Communion with the Church therefore cannot erre The Church hath from Christ and ever has exercised a Judicatory Power in all belonging to Faith and Worship therefore cannot err Christ hath sealed constantly in all Ages her Doctrine with Wonders and Miracles therefore it cannot err To conclude if the Church and her Pastors assembled in Councils mistake clear Scripture misapply Scriptures deceive or be deceived what particular man can either justly censure her and them or solidly Ground himself Magna vis veritatis great is the strength of Verity and nothing more true then what is here holden out that to admit with Mr. Menzeis of no Infallible visible Judge of Controversie is the only Fountain and Spring of all Divisions Schisms and Heresies to which this one Protestant Principle opens so wide a Gate SECT IV. Wherein Mr. Menzeis first Ground of the Protestant Religion to wit sole Scripture is shewn to be no Ground to them and that they have not reformed the Church according to the uncorrupted Scriptures but corrupted the Sciptures to deform the Church SCripture then is Protestants ground of Religion and in it all Fundamentals are clear this is very plausible to the ignorant people who think it to be so upon their Ministers Tradition and highly Glory both in reading and explaining the Bible Yet no peculiar Ground to them as was required all Hereticks for ought M. Menzeis hath said pretending with as great reason the same Neither have Heresies says St. Augustine l. 1. c. 4. contr ad vers leg proph or certain Doctrines bewitching the mind sprung from any other Head then from good Scriptures not well understood But to proceed with order before we come to the understanding of Scripture First What Scripture I pray you is this the Protestant Ground Is it the Scripture Translated or in the Original Tongues Mr. Menzeis speaks nothing of this The learned Chamiers cited as a chief Protestant Champion by him in his Panstratia l. 1. c. 2. s 15. Says only true Originals adding as for Translations the sense of Protestants is that all of them of what standing name or credit soever they be and with what Diligence Sincerity or Learning soever they were made are only so far certain as they agree with the first Context I mean says he as they express that sense which is certainly manifest to be the true sence of the Hebrew and Greek words And Doctor Daniel in his Treatise the Dippers Dipped has these words p. 1. No Translation is simply Authentical or the undoubted Word of God To these Subscribeâ— Doctor Baron our Countrey man inferiour to no Protestant I know either in Loyalty or Learning Tract 1. c. 2. p. 46. Laici illiterati c. Unlearned Laicks says he believe only Implicitly confusedly and 〈◊〉 upon the Divine Authority of Scripture formeâ—ly taken by reason they can have no certain express and distinct knowledge of the Doctrine contained in Scripture as such or of the agreement of Translations in vulgar Languages with the Originals yea they know not so much but upon other mens testimony and report as that the Doctrine propounded to them to be believed is set down in the Scripture or written Word at all Whence followeth according to these learned Protestants the ground of the Protestant Religion must be only the Scripture in the Original Languages that is Greek Hebrew and Syriack which of a thousand Protestants 2. does not understand Where then must all other Protestants ground their faith a very few number of Linguists being excepted shal they believe only Implicitely and on other mens report as D. Baron will have them But this is the Colliers Faith Mr. Menzeis jears though I fear all his skill in Languages often force him to turn a Collier himself or shall they rely on Translations which Chamiers after all diligence used and Doctor Daniel with him confess not to be the undoubted Word of God but in so far as they are known to agree with the Hebrew and Greek Texts and how few undoubtedly know this Yea Protestant Translations of the Bible are so generally corrupt that you shall find none that has not been challenged even by most learned Protestants for manifold corruptions and that very gross To begin at Luther let us hear Zuinglius of him Tom. 2. ad Luther C. de Sacram. fol. 412. Where after detection of many corruptions in Luther he concludes thus See how thy case standeth that in the eyes of all men thou art seen to be a manifest and common corrupter of holy Scripture which thing thou canst never deny before any Creature how much are we ashamed of thee who hereto have esteemed thee beyond all measure and now find thee to be such a false fellow Neither can Luther deny his corruptions himself for in that place of St. Paul where a man is said to be justified by faith he grants l. Contra Cochleum p. 408. he puts into the Text the word only which the Apostle has not Licet Paulus verbo sola non utatur qou ego usus sum and is not this a main place Protestants use against us so well are they grounded in Scripture Of Calvin Charles Molinaeus in his Translation of the New Testament part 2. fo 110. says Calvin in his Harmony maketh the Text of the Scripture to leap up and down as the truth it self declareth he useth violence to the Letter of the Gospel and in many places clearly transposes it and besides this addeth to the Text. Are these the Reformers of the Church by the uncorrupted word or corrupters of the Word to deform the Church Castalio saith of Beza That to note all his Errors in translating the New Testament it would require a great volume Five times he differs from himself though one of the best Linguists ever Protestants had King James a great Scholar as a great Monarch in the sum of the conference before his Majesty thinks the Geneva Translation the worst of all others And Mr. Parkes in his defence of the first Testimony concerning Christs descending into Hell says as for the Geneva Bibles it is to be wished that either they be purged from those manifold Errours which are both in the Text and at the Margent or else utterly prohibited Now as to our own Translations in English Mr. Bruges in his Apology Sect. 6. Says plainly that the approved Protestant Translation hath many omissions many additions which sometimes obscure sometime pervert the sense And M. Carleil p. 116. remarkes that the English Protestants in many places detort the Scriptures from their right sense and shew themselves to love darkness more then light falshood more then truth they have corrupted and depraved the sense obscured the Truth deceived the Ignorant and supplanted the simple And Mr. Broughton a chief Linguist in England in his Epistle to the Lords of the Privy Council desireth them to procure speedily a new Translation because that which is now is full of Errours And in his
Advertisement of corruptions to the Protestant Bishops saith that their publick Translation of Scriptures is such as it perverteth the Text of the Old Testament in four hundred forty eight places and that it causeth millions of millions to reject the New Testament and run to Eternal flames How many divers and different Translations in Queen Elizabeths and King James times how often what was first at the Margent hath been put in the Text Now if Translators of the Scripture in English men furnished with so many helps endued with so many gifts so well versed in the Hebrew and Greek tongues so guided by all the Rules Mr. Menzeis gives to attain the right meaning and sense of Holy Writ have fallen into so many and so gross errours and Mistakes as to have depraved detorted wrested obscured the Scripture and Word of God so that it as Translated by them decieveth the Ignorant supplanteth the simple perverteth the Text in so many places as that it carrieth milions to Eternal Flames What hope can any one have of meaner Talents with fewer helps and less learning and knowledge to attain by his own private reading of Scripture the undoubted Truth Steadiness in faith and Religion a full and satisfactory solution of all doubts or security of Salvation and yet these very same so corrupt Translations as their own Ghospellers testifie are read in Churches expounded in Pulpits and put in the hand of every one who understands neither Latine Greek nor Hebrew as his sole ground of Faith and Judg of controversie whereby he is made able to Judge not only of Popish Errors the Writings of the Fathers and Decrees of Councils but even of his own Pastors Doctrine his Churches Faith and his Countries Religion Secondly to come to the Originals Shall they then onely be the Protestants Ground of Faith If so I ask Mr. Menzeis where we shall find them Yea we are so far from having all the Originals that it is doubted in what Language some parts of Scripture were written The purity of Originals is sometimes called in Question and Calvin Inst l. 1. C. 13. Doth imagine even these the Fountains run not always clear Luther Enar. in Is Cryes out on the Jews for crucifying the Text as well as Christ and upon Gen. C. 24. Says again he has often told many words there be in the Hebrew Text which the Hebrews themselves do not understand And to say true amongst the Jews the least of their three Massoreshe's so they call the Book which contains the many corruptions and divers Lections in the Hebrew Text counts eight hundred places disagreeing ambiguous or corrupt neither do the most learned Rabbies agree in the Letter of Scripture In Hebrew it self some reading according to the Points or Vowels put in by Rabbi Jacob and some by these of Rabbi Aron most different one from another all the points being added to the Text Five hundred years after Christ and that by his professed Enemies the Jews long after the Vulgar Latine Translation which was made before the Text and Letter of Scripture was corrupt But Protestants take in also with these the corruptions of the Greek Text remarked in part by St. Ireneus Tertullian Origen and others says Eusebius when the ancient Hereticks the Arians Macedonians Nestorians c. had corrupted and adulterated the Word of God to support their Errours as Protestants at present in all their Translations do I know M. Menzeis will tell me perhaps he hath seen both the Hebrew and the Greek Texts well but who assures him they are not corrupt Yes but the Protestants have corrected them and that according to the Authenticks which never any Protestant did see The most Learned amongst Protestants have never seen the Original Scriptures which were first penned by the Prophets Apostles and Evangelists Copies are no less subject to faults in the Letter then Translations to mistakes in the sense Yea the Authors of that great famous Bible that is Printing at London if not yet ended in so many Languages witnesseth in the Preface they have set out not so much as one Copy could be found they can assure to agree in all things with the Original their labour may be great in this vast Volume to correct the Copies they find deficient but their Authority is not Infallible In a word no Infallible Authority is admitted by Protestants to judge either of the Letter or Sense For that savours rankly says M. Menzeis of that Erroneous Popish Tenet of an Infallible visible Judge of Controversie And I Answer to deny one in all these and such like cases savours rankly of a tottering wavering groundless Faith most like to that of M. Menzeis I say yet further if no Translations of Scripture can be a ground of Faith as most learned Protestants grant so neither any Original it would seem without some Infallible Judg for I must ever be sure they are unccorrupted and again all the defect in Translations coming from the misunderstanding of Originals I ask who dare say he understands them better then they who have Translated and upon this as he himself reads and conceives ground his Religion and Faith Thirdly before all this if M. Menzeis will prove it a solid Ground to rely on sole Scripture as the onely ground of Faith without any Infallible visible Judge or assurance that he who tells me this is the uncorrupted Letter this the true and genuine Sense has the peculiar assistance of the Holy Ghost I demand what Infallible Motive can prudently perswade Protestants that the Word of God they rely on was ever set down in Writing or is extant at this day Is it the testimony of Scripture calling it self Gods Word or the Innate Light of the same Scripture showing it self to be such to a well disposed Intellect and mind If the first do not Nicodemus and S. Thomas Gospels carry the same titles with these of St. Matthew and St. Mark If the second then the Fathers of the first three ages whom M. Menzeis most owns were not well disposed persons who did not acknowledge some Books of Scripture till the Authority of a Council at Carthage had declared them Canonical and much less Luther that holy man who rejecteth St. James Epistle with some others As Protestants ground their Faith say they on Gods word so Quakers on the Spirit and we deny not but both be equally Infallible if once known Infallibly to be the Spirit or Word of God But we demand of each Sect what Infallible External Rule or Motive they give us to know either Gods Word speaking in Scripture or Spirit in them Both answer with M. Menzeis they both show themselves to all who are well disposed But this clears not us the well disposed heart being only known to God let all then be objectively true as M. Menzeis sayes his Religion is which they both teach as certainly is what ever by Gods Word or Spirit is revealed we only insist to know Infallibly that
