THE THIRD BOOK OF COMMENTARIES UPON THE APOSTLES CREED, Containing the blasphemous Positions of Jesuits and other later Romanists, concerning the authority of their Church: Manifestly proving that whosoever yields such absolute Belief unto it as these men exact, doth believe it better than God's word, his SON, his PROPHETS, EVANGELISTS, or APOSTLES, or rather truly beeleeves no part of their writings or any article in this CREED. Continued by THOMAS JACKSON B. of Divinity and Fellow of CORPUS CHRISTI College in OXFORD. 1. King. 18. v. 21. How long halt ye between two opinions, if the Lord be God follow him; but if Baal, follow him. LONDON, Printed by WILLIAM STANSBY, and are to be sold by john Budge at the great South door of Paul's, and at Britain's Burse. 1614 TO THE RIGHT REVEREND FATHER IN GOD, AND MY HONOURABLE LORD, WILLIAM BY DIVINE PROVIDENCE L. BISHOP OF DURHAM, Grace and Peace be multiplied. RIght Reverend Father, the sweet refreshing your Honourable favours did yield to such of my labours as hitherto enjoy the light, when a sudden uncomfortable blast had sorely nipped them in the very setting, makes these last gatherings of that spring seek that comfortable warmth under your benign protection, which the unconstant frowning season would hardly afford them in their growth. Besides these and other my personal obligements, that famous and worthy founder of this Attic Beehive, of whose sweetness would God I had been as capable as I have been long partaker, had never allotted any Cell therein for me or other Countryman of mine, but with particular relation to that seat of dignity, which he sometimes did, your Lordship now doth, and, to the increase of God's glory and good of his Church, long may enjoy. Seeing this our great foster Father is now ignorant of his children's demeanour, and knows not me; it shall be my comfort, to have his honourable successors witnesses of my care and industry to fulfil his godly desire, whose religious soul in his life time (as his written laws do testify) did detest nothing more than idleness in the Ministry, specially in his adopted Sons. The matters I here present unto your Lordships & the world's view, are sometimes in themselves so harsh and hard to be concocted, as he that would strive to make them toothsome unto nice tastes, should put himself to excessive pains; unless his judgement be much riper, his wit readier, his invention pleasanter, his opportunities better, and his leisure greater than mine are. But it is one and the same point of judgement, not to require exact Mathematical proofs in discourses of morality, or a smooth facile Rhetorical style in Logical or Scholastic conflicts. And, as by the statutes of that society wherein I live, I am bound to avoid barbarism: so my particular inclination moves me, in controversies especially, to approve his choice that said; Fortia mallem quam formosa. If any professed enemy to the truth we teach, will answer me from point to point, or attempt (not as their custom now is only in scoffing sort but seriously) to avert those unsupportable, but deserved imputations, I lay upon the foundation of his Religion, I shall (I trust) be able to answer him; the better by continuance of your Lordship's wont favours, whom I still request the Christian Readers, as many as reap any profit from my pains on my behalf to remember with such respect as is due to honourable Patrons of religious studies, or cherishers of painful endeavours in good causes. From Corpus Christi College, March xxv. 1614 Your Lordships in all observance, THOMAS JACKSON. To the indifferent Reader specially to the learned Artists of the two famous UNIVERSITIES. CHristian and beloved Reader, I have been detained in this entry, though not longer than the structure of it required, yet than I myself, or thou perhaps, could have wished, for speedier dispatch of the main edifice intended. Somewhat notwithstanding, to my apprehension, I had observed, whereby Artists more accurate, but younger Divines then myself (whose furtherance in the like, throughout all my meditations I still respect) might be directed, for taking sure hold of their slippery antagonists in this conflict. And finding myself every day than other more unapt, more unwilling at least, to be any Actor in quarrels of this nature, because most desirous to spend my mortal spirits in opening the pleasant Fountains of immortality; I thought it not altogether unlawful to dispense with these labours for a while, in hope to prosecute them more safely and with better success hereafter, by seconding such as had gone before me with my small strength, for intercepting these despiteful Philistims, which continually labour to dam up these sacred Wells of life. Many excellent wits and grave Divines, as well in our English as other reformed Churches, I knew, had accurately deciphered the special characters of the Beast, and demonstrated most properties of great Antichrist upon the Pope. But that the fundamental charter of the Romish Church, or the commission pretended by Jesuits for the erection of it, should (as the manner was to demolish lesser religious houses for building others more magnificent) extend to raze the very first foundations of religion as common to Christians, jews, and Turks; that the acknowledgement of such infallibility as they Deify her with should be more incompatible with Christianity than any Idolatry of the Heathen; that such as absolutely believe all her decrees without examination, truly believe no article of this Creed; with the like principal branches of Antichristianisme; were points, for aught I knew, rather touched by the way, or proposed as clear in themselves to the indifferent and ingenuous, that judge of the Romish Church by the known picture of her misse-shapen limbs, than prosecuted at large, or with purpose to pull off that artificial painting, wherewith late Jesuits have so beautified this ugly Monster's face, that the world bewitched with gazing too much on it cannot but love her other deformities though in themselves most loathsome. For though the practices enjoined by her be so vile, as would have caused Rome Heathen to have blushed at their mention, or her other doctrines so palpably gross, that her own Sons heretofore have derided them, and as yet spare to speak aught in particular for their defence: yet to salve all this it must suffice, that the Church, which cannot err, hath now authorized them. If any think I prejudice the truth of moderate accusations, by laying such heavy imputations upon this doctrine, as make it incomparably more detestable than any other, he speaks not inconsequently to his positions, if he hold the Trent Council was infallibly assisted by the holy Ghost, or that the Pope in Cathedral resolutions cannot err. But, he which thinks foul impieties may bring Romish Prelates out of favour with the spirit of truth, and make them as obnoxious to errors as others are, or can persuade himself, that many practices and opinions, by that Church already authorized, are in their nature abominable and impious, must either accord to me or dissent from Reason, Conscience, and Religion. For these, so he will but vouchsafe his silence or attention, jointly proclaim aloud, that nothing amiss, either in matter of doctrine or manners, can be so detestable with out this presumptuous groundless warrant of absolute infallibility as with it; that albeit a man would set himself to practise all particulars directly contrary to what God hath commanded or to contradict God and his goodness, yet his iniquity without this absolute belief of full authority derived from him so to do, would be but as a body without a soul, in respect of the Romish Churches impieties, which makes the holy Ghost the principal Author of Gods written word the abettor of all her fraud, untruths, or villainies. Briefly as it is not the doing of those materials God commands us to do, but faithful submission of our wills to his in doing them, which, as S. james instructs us, makes us true Christians: so is it not the doing or maintaining of what God forbids or hates, but the doing of it upon absolute submission of our souls and consciences to other laws than he hath left, which makes men live members of Antichrist, as being animated, informed and moved by the spirit of error. Now this persuasion of absolute infallibility and universal warrant from the holy spirit, without condition or restraint, being peculiar to the Romish Church, admitting it to be as faulty in practices and as obnoxious to errors as any other, none can be reputed so truly Antichristian as it. For albeit Mahomet pretended divine revelations, yet his Priests challenge no such absolute infallibility as doth the Pope; they make no second Rocks or foundations, no ordinary Pastor equivalent to their great Prophet. Whence although the Turks hold opinions in themselves, or materially considered, more gross, and maintain some practices not much less villainous then Jesuits do: yet the grounds or motives of their belief, (which are as the soul or spirit of Religion) are nothing so pestiferous, nothing so directly opposite to the holy spirit, as is this jesuitical rule of faith. Nor do they either profess such belief in Christ, or acknowledge him for a foundation so elect and precious, as brings them within the Temple of God, within which unless Antichrist sit his contrariety unto Christ could not be so essential, so immediate or direct, as by the rules of sacred Philosophy we are taught it must be. Yet I know not, whether the indignity of this doctrine is more apt to affect Divines or Men rightly religious and fearing God, than the sottishness of their arguments to persuade it, to provoke the just indignation of ingenuous Artists, which cannot endure, though in matters of indifferency, to captivate their understandings to positions devoid of sense. To require some probability of reason, civil or natural, is on their part no insolent demand, for exchange of Christian faith or adventuring their inassurance of life eternal in the service of mere foreigners whom they never saw. Yet unto peremptory resolutions no less dangerous, do Jesuits solicit us, not only without any tolerable show of probability but quite contrary to God's principal laws and our natural notions of good and evil; as by these labours every Academic may in part perceive, but more fully, if he would vouchsafe to sift more of their arguments, then in these short transcursive disputes I could. Nor would I dissuade any Artist well grounded in Aristotle from perusing the most learned works any Romanist hath written in this argument. In most other controversies betwixt us and them it is dangerous, I must confess, even for well grounded Artists to begin with their writings, not so in this: for I protest in the sight of God and his holy Angels, that as far as I can remember the inclinations of my youth, or by them prognosticate how afterwards I might have been affected, I never was, I never should have been, so thoroughly possessed with such great dislike of Romish Antichristianisme in this point, by hearing the most famous Preachers in this Land, or reading all the learned Writers in reformed Churches, as I was by examining the labours of Bellarmine, Valentian, and others of best note amongst them seriously addressed to this purpose; comparing them only with the known principles of Christianity and such passages of sacred Writ, as every Christian Artist should be acquainted with. For the principles, whereon I proceed, I have been only beholden to the Canon of Scriptures; for deducing of such blasphemous consequences from them, as I charge the Adversary with, only to that small measure of knowledge in Aristotelian Philosophy wherewith my God had blessed me, whiles I was bound by local statutes to the study of Arts, purposely abstaining from other writings, which with their informations of my understanding might have bred prejudice in my affection. Since that time, although the years of my Ministry hardly exceed the space of ordinary apprenticeships, yet have I often wished the discussion of these points had been then imposed upon me by some experienced Divine, that would only have given me right hold of their assertions. Upon this consideration I would beseech the flourishing Artists of this famous Academy, whom God hath furnished with all store of munition necessary for this service, not to neglect opportunities present. Let them defer (if so they please) the fruits of their labours in other points (though this be the fault of our English) until the Autumn of their age. But the mark I now propose unto them, being the evident resolution of jesuitical positions into those gross and palpable blasphemies whereto they tend, which they only seek to hide by Sophisms and artificial tricks of wit, Academical wits might displume them of these figtree leaves and manifest their nakedness to the world, much better in the spring whiles their skill in arts were fresh and flourishing, whiles the strength and vigour of their invention would more easily bend this way, then in the Autumn, when their leaves begin to fade and their sap retire to the root, as their pleasant grapes grow ripe. Many towardly plants in this nursery, now able to match the stoutest jesuit living at his own weapon, whilst in his mature age, multo iam fractus membra labour, more fit to be a Leader, than a combatant in these encounters, he shall look back on his former labours or calls to mind his wont dexterity in School disputes, may take up old Nestor's complaint. Tunc ego debueram capienda ad Pergama mitti; Tunc poteram magni, si non superare, morari Hectoris arma meis: sed in illo tempore nullus, Aut puer Hector erat; nunc me mea deficit aetas. The school jesuit in these studies is like the ivy always green, because not set to bring forth fruit unto salvation, but rather to choke and strangle the plants of life. And for such instruments of the Romish Church, as this Land usually yields, this wrangling faculty is all the skill they care for, or for the most part make profession of. Yet such is the brittleness of the matter they are to work upon in this controversy, that were all the Priests and Jesuits harboured within the confines of great Britain at this present day, but enjoined to write all they could to any purpose in defence of their Mother; some few Artists of those Universities, which out of their pride they seem to vilify amongst the ignorant, would, I dare not say make them blush (for sooner might they make a blackmoors face of the same colour with his teeth) but as many of their favourers of this Kingdom, as have not sworn allegiance to the Church of Rome, and are able to examine an argument, to be ashamed on their behalf, even to acknowledge, that for aught these Mountebanks could say or write in their defence, the Positions maintained by their Masters, foreign Jesuits, were indeed idolatrous and blasphemous; howbeit the Church itself, we must believe, could never be vanquished, because no man can tell where or in what shape to find it. Nor need young Artists fear the countenance of antiquity in this point, from which their enemies supplies are so slender, that would they come to open trial, and bring only such of the Fathers for their seconds, as lived within five hundred years of Christ, or before the mixture of Romish Religion with Heathenism, not fully effected till a little after that time: the paucity of those whose aid they durst solicit, in respect of that great army, which is as resolute as we against them, would make them instantly either yield themselves, or forsake the field. Nor have they been hitherto able to address any answer, but to their shame, to the Worthies of the English Church, whose labours have made the conquest in this quarrel easy to any of their successors, that will adventure to follow their steps. Nothing remains but what best becomes the exercise of young wits; to exceed the sophistical disputes of Jesuits against the truth, in copiousness of irrefragable demonstrations, that the allegiance they seek to establish unto the Romish Church is solemn apostasy from Christ; that the belief of it is the very abstract of sorcery, the utmost degree of Antichristianisme that can be expected. These and like points, being fortified by strength of argument, in the time of your Regency or farewell to the study of Arts, might be polished at your better leisure, afterwards to be revised and published at the appointment of authority. Or if the zeal of God's glory thus mightily eclipsed by this foul Idol of the Romish Church do not as yet so fully move you; yet that indignation which first wrought a desire in me of giving this onset, should work (me thinks) in every heart, that bears any sparkle of love unto his native Country. For what indignity is it to think, that whilst our gracious Sovereign is a most zealous Professor and defender of the truth we teach; so many of his natural subjects our Countrymen and Brethren, should be won unto the Romish faction, especially by importunate inculcating two heresies, of all maintained by that Church in themselves most sottishly improbable; and yet apparently most damnable Idolaters in their consequences, if erroneous▪ I mean this concerning their Churches absolute privilege from all error, and that other of Christ's real presence in the Sacrament, by transubstantiation. It cannot again but add much to our grief and indignation, if we call to mind, how, when the chief Governor and public authority of this Land were for them, subscription was not urged upon such violent and bloody terms unto any articles of their Religion, as unto that of real presence. The mystery of which iniquity cannot better be resolved then into the powerful and deceitful working of Satan, thus delighting to despite our Lord and Saviour by seducing his professed subjects unto the highest and most desperate kind of rebellion he could imagine, upon the least occasions and shallowest reasons. For such is their madness in that other point, as hath been showed in this: Not one inconvenience they can object to our opinion, but may be demonstrated against theirs; not any fruits of godliness they can pretend but our doctrine more directly brings forth then theirs could, though we did admit it for true. For to what other purpose such a presence as they imagine should serve them, save only to countenance those desperate Idolatrous practices and litourges of Satan, touched by the way in some parts of these discourses, is inexplicable; as shall be showed more at large (without depriving that heavenly mystery of any solemnity of devotion due unto it) in the unfolding of that controversy. Yours in Christ jesus. THOMAS JACKSON. A Table of Scriptures expounded or illustrated by observations in this third Book of COMMENTARIES. Out of the old Testament. Exodus. 4 13 SEnd I pray thee by the hand of him, whom thou shouldest send. Sect. 3. Chap. 11. Paragraph. 20. 14 13 Fear ye not, stand still, and behold the salvation of the Lord. sec. 3. c. 6. par. 5. 15 26 If thou wilt diligently hearken, O Israel, unto the voice of the Lord thy God, etc. ibid. 17 7 Is the Lord among us or no? ibid. p. 7. 16 12 I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel. ibid. 19 4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, etc. ibid. p. 7. 20 10 In it thou shalt do no manner of work, etc. sec. 3. c. 1. p. 8 24 10 They said the God of Israel. sect. 3. c. 6. par. 5. p. 7 24 9 Then went up Moses and Aaron, sect. 3. c. 11. par. 10 28 30 Also thou shalt put in the breastplate of judgement the urim and the Thummim, etc. sect. 3. c. 1. p. 2. 3. Leviticus. 10 9 THou shalt not drink wine nor strong drink, etc. sect. 3. c. 1. p. 5. Numbers. 11 16 GAther unto me seventy men of the Elders of Israel. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 9 12 6 If there be a Prophet of the Lord among you, etc. ibid. par. 10. 23 22 God brought them out of Egypt, their strength is an an Unicorn, etc. ibid. par. 20. 27 21 And he shall stand before Eleazar the Priest, etc. sect. 3. c. 1. p. 3. Deuteronomie. 11 29 WHen the LORD thy GOD therefore hath brought thee into the Land, whither, etc. sect. 3, c. 7, p. 4 4 1, 2 Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the ordinances etc. sect. 3, c. 6, p 5 4 ●9 Take heed to thyself, & keep thy soul diligently, that thou forget not, etc. sec. 3, c. 7, p. 6 5 22 These words the Lord spoke unto all your multitude, in the Mount, etc. sect. c. 6, p. 7. 5. 28, 29 I have heard the voice of the words of this people, sect. 3, c. 11, p. 18 10 17 The Lord your God is God of Gods, and Lord of Lords, etc. sec. 3, c. 9, p. 6 11 2 Consider this day, for I speak not unto your children, etc. sect. 3, c. 7, p. 2 11 13 If ye shall hearken therefore to my commandments, etc. ibid. p. 4. 11 18 Therefore shall you lay up these my words in your hearts and in your souls, etc. ibid. p. 2. 11 19 And ye shall teach them your children, etc. ibid. 11 22 For if you keep diligently all these commandments, etc. ibid. 11 26 Behold I set before you this day a blessing & a curse, etc. ibid. p. 4. 18 15 The Lord thy GOD will raise up thee a Prophet like unto me, etc. sect. 3, c. 11, p. 1 18 15, 19 Unto him shall ye hearken according to all that thou desiredst of the Lord, etc. sec. 3. c. 11, p. 21 18 18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 10 18 18 Whosoever will not hearken unto my words, which he shall speak, etc. sec. 3, c. 11, p. 18 18 19 Whosoever will not hearken, etc. sect. c. 11, p. 16 18 14 The Nations which thou shalt possess, hearken unto those that regard the times. ibid. p. 19 18 20 But the Prophet that shall presume to speak a word in my name. ibid. p. 1. 17 8 If there arise a matter to hard for thee in judgement, etc. sect. c. 2, p. 1 17 19 And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life, etc. ibid. p. 4 24 10 There arose not a Prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, etc. sect. 3, c. 11, p. 18 27 11, 12, 13, 14, These shall stand upon Mount Gerizim to bless the people, etc. s. 3, c. 7, p. 4 30 1 Now when all these things shall come upon thee, etc. ibid. p. 11 31 16 That when they went a whoring after the Gods of a strange Land, etc. sect. 3, c. 9, p. 6 31 10, 11, 12, 13 Every seventh year, when the year of freedom shall be, etc. sect. 3, c. 7, p. 4 joshua. 8 33, 34, 35 ANd all Israel, and their Elders, and their Officers stood on this side the Ark, etc. sect. 3, c. 7, p. 4 judges. 2 7, 8 THe people had served the Lord all the days of joshua, etc. sect. 3, c. 7, p. 6 6 13 The Lord is with thou valiant man, etc. ibid. 6 14 And the Lord looked upon him, and said, go in this thy might. ibid. p. 7 17 15 When Gideon heard the dream told, etc. ibid. p. 8 6 15 Ah my Lord, whereby shall I save Israel, etc. ibid. 8 33 But when Gideon was dead, etc. ibid. par. 9 Samuel. 1 23, 9 ANd David having knowledge, that Saul imagined mischief against him, said to Abiathar the Priest, etc. sect. 3, c. 1, p. 3 1 30, 7, 8 And David said to Abiathar the Priest Ahimeleches Son, I pray thee bring me the Ephod, etc. ibid. 1 28, 6 Therefore Saul asked counsel of the Lord, and the Lord answered him not. ibid. p. 4 Kings. 1 13, 18 ANd he said unto him, I am a Prophet also as thou art, and an Angel spoke unto me, etc. s. 3, c. 8, p. 6 1 22, 24 When went the spirit of the Lord from me, etc. sect. 3, c. 9, p. 2 1 18, 36 And when they should offer the evening sacrifice Elijah the Prophet came and said &c. sect. 3, c. 11, p. 7 1 22, 28 If thou return in peace the Lord hath not spoken by me. ibid. 2 4, 27 Let her alone, for her soul is vexed within her, etc. sec. 3, c. 11, p. 11. Chronicles. 2 21, 20 THus saith GOD, why transgress ye the commandment of the Lord? Surely ye shall not prosper, etc. sect. 3, c. 9, p. 6. Nehemiah. 1 7 WE have grievously sinned against thee, etc. sect. 3, c. 7, p. 11. Psalms. 2 7 THou art my Son, this, etc. sect. 3, c. 11, p. 22 50 16 What hast thou to do, to declare mine ordinances, etc. sect. 2, c. 7. p. 12 50 25 To him that disposeth his way aright, will I show the salvation of God, etc. ibid. 78 33, 34 When he slew them they sought him, etc. s. 3, c. 7, p. 3. Isaiah. 6 1, 2, 3 I Saw also the Lord sitting upon an high Throne, etc. sect. 3, c. 10, p. 5 6 9 Go and say unto this people, ye shall hear indeed but ye shall not understand, etc. sect. 3. c. 5. p. 3. 11 2 And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, etc. sect. 3. c. 10. p. 5. 28 16 Behold I lay in Zion a chief corner stone, etc. sect. 2. c. 7 p. 7. 35 5 Then shall the eyes of blind be lightened. sect. 3. c. 10. p. 5. 40 3 A voice crieth in the wilderness, prepare ye, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 12. 42 1 Behold my servant I will stay upon him, etc. sect. 3. c. 30. p. 5. 61 1 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, therefore the Lord hath anointed me. sect. 3. c. 10. p. 5 53 8 9 But his generation who shall declare, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 22. 42 8 9 I am the Lord, this is my name, and my glory I will not give unto another. sect 3. c. 11 p. 13. jeremiah. 18 18 COme and let us imagine some devise against jeremiah, etc. sect. 3. c 9 p. 3. 28 6. 7. 8. 9 Even the Prophet jeremiah said, so be it the Lord so do, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 7. 26 8. 9 Now when jeremiah had made an end of speaking all that the Lord had commanded him to speak, etc. sect. 3. c. 9 p. 3. 28. 10. 12. This saith the Lord, even so will I break the yoke of Nebuchadnezars. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 1● 29 26 The Lord hath made thee Priest for jehoiada the Priest, etc. sect. 3. c. 9 p. 3. 30 13 14 Their is none to judge thy cause, or to lay a plaster, etc. sect. 3. c. 7. p. 11. 32 24 Behold the Mounts, they are come into the City to take it, etc. ibid. 32 42 43, etc. Thus saith the Lord, like as I have brought all this great plague upon this people: so will I bring upon them all the good I have promised them, etc. ibid. Ezekiel. 33. 32. 33 ANd lo thou art unto him, as a jesting song of on that hath a pleasant voice. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 7. Daniel. 2. 44. THis Kingdom shall never be destroyed, or given to another people, etc. sect. 2. c. 7. p. 20. Malachi. 2. 12. ANd now O ye Priests this commandment is for you, etc. sect. 3. c. p. p. 6. Ecclesiasticus. 23. 45. 24. 25 BEcause Phineas the son of Eleazar had zeal in the fear of the Lord, etc. sect. 3. c. 2. p. 8. Maccabees. 1. 2. 36. 37. 38. But the other answered them nothing, neither cast any one stone at them, etc. se. 3. c. 1. p. 9 1, 2 41 Whosoever should come to make battle with us upon the Sabaoth day, etc. ibid. Out of the New testament: Matthew. 7, 26 Whosoever heareth these my words & doth them not, etc. se. 2. c. 7, p. 25. 11. 3. 4, etc. Art thou he that should come, or shall we look for another, etc. sect. c. 10. p. 4. 12. 27 By whom then do your children cast them out, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 4. 12 28 But if I by the Spirit, etc. ibid. p. 5. 16. 13. 14, 15, etc. For jesus when he came unto the Coasts of Caesarea, etc. sect. c. 7. p. 2. 16 18 Tu es Petrus, & super hanc petram, etc. ibid. p. 1. throughout the whole Chapter. 16 19 I will give unto thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, etc. sect, 3. c. 3. p. 9 16 22, etc. Master be good to yourself, etc. sect. c. 2. c. 7. p. 21. 16 23 Then he turned back and said unto Peter, get thee behind me, etc. ibid. p. 8. 18 15 If thy Brother trespass against thee, dic Ecclesiae. sect. 2. c. 2. p. 5 21, 40, 41. 42, etc. When therefore the Lord of the Vineyard shall come, etc. sect. 2. c. 7. p. 9 21. 42. Read you never in the Scriptures, the stone which the builders, etc. ibid. 23 2. 3. The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses seat, etc. sect. 3. c. 3. p. 1. 23. 29. 30. They builded the tombs of the Prophets, etc. sect. c. 9 p. 4. 23 35. ibid. 26 27 Bibite ex hoc omnes. sect. 2. c. 4. p. 8. 26 57 They took jesus and led him to Caiaphas, etc. sect. c. 5. par. 7. 27 25 All the people answered and said, his blood be upon us, etc. ibid. 27 64 So shall the last error be worse than the first, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 22. 26 65 66 What think ye? And they answered and said, he is worthy to die. ibid. Mark. 6 2 ANd when the Sabaoth was come he began to teach in the Synagogue, etc. sect. 3. c. 10. p. 5. 7 37 He did all things well, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 7. 9 38. Master we saw one casting out Devils in thy name, etc. sec. 3 c. 11. p. 4. 13 21 22 If any man say to you, lo here is Christ, etc. sect. 3. c. 10. p. 7. Luke. 4 14 ANd jesus returned by the power of the spirit into Galilee, etc. sect. 3. c. 10. p. 5. 4, 16, 17, etc. And he came to Nazaret where he had been brought up, etc. ibid. 4. 18. 16 The spirit of the Lord is upon me because he hath anonted me, etc. ibid. 4 23 Then he said unto them, Ye will surely say unto me this Proverb, etc. ibid. 4 29 30 And rose up and thrust her out of the City, etc. ibid. 4 34 I know who thou art, even the holy one of God. sect. 1. 2. c. 7. p. 12. 6 9 Whether is it lawful on the Sabboath days to do good, etc. sect. 3. c. 1. p. 8. 11 20. But if I by the finger of God cast out Devils, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 5. 10 16 He that heareth you, heareth me, etc. sect. 3. c. 1. p. 13. 16 31 If they hear not Moses, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 21. 22 32 I have prayed for thee thy faith should not fail, etc. sec. 2. c. 2. p. 1. etc. 6. par. 1. 2. etc. 22 33 Lord I am ready to go with thee into prison. ibid. 22 66 Assoon as it was day the Elders of the people, etc. sec: 3. c. 5. p. 7. 24 25 Fools and slow of heart in not believing. sect. 3. c. 12. p, 1. 24 27 He began at Moses, etc. ibid. p. 2. 24 32 Their hearts did burn, etc. ibid. john. 1 18 NO man hath seen God at any time, se. 3. c. 11. p. 10 1 20 21 Art thou the Christ? Art thou Eliah, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 20. 1 25 Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not the Christ, etc. ibid. 1 29 Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 12. 1 31 And I knew him not; but because he should be declared unto Israel. sect c. 11. p. 20. 1 33 And I knew him not, but he that sent me to baptise with water, etc. sect. 3. c. 10. p. 5. 1 49 Nathaniel answered, and said unto him, Rabbi thou art th● son of God, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 14. 1 50 Because I said unto thee I saw thee under the fig Tree, etc. ibid., 2 22 Assoon as he was risen from the dead, his Disciples remembered, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 16. 2 24 25. But jesus did not commit himself unto them, etc. sect. 3. c. 8. p. 3. 3 5 Except that a man be borne of water and of the Spirit, etc. sect. 4. c. 11. p. 13. 4 3 Every spirit which confesseth not that jesus Christ is come in the flesh, etc. sect. 2. c. 7. p. 13. 4 25 When he is come, he will tell us all things, sect. 3. c. 11. p. 15. 4 29 Come and see a man that hath told me all things, etc. ibid. 4 42 And they said unto the woman, now we believe, not because of thy sayings, etc. ibid. 5 22 For the Father judgeth no man, etc. sect. 3. c. 10. p. 1. 5 43 44 I am in my Father's name and ye receive me not, etc. sect. 3. c. 8. p. 3, 5 46 For had ye believed Moses, you would have believed me, etc. sect. c. 10. p. 3. 6 5 And the bread that I will give is my flesh, etc. sect. 2. c. 4. p. 12. 10. 6 51 If any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever. ibid. p. 11. 10. 6 51 I am the living bread that came down from Heaven, ibid. p. 12. 6 53 Unless ye eat the flesh of the son of man, etc. ibid., p. 10. 6 54 Whosoever eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, &c. ibid. 6 56 Whosoever eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood dwells in me, etc., ibid. 6 58 He that eateth this bred shall live for ever, ibid. 6 14 This is of a truth the Prophet that should come, etc., s. 3. c. 8. p. 3. 6 30 What sign showest thou then, that we may see and believe, etc. sect. 3. c. 10. p. 7. 5 68 Thou hast the words of eternal life, ibid. 7 18 He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory, sect. 3. c. 14. p. 2. 7 31 Many of the people believed in him, etc., sect 3. c. 10. p. 7. 10, 40, 41, 42, And went again beyond jordan, into the place where john etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 12. 11 50 It is expedient for us that one die, etc., sect, 3. c. 5. p. 5. 12 28 Father glorify thy name, etc. sect. 3. c. 11. p. 16. 12 30 This voice came not because of me, etc., ibid. 12 32 If I were lift up from the Earth, etc., ibid. p. 17. 12 44 He that believeth in me believeth not in me, but in him, etc., ibid. p. 16. 12 48 And receiveth not my words hath one that judgeth him, etc., ibid. 12, 49, 50, For I have not spoken of myself, etc., ibid. 14 29 Now I have spoken unto you before it come, ibid. 15 14 Ye are my friends if ye do whatsoever I command, etc., sect. 3. c. 6 p. 3. 16 4 These things have I told you, that when the hour shall come, etc., sect, 3. c. 11, p. 16. 16 30 Now know we that thou knowest all things, etc. ibid. p. 15. 21 15 Feed my lambs. sec. 2. c. 6. p. 7. 21 18 Verily verily I say unto thee when thou which wast young, etc. ibid., p. 8, 21 16 Feed my sheep ibid. p. 8. Acts. 2 15 Ye men of judea, and ye all, etc. sect. 2, chap. 6, p. 6. 3 12 To the 13 verse of the 4 chap. ibid. 3 23 For it shall be that every person which shall not hear that Prophet, etc. sect. 3, chap. 12, p. 22. Et sect. 3, c. 11, p. 1 3 26 Unto you hath God raised up his Son, etc. sect. 3, chap. 11, p. 21 10 34 I perceive of truth that God is not an accepter of persons. sect. 3, c. 9, p. 6 13 27 For the Inhabitants of jerusalem, and their Rulers, because they knew him not, etc. sec. 3, c. 11, p. 21 13 33 Thou art my Son this day, etc. ibid. p. 22 13 46 Then Paul and Barnabas spoke boldly and said, It was necessary that the word of God, etc. sect. 2, c. 6, p. 6 17 2 And Paul as his manner was, went in unto them, & three Sabbath days disputed, etc. sect. 3, c. 14, p. 1 17 11 They received the word with all readiness, etc. ibid. 26 22 I obtained help of God, and continued unto this day, etc. ibid. p. 4 26 26 For these things were not done in a corner, etc. sect. 3, c. 11, p 22 Romans. 7 18 TO will is present with me, etc. sect. 3, c. 3, p. 5 10 9 If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord jesus, etc. sect. 2, c. 7, p. 7, 8 10 11 Whosoever believes in him shall not be ashamed, etc. ibid. Corinthians. 1, c. 2, 15 But he that is spiritual discerneth all things, etc. sect. 3, c. 14, p. 4 1, c. 3. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Who is Paul then? And who is Apollo's? but the Ministers by whom, etc. sect. 2, c. 4, p. 15 1, c. 3. 11 For other foundation can no man lay. sect. 2, c. 7, p. 7 1, c. 4. 1, 2 Let a man so think of us as of disposers of the secrets, etc. sect. c. 4, p 14 1, c. 7. 10. Unto the married command not I but the Lord, etc. sect. 3, c. 9, p. 6 1, c. 11. 26, 27, 28, 29 As often as ye shall eat this bread, etc. sect. 2, c. 4, p. 15 1, c. 11. 34 Other things will I set in order when I come, etc. ibid. 2, c. 8. 13 If meat offend my Brother, I will eat none, etc. sect. 2, c. 4, p. 21 Galatians. 1 8 THough We or an Angel from heaven preach etc. sect. 3, c. 7, p. 7. 2 7▪ When they said the Gospel over the circumcision was committed, etc. sect. 2, c. 6. p. 4 Ephesians. 2 20 WE are built upon the Foundation of the Apostles, etc. sect. 2, c. 7, p. 15 5, 32 This is a great secret, but I speak concerning Christ, etc. sect. 2, c. 4, p. 14 Colossians. 3 20 CHildren obey your parents in all things, etc. Sect. 3, c. 1, p. 16 Thessalonians. 2, c. 8. 11 THerefore GOD shall send them strong, etc. sect. 4, c. 7 2, c. 2. 4 He sits as God in the Temple, etc. sect. 2, c. 7, p. 22. Hebrews. 3 1, 2, 3, 4 COnsider the Apostle & high Priest of our profession, etc. sect. 3. chap. 6, p. 2 9 22 Without shedding of blood is no remission, etc. sect. 2, c. 4, p. 18 10 28 He that despiseth Moses Law, dieth without mercy under two or three witnesses, etc. sect. 3, c. 11, p. 18 11 12 Therefore sprang their Even of one, etc. sect. 3, chap. 12, p. 22. Peter. 1, c. 5. 1, 2, 3 THe elders which are amongst you I beseech, which am also an Elder, etc. sect. 12, c. 6, p. 10 2, c. 1. 17 He received of God the Father honour and glory, etc. sect. 3, c. 11, p. 16 2, c. 1. 14 Seeing I know that the time is at hand that I must lay down, etc. sect. 3, c. 13, p. 1 2, c. 1. 16 When he opened unto them the power and coming of Christ, &c: ibid. p. 2 2, c. 1. 19 We have also a most sure word of the Prophets, to the which ye do well that ye take heed, ibid. john. 1, c. 4. v. 3 EVery spirit which confesseth not that jesus Christ. sect. 2, c. 7, p. 13. Revelation. 1 3 BLessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the word, etc. sec. 2, c, 8, p, 4, 13, 4, 5, 6, 7, The beast which had his power from the Dragon, etc. sect. 3. c. 12. p. 4. A Table of the several Sections and Chapters in the Book following. SECTION. I. COntaining the Assertions of the Romish Church, whence her threefold blasphemy springs, page 1. In the marginal note, parag. 10. for Petrum a voto, read Petrum a Soto. In the marginal note, para. 13. for propter leges, read praeter leges. Margin, parag. 13. propriae virtutis suae, read propria. SECTION. II. The first branch of Romish blasphemy, in preferring human authority before Divine, Pag. 10. CHAP. I. Bellarmine's reply to the main objection, jointly urged by all Reformed Churches against the Romish: the Equivocation which he sought in the Objection apparently found in his Reply, pag. 10. CHAP. II. Inferring, the general conclusion proposed in the Title of this Section, from Bellarmine's resolution of faith, pag. 15. In the marginal note, parag. 9 for for the same grounds, read from the same grounds. Marg. parag. 1. deal si. CHAP. III. Containing a further Resolution of the Romish faith, necessarily inferring the authority of the Roman Church, to be of greater authority than God's word absolutely, not only in respect of us, pag. 24. CHAP. FOUR That in obeying the Romish Churches Decrees, we do not obey God's word as well as them, but them alone in contempt of God's principal Laws, pag. 28. In the marginal note, parag. 13. putamus, read non putamus. CHAP. V. Propounding what possibly can be said on our adversaries behalf for avoiding the force of the former Arguments: showing withal the special points that lie upon them to prove, as principally, whether their belief of the Church's authority can be resolved into any divine testimony, pag. 46. CHAP. VI That neither our saviours Prayers, for the not failing of Peter's faith, Luke 22. 32. nor his commending his sheep unto his feeding, john 21. 15. prove any Supremacy in Peter over the Church, from which the authority of the Pope can, with probability, be derived, p. 49. CHAP. VII. That Christ, not S. Peter is the Rock, spoken of Matth. 16. 18. that the Jesuits Exposition of that place, demonstrateth the Pope to be the great Antichrist, pag. 64. In the marginal note, parag. 24. for That Romish faith is that faith, read that Romish faith is not that faith. In the marginal note, parag. 31. for a paralile, read a parallel. In the marginal note, parag. 3. for Plinius, read Pintus. Parag. 22. for melang, read felang. CHAP. VIII. That the Romanists belief of the Churches in fallible authority, cannot be resolved into any testimony better than human, whence the main conclusion immediately follows. [That the Romanist in obeying the Church-decrees without examination of them by God's word, prefer man's Laws before Gods.] pag. 89. CHAP. IX. In what sense the Jesuits may truly deny they believe the words of man better than the words of God: In what sense again our Writers truly charge them with this blasphemy, pag. 99 SECTION. III. CHAP. I. What restraint, precepts for obedience unto the Priests of the Law, though seeming most universal for their form, did necessarily admit: How universal Propositions of Scriptures are to be limited, pag. 105. In the marginal note, parag. 3. for suscitaturus, read sciscitaturus. CHAP. II. The authority of the Sanhedrim not so universal or absolute amongst the jews as the Papists make it, but was to be limited by the former Rules, pag. 119. In the marginal note, parag. 2. for sarcedotem, read sacerdotem. Margin, parag. 11. for Canala, read Cabala. CHAP. III. That our saviours injunction of obedience to the Scribes and Pharisees, though most universal for the form, is to be limited by the former rules, that without open blasphemy it cannot be extended to countenance the Romish cause: that by it we may limit other places brought by them for the Pope's transcendent universal authority, pag. 128. In the marginal note, parag. 11. quae ad populi salutem fuit, read ut quae ad populi salutem sint. CHAP. FOUR What it would disadvantage the Romish Church to deny the infallibility of the Synagogue, pag. 139. Mar. par. 3. inveniebant, read inveniebantur. negat read negatur. CHAP. V. That justly it may be presumed the jewish Church, never had any absolute infallibitie in proposing or determining Articles of faith, because in our saviours time it did so grievously err in the fundamental point of salvation, pag. 142. Mar. par. 2. darmavit, read damnavit. sunt enim, read sicut enim CHAP. VI That Moses had no such absolute authority, as is now ascribed unto the Pope: That the manner of his attaining to such as he had, excludes all besides our Saviour from just challenge of the like, pag. 151. CHAP. VII. That the Church's authority was no part of the rule of faith unto the people after Moses death, That by experiments answerable unto the precepts and predictions, the faithful without relying upon the Priests infallible proposals, were as certain, both of the divine truth, and true meaning of the law, as their forefathers had been that lived with Moses and saw his miracles, pag. 159. CHAP. VIII. That the society or visible company of Prophets had no such absolute authority as the Romish Church usurps, pag. 169. CHAP. IX. That the Church representative amongst the jews was for the most part, the most corrupt judge of matters belonging to God: and the reason why it was so, pag. 178. CHAP. X. That the Sovereignty given by jesuits to the Pope is greater than our saviours was, pag. 186. CHAP. XI. Confirming the truth delivered in the former Chapter from the very Law given by Moses for discerning the great Prophet, further exemplifying the use and force of miracles for begetting faith: The manner of trying prophecies: Of the similitude betwixt Christ and Moses, p. 197 In the marginal note par. 19 for for sorcery, read from sorcery. CHAP. XII. That the method used by the great Prophet himself after his resurrection for planting faith, was such as we teach: The excess of Antichrists exaltation above Christ: The diametral opposition betwixt the spirit of God, and the spirit of the Papacy, pag. 221. CHAP. XIII. That the authority attributed to the present Pope, and the Romish rule of faith were altogether unknown unto Saint Peter: the opposition betwixt S. Peter's and his pretended successors doctrine, pag. 226. CHAP. XIIII. That S. Paul submitted his doctrine to examination by the words before written. That his doctrine, disposition and practice, were quite contrary to the Romanists in this argument, pag. 232. CHAP. XV. A brief taste of our adversaries blasphemous and Atheistical assertions in this argument from some instances of two of their greatest Doctors, Bellarmine and Valentian: That if faith cannot be perfect without the solemn testification of that Church, the rarity of such testifications will cause infidelity, pag. 239. SECTION, FOUR Containing the third branch of Romish blasphemy or the last degree of great Antichrists exaltation, utterly overthrowing the whole foundation of Christian Religion, preposterously inverting both Law and Gospel to God's dishonour, and advancement of Satan's Kingdom, pag. 245. CHAP. I. The jesuits unwillingness to acknowledge the Church's proposal for the true cause of his faith: of differences and agreements about the final resolution of faith either amongst the adversaries themselves, or betwixt us and them, p. 245. CHAP. II. That the Church's proposal is the true, immediate, and prime cause of all absolute belief any Romanist can have, concerning any determinate divine revelation, p. 249. CHAP. III. Discovering either the gross ignorance, or notorious craft of the jesuit in denying his faith, is finally resolved into the Church's veracity or infallibility: that possibly it cannot be resolved into any branch of the first truth, pag. 256. Mar. par. 3. faith, read the Romanists faith. CHAP. FOUR What manner of causall-dependance Romish belief hath on the Church: that the Romanist truly and properly believes the Church only, not God or his Word, pag. 268. CHAP. V. Declaring how the first main ground of Romish faith leads directly unto Atheism: the second unto preposterous Heathenism or Idolatry, pag. 277. Mar. par. 12. efferunt, read afferunt. CHAP. VI Proving the last assertion, or generally the imputations laid upon the Papacy, by that authority the Jesuits expressly give unto the Pope in matters of particular fact, as in the Canonizing of Saints, pag. 294. CHAP. VII. What danger by this blasphemous doctrine may accrue to Christian States; that of all heresies, blasphemies, or idolatries which have been since the world began, or can be imagined till Christ come to judgement: this Apostasy of the Jesuits, is the most abominable and contumelious against the blessed Trinity, pag. 300. THE TRIPLICITY OF ROMISH BLASPHEMY OR THE THREE DEGREES OF ANTICHRISTS EXALTATION Against all that is called God. THE THIRD BOOK. SECT. I. Containing the assertions of the Romish Church, whence her threefold blasphemy springs. Having, in the former dispute clearly acquitted, as well God's word from breeding, as our Church from nursing contentions, schisms, and heresies, we may in this, by course of common equity, more freely accuse their injurious calumniators. And because our purpose is not, to charge them with forgery of any particular, though grossest heresies, or blasphemies, though most hideous, but for erecting an entire frame, capacious of all villainies imaginable; far surpassing the hugest mathematical form human fancy could have conceived of such matters, but only from inspection of this real and material pattern, which by degrees insensible hath grown up with the mystery of iniquity, as the bark doth with the tree; such inconsiderate passionate speeches, as heat of contention in personal quarrels hath exstracted from some one, or few of their private Writers, shall not be produced to give evidence against the Church their Mother, whose trial shall be as far as may be, by her Peers; either by her own public determinations, in this controversy, or joint consent of her authorized best approved Advocates, in opening the title, or unfolding the contents of that prerogative, which they challenge for her. 2 Our accusations are grounded upon their Positions before set down, Lib 2 Sect. 1. c. 3 when we explicated the differences betwixt us. The position in brief, is this; That the infallible authority of the present Church, is the most sure, most safe, undoubted rule in all doubts, or controversies of faith, or in all points concerning the Oracles of God: by which we may certainly know, both; without which we cannot possibly know, either, which are the Oracles of God, which not, or what is the true sense and meaning of such as are received for his Oracles, whether written or unwritten: 3 The extent of divine Oracles, or number of Canonical books hath been (as our Adversaries pretend) very questionable amongst the ancient: They acknowledges S. Hierom as the Oracle of Antiquity, and yet directly contradict him in this decree concerning the number of Canonical books. though such of the Fathers, as, for their skill in antiquity, were in all unpartial judgements most competent judges in this cause, were altogether for us against the Romanists, and such as were for their opinion, were but for it upon an error, as thinking the jews had acknowledged all those books of the old Testament for Canonical Scripture, which the Churches wherein they lived, received for such, or that the Christian Church did acknowledge all for Canonical, which they allowed to be publicly read. Safe it was (our adversaries cannot deny) for the Ancient, to dissent one from an other, in this question, or to suspend their assent, till new probabilities might sway them one way or other. No reasons have been produced since, sufficient to move any ingenious mind unto more peremptory resolutions, yet doth the Council of Trent bind all to an absolute acknowledgement of those Books for Canonical, which, by their own confession were rejected by S. Hierome, and other Fathers. * Si quis autem libros ipsos integros cum omnibus suis partibus (prout in Ecclesia Catholica legi consu●uerunt, & inveteri vulgata Latina editione habentur) pro sacris, & canonicis no sasceperit; & traditiones praedictas, sciens & prudens contempserit: and thema sit. Conc. Trid. Sess. 4. decret. de Canonicis Scriptures. If any shall not receive the whole Books with all their parts (usually read in the Church, and as they are extent in the old vulgar) for sacred and Canonical, let him be accursed. So are all, by the same decree, that will not acknowledge such unwritten traditions, as the Romish Church pretends to have come from Christ and his Apostles for divine, and of authority equal with the written word. 4 So generally is this opinion received, so fully believed, in that Church; That many of her Sons, even whilst they write against us, forgetting with whom they have to deal, take it as granted: That the Scriptures cannot be known to be God's word, but by the infallible authority of the present Church. And from this supposition, as from a truth sufficiently known, (though never proved) they labour, in the next place, to infer: That, without submission of our faith to the Churches public spirit, we cannot infallibly distinguish the orthodoxal, or divine sense of God's Oracles, (whether written or unwritten) from heretical or human. 5 Should we admit unwritten Traditions, and the Church withal as absolute judge to determine which were Apostolical, The decree of the Tr●t council authorizing the latin vulgar edition. which not: little would it boot us to question with them about their meaning. For when the point should come to trial, we might be sure to have the very words framed to whatsoever sense should be most favourable for justifying Romish practices. And even of Gods written Oracles, whose words or characters (as he in his wisdom hath provided) cannot now be altered by an Index Expurgatorius, at their pleasure: That such a sense as shall be most serviceable for their turn, may (as time shall minister occasion) be more commodiously gathered; the Trent Fathers, immediately after the former decree for establishing unwritten Traditions, and amplifying the extent of divine written Oracles, have in great wisdom authorized * Insuper eadem Sacrosancta Synodus considerans non parum utilitatis accedere posse Ecclesiae Dei, si ex omnibus latinis editionibus, quae circumferuntur, sacrorum librorum, quaenam pro Auth●ntica habenda sit, innotes●at: Statuit, & declarat, ut haec ipsa vetus & vulgata Editio, quae longo tot saeculorum usis in ipsa Ecclesia probata est, in publicis lectionibus, disputationibus, praedicationibus, & expositionibus, pro authentica habeatur, & ut nemo illam reijcere quovis praetextu audeat, vel praesumat. Conc. Trident. Sess. 4. Decret. De editione & usu sacro●um librorum. the old and vulgar translation of the whole Canon. Which, though it were not purposely framed to maintain Popery (as some of our writers, say they, have as frivolously as maliciously objected) yet certainly, aswell the escapes and errors of those unskilful, or ill-furnished interpreters, as the negligence of transcribers, or other defects, incident to that work, from the simplicity of most ancient, the injuries or calamities of ensuing times, were, amongst others, as the first heads or petty springs of that raging flood of impiety, which had well nigh drowned the whole Christian world in perdition, by continually receiving into it channel (once thus wrought) the dregs and filth of every other error under heaven, with the corrupt remainder of former heresies, for these thousand years and more. And unto many gross errors in Romish religion, which this imperfect translation did not first occasion, it yet affords that countenance, which the pure Fountains of the Greek and Hebrew do not; but rather would scour and wipe away; were they current in that Church. Finally, though it yield not nutriment to enlarge or feed, yet it serves as a cloak to hide or cover, most parts of the great mystery of iniquity. 6 Yet, besides the favourable construction, that may be made for that religion, out of the plain and literal sense of this erroneous translation: the Church will be absolute judge of all controversies concerning the right interpretation thereof. So as not what our consciences, upon diligent search and just examination, shall witness to us, but what the Church shall declare to them, must be absolutely acknowledged for the true intent and meaning of God's word, as it is rendered by the vulgar interpreter: To this purpose is the very next decree. 7 * Praeterea, ad coercenda petulantia ingenia, decernit, ut nemo, suae prudentiae innixus, in rebus fidei, & morum, ad aedificationem Doctrinae Christianae pertinentium, sacram Scripturam ad suos sensus contorquens, contra eum sensum quem tenuit, & tenet sancta Mater Ecclesia, cuius est judicare de vero sensu, & interpretatione Scripturarum sanctarum, aut etiam contra unanimem consensam Patrum, ipsam Scripturam sacram interpretari audeat, etiamsi huiusmodi interpretationes nullo unquam tempore in lucem edendae forent. Qui contraveuerint, per Ordinarios declarentur, & poenis à iure statutis puniantur. Concil. Trident. Ibidem. Moreover, for bridling petulant dispositions, The Trent councils decree for interpretation of Scriptures. it is decreed; That no man in confidence of his own wisdom or skill, in matters of faith, and manners, making for the edification of Christian doctrine, shall dare to interpret Scriptures, wresting them to his own conceit or sense, against that sense or meaning, which the holy Church our Mother, to whom it belongs to judge of the true sense and interpretation of sacred writ, heretofore hath held, or now doth hold, albeit he never purpose to publish such interpretations. 8 It is further added in the same place, (because I take it had been specified a Synod before) that no man shall dare to interpret Scriptures against the unanimous consent of Fathers. Which I think were impossible for any man to do; though were it possible, few or none would attempt, besides the Papists. For, neither can it be known what all of them hold in most places, where upon are grounded controversies of greatest moment; and in such as we have best plenty of their interpretations, albeit they do not contentiously dissent, yet absolutely agree each with other they do not. Even one and the same Father oftimes thinks, of many interpretations, sundry alike probable: most of them unwilling, by their peremptory determinations, one way or other, to prejudice the industrious search of others (though their far inferiors) for finding out some more commodious, than any they bring; oftentimes intimating their doubts or imperfect conjectures in such manner; as if they would purposely encourage their successors to seek out some better resolution than they could find. Whence it is evident, that we should not always interpret Scriptures against the joint consent of Fathers, albeit we went against all the particular interpretations which they have brought; because they were more desirous to have the truth fully sifted, than their conjectural probabilities infallibly believed: Nor were it possible more to contradict most of them, then by following their interpretations, upon such strict terms, as the Romanists would bind all men to do, when they seem to make for their advantage. Not the least surmise or conjecture of any one Father, but, if it please them, must suffice against the joinct authority of all the rest. For, in all the three points above mentioned, they admit the Church (as may appear from the decrees cited) for a judge, so absolute, That, no man may embrace any opinion, upon what grounds or probabilities soever, but with humble submission to her censure: Whatsoever she shall enjoin, in all, or any of these points, albeit we have reasons, many and strong, not to hold it, to hold not one, besides her bare authority; yet must all believe it alone as absolutely, as if we had the apparent unanimous consent of Fathers; yea of Prophets, Apostles, or Evangelists, and all good writers in every age. 9 Hence * Bellarmine's assertion concerning the Church's authority grounded upon the former decree. Bellarmine rejects (as dissonant to the former decree) this resolution of * In articul. 155 ex illis quingentis quos Coch●eus colligit ex libris Lutheri; sic ait: Capite hoc evangelium, quiae neque Papae neque concilijs, neque ulli haminun commissum est, ut constituat & concludat, quid sit sides. Ideo d●ben dicere: Papa, tu conclusisti cum concilijs, nunc habeo ego judicium, an acceptare queam neene. 〈◊〉 quia non 〈◊〉 pro me, 〈◊〉 respondebis pro ●e, quando del co ●ori. Et falsam doctrinam nemo judicare potest, nisi spiritualis homo. Ideo res est insana, quod Concilia concludere & statuere volunt, quid credendum sit: cum saepe nullus vir sit ibi, qui divinum spiritum vel modicum olsecerit. Idem confirmat in assertionibus art. 27. 28. & 29. Bellarm. de verb. Dei Lib. 3. Cap. 3. Luther, That albeit the Pope and Council conclude points of faith; yet have private men a free arbitrement (so far as it concerns themselves) whether they may safely believe their conclusions, or no. Luther gives two reasons for his assertion, both most forcible. The one, because the Pope shall not answer for private men, at the hour of their death: The other, because none are competent judges of false Doctrines, but men spiritually minded; when as it often falls out, that, in their Counsels, there cannot be found one man, (much less a mayor part of men, without which how many soever there were, all were as none,) that hath any the least relish of the Divine Spirit. The like assertion doth the jesuit condemn in Brentius: 10 It is not lawful (saith * Similiter Brentius docet in Confessime Wirte●●●rgica cap. de sacra script erat & coplesias in Pralegr●●● contra 〈…〉. Primo, 〈◊〉 licet, inquit, in causa 〈…〉 ita inhaerere, ut eam sine nost●o ipsorum judicio ampl●ct●mur. Secund● addit; Ad 〈◊〉 quemque hominum priuat●m perti●et de doctrina rel●gionis iud●●are & 〈…〉 internoscere. Sed hoc interest inter privatum & princip●m, quòd ut privatus privates, 〈…〉 habet de doctrina religionis potestatem judicandi & decidendi, etc. Nec illud aduert●t, si 〈◊〉 sententia vera sit rectè 〈…〉 & alios Catholicos Germaniae principes, si etiam mortis suppli●o 〈…〉 ad sidem Catholicam: Bellar. de verb. Dei lib. 1. cap. 3. Brentius) for any man, in a point of salvation, so to rely upon another's sentence as to embrace it without interposition of his own judgement. The reason is there intimated; because, every man is to be immediately judged by his own conscience; and may for avoiding the just censure of condemnation by it, safely disclaim their opinions, the execution of whose sentence or bodily punishment, he may not decline; seeing they are (as was observed before) public and lawful, yet fallible judges of controversies in Religion. And Bellarmine bewrays, either gross ignorance, or great skill in wrangling, when he exclaims against this position of Brentius, as absurd and repugnant to itself [That the supreme Magistrate, or public judges, may be bound to command, where the subject or inferior is not bound to obey.] For, * So Bellarmine grants, that Saint 〈◊〉 did not commit any mortal sin, in contradicting Pope Stephen's decree, whom out of ignorance he oppugned, his reason is good, because this persuasion remaining in full strength, he had sinned against his conscience in obeying the Pope. His words are these, Ex v●ta part● non videtur mortaliter peccasse, quia non peccavit nisi ex ignorantia, putavit enim Pontificem perniciosè errare; & stante illa opinion, tenebatur ei non obedire, quia non debebat contra conscientiam agere. Ignorantia autem Cypriam non videtur fuisse crassa, neque assecta, sed probabilis, & proinde excusans a mortali peccato. Bellar. Lib. 4. de Roman. Cap. 7. as well the Prince in commanding, as the people in obeying, must follow whither their consciences lead them. Both may, and in case they disagree, the one, or other, cannot but err in the precedent information of their consciences; and * Vide Lib. 2. Sect. 1. Cap. 6. Parag. 11. & Sect. 4. Cap. 7. Parag. 2. 3. herein properly doth their sin consist, not in doing what erroneous conscience, upon so strict terms as penalty of eternal death, doth uncessantly urge them to. 11 The people, saith * Canus assertion concerning Churches authority. Nihil igitur asserunt, qui Ecclesiae authoritatem non absolutè sed ex conditione ponunt Si namque ad eum modum res habet & mihi quoque ●ides habenda est quando pronunciavero secundum scripturas recte intellectas. Id 〈◊〉 est non mihi sed scripturae credere. At, absolutè, non ex conditione populus Domino credidit & Moisi servo eius. Absolute etiam Prophetis & Apostolis populi crediderunt Quale vero esset Prophetis Aposto lisque loquentibus fidem ea exceptione detrabere, quod perperam Dei verba intellexissent? Canus de Eccles Cathol. Lib. 4. Canus, did absolutely (not upon condition) believe God and his servant Moses: and unless men so believe the Church, they make it of no authority. Nor is it enough to believe it to be infallible in points of moment, or such as might overthrow faith, unless it be acknowledged so absolutely inerrable in all, as it cannot either believe or teach amiss, in any question of faith, for, if in any (seeing there is one and the same reason of all;) it might aswell fail in receiving some books (indeed not such) for Canonical and Divine. * In summa si Ecclesia posset in fidei quaestione falli, librum quoque divinum recipere posset, qui tamen à Deo non fuisset. Cum sit eadem ratio de uno libro, ad de unequolibet dogmate. Quare non valeret argumentum, Ecclesia habet evangelium Mathaei pro canonico, ergo canonicum est. Quod quoniam impijssime & absurdissime diceretur; illud nos dicamus potius, recte fideles Ecclesiam Catholicam eredere, non solum in eo sensu, ut Ecclesiae Catholicae fides deficiat numquam: sed in eo etiam, ut nihil ipsa credere & docere possit, quod sit verae fidei contrarium. Canus Ibid. paulo ante. The authority ascribed to the Pope in his Bull of Confirmation. Whereupon, it would follow, that this argument would not follow, The Church acknowledgeth Saint Matthewes Gospel for Canonical, therefore it is Canonical. The denial of which consequence is most impious and absurd, in this man's censure, fully consonant to Valent. before cited, That Scripture which is commended unto us and expounded by the authority of the Church, is now even in this respect (because the Church commends it) most authentic. 12 Unto these, and far more gross conclusions all their modern Writers, for aught I can find, think themselves bound by the former decrees of the Trent Council. But what if any should dissent from these great Champions in the interpretation of it? Who should judge betwixt them, or whither were they to repair for resolution? To the place which God hath chosen, to wit to the Sea Apostolical, or, in other terms, to Rome. So saith the * Si cui in eyes aliquid obscurius dictum, & statutum fuisse, eamque ob causam interpretatione aùt decisione aliqua egere visum fuerit; ascendat ad locum, quem Dominus elegat, ad Sedem videlicet Apostolicam, omnium fidelium magistram, cuius authoritatem etiam ipsa Sancta Synodus tam reverenter agnovit. Nos enim difficultates & controversias, si que ex eis decretis ortae fuerint, nobis declarandas & decidendas, quemadmodum ipsa quoque sancta Synodus decrevit, reseruamus, parati sicut ea nobis meriton, confisa est, omnium Provinciarum necessitatibus ea ratione quae commodior nobis visa fuerit providere. Bull. Pij. 4. Sup. Confirm. Concil. Trid. Pope that confirmed this Council. As if there were only: a translation of the Sea, none of the Priesthood, sometimes established in jerusalem; where all were to worship. And if Rome have that place in Christendom, which jerusalem had in jewrie: the Pope must be such a Lord to all Christians, as He that dwelled betwixt the Cherubins was to the Israelites; both their answers of like authority. 13 But when we repair to Rome, who shall there determine what the Council meant? the Pope alone, or with his Cardinals? with his Cardinals, if he please; himself alone, without them, or any other, if he list; all after, as he shall find himself disposed to use his ordinary or * Plenitudinem, que suit Bealo Petro, dicunt Doctores ad Papam pertinere, non solu● quia quod omnibus & singulis Praelatis in Ecclesia Dei concessum est, id solus Papa potest, sed etiam quia amplius quam illi omnes, & singuli poss●nt ipse unus potest, eo exemplo utentes, q●●dquemadmod●m Deus potuerit statuere leges naturalibus rebus, ut iuxta●as operaretur: potest tamen idem Deus propter leges nature ex pro pr●ae virtutis suae agere, quod miraculum vocari solet: sic in Ecclesia spectat, ad sumum Pontisicem condere leges morales & priscribere ius omn●bus persoais Ecclesiasticis, & toti Ecclesiae, idem tamen non semper tenetur servare, huiusmodi leges, sed potest agere praeter illas. Quando igitur Papa ea vult observare, quae suis legibus continentur, tunc dicitur uti potestate ordinaria. Quando vero aliquid vult exequi supra id, quod legibus constitutum est, tunc dicitur pleaitudinem pòtestatis exercere. Palaeot de sac. Consist. Consult. partr. quest. 3. art. 1. plenary power by the former of which (answerable to Gods working with natural agents) he determines of matters by the usual course of laws provided for that purpose, using the advise or council of his assistants; by the other (correspondent to Gods working in miracles effected by his own immediate peculiar power, without the coagencie of any inferior or created cause he may resolve of himself alone, not consulting his Cardinals, Bishops, or others. * The authority given to the Pope by the Trent Council: Superest aunc ut principes omnes, quod facit, in Domino moneat ad operam suam ita praestandam, ut, quae ab ea decreta sunt, ab Haereticis depravari aut violari non permittant; sed ab his & omnibus devotè recipiantur & fideliter obseruentur. Quod si in his recipiendis aliqua difficultas oriatur; aut aliqua inciderint quae declarationem, quod non credit, aut desinitionem postulant praeter alia remedia, 〈◊〉 ●oc Concilio instituta, confidit Sancta Synodus Beatissimum Romanum Pontificem curaturum, ut vel evocatis ex illis pres●rtim Provincijs, unde difficultas orta fuerit, iis quos eidem negotio tractando viderit expedire, vel etiam Concilij generalis celebratione, si necessarium iudicaverit vel commodiore quacunque ratione ei v●sum fuerit, provideturum necessitatibus pro Dei gloria, & Ecclesiae tranquilitate consulatur. Concil. Tried Sess. 25. De recipiandis & obseruandis decretis Concilij. The authority given to the Pope by the Roman Catechism. This power and liberty, the Trent Council itself seems to give unto the Pope, as it were for an upshot to all the fools thunderbolts they had let sly before. And lest any man should think this absolute acknowledgement of the Pope's plenary power, to be a Counsel, rather than a necessary precept; The * Ecclesia vocatur unatanta hominum multitudo quae tam longè latèque disfusa est, ob eas causar, que ab Apost lo ad Ephesios scriptae sunt. unum enim Dominum: unam fidem, unum Baptisma tantum esse praedicat. unus est etiam eius rector & gubernator invisibilis quidem Christus, quem aeternus Pater dedit caput super 〈◊〉 Ecclesiam, quae est corpus eius: visibilis autem is, qui Romanam Cathedram Petri Apostolorum principis legitimus successor tenat. And immediately after proposing this question, Quid de Romano Pontifice, visibili Ecclesiae Christi capite, sentiendum est? Confirms the former blasphemous doctrine with this shameless lie; Do eo suit illa omnium patrum rati● & sententia consentiens, hoc visibile caput ad unitatem Ecclesiae constita endam & conseruandam necessarium fuisse. Catech. Roman. part. 1. cap. 10. de nono art. sive Eccles. Catnol. catechism published by the Trent Counsels authority, hath inserted amongst the Articles of faith, That the present Pope, is the sole visible head of the whole Christian Church, though Christ the invisible. The meaning of which (if I mistake not) is this, That the Pope * The institution of Sacraments and certain other Excellencies as they call them, are by their confession peculiar unto Christ, not communicable unto his Vicar general concerning the points above mentioned hath as absolute power, in Christ's absence, as Christ himself should have, were he present, or shall have in that day of final judgement; wherein if these men's positions be true, he shall have nothing to do in matters of saith, but only to ratify what the Pope hath defined, who must not be called to any account of his Spiritual, as Kings and Monarches must be for their Temporal Stewardships: nor shall it be said to him, as it must be to some of them, Well done thou good and faithful Servant. For such men only (by our adversaries Doctrine) do well, as might have done ill; but the Pope, live as he list, cannot possibly do a miss, in determining matters of Faith, which are, of all that are, of greatest difficulty and consequence. 14 When first I read josephus Acoste, I much wondered, to see a man, otherwise of an ingenuous spirit, and of parts so excellent, so zealous withal, for the Pope's Supremacy: But now, I perceive, the reason was all private Catechisms were to be conformed unto that public one, authorized by the Council and Pope. Amongst other contents of that Article of the Catholic Church (almost quite omitted in the former Indian Catechisms) * Doceantur ergo. Indi de Ecclesia tria praecipuè. Primum, quid illa sit, congregatio certe hominum Christum doctrinanque Christi prositentium, non Hispanorum aut barbarorune, aut nationis & gentis cuiusdam numere & sort desinita, omnia terrarum spatia, onmes temporum successiones complectens, Hujus vero caput esse Romanae urbis Pontisicem, Petri successorem, Christi vicarium plenissima ipsius in terris autheritate polientem, ●ui caeteri omnes Christiani, etiam Reges & Principes parcant. Hoc est, Ecclesiam Catbolicam eredere, & universalem. Ios. Accost lib. 5. cap. 7. de procuranda Indorum salute. Acostaes' advise is, to have this inserted, as an essential part, That the Pope is head of the Catholic Church; Christ's Vicar on earth, endued with his plenary power; to whom all other Christians (Kings and Princes not excepted) owe obedience. These allegations may testify our sincerity in proposing the state of the question, and points of difference betwixt us, gathered not out of one or two, but the general agreement of best Romish Writers: and whereunto Valentian, were he alive, would willingly subscribe. For he, as since I have observed, * An ut fidei abiectum per Christi●●am fidem infallibiliter credatur, satis sit, illud esse revelatum divinitus, & explicatum à 〈…〉 verbi dei ministro: 〈…〉 mete●ea necesse sit, illud tanquam à Deo re●elatum. & ideo credendam proponi et ostendi 〈◊〉 per insallib●tem aliquam et praeem●nentem anti 〈…〉 editio Symboli seu articulerum 〈◊〉 indicium atque desinitio emnium side, 〈◊〉, quae unquam oriri possunt Valent. Tom. 3 in Aquin Disp. 1. Quaest. 1. Punct. 7. in Tit. Puncti. proposeth the title of his main Controversy concerning the Church's authority, in terms aequivalent to those I used, Lib. 2. Section 1. Cap. 3. and Lib. 1. Parag. Vlt. SECT. II. The first branch of Romish blasphemy in preferring human authority before Divine. AGainst these late recited, The general objection of Reformed Churches against the former assertions. and infinite other aequivalent assertions frequent in their public determinations, and best private Writers; our Writers usually object, If the Church be judge of Scriptures, her authority must be above the Scriptures; If the sense of Scripture, without the Church or Pope's asseveration or proposal be not authentic, nor apt to beget most firm belief: then the word of God must receive strength and authority from the word of man. Some Romish Writers grant the inference, with this restraint, [In respect of us] and yet wipe their mouths with the whore in the Proverb, as if they had neither committed Idolatry, nor spoken blasphemy. But Bellarmine was too cunning a Bawd, to expose his mother's foul face to public view, without more artificial painting. CHAP. I. Bellarmine's Reply to the main objection, jointly urged by all Reformed Churches against the Romish: the Equivocation which he sought in the objection apparently found in his Reply. 1 THE former argument, Respondeo, hoc argumentum, quod ab haereticis plurimi sit, ●otum in aequivocatione versari: nam duobus modis potest intelligi Ecclesiam judicare de Scripturis uno modo, quod judicet, verumne sit an sassum quod Scripturae docent: Alterò modo, quod posito ut fundamento certissimo, Scripturae verba esse verissima, judicet quae sit vera corum interpretatio. Et quidem si primo modo Ecclesia iudicaret, verè esset supra Scripturam, sed hoc non dicimus, quamuis Haeretici calumnientur id nos dicere, qui passim vociserantur nos subijcere Scripturam pedibus Papae. At secundo modo judicare Ecclesiam, vel Pontificem de Scriptures, quod nos asserimus, non est Ecclesiam esse supra Scripturam sed supra judicia privatorum hominum. Non enim judicat Ecclesia de veritate Scripturae, sed de intelligentia tua, & mea, et aliorum. Neque hinc sumit verbum Dei abquod robur, sed intelligientia nostra. Non enim Scriptura est verior aut certior, quia sic ab Ecclesia exponitur, sed mea seatentia est verior, quando ab Ecclesia confirmatur. Bellar. de verb. interpret. Lib. 3. Cap. 10. Raesp. ad 14. Arg. howsoever much esteemed by such as bring it; yet in Bellarmine's judgement, is very weak, and as he suspects, sick of his own disease. Totum in aequivocatione versatur. The equivocation he seeketh to unfold with this distinction; The former speeches may admit a double sense. First their meaning may be, that the Church doth judge, whether that, which the Scriptures teach, be true or false, Or, Secondly, [This sure foundation of faith being first laid, The words of Scripture are most infallible and true] The Church doth judge which is the true interpretation, or meaning of them. This distinction he applieth thus; The former obiectuns were pertinent, if we held the Pope or Council to determine of Scriptures, in the former sense; but, taking our right meaning, they are mere calumnies. For we affirm the Church to judge Scriptures only in the later: and so to judge them, doth not set the Church or Pope above Scriptures, but above the judgement of private men. Nor doth the Church (by this assertion) become a judge of Scriptures truth, but of private men's understanding. Neither will it hence follow, that the word of God recetueth strength from the word of man; but private men's knowledge, may and doth receive strength and infallibility, from the Church. Finally, the Scripture or Word of God (as Bellarmine thinks) is neither more true or certain, because it is expounded by the Church; but every man's opinion is more true and stable, when it is confirmed by the Church's exposition or decision. He hath said as much as the whole Council of Trent could have said for themselves. But let us see if this be enough. 2 A private man's opinion (saith Bellarmine) is truer, when it is confirmed by the Church. If we had only an opinion of the truth or sense of Scriptures; the consent of others, especially men skilful in such matters, would indeed much confirm us, for all opinions, or uncertain persuasions, receive increase of strength, from addition of probabilities. But his words are more general, and concern not only uncertain, but all persuasions, that a faithful man in this life, can have of God's Word; at least of those writings, which we and they acknowledge for such: and the mark he aims at is, That no persuasion, in divine matters, can be certain, without the Church's confirmation; as he expressly addeth in his * Vide Chap. 2. Parag. 7. answer to the next argument. 3 If the Reader will be attentive he shall easily perceive, that, not our Writers objections, but Bella●mines answer, is tainted with equivocation. For this speech of his, The Church doth judge whether that which the Scriptures teach be true or false, hath a double and doubtful sense. In what sense (as impertinent as true) God's word by Romanists is acknowledged of greater authority than the Church. It may be meant either. Of Scriptures taken indefinitely or indeterminately, for that which God hath spoken, whatsoever that be. Of those particular Scriptures, which we and they acknowledge, or any determinate (written or unwritten) precepts questionable, whether they were from God or no. 4 If we speak of Scriptures in the former sense, Bellarmine's answer is true. For the Romish Church doth not take upon her to judge, whether that which is supposed, or acknowledged by all, for God's word, be most true in it proper & native, but indeterminate sense, seeing this is a Maxim unquestionable (amongst all such as have any notion of a Deity,) Whatsoever God hath spoken is most true, in that sense wherein he meant it. But, if we descend to any determinate speeches; written or unwritten, either acknowledged or supposed for God's Word, or such as can but ground any possible question, whether they are Gods Words or no; the present Romish Church doth take upon her, absolutely to judge of all and every part of them. For this is the very abstract, or abridgement of that infinite prerogative, which she challengeth, all men must infallibly believe that to be God's Word which she commends, that not to be his Word which she disclaims for such. So as only, the former transcendent, and indeterminate truth [Whatsoever God saith is true] is exempt from the Pope's unlimited, transcendent, royal sentence; no other word, or syllable of truth, which we can imagine, God hath or might have spoken since the World began, either by his own or his sons mouth, by the Ministry of his Angels, Prophets, Apostles or Evangelists; but is every way absolutely subject to the Pope's Monarchichall censure. 5 And here, let not the Reader mistake it, as any argument of our adversaries ingenuity, that they will for their own advantage vouchsafe to grant (what no heathen Idolater did ever deny) Whatsoever God saith is true. For, unless this were granted by all; the Pope could have no possible grounds of pretence, or claim, to his absolute infallibility, or infinite supremacy over all. And that which his hirelings seek to build upon the former foundation, is, Whatsoever the Pope hath said, or shall say, ex cathedra, is most true; because, if we descend to any determinate truths, we must believe that God hath spoken all, and only that, which the Pope hath already testified, or, (when any question ariseth shall testify he hath spoken. In fine, the present Pope, by their positions, is Gods only living mouth, only all-sufficient to justify, or authentically witness all his words past: all which, without him, are unto us, as dead. Whence they must of necessity, admit the same proportion, betwixt the present Popes and Gods acknowledged written word, or supposed unwritten verity, which in civil matters we make betwixt acredible man's personal auouchment, or living testimony of what he hath seen, heard, or known by undoubted experience, and another man's hearsay report, either of the matters he spoke of, his speeches themselves, or their true sense and meaning, after his death. For the Prophets, Apostles, and Evangelists (to use * Sacrobos. and Valentian both use the like speeches. their words) are dead, and Christ is absent; so as we can neither be certain, what they have spoken, or what they meant in their supposed speeches, but per vivam vocem Ecclesiae, by the living voice of the present visible Church; whose words are altogether as unfallible, as Gods own words, were. And for this reason, must be acknowledged a most absolute judge of Gods written and unwritten words, aswell of their Spiritual sense and meaning, as of their outward frame or visible character. This is the height of their iniquity and will infer more than our purposed conclusion in this Section, That even of such places, as are acknowledged by them for God's Word, we must not believe any determinate sense or meaning, but what the Pope shall expressly give or may be presumed to allow of. 6 This Doctrine, as I would request the Reader to observe, brings the second and third person in Trinity on the one party, and the Pope on the other, to as plain and evident competition, for Rule or Sovereignty over professed Christians faith; as God and Baal were at in Elias time. This their Doctrine, thus in show grounded upon, indeed and issue most opposite to Scriptures, is the true Spiritual Inquisition house, whereof that material or bodily one, The Romish rack of conscience. is but a Type: These following, are the joints or limbs, of that rack of conscience, whereunto, all such as are, or would be true members of Christ, but willing withal to hold their Union with the Pope as Visible head of the Church, are daily and hourly subject. First, their souls are tied, by surest bonds of faith and nature, unto this principle [Whatsoever God hath said is most true:] the Jesuits again, seek to fasten their faith and conscience, as strongly unto this; God speaks whatsoever the Pope speaks ex cathedra: This third likewise, must be believed as an Oracle of God, even by Papists (for the Pope hath spoken it ex cathedra) The Books of Moses, the Prophets, the four Evangelists, are God's Words, Whatsoever these have spoken, we contend, all should believe, for Gods own Word, upon such grounds as Saint Peter did from experience of their life-working sense, communicate unto them by hearing, reading, meditating, or practise. But the Pope, upon some controversies arising, propounds a sense of these writings, or of some part of them, quite contrary to that which brought the former comfort to our souls; a sense, to all unpartial senses, contradictory to the places jointly acknowledged for God's Word. A sense, the more we think on in sobriety, the more we dislike; a sense, the more earnestly we pray to God for his Spirits assistance, and other good means for the right understanding of his Word, and increase of faith, the more still we distaste and loath. Here, unless we let go some one, or more of the mentioned holdfasts of faith either the first, [Whatsoever God saith is true] or the second [Whatsoever the Pope saith, Lest they might in any doubt go against their conscience, they are taught to believe that whatsoever the Pope shall command is good and cannot hurt the conscience. See the Annotation out of Bellarmine cap. 2. §. 