of some dangerous Disease and seeking to an able Physician for advice which when he has received and is about to follow it in comes a bold Mountebank and tells the Man it 's utterly impossible he should ever recover by hearkning to his Physician but if he will be guided by him all shall be well for he has an infallible Cure at hand that will certainly do the work Now suppose the Physician be so modest that he will not answer this impudent Quack in his own language nor say it 's impossible for his Medicines to do any good only he deals honestly with his patient and tells him of the danger of trusting himself in such a Mans hands who takes very desperate courses and where he cures one kills Twenty but for himself he shall prescribe nothing but what he can demonstrate to be safe and good and which through God's blessing hath often been very effectual Now in point of prudence what ought the patient to do in this case What must he reject a skilful and safe Physician because he speaks with modesty and caution and chuse the daring ignorant Mountebank because he talks big and boldly and boasts of Infallible Receipts of a certain and speedy Cure L. No surely by no means T. Yet so he should do by this Authors Argument for the choice of their Church because forsooth she condemns all others and commends her self talking as much of Infallibility as the most cheating Mountebank is used to do and with much what the same reason and truth The Case is so like that I need not trouble you with applying it L. No you need not For I understand it well enough and as well do I discern the weakness of his Argument T. And yet for your fuller satisfaction if need be I would have you read that Sermon I formerly told you of on 1 Cor. 3. 13. by a Reverend Divine of the Church of England where you will find this piece of sophistry so shamefully bafled and exposed that he must be a very silly and shameless Priest that will ever offer to make use of it more Wherefore to all that hath been said on this subject I shall only suggest one thing more to your consideration viz. that so far as this Argument hath any force in it it may with great advantage be retorted on Papists themselves For if that way be safest to be chosen in which both parties are agreed then are we Protestants clearly on the safer side For they themselves own the Scriptures which we embrace they approve of the Creeds which we hold they cannot but allow of the Worship of God in the name of Jesus Christ with all other the substantials of our Religion which as I have often said is nothing else but Christianity it self But now we do utterly disown the additions which the Romish Church has made to the Ancient Creeds many of their traditions we also reject as being plainly repugnant to the Holy Scriptures we condemn their worship of Images of Angels and Saints as being neither commanded by God nor practised by the Church of Christ in the Primitive times Hence then you may be informed what is safest to chuse and follow whether the plain and pure Religion of Jesus Christ profest in our Church and acknowledged by all Christians in the World even by the Papists themselves or to swallow down all those new Articles which their Church has added to the Christian Faith and defile our selves with those superstitions with which they have corrupted the Worship of God Many of which Doctrines and Practices are disapproved by all Christians but those of their own Sect and which upon good grounds we believe to be so utterly unlawful and pernicious that they make the condition of those in the Romish Church very hazardous and for our selves should we embrace them we could have no hopes of Salvation Judge then upon the whole what is safest to be chosen L. I confess I see little or no difficulty in the Case wherefore pray proceed to the second Argument T. I shall repeat to you what he calls so though for my part I find nothing in it that may deserve the name of an Argument Thus it runs That Church is not to be heard whose Authors and chief Doctors are meer Cozeners and Impostors and such he says are all but those of the Roman Church and therefore are not to be heard L. I deny that the Authors and Doctors of our Church are Cozeners and Impostors T. Thus he goes about to prove it They all say that they will reform the Roman Church with the pure Word of God and yet they have never done it nor will ever be able and therefore they are all meer Cozeners and Impostors This is all the proof he gives L. This all seems to me just nothing for I reckon that the Author of our Religion was no other than our Blessed Saviour and the first Teachers of it were the holy Apostles and Evangelists who taught it by their Preaching and then committed it to Writing in the Holy Word of God which we most readily embrace and in which our Religion is wholly contained And surely these were no Cozeners or Impostors but rather they who have corrupted Religion by their own novel inventions contrary to this Holy Word T. This is very true that you say but here by the Authors of our Church he means those Learned men who were instrumental for the reforming it from those inventions which he pleads for as a part of Religion L. This I believe to be his meaning But since these good men by Gods assistance did actually reform our Church by the pure Word of God from those Popish corruptions wherewith it was before polluted I admire why he should say they were Cozeners and Impostors for not doing what they pretended they would when as they have really done it T. And admire you still may For I cannot guess at his reason except by the Roman Church he means that particular Church which is at Rome or else the whole