pope bids them or because they first believe in the Pope I do not think that either the eares of Good Christians or rational Infidels will relish such doctrine And what is this Believing in the Pope that must go first Is it not to take him to be Saint Peters successor and that Saint Peter was Christs Disciple who had a promise of infallibility which is now devolved to the Pope And must this be believed before men believe in Christ We must believe what he promised and who were his servants before we believe in himself This is a ground too like the Popish superstructure But perhaps they may in time grow moderate and tell us that it is not in all points of faith but some onely that the Pope is made Judge He may not judge about Christ himself whether he be the Messiah but about his Doctrines Answ 1. By what warrant will they distinguish and claim power in one which they have not in the other 2. Is it all or some of Christs Doctrines that the Pope is Judge of If all then it seems he must judge whether he that Believeth shall be saved or not Whether we should love God or hate him Whether we should seek first Gods Kingdom or worldly vanities And whether a man should commit Murder Adultery Theft c. or not May he decide these on either part or on one only as others may do May he judge that there is no Judgement Resurrection or life Everlasting I know they dare not say it If it be but some of Christs Doctrines that the Pope is made Judge of then let them tell us which it is and give us their proofs and they shall hear more from us Let it be the smallest point they will imagine Hath God given power to the Pope to contradict him and give him the Lye If God saith It is so May the Pope say It is not so What if the Pope say that the Gospel of Mathew or Luke or John is no part of Gods word Must we believe him What if he tell as that the world was made in five days and not in six Must we believe him 2. If they yet flye to his infallibility I shall speak more to that anon though the former answer may well suffice them But to another Arg. 3. The Scripture is Gods Law The Pope is not the Judge of Gods Law therefore he is not the Judge of Scripture The Major I hope no Christian will deny The Minor is evident from the nature and use of Laws and Judgements The Law is Norma judicis in judicando the Judges Rule He is not to Judge the Law but the cause of particular persons by that Law Indeed as to the right guidance of his own act of Decisive Judging the cause of the person he hath a Judgement of discretion concerning the sence of the Law but as if he Judge upon a false exposition of the Law the party may appeal from him so which concerneth our present case he hath no power to Judge the Law it self As he cannot make a plaine text to bear a false sence or oblige the subject to believe a false sence so in a doubtful case it belongeth to the Law-givers onely to interpret their own Laws Onely a sentence of a lawful Judge grounded upon a false exposition may sometime be executed among men where justice cannot be had but no man is bound to Believe that it is true and just James tells men what it is to pretend to be a Judge of the Law in stead of doing it and leaving that to the one Law-giver Jam. 4 11 12. And if the Pope be made Judge of every controverted difficulty in Scripture then why is he so unfaithful that he hath not hitherto written us an infallible Commentary on it and why doth he not determine all the controversies about it that among his own followers remain yet undetermined of which more anon Arg. 4. If the Pope be made the Deciding Judge of Faith and Scripture then either of the plain points or onely of the controverted difficulties or of both But not of the plain points For 1. That which is evident and not under controversie needs no Judge To the ignorant there may be need of an interpreter and teacher but not of a Judge 2. Such texts of Scripture do oblige us whether the Pope Judge of them or not Therefore there is no need of his judgement that they may oblige us Who dare think that a man is not bound by the word of God to love God above all to believe the Resurrection of Christ and of us to love Christs disciples c. unless he know the judgement of the Pope Do not all Laws of the Land oblige the subject upon the bare legislation and promulgation before the Judge meddle with them If they did not first oblige us to duty there were no place for the Judge to sentence us to punishment for disobedience It is the Legislator that obligeâ—h to duty by his Law proclaimed or any way published in his name But judgement interveneth to oblige men to punishment and bring it to execution and to help them to that which by the Law is their right If therefore it be evident in the very nature of Laws and judgement that we are obliged by Gods Laws to Believe and obey them in the several particulars before any judgement of the Popes it is then but dotage to talk of a Judicial Decisive power in the Pope to oblige men to Believe those same doctrines and obey those same precepts of the word And for the dark and controverted texts 1. Those are not of that moment as that mens salvation
other doth not The Text speaks but to the same person and not in one half to one and in the other half to others I may well argue therefore in this manner To whomsoever Christ here promiseth that his faith shall not fail to him onely doth he speak in this text But he promiseth onely to Peter here that his faith should not fail therefore it is onely Peter and not the Popes that he speaks of The Major is clear according to the intelligible sence of the words and Bellarmine hath not yet proved a mystical sence The Minor is confessed by himself Lastly Bellarmine saith de verbo dei li. 3. c. 3. that Onely out of the litteral sence of Scripture effectual arguments are to be fetched But this great argument of his for the Popes infallibility is not fetcht out of the literal sence of Scripture therefore by his own confession it is uneffectual and unjust The second Text which he cites to this use is Mat. 16. On this Rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it A double argument he would fetch from hence One from the Name Rocke the other from the nature of a Foundation which both imply firmeness Ans 1. Note that here is in the Text not one word of the Pope of the Church of Rome more