2. God saith] or the third [The Mosaical, evangelical, and Apostolical writings or those particular places, about whose sense the controversy is, were spoken by God] our souls are put to more violent torture, than Ravilaicks body was. But the true Papists are wise enough to slip the third or last, so as it shall not pinch them; and have a trick withal to make the First yield, what way they please; who are resolved to follow what way soever, it shall please the Pope's authority (whereunto their souls indeed are only tied) to lead them. But of such as ever had, or hope to have, any taste or relish of God's Spirit should resolve absolutely to believe his interpretation of any place of Scripture, contrary to that life-working sense, which must be in every heart endued with hope of seeing God: that man's disloyalty towards God and his Holy Spirit, is as impudent, as if a poor subject should reply unto his Prince, commanding him in express terms to do thus, or so, I will not believe your words have any such meaning as they naturally import; but a contrary, such as one of my fellow servants hath already acquainted me withal▪ whatsoever you say, I know your meaning is I, should believe him in all things concerning your will and pleasure: and whatsoever he shall enjoin that will do. 8 th●● neither the Church can prove the Scriptures, nor the Scriptures the Church's authority, was proved in the fourth Section of the former Book; that such as hold this damnable doctrine, against which we dispute, do not at all believe God speaking in the Scriptures, shall be evinced in the third Section of this. The present inconvenience, which now (will they nill they) we are to wrest from their resolutions of faith, is, that, indeed and conscience, they either acknowledge no authority in the Church, or Scriptures, or else greater in the Church, then in Scriptures. CHAP. II. Inferring, the general conclusion proposed in the title of this Section from Bellarmine's Resolution of faith. 1 ASwell to occasion the learned Readers further consideration of their ill-grounded and worse builded faith, as for deducing thence the proposed inconvenience: it will not be amiss to propose Bellarmine's resolution of a Roman Catholics faith. One especial objection of our Writers, as he frameth it is, That faith (if depending on the Church's judgement) is grounded but upon the word of man, a weak foundation for such an edifice; that the Scripture was given by the Spirit of God, and must therefore be understood by the same, not by the Church's Spirit. Hereunto * Respondeo verbum Ecclesiae, id est Concilij vel Pontificis d●centis ex cathedra non esse ●emnino verbum hominis id est verbum errori obnoxium, sed aliquo modo verbum Dei, id est si prolatum gubernante & assistance spiritu sancto; imo dico, Haereticos esse qui revera nitantur baculo arundineo. Sciendum est enim, propositionem fidei concludi tali Syllogismo. Quicquid Deus revelavit in Scriptures, est verum: hoc dens revelavit in Scriptures, ergo hoc est verum. Ex propositionibus huius Syllogismi prima certa est apud omnes, secunda apud Cathelicos est etiam firmissima: nititur enim testimonio Ecclesiae, Concilij, vel Pontificis, de quibus habemus in Scriptures apertas promissiones quod errare non possint, Actorum 15. Visum est spiritui sancto & nobis. Et Luc. 22. Regavi pro te ut non deficiat fides tua. At apud Haereticos nititur solis coniecturis, vel judicio proprij spiritus, qui plerumque videtur bonus, & est malus. Et cum conclusio sequatur deteriorem partem, sit necessariò, ut tota fides Haereticorum sit coniecturalis & incerta. Bellar. de verb. Dei interpret. Lib. 3. Cap. 10. Resp. ad 15. a●g. Bellarmine's Catholic Syllogism wherein all conclusions of faith must be gathered. Bellarmine answereth, The word of the Church. i. of the Council, or the Pope speaking ex Cathedra, is not the bare word of man. He means no word obnoxious to error, but in some sort the word of God: in as much as it is uttered by the assistance and government of the Holy Ghost. I add (saith he) that Heretics are they, which indeed do lean upon a broken reed. For we must know, that a proposition of faith must be concluded in this or the like Syllogism, Whatsoever God hath revealed in Scripture is true, but God hath revealed thus or that in Scriptures, Ergo this or that is true. The first proposition in this Syllogism is certain amongst all; the second likewise amongst Catholics is ●ost firm, as being supported by the testimony of the Church, Council, or Pope: of whose immunity, from possibility of erring we have express promises in the Scriptures, as, a Act. 15. v. 28. It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us: b Luk. 22. v. 32. I have prayed for thee thy faith should not ●aile. But, amongst Heretics, the second or minor proposition, is 〈…〉 only on conjecture, or judgement of a private Spirit; which usually seems, but is not good. Whence, seeing the conclusion must follow the weaker part, it necessarily follows, that all the faith of Heretics (such in his language are all that will not rely upon the Church) is but conjectural and uncertain. 2 A dreadful imputation, could it be as substanstially proved, as it is confidently avouched. And the consequence of his resolution (generally held by all his fellows) is of no less importance, than this; that no man can be infallibly assured, either of the truth, or true sense of any particular proposition; in the whole Canon of Scriptures received by us and them, unless he have the Church's authority for confirmation of both. For, unto us, that only, which the Church avoucheth is certain, and unfallible; that sense of it, which the Church gives, only sound; if we speak of any particular or determinate truths. 3 How certain and unfallible assent unto all, or any Scriptures, may be wrought in men's hearts, without any infallible teacher, already hath been, and hereafter shall be (God willing) in more particular sort exemplified. In this place, it stood the jesuit upon, to have given a better solution to the doubt objected; which he is so far from unloosing, that he rather knits it faster; as shall appear, if the Reader will first call to mind; That for the establishing of firm and undoubted assent to any truth proposed, it skills not how infallible the truth in itself or the proposer be, un-unlesse unless they, whose belief or assent is demanded, be as infallibly persuaded of this infallibility in the truth, or the proposer. In this respect, our adversaries plead their immunity from error, as an article necessary to be infallibly believed, for confirmation of God's Word, always most infallible (as all grant) in itself, but not so (as they affirm) to us, until it be avouched by infallible authority. 4 Herein they concur with us; both with the truth, That if, we believe it only as probable, that God spoke all those words, which we acknowledge to be most infallible, because his, our belief notwithstanding is not infallible, but probable, or conjectural. For as a man may have bad desires of things essentially good; so may he have uncertain persuasions of truths in themselves most certain. It is not therefore the supposed infallibility of the Church or Pope, howsoever, but infallibly apprehended and believed that must strengthen our faith, which otherwise (as is pretended) would be but conjectural. And by the former principle, (acknowledged aswell by them as us) it necessarily follows, that if we be only probably, not infallibly persuaded, the Pope or Church cannot err; our assent unto the minor proposition. i [unto any determinate part of God's Word,] is only probable not infallible. For, by the Jesuits Doctrine, we cannot be certainly persuaded, that God spoke this, or that, but by the Church's testimony. The immediate consequence of which two assertions, compared together, is, we cannot be more certain that God hath spoken this or that, than we are of the Church's infallibility. If then we be only probably, not infallibly, persuaded, that the Church is infallible: our belief of the minor proposition (that is of any determinate truth which men suppose God hath spoken) must be only probable, or conjectural, not infallible. Consequently to these collections, the learned Papists generally hold, that the Church's infallibility must be absolutely and infallibly believed; (as you heard before out of * Sect. 1. Parag. 1. & Seq. The first difficulty in their opinion whence our former conclusion may be deduced. Canus, Bellarmine, and Valentian) otherwise, as Bellarmine would infer, our belief of the minor in any Syllogism, wherein a proposition of faith is concluded, can be but conjectural. 5 The proposed inconvenience we may derive from this difficulty; How the Papists themselves can attain to the infallible belief of the Churches infallible authority? The Church, they think, hath a public spirit; and public spirits they know are infallible; hence they may persuade themselves the Church is infallible, only upon the same terms, they believe it hath a public spirit, if their belief of this latter be but coniectural; their assent unto the former can be no better. Seeing then they must of necessity grant (for this is the principal mark they aim at) that all must infallibly believe the Church hath a public spirit: the difficulty removes to this point, how this infallible persuasion is, or may be wrought in them. Either it must be grounded upon Scriptures, or not: avouched unto them and wrought in their hearts it must be, either by a public or private spirit. Let us examine all the parts of this division. 6 First if private men's infallible persuasion of the Churches public, or authentic spirit, be not grounded upon Scriptures acknowledged by us and them: the Church's authority without all controversy, is much greater than the authority of Scriptures; if it, by this assertion, can be any, and the Churches not all in all. For unto that which men cannot know, whether it be true or false, they cannot be bound to yield absolute or immediate obedience: unto that authority, which they absolutely believe as infallible, they are bound to yield infallible assent, and absolute obedience directly, in itself and for itself. But by this supposition men cannot know Scriptures infallibly without the Church's authority, and yet they must infallibly believe the Church's authority without Scriptures; The Scriptures authority therefore is either less than the Churches, or none at all. 6 But be it supposed that private men's infallible belief of the Churches public spirit is grounded upon Scriptures, acknowledged by us and urged by them to this purpose, as upon these, it seemeth good to the Holy Ghost & us; I have prayed for thee thy faith should not fail: The question whereunto we demand an answer, is whether this infallible belief of the Church's authority, grounded upon these places, must be wrought in men's hearts by a private or public spirit. If by a private spirit only Bellarmine believed the Churches public spirit, or those Scriptures truth, or true meaning, whereon he grounds it: He and all other Papists (such as he was when he delivered this Doctrine;) neither Bishops nor Cardinals, are subject to the same inconveniences, which he hath condemned us for, as Heretics. For all private spirits, by his positions, are obnoxious to error, unsufficient to plant any infallible persuasion in matters of faith; yet such is this article of the Churches authentic spirit, of which unless men be so persuaded, infallibly persuaded, they cannot be of the minor proposition in any Syllogism; wherein a point of faith is concluded: and uncertain of the minor, they cannot be certain of the conclusion, which, as Bellarmine rightly observes, always follows the weaker part. The infallible conclusion therefore of Bellarmine's resolution, is; unless private men may have public spirits to warrant the truth of Scriptures, and the Church's infallibility thereon grounded; they cannot truly believe any conclusion of faith. It remains than we inquire; what inconvenience will follow, if they admit private men to be partakers of public spirits. 7 Diversity of such spirits they acknowledge not. If therefore private men's infallible assent unto the truth, or true sense of those particular Scriptures whence they seek to prove their Church's infallibility, must be planted by a public spirit, planted it must be by the same spirit; which guides, and guiding makes the Church and Pope authentic and infallible, both in their proposal of Scriptures and declaration of Scriptures sense. Seeing this spirit is one and the same, if it can make the Church or Pope infallible in all; why may it not make all private men (by this supposition partakers of it) alike infallible, at the least in the right understanding of those places, which warrant the Church's infallibility or public spirit. For our adversaries, I hope, will easily grant, that the Churches public and authentic spirit must be most infallibly believed, because so expressly taught in those Scriptures cited by Bellarmine to this purpose. If this public or authentic spirit, can work such infallible apprehension of those places true meaning in private hearts, why not in all others as necessary for them to know; that is, in all necessary to salvation? And if thus it do, why are we bound to believe the Pope, more than the Pope us, we being partakers of a public and infallible spirit aswell as he? 8 Or if they hold it no absurdity to say; we must believe two or three places, [It seemeth good to the Holy Ghost and us: Peter feed my sheep;] by a public and authentic spirit, teaching us from these to rely upon the Pope in all other parts of God's Word, because (as it must be supposed) we have but a private spirit for their assurance: by this supposition the Pope's authority, in respect of us, must have the same excess of superiority unto Scriptures, that public spirit hath unto a private; or the Pope (who believeth all Scriptures by a public spirit) hath unto a private man. This public spirit, whereof they vaunt, is the same which did inspire the scriptures to Moses, the Prophets and Apostles; and must (by this position) be the Pope or Churches immediate agent for establishing this inviolable league of absolute allegiance with men's souls unto them, but of none so absolute to their Creator and Redeemer; and the rest of whose written laws, and eternal decrees, must be communicated unto them by a private spirit, and subscribed unto with this condition, If the Pope shall witness them to be his laws, or to have this or that meaning. 9 Nor can our adversaries dense the truth of this subsequent collection, If it were possible for the Pope in matters controversed to teach contrary to God's Word: we were bound to follow him; For they * Si volunt Pontificem in rebus alioqui omnino controversis id est, non satis expressè in Ecclesia compertis ac determinatis defi●ire posse ut personam pub●cam, errorem re ipsa contra fidem errant ipsi in fide grauissi●è. Posset enim imo teneretur tunc Ecclesia universa Pontificem de re controversa dicentem ac nondum haeresi manifestê notatum pro Pastore suo agnoscere, atque adeo ipsum omnino audire. Ita fierat ut si tunc errare possit, Ecclesia etiam universa possit immo teneretur errare. Valentian Tom. 3. de object. fid. Disp. 1. Quaest. 1. Punct. 7. Paragraph. 4●. Bellarmine for the same grounds Collects that the Pope cannot err in matters of manners. themselves argue thus, If the Pope could err in matters of faith; faith might perish from the Earth; all Christians bound to err, because bound to obey him. This proves that our assent to any Scriptures (besides those which teach the Pope's authority) cannot in itself be perfect and absolute, but subject to this condition [if the Pope be infallible.] And even of those places, which (as they pretend) witness him to be such, there yet remains a farther difficulty. These the Pope believes not, because they are confirmed to him by his predecessor, but directly and immediately, by his public spirit: But may private men believe them so too? No. For these, especially and the * Vide Librum 2. Sect. 4. Cap▪ 5. Paragraph. 14. Nam fides Catholica docet, omnem virtutem esse bonam, omne vitium esse malum, si autem Papa erraret praecipiendo vi tia vel prohibendo virtutes, teneretur Ecclesia credere vitia esse bona, & virtutes malas, nisi vellet contra conscientiam peccare. Tenetur enim in rebus dubijs, Ecclesia acquiescere judicio summi Pontificis, & facere quod ille praecipit, non facere quod ille prohibet: ac ne sort contra conscientiam agate, tenetur credere bonum esse quod ille praecipit: malum quod ille prohibet. Bellarmine Lib. 4. de Roman. Pont. Cap. 5. Church's infallibility contained in them, are (by all our advesaries consent) propositions of faith, in respect of us, need by their doctrine) the proposal or testimony of the Church, whereon all private men's faith must be immediately grounded: believing this we shall from it (at least conjoined with Scripture) believe all other parts of God's Word necessary to salvation, aswell as the Pope doth these former from the testimony of his public spirit. Wherefore his authority must be unto us altogether as great, as the authority of the Godhead is unto him; which is far greater unto him, than it is or can be to any others; for even that which is acknowledged for God's Word, both by him and us, must be less authentic unto us then the words of this mortal man; 10 For though we pardon our adversaries their former absurdities, in seeking to prove the Church's authority by the Scripture, and the Scriptures by the Churches; though we grant them all they can desire (even what shall appear in due place to be most false,) That, whiles they believe the Pope's particular injunctions, or decisions, from a presupposal of his universal transcendent authority, they do not only believe him, or his words, but those parts of God's Word, upon which they seem to ground his infallibility: yet our former argument holds still most firm; because that absolute assent, which private men must give unto these supposed grounds of their Religion, before other portions of Scripture, is not grounded upon any pre-eminency incident to these words as they are Gods, as if they were more his then the rest, in some such peculiar sort, as the Ten Commandments are in respect of other Mosaical Laws; nor from any internal propriety flowing from the words themselves, as if their secret character did unto faithful minds, bewray them to be more Divine than others; nor from any precedent consequent, or comitant circumstance, probably arguing that sense, the Romish Church gives of them, to be of itself more perspicuous or credible, than the natural meaning of most other Scriptures, all inspired by one and the same spirit, all, for their form, of equal authority and perspicuity. All the prerogative then, which these passages can have before others, must be from the matter contained in them; and that, by our adversaries position, is the Church's infallibility. Wherefore, not because they are God's word, or were given by his Spirit, in more extraordinary sort than others; but because they have more affinity with the Roman Lord, in late years exalted above all that is called God, Father, Son, or Holy Ghost: these places above cited, must be more authentikely believed, than all the words of God beside. As I have read of pictures, though not more artificial in themselves, yet held in greater estimation amongst the Heathen, and freer from contemptuous censure then any other of the same Painters doing, only because they represented their great God jupiter. 11 Another difficulty, whereunto we demand an answer is, whether whiles they assent, as they profess, not only to the infallibility taught (as they suppose) in the fore-cited places, but also unto the infallibilite of Scriptures which teach it: they acknowledge two distinct assents, or but one. If but one, let them show us how possibly the Church can be said to confirm the Scriptures: if two, let them assign the several properties of either; whether is more strong; whether must be to the other as Peter to his brethren; or if neither of them can confirm the other, let them declare how the one can be imagined as a mean or condition of believing the other. 12 An Heretics belief of the minor proposition in the former Syllogism (saith Bellarmine) is but weak: A Romanists belief of the same most strong. Let this be the Minor, Peter feed my sheep, or Peter I have prayed for thee that thy faith should not fail: what reason can be imagined, why a Romanists belief of these propositions should be so strong, and ours so weak? The one hath the Church's authority to confirm his faith, the other hath not. What is it then to have the Church's authority, only to know her decrees concerning those portions of Scriptures? If this were all, we know the Romish Churches decrees aswell as the Romanists: but it is nothing to know them, if we do not acknowledge them. To have Churches authority than is, to believe it as infallible: and for this reason is a Roman Catholics belief of any portion of Scripture, more certain and strong, because he hath the testimony of the Church, which he believes to be most infallible: and believing it most infallibly he must of necessity believe, that to be Scripture, that in every place, to be the meaning of the Holy Ghost, which this Church commends unto him for such. Let the most learned of our adversaries here resolve the doubt proposed; whether there be two distinct assents, in the belief of the forementioned propositions: one unto the truth of the proposition itself, and another unto the Church's infallibility. It is evident by Bellarmine's opinion, that all the certainty a Roman Catholic hath above a Sectary is, from the Church's infallibilite. For the proposition itself he can believe no better than an Heretic may, unless he better believe the Church, i. he believes the Church's exposition of it, or the Church's infallibility concerning it, better than the proposition itself in itself and for itself. And so it is evident that the Church's authority is greater, because it must be better believed. 13 Suppose then one of our Church, which believes these propositions to be the word of God, should turn of Roman Catholic, his former belief is by this means become more strong and certain. This granted, the next question is, what should be the object of this his strong belief; the propositions believed: Peter feed my sheep, I have prayed for thee: or any other part of Gods written word; or the Church's authority; not the propositions themselves, but only by accident, in as much as the Church confirms them to him. For suppose the same man should eftsoons, either altogether revolt from the Church, or doubt of her authority, his belief of the former propositions becomes hereby as weak as it was before: which plainly cuinceth, that his belief of the Church and this proposition, were two distinct beliefs, and that this strong belief was fastened unto the Church's authority, not unto the proposition itself immediately, but only by accident, in as much as the Church which he believeth so firmly, did teach it; for his belief, if fastened upon the proposition itself, after doubt moved of the Church's authority, would have continued the same, but now (by Bellarmine's assertion) assoon as he begins to disclaim his belief of the Church's infallibility, his former strong belief of the supposed proposition begins to fail, and of this failing no other reason, than already is, can be assigned. The reason was, because the true, direct, and proper object of his strong belief was the Church's authority, on which the belief of the proposition did entirely depend, as the conclusion doth upon the premises, or rather as every particular doth on the universal, whereunto it is essentially subordinate. CHAP. III. Containing a further Resolution of Romish faith, necessarily inferring the authority of the Romish Church, to be of greater authority than God's Word absolutely, not only in respect of us. IF we rack the former syllogism a little farther, and stretch it out in every joint to it full length: we may quickly make it confess our proposed conclusion and somewhat more. The Syllogism was thus, Whatsoever God hath spoken is most true. But God hath spoken, and caused to be written all those words contained in the Canon of Scriptures, acknowledged by opposite religions of these times. Therefore these words are most true. The certainty of the Minor depends, as our adversaries will have it, upon the present Romish Churches infallibility, which hath commended unto us these Books for God's Word. Be it then granted, for disputations sake, that we cannot know any part of God's Word, much less the just bounds, extent or limits of all his words supposed to be revealed for our good, but by the Romish Church: The Spiritual sense, or true meaning of all, most, or many parts of these determinate Volumes, and visible Characters, as yet is undeterminate, and uncertain; whereas all points of belief must be grounded on the determinate and certain sense of some part of God's Word revealed; for our adversaries acknowledge all points of faith should be resolved into the first truth. Hence, if we descend to any particular or determinate conclusion of faith, it must be gathered in his Syllogism, Whatsoever the Church teacheth concerning the determinate and true sense of Scriptures, whereon points of Faith are grounded, is most true. But the Church teacheth thus and thus, (for example her own authority is infallibly taught by the Holy Ghost in these words, Peter feed my sheep, Peter I have prayed for thee that thy faith should not fail) go: this sense and meaning of these words is most true. And as true as it is, must the sense likewise of every proposition, or part of Scripture by this Church expounded or declared, be accounted. 2 The Mayor proposition of this Syllogism, is as undoubted amongst the Roman Catholics, as the mayor of the former was unto all Christians: but as yet, the minor; The Church doth give this or that sense of this or that determinate place, may be as uncertain indeed, as they would make our belief unto the minor proposition in the general Syllogism, before it be confirmed by the Church's authority. For how can we be certain that the Church doth teach all those particulars which the Jesuits propose unto us? we have Books indeed, which go under the name of the Trent Counsel, but how shall we know that this Counsel was lawfully assembled, that some Canons have not been foisted in by private Spirits, that the Council left not some unwritten tradition for explicating their decrees, after another fashion then the Jesuits do? who shall assure us in these or like doubts? The present Church? All of us cannot repair to Rome: such as can, when they come thither, cannot be sure to hear the true Church speak ex Cathedra. If the Pope send his Writs to assure us, what Critcicke so cunning as to assure us, whether they be authentic or counterfeit? Finally, for all that can be imagined in this case, only the Mayor of the Catholic syllogism, indefinitely taken, is certain; and consequently no particular or definite conclusion of faith, can be certain to a Romanist, because there are no possible means of ascertaining the Minor, [What the true Church doth infallibly define] unto his Conscience. 3 Or if they will hold such conclusions, Wherein the Papists make the Pope's authority greater than Gods. as are ordinarily gathered from the Trent Council, or the Pope's decisions, as infallible points of faith: they make their authority to be far greater than the infallibility of Gods written word; yea more infallible than the Deity. This Collection they would deny, unless it followed from their own premises; These for example, That a conclusion of faith cannot be gathered, unless the minor (God did say this or that determinately) be first made certain. But from the Pope or Church's infallibility, conclusions of faith may be gathered, albeit the minor be not certain de fide. For who can make a Jesuits report of the Pope's Decrees, or an Historical relation of the Trent Council, certain de fide, as certain as an Article of faith: And yet the Doctrine of the Trent Council, and Pope's Decrees, must be held de fide, upon pain of damnation, albeit men take them only from a Priest's mouth, or upon a Jesuits faith and credit. 4 This is the madness of that Antichristian Synagogue, that acknowledgeth God's Word for most infallible, and the Scriptures, which we have, for his word, if itself be infallible. For it tells us, they are such: yet will not have collections, or conclusions with equal probability deduced thence, so firmly believed by private men, as the collections or conclusions, which are gathered from the Church's infallibility. An implicit faith of particulars, grounded upon the Churches general infallibility, so men steadfastly believe it, may suffice. But implicit faith of particulars, grounded only upon our general belief of God's infallibility, providence, or written word, sufficeth not. This proves the authority of the Church, to be above the authority of Scriptures, or the Deity, absolutely considered, not only in respect of us, [that is all besides the Pope and his Cardinals.] For that is of more authority absolutely, not only in respect of us, which upon equal notice or knowledge, is to be better believed, more esteemed, or obeyed; but such is the authority of the Church in respect of the divine authority; such is the authority of the Pope's Decrees in respect of God's Word. For the Minor proposition in both the former Syllogisms being alike uncertain; the conclusion must be more certain in that Syllogism, whose mayor relies upon the Pope's infallibility then in the other; whose Mayor was grounded upon the infallibility of the Deity. 5 Briefly, to collect the sum of all; The authority of the Church is greater than the authority of Scriptures, both in respect of faith, and Christian obedience. In respect of faith; because we are bound to believe the Church's decisions, read or explicated unto us, (by the Pope's messenger though à Sir john Lack-lattin) without any appeal: but no part of Scripture, acknowledged by us and them, we may believe, without appeal, or submission of our interpretation to the Church, albeit the true sense and meaning of it seem never so plain, unto private consciences in whom God's Spirit worketh faith. The same argument is most firm and evident, in respect of obedience; 6 That authority over us is always greatest, unto which we are to yield most immediate, most strict and absolute obedience: but by the Romish Churches Doctrine; we are to yield supreme, and most absolute obedience, to the Church; more supreme, and absolute then unto God's word: therefore the authority of the Church is greater over us. The Mayor is out of controversy, seeing greatness of authority is always measured by the manner of obedience due unto it. The Minor is as evident from the former reason; Our obedience is more absolute and strict unto that authority, from which in no case we may appeal, then unto that from which we may in many safely appeal: but, by the Romish Churches doctrine, there lies always an appeal from that sense and meaning of Scriptures, which Gods spirit and our own conscience gives us, unto the Church's authority; none, from the Church's authority or meaning unto the Scriptures, or our own consciences. 7 Our Saviour Christ, bids us, I●h. 5. 7. search the Scriptures; Saint Paul, try all, 1 Thess. 5. 21. retain that which is good; Saint john, try the Spirits, whether they be of God or no: joh. 1. Epist. 4. Suppose a Minister of our Church should charge a Romanist, upon his allegiance to our Saviour Christ, and that obedience which he owes unto God's Word, to search Scriptures, try spirits, and examine Doctrines for the ratifying of his faith; he will not acknowledge this to be a Commandment of Scripture, or at least, not to be understood in such asense, as may bind him to this practice. What follows? if our Clergy charge him to admit it, he appeals unto the Church: And, as in Schools, simus and nasus simus is all one, so in their language is the Church and the Church of Rome. This Church tells him, he may not take upon him to try of what spirit, the Pope is, not examine his determinations, decisions, or interpretations of any Scripture; by other known places of Scripture, or the analogy of faith acknowledged by all. Unto this decree or sentence of the Church, (although he have it but at the second hand, or after it have passed through as many Priests and jesuits mouths, as are Post Towns from London to Edinburgh, he yields absolute obedience, without acknowledgement of farther appeal, either unto Scriptures, or other authority whatsoever; further manifestation of Gods will he expects none. Let all the reformed Churches in the World, or all the Christian World beside, exhort, threaten, or adjure him, as he tenders the good of his own soul, as he will answer his Redeemer in that dreadful day of final judgement, to examine the Church or Pope's decrees, by Gods written Laws: his answer is, he may not, he cannot do it, without open disobedience to the Church, which to disobey is damnation of soul and body. But O fools and slow of heart to believe, and obey from the heart, that doctrine whereunto ye were delivered. Know ye not, that to whomsoever ye give yourselves as servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey, whether it be the man of sin unto death, or obedience unto righteousness? Ofall Mankind are only Roman Catholics, not bought with a price, that they may thus alienate their souls from Christ, and become servants of men; that they may consecrate themselves, by solemn vow, to the perpetual slavery of most wicked and sinful men, even monsters of Mankind. CHAP. FOUR That in obeying the Romish Churches decrees, we do not obey God's Word as well as them, but them alone in contempt of God's principal Laws. 1 But the simple (I know) are borne in hand, by the more subtle ort of this generation, That thus obeying sinful men they obey Christ, who hath enjoined them this obedience unto such; That thus believing that sense of Scripture, which the Church their mother tenders unto them, they do not believe her better than Scriptures, because these two beliefs are not opposite but subordinate; that they prefer not her decrees before Christ's written Laws, but her interpretation of them, before all private expositions. This is the only City of refuge left them, wherein, prosecuted by the former arguments, they can hope for any succour; but most of whose gates already have been, all shortly shall be shut upon them. The gross impiety of the Romish Church, in binding men to believe negatives; without any tolerable exposition of those Scriptures, which seem to contradict her decrees, in matters damnable to adventure upon without evidence of truth on her part. 2 That they neither believe nor obey God's Word whilst they absolutely believe and obey the Church without appeal, is evident, in that this Church usually binds men, not unto positive points of Religion gathered so much as from any pretended sense of Scripture expounded by it, but to believe bare negatives; as, that this or that place of Scripture, either brought by their adversaries, or conceived by such amongst themselves, as desire the knowledge of truth and right information of conscience, have no such meaning as the Spirit of God, not flesh and blood, (as far as they can judge of their own thoughts,) hath revealed unto them. 3 But the Spirit may deceive private men; or, at least, they may deceive themselves, in their trial of Spirits. They may indeed, and so may men in public place, more grievously err in peremptory judging private men, because obnoxious to error in the general, erroneous in this particular, wherein they ground their opinions upon God's Word, plentiful to evince it (at least) very probable reasons they bring many and strong, whereunto no reasonable answer is brought by their adversaries, whose usual course, is, to press them only with the Church's authority; which appears to be of far greater weight than God's word, unto all such as yield obedience to her negative decrees, without any evidence or probability, either of Scripture or natural reason, to set against that sense and meaning of God's Laws whereunto strength of arguments unrefuted, and probable pledges of God's Spirit undisproved have long tied their souls. Do we obey God, or believe his word, whilst we yield obedience to the Church in such Commandments, as to our consciences upon unpartial examination seem condemned, ere made by the very fundamental Laws of Religion, and all this oftimes without any show or pretence of Scripture, to warrant us, that we do not disobey God in obeying them? 4 But doth the Romish exact absolute obedience in such points, as, if it were possible they could be false, may endanger the very foundation of true Religion, without evident demonstration, that their daily practice neither doth nor can endanger it? Yes. For what can more concern the main foundation, which Christians, jews, and mahometans most firmly hold, than those precepts, in number many, all plainly and peremptorily forbidding us to worship any Gods but One, or any thing in the Heaven or Earth but him only. The Romanists themselves grant, The fearful dangers whereunto men's souls are exposed by the Trent Counsels decree for worshipping the consecrated host, For to adventure on such practises with any scruple or doubt, is damnable, because contrary to the Doctrine of saith. And yet to enforce a belief upon ourselves, that Christ is their present, without warrant of Scripture is more damnable; for this were to affect ignorance for cloaking Idolatry. V de lib. 2. Sect. 1. cap. 7. that, cultu latriae God alone is to be adored, that so to adore any other is Idolatry; and Idolatry (by their confession) a most grievous sin. O how much better were it for them to hold it none; or God's Word forbidding it of no authority, than so lightly to adventure the hourly practice of it (in contempt of such fearful threatenings, as they themselves out of God's Laws pronounce against it,) upon such broken disjoincted surmises, as are the best they can pretend for their warrant. 5 To believe Christ's flesh and blood should be there present, where it cannot be seen, or felt, yea where we see and feel another body as perfectly as we can do aught, is, to reason, without warrant of Scripture, but a senseless blind belief. But grant his body and blood were in the Sacrament rightly administered, yet that out of the Sacrament, either should be in the consecrated host, whilst carried from Town to Town for solemn show more than for Sacramental use, is to reason ruled by Scripture (to say no worse) more improbable. Now to worship that as God, which to our unerring senses is a Creature, upon such blind supposals, that Christ's body, by one miracle may be there; by another unseen is worse than Idolatry committed upon delusion of sense. So to adore a wayfer, only a wayfer in all appearance; without strict examination, nay without infallible evidence of Scriptures urged for the real presence; is more abominable, then to worship every appearance of an Angel of light, without trial what spirit it were, Satan or some other, that so appeared. And if we consider the old Serpents usual slight to insinuate himself into every place, wherein inveterate custom or corrupt affection, may suggest some likelihood of a divine presence unto dreaming fancies, (as he did delude the old World in Oracles and Idols:) the probability is far greater, his invisible substance, (by nature not incompatible with any corporeal quantity) should be annexed to the supposed host, than Christ's real body, uncapable for any thing we know of joinct existence in the same place with any other; howsoever, most disproportionable to such base effects as must proceed from the substance contained under the visible shape of bread, such as no accident could either breed, or support. 6 This is a point (as is elsewhere observed) wherein Satan seemeth to triumph over the modern Papists, more than over all the Heathens of the old World, whose senses only he deluded, or bewitched their reason, but quite inverts all use of these men's sense, faith and reason, making them believe Christ's body to be present in the Sacrament, after a supposed miraculous manner, quite contrary to the known nature of bodies, and yet more preposterously contrary to the very end and essence of miracles. For what miracles were ever wrought to other purpose, then to convince the imperfect collections of human reason by evidence of sense, God using this inferior or brutish part (thus astonished by his presence) to confute the curious folly of the superior or divine faculty of the soul, as he did sometimes the dumb Ass to rebuke the iniquity of the Prophet her Master. But so preposterously doth Satan ride the modern Papists that he is brought to believe a multitude of miracles; against the evidence of sense, or reason, contrary to the rule of faith; all offered up in sacrifice unto the Prince of darkness; that he having, put out the eyes of sense, reason, and spirit at once, may ever after lead them what way he list. And as unhappy wags, or lewd companions, may persuade blind men to beg an Alms, as if some great parsonage did, when as a troop of more needy beggars than themselves, pass by; so is it much to be dreadded, lest the Devil persuade the blinded besotted Papist that Christ is present where he himself lies hid; that he may with heart and soul offer up those prayers and duties unto him which belong properly unto God; and worship in such manner before the boxes whereinto he hath secretly conveyed himself, as the Israelites did before the ark of the Covenant. 7 * De adorand. lib. 3. disp. 1. c. 5. Vasquez thinks we may without offence adore that body wherein the Devil lurks, so we direct not our worship unto him, but to the inanimate Creature, as representing the Creator. Suppose this might be granted upon some rare accident, or extraordinary manifestation of God's power in some particular place, in case, men were ignorant, or had no just presumptions of any malignant spirits presence therein: Yet were it damnable Idolatry daily to practise the like especially where great probability were of diabolical imposture, which the solemn worship of any Creature without express warrant of Scripture, will invite. Yet sense doth witness that Christ is not, no Scripture doth warrant us, that he or any other living Creature, unless perhaps * The known experiments of such Creatures arising from corruption of their consecrated host: have enforced the Schoolmen to invent new miracles how they should come there. Some think per creationem novae materiae prima, others that the quantity of the late deceased consecrated host Supplet locum materi●e primae, which is the greatest miracle in the Sacrament, as Pererius thinks vide Pere. dispu. 16. in 6 tom. Jobannis & S●ares Met. disp. 20. worms, or such as spring of putrefaction, is present in their processions. Notwithstanding all the express Commandments of God brought by us against their practice: the § Si quis dixerit, in sancto Eucharistiae Sacramento Christum unigenitum Dei filium non esse cultulatriae, etiam externo, ad orandum: alque ideo nec festiva peculiari celebritate venerandum, neque in proc●ssionibus, secuudum laudabilem, & universalem Ecclesiae sanctae ritum, & consuetudinem solemniter circumgestandum, vel non publicè, ut adoretur populo proponendum, & eius adoratores esse Idololatras; anathema sit. Concil. Trid. Sess. 13. Can. 6. Trent Council accurseth all that deny Christ's real presence in procession, or condemn the proposal of that consecrated substance to be publicly adored as God; not so much as intimating any tolerable exposition of that Commandment, which forbids us to have any Gods but one. 8 * The impious decree of the Trent Council for communicating in one kind, against the express Commandment of Christ, the practice of his Apostles, and the Primitive Church. To omit many more; another instance suitable to the former and our present purpose, we have in the decree of communicating under one kind. Our Saviour at his institution of this Sacrament, gave the cup aswell as the bread, and with the cup alone this express injunction Bibite ex hoc omnes, Drink all of this, albeit none of his Disciples were consicients or such as did consecrate. S. Paul recites the same institution in like words & continued the practice in such Churches as he planted. The a Session 21. 20. Trent Council acknowledgeth that the use of the cup was not infrequent, or unusual in the Primitive Church; indeed altogether usual, and the want of it for many hundred years after Christ, unknown. The only instance, that can from Antiquity be pretended, to prove it lawful, and which in all likeli-hood did partly occasion it, argues the Ancients use of it in solemn assemblies, to have been held as necessary. For even in cases of greatest necessity, when the cup could not be carried to parties sick, or otherwise detained from public Communions; they had the consecrated bread dipped in it. And * Erant autem sub Arriana secta viventes: & quia consuetudo eorum est ut ad Altarium venientes, de alio calice Reges communicent & de alio populus minor, venenum in chalice illo posuit, de quo matter communicatura erat. Quo illa hausto, protinus mortua est, non enim dubium est tale maleficium esse de part Diaboli. Quid contra misere Haeretici respondebunt, ut in sancta eorum locum habeat minacus? Nos vero Trinitatem in una aequalitate pariter & omnipotentia consilentes etiamsi mortiferum bibamus, in nomine patris & filii & spiritus sancti veri & incorruptibilis Dei, nihil nos nocebit. Greg. Turon Hist. Lib. 3. Num. 31. Gregory of Towers relates the poisoning of King Clovis sister (Queen to Theodoricke) by her own daughter, in the Chalice, so, as he intimates withal, the ordinary use of the cup at that time, aswell amongst French Catholics as Italian Arrians. Only this was the difference; The Arrians did not, as the Catholics, drink of the same cup with their Princes. 9 It may be, fear, conceived upon this or like example, lest the Priests should, in a more proper sense prove conficients, not of Christ's, but of Lay Princes bodies; made them, afterwards, more willing to forbear the Cup; and the people, either in manners would not, or otherwise could not, be advanced above them at this Heavenly banquet. Turonensis reason against these Heretics, I think, did hold no longer than his life; few Princes afterwards durst have adventured to try the truth of his conclusion [Whether poison drunk in the Sacrament administered by the supposed true Church would have wrought. For, unless my memory fail me, ecclesiastic Princes, Popes themselves, have been as surely poisoned, in Catholic Chalies; as the forementioned Queen was in the Arrian cup. 10 But what occasions soever, either moved the laity of themselves to embrace, or the Clergy to enjoin this Communion under one kind; the * Concil. Trid. Sess. 21. Cap. 1. Itaque sancta ipsa Synodus à Spiritu sancto, qui spiritus est sapientiae, & intellectus, spiritus consily & pietatis edocta, atque ipsius Ecclesiae judicium & consuetudinem secuta declarat ac docet, nullo divino precept Laicos & Clericos non consicientes obligari ad Eucharistiae sacramentum sub utraque spec●e sumendum; neque ullo pacto, salva side, dubitari posse, quin illis alterius speciei communio ad salutem sufficiat. Nam etsi Christus Dominus in ultima caena venerabile hoc Sacramentum, in panis & vini speciebus instituit, & Apostolis tradidit: non tamen illa institutio, & traditio ●o tendunt, ut omnes Christi sideles statuto Domini ad utramque speciem accipiendam as●ringātur. Sed neque ex sermone illo ap●d johan. 6. recte colligitur, utriusque speciei Communionem a Domino praeceptam esse, utrumque juxta varias sanctorum Patrum, & Doctorum interpretationes intelligatur. Namque qui dixit, Nisi manducaveritis carnem filii hominis, & biberitis eius sanguinem non habebitis vitam in vobis: dixit queque; Siquis manducaverit ex hoc pane, vivet in aeternum. Et qui dixit, Qui manducat meam carnem, & bibit meum surguinem habet vitam aeternam: dixit etiam: Panis quem ego dabo, caro mea est etc. mundi vita. Et denique qui dixit, Qui manducat meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem, in me manet, & ego in illo: dixit nihilominus: Qui manducat hunc panem vivet in aeternum. Trent Council specifies none, and yet accurseth all that will not believe the Church had just causes so to do. Without any sure warrant of Scripture to persuade it, they bind all likewise to believe this bare negative, [That neither our saviours words, at his institution of the Sacrament, nor any other place of Scripture, enjoin the use of the cup as necessary, by way of precept or commandment:] Nor doth Christ's words, in the sixth of john, howsoever we understand them, according to the diverse interpretations of Fathers, (either of Sacramental or Spiritual eating) enforce any such necessity. Will you hear their reasons for this bold assertion. He that said, unless ye eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; said also, And in the second Canon of the same Session, it is expressed sub paena Anathematis. Si quis dixerit, Sancta Ecclesiam Catholicam non justis causis & rationibus adductam fuisse, ut laicos atque etiam Clericos non consicientes, sub panis tantummodo specie communicaret, aut in co errassè; anathema sit. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever. And he that said, whosoever eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life; said also, the bread which I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the World; He that said, whosoever eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwells in me and I in him: hath said withal, he that eateth this bread shall live for ever. 11 Gods precepts must be very peremptory, and conceived in formal terms, ere any sufficient authority to enjoin obedience, in what subject soever, will be acknowledged in them by these men, that dare thus deny a necessity of communicating Christ in both kinds, imposed upon all in these words; Verily, verily I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the son of man, and drink his● blood, you have no life in you; only because it is said in the words going before, If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever. Of how much better insight in Scriptures, than these grand seers of Rome, would blind Homer, had he lived in their time, have proved? For he never denied his feigned Gods their Nectar, because Ambrosia was an immortal meat, And would he, or any man not more blind in heart and mind than he was of bodily sense, collect, against Christ's express words, that his blood, the true heavenly Nectar, was not necessary, because his flesh doth strengthen to eternal life, especially if he considered their captious interpollation, against whom in that place he disputes, which caused him not to express his mind so fully there, as elsewhere he had done albeit afterwards he ingeminates the necessity of drinking his blood, aswell as eating his flesh in such precise and formal terms; as if he had even then bethought himself, that such Antichristian Spirits as these Trent Fathes, might happily dare to elude his most sacred precept, by such Satanical glosses, as in that decree they have done. 12 He had told the jews (as much as was pertinent to their objection) that he was the living bread, which came down from Heaven: much better than Manna, which their Fathers had eaten. Bread he called himself in opposition unto Manna, not restraining this to his body or flesh only; albeit what he meant by bread, he expounds partly by his flesh, And the bread which I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the World; Besides that bread in the Hebrew Dialect contains all sorts of food, the manner of giving this An brosia was such, as did afford Heavenly visible Nectar too. For whilst he gave his flesh upon the cross, he powered out his blood withal. But the jews catch at this speech, ere he had expounded his full meaning, How can this man give us flesh to eat? Then jesus said unto them, verily, verily I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Which words, considered with the former circumstances, Ista distinction (saith Bellarmine) tam frequens carnis, & sanguinis, & ●ibi ac potus apertè indicat Christum loqui de communicatione sui sub speciebus panis & vi●i talioqui enim quorsum ista distinctio, toties praesertim repet●ta? Spiritualis enim perceptio Christi per sidem non eget ista distinone cum uno modo fiat: idem enim est manducare, & b●bere in sumptione per solam sidem. Bellar. Lib. 5. de Sacrament. Euch. Cap. 5. in haec verba johan. to any man's capacity not infatuation, import thus much; Do ye murmur that I should proffer you my flesh? verily I say unto you, and ye may believe me, Unless ye drink my blood, as well as eat my flesh, ye have no life in you. For so he adds, my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed; that is, both are as necessary to eternal, as meat and drink to corporal life. 13 For these and many like reasons, necessarily arising from the text; some, aswell of their greatest Scholars, as best interpreters, deny the former places to be meant of Sacramental eating, otherwise, unable to conceive any possibility, either of avoiding the inconveniences urged by us, or of defending their infallible Church from error in this decree. Yet saith the Council, howsoever they be understood, according to the diverse interpretations of Fathers, they infer no such necessity. No? not if most Fathers, as Maldonate contends, did hold them to be directly meant of Sacramental eating? Why then did jansenius and Hesselius renounce the Fathers in this? surely to defend their mother, whose credit they have much better saved, upon supposition that these words are meant only of spiritual manducation, then Maldonate, otherwise acute, but most perversely sottish, in his Apology for this decree, hath done. And yet, to speak the truth, the same inconvenience will follow as necessarily, Now if we assume, But the Romish Church will not suffer Christians to receive CHRIST'S body and blood sub 〈◊〉 panis & vini, the conclusion is inevitable, therefore the Romish Church directly contradicts Christ and as much as in her lies deprives the Laity of eternal life. Our Saviour in the sixth of john speaks indefinitely both of Sacramental and Spiritual eating, not peculiarly of either. though not so perspicuously at first sight, albeit we grant them to be meant of spiritual eating primarily. Vide Bezae annotationes in vers. 63. cap. 6. johannis. For * in that they are meant primarily of spiritual they cannot but be meant of Sacramental eating also, seeing these two (as elsewhere I have observed) are not opposite, but subordinate. Whence if we grant that Christ's blood, aswell as his flesh, must be communicated to us by faith, or spiritual manducation; the consequence will be [Therefore the cup, as well as the bread, must be administered in the Sacrament;] Quoniam res ipsa, id est corporis & sanguinis Christi spiritualis manducatio & potus ibi luculenter traditur, ad quam postea Euangelistae ad sinem historiae suae declarant Christum adiunxisse symbola externa panis & vini, idcirco nos caput illud à Sacramento Eucharistiae putamus esse alienum. Peter Martyr Lib. contra Gardinerum pag. 1. ad solutionem 32. obiecti. because Christ saith in the institution, that the cup is his blood, and the bread his body or flesh: that is, the one is the sure pledge, o● instrument; whereby his flesh; the other whereby his blood, which we must spiritually eat, (as well in the Sacrament as out of it,) must be communicated unto us. For, as the ancient Fathers have observed, our Saviour Christ did in his institution exhibit that unto us sensibly which before he had promised as invisible, so that the precept of eating Christ's body, and drinking his blood sacramentally doth bind all capable of this Sacrament as strictly, as that other of eating his body and drinking his blood Spiritually: seeing this latter is the seal and assurance of the other. And as our adversaries acknowledge an absolute necessity of pre●pt, for eating Christ Sacramentally and Spiritually, though that precept concern not infants: so in all reason they should grant an equal necessity of precept, for eating his flesh and blood distinctly in the Sacrament, though this be not necessary to all men, at all times, if without negligence or contempt they cannot be partakers of both. For impossibility, upon what occasion soever, not caused through their one default, exempts them from that general precept of eating Christ under both kinds; as want of years, or discretion, doth children from any injunction, divine, or human of communicating so much as in one kind. For notwithstanding the former precept, [except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you,] as peremptory as any can be for communicating, aswell sacramentally as spiritually, in both kinds; it were uncharitble to mistrust God's mercy towards such poor souls, as long for the cup of salvation, which no man giveth them; yea which the Romish Church hath by decree, as peremptory as she could make, denied to all the Laity without exception, to all the Clergy except such, as may by a peculiar right challenge his blood as their own, by way of exchange, because they have made him a body which he had not before. 14 Yet is it a small thing with this great whore, The strange interpretation of Saint Paul words whereby the Trent Council deluded by Satan seeks to delude the Christian World. to deprive the Christian World of the Lords, unless she urge it, instead thereof, to pledge her in the cup of Devils, full of the wine of fornication, coloured with her adulterate Scriptures authorised no doubt for such purposes. Where our Apostle Saint Paul saith, that he, and his fellow Ministers were stewards of the mysteries of God; the vulgar Roman edition renders the Greek, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Latin dispensatores and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (rightly rendered in this place) elsewhere (upon carelessness, rather than any intention of harm, as I am persuaded) by the Latin * Ephe. 5. verse 32. sacramentum. Whether upon set purpose of some more learned in that Council, presuming to gull the simple and illiterate by their cunning, as Chemnitius probably thinks; or whether the mystery of iniquity (as is more probable) wrought unawares in the brains of the ignorant, The improper use of which word in that place made Matrimony a Sacrament amongst the Papists, yet Bellarmine defends the translation. Idem est Mysterium, Graecis & Latinis Sacramentum, Graecin enim cum de Sacramentis aegunt semper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocant. Bellar. Lib. 2. de verbo Dei Cap. 14. Parag. Septimus. So oftentimes we call an Ass a beast, but to translate bestia by the English Ass, would argue either rudeness or negligence in the translator, or the approver, partiality in the Apologizer. which were the mayor part, and, as some have related, did oversway the learned uncapable of such impudence as should give countenance to this ignominious decree; partly from the equivocation of the Latin dispensatores, partly from the synominall signification which the vulgar hath made of mysterium, and sacramentum, the beetle-heads have hammered out an interpretation of Saint Paul's words before cited, so scurrilously contrary to his meaning, that the black Dog, which is said to have appeared unto Cardinal Crescentius (might he have spoken in the Council) could scarce have uttered it without blushing. For the Apostle meant such dispensatores or Stewards, as our Saviour speaks of in the four and twentieth of Saint Matthew; such as should give their fellow servants their inst portions without purloining; such as daily expected their Master's return, to call them unto a strict account of their stewardship. For so it is expressly added, * 1. Cor. Cap. 4. Vers. 2. Moreover, (or as much as belongs unto our office) it is required of Stewards, that they be all sound faithful. Not to dispute of the Church's authority in disposing of Sacraments, nor to exagitate the impiety of this decree, be the one for the present supposed as great, the other as little as they list to make it; only this I would demand of any that is so himself; whether he can imagine any men, sober, or in their right minds, would not assoon have urged that text, The fool hath said in his heart there is no God, for establishing Atheism, or Saint Peter's check unto Simon Magus, to prove Simony lawful; as derive the Church's authority, for detaining the least part of the word of life, much less the cup of salvation, from these words, Let a man so think of us as of the Ministers of Christ, and disposers of the secrets of God. What secrets? of the Gospel, before hid, but now to be published to all the World; of which the same Apostle elsewhere had said, Anccessitie is laid upon me, and we unto me, if I preach it not. Of the use, or necessity of the Lords cup, not a word in this place, not a syllable, for the Lord had sent him, not to administer this Sacrament, but to preach the Gospel: of which the Doctrine of the Lords Supper was a part indeed; but where expressly and directly he delivers that, doth he intimate by any circumstance, that either it had been, was, or might be otherwise administered, then according to the pattern prescribed by our Saviour at the first institution? Rather his often repetition of these coniunctives, This bread and this cup, eating and drinking, the body and blood, etc. Argue, he never thought the one should be received without the other; that this prohibition of the cup was a particular branch of the Mystery of iniquity, not to break out till latter ages, hid from his eyes that had seen the Mystery itself begin to work. As often a 1. Cor. 11. vers. 26. 27. 28. 29. as ye shall eat this bread (saith the Apostle) and drink this cup, ye show the Lords death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink the cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man therefore examine himself, and so let him eat of this bread and drink of this cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh his own damnation, because he discerneth not the Lords body. * Praeterea declarat, hanc potestatem perpetuo in Ecclesia fuisse, ut in Sacramentorum dispensatione, salva illorum substantiâ ea statueret, vel mutaret, quae suscipientium utilitati seu ipsorum Sacramentorum venerationi, pro rerum, temporum, & locorum varietate magis expedire iudicaret. Id autem Apostolus non obscure visus est insinuasse, cum ait: Sic nos existimet homo, ut ministros Christi & dispensatores mysteriorum Dei, atque ipsum quidem hac potestate usum esse satis cons●at cum in multis aliis tum in hoc ipso Sacramento, cum ordinatis nonnullis circa eius usum. 1. Corinth. 11. vers. 34. Caetera (inquit) cum venero, disponam, Concil. Trident. Sess. 2. Cap. 2. Yet unto the Trent Council Saint Paul in the former place, where he had no such occasion, as not speaking one word either of the Doctrine, necessity, or use of the Sacraments seems to intimate, and that not obscurely, the Church's authority in dispensing them as the Trent Fathers have done. What then might every Minister of Christ, every distributer of God's secrets, have used the like authority, before the Church representative did; at least, by tacit consent, approve the practice? This place doubtless proves, either altogether nothing, or thus much, for the Apostles words are indefinite, for their literal sense, equally appliable to every faithful Minister, or private dispenser of such secrets; not appropriate to the entire public body Ecclesiastic, or the capital or Cardinal parts thereof. Of the Corinthians, to whom he wrote, one said, I am Paul's, another I am Apollo's, the third I am of Cephas; all boasting in the personal excellencies of their first Parents in Christ, as the Papists now do in Saint Peter and his successors Catholic Primacy. To assuage these carnal humours in his children, their Father that great Doctor of the Gentiles, seeks more in this, then in any other place of all his Epistles, to debase himself, and diminish others high esteem either of his own worth, or of his calling * 1. Cor. 3. vers. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9 Who is Paul then? and who is Apollo's, but the Ministers by whom ye believed; and as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollo's watered, but God gave the increase. So then, neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth, but God that giveth the increase, And he that planteth, and he that watereth are one, and every man shall receive his wages according to his labour. For we together are Gods labourers: ye are God's husbandry, and God's building. And after a serious incitement of master builders to fidelity, with the like admonition to God's husbandry, or building, not to rejoice in men, he concludes as he had begun, Let every man esteem us (such as I have said) Ministers of Christ and disposers of the mysteries of God. Of whom were they so to esteem? Of Saint Paul himself, and every faithful Minister. Doth he then intimate here any such prerogative above the meanest of his brethren, as the Romish Clergy usurps over the whole Christian World? any authority to prohibit, either the dispensors of God's mysteries from administering, or men so carnally minded as were these to whom he wrote from communicating Christ's blood aswell as his body? So the Trent Fathers think; and, as if for their wilful denial of the Lords cup unto the people, the Lord had given them the cup of giddiness, to cast them into a Babylonish slumber whilst they consulted about this decree; and their Scribes through retchlessenesse had written, what their raving Masters in their sickly or drunken dreams, had uttered: we find, in the same Decree, another place of Saint Paul immediately annexed, though as disproportionable to the former (as it is placed in their discourse) as a man's head to an horses neck, both as unsuitable to their intended conclusion, as a supper addition of fins or feathers would be, to such a monstrous Hippocentaurique combination. The place is Saint Paul's conclusion of that discourse concerning the Sacrament, * 1. Corinth. 11. vers. 34. Other things will I set in order when I come. 16 Granting (what is not necessary) he spoke of ordering matters concerning this Sacrament: to receive the wine, aswell as the bread, was no part of their present disorder, whose misbehaviour at the Lords Table did minister mere just occasions to Saint Paul, then long beards did to the Council of Constance, to deny the use of the cup, might Christ's blood and body, which he had jointly rendered to all, be upon any occasion justly severed by man in the administration of his last Will and Testament. Whatsoever the number or quality of the guests be; the great Lords Table must be always so furnished as it was at the first institution; for he hath no respect of persons. If a rich stately Prelate come in with a gold ring in goodly vestments, & a poor honest Layicke in vileraiments, he saith not to him in Pontificial robes, come sit you here at my mess, where you may drink of my wine aswell as eat of my bread: nor to the poor Layicke, stand thou there a part, or sit down here under my footstool, where thou mayst be partaker of the crumbs which fall from my table, though not of my cup, which must be kept for thy betters. High and low, rich and poor, all were redeemed with one price, all at this offering equal, all alike free to taste of every dish, so they come with wedding garments, without which even the best must be cast out, as unworthy to taste of any part, if not of all. That part, which the Counsels of Constance and Trent, upon pretences of reverence to the LORDS Supper, have detained from Modern Christians, the Corinthians had received unworthily; yet was not the Cup, for this reason, held superfluous by Saint Paul who only sought to repress the abuse, as knowing the use of it to be most necessary. The matters than he meant to order, when he came, was, to set out this Heavenly banquet with greater decency and solemnity, not to abridge them, of any substantial or material part thereof. 17 Nor do the Trent Fathers, if we may trust them upon their * Cited in the precedent annotation: Parag. 15. words. For they (desirous as it seems to make the whole Christian World as sottish, as themselves were impious) would make men believe, they could juggle away the Cup, and never touch the very substance of the Sacrament; as if the wine were not as substantial a part of the Lords Supper, as was his blood of his body, or humanity. An integral or material part they cannot deny it to be; and such if it be, there Apology is as shameless, as if a man should let out most of another's blood, cut of his arm, or leg, or maim him in some principal part, and plead for himself, I did not meddle with his substance, meaning (as the Council I take it here doth) his essence, seeing he is yet as truly a reasonable Creature, as before. 18 But to debar them of that refuge, That the Cup is an essential and substantial part of the Eucharist. it may be they sought or their followers may yet hope to find in the equivocation of this word, substance, importing as much sometimes as a material, or integral, sometimes as an essential part. If the cup be an essential and substantial part of this Sacrament, the Council by their own confession did souly err, in prohibiting Communion under both kinds: If no such part it be, they might by their own rule have altogether denied the use of it so much as to the sacrificer, or consicient: but so the very use and end, on which the essence of the Sacrament, (as of all other matters of moral practice) immediately depends, and by whose expiration instantly must determine, should utterly have perished. The end and use of this sacred institution, as our Saviour expressly teacheth, and the Council grants, was to represent the testators death, yea so to represent it, as we might be partakers of his body and blood, not spiritually only, but withal, (as the Trent Fathers contend) sacramentally. Admitting then all they can pretend against the necessity of the Cup [That whole Christ were in the bread alone;] yet this will not preserve the true and fruitful use of the Sacrament, nor salve that deadly wound, the essence of it must perforce receive from frustration of the end, necessarily ensuing the cups absence. For this Sacrament was ordained, as to represent, so to exhibit Christ's body, unto all faithful Communicants not as entire, and whole; his blood, not as it was enclosed in the veins: but the one, as torn and rend, the other, as shed and powered out upon the cross. This is my blood of the new Testament, (saith our Saviour) which is shed for many, (for all that receive it faithfully) for the remission of sins. His blood then, as shed and powered out, is as the lodestar of penitent and contrite hearts, whereon the eyes of their faith, that seek remission of sins in this Sacrament, must be fastened: for (as the a Heb. 9 22. Apostle saith) without shedding of blood is no remission. This was the complement of that inestimable all-sufficient Sacrifice, that which represents his precious blood thus powered out, the principal part of this Sacrament, aswell in respect of representing his death, as in applying remission of sins thereby in general purchased, and by this Sacramental Type sealed to every one in particular; especially if the Trent Counsels Doctrine be true, that Christ's very blood, which was shed upon the cross, is really present in the Chalice, and might be as immediately sprinkled at least upon the lips or doors of every faithful receivers heart, as the blood, of the Paschal Lamb was upon the doore-posts of the Israelites. Thus, as Satan the Father of lies, so false opinion, suggested by him, draw men with pleasure into those evils, for whose practice in the end they become their chief accusers. That opinion which first brought in neglect of the Chalice, and, as the Trent Council presumed, would have warranted them in making this decree, doth most condemn them: for the measure of their iniquity, could not have been so fully accomplished, unless they had held a transubstantiation of the wine into Christ's blood. 19 What part of Scripture, can we presume they will spare, that dare thus countermand the most principal of all God's Commandments? what reckoning may we think, they make of our Saviour Christ, that adventure thus shamefully to disannul and cancel his last will and testament, defrauding almost the whole Christian World, of half their Lord and Masters royal allowance, partly without any show of Scriptures, either to restrain, or otherwise interpret these Sovereign precepts; partly upon such idle and frivolous allegations, as may further witness their sleight estimate of God's Word, save only so far, as it may be wrested to serve their turns. 20 But grant the places there alleged by the Council, That the Trent Fathers had preferred their own authority above the Scriptures, albeit the Scriptures they allege for this decree, were as probable as these we bring against it. did so mitigate either the form of the institution, or the peremptory manner of our saviours speeches in the sixth of john, as to make it disputable in unpartial judgements, whether they did plainly enjoin any necessity of communicating under both kinds: the former decree notwithstanding would manifestly infer an usurpation of Sovereignty ●uer God's word, quite contrary to the general Analogy of faith, reason, and conscience; by all which, in cases doubtful, and, for the speculative form of truth, disputable with eqall probability, affirmatively or negatively; we are taught to frame our choice, when we come to practise, according to the difference of the matter, or of consequences, which may ensue, more dreadful one way, than the other, always to prefer either a greater good before a less, or a less evil before a greater, though both equally probable. Suppose then these two contradictory propositions, [The denial of the cup is a mutilation of Christ's last will and testament: the denial of the cup is no mutilation of Christ's last will, and Testament,] were, for their speculative probabilities, in just examination, equipendent; yet the doctrine of faith delivered in Scripture, reason and conscience, without contradiction, instruct us, that to alter, abrogate, or mutilate the son of God's last will and testament, is a most grievous, most horrible, most dreadful sin; but to permit the use of the Chalice, hath no suspicion of any the least evil in it. Had the Trent Fathers thus done, they had done no worse than our Saviour, than his Apostles, than the Primitive Church, (by * Sess. 2●. Cap. 2. their own confession) did. This excess of evil, without all hope of any the least compensative good to follow upon the denial, should have swayed them to that practice, which was infinitely more safe, as not accompanied with any possibility or show of danger; although the speculative probability of any divine precept necessarily enjoining the use of the cup, had been none. Thus peremptorily to adventure upon consequences so fearful, whereto no contrary fear could in reason impel, nor hopes any way comparable allure them; thus imperiously to deprive the whole Christian World of a good, in their valuation, (testified by their humble supplications and frequent embassages to that Council) so inestimable, without any other good possible to redound unto the deniers, save only usurpation of Lordly Dominion over Christ's heritage; plainly evinceth, that the Church is of far greater authority with them, than GOD: Word, either written in the Sacred Canon, or their hearts; then all his Laws, either engrafted by nature, or positive, and Supernatural. For, 21 Admit this Church representative had been fully persuaded in conscience rightly examined, and immediately ruled by Scripture, that the former decree did not prejudice the institution, use, or end of this Sacrament; yet most Christians earnest desire of the Cup, so publicly testified, could not suffer them to sleep in ignorance of that great scandal, the denial of it needs must give to most inferior particular Churches. Wherefore the rule of charity, that moved the Father of the Gentiles to that serious protestation. * 2. Cor. 8. ve. 13. Mat. 26. ver. 27. Sacrosancta oecumenica & generalis Tridentina Synodus, in spiritu sancto legitimè congregata, praesidentibus in ea eisdem Apostolicae sedis legatis, cum de tremendo, & sanctissimo Eucharistiae sacramento varia diversis in locis. errorum monstra nequissimi damonis artibus circumferantur, ab quae in nonnullis provintijs multi a Catholicae Ecclesiae ●ide atque obedientia videantur discessisse: Censuit ea, quae ad communionem sub utraque specie, & par●ulorum pertinent, hoc loco exponenda esse; qua propter cunctis Christi fidelibus interdicit, ne posthac de iis aliter vel credere vel docere, vel praedicare audeant quam est his decretis explicatum atque definitum, Concil. Trid. Sess. 21. in Proaemio. If meat offend my brother, I will eat no flesh while the World standeth, that I may not offend my brother: should in all equity, divine, or human, have wrought these Prelates hearts to like profession, If want of their spiritual drink offend so many Congregations, and such a multitude of our brethren, we will rather not use our lawful authority acknowledged by all, then usurp any that may be offensive or suspicious unto others, though apparently just unto ourselves: for they could not be more fully persuaded, this decree was just then Saint Paul was that all meats were lawful to him. 22 But may we think these Prelates had no scruple of conscience, whether the very form of this decree were not against our saviours express command, * 2. Cor. 8. ve. 13. Mat. 26. ver. 27. Sacrosancta oecumenica & generalis Tridentina Synodus, in spiritu sancto legitimè congregata, praesidentibus in ea eisdem Apostolicae sedis legatis, cum de tremendo, & sanctissimo Eucharistiae sacramento varia diversis in locis. errorum monstra nequissimi damonis artibus circumferantur, ab quae in nonnullis provintijs multi a Catholicae Ecclesiae ●ide atque obedientia videantur discessisse: Censuit ea, quae ad communionem sub utraque specie, & par●ulorum pertinent, hoc loco exponenda esse; qua propter cunctis Christi fidelibus interdicit, ne posthac de iis aliter vel credere vel docere, vel praedicare audeant quam est his decretis explicatum atque definitum, Concil. Trid. Sess. 21. in Proaemio. bibite ex hoc omnes, drink ye all of this: For mine own part, whiles I call to mind, what else where I have observed, that the jews were never so peremptory in their despiteful censures of our saviours doctrine, nor so outrageously bend against his person, as when their hearts were touched in part with his miracles, or in some degree illuminated with the truth he taught: The Counsels extraordinary forwardness to terrify all controvenaries of this decree, makes me suspect they were toe conscious of their own shallow pretended proofs to elude God's word, whose light and perspicuity in this point had exasperated their hardened hearts, and weak-sighted faith, to be so outrageous, in the very beginning of that session, as if they had meant to stifle their consciences, and choke the truth, lest these happily might cross their proceedings, or control their purposes, if this cause should once have come to sober and deliberate debatement, For, as thieves oftentimes seek to avoid apprehension by crying loudest, turn the thief; so these wolves hoped well to smother their guilt, and prevent all notice taking of their impiety by their grievous exclamations against others monstrous impious opinions in this point interdicting all upon penalty of the causes following, ere they had determined aught to teach, preach, or believe otherwise then they meant to determine. 23 Yet, Cum sacrosancta Synodus superiori sessione duos articulos, al●●● propositos; & tum nondum discussos, videlicet; an rationes, quibus Sancta Catholica Ecclesia adducta fuit, ut communicaret laicos, atque etiam non celebrantes Sacerdotes, sub una panis specie, ita sint retinende, ut nulla ratione calicis usus cuiquam sit permi●●edus: Et, An, si honestis & christianae charitati consentaneis rationibus concedendus alicui vel nationi vel regno calicis usus videatur, sub aliquibus conditionibus concedendus sit, & quaenam illae sint, in aliud tempus, oblata sibi occasione, examinandas, atque desiniendas reseruaverit; nunc, eorum, pro quibus petitur, saluti optime consultum volens, decrevit, intergrum negotium ad sanctissimum Dominum nostrum esse reserendum, pro ut praesenti decreto referti, qui pro sua s●●ulari prudentia id efficient, quod utile reipublicae Christianae & salutare petentibus usum cal●cis sore iudicaverit. Concil. Trident. vicessima secunda Sessione in decreto super petit: de concessione Calicis. though the Council accurse all that hold communication under both kinds as a necessary Doctrine, it doth not absolutely inhibit all use of the Chalice, but leaves it free unto their Lord the Pope to grant it, upon what Conditions he please, either unto private men, or whole Nations, upon what conditions then, may we presume, will it please his Holiness for to grant it? upon any better than Satan tendered all the Kingdoms of the Earth unto our Saviour? for this feigned servant of Christ, a true Gehazi, repining at his Lord and Master's simplicity, that could refuse so fair a proffer, made after Satan in all haste, saying, in his heart, I will surely take somewhat of him, though my Master spared him; and, pretending, a message in his name, to whom all power was given in Heaven and in earth, hath got an interest in the chief Kingdoms of the World disposing such as he can best spare, or worst manage, to any potent Prince, that will fall down and worship him and his copartner the Prince of darkness; who, of late years, have almost shared the whole World betwixt them; the one ruling over infidels, the other over professed Christians. And seeing the Pope (because his pomp and dignity must be maintained by Worldly wealth and revenues) dares not part with the propriety of so many Kingdoms at once, as Satan (who only looks for honour) proffered; he hath found out a trick to supply his wants, for purchasing like honour and worship, by his office of keeping Saint Peter's keys, if earthly Provinces or Dominions fail him, God's Word, his sons blood and body, all, shall be set to sale, at this price, Fall down and worship him. For no man, we may rest assured, no Nation or Kingdom, whom he can hinder, shall ever taste of the Lords Cup, unless they will first acknowledge lawful authority in him, to grant, deny, or dispose of it, at his pleasure; which is an homage wherewith the Devil is more delighted, then if we did acknowledge him Supreme Lord of all the Kingdoms of the Earth: for that were as much less prejudicial to Christ's prerogative royal, as a damage in possession or goods would be to a personal disgrace, or some foul maim or deformity wrought upon a Prince's body. CHAP. V. Propounding what possibly can be said on our adversaries behalf for avoiding the force of the former arguments: and showing withal the special points that lie upon them to prove, as principally, whether their belief of the Church's authority can be resolved into any divine testimony. 