was accordingly performed by Esdras Nehem. 8.1,2,3 And this was all we read in Scripture of the common People knowing the written word And it appears that the people were so far from undertaking by their own private judgements to attain to the full meaning of every hard sentence in the Law that it is said v. 79. that the Levites interpreted to the people and that Esdras taught them And v. 13. not only the people but the inferior Levites and Priests came to Esdras the chief Priest to hear from him the interpretation of the Law Now the respondent if he will make a parallel between the common people of the Jews and his Protestants must produce some clear place of Scripture where the Books of the Law of Moses and not only they but the whole Old Testament was as common and familiar in the houses and hands of every ignorant Jew as the Old and New Testament is now in the houses and hands of every ignorant Protestant which I believe he will find a very hard task seeing Printing being then unknown to the world it would have been very difficult to have found so immense a number of copies as are now since Printing of the Bible amongst Protestants Yet are not we of opinion that the Scriptures are either not profitable as Saint Paul says they are or not sufficient supposing them to be the written word of God by some precedent proof by way of Rule to make us wise unto Salvation For they contain many of the most important points of Religion clearly and expressely to all who are not willfully pertinacious and what they contain not in particular expressions by general rules they refer to the Church and the chief Governors of it to learn them from their mouths or from the Vniversal Tradition of Christendome But that every particular Christian is to receive and know what he is to believe what not by his sole perusal of Gods written word as though every particular point of Christian Faith were particularly set down in it or by particular respective consequences or other particular proofs concerning every such point to be deduced from it is so great a Paradox that no man I think who hath his right senses can averr it For besides the unlearned which is the far greater part of Christendome whereof a very great part know neither to write nor read and therefore depend upon the credit of others what are the words of Scripture or if they can read know no other save their Mothers tongue and thereby are subject to a thousand misconstructions of the words or Phrases in the Original or if they arrive to the knowledge of the original know not the true Rules of interpretation of Scripture and thereby run into errors or if they know them out of Pride or self conceit of their own wit and jugdment will not apply them And as to the Learned seeing they after all their industry skill in Languages comparing one place with another c. are yet so far from according one with another in the interpretation of divers places of Scripture touching points of Faith controverted that there is no hope after 150 years discord they will ever come to an agreement But suppose some learned men might have a greater insight into Scripture and approach nearer to the sense of it then those that are less learned or the ignorant yet Scripture interpreted by private mens judgment cannot be a sufficient Rule of Faith or means to obtain it For the Rule and means appointed by almighty God to attain Faith must be common and universal to all sorts of Christians nor must there be one rule and means for the learned and another for the unlearned Seeing Scripture cannot be sufficiently interpreted by the sole means of Scripture by the unlearned as I have shewed and Scripture interpreted by private men cannot be the Rule and Means appointed by Almighty God for the guiding of consciences in all points of Faith there must therefore be some other for the unlearned and consequently for all Now this other means and rule can be no other excogitable unless we run to the Sole private Spirit of Phanatiques which is more absurd then all the rest save the direction and universal Tradition of Gods Catholick Church as is above declared As to your last sentence I acknowledg That he who can answer these Queries may answer mine and the same substantial answer mutatis mutandis will satisfie a good conscience in both Nor did I ever think my Queries unanswerable for I know I could answer them my self or any one may do who assents to the Principles of the Roman Church But I propounded my Queries to Protestants and shewed they are unanswerable by them and from them only it is from whom I in this occasion expect an answer N. 2. Now let us weigh the Categorical Answers To the first the Answer seems to be affirmative Onely there is some dubiousness in the word Christianity For all Hereticks make a visible profession of Christianity Supposing therefore you mean true Christianity in their whole Profession the Answer is accepted To the second you add the word Ordinarily If therefore you mean by this that some may be saved in extraordinary cases out of the visible Church I take the Answer to be affirmative that some may be saved out of the visible Catholick Church which I think is contrary to the stream of all Christian Antiquity The third hath nothing of a Categorical Answer For I demand amongst all different pretended professions which is now the Holy Catholick Church by designation of