then any other or of infallibility 2. How doth he prove that by the Rocke is not meant Peters Faith or that Doctrine which he confessed but Peter himself 3 If he had proved it are not all the Prophets and Apostles as well as Peter called the foundation Eph. 2.20 So that here is no more promised to him then what was elswhere promised and given to the rest Onely his present confession occasioned the promise to be made expresly and particular at that time to him 4. As the rest of the Apostles were the Foundation on which we are built and yet their successors are not so So though Peter were the Foundation it followeth not that all or any of his successors are so The third text which Bellarmine citeth is Joh. last Feed my Sheep Where note again 1. That here is not a word of the Pope or Rome or infallibility 2. Did not Christ bid the rest of the Apostles Feed as well as Peter Sure Mat. 28. He bid them all Go teach all Nations baptizing them and teaching them to observe all things whatever he commanded them And what could Peter do more in Feeding Yea thirdly Are not all Pastors though inferior to Apostles bound to Feed the Sheep of Christ and yet it follows not thence that they are infallible 4. Bellarmine would next prove this from The High Priests wearing the Urim and Thummim Exod. 28. When he first confesseth that it is not agreed among Jews or Christians what these are And yet it will serve him for a proof 2. The Priests were not infallible for all their Urim and Thummim therefore no more is the Pope They judged Christ not to be the Messiah and therefore crucified him They lived and died Infidels and hardened the people in the same Infidelity for which they were broken off and unchurched 3. And whereas he argueth that the High Priest was infallible because the people were to go to him for resolution of difficulties and obey them Deut. 17. I must say that Bellarmine had some fault in his eyes that caused him to overlook the Judge and name onely the High Priest God sendeth them to the Judge who was the chief Magistrate in those dayes as well as to the High Priest as any man that will read the text may see If therefore the one of them be infallible because of this why is not the other so too But perhaps they will make the Pope to be the successor both of the Magistrate and Priest and so to be the universal Emperor as well as the universal Bishop and use both his swords that so this promise may belong onely to him For he will hardly grant every King or Judge to be infallible 4. By this rule the rest of the Priests also should be infallible For the people were also to receive the Law at their mouthes 5. When was there ever one Priest in any age so impudent at Bellarmine and his faction are to plead for or pretend an infallibility in themselves Let them name one Priest or person if they can that ever had such a conceit of themselves except it were Gods Prophets in the matters of their Prophecy 6. What if the Jews High Priest had been infallible What 's that to the Pope of Rome any more then to another man Hath he indeed yet proved himself successor of the Jews High Priest Except as a corrupter of the Law and a persecutor of the Church of Christ Well! you have heard all the Scripture arguments that Bellarmine had to bring for he brings no more to prove the pretended infallibility of the Pope May I not well say that it is no marvaile that they are such ill friends to Scripture who have no more Scripture that is none at all to befriend the very foundation of their cause And may I not justly recite again Bellarmines own conclusion lib. 3. de verbo Dei c. 3. and from thence shew them that their cause is built upon confessed fraud and vanity It is agreed bâ—tween us saith Bellarmine that onely out of the literal sence of Scripture effectual Arguments are fetcht But Bellarmine bringeth no one Argument for the Popes infallibility out of the literal sence of Scripture therefore he bringeth no one effectual Argument from Scripture But yet one other Argument he hath though not from Scripture and no more and that is from a double pretended experience And his first experience is That in all the other Patriarchal seats there have been Hereticks but not in that of Rome But here 1. Bellarmine must be judge or the Pope who is a party before all the Patriarchs can be thus condemned 2. And what if that were true Can he say the like of all the Bishops as well as Patriarchs If not they may as well hence prove themselves infallible as the Pope can do 3. Whether ever there were in the chair at Rome either Pope Liberius an Arrian Pope Honorius a Monothelâ—te Pope John denying the immortality of the soul with abundance more such like we shall have fitter opportunity to open anon to the shame of this experinemt of Bellarmines His second experiment is that The Pope without a Council hath condemned many Heresies which upon that very account have been taken for true Heresies by the whole Church of Christ Ans But you must first unchurch the greatest part of the Catholike Church and damne most of the Christians on earth the Greeks Armenians Abassines c. and make your own faction to be the whole Church of Christ before you will ever give us the least proof of this All the Church doth not do that which your flatterers do Nor did
infallible while our sufferings prove us Heretical 4. Is it not ambition and desire of Rule that is the very cause which they contend for What 's the unreconcileable quarrel so much as that all the world will not be subject to them And yet the sufferings of these men prove them infallible If one Butcher Henry the third of France and another Henry the fourth and others would blow up the English Parliament with Gunpowder is the Pope infallible if some of these be hanged Or what if some of them have suffered from infidels Are not others as ready so to suffer as they and have suffered as much as they The next mark that he layes down is Victory over all sorts of enemies But is it over their minds or over their bodies that they mean If the first who must be judge of their victories but themselves I never heard any of them plead their cause but in my judgement they had the worst There iâ— no party but may turn divers others to their opinions Mahomet hath got far more followers in the world then Christ and Heathenism than either If Papists can turn