Sect of Papists all who own the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome and so stile themselves the Romish Church Take it in either of these senses and I confess this Romish Church is not yet reformed But this rather shews their obstinacy than any thing of deceitfulness in those who have attempted their Reformation If the Prophets and pious people of old would have healed Babylon and she would not be healed was this any dishonour to the Prophets Neither surely were any of the first Reformers so vain as to say that they would certainly reform the whole Church of Rome though they might heartily desire it and in their several places diligently endeavour it And thanks be to God through his assistance and blessing these their endeavours have been most happily successful in many Nations of the World and particularly in this our Kingdom of England for the delivering of our Church from the Usurpation of the Pope and
presses all men to endeavour after perfection in every grace and vertue and especially to be much in works of mercy and charity but yet she does not fright people with stories of Purgatory to bring in their wealth to the Church nor teach them that there is any great perfection in leaving their honest callings to run into a Monastery bringing their riches along with them thither She requires constant temperance and sobriety and sometimes imposes fasting and abstinence but then whether men eat a little flesh or fish oyl or butter she thinks it not a matter of the least moment but leaves all men to their own choice and prudence In a word she does not with the Pharisee teach for doctrines the commands of men but diligently inculcates the express commandments of Almighty God delivered to us in his holy Word And tho' she would not have us so foolish and proud as to think of meriting Heaven by our own good works yet she teaches that upon our patient continuance in well doing we shall through the mercies of God and the merits of Christ certainly obtain eternal life but upon no others terms does she encourage any man to hope for it And thus you see how our Church teaches us to take that same safe and narrow but sweet and pleasant way to salvation which is proposed to us in the Gospel L. I am fully perswaded she does so God grant me grace ever to walk in this holy way and then I shall not doubt of an happy end Pray proceed to his last argument T. I shall so and this it is That Church is not to be heard which has no solid reason for her keeping the Sabbath-day on the day she does keep it but no Church or Congregation of Sectaries has this and therefore none of them ought to be heard What say you to this L. I say that we of the Church of England whom he unjustly calls Sectaries have good reason for our keeping the Sabbath on that day we do keep it even as good reason as the Church of Rome it self has T. He goes on to prove the contrary thus No Church of Sectaries has Scripture for keeping the Sabbath-day on Sunday and no longer on Saturday as God commanded it and yet they reject tradition upon which ground the Roman Church keeps the Sunday in lieu of Saturday and therefore they have no solid reason for what they do c. L. I answer we have Scripture for keeping one day in seven viz. the fourth Commandment And we read that after our Saviours Resurrection the Apostles and Disciples commonly assembled together on the first day of the week which is called the Lords-day Revel 1. 10. And then we have tradition to assure us that this day was observed by the Christian Church ever since which tradition we may plead for our practice I trow as well as the Church of Rome T. Yes certainly we may for though we reject a great many ill things which they would thrust upon us for old traditions many of them being meer novelties of their own devising yet we do by no means reject such traditions as have sufficient evidence of their having been generally received by all Christian Churches from the very times of the Apostles down to our days and of this nature do learned men generally affirm the observation of the Lords-day to be And what you alledg from Scripture may very well serve to recommend to us so ancient and general a practice To all this besides the great equity and reasonableness of the thing in it self you may add the authority of those whom God hath set over us in Church and State all which being put together leaving the nice disputes that have been about this matter is a sufficient ground for our observation of the first day of the week as a Christian Sabbath a day of rest from our common employments devoted to the more solemn worship and service of God both in publick and private As solid reason therefore do we give for our practice herein as the Church of Rome it self can do or any other Church in the world And thus we have done with his five mighty arguments in which upon a little examination there appears nothing of strength or solidity He next musters up some weighty objections as he reckons them against those whom he calls Sectaries which he says ought to make them very much doubt whether they be secure in the way they are in And here according to his usual vain way of bragging he makes this large offer which yet he will never make good that all Priests Jesuits and Catholicks over all the world will turn to their way if they can but get from their Ministers a clear and satisfactory resolution of the following doubts L. It was cunningly done of him to call for a satisfactory resolution since though it be as clear as the light at noon-day yet they may still pretend that it is not satisfactory T. They may so though I question not but it will appear such to all that are impartial and judicious These doubts I shall propose to you in order and hear what you your self can say for the resolving of them L. I shall give in the best answers I am able and where I am at a loss shall still desire your help CHAP. II. A resolution of some doubts and questions proposed to Protestants T. FIrst he demands whether it can be clearly shewn that our Ministers were sent by Almighty God to preach and to reform the Roman Catholick Church or whether they are not some of the false Prophets who say The Lord saith when the Lord hath not sent them Ezek. 13. 