God did reveal such Doctrine as theirs either by his Word or Spirit For we receive now no Immediate Revelations as the Prophets and Apostles did in old times nor have we Evidentiam in attestante as the Divines call it that is any Evidence that it is God who speaks points of faith being only propounded to us by men who either put the Scriptures in our hands to read or teach us by word of mouth The Protestants great Principle let 's own no man or Church as an Infallible Judge yea M. Menzeis in his sixth paper offers upon this to turn Papist if the Infallible assistance of the Propounder can be proved necessary but never clears what other way we can be Infallibly assured that all which the Protestants do teach was revealed by God Unless it be in his third paper where speaking of the True and Genuine Sense of Scripture he tells us we may have it as from a Jurist the Explication of a Municipal Law or from a Mathematitian a demonstration of Euclides But what a weak Answer is this Do any receive Demonstrations on Authority as Points of Faith Or is the assent I give to the Law so explained by a Jurist Infallible If Christ himself had not shown his Divinity by his Works and Wonders he grants the Jews had committed no sin in refusing to belive him The Apostles Credentials were their Miracles both did thus evidence the Infallible assistance they had of Gods Spirit to the World and shall any man trust M. Menzeis boldly asserting there is no necessity of any was it not for this the power of Miracles was left in the Church as the marks of her assistance and seals of her Doctrine with other Motives of credibility Notwithstanding Protestants with M. Menzeis will propound to us the Catalogue of Canonical Scripture Books assure us of the uncorrupt Copies and Letter enforce upon our Consciences the sense they give whil'st so confidently obtruding all this they neither dare or do say nor can evidence by any external mark or sign they have the particular assistance of Gods Spirit As if all this were clear in it self with Mathematical Demonstrations But doth Scripture in our Bibles show it self better to be the Word of God now then when Christ was speaking in person Then an external Evidence God did speak by his Son is acknowledged as necessary by him and now shall any man reasonably say there is no necessity of any when he speaks by his servants and Church however this prove efficacious and strong for M. Menzeis conversion it would seem to me more then sufficient for his or any mans conviction Fourthly to claim to Scripture yet so as they can no wise evidence they take it aright is common to Protestants with all Hereticks so no peculiar Ground When Sectaries clash with Sectaries is not all their babling out of Scripture You shall see says Vincentius Lyrinensis c. 35. Hereticks so abound with Scripture as they fly through all the Volumes of the holy Law through Moses the Books of Kings the Psalmes and Prophets c. read the works of Paulus Sam satenus Priscillian Eunomius c. you shall not find ae page which is not Coloured and painted out with the sentences of Old and New Testament Nestorius to support his Heresie gloried as Gennadius reporteth in his Catalogue in the evidence of threescore Testimonies which he produced as the Covenant in three hundred whereof scarce three any wise to the purpose The Valentinians Marcionists Arians will submit to none but Scripture as St. Augustine witnesseth of Maximinus the Arian Bishop in his first Bok against him Neither doth it avail M. Menzeis to say Scriptures are clear in terminis or made clear by conferring of places or show themselves clearly to a well disposed mind First for that though a place of Scripture be clear in it self yet when divers Sects take it diversly a man may justly suspect his own judgment seeing so many of a contrary mind So that it wanteth not difficulty to determine always what is absolutely clear there being many clear places as would seem not to be taken in the clear and obvious sense as the passages Hereticks did most build on will presently shew As when Marcion despiseth Moses and the Prophets upon Christs own clear words in S. John the 10. How many soever have come before me are Thieves and Robbers The Manichees affirmed Christ to be the Sun upon a like Scripture in St. John the 8. I am the light of the world The Waldenses taught no man could be put to death no not by the lawful Authority of a Judge upon clear Scripture again Exod. 20. Thou shalt not kill c. The Devil citeth clear Scripture to Christ and the Jews against his death we have heard in the Law the Messias abideth for ever Moreover many seeming Contradictions in Scripture you shall find in Becan and others one might think clear And many things are believed even by Protestants which be not in Scripture at all as Persons in the Trinity Sacraments in the Church and the Command of keeping holy the Sunday the Scripture neither naming persons or telling what a person is defining Sacraments as M. Menzeis doth or setting down their number abrogating the keeping of the Sabbath or having for the Sunday any command Many places of Scripture again are flatly against Protestants and clear for us as for the Real Presence This is my Body this is my Blood S. Matth. 26. For Justification not by Faith only but also good works Ye see then how that by works a man is justified and not by Faith only S. James 2.24 For Traditions from the Apostles besides the written Word Therefore brethren stand fast and hold the Traditions which ye have been taught whether by Word or our Epistle 2 Thes 2.13 And such like places cited in most Books of Controversie for all Controverted Tenets Protestants never being able to bring any one clear place of Scripture against any of our Tenets not evidently mistaken or confessedly corrupted as when they make S. Paul say a man is justified by faith only Luther above cited granting he has put in the word only which Saint Paul hath not or Thou shalt not make to thy self any Graven Image in place of Idol as is clearly the word Pesel in the Hebrew Text. Secondly as to conferring of places and explaining the more obscure by these which are clear did not Arius boast of this against the Fathers of the Council of Nice proving the unity in Nature of the Father and Son out of these words in S. John the 10. I and my Father are one No says the Arian this place as obscure to us and passing the reach of Humane capacity must be explained by this other more clear in St. John 17. where Christ prayes his Apostles May be one with him as he and his Father are one that is in will and affection and surely the second place is clearer to us and
consequently according to M. Menzeis Rule the Arian Heresie must prevail neither will he ever be able standing to his Rule to answer an Arian Cobler making this Objection as Learned Writers remark Eutyches conferring these two places The Word was made flesh in S. John 1. and the water was made Wine in S. John 2. fell in this detestable Blasphemy That the Humane Nature was changed into the Divine as the Water was converted into Wine And without all doubt again the second is the clearer place to us the first that two Natures should be united in one Person surpassing as the Divines teach even the Natural capacity of Angels Manicheus explains the same passage The Word was made flesh Figuratively and in show as Protestants This is my body and that by a clear place of S. Paul to the Phil. 2. v. 7. where it is said Christ took upon him the form of a servant and was made in the likeness of men Most clear words as would seem in favour of this Heresie and such that if Protestants could bring any with as great a show against the real presence all their Pulpits should sound with them till their hearers became deaf But there be none in all the Scripture so clear against the real presence I say as the words quoted have a seeming clearness against the real Incarnation of Christ the four Evangelists and S. Paul speaking in so express and formal words for the former that the Fathers with St. Chrysostome Hom. 6. have recourse to the words for the real presence as clearer to prove that giving in the Sacrament his body and blood he must have taken the Nature of Man Nestorius on the contrary will have these words of S. John the 2. Dissolve ye this Temple and in three dayes I shall raise it again to be taken Litterally and not Figuratively and upon this holds out a new Heresie that the Son of God did dwell only in his Holy Humanity as in a Temple Valentine and Apollinaris reading in S. John 3. no man hath ascended into heaven but he that descended from Heaven gain sayes the Mystery of Christs Incarnation and wil needs have his flesh to have descended from Heaven as his Manhood afterwards ascended thither And this Heretical Exposition they confirm by conferring the ensuing places in St. Paul to the Ephesians 4. He that descended the same is also he who ascended And in the first to the Corinths 15. The first man of Earth Earthly the second Man of Heaven Heavenly A thousand such Errors in the greatest Fundamentals of Christianity have Hereticks drawn out of the clear Fountains and Brooks of holy Writ by the deceivable and deceiving search of weighing places Why not Protestants with them they sail on the same Sea and deep of Scriptures with them they direct their course by the same Card of conferring clearer and obscurer places the same Rule they apply to all the crooked lines of their Errors and Deviations What can be answered to all this M. Menzeis Principle always standing No Infallible visible Judg but to have recourse with him to the well disposed mind wherefore Thirdly I say this doth not yet satisfie to the Question no not with all the means of Interpretation M. Menzeis doth bring it being as hidden Intricate Doubtful and Inscrutable who performs all these Conditions aright as to find out certainly and infallibly the true sense of Scripture without an Infallible Judge Yea supposing one uses them aright yet let us learn from no lesser Protestant then Doctor Jeremy Taylor what certainty of the true sense men can attain by them His words are so remarkable to my purpose in a Discourse of liberty in Prophesying Sect. 4. that here I even set them down at length First then says he Sometime the sense is drawn forth by the Context and Connexion of Parts It is well when it can be so But when there is two or three Antecedents and Subjects spoken of What Man or what Rule shall ascertain me that I make my Reference true by drawing the Relation to such an Antecedent to which I have a mind to apply it another hath not Secondly One other great pretence is the conference of places which is of so indefinite capacity that if there be ambiguity of words variety of sense alteration of Circumstances or difference of Style amongst Divine Writers then there is nothing which may be more abused by wilful people or may more easily deceive the unwary or that may more amuse the most diligent observer Thirdly Oftentimes Scriptures are pretended to be expounded by a proportion and Analogy of reason but it is with Reason as with mens tasts When a man speaks reason it is but reason he should be heard c yet because it must be reason that must judg of reason unless other mens understandings were of the same Air the same Constitution and ability they cannot be prescribed unto by another mans reason especially because such reasonings as usually are in Explication of particular places of Scripture depend upon minute Circumstances and Particularities in which it is so easy to be deceived and so hard to speak Reason regularly and always that it is the greater wonder if we be not deceived Fourthly Others pretend to Expound Scripture by Analogy of Faith This he says is but a Chimera a thing in the Clouds which varies like the right and left hand of a Pillar c. Fifthly Consulting of Originals is thought a great matter to Interpretation of Scriptures but this is to small purpose for indeed it will expound the Hebrew and the Greek and rectifie Translations But I know no man that says that the Scriptures in Hebrew and Greek are easy certain to be understood and that they are hard in Latine and English The difficulty is in the thing however it be expressed the least in the Language c. Then numb 6. he saith in general All these ways of Interpreting Scriptures which of themselves are good helps are made either by design or by our infirmities ways of Intricating and Involving Scriptures in greater difficulty because men do not learn their Doctrines from Scripture but come to the understanding of Scriptures with preconceptions and Idea's of Doctrines of their own and then no wonder Scripture look like Pictures wherein every man in the room thinks they look on him only and that wheresoever he stands or how often soever he changes his Station So that now what was intended for a remedy becomes the Promoter of our Disease and our Meat becomes the matter of sickness and the Mischief is the wit of man cannot find a remedy for it For there is no Rule no Limit no certain Principle by which all men may be guided to a certain and so Infallible Interpretation that he can with any Equity prescribe to others to believe his Interpretations in places of Controversie or ambiguity Osiander in his confutations of the Book which Melancton wrote against him observes there