all these why do they suffer themselves still to be confined to so small a part of the world And if it be victory over mens bodies that they mean I say the like Have not the Turkes a larger Dominion than the Pope Have they conquered the Great Turk the Great Mogol the Grand Cham of Tartary c Are we not as infallible as they on this account when we conquer them It seems then when Papists are so industrious to enlarge their Dominions to destroy their enemies by Poysoning or stabbing Kings or other means it is that they may have a further Testimony of their infallibility The last mark which the Jesuite mentioneth is the conversion of Infidels But 1 If that be a sure Mark we are infallible as well as they For we have been means of converting Infidels And so have the Greek Churches and others that disown the Popes infallibility 2. If that Argument be good then it was not only the Apostles but all that converted Infidels at the first or after preaching of the Gospel that were infallible which sure they never pretended to 3. If it will prove any body infallible it s liker to prove them so that did convert any Infidels then the Pope that onely gives them leave or order to do it 4. Let them not boast too much of their conversions till we have a better character of their new made Christians and a better report of their means of conversion then Acosta and other of their own Jesuites give us who have been eye witnesses of the case To cut men off by thousands or millions and force the rest to Baptism as cattle to watering when they have nothing of a Christian but the name and that sign and some forget the name it self this is not a conversion much to be boasted of Nor must they think that all are Christians that the King of Spain conquereth for love of their Gold and Silver Mines The Apostles did not convert Infidels by an Army but by the word and miracles but it is the King of Spaines souldiers that have been the effectual preachers to work the conversions that you have most to glory in If the Jesuit had put his proofs into well formed Arguments what stuff should we have had So much for the Answer to Chilling worth and the new Fundamentals of the Romish faith by which they can prove their Pope infallible without being beholden to Scripture for its help And I marvaile not at their contempt of Scripture-Testimony to them unless there were more or more appearance for them then there is Having considered the Papists proof of their infallibility I shall next though it be more then the cause obligeth me to say somewhat to prove the Negative and so proceed to my second Argument against them Argu. 2. If the common senses of sound men or their sensible apprehensions be infallible then the Pope with his pretended General Council is fallible But the common senses of sound men are infallible Therefore c. I know not how we should come neerer hand with a Papist nor to plainer dealing then to argue from common sense And as to the Antecedent Either sense is infallible or it is not If it be I have that I seek If not then mark what follows 1. Then no man can be sure that the Christian Religion is true For the proofs of it all vanish if sense be not infallible If you plead the Miracles of Christ and his Disciples no man was sure that he saw them If you plead the death and Resurrection and Ascension of Christ no man was sure he saw them and therefore could give no assurance of it to another All the Disciples senses and the worlds senses were or might be for ought we know deceived Nor are you sure that any writings or traditions came down to us from the Apostles For the eyes of the Readers and the ears of the hearers might be deceived 2. And then most certainly the Pope himself and all his Clergy are fallible For they cannot be sure of that which the Apostles and following Church were not sure of Nor can they be sure that in reading and hearing their eyes deceive them not And I take it for granted that the Pope and his Clergy do use their senses and by them receive these matters into their intellect Nay if sense be fallible no man in the Church of Rome can tell whether there be any such place as Rome or any such person as the Pope at all or ever was Nay what else can any man be sure of I suppose you will marvail why I bestow so many words on such a point But you see what men we have to deal with When all the quarrel between us must be issued by this point whether common sense be infallible For if it be we infallibly carry the cause Yea whether it be or be not as shall appear I come next therefore to prove the consequence and that I do thus The judgement of the Pope and his pretended General Council is directly contradictory to the apprehension or judgement of common sense therefore if common sense be infallible the Pope and his Council are fallible The consequent is unquestionable the Antecedent I prove by this known Instance Common sense takes it to be bread and Wine that remaineth after the words of consecration The Pope and his Council say it is not Bread nor Wine that remains after the words of consecration therefore the judgement of the Pope and his Council is directly contradictory to the apprehension of common sense For the first I appeal to the senses of all men that ever received the Eucharist Whether seeing feeling smelling and tasting do not as plainly take it to be Bread and Wine as they do any other Bread or Wine at their own tables and whether they can see or taste or smell