1 Unto all the difficulties hitherto proposed, I can rather wish some learned Priest or jesuit would, then hope any such ever will directly answer point by point. For the Readers better satisfaction I will first briefly set down, what possibly can be said on their behalf, and, after a disclosure of their last secret refuge, draw forth thence the dead & putrefied carcase of Romish faith; which unto the ignorant and superstitious, that cannot uncover the holes and clefts wherein these impostors upon every search are wont to hide it, may yet seem to live and breath; as the fable went of Saint john the Evangelists body, after many years reposall in the grave; or as the blinded jews to this day brag, the sceptre of judah yet flourisheth, beyond Babylon in Media, or some unknown part of India, whither no European is likely to resort for a disprovall of his relation. 2 Unto the demonstrative evidences aswell of their error in expounding Scriptures pretended for, as of other Scriptures rightly alleged by us against their former or like decrees, they will be ready to oppose what Bellarmine hath * done, Cap. 10. That the Church must judge of Scriptures evidence, and private errors in expounding it, not private men of the Church's expositions. Unto the objected dreadful consequences of their decrees, (could these possibly be erroneous) they would regest disobedience to the Church; that to disobey it is to disobey God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, a sin as heinous as mangling of Christ's last will and Testament, as Idolatry. On the contrary, to obey the Church even in her negative decrees and naked decisions, ungarded with any pretence of Scripture, (much more where this loving Mother, for the education of her children will vouchsafe, what she need not, to allege some clause or sentence of Holy writ,) we obey not the Church only but God's Word also, though not in those particular places, which in our judgements either contradict the former, or like decrees, or else make nothing at all for them; yet in texts produced for the Churches transcendent general authority. As he that adores the consecrated host in procession, because his holy Mother commands him so to do, or accounts want of Christ's blood no loss, because denied him by her authority; although unto private spirits he may seem to contradict that Law, * Deut. 6. 13. Luke 4. 8. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve: doth yet sincerely obey the Holy Ghost, and rightly observe the true sense and meaning of these his dictates, Peter I have prayed for thee, that faith should not fail, Peter feed my sheep, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church. From these places once firmly believing the Church possibly cannot err, he must not question, whether the practices by it enjoined contradict the former laws both being delivered by the holy spirit, who can not contradict himelfe. This I take it, is the sum of all, the most learned of our adversaries can or would reply unto the former difficulties. Not to draw faster, but rather remitting the * Vide Lib. 2. Sect. 4. Cap. 5. former bonds, wherein they have inextricably entangled themselves, by their circular progress in their resolution of faith; admit their late doctrine lest any possibility of knowing Scriptures, acknowledged by both to be God's word, or of distinguishing human testimonies (written or unwritten) from divine: The present question we may draw (with their free consent) unto this issue; whether their belief of the Churches infallible authority, undoubtedly established, as they pretend, in the forecourt places, can be truly resolved into any branch of the first truth, or into human testimonies only. If into the latter only, the case is clear, that absolutely obeying the Romish Church, in the former or like decrees, (which her authority set aside) to all or most men's consciences would seem to contradict Gods principal laws; we believe, and in believing obey men more than God; human authorities, laws, or testimonies more than divine. 4 The strength or feebleness of Roman faith will best appear, if we try it in any one of these joints Whether by Divine testimony it can be proved, that Saint Peter had such an universal, infallibe, absolute authority, as these men attribute unto the Pope: Whether by like infallible testimony it can be proved, the Popes from time to time, without exception were Peter's undoubted successors, heirs apparent to all the pre-eminencies, or prerogatives he enjoyed: Whether either the sovereignty or universality of their authority, supposed probable in itself, or to themselves; or particular injunctions derived from it can be so fully notified to all Christians, as they need not question, whether in yielding obedience to such decrees, of like consequences as were the former, they do not grievously disobey God's Word. For though the Popes themselves might know this truth by Divine revelation, or otherwise, their internal assurance, unless generally communicable by divine testimonies, could be no warrant unto others, for undertaking matters of fearful consequences, whereof they doubt, not only out of secret instinct or grudging of their consciences, but from an apprehension of opposition betwixt the very forms of laws papal, Peter was no the Church. Math. 18. v. 15. and divine. 5. First, it is improbable, that he to whom our Saviour said; If thy brother trespass against thee, di● Ecclesiae, was the * Bell. lib. ● de P●nt. Rome 5●. cap. 12. Qu●e d●cuntu● Petro ut uni ex fidelibus ●erte omnibus, fidel●bus dicta intell●guntur: ut Mat. 18. Si peccaverit 〈…〉. etc. By this reason then the Pope must appeal to the Church; who then are meant by the church? Respondemus (saith Bellarmin else where) illud di● Ecclesiae, significare de●er ad publicum Ecclesiae iuditium. i. ad eos qui publicam personam in Ecclesia gerunt. Bellar. lib. 1. de Pontif. Rome c. 6. So that if any man offend the Pope, the cause must come to be decided, by himself, as a public person. Church unto which all must, from which none may appeal: Or, if Peter, the Pope if he will be Peter's successor must, in causes of controversy appeal unto the Church. How is he then, as our adversaries contend, the Church, or such a part of it, unto whom all, even Peter himself (were he alive) must appeal? Must others appeal to him, as judge, in his own cause? or he unto himself alone? Not as alone, but (so a late Papist, to my remembrance, answers Gerson) as accompanied with his fellow Consul, his Chair, which is to him, as Caesar was to julius: and so shall God's word be to both; as Bibulus was to julius Caesar, a mere pretence, or bare name of authority, nothing else. Yet if that word avouch, that neither S. Peter's, or his successors faith, could ever fail in determining, controversies, we contradict it, not the Pope's decisions only, if we do not in all doubtful doctrines fully rely upon them. CHAP. VI That neither our saviours prayers, for the not failing of Peter's faith: Luke 22, ver. 32. nor his commending his sheep unto his feeding: joh. 21. ver. 15 prove any supremacy in Peter over the Church, from which the authority of the Pope cannot, with probability, be derived. 1. IS it then probable, Our saviours prayers for S. Peter did not bestow upon him any oecumeniall Sovereign authority, absolutely infallible in such sense as the Romanist, would make the Popes. our saviour's prayers, for Saint Peter did collate any authority upon him, either ecumenical for extent, or sovereign for others dependence on it; or absolutely, and perpetually infallible for time, without integrity of life, or other condition: besides such cathedral consultation, as is required in the Pope to support it? Rather the proper effect they aimed at, was an extraordinary assistance in the practice of such points, as already had been, or afterwards should be revealed unto him. Our Saviour while he uttered them, did clearly foresee all his followers should be sifted by Satan, he that professed greatest love and resolution more than all the rest, in such fearful sort, that without this promised supportance, his faith had utterly failed: which though afterwards it proved much stronger, by this shaking, yet whether stronger than was any of his fellows, is uncertain, most unfit to be disputed: Howsoever, no circumstance in that place prognosticates, or aboods such extraordinary future strength, rather all suppose for the present, a peculiar necessity of his Master's prayers for him, as foreseeing his tripping (to use the mildest censure) would be so dangerous, as the memorial of his recovery, might be a perpetual encouragement to all back sliders, against distrust of God's mercies. No man so sit to raise up such as are fallen, The admirable use of Peter's fall foreseen by the allseeing wisdom of God. or wallow in the filth of sin, as he that hath firmly apprehended grace from above (or rather is so apprehended by it) and yet can withal, out of a sincere and humble acknowledgement of his relapses, stoop lower than others in spiritual graces his inferiors, and as it were let himself into the pit of despair, wherein sinners lie linking their present frailty in his own forepast infirmities. It much disagrees with my temper, ever to exaggerate the sins of God's Saints; yea, I think the denial of Christ was less sinful in Saint Peter, than the like would be in many others, that have received less grace, because the temptation was above measure * Not in respect of danger represented (which was but death) but of extraordinary licence at that time granted to the power of darkness. extraordinary permitted (no doubt) to this end, that he might be a more faithful comforter of his brethren; whose faith was feeble, crazed, or decayed. He that hopes with fruit to reprehend, or exhort men much daunted, or ashamed at the foulness of their offences, must as far as truth will suffer him, acknowledge himself to be a sharer in his own reproofs; to have been sometimes tainted with the original of their present grief: for so the parties grieved will be less jealous, and conceit the medicine better. Thus the royal host, in the Poet, cheers up his Princely guest, amated at the mention of his infamous ancestors; Ne perge queri casusque Statius lib. 1. Theb. priorum Annumerare tibi: Nostro quoque sanguine multum Erravit pietas, nec culpa nepotibus obstet. Tu modo dissimilis rebus mereare secundis Excusare tuas.— Did Parents shame their children stain, sweet Prince thy case were mine: For Piety, sometimes, her course did alter from our line, The blemish though did not descend. Let virtue be thy guide; So shall thy same, thy Parents faults, though fowl and monstrous hide. 2. By these, and like circumstances, may our saviour's words, [But I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not: Therefore when thou art converted strengthen thy brethren] be construed most appositely to his meaning. What was it then Peter was to strengthen in others? Petrus non erravit circa fidem, sed tantum aliquid ignoravit, cum audivit: Vade Satana, & à charitate excidit non à fide, quando Christum negavit. Quod in tractatu de Ecclesia suo loc● docebimus. Bellar. lib. 1. de Rom. Pontif. In those books of, his de Ecclesia, the Reader shall find the place alleged totidem verbis. Bellarmine as most of his fellows, deny that Peter was the Church's foundation as yet: but their readiness to defend the indeficiencie of his faith in this denial, argues, they must of necessity hold, that the Pope's faith doth never fail, albeit he usually manifested as great want of christian charity and resolution, as Peter did in that denial; or, as great ignorance in divine mysteries as Peter was, when our Saviour said unto him: go behind me Satan, upon Peter's affection at that time is the Romish faith, as appears in the latter end of this chapter. That which had been defective in himself. Was that his charity, his faith, or both? We read (saith Bellarmine) Peter's charity did fail, that his faith did fail we never read. In vain then doth Bellarmine, in vain do all his fellows labour, to prove our Saviour should in these words ratify a perpetually indeficient purity of Roman faith? for Peter was to repair in others what had been impaired in himself; to prevent, if it were possible, the like fall in such as did, or to themselves did seem to stand; to convert, restore and strengthen such, as in like, or worse sort had denied their Redeemer. With much greater probability, might the Romanists seek to establish a perpetual indeficient Christian charity in Peter's successors, had Peter's love, or charity only failed. But the bad lives and manners of the Roman Clergy, would give too manifest evidence against them in this attempt: In this respect have these stout challengers taken upon them the defence, of a never failing faith, because not so easily confuted. For, it is a matter very hard (I must confess) to prove, that faith can never fail, which may deny Christ, so formally and constantly as Peter's did, without defect. The best is, that by their own confession this place can prove, the acts or exercises of Roman faith to be no better, than S. Peter was in this denial of Christ. His offence, they grant, was foul, but his faith without defect. So may Popes be monstrously luxurious in their lives, but always infallible in their Doctrine. Reader, consult with thine own heart, and give sentence (as in the sight of God) of the whole frame of their Religion, by the foundation; and of the foundation (such as they willingly acknowledge faith to be of all true Religion and every Christian virtue) by Bellarmine's testimony. If Peter became (as they pretend) the fundamental rock, by confessing: that Religion doubtless, which hath no better ground of infallibility, than Peter's faith not secured from a threefold denial of Christ, our Confession, was first planted by the Spirit of error, and of Antichrist. 3 Not to dispute any longer, what it was, but who they were Saint Peter was to strengthen: all without exceptions. This justly may seem impossible, seeing the exercise of his ministery could not extend to all Nations, much less unto all ages. Yet these words bequeath no hereditary royal jurisdiction over all persons, but rather enjoin personal acts of penetencie unto Saint Peter, for his former personal offence. He had found extraordinary mercy at his Lord and Masters hands; and was to communicate the like unto his fellow servants more guilty of his offence. Christ, after his faith had failed did convert and strengthen him against the like temptation; and he, converted, was commanded to convert and strengthen others. Whom? Not such as by conversion might become his brethren, or rather his children in Christ; but rather such, as were hewn out of the same roke, and could truly call Abraham their father, Sirrah their Mother, joinct professors with him of Moses Law and the Prophets, more than his brethren and associates, in denying him, of whom Moses and all the Prophet's bare testimony. 4 To subtract all matter of calumniation from men, too much disposed to cavil without any probable cause, or just occasion: notwithstanding his threefold denial of Christ, I deny not a triple or quadruple prerogative in Peter, in respect of Christ's other Apostles; yet consisting, not in any authority more infallible in itself, or more sovereign for superiority, over such as were to depend upon him as a chief messenger of the Lord of Hosts, but in an extraordinary efficacy of his ordinary Apostle-ship. In what respect then was his ordinary ministery or Apostles-ship, so extraordinarily powerful? In respect of the universal Church throughout all ages, of the jewish Synagogue, for the time being only. S. Paul confutes the former as evidently as he plainly avoucheth the later, * Gal. 2. v. 7. 8. 9 When they saw the Gospel over the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the Gospel over the circumcision was unto Peter (For he that was mighty by Peter in the Apostle-ship over the circumcision, was also mighty by me toward the Gentiles) james and Cephas and john, which were counted to be pillars, knew of the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and to Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should preach unto the Gentiles and they unto the circumcision. 5 Here the less in speech I amplify, S. Peter's extraordinary power and efficacy in converting the circumcision. the more in heart and mind I tacitly admire the unspeakable power & wisdom of our God, that by the extraordinary offences, or infirmities of one or two, cause firmly establish the faith of all his Saints. Albeit he used the ministery of every other Apostle, in reconciling the world unto himself: yet Paul and Peter were as the two principal intermediate elements, proportioned and qualified of purpose, for the more apt connecting this mixed inferior Globe with the Heavenly Sphere, the sons of men with the son of God; the one by symbolizing with the jew, the other with the Gentile in his sin, both with Christ in true wisdom, in all good gifts and graces of the spirit. Saint Paul's offences against God manifested in the flesh, have the same proportion to Saint Peter, that the ignorance, infidelity or idolatry of the Gentiles had with the jews delinquency, or Apostasy from the God of their Fathers. Saint Paul had not known our Saviour in the flesh, ignorant of his wisdom in teaching, or power in working, and in his ignorant zeal unto Moses and the Law, did persecute his followers and disciples after his resurrection; hereby made a ●itter Symbol for reconciling the Gentiles unto God, whom they had not known, usually misled in a blind devotion to their dumb Idols and traditions of their elders, to hate and persecute the jews, the only professors of true Religion, the only servants till that time of the everliving God. Saint Peter had long conversed with our Saviour, heard him teach as never man taught, seen him do what no man else could ever do, his eyes had beheld the brightness of his excellent glory, and, out of his apprehension of his Deity he had professed more than ordinary love, * Luk. 22. 33. Lord I am ready to go with thee into Prison, and to death: yet when he comes unto his trial, flartly denies that ever he knew him; hereby more fitly qualified for recovering the backsliding Apostatical jews, who had known the Lord, and all the wonders which he had wrought for Israel: they had professed such love and loyalty to him, as no people could do no more unto their Gods; posterity still retaining the protestations of their Religious fathers; All this is come upon us, yet do we not forget thee, neither deal we falsely concerning thy covenant. Our hearts not not turned back: neither our steps gone out of thy paths. Surely for thy sake are we slain continually, and are counted as Sheep for the slaughter: Yet when he came in the similitude of man to exact obedience and a leageance at their hands, they will not know him; but, as Samuel had foretold, cast him off from reigning over them, and openly protest against him; We have no King but Caesar. 6 Answerable to this observation is the success of their Apostleship, registered by the Evangelist. We never read so many jews, at once so thoroughly converted by our Saviour, or so seriously affected with his Doctrine in his life time, as with that memorable a Act. 2. ver 15. unto the end of the chapter. Vid. Acts 3. ver. 12. to the 13. verse of the 4. chapter. sermon of Saint Peter. The manner, of his reiterated appellations, Ye men of judea, and ye all that inhabit jerusalem, ye men of Israel, b Vide Act. 3. vers. 25. Men and Brethren; of mentioning Gods promises made to them, and to their children; of his reply; his earnest beseeching and exhorting them, that had appealed jointly to him, and the other Apostles: argue, these were the brethren, he in particular was enjoined to convert, confirm & strengthen. And like a skilful Surgeon, that knew by his own recovery how to prick their consciences, without giving them a deadly wound, he presseth them in the last place, with crucifying the Lord of glory. The mention whereof had been enough in another's judgement, to have moved them to despair: but this comforter knew by experience, that to be thoroughly touched in heart, as he had been, for such foul offences passed, was the readiest way to that true repentance, which he found, and such repentance the surest holdfast of lively faith. But he that was thus powerful in the circumcision, became a stone of offence unto the Gentiles, with whom he had to deal at Antioch. For by his tripping in an uncouth way, (as being out of his natural element) he made them stumble, justly reproved, for his amphibious conversation with men of tempers so contrary, by Saint Paul; under whose hand the edification of the Gentiles did better prosper. Yet he nothing so powerful in converting the jews, Saint Paul's extraordinary power and efficacy in winning the Gentiles unto Christ. though his zeal towards them was no less than Saint Peter was; his endeavours, to sow the seed of life in their hearts, as great but with small hope of seeing any fruit of his labours. But it will be worth the Readers pains, I am persuaded, to observe; that albeit he press the jews at Antioch with the very same arguments, (but more forcibly and artificially framed) wherewith Saint Peter had converted so many, yet is enforced to make a contrary conclusion. Peter concludes in hope prognosticating success, Amend your lives, and be baptised every one of you in the name of jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gifts of the Holy Ghost; For the promise is made unto you and to your children. And the same day were added to the Church about three thousand souls. See the like success of his preaching. Acts 4. verse 4. Saint Paul, for conclusion, takes his farewell of them, as no part of his peculiar charge; only tells them it was his, and his fellow Barnabas duty, to admonish them. Then Paul and Barnabas spoke boldly, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken unto you: but seeing you put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us; saying I have made thee a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be the salvation unto the end of the World. And when the Gentiles heard it, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many, as were ordained unto eternal life, believed. Thus the Word of the Lord was published throughout the whole Country: But the jews stirred certain devout and honourable women, and the chief men of the City and raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them out of their Coasts. 7 Thus it is as true of graces, as nature's ordination, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: the power & efficacy of Christ's chief Apostles, is restrained unto their proper and limited Sphere; God always blessing those endeavours best, that are employed within the precincts of that peculiar charge whereto he apoints us. By that which hath been said it may appear, that Saint Peter and Saint Paul's prerogatives, how great soever, were both personal, to expire with themselves; although a title of supremacy over the Gentiles might be pretended, with much greater probability from S. Paul then from S. Peter, whose peculiar charge was the jew; as may be yet further manifested by the place most urged for his, his & Successors ecumenical jurisdiction, bequeathed, as the Romanists suppose, in these words, Who were the sheep Peter was principally appointed to feed, and what authority he had over them. Peter feed my lambs, Peter feed my sheep, etc. 8 But the natural circumstances of that place compared with the late exposition of the former, deads' all their blows, thence intended against us, ere they can rightly frame themselves to fetch them. A little before these words were uttered, desirous to approve his excessive love to our Saviour, and manifest more than an ordinrie desire of his company (that had appeared unknown unto him, but from john's notification) girt his coat about him, and cast himself into the Sea, whiles the other Disciples (not above two hundred Cubits from Land) came by ship to meet him. After a short dinner passed, as the text seems to insinuate, in silence; * jesus said unto them, come & dine & none of the Disciples durst ask him who art thou? seeing they knew he was the Lord. joh. 11. 12 at least not entertained with such variety of discourse, as might either interrupt some private intimation made to Peter of future conference, or put the former occasion of this following exhortation out of the other Apostles memory: our Saviour enjoins Simon the son of jona, to feed his Lambs, again and again to feed his Sheep. He see him then like a loving Soldier, desirous, by his adventurous approach unto him, to recover his formerr reputation, much impaired by denying him. Whether our Saviour check or cherish this desires I question not; much less determine. His speeches, with the former circumstances, import thus much, Thou hast made profession of more than ordinary love unto me of readiness to lay down thy life for my sake, though all others, even these thy fellows, should forsake me; willing I see thee, by thy present hazard of it, to make thy former words good. But wouldst thou have me yet to show thee a more excellent way? I have told thee it long since thou art converted, strengthen thy Brethren, SIMON the Son of JONA, if thou desire to prove thyself a CEPHAS, or testify the sincerittie of thy faith and love, which by the powers of darkness were of late so grievously shaken, feed my Lambs, feed my sheep: yea, seeing thou thrice deniedst the Shepherd of thy soul, I say unto thee the third time, feed my sheep. Let the memory of thy forepast threefold sin, also let this same my present threefold admonition, excite thee unto triple diligence in thy charge; to show such pity and compassion, as I have showed to thee, unto that lost and scattered Flock, which have denied me, or consented to my crucifying. Let thy faithful performance of what I request thee at my farewell, be the first testimony of thy love to me, to be lastly testified by the loss of thy life, which thou didst promise me when I gave mine for my sheep, but shalt not pay until thou hast fulfilled this my request; a john 21. v. 18. Verily verily I say unto thee, when thou wast young, thou girdest thyself, and walkedst whither thou would b Thus much it seems Peter did prophecy unaware. john 13. v. 37. but failed in application of the time. So our Saviour saith Thou canst not follow me now, but thou shalt follow me afterward: as well in death as in life after death. but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thine hands and another shall gird thee and lead thee whither thou woulddest not. 9 But here Bellarmine, always exceeding witty, either to elude Scriptures, whose natural meaning is evidently against him, or to collect a gulling sense from such, as nothing at all make for him, would infer that the possessive, c Deinde aliam rationem eamque insignem nobis suppeditat pronomen illud, Meas. Nam cum absque ulla restrictione addatur ad nomen, ●ues pronomen, Meas manifest significatur eas omnes Petro commendari, ad quas extenditur pronomen, Meas; certum est autem illud, Meas extendi ad omnes simpliciter. Nec enim ullus est in Ecclesia, qui se Christi ovem esse non glorietur: igitur omnes omnino Christianos nullo excepto, Petro Dominus commendavit. Bellar. de Rom. Pont. Lib. 1. Cap. 16. My necessarily refers Peter's charge, or jurisdiction, unto all the flock that called Christ their Lord, owner. For seeing after his resurrection there was but one Fold; for this great Shepherd to say; My sheep, could not distinguish one sort from another; and therefore none to be exempted from Peter's oversight. But the Flock though one in respect of the owner, which had purchased all with one price, did consist of sheep much different in breeding, and retaining their several marks; some were of the circumcision, others of the uncircumcision; the former had been our saviours peculiar charge in his life time, (for he was not sent but unto the lost-sheep of Israel;) these he might with note of distinction, call My sheep. As if a Shepherd, raised to better fortunes, should purchase a great many more sheep, than he was wont to look to himself and refer both sorts to several keepers, though both to Fold together in the evening, he might Signanter say to the one, look well to my sheep: though both Flocks were his by right of possession; but only the one his, by a peculiar relation of former charge or over sight. And thus, as we have said before, the jews were committed peculiarly to Saint Peter's care. Albeit, consonantly to the former exposition of both places alleged, our Saviour by My sheep, might only intimate his tender care over his flock, without distinction; that Peter might more carefully feed as many as he could personally look to, seeing the proof of his love to his Lord and Master, and of his fidelity which had failed, did consist herein. As for Bellarmine's other collections, that our Saviour, by mentioning his sheep, should mean Prelates or Superiors; by his little sheep (so their vulgar distinguisheth,) inferior pastors; Vide Bellar. de Rom. Pont lib. 1. cap. 16. by his lambs, mere Layickes, such as have Fathers but no children in Christ: they only prove that in this light of the Gospel, there is a generation of men professing Christianity, yet as apt as grossly to transform Christ's Spiritual love, as the Heathen did his father's glory, into the similitude of their carnal corrupt affections. 10 If it may stand with Christian sobriety, so precisely to determine of particular differences implied in these words; it is most likely our Saviour meant to include all sorts of people, according to the different care their divers estates required: some were to be tenderly handled and cherished like lambs; others to be looked unto like elder sheep, and to be fed with stronger meat, but with less personal or assiduous attendance. There is no one kind of argument persuades me more, the Romish Church is led by the Spirit of error, then whiles I observe, how they still approve themselves to be Peter's successors in denying Christ, and going the wrong way unto the truth of the Gospel; always like ungracious children, seeking to enter upon the inheritance bequeathed, without performance of what the Testator principally required. Our Saviour requested Peter in these terms, Feed my sheep (not thine;) intimating, he should approve himself a faithful Shepherd, one that was to give strict account unto the owner, of whatsoever befell the flock: these men by commission pretended from Saint Peter, would make themselves great sheep-masters, to kill and eat at their pleasures. That to feed, is all one, as to rule and govern, as they would have it, is a conceit of men only minding their bellies, or seeking to be fed by others spoils. That feeding or pastorship is always accompanied with rule and authority, none that ever tasted any Spiritual food will deny. That Peter was a Pastor and a Feeder, an extraordarie Pastor, a principal Feeder, and therefore of preheminent rule and authority over his flock; we acknowledge: but no pre-eminence in him above his fellows, which was not grounded upon his eminent care, and more than ordinary fidelity in feeding it; not with Lordly injunctions sealed with Anathemaes, but with sincerity of life and soundness of Doctrine. There was no difference betwixt the tenure of his and others estates, as if he had been Lord by inheritance, not obnoxious to any forfeiture by misdemeanour; and others but lease holder's (during term of good life and manners) of the privileges they enjoyed to return by excheate, or for want of succession unto Peter's successors. That penitential exercise of feeding Christ's sheep, in such strict terms so often enjoined; rather argues, that should have been interpreted unfaithfulness or disloyalty in him, which would have been accounted only neglect or want of diligence in others. And the ingenuous Reader may if it please him, easily observe, that of all Apostolical writings now extant, none have either less intimation of any pre-eminency or supremacy, or more lively characters of their authors unfeigned humility, and lowly submission of himself unto the meanest of his fellow Ministers, than Saint Peter: as if by them he would have testified his perpetual mindfulness of that former offence, and strict charge of fidelity in feeding Christ's flock thereupon enjoined. 1. Pet. 5. v. 1. 2. 3. The Elders (saith he) which are among you, I beseech, which am, what? the chief Apostle, an Ecclesiastic Monarch, Christ's Vicar general, an Elder of Elders? no but also an Elder 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ●nd a witness of the sufferings of Christ▪ and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed; Feed the flock of God, which dependeth upon you, caring for it, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; not as though ye were Lords over God's heritage, but that ye may be examples to the flock. Yet for any to arrogate such infallibility, or challenge such authority, as he had without perseverance in the like fidelity and sincerity, as Peter requested upon the strictest terms of love unto his Lord and Master, in all likelihood would and did use in feeding his flock; is such a mock of Christ and this his blessed Saint, as none but the brood of Antichrist could ever have hatched, yet inferior to that, which accompanies the third pretended ground of Romish faith, Tu es Petrus & super hanc Petram, Thou art Peter and upon this Peter (as they would have it) will I build my Church. CHAP. VII. That Christ, not Saint Peter is the rock spoken of Matthew 16. verse 18. that the jesuits exposition of that place demonstrateth the Pope to be the great Antichrist. 1 WHy the Latin interpreter following the Greek, should vary the Gender, reading Tu es Petrus & super hanc Petram; not, Tu es Petra, or super hanc Petram: although the tongue wherein they suppose Saint Matthew wrote, had but one and the same word, Cepha, Bellarmine and * Dubitabit autem aliquis, cur si non Mattheus Matthaei tamen Graecus interpres illam nominum & generis distinctionem adhibuerit. Respondeo in promptu rationem esse, quia quamuis graece petra & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 genere masculino 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 faeminino dicatur, tamen Petrus, quia vir erat, non Petra faeminino, sed Petrus masculino nomine vocandus erat. Secundo autem loco, ubide aedificij fundamento agebatur non Petrum sed Petram dixit, quamuis idem utrumque nomen significaret, quia in eiusmodi aedificij nomen Petra, faemininun magis est usitatum, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enim et At●icum et rarum est. Maldonat in 16. Matthaei. Vide Bellar. de Rom. Pont. Lib. 1. Cap. 10. What the name of Cephas doth import in Saint Peter. Maldonate give these two reasons. First seeing Saint Peter was a man, his name was to be expressed in the Greek and Latin by a word of the Masculine gender. Secondly, albeit the Greek Masculine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be sometimes used for a rock; yet very seldom, or in the Attic Dialect only, if at all, when it is taken for a fundamental rock fit to erect edifices upon. Thus professed Commentators oftimes find out many witty reasons of like alterations in words, which the Authors never dreamt of. But granting (what these two learned Romanists only, suppose, none can prove) S. Matthew had written in the Syriake tongue: neither of the two reasons alleged for the Greek or Latin interpreters variation of the Gender, can have any place in Saint john, who wrote in Greek, but not in the Attic Dialect, and yet purposely instructing us what the Syriake word Cepha, which our Saviour gave as a Surname to S. Peter at his first calling meant, saith it is by interpretation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Petrus not Petra; though this feminine might have been used without offence in the interpretation of his name, so he had not been usually called thereby, or being so usually called, it might have grown into a masculine; for why should Petra seem a more effeminate name in Saint Peter, than Zabarella or Carafa, in their Cardinals, or Aquaviua, in the General of the jesuits? If jesus himself had given the governor of the society, enstiled by his own name, this surname in the abstract, Aquaviua: what would men think it did portend? john. 4. v. 13. that he should be that well of water, which springeth into everlasting life? or rather that he had been so denominate from some relation to such water, that Claudius Aquiviua was as much as Claudius de Aquaviua? It is most likely then, that as well Saint john when he interprete Cepha 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the Greek Translator of Saint Matthew, in saying, Tu es Petrus, not Petra; did seek to prevent that sinister sense, which posterity might c●ll out of the ambiguous Syriake Cepha, sometimes signifying the rock itself, otherwhiles implying no more than a denomination from it. Nor was it Saint Austin's, ignorance of the Hebrew and Syriac, as a Existimavit Augustinus Petram, super quam aedificatur Ecclesia, non esse Petrum, quia credidit Cepham non significare petram, sed aliquid à Petra derivatum, ut si diceremus, Petrenam, aut Petr●ium, quo●odo Christianus 〈◊〉 significat Chr●stum, sed ●l●quid à Christo deriua●●m, quia igitur Ecclesia sup●r Petram non super aliquem Petrinum, vel Petr●m aedificanda● est, ideo existimavit Augustinus per illam Petram intelligi non Petrum, sed Christum: de Rom. Po●●, l. 1. c. 10. Bellarmine objects; but rather his perfect knowledge of Christ, as the only rock of salvation, which made him think that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek should imply no more than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, one belonging to that sure foundation whereon the Church is built. Would God Bellarmine could plead ignorance in these tongues for his excuse; even he that hath no acquaintance with the Syriac, but by the affinity of it with the Hebrew, or with neither but from the common analogy betwixt them, and modern tongues destitute of such variety of formations or cases, as are facile and plentiful in the Greek and Latin, cannot be ignorant that abstracts or substantives whilst given as names to men, are usually equivalent to the concrete or adjective, whereby they are oftimes expressed in Latin, as in our English we attribute the substantive or abstract name of Countries unto Earls, or of Towns unto Barons; whom our sovereign Lord when he speaks in Latin, would call Essexius, in English lie calls Essex: so Roger Mortimer with us, is Rogerus de mari mortuo with latin Writers. Even in the latin itself, wherein in the distinction between abstracts and concretes, or substantives and adjectives, is obvious and apparent: the fundamental abstract or substantive is given oftimes by way of cognomination, to express some relation between it, and the party denominated from it, in value no more than the adjective or denomination in the oblique case; so Scipio taken properly, or in it direct and primary signification, is a walking staff, baculum, but attributed to Cornelius (the first of that honourable family called Scipiones) implies no more than one that had been instar Baculi, Non aliter dicti Scipiones, nisi quòd Cornelius qui patrem luminibus carentem pro baculo regebat, Scipio cognominatus, nomen ex cogn●mine posteris deed it. Macrob. Satur. lib. 1. cap. 6. or Scipionis, instead of a rod or walking staff to his blind decrepit father: so a Vide Macrobium loco citato. Scropha thereto attributed in the abstract unto another family in Rome, imports not their ancestors had been swine, or their mother a sow, but only some particular relation to that creature. The like we may say of b Asinae cognomentum Cornelijs datum est, quoniam princeps Corneliae gentis empto fundo, seu filia data marito cum sponsores ab eo solenniter poscerentur asivam cum pecuniae onere produxit in forum, quasi pro sponsoribus praesens pignus. Macrob. Saturn. l. 1. c. 6. Why Peter was called Cephas. Asina and Bestia, names of other Roman families. And if I mistake not, that famous professor which hight Victoria in the abstract, was but Franciscus ● victoria, de victoria, or victorius. In like sort, although it were true that Cepha in the Syriac did only signify a rock or fundamental stone; yet seeing all grant that Christ was truly and principally such, the same name given unto Simon the son of jona, must imply no more than a denominative reference unto the rock, so as if he had been called in latin Simon Petra, or in English Simon Rock, this could imply no more than Simon de Petra or Petreus, Simon a rock, or of the rock. 2 But whatsoever the Syriac Cephas, or the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place cited do import: it will be demanded, why our Saviour bestowed this name on Simon the son of jone, at his first coming to him? The particular references betwixt him and the rock itself, or chief stone, might be so many, as might convince him of curiosity, perhaps of folly, that would peremptorily or precisely determine, what one should give occasion to this denomination: Most probable it is, that he who knew what was in man, did at the first sight of Simon, see in him, or mean to bestow upon him some extraordinary aptness to apprehend the words of eternal life, or to descry the gate of the Lord whereby the righteous were to enter, or (which is equivalent) Christ to be the chief corner stone spoken of by the Psalmist: Herein I willingly assent to Bellarmine, that Saint Peter was the first that distinctly did apprehend, or at least, by confession, open the great mystery of Christianity and foundation of true religion, God incarnate in our flesh. Thus much the circumstances of that place seem to infer; For jesus, Math 16. v. 13. 14. 15. etc. when he came unto the coasts of Caesarea, he asked his Disciples whom do men say that I (commonly known by the name of the son of man) am; and they said, some say, john Baptist, some, Elias, and others jeremiah; all to this effect, that he was some one of the Prophets, john 1. v. 49. or as Nathanael in his confession meant) such a son of God, as they had been. These were in the way, but came not near the main foundation, which Peter first uncovers, for when our Savious demands; But whom say ye (whom I must appoint, as chief builders, and principal parts of that spiritual temple, which is toward) that I am; Then Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ the son of the living God. And from his first discovery of this rock, or chief corner stone, he might well be denominated a rock or stone, as Maximus was named Messala from a town in Sicily so called, which he had taken, or, as we might denominate some famous mariner, from some notable place which Bee should first discover. To this effect doth our Saviour reply unto Saint Peter; Blessed art thou Simon the son of jona, for not flesh and blood, not the chief builders amongst the people, but he that laid this precious stone in Zion hath uncovered the same to thee, And seeing thou hast said, what should be said and thought of me, I only say of thee, thou hadst not thy name for nought; rightly wast thou called a Rock, or stone, that hast so plainly opened the way unto that very rock, whereon I mean to build my Church. Had our Saviour meant Peter had been that Rock, or were his words to be interpreted, as in effect the Papists do; He had said, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Tu es Petra illa super quam, etc. But seeing he adds no Emphasis to Peter's name, but unto petra, these words [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] are but an actual expression, or more definite specification, of what had been potentially included in the indeterminate transitive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 revelabit; for where our English reads flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, the original is verbatim, hath not revealed to thee, to wit, that rock whereupon I will build my Church, the direct current then of our saviours speech is thus; Blessed art thou Simon the son of jonah, for not flesh & blood, but my father which is in heaven, hath revealed that Rock to thee, whereupon I will build my Church, against which the gates of hell shall never prevail, whereof thou (according to the omen of thy name long since given by me) shall be the first living stone, by whom all others shall be squared, ere admitted into this spiritual edifice. 3 That our Saviour did not expressly mention any other rock or stone before he said to Simon, Thou art Peter, doth nothing prejudice this exposition. It sufficed that God and the Rock of salvation: a Pronomen hanc non potest referri ad Christum, Petram, sed ad Petram, Petram debet enim referri ad aliquod proximum, non ad remo●um, proxime ante dictum fuerat non Christo sed Petra, tu es Cephas id est Petra, dei●de licet Christus dici posset, Petra, tamen hoc in loco non est vocatus petra à Petro confitente, sed Christus filius Dei vivi debet autem referri, Hanc cum qui nominatus est Petra, non ad cum qui non est appellatus hoc nomine, Bellar. lib. 1. de Rom. Pont. cap. 10. Vide Deut. 32. Ps 18. ●s. 19 ult. Tu vero considera verborum Prophetae amplitudinem, poterat●d cere, Mi●tam vobis Messiam se● voluit tam ensign beneficium verbis insignibus & Metaphoricis explicare. Est autem transtatio sumpta ab ●icantibus, quae verborum amplitudine minuit rei magnificentiam & maiestatem. Plinius in 28. Isa●e. ver. 16. See the latter Annotation out of Bellarmine, a● the 25. §. of this Chapter, and Mal●onat. in Matthei 21. ver 42. Messiah, the chief corner stone, the Christ, were then known, and yet are held as aequivalent, even amongst the learned Papists, that the Disciples to whom he then spoke, did no less perfectly know, more ready to acknowledge as much, as our adversaries yet do, that not Peter, but his and their master only, was to be the chief corner stone in that Temple, they had often heard he should, and now he tells them he was to build. The present Dialogue would abundantly instruct them, that not the son of man himself, howsoever considered, but in such sort as his heavenly father had revealed him to Saint Peter, truly apprehended as God and Man, was a foundation competent for so incomparable a structure; such as before this time had gone the farthest; such as thought he had been Moses, (who had no peer among the Prophets, greater then whom it was scarce expected any son of mortal man should be) had not come unto ground firm enough to build their own, and all men's faith upon, To them the gate of the Lord▪ by which the righteous were to enter, was not fully opened, they came not to a distinct, direct, & perfect view of this chief corner stone: for this reason they could not be accounted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, stones actually wrought, and so well sitting this precious foundation, as others might be framed by their pattern, and them jointly fastened to it. This was Peter's prerogative, unto whom the keys are first given (as unto the first of all the faithful that had passed this gate & power by them, to admit as many as were, to exclude all that were not fashionable to this Rock and corner stone. 4. Seeing then neither the Apostles then thought, nor can any man yet conceive, that Peter could be an extraordinary stone or second foundation in the edifice, there spoken of, but must withal admit Christ to be the chief corner stone, or surest fundamental rock: I would appeal to my adversary in his sober mood; to any not actually drunken with the Babylonish cup, unto whether foundation, unto what stone, the principal or less principal, these words [and upon this Rock will I build my Church] must be referred? We must judge of the foundation by the edifice, and of the edifice by the attribute. Now, as there is no one title wherein the spirit doth more delight to express the strength and praises of the living God, than this of Rock: so was there never any more puissant effect attributed to any Rock, than the eternal stability of this edifice. What Saint Paul saith of the foundation, I may truly say of the edifice and the attribute. Another edifice more strong than this Church, can no man build; no attribute can be imagined more glorious than this: That the gate of hell shall never prevail, or (as * Omnes quos ●egi praeter Hilarium existimant sensum esse sore, ut diaboli potentia Ecclesiam quidem exerceat, vunquam vero apprimat. Sed non solent portae vincere sed resistere, itaque non potu●t offendendendi vis per portas significari sensus igitur, nisi fallor, est fore, ut Ecclesia super Petram à Christo fundatae omnem diaboli potentiam expugnet; ita ut nulla arte, nullis viribus possit resistere. Hoc enim multo maius est, & verbis magis consentaneum: Portas enim inferi non praevalituras adversus Ecclesiam phrasis Hebraica est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non poterunt ad versus illam, id est non poterunt illi resistere. Maldonate more fully expresseth the majesty of the hebraism) shall not be able to stand against it or confront it. To ascribe the supportance of such a structure to the strength of Peter's faith, not as it was in him only, but as it is perpetually propagated to his successors, is, to impeach him of disloyalty, and rob Christ of his greatest glory. For, * Vid. Maldonatum in versum 42. cap. 21. Math. & Bellar. lib. v. de Pont. Rom. cap. 17. even such as plead, for this prerogative in Peter's successors, confess, that this they give to Peter is our saviours most usual style; we may with the Prophet demand, Who is the d Psal. 18. v. 31. v. 46. Rock besides our God? e Psal. 19 v. 14. The Lord is the Rock of our salvation: (of such salvation as the gates of Hell cannot oppugn) the same he is the Lord our Rock and our Redeemer. 5. The former interpretation will yet further approve itself, to be most consonant to the general analogy of faith, most native to the place before alleged, and in respect of Romish glosses, such, as is the Church of Christ unto the gates of Hell, or the Ark of old unto Dagon; if we observe (what is most frequently, and perspicuously taught in other Scriptures, pertinent to the main point in controversy): First, that the immediate subject of Peter's confession [Goa incarnate or dwelling (as S. Paul speaks) bodily in Christ] is presupposed, by all sacred writers, as the great mystery of man's redemption, the fundamental Rock of salvation. Secondly, that all, and only they, which in sincerity of heart conceive, and with steadfast perseverance, retain this confession which Peter made, are true and lively parts of that edifice, which the Son of the living God here promised to erect. 6. The Reader, I know, in this fruitful age of learned expositors may find variety of Comments, but none that can more fully satisfy him, than Saint Peter's own paraphrase upon our saviours promise to him, if we compare it with other Scriptures, in sense and meaning equivalent; That Christ was the only Rock whereupon this Saint himself, as a living member of the Church, was built, is apparent: because, intending to make his flock, lively parts of the same edifice, he tells them they come not to himself, as to a second Rock, but unto the Lord, as unto a living stone, disallowed of men, yet chosen of God and precious: As if he had said; Not flesh and blood, not the wisest of men, but only our heavenly Father did first reveal him unto me for such, and in the words following (as if he had purposely intended to certify us) that the name of Peter did descend to him from this affinity with this elect and precious stone (not because he was a Rock or fundamental stone himself) he adds, and ye as lively stones be made a spiritual house, a lively Priesthood (Priests as living, and altars as stones) to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God, by jesus Christ. Though they were not all to have the title or name of Peter's (for so there could be no distinction) yet so they would believe and confess as he did, that Christ was the living stone, they were to have the realty or substance, to be stones of that spiritual house, against which the gates of hell should not be able to prevail. 7. And seeing he now endeavoured to fasten them unto Christ, as unto the only sure Rock of their redemption; it could not be so available to tell them in our saviours own words, that becoming such a spiritual house, and continuing in offering up sacrifices acceptable unto God, the gates of hell should not prevail against them. Until this day-star had more fully shined in their hearts, he knew it for the better method to kindle the same hope in them, by the Prophet's light, which in time would break forth clearer of itself: for that glorious promise of our Saviour differed from the prophetical prediction, which S. Peter gives them for their assurance, but as the light which goes before, doth from the brightness following the Suns rising: What Christ had told him, was in effect contained before in that * Isa. 28. v. 16. Vide Forerium in hunc locum. scripture: Behold, I lay in Zion a chief corner stone, elect and precious, and he that believeth therein shall not be * The word in the Original signifieth to make haste, & therefore any kind of haste according to the difference of the matter, or object; in this place aequivalent to the latin proripiat, a word signifying haste, but haste caused by shame or fear of men's presence from which the party ashamed seeks with confused speed to hide himself. Et cum damarē quo nunc se proripit ille? Tityre coge pecus tu post carecta latebas. This is true of faith, which the Apostle saith of love. 1. joh. 4. v. 17. Herein is love perfect in us, that we should have boldness in the day of judgement: for as he is, even so are we in this world. Vid. Luc. 21. v. 25. 26. of the confused state of the wicked. ashamed? Why not ashamed? because his hope should be most sure; and Hope (as the Apostle saith) maketh not ashamed: he meant, It supporteth against all shame or terror, the world, flesh, or devil can oppose against us. They may threaten but not so deject us, as to cause us, either through fear of disgrace or other danger, skulk, or run from men's presence, as a learned Hebrician expresseth the Hebrew word rendered by the vulgar, non festinabit, he shall not hasten; or to express the full value of both these Apostles speeches, by the last and most potent object of shame; believing in Christ, we shall not be found naked in that last day, nor wish the Mountains for a covering to our shame; but enabled by sure hope to stand before the Son of man: for, not ashamed of him before men in this life, he will not be ashamed of us in that day. Then shall that victory of this spiritual house over the impotent assaults of Hell gates be manifested. Thus by Saint Peter's own exposition, The Son of the living God, whom he confessed was that living Stone, from whose strength this spiritual house, whereof he and his flock were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lively stones becomes so strong. To make either Saint Peter or his successors joint, though secondary, supporters of this glorious work, were to divide our faith betwixt Christ and them: For it only stands by faith and confidence immediately fastened upon the foundation or supporters. If then we may not so fasten our faith either upon Peter, or his successors, we can receive no other strength from them, than we do from Christ's other Apostles, and that is only from their Ministerial function, in squaring and fastening us unto this living stone. To this purpose, saith Saint Paul, Other foundation can no man lay, then that which is laid, which is jesus Christ. Whosoever was himself builded on him, albeit he never heard of Saint Peter, albeit the doctrines he heaped upon this foundation were but hay and stubble, or matter alike apt to take fire; yet the flame wherein these idle speculations of his brain were to perish, should but sing his clothes not devour his substance; because by faith united unto that living stone, which without any other intermediate sconce, or fence, doth quench the flames of hell, and keep them from scorching any, even the last and uppermost that shall be built upon him, unto the world's end. For the same Apostles rule is universal both in respect of time and persons. * Rom. 10. v. 9 If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart, that God raised him up from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 8. But did Saint Paul by special revelation utter this, as a mystery altogether unknown before unto the faithful? Rather by participation of the same spirit, which spoke in the Prophet, he only unfolds the Oracle late expounded, I must confess without distinct apprehension of so good warrant them, as is now suggested; For the Apostle to prove his former assertion, urgeth that place of the Prophet, a Rom. 10. v. 11. Whosoever believes in him shall not be ashamed; So then with Saint Paul it is all one, to believe in Christ raised from the dead, or in the corner stone, rejected of men, allowed of God. And it seems the declaration made unto Saint Peter, that Christ whom he confessed (howsoever a Rock to fall upon to both the houses of Israel) was the sure foundation of the faithful, which the Prophet foretold should be laid in Zion, made his ignorance, (to say no worse) in dissuading his master from suffering such disgrace and ignominy of the Elders, high Priests and Scribes, more inexcusable, because it had been so plainly foretold, that the corner stone was to be basely esteemed of them, ere advanced of God. Hence our Saviour reproves him so sharply * Math. 16. 23. Then he turned back and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me Satan, thou art an offence unto me, because thou understandest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men: As if he had said, shall this Rock become a stumbling stone unto thee also, unto whom it was first revealed? What I now told thee, the Prophet long since foretold; a Psal. 118. v. 23 It was the Lords doing, and should have been marvelous (not offensive) in thy sight. Hast thou never read how the builders must first refuse that stone which the Lord will afterwards appoint chief in the corners? From remembrance of this check Saint Peter it may be, whiles he paraphrased upon this place, used not the Psalmists but our saviours words, Ye come (saith he) as unto a living stone, disallowed not by the builders, but of men, chosen not of the Lord, but of God, howsoever elsewhere he more fully parallels these two, (as Saint Paul had done) [Christ crucified and raised again.] [the stone cast aside, and constituted as h●ad of the corner] * Acts 4. v. 10. Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of jesus Christ of Nazaret, whom ye have crucified, whom God raised again from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole: This is the stone cast aside of you builders, which is become the head of the corner; neither is there salvation in any other: for among men there is given none other name under heaven whereby we must be saved. Then is there no other, whose name imported as much as a Rock or stone, to support men against all commotions, the powers of hell could raise against them. 9 So our Saviour takes [the husbandmen killing of the Lord of the vineyards son] and [the builders rejecting the head stone of the corner] as equivalent; Math. 21. First, he demands, * Ver. 40. When therefore the Lord of the Vineyard shall come, what will he do to those husbandmen (that had slain his son) * Ver. 41. they reply, he will cruelly destroy those wicked men, and will let out his Vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall deliver him the fruits in their seasons: And this judgement they had given against themselves, he ratifies by the like express sentence, which the Lord already had passed upon them; * Ver. 42. etc. Read ye never in the Scriptures, the stone which the builders refused, the same is made the head of the corner? (This was the Lords doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes. Therefore say I unto you, the Kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation which shall bring forth the fruits thereof:) and whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken, but on whomsoener it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. 10 This may suffice for proof, that Saint Peter's confessing the son of man to be the Christ, the son of the living God, was all one with our saviours declaration, Upon this Rock will I build my Church, etc. because Christ and the living stone which God had promised to found in Zion, are unto sacred Writers, and all participants of that spirit, by which they wrote the self same. Nor is there any thing more usual with the holy Ghost, then to refer like speeches of our Saviour unto places of Scripture more different in words then the two former alleged; albeit there be no such identity of persons, time and place, or continuation of discourse, to manifest their mutual coherence, but only equivalency of their inward meaning; This Method the holy Spirit useth the rather, I think, because he would accustom us ●o investigate his sense and meaning, not so much by the like form, or character of words, as by the analogy of faith. For, as the Apostle saith, the letter killeth, because it usually leadeth such as rely upon it to strange and unwholesome senses; as the identity of our saviours and Saint Peter's name in the Syriac, or their vicinity in the Greek and Latin, made the Rock of salvation become a Rock of fence unto the Romanist, who by his stumbling at the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1. Pet. 2. 7. 8. falls upon the stone laid in Zion, and shall be broken, yea for this disobedience to this eternal word, and seeking to lay another foundation then what was laid already; that stone shall fall upon him and grind him (at least his doctrine) to powder, as will more fully appear, if we compare their exposition of that donative, they suppose he did bestow upon Saint Peter, with that Disciples doctrine whom he loved. 11 As we have showed from Saint Peter and Saint Paul, and the general analogy of faith, that Simon the son of jonah had his name of Cephas or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from his affinity with the Rock of salvation, or chief corner stone, he being as the first wrought stone in that edifice: so doth Saint john (whose doctrine pregnantly confirms our former exposition of these words, Thou art Peter. etc.) make that very confession which Peter uttered, as the surest square or line, the perfect Index whereby to try and examine all other stones, whether fitting or rightly proportioned to this everlasting structure. 1. john 4 v. 1. Vide Tyram in hunc locum. dearly beloved (saith he) believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God, for many false Prophets are gone out into the world. How should they know true Prophets from false, such as were true, were of God, such as were false, of Antichrist; how should they know such as were of God, from such as were of Antichrist? Hereby shall ye know the spirit of God; every spirit▪ that confesseth that jesus Christ is come in the ●lesh, is of God. 12 But is every spirit of God that can frame an orthodoxal conceit of this great mystery, and outwardly confess what they inwardly assent unto, as undoubtedly true? So should the wicked spirits be of God: for a spirit of an unclean Devil openly said as much in effect, as Peter did; what he knew by arguments more sure than most Popes do, I know who thou art, even the holy one of God, yea many came out of the possessed crying, what Peter afterwards confessed, Thou art the Christ the son of God. The mystery it seems they had conceived aright, because our Saviour gives them the like injunctions his Disciples had upon Peter's confession, the one he rebuked, and would not suffer to say, the other, he charged they should tell no man, that he was jesus the Christ, because this Rock was not as yet to be plainly manifested to the world, Although it is most probable, he would not have the unclean spirits at any time to be proclaimers of this mystery: for unto the * Psal. 50. v. 16 wicked said God, What hast thou to do to declare mine ordinances, that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth, seeing thou hatest to be reform, and hast cast my words behind thee? etc. If unclean spirits may not be permitted to promulge this or like divine mysteries, by the mouths of men, whose bodily members they so possess, as to cause them utter they know not what; may we without exception safely admit all their cathedral decisions, whose souls and minds they have wholly transformed into the similitude of their uncleanness, for heavenly oracles, for embassages of salvation immediately sent from God for foundations of faith and manners? Psal. 50. v. 25. Christ by the same Psalmist hath said, To him that disposeth his way aright, will I show the salvation of God. 13 But to proceed by our Apostles former rule; from which, and others of his fully * No man hath seen God at anytime, If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, & his love is perfect in us. Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit. And we have seen and do testify, that the Father sent the son to be the Saviour of the world. Whosoever confesseth that jesus is the son of God, in him dwelleth God, and he in God. Vide cap. 2. ver. 16. johan. parallel thereunto, it is evident, that for a just trial of a spirit speaking by God, there must be both a platform of doctrine rightly proportioned to the former foundation [Christ come in the flesh] and a correspondent edification, not of verbal or school consequences, but of real and material works, proceeding from lively faith and inward sanctititie, so testifying the habitation of Christ the living stone in the confessors heart, as Christ's own works and doctrine did the Godheads bodily dwelling in him, the Apostle adds, Every spirit which confesseth not that jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is not of God (that is) is opposite unto the spirit of God, but this is the spirit of Antichrist, of whom ye have heard, how that he should come, and now already he is in the world. A spirit of Antichrist then is manifested, by a contrariety in the form of doctrine, or by an hostility between the very foundations, which he and the spirit of God endeavour to lay; so as the edification of the one doth in the issue, menace the demolition of the other. And as this opposition unto God's spirit is greater or less, so doth it argue the party in whom it is to participate, more or less of the spirit of Antichrist. In both these respects of opposition or hostility in the foundation, or in the issue or consequences of all heretical temples or congregations, that hitherto have been, or can be imagined as possibly future, the structure of the Romish Church, doth most fully answer to the Idea or platform of that edifice, which the Apostle hath foretold great Antichrist should erect. 14 For demonstrating which conclusion, we only suppose, what every one must grant, In what sense the Papist deny Christ to be come in the flesh. that if the spirit of unclean devils, he whose coming is by the power of Satan, in guile and deceit, may without prejudice to his grand hostility against Christ, in formal terms confess the great mystery of salvation. [Christ manifested in the flesh:] for seeing he must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opposite unto Christ, not by way of negation or contradiction, but by a positive contrariety or hostility; Christian Religion and Antichristianisme, must as all other contraries agree in some one kind or matter; and the kind or matter in matters of Religion, must be the object. If we here only set aside an agreement with true professors in that general transcendent object, that Christ is the son of the living God, the very first principle of Romish Religion, even the specifical difference which makes it Romish, is as contrary with the first Element of true orthodoxal christian Religion, as fire to water, heat to cold. For, if to confess Christ come in the flesh, put to death, and raised again, be (as is proved) all one, as to acknowledge him the chief corner stone rejected of men, but advanced by God: if this be the main foundation of Christianity, so all-sufficient, that without it, no other must be laid. How were it possible more to deny this truth in effect or consequence, more to oppugn the whole edifice of our faith, then by planting another Rock, another foundation, without communication wherewith, none can be supported by the former, against the gates of hell. 15 But perhaps we mistake, o● malign the Romanist, in charging him with shuffling in another foundation besides Christ, in that sense the Apostle denies any other * 1. Cor. 3. v. 11 foundation can be laid: We rather by too much pressing them with that axiom of his, make him contradict himself; for elsewhere he saith * Eph. 2. 20. We are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets. I will not here dispute whether Saint Paul in that place mean, Nor doth that place Reu. 21. ver. 14. prove any more than that by the Apostles ministry the Church was erected. we are built upon the persons: of the Prophets and Apostles, they being placed nearer the rock, or main foundation itself, than we, or rather upon the main foundation, which both the Prophets and the Apostles jointly had laid, besides which no other can be laid, Christ crucified and glorifiea: For he is both the foundation which wholly supporteth, and the corner stone which only ocupleth the whole building; in which he is the highest and the lowest, first laid in humility for the disobedient to fall upon, but now exalted unto greatest glory to fall upon them. And as the Apostle calls his own scars, the marks of Christ, because inflicted for Christ's sake; so may he call Christ the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, because the only end whereto both Prophetical and Apostolical laws were directed, was to lay this sure foundation. But granting what they take for granted. The Apostle did mean, we were builded upon the Prophets and Apostles, as upon a second foundation, or first row of stones; next in order unto the rock, so they make Peter a rock or foundation only in this sense? If they do not, he could not be the Rock on which the Church is built. If they do, let them give us the right hand of fellowship; for we accuse them, not for making him such a foundation as the other Apostles were, but suchas, it is evident, they were not, yea such indeed, and substance as Christ only is, and should be acknowledged by all the faithful. For in what sense is Christ said to be the foundation? Because he is the head of his Church, both for supporting and directing it. Was not Peter such in respect even of his fellow Apostles? * Dicuntur fundamenta omnes Apostoli ratione gubernationis. Omnes enim suerunt capita, rectores, & pastors Ecclesiae universae, sed non eodem modo quo Petrus, Illi enim habuerunt summam, atque amplissi nam potestatem ut Apostoli, seu legati, Petrus autem ut Pastor ordinarius. Deinde ita habuerunt plenitudinem potestatis, ut tame Peteus esset caput eorum, & ab illo penderent non é contrario. Bellar. lib. 1, de Rom. Pont. c. 12. Bellarmine can assign no difference betwixt them but in these very terms. All of them he confesseth had occumenicall jurisdiction, but not in such sort as Peter had, all were infallible, because Apostles and Ambassadors, but not after the same manner he was: yea Peter was their head, on whom they did depend; so did not he on them. This makes Peter the corner stone that cupleth the building. Which doubtless was Christ's peculiar whilst he lived on earth, not communicated unto Peter as they acknowledge, until his resurrection or ascension. That they tell us then, they make but one primary foundation, and therefore none such as Christ is, as if they should say, they admit no more such Popes as Pius primus was, because there hath never been, nor ever shall be any Pope Pius the First but he: for to make Peter such a Primate, is to make him a foundation or head of the same rank and order, that Christ was (only his inferior, as successor in time) or (to use their words) a foundation in Christ's place, So Bellarmine * Cephas Syriace significat ●etram ut nos supra docuimus & Hieronymus test stew in cap. 2. Epistolae ad Galat. Grae●d autent significat caput ut lib. 2. con●ra Pa●menianum annotaui● Optatus. de demum unum est ex celeberinis Christi nominibus. Nihil enim frequentius in Scriptures Christ●s appellitur qùam Petra. Christus ergo cum solo Petro suum ipsius nomen communicans, & nomea illud quo ipse significutur, ut 〈◊〉 & caput Ecclesiae universae, quid aliud indicare voluit, quam se faccre Petrum fundamentum & caput Ecclesiae 〈◊〉, Ibidem cap. 17. expressly avoucheth, where proving Peter's Supremacy or Lordship from his name, he thus infers, Peter only was known by Christ's own name of Cephas or Rock, whereby he is called as often as by any other whatsoever, yea this is the peculiar attribute, in which he is set out unto us as the foundation and head of the Church: therefore Christ communicating this unto Peter, would have it signified unto the world that he meant to make Peter the foundation and head of the Church in his own place. Why doth Christ cease to be the foundation in becoming the head stone in the corner? or do they to avoid open suspicion of Antichristianisme acknowledge him come in the flesh, but gone again to make room for Peter and his successors? Certainly, were the Apostle to gather the meaning of Bellarmine's speeches, his inference would be thus; a Heb. 8. v. 13. In that he sayeth, a new head is come in his place, he abrogates the former's authority, as he was Ambassador between God and man: nor is it now as the Testament given by Moses was in the Prophet's time ready to expire, but already expired by actual succession of another, unto whom Christ the first visible head (or foundation) did at his advancement to higher dignity, seal the same commission he had from his father, for transacting all affairs concerning the state of his visible Church. 18 But doth the space between heaven and earth more exceed Rome's distance from the utmost ends of the world, than he to whom all power was given in heaven and earth, doth the present Pope in amplitude of spiritual jurisdiction? Whence is it else that Christ regiment cannot so fully and immediately extend itself unto his Church militant, wheresoever scattered upon the face of the earth, as the Popes may to the East or West Indies, from either of which he cannot receive certain information, how his instruction sent thither, succeed with his flock under a years space at the least. Every Pope in his time is a rock, a * The difference between Christ and the Pope much less (by the Papists opininion) then between the Pope and other Bishops. foundation, an head in Christ's absence from the earth. Might not every one of them in like sort admit a Pope, a Vicar general, an absolute fellow Monarch, from whom in these remote countries, there should be no more appeals to Rome, then are from Rome to Christ's throne of Majesty: If we speak not of that Majesty which he there enjoys, but of that authority which he sometimes had, * N●s non negamus, imo defendimus contra negantes, verbum Dei ministratum per Apostolos & Prophetas esse primum fundamentum nostrae fid●i. Ideo enim credimus quidquid credimus, quia Deum ●d per Apostles, & Prophetas revelavit, sed addimus praeter hoc fundamentum primum, requiri aliud fundamentum secundarium, id est, Ecclesiae testificationem. Neque enim seimus certò quid Deus revelaverit, inisi ex testimo monio Ecclesiae, & propterea sicut legimus, Christum esse lapidem fundamentalem, & fundamentum primum Ecclesiae, ita legimus Matth. 16. de Petro, super hanc Petram aedis●abo Ecclesiam meam. Itaque sides nostra adheret Christo, primae veritati reveclanti mysteria, & fundamento primario, adhaeret etiam Petro, id est, Pontifici praeponenti & explicanti haec mysteria, ut fundamento secundario. Bellar. de Verbi Dei, Interpret. cap. 10. Respons. ad 13. or we can imagine he could have in regiment of his Church, were he now visibly present in the flesh: it is that Saint Peter, and his successors may by our adversaries doctrine, be more properly instiled compeers to Christ, than the best man living beside unto the worst of them. For it must be thought that Christ in his absence ratifies all their decrees without exception, as we may not question them more than we might Christ's own, were he visibly resident in his Church, yet was the authority of Christ's other Apostles so mightily overtopped by Peter's Supremacy, that they could not be infallible or occumenicall without his approbation? If they were, Peter was not such an head to them, as his Successors are to theirs, even to all Bishops or inferior Ministers throughout the world. If they were not, the Pope, if he will be Peter's Successor, should make Bishops or Cardinals, at least eleven, occumenicall Pastors of authority infallible, though with such dependency on his plenary power, as Christ's other Apostes had on Peter's. Or let them resolve us in other fundamental difficulties, which their doctrine ministers. 19 * Of all Peter's prerogatives those most urged by the Romanists, as alike appertaining to his successors, are most personal. Christ said, thou art Peter; that is, say they, a Rock, an head, a foundation in my place. Unto whom was this said? to one of the twelve expressed by name, Simon the son of jona: To whom likewise (singularised by the same express terms of individual difference, and like restraint of present circumstances or occurrences) it was said, feed my lambs, feed my sheep. If any of Christ's speeches, (as the * Vide Bellar. lib. 2. de Romano Pontif. cap. 12. Parag. ultitimo, and the annotation, §. 21. Pope's advocates grant many) were personally directed to Saint Peter, questionless these two. By what analogy of faith, or rule of Grammar can they then extend these, to every Pope in his generation; or if any such there have been, or yet may be, unto whom the foeminive title of Petra, by right of sex, may better agree then unto Simon Bar-Iona. Yet might the name or title infallible draw the supreme dignity after it, they are much-overseene in not giving the name of Peter to every Pope. Christ they confess, is come in the flesh, and was in person made head, and foundation of the Church, and at his departure left Peter in his steed: Peter, the Scriptures tell us, was to follow Christ; but (as they pretend) left Pope Linus in his place, so hath every Pope his successor since that time. Yet these latter mightily fail in not nominating others, whiles they themselves are living and visible stones; as Christ without question did Saint Peter, whiles conversant with the faithful in the flesh, and Peter Linus in his lifetime. 20. But howsoever, they must of necessity either make Peter Linus, and their * The Pap●sts either admit many foundations, or build all the Apostles, beside S. Peter, upon their modern Popes. successors but one joint permanent foundation, and so the Popes should not be builded upon the foundation of the Prophets and the Apostles, but rather Christ's other Apostles upon them; upon whom, likewise, all the faithful, since the Apostles time, should be immediately built: Or, if they do not make Peter and the Pope's one joint unseparable foundation, they must admit as many several foundations as Popes, so as the everlasting Rock whereon the Church is built, could not be truly said one and the same, but by a perpetual equivalency of alteration or succession: as we say corruptible elements, fire, or water, or candles, remain one and the same; because as one part consumes, another, as good, comes in the place. This glorious edifice (as hath been observed) stands only by faith, or firm adherence to the foundation: and by the Adversaries own confession, to disclaim the authority of the present Romish Church, or Pope in points of faith, is an heresy or Apostasy, of the same nature, as if a man had renounced Peter for his supreme head, and this all one, as if he had cut himself of from being a member of Christ. Wherefore, in respect of us that are now to be edified, the authority of this present Pope is equivale ●t to Christ's: our adherence to the one, in points of faith and manners must be such, as it should have been to the other, had we lived in the days of his visible conversation in the world. Finally, v. cap. 8. §. 13. CHRIST, Saint Peter, and his successors, in regiment of the Church militant here on earth, differ, by the Roman account, no otherwise than Romulus, Numa, Ancus, etc. Romulus was first Founder of that kingdom, but least other of kings of the same rank and order he was: only his dignity after his departure was acknowledged greater in another world; because, as his people were made to believe be ascended alive into heaven, as a God. Much better might the Romanist derive his Psewdocatholique Roman faith, from * The Papists conceive of Christ but as of another Romulus. Romulus the first builder of that great City, that sometimes ruleà over the Kings of the earth; then from Christ, who did erect a kingdom indeed, but not of this world; wherein none was to succeed him, because he remains, Yeasterday, to day, the same for ever: Whence the * Daniel 2. v. 44. Prophet saith, this kingdom shall never be destroyed or given to another people, but shall break and destroy all former kingdoms, and itself stand for ever. For any, especially of that nation whose former kings had put this immortal King to death concerning the flesh, to enstile themselves Rocks, and foundation of this everlasting Empire, or absolute spiritual Monarchies in this place; doth evidently show, they are the feet of that image, most of which hath been, as shall be broken to pieces, by that stone cut without hands out of the Mountain, until it become like the chaff of the summer flowers, carried away with the wind, and no place be found for them; or, as the * 2. Thes. 2. cap. 8. ver. Apostle interprets the Prophet, the Lord shall consume them with the spirit of his mouth, and shall abolish them with the brightness of his coming. 