some one or some set number of Professions now on foot And you tell me what the Holy Catholick Church is but give no designation of any particular profession or professions of Christians Or if you intended to make a designation you have answered obscurum per aequè obscurum which can be no Categorical Answer For it is now as obscure among Christians which profession that is which now professeth the true Catholick Faith once for all delivered to the Saints c. as it is which is now the Holy Catholick Church Your fourth Answer is defective ex insufficienti enumeratione partium and not Categorical For I put two parts in my Querie Destructive of Salvation or indangering of it You answer to the first but you say nothing to the second wherein notwithstanding was the main force of the Querie Your fifth Answer is not Categorical because only conditional You say The Catholick Church so long as it continues so cannot c Now this conditional So long as it continues so supposes that the Catholick Church can cease to be the Catholick Church which is both contrary to your answer to the first Querie wherein you grant that there is in all ages a Visible Catholick Church and a most damnable error in Christianity For if the Visible Catholick Church can ever cease to be Christ who hath promised it shall ever be Eph. 4.10,11,12
that the learned Papists who differ about the Conception of the blessed Virgin Mary do on either side urge for their defence universal Tradition If then it be not sufficient to determine this controversie why should it be set up to justle Scripture out of its Seat to make room for another means of determining controversies which is as uneffectual and indeed infinitely more unfit If a Papist say that the determination of this point is not necessary which is a gross absurdity because this remaining undetermined no small part of Popish worship of the Virgin Mary as the Feast of the Immaculate Conception hath no certain ground of Faith and by the Apostle St. Paul's sentence is Sin Rom. 14 23. we may with more reason say that the determination of the points in controversie between us is not necessary Or if it be necessary that determination is to be regulated now as the decision of things in dispute was of old in the general Councils by the Scripture or written word of God by which Tradition it self is to be measured and judged as St. Paul made the Scriptures the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or measure of truth between * Mat. 26.15 Read 1. Cor. 15.3,4 the Tradition of the Jews on the one side and the Christians on the other side concerning the Resurrection of Jesus Christ 6. Because here is frequent mention of Tradition and the ambiguity of the word is apt to beget mistakes and confusion therefore give me seave to unfold the Senses of the word that we may have a clear apprehension of the matter in hand Tradition is sometimes put to signify the thing delivered whether the way of delivery be writing or speaking and Tradition thus taken materially is indifferent to the being written or unwritten for the same Tradition or Doctrine of the Gospel which was at one time unwritten might have been written and for certain was at another time writen And the Jewish Traditions which for many generations past by a successive conveyance without Book have been by the Rabbies committed at length to vvriting for their better Security And the Papists now make no scruple of vvriting their Traditions vvhich they call the unvvritten Word of God let them justify the presumption as vvell as they can Mat. 14.2,3,6 Novv as the Traditions of the Elders mentioned in Scripture signify the doctrines and Ceremonies that vvere delivered by the Fathers but vvere distinct from the Law vvritten So when vve speak of Traditions in the Christian Church vve do now in these latter ages commonly understand some particular doctrines or Rites or matters of fact delivered with a pretence of divine or at least Apostolical Authority for their reception which are not expressed in the written word of God These Traditions once accepted and commended by the present Church of Rome the Conventicle at Trent hath very severely enjoyned to be received and embraced with an equal affection of holy reverence wherewith we entertayn the sacred Scriptures themselves But to keep up the mystery of iniquity with the liberty of laying aside old Traditions and giving credit to new inventions as their interest and occasions may require they who determined the Canon of Scriptures and numbred the Books yet would not reckon up and determine the Traditions of the Church that Christians might know what is the perfect and fixed Rule of Faith Thus Romanists though they have a larger Object of Faith then we have yet they have no certain measure because the Traditions of the Roman Church are like the Moon subject to decreases as the giving of the Eucharist to Infants was once held by D. Innocentius 3. as a Doctrine of Faith and a Tradition of the Church Maldonate on John 6. confesseth thus much but after 600 years practise wore out insensibly and hath been condemned by the Councils of Constance and Trent with an Anathema and to increases also and therefore their Religion is indeed Irregular But concerning Traditions as the word signifies particular points of beliefe or practise in Christian Religion these 3 Rules are worth Observation 1. Whatsoever is offered to us or enjoyned to us in belief or practise under colour of being a Tradition if it be repugnant to the written word of God or destructive of Gods precepts ought to be rejected by Christians Christs reason together with the refutation of Phaâ—…aical Traditions confirms the Truth of this Rule Nihil credi Deus voluit adversus Sc ipturarum authoritatem Aug. l. 13. cont Faus Manich. Mark 7.5 13. 