6. L. There seems no great difficulty in resolving this doubt since our Ministers had lawful Ordination and thereby had authority to preach the Word of God And by the light of this word they discovered many errors and abuses in the Roman Church wherewith we were foully polluted and by Gods blessing and the assistance of lawful authority they were very instrumental in reforming us from the same Now whilst they proved their Doctrine by this Word of God they are not to be compared to those false Prophets who taught the people lyes and vanity as we have it Ezek. 13. 7 8. T. Your answer is sufficient and very clear For since our first Reformers did not publish a new Religion but rather restored the old by removing those corrupt additions that had been made to it they did not need any extraordinary commission from Heaven such as Moses had from God when he delivered the Law and as the Apostles had from Jesus Christ when they were first sent to preach the Gospel But it was sufficient that they were duly qualified by Gods Spirit for the work of the Ministry and were lawfully called to it by those who had authority in the Church to ordain them to that Office Such as these are truly said to be sent of God and are therefore
the Iewish Church by the solemn rite of Circumcision and since our Saviour hath no where given the least intimation that this priviledg should be taken from them I can see no reason why the children of Christian Parents may not be solemnly consecrated to God by Baptism and so admitted members of the Christian Church And to omit many other Texts which speak in favour of infants this without any wresting of the words may be fairly drawn from that commission given to the Apostles and their Successors Mat. 28. 19. Go ye therefore and teach or disciple all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost They were to make Disciples of whole Nations which surely comprehends both Parents and Children First the Parents were to be instructed in the Christian Faith and upon their profession of it to be baptized And then they themselves being devoted to God and entred into Covenant with him since Parents have power over their children to dispose of them for their good and to lay engagements on them for that end surely it was lawful for them to devote their children also to God and to enter them into Covenant with him by Baptism thereby laying a strict obligation upon them when they come to years of discretion to perform their part of this holy Covenant if ever they hope for any benefit by it the Parents also being bound to acquaint their children with their duty so soon as they are capable of learning it Thus when any one from among the heathens became a proselyte to the Iews when he himself was circumcised so were his children also Yea learned men tell us that it was also the custom to wash these proselytes in pure water and that very probably our Saviour was pleased to accommodate himself to this same usage of theirs in his instituting of Baptism for the more solemn admission of members into his Church Now as an excellent Writer argues suppose that our Blessed Saviour instead of the word Baptizing should have used that of circumcising and have said Go teach all Nations circumcising them in the name c. would not all men have been apt to think that the same priviledg which the Iews had of admitting their children into Covenant by Circumcision that Christian Parents also should have the like why then may not the same be reasonably argued from the words though Baptism be here named and not Circumcision Very probable it is that the Apostles thus understood it and that they practised accordingly when we read of their Baptizing such and such persons and their housholds as Act. 16. 15 33. amongst whom there might be some children for any thing that can be shewn to the contrary And certain we are that very early in the Christian Church insants were admitted to Baptism and thence hath it continued to this day to be the general custom of all Churches throughout the world And pray take good notice that though our Church allows nothing to be imposed upon our belief or practice as necessary to salvation but what is contain'd in Gods holy Word yet she hath great regard to antiquity to the customs of the truly Catholick Church and the current Doctrine of the Fathers and requires Ministers to have due respect thereto in their Exposition of Scripture And therefore without any contradiction to her self may very well admit the observation of such customs that having so much ground from Scripture are recommended also by the early and general practice of the Christian Church This I say she may very well do but is by no means thereby obliged to receive all the traditions and customs of the Roman Church for many of which nothing can be truly pleaded either from Scripture or antiquity but very much against them from both L. This is very plain and satisfactory Pray let us have his next question T. It is this Can you make it appear to me how your Sectaries can with reason and sufficient ground condemn all the Catholicks that were so many