a Copy conform to the Original such a Translation Authentick such a place clear such a sense genuine 2. The Judge of Controversie ought to give a clear sentence which the learned and unlearned may equally understand and as the Law sayes the Apostle is not for the just but the unjust so the Judg of Controversie is not only for the well disposed but more in some manner for others and especially the unlearned and unstable who according to St. Peter Wrest the Scriptures to their own damnation Yea the most learned amongst the Fathers as S. Basil and S. Gregory Nazianzen after much pains in the study of Scripture as testifieth Ruffinus l. 11. Hist C. 9. refuse to interpret them but according to the Rule and Uniform consent of their Fore-fathers not relying on all the means of Interpretation M. Menzeis prescribes and they had reason the Scripture being the Book S. John describeth to be clasped with seven Seals Apoc. 5. v. 16. which Ezekiel termeth the enrolled volume written within and without S. Ambrose Ep. 44. A Sea containing most profound Senses of Prophetical Riddles S. Augustine l. 2. de doctrina Christ C. 6. hard in the Stile Discourse Places as well as in the Subject and Matter which makes him cry out l. 12. Confess c. 14. O the wonderful depth of thy speeches O the wonderful depth S. Hierome Ep. 13. C. 4. Says the Text of Scripture has a Shell to be broken before that we can tast the sweetness of the Kernel and Vincentius Lyrinensis C. 2. That all take not holy Scripture by reason of its deepness in one and the same sense but some interpret one way some another so that there may seem to be picked out as many senses as men for Novatus doth Expound one way and Sabellius another otherwise Donatus otherwise Arius Eunomius Macedonius otherwise Photinus Apollinaris and other Hereticks with them therefore very necessary it is for the manifold turnings and by-wayes of Errors that the Line of Prophetical and Apostolical interpretation be levelled according to the Square of the Ecclesiastical and Catholick sense whereof Tertullian de Praescript gives this reason for that the sense adulterated is alike perillous as the Stile corrupted But what danger of this says M. Menzeis if Scripture be clear men cannot mistake if not wilfully blinded what is so Could not the Law-maker speak as clear as the Judg Answer we have seen there is nothing almost in Scripture but has been and so may be mistaken Therefore the necessity of a Judge however the Law speak clear has been acknowledged by the greatest men and best wits in the world Aristotle in the first Book of his Morals and fourth of his Politicks And Plato in his Republick prefers good Judges even to best Laws Judges have been ever establisht by the Laws in all Nations as by Scripture in the Church of God and the necessity of one to keep concord and unity is partly grounded on the nature of most clear Words and Sentences which may be taken according to the Letter or Sense Properly or Figuratively Morally or Mystically and so forth Partly on the diversity of Opinions men commonly judging as they are affected and diversly of one and the same thing as their understandings inclinations or interests leads them His Majesties Secretary of State may write no doubt as clear as the Lords of Council and Session speak yet his Letters are directed to them in most businesses of weight least others should take them otherwise then written or wrest them to their own ends even so is it of Scripture written by the Prophets and Evangelists and delivered to the Pastors and Doctors of the Church Whence Catholick Romans build their Belief upon Scripture not taken as they fancy but Explained by Apostolical Tradition conserved in the Church and the unanimous consent of the Fathers and if any doubt arise of both these on the General Definition and Decision of the present Catholick Church Protestants as M. Menzeis holds out ground their Faith on Scripture which they have corrected or rather corrupted as clear in it self or made clear by diligent reading and conferring of places with prayers and as they imagine a well disposed mind that is a Prejudicate Opinion that their own Tenets are right Now let any man judg which of these two is most conform to Scripture it self in both Testaments to the practice of the Church in all ages to the consent of Fathers above cited and Reason For first This the Protestant way would seem vain arrogant and presumptuous in so far as that a man who followeth it must be so confident of himself that if he fancy Scripture to be clear for such a Tenet were all the Christian World in a contrary judgment yea had all Christians been so from the time of the Apostles yet must he stand to his fancy grounded upon clear Scripture as he thinks So that no perswasion can remove him from it for that it is a point of his Faith but for a man to be so peremptorily resolute in the sense he hath found in Scripture by his private reading is very presumptuous I say for wherein can he ground prudently such a strong assent as is required in Divine Faith which ought to be above all can be said against it Shall it be on the clearness of the words conference of places on his skill in Tongues on his weighing the precedent and consequent places or on the assistance of the Spirit given to him If so is it not intollerable pride and presumption in any one man to think that no other was ever so clear sighted or quick witted to see and understand in Scripture what is clear no other in such a multitude of Doctors and Fathers so well versed in the Original Languages so circumspect to confer places so exact to weigh Circumstances so acute to draw Consequences in fine so well disposed to find the Truth so fervent in Prayer so particularly enlightned directed and assisted by the Spirit of God What is whymsical Phanatick and Foolish if this be not wherefore Doctor Field ashamed any should think this to be Protestant Doctrine says None of their Divines teach the Scriptures to be so clear that they may be certainly understood by reading and conferring of places For the Rule of Faith says he in his Appendix 2. p. p. 12. is Doctrine descending by Tradition from the Apostles according to which the Scriptures are to be Expounded And in his fourth Book C. 14. The Rule of Faith is the consenting judgment of them that went before us the Rule without which we cannot know the meaning of the things that are in Scriptures for who shall be able to understand them but he that is setled in these things which the Apostles presupposed in their delivery of Scripture Afterward in the 15. Chap. having said There is no question but there be many obscurities in Scripture And in the 18. Ch. having set down many senses of Scriptures in
Auricular confession on the 5. Ch. of James seven Sacraments in his Postscript on the first Ep. and 1. Ch. to the Corinths Wherefore Melancton Ep. ad Micon thus censures him I have read Wickliff and found in him many Errors he never held nor understood Justice of Faith which is the Protestants main Fundamental With the same confidence M. Menzeis calls the Waldenses Protestants who held the Real Presence that the Apostles were but Lay-men that all Magistrates fall from their Dignity by mortal sin that it is not lawful to swear in any case c. as witnesseth Illyricus in Catal. Wald. Confess Bohem. c. And with these the Grecians upon a private Letter sent as he pretends by a Patriarch to the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury though all who ever conversed with Grecians know they say daily Mass hold Transubstantiation seven Sacraments Prayer to the Saints and for the dead c. as all may see in the censure of the Oriental or Grecian Church and deny the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son and consequently make no distinction betwixt these two Persons in the Godhead But it is enough to M. Menzeis it seems that they disown the Pope to be called Protestants and so Turks and Tartars may come in with them Whence I leave to judg how constant a Protestant M. Menzeis is owning such Doctors and Doctrine and what Credit again he deserves after so many clear Testimonies and that even of learned Protestants and the very writings of the persons in question convincing him of most notorious falshood and Errour The most antient and holy Fathers as S. Ireneus Tertullian Philastrius S. Epiphanius S. Augustine Theodoret S. John Damascen and others who have written a Catalogue of Heresies did not certainly distinguish Fundamentals and Integrals amongst Divine Truths sufficiently propounded as Protestants do when they condemned many lesser things as Heresies and consequently damnable Errours then what they think to have no repugnancy with Fundamentals and essentials in the Doctrine of the true Church as in the Pelagians Novatians Donatists Monothelits who all embraced the Trinity Incarnation Passion of Christ c. S. Epiphanius Heres 75. and S. Augustine l. de heres C. 33. condemn the Arians for denying the Fasts commanded by the Church the first remarking they were accustomed to eat flesh on Fridays and in the Lent yea chiefly in the holy Week wherein Christ died S. Hierome in his 2. book against Jovinian condemneth him for saying Fastings and all other Exercises of good works were not meritorious S. Augustine in his Book of Heresies c. 54. condemns the Eunomians for teaching no sin could hurt a man if so he had but only Faith S. Epiphanius haeres 64. all who denied free will S. Hierome Vigilantius in his Book against him for affirming the Relicks of the Saints ought not to be reverenced the same S. Hierome against Jovinian with S. Augustine in his Book of Heresies C. 82. condemn him for holding Wedlock equal in dignity and merit to virginity S. Augustine again l. Contr. Julian C. 2. the Pelagians for teaching the Children of the Faithful Parents did not need Baptism but were born holy and in his 1. Book 2. C. and last against Maximus the Arians for not receiving Traditions Now let M. Menzeis choose either to acknowledge all these and many such like condemned Heresies by the Fathers to be no Fundamentals and consequently that many other things then these which Protestants call Fundamentals are necessary to be believed under the danger of incurring Heresie and Eâ—ternal damnation or owning them as such let him confess Protestants Err even in Fundamentals with them seeing all here condemned is Protestant Doctrine borrowed from those more ancient Hereticks and condemned by the Fathers even then 4. As to that he says all Fundamentals are clear in Scripture and that according to S. Chrysostome S. Augustine S. Irenaeus S. Thomas of Aquine and Sixtus Senensis holding what ever is obscure in one place to be clear in some other I answer very easily with a manifold distinction 1. To such eminent Doctors of the Church as he cites most Scriptures are clear I grant to all indifferently I deny 2. To such as take the places of Scripture commanding us to hear the Church and hold fast the Traditions of the Apostles conserved in her as two main Fundamentals for clearing all the rest I grant to others I deny 3. With Vincentius Lyrinensis c. 2. to such as level the Line of Prophetical and Apostolical interpretation to the square of the Ecclesiastical and Catholick sense I grant to others I deny 4. With Doctor Field a Protestant in his 4. Book C. 14. to such as be first setled in those things which the Apostles presupposed in their delivery of Scriptures I grant to others I deny Neither are these my Distinctions any wise to shift the Argument which maketh nothing either against us or for him But to clear the Fathers words in the very genuine sense they speak them See S. Chrysostome his meaning in his 14. Hom. on S. John S. Augustines contra Cresconium C. 33. where he says if any one fear to be deceived in this question through its obscurity let him ask Councel of the Church which the holy Scriptures do demonsrate without any ambiguity That of S. Irenaeus in his 2. Book Ch. 47. and more expresly in his 1. Book Ch. 49. S. Thomas his words That what ever is necessary to be believed under the Spiritual Sense that some where is manifestly declared by the Letter as they do not specifie to whom this manifest declaration is made so we grant it to the Church and her Doctors for to her all things are known says St. Irenaeus in which is perfect Faith as to the Apostles it was given by our Saviour Christ to know the Mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven 5. But I would ask M. Menzeis did ever any of these Fathers receive the Scriptures as the undoubted Word of God otherwise then on the Churches Authority S. Augustine saying I would not believe the Scriptures if the Authority of the Church did not move me to it is no less clear for this then Scripture it self in Fundamentals Or did ever any of them fancy to himself a place of Scripture as clear for any thing the whole Church standing in a contrary Judgment For this is the only Point we debate with Protestants and clearly prove both by the Scriptures and Fathers against them 6. However Scripture be clear in Fundamentals in the sense I have given that is particularly and in as many words or generally and as commanding us to hear the Church yet surely it doth not set down all that is Fundamental in express terms if we trust the Fathers whom M. Menzeis appeals to as holding Scripture clear in Fundamentals or can all be so evidently deduced from scripture but by the Authority of the Church that Hereticks be silenced and Unity preserved in Faith S. Chrysostome on