2. Whatsoever is obtruded upon us under the pretext of being a Tradition that is neither clearly delivered in nor fairly by good consequence deduced out of Gods written word needs not and ought not to be received as a matter necessary to Salvation The manner of conveniency or necessity wherein things which are strangers to Scripture are held is carefully to be taken notice of For several practises have been in early times introduced under shew of conveniency as the Apostle says some bodily exercises carry a plausible shew of wisdome which having once obtained credit by the favourable commendation of eminent persons and custome have been in succession of time adorned with the Title of Tradition and grown up from being thought convenient to be accounted and prest as necessary to Salvation This danger is to be prevented by circumspection And the perfection of Scripture as it is a compleat Rule of Religion proves the truth and usefulness of this second Rule 3. Doctrines of Faith and divine Worship being secured by Gods written word from intrusions of humane inventions if any Rites or Ceremonies can be proved by fair Testimonies of Antiquity to have been practised by the Church universal of primitive times and are still continued by the Authority of Church Governors as tending to edification or the free and open profession of our Faith whether they be called Traditions or no are not lightly to be rejected much less violently opposed by private Christians Thus much for Traditions as meaning Matters of Religion delivered down from former times to posterity But Tradition often bears another sence and is taken formally for the manner of conveyance of matters that concern Religion which is partly oral partly practical The joynt agreement of Doctrine and practice continued by succession of one Age after another whilst one generation derives to another the whole body of Religion is now called Tradition and of late is asserted by Papists in this Kingdom to be the only Principle and Rule of â—aith and affirmed to be of its own nature infallible and incorruptible and to be evident by its own light And thus the order of inquiring for the ancient dayes and old wayes is quite inverted for now we need only as they teach mark what the present Church of Rome doth and because Tradition cannot fail nor vary therefore the Popes Court at this day with the Church Altars Pictures Wafers mangled Eucharist adoration of the
Counter-Queries My next Task is to examine his exceptions against my Categorical Answers I shall not contend about words nor much crave excuse for want of accurate expression in that hasty delivery of my Conceptions to comply with your request at that time 1. As to the first he excepts against the term Christianity as dubious to make my Answer acceptable I will insert the Term he desires and say True Christianity But I fear the addition will dispel no mist of doubtfulness if there were any such about the answer For Hereticks alwaies pretend to Truth as much as to Christianity and would be taken for the only true Christians But to satisfy his nice and curious palate I answer as fully as he desires There was is and shall be till the worlds end a Catholick Church that in every age is visible by profession of true Christianity to the persons then living That is to say In all ages God had and will have and preserve some Christians who shall so profess the Truth according to the doctrine of the Gospel that their light of Faith shall shine to the men of their generation respectively But I cannot so easily admit another addition sliely made by the Querist to my Answer viz. in their whole profession Latet anguis in herbâ 1 Cor. 3.12,13 He that professes true Christianity may build hay and stubble upon the foundation and yet not miscarry in his person whilst he holds fast his profession of the saving truth unto the end though he be saved through the fire and loose his superstructure as St. Paul assures us It is not therefore necessary that any person or Church which maintains true Christianity should profess it in such an absolute purity as that water should never be mixed with the wine It is enough that poyson is not admixed with the liquor of life But because I perceive that there is much ambiguity in the termes of the Query for which it deserves to be called Fallacia plurium interrogationum a sophistical trick of asking many things under one word that hath two faces under a hood I will weigh the vvords over again and mould my answer anevv fitted to his explication of the vvord Catholick In common speech Catholick is no more than Universal Just. Mart. dial cum Tryph. Justin Martyr vvho vvith many others of that age believed a particular Resurrection of some that should rise and reign 1000 years before the end of the World calls the last Resurrection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Catholick or in plain English Universal Resurrection There is also a Catholick Faith vvhich is common