or feel any difference to give them the least cause of doubting I am sure I have the judgement of thousands and millions on my side which in a matter of sense among sound men is certainly enough And if the Papists are so mad as to tell me that it is otherwise with their senses and will seriously profess that their eyes and taste c. do not take these for Bread and Wine but perceive that they are not I will take them for shameless lyars or madmen and I suppose no man in his senses will blame me for so doing Well I its paâ—â— doubt that all our senses tell us its Bread and Wine as confidently as they tell us any thing is such And it is certain that the Pope and his Council tell us it is not Bread and Wine If our eyes be infallible that read it and our ears that hear it from their own mouthes then this is sure enough and too sure I know they will not deny it I would they would we should then be somewhat neerer a reconciliation What now can be said to avoid the conclusion is past my understanding save onely that it is possible that some of them may come in with some alluding distinction to see if they can blind mens sense and reason and so perhaps they 'l tell them that 1. sense is infallible on supposition of the right constitution of the medium but else not or 2. that sense judgeth but of accidents and not of substances and the accidents of Bread and Wine are here or 3. that sense is infallible in common cases where substances and accidents are not separated as here they be To which if such stuff deserve an answer I reply 1. What medium is here questionable or questioned by you but the accidents themselves which you say are the objects Sure the aire is clear and perspicuous the distance is not too neer or too far off our eyes and taste are sound 2. I think senses judge of substances with their accidents The eye sees substantiam coloratam and the hand feeleth the substantiam qualem quantam and not onely qualitatem quantitatem substantiae But let that controversie go how it will I am sure the substance is objectum sâ—nsus per accidens though not per se or that the intellect infallibly judgeth of substance by the help of the senses apprehension Otherwise all the forementioned absurdities will follow and still the Pope and Church will be fallible For then the Apostles and others that saw Christs Miracles could be sure onely of the accidents and not of the substance Then no man is certain whether it was Christ himself that lived on earth that was crucified and rose again or onely the accidents of Christ And then no man knows whether there be a Pope at Rome or onely the accidents of a Pope and so of the rest 3. And to the third part of the answer I reply That if sense be infallible when substances and accidents are inseparable then it is alwayes infallible For the accident separated from the subject doth perish Moreover how shall we know whether substances and accidents are separated or not If we be sure of that by sense then sense is still infallible so far if not then sense is fallible because it knows not when it apprehendeth any more then naked accidents But indeed it s a contradiction to talk of accidents that are not subjecti alicujus accidentia Obj. Sense is infallible suppose the right temper of the Organs object Medium till God tell us the contrary but then it is fallible But in the point of Transubstantiation God hath told us the contrary to what common sense apprehendeth Therefore here sence is deceived Answ 1. Sense must in order be first known to be infallible before you can tell any thing that God hath said or wrote of its fallibility or infallibility or else you cannot tell but your eyes in reading or your ears in hearing those words of his did deceive you 2. Sense and Reason are the judging faculties which God hath given to mankind for the discerning of their objects It is not therefore to be imagined that God doth turn the great Deceiver of the world and by supernatural light contradict the Light of Nature even the apprehensions of the sound and general sense of the world Gods supernatural Revalations presupposes his Natural ones and are additions thereto but do not contradict them for then God should contradict himself when both are his Revelations God cannot lye saith the Apostle And what were it for God to lye or say truth but onely to make a deceitful or not deceitful discovery of his mind and will or the effects to us Indeed there may through our imperfection be a deceit of the senses when the Organs are distempered and the medium or object are not conveniently disposed and every such distance impediment or other ill disposure is not as Gods voice to tell us the thing as what to our imperfect sense it seems But if the common senses of men that are sound and not hindred by any such impediments shall yet be all deceived meerly by a contradicting ordinance of God then it would seem that God gave man contradictory lights and guides And their objection seems to be as bad as if they should say so of Gods word That it is alway true except where God tells us the contrary but if it might be false at any time how can you tell that that very word is true which you pretend doth tell you of the falshood of another word so say I here If sense be not alwayes infallible where it hath its requisite assistance then how can you tell that your senses are infallible when you are reading Hoc est corpus meum This is my body which you think contradicteth the infallibility of sense For 2. Is the infallibility of sense a thing that is known by nature or by supernatural Light Not by supernatural Light unless consequentially where doth Scripture or your Tradition say that sense is sometime infallibe and sometime fallible supposit is requisitis And nature tells you no more of the infallibility of any other acts of sence or Receptions then of those same which you pronounce to be fallible 3. We challenge you and all the world to prove that ever God hath revealed in Scripture that the common sences of men are deceived about their proper objects the requisites in Nature supposed Or that ever he made any ordinances for the deluding or contradicting the sences of his Church Or ever said any such thing Cannot Christ say Hoc est corpus meum This is my Body but he must needs proclaim a delusion of the sences of all men that take it to be Bread Then when God saith Hoc est faedus meum This is my Covenant Gen. 17.10 He must proclaim all mens sences deceived because sence faith it was but Circumcision and Bellarmine will confess it was but the sign of