de Unit. eccl We must obey his Precepts and Admonitions that our Merits may receive their reward And in his Serm. de Eleem. If the day of our return shall find us unloadned swift and running in the way of good works our Lord will not fail to reward our merits 10. Protestants deny the possibility of keeping the Commandements which S. Basil orat in illud attende tibi calls a wicked thing to say S. Hierome on the 5. of S. Matthew Blasphemy S. Augustine serm 61. de tempore a denial both of the justice and holiness of God In the the third Age Tertullian as cited by the Centurists Cent. 3. says No Law could tye him who had not in his power due obedience to the Law This is a maxime in Philosophy wherefore Origen hom 9. in Jos sayes plainly the baptized may fulfil the Law in all things Now not to be more tedious or prolix in ciing either Passages or Fathers whose Quotations could easily make a just Volume of the Sacraments I have spoken in the former Section and of the Pastors of the Church their infallible Authority in a general Council in the third which with what is here said are the main things and most substantial denyed by Protestants but clearly asserted by the Fathers cited who all confessedly did live in the first three ages a very few excepted I have brought of the fourth and fifth age only as witnesses of what was practised in the Church before their time leaving the Canons of the Apostles and many things by Tradition from them conserved in the Church and witnessed by the Fathers with the Decrees of most holy Popes and Martyrs of the first and second Age as these of Anacletus Alexander Sixtus Telesphorus Pius Anicetus Soter c. holding out so many of our Tenets against Protestants and this to shun Cavils and Exceptions which they might take either at their writings or place as they do As for the same cause many other most renouned Authors as Policarpus Cornelius Prochorus Methodius Nilus Agapetus Dorotheus and others upon this only account with the Book of Hermes of whom S. Paul to the Romans Ch. 16. maketh mention called the Pastor which Hamelmanus and M. Hooker both Protestants grant to have been reckoned by the antient Fathers in the number of Ecclesiastical Books and particularly as seemeth to Hamelmanus by no less men then Irenaeus Clement and Origen Yet this Book in such esteem with them he will have to be impure as laying the ground of Purgatory Prayer for the dead Merit and Justification of Works of professed Chastity in Priests and Church-men of fasting from certain Meats at times c. But I hope M. Menzeis will make no exception against most Authors I have produced unless passing from his appeal to the Fathers of the first three ages he pass also from his second ground of Faith as certainly after all has been said he should do seeing I may justly speak home to him here with S. Augustine in his 11. Book against Julian the Pelagian Heretick c. 10. What the Catholick Fathers and Doctors have found in the Church that they hold what they have received from their forefathers that they have delivered to their children Whilest we had no debate as yet with you before them as Judges our case was pleaded amongst them we were not as yet contesting with you and nevertheless by their decree we have the victory over you Neither is this victory imaginary as that of M. Menzeis but real as the three Arguments I have brought make good which by way of recapitulation I set before him in this one Argument the Doctrine of the Church and writings of the Fathers in the first three Ages can be no ground to Protestants for what they teach First if the chief Reformers disown them Secondly if most learned Protestants accuse them of many Errours Thirdly If their own Writings in all controverted Tenets be flatly against Protestant Doctrine but all this is true from the places produced then their Writings can be no ground to them Yet Protestants will needs make up their Religion from the Writings of the Fathers as some Poets from the Centons and broken Verses of Virgil and Homer the life of Christ They challenge the Fathers for their Heresie upon a word or two picked out of places wherein they have an Orthodox sense In so many hundred Volumes of the Fathers writings that some word or passages seem to favour Heresie what wonder Gods own Word if we will stick to the naked Letter seeming to favour so many as we have seen above They oppose Fathers to Fathers and sometimes one to himself so they are possessed with the Spirit of contradiction that all may turn Problematick and be controverted among them They cite the Scriptures against the Fathers as if their new and giddy headed start-ups did better understand them then the most antient and solid Divines they will at times by passages of the Fathers or Scripture strive to condemn the practice of the Church and Decrees of Councils but whoever amongst the Fathers did so doth any one of the Fathers with the first Reformers oppose Scripture as understood by them to the Authority of the Church or to the same Scripture as explained by her Doth any of them attach the Roman Church of Errour To say such a Church so great and glorious in the Christian world did Apostatize and none did remark her Apostacy is like a general Eclipse of the Sun remarked by none The least Errours of particular Hereticks the Fathers have so narrowly sifted so sharply censured so solidly confuted and shall we think they have either not spyed or spared to censure the corruptions of a whole body and Church But let wise men and greatest Shcollars be at variance as they please about some places both of Scriptures and Fathers as surely it will be to the Worlds end God hath given us both a sure and short way promised by the Prophet wherein even ignorants and fools cannot err Christ having left us the present Catholick Church in all ages as the most faithful Depositary of his Doctrine and the Infallible Visible Judge of all that can be controverted in matters of Faith Before I end this Section to give you but a scantling with what sincerity and candor Hereticks cite the Fathers this I borrow from M Menzeis in his third paper where in general he most confidently says That whatever the antient Apologists as Justin Martyr Tertullian and Athenagoras have said for the Christian Religion the same Protestants may say for their own Whereupon having diligently read over the first of these Apologies which is that of Justin Martyr as any may do in an hour I have found him so grosly mistaken in citing this Father that I may justly say he could not more forfeit his reputation This I evidence in four chief Points asserted by us and denyed by Protestants The first is Free Will for which Justin in his Apology
Protestant Writers spoken of who have done this but nothing as either borrowed from them or as laid out by himself is brought in Many passages of the Fathers are misapplyed Many Cavils Criminations and Calumnies are objected Many strong words as Logomachies Vertigo's and Needle-headed Nicities with Prophecies from Poets are used a great part of Erasmus Chilias spent in Proverbs Much paper blotted but what concluded I shall not here interpose my judgment as Mr. Menzeis publishes his victory as Trumpet in the Triumph himself leaving to each one to read and judge of the papers adding only of him what was said of a Prolix and tedious Orator who on little matter spent much time in many flourishes of words and frequent Digressions Nullum vidi qui magis operosè nihil diceret Multa sed non multum Magni passus sed extra viam Seneca That is I have seen none take greater pains to say nothing he sayes many things but not much he walks at a great pace but out of the way For me as I mind not here actum agere so neither do I presume to add any thing to what Mr. Dempster has said in his way of Disputing which I acknowledge both the shortest and best to make Mr. Menzeis prove his Grounds but he ever declining this and urging we should shew in them any weakness or defect this I here undertake for Mr. Menzeis further conviction and happily some Protestants conversion by the goodness and mercy of God My design being to prove positively the falshood and nullity as well of his great Principle of no Infallible visible Judg as of both his Grounds and that very succinctly in a few Sections without Digressing in the least or medling with what hath been said SECT III. Wherein Mr. Menzeis great Principle That there is no Infallible visible Judge of Controversie in the true Church is Positively refuted as the main Ground of all Divisions Schisms and Heresies and contrary to the Scriptures Fathers and Reason AS all Rebellion in Kingdoms and Common-wealths has its rise from contempt of the lawful Authority of Princes and Magistrates upon the specious pretence of abuse of Power against the Laws of the Kingdom and Liberties of the Subjects So all Heresies in the Church begin with appeals from the Pastors of the Church the only Judges establisht by Christ to his Written Word which is to all Christians as their Law Book LEX REX cry out Rebels with their Calipha Buchanan LEX JUDEX or nolo verba quae non sunt scripta Answers the Heretick with an Arian in the Councel of Nice They will believe what they read and not what they hear though the Apostle teach us that Faith comes of hearing and the reason is because with Mr. Menzeis they acknowledge none speaking in matters of Faith and Religion Infallible No Infallible Visible Judge This is indeed that great Principle Protestants did broach to themselves in the beginning of Reformation and at their very first leaping out from the Church they would admit of no Infallible visible Judge stand to no Sentence or Decree of Church Councils Fathers Now this Principle being supposed by them to be solid and an unquestionable truth nothing can follow thereon but what is true Ex vero nil nisi verum and consequently any private Protestant reading Scripture with a sincere intention may yea ought to adhere to what he thinks to be in Scripture should all the Protestant Church with all her Assemblies Synods Preachers be of a contrary mind Upon this Luther and Calvin leave the Catholick Roman Church and all visible Congregations in the Christian World at that time because sayes Chamiers Ep. 49. though Mr. Menzeis deny it was so Then Apostacy averted the whole body from Christ. They made all the Kings and people drunk from the first to the last says Calvin Inst l. 4. c. 18. and Whitaker Cont. 4. q. 5. c. 3. No Religion but the Papistical had place in the Church Duditius apud Bezam Ep. 1. sayes more if that be true which the Fathers have professed with mutual consent it is altogether on the Papists side Upon this same Principle innumerable other Sects and Sectaries have left again Protestants and the Protestant Church upon this and this only Principle every particular man reading Scripture and taking it as he thinks both words and sense clear is made his own Judge and so as many heads almost as many sentences and diverse Opinions in Religion some thinking Scripture clear for this some for that Sect some admitting or rejecting whole Books of Scripture at their pleasure Yea some and that too too many seeing most clear Scripture tossed and wrested by contrary Sects suspend their Judgment renounce their Faith and quit all Religion not knowing with what party to side Others in fine who think themselves deeper wits as they are more speculative and searching brains having run through all can be said to ascertain any point of Faith save only the Divine Oracle in the Church have turned Scepticks in Religion grounding themselves on meer probability Which Seed of Infidelity sayes the Author of a Treatise Intituled Faith vindicated from possibility of Falshood Sowen when the Infallible Authority of the Church as the rule of Faith was renounced dared first appear publickly above ground in the Writings of Mr. Chillingworth and the L. Falkland dressed up in a plausible Rhetorick and set out under a yet more pleasant Title to Protestants as being against Popery was most graciously received by many Yea when it appeared in Mr. Tilletson his Eloquent and Famous Sermon did begin to get credit as an Evangelical truth and all this upon the foresaid great principle Upon it the holy work of Reformation by private men opposing the Law and Gospel to the judicial Sentence and Decrees of the whole Catholick Church Upon it the glorious work of the Covenant by some factious Zelots against Prince and Pastors in the Protestant Church Upon it Preachers and Pulpits clash at randome Sects and Sectaries multiply the Christian world is put in confusion with endless Jars and Debates in Religion And all this because there is no Infallible Judge of Controversie to give Sentence in favour of any one party silencing all others In a word for that according to Protestants God hath given us a Law without a Judg however inconsistent this may seem with Order Providence and wisdom This one Principle I say once more with the great St. Augustine Serm. 14. de verbis Ap. Ruines the very Grounds of Religion In aliis quaestionibus non diligenter digestis non plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate firmatis ferendus est disputator errans ibi ferendus error non tamen progredi debet ut fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliatur According to the same St. Augustine ib. whosoever run their heads were they never so great with Mr. Menzeis against this Inexpugnable wall of the Church Authority are crusht Hoc habet Authoritas matris Eccelsiae