to all Christians and comprises all that is necessary to Salvation And the Church of Christ novv unconfined to any one place or nation but spreading like a fruitful vine her branches throughout the carth is called Catholick that is not National as the old Church of the Jevvs vvas but Universal since the Gospel is preached to all the vvorld indifferently and the voice of the Apostles vvent forth into all the earth and their vvords unto the ends of the habitable vvorld Col. 2.6 Rom. 10.18 It is not to be omitted that in a secondary and borrovved sense the word Catholick is applied to them that hold the true Faith which is common to all Christians and therefore Catholick In this sense not only a particular Church but also a singular person may be called Catholick meaning one that professes the Catholick Faith But the Querist who hath a peculiar language and though he speaks English yet means Italian hath taught me since I first read his Questions and answered them according to the common usage of the words that he meant by the Catholick Church the Representative Church in a full and lawful meeting of the Priests and Pastors to teach the Church diffusive Now according to this sense of the words Catholick Church I do turn my Affirmative Answer into a Negative and say There is not in all ages a visible Catholick Church meaning a general Council lawfull assembled If this be Equivocation you see who teac hes me to be double tongued The exception against my second Answer is that I add the word ordinarily and he supposes that I might mean that some may be saved in extraordinary cases out of the visible Church and therefore he takes my Answer to be Affirmative That some may be saved out of the Catholick Church and this he thinks is contrary to the stream of Antiquity Mage cernit acutum quam aut Aquila out Serpens Epidaurius Horat. If he had not had the malignant disposition rather then the quick-sighted eye of a Serpent he would never have espied a fault in my Answer and fancied an Affirmative sentence in a Negative Proposition For if he had not been forward to cavil he might have easily conceived a very obvious reason of my putting in the word Ordinarily Because we know not how God will deal in judging all out of the pale of the Church and we that live within it are concerned to give an account onely for our selves and for the use of our Light and Talent I said that Ordinarily out of the Catholick Church there is no Salvation This negative which resolves nothing positively concerning Gods extraordinary acting cannot without unjust violence to my words be taken for an affirmative sentence That some may be saved out of the Church And I hope you will excuse if not justify my unwillingness to limit the spirit and mercies of God which blows and shine where God pleases As for Christian Antiquity you know that many antient Doctors have been very favourable in their judgment not only of them who lived by the law of nature in a communion with God when the Covenant of Grace was first ratified with the Hebrew Patriarchs though those worshippers of God were not of the stock of Israel Of this see Is Casaub Exerc 1. ad Card. Baron App. c. 1. but also of them who lived in latter ages in the acknowledgment of one God with a constant observation of Truth and Justice such as were Socrates and Aristides But according to the Querists explication of the Church Catholick I shall now change the shape of my second Answer also and say That Christians may attain salvation out of a Representative Church which he gives to be the meaning of a Catholick Church in the Querie and charges me with sophistry because I will not understand it so The members of a general Council being but few and that not agreed who have right to be so it were hard with Christendom if all who are extra Concilium out of that compass were excluded out of Heaven I add that the Church Catholick may stand and all the members of it may be saved without a Church Representative Now because all that he says is but beating the Air and very impertinent to his design of making a Convert which is the thing aimed at I add a Proposition which though
senses to be the instruments of our faith and the Bread and Wine are designed to be sensible Symbols of spiritual things even as the Water in Baptism is Briefly since our Blessed Saviour the Angels and the holy Apostles Luk. 24.39 Joh. 20.27 Mat. 28.26 Act. 10.41 1.9 1 Joh. 1.1,3 have made our senses competent instruments to assist our faith and reason in judging of the truth and presence of Christs Body even after the Resurrection and Christ hath not any where by himself or his Apostles limited the free exercise of our senses nor lessened the credit of their Verdict in the Sacrament of the Eucharist more then in Baptism is it not a horrid tyranny over Christians to require that we renounce both senses and reason and at the command of a Romish Priest believe that there is no Bread and Wine where all our senses almost conspire to inform us of their presence and the very nature of the Sacrament requires it and on the other side to believe that Christs Body is in every consecrated Host and in every crum whole and entire and continues one though divided from it self in a million of places when our senses can give us no information of this presence and our reason assures us that it is inconsistent with many Articles of our