discending to the second thence to the third and so on to the succeding ages of the Church whereby he will perceive how the true Religion has been handed downe from one age to another and how and when this or that errour sprang up as he â—hat sails down some great and clear pure river may easily perceive where little Rivuletts and puddles have run into it and have muddyed and troubled the Cleareâ— Stream Firm. I much approve of what you say concerning the rise and cause of errours in Religion the chiefe reason of them is ignorance in the records of Antiquity and holy Scriptures and want of orderly proceeding in our studies from age to age whereby we may easily perceive how and when the puddles corrupt rivuleâ—s of errour have troubled the purer stream of Christianity and you may without much labour perceive that if you had been well instructed in the being and Attributes of Almighty God in a firm beliefe of his most sacred word you had never fallen into those most dangerous errours of Popery Quakerism or oâ— any such pernicous sect Dub. I do confesse my error and especially that I was so great a stranger not onely to the writings of the fathers but to the holy Scripture it selfe which I did too much neglect and scorn but seeing by Gods blessing upon your endeavours I am fully satisfied of the vanity absurdity and falshood of Atheism infidelity and Popery if you please to give your self thâ—t trouble we will proceed in our discourse concerning Quakerism Anabaptism Independency and Presbytery I shall not trouble you with any other sect because they are all included in some one of these or at least are so vain and ridiculous that we should do them to much honour if we should gratifie them with a sober and serious confutation Firm. I shall most willingly embrace your proposall and if it please you we will proceed to Quakerism the errour which you embraced immediatly before you turned Papist and in truth 't is a faire introduction to Popery and by many grosse errours which the Quakers embrace 't is as evident as the light at noon day who were the fathers of those spurious brats Dub. This is a very truth the Quakers holding many things which are maintained by Papists we may easily know whose Children these poor deluded Souls are and the Corespondence betwixt them made my passage to Rome more ready and easy DIALOGVE IV Against QVAKERISM Firm. You have informed me in our last discourse that being sometime a quaker you had a ready way open to become a Papist I pray tell me why and how you turned a quaker Dub. You put me hard to it for I can give yoâ— no verâ— good reasons for that change and those that moved me are so ridiculous that I am almost ashamed to name them yet such as they are I shall give you the trouble of hearing them I am almost perswaded that the man that perverted me used some enchantments and Diabolicall arts so that I was rather bewitched then rationally perswaded to be of that party as I have heard some have been but because I am not certain of this I shall wave it and shew you my reasons 1. I observed that the cause why there were so many sects and schisms in the world was for want of a certain infallible rule to guide us in our judgments and practises as I was made believe and I was perswaded that the Quakers had such a rule to wit the light within them 2. I observed these men to be very demure in their carriage very austere in their lives sober and tempâ—â—â—tâ— of afflicted dejected countenances very punctuall and just in their dealings not abating one fartâ—ing of the price of any commodity they first demanded greâ—t contemners of the world no respecters of any mans person how great soever so meeke humble and lowly in their apparell and behavior that they cannot endure the wearing of gold-rings silver or silks in themselves or any others and if any man should strike them on the one cheek these poore innocent soules were so farr from revenge that they would turne the other so that I conceiued them to be so many Nathaniels so many true Israelites in whom there was no guile Firm. How could you be deceived by such painted sepulchers what could you see more in them then what was conspicuous in the Scribes and Phariâ—ees of old take iâ— for an infalible rule that whosoever hold or practise any thing which is contrary to the law of nature and good manners expresse Scripture the usages of all sober and civill people in the world are so farr from being true Christians that they are not worthy the name of men Dub. I am fully of your perswasion that these men hold and practise many things which are contrary to the law of nature good manners and holy Scripture but for my farther satisfaction let us discourse some of their tenents and practises Firm. For their tenents you may at your leisure peruse the Synopsis of Quakerisme wrote by Mr. Danson The heads whereof are breifly these taken out of their owne writings which are a mixture of Popery and Socinianisme as 1. They affirm that there are not three persons in the Trinity 2. That Christ did not make satisfaction for the sins of men 3. That justification is not by imputed righteousness but that our owne inhaerent righteousness and good works is the cause of our justification 4. That a state of perfection and freedome from sin is attainable in this life 5. That there is a