21. Would the jesuit then know, wherein he, and his Latian Lord God must take after Saint Peter? Me thinks their formal acknowledgement of that general principle; Christ manifested in the flesh, * The Pope successor unto the check, not to the promise given by Christ to Saint Peter. & made the headstone in the corner, compared with their late mentioned Apostasy, in seeking to lay another foundation; was lively resembled, if not mystically prefigured, by Saint Peter faith, (immediately after his glorious confession) eclipsed by interposition of such earthly conceits, as perpetually darken their minds. For, upon our saviours declaration, what bodily calamity, what ignominy & reproach should at jerusalem, shortly after, befall the Rock itself; whereupon that Church, against which he had now said, the gates of hell should never prevail, was founded: Peter (as Saint Matthew saith) took his Master aside, and friendly checks him, as if he had forgotten his former promise, * Math. 16. v. 22. etc. Master be good to yourself, this shall not be unto you. As if he had said, if the gates of hell shall not prevail against your Church, or us your poor Disciples; I hope you are able to privilege your own person from such disgrace, and scorn, as none but they can intend against you. So carnally did this great Apostle upon ignorance, conceit Christ's spiritual promise, as the papacy, upon habitual or affected error, doth to this present day. For one principal argument, most usual in the mouths and pens of that great Heads chief disciples, to prove the Romish the only Church, unto which that glorious promise was made, or, at least, hath been perpetually performed, is, because no temporal or secular power hath ever been able, (though many wicked Potentates, Kings, and Emperors (such titles they give to all their enemies) have attempted, either to deface her external pomp, state, and splendour, or so to use the Popes or Cardinals, or other of her principal and dearest children, as the jews did our Saviour Christ and his Disciples. They are of the world, and therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. But could they, unto any child of God, more plainly prove themselves heirs to that check, given by our Saviour to Saint Peter, * Bellarm●ne apphes all that is spoken in Peter's comen dations, unto-his successors, whom he will not have sharers in his reproofs. Ea quae dicuntui Petro in triphci sunt differentia, quaed in enim dicuntur ei pro se tantum, quaedam pro se & omnibus ●o●istianis, quaedam pro se & successoribus, id quod evidenter colligitur ex ratione diversa, qua ei dicuntur. Nam quae dicuntur ei, ut uni ex fidelibus certe omnibus fidelibus dicta intelliguntur Vt Mat. 18. Si peccaverit inte ●rater t●us, etc. Quae dicuntur ei ratione aliquà propria personae ipsius, ei soli dicuntur, ut vade post me Satana. Et Term ne●abis, ista enim dicuntur ei ratione propri● imbe cillitatis, et ignorantiae. Quadam dicuntur ei ratione officij pastoralis quae proinde dicta intelliguntur omnibus sucessoribus, ut pas●e oves meas et Bellar lib. 2. cap. 12. §. ultimo. The Romanist makes the Pope his God in that he makes him the Rock on which the Church is built. Compare. Exod. 17. 1. Cor. 10. 4. The Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken in the same sense. Psal. 18. 3. Isa. 31. 9 Go behind me Satan's, ye are an offence, because ye understand not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men? Could they more evidently demonstrate, the Pope to be that man of sin, that must be inducted to the Church of God by Satan * This observation will easily approve itself to any that will read the book of Deuteronomium, and the Psalms. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the chief adversary or accuser, he himself bearing the name of adversary, likewise, in his title * This observation will easily approve itself to any that will read the book of Deuteronomium, and the Psalms. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— a second foundation, in show subordinate, in deed and consequence quite contrary to that, which the Prophets and Apostles have laid; eternally privileged, if we may believe his followers, from those spurnings of men, from which the precious stone of Zion was not exempted. 22. To collect the sum of late Romanists comments, upon their Churches supposed fundamental Charter; Their confession of Christ come in the flesh, and made head stone in the corner, though conceived in form of words orthodoxal enough, proves only this, (but disabundantly to all the world) that the Pope, their supreme head, sits in the Temple of God, whose circumference in respect of men, who cannot search other men's hearts, is defined by this confession. Their attributing the title of Rocks, or fun damentall supportance of that spiritual house, unto this head, proclaims unto all the world, that he sits as God in the Temple of God, showing himself that he is God. For the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equivalent to the Syriac 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that sense they take it, (as affording such impregnable supportance, or fortification against the powers of hell, world, or flesh,) is oftener by their own * This obsevation will easily approve itself to any that will read the book of Deuteronomium, and the Psalms. vulgar latin, rendered Deus, than Petra or Rupes, which it directly signifies; because, considered with these circumstances or effects, it is rather a glorious title of the godhead, or deity itself, than a particular attribute, taken from some divine propriety, communicable to God's servants in the abstract. 23. Lastly, unto me their common exposition of Christ's speeches unto Saint Peter, suggest this argument more than demoustrative, that the Papacy is led by the spirit of great Antichrist, How Romish Religion denies the virtue and power of Christ come in the flesh. in that no doctrine of Devils can more directly contradict, or more shamefully deny the virtue and power of Christ come in the flesh, nor more peremptorily disannul, or cancel his promise there made unto his Church, then jesuitical comments upon it, do. Christ's promise was a promise of life and saving health, a full assurance of eternal happiness, to all that should be truly built upon that Rock which Peter confessed, or which they say, Peter was They make the tenure of this glorious covenant to be no more but this, that Peter's successors and such as will build their faith upon them (speaking ex Cathedra) as upon Rocks invincible; shall be indefectible in points of Christian faith and manners; howsoever even these Rocks themselves may be, for life and conversation, as wicked as Annas or Caiphas, or other blinded guides of the jewish Synagogue that crucified our saviour. 24 Thus by a pretended successive perpetuity of Peter's faith, they utterly abolish that lively faith, That Romish faith is that faith by which S. Peter confessed Christ. whereby he confessed Christ, which is always included as a necessary condition, without which none be capable of that glorious promise, but with it all are made immediate heirs of salvation. Or to speak more plainly, none may expect the least portion of Peter's blessing without Peter's faith; nor can that be in any, but such as are borne of God: Every one saith Saint JOHN, that is borne of God over cometh the world, and this is the victory that over cometh the world, even our faith. And again, who is he that over cometh the world, but he which believeth: (what Peter had confessed) that jesus is the son of God. And our Saviour himself, to whom his father had given power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to all, given him by his father; tells us, that this life eternal must grow from that root of faith which first did branch in Peter's mouth; but must be so planted as it grew in him, in every heart endued with sure hope; much more in all such as lay challenge to such pre-eminency, or prerogative of faith, or hope, as Peter had; This is life eternal that they may know thee, (sayeth Christ speaking of his Father) to be the only very God, & whom thou hast sent jesus Christ, so then God manifested in the flesh, was the Rock of salvation, whereupon the Church is built: he that rightly knows, and so believes this truth, hath life eternal dwelling in him. 25 But shall such a faith as may be severed from charity? That the Romish Church is neither that Rock, nor built upon that Rock, against which the gates of hell cannot prevail, because their faith is unsound. Mat. 4. 23. shall such a knowledge of Christ as may be in them to whom Christ shall say; Depart from me I never knew you, I say not, make any so impregnable a Rock, but so fasten any to that Rock so impregnable, as the gates of hell shall not be able to dispossess him of eternal life? Whiles we produce the late cited, or other testimonies alike pregnant to condemn the Pontificians for denying justification only by faith, they think themselves fully acquitted with this solution, that our assurance of salvation relies not upon faith, as alone, but as it is the foundation of charity, and accompanied with other christian virtues. We never taught (as shall be showed in that controversy,) that faith, unless thus attended, could with true confidence plead cur cause before God, which yet though thus at tended, it only pleads. But here our adversaries must be contented to take their payment in their own coin: For, if no man can be justified, or made heir of salvation, it is unpossible any should be a lively stone, or living member, much less a supreme head, or sure foundation of that spiritual house, always victorious over death and hell, without a faith so appointed, as in the former case they require, without a faith as clearly testifying Christ dwelling in men, by works flowing from it, as their edification upon him by an Orthodoxal form of words. Whosoever is destitute of a faith thus bearing fruit unto salvation, is so far from being a Rock or sure foundation for others to build upon, that he himself (if we may believe our Saviour) builds all h●s hopes upon the sand: Math. 7. 26. Whosoever heareth these my words, and doth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which hath builded his house upon the sand, & the rain fell, and the stoudes came, and the winds blue, and beat upon that house, and it fell, and the fall thereof was great. Not every one therefore that saith unto our Saviour, as Peter did, thou art the Christ the son of the living God, but he that expresseth his faith and hope by works, answerable to Christ's conversation in the flesh, and his father's will, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; because he only is built upon that Rock, which the flood-gates of hell cannot undermine or overthrow: For, whosoever (sayeth our Saviour) heareth of me these words, and doth the same, I will liken him to a wise man which builded his house on a rock, And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blue, and beat upon that house, and it fell not, for it was grounded upon a Rock. 26 Let the jesuit either produce any heresy, broached since our saviours Incarnation, or frame a conceit of any but Logically possible before his coming unto judgement, which in outward profession, not disclaiming the former main foundation of christianity [God manifested in the flesh] can indeed and issue more evidently overthrow it, more distinctly contradict either those fundamental precepts of salvation last cited, or more fully evacuate the often mentioned promise made unto Saint Peter, than the foundation of Romish religion, as Romish doth; and I will do public penance in sackcloth and ashes, for laying the imputation of Antichristianisme upon it. Our Saviour saith, whosoever heareth these words and doth them not, doth build his house upon the sand: They teach the contradictory as an Article of faith; that the Pope or a council of Bishops assembled by his appointment, instructed by his infallibility, Praeterea Ecclesia congregata, sive consilium proprijssime est Ecclesia Christi, ut etiam adversarij concedunt: nam Ecclesi a est congregatio fidelium, ergo quo magis fideles sunt congregati & uniti, eo magis proprie sunt Ecclesia: at stultu est cum aliquid de alio absolute pronunciatur, excipere id quod proprijssimè per illud significatur, ergo cum Christus dicit, Super hanc Petram aedisicabo Ecclesiam meam, slultè excipitur Ecclesia universalis congregata, cum ea proprijssimè sit Ecclesia, Bellar. lib. 2. de Con. Auc. cap. 15. Of this Church the Pope is the foundation as he avoucheth in the words going before. Quod est in domo fundamentum, est in corpore caput, & in grege Postor. Vt. n. fundamentum non pendet à domo, sed domus à fundamento, ita ellam caput non pendet à corpore, se● corpus à capite, & pastor non pendet à grege, sed grex à pastore. His conclusion is, Papa praest omnibus loco Christi quibus Christus ipse invisibiliter praeest, & quibus etiam praeesset vis●●il●er, si visibiliter adesset: Christus aut cum praeest, & praeesset invisibiliter, si adesset visibiliter, non solem Ecclesus particularibus sed etiam toti Ecclesue universal, & generalibus concilijs: igitur etiam Papa priest Ecclesie universali. confirmed by his plenary power, do always build upon the same Rock as Peter did; yea that the Pope himself, how wicked soever, is that very Rock whereupon the Church (that is in their language, the Bishops thus assembled) is built; the ecumenical Pastor that must keep them, and by them all Christ's flock, from going astray; the supreme head, that by his virtue and influence must sustain every member of Christ's body (here on earth) from falling into heresy, or approaching the territories of hell, through any kind of error or infidelity. 27 Our Saviour promised in solemn manner, ex Cathedra, the gates of hell shall never prevail against his Church. What Church? the Catholic. What Catholic? Visible or Invisible? Triumphant or Militant? Visible and Militant? What Catholic, visible, militant Church? Either is not the Romish Church representative, that Church spoken of Mat. 10. or else Christ's promise hath sailed. The Roman? that consists of divers members: In it some are Pastors, some are sheep; whether have better interest in that promise? Pastors. Of Pastors, some are Prelates, some inferiors; whether are to be preferred before the other? Prelates doubtless; for of them consists the body of the Church representative, which is most properly called the Church, and next in reversion unto Peter's prerogative. Did the gates of hell than never prevail against the greatest Romish Prelates? I nominate no particular person; I speak only of them as the Scripture doth of Drunkards, Whoremongers, Adulterers, Dogs, Enchanters. Many of highst place in that Church have for a long time lived, and for ought their followers can, or * Caput Ecclesiae non potest quidem errare docendo falsam doctrinem, tamen potest errare male v●uendo, & malè etiam sentiendo, ut pr●uatus humo, atque hoc tantum videmus accidisse Adamo: malè enim aliquando vixit, & sortè etiam malè de Deo sentit, tamen non malè docuit. Bellarminus de Ecclesia militant. lib. 111. cap. 16. Some of their Popes by their own writer's confession have been strangely cut off, in the very acts of adultery, or other sins by them accounted mortal. Christ's promise unto S. Peter, but a mere mockery by the jesuits construction. care to say unto to the contrary, died such as the spirit of God hath excluded from the kingdom of heaven; such as God's word tells us, hell must swallow up with open mouth. Are they the Church, and may hell gates prevail against them, and yet not prevail against the Church? 28 But if a woman, an whorish woman cannot be taken without an excuse, may we think those effemenate sworn creatures of servitude to that great strumpet, can want an answer? No, this distinction is always at hand. Their Popes and Cardinals may as err, so go to hell. But how? as private Doctors, not as ecumenical Pastors, not as they speak ex Cathedra: so to my remembrance I have read of a proud Romish Prelate, that reproved for his secular pomp made answer, he followed these fashions as he was a Duke, not as an Archbishop. But the reprovers reply hath made the Apology (better than which no jesuit can make for the Pope) most ridiculous ever since. If this be so, quoth the shepherd (such was the Pastor God had appointed to rebuke the madness of this false Prophet) I pray resolve me what shall become of my Lord Duke, if the Archbishop go to the devil. If many, sometimes Popes, be now in hell (as no jesuit I think, will profess any moral hope that all are saved:) What is become of the Church representive, which lodged in their brains? Hath the number of glorified Saints been increased by their departure from earth? Were they ever a whit more happy for being heirs to that glorious promise; Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I build my Church? or were their comments upon that place Orthodoxal? what was the comfort Saint Peter himself could ever have reaped thence? Only this, though Satan may so sift thee, that thy soul may go to hell before thy body descend to the grave; yet rest assured of this, that thy faith which in Cathedral resolutions shall never fail thee in thy life time, shall suruine in thy successors when thou art dead; but to what purpose, if notwithstanding this prerogative, all may descend one after another into hell? 29 Or if their doctrine were true, to what end did Christ come in the flesh? only to build a Church, which like a lamp or candle may gloriously shine, whiles there is an interrupted succession of Pope's▪ to propagate the splendour; but whose glory when that expires, for aught that glorious promise adds unto it, must be extinguished; as the light goes out when the oil is spent. Better assurance than every Pope for his time hath, Saint Peter by their doctrine had none from those words of our Saviour. For whatsoever power or prerogative was in them bequeathed to him, doth descend by inheritance to his successors. And would the meanest jesuit now living have gloried much in a life, graced with no greater visible Church dignity then S. Peter was, perpetually exposed to like danger, without any other solace to support it, save only this, that his posterity should enjoy the same privileges? But now that the glory and dignity of the Romish Church is become so great, & the Jesuits portion thereby grown so fat; they can be well content to soothe up the Pope in his conceit, that howsoever his person may go to hell (a place it seems not much dreaded, because unknown) yet hell gates shall never prevail against his faith; which hath brought such large possessions to the Church; both which he may infallibly entail to his successors until the world's end. But (as I said before) what then shall become of that cathedral faith? shall it augment the choir of Gods elect, or can they make as many S. Faiths as have been Popes? 30 Herein appears the excess of these days impiety, The Romish Church of all Idols that are, or have been the most vain and foolish. in respect of former, that this imaginary Idea of Romish faith should be more superstitiously adored then any other Idol in the world ever was; Although that of the Apostle may be more properly said of it then any other, nihil est in mundo. Other Idols represented either men or beasts, some permanent creature, or real quality: This is a fancy of a Chimaera, a shape of nothing; or if by nature and essence ought, it is such a conceit or mental quality as may be in devils. Existence it hath none, but as Eclipses of the sun, by fits or courses, when the Pope shall speak ex Cathedra. What shall become of it, and the colours in the Rainbow, after the day of judgement, are two questions of like use & consequence: and of these two objects, the one as fit to direct men's courses by sea or land, as the other to conduct us towards heaven. The dazzled imaginations of these Idolaters, that can thus conceit this faith to be spiritual, and eternal by succession, when it cannot save them in whom it is, are much worse than some foolish heathens dreams of an immortal fame, that was to accompany their mortal souls, (as they esteemed them) and argue in these sons of Antichrist, either an incogitancy, or unbelief of Christ, who lives for ever, come in the flesh, or a secure worldly hope, he shall never, or not this long time, come to judgement. 31 Saint Peter hath foretold, 2 Peter c. 3. v. 4. A Parallile of Atheistical and Papistical mockery. that there shall come in the last days mockers, which will walk after their lusts, and say, where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers died, all things continue alike from the begiuning of the creation. Atheists and Libertines I know here are literally meant. But as the Prophets usually prefigure our future bliss by jerusalem's present glory, or other known felicity, by which perhaps it was represented unto them: So might S. Peter shadow out unto us the mystery of iniquity, according to that rude draft which it had in his time. For the substance, native quality, or proportion of the Atheists, and the modern godless Romanists mockery, that are the same, only the one is more rude and rough hewn, the other more smoothly varnished with hypocrisy, and overlaied with artificial colours. The blunt Atheist like a lewd debtor that simply denies his bond, imagines the Lord will never come to call him to an account. The subtle Romanist like a crafty companion that acknowledgeth the debt, but no set day of payment specified, save only [tomorrow] hopes to drive off God almighty from day to day, putting Christ's coming as far from him the next three years to come, as it was the last three past; and so would hold on these hundred thousand years, if the world should stand so long because Antichrist, who by professed enmity against Christ, shall give the world three years warning (according to the years of an hireling) of its dissolution, The jew and the jesuit, are alike bewitched, the one in expecting Messias already come and crucified by his fathers, the other in looking for Antichrist already revealed, and adored by him as his God. (if we may believe this mocker) is not yet revealed: Nor ever shall be to him, unto whom; since the patriarchs and Apostles died, continue as they did from the beginning of the new creation, (man's redemption) without any general Apostasy or decay of Peter's faith, which remains still as fresh and lively, as when he first confessed Christ. Not the jew more sottish, in expecting his Messias, than this hypocrite in deferring Antichrists coming. And no marvel, when that which first caused the jew so grievously to stumble, and since retains him in his unbelief, is made the only ground of the Roman Catholics faith. Hell, by approved experiment of the ones fall, knew well the same charm would enchant the other: both being equally tainted with a superstitious heathenish conceit, that their teachers could not err, because they sit in the seats of such as were infallible in their life times. And hence it is they are so blind, and see it not, bewitched, and bewitching others with continual reiterating that magic spell of templum Domini, the Church, the Church, words whose meaning they understand no more, then simple women do waggish scholars medicines, or charms for the tooth ach. Their ignorance though they may put us in mind of another mockery, they make of our saviours words. 32 For where he promised hell gates should never prevail against his Church, meaning against no true Christian soul espoused to him by an indissoluble knot of faith and everlasting love: these mockers dispossess the Christian world of this glorious hope, by a double delusion; first persuading it, that the universal Church militant may encamp in one man's breast, upon whom, though hell shut her gates, the simple (such as they would make us all) must believe the Church is safe, because he came not with them as an heretic. For so in the second place, though our Saviour promiseth in terms as ample and majestical as can be devised, that not Hell gates; that is, no power or force of hell, shall be able to hold play with that Church, whose safe conduct to his heavenly kingdom he there undertook, they make the meaning of his assurance to be but this: No heresy (as if hell gates were furnished with no other munition) shall ever make breach upon the Roman Consistory, or approach the Pope's seat of dignity. Thus, to support the Pope's supremacy, they would make Christ so to shuffle, as if a Prince, (were it possible any Prince could be so base) should warrant his confederates safe conduct through his territories, upon as high terms, as his soveraignery or supremacy would stretch unto, and yet challenged upon the others miscarriage, interpret his meaning to have been but this; I did warrant him he should not die of poison, administered by any Physician of mine in my dominions; that no violence should be offered him by thieves and robbers, or other unruly subjects, I undertook not. CHAP. VIII. That the Romanists belief of the Churches infallible authority cannot be resolved into any testimony better than human, whence the 〈◊〉 conclusion immediately follows. That the Romanist in obeying the Church-decrees, without examination of them by God's word, prefer man's laws before Gods. 1 Sing it hath been manifested as well by ostensive proof from Scriptures, as by deduction to inconveniences, most contrary to the analogy, and prejudicial to the main foundation of faith, that Saint Peter was not the Church, nor such an head as the Pope doth make himself of all the faithful: the principal point is clear, that the Romanists belief of such a transcendent, absolute ecumenical authoriry in the Church, as might warrant our obedience to the former decrees, cannot be resoluedinto any divine testimony, or absolute promise of Christ: in neither of which the Pope can have any interest, but only by right derived from S. Peter. 2 To follow them a little in their school humour, only reckoning the speculative probabilities that can be brought for them, without computation of their blasphemies, or other dangerous consequences, wherewith their doctrine heretofore hath been, and must be farther charged; let us try what strength the other joincts have in themselves, and see in the next place, what proof they can make their Popes are successors to such pre-eminences as Peter had. Albeit even this joinct, as all the rest of their religion, is quite benumbed, and utterly deprived of sense, by the deadly blow lately given to the principal nerve, whence life and motion must be derived to the whole body of their religion: for if we consider the intensive perfection of that pre-eminence, or estimation, which Peter in respect of his fellows had, either with his Lord, or with his flock: this was founded in a correspondent excess of his love, his lively faith, and diligent feeding; unto no one of which good qualities, the Popes profess themselves heirs infallible. Or if we respect the extent or amplitude of S. Peter's extraordinary sovereignty, it was the same with David's kingdom, or Christ's own pastoral charge; and reached but from D●n to Beershebah. At the utmost, it and the circumcision had the same circumference: Within which, how great soever his authority was, the Pope can have no pretence to be his successor therein. For the edification of the people committed to him by our Saviour, was to be finished before jerusalem's destruction; since which time Israel hath been perpetually scattered amongst the nations without a shepherd, to gather them. And when it shall please the Lord, as it is probable it will, to reduce them to his fold: their Ruler shall be of their own people, strangers shall have no more dominion over them. 3 Had the Pope derived his right from Saint Thomas, Bartholomew or other Apostle, which have no writings extant, this might have yielded some surmises, The adversaries 〈◊〉 in deriving ecumenical authority perpetually infallible from Saint Peter. not so easy to be disproved, that Romish traditions did contain the sum, at least of all these Apostles unwritten doctrine: if from Saint Paul the great Doctor of the Gentiles and first planter of faith amongst the Romans, as much commended by him as any other of his children in Christ; the improbability had been much less than now it is in Peter's case, that the Bishop of Rome, if any should have succeeded him. But when that people began to grow out of love with the truth, fashioning themselves unto this present world, (the disease whereof Saint Paul * Rom. 12. 2. forewarned them) it was Satan's policy to present unto them, longing after such a Monarchical state as their heathenish Predecessors had, such shows of Peter's Supremacy, and residency at Rome, as by the divine permission had either crept into some of the Ancients religious cogitations, or else in time of darkness have been shuffled by the predecessors of these cheating mates late discovered, into their writings, as fit baits to entice them unto this derivation of that absolute power from Peter, to their greater condemnation, and our good. For God no doubt in his providence ordered this their blindness to illuminate us, as he did the fall of the jews to confirm the Gentiles in faith, seeing of all the Apostles Peter's prerogatives (as hath been showed) were most evidently personal, all to determine with himself; unto which observation his own writings also give testimony. Even a little before he was to leave the world, where he most manifested his earnest desire of preserving his flock, sound in faith after his death, he gives no intimation (as shall be showed more at large hereafter) of any Successor, unto whom they were to repair. Sect. 3. cap. 13. His present Epistle he foresaw would be more available to this purpose, than any tradition from him: * 2. Pe. 1. 12. etc. I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though that ye have knowledge, and be established in the present truth. For I think it meet as long as I am in this Tabernacle, to stir you up, S. Peter knew not his successors should be infallible. by putting you in remembrance; seeing I know that the time is at hand, that I must lay down this my Tabernacle, even as our Lord jesus Christ hath showed me. I will endeavour therefore always that ye also may be able to have remembrauce of these things after my departing. 4 As for peculiar direction of later times, whence perpetual infallibility must be derived; it cannot be gathered from his writings, that he knew so much as his brother Paul did. Albeit in this point, these two great pillars of Christ's Church, more famous than all their fellow Apostles beside for present efficacy of their personal ministry, come far behind the Disciple whom jesus loved; whose written embassage was in a peculiar sense, to tarry till Christ's last coming unto judgement, as he himself did unto Christ's first coming to destroy jerusalem, and forewarn the nations. Besides the doctrine of common salvation, necessary for all to know, plentifully set down in this Disciples Epistle, his Revelations contain infallible directions, peculiar to every age. And as in some one gift or other, every Apostle almost exceeds his fellows: There be greater probabilities that S. joha should have had infallible successors then S. Peter. so if amongst all, any one was to have this prerogative of being the ordinary Pastor, or to have ordinary successors as Aaron (though inferior to Moses in personal prerogatives during his life) had after his death: this doubtless was Saint john; who ascribes that unto the diligent expositors, hearers or Readers of his books, which the Romanist appropriate to such as rely upon the visible Church's determinations: never questioning whether it be that Babylon which Saint john deciphers, or no; Blessed is he (saith Saint john) that readeth; and they that hear the words of this prophesy, Revel. 1. ver. 3. and keep those things which are written therein, for the time is at hand. Blessed they are that read it with fear and reverence, or so affected as this Disciple was: for unto such the Lord will by means ordinary, by sober observation of the event, reveal his secret intent, as he did it unto him by the extraordinary gift of prophesy, * Reu. 19 10. for the testimony of jesus is the spirit of prophesy. 5 It is evident the spirit of God intended to show john, and john to show the faithful, all the Eclipses that should befall the Church until the world's end. His prophecies since his death, were so to instruct the world of all principal events present or to come, as histories do of matters forepast. Now as he in our times, wherein God inspires not men with Moses spirit, is accounted the best Antiquary, that is, most conversant and best seen in the faithful cords of time; not he that can take upon him to divine as Moses did of the world's state in former ages: so since the gift of prophesy ceased, he is to be esteemed the most infallible teacher, the safest guide to conduct others against the forces of hell, chiefly heresies or doctrines of Devils, that can best interpret him, who first descried them, and in his life time forewarned the Churches of Asia, planted by Saint Paul, and watered by him, of the abominations that threatened shortly to overspread them, and after them the whole visible Church until these latter times, doth the Pope then profess more skill in Saint john's Revelations then any other? If he do, let him make proof of his profession by the evidence of his expositions. But from this Apostle he pretends none at all, and we demand but any tolerable proof of succession from S. Peter. 6 A supreme ecumenical head (say the Parasites to the See Apostolic) is as necessary now, as in Saint Peter's time: therefore he must iure divino have a Successor. Vide lib. 2. Sect. 4. cap. 4. But neither doth Scripture or Reason admit any such head, as they have moulded in their brains, either then or now. As hath been abundantly proved; and their own instances brought to illustrate the probability of such a device contradict them. For admit that Christ and earthly Princes stood in like need of Deputie-governors in their absence: would the King of Spain were he to go on Pilgrimage unto his Kingdom of jerusalem, leave but one Deputy over all the Dominions of Spain and Portugal, the West Indies, Sicily, Naples, and Milan? Or leaving but one, would endue him with such absolute power over all his Subjects in these Nations, as they imagine Christ doth the Pope over every Christian soul throughout the whole world (what spirit then may we think) did possess Bellarmine, when he avouched that the church and common weals are different in this case? let us hear the difference. The Church Catholic must be one by communion with one head: so must the Liege people of every Monarch be one by subordination to one Sovereign, whether resident amongst them, or far absent. RESPONDEO, non esse eandem rationem Politici & Ecclesiastici regiminis. Siquidem orbis terrarum non necessario debet esse unum regnum, proinde non necessario postulat unum qui omnibus praesit; at Ecclesia tota unum est regnum, una civitas, una domus, & ideo ab uno tota regi debet. Cuius differentiae, illa est, ratio, quòd ad conversationem Poli●●●orum regno●um non necessariò requiratur, ut omnes Provinciae seruent easdem leges civiles, & e●sdens vitus. Possunt enim 〈◊〉, & personarum varietate diversis uti legibus, & institutis, & d●irco non requiritur unus, qui omnes in v●itate contineat. Ad con●eruationem verò Ecclesiae necessè est, ut omnes conveniant in eadem fide, ●sdem Sacramentis, ●sdemque praeceptis divinitus traditis, quod sanè sierinon potest, nisi sint unus popu●●s, & ab uno in unitate contineantur. Bellar. l. r. de Rom. Pont. c. 9 sub sinem. He acknowledgeth it were convenient the whole world should be governed by one civil Monarch. Were it possible to create surely one without bloodshed of wrong, it were requisite he or any in his behalf should resolve us why the whole Church might not as truly be one people by communion with Christ their head, as the Tartars and Spaniards by subordination to one Lord, to wit, the King of Spain, suppose he were Lord of both, & they as far distant each from other as they are. Why may not Christ then, though absent, be that only supreme head, whence universally the Church receiveth unity? or why may not he rule in it, though dispersed through many Nations, as effectually by his Angels, and ordinary Ministers of the Gospel, as the Pope doth by his Nuntioes, fallible Legates, or other inferior Prelates? 7 But though reason and Scripture fail them, yet Counsels, Histories, and Traditions, may be mustered to their aid. These are the first Springs of these many Waters, whereon the great Whore sits. From what history therefore do they believe the Pope is Peter's successor? from history canonical or divine? no Secular, Monkish, or Ecclesiastical at the best, upon which the best faith that can be founded is but human: and their professed villainy in putting in and out whatsoever they please, into what writing soever, (God's word only excepted) makes it more than doubtful, whether many ancient Writers did ever intimate any such estimate of the Romish Church, as is now fathered upon them; or rather, this foul iniquity late revealed, whilst some have been taken in the manner, hath been long time concealed as a mystery of the Romish state. But they believe not this succession from express written history, but from Tradition partly. From Tradition, of whom? Of men, what men? Men obnoxious to error, and parties in this present controversy: yet neither partial, nor erroneous while they speak ex Cathedra, saith the jesuit. But who shall assure us what they have spoken ex Cathedra concerning this point? The Counsels, What Counsels? Counsels assembled by the Pope; Counsels of men for the most part, as ill qualified as carnally minded, and so palpably carried away with faction, that to attribute any divine authority unto them, were to blaspheme the holy Spirit. The uncertainty of Popish councils or traditions. Counsels which the Papists themselves acknowledge not of sufficient authority, unless they follow the Pope's instructions; from whom likewise they must receive their approbation. The Pope must assure us the Council (which perhaps elected him, rejecting a Competitor every way more sufficient) doth not err. But that the Pope is lawfully elected; that so elected, he cannot err in this assertion, who shall assure us? he himself or h●s Predecessors. This then is the last resolution of our faith, if it rely upon the Church. 8 We must absolutely believe every Pope in his own cause: First, that he himself is; secondly, that all his Predecessors up to Saint Peter were infallible. When as many of them, within these few hundred years late passed (by their own followers confession) were such, as whatsoever must derive it pedigree from them, may justly be suspected to have first descended from the father of lies; such as not speaking ex Cathedra, were so far from the esteem of absolute infallibility, that such as knew them best did trust them least in matters of saecular commodity, and if they were found unfaithful in the wicked * Luke 16. v. 11 Mammon, who will trust them in the true? Not * He that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much, saith our Saviour in the same place v. 10. Papists themselves, unless they speak ex Cathedra. Then belike our Saviour did not foresee this exception from his general ray: or judas by this knack might have proved himself or any other knave, as faithful a Pastor as S. Peter. 9 But if a Pope shall teach ex Cathedra, that he is Peter's lawful successor and therefore of divine infallible authority, in expounding all the former places, A Pope's testimony of himself or his predecessors is authentic. we must notwithstanding our saviours caveat, believe him. Why? Because it must be supposed he hath divine testimony for this assertion. As what, either divine history, divine tradition, or divine revelation? Divine history thy disclaim, nor can impudence itself pretend it. It may be he hath the perpetual traditions of his predecessors. But here again we demand what divine assurance they can bring forth, that every Pope from Saint Peter downwards, did give express cathedral testimony to this perpetual succession in like authority. Suppose (what no jesuit dare avouch, unless he first consult his superiors, whether he must not of necessity say so, for maintenance of the Pope's dignity) that this assertion had been expressly conveyed from Saint Peter to the present Pope, without interruption; yet if any one of them did receive it from his predecessor, having it but as a private man, or upon his honesty, he might err in delivering it to his successor, so might the third in believing him. For no belief can be more certain than it proper object, or immediate ground. If That be fallible, the belief must needs be uncertain, obnoxious to error, and at the best human. No better is the Pope's testimony, unless given ex Cathedra: and no better is the ground of his own belief, of what his Predecessors told him, unless they told it him so speaking. Wherefore though this present Pope should teach ex Cathedra, viva voce, that he is Peter's lawful successor; yet unless he can prove that none of his predecessors did ever neglect so to avouch the same truth, it is evident that he speaks more than he can possibly know by any divine testimony, either of history, or unwritten tradition. It is evident again, he binds us to believe that by divine faith which he cannot possibly know himself, but only by faith human. For the only ground of his assertion, is this supposed perpetual tradition: and this is but human, unless it be perpetually delivered ex Cathedra. Pope's bind us to believe by divine faith their reports of matters forepast which they cannot believe by any other faith, but human and fallible. No is there any other means possible under the sun, nay either in heaven or earth, for to know matters of this nature forepast, but either the testimony of others, that have gone before us, who either were themselves, or took their relations upon trust from such as were present, when the things related were acted, or else by revelation from him who was before all times, and is a present spectator, an eye witness of every action. 10 Our knowledge of matters forepast by the former means, (though Popes themselves be the relators, unless their relation be cathedral) as hath been proved, are but human and fallible, Things known by immediate revelation from God are most certain, because the immediate Relator is most infallible. Doth the Pope by this means know, He that will be reputed a Prophet of times forepast, must show himself a prophet of things to come. what his Predecessors, or Saint Peter thought concerning this perpetual succession, or generally all matters concerning this point long since forepast? He may as easily tell us what any of his successors shall do or say an hundred years hence. And thus much if this present Pope will undertake, the Christian people then living, may safely believe, what the Pope then being shall say of this; or both of their predecessors. But to believe man, as an infallible prophet of things past, which cannot approve himself a true foreteller of things to come, were to invert God's ordinance, and mock his word. For it hath been a perpetual law of God, that no man should ever be believed more than man, or by any faith, more than human, though in matters present, whereof he might have been an eye witness: unless he showed his participation of the divine spirit, by infallible prediction of things to come, or evidency of miracles fully answering to the prediction of God's word already written, as shall be showed at large in the next section. 11 If we put together the first elements of Romish faith, as they have been sounded apart, they make no such compound, as the simple and ignorant Papists, (who in policy) are taught to read this lesson, as little children untaught, will by guessing at the whole in gross, without spelling the parts, believe they do. First, their prerogatives they give to Peter are blasphemous. Secondly, their allegations, to prove that their Popes succeed as full heirs to all Peter's prerogatives, are ridiculous. Whence it must needs follow, that their faith is but a compost of folly & blasphemy. This pretended perpetuity of tradition, or suspicious tale of succession from Peter, is the best warrant they have, the Church doth not err in expounding the places alleged for her infallibility, and their belief of their infallibility in such expositions, the only security their souls can have, that obeying the former decree of worshipping the consecrate host, of communicating under one kind, they do not contemptuously disobey Gods principal laws, mangle Christ's last Will and Testament, vilify his precious body and blood. Seeing then they themselves confess the places brought by us against their decrees to be divine; and we have demonstrated that men's belief of that infallible authority in making such decrees, to be merely human: the former conclusion is most firm, that whilst men obey these decrees against that natural sense and meaning, which the former passages of scripture suggest so plainly to every man's conscience, that the Church's pretended authority set aside, none would ever question whether they could admit any restraint, they obey men more than God, human laws more than divine, and much better believe the traditions of human fancy, of whose forgery for others worldly gain there be strong presumptions, than the express written testimony of the holy spirit, in the especial points of their own salvation. 12 Or if unto the testimony of God's spirit, The present Pope's authority is greater than history, traditions or counsels, or aught that can be pretended for it. recorded in Scriptures, we add history, tradition, Counsels, or former Pope's decrees or whatsoever possibly may be pretended to prove the present Pope's authority, it must still be supposed greater & better known, than all that can be brought for it or against it, as will appear, if we apply our argument used before. That authority is always greater which may try all others, and must be tried by none, but such is the Pope's declaration, or determination of all points in controversy, whether about the canon or sense of Scriptures, over those which are brought for it, whether about the truth, true meaning or authority, or unwritten traditions, whether about the lawfulness of counsels, or their authentic interpretations: in one word, his determinations are monarchical, & may not be examined, as S. Austen or others of the ancient father's writings may by any law written or unwritten. So * Aliud est interpretari legem more doctoris. aluid more judicis, id explicationem more doctoris, requiritur e●uditio, ad explicationem more judicis requiritur authoritas. Doctor enim non proponit sententiam suam ut necessario sequend●m, sed solum quatenus ratio suadet: at judex propon●t ut sequendam necessario. Aliter accipimus glossas Bartholi & Baldi, aliter declarationem Principis. Augustinus igitur & ceteri Patres in Commentarijs fungebantur offic●o Doctorum: at Concilia, & Pontifices funguntur officio judicij à Deo sibi commisso. Bellar. de verbi Dei interpret. lib. 3. cap. 10. respon. ad 16. Bellarmine suitable to the Trent Council, expressly avoucheth: The Fathers were only Doctors or expositors, the Pope is a judge, What then is the difference between a judge and an expositor: To explain as a judge, there is required authority, to explain as a Doctor, or expositor, only learning is requisite. For a Doctor doth not propose his sentence as necessary to be followed, but only so far as reason shall council us: but a judge proposeth his sentence to be followed of necessity. Whereof then will the Pope be judge? Of expounding Scriptures: these places of Scripture which make for his pretended authority. Must his sentence herein of necessity be followed? By Bellarmine it must, albeit we see no reason for it, either out of Scripture or nature. It is for Doctors to bring reasons for their expositions; but the Pope needs not except he will: nor may we exact it of a judge. So he adds more expressly, We admit not of Bartolus, or Baldus glosses, as we do of Empecours declarations. Austin and other Fathers in their Commentaries supply the places of Teachers, but the Council and Pope's exercise the function of judges, whereunto God hath designed them. But how shall we know that God hath committed all judgement unto them, seeing we have been taught by his word, * joh. 5. 22. 23. that he hath committed all judgement unto his son, Because all men should honour the son as they honour the father? We read not of any other to whom the like authority is given by God, or his son; yet of one, whose very name shall import the usurpation of like authority, that is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Christ's Vicar general, unto whom the Son as must be supposed, doth deligate the same judiciary power the Father deligated unto him. 13. But may a Prince's declaration in no case be examined by his subjects? Yes, though in civil matters, it may, so far as it concerns their consciences; as whether it be consonant to God's word or no, whether it make more for the health of their souls, to suffer what it inflicts upon the refusers, or to act what it commands. To control, contermaund, or hinder the execution of it, by opposition of violence or contrary civil power, subjects may not. But for any, but man, to usurp such dominion over his fellow creatures souls, as earthly Princes have over their subjects goods, lands, or bodies, is more than Monarchical, more than tyrannical, the very Idea of Antichristianisme. And what I would commend unto the Reader, as a point of especial consideration, this assertion of Bellarmine, concerning the Pope's absolute authority, directly proves him, as was avouched * Cap. 7. §. 18. & 20. Bellarmine to prove though Pope is absolutely above the universal Church useth these words, Omnia nomina, quae in scriptures tribuuntur Christo, unde constat eum essè supra Ecclesiam, eadem omnia tribuuntur: Pontif. Bellar. de conciliorum auct. Lib. 2. cap. 17. before, to be a supreme head or foundation, of the self same rank and order with Christ, no way inferior to him in the intensive perfection, but only in the extent of absolute sovereignty. For, greater sovereignty cannot be conceived then this, That no man may examine the truth, or equity of commands, or consequences immediately derived from it, though immediately concerning their eternal joy or misery. No Prince did ever deligate such sovereign power to his Vice gerent, or deputy: nor could he, unless for the time being (at least) he did utterly relinquish his own supreme authority, or admit a full compear in his kingdom. * Christum caput esse Ecclesiae universae libentisme consitemur, neque ullum hominem, ac ne angulum quidem illi aequamus; quod esset propr● duo capita in Ecclesiae corpore constituere, at quin sub Christo suo capite Vicarius eius in terris caput ut sic dicam, ministerial non principale rectè nominetur, negari nullo modo potest; Siquidem ut in republica temporali caput omnium principale Rex est, sub Rege deinde capita sunt provinciarum, ij qui dicuntur Proreges & sub Proregibus capita suat urbium singularum, certi quidam Praetores, & sub praetoribus quaelibet familia suum habet caput, ipsum videlicet Patrem familias: Ita quoque in Ecclesia, Dei summum caput omnium hominum & Angelorum Christus est: sub Christo in terris caout omnium Christianorum est Pontifex maximus: sub illo Episcopi Parochi capita sunt Christianae multitudinis. Bellar. de summo Pont. sive lib. 2. de trans. Imp. cap. 24. His similitude falls in this that they admit of no appeal from the Pope to Christ, no examination of his decrees by God's word: Nor is the Pope by their doctrine subordinate in such sort unto Christ, as all other Bishops are to the Pope. Bellarmine's distinctions, of a primary and secondary foundation, of a ministerial and principal head of the Church, may hence he described to be but mere stales set to catch gulls. Their conceit of the Pope's copartnership with Christ, is much better resembled, and more truly expressed, by the Poet's imaginations of jupiter, and Augustus Caesar's fraternity, Divisum imperium cum jove Caesar habet: jove and Caesar are Kings and Gods: But jove of heaven; that's the only odds. That Christ should retain the title of the supreme head over the Church militant, and the reality of supremacy over the Church triumphant, over adversaries are not offended: Because, there is small hope of raising any new tribute from the Angels, and Saints in heaven, to the Romish churches use; and as little fear that Christ should take any secular commodity from it, which anciently it hath enjoyed. 14. But though it were true, that we were absolutely bound to obey an absolute Monarchy, of whose right none doubts: yet may we examine whether every Potentate that challengeth Monarchical jurisdiction over others, or gives forth such insolent edicts in civil matters, as the Pope doth in spiritual, do not go beyond his authority in these particulars; albeit his lawful prerogatives in respect of others, be without controversy many and great, yet limited both for number and magnitude. For suppose King Henry the eight, after he had done what he could against the Pope, should still have professed his good liking of Romish religion, opposing only this to all his Popish Clergy, that had challenged him of revolt: Am not I defender of the faith. The Pope, whom I trow you take for no false Prophet, hath given me this prerogative amongst Christian Princes, as expressly, as ever Saint Peter bequeathed him his supremacy above other Bishops. It is as impossible for me to defend, as for his Holiness to teach, any other besides the true Catholic faith. Let the proudest amongst my Prelates examine my expositions of his decrees, and by S. George, he shall fry a faggot for an heretic, Would this or the like pretence (though countenanced by royal authority) have been accepted for a just defence, that this boisterous King had not contradicted the Pope, but the tattling Monks, or other private expositors of his decrees? would this have satisfied the Pope's agents, until the King and his Holiness had come to personal conference, for final debatement of the case? yet for Christ's servants thus to neglect their master's cause, is no sin in the Romanists judgement, yea an heresy is it not to deal so negligently in it. For a sin of no lower rank they make it, not to submit our hearts, minds, and affections, unto the Pope's negative decrees, though against that sense of scripture, which conscience and experience give us. Unto all the doubts, fears, or scruples these can minister, it must suffice; That the Pope saith he expounds scripture no otherwise than Christ would, were he in earth, but only controls all private glosses or expositors of them. But can any Christian heart content itself with such delusions, and defer all examinations of doctrine, until that dreadful day come upon him, wherein the great Shepherd shall plead his own cause, face to face, with this pretended Vicar and his associates? Do we believe that Christ hath given us a written law, that he shall come to be our judge, and call us to a strict account wherein we have transgressed or kept it; yet may we not try by examination, whether these Romish guides lead us aright or awry? Whether some better or clearer exposition may not be hoped for, than the Pope or Council, for the present, tenders to us? What if the Pope should prohibit all disputations about this point in hand, [whether obeying him against the true sense of scripture, (as we are persuaded) we yield greater obedience unto him, then unto Scriptures;] may we not examine the equity of this decree, or his exposition of that Scripture which happily he would pretend for this authority, his amplius, fili mi, ne requiras? No: by their general tenant, and * Lib. 2. sect. 2. cap. 5. par. 8. Valentians express assertion, it were extreme impiety to traverse this sense, or exposition, under pretence of obscurity, etc. By the same reason, for aught I can see, it would follow, that, if the question were, [whether, obeying the Pope more than God, we did obey man more than God] we might not examine, at least not determine, whether the Pope were man or God, or a middle nature betwixt both, which came not within the compass of that comparison. CHAP. IX. In what sense the Jesuits may truly deny they believe the words of man better than the words of God: In what sense again our writers truly charge them with this blasphemy. 1. IF we review the former discourse, we may find, that equivocation, which Bellarmine sought (as a knot in a bulrush) in our writers objections, to be directly contained in their Church's denial of what was objected. Whilst they deny that they exalt the Church's authority above scriptures, or man's word above Gods; this denial may have a double sense. They may deny a plain and open profession, or challenge of greater authority in their Church then in Scriptures: Or they may deny, that in effect and substance they overthrow all authority of Scripture, save only so far as it makes for their purpose. 2. That the Pope should openly profess himself competitor with God, Antichrist must not be a professed or open enemy but a secret underminer of true Religion. or, in express terms, challenge greater authority than Scriptures have: was never objected by any of our writers. For all of us know, the man of sin must be no open, or outward enemy to the Church, but judas like, a disciple by profession: his doctrine, indeed, must be a doctrine of devils, yet counterfeiting the voice of Angels; as he himself, though by internal disposition of mind a slave to all manner of filthiness, and impurity, must be enstiled sanctissimus Dominus, the most holy Lord. If the poison of his iniquity were not wrapped up in the titles of divine mysteries, it would forthwith be disliked by many silly superstitious souls, which daily suck their bane from it, because persuaded that the scriptures, which they never have examined, whose true sense they never tasted, but from some relics of heathenish zeal, idolatrously worship in gross, do fully warrant it. When our Writers therefore object, that the Papists exalt the Pope's laws above Gods; (had not these holy Catholics an especial grace to grow deaf, as often as we charge their mother with such notorious and known whoredoms, as they see might evidently be proved unto the world, if they should stand to contest with us) their meaning is plain; that the Pope, in deed, and issue, makes the Scriptures, which in show he seems to reverence, The Pope and his followers have good reason to magnify Christ's authority in words or outward show for their own gain and glory could not otherwise be so great. of no authority, but only with reference to his own. That he, and his followers should in words much magnify God's word, written or unwritten, we do not marvel; because the higher esteem men make of it, the higher still he may exalt his throne, being absolutely enabled, by this devise, to make all that belongs to God, his Word, his Laws, his Sacraments, the precious Body and Blood of his Son, blessed for ever, mere footstools to his ambition. For, if the authority of Scriptures, or such traditions as he pretends, be established as divine, and he admitted, sole, absolute, infallible judge of their meaning; it would argue either Antichristian blindness not to see, or impudence of no meaner stock, not to acknowledge that the Pope by this mean might appropriate unto himself the honour due unto God, and play upon his Creator in such sort, as if a corrupt Lawyer having evidences committed to his trust, should by virtue of them take up rents, and let leases to the Landlord's damage, and tenants overthrow. And (what is most villainous) unto whatsoever prerogatives, though most prejudicial to the divine majesty; his Parasitical Canonists shall blasphemously entitle this most holy Father the son of God, and his faithfullest servants, (Apostles or Prophets) must be brought forth to abet the forgery, as if evidence given in Court by infamous Knights of the Post, should in the final day of hearing be produced, under the hands and seals of free Barons, or other chief Peers of the Land: for, as was intimated before, whatsoever the Pope though in his own cause, shall say, it must by this doctrine, be supposed, that Christ doth say the same. Yea, if it should please his Holiness to avouch ex Cathedra, that these words, Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech, are truly and literally meant of himself as Christ's Vicar, or of perpetual succession in Peter's chair: the evidence must be taken as upon the Almighty's oath; who in that place hath sworn as much as these words import; but what that is the Pope must judge. That then he permits Christ the title of his sovereign Lord, and urges others to subscribe unto his laws as most divine, is just, as if some Politician should solicit the whole body of a kingdom, solemnly to acknowledge one, otherwise lawful heir unto the Crown, for their Monarch most omnipotent and absolute, (whose will once signified must be a law for ever inviolable, to all his subjects) not with intent that he should in person retain such perpetual sovereignty over them, but that he might have absolute power to dispose of his kingdom, as he pleased unto the world's end; or to nominate others, as absolute in his place, whilst he spent his days as a sojourner in a foreign land. Finally, not the most treacherous and detestable plot, the most wicked Pope that hath been, is or shall be, could desire to effect, but may by this device be countenanced, with as great and sacred authority, as were the best actions our Saviour ever undertook which (as may better appear from what shall be said in the next * Cap. 10. 11. Section) is to make every Pope's authority as much greater than our saviours, as their lives and actions are worse than his was. 3 Suppose some Devil should possess the Pope's place in similitude of a man, The same plea the Jesuits make for the Pope's absolute infailibility, the Devil himself might use with as great probability, were he formally elected in his place. (as some Papists think the great Antichrist, who shall challenge as great authority as the Pope doth, shall be a Devil incarnate, or the son of a Devil,) might he not hold his dignity by the same plea the Jesuits make for their Lord and Master? Could he not be content to pretend Christ's name, or succession from Saint Peter, (as Simon Magus might he have obtained what he desired, would have done) for his own advantage? Could he not urge the authority of God's word to confirm his own over it, and all that is called Gods? If in such a case it might not be permitted men to examine his allegations out of Scriptures, how could the devil himself be convinced by Scriptures, or deposed from his supremacy, thence pretended? And can we doubt, whether he which makes no other plea, than the Devil were he in place might, is not that Filius Diaboli, The great Antichrist? Were we not taught that the sons of this world are wise only in their own generation, we might justly wonder that any men endued with natural wit, could be so blind, as at the first sight not to descry the politic sophisms used by the Romanist to cozen Christ of his kingdom. As their whole Religion is but the image of the old Roman policy; so their main plot of Templum Domini, Templum Domini, the Church, the Church, as if all were rebels against Christ, that will not swear absolute fealty to the Church Romish, may be most fully paralleled by the like practice of such cunning Statesmen, as having always one eye to the advancement of their own private fortunes, live under an absolute Monarch, of himself royally minded, but not much intermeddling in the affairs of greatest moment. Opportunity of high place under a king, upon what occasion soever thus sequestered, that poor men's complaints cannot possess his ears, tempts politicians to effect their own purposes, under pretence of his right, to condemn all of treason or disloyalty, that will not obey their designs directed in their Sovereign's name, though most abhorrent from the disposition of his royal heart, were he acquainted with such lamentable grievances of his poor Subjects, as are the usual consequents of Princes gracious favours upon great ones. The more absolute such a Princes lawful authority, the greater his native subjects love unto him is, the more both, may both be abused by such unthankful officers. As it is the sovereign conceit all men have of Christ's kingdom, which keeps the silly in such servility unto the Pope, his pretended agent. 4 This is the only difference in these two cases otherwise most like. An earthly Prince may live and die deluded of his Machiavillian statesmen, over whom he hath no power, after he himself is once subject. But Christ lives and reigns a King for ever; and though his throne be in the highest heavens, beholds the things are done on earth; he sees, and yet suffereth his pretended officers to retain such as love darkness more than light, in grossest ignorance and blind subjection to the Prince of darkness, and his associate, the Prince of darkness; he sees and yet suffers them detain all such as delight in lies more than in truth, from acquaintance with his holy spirit; He sees, and yet suffers their foulest villainies to be countenanced by his sacred laws; he sees, and yet suffers his holy name to be abused, to the establishing of Antichristian heresies; he sees and yet suffers his glory made a stale for maintenance of their secular pomp. He is the keeper of Israel, and cannot so slumber, as any abuse should escape his notice; his indignation shall not sleep for ever, but in due time he will rouse himself as a Lion awaked, to take vengeance upon all the workers of iniquity, on them above others, who have thus usurped his throne on earth, taking that judgement during the time of his supposed absence wholly into their hands, which belongs only unto him: Even so come Lord jesus, holy and true, and with the breath of thy mouth destroy him that hath destroyed truth and sincerity from amongst the sons of men. SECT. III. Containing the second degree of great Antichrists exaltion, in making his authority more absolutely infallible than any the visible or representative Church of the jews, Moses or the Prophets ever had: Finally, in making it greater than Christ's or his Apostles was. THat the Church of Rome doth advance her decrees above the laws and ordinances of the Almighty, her words that in this kind is called Gods, above all divine Oracles, written and unwritten, is apparent out of their own positions hitherto discussed; yet is this but the first degree of great Antichrists exaltations. The second is the exalting the Popes above any personal authority that ever was either practised or established on earth. This in brief is the assertion, which (by God's assistance) we are in this present section to make evident; The authority which the Jesuits and jesuited Priests give, and would bind others upon pain of damnation to give unto the present Church or Pope, throughout every age, is greater than any authority that ever was challenged since the world began, by any man or visible company of men, the man Christ jesus not excepted. This conclusion followeth immediately out of three positions generally held, Romish positions whence the inconvenience proposed must be reduced. and stiffly maintained by that Church. The first, that the Pope (live he as he list) cannot err in matters of faith and manners, when he speaketh ex Cathedra: that we are bound infallibly to believe whatsoever he so speaks, without examination of his doctrine by God's word, or evident external sign, or internal experiment of God's spirit, speaking in him. The second, that we cannot assure ourselves the Scriptures are the Oracles of God, but by the infallible testimony of the Visible Church. The third, that the true sense and meaning of Scriptures, in cases doubtful, or controversed, cannot be undoubtedly known without the infallible declaration of the same Church. CHAP. I. What restraint, precepts for obedience unto the Priests of the Law, though seeming most universal for their form, did necessarily admit: And how universal Propositions of Scriptures are to be limited. 1 Sing we undertake to prove, that no such authority as the Romish Church doth challenge, was ever established on earth: The answering of those arguments drawn from the authority of the Priests in the old Testament, may to the judicious seem at the first sight needless, yet because such as they set the fairest glosses upon, if we look into the inside or substance, are fullest fraught with their own disgrace and ignominy; It will not be superfluous to acquaint the Reader with some particulars, prefixing some general admonitions to the younger sort, for more commodious answering of all that can be brought of like kind. 2 Their common places of consening the world, especially smatterers of Logic, or school learning, with counterfeit proofs of Scripture, is either from some universal precept of obedience to the people, or general promises of infallibility made to the Priests in the old Testament. Such as come unto the Scriptures, having their mind dazzled with notions of universal primum, or other Logic rules true in some cases, think the formerprecepts, being for their form universal, may admit no exception, limitation, or restraint, otherwise the holy Ghost might break the rule of Logic: when as they admit many restraints, nor always from one, Obedience may be complete though not absolute. but ofttimes from diverse reasons; from these following especially. God sometimes enjoins obedience (as we say) in the abstract, to set us a pattern of such true accurate obedience; as men should perform unto authority itself, or unto such governors, as neither in their lives, nor in the seat of judgement, would decline either to the right hand or to the left, but square all their proceedings to the exact rule of God's word. Unto such governors continual and complete obedience, was to be performed; because the parties governed upon examination, should always find them jump with the law of God, unto which absolute obedience, as hath been showed, is due. Nor doth the word of God in setting out such exact obedience, lie open to that exception, which Politicians take against Philosophers; as if it (as Philosophers do) did give instructions only, for happy men of Aristotle's making, or for the Stoics wise men, who can no where be found but in Plato's commonwealth, whose Metropolis is the Region of Utopia. For the ancient Israel of God had this prerogative above all the nations of the earth, that their Priests lips whilst they themselves were clothed with righteousness and bare holiness unto the Lord in their breasts, should still preserve knowledge, and be able to manifest the will of God unto the people, not only by interpreting the general written law, but by revelations concerning particular facts of principal moment, as may be gathered from that law, * Exod. 28. 30. Also thou shalt put in the breast plate of judgement the urim and the Thummim, which shall be upon Aaron's heart, when he goeth in before the Lord; And Aaron shall bear the judgement of the children of Israel upon his heart before the Lord continually. 3 To omit the various interpretations, and divers opinions of this breastplates use; why it was called the breast plate of judgement: a joseph. lib. 3. antiquit. c. none. josephus and Suidas in my mind come nearest the truth. That the Revelation by it was extraordinary, that God's presence, or juridical approbation of doubts proposed, was represented upon the precious stones, that were set therein is probable, partly, from the aptness of it to allure the Israelites unto Idolatry, partly from that formality which the b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Diodorus Siculus, l. 1. c. 3. And a little after, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Suidas ex incerto quodam authore haec refert, as saith Fagius, Ephod, (inquit) nomen est Hebraicum, quod si interpreteris, significat manifestationem aut redemptionem (Vides autem ●um authorem ex quo Suidas hoc exscripsit, Hebraeae linguae ignarum fuisse. Ephod enim longd aliud significat. Fortassis pro Ephod dicere voluit Hoschen) Erat autem forma eius, textura palmaris, vario artificio instar pectoralis, ex aureis filis confecta. Ac in medio habebat quasi stellam omnino auream. Ex utraque autem part duos Smaragdos, in quorum unoquoque sculpta erant sex nomina, vidilicet, duodecim nomina Tribuum Israel. Porro inter Smaragdos continebat lapidem Adamantem. Cum ergo Sacerdos sciscitaturus erat de re quadam oraculum à Deo, ligabat Ephod in super●umerali ad medium pectoris, & subijcieb●t manus suas sub ipsum, quas cum retraheret, deprehendebat eas quasi colore quodam infectas. Petebat autem à Deo responsum defixis in Ephod oculis. Itaque si Deus annuebat ad id quod petebatur, consestim micabat lapis Adamas Si autem negabat, nihil ad pristinum & proprium lapidis sulgorem accedebat. Quod si Deus voluit populum subijcere gladio. ●apis reddebatur cruentus. Si autem imminebat mors, lapis ficbat niger. Fagius in caput 18, Exod. quem plur. Vido ib. de Rationali. vid. & Delrium Disquisit. Magic. lib. 4. quaest. 2. Sect. 1. Egyptians in imitation of the Ephods ancient use amongst the jews, retained long after in declaration of the truth in judgement. For Diodorus tells us that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or chief judge in that famous and venerable Egyptian high Court, or Parliament, did wear about his neck in a golden chain, ensign, a tablet of precious stone, or (if the Reader be disposed to correct the translator) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which they called (as the Septuagint did Aaron's breastplate) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, on which he steadfastly looked while matters were debating, (as Suidas saith the High Priest did on his breast plate, whilst they asked counsel of God;) and whilst he gave sentence turned it unto the better cause (exhibited as the fashion was in that Court, in writing) in sign the truth itself did speak for it, that the urim or Thummim were more than an Emblem, yea an Oracle of justice and right judgement, is apparent out of Scripture: When joshua was consecrated to be Israel's chief governor in Moses stead, he was to stand before Eleazar the Priest, ordained to ask counsel for him by the judgement of urim before the Lord: 1. Sam. 23. 95. So did * Numb. 27. 21. Abiathar certify David of Saul's malicious resolution against him, and the Lords of Keylahs' treachery, if he should trust unto them. 1. Sam. 30. 7. 8. So again David is assured of victory, by the judgement of urim and I Thummim, if he would follow the Amalakites that had burnt Ziglag. 4 Such Priests as these, were to be absolutely obeyed in answers thus given from the mouth of God. And it is most probable, that the parties whom these answers did concern, had perfect notice of the Revelation made to the Priests, howsoever the truths of such answers being confirmed by experiment in those days, they were to undertake what the Priests appointed, and to obey his advice at least by cautelous obedience, That God's promise unto the Priest or people of Israel for their direction by urim and Thummim, or otherwise was not absolute but conditional. until the event did prove the truth. But neither was this certain manifestation of Gods will so absolutely promised unto the Priests, but not living according unto the direction of God's law, he might fail in his Oracles; Nor was this people's prerogative above others without all limit; that if they lived no better than others did, they should as often as they asked counsel of God, infallibly know, whether the answer were from him or no, albeit there were no defect in the Priest. For this reason the Lord answered not * 1. Sam. 28. v. 6 Saul, when he asked counsel of him, neither by dreams, nor by visions, nor by urim, nor by the Prophets, for Saul was now cast off by God, not willing to vouchsafe an answer unto his demands: which argues, that the revelation made to the Priests, was also manifested to the party, solemnly and in sincerity of heart proposing the questions, The Priest's infallibility did depend upon their continency & integrity. whereof he desired to be resolved. 5 That the Priest had no such privilege, or absolute promise of God's infallible presence, as the Pope challengeth, is apparent from the law of temperance prescribed. * Leuit. 10. ver. 9 10. And the Lord spoke unto Aaron saying, thou shalt not drink wine, nor strong drink, thou nor thy sons with thee, when ye come into the Tabernacle of the congregation; lest ye die. This is an ordinance for ever throughout your generations, that ye may put difference between the holy and unholy, and between the clean and unclean, and that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes the Lord hath commanded thee by the hand of Moses. If these Priests themselves were unholy and unclean, they could not infallibly discern between the holy and unholy, between the clean and unclean: if they lived not according to this, they could not teach the children of Israel the rest of God's express laws, much less could they infallibly manifest unto them his will in all doubts and controversies. But the Pope (so absolute is his prerogative, which the Jesuits attribute unto him) must be thought to be infallibly assisted by the holy spirit, albeit he lead a most unhallowed, unclean, polluted life. 6 But for the promise made unto Levi, and his seed, God himself by his Prophet * Malach. 2. 1. 2. Malachy most expressly interprete the meaning of it; And now O ye Priests, this commandment is for you, if ye will not hear it, nor consider it in your heart, to give glory unto my name, saith the Lord of hosts, I will even send a curse upon you, and will curse your blessings, yea, and I have cursed them already, because ye do not consider it in your heart, behold I will corrupt your seed, and cast dung upon your faces, even the dung of your solemn feasts, and you shall be like unto it, and ye shall know, that I have sent this commandment unto you, that my covenant which I made unto Levi might stand, saith the Lord of hosts. My covenant was with him of life and peace, and I gave him fear, and he feared me, and was afraid before my name, the law of truth was in his mouth, and there was no iniquity found in his lips, he walked with me in peace and equity, and did turn many from iniquity; for the Priests lips shall preserve knowledge, and they shall seek the law at his mouth. As if he had said; Such Priests I have had in former times, and such might your praises from my mouth, and your estimation with men have been, had you framed your lives according to the rules which my servant Moses had set you. But were these Priests, against whom he here speaks, infallible in their doctrine still; because God's promise was so ample unto Levi? If they were not, why doth Bellarmine bring this place to prove the Pope's infallible authority, in teaching divine untruths? If they were, why doth the Lord complain in the words immediately following? But ye are gone out of the way, ye have caused many to fall by the law, ye have broken the covenant of Levi, saith the Lord of hastes, Therefore have I made you also to be despised, and vile before all the people, because you keep not my ways, but have been partial in the law. 7 This place alone (though many others might be brought) clearly evinceth God's promise unto Levi and his posterity, during the time of their priesthood, to have been condititionall, not absolute. And as Gods promise of infallibility was unto him & his seed, such was the obedience due to them & their authority, not absolute, but conditional & where the precepts may seem universal, yet are they to be limited oftimes by the condition of the priests life. 8 But sundry propositions there be in Scriptures for their form universal, which are also absolutely true in their proper subject, Universal propositions in Scripture are to be limited by their proper subject, the end of the prece● or other circumstance. whose full extant or limits notwithstanding are not always evident. Whence many mistake in stretching them too far; others seeing them fails in some particulars, which seem comprehended under the universality of their form suspect the absoluteness of their truth; and account them rather morally probable, or conditionally true, then necessary and certain; yet are they most absolutely necessary and certain, only their universality is to be limited by their proper subjects. This is a common difficulty in all arts, though less apparent in the Mathematics, or Metaphysics, or other like abstract contemplative sciences. But in Philosophy, as well natural as moral, many general rules there be most true and evident to such as know the nature or quality, either of the subject, or matter whereunto they are applied, or of these particulars, whence the induction was gathered; and yet are obscure and doubtful unto others, who mark the universality of their form, not so well acquainted with the nature of those subjects, in which their true his principally, and most evidently seen, nor so able to discern the identity or diversity, the proportion, or disproportion which other subjects may have with the former; but of the trial of rules in arts (if God permit) elsewhere. I will now instance in Scripture only; what proposition could be for the form more universal, what precept conceived in words more general, then that of sanctifying the Sabaoth. In it thou shalt do no wanner of workees, * Exod. 20. v. 10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Non facies ullum opus? The Scribes and pharisees putting a Religion in the letter of the Law, (as the Jesuits now do, The precept concerning the Sabaoth than which none can be more universal did not extend to all manner of works. when it may make for their advantage) did conclude from the generality of this precept, that our Saviour broke the Sabaoth, when he healed the sick upon it: Their pretences, if we respect the universality of the proposition only, were far more probable than the Papists can pick any for their purpose: Yet jewish skill, in that they consider not the end of the Sabaoth, which might have limited the universal form of the precept, and restrained it unto some kind of works only; for not all, but only all those works which were repugnant to the end of this precept were forbidden. The end of the Sabaoth was to sanctify themselves unto the Lord; to set forth his praise both in words and works. Such works then only are here only forbidden as did distract the mind, or make men unapt to hear, read, or meditate on heavenly matters; all works of secular vocation, or private consequence, which might hinder men's endeavours for procuring the health, or welfare of others; not works of charity, or present necessity, not works tending to greater public good, or to the avoidance of greater harms, which could not be prevented but by present working; for men are to read, hear, and meditate upon God's word, that by it they may be fruitful in good deeds by which Gods name is more immediately glorified, then only by speaking well, and not doing so. Wherefore our Saviour Christ did better observe the Sabaoth by working upon it, to save men's lives, or recover their health; then the Pharisees did by abstaining from such works of mercy, as might have glorified God's name more immediately, than any speculalative or precise rules, how it should be kept: Yea, by not working these good works, when fair occasion was offered, they did the works of Satan, even murder itself, as our Saviour Christ implies in that question proposed unto the Scribes and Pharisees which sought an accusation against him: * Luk. 6. v. 9 I will ask you a question, whether it is lawful on the Sabbaoth days to do good or to do evil, to save life, or to destroy it? 9 The like limitations this precept had in case of necessity, or for the avoidance of some great extraordinary calamity, not otherwise avoidable, then by doing such works, as upon ordinary and daily occasions were unlawful to be done upon the Sabaoth day. It was an opinion received (as it seems) amongsts the jews, that they might not fight, nor build the breaches or places whereby their enemies did hope for entrance upon the Sabaoth. In this persuasion * Mac. 2. 36. 36. 