Creed But observe the confidence of this Factor who with a fore-head well rubbed tels you that Protestants require you to renounce your senses whereas we think that our Saviours command He that hath ears to hear let him hear holds by proportion in the rest Mat. 13.9 Apoc. 2.9 He that hath eyes to see let him see with assurance that the God of truth who fitted man with senses for the service of his Maker as well as for his own benefit doth secure him from deceit in the use of them about their proper objects in Religion as well as in civil conversation As for our Reason this he would perswade you must be renounced in the belief of the Trinity that you may renounce it for the easie swallowing the Camel of Transubstantiation Think what advantage this man gives to Heathens Socinians Anti-Trinitarians and indeed all the adversaries of the Gospel by confessing that the prime Article of our faith concerning the God whom Christians worship is more opposite to reason then the scandalous Monster of Transubstantiation The Doctrine of three Persons in one God is indeed a sublime mystery which is beyond the discovery of reason before it is revealed and incomprehensible by reason after revelation as many secrets in the very course of nature cannot be accounted for by our dark and narrow understandings Reason it self tels us that the infinite nature of God is not to be measured by the limited being of the creatures and also that the glory of the invisible God cannot be discovered but by his own manifestation of it and that according to his own good pleasure with different degrees of light as Gods wisdom thinks fit to impart unto man the knowledge of God And lastly Reason resolves that Gods Word especially of himself who like the Sun is seen by his own light is to be believed without dispute Since therefore God in his Word written hath clearly revealed that the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are one God it is a kindly office of enlightened reason to bring down every vain thought and weak reasonings that lift up themselves against the knowledge of God and to lead them captive under the obedience of faith But there is no cause why we should struggle with our reason and un-man our selves that we may admit the divelish figment of Transubstantiation whereof there is not the least shadow in the Word of God This subtil Sophister aggravates the difficulty that may be fancied in the Trinity to the greatest advantage of Atheistical cavillers but he would lessen the absurdities of Transubstantiation by an imperfect and false representation of his own Doctrine which hath no ground in Gods Word All that is with any colour alleadged out of Scripture to give countenance to the lie which we are required to believe is the sentence of Christ This Bread is my Body This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood Luk. 22.19,20 Mat. 26.26,28 or My Blood of the New Testament Mark now what a vast difference between the speech of our Blessed Saviour The Bread is my Body that is signifies and represents my Body as God himself says Ezek 37.11 These hones are the whole house of Israel and Ezek 25.3 Concil Trâ—d Sess 13. c. 4. This to wit the Hair before-mentioned is Jerusalem and the definition of the Tridentine Fathers The whole substance of the Bread is turned into the whole substance of Christs Body and the whole substance of the Wine into the whole substance of Christs Blood Where is this Conversion recorded in the Gospel or Apostolical Epistles that we should offer violence to our reason to work our minds to the belief of it It is also false that you are required only to believe that Bread is turned into Flesh We do believe and that without renouncing our reason that Christ who could turn stones into Bread and did turn water into Wine could turn if he pleased Bread into Flesh and Wine into Blood as easily as he did Water into Blood in Egypt And if Christ should do this at any time the change would be as evident to the senses as it was in all miraculous conversions and the Flesh would be as visible as the Serpent was into which Aarons Rod was turned and the Blood as truly obvious to the eye as the sanguified streams of Egypt But Papists require your unreasonable belief of another thing to wit that the Sacramental Bread is turned substantially into the very Body of Christ which was before that born of the Blessed Virgin Mary and is now at the time of every conversion sitting at the right hand of God in glory above the Heavens By the way because it is not my business now to refute this false Doctrine remember that unquestionable Axiome of true Philosophy Nothing is before it is made or whilst it is in making But Christs Body was before the Sacrament and is already when the Priest begins the first syllable of his Magical murmur by which he pretends to make the Body of Christ You see the manifest contradiction which you are obliged by Papists to believe in this insensible conversion Now if you will to please a Papist renounce sense and reason that you may be capable of this rare belief I know no cause why you should not also take Ovid's Poem of Metamorphosis for a veritable History He fraudulently minces the matter again when he speaks of the easinesse of believing that one Body is in more places at one time I know that Thomas Aquinas in his Quodlibets says that the subsistence of one Body in more places at one time is impossible because that which is one in it self cannot