ages before Luther and Calvin for being no better than heathens and convince me that by adhering to you I shall be more secure of my salvation than if I joyn my self to them that have been held time out of mind in most parts of the world for the men that have the true and only saving Religion What answer give you to this L. First I know no body that does thus condemn all Catholicks before Luther and Calvin For as to those Christians in the first ages of the Church who truly deserve the name of Catholicks whether of the Roman Church or any other we are so far from condemning that we admire and applaud them we approve of their Doctrine contain'd in the ancient Creeds and do imbrace and profess it we honour their memory and endeavour to imitate their example But as those of the Roman Church in latter ages whom he means I suppose by his Catholicks though we do not say they are as bad as heathens yet we do truly say that they have very much corrupted Christian Religion by false Doctrines and Superstitious usages and therefore we think it a much safer way to salvation to adhere to the ancient certain truths of Christianity every where received and to worship God in that pure and holy manner which our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles both taught and used than to embrace those additions made by the Roman Church which are no parts of true and saving Religion nor have ever been so accounted by the generality of Christians And though our ancestors might have some excuse from the state of this Church in their days yet we their posterity should be utterly inexcusable if now that our Church has so justly reformed her self from Popish corruptions we should break off from her communion and go over to the Church of Rome that hates to be reformed This were to add the guilt of Schism to that of Superstition T. Your answer is very clear and full and may well enough serve for the solution of his fifth Query which is to the same purpose with the former viz. Can you make evident at least that in your little flock or in Luther and Calvin their guides more holiness and virtue was to be found than in the Catholicks And that it is this little flock of yours not the Catholicks that go the narrow way that leads to life L. To this may easily be answered as you have formerly instructed me that though Luther and Calvin were learned and good men who in their own times and places did much service for the Reformation of Religion yet they never had authority in our Church nor do we own them as our guides The blessed Iesus is the Author of our Religion and after him the holy Apostles were the teachers of it being no other than Christianity it self and consequently the true way to eternal happiness even that narrow way of truth and holiness which the whole flock of Christ
articles of Faith so that no Church on Earth has any power to coin and impose new ones not revealed in the Scripture which I say acquaints us with all things needful to Salvation And this I am sure is plainly enough taught in the Scripture it self 2 Tim. 3. 15 16 17. The Holy Scriptures they then enjoy'd viz. the Writings of the Old-Testament are said to be able to make him wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Iesus being profitabâ—e to all things necessary thereto as you may there find it fully exprest So Joh. 20. 31. These things are written that you might believe that Iesus is Christ the Son of God and that believing you might have life through his name So that if we believe in Jesus Christ according to all that is written of him in the Gospel this Faith if it produce Obedience will certainly procure everlasting Life And indeed our own reason may well tell us that since the very design of the Holy Scripture is to reveal to us the whole Will of God in order to our Eternal happiness surely there is revealed in them all that is necessary to this end Can we imagine that those Holy Men who committed to Writing the Doctrine of our Blessed Saviour with an account of his Life and Death his Resurrection and Ascension c. that they would omit any thing which was necessary for us to know and believe in order to our Salvation when they wrote these things purposely that we might be saved Especially if we consider that they have given us a very large account of things much more than was of absolute necessity And in such abundance would they leave out things more necessary than those they have Recorded The necessary Articles of Faith are comprized in a little room and have generally been thought to be comprehended in the Apostles Creed This was the judgement of the Primitive Fathers and many Learned men of the Church of Rome have acknowledged as much Now the Articles of this Creed I hope are all contained in the Holy Scripture being there both largely exprest and frequently inculcated So that the ground-work of the Reformation remains firm and unshaken viz. that the Holy Scriptures contain all things necessary to Salvation and therefore those new Articles which the Roman Church hath invented besides yea contrary to these Scriptures ought by no means to be admitted L. The Doctrine of our Church concerning the Sufficiency of Holy Scripture seems very plain and the inference you make from it clear and natural But the Sixth Argument will give you occasion to discourse further on this Subject For my Author says it will be for confirmation of his former Proposition and thus it runs We would fain have Luther Calvin and other Sectaries shew where they find written that the Gospel according to St. Matthew is Holy Scripture rather than the Gospel of Nicodemus which seeing they cannot do and yet they believe too the Gospel of