38. about the number of a thousand Jews did lay down their lives. But when Mathias heard of this his people, and Country men's massacre (more general than it needed to have been, but for this their strict and precise interpretation of the former general commandment, he and his friends wisely resolved * Mac. 2. v. 4●. Whosoever should come to make battle with us upon the Sabaoth day, we will fight against them, that we die not all as our brethren that were murdered in the secret places. Which they might have stopped, but would not, for fear of violating the Sabaoth. The reason of this their resolution (contained in the 40 verse) was most strong, drawn from the end of the Sabaoth; For they said one to another, If we all do as our brethren have done, and fight not against the heathen for our lives and for our Laws, then shall they incontinently destroy us out of the earth. And if the whole jewish nation had been at that time utterly rooted out; who should either have sanctified God's Sabaothes, or preserved his laws from the injury of times, or fury of the heathen? Nature had taught the heathen, that it was foolish, propter vitam vivendi perdere causas: much more might religious discretion teach all men, how preposterous a course it were for the pre●ise keeping of one, to cross, or overthrow the end of all Sabaothes. 10 Yet our Adversaries I am sure cannot bring any precept so peremptory or general, for absolute obedience unto the High Priests, and governors, as the former was for not working upon the Sabaoth. And yet this we see hath its restraint from the end, and holds only absolutely true in certain kind of works, not in all. The like restraint, either from the end, or from the circumstance, may all those places likewise suffer, which seem to be most general for absolute obedience unto God's messengers or spiritual governors. 11 The end of obeying God's messengers is, Universal precepts for obeying God's messengers must be limited by the end of obedience. that men thereby may obey God himself. Suppose then God had said [Thou shall obey the Priest in all things whatsoever he shall command thee:] a Wise man notwithstanding all this would thus resolve; suppose the Priest command me to do that, in doing which I shall disobey God, or to omit that continually, in performing of which I should obey God: am I bound to obey him in all such commands: so should I frustrate the end of the law, and commit the same offence by this my blind obedience, which others do by presumptuous and wilful disobedience unto spiritual governors. But it will be replied, who shall judge whether the spiritual governor command thee such service, as argues disobedience unto God, or no? If the case be doubtful, and I be commanded by my lawful Pastor, I have answered already in what sense obedience must be performed. But if the case be evident, men must openly disobey their Pastors, before they certainly disobey God. But who shall judge of the evidence? Every man's conscience. Shall that then be evident which every man shall say is evident unto him? No, but what indeed and conscience is, and so shall appear in his judgement that searcheth the heart and reins. Such as do not fear his censure will make no conscience of disobeying men pretending authority from him: Such as with fear and trembling expect the son of man's appearance will not much esteem, how they be judged by men further than in reason they may be persuaded; their sentence shall be ratified in the last day of judgement. And because God hath endued spiritual governors with power of retaining and remitting sins; every one that fears him which gave, will fear to disobey them to whom this power is given; lest if they retain, he will not remit; and retain they justly may, or rather must, the sins of all sins, as add thirst to drunkenness, contempt of God's messengers, summons to repentance unto actual breaches of his law. This is as open rebellion upon a riot, perhaps first attempted upon ignorance of the Law, inconsiderateness or foolish passion, but continued after proclamation made in the King's name, by a public magistrate authorized for such purposes: The parties admonished upon such high terms, to desist from any suspicious enterprise (though no more) must be certain of the Princes, or chief Lawgivers future approbation of what they go about, if they persist, otherwise disobedience to a lawful Magistrate or inferior officer, will be found rebellion against the state or sovereignty. 12 Though it be most true what hath been before delivered, that unto Pastors conditional obedience is only due, Conditional obedience of two sorts. yet is not the condition precedent to all acts of obedience, but subsequent at least to some, and to be inserted by way of limitation or caution, for desisting upon discovery of farther danger, rather than interposed as a stop to breed delay, or prohibition of all obedience until evident proof be made, that it is expressly due in the particulars enjoined. The want of this distinction between a condition precedent, and a condition subsequent, or annexed unto actual obedience, hath been the original (I am persuaded) atwel of the Papists error in demanding absolute obedience, without all condition of limitation, as of many Protestants granting less than is due to Pastors, that is obedience only upon this condition; If they show express warrant of Scriptures for the particulars enjoined. Nor is the condition between the Pastor and his flock like unto that between man and man in legal contracts, or in controversies of debt, wherein all are equal, & nothing due unto the plaintiff, before the performance of the condition be proved: but such as is between a private man, and a Magistrate, (both subordinate in their several places to one sovereign, unto whom only absolute and complete obedience is due, though unto his officers some obedience is absolutely due, at the least to be dicto audience, to hear him with patience, reverence, and attention, not to contradict, or neglect his commands, but upon such evident reasons as the inferior party dare adventure to try the cause instantly with him before the supreme judge. The acts of obedience which are absolutely due from the flock to spiritual magistrates, or Christ's messengers, and precedent to the condition interposed or inserted, In what acts absolute obedience is due to Pastors. are the unpartial examinations of their own hearts and consciences, the full renouncing of all worldly desires, earthly pleasure, carnal lusts or concupiscences, because these unrenounced have a command over our souls, and detain them from performing service, best acceptable unto God, or yielding that sincere obedience, which is absolutely due unto his sacred word. For this end and purpose the flock stand absolutely bound to enter into their own hearts and souls, to make diligent search and strict inquiry, what rebellious affection, or unruly desire is harboured there, as often as their overseers shall in Christ's name charge them so to do: otherwise their neglect or contempt will be in that dreadful day a witness of their rebellion in this life, a bar to keep sin in, and shut grace out. 13 But if any man out of the sincerity of a good conscience, and steadfast resolution of a faithful heart, (which hath habitually renounced the world, flesh and Devil, that it may be always ready to serve Christ) shall refuse his Pastor's commandment, though threatening hell pains to his disobedience in some particulars, he doth yet better observe the former precept by this his denial, than others do by performance of absolute blind obedience without strict unpartial examination of their consciences, for he doth herein obey God, whom to obey with heart and mind thus freed from the dominion of Satan, and the world, is the very end and scope, the final service whereunto all performance of obedience unto spiritual governors is but as a training of Christ's faithful Soldiers. And in these acts of obedience, is that saying of our Saviour most generally and absolutely true; * Luk. 10. 16. He that heareth you, heareth me, he that despiseth you, despiseth me. That precept of denying ourselves, and renouncing all, is the foundation of all the rest, concerning obedience: without performance of this, neither can our undertaking any other acts be sincere, nor our refusal (lawfully admonished) safe: our best obedience, not hereon grounded, is non christian, our disobedience unchristian, and rebellious. For which cause we are absolutely bound unto habitual performance of this, ere we can be admitted as lawful auditors of Christ's other precepts. All other our resolutions, or deliberate intendments; whether for performance of any action commended for good and honest, or for maintaining any doctrine proposed by lawful pastors for true and orthodoxal, must be limited by their proportion. or disproportion to the end of obedience enjoined unto spiritual commanders; which as we said before, was to obey God in all. Those acts than must be undertaken, which upon examination appear not prejudicial to that oath of absolute obedience, which we have taken unto our supreme Lord: these omitted, which out of this general resolution of renouncing all, and denying ourselves, and this unpartial examination of our souls in particular doubts, may seem to derogate from that absolute loyalty which we owe to Christ. No minister may expect obedience, but upon these conditions; & he that sincerely obeyeth in the forementioned fundamental act of renouncing all, and denying himself, & yet disobeys in other particulars, upon such grounds and motives as we have said, doth perfectly fulfil that precept, (if any such there were) obey your spiritual overseers in all things. 14 Be our bond of duty to such governors, whether by ordinary subjection to their calling, or voluntary submission of our judgements, to their personal worth, never so great; yet seeing they command only in Christ's name, and for the adunacement of his kingdom, to imagine spiritual obedience should be due to such injunctions, as upon sober and deliberate examination seem to cross the end they propose, would argue such spiritual madness, as if a man should adventure to kill (by all probability of present occurrence, his father or mother, because he had formerly vowed (without consideration of any homicide, much less pa●●icide) thence likely to follow, to kill the first live creature he met. In such a case as * Philo de specialibus legibus. Philo acutely observes, a man should not forswear himself, or break his vow, yet overthrow the very end and use of all vows, which were instituted as bridles to make us refrain all occasions, or provocations to evil, not as halters to lead or draw us to such unnatural villainies. 15 These rules hitherto mentioned rightly observed, there is no greater difficulty in restraining universal precepts of obedience to the Church; then in limiting general commandments of kings to their Deputies or vicegerents. Now, if a King should charge his subjects to obey his Lieutenant in all that he should command: any reasonable man would take the meaning to be this; That he should be obeyed in all things that belong unto the King; service, because this is the end of his appointment, and the proper subject of this precept. No man in this case would be so mad, as to take the Prince's word for his warrant, if by his Lieutenant and he should be put into some service, which here more than suspicious to be traitorous, or apparently tending to the King's destruction. If a jesuit should see the Pope's agent or nuncio (whom he were bound to obey by the Pope's injunction delivered in most ample terms) tampering with the Pope's open enemies; either consorting with us in our Liturgy, or communicating with us in our Sacraments; receiving pension from foreigners, or secretly conferring with such of their Counsellors as had more wit than himself; could he dispense with his oath of absolute allegiance to the Pope, upon these or like evasions? This is suspicious indeed; but how shall I know whether the Pope's Agent in doing this, do disobey his Holiness? If he say no, must I not believe him? must I not obey him, and do as he doth, whom the Pope commands me to obey in all things? The Jesuits are not so simple in the Pope's cause, as they would make all other in Gods: they could tell how to limit such commands, though delivered in most universal and ample terms. This is the matter then which so vexeth their devout hearts, and sets them beside themselves with furious zeal in this argument; that any Christian should be as wary and circumspect, lest he should prove disloyal unto the Creator and Redeemer of mankind, as they are, lest they should disobey the advancer and supporter of their order. 16 But to come nearer the point, Precepts of obedience unto masters or parents though most universal for their form are limited by their subject. & instance in some precepts of obedience delivered in most general form: Might the literal or Logic note of universality carry away such absolute sovereignty as they contend for: far greater reason there is, why every father or minister should be an absolute Pope over his own family, then why the Pope of Rome should be a father of all christian congregations, an absolute judge of Scripture, or master over men's faith. * Collo. 3. ver. 20. Vide Bellar. l. 2. de Mona●h. cap. 21. Saint Paul commands children to obey their fathers in all things, for that is well pleasing unto the Lord, which is as much as if he had said, in obeying them you obey the Lord. Again, he commands servants to be obedient unto them that are their masters according to the flesh in all things, not with eyeservice as men pleasers, but with singleness of heart fearing God. Both these precepts are conceived in terms, as general, as any precept for obedience to spiritual governors. In the precept concerning wives obedience to their husbands, the note of universality is omitted: for he saith wives submit yourselves unto your husbands, as it is comely in the Lord, not in all things had the Apostle made any mention of obedience unto spiritual governors, or were there any hope to comprehend Pastors under the name of fathers or masters, it would quickly be inferred, the note of universality was purposely added by our Apostle in these latter precepts, that men might know absolute obedience without limitation or examination, was due unto the Pope. So Aquinas expounds it as Bellar. acknowledgeth it: Quod vero B. Paulus ait Col. 3 filii obedire parentibus per omnia, vel ita intelligi debet, ut illud (per omnia) significat per omnia, ad quae se extendit patria potestas, ut rectè docet Sanct. Thom. in 2. 2. quae. 104. ar. qu●madmodum, si quis diceret, opo●tere milites obedire Imperatori per omnia, exponendum esset per omnia, quae ad militiam perttinent, vel certè tenentur filii per omnia pareatibus obedire, sed dum paruuli sunt. Bellar. l. 2. de Monach. c. 21. 17 But the holy men of God, whose mouths always spoke out of the abundance of their hearts, as the spirit gave them utterance, and were not curious to cast their words in such exact scholastic moulds, as men addicted to artificial meditations, having their brains more exercised than their hearts in God's word, usually do, even where they seem to speak most universally for the former, are to be universally understood only in that subject or matter, which for the present they mind most. As when our Apostle commands servants and children to obey the one, their masters; the other, their parents in all things: the meaning is, as if he had said, ye that are christian servants, be ye most willing to yield all obedience that is due unto masters; ye that are Christian children, to yield all obedience unto your parents, which is convenient for any children to yield to theirs: So that the universal note doth rather enjoin a totality of heartiness and cheerfulness, a perfection of sincerity, in performing that obedience which other children ought to their fathers, or servants to their masters, than any way extend the object of christian children's or servants obedience to more particulars, than others were bound unto, at the least he doth not extend the object of their obedience to any particulars which might prejudice the sincerity of their obedience due unto other commanders; whilst he enjoineth servants to obey their masters in all things, he reserves their allegiance entire unto Princes and higher powers. Such must be obeyed both by masters and servants, by fathers and sons. Much more doth God when he enjoins obedience in most ample form unto Kings or spiritual governors, reserve obedience due to himself most entire and absolute. 18 Yet entire and absolute it cannot be, unless it depend immediately & absolutely upon his laws; That universal absolute obedience unto men is incomparable with true loyalty unto Christ. unless it be exempt from the uncontrolleable disposal, or infallible direction of other authorities. Nor can Christ be said our supreme Lord, unless our obedience to him and those laws which he hath left us, do limit and restrain all other obedience due unto any authority derived from him or his laws, more than a Prince could be said to be that servants supreme Lord or Sovereign, which were bound absolutely to obey his Master in all points, without examination, whether his designments were not contrary to the public laws and statutes of his Prince and Country. Wherefore as the oath of Allegiance unto Princes doth restrain the former precepts; Servants obey your Masters in all things, that is, in all things that are not repugnant to public laws, nor prejudicial to the Crown and dignity of your Sovereign: so must that solemn vow of fidelity made unto Christ in Baptism, and our daily acknowledgement of him for our Sovereign Lord, restrain all precepts in joining performance of obedience to any power on earth, and set these immovable bounds and limits to them; Obey thy King and Governor in all things, that is, in all things that are not repugnant to the laws and ordinances of the Great King, thy supreme Lord and Governor. Whilst thou obeyest him, thou dost well, in disobeying them, as well as that servant that takes Arms against his Master in the King's defence, whilst thou disobeyest him, all other obedience is rebellion; Ye are bought with a price (saith our Apostle) be not ye the servants of men; Service according to the flesh he elsewhere approves, he strictly enjoins: for that is freedom in respect of this servitude of mind and conscience, in being wholly at any other man's disposition. 19 Nor is it more difficult for Christ's servants to discern when governors solicit them to disloyalty against him, then for servants according to the flesh, to know when their masters seduce them unto rebellion; so Christian men would fear God, as much as natural men do earthly Princes. Such as fear God, are sure of a better expositor of his laws for fundamental points than servants can have for their Princes. The transgression of both are easy to discern in the beginning of revolts or apostasies; but the latter more difficult, when traitors or usurpers are grown strong, and can pretend fair titles unto soveraigneties, or coin false pedigrees, yet is it not impossible for sober and observant spirits in such a case, to foresee what party to follow; unto such the signs of the time, and carriage of the several causes will bewray who have the true title. But this difficulty is none in our spiritual obedience, challenged by the Church of Rome: for that Church in words confesseth Christ to be the true King and supreme Lord, no usurper, which is as much as to say, the Pope is an usurper, and a rebel, that dares in deeds and substance challenge the sovereignty from him (as you heard in the former dispute, by making claim to this unlimited, unreserued obedience. Upon what grounds especially we are now to examine, by these rules hitherto discussed. CHAP. II. The authority of the Sanhedrim not so universal or absolute amongst the jews as the Papists make it, but was to be limited by the former Rules. 1 ONe especial place on which they stand, is from that Law in * Deut. 17. v. 8. 9 etc. Deuteronomy, If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgement, between blood & blood, between plea and plea, between plague and plague, in the matters of controversy within thy gates, then shalt thou arise, and go up unto the place which the Lord thy God shall choose, And thou shalt come unto the Priests of the Levites, and to the judge that shall be in those days, and ask, and they shall show thee the sentence of judgement, and thou shalt do according to that thing which they of that place (which the Lord hath chosen) show thee, and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they inform thee: According to the Law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgement which they shall tell thee shalt thou do, thou shalt not decline from the thing which they shall show thee, neither to the right hand nor to the left: And that man that will do presumptuously, not hearkening unto the Priest (that standeth before the Lord thy God to minister there) or unto the judge, that man shall die, and thou shalt take away evil from Israel, so all the people shall hear and fear, and do no more presumptuously▪ 2 This precept admits of many restrictions, any one of which doth take away all the force of our adversaries objections; First, it may (without prejudice to our cause) be granted; although it cannot out of these words be necessarily inferred; that God here prescribes obedience in the abstract, such as was to be performed unto those Priests and judges that lived, according to that pattern which he had set them. Thus may this precept of obedience for the extent be universal, and concern all causes whatsoever, spiritual or temporal; doubts of conscience or matters of this life: in all which such governors wereto be obeyed; but conditionally [if they were such as God in his law required they should be] unto such (as you heard before) he gave illuminations extraordinary, such as the parties that were to obey, might have perfect notice of. But how great soever the extent of this precept be: not one fyllable in it makes more for absolute obedience unto spiritual, then unto civil governors; for it is said indefinitely * Ver. 10. a Obijcit Brentius, hoc loco non solùm ad Sar●ce dotem, sed ad judicem etiam remitti eos, qui dubitant, judicem autem fuisse politicum principem. RESPONDEO, nomine judicis posse tum intelligi Principem Sacerdotum, nam in Hebraeo est: Ascend ad Sacerdotes, & ad judicem: quasi diceret, ad Concilium Sacerdotum, & eorum principem, summum Sacerdotem. Dico secundò, si intelligamus nomine judicis politicum principem, tum esse distincta ossi●ia. Nam Sacerdoti tribuitur sententia definitiva, judici antem executio in contumaces: Qui superbierit, inquit, nolens obedire Sacerdotis imperio, ex decreto judicis moriatur. Bellar. de verb. Dei interpret. l. 3. c. 4. thou shalt do according to that thing which they (either spiritual or temporal) of that place which the Lord hath chosen shall show thee. And again, the words are disjunctive, That man that will do presumptuously, not hearkening unto the Priest or unto the judge, that man shall die; whether the Priest were to be supreme judge or no, it is not said, at the least the High Priest was not the chief man always in the Council, for he was not always admitted into the supreme Consistory or Sanhedrim, which is established in this place, yet a This distinction is quite contrary to the words of the Text, for the Hebrews call such as execute sentence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in opposition to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, used in this place which signifieth such a magistrate as giveth definitive sentence Vid. Fagu. in 16. Deuteronem. Bellarmine will have the ᵇ definitive sentence belong unto the Priest, and the execution of it to the civil magistrate: so indeed the present Romish Church in spiritual cases would be judge, and make Christian Princes her hangmen, The Law of God, Deut. 17. did concern temporal causes, either only, or especially. but their practice must not be taken for an infallible exposition of that Law, whence they seek to justify their practice quite contrary to the practice of the jewish Church and Synagogue. Nor doth Bellarmine or any other, beside the base parasitical Canonists, or the Pope's trencher chaplains, deny, but that in many civil causes, the Prince or temporal Magistrate hath a definitive sentence; can he then gather out of any circumstance of this place, that only spiritual causes are here meant? nay, he confesseth that the law is general concerning all doubts that might arise out of the law; yea it is most probable, that it only concerns civil controversies, and Bellarmine's reason to prove, that it includeth spiritual causes, or matters of religion, is most idle. The occasion of this Law (saith he) was for them that did serve other Gods as appears, out of the beginning of the Chapter; now the service of other Gods is a point of Religion. But what though Moses in the former part of this Chapter speak of Idolaters, must this law therefore concern Idolaters. In the former part he speaketh only of Idolaters, but this law is not only for them by Bellarmine's confession. Yea the circumstances of the place, and the express law against Idolaters mentioned before, evince, that in this Chapter, as in the former, he first sets down laws concerning the true service of God, and in the latte● part gives precepts for the observation of the second Table, the maintaining of love, by the final composition of all controversies that might arise betwixt neighbours. In the former law Idolaters are sentenced to death, and Idolatry (saith Bellarmine) is a point of Religion; Was the Priest alone then to give sentence, and the civil Magistrate only to execute it. There is not the least pretence for it out of this Text. Any ordinary Magistrate might execute him that was lawfully convicted of this crime, nor was it so hard a matter to judge, who was an Idolater amongst the jews, as it is to determine what is an heresy amongst the Romanists. This was to be proved by witnesses, not by Logical proof or force of speculative reason: Had the cunningest jesuit in the world been taken amongst them kneeling down before an Image and praying to it, all the distinctions in the master of sentences, or Aquinas or both their Commentators could not have redeemed him, against two honest men that would have sworn he would have done thus much; there had been no appeal from any City in judah, unto any higher Court; his doom had been read in the gates, and without them he should (as Homer speaks) have put on a stony coat. 3 That the Kings of judah were only to execute the Priests definitive sentence in all hard controversies, is a position well deserving execution without appeal at Prince's hands. And no doubt but it did so amongst the jews. The former Court as is most probable, was to cease, when they had a King amongst them. And Moses in the former Chapter, after he had given the other law for ending controversies, gives the law for the election of their king, if so be they would have one: as if the former Court had then ceased to be the supreme Tribunal; seeing all Subjects might appeal unto the King from it, in which this Sovereignty did before reside, as being the supreme Tribunal, whence there could be no appeal. 4 The King in the Law concerning his qualification, is commanded to have the Law of his God written out. * Deut. 17. 19 And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, and to keep all the words of his Law, and these Ordinances for to do them, that his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not from the commandment to the right hand, or to the left. Was he to take all this pains, only that he might learn to execute the priests definitive sentence? This any heathen might have done. But the Kings of Israel, albeit they were not to meddle in the execution of the Priest's office, were notwithstanding to be so well skilled in Scriptures as to be able to judge, whether the Priest did according to that Law which God had set him to follow, and to control his definitive sentence, if it were evidently contrary to God's word, which both were absolutely bound to obey. 5 It may perhaps here be objected, that the King had no such assurance of infallibility in judgement as the Priest had, & therefore it was requisite he should rely upon the priests definitive sentence. What construction then can any jesuit make of these words; A divine sentence shall be in the lips of the King, his mouth shall not transgress, he saith not, in execution of judgement given by the Priests, but in judgement given by himself, seeing it is an abomination to Kings to commit wickedness, for the throne is established by justice. And again, * Prou. 16. 10. That the infallibility of kings may be defended with as great probability of Scriptures as the infallibility of priests. Prou. 16. 13. Righteous lips (such the Priests should as and might have been, but usually were not) are the delight of Kings, and the King loveth him that speaketh right things. This place if we respect either the abstract form of precept, or plenitude of God's promise for habiliment to perform it, is more plain and peremptory for the Kings, than any can be brought for the high Priests infallibility, in giving definitive sentence; yet doth it not necessarily infer, Kings shall not; but rather shows that they should not, or that they might not at any time err in judgement, so they would steadfastly follow those rules which God had prescribed them. For when God saith; A divine sentence shall be in the lips of Kings; this speech doth no more argue a perpetual certainty in giving righteous sentence, then if he had said; A corrupt or erroneous sentence shall not be in the lips of Kings, or his mouth shall not transgress in judgement. For as that which God saith, shall not be done, oftimes is done: so may that which God saith, shall be done, be oftimes left undone. Who is he then would make this collection: God saith, Thou shalt not steal, that is no man shall steal, ergo there can be no thieves, no theft committed, yet is our adversaries collection as foolish, The Priest's lips shall preserve knowledge, Ergo they cannot err in giving definitive sentence, or again, The spirit shall lead you into all truth, they shall be all taught of God; therefore the Church shall be infallibly taught by the spirit, and shall as infallibly teach others, live they as they list. 6 These places show what should be done, and what God for his part will infallibly perform (so men would be obedient to his word) but neither do these, or any of like nature, include any infallibility of not erring without performance of due obedience in practice of life; nor do they necessarily conclude, that men always shall perform such obedience. The most which they infer, is this, that Governors by duty are bound to perform, that performing such obedience in practice of life, they might be freer from error, in their doctrine or definitive sentence. And it was abstinence and integrity of life that was to preserve sincerity of judgement in Princes as well as Priests lips, for which reason Princes had their precepts of temperance, answerable to those rules prescribed for the Priests. So Solomon teacheth kings, * Pro. 31. ver. 3. 4. 5. Give not thy strength unto a woman, nor thy ways, this is to destroy Kings. it is not for Kings, O Lemuel, it is not for Kings to drink wine, nor for Princes strong drink, lest he drink and forget the decree, and change the judgement of all the children of affliction. This place evidently shows, that if their Princes were of riotous or intemperate lives, they had no promise that they should not pervert the judgement of the children of affliction. The Conclusion hence arising is; all the places that can be brought, either for the King or Priest's authority, rather show what manner of men they should be both in life and judgement, then assure them of any infallibility of judgement, if they be dissolute in life. This was a point never dreamt of by any, before the Popes notoriously infamous lives, did discredit the titles of sanctity and infallibility (which from a conceit of their predecessors integrity they have usurped) and enforced their parasites to frame a distinction of sanctity in doctrine separated from sanctity in life. 7 It is questionable, whether both Priests and Princes of judah had not an extraordinary privilege above all other nations, both for being infallible in their definitive sentences whilst they lived according to the laws which God had given them, and also for their more than ordinary possibility of living according to such laws. God's blessings (as is most probable) in both these respects, were extraordinary unto their Princes and Priests: yet not so infinitely extraordinary, that either of them might without presumptuous blasphemy hope for ordinary integrity (such as the more civil sort of heathens had) much less for any absolute infallibility, if they were extraordinarily wicked in their lives, or unfaithful in their other dealings. Even the people's wickedness did impair the force and virtue of these extraordinary blessings promised to their Kings and Priests, God gave them priests as well as Princes in his anger, such as should be pliable to their humour, not such as should infallibly direct them against the suggestions of the world and flesh for their spiritual good. So that these gracious promises both for their spiritual and temporal governors sincerity in judgement, did depend in part upon the condition of this people's life. 8 The usual Proverb was most true (though the words thus inverted) like people, like Priests. Thus did the wise son of Sira●h interpret God's promises both to Priest and Princes * Eccles. 45. v. 23, 24. 25. Because Phineas the son of Eleazar had zeal in the fear of the Lord, and stood up with good courage of heart, when the people were turned back, and made reconciliation for Israel; therefore was there a covenant of peace made with him, that he should be the chief of the Sanctuary, and of his people, & that he and his posterity should have the dignity of the Priesthood for ever. And according unto the covenant made with David, that the inheritance of the Kingdom should remain to his son of the Tribe of judah, so the heritage of Aaron should be to the only son of his son, and to his seed. God give us wisdom in our heart to judge his people in righteousness, that the good things that they have be not abolished, and that their glory may endure for their posterity. 9 For what we have said it is most evident, that the precepts enjoining obedience unto civil Magistrates, are as large & ample as any can be found for obedience unto spiritual governors, and what limitations soever the one did, the other might admit, during the time of the Law. The promises of Gods extraordinary favour, for directing both in their proceedings, were equal to both always conditional in both cases. 10 As for this Law, Deut. 17. the very nature of the Text and circumstances annexed thereto, That this law of Deut. doth justify our English laws for executing priests and Jesuits, or all such as acknowledge the Pope supreme judge in causes Ecclesiastical. infer no more than this; That God would have a supreme Tribunal amongst the Israelites, wherein all con●rouersis which could not be ended in inferior Courts, were to be finally determined, lest private contentions might grow to public dissensions, or wranglings for petty damages, turn to the overthrow of the state by disturbance of common peace. It may be admitted then that absolute obedience is here enjoined, but not universally absolute, nor in all causes, but in causes of controversy betwixt man and man, not in causes betwixt men and their own consciences. And although the ground of controversers' plea might be from some spiritual law, (as concerning succession in the Priesthood, etc.) or have some spiritual matters annexed as consequent, the judges censure was to extend only unto men's civil carriage, in such controversies, and the Plaintiffs were to prosecute their right or title (were it matter of wrong, of inheritance, spiritual or temporal) no farther than the sentence of his Court did permit. All were bound upon pain of death to sit down with their private loss, rather than raise tumults or endanger the public form of government established in Israel. Even when they knew the judges sentence in particular to be erroneous, they were to do or suffer as he commanded, to remit their right, to let go that hold and interest which they thought they had in matters of temporal consequence (though perhaps of spiritual title) and undergo what corporal penalty soever the Priest or judge (whethersoever were supreme magistrates) did enjoin them; but they were not bound to think as the Priest or judge thought, nor to hold their sentence was always agreeable to the law of God. Albeit much easier it was for the Sanhedrim, then for the modern Romish Consistory, to resolve more controversies brought unto them by this divine rule. Because the ancient Israelites did not use to trouble their Priests or judges with such quirks and quiddittes, as coined for the most part by Schoolmen, have bred greatest contention in the Christian world, such as never could have been decided by the judgement of urim or Thummin, not by Prophets, visions or dreams: He that had desired any, must have gone to Endor for resolution, Sam. 1. c. 28. v. 7. In jerusalem or Shiloh (whiles they flourished) the proposers of such controversies should have been punished for their curiosity, which amongst the Israelites had been as hateful as the sin of Witchcraft. The want of such a Tribunal as this, for punishing contentions and curious spirits, hath caused such fruitless contentions, and nice questions, as cannot possibly be resolved, once set abroach or prosecuted, but might easily have been prevented by the religious care and industry of such a supreme Consistory in every kingdom. What hath been said concerning the meaning of this place, Deut. 17. is confirmed by the practice of the jews and their ancient Records; First, that not only conditional, but absolute obedience is here enjoined, is not probable out of those words, v. 11. * Tria genera doctrinarum & sententiarum veteribus fuerunt. Primum rece● tum credebatur a Mose ac Prophetis, quod Cavala nominatur. Secundum, quod opinatione judicum constitit, ut in Scripturae locis enarrandis, quae ad Occonomiam pertinebant. Ex quo intelligitur causa, quam ●b rem sub priore templo & prioribus annis posterioris, tanta concordia judaeorum Ecclesia administrata sit, donec enim magnum judicium viguit omnia certo desinita, summo consensu recipiebantur. Exinde in sententia facienda, & respondendo de lege saepissimè coniectu●is connix● sunt, Et tamen quod sic erat pronuncia●ū, pro lege recipibaturl Tertiam genus quod s●atuunt ultra legen, quo illa defenditur, seu obiecto sepimento, ut prius v●olandum sit hoc, quam in lege a● quid soris admittatur. Hoc Christi domini aetate inverterunt, Nam propter traditiones reliquerunt legem Dei. 〈◊〉 interim duo genera, alia perpetuo esse volverunt alia tempora●ia. Fag●us in hunc locum. [according to the Law which they shall teach thee:] not only the written law of God (as some will have it) but such customs as were received in this Court, though but probably deduced from the written law, or otherwise invented by their magistrates in cases omitted by the Lawgiver. All such customs, decrees, or ordinances were to be obeyed absolutely in such matters as did concern men's temporal losses or commodities, there was not appeal to any other Court on earth, for the reversing of any sentence given in this; to have attempted thus much, by this law, had been present death; and by the same all Christian Princes justly might, yea ought to put death all such, as in any cause spiritual or temporal, upon any occasion whatsoever, shall appeal to Rome from the chief Tribunal allotted for the hearing of such causes in their native Country: for by nature and Christian duty, all are bound to abide the sentence of that Tribunal; though not to approve it, yet not to resist it, or oppose violence unto it, though it offer violence to them: for God only must take vengeance of their abusing of that authority, which he had given them for others good, not for their harm. Would God all Christian Princes would put this law in practice, and fulfil God's word in the forementioned place, that all might die which do thus presumptuously: that so evil, and (the mischief of mischiefs) all appeals to Rome, might be taken away from Israel; that so all Christian people hereafter might hear and fear, and do no more presumptuously. Secondly, that the high Priest was not the infallible judge, nor above Kings in giving definitive sentence, is most evidently confirmed by consent of jewish * Sed nec rex in Sanhedrim admittebatur, eo quod prehibitum si contendere eum eo. Sacerdòs vero magnus recipieba●●a modo●●pientiae praeditus esset. Fagius in cap. ●6. Deut. ex Hebraeis. antiquity; for the High Priest was not admitted into their chief Consistory but upon this condition, if he were a wise man, and being admitted, yet was he not to sway all as he pleased, for so is it said in the same place, that the king was not to be of the * Vide Fagium in cap. 10. Deut. and the annotations unto the 9 §. of the next Chapter. Sanhedrim, because they were forbidden to contend with him, with the High Priest they might. But the Prophets of God did always in their doctrine withstand either the Priests, Prophets, Kings or judges, as often as they went * contra stationes Montis Sinai. CHAP. III. That our saviours injunction of obedience to the Scribes and Pharisees, though most universal for the form, is to be limited by the former Rules, that without open blasphemy it cannot be extended to countenance the Romish cause: that by it we may limit other places brought by them for the Pope's transcendent universal authority. 1 ANother place there is, which, as it seems hath been too much beaten heretofore, because some of the cunningest Anglers for Peter's tribute, begin of late to relinquish it. The place is Math. 23. verse 2. 3. The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses seat. All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do, but after their works do not, for they say, and do not. Bellarmine in his first attempts, is more forward to fortify this hold then any other; to what purpose, I cannot divine, unless to terrify such as view it only a far off; but it seems he felt upon better experience, the maintenance of it once closely besieged, would not quit the cost; for elsewhere, he yields as much expressly, as will enforce him to surrender up this, if it be instantly demanded. Perhaps he hoped his premunitions might work some secret disposition in most men's minds more prejudicial to our cause, than we out of our honest simplicity could at first sight suspect. It will not therefore be amiss, partly to prevent the possible danger of his concealed conclusion, by showing the express folly of his premises; partly, to examine the place itself, because the evidence of it failing, will be a presumption against all they pretend of like kind, and may afford some farther light how we may restrain propositions for their form most universal, by the matter or circumstances concomitant. 2 The fortresses which he erects for defence, are three. His first, that our Saviour in this very Chapter * Mat. 23. wherein he reprehends the Scribes and Pharisees most sharply, yet gives this cave at to such as are weak in faith, lest they should neglect their doctrine for their bad lives and hypocrisy The note, Nota 3 PRIMO loto illo capite 〈…〉 colligere, non● 〈…〉 capitis 〈…〉 eorum 〈◊〉 SECUNDO, nota cum 〈◊〉 ano lib. 4 Epist. 9 Nunquam Dominum, neque Apasto●s in tota Scriptura reprehendisse Pontifices et Sacerdotes judaeorum, nominando eos Pontifices vel Sacerdotes, sed solùm sub nomine Scribarum et Phariscorum, ne videretur roprchendere cathedram et Sacerdotium, et ut intell ge●●mus, semper deberi honarem Sacerdot●o et Pontificatui, etiam si sortè persona quae in Cathedra sede●, sit minus 〈◊〉. Ex quo intell gimus hareticos hu●us temporis, qui ●eassim in Episcopos et Sac●rdotes & praecipuè in ipsum ●ummum Ecclesiae Pontificem invehuntur, nihil habere commune cum moribus Domini, & Apostolorum. TERTIO nota, quod Dominus de Cathedra Mosis dicit, intelligi à fortiori de Cathedra 〈◊〉. Bel. de interp. ver. Dei. l. 3. c. 5. considered in itself, is not amiss, but brought to countenance their bad cause, or else to prejudice the truth of ours, by raising a suspicion in the ignorant of our bad dealing, as if we taught the contrary. 3 His second fortress is, that neither our Saviour Christ, nor his Apostles did ever tax the Prelates, or inferior Priests, by these names directly, but always under the name of Scribes and pharisees, lest they might thereby seem to reprehend the Priesthood or seat of authority. And this they did, that men might know, honour and reverence to be due unto the Prelacy or PriesthOod, although the Priests or Prelates in their lives and persons were not so commendable. The consequence is not amiss; albeit his reason be not so firm, and the corollary, which he hence deduceth, most malicious. Hence (saith he) we are given to understand, that the heretics of this age, which upon every occasion inveigh against Bishops, Priests, especially the Pope, do but ill consent in manners with our Saviour and his Apostles. But did neither our Saviour Christ, nor his Apostles tax the Priests & Prelates by their proper names for that reason which Bellarmine brings? * Bellarmine's idle and malirious collections out of our saviours words refuted. We may suppose I trust without offence, that God's Prophets did not go beyond their commission, in taxing the chief offences or offenders of their times; that our Saviour or his Apostles might upon the like or greater occasions, have used the same form of reprehension the Prophets did, or other more personal. The true reason why so they did not, was, because they had no such respect of persons or titles, as Bellarmine dreams of, but aimed chiefly at the fairest, for such usually gave greatest countenance to foulest sins. And who knows not, now in the Synagogues latter days, the glorious titles of Scribes and pharisees had, in a sort drowned the names of Priests; as the reputation of Jesuits hath of late years much eclipsed all other titles of inferior ministers, heretofore more famous in the Romish Church? It was likewise the high esteem of these two Saint like sects, which seduced most silly souls throughout jewry, to follow traditions contrary to God's laws, as the Jesuits late same hath drawn most of the blind Churches children (which go more by ear then eye sight) to account villainy piety, and falsehood subtlety. As our Saviour and his Apostles reprehended the Rabbis or Priests in their times, not under the names of Priests and Levites, but under the glorious names of Scribes and pharisees, then reputed the only guides of godliness: so would they, were they now on earth (as we in imitation of them) tax the Romish Clergy, especially under the names of jesuits, or other more famous orders in that church. But the Sect of Scribes and pharisees being not known in Malachies time, nor any other order so glorious then, as the order of Priests, Mala. 2. ●. he tells them their own in their proper names; And now O ye Priests this commandment is for you. So did Micah and Zephania, and every Prophet, as their demerits gave occasion. 4 His third fortress is, that whatsoever Christ saith of Moses chair, must he conceived to make more for Saint Peter, and such as sat therein. Why our saviours admonition should make more for the Pope's authority within his own territories than it did for the Scribes and pharisees, or High Priests authority in the land of jewry; I see no reason that it may concern the people, living under the Pope, and Clergy of Rome, as much as it did the people of jewry then subject to the High Priest, Scribes and pharisees, I will not deny; for such judges as they were, the Popes of Rome in their several generations may be, nay, would God they were not. Let us see then, what infallibility in giving definitive sentence, Bellarmine can prove out of the forementioned place. The words are plain, Whatsoever they bid you do, that do. What, all without any exception? nay, you do the Papists wrong, if you collect so; Whatsoever they speak ex Cathedra. Then the proposition, though most universal for the form is restrained by our adversaries themselves, unto such doctrines only, as they taught ex Cathedra. And justly, seeing this restraint hath more apparent ground in the Text than any other. Therefore it is said, they sit in Moses seat, they are infallible, not always, because they sometimes sit; but whiles they sit in Moses seat, or give sentence out of it; what is it then to give sentence out of Moses seat? to pronounce sentence solemnly, and upon deliberation? If unto all their doctrines or definitive sentences so prononnced, men had been bound in conscience to yield obedience: the Pope (as shall be showed anon) had never sat in Peter's chair; yea, Peter himself had been in conscience bound to be an Apostata from Christ. Maldonates' restraint of the former injunction. But what is the meaning of these words? They sit in Moses seat, all therefore whatsoever they bid you, that observe, and do? That is, all that Moses first said, and they recite, This is a strange interpretation indeed, will the ignorant or illiterate Papist reply, yet (to omit many others of their own,) a late * Cum jubet servare, ac facere quae Scribae & Pharisaei, dumb in Cathedra Moysis s●deat, licunt non de ips●rum, sed de legis, ac Moysis doctrina loquitur, periade enim est, ac si dicat, omnia, quae lex & Moses vobis dixerint, Scribis & Pharisaeis recitantibus seruate ac facite, secundum autem opera eorum nolite facere, ut Hila. Hieron. videntur intellexisse. Cur ergo, dicet aliquis non dixit, quaecunque Moyses dicet, ●eruate ac 〈◊〉, sed quaecunque Scribae & Pharisaei dixerint? Duplex reddi causa potestcaltera: quod volverit Scribarum et Pharisaeorum hypocrism arguere: non autem artguisset nisi dixisset eos aliter docere. Altera quod toto capite accrbè eos esset reprehensurus, & conveniebat aliquantulum eos prius laudare, ne omnia ex affects, & sine judicio improbare videretur. Maldonatus in c. 23. v. 3. Math. S. Augustine's answer, [Non sequitur de Pharisaeis, nisi in Cathedra Moysis sedentibus, tunc autem Cathedra ipsa coegit eos vera dicere.] He thus rejects [Quis dubita● illa ipsa falsa, quae docebant, in Cathedra ipsa, si in Cathedra sedebant, aut in Syaagoga & Schola. 2. Moysis docuisse? Seeing the jesuit thus rejects the disjunction of speaking ex Cathedra, or as private men, what reason have we to acknowledge the Pope's public or infallible spirit, whilst he speaks ex Cathedra, when by their own confession he may be worse than an Heretic of Infidel if we take him as a private man. Jesuits whole skill in expounding Scriptures (save only where doting love unto their Church, hath made him blind) none of theirs, few of our Church have surpassed, [ * Cum jubet servare, ac facere quae Scribae & Pharisaei, dumb in Cathedra Moysis s●deat, licunt non de ips●rum, sed de legis, ac Moysis doctrina loquitur, periade enim est, ac si dicat, omnia, quae lex & Moses vobis dixerint, Scribis & Pharisaeis recitantibus seruate ac facite, secundum autem opera eorum nolite facere, ut Hila. Hieron. videntur intellexisse. Cur ergo, dicet aliquis non dixit, quaecunque Moyses dicet, ●eruate ac 〈◊〉, sed quaecunque Scribae & Pharisaei dixerint? Duplex reddi causa potest: altera, quod volverit Scribarum et Pharisaeorum hypocrism artguere: non autem ar guisset nisi dixisset eos aliter docere. altars quod toto capite acerbè eos esset reprehensurus, & conveniebat aliquantulum eos prius laudare, ne omnia ex affects, & sine judicio improbare videretur. Maldonatus in c. 23. v. 3. Math. S. Augustine's answer, [Non sequitur de Pharisaeis, nisi in Cathedra Moysis sedentibus, tunc autem Cathedra ipsa coegit eos vera dicere.] He thus rejects [Quis dubita● illa ipsa falsa, quae docebant, in Cathedra ipsa, si in Cathedra sedebant, aut in Syaagoga & Schola. 2. Moysis docuisse? Seeing the jesuit thus rejects the disjunction of speaking ex Cathedra, or as private men, what reason have we to acknowledge the Pope's public or infallible spirit, whilst he speaks ex Cathedra, when by their own confession he may be worse than an Heretic of Infidel if we take him as a private man. When he commands to observe, and do all that the Scribes & pharisees say, whilst they sit in Moses seat, he speaks not of theirs, but of Moses his doctrine. the meaning is, as if he had said, whatsoever the law or Moses (recited by the Scribes and pharisees) shall say unto you, that observe and do, but do not ye according to their works.] This he takes to be Saint Hilaries, and Saint Hieroms exposition of the place. If any man yet further demand, why our Saviour did not speak more plainly, [Whatsoever Moses saith, observe and do] rather then [Whatsoever the Scribes and pharisees say, observe and do:] Maldonat in the same place gives two reasons: The first, because our Saviour did now purpose to tax the Scribes and pharisees hypocrisy which he had not taxed, unless he had showed, that they taught otherwise then they lived. The second, that in this Chapter he intended to reprehend the Scribes and pharisees sharply, and therefore it was expedient, he should first commend them for some things, lest all his reproofs might seem to proceed from passion, or want of judgement. Thus far Maldonat, unto whose answer we may adjoin, that our Saviour Christ (as Maldonat also well hath noted) did speak these words unto such as had seen his miracles, and heard his doctrine, and yet could not be his daily auditors with his other Disciples: but were to repair to the Scribes and pharisees, as unto their ordinary teachers, and instructors in the Law. Here, if we consider the humour of rude and ignorant people for such may we suppose most of his auditors were as yet) it was very likely they would either be slow to hear, or ready to distaste any doctrine that should proceed from the Scribes and pharisees mouths, whom they had heard so much discommended by that blessed mouth, which spoke as never man's did. For it is a work of great judgement▪ nay of the spirit overruling the flesh, to make men relish their doctrine, whose lives & conversations they loathe. And such as are but scholars (though never so mean) to an excellent master, will usually be puffed up▪ with a conceit of themselves, from other men's conceit and commendations of him, and in this humour scorn to learn of any more meanly qualified, or of less estimation in the same profession. Again, there is a jealousy in most illiterate minds, that their Preacher, if he follow not such lessons in his life, as he gives them, doth not teach them as they should be taught, nor instruct them sincerely as he thinks, but rather in policy enjoins them strictness of life, that he himself may follow his pleasures without partners. 5 Hence usually are many wholesome spiritual medicines disproved, The original of jealousies in the flock, or needless exceptions against the wholesome admonitions of Pastors. ere proved or tasted, because the parties unto whom they are tendered, have no conceit or relish of any good, but what is pleasant to sense, or profitable for secular purposes; such as none that truly think, or call good, but will so entertain it in action and resolution, never willingly preferring the less before the greater, both being of the same kind. If a man should make choice of that bargain, which he would persuade as less commodious unto others; none would believe he spoke sincerely as he thought, but rather cunningly to prevent others, or to effect his own gain without a sharer. But whilst secular good stands in competition with spiritual, albeit we approve the one as truly good, and condemn the other as evil; yet even the best of us is often enforced to take up that complaint; To will is present with me, Rom. 7. 18. 19 but I find no means to perform that which is good for I do not the good things which I would, but the evil which I would not, that do I. Rude and illiterate minds, ignorant of this difference between sensitive and spiritual good, as altogether unacquainted with the one, out of their own custom always to act what they intent, suspect their Pastors, whilst they commend wholesome food unto them, do not think because they do not as they say. From this source issue these or the like mutterings amongst themselves, Tush, if our Parson were of the same mind out of the Pulpit, as he makes show for in it; why should be not frame his life accordingly? Doth he love us (trow we) better than himself? nay, I warrant him, he is old enough to know what is good for himself: and if he knew that which he bids us do, to be as good for him, as he would make us believe it is for us; what a God's name, hinders him from doing it? he hath little else to do beside, much less I am sure than any of us. 6 To meet perhaps with all these, but especially with this last temptation, our Saviour gives his auditors this preservative; The Scribes and pharisees sit in Moses chair, all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do, but after their works do not] As if he had said, Though their lives be hypocritical and bad, yet be not too jealous of their doctrine: They deliver that ordinarily unto you, which Moses did teach your forefathers. The doctrine is exceeding good, howsoever these cursed hypocrites do not follow it: But this is God's judgement upon them, that they should see the truth with their eyes, and not understand it by laying it to their hearts. 7 This I ta●e it, The true restraint of the former injunction. is the drift of our saviours speech, whence the universal no●e [whatsoever] must be restrained to such material doctrines, as the Scribes and pharisees themselves, either expressly delivered out of Moses, or whiles they interpreted him, commended to others as good in the general, howsoever they shrunk back or shuffled, when they came to the practice of such particulars as crossed their humours; or unto these precepts of good life, whose truth and equity their auditors might easily have acknowledged, either from their conseruancie with the principles of nature, or other undoubted mandates of Moses law, or from the authority of bad, yet lawful teachers, whose advise is always to be followed as good, unless there be just suspicion of evil, or sinister respects, of which their bad lives are then only just presumptions, when they handle particulars that concern themselves, as making for their gain, credit, glory, Apologies in bad courses, or avertment of deserved disgrace. 8 If we take this whole universal affirmative, [Whatsoever they bid you, that observe and do] in that sense our Saviour meant it: it is but equivalent to this, or the like universal negative, [Leave nothing undone that either Moses, or such as sit in his seat commands as good] or your conscience cannot justly witness to be evil, albeit they which commend it to you for good, are evil, and cannot teach themselves to do it. Few Preachers in any well ordered Church, are so unlearned, or bad of life, but what they solemnly one time or other deliver out of Moses and the Prophets, might be a sufficient rule for their hearers internal thoughts, and outward actions: did not the flock preposterously make their Pastors doings, the rule of their thoughts and sayings; always suspecting that, as not good, which they see left undone, and accounting all lawful for themselves to do, which they see done and practised by their leaders. When as not the Pastor's lives or doings; but their sayings are to be made rules of other men's lives and actions. And our Saviour enjoins the former obedience unto the very pharisees; who spoke as well, and did as ill as any could do; very patterns of hypocrisy. In expounding Moses, hay could not but often inculcate the orthodoxal doctrine of good works, of alms deeds, and liberality; yet retained they the roots of avarice in their hearts, whose bitterness would bewray itself upon particular occasions, * Luc. 16. v. 14. All these things heard the pharisees, saith Saint Luke, which were covetous, and they mocked him. They often exhorted others to circumcise the heart, to be humble and meek as Moses was, yet remained proud themselves, ambitious of highest places in the Synagogues, Luc. 11, v. 39 inwardly fully of raven and wickedness. They often taught others as Moses had done, to walk uprightly as in the sight of the Lord their God; and yet did all their works to be seen of men. They had often taught their auditors to honour father and mother, and learnedly discoursed upon the equity of this precept in general: yet could upon private respects dispense with it in sundry particulars. They said well in the former, and did ill in the latter. And albeit they justified their practice by tradition of the elders (as the Pontificians do theirs, when they absolute subjects from the bond of duet, to their civil; or children; to their natural parents, that they may be more serviceable to the Church their mother,) yet their sayings in these Apologies were but accessary to their doings; not comprehended under▪ that universal affirmative [All whatsoever they bid you, observe, and do,] but under the negative [After their works do not] for they were more desirous to be honoured as Rabbis and Fathers of the congregation, then to honour the parents of their flesh: albeit they usually taught others so to do, save only when their treasury might be enriched, or their own honour enlarged by dispensations, which the people easily might have discerned for contrary, as well to the Law of God and nature, as these dispensators own doctrine, when themselves were not parties. 9 * The authority of th● Keys not universal, but to be limited as the former precept or injunction hath been. From the restraint of this universal precept, we may easily limit that speech of our Saviour unto Saint Peter, which Bellarmine labours to make more than most universal, because the surest ground in their supposals of the Pope's transcendent authority, [ * Math. 16. v. 19 I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt lose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven.] By these keys saith a Per istas claves non solum intelligitur potestas soluendi à peccatis, sed etiam ab omnibus aliis vinculis & impedimentis, quae nisi tollantur, non potest intrare in regnum caelorum, siquidem promissio generalis est, nec dicitur, Quemcunque solueris, sed quod cunque solueris, ut intellig mus modos omnes, seu legum dispensando, seu peccatorum et paenarum relaxando, seu dogmatum, et controversiarum explicando à Petro eiusque, successoribus solui posse Bellar. de verbi Dei interpret. lib. 11. cap. 37. Bellarmine, is understood a power of losing, not only sins, but all other bonds or impediments, without whose removal there is no possibility of entrance into the Kingdom of heaven: for the promise is general; nor is it said, Whomsoever, but whatsoever thou losest, etc. giving us hereby to understand, that Peter and his successors may lose all knots or difficulties, of what kindsoever, if of laws, by dispensing with them, if of sins, by remitting them, if of controversies, or opinions, by unfolding them. Thus far would this cunning Sophister improve the universal [Whatsoever] above it ordinary and ancient value in Scripture phrase: further than the condition of the party, to whom the promise was made (being Christ's servants, not his equal) will suffer. For what greater prerogative could Christ himself challenge, than such as Bellarmine (for the present Pope's sake) would make Saint Peter? The universal note in this place, as the like before, includes only an abundant assurance of the power bequeathed; a full and irrevocable ratification of the Keys right use, such a shutting as none can open, such an opening as none can shut; as often as sentence is either way given upon sufficient and just occasions. The proper subject that limits the universal form of this more than princely prerogative, is the denial or confession of Christ, either in open speech, in perpetual actions or resolution; as shall be (by God's assistance) made evident against Romish assertions) without derogation from the royalty of Priesthood, which within these territories is much more dreadful and sovereign, than worldlings will acknowledge, until they be made feel the full stroke of the spiritual sword, in these our days, for the most part borne in vain. 10 Whatsoever reasons else they can from any other places of Scripture pretend for absolute infallibility in the High Priests, or Church representative under the Law, fall of their own accord, these fundamental ones being overthrown. But before I proceed to evince the jewish supreme tribunal most grossly erreneous de sacto: I must request the ingenious Readers, as many as understand Latin, and can have access unto these great Doctor's writings, to be eye-witnesses with us, or if it please them, public Notaries of their reckless impieties. Of which unless authentic notice be now taken, and propagated to posterity by evident testimonies beyond exception: his impudent generation in future ages, when these abominations grow old, and more stirred in begin so to stink, that for the Churches temporal health, the books of modern Jesuits must be purged, will surely deny that ever any of their grand Divines were so mad with incestuous love of their whorish mother, as to seek her maintenance by such shameless, That no argument 〈…〉 from the former pla●e to prove the Church's infallibility, but 〈◊〉 as 〈…〉 of our Saviour. gross, notorious, palpable written blasphemies, as ungracious judes would rather have choked with an halter in their birth, then have granted them entrance into the world through his throat. He in comparison of these Antichristian Traitors, ingenuously confessed his soul offence in betraying innocent blood. But even the flower of Romish Doctors Bishops, and Cardinals, are not ashamed to justify him, in betraying; and the Scribes and pharisees, in solemnly condemning our Saviour; For, if the one sort did not err in judgement, the other did not amiss in executing what they enjoined: * Tria genera 〈…〉 hoc loco lex d●cuntur, Puta ordin● a●ones, edicta, vel traditiones & consuetudines legitimae, quibus in multitudine publica honestas continetur. Hinc est quod Prophetae constantissimè refragati sunt, quoties contra stationes montis Sinai, ut vocant, aut reges, aut judices, aut populus aliquid admiserat. [Of which see the Annotations to the last §. save one of the former Chapter.] yet by that very consistory of Priests, and Elders, brought in by Bellarmine, as chief supporters of the Church's infallibility, was the life of the world censured to death for an heretic, or refractarious Scismatique; and the * In Talmud scribitur dominum nostrum illis damnatum. Caeterum accusationem falso 〈…〉 nunquam voluit Pontifi●um & Pharisa orum tanquam judicum authoritatem esse conuuls●m, sed stab●●tam potiu●. Matth. 23. Fagius in Deu. 17. ●al●udists, taking that Consistories authority but for such as the Jesuits supposed, conclude directly from principles common to the Synagogue and the Roman Church, that he deserved no less, because he would not subscribe unto their sentence, nor recant his opinions. 11 Again; if we understand that other place [The Scribes and pharisees sit in Moses seat, all therefore whatsoever they bid you, that observe and do,] universally as most Papists do, and heart out of his transmarinall Catechism, would gladly have maintained it: any jew might thus assume; unto the Scribes and pharisees solemnly bid judas and others to observe our Saviour as a seducer, or traitor, and charged the people to seek his blood: therefore they were in consciences, and upon pain of damnation, bound so to do. Do I amplify one word, or wrong them a jot in these collections? I appeal unto their own Writers. Let Melchior Canus, inferior to none in that Church for learning, and for a Papist a man of singular ingenuity be judge betwixt us. If from his words, as much as I have said, do not most directly follow: let let me die the death for this supposed slander. Against the absolute infallibility of Counsels, or Synods, maintained by him in his fifth book: our Writers, as he frames their argument, thus objects. The Priests and pharisees called Counsels, whose solemn sentences were impious, because they condemned the son of God for such: in like sort may the Romish Prelacy give sentence contrary unto Christ. Unto this objection, saith * Ad id quoque quod dem●eps sequitur, non est difficile respondere. Nam sacerdotum veterum acta quidem Christo adversa fueruent all sententu. hominum ali●qui possimorum non solum verissinia, sed reipub. etiam utilissima suit. Quin divinum o●aculum fuisse joan. Euangel. testatur. Cum enim post longam variamque, concilij deliberationem Caipha●, qui ut summ●● Pontifex Concino praesidebat▪ sententiam illam, cui omnes ferè consenserunt, dixisset: Expedit nobis, ut unus m●riatur homo pro populo, & non tota gens pereat: mox evangelista subiecit. Hoc autem à semetipso non dixit sed cum esset Pontifex animi illius prophetavit. Qua ex re sit, ut ex nostrorum Pontifi●um vita quidem & opera contraria fortè siat Domino jesu, sed eorum judicia, quae videlu et à summo Pontifice comprobata s●nt, & vera erant & Christiani utilia, quae ad populi salutem suit divinitus instituta. Imo adeo à Spiritu sancto erunt ob eam 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 am ebb evangelista ●id cimus, quia scilicet Ecclesiae Chri●●i Pontifices sunt. At de secundo argumento satis. Canus, lib. 5. cap. postremo. Canus, the answer is easy; Let us hear it. The practices of the Priests were indeed against our Saviour: but the sentence of men otherwise most wicked, was not only most true, but withal most profitable to the commonweal. Yea, Saint john the Evangelist tells us, it was a divine Oracle: for after a long and various deliberation used by the Council, Caiaphas now sat as chief, being the Highpriest, pronounced that sentence whereunto almost all (at the least the mayor part) agreed; [It is expedient, that one die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not], upon which speech the Evangelist forthwith a●s; This he spoke not of himself, but being Highpriest for that year, he prophesied, Whence it follows, sayeth Canus, that our Prelate's lives and actions may perhaps be contrary to our Lord jesus: but their judicial decrees or sentences, such as are confirmed by the Pope (who must be precedent in their Counsels, as Caiaphas was) shall prove true and profitable unto Christians, as instituted by God for the people's good, yea ●hey shall proceed from the holy Ghost, for the reason which we have learned of the Evangelist, to wit, because such as give them, are Prelates of Christ's Church. And this is all I have to say unto the second argument. 12 It is easy indeed for them thus to answer: to whom it is most easy and most usual to blaspheme, That the Popes, aswell as Caiaphas' prophecies, may in the event prove true and profitable to Christ's Church, we do not doubt: because unto such as love God, or are beloved of him, all things, even Satan's malice that had suborned Caiaphas and his brethren against Christ and his members, turn to the best. But he that had taken this Highpriest, whilst he uttered this sentence, for an infallible Prophet of the Lord, had been bound in conscience to have done so to our Saviour at his, as the people did to Baal's Priests, at Elias instigation. If our adversaries will permit us to interpret the Trent Counsels decrees, as the faithful of those times did Caiaphas' prophecy: we will subscribe unto them without delay. It is expedient, we grant, and profitable withal unto the Church, that there should be such decrees, whereby the faith of others might be tried. But as it was not lawful for the people, to imbrue their hands in Christ's blood, though the greatest benefit that ever befell the world, was by his death: so neither is it safe to admit the Trent Canons, though a wonderful blessing of God they should be set forth, because they so clearly testify the truth of his word concerning Antichrist. Canus said more in this than was needful, according to his supposed principles in his answer to the next argument. But God who ruled the mouth of Caiaphas, and made him speak the truth, when he intended nothing less, did also direct Canus pen to vent, what upon better consideration he would have concealed. Yet herein he wrote, but out of the abundance of his own, and most of his fellows hearts, who hold that the Priests and pharisees did err only in a matter of fact, not in any point of faith, when they condemned Christ. Of which in the next Chapter. For conclusion of this, consider with me, Christian Reader, how great cause we have to thank our gracious God, that the sect of Jesuits, or rabble of Predicants, were not founded in our saviours days; for then doubtless the Devil had picked a traitor out of that crew, whose impudent, sophistical Apologies for open blasphemy, and unrelenting perseverance in traitorous plots, might have outfaced the world, that the delivering of Christ into his enemy's hands had been no such sin, as judas testified it was, both by his penitent speech, and desperate end. CHAP. FOUR What it would disadvantage the Romish Church to deny the infallibility of the Synagogue. 1. THat any visible company of men before our Saviour Christ's time, Such infallible authority as the Jesuits plead for more necessary in the time of the Law, then of the Gospel. did challenge such absolute authority over men's faith, as the Pope doth, would be very hard for them to prove; & no question but the Highpriest and Rulers amongst the jews, did oftentimes challenge more than they had. If the Romanist should say, that they had no such infallible authority in deciding all controversies, as their Church now challengeth: the assertion would be as improbable in itself, as incongruous to their positions. For unto any indifferent man such infallibility in the watchtower of Zion, must needs seem more requisite during the time of the law, then since the promulgation of the Gospel. Be it granted, the points to be expressly believed of the ancient people, were but few: yet even such of them as were most necessary to salvation, were more enigmatically and mystically set down, than any in the new Testament are; and the measure of God's spirit upon every sort of men, (the vulgar especially) in those times, much less. For this cause God raised up Prophets to instruct them, whose authority though it was not such, as the Roman Church now challengeth (but given to supply the ignorance and negligence of the church representative in those days:) yet much greater than is ordinarily required in the light of the Gospel, by which as the doctrine of salvation is become most conspicuous in itself, so is the illumination of God's spirit more plentiful then before it had been. And since the Prophets have been so clearly expounded by the Apostles, and the harmony of the two Testaments so distinctly heard, the ordinary * Revel. 19 10. testimony of jesus is become equivalent to the spirit of prophesy. Allowing then these infinite odds on our parts, that enjoy the labours of former's ages, with the ordinary preaching of the Gospel, an infallible ecumenical authority is much less needful now, than it was in the law. 2 Or if our adversaries will be so wayward, Unless the jewish Church were infallible our adversaries principal arguments, to prove the Romish churches infallibility are apparently false. as to deny the like infallibility to have been requisite in the ancient jewish Church: they shall hereby thwart evidently themselves, disannul their chief title, and utterly disclaim the main plea hitherto used for their own infallibility. For most of them do urge God's promises made unto that Church, to prove a necessity of admitting a like authority in theirs. And if these promises made to the jews, admit any distinction, condition, or limitation, whereby this most absolute infallibility (as they suppose it) may be impaired: then may all the promises made or supposed to be made unto their Church; admit the same, or like. But besides the weakening of their title, by debarring themselves of this plea (drawn from the example of the ancient jewish Church) no man that reads their writings can be ignorant, that all their chief and principal arguments (wherewith they carry away most simple souls, and importune such, as almost neither fear God nor man, to give sentence for them and their Church against us) are drawn from these, or the like tropicks [unless God had ordained one supreme judge, or infallible authority, that might decide all controversies in matters of faith viva voce, he had not sufficiently proved for his Church, yea, which were most absurd, he had left it in worse estate, then civil Estates are for ordinary matters; for they, besides their written laws, have judges to determine all cases or controversies arising. And seeing that Monarchical government is of all others the best; and in any wise man's judgement most available for avoiding all dissension, and keeping the unity of faith; there should be no question, but God hath ordained such an authentical manner of deciding all controversies. If he have not, it must needs be, either because he could not establish such an infallible authority, and uncontroleable power; or else, because he would not. To say he could not, were to deny his omnipotency, open blasphemy: to say he would not, were little better; for this were to deny his goodness and love to his Church, both which the Scriptures testify to be great, nay infinite. 3 But how great soever his love to his Church, and chosen be (as we acknowledge it to be infinite and everlasting) if these or the like arguments make any things for the infallibility of the present Romish; they prove as much, and as directly, for the ancient jewish Church. For that was a visible company of men, not of oxen and Asses, and of them God had a care also. Nay they were his own peculiar people, and (without all controversy) * Yet I know not what Bellarmine should mean, when he makes it a particular Church, his folly confutes itself, and it shall be sufficient to propose it Bellar. de Ecc. milit. l. 3. c. 16. Ad tertium, de tempore Eliae, negat? consequentia & antecedens huius argumenti. Consequentia quidem, quia non est eadem ratio populi judaeorum, & populi Christianorum: nam populus judaeorum non erat Ecclesia universalis ut est ●opulus Christianorum, sed particularis, & propterea etiam extra illum populum inveniebant fideles & justi, ut Melchisedech, job, & postea Counclius Centurio, & Ennuchus Candacis Regine, & alij nonnull. Itaque etiam si ●niuersa Synogoga Iudae●rum defecisset, non continuò omnis Ecclesia Dei in terris defec. 〈◊〉 Sed antecedens etiam negat? Non enim estendi potest, unquam Synagog●m judaeorum defecesse omnino usque ad Christi adventum, quo tempore eti●m non tam defecit, quam mutata 〈…〉 His comparison holds right thus. None were saved then but Israelites, none now but Christian in heart▪ divers were saved then, though not Israelites by outward profession, or solemn association to the people of God: so are m●●y now, that are not professed members of the true visible Church, whether that be theirs or ours. They drink many amongst us ignorant of theirs, and we in charity hope many amongst them ignorant of our Church's tenants, yet ready to embrace them when it shall please God to reveal them: are elected to salvation. But it was a pretty Sophism in so great a Clerk to compare not Israelites in heart, or in the sight of God, but the visible Church of Israel with Christians in heart, not with any visible Christian Church. the only visible Church, which he had on earth. Wherefore all the former arguments, if they conclude any infallible authority in the present Romish Church; they conclude much more for the like infallibility of the jewish. And by necessary consequence, if I prove that the Church had no such authority, my assertion stands sure; That this infallible authority which the factors of the Romish Church do challenge, is greater than any visible Company of men had before our Saviour time. And by the same proof, shall the Romish Church be debarred for ever, of both the two former pleas; either drawn from the authority of the Priests, or from the best form of government. CHAP. V. That justly it may be presumed the jewish Church, never had any absolute infallibility in proposing or determining Articles of faith, because in our saviours time it did so grievously err in the fundamental point of salvation. 1 FOr proof of the Conclusion proposed [that jerusalem had no such absolute infallibility, as Rome pleads for,] I took it for a long time as granted by all, that if any such authority had been established in the law, it should not have varied until the alteration of the priesthood. For God's covenant with Levi was in this sense everlasting, that it was to endure without interruption, until his sacrifice was accomplished, that was a Priest after a more excellent order. His oblation of himself, was the common bond to the law and Gospel: the end of the one, and the beginning of the other. Nor did the legal rites or ceremonies themselves (though these most obnoxious to corruption) vanish by little and little, as this sacrifice did approach nearer and nearer, as darkness doth before the rising of the sun: rather that consummation wrought upon the Cross, did swallow them up at once, as virility doth youth, youth childhood, childhood infancy. Seeing then our adversaries suppose this infallibility was annexed as a prerogative royal unto the Priesthood: they cannot imagine any tolerable reason, why the one should expire before the other was quite abolished. Hence it is that most of them hold the Scribes and pharisees in our saviours time, were absolutely infallible in their Cathedral consultations. And I had just reasons to presume Bellarmine had been of the same mind. For besides his urging that place (without all sense or reason, unless grounded on this opinion,) They sit in Moses chair; All therefore whatsoever they bid you, that observe and do,] these other words of his, seemed to imply thus much, [ * Non ostende's potest, nunquam Synagogam judaeorum def●cisse omnino usque ad Christi aduentum, quo tempore etiam non tam defecit, quam mutata est in meluis, Bellar. de Ecclesia militant Lib. 3. cap. 16. It cannot be showed that the Synagogue of the jews did fail [in saith] until Christ's coming, at what time it did not fail, but rather become better by change] By his speeches elsewhere I perceived, by the Synagogue thus changed, he meant the Church planted by Christ: not the Consistory of the High-Priests and Elders, not the Catholic representative jewish Church. * Sunt qui dicunt, Concilium illud (in quo Christus condematus est) errasse, q: non processit s●cundu morem legitimi judicis, sed tumultuaria conspiration, subornatis falsis testibus, Christum darmavit id quod adeò notum erat omnibus, ut etiam Pilatus s●iret per invidiam eum fuisse traditum sibi à Pontificibus, ut habemus Math. 27 atque haec quidem responsio probabilis est. Quia tamen non est inferiorum judicare, an superiores legitime procedant ne●ne, nisi manifestissimè constet intollerabilem errorem committi, & redibile est Deum non permissurum, & Concilia quibus summus Pontifex praesidet. n. legitimè procedant. Ideo respondemus, Pontifices & Concilia judaeorum non potuisse errare antequem Christus veniret, sed eo present potuissè, imo suisse praedictum erraturos judaeos & Christum negaturos. Isaiae 6. Danielis 9 & alibi. Sunt enim, non est necessarium, ut V●carius Papae non possit errare, cum ipse Papa regat Ecclesiam, & ab errore defendat. Sic etiam non suit necissarium, ut Pontifices judaeorum non possent errare, quando Christus, summus totius Ecclesiae Pontifex praesens aderat, & Ecclesiam per se adm●nistrabat. Bellarm. lib. 2. de. Conciliorum. auct. cap. 8. For, sayeth he, as it is not necessary the Pope's Vicar should be inerrable, when the Pope himself doth guide the Church, and defend it from error: so neither was it necessary, that the jewish high Priest should not err, when Christ the Highpriest of the whole Church was present, and did govern his Church in person. 