be divided from it self without the destruction of its unity and being together But that is not all which you are bound to believe in this device For you must believe if you can that the very Body of Christ which consists of limbs and lineaments distinguished by several proportions and situations and at this time is now in a certain place in Heaven clothed with glory brighter then the Sun is now lurking an invisible and indivisible Body in all the Hosts that are consecrated or inchanted rather in the Papacy and in every crum of every Wafer This is the substance of the Popish Doctrine which the Sophister rarifies into a thin cloud but that hath still gross contradictions in it which are enough to divert a man that would serve God with his reason and understanding from going into the region of darknesse Rom. 12.1 1 Cor. 14. that is the Roman Church He would fain repair the breach which is made in their Charity Here his jugling is unsufferable He conceals the uncharitable condition of your admission into the Roman society To joyn with Papists you must break off communion with all Christians that are not subject to the See of Rome Can you leap over this stumbling stock and think your self in a safe Sanctuarie when you have shut up your self in the Popes cloyster from converse with all Christians besides in offices of Religion But all our complaint of their uncharitableness he sais is our mistake You have read enough of that argument I need say nothing now But see how untowardly this wolf puts on the Sheeps skin on his back He thinks their Charity unreproveable because they as he shamelesly affirms censure not Persons but Doctrine and that maintained pertinaciously Read the Canons of the Council of Trent wherein this is the constant form of cursing their Adversaries Si quis dixerit If any person say so and so let him be Anathema And have not Armes been raised after that the Anathemaes were thundred to extirpate with fire and sword the doctrine of the Gospel by destroying the persons that profess it What truth can you expect from such open lyers as the men of this mould are He says further that neither Papists nor Protestants can absolutely Judge who maintains an error obstinately Where then is their Charity or Justice when they do as the Histories of Christendome sufficiently witness adjudg Protestants to be Hereticks and so render them up to the secular arm to be slaughtered as the Executioners of Papal decrees think fit But the Papists do so abound in Charity that it is only out of Charity that they endeavour our conversion by warning us of dangers I will believe that Romanists seek our Souls Salvation more than English money when out of meer Charity they seriously undertake the conversion of the Strumpets in the Popes Dominions who are in as great danger of being damned as those whom they call Hereticks can be by their profession But they that are the Popes creatures dare not exercise their Charity to the impoverishment of the Popes Exchequer to which the licensed Stewes afford no small contribution Neither will these charitable savors of Souls allow us the same exercise of our Charity in Spain or Italy although we are as firmly perswaded of the danger that Papists are in as they are conceited of our perils and have as much pity and kindness for poor Souls kept in bondage and blindness in spiritual Aegypt as Papists have for us Till we can obtain the same freedome for us to employ our Charity it is not agreeable to justice that Papists should be permitted such liberties as they now take to make an ostentation of their counterfeit Charitie which is indeed carnal Policy to restore the Papal jurisdiction in England He proceeds in his falshood and denies the profession of Faith expressed in the Pope Pius 4. his Bull dated A. D 1554 to be a new Creed Do you not take that to be new in Christianity which is but a little above a hâ—…red years old for the whole mass which is superadded to the antient Creed of the Church was never known for a Creed till that Pope gave it out for one But what name will you find out for this Gentleman who says it is no Greed but a Catalogue of points to be professed by teachers in publick Academies c. If you read the Bull it self you will see that Credo I believe runs through the vvhole body of the form and I acknowledg profess assert firmly embrace this and that are the expressions used in that Creed which is there also called The true Catholick Faith without which no man can be saved The Querist also knows as well as I though he doth worse than dissemble his own knowledg that the Popes Bull enjoyns this Creed to be sworn to by all Ecclesiasticks vvhich are more then Teachers in Universities all dignitaries in Churches all Regulars c. and it strictly charges all Clergy-men to endeavour as much as in them lies that all men under their care and charge shall learn and hold this Faith These animadversions I offer to your assistance in the giving a right judgment of the Gentlemans Reply to mine Answers If you please to offer a Copy of my Letter to the unknown person you may do well And if he shall return any thing that you shall think fit to impart unto me I-shall peradventure be at leisure to consider it and tell you what sense I have of it as freely and plainly as I have dealt in the examination