St. Matthew as to Holy Scripture they must needs confess that they believe some things which are not contain'd in Scripture T. His former Argument truly stands in much need of confirmation but is like to receive little from this which he brings to strengthen and enforce it Since if we grant him the whole of it I cannot see that it will do any service to his cause or any prejudice to ours For who ever denied but that we believe some yea many things which are not contain'd in Holy Scripture We believe there is such a Country as France and such a City in it as Paris though there be nothing of them in Scripture Or which is nearer to our purpose we believe there was such a Man in the World as Iulius Casar and that the Book which goes under his name called Casars Commentaries was indeed written by him This we believe on account of the current Tradition and constant opinion of the World from his time down to this present Age there being no ground to doubt of the truth of it since all circumstances concurr to render it credible Even thus to come to the Case in hand we believe the Gospel according to St. Matthew and the other Sacred Books to be Written by those persons whose names they bear in the Title as Authors of them because this hath been the constant judgement of the whole Church of God from the very Age wherein these Books were Written to this present time And on the other hand we have good reason to reject a Book pretended to be written by Nicodemus because none such was admitted by the Primitive Church which must needs have known of it if any such Book there had been For this reason it was never own'd as Canonical by the Catholick Church in any Age since nor therefore do we now receive it as such Where now I beseech you lies the strength of this his mighty Argument L. I confess I am so far from discerning the strength of it that I do not well understand what he aims at by it T. I 'le tell you then in a few words He would by his way of arguing force us to acknowledge that Holy Scripture does not contain all things necessary to Salvation but that there are some Traditions of the Church to be received with equal reverence and esteem as particularly that such and such Books are Canonical Scripture others not and that it is on account of the authority of the Church of Rome that these Traditions are to be received and therefore lastly they hence infer that all other Traditions which their Church proposes to us are by the same reason to be received without doubting or disputing This is their common way of arguing and this Author here and in other places insinuates the same But now to shew further how little of force or solid reason there is in this smooth and subtle talk pray consider with me seriously two or three things which I shall suggest to you L. I promise you my most diligent attention T. 1 Then we must ever carefully distinguish betwixt the tradition or delivery of the holy Scripture it self from one generation to another and those other traditions whether Doctrines or customes beside the holy Scripture which yet are by the Roman Church made of equal authority with it the former we own but not the latter For we most readily grant that there hath been a tradition of the holy Scripture as that which was written by such and such men inspired by the Holy Ghost from one age to another ever since the time of its first writing and so hath it been brought down to us in these days And those Books which the Primitive Church embraced as thus Sacred and Canonical and so delivered them to succeeding ages these do we embrace with all reverence and submission as the rule both of faith and manners containing the whole will of God in order to our salvation But then for this very reason do we utterly deny
that there are any other traditions of equal necessity to salvation which are not contain'd in these holy Scriptures 2 Note well that though the Church of God hath been a most faithful preserver of these holy Scriptures and hath carefully transmitted them from one generation to another yet it is not the Church which gives authority to the Scriptures as if she by any power in her could make that to be the word of God which is not so or unmake that which is indeed so No but the Church received for the word of God that which was delivered by holy men inspired by the Holy Ghost who gave full evidence of this their inspiration both by the nature of that Doctrine which they delivered and by the mighty miracles which God enabled them to work for the attesting the truth of this Doctrine both preached and written Now the Church which was in being in the first ages when these holy men committed their Doctrine to writing was a most competent witness of their writing those Books which go under their names and accordingly received them as the Sacred writings of such persons divinely inspired and so convey'd them to the next generation Thus the Iewish Church received the Books of Moses and the Prophets and thus the Primitive Christian Church received the writings of the Evangelists and the Apostles as also the Books of the Old Testament both upon the tradition of the Iewish Church and also upon the authority of our Blessed Saviour who own'd and approved of the same And thus the Books both of the Old Testament and the New have ever since by the good Providence of God been preserved in the Christian Church and handed down from one generation to another and so shall be we need not question to the end of the world And this same tradition of the Church whereby these holy Books are distinguished from all others and carefully delivered by the former age to the next following this we give all just regard to