light in every man sufficient to guide him to salvation 6. That the Scripture is not the word of God or a standing rule of faith and manners 7. That there is no resurrection of the dead 8. That there is no need or use of ordinances as Baptisme and the Lords Supper 9. That 't is unlawfull to take an oath before a Magistrate upon any account whatsoever Dub. I know these and many more to be the positions of quakers and that they are directly contrary to sacred Schripture Firm. These things are so clearly confuted by the expresse word of God and tradition of the Catholick Church that 't is superfluous to trouble you with any further discourse about them As for their practises they are extreamly opposite to all good manners and the Civilities of aâ—l Nations that are not grosly barbarous as well as â—o the holy Scripture and whereas you have observed their carriages to be very demure austere and that they are of a sad countenance 't is no more then what our blessed Saviour reproved in the Scribes and Pharisees long since indeed to be sad and mourn in times of publick Humiliation Calamities and great Judgements is Christian but to be constanly so savours too much of the Pharisee and is contrary to holy Scripture which instructs us there is a time to Laugh as well as to Weepe there is nothing which more delights and cheers the
enemies to Christianity acknowledg but besides their Testimony which being from adversaryes is vâ—â—y cogent we have the tradition of the Catholick Church in all ages and most places of the world for 1600 years and upwards and as he that will go up by the side of the River will at last come to the head and fountain of it so he that shall ascend through the several Centuries of the Church will at last infallibly come to the head of it Christ Iesus to the place of his Nativity his Preaching and mighty Works that he did his bitter death and bloody passion or if he shall descend from Christ through the same Centuries down to this present time he may be farr more certain of the birth and life and works and sufferings of this our bessed Saviour of the writings of the Holy Evangelists and Apostles then that there have been such men in the world as Alexander the great Iulius Caesar Pompey Scipio Hannibal of the Warrs and noble Acheivements managed by them of William the Conquerour the Barons warrs and yet none but a fool or a mad man or one that has vowed to believe no farther then what he can see with his own eyes will doubt of these for that the tradition which conveys the same of these Worthies and their Actions down unto us is nothing so general as that of the Catholick Church neither is it at all practical but purely historical wherein we are not at all concerned whether or no the things reported of those noble warriours be true or false Dub. He that will not assent to what is delivered by universal Tradition takes away the use of one of the most noble Sciences in the world viz. History and wants rather a Cudgel then an Arguâ—ent to confute him T is evident by undeniable tradition that there were such persons as Christ and his Apostles that thay did great and marveilous things but how shall we know whether the works which they did were true miracles surely t is very difficult to know what is true and what is an imposture Firm. Thô at present this may appear difficult to you yet I hope I shall make this difference as manifest to you as is that which is betwixt Gold and drosse And here I will not trouble you with the niceties of the schoolemen betwixt mirum miraculum that a true miracle is arduum insoliâ—um supra vim naturae hard unusuall and above the powèr of nature that it differs from a â—alse one in the efficient material and formall cause which is ignotum per ignotius But to wave such subtilties a true miracle may be known from a false one 1. By the successe as Exod. 7.12 t is said Aarons rod swallowed up those of the sorcerers and in the primitive times t is cleare how the miracles wrought by the Apostles swallowed up in effect all false ones â—one by satanâ— Instruments how notwithstanding all those lying wonders wrought by Simon Magus Apollonius and others the prejudicating world was brought over from Idolatry and superstition to embrace poor persecuted Christianity by those true miracles which otherwise had been the greatest miracle in the world 2. A true miracle may be known from that which is a jugle or imposture by the design or end of it which is for the confirmation of a divine revelation to bring men over to the worship of the true God to propagate the true Religion the end of false ones is to draw men from this worshâ—p which note of difference God himself has stamp'd upon false miracles Deut. 13 Dub. But doe not you now run into the same erroâ—r which you so lately condemned in others for by what you have said I must first know which is the true Religion before I can know which is a true miracle and surely then there will be no use of miracles to confirme me in the truth of what I knew before Firm. there is a mutuall confirmation betwixt the true religion and a true miracle true Religion does give light to miracles these do seal and confirm that Religion We see that all discursive knowledge does arise from some precedent knowledge untill we ascend to such principles that are clear to the light of