the 19. he writes thus We confess that neither conference of places nor consideration of what followeth or goes before nor looking into Originals are of any force unless we find the things which we conceive to be understood and meant in the places interpreted to be consonant to the Rule of Faith that is Tradition conserved in the Church neither is there any of our Divines that ever taught otherwise Where you see by Doctor Field M. Menzeis is discarded from being a Protestant Divine the Scripture however clear is declared to be no Rule or Ground of Faith but according to the sense of them that went before us as all other means besides Tradition in his 16. Ch. are propounded to be but probable Conjectures and not infallible grounds And this most rationally for what private man as I have said can assure himself that either the finding out the true sense of Scripture as to him is tyed to the means of Interpretation M. Menzeis sets down or that he makes a right use of all these means For as the same Dr. Field judiciously remarks and ingenuously grants with S. Augustine contra Ep. Fundam and de Util. cred few men have leasure fewer strength of understanding to examine the particular Controversies so many and so intricate in these our dayes and that the way to satisfie their Consciences in this most important affair is to find out the true Church and rest in her judgment Ad sapientiam says S. Augustine in Ecclesia Spirituales pauci perveniunt caeteram vero turbam non intelligendi vivacitas sed credendi simplicitas tutissimam facit that is few even Spiritual ones in the Church attain to perfect knowledge the rest being made most sure not by their quickness in understanding but by their simplicity in believing 2. This the Protestants way is but a trifling loosing of time never having been found able to settle debates amongst themselves as witness 60. Synods holden in 60. years time says Rescius l. de Atheismo in which all taking Scripture for their ground without any Infallible Judge did so little agree that they parted not so much as good friends Neque dantes dextras fraternitatis aut humanitatis How many Examples of this amongst Lutherans and Calvinists Prelaticks and Presbyterians and even in our confessions of Faith and Covenant among our selves I know M. Menzeis Answer will be their Dissentions are not in Fundamentals of these I shall speak presently in the next Section only here I ask why then so great cruelty so much bloud so many Excommunications and Curses If they did not think them so who moved such troubles they were either most cruel or mad as Tertullian l. de praescr most truly says in Disputing out of Texts of Scripture that is as every man reads and understands there is no other good got but either to make a man sick or mad It is not so in the Catholick Church what ever M. Menzeis says of Jesuits and Dominicans neither party having ever contested in any thing that was once decided by the Church 3. The Protestants way is Preposterous Religion being Established before the Scriptures and they only written to true believers whence Tertullian prescribing against all Hereticks says We do not admit them to dispute from Scripture till first they can show who their Ancestors were from whom by whom when and to whom the form of Christian Religion was delivered Whereupon to conclude all this I ask at M. Menzeis is every particular man amongst Protestants infallibly assured by Scripture of what he believes If so why not then Catholicks and all the Catholick Church they receive the Scriptures with Protestants yea Protestants only from them their Churchmen read the Scriptures with as great diligence they be in a far greater number they have ten for one who have Expouded it they apply no less all the means for a right Interpretation they study the Originals confer Places pray many hours both day and night have no Wives Children or Family to divert them most of them have renounced all pretence to Riches Honours and all Temporal Interests wherewith they might be Byassed any wise in what they profess The extraordinary and unparallelled pains they take in the most Barren Savage and cruel nations of the Earth for their conversion to Christianity would seem sufficient to evidence both the good disposition of their minds and the sincere intention of their hearts beyond the Preachers of whatsoever Sect Their manifold Writings witness enough the solidity and quickness of their wits and even their Wonders and Mracles in latter ages in all most Authentick Records of History would make believe they want not the assistance of the the Spirit yea and of the power of God and yet that we should think that they are blinded Protestants see clear they mistake Scripture Protestants take it aright they are misled by the Spirit of Errour Protestants directed by the Spirit of Truth what Reason Proof or Probability for this But why do Protestants pretend it is so Forsooth chiefly because they acknowledge one high Bishop in the whole Church as Protestants a primate in each Kingdom with the Negative voice to silence all private sowers of Dissention and keep unity because they take the Canons and Rules of their Faith from Scripture explained in general Councils and the Unanimous consent of the Church and Fathers and not by private Reading because in a word they reverence Publick Authority establisht by God in his Church above particular Opinions and Conceits Why then should Scripture be called a Ground to Protestants who neither did receive it from Christ and his Apostles as all Historians and Chronologues marking the rise of Protestancy in Luther his dayes do evidence nor have it uncorrupt as their own Doctors and Ghospellers do acknowledge Nor take it in the true sense upon publick Authority but as they fancy upon private Reading and Interpretation against the Apostle And not rather to Catholicks who having received the Scriptures from Christ and his Apostles as the Word of God left to his Church which she is bound to have an Eye to in all her Decisions Statutes and Laws so that none of them be Repugnant to it in the least neither by adding or pairing in Words or Sense but all fully consonant and conform to both In acknowledgement whereof in all her General Councils she placeth it above Pope Prelates Pastors who in all the search they make into former Councels Fathers Schoolmen Tradition or practice of the Church intend nothing else generally speaking then to find out by all possible diligence the true sense and meaning of what is taught us in General and Particular Terms in the Written Word Yet Protestants with all Hereticks most vainly bragg of Scripture as their Ground and Catholicks be calumniated to abandon it as if Loyal Subjects did less rely on the Acts of Parliament and funâ—â—mental Laws who receive them their Sentence and meaning from the lawful Judges establisht
2.24 Ye see then how that by Works a man is justified and not by Faith only Is it not to protest against his Divine Appointment again and his Word to teach that good Works done in his Grace and by his Grace merit nothing when through all the Scripture Heaven is promised as a reward to our Works and in St. Matth. 10. It is said Christ shall render to every one according to his Works Is it not to protest against his Divine Authority and Word to deny the Real Presence All the Evangelists speaking so clearly This is my Body this is my Blood Is it not to protest against his express Command and Word to forbid Images as Idols He having ordered two Cherubims to be set on the Ark of the Covenant Exod. 25. Is it not to protest against his own Practice and Word to deny we should honour his Saints whom God himself Honours yea and glorifies Them that honour me I will honour 1 Reg. 2.30 Is it not to protest against his Dispensation and Word to deny the Power given to his Apostles and their Successours to forgive sins he having said in S. John 20.23 Whose sins ye shall forgive they are forgiven Is it not to protest against the Satisfaction which his Justice requires for our sins even after the guilt is forgiven to deny Purgatory The Scripture witnessing that he did exact satisfaction of David and many holy penitent sinners after he had forgiven their sins And S. Paul 1 Cor. 3. If any ones work burn he shall suffer loss but himself shall be saved yet so as by fire where we have clearly a purging and punishing yet saving fire Is it not to protest against Christs Eternal Priesthood according to the order of Melchisedech Ps 109. and S. Paul Hebr. 5. to reject the unbloody and unspotted Sacrifice of the Mass which the Prophet Malachy 1. C. 10. V. calls a clean Oblation to be offered amongst the Gentiles from the rising of the Sun even to the setting and that in every place Is it not to protest against all God commands us and his Word to take away free Will in obeying Deut. 30.19 I have set before you life and death chuse To conclude what Point is there in all the Catholick Faith which Protestants protest against which is not either Directly against Gods Divine Attributes Christs Mediation and Dispensation his Churches Authority his Saints and Servants honour some part of Christian duty belief or life or generally not against his express written Word as it is plain in it self or expounded by the unanimous consent of the Fathers And yet so impudently bold is this spirit of Heresie as to dare say that that is contained in Scripture which Scripture most evidently contradicts that is only in opposition to Popish Errours which impugnes the very Fundamental and most substantial Verities of the Gospel and Christian Faith that by the pure and uncorrupted word it will reform the Church when corrupting the Word and correcting the Church as subject to failings and Errours in Religion it ruinateth both Church and Word What has been said in this and the former Section further instanced in two Particular Controverted Points The Real Presence and two Sacraments THE Protestant Religion is The Christian Religion as contained in Scripture Sole Scripture is their Ground and in it all Fundamentals are clear Says M. Menzeis How false all this is in general doth evidently I hope appear by what I have said above Here I instance only further two particular Points he handles at length the better to make see the falshood of his strong and bold Assertions in the weakness and nullity of his Proofs And this first in his refuting one of our chief Tenets viz. The Real Presence then in maintaining one of his own to wit That there are two Sacraments and no more 1. Then to prove Christs body is not really in the Sacrament these most clear words This is my body must not says he be taken in the literal sense but Figuratively why so doth the Scripture say this no no Scripture is brought What then a Philosophical Demonstration as he pretends The word this in the literal sense is inexplicable and the Proposition implyeth a contradiction ergo c. But why the Pronoun this inexplicable because let Romanists strain their wits Answers M. Menzeis and squeeze their Authors they cannot tell what it can signifie whether the Bread Body or something indeterminately Who would not laugh here to see Mr. Menzeis a professor of Divinity take such a weak Argument for a Demonstration most like in this to a certain Romantick Knight Errand call'd Don Quicsot who imagining to himself a Windmil to be a Gyant and then fighting with it as with a Hector he did both blunt his Sword and batter his Reputation For what I pray you doth the Pronone this signifie in any proportion but Indeterminately till it be determined to some particular thing by the following words So that let a man say a hundred times this he determines nothing but by the ensuing words as here This is my Body makes a determinated sense the last words determinating the first which alone and of it self signifies nothing determinately and so to seek what it signifies determinately alone and before the other words be pronounced is to quibble and speak non-sense by seeking a determinate Object under a word which of its nature hath none And this is the first part of his Demonstration for establishing by a Logick Sophism without any clear Scripture a main Point of Religion The second part of this Demonstration is That it implyes a manifest contradiction a true Affirmative Proposition de praesenti should produce its Object Why this because in the instant of Nature wherein the Proposition is conceiv'd before its Object as the cause before its Effect the Proposition should be true as is supposed and not true because the Object in that instant is not The same Argument he urgeth in the instant of time wherein the Copula is pronounced or Particle is before the two last words And for that Catholick Authours give many and diverse Solutions of this Argument as the Custome is in the School he will be satisfied with none But because Mr. Menzeis is good at Retortions I retort his Argument thus Is not this a true Affirmative Proposition de praesenti which produces its Object in St. John 15. This is my command that ye love one another Now what difficulty in the former Proposition either in the word this or in the Instants of Nature and Time or that a true affirmative Proposition make its own Object which is not here do not these words make a new Command says Christ as the former his body what if M. Menzeis could have brought an Axiome of Philosophy against the Real Presence as that Maxime so commonly propounded and answered in the School quae sunt eadem cum uno tertio sunt eadem inter se proving as would seem that