2 This example, were it true, might illustrate (though illfavoredly) his assertion once supposed, as possible; but no way argues it to be probable. Herein his similitude fails, that the High Priests in our saviours time, were Aaron's lawful successors, their Priesthood as entire then as ever it was; and they Deputies to none in this rank or order. That their Predecessors had such infallibility, he fain would prove. Can he or any for him, show us when, or by what means it should determine, whiles the Priesthood lasted? To take away the Pope's infallibility, even in this last age of the world, were, in their construction to deny Christ's promise made unto Saint Peter's chair. And was not the former like prerogative as inseparably annexed to Moses seat? did our Saviour before his Passeover, either by doctrine or practice, derogate aught from any lawful authority established on earth; much less from that, which God had expressly instituted? The greatest prerogative, the Scribes and pharisees, Priests or Rulers ever had, was, that they were Aaron's successors, and possessed Moses place: and this authority was never disannulled, but rather ratified by our Saviour, after he had undertaken his ministerial function; They sit in Moses seat, all therefore whatsoever they bid you, that observe and do. And elsewhere, Go, and show thyself unto the Priest, etc. 3* Yet this Sophister would persuade us, that Isaiah and Daniel had foretold the expiration of this prerogative in latter times. They both indeed foretell this people's extraordinary general blindness; about the time of our saviours conversation on earth, But this directly proves, what we object; not what Bellarmine should have answered, at least to us, who contend the Priests and Rulers of this people, were not infallible in our saviours time; nor doth Isaiah, or Daniel, or any Prophet of God say, they were at any time such. Let any jesuit prove (what easily he may) out of * Bellarmine's reason to prove the jewish Church 〈◊〉 in faith in our saviours time prous it to have been erroneous in the time of Isaiah. Isaiahs' words, cited by Bellarmine, that the jewish church representative was not infallible in our saviours time; and from the same we shall as clearly evince it, palpably erroneous in Isaiahs' own days, or immediately after. For the self same words which the Evangelist saith, were fulfilled in the unbelieving jews that heard our saviours doctrine, were literally and exactly verified of their forefathers before the captivity of Babylon, as the Cardinal himself (would he take the pains to read the whole Chapter, and revive the place cited by him,) I know would not deny: His words are these; * For Dan●●l hath nothing which can be wrested to this purpose, for which reason this impostor cities only his 9 Chapter at large. And he said, go, and say unto this people: a Isai. 6. v. 9 10. 11. 12. Ye shall hear indeed, but ye shall not understand, ye shall plainly see and not perceive. Make the heart of this people sat, make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes, lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and convert & he heal them. Then said I Lord, how long? And he answered, until the Cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate, and the Lord have removed men far away, and there be a great desolation in the midst of land. The truth of our assertion is so pregnant, that * Dicitur autem prophetia, quantum equidem observare potui, quatuor modis impleri. Primum quum id ipsum sit, de quo propriè & literate ut dicitur, sensu intelligebatur, sicut cap. 1. vicessimo secundo. Matthaeus dixit impletam in Maria Isaiae prophetiam fuisse. Ecce virgo concipiet, & pariet filium. Secundo, cum sit non id de quo propriè intell●gebatur prophetia, sed id quod p●r●ll●d significabatur, ut 2. Regum 7. 14. Ego ero illi in pat●em, & ille erit nihi in silium, qu●d proprie de Sal●mone dictum esse perspecuum est. Diws tamen Paulus de Christo cuius Salomon sigura ●rat 〈◊〉. Heb. 1. 6. quasi in eo impletum esset, & quoth Exod. 12 46. dictum est, Os non comminuetis ex eo, certum est intelligi de agno, tamen joan. cap. 19 36. in Christo, qui per agnum significabatur, impletum dicit. Tertio, cum nec id sit de quo propriè intelligitur prophetia, nec id quod per illud significatur, sed quod illi simile erat, & om●no ciusmodi, ut prophetia non minus aptè de eo, quam de quo dicta est, dici patuisse videatur. Nam populus hic labijs me honorat▪ de judaeis qui tempore Isai erant, Deus dixerat Isai. 29. 13. Christus autem in iis, qui suo erant tempore, impletum significat, Matth. 15. 7. 8. Simile est exemplum Matthae 13. 14. & Act. 28. 26. Quarto, cum id ipsum, quod per Prophetiam, aut Scripturam dictum erat, quamuis iam factum suerit. tamenmagis, ac magis fit. Tunc enim Scriptura impleri dicitur, id est, quod per eam dictum erat, cumulatissimè fieri. Maldonat. Comment. in Math. v. c. 2. The place cited Matth. 13. and 14. Act. 28. & 26. is that very place out of the 6. of Esai, which Bellarmine urgeth to prove the jews Church should fail in our saviours time. Maldonat the most judicious expositor amongst the Jesuits, takes it as granted, the words late cited were literally meant only of that generation, with whom the Prophet lived, and brings this very Text, as one of the aptest instances to illustrate the third kind, as he makes it of fulfilling prophecies, to wit, when that which is truly and literally meant of one, is fitly applied unto another matter or sort of people, for the similitude of their nature or disposition. Although (to speak the truth) he might have referred it more justly, at least, more artificially, to the fourth kind there mentioned by him. For, as shall appear hereafter, this prophesy was alike literally, properly, and directly meant of both, but verified of the former times more immediately, as first in order, because that part of it object had precedency in actual existence; of the latter more completly as principally intended by the holy Ghost. 4 The blindness there spoken of, was even then begun, but did increase from that age until the captivity, and continued until Christ's coming, in whose days it was augmented, and the prophesy fully accomplished as the desolation which followed their blindness in putting him to death, was greater than that which Nebuchadnezer brought upon the City and land for the provocations wherewith Manass●th, jehoiachim, and other wicked Rulers, as well Priests, as Laics, had provoked: he Lord by cruel persecution of his messengers sent unto them. This was a disease in their Prelates and Elders, lineally descending to the Scribes & pharisees, who took a Math. 23. 52. Ye ●i●●enceked and uncircumcised hearts and ears, ye have always resisted the holy Ghost, as your fathers did, so do you, which of the Prophet's have not your fathers persecuted? and they, have slain them, which showed before of the coming of that Just, of whom ye are now the betrayers and murderers. Act. 7 51. 52. themselves for infallible teachers, and free from oppugning such doctrine, as their forefathers had persecuted unto the death. The sin of these later in crucifying Christ, was in degree more grievous, because his personal worth was much greater than the Prophets; but the ignorance was of the same kind in both; for, as our Saviour saith, the latter did but * See Chap. 9 Parag. 4. fulfil the measure of their father's iniquity, in murdering Gods messengers. And, as afterwards shall be declared, such as the Romanists account the Church representative most infallible, did continually cause, or countenance these persecutions. The original likewise of this cruelty, continued from former to later generations, was the very same in both: the one distasted God's word, whilst the Prophet spoke them; the other understood them, not, whilst they were read every sabbath day unto them, both * Act. 13. v. 27. fulfilled them in condemneth God's messengers, & shedding innocent blood, upon such gross & palpable blindness, as Isaiah describes. 5 It will recreate the attentive Reader to observe, Respo ideo, quidam aiunt, quaestionem fuisse de facto, non de iure, quam Concilium illud iudicavit, videlicet num jesus necandus esset, in e●u●modi autem judicijs Concilia errare posse, non dubium est. At quaestio illa etiansi de facto esset, tamen involuebat quaestionem de fide gravissimam, nimirum an jesus esset verus Messias, & Dei silius, atque adeò Deus verus. Quocirca erravit in fide perniciocissimè Caiphas cum universo Concilio, cum iudicavit jesum bl●sphem●sse, qui se Dei filium appellaverat. Alij dicunt, Pontificem & Concilium errasse, quantum ad errorem propriae mentis, non tamen errasse in sententia, quam protulit. Verè enim I●s●s erat reus mortis. q. pecca●a nostra in se●pso purganda susceperat, & verè expediebat, eum mori pro populo. Quare johan. cap. 11. dicit Caipham prophetasse. At licet verba Caiphae bonum sensum recipiant, non tamen omnia, cum enim ait de Christo, Blasphemavit, quid adhuc egemus testibus? Certè tunc non prophetavit, sed blasphemavit. Bellar. de Conciliorum auct. cap 8. lib. 2. how the Lord hath confounded the language of these cunning builders whiles they seek to raise up new Babylon from the foundation of the old Synagogue. Bellarmine would seem to make a conscience of blaspheming, and therefore hath rather adventured to be reputed ridiculous, in avouching (as you heard before) without all ground or show of reason, that the infallible authority, formerly established in the Synagogue did expire upon our saviours entrance into his Ministerial function. Many of his fellows knowing how necessary it is for them to defend the public spirit of the Synagogues, and conscious withal how frivolous it would be, to say it should vanish by our saviours presence, who came rather by doctrine and practice to establish, then overthrow any ordinance of the law, resolve (though by open blasphemy) to maintain the Scribes and pharisees infallibility, until the abolishing of Aaron's Priesthood. That they condemned our Saviour, was (in these men's judgements) an error only in matter of fact, not of faith, or doctrine: and in such case the Pope himself may err, whiles he speaks ex Cathedra. That the High Priest did not err in faith, they take it as proved because the * john. 11. ver. 50. Evangelist saith, he prophesied, It were good one should die for the people. 6 Such infallibility as this, I never shall envy the Pope: and I desire no more, then that he would confirm this last cited doctrine ex Cathedra. * That the Pope did err in matters of saith,, not only of fact when they condemned our Saviour. For no question but all such throughout the Christian world, as bear any love to Christ at all (any besides the Jesuits, who make no conscience of vilifying their Redeemer for advancing the Pope's dignity, by defending his infallibility) would renounce his decrees, and take him for Antichrist ever after. For this was no error de facto, upon false information, or privy suggestion. Even the High-Priests themselves, for the inveterate hate which they had borne unto our saviours person and doctrine (such as the Romish Church did unto Hus, and Jerome of Prage,) hold a Council, how they might put him to death; and so far were they from being misled with false information, that they suborn false witnesses against him, and failing in this, seek to ensnare him in his own confession; & finally condemn him with joint consent, for avouching one of the main points of Christian belief, the article of his coming to judgement. I think might Satan himself speak his mind in this case, he would condemn Gretzer and his fellows, if not for their villainy, yet for their intolerable folly, in questioning, whether it were an error in faith, or no, to pronounce the sentence of death with such solemnity against the judge of quick and dead▪ for professing and teaching the main points and grounds of saith. This villainy is too open and evident to maintain the policy of the Prince of darkness. And if neither fear of God, nor shame of the world, could bridle the Iesui●es mouths, or stop the pens from venting such doctrine: yet certainly this Prince of darkness (their Lord and Master) for fear of some greater revolt, will lay his command upon them, and make them in this discoursing age speak more warily, though they mean still no less wickedly. 7 Because this is a point worth the pressing let us overthrow, That the High priest with his associates did err ex Cathedra in the main Article of faith. not only their answers already given, or arguments hence drawn for their Church's authority: but in brief prevent all possible evasions. If any Papist shall here reply, that these High Priests, and their assistants did not speak ex Cathedra, when they so far miss the cushion: this answer as it might perhaps drop from some ignorant Jesuits mouth or pen, who is bound by oath to say something (and therefore must oftentimes say he knows not what) sot the defence of the Church: so we may well assure ourselves, that the Pope himself dare not for his triple Crown deliver it ex Cathedra; nor will the learned Papists hold this point, if it be well urged. For, as these High-Priests error was most gross and grievous: so was it received upon long and mature deliberation, their manner of proceeding was public and solemn. They took jesus, saith the * Math. 26. Evangelist, and led him to Caiaphas the High priest, where the Scribes and Elders were gathered together. And lest a jesuit should have picked a quarrel at the time of their assembly, as if they had met at some unlawful hour, Saint * Luk. 22. 66 Luke saith, as soon●● as it was day, the Elders of the people, and the High-Priests, and the Scribes came together, and led him into their Council, and examined him upon the very fundamental point of saith; Saying, 〈◊〉 thou the Christ, tell us? For affirming this, which is open infidelity to deny the High Priest himself, not misled by any witnesses, but from * Math. 26. 65. Christ's own words which he himself had heard, pronounceth sentence against him. And if this were not enough, he proposed the matter to the rest of his associates; * Ver. 66. What think ye? and they answered and said, He is worthy to die? After all this, they urged the people to approve of this their sentence, persuading them to ask Barrabas, and to destroy jesus. And so strongly had they conjured the multitude by their pretended authority, that they apprehend this their choice as a point of faith, or good service to God and his Church. For when Pilate layeth his blood unto their charge: All the people ( * Math. 27. 25. as the Text sayeth) (all such as relied upon the Scribes and pharisees, or their high Priests) answered and said, His blood be upon us and our children. One of your say Papists could not have been more thoroughly persuaded of your Church's authority, nor more violently bend against john Hus, or any other of Christ's Martyrs, for the like reasons, than this whole multitude was against Christ, being condemned by the Highpriest▪ speaking ex Cathedra. Here were 〈…〉 & more solemnities observed in this proceeding 〈…〉 require in the Pope speaking ex Cathedra. Theirs 〈◊〉 public assembly, and sentence was given by joint consent in 〈◊〉 story, and in the morning: you hold it sufficient for the Pope to give his definitive sentence alone, without evidence of the fact itself, whereunto he ties men's faith, as shall appear by your own confessions. Nor do you limit him any time, as well in the afternoon, as in the forenoon; as well (for aught we can gather) when drink is in, and his wits out of his head, as when he is sober. For you hold it not necessary for him to use any long deliberation. But, if it be his will to bind all Christians to believe him, the whole Church must believe that he was herein directed chief by the holy Ghost: for the Church is bound to hear their Pastor: And, if he bind all men to believe him, then must all of necessity believe, that he was infallibly assisted by the holy Ghost, in showing that which he binds them to believe: for otherwise the whole Church might err, nay were bound to err, because it is bound to believe the Pope. These consequents are your own, not mine, as may in part appear from what hath been already, more fully from what shall be said hereafter. Besides, the whole multitude of the jewish people heard the Priests and Elders utter their opinions concerning Christ and his doctrine viva voce: we have the Pope's decrees but by hear say. Either was this sentence pronounced ex Cathedra, or else it will be hard for you to prove, that any sentence in your Church hath been so pronounced, or can be, although the Pope himself be present in the Council, and be an eye witness of all proceedings. 8 Yet if any of you should here shuffle (as ye usually do at the last pinch) and say [Howsoever Valentia, or some others of our learned, but private spirits, may define, what it is to speak ex Cathedra; yet we know not, whether our Church hath so defined it, or no: and therefore although these High-priests and Elders did observe all the circumstances, which these doctors require in a sentence given ex Cathedra; yet, for aught we know, they might, nay sure they did fail in some circumstance which we know not, and did not indeed speak ex Cathedra, albeit they seemed so to do: wherefore this doth not conclude against the Pope's infallible authority, when he speaks ex Cathedra:] if any of you shall take this last hold (as I cannot imagine any other left you) we shall quickly beat you out of it. * Though it were sufficiently proved that the Pope could not teach false doctrine, ex Cathedra, yet were it not safe to rely upon his authority, Vide lib. 2. Sect. 4. cap. 6. Parag. 3. etc. For let it be granted for disputations sake, that the Pope hath (as ye suppose these jews had) an infallible authority, when he speaks ex Cathedra: yet seeing it is a matter so hard to be known, even by these that hear him, whether he observe all circumstances required to the exercise and true use of such infallible authority, and whether her he speak ex Cathedra or no, when he may seem to sundry so to speak; it would be the only safe course for all Christian Churches utterly to renounce all obedience to him, but upon examination of his doctrine, to stand continually upon their guard, lest under pretence of this his infallible authority, when he speaks ex Cathedra, he may work some such inestimable mischief unto the Scriptures, or Christ's chosen here on earth, as these High Priests did unto Christ himself, by his seeming to speak ex Cathedra, when he doth not. If, by abusing this his infallible authority, he should either make away these Scriptures, or animate the people to imbrue their hands in the blood of Christ's dearest Saints: it is not his speaking ex Cathedra, that can redeem their souls from hell, nor restore God's word again; for these are matters of an higher price, then that they should be purchased with two or three words of his Holiness unhallowed mouth. 9 To conclude, if this authority of your Church be but such, as the ancient Church of the jews had; you cannot expect any faithful people should otherwise esteem of your decrees, than the faithful in our saviours time were bound to esteem of the jewish High-Priests and Elders, whom surely they did not take for Christ's only, nor best friends. If the Pope's infallibility be but such, as these high Priests had: you may be as guilty of the blood of Christ's Saints, as they were. If you will challenge (as indeed you do) greater authority than they had: ye must of necessity renounce your principal arguments brought to prove it. CHAP. VI That Moses had no such absolute authority as is now ascribed unto the Pope: That the manner of his attaining to such as he had, excludes all besides our Saviour from just challenge of the like. 1 whether Moses were a Magistrate (as the Papists think) spiritual, or (as others) merely civil, or (whereunto upon grounds in due places to be discussed, I most incline) actually neither, and virtually both, it will suffice, for proof of our conclusion, that the Pope is no servant of God, but an adversary, in that he exalts himself above Moses, whom none, besides the High Priest, and sole Mediator of the new covenant, was to equalise in sovereignty over God's people. Nor doth the excess of glory ascribed unto the new Testament, in respect of the old, argue greater authority in Christian, then was in ordinary legal governors, whether temporal or spiritual, much less doth it infer greater authority in any (Christ only excepted) than Moses had. 2 If we take Christ's Church, as consisting both of Priests and people: it is a congregation far more royal and glorious, than the Synagogue so taken was. If we compare our Highpriest (or mediator of the new Covenant) with theirs, the Apostles comparison is fittest: * Heb. 3. 12. 3. 5. 6. That the excessive glory of the new Testament argues no greater sovereignty in spiritual governors since Christ's time then the priest● had in the Law. Consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ jesus: who was faithful to him that hath appointed him, even as Moses was in all his house. For this man is counted worthy of more glory than Moses, in as much as he which hath builded the house, hath more honour than the house. Now Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a witness of the things which should be spoken after: but Christ is as the sonn● over his own house, whose house we are. If severally we sort our people, or Ministers with theirs, as the Apostles successors with Aaron's, the pre-eminence both ways is ours. Notwithstanding, this excess of our Minister's glory, whether ordinary or extraordinary, compared with the like of theirs, is not so great as the pre-eminences of Christ's flock above the people of the Synagogue. Yet must all excess of in spiritual graces, which the ordinary hearers of the Gospel have the ordinary hearers of the law, be subducted from that prerogative which we that are Christ's messengers, have in respect of Aaron's successors, ere we can take a right account of our own authority over our flock committed to us, in comparison of theirs over the ancient people. Computatis computandis, our sovereignty will prove less, not greater, as our adversaries confusedly reckon without their host. Their pretended glosses, that all such places of Scripture as make for the authority of Moses chair, conclude á fortiori for Saint Peter, because the New Testament is more glorious than the old, are, as if a man should argue thus: The ancient Roman and modern Germane, are States far●e more noble than the Turkish or Moscovitish: therefore the Roman Consuls had more absolute authority over the people, or the present Emperor, over the Princes and States of Germany, than the Turk hath over his bashaws, or the Moscovit over his Vassals. 3 The glory of a common weal, or praise of government, consists in the ingenuity or civil liberty, not in the slavery, or servile condition of the governed: or in their voluntary obsequiousness to wholesome laws, proportioned to common good; not in their absolute subjection to the omnipotent will of an unruly Tyrant, subject to no law, but the law of sin. Our saviours authority over his Disciples was more sovereign, then is befitting any to usurp or challenge over his fellow servants; his kingdom more glorious after his resurrection then before: yet a little before his suffering, he saith to his Disciples: * joh. 15. 14. 15. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. Henceforth call I you not servants, for the servant knoweth not what his Master doth, but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard of my Father, have I made known to you. It is the very conceit of the base degenerate, dissolute, sottish later heathen Roman, more delighted in such gaudy shows as his luxurious Emperors made happily, once or twice in their whole reign, then in the valour and virtue of his victorious, freeborn Ancestors, that to this day swims in the Jesuits brain, and makes him dream the royalty of Christian Priesthood, or glory of the Gospel, should consist wholly, or chiefly in the magnificent pomp of one visible high Priest, or Ecumenical Bishop; for garnishing of whose Court, the whole Body of Christ beside, must be content to spend their lives, goods, or substances, and as his occasion shall require, to pawn their very souls, as younglings, will be at any cost or pains they can devise, to deck up a Lord of the Parish, a victor in a Grammar school; or as merry fellows will be ready to spend more than their incomes will defray, to have a gallant Lord of misrule of their own making. 4 But they demand, Wherein doth the Pope aspire above the pitch of Moses throne? Wherein the Pope's Sovereignty is made greater-then Moses had any. He desires but to he reputed an infallible teacher, and was not Moses such? yet not such after the same manner. He approved himself perpetually infallible, because always found most faithful in all affairs belonging to God: but had it been possible for him to have worshipped the golden Calf, to * Psal. 106. 28. have eaten the offerings of the dead, or to have joined himself to Baal-Peor: The Levites and such as clave unto the Lord in these Apostasies would have sought Gods will at more sanctified lips, than his, at least for that time, were If then we consider him not as he might have been, but as indeed he proved; the people's obedience unto him, was the facto perpetual and complete: yet but conditionally perpetual, but conditionally complete, or perpetually complete upon their sight and undoubted experience of his extraordinary familiarity with God, of his entire fidelity in all his service. The Pope would be proclaimed so absolutely infallible by irrevocable patent or inheritance, as no breach of God's commandments, no touch of disloyalty to Christ in actions, might breed a forfeiture of his estate, or estrange Christian consciences from yielding obedience to him, every way as complete and absolute, as that which the people of God performed unto Moses, or Christians do yet unto their Saviour. Whence though we admit Moses infallibility, and his to be the same; yet the difference between the absoluteness of their authority, or the tenor, or holds of this same infallibility, would be such, as is between a Tenant at will, or one that enjoys a fair estate, perhaps, all his life time, yet only by continuance of his Lords good liking of his faithful service, & a Freeholder that cannot by any act of felony, murder, treason, or the like, forfeit his interest in as large possessions. 5 Again, albeit the authority gotten, or manner of holding it, were the same; yet the manner of getting it in Moses and the Pope is not alike. The one proffers no miracle for the purchase, no sign from heaven, no admirable skill in expounding God's word; his calling he professeth to be but ordinary, and in this respect (say his followers) he was to succeed Saint Peter: Moses not such, nor so affected: his miracles were many and great; the signs & tokens of his especial favour with God, almost infinite: his calling extraordinarily extraordinary: otherwise that obedience the people performed to him, had been no less than desperate Idolatry; as the challenge of the like without like proof & evidence of such favour with God, is no better than blasphemy or Apostasy. Hence saith * Cum igitur oporteret Dei legem in edictis Angelorum ●●erribiliter dari, non uni homini pa●●cisue sapientibus, sed universae genti & 〈…〉 coram eodem populo magna ●●ctasant in monte, ubi 〈◊〉 per 〈◊〉 dabatur? consp●ciente multitudine metuenda ac tremenda, quae siebant. Non enim populus Israel, sic Moysi credidit, quemadmodum suo Lycurgo Lacedaemony, quòd a jove seu Apol●●ue leges quas condidit accepisset. Cum enim lex dabatur populo, 〈…〉 unus iubehatur● 〈…〉 conspectu ipsias populi, sufficere di●●a providentia iudicabat, mirabilibus 〈…〉 signis ac motibus 〈…〉 ad eandem leg 〈…〉 creatori servire creaturam. Aug. de Civit. Den. lib 10. cap. 13. S. Austen, the people of Israel did believe Moses laws were from God, after another manner, than the Lacedæmonians did Lycurgus laws were from Apollo. For when the Law which enioines the worship of one God, was given unto the people, it did appear (as far forth as the divine providence did judge sufficient) by strange signs and motions, whereof the people themselves were spectators, that the creature did perform service to the Creator for the giving of that Law. But we must believe as firmly as this people did Moses, that all the Pope's injunctions are given by God himself, without any other sign or testimony, than the Lacedæmonians had, that Lycurgus' laws were from Apollo. Yet is it here further to be considered, that the Israelites might with far less danger have admitted Moses laws then we may the Popes, without any examination, for divine, seeing there was no written law of God extant before his time, whereby his writings were to be tried. No such charge had been given this people, as he gives most expressly, to this purpose * Deut. 4. 1. 2 Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the ordinances, and to the Laws which I teach you to do, that ye may live and go in, and possess the land which the Lord God of your fathers giveth you. Ye shall put nothing unto the word which I command you neither shall ye take aught there from, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you. But was the motive or argument by which he sought to establish their belief, or assent unto these commandments) his own infallible authority? no but their own experience of their truth, as it followeth, * Ver. 3. Your eyes have seen what the Lord did because of Baal-Peor. For all the men that followed Baal Peor the Lord thy God hath destroyed every one from among you: The motive, used by Moses, for establishing the Israelites faith. but ye that did cleave unto the Lord your God, are alive, every one of you this day; so gracious and merciful is our God unto mankind, and so far from exacting this blind obedience which the Pope doth challenge, that he would have his written word established in the fresh memory of his mighty wonders wrought upon Pharaoh and all his host. The experiment of their deliverance by Moses had been a strong motive to have persuaded them to admit of his doctrine for infallible, or, at the least, to have believed him in his particular promises. When the snares of death had compassed them about on every side, & they see no way but one, or rather two inevitable ways to present death and destruction, the red sea before them, and a mighty host of blood behind them, the one serving as a glass to represent the cruelty of the other: they (as who in their case would not?) * Exod. 14. 10. cry out for fear. He that could have foretold their strange deliverance from this eminent danger, might have gotten the opinion of a God amongst the Heathen: yet Moses confidently promiseth them, even in the midst of this perplexity, the utter destruction of the destroyer, whom they feared. * Ex. 14. 13. 14 Fear ye not, stand still, and behold the salvation of the Lord, which he will show to you this day: for the Egyptians whom you have seen this day, Vide Psal. 106. ver. 10. etc. you shall never see again. The Lord shall fight for you: therefore hold you your peace. Notwithstanding all this, Moses never enacts this absolute obedience, to be believed in all that ever he shall say, or speak unto them, without farther examination, or evident experiment of his doctrine. For God requires not this of any man, no not of those to whom he spoke face to face; always ready to feed such as call upon him, with infallible signs and pledges of the truth of his promises. For this reason, the waters of * Exod. 15. 23. Marah are sweetened at Moses prayer. And God upon this new experiment of his power and goodness, takes occasion to re-establish his former covenant, using this semblable event, as a further earnest of his sweet promises to them. [ a Ver. 26. If thou wilt diligently hearken O Israel unto the voice of the Lord thy God, Faith must be confirmed by continual experiments answerable to God's word. and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear unto his commandments, and keep all his ordinances: then will I put none of these diseases upon thee, which I brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the Lord that healeth thee.] As if he had said; This healing of the bitter waters shall be a token to thee of my power in healing thee. Yet for all this they distrust Gods promises for their food, as it followeth, cap 16. Nor doth Moses seek to force their assent by fearful anathemas, or sudden destruction, but of some principal offenders herein. For God will not have true faith thunderblasted in the tender blade: but rather nourished by continuance of such sweet experiments: for this reason he showers down Manna from heaven a Exod. 16. 4 12. I have heard the murmuring of the children of Israel, tell them therefore, and say, At evening ye shall eat flesh, and in the morning you shall be filled with bread, and ye shall know that I am the Lord your God. For besides the miraculous manner of providing both Quails and Manna for them, the manner of nourishment by Manna did witness the truth of God's word unto them. They had been used to gross and solid meats, such as did fill their stomachs, and distend their bellies▪ whereas Manna was in substance slender, but gave strength and vigour to their bodies; and served as an emblem of their spiritual food, which being invisible, yet gave life more excellently than these gross and solid matters did So saith * Deut. 18. v. 3. Moses: Therefore he humbled thee, and made thee hungry, and fed thee with Manna which thou knewest not, neither did thy Fathers know it, that he might teach thee, that man liveth not by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord. 6 Yet in their distress (so frail is our faith, until it be strengthened by continual experiments) they doubt, and tempt the Lord, saying. * Exod. 17. 7. Is the Lord amongst us or no? Nor doth Moses interpose his infallible authority, or charge them to believe him, against their experience of their present thirst, under pain of eternal damnation, or sufferance of greater thirst in hell: such threats without better instruction in God's word, and the comfort of his spirit, may bring distrusts or doubts to utter despair, and cause faith to wither where it was well nigh ripe, they never ripen & strengthen any true and lively faith. Moses himself is fain to cry unto the Lord, saying, What shall I do unto this people? for thy be almost ready to stone me. As the Papists would do to the Pope, were he to conduct them through the wilderness in such extremity of thirst, able to give them no better assurance of his favour with God, than his Anathemaes, or feed them only with his Court-holy-water, or blessings of mind▪ But even here again God feeds Israel's faith with waters issuing out of the rock, making themselves eye-witnesses of all his wonders, that so they might believe his words and promises, nay himself, from their own sense and feeling of his goodness, and truth of his word. 7 Though no Lawgiver or Governor, whether temporal or spiritual, especially, whose calling was but ordinary, could possibly before or since so well deserve of the people committed to his guidance, as this great General already had done of all the host of Israel; were they upon this consideration, forthwith to believe whatsoever he should avouch without further examination, sign, or token of his favour with God; without assured experience, or at the least more than probable presumptions of his continual faithfulness in that service, whereunto they knew him appointed? Albeit, after all the mighty works beforementioned, wrought in their presence, they had been bound thereunto: the meanest * The Hebrews have a common saying, Ancilla plus vidit ad mare rubrum, & montem Sinai quam viderent omnes Prophetae ●ag. in 5 De●t. handmaid in that multitude had infallible pledges plenty of his extraordinary calling, locked up in her own unerring senses. But from the strange, yet frequent manifestation of Moses power and favour with God, so great as none besides the great Prophet whom he prefigured, might challenge the like, the Lord in his all ●acing wisdom, took fi●te occasion to allure his people unto strict observance of what he * Deu. 13. 1. etc. God in the establishing of Moses authority, give a caveat to future generations for avoiding blind obedience. afterwards solemnly enacted, as also in the●▪ to forewarn all future generations without express warrant of his word, not absolutely to believe any governor whomsoever in all, though of ●ried skill and fidelity in many principal points of his service. That passage of Scripture wherein the manner of this people's stipulation is registered, well deserves an exact 〈◊〉 of all, especially of these circumstances, [How the Lord by rehearsal of his mighty works forepast, extorts their promise to do whatsoever should by Moses be commanded them, & yet will not accept it offered, until he have made them eare-witnesses of his familiarity and communication with him.] First, out of the Mount he called Moses unto him to deliver this solemn message unto the house of jacob; Exod. 19 4. 5. & 6. Ye have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I carried you upon Eagles wings, and have brought you unto me. Now therefore, if you will hear my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, than ye shall be my chief ●easure above all people, though all the earth be mine. After Moses had reported unto God this answer, freely uttered with joint consent of all the people, solemnly * Ver. 8. assembled before their Elders [ b Ver. 7. All that the Lord commanded, we will do,] was the whole business betwixt God and them, fully transacted by this Agent in their absence? No, he is sent back to sanctify the people, that they might expect Gods glorious appearance in Mount Sinai, to ratify what he had said upon the return of their answer; * Ver. 9 Lo● I come unto thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear, whilst I talk with thee, and that they may also believe thee for ever. They did not believe that God had revealed his word to Moses for the wonders he had wrought; but rather that his wonders were from God, because they heard God speak to him, yea, to themselves. For their principal and fundamental laws were uttered by God himself in their hearing, as Moses expresseth, d Deut. 5. 22. Vide. Innet. a● § ex 〈◊〉 These words, (to wit) the Decalogue) the Lord spoke unto all your multitude, in the mount, out of the midst of the fire, the cloud, and the darkness, with a great voice, and added no more. And lest the words which they had heard might soon be smothered in fleshly hearts, or quickly slide out of their brittle memories▪ the Lord wrote them in two Tables of stone, and at their transcription not Moses only, but Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, with the seventy Elders of Israel, are made spectators of the divine glory, ravished with the sweetness of his presence. * Exod. 24. v. 1. 9 10. 11. They saw saith the Text, the God of Israel, and under his feet, as it were, a work of a sapphire stone, and as the very heaven when it is clear. And upon the Nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand, also they saw God, and did eat and drink. After these Tables through Moses anger at the people's folly and impiety, were broken, God writes the a Exod. 34. v. 1. same words again, and renews his Covenant b Ver. 10. 11. before all the people, promising undoubted experience of his divine assistance. 8 Doth Moses after all this call fire from heaven upon all such as distrust his words? Aaron and Miriam openly derogate from his authority, which the Lord confirms again viva voce, descending in the a Numb. 12. 5. 6. 8. 9 pillar of the cloud, conventing these detractors in the door of the Tabernacle; Wherefore were you not afraid to speak against my servant, even against Moses? Thus the Lord was very angry and departed, leaving his mark upon Miriam, cured of her leprosy by Moses instant prayers. No marvel if Korah, Dathan. and abiram's judgements were so grievous: when their sin against Moses, after so many documents of his high calling, could not but be wilful, as their perseverance in it, after so many admonitions to desist, most malicious and obstinate. Yet was Moses further countenanced by the appearance of God's glory d Mumb. 16. 19 unto all the congregation, and his authority further ratified by the e Ver. 33. strange and fearful end of these chief malefactors, ( * Ver. 27. 28. foretold by him,) and by fire, issuing from the Lord to consume their confederates, in offering incense ungrateful to their God, Tantae molis erat judaeam condere gentem! So long and great a work it was to edify Israel in true faith, but without any like miracle or prediction, such as never saw him, never heard good of him, must believe the Pope as well as Israel did their Lawgiver, that could make the sea to grant him passage, the clouds send bread, the winds bring flesh, and the hard rock yield drink sufficient for him and all his mighty host, that could thus call the heavens as witnesses to condemn & appoint the earth as executioner of his judgements upon the obstinate and rebellious, yet after all this he inflicts no such punishments upon the doubtful in faith, as the Romish Church doth, but rather (as is evident out of the places * Deut. 4. ver. 2. before alleged) confirms them by commemoration of these late cited, and like experiments, making a Deut. 7. ver. 17 18. 19 If thou say in thine heart, These nations are more than I, how can I cast them out? Thou shalt not fear them, but remember what thy Lord thy God did unto Pharaoh, and unto all Egypt. The great tentation which thine eyes saw, and the signs and wonders, and the mighty hand, and outstretched out arm, whereby the Lord thy God brought thee out: so shall the Lord thy God do unto all the people, whose face thou fearest. Gods favours past the surest pledges of his assistance in greatest difficulties that could beset them. To conclude this people believed Moses for God's testimony of him, we may not believe God's word without the Pope's testimony of it. He must be to God as Aaron was to Moses, his mouth, whereby he only speaks distinctly or intelligibly to his people. CHAP. VII. That the Church's authority was no part of the rule of faith unto the people after Moses death, That by experiments answerable to his precepts and predictions, the faithful without relying upon the Priests infallible proposals, were as certain, both of the divine truth, and true meaning of the law, as their forefathers had been that lived with Moses, and saw his miracles. 1 TO proceed unto the ages following Moses; How did they know Moses law, either indeed to be God's word, or the true sense and meaning of it, being indefinitely known for such? How far the traditions, exhortations, or instructions of parents did steed their children for establishing of faith. By tradition? Yes, By tradition only? No, But how at all by tradition? As by a joint part of that rule, on which they were finally to rely? Rather it was a mean to bring them unto the due consideration, or right application of the written rule, which Moses had left them. So hard were their hearts with whom this great Lawgiver had first to deal, that faith could not take root in them, unless first wrought and subacted by extraordinary signs and wonders: but once thus created in them, the incorruptible seed thereof might by means ordinary, easily be propagated unto posterity, with whom it was to grow up and ripen, not by bare credence to their ancestors traditions, nor by such miraculous sights as they had seen; but by assiduous and serious observation of God's providence in their own times. For all his ways, to such as mark them, are ever parallel to some one or other rule contained in this book of life. The Israelites in every age might have discerned the truth of his threats or promises, always fulfilled according to the diversity of their ways, though thus much the best amongst them would seldom have observed, perhaps not so much as once have compared their course of life, with either part of God's covenant of life and death, unless thus forewarned by their Ancestors. The tradition then of former, was of like use, for begetting true belief in latter generations, as the exhortations of tutors, who have already tasted the sweet of helicon, are unto their pupils for attaining true knowledge in good arts, of whose pleasantness they never conceive aright, until they taste it themselves, though taste it but upon the others commendation, they would not, without their direction, (ordinarily) they could not. 2 This Method Moses himself prescribes; * Deut. 11. v. 2 Consider this day, for I speak not unto your children, which neither have known nor seen the chastisement of the Lord your God, his greatness, his mighty hand and his stretched-out arm, and his signs, and his acts which he did in the midst of Egypt, unto Pharaoh the King of Egypt, and all his land. For your eyes have seen all the great acts of the Lord which he did. Therefore shall ye keep all the commandments which I command you this day, that ye may be strong, and go in and possess the land whither ye go to possess it. God's wonders past, they were to consider to what end? That they might lay up their lawgivers words a Ver. 18. in their hearts, and in their souls, bind them as remembrances upon their hands, that they might be as frontlets between their eyes, or sights whereby to level their steps, lest they trod awry. God's word so rooted in the fathers, as thus to fructify in their carriage, gesture, speech, and action, the seed of it was to be sown in the tender & supple hearts of children, as Moses in the next words adds; * Ver. 19 And ye shall teach them your children, speaking of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thine house, and upon thy gates. Thus was God's covenant with his people, first, briefly drawn in signs and wonders, and uttered by a mighty voice in mount Horeb, as it had been a demise parol; afterwards, conceived in more ample sort, and written in more special terms by Moses, but was to be sealed to every generation, by their sure experience of God's mercy and justice; the one, infallibly accomplishing their prosperity for obeying; the other, their calamities for transgressing it, as in the same place followeth, * Ver. 22. For, if ye keep diligently all these commandments which I command you toe, do that is, to love the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways, and to clean unto him; then will the Lord cast out all these nations before you, and ye shall possess great nations mightier than you. All the places whereon the soles of your feet shall tread, shall be yours; your coast shall be from the wilderness, and from Lebanon, and from the river, even the river Perah, unto the uttermost Sea. No man shall stand against you, for the Lord your God shall cast the fear of you upon all the land, that ye shall tread upon, as he hath said unto you. 3 Every light or formal observation of this covenant sufficed not to avert God's threats, or make them capable of those bounteous promises, which he never failed to fulfil, as long as in heart and deed they used Moses writings for their rule, nor weighing the foolish traditions of the Elders; * Psal. 78. When he slew them (saith the Psalmist) they sought him, * Ver. 33. 34. and they returned, and sought God early. And they remembered that God was their strength, and the most high God their redeemer. Proportially to their repentance (but far above, or rather without all proportion of deserts) did the Lord deal with them. For, as their hearts (though in some sort turned unto him) were not upright with him, neither were they faithful in his covenant: so he being merciful, thus far forgave their iniquity, that he destroyed them not, but oftimes called back his anger, and suffered not his whole displeasure to arise. 4 The whole historical part of the old Testament, until David's time (epitomized by this Psalmist) witnesseth, what way soever this people went, either the blessing or the curse which Moses there sets sets before them, did always surely meet them * Deut. 11. 26. Behold I set before you this day a blessing, Ver. 26. and a curse, the blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you this day, and the curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the Lord your God, but turn out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other Gods ye have not known. In these terms of blessings and cursings, he enstiles the former disjunctive covenant; If ye shall hearken therefore to my commandments which I shall command you this day, Deut. 11, v. 13. 14. 15. 17. that you love the Lord your God, and serve him with all your heart, and with all your soul: I also will give rain unto your land in due time, the first rain and the latter, that thou mayest gather in thy wheat, and thy wine, and thine oil. Also I will send grass in thy fields for thy cattle, that thou mayest eat, and have enough. But beware lest your heart deceive you, and lest ye turn aside and serve other Gods, and worship them, and so the anger of the Lord be kindled against you, and he shut up the heaven, that there be no rain, and that your land yield not her fruit, and ye perish quickly from the good land which the Lord giveth you. To stir them up to more strict observance of the former covenant, the blessings and cursings here mentioned, were to be pronounced with great solemnity at their first entrance into the land of Cannon, Deut. 11. v. 29. When the Lord thy God therefore hath brought thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, then shalt thou put the blessing upon Mount Gerizim, and the 〈◊〉 Mount ebal. And elsewhere Moses chargeth the people saying, * Deut. 27. v. 11. 12. 13. 14. These (all sons of the freewoman) shall stand upon Mount Gerizim to bless the people when ye pass over jordan, Simeon and Levi, and judah, & Issachar, and joseph and Benjamin, and these (sons of the bondwoman) shall stand upon Mount Ebal to curse, Reuben, Gad, and Asher, and Zebulon, Dan, and Nephtali, and the levites shall answer and say unto all the men of Israel, with a loud voice. Nor was this rehearsal more strictly enjoined by Moses, then faithfully performed by joshuah; josuah. 8. v. 33. 34. 35. And all Israel and their Elders and Officers, and their judges stood on this side of the Ark, and on that side, before the Priests of the levites, which bear the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord, as well the stranger, as he that is borne in the Country half of them were over against Mount Gerizim, and half of them over against Mount ebal, as Moses the servant of the Lord had commanded before, that they should bless the children of Israel. Then afterward he read all the words of the Law, the blessings and cursings, according to all that is written in the book of the Law. There was not a word of all that Moses had commanded, that josuah read not before all the Congregation of Israel, aswell before the women and children, as the stranger that was conversant among them. The like solemnity was to be continued every seventh year, as Moses commanded them, saying, every seventh year, Deut. 31. v. 10. 11. 12, 13. when the year of freedom shall be in the feast of tabernacles, when all Israel shall come to appear before the Lord thy God in the place which he shall choose, thou shalt read this law before all Israel, that they may hear it. Gather the people together, men and women and children, and thy stranger that is within thy gates, that they may hear, and that they may learn, and fear the Lord your God, and keep and observe all the words of this law, and that their children which have not known it may hear it, and learn to fear the Lord your God, as long as ye live in the land, whether ye go over Iorden to possess it. 5 * The Israelites care to instruct their children in the precepts of the Law, necessary unto Christians, seeing faith seldom grows without miracles, unless planted in tender years. Children were to be instructed first, privately, then publicly; that the solemnity of the spectacle might work in them a modest fear and reverence, without whose precedent impression true faith hardly finds entrance into the heart of man. And without miracles it seldom takes, but where the seeds of it have been sown in tender years; nor doth it usually sink in younger breasts, unless sucked in with admiration. All that Moses, all that josuah, all that Priests and Levites, all that Parents or other instructors, private or public, could do to such, all they aimed at, was to propose the infallible word in such sort, as might stir up their hearts to receive it with attention and admiration; afterwards to make sure trial of it (always sufficient to prove itself) by their practice. No instructor in that people, ever taught his hearers, either finally or jointly, to rely upon the infallibility of his proposals. 6 But the jesuits heart, though his mouth will not utter it, thus indites; Did all this stir these Scripturians would seem to make, or tattling parents daily invitation of their children to strict observance of this rule, take such effect as Moses dreamt of in posterity? No▪ But the reason why it did not, was because they sought not in time to supply the defect or rarity of miracles in latter, with more frequent and solemn memorial of such as had happened in former ages; or with more abundant meditation upon their written law, and diligent observation of their ordinary success, always correspondent thereunto. Take heed to thyself sayeth Moses, and keep thy soul diligently, that thou forget not the things thine eyes have seen, Deut. 4. 9 etc. and that they depart not out of thine heart all the days of thy life, but reach them thy sons, and thy sons sons; forget not the day that thou stoodst before the Lord thy God in Horeb, when the Lord said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will cause them to hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children. judg. 2. v. 7. 8. The necessity of this, and like premonitions, was too well manifested by the event. The people (saith another Penman of the sacred Canon) ha● served the Lord all the days of josuah, and all the days of the Elders that outlived josuah, which had seen all the great works of the Lord that he did for Israel. Not the auouchment or presence of infallible teachers, but their sure experience of God's power and mercy, did more surely fasten this people's assent unto the truth of that which Moses had left written, than Moses live personal proposal could do their Fathers, to his words uttered in their audience. Ver. 10. 11. But after that generation (with whom josuah had conversed) was gathered unto their fathers, and another generation arose after them, which neither knew the Lord, nor yet the works he had done for Israel, than the children of Israel did wickedly in the sight of the Lord, and served Baal. Whence it came to pass, that whither soever they went out, the hand of the Lord was sore against them, Ver. 15. 16. as the Lord had said, and as the Lord had sworn unto them, so he punished them sore. Notwithstanding, the Lord raised up judges which delivered them out of the hands of their oppressors: yet when the judge was dead, they returned, and did worse than their fathers, Ver. 19 in following other gods, to serve them, and worship them, they ceased not from their own inventions, nor from their rebellious way. What rule then was left to reclaim them? the infallible proposals of their Priests? Though these or an Angel from heaven should have proposed any other doctrine, than what was consonant to their written law (whose true meaning in this respect, every one of them should have known) Moses curse before mentioned, had overtaken them following it. So much were they addicted unto Baal's Priests proposals, Of gedeon's distrust, and the means how his faith was established. that Angels could scarcely be heard, though suggesting nothing but what their Lawgiver had taught, though assuring them by their presence of such assistance from their mighty God as he had promised. Thus when the general of these heavenly soldiers, sought to encourage Gedeon, The Lord is with thee thou valiant man; judg. 6. v. 13. He replies, Ah, my Lord, if the Lord be with us, why then is all this come upon us, and where be all his miracles which our fathers told us of, and said, Did not the Lord bring us out of Egypt? but now the Lord hath forsaken us, and delivered us into the hand of Midianites. As if he had said, I will not deny but the Lord hath done of old, as our fathers have declared unto us; Moses story I distrust not, but am sure he hath dealt far otherwise with us. 7 But doth this defect of faith in him, convince the law of imperfection? rather the object of his distrust, might have taught him to have believed the perfection of Moses law, which had so often forewarned them of such oppression by their enemies, when they forsook the God of their fathers. These forwarnings had Gideon believed aright; he had not disinherited the Angel's exhortation. What was the reason then of his misbelieving, or rather overseeing that part of the law? Not ignorance of God's word in general; for the miracles related by Moses he had in perfect memory. What then? want of sufficient authority to propose unto him these particular revelations, or their true meaning? This is all the Romanist can pretend. Yet what greater authority could he require, than that Angel had, which spoke unto Gideon? Our Apostle supposeth any Angel's proposal of divine doctrines, to be at the least equivalent to Apostolical, Though we sayeth he (whether Paul or Cephas) or (which he supposeth to be more) an Angel from heaven preach unto you otherwise, Gal. 1. 8. than we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. Or, if we respect not only the personal authority of the proposer, but with it the manner of proposing God's word: What proposal can we imagine more effectual than this great Angel of the covenants reply unto gideon's distrustful answer; [and the Lord looked upon him, and said Go in this thy might, judg. 6 14. and thou shalt save Israel out of the hands of the Midianites, have I not sent thee?] 8 Whether gideon's diffidence after all this, were a sin, I leave it to be disputed by the Jesuits. A defect or dullness, no doubt it was, and only in respect of the like in us, they hold a necessity of the visible Church's infallibility: unto whose sentence whosoever fully accords not, is by their positions, uncapable of all other infallible means of divine faith. To pretend doubt or distrust of God's word once proposed by it, yea, to seek further satisfaction or resolution of doubts than it shall vouchsafe to give, is more than a sin, extreme impiety. Yet had this great Angel stood upon his authority in such peremptory terms, Gideon had died in his distrust. For after a second reply made by Gideon, Ibid. v, 15. [Ah my Lord, whereby shall I save Israel? behold my family is poor in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father's house] and a further promise of the Angel's assistance not like the former, [have I not sent thee] but [I will therefore be with thee, and thou shalt smite the Madianites as one man;] he yet prefers this petition; I pray thee, if I have found favour in thy sight, then show me a sign that thou talkest with me: Depart not hence I pray thee, until I come unto thee, and bring mine offering, and lay it before thee. After he had by more evident documents fully perceived it was an Angel of the Lord that had parleyed with him all this time, erecting his dejected heart with these comfortable words, Peace be with thee, fear not, thou shalt not die; He yet demands two other signs before he adventures upon the Angel's word. But after it is once confirmed unto him by experience of his power, in keeping his fleece dry in the middle of moisture; and moistening it where was nothing but dryness about it; he is more confident upon a soldiers dream, than a jesuit in like case would be upon the Pope's sentence or blessing given ex Cathedra, * judg. 7. 15. When Gadeon heard the dream told, & the interpretation of the same, he worshipped and returned to the host of Israel, and said; Up, for the Lord hath delivered into your hand, the host of Midian. 9 Nor he, nor his people could at any time have wanted like assurance of God's might and deliverances, had they according to the rule which Moses set them, turned unto him with all their heart, and with all their soul; but as far were they, as the Papists from admitting his words for their rule of faith. The unwritten traditions of Baal, were (at the least) of equal, or joint authority with his writings, and in deed, and action, though not in word and profession, preferred before them. Longer than their assent was, by such miraculous victories as Gideon had now gotted over the Midianites, and as it were tied and fastened to the blessings and cursings of Moses law, this stiffnecked generation did neither cleave to it, nor to their God; * judg. 8. 33. But when Gideon was dead, they turned away and went a whoring after Baalim, and made Baal-Berith their God, and remembered not the Lord their God, which had delivered them out of the hands of all their enemies on every side. Miracles after the Law-given, were usually either tokens of precedent unbelief, or for signs to unbelievers, serving especially to put them in mind of what Moses had foretold: the attentive consideration of whose predictions, wrought greater faith and confidency in such as without miracles laid this law in their hearts, than this people conceived upon the fresh memory of gideon's extraordinary signs and glorious victory. 10 * The people's experience of such calamities as Moses threatened, was their surest ground of such joyful hopes as he had promised. The like occasions of such distrust as were observed in Gideon, were frequent in those times, wherein the four and fortieth Psalm was written, yet the author of it, is not so daunted with the oppression of his people, as Gideon was. The manifestation of such reproach, contempt, and scorn, as Moses said should befall them, did always animate such as indeed had used the Law as a perpetual rule to notify the diversity of all success, good or bad, by the degrees of their declining from it, or approach unto it. The greater calamities they suffered, the more undoubted experience they had of divine truth contained in Mosaicalthreats: the more undoubted their experience of their truth, upon consciousness of their own transgressions, the greater motives they had upon sincere and hearty repentance, to apprehend the stability of his sweetest promises for their good. No depression of this people, but served as a contersway to accelerate, intent, or enlarge the measure of their wont exaltation, so long as they rightly weighed all their actions and proceedings in Moses balances, equalizing their permanent sorrow for sins past, unto their wont delight in transient pleasures. 11 Thus when jeremy more admired than distrusted Gods mercies, in rendering the purchase of his kinsman's field to him, close prisoner, for denouncing the whole desolation of his country, when the Kings and Princes of judah had no assurance of so much possession in the promised land, as to inherit the sepulchres of their fathers: the Lord expels not his suspensive rather then dissident admiration, with signs and wonders, as he had done gideon's doubt, or his stiffnecked forefather's distrust. By what means then? by the present calamities which had seized upon the Cities of judah, and that very place wherein his late purchased inheritance lay, when he cast these, and the like doubts in his mind; * Ier 32. 24. 25. etc. Behold the Mounts they are come into the City to take it, and the City is given into the hand of the Chaldeans that fight against it, by means of the sword, and of the famine, and of the pestilence, and what thou hast spoken is come to pass, and behold thou seest it: And thou hast said unto me, O Lord God, Buy unto thee the field for silver, and take witnesses: for the City shall be given in to the hand of the Chaldeans. Then came the word of the Lord unto jeremiah saying, Behold, I am the Lord God of all flesh, is there any thing too hard for me? The Lord had * jer. 30. 13. 14. stricken jacob with the wound of an enemy, and with a sharp chastise mē●, for the multitude of his iniquities, wherefore he cried for his affliction, and said, My sorrow is incurable, not considering who it was had done all this unto him: for, because the Lord had killed, they must believe he would make alive again. Their present wounds inflicted contrary to the rules of politic defence, where the best pledges of their future health, beyond all hope of State-Surgeons. And this is the very S●ale of jeremiahs' assurance, from the Lords own mouth: jer. 22. 42. 43. etc. Thus sayeth the Lord, like as I have brought all this great plague upon this people; so will I bring upon them all the good I have promised them. And the fields shall be possessed in this land, whereof ye say, It is desolate, without man or beast, and shall be given into the hand of the Chaldeans. Men shall buy fields for silver, and make writings, and seal them, and take witnesses in the land of Benjamin, and round about jerusalem. So absolute and all-sufficient was Moses law in particular actions, much more in general or doctrinal resolution, that God himself, for confirmation of his Prophets, & this distrustful people's faith, in a point by human estimate most incredible, thought it sufficient to be a remembrance to the Lawgiver. For the Lord here saith to jeremiah, concerning this particular; Moses many generations before, had universally foretold; * Deut. 30. 1. Now when all these things shall come upon thee, either the blessing or the curse which I have set before thee, and thou shalt turn into thine heart among all the nations, whither the Lord thy God hath driven thee: then the Lord thy God will cause thy Captives to return, and have compassion upon thee, and will return to gather thee out of all the people, where the Lord thy God had scattered thee. Though thou w●rst cast unto the uttermost part of heaven; from thence will the Lord thy God gather thee, and from thence will he take thee. And the Lord thy God will bring thee into the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou shalt possess it, and he will show thee favour, and will multiply thee above thy fathers. By this rule of Moses, according to the prediction of jeremiah; doth Nehemiah afterwards frame his prayers to God, & direct his enterprise for restoration of jerusalem: We have grievously sinned against thee, Nehemiah. 1. 7. and have not kept the commandments nor the statutes, nor the judgements which thou commandest thy servant Moses, I beseech thee remember the word that thou commandest thy servant Moses, saying, Ye will transgress and I will scatter you abroad among the people. But if ye turn unto me, and keep my commandments, and do them, though your scattering were to the uttermost part of the heaven, yet will I gather you from thence, and will bring you unto the place that I have chosen, to place my Name there. Now these are thy servants, and thy people, etc. O Lord I beseech thee, let thine ear now hearken to the prayer of thy servants, who desire to fear thy name, and I pray thee, cause thy servant to prosper this day, and give him favour in the presence of this man. He saw the truth of Moses divine prediction confirmed by the King's present grant of his petition, & speedy restoration of jerusalem, * Nehe. 6. 10. 11. albeit a Prophet by profession, had dissuaded the enterprise, as likely to prove dangerous to his person. CHAP. VIII. That the society or visible Company of Prophets had no such absolute authority as the Romish Church usurps. 1 DId the Records of antiquity, afford us any the least presumption to think, that absolute belief or obedience might safely be tendered by inferiors, as due to any visible Company of men, without examination of their proposals by Moses writings, since they were extant: the society of Prophets in all respects the Romanists can pretend, had the most probable title to this prerogative. That the company of Prophets had as great privileges as any 〈◊〉 can challenge. Their profession or calling was public and lawful; their distinction from all others, eminent; their persons and places of residence, visible and known; their promises for enjoying the extraordinary presence or illuminations of God's spirit, peculiar: many of them, venerable for their integrity in civil dealings, and sanctity of private life; some of them endued with the gift of miracles: In all these, and many like considerations, that fraternity or collegiate society, might justly have pleaded all the privileges a public spirit can grant to one sort of men before others. For, if the more or less express testimony of God's word for extraordinary assistance of his spirit, or the different measure of his illumination, or manner of immediate teaching be that which makes some men's spirit more public than their brethren's: this difference was greater between the Priests or Prophets, and people of old, then since God spoke unto the world by his son; yet what Prophet did once intimate the necessity of his proposal, That the people were not bound to believe what a mayor part of Prophets determined without examination. for notifying the truth of Scriptures? What one did ever bewray the least desire to have his interpretations of them, universally held authentic? or his particular predictions, absolutely assented unto, without further trial than his bare assertion, without examination of them by Moses doctrine already established? 2 Had they been the infallible Church representative, had their assertions, though given by joinct consent ex Cathedra, or in the most solemn manner used in those times been of such authority as the Romanist would persuade us a Council of their Prelates lawfully assembled is, God's people had stood bound to embrace whatsoever a mayor part of that profession had resolved upon: but this inference, though necessarily following the supposed premises, the jesuit I know, dare not affirm, lest Ahabs blood, untimely shed by confidence in their infallibility, cry out against him. Yet a De Eccles. milit. l. 3. c. 17. Ad primum 〈◊〉 illos 400. prophetas manifest fuisse pseudo Prophetas, ne●●● ignorasse v●l ipsum Achab, qui eos consulebat. N●m ibid. 〈…〉 rex I 〈…〉 aliquis Propheta Domini per quem 〈…〉 Dominum? Respondet Achab, Romansit unus, sed ego 〈◊〉, qu a ne● prophetat 〈…〉 malum 〈◊〉 quis nunc in media Sa●on●● 〈◊〉 400. Ministro, ●uth●ranos de fide ●stificante, postea 〈…〉 non esset mirum, si maior 〈◊〉 erraret: & sicut nun●● non sequitur, totam ecclesiam errare, e●am si 〈◊〉 400. Ministri Lutheram, 〈◊〉 preter Saxoniam & 〈…〉 alia mulla, 〈…〉, ita non sequitur, omnes Doctores judaeorum tempore 〈…〉 etiamsi 〈…〉 Samaria erant. Nam praeter eos Prophetas erat 〈…〉 Sacerdotes in jerusalem, quibus ex officio 〈…〉. Bellarmine too well knowing the liquorish temper of this present age, (for the most part acquainted with none but tabletalk Divinity) to be such as will swallow down any doctrine, be it never so idle, profane, or poisonous, so it be sauced with pleasant conceit and merriment, would put us of with this jest; That as in Saxony, one Catholics verdict were to be taken b●fore sour hundred Lutherans: so should one of the Lords Prophets have been followed in those times, before five hundred of Baal's. And * That Ahabs false Prophets were not professed enemies of Baal. Ahab no doubt had so done, had not the Devil taught his Divines then as he hath done Bellarmine and his fellows since, to take universality, as a sure note of the Church; traditions, and customs of the Elders, for the rule of faith, and (which is the undoubted Conclusion of such premises) to follow a multitude to any mischief. So mightily did the opinion of a mayor part, being all men of the same profession, sway with the superstitious people of those times that a 1. King. 22. 13. Ahabs Pursuivant conceived hope of seducing Micaiah whilst they were on the way together, by intimating such censures of schism, of heresy, of peevishness, or privacy of spirit, as the false Catholic bestows on us, likely to befall him, if he should vary from the rest. The best answer (I think) a Roman Catechism could afford, would be to repeat the conclusion which Bellarmine would have maintained, [All the rest beside were Baal's Prophets.] They were indeed in such a sense as Jesuits and all seducers are: but not by public profession or solemn subscription to his rites, as may partly appear by jehosaphats, continuing his resolution to go up to battle against Micaiahs' counsel, which questionless, he would rather have died at home, then done, had he known Michaiah only to have belonged unto the Lord, and all his adversaries unto Baal; partly, by that reverent conceit which even the chief of these seducers entertained at that time of Elias, whose utter disgrace Baal's servants would by all means have sought, for his late designs acted upon their fellows: Yet as * Antiq. l. 8. c. 10. Interea Sedecias quidam unus 〈◊〉 Pseudoprophetis in medium progreditur, negans curandum quid Michaeas garriet, nihil en●m veri cum predicere, argumento esse praedictionem Eliae, qui sine dubio melius quiam iste futura cerneret Illum enim praedixisse apud jezraelem in Nabuthi suburbano lambendom à ca●● bus regis sanguinem, quemadmodum, ●ambuissent cruorem Nabut●i opera ipsi●●● lapidati à populo. Perspicuum igitur esse eum mentiri, qui longè prestantiori Prophetae no● vereatur contrarium dicere, quòd: eriturus sit rex ab hinc die 〈◊〉 sed mox sore evidentius etiam quam verax sit aut a●status divino spiritu. josephus records, the chief argument used by Zidkiah to diminish Micaiahs' credit with both Kings, was an appearance of contradiction betwixt his and Eliahs' prediction of ahab's death, the accomplishment of both being apprehended as impossible, less credit (as he urged) was to be given to Mica●ah, because so impudent as openly to contradict so great a Prophet of the Lord as Elias, at whose threatenings Ahab King of Israel trembled, humbling himself with fasting, clothed in sackcloth. And it is likely he would so shortly after entertain the professed servants of Baal for his Councillors? yet, seeing the event hath openly condemned them for seducers, and none are left to plead their cause: it is an easy matter for the jesuit or others to say, they were Baal's Prophets by profession. But were not most Priests and Prophets in judah & Benjamin usually such? yes, and (as afterward shall appear) did band as strongly with as joint consent, against jeremy, and Ezechiel, as these did against Michaiah. The point wherein we desire resolution, is, by what rule of Romish Catholic Divinity, truth in those times might have been discerned from falsehood before God's judgements did light upon the City and Temple. He is more blind than the blindest jew that ever breathed, who cannot see how such as professed themselves Priests and Prophets of the Lord, aswell in judah as in Israel, did bewitch the people with the self same spells the Papists boasts of to this day, as the best prop of his Catholic faith. Yet such is the hypocrisy of these proud pharisees, that they can say in their hearts; Oh had we lived in the days of jezabel, we would not have been her inquisitors against such Prophets as Elias and Micaiah were: When as in truth jezabels' impiety towards them, was clemency in respect of Romish cruelty against God's Saints, her witchcrafts but as venial sins, if we compare them with jesuitical sorceries. But of this error more directly in the Chapter following; of their sorceries and impieties hereafter. 3 Unto our former demand, [whether the society of Prophets were the Church representative, whether the people were bound without examination to believe whatsoever was by a mayor part, or such of that profession as were in highest or most public place determined.] What answer a learned Papist would give I cannot tell. Then this following, better cannot be imagined on their behalf, [That this supreme authority which they contend for, was in the true Prophets only; that they, albeit inspired with divine illuminations, and endued with such authority as the jesuit makes the Pope's humana divinitas inspirala, did notwithstanding permit their declarations, for the hardness of this people's heart to be tried by the event, or examined by the law, not that they wanted lawful power (would they have stood upon their authority) to exact belief without delay; seeing readiness to believe the truth proposed, is always commended in the sacred Story. And no doubt, but the people did well in admitting the true Prophet's doctrine, before the false, at the first proposal; the sooner, the better. But were they therefore to believe the true Prophets absolutely without examination? Why should they then believe one of that profession, before another; seeing seducers could propose their conceits with as great speed and peremptoriness as the best? Nor did reason only dissuade, but the * jud. 13. 1,. law of God also expressly, forbid that people, always, and in all causes to trust such, as upon trial had been found to divine aright of strange events. Yet grant we must, that hardness of heart made this people more backward, then otherwise they would have been to believe truths proposed; that oftimes they required signs from their Prophet, when obedience was instantly due from them to him; that oftimes they sinned in not assenting immediately, without interposition of time for trial, or respite to resolve upon what terms belief might be tendered. Thus much we may grant with this limitation; [if we consider them absolutely, or so well disposed as they should, In what cases and persons pronensse to believe particular truths is commendable, in what or in whom suspicious. and might have been, not as the Prophets found them.] For in men inwardly ill affected or unqualified, for true faith, credulity comes near the nature of vice than virtue, a disposition of disloyalty, a degree of heresy or infidelity, rather than a preparation to sincere obedience, or any sure foundation of true and lively faith. Assent perchance men so affected, may more readily than others would unto sundry divine truths: yet not truly not as they are divine and consonant to the rule of goodness, but by accident, in as much as they in part consort with some one or other of their affections. And the more forward men are upon such grounds, to believe some generalities of Christian duties; the more prone they prove, when opportunity tempts them, to oppugn others more principal, and more specially concerning their salvation. For credulity, if it spring not out of an honest disposition uniformally inning unto goodness, as such; but from some unbridled humour, or predominant natural affection: will always sway more unto some mischief, then unto any thing that is good. * john. 2. 23. Many believed in jesus (saith Saint john) when they saw his miracles. It pleased them well he had turned water into wine, that he had given other proofs of his power, in driving buyers and sellers out of the Temple, did minister hope unto proud hearts, he might prove such a Messias as they expected, as elsewhere upon the like occasion they said, * john 6. v. 14. This is of a truth the Prophet that should come into the world. The ground of this their aptness to believe thus much, (as is intimated in the words following) was their inordinate desire of having an earthly King, that might rule the nation with an iron rod. a john 6. v. 15. When jesus therefore perceived by their forwardness to profess the former truth, that they would come and take him to make him a King, he departed again into a mountain himself alone; for the same cause no doubt, which the Evangelist specifies in the former place, * 〈…〉. 2. 24. 25. But jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew them all, and had no need that any should testify of man. He knew such as upon these glimpses of his glory were presently so stiffly set to believe in him, upon hopes of being fed with dainties, or mighty protection against the Heathen; would be as violently bend against him, even to crucify him for a seducer, after they had discovered his constant endeavours to bring them both by life and doctrine unto conformity with his cross, mortification humility, contempt of the world, patience in affliction, with other like qualities despiseable in the world's eyes; yet main principles in his school, and elementary grounds of salvation; so his countrymen of Nazareth suddenly admiring the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth, Luke 4. v. 22. 28. 29. after he begun to upbraid them with unthankfulness, as speedily attempt to throw him headlong from the top of the hill, wherein their City was built. By this it may appear, that of the jewish people in ancient times, some did sin in being backward: others, in an immature forwardness to believe prophetical doctrines. But the fountains or first heads whence these swift motions of life were depraved in the one, was inordinate affection, or intrinsic habitual corruption; the root whence such deadness was derived into the actions of the other, was hardness of heart, precedent neglect of God's word, and ignorance of his ways thence ensuing. Which presupposed, the parties so affected, did not * Bellarmine grants that he which doubts of the Pope's absolute authority doth not amiss to examine it, albeit he sin in doubting of it. Vide Annot. cap. 14● §. 7. Sect. 1. §. 10. amiss, in not believing the true Prophets without examination; but in not abandoning such dispositions, as disenabled them for believing all parts of truth proposed with constancy, and uniformity, making them fit instruments to be wrought upon by seducers. Hence saith our Saviour, * job. 5. 43. 44. I come in my father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him will ye receive. How can ye believe which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh of God alone: Nor Prophetical, nor Apostolical, nor messiacal much less could Papal authority make them believe the doctrine of life, entirely and sincerely, whilst their hearts were heardned; whose hardness though, might easily have been mollified, by laying Moses law unto them, while they were young and tender. 