and do freely grant that this is of singular use for our information what Books belong to the Canon of Scripture what not and by this tradition we learn that this Book was written by this man under whose name it goes and another by that as for instance this by St. Matthew that by St. Mark c. But whilst the Church thus bears testimony to the Scripture to which testimony we give all due regard she does not I say give authority to it For there is a vast difference betwixt these two It 's the Kings hand and seal which gives authority to a writing containing suppose a grant of this or that priviledg but some credible persons his Secretaries or others who were witnesses to his signing or sealing of that writing may give testimony to it and so procure it to be own'd as authentick Thus the holy Scriptures which are recommended to us by the testimony of the Church derive their authority from God only who hath set to his seal that they are true as I have said both by the miracles that were wrought to confirm the Doctrine contained in them by the holiness of that Doctrine and many other circumstances relating thereto 3 Yet again take notice when I say we give such regard to the testimony of the Church I do not hereby mean the Roman Church as distinct from all others no by no means but the truly Catholick even the whole Christian Church whether of the East or West the North or South For this hath been the constant tradition of the whole Church in all ages ever since the Apostles that these Books were written by men divinely inspired and were given to be the rule of our faith and manners If some doubt was for a while made concerning a Book or two yet when these doubts were removed they were received into the Canon with the rest And this hath been the opinion not only of the Catholick Church but of most Hereticks and Schisinaticks also whose testimony here may be of great force whilst they could not but own the authority of Scripture even though they were confuted by it Yea to this I may add the acknowledgment of Heathens themselves or of Iews who lived in those times that the Books which go under the names of St. Matthew St. Paul c. were indeed written by them Thus we have a general current tradition not only of the Roman but of all other Churches in the world that such and such Books belong to the Canon of Scripture and this is commonly granted by Hereticks and Schismaticks themselves And even Heathens and Infidels who wrote against the Christian Religion have own'd these Books to be written by those persons whose names they bear who were eminent in that age for the propagating of our holy Religion So that we have a much more famous and uncontroulable tradition for it than that the Books which are said to be written by Tully Virgil c. are indeed their works which I think no body makes any doubt of Lastly from what hath been said you may infer that though we give just regard to this current tradition of the Universal Church by which these holy Books are convey'd to us as Canonical Scripture yet it does not in the least follow that we are therefore obliged to embrace all those Doctrines and practices of the Roman Church which she would impose upon us under the venerable name of Traditions of the Catholick Church whilst they are for the most part only the private opinions and usages of their own Church many of them of very late date and expresly contrary to the judgment and practice of the Christian Church in the first and purest ages of it as well as to the holy Scripture it self So that there is no more reason for our embracing these traditions of the Romish Church than there was for our Saviour and his Apostles to receive all the traditions of the Iewish Church by many of which they had made void the Commandments of God After all then Tradition rightly understood makes nothing against but apparently for us For if there be any other Tradition as universal as this of the Books of Holy Scripture our Church readily embraces it as before has been exprest And we will own that the summ of our Faith is brought down by Tradition viz. in the very form of baptizing in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and more largely in the Apostles Creed wherein this form is explain'd We grant also that at first the Christian Faith was thus planted by the Preaching of the Gospel before the Books of the New Testament were written But now this our Faith is most plainly and fully contained in these Sacred Books whereas the additional Doctrines of the Romish Church are no more brought down by Universal Tradition than they are contain'd in the Holy Scripture which we assert to be the only sure and perfect rule of Faith and manners and upon all accounts much
more fit to be so than bare tradition which they of the Church of Rome so vainly boast of But for your further satisfaction in this point I shall refer you to a most solid and rational discourse concerning the Rule of Faith done by a Reverend Divine of our Church and shall now hasten to what remains L. His seventh Argument is this It cannot be shewn that for these 1500 years there hath been any Catholick who held that the Pope of Rome was Antichrist or that did revile and rail at the holy Sacrifice of the Mass or lastly that did blame Invocation of Saints the usual praying for the Dead and such like works of piety belonging to Faith and Religion which the whole world hath laudably practised and reverenced for 1500 years Wherefore it is most evident that Lutherans Calvinists c. do most wickedly when they dare revile such things T. These points have all of them been sufficiently discust already I have told you how one of their Popes did assert him