every one Point of our Religion and Faith Now to prove what I have set down to be the only true solid and infallible Grounds of the true Christian and Catholick Faith 1. That Scripture is this Ground is granted by M. Menzeis and all Protestants so needs no proof as to them 2. That sole Scripture without the Declaration and Exposition of the Church as an infallible Propounder Expounder and Judge cannot be this Ground is proved at length in my fourth Section and presently you shall see it again 3 That Apostolical Traditions are necessarily joyned with Scripture Is 1. proved from clear Scriptures most expresly commanding us to receive them 2 Thes 2.13 Therefore brethren stand fast and hold the Traditions which ye have been taught whether by word or by Epistle 2 Thess 3.6 Now I command you brethren in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that ye withdraw your selves from every Brother that walketh disorderly and not after the Traditions which he received 1 Corinth 11.2 Remember me in all things and keep the Traditions as I delivered them to you 2. By the Authority of the Fathers of the first three ages quoted in my sixth Section with that of S. Chysostome S. Augustine and others above mentioned 3. From manifest and Demonstrative reason in some chief Points which all Christians believe without any express Scripture as I have instanced in persons in the Trinity Sacraments in the Church the keeping of Sunday c. and in many Heresies condemned by the Church Councils Fathers yea and Protestants themselves without any clear Scripture can be brought against them as S. Augustine avoucheth of the Errour of Donatists c. Rests then only to prove that the Church's Authority as an infallible Propounder is necessary to make all these Divine and infallible Truths in themselves contained either in Scripture or delivered by Apostolical Tradition both solid and infallible Grounds to us For this I presuppose 1. From the Apostle S. Paul Hebrews 11. That without Faith it is impossible to please God 2. From the same Apostle Ephes 4.5 That there is but one Faith one Baptism one Lord JESUS Christ 3. From him again Hebr. 10.23 That we must hold fast the profession of our Faith without wavering From which Texts importing the Necessity of Faith the Unity of Faith and the steadiness in believing required in Divine Faith it doth follow that some infallible means which all may make use of must be appointed by God to attain to this Faith so absolutely necessary to all For to say God hath commanded us and that under the pain of Eternal Damnation to believe undoubtedly and not furnished infallible means to attain to such belief were to accuse his Goodness Providence and Wisdom And this no Christian or rational man will deny so that all the Question that can be moved is about the infallible means to attain without doubt or wavering to Divine Faith which may perswade infallibly all sort of persons that such things are revealed by God removing all reasonable doubts that can arise either concerning Gods Revelation which is the formal object of Faith or the things he hath revealed which makes its material Object and this means I say again must not only be solid and infallible objectively and in it self as M. Menzeis will have the Protestant Religion and Grounds of it but also subjectively and to us it being the same thing as to make a perswasive motive not to appear and not to be according to that Maxime Idem est non esse non apparere Wherefore a ground however infallible in it self yet not appearing so to us and known to be such availeth nothing as to our belief The Mathematicians Demonstrate the Sun to be many times greater then the Earth and their Demonstration no doubt is both certain and evident in it self yet never shall perswade a Country clown that it is greater then his Cap for that no Demonstration of this is clear and certain to him Even so is it in the Ground of Faith it must be both solid and and infallible in it self and it must be known to be such by all who prudently rely upon it This presupposed to conclude all that has been said and fully prove both the Ground of Faith in the Catholick Roman Church solid as the Rock it is built on and the means for conveying it to us infallible I first show against M. Menzeis or rather for him and his conversion the necessity of an infallible Propounder of what â—e must undoubtedly believe for if this can be made good he engageth again to turn Papist 2. That the true Church is this infallible Propounder â— That the Catholick Roman Church is the only true Church 1. Then as to the necessity of an infallible Propounder If no men no Church be infallible in propounding then holy Scripture and consequently all that is contained in it is only delivered to us by fallible means and so no infallible certainty in Faith The consequence is clear for most infallible Truths may be changed altered corrupted and both fallibly and falsly propounded to us as the first and chief Mysteries of the Christian Religion by Hereticks have been 2. Faith comes of hearing says the Apostle then as there be infallible believers and hearers so must there be infallible Teachers for Hearing and Teaching are Correlatives 3. No other infallible means is or can be assigned by Protestants to Ignorants yea to all who understand not the Original Languages for what is contained in Scripture save only the Authority of their Pastors and Church but this Authority in propounding is not acknowledged infallible by them then no infallible means is left 4. There is no less necessity the Church be infallible in propounding then the Evangelists in penning and the Apostles in Preaching no disparity can be given Gods Word being equally infallible in it self before both as iâ— is now 5. Our Saviour Christ most expresly owns the necessity of an infallible propounder granting the Jews had not sinned in refusing to believe him if by his Works and Wonders he had not evidenced himself to be the Son of God and consequently infallible in his Doctrine 6. For this the gift of Miracles is given to the Apostles and left in the Church to show their infallible assistance in propounding If you answer that was necessary at first but not now because it is the same Doctrine you teach which the Apostles did propound infallibly You say nothing for that it is we doubt of or rather undoubtedly we deny that your Doctrine is the same You presently appeal to Scripture but in vain till first you answer to all that is objected in my fourth Section how ye know infallibly what ye call Scripture to be Gods Word then the Letter you read to be uncorrupted the sense you give to the genuine c. and to all the clear places of Scripture I have brought against most of your particular Tenets I do not here ask
ye 〈◊〉 prove that to be infallibly Gods Word which was preached by the Apostles this they did sufficiently themselves Neither that the Doctrine of Authentick Scripture is infallibly true that was also done before there was a Protestant in the world but coming from those Generals which make all the Answers of your best Writers we desire ye shew by some infallible sign that your Bible is Gods pure Word and your Glosses on it conform to the Sense and Letter To reply Scripture doth evidence it self by its innate light to be Gods Word so that all may sufficiently know it by this and all be obliged to believe it is refuted by Christ himself presently telling us his own hearers had not sinned in not receiving it as such if he had given no External Evidence of his infallibility in propounding for as I have remarked above Scripture hath no greater Efficacy Evidence or Light in our Books then in our blessed Saviours own mouth Neither will the Majesty of the Stile or the purity of the Doctrine do it both these being as great in the the Books of Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus which Protestants reject as in the Ecclesiastes and Canticles which they receive Besides that the first of these two is imaginary as to the Letter there being less Majesty in the Letter of Scripture then in the Philosophers and Orators Writings as is conâ—essed by Paul And the second is in question chiefly in Protestant Bibles which do not agree with any Original or Copy that before Luther can be found if we trust their own Authours whom I have quoted Lastly If all Councils all the Fathers all the Pastors of the Church be fallible then let Protestants bring nothing but Scripture against us for we will receive nothing but upon infallible Authority and all their Volumes of Controversie shall not come to one line Yea further could they bring Scripture for what they teach as they will never be able to do yet without an infallible Propounder and Judg well might we dispute but conclude nothing wrangle but agree in nothing to the Worlds end For as sole Scripture without an infallible Church propounding and Explaining it so a naked Church without infallible Marks and a Doctrine without infallible Motives prove nothing Secondly I say the true Church is this infallible propounder on whose Authority we must rely For proof of this It is to be observed that in holy Scripture there be three Foundations or Grounds of Faith mentioned by the Apostle S. Paul The 1. Is our blessed Saviour Christ 1 Cor. 3.11 Another Foundation no man can lay then that is laid which is Jesus Christ The 2. Is the Apostles and Prophets Ephes 2.29 Built upon the Foundation of Apostles and Prophets The 3. The Church 1 Tim. 3. The house of God which is the Church of the living God the Pillar and Ground of Truth From which clear places of Scripture I remark 1. The Foundation of Faith is ever a Living Visible and Speaking Ground to wit Christ the Apostles Prophets and Church the dead Letter of Scripture being no where called this Ground 2. That these three Grounds of Faith both in the Old and New Law properly speaking make but one according to the same Apostle for another Foundation no man can lay sayes he beside Christ JESUS So that the Prophets Apostles and Church must not be thought different Foundations from Christ all their Vertue in upholding Faith and Veracity in propounding Faith Whence they are called the Foundation and Ground of it coming from the particular assistance of his Spirit Strengthening Inspiring and Directing them Hence also is their infallibility for the Foundation of Christ stands sure says the Apostle 2 Tim. 2.19 And consequently is altogether infallible 3. That the Church here called a Ground which supporteth our Faith is not to be said the only diffusive body of all true Believers but more the Representative Church in her chief Pastors as the Prophets and Apostles in old Wherefore some few Catholick Authors so often objected as holding the Canons and Decrees of Councils only infallible when they are generally received by the whole Church in my opinion are highly mistaken and surely to be understood if any in Express terms speaks so of Councils not wholly Oecumenical or not Lawfully convocated and knownly approved by the Pope or whereof some rational doubt may be made in things essentially required in which cases I grant the general belief of the Church could best warrant the infallibility of their Decrees Otherwise a few particular persons might cope with General Councels as Luther and his Adherents at first Vendicating to himself the Negative voice as if he had been high Bishop in the whole Church which were to take away all possible means of preserving Unity in Faith yea to foment all Schisms and Divisions every one pretending the whole Church holds no such Doctrine whil'st he who is a Member dissents So that such Doctors if they should allow no obligation in receiving the Decrees of the Representative Church to the which they do and must submit even this their Sentence could neither be thought Catholicks or rational men But however some few speak or think God did promise us an infallible Church Isa 2. V. 2 3. Wherein he should teach us his ways and judge amongst the Nations himself not personally for he never went out of Jewry but by her Pastors He has establish'd this infallible Church in St. Matth. 16. V. 19. Upon the Rock Christ hath commanded us to hear her in St. Matth. 18. V. 17. And the persons we should hear in this Church as well as the end wherefore we would hear them and rest upon their Authority is clearly set down in these words 4. Ephes 11. He gave some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and Teachers for perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministry till we all come in the Union of Faith that we henceforth be no more children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of Doctrine c. From all which places of Scripture it is Demonstratively manifest that as the true Church is infallible and we bound to hear her yea and to rely upon her Authority as the Pillar and Ground of our Faith so is it most evidently clear that as she speaketh only to us infallibly by the voice of her Pastors and teachers united it is them we should hear seeing God in her not personally as I have said but by them both Judgeth and Teacheth as the infallible Propounders of his Divine Truths with the Prophets and Apostles in old and the infallible Judges of our Controversies and Debates 2. The same is proven from the unanimous consent of the Fathers quoted at length in my third Section for the infallibility both of the Church and Councils And may be confirmed even by the confession of many Rational and Moderate Protestants who receive the Scripture and consequently all and every Point contained in it