of the precedent discourse I conclude in St. Pauls words 2. Tim. 2.7 The Lord give you a good understanding in all things So I rest SIR Your very faithful Servant C. G. THe emptiness of this spare Paper tempts me to recite the Exposition of that acute Commentator Maldonate who though a Jesuite expounds our blessed Saviours Precept Mat. 23.2,3 far otherwise than this Advocate for the Jewish Chairmen doth His words are these Ergo cum jubet servare facere quae Scribae Pharisaei dum in cathedrâ Mosis sedent dicunt non de ipsorum sed de Legis 〈◊〉 Moysis doctrinâ soquitur Perinde est enim ae si dicat Omnia quae Lex Moyses vobis dixerunt Scribis Pharisaeis recitantibus servate ac facite secundum aurem opera illorum nolite facere ut Hilarius Hieronimus videntur intellexisse The sense of his words is this Therefore when Christ bids them keep and do what the Scribes and Pharisees say whiles they sit in the Chair of Moses he speaks not of their own doctrine but of that of the Law and of Moses For it is all ove as if Christ say All those things which the Law and Moses have told you when the Scribes and Pharisees recite them do ye keep and perform but do ye not according to their works as Hilarie and Hierome seem to have understood the Text. Mark that this learned Papist is
constreyned by the force of truth and uncontrollable evidence of the false doctrines of the Scribes and Pharisees to imply tacitely that those Chairmen could teach a Doctrine far different from that of the Law and of Moses and openly to overr that the Doctrine of the Law and Moses that might then be well known was to be the Object and limit of the Observance and Obedience enjoyned as due to the Ministery of the Scribes and Pharisces The Commentator to justify his Exposition alleges Hilarie and Hierome two ancient and very learned Latine Fathers seemingly at least to have been of his sense in the understanding our Saviours words A Letter of Sir Lucius Carie Lord Viscount Falkland to Mr. F. M. An. Dom. 1636. Frank I Have received not your Letter but your Declamation for I would rather believe that you had a mind to exercise your stile then that you are likely to make Mr. Lee once Tutor to that Gentleman did often say than his Scholar would one day prove a Jesuit Mr. Lees prediction a Prophesie But if it be possible that having carried up Baronius you should be in earneste that you should be moved by the Authority of a Father living 400 years after Christ to the choice of that Religion which I have shewed you in that question of the Chiliasts opposeth seven Fathers the youngest more antient than he and the rest the most antient that are That their Sanctity should move you which not only their own learned Salmeron makes a false Note of the Church but which as I find by their own Authors they have had but so lately that their Piety is but the effect of their Emulation who till we reformed their Doctrine reformed not their lives and owe the purity of their Church to him whom they stile the Author of ours That you should choose them for the convenience of an Infallible Guide when they neither know her Infallibly to be Infallible nor Infallibly what Definitions are hers when those are yet more hard to be understood than to be known and those who have the convenience of so infallible a Director neither agree by what Notes she is to be known nor what Doctrines she teaches and cannot but confess that there are infinite Questions which concern the Duty of our lives of which she is wholly silent and concerning which they are in the same miserable estate in which we are who have none That their Multitude should move you who cannot but know that almost all the world hath been Idolaters and most Christians have been Arrians Indeed if any such Topical Arguments should seem to you worthy to enter the lists with those at least much more apparent Vnreasonablenesses which are in so many of their doctrines as Transubstantiation c. If I say this be possible I doubt not but either at the end of this week or the beginning of the next to say so much more to you as will serve to let you see that those Works of theirs are very weak which may be demolished by a Potgun Till then I pray consider That if God as we say requires our Assent to nothing but to what is apparent to be his Will then there is no necessity of a Guide since those who would deny apparent Doctrines would as well resist an apparent Guide And that they confess that it is Obstinacy in which Heresie consists and which damnation follows and that sure this secret I mean who is guilty of Obstinacy is fitter to be reserved for Him to discover who made the heart then to be judged by them who cannot know it and both parts may keep their Opinions till it shall be made there infallibly appear both whose Opinions are erroneous and whose errors are guilty whereas the subsistence of the Common-wealth will not suffer Criminal matters to stay for so long though a more certain tryal I am in hast for it is late which time I was fain to take lest your Mother should come in Your very affectionate Brother-and Servant FALKLAND Pray read Baronius over and carefully Not the Cardinal Baronius whose Annals are compacted to serve the Popes Interest without any regard to truth but a learned Divine of Scotland who hath written solidly De objecto formali fidei and hath defended his Discourse against Turnlull a Jesuit FINIS