nature now evident it is to natural reason that there is a God Creatour of all things that there is but one God that this one God ought to be religiously worshipped the intelligent and learned heathens have acknowledged all these Again 't is evident that there were never but four general Religions in the world Paganisme Turcisme Judaisme and Christianity and I think I have already made it manifest that of all these Religions none is so râ—tional or such a reasonable service as is that of the Christian which for the substance of it is the oldest of all others being the same which was practised by the fathers both before and after the flood for the spirituality morality and unity of the God heaâ— worshipped 't is excellent beyond all others most agreeable to the Common principles and notices of the reasonable Soul Here upon any serious sober man may conclude that all these miracles which have been â—ttempted to draw men from Christianity are but mere impostures and those that have been wrought for the confirmation of it wherein one true God of infinite majesty wisdome power and glory is worshipped in spirit and truth are the only true miracles Dub. Pray Sir excuse me this unnecessary trouble which I have given you for by what you had said before concerning the supereminent excellency of the Christian Religion above all others I might have seen the force of your reasoning which as I conceive stands thus If the Christian Religion be the only tâ—ue Religion then those miracles which were wrought for the Confirmation of it are the only true miracles Firm. You rightly conclude I shall therefore proceed to the third note or marke of a true mirâ—cle and that is the effect and consequent of such a miracle which is the drawing of the mind from sin to God the primitive Christians much insisted on this as an undoubâ—ed evidence of tâ—e miracles wrought by Christ that they were done by divine power because the effect that followed them was the worke of conversion of Souâ—â— from sin and Idoâ—s to Goâ— and Christ and all true piety and holinesse of life they tended mainly to the overthrow of Satans Kingdome Christ by his miracles did not only disposesse Satan out of mens bodies but out of his Temples upon this accouâ—t he convinces the Scribes and Pharises of most irrational blasphemy when they objected against him that he did cast out devills by the power of the devill but he replyed every Kingdome divided against it selfe cannot stand Mat. 12.25 Besideâ— Christs doctrine which he confirmed by miraclâ—s was in every thing contâ—â—â—y to the devils dâ—sign which was to draw men from the worship of the true God that himself might be worshiped to insnare men in the practise
infirmities is the same Strong Handsome Healthy Man that he was when at twenty five or thirty years old Dub. Thô I have sometimes much reverenced the Church of Rome for her antiquity yet now I begin to doubt that there are many diseases in the body of that Church many wrinkles in her face which were not from the beginning but not withstanding those infirmities 't is the same true Church as 't was at the first plantation as the old decrepite man is the same man that ever he was for substance Firm. I deny not but that the Church of Rome is in some sence the same it first was in respect of divers Articles it holds but in respect of those gross errours it now maintaines 't is no more like what it was then the old decrepite diseased man is like what he was in his younger dayes Dub. Your comparison is very good and apposite to the present Church of Rome which past dispute is full of dangerous and desperate diseases as I in part do apprehend I pray you proceed to my other motive Firm. The Church of Rome is not so universal as her disciples boast of neither in respect of place or time 1. 'T is the observation of a learned man that if the world were divided into 30 parts 19 of them are heathens 6 Mahometans and 5 Christians of which the Papists are not the one halfe as Mr. Breirwood in his Enquires does demonstrate 2. As to the universality of time the Church of Rome cannot deduce her present tenents from the beginning of Christianity through the several ages or Centuryes that it has continued a Church from the first preaching of the Gospell I deny not but that 't is the same for purity of Doctrine as once it was is most false for the antient Church of Rome never taught worshiping of images praying to Saints that monstrous transubstantiation halfe Communion Praier in an unknowne tongue and many more Groundless fopperies against Scripture the general consent of fathers common sence and reason Dub. All this I am inclined to believe but how could these errours creepe into a Church which did so punctually observe the traditions of their forefathers what the Church of Rome now believes and teaches it received from the Church that was in the next age before it that from the Church next before it and so quite down to the Apostles times as the Author of the Dialogues betwixt the Vnckle and the Nephew hath most learnedly demonstraâ—ed Firm. Truly very learnedly even as Zeno proved there was no locall motion you have heard how Diogenes confuted him by an ocular demonstration were not the Scribes and Pharises great pretenders to a Strict observation of the traditions of their fathers And yet