visible in her Pastors and people by a continued succession from the Apostles which held S. Augustine in her Tenet me in Ecclesiâ says he Successie facerdotum I am holden in the Church by the succession of Priests then he reckons out the only high Priests and Bishops of Rome as the lawful Successors of S. Peter as in his 162. Epistle he says in the Roman Church has ever been the Authority of the Apostolick Sea In ecclesiâ Romanâ semper Apostolicae Cathedrae viguit authoritas No other having unity in Faith or the means to preserve it by General Councils which have all been holden in her No other and specially the Protestant Church having either Universality or Antiquity as is clear from their late Rise and little Extent Whatever Protestants and other Sectaries sophistically or Subtilly Object against all this is but weak and should stumble none many stronger Objections Atheists Infidels and Hereticks have made against God our Saviour Christ and the holy Scripture The first Principles most clear by the light of Nature suffer their Objections whence the Scepticks amongst Philosophers as the Socinians amongst Hereticks those admitting of nothing as unquestionably clear and these as infallibly true Wherefore to conclude all I have said the Catholick Roman Church being so gloriously marked so generally attested and so notoriously known to be the true Church established by Christ and his Apostles ever conspicuous and visible ever working Miracles converting Infidels making Saints ever holding Councils deciding controversies keeping unity opposing Hereticks and maintaining true Faith upon Solid and Infallible Grounds having so clear testimony from the Fathers from Scripture from God having charisma veritatis certum the Gift and Grace of certain and infallible Truth says S. Irenaeus origines firmas sure beginnings saith Tertullian Veritatem undequaque munitam verity solidly grounded and guarded says S. Epiphaniâ—s haeres 55. authoritatem stabilissimam most solid and constant Authority says S. Augustine Ep. â—8 may 〈◊〉 not say justly with our Countryman Richard of S. Victor l. 1. de Trinit c. 2. Si error est quem credimus à te decepti sumus If it be Error we do believe in this Church and upon her Authority it is thou O God who hath deceived us for with such signs this Doctrine is confirmed that it can be from no other but thee Let the impartial Reader here compare both Protestant Grounds and Doctrine with ours and see after all their Objections and Cavils what they bring for their new doubtful and inconstant Opinions against our old infallible and constant Faith what against our just claim our clear right our long and uninterrupted possession They come in with the Scripture in hand as the Fundamental Law against which there can be no prescription but what Scripture I pray you save that they have wrested from us olim possideo prior possideo says Tertullian it was first delivered to us we have it of old and we conserve it whole and intire But not so Protestants the many Books they reject shows it is but like a torn bond in their hands blotted in as many places as there be things put in of new or others rased out in their Bibles And then as they bring it it is altogether forceless and can make no security as a rent Charter without Subscription Witness or Seal Gods Subsciption would be seen and acknowledged if it were presented by them as at first by the Apostles with Supernatural 〈…〉 Motives witnesses if they could show it handed down from age to age by infallible Propounders his-Seal in Miracles But the Protestant Church granting her self to be fallible and being destitute both of infallible Motives of credibility and miracles can be no sure propounder of Gods Word neither can it as propounded by her be any sure ground to us Yea Examine well all the Principles Protestants build their Pretended Reformation upon and you shall find them all mearly Whimsecal Paradoxal and improbable For what Probability can there be 1. Of what they say against us that the Popish Church as they call it which they grant to be most antient should have continued so long and ever possessed the greatest part of the Christian World holding Councils condemning Heresies converting Infidels working Miracles and that the Protestant Church which they will have to be the Catholick or Universal all this time was no where to be found never once made mention of by any Author without Councils Statutes or Laws published to the World never converting one Kingdom opposing one Heresie having one Writer of note witnessing her Faith and Doctrine her doings or sufferings her Pastors or People That the antient Congregation diffused through the whole World should be Heretical and the new one in some few corners be Orthodox That corruption of Doctrine did enter so insensibly into the Roman Church that no Councils no Fathers did see or censure it who have observed many lesser things in private men that all the Fathers I have quoted in my 6. Section should have unanimously holden ever since the Apostles what Protestants call Popish Errors or that so many Learned men in the Roman Church who have dived into the very depth of most abstract Sciences could not see before Luther what in Scripture was clear 2. What probability for what they vent of their first Apostles and Reformers that God did send one Apostate Friar who in the Monastery as he confesseth lived so mortified chast and devote but quitting it is so hurried with his passions of Lust and stings of Conscience even for this his new Doctrine as may be seen in the Preface of his Works in Latine and his Table Conferences without any visible mark of his Mission to reform both his Word and Church in opposition to all her ordinary Pastors at that time that the Church before him I mean Luther as he himself glories should have been destitute of the true Letter and sense of Scripture of true Worship true form of Government c. that notwithstanding so many solemn promises made by God the Word should not depart out of the mouths of Pastors nor the true Church be so much as obscured yet that Christ should have suffered the light of the Gospel to be under a Bushel and the Cuhrch invisible for more then a thousand years That his Reformation should be the work of God and the world ever worse since it That Protestancy should bring back true Faith which is divided into so many Heresies and has caused so many Troubles Divisions and Schisms 3. What show of probability or solidity in Protestant grounds that the ground of Faith which they will have to be sole Scripture as every one reads and understands should support all the Heresies in the World That this Ground given us for keeping of Unity should make all our Divisions in Religion To deny the Authority and Tradition of the Church infallible and yet take Scripture on it that the whole Representative Church in a General Council is not infallible in its Decrees and yet private men reading Scripture are infallible in what they believe That what was at the Margent in their first Bibles would be now put in the Text That pure Scripture should be a cleer Ground for Protestancy and not one Point specifical or special to it to be found in Scripture in express words In fine that Protestants should have the pure Word and rely on the Originals their best Writers granting they have not found so much as an Authentick Copy any where If you will see what probability at last they have either for their Doctrine or Church consider amongst Protestants with the Author of a late Answer in Writ Faith without Unity a Body without united Members a Law without a Judg a Church without an Altar Religion without a Sacrifice Sacraments that do not sanctifie Divine Service without Religious Ceremonies Preachers without a call Doctrine without Infallibility Belief without a ground Commands impossible to be kept Exhortation to what is not in our power Reward without Merit Reprobation without demerit Sin punished where there is no free will new Apostles without Mission or Miracles Reformation without Authority the private Spirit against the whole Church new lights against old revealed Verities single mens Opinions against the common consent of the Fathers Scripture received or rejected upon the Catalogue of the Jews in a word wavering Pastors unsetled Government unstable Faith FINIS
Religion from Prelaticks to Presbyterians from Presbyterians to Independants from Independants to I know not whom again is more like the Weathercock on the Steeple turning at every wind then the Member of any one Church His Exclamations wherewith he concludes his two long Epistles are both ludibrious and childish in misapplying so many Scripture Phrases to the Catholick Roman Church whose Faith is so highly commended by the Apostle St. Paul and holy Fathers in all Ages who ever amongst them did tax her of Errour flie her Communion renounce her Faith decline her Censures question her Authority disapprove her Doctrine or chalenge the Supreme power and Headship of her Bishop In the second age St. Irenaeus extols her Authority All Churches says he l. 3. c. 3. round about ought to resort to the Roman Church by reason of her more powerful Principality In the third St. Cyprian Ep. 55. calls her St. Peters Chair and the principal Church to which Infidelity or false Doctrine cannot have access In the fourth St. Athanasius has his recourse both to her Bishop and her against all his Adversary Hereticks In the fifth St. Augustine thinks her Sentence an end of Controversie Scripsimus Romam Roma rescriptum est quaestio finita est c. And in following ages do not St. Gregory St. German St. John Damascene Venerable Bede St. Bernard St. Thomas of Aquine and generally all the Fathers and Doctors of the Church the same So that I answer his places of Scripture as St. Augustine Petilian's the Donatist Heretick l. 2. c. 5. He brings the words of the Law but takes not heed against whom as the Devil speaks Scripture to Christ not discerning to whom Verba legis dicitis sed in quos dicitis non attenditis sicut Diabolus verba legis dicebat sed cui diceret non agnoscebat And with the same St. Augustine I answer to all Mr. Menzeis pretended victory and triumph over Mr. Dempster Facile est ut quisque Augustinum vincat quanto magis ut vicisse videatur aut si non videatur vicisse dicatur facile est St. Aug. Ep. 174. SECT II. Wherein the Question is stated as propounded by Mr. Dempster and Mr. Menzeis great Principle and Grounds set down as cleared by him with the Design of the Author thereon THe sole Argument that I find Mr. Dempster urges in all his papers in substance runs thus in this one Syllogism That Religion cannot be a true Religion which hath no peculiar principle or ground to prove that it is a true Religion and conform to the true sense of the word of God But the Protestant Religion hath no peculiar ground or principle to prove it self the true Religion c. Then the Protestant Religion cannot be true Mr. Menzeis cavils at this Syllogism as not being in form both the premises being Negatives as well as the Conclusion Mr. Dempster Answers the second is Affirmative and only objectively Negative As if one should say in Latin wherein the form of Syllogisms best appears Sed omnis Religio Protestantium est talis ut nullum habeat peculiare fundamentum quo se probet veram or else Est habens nullum peculiare fundamentum c. which the least Logician in the Colledge presently sees to be an Affirmative Proposition And yet what Clamours hath not Mr. Menzeis made for this as if at the first bout he had disarmed his Adversary So well this great Professor of Divinity is versed in Logick that he cannot resolve and answer a proposition if not set down as to a Bajan Like to that young man who lately come from the Fencing-School and hardly put to it mistaking the thrust is put off his Guard and so both wounded and mocked So the Syllogism standing in good Form the first Proposition in it suffers no debate The second is denyed by Protestants whereupon they are required to produce this peculiar Ground which proves their Religion to be true Master Menzeis after many Wheelings Turnings and Windings in his Scoldings Digressions Retorsions at the end brings two grounds for the Protestant Religion The first Scripture and that clear in Fundamentals or things necessary to Salvation The second its agreement in Essentials with the Faith of the purest and most ancient Primitive Church in the first three Centuries or Ages To clear his first Ground which in his sixth paper he storms to have called his Achilles or strength seeing he had given another which it seems he holds no less strong then it he sets down That all Scriptures are not clear Secondly that Protestants do not exclude means of Interpretation Thirdly by perspicuity he understands in Terms or by firm and clear consequence Fourthly that by this perspicuity again he means an External and objective Evidence which is nothing impeached by the misunderstanding of Hereticks or others Fifthly that by things necessary is here understood whither necessary as means or as commands What he cites in his eight paper as Maximes taken out of George Scholarius a Grecian is but to the same purpose with what he hath formerly said One onely thing I add which he urges most in all his Book that though Protestants do not exclude means of Interpretation in explaining of Scripture and in deducing consequences from it yet no necessity there is that we should know that he who gives the true Interpretation and Sense have the assistance of the Holy Ghost because forsooth this savours rankly says he of that Erroneous Popish Tenet concerning the necessity of an infallible visible Judg of Controversie whereof he proves in his third paper there is none for that a Jurist without any such Infallible assistance may be known to explain aright a Municipal Law and a Mathematician to demonstrate a Proposition of Euclydes This is the state of the Question as propounded by Mr. Dempster and this in substance is Mr. Menzeis Answer to it their debate is long Mr. Dempster constantly putting Mr. Menzeis to it that he would prove these Grounds to be peculiar to Protestants and support their Controverted Tenets with us but this he still declines to bring any Positive proof for either desiring his adversary should rather Positively prove the contrary No says Mr. Dempster make good your Assertion as he who affirms should prove I will not be so put off of my medium I have taken against you Let us see the Grounds you build on in the sence you take them and without any Infallible visible Judg of Controversie assuring you either of the uncorrupt Writings and sincere Doctrine of the Fathers in the first three ages or of the uncorrupt Letter and genuine sense of Scripture first to be solid and Infallible and then to agree peculiarly to you and the business is done You confidently assert both but what Sectary sayes not the same their claim to the foresaid Grounds say ye is meerly pretended rests to see how your own is proved as just Many Digressions and Retorsions against Popery are made Many