a Covenant Then when Paul saith This Rock was Christ it must proclaim that all the Israelites sences were deceived that thought it to be a true Rock when a Papist will confess that the meaning is This Rock represented or signified Christ As if among many Images you should say This is Peter and this John and this Paul this were plainly to say This signifieth Peter or representeth him c. and doth not proclaim that deceit of sence Bellarmine cannot deny but that it is called in 1 Cor. 10. 11. Bread and the Cup six times over as after the consecration and here his shifting answer is that things are said to be in Scripture what they seem to be as the brazen Serpent is called a Serpent and so here he pleadeth a Trope Good still The Scripture calls it Bread six times neer together after the consecration and it calls it Christs Body once when his living body sate by Now the Question is which of these speeches are Tropical And we must believe Bellarmine that the text which calls it six times Bread must needs be Tropical and that which calls it once Christs Body must needs be understood without a Trope And this is all the evidence they can bring that God hath proclaimed mens sences to be fallible Nay all that we need for our cause is but to take est for significat which is so common that one would think there should not such unnatural absurdities be admitted to avoid it as overthrow our humanity When we plead that Christ had a true body and that a true body may be seen and felt because Christ bids them Luk. 24. See and feel for a spirit hath not flesh and bones c. Bellarmine answereth that Sence is infallible in positives and therefore thence we may say This is a body because I see it self but not in Negatives and therefore we cannot say This is not a body because I see it not And what need we more then that which is here granted By his own confession then we may conclude that This is Bread and Wine because we see feel smell taste it Yet no doubt we may also argue that it is not a natural body because it is not visible or sensible So much for this second Argument which I may thus with full advantage enforce If sence be either fallible or infallible the Pope is fallible But sence is either fallible or infallible Therefore If sense be fallible the Pope is fallible and all his Church for their sences and the Apostles and their followers were fallible If sence be infallible the Pope and his Council are fallible because the common sences of all sound men take that for Bread and Wine which they expresly say as de fide to be believed is not either Bread or Wine Argu. 3. If the Pope and his pretended General Councils have erred already then are they not infallible But the Pope and his pretended General Councils have erred already Therefore they are not infallible As the first Argument was taken from the no proof of his infallibility and the second from the common senses of mankind so the third is taken from certain experience which is a medium so evident that their vain words and subtil evasions have the less force to elude or obscure it Of the validity of the consequence there is no question can be made He that hath erred is not infallible All the doubt therefore is of the Antecedent which hath by unquestionable evidence of History been put out of doubt by our Writers long ago I shall produce some few instances of many There are no less than fourty Popes whom Bellarmine himself takes notice of as charged with error or heresie for whom he frameth such poor excuses that I should think any impartial Reader might receive satisfaction enough from Bellarmine that the Pope is too fallible Yea that even judicially and in fundamentals he may err Did not Pope Liberius erre judicially when he subscribed to the Arrians confession in the Council of Sirmium Libenti animo suscepi in nullo contradicens which the Fathers condemn of Heresie and to the Councils condemnation of Athanasius as Athanasius himself and many more witness Did not Pope Vigilius err judicially when he condemned the Decree of the General Council for condemning dead Hereticks And when Pope Pelagius and Gregory the first and Adrian the first did all approve of the same Sure one party of these Popes erred unless contradictoryes may be true Yea when Pope Vigilius did afterward revoke his own constitution sure he erred either in making or revoking it And so did Pope Paschalis when they gave God thanks in open Council that they heard the Pope with his own mouth revok those grants which said they contained Heresie which he himself had before made to the Emperor Though Cajetans excuse be true that it was no Heresie yet either the making or revoking was an error What will they invent at last to hide the nakedness of Pope Honorius who in two several General Councils was condemned for a Monothelite Heretick which he judicially perswaded Sergius to when he sought his judgement Stapleton and many more of them confess the full certainty of the Councils condemning him of Heresie but forsooth they say the Council did mistake the case It seems then either a Pope may be a Heretick or a General Council err Moreover will any Papists deny that Pope Stephen six and Sergius erred when they judicially decreed that those should be ordained again that were ordained by Pope Formâ—sus And of Pope Celestines error Alphonsus a Castro faith that he himself saw it in the ancient Decretals as his Definition and therefore that it cannot be said that he erred as a private man and not as Pope What can they say of Pope John twenty two who denyed the immortality of the soul and was admonished of his heresie by the Doctors of Paris as not onely Pope Adrian the sixth Joh. Gerson Alphons a Castro and others witness but Bellarmine himself confesseth also But he excuseth him because that opinion was not there defined against and therefore was no heresie See here 1. Whether the Papists do not make themselves a new Faith and Religion when they please and that is a point of Faith with them one year that was none the year before so that the novelty and the mutability of their Religion is thus by themselves confessed 2. See here that a point declared in Scripture and held by the former Church is no point of Faith with them unless it be declared by a Pope or General Council 3. See here what men Bellarmine would make all the former Popes to have been that had determined whether the soul were immortal or not 4. Chamier truely noteth that Bellarmine himself forgetfully contradicteth himself and tells us elswhere that Innocent the third the ninteeneth Pope before John twenty two had taught the contrary in express words I shall