to be the forerunner of Antichrist who should assume the title of Universal Bishop which his Successors have now a long time done whilst they claim a Supremacy over the Universal Church But which is more material I have she-wn how contrary the Doctrines and practices wherein Popery consists are to the nature and design of true Christianity and therefore may well enough be stiled Antichristian I have shewn that there is not properly a Sacrifice in the Communion but a commemoration of Christs Sacrifice only once offered and have also manifested that there is neither Scripture Reason nor good Antiquity to be pleaded on behalf of that Invocation of Saints and praying for the Dead which are now used in the Church of Rome As for railing and reviling I would not be guilty of it 'T is enough to disprove their errors and renounce them to shew the falshood and mischiefs of them and this I hope is not to be accounted railing In a word whatever he pretends no Christian Writers for four or five hundred years after our Saviour did assert the Bishop of Rome to be Christs Vicar on Earth and under him supreme Governour of the whole Christian Church Nor did they teach or practise such Invocation of Saints and praying for the Dead as are now in use amongst Papists And upon this account our Church hath with great reason and religion reformed her self from these and the like corrupt innovations L. Doubtless she has so and the weakness of his Arguments do the more assure me of it His last is nothing else but a repetition of what he has often said viz. That the first Authors of Christian faith in Germany Spain England c. have acknowledged and brought in no other faith nor have our forefathers received any other Faith than the Holy Catholick Roman which self-same we have received from our forefathers and have hitherto conserved Whence he concludes that Sectaries his common name for all Protestants have invented new opinions of their own and presented them to the people as a certain rule of Faith and the pure word of God and that consequently they are liable to the curse denounced against those who preach a new Gospel nor can ever hope to please God and attain eternal happiness being destitute of the right faith whereupon he advises his Scholar considering the nearness of death and the eternity of Hell torments to prefer the salvation of his Soul before all sublunary things T. So far his advice is good but 't is a wonder that any man who pretends to have a regard to his own or others souls and believe there is an Hell provided for such as make and love a lye dare be guilty of such notorious forgeries and calumnies as are contain'd in this his charge against Protestants as if they had proposed some new opinion of their own devising for a rule of Faith whilst it 's well known that we make the holy Word of God to be the only certain rule of it And even he himself a little before accused us for saying that nothing is to be believed but what is contained in Gods Word that is nothing as necessary to salvation as I have before granted and proved This he calls the ground-work of the Reformation and we do not deny it And that same Christian Faith which is contain'd in these holy Scriptures at large and briefly summ'd up in the Creed is that same Faith which the first planters of Christian Religion taught and established in our own and other Countries and this self-same do we retain to this day If then the Apostles Creed or the Nicene Creed as we commonly call it be a new invention so is our faith but if these contain an Abridgement of the truly ancient Catholick Faith then his charging us with new inventions is a most false and malicious slander so far are we from it that a great reason why we reject their Doctrines of the Supremacy and Infallibility of their Pope or Church with the rest of their Errors is because these are new inventions of their own and no part of the ancient Faith Wherefore instead of pronouncing the heavy sentence of damnation upon others which is true Popish charity it behoves them well to consider how they can exempt themselves from the curse threatned to those who preach another Gospel than the Apostles did which in some sort they do whilst they impose the Traditions of their Church of which the Apostles never spoke a syllable as of equal certainty and authority with the Holy Scriptures themselves But I am tired with his Arguments which still lead me so oft to repeat the same things Though I shall not repent it if it any way tend to give you more satisfaction L. I thank God I am well satisfied with your discourse and am now fully convinced that there is small strength in these his Arguments which he pretends to be such pregnant and unanswerable things But after all there remains something which he calls an evident demonstration that the Roman Catholick Church hath been and still is the true Church which I shall desire you to take into examination T. Yes very willingly and I doubt not but we shall soon find how little it deserves the name of a demonstration Though if it be possible for him to produce any thing that has an appearance of truth and reason sure he will now do it in the last place that it may leave the greater impression upon his Reader Let us hear then what he says CHAP. IV. An Answer to a pretended Demonstration That the Roman Church is the true Catholick Church L. THIS Demonstration which he so much boasts of is taken he says from one Dr. Baily who it seems revolted from our Church to that of Rome and thus it runs It will not be denied but that the Church of Rome was once a most excellent flourishing Mother-Church This Church could not cease to be such but she must fall