in the Kingdom then Out-laws and Rebels pretending to adhere immediately to them as they themselves read Think them clear or expound SECT V. Scripture however clear in Fundamentals clearly mistaken by Protestants and clearly making against them LEt us come at last to the Fundamental Points of the Protestant Religion which Mr. Menzeis holds out to be clear in Scripture Whereupon his Adversary demands what things he esteems Fundamental He Answers to ask a Catalogue of Fundamentals is to ask how to make a Coat to the Moon in all her changes And this his quick Reply he borrows from a learned Divine as he calls him Mr. Chillingworth is the man as I conceive for he has the same words a meer Sceptick in Religion and who takes away all certainty in Faith and to say true the Protestant Religion is so Obnoxious to Reformations Alterations Innovations that it is most fitly compared by him to the Moon in all her changes Yea Protestants are of so different Opinions even in what they call Fundamentals that scarce two set down the same Perkins in Cath. Reform p. 407. and in his Exposition of the Creed p. 503. will have all Fundamentals included in the Apostles Creed Duplessis in his Treatise of the Church C. 5. in the Decalogue Du Moulin after Melancton in C. 4. Matt. the Creed and Decalogue Luther Tom. 7. in Enchir. f. 118. in the Creed Decalogue and Lords Prayer Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 4. p. 340. in the Creed Lords Prayer and Sacraments Sadeel Praef. Resp ad Turr. to believe Christ crucified and the Pope to be Antichrist Chillingworth in his Treatise Intituled the Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation p. 408. n. 35. says plainly Protestants do not agree touching what Points are Fundamental and page 166 we know not precisely just how much is Funtamental Again page 23. he that will go about to distinguish what was written because it was profitable from what was written because necessary shall find an intricate business of it and almost impossible that he should be certain he hath done it when he hath done it Wherefore he says in the same page n. 27. that Protestants give not a Catalogue of Fundamentals it is not from Tergiversation but from Wisdom and Necessity and when they had done it it had been to no purpose there being as matters now stand as great necessity of believing those Truths of Scripture which are not Fundamental as those that are And yet other Protestants with M. Menzeis harp upon nothing more then the Distinction of Fundamentals from not Fundamentals as if those were necessarily believed these not I know in other places of the same Treatise this Author contradicts himself which shews not only Protestants disagree in Fundamentals one from another but even the same man from himself so well grounded they are in these their Fundamentals and Grounds wherein notwithstanding their monstrous Divisions they vainly bragg to agree But how can it be discerned whether all Protestants or a few agree in Fundamentals unless it be precisely known what and how many Fundamentals there be Potter in fine extends the number of Fundamentals beyond all his Brethren have said his words are page 24. it is Fundamental to a Christians Faith and necessary for his salvation that he believe all revealed Truths of God whereof he may be convinced they are of God And doth not this diversity of Opinions equal the changes of the Moon Or is not all this a most clear and manifest Demonstration however Scripture be clear in Fundamentals which now I do not dispute at least it is not so even to the Learnedst and most sharp sighted Protestants who so little agree in that Point that scarce two are of the same Judgment and Mind If others did thus mistake what is perspicuous in Scripture Mr. Menzeis would presently tell us no wonder they do so by reason of their evil disposed intellect But that Protestants and these not of the Vulgar sort but even the Pillars of their Religion and Defenders of their Faith by Volumes in Print should not see what in Scripture is most clear but so vary and divide in such a multiplicity of Opinions and yet maintain Scripture in these same things wehrein they so vary is clear what a wonderful thing is this Or who I pray you can trust men both at once saying Scripture is clear in Fundamentals and yet setting down the same Fundamentals diversly By this plainly confessing either their own blindness and so that they are not good Guides nor to be believed when they speak of what in Scripture is clear or else that their Doctrine in this is false What M. Menzeis holds Fundamental so great a secret it is that neither will he tell us himself nor can any other know it he having so often changed House and built upon diverse Grounds Yet that he should not seem to say nothing a mark he gives us to know what in Scripture is Fundamental to wit if we find it commanded to be believed by all or a Character of necessity to be put upon it Whereupon I reflect first M. Menzeis Doctrine is here very Incoherent for both he teaches it is commanded in Scripture all men believe Fundamentals as things absolutely necessary to salvation and nevertheless the Catalogue of these same things he will have impossible as a Coat to the Moon Would not this argue he is ignorant himself of what all should know and believe Otherwise surely he should never have judged this Catalogue impossible it being easie to a man to call to memory what he knows yea we know no more then we can call to memory says the Roman Orator Tantum scimus quantum memoriâ tenemus Secondly I reflect that rejecting the Infallible Authority of the Church teaching every particular person what is Fundamental and what we must necessarily know and explicitely believe to attain salvation pretending all this is clear and may be found by the marks he has given in Scripture he remaines obliged to a very hard task 1. To prove in General from evident and clear Scripture that all things necessary to be believed are clear and evident in Scripture Let him answer then First where he reads this and to the Fathers teaching the contrary as we shall see below 2. To prove every Fundamental Point in particular immediately and clearly from Scripture And this so that the words cannot be taken obviously and literally in any other sense For if they can be so taken then I have no Infallible Evidence but they should be so taken without some Infallible Guide telling me they should not be so taken in the place alledged As for example these words This is my Body undoubtedly may at least signifie and that most Obviously and Litterally that Christs Body is really in the Sacrament as when I say this is a piece of Gold this a piece of Silver these words litterally signifie real Gold and Silver Wherefore if I will take the words
are twenty several Opinions concerning Justification all drawn from the Scriptures by the men only of the Augustan confession There are sixteen several Opinions concerning Original sin and as many Definitions of the Sacraments as there are Sects of men that disagree about them Lastly He concludes Num. 8. since those ordinary means of Expounding Scripture as searching the Originals Conference of places Parity of Reason and Analogy of Faith are all dubious uncertain and very fallible He that is the wisest and by consequence the likelyest to Expound truest in all probability of Reason will be very far from confidence because every one of these and many more are like so many degrees of Improbability and uncertainty all depressing our certainty of finding out truth in such Mysteries and amidst so many Difficulties Remark well all this discourse from so great a Protestant Doctor finding no certainty of the true sense of Scripture by all the means of Interpretation and reflect with all a little in how hard a condition Protestants stand admitting no Infallible visible Judge in Controversy but boldly undertaking to decide all that which is controverted by sole Scripture Explained by such fallible means and yet more fallible men It is but a Labyrinth of windings and turnings to pass from Scripture as clear in words to conferring of places and deducing consequences after Prayer used and diligent search made with a well disposed mind then to the inward motion or the private Spirit against which the Prophets and Apostles so generally exclaim Ezekiel in his 13. Chapter wo be to the foolish Prophets who follow their own Spirit S. Peter in his 2 Epistle Chap. 1. No Prophecy of Scripture is of Private Interpretation Neither is the question here what is inwardly required in every private man to believe Scripture but what is the external visible and infallible Rule of Faith for that is out of all doubt with us Faith is a supernatural and infused virtue to which the pious motion in the will is no less requisite then the Supernatural light in the understanding to assent to what is revealed by God But seeing neither this light nor pious motions as they are supernatural and incline only to believe a revealed truth do manifest themselves to be such Therefore many thousands even well disposed persons and who seek God in the sincerity of their hearts oftentimes perswade themselves till they be better instructed they believe such a thing as a revealed truth by God which is a condemned Error by him And this none can deny who will not maliciously condemn a world of zealous Ignorants yea some even most learned and holy Fathers who with St. Cyprian in the Point of Rebaptization have believed an Error for a revealed Truth before it was clearly decided by the Church However whether it be this or something else M. Menzeis calls a well disposed mind others the Spirit or the private spirit the Spirit of the Righteous man and so forth I say it cannot be either with the holy Scripture or alone the Rule of Faith and Judg of Controversie 1. Because none without some Particular help can be Infallibly assured of this Interiour Motion Affection or Spirit whether it be Natural or Supernatural from God or the Devil the Spirit of Darknes or Light now no man as M. Field confesseth L. 4. C. 7. Proveth any thing is or may be doubted of by that which is as much to be doubted of as it self 2. We are counselled in the 2 Epistle of St. John Ch. 4. Not to believe every Spirit but to try the Spirits if they be of God But if the Spirits must be brought to the Touchstone of Trial if they must be judged and approved by some other well known and undoubted Authority they are not the sole Rule and Supreme Judg of Faith and Controversy Because this Spirit is secret and hidden our Faith publick and evidently credible this Spirit particular our Faith Catholick or Universal this Spirit the gift of every particular man our Faith subject to no private censure Wherefore M. Hooker Eccl. Pol. L. 1. Sect. 14. and Whitaker against Stapleton C. 2. C. 4. Ingeniously grant that the outward Letter of Scripture sealed with the inward and private Spirit is not a sufficient Warrant for every particular man to receive or reject Scripture Books but that the publick Authority of Gods Church is necessarily required Whence I say further with S. Augustine l. Contr. Ep fund c. 5. That Authority which we obey and believe testifying the Books of the holy Ghospel the same must we believe witnessing this to be the sence of the Ghospel that is not the private Spirit but the same Authority of the Church Thirdly This private Spirit is so far from being the Judge of controversy upon any pretence of adhering to Scripture either as clear in it self or explained by it that instead of compounding debates and keeping unity the chief Office of this Judg it is the very Root of Dissention and Fountain of Heresies and Schisms for as by experience we see it to be different in divers persons so as the Bell to fools it speaketh as they fancy it inclines as they are affected it points out the Object according to the Colour which is in the eye It is like a false light which makes the Aspect of best and fairest Figures vary It is often a blind zeal or a prejudicate Opinion which hinders to see what is clear in Scripture as S. Augustine l. 3. de Doctr. C. 10. well Remarks If the Prejudice saith he of any Erroneous Opinion preoccupate the mind whatsoever the Scripture hath to the contrary men take it to be a Figurative Speech So that it furnisheth to every Sectary reading Scripture his own Spectacles in conferring places his own Rule of proportions His private Weights to ponder Reasons his particular Forge to coine Opinions his secret Touch-stone to try Doctrines his own Reed to measure the Temple Sanctuary and Altar Makes him his own high Priest Pastor and Judg setting up within himself a Supreme Judicatory giving ever sentence in his favour and censuring all the world beside So that none standing to this Rule can be compelled to the unity of the Church and yet none can be accounted Hereticks as the learned Suares l. 1. de defi fid C. 11. most judiciously remarketh if we take Scripture as men read who think themselves well disposed or Expounded by it self according to the Dictamen of the private Spirit for ground for who can swarve from Scripture as clear according to his particular Judgment and Spirit which he even esteemeth to be the Spirit of God Scripture therefore cannot be Judge of Controversie as M. Menzeis will have it 1. By reason the sentence of this Judg must breed a certain and Infallible assurance of all that can come in doubt which Scripture cannot do It being infallible indeed in it self but not to us who may doubt if such a Book be Canonical such