extraordinary way it was given to them that they could not be deceived or erre But are these priviledges therefore granted to the Pope or to other Bishops And what is the infallibility that this Doctor resolveth his Faith into Let it be observed whether it be neerer the Miracles of Knot or to the universal Tradition of Chillingworth Pag. 174 175. He hath these words Statuendum 20. juxta superius stabilita principia Ecclesia soliditatem in fide seu in fidei divinae Catholicae in haerendi certitudinem infallibilitatem non in privilegio aliquo aut sedi Romanae Deo authore concesso aut S. Petri successori Pontifici Romano divinitus impartilo c. Sed universae Catholicae traditioni Ecclesia speciali Dei providentia Christi Domini promissis fulcitae praecipue tribuendam esse postea Deinde Catholicae universae traditionis rationem omnibus ommino fidei divinae dogmatibus pernecessariam esse Traditioniis vero medium seu testimonium adeâ— publicum universale apartum esse debere ut sensibus ipsis externis fidelibus omnibus Christianis oporteat constare That is The Churches infallibility and certainty of faith Is not in any privilege either granted by God as the Author to the See of of Rome or bestowed from God on the Pope of Rome as Saint Peters successor but it s chiefly to be attributed to the tradition of the universal and Catholicke Church upheld by the special providence of God and the promises of Christ And the account of this Catholike and universal Tradition is most necessary to all points of divine faith And the means or Testimony of this Tradition must be so publike universal and open that it must be manifest to all Christians to their very outward senses I confess this Doctor allows us pretty fair quarter in comparison of many others of his party If they will but give us such Open publike universal certain Tradition which must be known to the very outward senses of every Christian we shall be very ready to comply with them in receiving such a Testimony But if all the Romish Traditions had been such they would be known to all Christians as well as to the Pope and not lock't up in his Cabinet and our selves should sure have known them before now if we be Christians Quest 5. To proceed I am very desirous to know whether it be upon the credit of the present Church Pope or Council or of those former that are dead and gone that we must receive our faith and the Scriptures Or upon both If it be on the credit of any former Church then would I know of which age whether of the neerest or the middle or of the first and remotest age that is from the Apostles and the Church in their dayes If from the last age then 1. How know we their Testimony If it be by their writings Canons or Decrees why cannot other men who are much wiser and better understand these as well as the Pope And why do they not refer us to those writings but to their own determinations If it be by the Fathers telling the children what hath formerly been believed then why cannot I tell what my Father told me without the Pope and better then the Pope that never knew him 2. And then it must be known upon whose credit the former ages did receive that faith and Scripture which they deliver down to us Doubtless they will say from their predecessors and they again from their predecessors and so up to the Apostles And why then may not we take it immediately on the credit of the Apostles as well as the first ages did supposing that we have the mediation of a sure hand to deliver to us their writings without meditation of the like inspired prophetical persons or of any priviledged infallible judge of the faith And if it be on this Testimony of former ages that we must receive the Scripture as the word of God I shall then proceed further to demand Quest 6. Why may not the Greeks Abassines Protestants c. that acknowledge not the Popes authority or infallibility receive the Scripture as the word of God as well as the Papists Do they think that none else in the world but they can tell what was the judgement of the former Church What records or Tradition have they which all the rest of the world is ignorant of Or dare they say if they have the face of Christians that none of all the Christians on earth but Papists onely have any sufficient evidence that the Scripture was written by the Apostles and delivered from them and that this is it which is now in the Church Can no man indeed but a Papists know the Scripture to be the word of God upon justifiable grounds But if it be on the credit of the present Church or both that we must take the Scripture to be Gods word then I shall further desire to be informed Quest 7. What is it which they call the present Church Is it 1. The whole number of the faithful 2. Or a major vote or part 3. Or the Bishops or Presbyters in whole or part 4. Or a Council chosen from among them 5. Or the Pope If the first Quest 8 Do they not then make all Christians infallible as well as the Pope And so they are in sensu composito in the essentials of Christianity and the whole Church shall never deny those essentials but 1. whole particular Churches may and 2. the whole Church may erre some smaller errors against the revealed will of God the Apostle telleth us that we know but in part and as in many things we offend all so in many things we err all And moreover if this be their sense Quest 9. Will it not then follow that the Pope cannot be proved infallible because it is most certain that All the Church doth not take him to be infallible no nor the greatest part of Christians in the world Yea if they will take none for Christians but Papists yet it will hence follow that there is no certainty that either Pope or Council are infallible For the French take a Pope to be fallible and the Italians and others take a General Council to be fallible and therefore the whole Popish Church being not agreed of it we cannot be sure that either of them is infallible And moreover on this ground I demand Quest 10. How shall we know in very many cases at least either which is the judgement of the whole Church or of the major part What opportunity have we to take the account Or can no poor Christian believe the word of God that cannot take an account of this through the world The same Question also I would put if they take all or most of the Pastors for this Church Quest 11. But if they take a General Council for the Church I would first know How we shall be sure that ever there hath at least these