we know how grosly they had corrupted the law of Moses as is evident by our Saviours confutation of them Mat. 5. and in severall other places Dr. Crakanâ—thorp and other Learned prâ—â—â—stants do evidently shew the beginning the progress of the Corruptions of the Church of Rome the manner of their spring and Growth but Suppose we cannot punctually tâ—ll the beginning and progress of such and such an errour shall we therefore believe it to be no errour you walk sometimes in the fields 't is evident to your eyes that the Grasse aâ—d graine do grow though you do not see them move at all sometimes you visit a friend that is sick of a languishing consumption you see by infallible symptoms that your friend is in a desperate Condition will you not believe him to be so because you cannot tell the time when or the manner how his disease came upon him Dub I cannot be so unreasonable and by what you have said my third reason falls to the Ground for the present Church of Rome has no agreement with the primitive but is extreamly opposite to it in the points before named besides many others I pray let me hear what you can say against their unity for they seem to be firmly united under one infallible head the Pope Firm. Truely Sir they do but seem so for they are miserably divided in the great fundamentall of their faith their infallibility and are not they very unjust to us to exact our beliefe of that which they themselves know not where to find for some of them tell us 't is fixed to the Popes chair some say 't is to be found in a Generall Councell otâ—â—rs believe it to be in neither but in both united together others would perswade us that 't is in the whole body of the Church so that if you seek after this pretty knack of infallibillity you will be abused as young apprentices are used to be in great Cittys and corporations who in waggery are sent from shop to shop for a penyworth of Ell-broad Packthred or a pound of stock-fish Tallow or a Lefthanded Shuttle after these poore novices have been sent from one end of the Citty to the other they returne home without such ridiculous Commodities and are sufficiently exposed to laughter and derision There 's scarce a Controversy in all Bellarmin's voluminous workes wherein he recites not the different opinions of the Roman Catholicks among themselves insomuch that this great Cardinals workes were not to be bought in Rome as Sir Edw Sandyes reports in his Europa speculum because he had so imprudently discovered the nakednesse of his mother in point of unity To say nothing of the contentions betwixt the Thomists and Scotists Ochamists c 't is pleasant to see how sweetly the Dominicans Franciscans Iesuites Molinists Iansenists Regulars and seculars agree together Though a laté Pope durst be so bold as to decide a Controversy for the Molimists against the Iansenians and so that which was none before very luckily became an article of Faith such is the Popes omnipotent Power that he can create Articles of Faith out of that which was a pure noâ—-entity a very nothing in the primitive times yet I heare that the Iansenists are so saucy as to continue very Iansenists still notwithstanding his holinesses inâ—allible determination Dub. I see there is no such unity in the Church of Rome as they bragg of I desire to heare what you can say against the Sanctity of their Doctrine Firm the Sanctity of their Doctrine referrs to that of Faith and Manners for that of Faith which is briefly comprehended in the Apostles Creed or any other Doctrinall poynt contained in holy Scripture expressly or by good consequence deduced from thence by the generall consent of Fathers we allow of but as for popish additions of new atticles by Pope Pius the 4. and the councell of Trâ—nt that are against Scripture and can never be justified by the generall consent of the ancient Doctors of the Church we reject as false and consequently not Holy this I suppose you will demâ—nsâ—rate when you please to give me the reasons which made you forsake the present Church of Rome As to their Saâ—ctity of manners their
to the Sight the Smell the Tast shall we think that the God of truth Gave to mâ—n five Scences to deceive 4 of them by one pretended miracle or that 't is his method to informe the mind by Impostures if one or two or three Senses may be deceived why not all then what will become of Romes orall Tradition for may not the eare be deceived as well as the eye the nose the tast the touch here are 4 Sences to one against that tradition and then how are the papists certain of what they have received from the present Church or how is shee certaine of what shee received from the Church immediatly before her is not the doctrine of Transubstantiation which teaches men not to believe their eyes and other of their Sences a ready way to Atheism and infidelity for if four of the five Sences may be deceived then farewell all tradition and if these inferiour faculties may be thus bafled what satisfaction could it have been to St. Thomas that Christ was truly risen from the dead by putting his finger into the print of the nailes or his hand into his side But beside what sence and reason witness against this monstrous opinion the Scripture is clearely opposite unto it for Christ at the institution of this Sacrament did not take his own Body into his