elswhere Quia nolo humanis documentis c. Because I will not have the holy Church to be demonstrated by humane documents but by Gods Oracles For if the holy Scriptures have placed the Church in Africa alone and in a few places of Rome c. then whatsoever may be brought out of other papers the Church is onely with the Donatists Si autem c But if the Church of Christ is placed by the Divine and most certain testimonies of the Canonical Scriptures in all Natitions then what ever they bring and whence ever they recite it who say Lo here is Christ or lo there let us rather if we be his sheep hear the voice of our Shepherd saying Believe them not For those parcels are not found in many Nations where that Church is but it which is every where is found even where they are therefore let us seek it in the holy Canonical Scriptures And thus he goes on and proves at large by the Scriptures the true Church fitting all as meet to the present schisme of the Papists almost as if he had seen and named it Cap. 18. Begins thus Because therefore the holy Church is manifestly known in the Scriptures c. Remotis ergo omnibus c. Laying aside therefore all such matters let them demonstrate their Church if they can not in the speeches and rumors of the Africans not in the Councils of their Bishops not in the writings of any disputers not in signes and fallacious Miracles because we are prepared and cautioned against such things by the word of God but in the writings of the Law in the predictions of the prophets in the Psalms in the words of our Pastor himself in the preachings and labors of the Evangelists that is in all the Canonical authorityes of the sacred Books Next he shews that it must not be out of Parables Allegories or such Scriptures that make no more for one side then the other what then doth he tell them that it is all such and send them to Rome to know the sence no but it is the plain Scripture of which he produceth abundance that must tell us which is the true Church And he thus begins the 19 Chap. Omissis ergo c. Letting pass therefore the snares of delayes let him shew their Church c. and so shew it as not to say It s true because I say it or because my collegue said it or these collegues of mine or those Bishops or Clerks or our Layity or therefore its true because these or those wonders were done by Donatus or Pontius or any other or because men pray and are heard at the Memories or shrines of ours that are dead or because such or such things happen there or because that brother of ours or that sister of ours saw such a sight waking or had such a dreaming vision sleeping Away with these either fictions of lying men or wonders of deceiving spirits For either the things that are said are not true or if any wonders are done by hereticks we must the more beware seeing the Lord when he told us there would come deceivers who by doing certain signs would deceive if it were possible even the elect addeth Lo I have foretold you And if any be heard praying at the Memories of hereticks it is not for the desert of the place but the desert of his desire that he receiveth good or evil No man can have Christ for his head that is not in his Body which is the Church which Church we must know as we do Christ himself in the sacred Canonical Scriptures and not to inquire into the various rumors of men and their opinions and deeds and sayings and sights But let them shew me whether they have the Church no way but by the Canonical books of the divine Scriptuers Because neither do we therefore say that they ought to believe us that we are in the Church of Christ because that Church which we hold is commended by Optatus Melevitanus or by Ambrose of Millan or innumerable other Bishops of our communion or because it is predicated or praised by the Councils of our Collegues or because through the whole world in the holy places which are frequented by our communion so great marvailes of hearings or healings are done here some are named What ever things of this sort are done in the Catholike Church are therefore to be approved because they are done in the Catholike Church but it is not therefore manifested to be the Catholike Church because these things are done in it This he testifieth is written in the Law and the Prophets and Psalms this we have commended by his own mouth These are the documents of our cause these are its foundations these its upholders or confirmers We read in the Acts of the Apostles of some Believers that they daily search't the Scriptures whether those things were so What Scriptures but the Canonical of the Law and prophets Hereto are added the Gospels the Epistles of the Apostles the Acts of the Apostles and the Revelation of John Search all these and produce somewhat manifest which will demonstrate that the Church either remaineth in Africke alone or is to be from Africk so that it may be fulfilled which the Lord saith This Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the world c. But bring somewhat that needeth nor an interpreter that you may not be convinced that it speaks of another matter and that you strive to turn it to your own sence Chap. 25. The question is not dark in which they may deceive you You see the Church is every where diffused and increaseth to the harvest This whole Book of Austin is written as if it had been purposed as a confutation of the Papists that will have the Church to contain onely the Romane faction and exclude all the rest of the world and will try the Scripture by the Church and not the Church by the Scripture but fly to I know not what visions and pretended miracles to prove their Church which Austin professeth are not a proof no not of the true Church though there be much more then there to boast of so that the Papists cannot here say that Austin thus dealeth with the Donatists because they denyed the Church of Rome and believed the Scripture he expresly enough preventeth all such expositions of his words August con Cresconium li. 2. cap. 33. p. 177. Saith Ego hujus Epistolae c. I am not bound by the authority of this Epistle of Cyprians ad Jubai because I take not Ciprians Epistles be Canonical but by the Canonical I consider them and that in them which agreeth to the authority of the Divine Scriptures I accept with his praise but that which disagreeth I refuse with his peace And so if thou hadst recited those things which he wrote to Jubajan out of some Canonical book of the Apostles or Prophets I should have had
of Transubstantiation they feign him to have a body that can neither be seen nor felt nor circumscribed that is in innumerable places at once which is not made of the substance of the blessed Virgin but of bread as wine of that water Joh. 2.9 and which sustaineth the accidents of bread as their subject For they can devise no other subject after the transubstantiation of the bread Whence it follows that they are no more accidents of bread but of Christs body 6. And as to Christs Office they teach that Christ is Mediator onely according to his humane nature 7. They deny Christ to be the onely Mediator of intercession but joyn with him Angels and Saints 8. They teach that we must pray to Saints to intercede for us 9. That we are heard by the Saints suffrages and Merits 10. They deny Christ to be the onely Prophet whose voice onely must be heard spiritual King and Priest of the New Testament But they make the Pope also the chief Prophet and Pastor King and Monarch and Priest Whence it follows that the Pope is not onely opposied to Christ as his adversary but as his Rival 11. And they make other sacrificing Priests also of the New Testament having an external visible Priesthood and that according to the order of Melchizedeck whose office it is to sacrifice Christ again and offer him to his Father 12. That the unchangeable Priesthood of Christ the eternal Priest is made eternal by the succession of such Priests 13. That an Eternal Priesthood requireth an Eternal Sacrifice but is not Eternal unless it be often sacrificed 14. That this Eternal sacrifice can be nothing else but the sacrifice of the mass 15. That Christ who is God over all blessed for ever did merit for himself 16. That Christs merits are not the onely meritorious cause of salvation But they hope to be saved by their own and other mens merits § 5. Of the outward means LEt us now come to the external means to wit Gods Covenant and the administration of the Covenant in the Ministry of the word and Sacraments The Covenant is twofold 1. Of works or the Law 2. Of Grace or the Gospel 1. These two the Papists do almost confound for they plainly make the Gospel a Covenant of works and call it the new Law which prescribes a more perfect obedience then the Law it self for the obtaining of Justification and Salvation 2. That faith is stirred up and so sins forgiven by the preaching of the word they say is a fiction of the Hereticks of our Times 3. That the Sacraments are not seals of the promises or Covenant of God nor instituted to confirm the promise 4. That Circumcision was a seal of the Righteousness of faith onely to Abraham 5. That Sacraments of the new Law do confer grace that makes us acceptable or justifying Grace ex opere operato i. e. upon that very account because the external Sacrament is administred if they put not the Bar of mortal sin 6. That grace is contained in the Sacraments as in a vessel nay that the Sacraments are Physical instrumental causes of Grace and that they do work holiness by a power put into them by God as the heat of the fire is the cause of the burning of the wood 7. That there is necessarily required the intention of the Administrator to the truth of the Sacrament at least of doing what the Church does 8. That there are seven Sacraments of the new Covenant instituted by that neither fewer nor more 9. That in the Sacraments of Baptism Confirmation and Order there is imprinted in the Soul by God a Character or certain spiritual and indeleble sign or marke so that they cannot be reâ—iterated In the other Sacraments there is onely an ornament or dress imprinted instead of a Character or mark 10. That the observation of the Ceremonies which they use in the Administration of Sacraments though invented by themselves through will-worship is mâ—ritorious and part of Divine worship § 6. Of Baptism 1. THat all Infants before are possessed by the Divel 2. They grant a power to women even such as are unbaptized themselves to baptize 3. That Baptism is not only necessary by necessity of precept which we confess but also to be simply necessary to salvation by necessity of means for none can be saved without Baptism 4. That the efficacy of Baptism does not extend it self to the future but onely to that which is past 5. That the laver of Regeneration is not profitable to those that fall after Baptism 6. That there is in Baptism a silent and implicite oath of obedience to the Pope 7. That no sin remaines or is lâ—â—t in the Baptized for sin is wholly taken away by Baptisme not onely so that it is not imputed but â—o as that has no being 8. That Baptisme also does confer grace to the Baptized exopere operato by the work done by which he is truely and formally justified 9. That the Baptism of John was not the same Sacrament nor had it the same force and efficacy with the Baptisme which is instituted by Christ as if Christ were â—ot the Author of Jonh's Baptisme 10. That after the Baptism of John they must needs receive the Baptisme of Christ 11. That the Bells are to be Baptized by the Bishops or Suffragans with a solemn Rite 12. They use and urge some unprofitable and superâ—itious Ceremonies as if they were necessary both before Baptism and after For 1. The Baptized are signed with the sign of the Cross on the forehead on the brest on the eyes on the ears on the nose and on the mouth that all the senses of the body may be guarded with this sign for by vertue of this signe are the Sacraments compleated and the Divels stratagems frustrated 2. They give them hallowed Salt to eat that being seasoned with wisdom they might be free from the stink of sin and may not putrifie again 3. They play the Conjurers about little children as if they were such as were pulled out of the hands of the Divel and they blow the wicked spirit out by their breath That one spirit may be driven out with â—nother 4. They touch their nostrils and ears with spitle saying Ephata be opened 5. They anoint them with consecrated oile in the breast that they may be fortified against the adversary and he may not be able to perswade them unto unclean and hurtful things They anoint them also between the shoulders that they may receive strength to bear the Lords burden After Baptism they anoint the top of the head of him who is newly Baptized with Crisme or Oyle After this sacred Unction they cover his head with a holy veil that he may know himself to enjoy a Kingly and Priestly Diademe They give him a lighted Taper that he may be taught thereby to fulfill