handâ— but Bread he brake not his owne Body but Bread he did not eat his own Body he did not drinke his owne Blood but he drank of the fruit of the Vine Mat. 26.29 for so he called it after Consecration and Distribution I will not drink henceforth of the fruit of the Vine c. in like manner St. Paul 'T is stil this bread and this cup. 1. Cor. 11.26 When our Saviour saies Hoc est corpus meum what doth hoc stand for either it must signify this thing in my hand i. e. the bread or else his own body which body he holding in his hand utters these words hoc est corpus meum that is corpus meum est corpus meum a mere Identical trifleing proposition which according to all Logick is most absurd and destroys the very nature of a Sacrament which consists of two essential parts the sign and the thing signified besides they of Rome conâ—ess that the Body of Christ is not present under the species of Bread and Wine when the Preist begins to pronounce hoc nor till he hath uttered the last sillable um hoc est corpus meum such poore shifts these men are forced to use As for antiquity so much boasted of by those of Rome I know that some of the fathers to draw mens minds from the earthly elements to heavenly misteries used now and then high Rhetoricall expressions never dreaming of any substantiall change of the elements into the Body and Bloud of Christ as is evident from Iraeneus Panis Communis post consecrationem non est amplius panis communis sed efficitur Eucharistia quae constat ex duabus naturis terrenâ caelâ—sti haec oblatio â—st figura corporis sanguinis Christi Ambrose 1. ad Cor. Cap. 11. lib. 4. de Sacram. Non dubitavit dominus dicere hoc est corpus meum cum dedit fignum sui corporis Aug Epist 23. ad Bonifa 12. Cap. contra Adiman Hoc est corpus meum i. e. typus corporis mei Terâ—ull Panem vinum Appellatione corporis sanguinis honoravit non naturam quidem mutans sed naturae gratiam adjiciens Theod. dial 1. 2. In a word the ancient fathers who opposed the Eutychian haeresy did make use of the sacramentall union of Bread and Wine to the body and blood of Christ shewing that the humane nature of Christ is not more changed into the divine then the Sacramentall Bread and Wine is into the very Body and Blood of Christ therefore they believed no such thing as that monstrous Popish transubstantiation So that we see the falsity and absurdity of it by Scripture antiquity common sence and reason besides the great danger of Idolatry in worshipping a piece of bread if there be no transubstantiation as some of the papists themselves confesse and they also acknowledge that if the Priest that consecrates were not rightly ordained or that he did not actually intend to consecrate or that he omitted any one Ceremony which they call necessary at the time of consecration that the Bread and Wine are not duely Consecrated and consequently no transubstantiation and therefore great probability that the Papists in worshipping the host do frequently comitt the very great Sin of Idolatry which was to me one great reason of forsaking their Communion Firm. Truely 't was a substantiall reason and such an one that has wrought upon others beside your selfe however I desire to hear from you what further reasons you had to leave the Church of Rome Dub. The next which I shall acquaint you with is the half Communion so manifestly against scripture and antiquity Our Blessed Saviour at the instituition of the Sacrament commands drinke yee all of this whereas at the giveing of the bread he said only take Eate foreseeing and obviating this grand error of the Church of Rome 't is true the persons then communicating were only his disciples which had received their Commissioâ— to preach the Gospell before that time but not in that ample and full manner as they received it after his Resurection as is plain from Iohn 20 22 23. and Mâ—t. 28 29. but be it granted that they were all in full orders and upon that account the Cup was given them otherwise they should not have received it by the same reason the bread might be denyed to the people because none but Priests did then Communicate but we know that a Priest when he doth not consecrate is in the place of a Lay-man and consequently the disciples not consecrating at the Supper were no better and therefore according to the doctrine and practise of the Church of Rome should not have received the Cup. But what will they thinke of the whole Church of Corinth to whom St. Paul sent a first and second Epistle they cannot imagine they were all Priests observe then how â—e â—xhorts all of them to examine themselves in order to the receiving of the holy Eucharist under both kinds 1. Cor 11. this is so eviâ—ent that our adveâ—saries have nothing to Reply As for Antiquity the practise of the Câ—urch of Rome is clearly against it as Iam able to demonstrate from express testimonies of the fathers but our learned writers have â—aved me that trouble those that please may peruse Chamiâ—re Châ—mnitius Iewell Cracanthorp The confeâ—sion of the Councell of Coâ—stance stands as a lasting Monument against the Popish innovation in this particular the words are these we decree in like manner that though in the Primitive Church the holy Eucharist was received under both kinds by the faithfull yet this Custome to avoid some dangers and scandals is reasonably