4 It is a rule as profitable for our own information in many points, A rule for the right settling of our persuasions in divine matters, or ripening of true faith. as for refutation of the adversary, that the commendation of necessary means, is always included in the commendation of the end; which how good or excellent soever it be, our desires of it are preposterous, all earnest endeavours to attain it, turbulent; unless first addressed with proportionable alacrity to follow the means that must produce it: sober spirits always bound their hopes of accomplishing the one by perfect survey of their interest in the other; as minds truly liberal, determine future expenses, by exact calculation of their present revenues. Even in businesses of greatest importance, though requiring speediest expedition, a wise man will moderate his pace according to the quality of the ground whereon he goes, otherwise the more haste may cause worse speed. The jews were, as we are, bound to believe truths proposed without delay: but both for this reason most strictly bound to a continual uniformity of practising divine precepts already known, without dispensing with this or that particular, though offensive to our present disposition without indulgence to this or that special time, without all privilege sought from the pleasure or displeasure of men, both bound, so to frame our lives and conversations, as to be instantly able to discern the truth proposed, not by relying upon their authority that propose it, but for itself, or from a full and lively, though a quick and speedy apprehension of immediate homogeneal consonancy between the external and the internal word. For if any part of God's word truly dwell in us, though secret it may be and silent of itself, yet will it Echo in our hearts, whilst the like reverberates in our ears from the live voice of the Ministry. Thus had the jews hearts been truly set to Moses law, had their souls delighted in the practice of it as in their food, they had resounded to the Prophets call, as a string though untouched, and unable to begin motion of itself, will yet raise itself to an unison voice, or as the souls of heaven answer with like language to others of their own kind, that have better occasion to begin the cry. In this sense are Christ's sheep said to hear his voice, and follow him; not every one that can counterfeit his or his Prophets call, 5 The issue of all that hath been said is, that none within the precincts of these times, whereof we now treat, from the Law, given, unto the Gospel, were bound to believe God's messengers, without examination of their doctrine by the precedent written word. Only this difference there was; such as had rightly framed their hearts to it, did make this trial of Prophetical doctrines, as it were by a present taste, which others could not without interposition of time, to work an alteration in their distempered affections. For this reason do the Prophets always annex Mosaical precepts of repentance, Why the Prophets enjoin repentance whilst the● foretell events to come. to their predictions of future events, as knowing that if their hearts to whom they spoke, were turned to God, their sight should forthwith be restored clearly to discern the truth. For further manifestation of the same conclusion, it appears sufficiently from sundry discourses in the former book, that Israel's incredulity unto their Prophets, was finally to be resolved into their neglect, their imperfect, or partial observance of Moses precepts. Wherefore not the live voice of them, whose words in themselves were most infallible, and are by the approbation of time, with other conspicuous documents of Gods peculiar providence, preserving them in divine estimation so long, become an undoubted rule of life unto us: but the written word before, confirmed by signs and wonders, sealed by the events of times present and precedent, was the infallible rule, whereby the prophetical admonitions of every age, were to be tried and examined. 6 The words of the best, while they spoke them, were not of like authority, as now written they are unto us, nor were they admitted into the Canon, but upon just proof of their divine authority. That one speech which Esay uttered, was an axiom so well known, as might bring all the rest to be examined, before admission; * Isaiah 8. v. 20. To the Law and to the Testimony if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. For Gods will already known and manifested to the proples' consciences, was to oversway the contrary proposals of known Prophets, though never so peremptory. Nor was it impossible for Prophets to avouch their own conceits under the name of divine Revelations, more immediately sent from God, than the Pope pretends: witness the * 1 King. 13. v. 18. man of God, that went from judah to Bethel, seduced by his fellow Prophets, feigned revelation from an Angel, counseling him to divert into his house, contrary to the Lords commandment given before. The ones dealing was, I confess most unusual; so was the others death, yet a lively document to cause all, that should hear of it until the world's end, take heed of dispensing with the word of the Lord once made known unto themselves, upon belief of more manifest revelations or instructions, by what means soever given to others, either for recalling or restraining it. Hence may the Reader descry, aswell the height of our adversaries folly, as the depth of their impiety, making their Church's authority, which by their own acknowledgement cannot add more books to the number of the Canon already finished, but only judge which are Canonical, which not, far greater than theirs was, that did preach and write these very books, which both we and they acknowledge for Canonical. For the Prophet's words were no rule of faith, until examined and tried by the written word precedent, or approved by the event; the Popes must be, without trial, examination, or further approbation than his own bare assertion. CHAP. IX. That the Church representative amongst the jews was for the most part, the most corrupt judge of matters belonging to God: and the reasons why it was so. 1 But was the neglect of Moses law, or this people's inward corruption, abounding for want of restraint by it, the sole cause of their dullness in perceiving, or of their error in perverting the things of God's spirit: This overflow of wickedness served as a tide to carry them: but the continual blasts of such vain doctrine, Templum Domini, Templum Domini, the Church, the Church, was like a boisterous wind to drive them headlong into those sands, wherein they always made shipwreck of faith and conscience. The true Prophets never had greater opposites then the Priests, and such as the Papists would have to be the only pillars, yea the only material parts of the Church representative. Notwithstanding, whom the Fathers had traduced for impostors or Sectaries, and oftimes murdered as blasphemers of the Deity, or turbulent members of the state; Posterities good affection to the Prophets their fathers had killed, oftimes an argument ●ather of hypocrisy than sincerity. the Children reverenced as men of God, and messengers of peace unto the Church and common weal. What was the reason of this diversity in their judgement? or doth it argue more steadfast belief in posterity? No, but more experience of the events, foretold oftimes, not fulfilled until the Priests, and other opposites, either coaevals or ancients to the Prophets, were covered with confusion. The children's motives, to believe particulars oppugned by their parents, were greater; and the impediments to withdraw their assent from them, less: That the children should thus brook what their father's most disliked in the Prophets, is no more than we may observe, in other Writers. Few much reverenecd in any faculty by posterity, but had eager detractors in their flourishing days, vicinity always breeding envy. And even of such, as did not emulate them for their skill, nor would have been moved with envy at their fame or glory, they were not esteemed as they deserved, being defrauded of due praise by such of the same profession, as better pleased the predominant humour; always next in election to the lavish Magnificates of present times; but usually rejected by posterity, when that particular humour, (evermore shorter liv'th than the humorous) began to change. Thus in every faculty, have those authors which most applied themselves to solidity of truth, neglecting newfangle tricks or flashes of extemporary wit, endured in greatest request, and best credit throughout all ages: as meats strongest and most nourishing, not most delicate, are fittest for continual diet. Statius in sine 12. Thebay. What the Latin Poet said of his Poems, every Prophet might have more truly applied unto his writings. Mox, tibi si quis adhuc pretendat nubila, livor Occidet, & meriti post me referentur honores. Though clouds of envy now may seem, thy splendent rays to choke; These with my ashes shall dissolve, and vanish as their smoke. What whilst I breathe sharp censures blast, when my leaf falls, shall spring, Thy fame must flourish, as I fade; grave honour forth shall bring. It was a Method most compendious, for attaining such eternity of fame, as the continual succession of mortality can afford us, which is given by * Petrarch. another Poet, but in prose; Dum vivas virtutem colas, invenias famam in Sepulchro; He that hunts after virtue in his whole course of life, shall be sure to meet with fame after death; but hardly sooner, lest of all could these Prophets be much honoured in their own Country, whilst men of their own profession, Why the priests or spiritual rulers hated the living Prophets whilst they loved the memory of the deceased. carnally minded, possessed the chief seats of dignity, sometimes the best stay and pillars of faith in God's Church, most capable of that infallibility, which their proud successors did more boast of. Yet were, even these seducers always willing to celebrate the memory of ancient prophets, because the authority given to their sayings, or reverence showed unto their memory by the present people, over whom they ruled, did no way prejudice their own dignity or estimation which rather increased by thus consorting with the multitude in their laudatoes of holy men deceased. Thus from one and the same inordinate desire of honour and praise from men, did contrary effects usually spring in these masters of Israel. The dead they reverenced, because they saw that acceptable unto most, & likely to make way for their own praise amongst the people: but fear lest the living Prophets should be their corivals in suits of glory, whereunto their souls were wholly espoused, did still exasperate and where the malice of impatient minds, conscious of their own infirmities, against their doctrine, which could not be embraced, but their estimation must be impaired, their affections crossed, & their politic projects dashed. The higher in dignity the Priests and Rulers were, the more it vexed them, such poor men, as the true Prophets, for the most part, were, should take upon them to direct the people. Their objections against those men of God, their scurrilous taunts, and bitter scoffs, their odious 〈◊〉 forged, to make way for bloody persecutions, are most lively represented by the like practises of the Romish Clergy; continued almost as many years against the Albigeans, Hu●sites, and generally against all whom they suspect to have any familiarity with the spirit, whose testimony against them, is as authentic as evident; only overborne through God's permission in the world's sight, by prejudice of privateness. Thus, when poor Michatah would not say, as the King would have him, the politic State-Prophet Zidkiah; son of Chenaanah, gave him a blow on the cheek, to beat an answer out to this demand; When went the Spirit of the Lord from me to thee? As many proud Prelates would in like case, reply upon his poor brother, that should cross his opinion, specially in a matter belonging, though but a far off, unto the State; Sirrah, I am your better, know your place, before whom, and in what matter you speak. Nor did Zidkiah only, but 400. more (no otherwise discernible for false Prophets then by such trial as we contend for) as if they would have bound the Almighty to have followed most voices in bestowing victory, persuade the King to go up against Ramath Gilead. But my former assertion is fully ratified by Michaiahs' reply to the others demand; When went the etc. Thou shalt see (saith he) in that day, when thou shalt go from chamber to chamber to hide thee. No question, but such as were neuters before, after they see his prophesy fulfilled in ahab's overthrow, did take Michaiah for a Prophet, as true as Zedkiah was false. 3 In like manner when jeremy a poor Prophet and Priest of Anathoth had come unto jerusalem among the Prelates, and prophesied the truth, but truth offensive to the State, * jer. 29. v. 15. That all the evils which God had pronounced, should be brought upon that City, and her towns: Pashu● the son of Immer the Priest, which was appointed governor in the house of the Lord, entreats him worse than Zidkiah had done Michaiah. He could have flouted him with as good applause of his complices, as the Inquisitors can a Protestant now: You that can read State fortunes a far off, can you tell where you shall lodge yourself this next night? if you cannot take him for a better Prophet that can. And by Pashurs' prophesy, he was to take up his lodging in his way home in the Stocks that were in the high gate of Ben●amin, near unto the house of the Lord. whose desolation he had threatened. The like entertainment he found again at the whole multitudes hands, but by the Priests and Prophet's instigation; * jer. 26. v. 8. 9 Now when jeremiah had made an end of speaking all that the Lord had commanded him to speak unto all the people, than the Priests and the Prophets, and all the people took him and said, Thou shalt die the death. Why hast thou prophesied in the name of the Lord, saying, This house shall be like Shiloh, and this City shall be desolate without an inhabitant? As if the Church of God could possibly err, or the gates of hell prevail against the splendour of it, would the Romish Clergy add, should the Lord send a Prophet with such tidings unto Rome. And did they not learn this interpretation of Christ's promise unto his Church, from the hypocritical jews their predecessors, which made the like comment in jeremiahs' time, upon God's words as pregnant for the highpriests succession as Saint Peter's; * jer. 18. v. 18. Come and let us imagine some devise against jeremiah, for the Law shall not perish from the Priest, nor counsel from the wise, nor the word from the Prophet, come, and let us smite him with the tongue, and let us not give heed to any of his words. Away with the heretic. The manifestation of like affection in the Prelates towards God's Prophets, did embolden Shemaiah the Nehelemite, to write from Babylon unto Zephaniah the high Priest and his associates to this effect. * jer. 29. v. 26. The Lord hath mad thee Priest, for jehoiada the Priest, that ye should be officers in the house of the Lord, for every man that raveth and maketh himself a Prophet, to put him in prison, and in the stocks. Now therefore, why hast not thou reproved jeremiah of Anathoth which prophesied unto you. This captivity is long: built houses to dwell in, and plant gardens, and eat the fruits of them. 4 But when Pashur found the Omen of that * jer. 20. v. 3. 4 name which jeremiah gave him, when he and his mates proved indeed Magors Missabibs, a terror to themselves, and all about them, when they saw with their eyes all the miseries there expressed, then was jeremiah held for a true Prophet, especially by such as outlived the captivity, to see the truth of his prophesy for their good as exactly fulfilled, as this had been for their harm, whilst according to his * jer. 29. v. 31. 32. prediction, Shemaiah and his seed were rooted out from amongst God's people happily replanted in their native soil. For from the reasons set down before, posterity did always better judge of prophecies then the age wherein their Authors lived, at the least, the younger and meaner sort of that age which outlived the event, usually better digested their doctrine, than the ancient or men of dignity that envied them credit amongst the people, yet were not such as less maligned them, greater believers universally, as was said before, but only of some few particulars. For, if a new Prophet should have risen amongst them he was almost as evil entreated by the present Clergy, or others, whose humours he contradicted. This is evident by the Scribes and pharisees, and the chief Rulers of the jewish Church in our saviours time; * Math. 23. v. 29. 30 They builded the tombs of the Prophets, & garnished the sepulchres of the righteous, and said (as they verily thought) If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the Prophets: yet made they the people of their own time so mad, as to be partakers with them in the blood of that great Prophet, their long desired Messiah, the only Saviour of the world. Throughout the whole Story almost of the old Testament, the truth proposed may appear, that the visible Church (if it be taken in such a sense as the Romanists take it) was the most corrupt judge either of the truth, or true meaning of God's word; that the people seduced by their goodly shows and glorious titles of Moses successors, were still brought into the combination of blood, until they brought upon themselves, their posterity, and the holy City, * Math. 23. v. 35 All the righteous blood that was shed upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous, until the blood of their Messiah. 5 But though their cruelty and hypocrisy be so notoriously known, What means the people had to discern true Prophets from false. as it even seems to point out the like in the modern Romanist: yet some honestly minded will perhaps demand, how the people of those ages wherein the Prophets lived, could possibly know the truth of their Prophecies, seeing for the most part they saw a mayor part of men in Ecclesiastic authority, bend against them. This happily may tempt unsentled minds to think the Lord had determined his Prophets should have Cassandra's fates, never to be believed till remedy were passed. The people's mistaking of their predictions, was in a sort fatal, yet not necessary, but upon supposition of former neglect God sent them Prophets for their good, but their wickedness turned his blessings into cursings, their hypocrisy and folly made them so blind, that they could not discern the signs of the times, until woeful experience, the fools only Schoolmaster, began to teach it them, when their time for lore was ended. a Prou. 22. v. 3. A prudent man (saith the wiseman,) seeth the plague, and hideth himself: but the foolish go on still, and are punished. But wherein doth that prudence consist, which might have prevented this plague? surely in reading God's law and continual meditation thereon; for this gives wisdom to the simple. Men in this case should have asked b Eccles. 37. ver. 13. 14. 15. counsel of their own heart▪ for there is no man more faithful unto thee than it, for a man's mind is sometimes more accustomed to show more than seven Watchmen that sit above in an high Tower. And above all this, pray to the most High, that he will direct thy way in truth. Had they thus done without partiality to their corrupt affections, or without all respect of persons (in which Christian faith cannot be had:) Moses law had been a lantern unto their feet, for the discerning of true Prophets, and those discerned, had been a light unto latter ages, for discerning the true Messias. 6 The evidence of this truth, Of later Prophets subordinate unto Moses. not without cause so often inculcated, will better appear, if we consider ●ow most prophetical predictions of particular alterations, were but determinations of Mosaical generalities, out of which they grow as branches out of the stock. As for example, The Lord told Moses before his death, and he gave it to Israel for a song to be copied out by all, * Deut. 31. v. 16 That when they went a whoring after the Gods of a strange land, forsaking him he would forsake them, and hide his face from them. After Ie●oiadahs death, Zechariah his son seeing the Princes of judah leaving the house of the Lord to serve Groves and Idols, albeit he were moved as the Text saith, by the spirit of God, yet only applies Moses general prediction to the present times, * 2. Chr. 24. v. 20 Thus saith God, Why transgress ye the commandment of the Lord? Surely ye shall not prosper, because ye have forsakeu the Lord, he also will forsake you. Saint Paul himself useth his own advise, not the Lord's authority in such points, as were not evidently contained in Moses law; * 1. Cor. 7. v. 10 Unto the married command not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband, for so Moses had expressly commanded. But to the Remnant, I speak, not the Lord, If any brother have a wife that believeth not, if she be content to dwell with him, let him not forsake her. And again, concerning Virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord, but I give mine advise as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful; This was his judgement, and as he thought warranted by the spirit of God; yet he prescribes it not as a general rule of faith to all, but rather leaves every man to be ruled by his conscience, and the analogy of Moses law. So likewise, though God use an extraordinary revelation to instruct Saint Peter in the free use of meats forbidden by Moses; yet he persuades him it by manifesting the true meaning of another clause of the same law; for what he uttered upon this * Vide lib. 1. Part. 2. Sec. 4. cap. 1. para 1. & lib. 2. Sec. 1. cap. 7. Para. 9 instruction and the experiment answerable thereto, was but a further specification of what Moses had said, a Act. 10. v. 34. I perceive of a truth (saith S. Peter) that God is no accepter of persons, Moses had said, * Deut. 10. v. 17▪ 18. The Lord your God is God of Gods, and Lord of Lords, a great God, mighty and terrible, which accepteth no persons, nor taketh reward, who doth right unto the fatherless and widow, and loveth the b It was a peculiar operation of God's spirit (the principal end of this Revelation) to instruct Saint Peter that God's graces were to be communicated henceforth to the Gentiles. And this was but a branch of that Precept of loving strangers, so often ingeminated by their Lawgiver. Had the jews sincerely practised this duty towards Aliens, the communication of God's graces unto the Gentiles could not have seemed so strange unto them. stranger, giving him sood and raiment. 7 These passages sufficiently inform us, that the extraordinary spirit wherewith the Apostles themselves were above the measure of God's former messengers inspired oftimes, only made the stems, whether of the tree of life, or of knowledge planted by Moses to blow and flourish in them by little and little after the manner of natural growth, it did not always bring forth new ones in an instant, as the earth did at the first creation. Much more usually did prophecies during the standing of the first temple, spring out of Mosaical predictions. If we compare his writings with latter prophecies, not long before the Babylonish captivity, though he had departed this life before their fathers entered into the land of promise, yet he speaks unto this last generation as an intelligencer from a far Country, that great preparation was made against them, but who should be the executioners or managers of mischief intended; he leaves that to such Prophets as the Lord should raise them up for the present. jeremy and Ezechiel upon his admonition, following his direction, are sent by God, as it were, to scour the coast, to descry when the Navy comes, for what Coast it is bound, and how near at hand. Here had the people faithfully examined their hearts by Moses law, whether not guilty of such sins as deserved the plagues threatened by him, they had quickly assented unto Moses writings, and the Prophet's words. For as consciousness of their sins in general, might cause them fear some plague or other, indefinitely threatened by their Lawgiver, whose writings they best believed: so might the diligent observation of their particular transgressions, and their progress in them, have taught them to presage the determinate manner of their plagues and punishments foretold by the present Prophet. For God in his usual course of justice, so suits his punishments to the most accustomary habits or predominant sins, as unto men religiously observant of times and seasons, the growth and process of the one will give a certain crisis of the other. Besides every age hath peculiar signs subordinate to the general predictions of good or evil foretold by God's messengers, whereby the faithful learn to know the day of their visitation, and as Solomon saith, to hide themselves (in latibulo altissimi) from the plague;) if not by their hearty repentance, godly prayers, and religious endeavours to prevent it. And because we in this age, are not so well acquainted with the particular signs of former times, wherein true Prophets lived, it is hard for any living now, though easy to all the faithful then, to give any certain or particular rule how the truth of their prophecies might have been, at least probably known, before the event did finally and absolutely approve them. Would to God we could discern the signs of times present; and the Lord of his infinite mercy give us grace to know the day of our visitation. But of this argument elsewhere by God's assistance. It shall suffice in the next place to show that our saviours doctrine was by the same means to be discerned. CHAP. X. That the Sovereignty given by Jesuits to the Pope is greater than our saviours was. 1 IT is a Rule in Divinity [whatsoever can rightly be conceived as an absolute perfection, hath real existence in the Almighty.] From this notion of the Deity, swimming in the brains of such as in heart & deed make the Pope their Lord & God, do the parties thus affected, usually take whatsoever power might possibly be deligated by God to any, as actually granted unto his holiness. And thus I imagine some jesuit or other, when he shall bethink himself will except against our disputes in this present cause, [Deny you cannot that God can, and what if he should expressly grant such authority as the Pope now challengeth, would your arguments conclude him to be Antichrist, or the doctrine we teach to be blasphemous.] On the contrary, seeing our Saviour Christ did never either practice or challenge, seeing neither Moses nor the Prophets did ever so much as once intimate such absolute power should be acknowledged in that great Prophet, of whom they wrote, we suppose the imagination of the like, in whomsoever, cannot be without real blasphemy. Yet suppose Christ's infallibility, and the Popes, Though the Pope's infallibility be made by jesuits but equal to Christ's, yet is his sovereignty much greater in respect of Christian people. were; in respect of the Church Militant, the same: the Pope's authority would be greater: or were their authority but equal, his privileges with God would be much more magnificent than Christ's. That which most condemned the jews of infidelity, in not acknowledging Christ as sent with power full & absolute from God his father, were his mighty signs and wonders, his admirable skill in God's word already established; but chiefly his sacred life and conversation as it were exhibiting unto the world a visible pattern or conspicuous model of that incomprehensible goodness which is infallible. Now, if we compare his powerfulness in words and works, with the Pope's imperfections in both; or his divine virtues with the others monstrous vices: to equalize their infallibilities, were to imagine God to be like man, and Christ (at the best) but as his faithful servant, the Pope his Minion, his Darling, or some of his age. For such is our partiality to our own flesh, that oftimes (though the Wise man advise to the contrary) a lewd and naughty son (in that he is a son) hath greater grace and privileges, than the most faithful servant in the father's house. So would the Jesuits make God dote upon the Pope, whose authority, be his life never so ungracious, if they should deny to be less than Christ's in respect of us, their practices enjoined ex Cathedra would confute them. For much sooner shall any Christian, though otherwise of life unspotted, be cut off from the congregation of the faithful, for denying the Pope's authority, or distrusting his decrees, than the jews that saw Christ's miracles, for contradicting him in the days of his flesh, or oppugning his Apostles after his glorification. Nor boots it ought to say, they make the Pope's authority less than Christ's, in respect they derive it from his; rather, because they evidently make it greater than Christ's was, it cannot be truly thence derived: or if it could, this only proves it to be less than the other, whilst only compared with it, not whilst we consider both in respect of us: for Christ's authority as the Son of Man, in respect of us, is equal to his Fathers, whence it is derived, john 5. v. ● For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgement unto the Son. 2 But wherein do they make the Pope's authority greater than Christ's? That our saviour's doctrine was to be tried by Moses, and the Prophet's writings: but the Popes (if we believe the Jesuits) neither by these, nor our saviours doctrine. First, in not exempting it from trial by Christ's and his Apostles doctrine, neither of which were to be admitted without all examination of their truth, for as you heard before God's word was first uttered in their audience, established by evident signs and wonders in their sight, and presence of whom belief and obedience unto particulars was exacted. And it is a rule most evident and unquestionable, that God's word once confirmed and sealed by experience, was the only rule whereby all other spirits and doctrines were to be examined; that not Prophetical visions were to be admitted into the Canon of Faith, but upon their apparent consonancy with the word already written. The first Prophets were to be tried by Moses, the latter by Moses and their Predecessors; Christ's and his Apostles, by Moses and all the Prophets, for unto him did all the * Act. 10. v. 43 Vide Act. 3. v. 18. 21. 24. Prophets give testimony. The manifest experiments of his life and doctrine so fully consonant to their predictions, did much confirm even his Disciples belief unto the former Canon, of whose truth they never conceived positue doubt. 3 Again, there had been no Prophet, no signs, no wonders, for a long time in judah, before our saviours birth, yet he never made that use either of his miracles, or more than Prophetical spirit, which the papists make of their imaginary public spirit: he never used this or like argument, to make the people rely upon him. How know ye the Scriptures are God's word? How know ye that God spoke with Moses in the Wilderness, or with your Fathers in Mount Sinai? Moses, your Fathers, and the Prophets are dead, and their writings cannot speak. Your present Teachers the Scribes and pharisees do no wonders. Must you not then believe him whom daily you may behold doing such mighty works as Moses said to have done; that Moses, as your fathers have told you, was sent from God; that God's word is contained in his writings: otherwise you cannot infallibly believe that there was such a man indeed as you conceive he was, much less that he wrote you this Law, least of all can you certainly know the true meaning of what he wrote. He that is the only sure foundation of faith, knew that faith grounded upon such doubts, was but built upon the sand, unable to abide the blasts of ordinary temptations; that thus to erect their hopes was but to prepare a rise to a grievous downfall, the ready way to atheism, presumption, or despair. For this cause he doth not so much as once question how they knew the Scriptures to be God's word: but supposing them known and fully acknowledged for such, he exhorts his hearers to search them, seeking to prepare their hearts by signs and wonders to embrace his admirable expositions of them. And because the corruption of particular moral doctrines brought into the Church by human tradition, would not suffer the generality of Moses, and the Prophets already believed to fructify in his hearers hearts, and branch out uniformly into lively working faith: he laboured most to weed out Pharisaism from among the heavenly seed, as every one may see, that compares his sermon upon the Mount, with the pharisees glosses upon Moses. If the particular, or principal parts of the law and Prophets, had been as purely taught, or as clearly discerned, as the general and common principles: His Doctrine, that came not to destroy, but to fulfil the law in words and works, had shined as brightly in his hearers hearts at the first proposal, as the sun did to their eyes at the first rising. For all the moral duties required by them, were but as dispersed rays or scattered beams of that divine light and glory; which was incorporate in him, as splendour in the body of the sun. Nor was there any possibility the jews belief in him should prosper, unless it grew out of their general assent unto Moses doctrine, thus pruned and purged at the very root; * john 5. v. 46. 47. Had ye believed Moses (saith our Saviour) ye would have believed me, for he wrote of me, but if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? For which cause, they were in conscience bound to examine his doctrine by Moses, and the Prophets: otherwise they might have believed the saving truth, To believe Christ without examination of his doctrine by Moses had been neither to believe Christ nor Moses. but falsely; and upon decitfull grounds. The stronger or more absolute credence they had given unto his words or works without such examination, the more they had ensnared their souls, and set their consciences upon the Rack, by admitting a possibility of contradiction betwixt two doctrines both firmly believed, without any evidence of their consonancy, or bothes conspiring to the same end. The speedier and higher this edification in Christ had been, the sooner it might have ruinated that foundation which God by Moses and the Prophets had reared in Israel, unless this new work had been orderly squared, well proportioned, closely laid, and strongly cemented unto the former. In secular schools he is held an unwise answerer, that will admit Socratical intertogations; for, albeit there appear no difficulty in any one proposed apart, yet in the process, a respondent may be easily brought to grant conclusions, from which he knows not what consequences may be drawn, because their consonancy with the problem whose defence he undertakes, is not so evident nor immediate, as upon a sudden may be fully examined. And not examining the consonancy of every other proposition with the principles of that faculty, whereto the problem belongs, the best answerer living may be made either grant what he should not, or deny what should be granted. Now Christ's doctrine was to Mosaical and Prophetical, as the conclusion to the premises, or as the corollary of greatest use unto the speculative theorem. Suppose then a jew well skilled in Moses and the Prophets, should instantly upon the first hearing of our saviours sermons, or sight of his miracles, have admitted him for such an infallible teacher, upon terms as absolute and irrevocable, as the jesuit would have the Pope acknowledged by all Christians, a good disputant might easily have staggered him by these or like Socratical demands; Do you steadfastly believe Moses writings for God's word? God forbid I should doubt of this: Do ye believe this new doctrine confirmed by miracles as firmly? What if I do? Do you know as certainly, whether both agree as well as one part of Moses writings with another? What if I do not? until you be fully resolved in this, your belief in both cannot be sound: for in case they should disagree, the one must needs be false; and if choice were given you, whether in sooth would you disclaim? Here a wise man, that (as the wise King speaks) had eyes in his head and would not be led by a blind saith, would have paused a while, and thought with himself, This is a point that should be looked to: for if these new doctrines should prove incompatible, as for any just examination hitherto made, they may, I cannot see whether deserves more credence; Whiles I consider Moses writings, & call to mind those mighty wonders our fathers told us, with like continual experiments of their divine truth; nothing can seem more certain than they; again, whiles I behold these new miracles, me thinks his authority that works them, should be as great as Moses was; yet if they should happen to disagree, the one must be better believed then the other, or else (for aught I see) there can be no certainty of either; for, if this man's possibly may be, why might not Moses doctrine likewise be false? or if our fathers were deceived by his signs and wonders, why may not we be so served by this man's miracles? But if upon just trial they shall be found fully to agree in every point (as I trust they do) then doubtless both are from God, and I shall steadfastly believe this new doctrine to be divine, if such as Moses had foretold; & withal, more evidently acknowledge, then before I could, that Moses spoke by the spirit of the all seeing, everliving God, if this jesus of Nazareth be in all points like to him, and so qualified as he foretold the great Prophet should be. But in the interim till the trial be made, it is best to lay sure hold on Moses and the Prophets. For prior tempore potior iure: their writings doubtless were from God, because hitherto they could not be destroyed: time and they shall try whether jesus and his doctrine be so or no; whether he be that great Prophet that should come, or we are yet to look for some other. 4 Thus when john Baptist sent his Disciples to our Saviour with this very question, Prophetical testimonies did more sufficiently witness our Saviour to be the promised Messias then any miracles. Art thou he that should come, or shall we look for another; The answer he returned again, (whether for confirmation of john's own faith, or as the most interpreters think of his Disciples,) was this and no more; * Math. 11. ver. 3. etc. & Luk. 7. ver. 18. 19 22. Go and show john what things ye have seen and heard, that the blind see, the halt go, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead rise again, and the Gospel is preached to the poor, and blessed is he that shall not be offended in me. These or other of their fellow Disciples had informed their Master john before of Christ's healing the Centurion's servant by his word or command, though absent; of his raising the widow's son from death to life; of the rumours spread abroad of him throughout all judea, and the regions round about: and upon this report, as Saint Luke tells us, did john make the former solemn demand. But some will yet demand, how could he or his Disciples be confirmed by the answer given them, wherein is little more than formerly both had heard: for the raising up of the widows son which especially occasioned their coming was the greatest of all in this Catalogue, and yet as great as this, some of the ancient Prophets had done; how could it then prove him to be the Messias? Had he told them as much in plain terms, they might have believed him, because this great work did witness him to be a Prophet, and therefore one that could not lie: But by this answer, how could they gather more, than the people upon the astonishment of that accident, had said? for * Luk. 7. v. 16 when the dead man sat up and spoke, fear, saith the Evangelist, came on them all, and they glorified God saying, A great Prophet is raised up among us, and God hath visited his people. 5 Yet this objection, at least the solution, confirms the truth of my former assertion, that by his miracles alone considered, they were not bound absolutely to believe he was the Messias, but by comparing them with other circumstances, or presupposed truths especially the Scriptures received and approved prophecies of the Messias: though no one for the greatness of power manifested in it, could of itself, yet the frequency of them at that time, and the condition of the parties on whom they were wrought, might absolutely confirm john and his Disciples; because such they were in these and every respect, as the evangelical Prophet had foretold Messias should work: for this reason our Saviour delivers his answer in the Prophets own words, as * Though in that 61 of Esay no express mention be made of restoring blind men to sight, yet the Septuagints (as elsewhere) truly express the meaning of the Hebrew phrase there used. For in the Hebrew Dialect as some judicious Hebrecians observe, the deaf or bind are called vinsti, or ligati. elsewhere he himself did read them, then best interpreted by the signs of the time, that john might see by the event, he was in the man of whom Isaiah speaks a Luk. 4. v. 18. 19 At that time (when johns Disciples came vuto him) he cured many of their sicknesses and plagues, & of evil spirits) and unto many blind men he gave sight. And lesus answered and said unto them, Go your ways, and show john what things ye have seen & heard, that the blind see, the halt go, etc. Luk. 7. ver. 21. 22. He whom the Lord had anointed to preach the Gospel to the poor, whom he had sent to heal the broken hearted, to preach deliverance to the Captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty such as were bruised, and that he should preach the acceptable year of the Lord. The multitude of blind men restored to sight in their presence was a good preparative to dissolve that suffusion which had blinded their hearts; the releasing of so many from the possession of unclean spirits, was an ocular demonstration he was the man appointed to preach deliverance to the Captives, plagues & sicknesses then cured by him in great abundance, were sure pledges to the observant, that he was the great Physician of body and soul so often spoken of by Isaiah. Besides, john's moving this doubt at that very instant, wherein such variety of miracles; of all, or most of which, his Disciples one or other, were eye-witnesses, did concur all so well suited to the several * Isaiah. 6. v. 1. 2. 3. & caps 35. ver. 5. & cap. 53 ver. 4. predictions of Isaiah, and these as a For john himself from the words immediately precedent had been taught by God himself to discern Christ for the true Messias. Compare john 5. v. 33. with Esay 61. v. 1. & 42. v. 1. & 11. v. 2. john could instruct them, all unquestionably meant of the Messias, was an infallible argument of God's unspeakable providence in thus disposing times & seasons for their fuller resolution. The like disposition of the divine providence, might the ingrateful Nazarites have observed. First, that when he c Luke 4. v. 16 17. etc. stood up to read in the Synagogue, they should deliver the book of the evangelical Prophet before any other; afterwards, that he should at the first opening light upon that very place wherein his late miracles, yet rise in all men's mouths, (as appeareth by Saint * Mark. 6. v. 2. & Luke 4. 23. Mark) were foretold: especially, if they had diligently marked the meanness of their own estate, the manner of his coming thither, moved (as the r Luke 4. v. 14. Evangelist saith) by the spirit, which as the d Esaiah 61. v. 1. Prophet had foretold, was to be upon him, and did manifest itself at that time by his strange escaping his turbulent countrymen's desperate attempts against him. This melodious harmony betwixt his works and Gods word already established, Luke. 4. v. 29. 30. and this sweet disposition of the divine providence, in causing the one sound in men's ears, whilst the other were in their eyes, were in his heavenly wisdom the best means to establish true and lively faith: he never exacted blind obedience, which who so suffers to be imposed upon him by others, or seeks to enforce upon himself, strives to put out that light of nature or inferior grace, whereby he should view and mark the ways of God, always confirming his truth already revealed, by experiments and signs of the time proportioned to them. 6 From these instances, In what sense Christ's works are said to bear witness of him. to omit others, the Reader may resolve himself, in what sense Christ's works are said to bear witness of his Divinity, or condemn the jews of infidelity. Both which they manifestly did, yet not in themselves, not as severally considered or sequestered from all signs of times and seasons; but as they involved such concurrence of God's providence or presupposed such prophetical predictions, as have been intimated. Every miracle was apt of itself to breed admiration, & beget some degree of faith, as more then probably arguing the assistance of a power truly divine. But, seeing Moses had forewarned, God would suffer seducers to work wonders for the trial of his people's faith: who besides him that gave them this liberty could set them bounds, beyond which they should not pass? who could precisely define the compass of that Circle, within which only Satan could exercise the power he had by that permission? Be it granted (which is all, men otherwise minded concerning this point, demand) that Beelzebub himself with the help of all his subjects, can effect nothing exceeding the natural passive capacity of things created: he must be as well seen in the secrets of nature, as these subtle spirits are, that can precisely define in all particulars, what may be done by force of nature, what not. Hardly can we (without some admonitions to observe their carriage) discern the sleight of ordinary jugglers: much more easily might the Prince of darkness, so blind our natural understanding, as to make us believe (were the light of God's word taken away) that were effected by his power, which had been wrought by the finger of God, that secret conveyance of materials else where pre-existent, into our presence, were a new creation of them. 7 For mine own part (until I be by some others better instructed) I rest persuaded our Saviour taught the same doctrine I now deliver; thus much at least, [Such signs and wonders might be wrought by seducers, that such as would gaze on them, and trust their own skill in discerning their tricks, should hardly escape their snares] * Mark. 13. v. 21. 22. If any man say to you, lo here is Christ, or lo he is there, believe it not. For false Christ's shall arise, and false Prophets, and shall show signs and wonders to deceive if it were possible, the very elect. And possible it was to have deceived even these: if it had been possible for these not to have tried their wonders by the written word. Wherefore necessary it was, that which immediately follows, should be written for our instruction; But take you heed (this he spoke to his elect Apostles,) behold I have told you all things before. Much easier it was for such seducers to counterfeit his greatest wonders with deceitful sleights, undiscoverable for the present, then in these plain distinct predictions of matters so far above the pitch of ordinary observation, so to imitate him as time should not detect their impostures, nor experience convince them of open folly, or their soothsaying of grossest falsehood. And consequently, this very Oracle compared with the event, was of more force to establish true faith, than any one miracle he ever wrought, considered alone. Yea this foolish expectation the jews had, their Messias should work mighty, but pompous and vainglorious wonders, did make them (not prefashioned in mind to those descriptions the Prophets had made of his first coming in humility) undervalue both his true miracles and heavenly doctrine. Even such as are said to have believed in him for the works they had seen him do, seemed doubtful whether to acknowledge him for some great Prophet, or for their long looked for Messias. * john 7. v. 31. Many of the people, (saith S. john) believed in him, and said, When the Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than this man hath done. And as the same Evangelist elsewhere tells us, such as had tasted of his miraculous goodness, and in huge troops followed him for their daily food, that had nowhere to lay his head by night, * john 6. v. 30. desire a further sign that they might see and believe the father had sent him. His late satisfying five thousand hungry souls with five loves, they deemed much less than Moses sustaining six hundred thousand so long with Manna, a meat immediately sent from Heaven, Expectation of pompous and vainglorious miracles the original of jewish infidelity. not made by multiplication of such bread as they might have bought of ordinary Bakers. Nor doth our Saviour seek to win them by outuying Moses in multitude or magnificence of his miracles: but by alluring them to taste and prove his heavenly doctrine For the experiments that give us the seal and assurance of lively faith, must of necessity be within us, even in our hearts, and in our souls; and these are they. Had this people without miracles been dicto audience, as they were enjoined by Moses, in that they took him for a Prophet, they might in short time have known what Peter confessed, * john 6. v. 68 No man is ever truly converted without an internal miracle, wrought in his own soul, unto this end only outward miracles serve Verba vitae aeternae habes, Thou hast the words of eternal life, whose sweetness once inwardly tasted was much more than all the miracles that could be wrought without his hearers or upon them. But of such works these proud jews never dreamt, as not knowing the Scriptures, nor the virtue of their Messias, who as the Prophets had foretold, was to preach the Gospel unto the poor, to comfort such as mourned in Zion, to whom no miracles could be more welcome, than such as he did, for what could be more acceptable to the blind then restitution of sight, to the lame, then right use of his limbs? what more grateful message could be uttered to the deaf, than ephata, to have his ears opened? what to the dumb, then untying of the tongue? what to the possessed, then to be freed from the tyranny of Satan, or his Ministers? Finally, as the * Mark. 7. v. 37 Evangelist notes, he did all things well, and unto the best contentment possible of every afflicted soul, far above the exigence or significations of their peculiar necessities, but further beyond their expectation. In every work he showed his willingness in all, his power to ease & refresh all that were weary and heavy laden: but unto such as thought themselves so whole and sound, as no way to need his Physic, rather desirous to feed their curious fancies with superfluous or unnecessary wonders, he was not willing to give satisfaction by turning Gods graces into wantonness, or vain ostentation of his power or skill. Another especial occasion of this people's stumbling at this stone elect and precious, was their not considering that many of Moses greatest wonders were types, partly of those glorious miracles which Messiah was to work secretly by his spirit, manifested only to their hearts and consciences, in whom they were wrought; partly of that his glory and power, which was outwardly revealed to his Disciples, and might so have been to more, had they not stumbled (as the Proverb is) in the very entry, and so departed from him in despair, bred from a foolish prejudice, that no great good could be expected from a Nazarite, of parentage, birth, and education so mean. CHAP. XI. Confirming the truth delivered in the former Chapter from the very law given by Moses for discerning the great Prophet, further exemplifying the use and ●orce of miracles for begetting faith: The manner of trying prophecies: Of the similitude betwixt Christ and Moses. 1 ASwell for farther discovery of Romish blasphemy, as ratification of our former assertion: let us view with diligence that place of Moses, wherein such strict obedience and attention to the Messias doctrine is enjoined, as no where else, such as no other may exact, without incurring the curse there threatened to the disobedient, * Deut. 18. v. 15 16. 17. 18. 19 The Lord thy God will raise up thee a Prophet like unto me from among you, even of thy brethren. unto him ye shall hearken. According to all that thou desiredst the Lord thy God in Horeb, in the day of the assembly, when thou saidst. Let me hear the voice of my Lord God no more, nor see this great fire any more that I die not. And the Lord said unto me, they have well spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their Brethren like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. The law cited literally meant both of Christ and the Prophets. And whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my Name, I will require it of him. This prophesy by joint consent of best interpreters, as well modern, as ancient Pontificians as Protestants, may be truly and literally applied to other Prophets, whether of the old or new Testament, according to that measure of the spirit they had from him, of whose fullness all, as well such as in time went before him, as those that came after him, had received grace for grace. True it is, if we rightly value the strict propriety of every word or clause in the whole context; what all historical circumstauces put together import, or the full extent of S. Peter's * Act. 3. v. 23. See Pag. 21. paraphrase on the last sentence, it cannot be exactly fitted unto any but Christ, unto whom only the whole discourse is as fully commensurable, as a well made garment to the body that wears it: yet is this no impediment why the same rule taken according to some literal circumstances, might not usually serve for certain discretion of true Prophets from false, as we use to notify lesser, but indefinite quanties of things, by the known parts of some greater measure, commensurable, if we take the whole, to substances of a larger size. 2 Evident it is out of the literal meaning of this law acknowledged by all, that Israel was strictly bound to hearken unto such Prophets as God at any time should raise them up, How far, & on what terms Israel was bound by the former law to hear God's Prophets. though with most attention and greatest reverence to hear the Prince of Prophets. But the question is, upon what terms, or how far they were bound to hear all. Absolutely, and at first proposal of their doctrines, without examination of them by the written law? So might he that could have set the best leg foremost, and stepped up soonest into Moses chair, have kept the rest of his profession in awe, by thundering out Anathemaes thence, as the Pope doth from Saint Peter, to all gainsayers, priest or people. By what rule then were true Prophets to be distinguished from false? By miracles? These were means oftimes effectual, but (as was intimated) more usual for enforcing men to an acknowledgement of the truth in general, then for trying particular controversies by, amongst true professors: in respect of whom they were subordinate to that rule given by Moses in the words immediately following: * Deut. 18. ver. 20. 21. 22. But the Prophet that shall presume to speak a word in my Name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that speaketh in the name of other Gods, even the same Prophet shall die. And if thou think in thine heart. How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a Prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the Prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not therefore be afraid of him. 3 Before this or any other part of the law was written, somewhat in proportion answerable to it, Miracles in themselves no sure rule of trying Prophets before the Law was given. did always necesssarily concur with miracles, for distinguishing true professors from seducers. When the controversy was betwixt Moses and Pharaohs Enchanters, the Lord confutes his adversaries by an ocular demonstration of his power, yet further ratified by their confession whose words were the best Oracles that people knew. These fair warnings concurring with the Egyptians consciousness of their unmercilesse practices against poor Israel, still thriving in despite of policy, could not but witness even to the most unnatural men amongst them, that the God of jacob and his seed, was a father to the fatherless, an help to the helpless, a God of mercy, and a God of strength, willing and able to right such as suffered wrong, to succour all in distress, that with faith and patience commended their cause unto his patronage. The most devoutly superstitious or idolatrous might (at the least) more than probably have gathered, that the God of Moses was greater than any, they or their cunning Magicians worshipped. But it is a curiosity incident to superstitious hypocrites, at their first entrance into God's school, scrupulously to demand full satisfaction in all doubts or difficulties can be suggested, and (as if they sought to obtain mercy by way of bargain, not by faith or favour) to have their assurance precisely drawn, and fully sealed, before they surrender up the least part of their interest, in any pleasure, commodity, or custom long enjoyed, though never so destitute of reason. As in this case, imagine some Romish schoolman or jesuit had been in such favour in Pharaohs Court, as that crew is now in too many Princes; what other collections could we imagine he would have made, but these? [How do these wonders prove the God of Israel to be so great a God, as Moses boasts of? He hath more skill we see in these particulars, than the Gods adored by us Egyptians: therefore in all? or more, in these then the Gods of any other nation? These were stranger works indeed, than we expected such poor silly fellows could have wrought: but may not others by the same reason work more strange hereafter?] And to speak the truth, more, that victory Moses had over the Egyptians, could not prove unto the natural man (so long as he considered the wonders only in themselves, without any concurrence of other circumstances or truth (presupposed) then that this God of Israel was greater than any other he yet knew of, not greater than any that might manifest himself hereafter. Notwithstanding, these few documents or essays of his power, compared with the end and occasions, for which they were exhibited, were so fully conformable to those natural notions, even the heathen had of the Deity, that no man free from passion or prejudice of their mean estate, for whose good the cunningest were thus foiled at their own weapon, and the mightiest among the Egyptians plagued, but might have seen the finger of a good, a just, and merciful God in all their troubles, had he in sobriety of spirit seriously consulted his own heart. And who so sincerely had glorified his name, according to this measure of knowledge, ot apprehension of his justice to him, no doubt more had been given daily of this bread of life. 4 The jews I am persuaded could have given as many instances of Devils cast out by * Mat. 12. v. 24 The end and manner of our Saniours casting out Devils, did sufficiently testify his divine power, albeit others had cast out Devils by the help of Beelzebub. Beelzebub the Prince of Devils, as might have defeated any induction gathered from the manifold practice of such works (considered alone) to prove the divine powers assistance. Most apparently, most malicious, notwithstanding was their application of such instances to our Saviour, whose usual manner of dispossessing wicked spirits of those mansions wherein they had reveled most, did abundanrly witness he wrought by the finger of God, who only was greater than that strong man whom he vanquished, bound and spoiled of his goods, servants and possessions. For though Devils sometimes suffer themselves to be commanded by men, neither of greatest wisdom, best place, nor fashion: yet this they do (as any well instructed in God's law, or illuminated with the notions of good and evil will easily discern) always with purpose to bring men unto a perpetual acknowledgement of some divine power in them, or to performance of some Magical service unto them; no otherwise then cheating mates or cunning gamesters can be well content to suffer bunglers beat them the first or second set, in hope to entice them hold play longer, or for greater wagers. On the contrary, the only fee our Saviour demanded for all his admirable cures in this kind, was, the parties should give such glory unto God alone, as that infernal crew most detested, but which the law of Moses so highly esteemed by his calumniators, did purposely require in defiance of Beelzebub, and all the powers of darkness. The end of every particular dispossession was such, and the multitude of legal confessions, sincerely uttered by poor souls set free, so many as his bitterest adversaries own consciences, could not but witness against themselves, that all the chief titles of Satan's wont triumphs over God's people, were utterly overthrown, that he could not urge them either unto such blasphemies against God, or outrages against themselves or their neighbours, as he most delighted in. Besides, few or no instances could (I think) be brought of Devils cast out in any Magicians name, in Christ's they were, and (as it seems) by such as had better acquaintance, or more alliance with his accusers, then with himself. Thus much our Saviour in my conjecture, intimates in that speech * Math. 12. v. 27 By whom then do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. Which words I neither would refer to Christ's Disciples, as some good Interpreters do, nor (as others) unto such exorcists as those mentioned, Acts 19 verse 15. which attempting to throw out this strong man, were overthrown in their own play: but unto such as john complained of, * Mark. 9 v. 38, Master, we saw one casting out Devils in thy name, which followed not us, and we forbade him. This man, though no Disciple, was neither so ill disposed in himself, nor so maliciously affected to our Saviour as these jews were, as appears by our saviours answer unto john; * Ver. 39 Forbid him not, for there is no man that can do a miracle in my Name, that can lightly speak evil of me, for whosoever is not against us, is on our part. In the same words he concludes his disputation against the jews in the * Math. 12. v. 30 forecited place. 5 Such as this man was, none of Christ's followers, but rather a friend (as seems) of his accusers, yet using Christ's not Beelzebubs Name, to cast out Devils, were competent witnesses of his heavenly virtue, and his adversaries malicious partiality. Many other circumstances well known then; not now, especially the long want of miracles more than prophecies, before his coming did manifest their malice to be more impudent & shameless, than we in such distance of time can discern. That finger of God (from such signs of the time as we in general may suppose) far more apparent in his victories over Satan himself, then in Moses over his Scholars the Enchanters, especially whiles compared with known Prophecies of the Messias, did point him out to be the woman's seed, ordained of old to bruise the Serpent's head; to be the son of man, appointed to erect the everlasting kingdom, foretold by Daniel, unto whose and other prophecies he refers his enemies in that speech, * Math. 12. v. 28 But if I by the spirit (or as Saint * Luke. 11. v. 20. Luke reads) by the singer of God cast out Devils, then is the Kingdom of God come unto you. Yet were not all his miracles of this kind thus considered, so effectual to confirm the faithful, or so pregnant to condemn all unbelievers, as the former rule of Moses. For this cause after the former dispute ended, he gave his adversaries such a sign, as if it did follow▪ would infallibly prove him to be that great Prophet, Moses there speaks of, and consequently leave them liable to God's heavy judgement without excuse, for not hearkening unto him. Of which hereafter. 6 Here I may once for all conclude, that the power of doing miracles was as effectual to assure such as did them of salvation, as sight of them done, was to establish spectators in saving faith. But the power of casting Devils out, or doing greatest miracles, was no infallible pledge of salvation to such as did them: much less could the acknowledgement of this divine power in them, breed full assurance of true faith in others, but only serve as a means to cause them rely upon the Law and Prophets as their only rule, and to taste and prove the bread of life proffered to them by our Saviour, which alone could ascertain them by their names were written in the book of life. But to proceed by the former rule. 7 If others by experiments answerable to it, Christ was to be acknowledged for the great Prophet by his supereminency in those gifts of the spirit, whereby former Prophets had been approved. were known to be true Prophets: Christ likewise by his known supereminency in that which approved them, was to be acknowledged for the Prince of Prophets. Now, if we reuise the history of the old Testament, how few Prophets shall we find endowed with the gift of miracles; such as were, did exercise their power rather among Idolaters, then true professors. So, when God's messengers were brought to as open competition with Baal's Priests, in the King of Israel's; as Moses had been with the Enchanters, in Pharaohs Court: * 1. King. 18. Elias makes his calling as clear as the light, by calling down fire from heaven, which Baal's Priests attempting in most furious manner could not effect: but Elias professed thus much before, as Baal's Priests, no question had done: so as the event, answering to his prediction, not to the others, did, by Moses rule, demonstrate him to be, them not to be, Prophets of the living God. But when the like controversy was to be tried between Zidkiah and his four hundred complices, on the one part, and * 1 King. 22. Michaiah, on the other before king Ahab, in whom Elias late miracles, and later threats, had wrought such a distaste of Baal, and such a liking of the truth in general, as he would not consult either any professed servant of the one, or open oppugner of the other; for his future success: Michaiah (as was observed before) appeals to this law of Moses as most competent judge between such as jointly did embrace it; * Ver. 28. If thou return in peace, the Lord hath not spoken by me, as if he had said (what Moses there doth) he hath not put his word in my mouth. And having brought his controversy to this trial, he desires the people to contestate the issue thus joined [and he said hearken all ye people] From this and many like cases, ruled by the former express and pregnant law of Moses, jeremy pleads his warrant, being born down by the contradictions of Hananiah a professed Prophet of the Lord, as he was, but of greater favour in the Court, because he prophesied peace unto the present state, and good success to the Projects then on foot; * jer. 28. v. 6. 7. 8. 9 Even the Propeth jeremiah said, So be it: the Lord so do, the Lord confirm thy words which thou hast prophesied, to restore the vessels of the Lords house, and all that is carried Captive from Babel into this place. But hear thou now this word that I will speak in thine ears, and in the ears of all the people. The Prophets that have been before me, and before thee, in times past prophesied against many Countries, and against great kingdoms, of war, and of plagues and of pestilence. And the Prophet which prophesieth of peace, when the word of the Prophet shall come to pass, then shall the Prophet be known that the Lord hath truly sent him. Ezechiel likewise refers himself to the same trial amongst such as were professed hearers of the word in general, which they would not obey in particular * Ezec. 33. v. 32▪ 33. And lo thou art unto them, as a jesting song of one that hath a pleasant voice, and can sing well: for they hear thy words, and do them not. And when this cometh to pass (for lo it will come) then shall they know that a Prophet hath been among them. 8 From these debatements, In what case Moses rule for discerning true Prophets did hold infallibly true. we may gather in what cases the former rule held for certain. First, negatively, it was universally true; for he that prophesied any thing which came not to pass, did sufficiently prove himself to be no true Prophet, but a counterfeit. So did not every prediction of what afterwards came to pass, necessarily argue it to have been from God. Yet as the force and virtue of many things, not such of themselves, became evident from vicinity, or irriation of their contraries: so though God permitted some to foretell strange events for trial of his people's faith; yet this power he restrained when the controversy came to a former trial; then he caused the true Prophet's words to stand, whiles the predictions of the false, and the Prince's blood which relied upon them, fell to the ground, like Dagon before the Ark. So as the fulfilling of what the one, and frustrating of what the other had said, did sufficiently manifest the one had spoken of himself presumptuously; the other, what the Lord had put into his mouth. Hence is the determination easy, what means this people had to discern, amongst true Prophets which was that Great one, in all things like to Moses. First if events foretold did sufficiently testify of his divine spirit: his own witness of himself would be authentic, because a true Prophet could hardly lie, or make himself greater than he was. This is an argument, which directly confutes such, as acknowledge Christ to have been a Prophet, sincere in doctrine; & mighty in deeds: and yet deny him to be the Prince of that profession, the great mediator of the new Covenant, both which he often avouched. Besides the quantity of that spirit, whose sincere quality manifested him to be a Prophet, would notify his excessive Greatness in that rank and order, or more directly to the question. 9 The great Prophet there spoken of was to be known by his similitude with Moses, Moses description of the great Prophet in strict propriety of the words used by him, peculiar unto Christ. who was as the symbol, or proportional mean between him and lesser Prophets. Others in these few gifts wherein they resembled their father, came far short of him: Christ in all, far exceeded him. Others, were all of Jacob's line, raised up by God's appointment, so to instruct their brethren in doubtful cases, as they should not need to consult sorcerers, or entertain familiarity with wicked spirits. Christ (to omit the eminency of his Prophetical function till hereafter) besides this common fraternity with his people was in more especial manner Abraham's seed, and in particular sort raised up by jehovah his God, by intrinsic assumption into the unity of his person, not by external assistance or impulsion of his spirit. Raised likewise he was in a strict and proper sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from amid this people, being as it were extracted out of the pure virgin, as the first woman was out of the man by jehovahs' own immediate hand, from his cradle to his cross, most exactly answering to that delineation of the Great Prophet, and Mediator to be revealed, which was exhibited first in Moses, when he stood before the Lord in Horeb, his strange deliverance from Herodian butchery, whiles all the Infant males besides did perish, was fully parallel to the others exemption from Pharaohs cruelty, like to Moses he was, in the * Numb. 11. 16. vid. 8▪ Luk. 10. v. 1. etc. number of his Disciples, in * So Exodu● 24. God commands Moses to come up to the Lord in the Mount, with Aaron, Nadab and Abihu. and 70. of the Elders of Israel, which were to worship a far off while Moses himself alone went near unto the Lord: so saith S. Peter, God caused Christ to be showed openly not to all the people, but to the witnesses chosen before of God, to such as did eat and drink with him, after he arose from the dead His Disciples alo● were present when God called Christ into heavenly places, v. Exod. 24. v. 10. 11. communication of his spirit unto them, in admitting them to more special participation of his secrets, in the peculiar testifications of his familiarity with God, in his fasting, in his transfiguration, in multitude of miracles. But these and the like I leave to the Readers observation. 10 b The excellency of the great Prophet in respect of Moses gathered from the difference betwixt Moses and the lesser Prophets, The peculiar and proper undoubted notes of the great Prophet there spoken of, will be most conspicuous in our Saviour, if we compare him, first, with Moses, then with ordinary Prophets, according to that difference the Lord himself made between these and Moses; * Numb. 12. v. 6. 7. 8. If there be a Prophet of the Lord among you, I will be known to him by a vision, and will speak unto him by dream. My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house. Unto him will I speak mouth to month, and by vision not in dark words, but he shall see the similitude of the Lord. Wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant, even against Moses? It is said signanter, he should see the similitude of God, not God; for as the Evangelist saith * john 1. ver. 18. No man hath seen God at any time; so was it told Moses from the Lords own mouth, that he could not see his face and live. Yet saw this great Prophet more of God, than all the Prophets beside. Herein then was Christ like unto him, but far above him, that he was in the bosom of his father, (not admitted to see his back parts only) and hath declared him to the world. Moses from the abundance of his Prophetical spirit, so perfectly foretold the perpetual estate of his people, from the Law given, to the time of their Messias, as the best Prophets may seem to be but his scholars. From participation of that fullness which was in Christ, hath that Disciple whom he loved, far exceeded Moses, as well in the extent, weight and variety of matters foretold, as in the determinate manner of foretelling them. And I know not whether if it were possible to call both Christ and Moses from heaven, their presence (though more glorious than it was upon Mount Tabor) would be more forcible to illuminate the jew or Atheist, then serious reading the books of Deutoronomy, and the Revelation, comparing the one with the jews known misery, the other with Ecclesiastical Stories, the late abominations of the Papacy, and Romanists more than jewish blindness. The one, shows Moses to have been the father of Prophets, the other Christ (from whose immensurable fullness john had that extraordinary measure of the spirit) to be the fountain of Prophecies, whose supereminencies and inexhaustible fullness, may yet be made more apparent by comparing him, not with Moses the symbol or mean; but with the other extreme, to wit, the rank of lesser Prophets. 11 It is rightly observed by the Schoolmen, The gift of prophesy not habitual to ordinary Prophets. Lumen Propheticum erat aliqualiter aenigmaticum; these ordinary Prophet's illuminations were not so evident or distinct, as certain; they discerned rather the proportion then featur of truth, which they saw but as it were through the cover, or in the case, not in itself. And albeit the event did always prove their answers true, oftimes in an unexpected sense: yet could they not always give such answers when they pleased. Nor did the light of God's countenance perpetually reside upon them, as the suns brightness doth by reflection upon the stars: they had their vicissitude of day and night, daily Eclipses, overcasting many; their chief illuminations came but as it were by flashes. Thus * jer. 28. jeremy in the late cited controversy dares not adventure to give the people a sign for confirmation of his doctrine, or other more distinct, or determinate prediction, besides that of the general event, about which the contention was: That, he knew (because the Lord had put it into his mouth,) would in the end condemn his adversary of presumption. But after Hananiah had outfaced him with a sensible sign of his own making, breaking the yoke which he had taken from jeremiahs' neck, on which the Lord had put it, jer. 28. v. 10. 12. and boldly avouched in the presence of all the people [Thus saith the Lord, even so will I break the yoke of Nabuchadnezzar King of Babel, from the neck of all nations within the space of two years:] the word of the Lord came unto jeremiah again, and sends him back with this message to his adversary; * Ver. 12. 15. 16. Hear now Hananiah, the Lord hath not sent thee, but thou makest this people to trust in a lie. Therefore thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will cast thee from off the earth: this year thou shalt die, because thou hast spoken rebelliously against the Lord. So Hananiah the Prophet died the same year, in the seventh month. Not long after this event were both Prince and people of judah rooted out of the land the Lord had given them, because contrary to Moses admonition, they reverenced the Prophet that spoke presumptuously, and would not hearken unto the words which the Lord had put in jeremiahs' mouth: Elisha likewise to whom Elias had given a double portion of his spirit in respect of his fellows, of all the Prophets, (unless Elias might be excepted) most famous for the gift of miracles, a lively type of the Messias, in raising from death and giving life, had his spirit of Divination but by fits, and needed Music to tune his spirits unto it. He gave the barren Shunamite a son, of whose death notwithstanding he knew not as the Lord of life did of Lazarus in his absence: nor ruled he by her unusual gesture or strange signs of sorrow, distinctly divine the true cause of her coming: only, when Gehezi went to thrust her away, he said as much as he knew: * 2. King. 4. v. 2●. Let her alone, for her soul is vexed within her, and the Lord hath hid it from me, and hath not told it me. 12 But from the perpetual and internal irradiation of the Deity, john Baptist more than a Prophet▪ from the vicinity of the great Prophet. bodily or personally (such as the Apostle speaks) dwelling in Christ, and incorporate in his substance, this spirit of prophesy, (if without prejudice so we may call it) did never wain, was never eclipsed, always most splendent in him, as light in the Moon at the full. As he never foretold any thing which came not to pass, so could he at all times when he pleased, foretell whatsoever at any time should befall his friends or foes, with all the circumstances and signs consequent, or precedent. From this brightness of his glory did john Baptist (who was sent from God as the morning star to usher this Sun of righteousness into his Kingdom) become more than a Prophet for distinct illuminations, concerning matters to come. A Prophet he was in the womb, and bare witness of that light which enlighteneth every man that cometh into the world, before he came into it himself, or saw this bodily Sun when he could not speak, he danced for joy at his presence, and at his first approach, after Baptism, he thus salutes him; a joh. 11. v. 29. Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world. What Prophet did ever so distinctly prophesy of his passion, and so fully instruct the people what was foresignified by the sacrifice of the Paschall Lamb? yet was john himself secured by the former rule, that he spoke this by the spirit of the Lord, not out of fancy, not presumptuously. For till this Baptism, * john 1. 33. See the stimulator chap. 10. Parog. 5. he knew him not, but he that sent him to baptise with water, he said unto him, Upon whom thou shalt see the spirit come down and tarry still upon him, that is, he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And he saw it so come to pass, and bare record that this was the son of God. From this more than Prophetical spirit of john, manifested by this and the like testifications of Christ, all afterwards approved by the event, did the people gather, Christ not john, to be that great Prophet, mighty in words and deed. For after he had escaped the violence offered him at jerusalem, * john 10. v. 40. 41. 42. and went again beyond jordan, into the place where john first baptised, Many (saith the Evangelist) resorted unto him and said; john did no miracle, but all things which john spoke of this man, were true. And many believed in him there; For his works sake not doubt, but for these as accompanied with the former circumstances of place and john's predictions. john had witnessed he was the son of God, mighty in deed and word: and reason they had to think his works were the works of his father, that his privileges were the privileges of the only begotten son, and heir of all things; When john though a Prophet, and more than a Prophet for his portion of the divine spirit, was yet restrained (by reason of his approach that was before him) from doing such wonders as meaner Prophets had done. To such as rightly observed this opposition between john's power in words, and his defect in deeds: or Christ's superabundant power in both, the case was plain, john was but the * Isai 40. v. 3. Crier, the other (in whose presence his authority decreased,) the Lord, whose ways he was sent to prepare. 13 If unto the variety of Christ's miracles, The matter of our saviours predictions compared with the precedent prophesies of him, declare his Godhead. compared with john's predictions, and other prophecies, we join his arbitrary usual manner, either of foretelling future, or knowing present matters of every kind, many such as no Prophet durst ever have professed to belong unto himself: our faith may clearly behold the sure foundation whereon it is built, That he, even he himself, who had said by the Prophet, [ * Isaiah 42. v. 8. 9 I am the Lord, this is my Name, and my glory will I not give unto another, neither my praise to graven Images. Behold the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare: before they come forth, I tell you of them] did at the fullness of time manifest his Glory in our flesh, by the practice there mentioned, of foretelling things strange, and unheard of to the world. Prophecies of former times were fulfilled in his personal appearance, and made their period at the beginning of his preaching. Whatsoever concerns the state of the world, chiefly the Gentiles, since, came from him either as altogether new, or was refined and renewed by him. For what man among the Nations, yea what Master in Israel did from the Law or prophets conceive aright of * john 3. v. 5. the new birth, by water and the spirit, or of that everlasting Kingdom, whereunto only men so borne, are heirs predestinate? These were the new things, which he only could distinctly declare before they came forth. 14 That their Messias was to be this God here spoken of by Isaiah, Our saviours arbitrary discovery of secrets and predictions of future's contingent fully consonant to the received notions of the Messias. dwelling and conversing with them in their nature & substance, might have been manifested to the jews (had they not been hoodwinked with pride and malice) from that common notion, even the most vulgar amongst them had, of his divine spirit, in declaring secrets, and foretelling things to come. What one miracle done by Christ, did ever take so good effect with so great speed in best prepared spectators, as his discovery of Nathaniels' heart in presence, and outward carriage, in so great distance? * john 1. v. 49. Rabbi (saith Nathaniel) thou art the son of God, thou art the king of Israel. Though faith be the true gift of God, only wrought by his spirit; yet, no question, but Nathaniel was more inclined to this confession from the general notion of the Messias divine spirit; even by it he was capable of that promise, habenti dabitur. And our Saviour highly approves, and so rewards this his docility; * Ver. 50. 51. Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree, believest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these: What were they? Miracles? Yes, for so he saith to him, and the rest of his hearers: Verily, verily, I say unto you, hereafter shall you see heaven open, and the Angels of God ascending and descending upon the son of man. Then miracles, it seems, were more effectual to confirm faith, than this experience of his Prophetical spirit: not of themselves, but joined with it, or as thus foretold by him, and foresignified by * Gen 28. v. 12. 13. 19 Jacob's vision, which compared with the event, (whether that were at his ascension or no, I now dispute not) did plainly declare him to be the way and the door, by which all enter into the house of God. 15 Upon the first apprehension of like discovery made by him, did the poor Samaritan woman acknowledge he was a Prophet, and upon his avouching himself to be more than so, she takes him indeed for the expected Messtas, of whom she had this conceit before, * joh. 4. v. 25. That when he came, he should tell them all things. From this preconceived notion, working with her present experience of his divine spirit, able to descry all the secrets of her heart, she makes this proclamation to her neighbours: * Ver. 29. Come and see a man that hath told me all things that ever I did: is not he the Christ? Upon their like experience, fully consonant to the same common notion or conceit of the Messias, did a many of that City conceive faith from the woman's report; but more * Ver. 42. because of his own words; And they said unto the woman; Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world. From the like, but more lively experience of his discovering secrets, did his Disciples make that confession, b john 16. v. 30. Now know we that thou knowest all things, and needest not that any man should ask thee. By this we believe that thou art come out from God. 16 The manifestation of this Prophetical spirit, Our saviours Disciples and Apostles did (according to his instructions) more rely upon his predictions then his miracles. did give life unto his greatest miracles in working faith: for his Disciples believed in him after his resurrection, because he had foretold his reedefying the temple in three days space. Which speech of his the foolish jews, not knowing his body to be the true temple, wherein their God did dwell after a more excellent manner then between the Cherubins, take as meant of the material Temple, which had been 46. years in building. But (saith Saint * joh. 2. v. 22. john) Assoon as he was risen from the dead, his Disciples remembered that he thus said unto them: and they believed the Scripture, and the word which jesus had said. Nor did they compare these two together by chance: for our Saviour often inculcated this Method, as of purpose to imprint the former oracle of Isaiah in their hearts. To assure them of his going to his father, he expressly tells them: * john 14. 29. Now I have spoken unto you before it come, that when it is come to pass ye might believe. Foretelling the persecution of his Disciples, he adds, * john 16. ver. 4 These things have I told you that when the hour shall come, ye might remember that I told you them. That glory likewise which God had professed he would not give to any other, Foretelling the fulfilling of that Scripture [He that eateth bread with me hath lift up his heel against me] in judas, he gave this general rule, from henceforth tell I you before it come that when it is come to pass, ye might believe that I am He, john 13. v. 19 he foretells should be given him, and so demands it, as if He that did glorify, and He that was glorified, were both one: * john, 12. v, 28 Father, Glorify thy Name. Then came there a voice from heaven saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again. How had he glorified it before? By glorifying this great Prophet, who did fully express, but far exceed Moses, in all things wherein former Prophets did resemble him, but came far short of him. When was he so glorified? At his transfiguration upon Mount Tabor, which none without sacrilegious impiety could have foretold, as likely to befall himself, save he alone, that had, not as Moses, only seen the similitude of the Lord, but being in the form of God, thought it no robbery to be equal with him. Yet this Prophet of whom we speak, though like to his Brethren in shape and substance, to assure them he should come in the glory of his father, foretells his Disciples that some of them should not * Marc. 9 v. 1. Math. 16. v. 28. Luk. 9 27. 2. Pet. 1. 17. die until they had seen the Kingdom of God come with power: which was accomplished in that transfiguration, where, as Saint Peter witnesseth, He received of God the father, honour and glory, when there came such a voice unto him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased; Yea, so well pleased, as for his sake the world might henceforth know how ready he was to hear all, that through faith in his name should call upon him, even such as had displeased him most. For this cause, the Codicill annexed to the divine will and Testament here signified, immediately after to be sealed with the blood of this best beloved son, was that reciprocal duty before intimated in the Law, Hear him: as is specified by * Mark. 9 v. 7 Luk. 9 v. 35, Math. 17. v. 5. three Evangelists. For more public manifestation of his Majesty, as then revealed but to a few, was that glorious commemoration of it lately mentioned, celebrated again in the audience of the multitude: * john 12. v. 30. This voice saith our Saviour, Our Saviour in his last conference with the jews proclaims himself to be the great Prophet foretold by Moses. came not because of me, but for your sakes. And in that place again, after his wont predictions of things should after come to pass, as of his victory over death, he testifies aloud to all the people that he was the great Prophet foretold by Moses, sweetly paraphrasing upon his words; * john 12. v. 44. And jesus cried and said, He that believeth in me, believeth not in me, but in him that sent me. And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. He did not accurse such as would not acknowledge his authority, or derogated from his person or miracles; nor needed he so to do: * john 12. ver. 48 for he that refuseth him, and receiveth not his words, hath one that judgeth him; the word which he had spoken, it shall judge him in the last day. This was that which Moses had said; * Deut. 18. v. 19 And whosoever will not hearken unto my words, which he [the great Prophet] shall speak in my Name, I will require it of him, to wit, in the last day of accounts, * john 12. v. 49. & 50. For I have not spoken of myself, but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment what I should do, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: the things therefore that I speak, I speak them so as the Father said unto me. What is this, but that speech of Moses improved to it full value, according to the circumstances and signs of those times, and as it concerned the Lord and Prince of Prophets? a Deut. 18. v. 18. Our saviours prophetical spirit gave life to his miracles though his miracles were good preparatives to belief I will raise them up a Prophet, from among their brethren like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.] 17 This being the last conference our Saviour was willing to entertain with the jews, this his last farewell given in Moses words, warrants me to construe that speech of S. john's a john 12. v. 37. [though he had done so many miracles before them, yet believed they not on him] as I have done the like before: to wit, that not his miracles considered alone, but with Mosaical and Prophetical writings, or common notions of the Messias thence conceived, or (especially) as they concurred with his own predictions, did immediately condemn the jews. Under the name of works, his words are comprehended; such at the least, as foretell his admirable works, or in general, all those solemn invocations of his Father's name, in such predictions, as had he not been the son of God, would rather have brought speedy vengeance from heaven upon his head then such glorious testimonies of his Divinity. And to me our Saviour seems to call his very words works, in that speech to Philip, a john. 14. v. 10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself, but the father that dwelleth in me, he doth the works. Howsoever as all the works of God were created by this eternal word: so did his words give life unto his greatest works; his Divinations were to his miracles, as his human soul was to his body. And no question, but the conception of their faith that heard him preach, was as immediately from those words of eternal life which issued from his mouth, as ours is from the Word preached by his messengers. To what other use than could miracles serve, save only to breed a praeviall admiration, and make entrance for them into his hearers hearts? though his bodily presence at all times was not; yet were his usual works in themselves truly glorious, more than apt to dispel that veil of prejudice, commonly taken against the meanness of his person, birth, or parentage; had it been merely natural, not occasioned, through wilful neglect of extraordinary means precedent, and stubborn opposition to present grace most plentifully offered. His raising others from death to life, was more than sufficient to remove that offence the people took at that speech, * john 12. ver. 32. If I were lift up from the earth, I should draw all men unto me. To which they answered, We have heard out of the Law, that the Christ bideth for ever: and how sayest thou that the son of man must be lift up? Who is that son of man? 18 To conclude then, The peculiar similitude between Christ & Moses in the office of mediation. his distinct and arbitrary foretelling events of every sort any Prophet had mentioned, many of them not producible, but by extraordinary miracles, withal including divine testifications of far greater glory ascribed to him, than Moses or any Prophet ever challenged, was the demonstrative rule (according to Moses prediction) whereunto all visible signs and sensible miracles should have been resolved by their spectators: as known effects lead contemplators unto the first and immediate causes, on which their truth and being depends. That Encomium, [This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased, Hear him;] with the like given by john Baptist [Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world] unto all such as took him for a true Prophet, did more distinctly point out the similitude peculiar to him with Moses, expressed (in the forecited place of Deuteronomy) literally: though not so plainly, as most Readers would without direction observe it, seeing even interpreters most followed either neglect the words themselves, in which it is directly contained, or w●est their meaning. * Deut. 18. v. 15 16. Unto him shall ye hearken, according to all that thou desiredst of the Lord thy God in Horeb, in the day of the assembly. Their request then was; Talk thou with us, and we will heart; but let not God talk with us lest we die. Here the whole multitude bound themselves to hear the word of the Lord, not immediately from his mouth but by Moses. For whiles the people stood a far off, he only drew near to the darkness where God was. This their request and resolution, elsewhere more fully expressed, the Lord highly commended; * Deut. 5. v. 28. 29. I have heard the voice of the words of this people, which they have spoken unto thee: they have well said, all that they have spoken, Oh that there were such an heart in them, to fear me, and to keep all my commandments always, that it might go well with them, and with their children for ever. If we observe that increment, the literal sense of the same words may receive by succession of time, or as they respect the body, not the type, both which they jointly signify; the best reason can be given of Gods approving the former petition and Israel's peculiar disposition at that time above others, will be this; That as posterity in rejecting a Vide lib. 1. part. 2. Sect. 3. cap. 11. Parag. 8. 9 10. Samuel, rejected Christ, or God the second person in Trinity: so here the Fathers, in requesting Moses might be their spokesman unto God, requested that Great Prophet ordained to be the author of a better covenant even that promised woman's seed, their brother according to the flesh, to be Mediator betwixt God and them, to secure them from such dreadful flames as they had seen, Heb 3 v. 3. so they would hearken (as then they promised) unto his words, as unto the words of God himself, esteeming him (as the Apostle saith) so far above Moses, as he that builds the house, is above the house. And in the Emphasis of that speech [ * Deut. 18. v. 18. Whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him:] purposely resumed by Moses with these threats annexed, as if he had not sufficiently expressed his mind in the like precedent, [Unto * Deut. 18. v. 18. him ye shall hearken] the same difference, between Moses and the Great Prophet then meant, is included which the Apostle in another place expresseth, d Heb. 10 ver. 28 20. He that despiseth Moses Law, dieth without mercy under two or three witnesses. Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye he shall be worthy, which treadeth under foot the son of God, and counteth the blood of the Testament as an unholy thing? Until the sovereignty of the Law and Prophets did determine; that Encomium of Moses did bear date [ * Deut. 24. v. 10. There arose not a Prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face:] but vanished upon the Criers voice, when the kingdom of heaven began to appear. The Israelites to whom both promises were made, did far exceed all other nations, in that they had a law most absolute given by Moses, yet to be bettered by an everlasting Covenant; the former being as an earnest penny given in hand, to assure them of the latter. In respect of both, the name of a Soothsayer or Sorcerer was not to be heard in Israel, as in the nations which knew not God, much less expected a Mediator, in whom the spirit of life should dwell as plentifully, as splendour doth in the body of the Sun; from whose fullness ere he visibly came into the world, other Prophets were illuminated (as those lights which rule the night, are by that great light which God hath appointed to rule the day) at whose approach the Prince of darkness with his followers, were to avoid the Hemisphere wherein they had reigned. In the mean time, the testimonies of the Law and Prophecies, served as a light or candle to minish the terrors of the night. Even Moses himself, and all that followed him, were but as messengers sent from God to solicit his people to reserve their allegiance free from all commerce, or compact with familiar spirits, until the Prince of glory came in person. 19 Thus without censure of their opinion, that otherwise think or teach, The chief grounds of Moses dissuading Israel for sorcery, was their expectation of the great Prophet. albeit the continuance of Prophets amongst this people, were a mean to prevent all occasions of consulting forcerers or witches: yet the chief ground of Moses dissuasion from such practices, according to the literal connexion of these words. * Deut. 18. v. 14. The nations which thou shall possess, hearken unto those that regard the times, and unto sorcerers, as for thee, the Lord thy God hath not suffered thee so,] with those following hitherto expounded. [The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet] was the consideration of their late mighty deliverance by Moses, the excellency of their present law, and their expectation of a greater lawgiver, (when the first covenant should wax old, and Prophecies for a long time fail) unto strict observance of whose precepts they solemnly bound themselves (as was lately observed ever whilst the former was established. That which moves me to embrace this interpretation, is Balaams Prophesy uttered of Israel, considered in the abstract, as he might have been, not as he proved (as * cap. 1. Malachi speaks of Levy) or according to the excellency of his calling in Moses and in Christ, or God's promise, which he for his part was ready to perform; * Num. 23. v. 22. God brought them (saith he) out of Egypt, their strength is as an Unicorn: For there is no sorcery in jacob, nor soothsaying in Israel, according to this time it shall be said of jacob, What hath God wrought? And in the * God brought him out of Egypt, his strength shall be as an Unicorn. He shall eat the Nations his enemies, and bruise their bones, & shoot them thorough with his arrows. He coucheth & lieth down as a young Lion, & as a Lion: who shall stir him up? Blessed is he that blesseth thee, and cursed is he that curseth thee. I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not near. There shall come a star of jacob, and a sceptre shall rise of Israel, and shall smite the coasts of Moah, and destroy all the sons of Sheth: And Edom shall be possessed, and Seir shall be a possession to their enemies: but Israel shall do valiantly. He also that shall have dominion shall be of jacob, and shall destroy the remnant of the City. Num. 24. v. 8. 9 & 17. 18. 19 Chapter following, he joins Israel's deliverance from Egypt, as the foundation or beginning, and his victory in Christ, as the accomplishment or finishing of his glory. Of that jacob meant by Balaam, even we Gentiles are a part, every way as strictly bound by Moses law, as Israel was to abandon soothsaying and sorcery, but especially bound to abhor these and like works of darkness, from that light, the star of jacob hath afforded us. These two great Prophets then, Christ and Moses, appointed successively to declare God's will unto his people, were the main supporters of true religion in Israel, by whose doctrine all curious and superstitious arts were to vanish. And, if my observation fail not, Israel was much less given to sorcery after ordinary Prophets ceased, then before: because this great Prophet, the Hope of Israel, was at hand. 20 The apprehension of what we now by long search hardly find; was more facile to the ancient jews, from the known conceits, or received traditions thereto pertinent. Before the Law * That our saviours authority might have been and was more manifestly proved out of Moses and the Prophets to the ancient: than it can be to the modern jews altogether unacquainted with the right manner of interpreting prophecies, or such common notions or traditions, as the Scribes and pharisees had in our saviours time. was written, one they had heard should be sent from God, a mighty deliverer of his people: unto whom Moses thought himself much inferior, as appears by his reply to God when he was first sent to visit his brethren; a Exod. 4. v. 13 Mitte, quaeso, quem missurus es; Send, I pray thee, whom thou wilt send: as if he had said, One thou hast appointed from everlasting, to declare thy name unto his brethren, to show mercy to thy people, and thy power upon thine enemies; and I beseech thee send him now, for this is work befitting his strength, not my weakness. From the like notions or received opinions, did the Pharisees understand this place, as meant of the Prophet that was to come: albeit it may be doubted, whether they took him to be the same with the Messiah. For so they demand of john severally; b john. 1. v. 20. & 21. Art thou the Christ? Art thou Eliah? Art thou the Prophet? Eliah was plainly distinguished from the Messias by Isaiah, or perhaps they knew the Messias and the Prophet to be the same: yet, like strict examiners, proposed these two several names, to leave john no evasion. It was likewise a truth presupposed and known, at least amongst the * Some interpreters observe that S. john doth purposely insert these words, Now they which were sent were of the Pharisees, joh. 1. ver. 24. though other Evangelists call them only Levites; to notify unto us that this was a tradition known unto that sect. Pharisees, that Eliah, Messias, the Prophet, one or all, should baptize. Hence they further question the Baptist; c joh. 1. ver. 25. Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not the Christ, neither Elias, nor the Prophet? And of himself he saith, because He d ver. 31. (to wit, the Christ) should be declared to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water. This answer, with his practice permitted by the Pharisees, and approved by the people, so fully concurring with the former notion, but especially his prediction of Christ's baptizing with the holy Ghost, and (as Saint e Mat. 3. ve. 11. Matthew adds) with fire; were most pregnant testimonies against unbelievers, after they had notice of the Holy Ghosts descending (upon the same day their Law was given) from heaven. for the plentiful manner of effusion, and placide illapse into the souls of every sort, resembling water powered out (as the f joel 2. 28. Prophet's phrase imports;) but for outward appearance, and inward effects of ardent zeal, like unto fire. And likely it is, as well the g Ex. 13. 21. 22. pillar of fire which enlightened Israel by night, as the cloud that rested upon the tabernacle, under which (S. h 1. Cor. 10. 1. 2. Paul saith) the Father's being, were baptised in it, were such praeluding types of baptism by water and the Holy Ghost: as the Rock was of Chrik; or the waters thence flowing, of those springs of life, which issue from him to the refreshing of every faithful thirsty soul. The mystical significations of such shadows of good things to come, were sufficiently known to the jews living in our saviours time. Whence, (as the two judicious commentators, Bucer and Martyr observe) his adversaries mouths were instantly stopped, at the first allegation of those places the modern jews bark most against, as not inferring what the Evangelists report their forefathers granted: because these had a peculiar manner of interpreting scriptures not acknowledged by the later, grown out of use for the most part amongst Christians, or rather overgrown with the abuse of luxuriant allegories, and mystical senseless, senses, framed by Monkish or rather Apish imitation of orthodoxal antiquity. The weeding out of such tars, as, through these bad husband's sloth and negligence, have abounded in God's harvest, will not (we trust) be either difficult, or dangerous to the good seed primitive antiquity hath sown: whose general method and manner of interpreting prophecies (though in particulars it often fail; partly, through adventurous imitation of some Philosophers in unfolding heathenish mysteries; partly, through want of skill in the original tong●es) holds the just means between barbarous Postillers, and some late preachers, worthily famous, yet too nice and scrupulous in this subject, as shall appear when we come to handle it. 21 But to finish what we had last in hand, Our saviours prediction of his death and resurrection, was that which according to Moses prophesy, did most condemn, the jews. the most remarkable, most public document our Saviour gave to unbelievers, of his designment to that great office foretold by Moses, was the constant auouchment of his death and resurrection, unto such as so well observed his words, that after they had taken away his life, a Mat. 27. v. 63. procured a strong watch to be set about his sepulchre lest his Disciples should take his body thence, and by emptying it seem to fulfil his prophecy. Nor did he once only, but b Mat 12. v. 39 Math. 16. v. 14 twice foretell; not barely, he would rise again: but that thus much was presignified by the Prophet jonahs' three days imprisonment in the Whale's belly; thus inviting them to observe all congruity of circumstance between the historical type already exhibited, and the substance prophesied: which method, as hereafter (God willing) will appear▪ is, of all the best, for insinuating faith into superstitious, perverse, and crooked hearts, otherwise most unapt to receive truths late revealed. Since Christ's glorification, sundry impostors have done many works, hardly distinguishable by spectators from true miracles: but the end of all their purposes, which they sought thence to persuade, was always so dissonant to the uncorrupt notions, precedent types, or prophecies of the Messiah; as, unto hearts well settled, and surely grounded upon scriptures formerly established and confirmed, their greatest wonders seemed but apish toys, howsoever difficiles nugae. And some of these jugglers, either out of the strength of their own illusions, or upon the presumption of their profane skill in deceiving others, have adventured to foretell their resurrection; but were not able to dissolve the bands of death: their everlasting durance in whose prisons, hath openly showed they spoke presumptuously; that not Mahomet himself the greatest of them, was that Great Prophet foretold by Moses. What was the reason then the jews would not; the Turks, unto this day, will not believe in Christ crucified? For the a Act. 13. v. 27. inhabitants of jerusalem, Saint Paul hath answered, Because they knew him not, nor yet the words of the Prophets which are read every Sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him. The same apostle, though endued with the power of miracles, yet in that place rather useth David's words, than his own works, to prove Christ's resurrection. Of which, that saying of his was most truly verified in the obstinate jews, b Luk. 16. v. 31. Not hearing Moses, and the Prophets (so as to be moved by them to true repentance,) neither were they persuaded, though this great Prophet of whom they wrote, was raised from the dead again. 22 Were we well acquainted either with that manner of interpretation, or those praenotions the Apostle supposed as known, when he used that testimony of the Psalmist c Act. 13. 33. Psal. 2. v. 7, [Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee] to prove our saviours resurrection: it would not be hard to persuade us Moses words, hitherto expounded, were as literally meant of Gods raising his Son out of his Maiden grain as out of his virgin Mother's womb. And I make no question but the conclusion of Saint Peter. Sermon, d Act. 3. 26. Unto you (whom a little before he had termed children of the Prophets) hath God raised up his Son, were meant by him of his raising Christ from the dead. And yet are these words but an application of the former principal text he there insists upon e We 3. ●r. 2●, Moses said unto the Father's▪ The Lord your God shall raise up unto you a Prophet even of your brethren like unto me, ye shall hear him all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And unto this resurrection doth the strict propriety of that phrase [ * Deut. 18. 15. from the midst of thee] well agree. a Act. 26. 26. For these things were not done in a corner, but in Jerusalem, the metropolis of judea, not without express notice given to the rulers. Moses indeed foretold his own death, and whatsoever other Prophets, (raised up by God unto this people,) did foretell, came still to pass: yet none ever foretold his own raising up. But seeing Christ's first raising from the virgin's womb, though most miraculous, was yet more private: he forewarned the world to expect this second, altogether as powerful, but more public. And in it again he is like to Moses raised up by God, to be a Saviour of his people, out of that Ark which without divine especial providence had been his tomb. This similitude amongst the rest, betwixt Christ and Moses, as well in their latter as first birth, but especially the notice our Saviour gave unto his enemies of the latter; hath made them unwittingly Prophets to their woe. For seeing it hath left their unbelief without excuse, c Math. 27. 64. their last error concerning his resurrection, is become worse than the first concerning his birth. Neither could have seemed incredulous (though both most miraculous) to this ungracious seed of jacob; had they looked (as the Prophet willed them;) d Isaiah. 51. v. 1. unto the rock whence they were hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence they were digged. The mighty increase of Sarahs' womb, no better then dead, and strange multiplication of isaack's seed beyond the posterity of all the people with whom he sojourned, did but portend the fruitful offspring of the Virgins only son should in number and dignity far surmount the sons and daughters of all the fertile mothers in judea, Isaackes' posterity had been great; yet able to be numbered, by David. e Isai 53. v. 8. 9 But his generation who shall declare, that was cut out of the land of the living? f Heb. 11. 12. Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as dead: (or destinated to death, as Isaac was; yea of one truly dead, that made his grave with the wicked, as many as the Stars in the sky in multitude (in dignity greater,) and as the sand by the seashore innumerable. Mighitier was the increase of that Rock wherein he made his grave, whence we are hewn, then of that pit whence Israel according to the flesh, was digged. His exaltation since, hath been their fall. For seeing they would not believe his predictions, as their Lawgiver had commanded; the world may clearly see the curse indefinitely there denounced against all such as would not hear, fulfilled upon that stubborn generation, according to the full extent of Saint Peter's paraphrase a Act, 3. ver. 23. For it shall be that every person which shall not near that Prophet, shallbe destroyed out of the people. upon it, Not one or a few only were destroyed out of the people (as Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, for disobedience unto Moses:) but the whole people, or nation, were utterly rooted out of the land. All which, with all particular circumstances and signs precedent or ensuing, this great Prophet in his life time had so distinctly foretold; that, if we compare former Prophets with him, they may seem to have but dreamt; he alone, that put these unknown ditties into their heads, to have had the perfect skill of right interpreting their meaning. CHAP. XII. That the method used by the great Prophet himself after his resurrection for planting faith, was such as we teach: The excess of Antichrist's exaltation above Christ: The Diametrical opposition betwixt the spirit of God, and the Spirit of the Papacy. 1 MOses was to be acknowledged a great Prophet, because the whole host of Israel infallibly knew the Lord was with him in all he did; every Prophet after him to be known by the rules which he had given, for their discrement; Christ jesus to be taken for the great Prophet and mediator of the everlasting covenant, because in words, in works, in all his ways, exactly answerable to Mosaical and prophetical Characters of the Messiah that was to come. This sweet harmony of legal types or ancient prophecies, as well with the whole course of his blessed life, as with his ignominious and cruel death, or manner of his glorious resurrection, I should either have esteemed or regarded less, had not my Saviour himself preferred the assurance of prophetical testimonies before the certainty of their senses that had conversed with him in their life time, admitted to conference with him after his rising from the dead. For so we read of two Disciples which had seen his miracles, heard his doctrine, and acknowledged him for a Prophet, mighty in word and deed: but yet disinherited the report of his resurrection after it had been the second time confirmed by such of their fellows as had doubted with them: yea their Master himself had told them as much before his death. And had he not good reason then to upbraid them with distrust, having now met them as live-like as they themselves were? Was he to them a Prophet, mighty in word and deed: and yet not able to perform what he had constantly spoken? But what was the chief matter of their just reproof? That they had not believed his words, nor given due credence to his works? Dull, no doubt, they had been, in not esteeming better of both; unwise, in not learning more of him, that taught as never man taught: but (as in them he teacheth us) most dull and most unwise, even a Luk. 24. 25. fools and slow of heart, in not believing all that the Prophets had spoken. Ought not Christ to have suffered these things (as if he had said, Is it possible your ignorance in them should be so gross, as not to know that Christ was thus to suffer) and so to enter into his glory? 2. You will say perchance they did not well in giving so little attention and credit to the Prophets, whose light should have led them unto Christ: but now that they have light on him in person, without their help, only by his seeking them, shall not he who was the end and scope of all prophetical writings, teach them all? He will: but not by relying only upon his infallible authority. This edifice of faith must be framed upon the foundation laid by the Prophets. For this reason happily our Saviour would not bewray himself to be their infallible teacher, until he had made them by evidence of Scripture, by true sense and feeling of his spirit, believe and know the truth, which he taught, to be infallible. He had opened their hearts, by opening the Scriptures unto them before their eyes were open to discern his person: for b Luk. 24. 27. he began at Moses and at all the Prophets, and interpreted unto them in all the Scriptures the things which were written of him. Steadfast belief then of any man's authority, must spring out of the solid experience of his skill, and truth of his doctrine. These two disciples might now resolve their hearts, that this was he who john said should baptise with the holy Ghost and with fire; when by the working of his spirit, c v. 32. their hearts did burn within them, whiles he talked with them, and opened the Scriptures unto them. Though before they had received john Baptists witness of the truth, as a tie or fest to stay their fleeting faith; a joh. 5. 34. 32. yet now they would not receive the record of man; there is another that beareth witness of him; the spirit of truth, which hath imprinted his doctrine in their hearts. 3. Would the Pope who challengeth Christ's place on earth amongst his living members, and requires we should believe his words, as well as these Disciples did Christ's, but expound those Scriptures unto us which Christ did to them, with like evidence and efficacy; could he make our hearts thus burn within, by opening the secret mysteries of our salvation: we would take him for Christ's Vicar, and believe indeed he were infallibly assisted by the holy spirit. But seeing he and his followers invert our saviours method by calling the certainty of both Testaments in question, telling us we cannot know them to be God's word unless it shall please this Roman God to give his word for them, or confirm their truth; seeing this his pretended confirmation is not by manifesting the mysteries of our salvation so distinctly and clearly as Christ did unto these Disciples, nor by affording us the true sense and feeling of the spirit, in such ardent manner as they enjoyed it, and yet accurseth us if we believe not his words as well as they did their Redeemers: we may hence take a perfect measure of that b A brief survey of the mouth of blasphemies spoken of by S. john. mouth of blasphemies spoken of by Saint john, according to all the three dimensions contained in the three assertions prefixed to the beginning of this Section. Nor can the reader imagine either any other forepast, like unto it; or yet to come, likely to prove more abominable: if it shall but please him to survey the length and breadth of it, but especially the profundity. 4. The length of it I make that assertion; The Pope must be as well believed, as either Christ was whilst he lived on earth, or his Apostles after his glorification. The breadth; His absolute authority must be for extent as large and ample as Christ's should be, were he on earth again; or that commission he gave to his Disciples, Go Preach the Gospel to every creature: his directions must go forth throughout all the earth, and his words unto the ends of the world. The depth is much greater than the space between heaven and hell. For if you would draw a line from the Zenith to the Nadir through the Centre, it would scarce be a gag long enough for this monstrous mouth; so wide as hell cannot conceive a greater. The depth I gather, partly from the excess of Christ's worth, either arising from his personal union with the Godhead; his sanctity of life and conversation; or from his hyperprophetical spirit and abundant miracles. For look how much he exceeds any but mere man in all these: by so much doth the Pope (though supposed as not obnoxious to any crime) make his authority and favour with God greater than Christ's, which is the semidiameter of this mouth of blasphemies. The other part, equal hereunto in quantity, but for the quality more tainted with the dregs of Hell, ariseth from that opposition the Pope's spirit hath unto Christ; or from the luxury and beastly manners of the Papacy, erected by Satan as it were of purpose to pollute the world with monstrous sins, and to derogate as much from mankind, as true Christianity doth advance it: finally to make the Christian world as much more wicked, as Christ's Disciples, Apostles, and faithful followers are better than the heathen. Nor doth the Pope exact belief only without miracles or manifestation of a prophetical spirit: The chief arguments brought by Romish Writers to prove the excellency of their church directly contrary to the principles of Sense & Nature. but contrary to all notions of good and evil, common to Christians and Heathens, and as it were in despite of the prophecies that have deciphered him for Antichrist. What heathen Philosopher could with patience have endured to hear, that a dissolute luxurious tyrant could not, though in matters of this life, give wrong sentence out of the seat of justice? The Jesuits teach it as an Article of faith, that the Pope, albeit a dissolute and ungracious tyrant, Mankind's reproach, the disgrace of Christianity, cannot possibly give an erroneous sentence ex cathedra, no not in mysteries of religion. But as if it were a small thing thus impudently to contradict nature, and grieve the souls of ingenuous men, unless they also grieve their c Isa. ●, ●●er. 13. God, seeking as it were to cross his spirit by holding opinions not only contradictory but most contrary to his sacred rules; they importune the Christian world with tumultuous clamours, to take that, which the spirit hath given as the demonstrative character of great Antichrist, the old serpents chief confederate, for the infallible cognisance of Christ's Vicar, the very signet of his beloved Spouse. Nor will they (I know) though friendly admonished, cease henceforth to urge their outworn arguments, drawn from antiquity, universality; from that reverence and allegiance which most Kingdoms of Europe have for these thousand years and more borne to the See of Rome; or from the bloody victories over all other inferior Churches or private spirits, that have oppugned her. These or like allegations in their judgement abundantly prove their Church to be Christ's best beloved, the Pope to be his Deputy, or rather his corrival here on earth, whose words sound as the word of God, and not of Man; albeit the spirit hath plainly foretold, that * Revel. 13. v. 4. 6. 7. the beast which had his power from the Dragon, and should open his mouth unto blasphemies against God, to blaspheme his name and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven, should have power given withal to make war with the Saints, and to overcome them, yea, over every kindred, tongue and nation, so as all that dwell upon the earth should worship him, whose names were not written in the Book of life of the Lamb, which was slain from the beginning of the world. 5 To the jesuits brags, that no visible Church since the world began, did either spread itself so far, or flourish so long as theirs hath done; I only oppose that of our Saviour, Ex tuo ipsius ore iudicabere serve nequam, Thine own confession shall condemn thee, thou bondslave of Satan. For if the Romish Hierarchy be or hath been in the world's eye, the most potent and flourishing that ever was: This description of the Beasts power cannot agree so well to any as unto it, Nor doth the Scripture any where intimate the true Church militant should domineer over all Nations, or be so triumphantly victorious, as they boast theirs hath been. To think the Antichrist whom they expect should in three years space subdue as many Nations as have been tributary to the See of Rome, is a conceit that justifies the jew as well in his credulity of things to come which are impossible, as in his hypocritical partiality towards his present estate, which he never suspects of Apostasy. Unto this observation the Reader may add other like descriptions of this scarlet Whore; all so fitly agreeing to the Papacy, as he that will not acknowledge it for the Kingdom of great Antichrist, hath great reason to suspect his heart, that if he had lived with our Saviour, he would scarce have taken him for his Messias; nor can the Jesuits bring any better reasons, why the Pope should not be the Antichrist; then the jews did, why Christ should not be the Great Prophet. Yet this I say, not to discourage such as doubt whether the Pope be that Man of sin; or to bring them out of love with their belief, which may be sound without express or actual acknowledgement of this truth, not as yet revealed unto them: as those two Disciples, no doubt, were neither hypocrites nor infidels, albeit they mistrusted the report of Christ's resurrection; for they were farther from approving the practices of the jews against him, then from actual acknowledgement of it. If any man thus doubt, whether the Pope be Antichrist, so he do not approve his hatred and war against God's Saints, or his other devilish practices: God's peace be upon him; and in good time I trust his eyes shall be enlightened to see the truth in this particular, as those two Disciples did in the Article of the resurrection. 6 Seeing we have proved the Pope's authority so far to exceed Christ's; it may seem needless to compare it with the Apostles. Yet lest any jesuit should except, that their authority might be greater after their Master's glorification, than his was before: let us a while examine, what they assumed unto themselves; what they gave unto the Scriptures before extant. CHAP. XIII. That the authority attributed to the present Pope, and The Romish rule of faith, were altogether unknown unto Saint Peter● the opposition betwixt Saint Peter's and his pretended Successors doctrine. 1 TO begin with Saint Peter, the first supposed to be installed in this See of Rome. It may be presumed that this Supremacy over his fellow Apostles, were it any, was in his life time, whiles his miracles were fresh, & the extraordinary efficacy of his Ministry daily manifested, as well known amongst the faithful, as the Popes now amongst Roman Catholics. If necessary it had been to acknowledge him, or his successors, as a second Rock or foundation: the commendation of this doctrine unto posterity, had been most requisite at the time he wrote his second Epistle, * Pet. 2. c. 1. v. 14. as knowing then the time was at hand he should lay down his Tabernacle; when he endeavoured his auditors might have remembrance of his former doctrine, to make their calling and election sure. If ever there had been a fit season for notifying the necessity of the See apostolics infallibility, all the circumstances of this place witness this was it. a 2. Pet. 1. 14. If any, they to whom he wrote, were most bound to obey it: Their faith had been planted by him: his present intent and purpose was, more and more to confirm them in the truth wherein they were in some measure established. And being thus mindful, will he not make choice of means most effectual to prevent heresy or Apostasy? What are these then? absolute reposall in his and his Successors infallibility? Had this been the best rule of faith, he knew his fault were inexcusable for not prescribing it, to such as most willingly would have used it. His personal testimony and authority was, I confess, as great as any mortal man's could be: with his own eyes he had beheld * 2. Pet. 1. 16. the Majesty of our Lord Christ, whom he preached unto them. If any trust there be in human senses, this Saint of God could not possibly be deceived. If any credence to be given unto miracles, or sanctity of life: his flock might rest assured he would not deceive; his works so witness the sincerity of his doctrine: or if his eyes were not, in these his auditors judgements, sufficient witnesses of this truth: he further assures them, when his Lord received of God the Father. * 2. Pet. 1. 17. honour and glory, there came such a voice unto him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased. And this voice saith he, we heard when it came from heaven, (being not a far off) but with him in the mount. If Saint Peter's seat or chair had been as the pole-star, whereto our belief, as the Mariner's needle, should be directed, lest we float we know not whether in the Ocean of opinions: were the bosom of the visible Church the safest harbour our souls in all storms of temptation could thrust into: this Apostle was either an unskilful Pilot, or an uncharitable man, that would not before his death instruct them in this course for the eternal safety of their souls, whose bodily lives he might have commanded to have saved his own. Had perpetual succession in his See, or Apostolical tradition never interrupted, been such an Ariadne's thread, as now it is thought, to guide us through the Labyrinth of errors: Such was Saint Peter's love to truth, that he would have so fastened it to all faithful hearts, as none should ever have failed to follow it, in following which he could not err. Doubtless had any such conceit lodged in his breast, this discourse had drawn it out, his usual form of exhortation had been too mild, his ordinary style too low. This doctrine had been proclaimed to all the world, with Anathemaes, as loud and terrible, as the Canons of any Papistical Council report. 2 But he followed no * 2. Pet. 1. v. 16. such deceitful fables, when he opened unto them the power and coming of Christ: whose Majesty as he had seen with his own eyes, so would he have others to see him too. But by what light? By Scriptures. What Scriptures? Peter feed my sheep? Nay, but by the light of prophesy. That is a light indeed, in itself, but unto private spirits it is no better, (saith * Vide lib. 2● Sect 2. cap 5. Parag. 6. Valentian) than a light put under a bushel, unless the visible Church do hold it out. Where did the visible Church keep residence in those days? In Saint Peter, I trow. How chances it then he saith not; fix your eyes on mine that have seen the glory of the Lord, and the Prophet's light shall shine unto you? If by his commendation and proposal it were to shine, he had said better thus: a 2. Pet. 1. v. 19 Ye do well in that you give heed unto me, as to your only infallible teacher, that must confirm you in the truth of Prophetical Writings, and cause them shine in your hearts: but now he saith: Ye do well in that ye take heed unto the Prophets, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day-star arise in your hearts. This light of Prophets illuminated the eyes of Peter's faith, albeit with his bodily eyes he had seen Christ's glory. For speaking comparatively of that testimony which he had heard in the Mount, he adds, We have also asurer b Prophetical predictions of Christ surer grounds of faith, than the live testimonies of the Apostles, that had seen Christ, and conversed with him. Amplectendus est Commentarius qui interpretatur in hunc modum, habemus sirmiorem, id est, certiorem & compertiorem [rationem] Id enim temporis sermo Propheticorum spectatior erat, & latius receptus quam sermo Apostolorum & Euangelistarium. Sasbout in hunc locum. word of the Prophets. That the Lord had been glorified in the Mount, his Auditors were to take upon his credit and authority; nor could he make them to see this particular, as he himself had done: but that Christ jesus whom he saw glorified in the Mount, was the Lord of Glory; he had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a surer testimony than his bodily sense, the light of Prophets. This than was the commendations of his flock, that they looked upon it which shined as well unto them, as him; to all without respect of persons, that take heed unto it; able to bring them not to acknowledge Peter's infallibility, but to the day-star itself whose light would further ascertain them even of the truth the Prophets and the Apostles taught. For Christ is in a peculiar manner, the first and the last in the edifice of faith, the lowest & the highest stone in the corner, refused by the master builders or visible pillars of the jewish Church: their faith was not grounded upon the Prophets, whose words they knew not; and not knowing them, they knew not him: but unto such as raise their faith by this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the true square and line, Christ is both the fundamental Rock, which supporteth; and the chief corner stone, that binds the whole house of God, and preserves it from cliffs and ruptures. 3. But lest his followers might look amiss upon this prophetical light, 2. Pet. 1. v. 19 rightly esteemed in the general, Saint Peter thought it necessary to advertise them, not to content themselves with every interpretation, or accustomarie acknowledgement of their truth, grounded on others relations, reports, or skill in expounding them, or multitude of voices that way swaying. This had been as if a man that hath eyes of his own, should believe there was a Moon or stars, because a great many of his honest neighbours had told him so, A thousand witnesses in such a case as this, were but private testimonies, in respect of that distinct knowledge which every one may have that list. That the Lord should preserve light in Goshen, when darkness had covered the whole face of Egypt beside, seems unto me less strange, but more sensibly true then before: whilst I consider, how in this age wherein the light of his countenance hath so clearly shined throughout those parts of Europe whence the Gospel came to us, Ingolstade should still sit in darkness, environed with the shadow of death. That her great professor Valentian, borne I take it, within these fourscore years, should grope at noon day, as if he had been brought forth in the very midnight of Popery, or died well nigh three hundred years ago. Scarce Scotus himself, not Ockam (questionless) though shut up in a prison, where no light of any expositor had ever come, could have made a more dunstical collection of the Apostles words, than he hath done. * Cum tam serio ac graviter admonuit beatus Petrius, ut hoc inprimis intelligeremus, quod omnis inquit, Prophetia scripturae, propria interpretatione non fit. 2. Pet. 1. all quid è tribus significare voluit, nempe, 1. aut non posse ullo modo, scilicet certo vel prohabili, exponi scripturam propria industia & ingenio: Aut. 2. non posse certo quidem exponi unum aut alterum scripturae locum ex ingenio proprio, sine collatione aliorum scripturae locorum, cum ea vero collatione posse: Aut. 3. non posse certo quidem & infallibiliter ubique eam expani sine sententia ali●uius alterius communis & infallibilit authoritatis, quae proinde in Ecclesia sit fides judex. Sed nec primum nec secundum significare voluit, Ergo tertium. Non quidem primum; Nam constat multa possim Scripturae loca esse probabiliter exposita à sanctis Patribus, propria eorum ingenij solertia atque industria. Non etiam secundum, nempe ut non putet aliquis se posse unum aut alterum scripturae locum ingenio proprio infallibiliter ac certo exponere, non consultis & collatis aliis Scripturae locis. Nam quis omnino haereticorum hoc putat? Aut quid opus crat hoc tam serio admonere? Item, si unum aut alterum Scripturae leci●, ingenio sensuque proprio interpretari certo nemo potest: suanto minus locos scripturae plures inter quos collatio institui●● unde ipse D. Petriu: Omnis, inquit, Prophetia Scripturae, etc. Non dicit, haec aut illa tantum, sed absolutè ac sine ulla acceptione, omnis Prophetia Scripturae, propria interpretatione non fit. § Restat igitur ut tertium illud, quod diximus, significaverit hoc loco D. Petrus: Nempe ut vis atque sapientia huius Apostolicae monitionis sit, Neminem privalo suo labore atque proprio study, quacunque demum ratione, atque adeo etiam ne ex ipsa quidem Scriptura, doctrinam scripturae certo ac infallibiliter in controversis quaestionibus intelligere posse sed opus esse ut discat ex aliqua alia authoritate in Ecclesia communi, per quam spiritus sanctus communiter loquatur, ac omnes doceat. § Name ut ipse Apostolus ibidem subiungit, quemadmodum non authoritate humana, sed divina, locuti in Scriptures sunt sancti Dei homines, ita etiam non humna ac propria industria huius vel illius hominis ullo modo, ne ex ipsa quidem scriptura, sententia scripturae certo cognoscenda est, sed ex aliqua authoritate, item divina, per quam ipse spiritus sanctus, qui Scripturae author est, sit etiam certissimus Scripturae interpres. Ita fit, ut sola Scriptura non sufficiat nobis, ad certo dijudicandas fidei quaestiones. Valen. Tom. 3. in Aquinat. disp. 1. quaest. 1. de object. fidei. Punct. 7. §. 9 Saint Peter meant one of these Three. First, that there can be no certain or probable way of expounding Scriptures by our proper wit or industry: or Secondly, that one or other place of Scripture cannot be rightly expounded by human wit or industry, but so compared they rightly may: or, Thirdly, that the Scriptures cannot certainly and infallibly be expounded every where without the sentence of some other common infallible authority, which in this respect is to be held as judge of faith in the Church. The Apostle (he infers) did not mean the first or second: ergò, the third. So as the force and wisdom of the Apostolical admonition, is this; No man by his private industry or study, howsoever employed (either he thought not of the holy Ghosts direction or assistance, or did not except it,) no not by any search of Scripture itself, can certainly and infallibly understand the doctrine of Scriptures, in controversies (of which Saint Peter in that place speaks not one word) but it is necessary he learn this of some other public authority in the church, by which the Holy Ghost speaks publicly, and teacheth all. His reason follows more duncticall than the collection itself: For the Apostle strait (subions: As the holy men of God did speak in Scriptures, not by human authority, but divine: so likewise cannot the Scriptures be possibly understood by any human or private industry of this or that man, but by some other authority, likewise divine, by which the holy spirit which is the Author of Scriptures, may be likewise the most certain interpreter of Scriptures 4 Had another read thus much unto me, and bid me read the Author or his works wherein it was found: I should presently have named either Erasmus Moriae Encomium, Frishlins Priscianus Vapulans, or some such like Comedian, disposed in merriment to pen some old Dunces part. Cannot the Sun of righteousness infuse his heavenly influence, by the immediate operation of his spirit? Participation of that spirit, by which the scriptures were written, makes private men's interpretations of them not private but authentic. or doth his influence want force without conjunction with this blazing Comet, or falling star? Was it not the authority of this spirit which made Saint Peter himself to be so authentic in his doctrine? Is it not the pretended privilege of the same spirit which exempts the Pope from privateness, & makes his authority ecumenical and infallible? Whosoever then by participation of this spirit understands the Prophecies, either immediately, or expounded by others, whomsoever; his conceit of them, or their right interpretation, is not private, but authentic. And * Lib. 2. loc. Theol. cap. 8. Vide Sect. 4. cap 1. Parag. 3. Canus, though a Papist, expressly teacheth, that the immediate ground or formal reason of ours and the Apostles belief, must be the same; both so immediately and infallibly depending upon the testimony of the spirit, as if the whole world beside should teach the contrary, yet were every Christian bound to stick unto that inward testimony which the spirit hath given him. Though the Church or Pope should expound them to us, we could not infallibly believe his expositions; but by that spirit, by which he is supposed to teach: so believing, we could not infallibly teach others the same; for it is the spirit only that so teacheth all. The inference than is as evident, as strong; that private in the forecited place, is opposed to that which wants authority, not unto public or common. The Kings promise made to me in private, is no private promise: but will warrant me, if I come to plead before his Majesty, albeit others make question whether I have it or no. In this sense that interpretation of scriptures which the spirit affords us that are private men, is not private but authentic, though not for extent or publication of it unto others, yet for the perfection of our warrant in matters of salvation or concerning God. For where the spirit is, there is perfect liberty, yea free access of pleading our cause, against whomsoever before the Tribunal seat of justice; especially being wronged in matters of the life to come. To this purpose saith our Apostle * Cor. 1. 2. 15 But he that is spiritual discerneth all things: yet he himself is judged of no man. In those things wherein he cannot be judged by any; he is no private man but a Prince and Monarch, for the freedom of his conscience. But if any man falsely pretend this freedom to nurse contentions, or to withdraw his neck from that yoke whereto he is subject; he must answer before his supreme judge and his holy Angels, for framing unto himself a counterfeit licence without the assured warrant of his spirit. And so shall they likewise that seek to command men's consciences in those matters, wherein the spirit hath set them free. This is the height of iniquity, that hath no temporal punishment in this life: but must be reserved as the object of fiercest wrath in that fearful day; the very Idea of Antichristianisme. CHAP. XIIII. That Saint Paul submitted his doctrine to examination by the Words before written. That his doctrine, disposition and practice, were quite contrary to the Romanists in this argument. 1 SAint Paul, as well as other Apostles, had the gift of miracles, which amongst Barbarians or distressed souls, destitute of other comfort, likely to be won to grace by wonders, he did not neglect to practise: but sought not to enforce belief upon the jews, by fearful signs, or sudden destruction of the obstinate, albeit he had power to anathematize, not only in word, but in deed, even to deliver men alive unto Satan. When he came to Thessalonica, he went as his manner was into the Synagogue, * Act. 17. v. 2. & three Sabbath days disputed with his countrymen by the Scriptures, opening and alleging that Christ must have suffered, and risen again from the dead: and this is jesus Christ whom I preach to you. These jews had Moses and the Prophets, and if they would not hear them, neither would they believe, for any miracles: which to have wrought amongst such had been as the casting of pearls before swine. What was the reason they did not believe? because the Scriptures which he urged, were obscure? but Saint Paul did open them. Rather they saw the truth, as Papists do, but would not see it. They rightly believed, whatsoever God had said, was most true; that he had said what Moses and the Prophets wrote: and yet Saint Paul taught nothing which they had not foretold. But that was all one; these jews had rather believe Moses and the Prophets meant as the Scribes and Pharisees, or other chief Rulers of their Synagogues taught, then as Paul expounded them: albeit his expositions would have cleared themselves to such as without prejudice would have examined them. But the Beroeans were of a more ingen●ous disposition (so the word * Acts 17. v. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports) they were not vassals to other men's interpretations or conceits, but used their liberty to examine their truth. * Acts 17. v. 11. They received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures whether these things were so or no. If they believed in part before, their practice confirms the truth of our assertion, that they were not to believe the infallibility of Paul, but of his doctrine, albeit they were well persuaded of his personal authority. If they believed neither in part, nor wholly, before they see the truth of his doctrine confirmed by that scripture which they had formerly acknowledged; their ingenuity herein likewise confirms our doctrine, and condemns the Papists of insolent blasphemy, for arrogating that authority unto the Pope's decrees, which is only due unto God's word already established. 2 I would demand of any Papists, whether the Beroeans did well or ill in examining Saint Paul's doctrine: if ill, why hath the spirit of God commended them? if well, why is it not lawful and expedient for all true Christians to imitate them? Unless the Reader bite his lip, I will not promise for him he shall not laugh at Bellarmine's answer, albeit I knew him for another Heraclitus, or Crassus Agelastus, who never laughed in all his life save once when he saw an Ass feed on thistles. Surely he must have an Ass' lips that can taste, and a swine's belly that can digest this great Clerks Divinity in this point. * Respondeo, etsi Paulus erat Apostolus, & non poterat falsam doctrinam praedicare, tamen non constabat hoc initio Beroensibus, nec tenebantur mox credere, nisi prius viderent miracula, aut alias probabiles rationes credendi. Itaque cum Paulus probaret illis Christumex oraculus Prophetarum, merito illi scrutabantur Scripturas, an haec ita se haberent. Bellar. de verb. Dei, lib. 3: cap. 10. resp. ad 7. I answer (saith he) albert Paul were an Apostle, and could not preach false doctrine: thus much notwithstanding was not evident to the Beroeans at the first, nor were they bound forthwith to believe unless they had seen some miracles or other probable inducements to believe. Therefore when Paul proved Christ unto them out of the Prophetical Oracles, they did well to search the Scriptures, whether those things were so. If Saint Paul had thought miracles a more effectual means than Scriptures, for begetting faith in such as acknowledged Moses and the Prophets: no doubt he had used miracles rather than their authority. Or if the Pope cannot expound the scriptures, as effectually and perspicuously as S. Paul did: why doth he not at the least work miracles? are we bound absolutely to believe him, & is he bound to do neither of these, without which the people of Beroea were not bound (as Bellarmine acknowledgeth) to believe Saint Paul? We are if his reason be worth belief. * At Christiani quibus constat Ecclesiam non posse errare in explicanda doctrina fidei, tenentur eam recipere, & non dubitare, an haec itase habeant. Ibidem. Christians, which know the Church cannot err in explicating the doctrine of faith, are bound to embrace it without questioning, whether the places alleged be to the purpose or no. Let such Christians as believe the Pope cannot err, in the name of God believe what soever he shall teach, without examination; yet remember withal, that thus to believe is to worship the dragon, by giving their names unto the Beast. But unto what Christians is the Pope's infallibility better known, then S. Paul's was to the Beroeans? Not unto us whose fathers have forsaken him for his Apostasy from God, & taught us to eschew him, as Antichrist; to hold his doctrine as the very doctrine of devils. Unto us at least, his Holiness should seek to manifest his infallibility, by such means as S. Paul did his even unto such as had seen his miracles, and had experience of his power in expounding scriptures. Besides, Paul's conversation in all places was continually such as did witness him to be a chosen vessel full of the spirit of grace. He did not make merchandise of the word of God, as most Popes do: * 2. Cor. 2. v. 17. but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God, so he spoke thorough Christ▪ he did not walk in craftiness (yet who greater politicians than Popes?) * 2. Cor. 4. ver. 2. Nor did he handle the word of God deceitfully: but in declaration of the truth, he did approve himself to every man's conscience in the sight of God. This one amongst others, he acounts as an especial motive to persuade men of his heavenly calling, in that he did not preach himself, but Christ jesus and himself their servant for jesus sake. For so our Saviour had said: * john 7. v. 18. He that speaketh of himself, seeketh his own glory. The Pope (that we might know him to be Christ's opposite) seeks almost nothing else, nothing so much, as to be absolute Lord over all other men's faith. If this any jesuit will deny: let him define what Prince amongst the nations, what Tyrant in the world, did ever challenge greater sovereignty in affairs of this life, than the Pope doth in all matters whatsoever concerning the life to come? 3 But it may be Bellarmine was either afraid or ashamed of this answer: wherefore he adds another (as wise) to keep it from blushing. * Addo etiam, quod etsi haereticus peccat dubitando de authoritate Ecclesiae in quam per baptismum regeneratus est, neque est eadem conditio haeretici, qui semel fidem professus est, & judaei aut Ethnici, qui nunquam fuit Christianus: tamen posito hoc dubio, & hoc peccato, non malè facit scrutando, & examinando, an loca scripturae & Patrum, à Concilio Tridentino prolata, ita se habeant, modò id faciat intentione inveniendi veritatem non calumniandi. Deberet quidem ille sine examine recipere doctrinam Ecclesiae. tamen melius est, ut examinando praeparetur ad veritatem, quam negligendo remaneat in suis tenebris. I add (saith he) albeit an Heretic sin in doubting of the Church's authority, into which he hath been regenerate by Baptism, (nor is the case the same in an Heretic, which hath once made profession of faith, and in a jew or Ethnique which never was Christian:) yet this doubt (which is a sin) being supposed, he doth not amiss in searching and examining, whether the places alleged by the Trent Council out of scriptures or fathers, be true or pertinent; so he do this with an intent to find the truth, not to calumniate. A man at the first sight would deem Bellarmine, for his own part at least, had given us leave to examine the Pope's doctrine by scripture: but that, as you heard before, he absolutely denies: nor will he (I am sure) pawn his hat, that he which searcheth the Scriptures and Fathers alleged, & cannot find any such meaning in either, as the Trent Council would thence infer, shallbe freed by their Church from heresy: although he be not so uncivil, as to calumniate the Pope, but only (saluâ reverentiâ) ingenuously profess, that he thinks on his conscience the scripture meant no such matter as the Council intended. This none of their church dare promise: for dubius infide (by their doctrine) est haereticus: he that doubts after such an authentic determination, is condemned for an heretic: and yet without such assurance of being freed from heresy, this permission of reading scriptures is not worth God a mercy, seeing he must at length be constrained to believe the scripture saith just so as the Pope saith; albeit his private conscience inform him to the contrary; so that by reading them, he must either wound his own conscience, more than if the use of them had been denied him; or else use them but as a court favour or grace bestowed upon him by the Pope, for which he must in good manners yield his full assent to his doctrine, with infinite thanks for his bounty. Howsoever (if he be doubtful in their tenants) he may not read the Scriptures with Calvin, Beza, or any of our writers expositions, or in any edition save such as they approve, or with the Rhemish animadversions or gloss, or according to the analogy of that faith wherein the Jesuits have catechised him. So that the reading of scriptures, if their opinions be erroneous (as we hold the Pope's decisions are) serves to as good purpose for confirming one of their catechizing in the right faith, as the ringing of bells doth to bring a melancholy man out of some foolish conceit, which runs in his mind: both of them will believe their former imaginations (though never so bad) the better, because the one thinks the bells ring, the other, that the scriptures speak, just so as he imagines. This Bellarmine cannot dissemble in his next words: Bound he is to receive the Church's doctrine without examination: but better, he were prepared unto the truth by examining, then by neglecting it to persist still in his blindness. His meaning in plain English, is this; He and his fellows could wish reform Churches would all come off at once, and believe as Romanists do, without all examination, whether they believe as Christians, or Magicians: but if we will not be so forward as they could wish we were, they could in the second place be very well content to admit us into their Church again, though after a year or twoe deliberation, rather than lose our company for ever. 4 The learned Doctor Whitakers, of famous memory, out of the former place gathered these two corollaries: [Every doctrine is to be tried by Scripture: The Apostle taught nothing but what might have been confirmed out of Moses and the Prophets.] Sacroboscus reply to these Orthodoxal collections, confirms me in that conceit I entertained of Romish Schoolmen, when I first began to read them. They seemed to me then, much more now, to handle matters of greatest moment in divinity, after the same fashion (for all the world) nimble Artists do Philosophical Theorems in the Schools, whiles they are coursed by such as would triumph in their disgrace. Be the argument brought, in itself never so good or forcible to evince the contradictory to their tenants: yet if the opponent in his inference of what was last denied, chance but to omit some petty term or clause impertinent to the main question, or make his propositions more improbable by framing them more universal than he needs, occasion will quickly be taken to interrupt his progress and put him off, especially (if the Answerer be so well provided) with some show of instance to the contrary, or absurdity likely to follow, if all were true his Antagonist would seem to prove. Nor do I censure this as fault in youth, or whilst we are in Aristotle's forge, so the fire be out of us when we come into the sanctuary. But just in this manner doth the mimical jesuit reply to the former truth. * Neque praetermittenda puto duo corollaria, quae ex hoc malo argumento peius collgit doctor iste. unum est: Omnem doctrinam ex scripturis esse diiudicandam. Alterum. Apostolos nihil praedicasse, quod non ex scripturis propheticis confirmari posset. quaero enim num illi probetur haec consecutio? Paulus praedicans Atheniensibus, suam doctrinam confirmavit testimonio Arati poetae, rectèque fecissent Athenienses, si Aratum scrutati fuissent, an ita se haberet: Ergo omnis doctrina ex poc●is d●udicanda est. Sacro Bos. def. Decr. Tre. pag. 122. I demand (saith he) whether the Doctor would approve this consequence; Paul preaching to the Athenians confirmed his Doctrine with the testimony of the Poet Aratus, and the Athenians had done well if they had sought whether Aratus had said so or no: therefore all Doctrines must be judged by Poets. But what if the Beraeans practise considered alone, or as Jesuits do Scriptures, only Mathematically, do not necessarily infer thus much? The Learned Doctors charitable mind would not suffer him to suspect any public professor of Divinity, as Sacroboscus was, could be so ignorant in Scriptures, as not to consider (besides the different esteem of Prophets, and Poets amongst the jews) what Saint Paul had else where expressly said; u Act. 26. ve. 22. I obtained help of God, and continue unto this day, witnessing both unto small and great, saying none other things, than those which the Prophets and Moses did say should come. Unless he could have proved Christ's resurrection & other articles of Christian faith, out of Moses and the Prophets, the jews exceptions against him had been just. For they were bound to resist all Doctrines dissonant to their ancient ordinances, especially the abolishment of Rites and Ceremonies which Paul laboured most; as knowing the Lawgiver meant they should continue no longer then to the alteration of the Priesthood: but in whose maintenance his adversaries should have spent their blood whiles ignorant they were, without default, of the Truth Paul taught, as not sufficiently proved from the same authority, by which their laws were established. Nor c Vide c. 8. pa. 6. was any Apostle, either for his miracles, or other pledges of the Spirit that he could communicate unto others, to be so absolutely believed in all things during his life time, as Moses and the Prophet's writings. For seeing the gift of miracles was bestowed on hypocrites, or such as might fall from any gifts or grace of the spirit they had: though the spectators might believe the particular conclusions: to whose confirmation the miracles were fitted, yet was it not safe, without examination, absolutely to rely upon him, in all things that had spoken a divine truth once or twice. In that he might be an hypocrite or a dissembler, for aught others, without evidence of his upright conversation, and perpetual consonance to his former Doctrine, could know, he might abuse his purchased reputation to abet some dangerous error. Nor do our adversaries (though too too credulous in this kind) think themselves bound to believe revelations made to another, much less to think that he which is once partaker of the Spirit should for ever be infallible. Upon these supporters the forementioned Doctors reason (which the jesuit abuseth to establish the Church's authority) stands firm and sound; Credo id verum esse quod Deus dicit, quia ille dicit, nec aliam ullam quaero rationem; non audeo vero homini tantum tribuere, ne ipsum Deo aequalem faciam. whit. q. 5. c. 8. arg. 3. citant Sacrobo. p. 122 I absolutely believe all to be true, that God saith, because he saith it, nor do I seek any other reason: but I dare not ascribe so much unto man, lest I make him equal to God; for God alone, and he in whom the Godhead dwelleth bodily, is immutably just and holy. Many others have continued holy and righteous, according to their measure until the end: but who could be certain of this besides themselves? no not they themselves always. And albeit a man that never was in the state of grace, may oft times deliver that Doctrine which is infallible: yet were it (to say no worse) a grievous tempting of God to rely upon his Doctrine as absolutely infallible, unless we know him (besides his skill or learning) to be always in such a state, Though both his life and death be most religious, his Doctrine must approve itself to the present age, and God's providence must commend it to posterity Nor did our Saviour though in life immutably holy & for doctrine most infallible, assume so much unto himself before his ascension, as the jesuits give to the Pope. For he submitted his doctrine to Moses & the Prophet's writings. And seeing the jesuits make less account of Him then the jews did of Moses; it is no marvel if they be more violently miscarried with envious or contemptuous hatred of the Divine truth itself, than the jews were against our Saviour or his doctrine. These even when they could not answer his reasons, drawn from scriptures received, though most offensive to their distemperate humour, were ashamed to call Moses & the prophet's authority in question, or to demand him, how do ye know God spoke by them? Must not the Church's infallibility herein assure you? and * So Canus argueth before cited L. 2. Sect. 3. c. 4. parag 8. if it teach you to discern God's word from man's, must it not likewise teach you to distinguish the divine sense of it from human? This is a strain of Atheism, which could never find harbour in any professing the knowledge of the true God, before the brood of Antichrist grew so flush, as to seek the recovery of that battle against God's Saints on Earth, which Lucifer their Father and his followers lost against Michael and his holy Angels in Heaven. CHAP. XV. A brief taste of our adversaries blasphemous and Atheistical assertions in this argument from some instances of two of their greatest Doctors Bellarmine and Valentian: That if faith cannot be perfect without the solemn testification of that Church, the rarity of such testifications will cause infidelity. 1 FOR a further competent testimony of blasphemies in this kind wherewith we charge the Church of Rome, let the Reader judge by these two instances following, whether the Christian world have not sucked the deadliest poison that could evaporate from the infernal lake, through Bellarmine's and Valentians pens. Valentian, as if he meant to outflout the Apostle for prohibiting all besides the great pastor Christ jesus, for being Lords over men's faith, will have an infallible authority which may sit as judge and mistress of all controversies of faith, and this to be not the * Quod si igitur aliquam humanam auctoritatem divina assistentia infallibilem, magistram ac judicem omnibus quaestionibus fidei, extare necesse est, ut superius, §. 1. probavimus: neque verò ea est illorum hominum propria, qui olim divinam doctrinam aut verbo, aut scripto tradiderum, & vita 〈◊〉 sunt ut iam etiam probatum est▪ restat, ut vivet haec auctoritas, successione semper inter fidiles praesens, quemadmodum in assertione nostra posuimus. Valem, Tun. 3. in Aquin dis. 1. q. 1 de object. fidei punct. 7. §. 11. vide annot. Lib. 2. Sect. 4. Cap. 5. §. 21. authority of one or two men deceased, not peculiar to such as in times past have uttered the divine truth either by mouth or pen, and commended it unto posterity; but an authority continuing in force and strength amongst the faithful throughout all ages, able perspicuously and openly to give sentence in all controversies of faith. Yet as these Ambassadors of God deceased, cannot be judges: shall they therefore have no say at all in deciding controversies of faith? You may not think a jesuit would take jesus name in vain: he will never for shame, exclude his Master for having at least a finger in the government of the Church: Why, what is his office? or what is the use of his authority, registered by his Apostles and Evangelists? Not so little as you would ween. For, his speeches, amongst others that in their life time have infallibly taught divine truths by mouth or pen, may be consulted as a witness or written law in cases of faith, but after a certain sort and manner, either to speak the truth, or somewhat thereto not impertinent, as shallbe declared in due place. The place he means, is, where he disputes whether the Pope be bound to consult other authority besides his own, or use any means to search the truth before he pass sentence ex cathedra, that is, before he charge the whole Christian World to believe his decision. This he thinks expedient, but so far forth only, as if it please his Holiness to enjoin the belief of some particular point upon the whole World, all must believe that he hath consulted Scripture and antiquity as far as was requisite for that point, as you shall after hear. 2 That in such controversies he includes the means of knowing Scriptures to be the word of God: is evident out of his own words in the forecited place. For the knowledge of Scriptures he would have to be an especial point of faith, yet such as cannot be proved by Scripture, but by this living and speaking authority, as he expressly contends in the eleventh paragraph of the same question. His conclusion is; If it be necessary, there should be some authority, though human, yet by divine assistance infallible, to sit as mistress and judge in all controversies of faith, and not to be appropriated to any deceased, as is already proved: it remains that it be always living in the Church, always present amongst the faithful by succession, he means, of Popes. Thus you see the present Pope must be judge, and Christ & his Apostles must be brought in as witnesses. And yet whether there were such a Christ, as Saint Matthew, Luke, Mark, and john tell us there was; or whether the Gospels which go under their names be Apocryphal, and that of Bartholomew's only Canonical; we cannot know but by the Pope's testimony: so that in the end, he is the only judge, and only witness, both of Christ, the Apostles, and their writings, yea of all divine truths, at least assisted with his Bishops and Cardinals. Which Bellarmine though otherwise a great deal more wary than Valentian, hath plainly uttered. Tertium testimonium est Concilij Triden●●i ●ess●r Can. 1 ubi additur anathema negantibus sep●● esse vera & propria Sacramenta: quod testimonium etiamsi nullum haberemus aliud deberet sussicere. Nam si tollamus authoritatem presetis Ecclesiae, & praesentis Concilij, in dub●um revocari poter●̄e omnium aliorum Conciliorum decreta, & tota fides Christianae. Semper enim haec fuit consuetudo apud Christianos, ut exortas controversias definirent Episcop●, qui tunc vivebant. Et praeterea omnium Conciliorum veterum, & omnium dogmatum firmitas pedet ab authoritate praesentis Ecclesiae. Non enim habemus testimonium infallibile, quod Cōc●lia ill● fuerint, & legit mo fuerint, & hoc aut illud desinur●●t, nisi quia Ecclesia, quae nunc est, & errare non potest, ita sentit & docet: quod enim historici quidam meminerint eorum Conciliorum, non p●est parere fidem, nisi humanam, cui potest subesse falsum. Bellarm. De ●ff. Sac. Lib. 2. Cap. 5. Unless (saith he) it were for the authority of the present Church of Rome (he means the Trent Council) the whole Christian faith might be called in question; so might all the acts and decrees of former Counsels: his reason was, because we cannot know these antiquities but only by tradition and historical relation, which are not able to produce divine, firm, infallible faith. 3 Thus whilst this great Clerk would dig a pit for the blind (for he could not hope (I think this block should stumble any that hath eyes in his head) he is fallen into the midst of it himself: by seeking to undermine us, he hath smothered himself and buried the cause he was to maintain. For if without the Trent Counsels testification we cannot by divine faith believe the Scriptures, or former Counsels, to be of divine authority; How can such as were borne within these thirty years, believe that Council itself, which ended above forty years ago? Few this day living were auditors of the Cardinals and Bishops decisions there assembled; not hearing them, their faith must needs be grounded upon hear says. Again, if it be true, the Scriptures cannot be known to be divine, but by the authority of the present visible Church: if this Church do not viva voce confirm all Christians in this fundamental truth, their faith can not be divine, but human. What the Pope or his Cardinals think of these points, is more than any living knows unless they hear them speak, and then it may be a great question whether they speak as they think. Pope Alexander the sixts decisions should have been negative, like the fools boult in the Psalm, There is no God, No Christ, No Gospel, for so his meaning might have been interpreted, as they say dreams are, by contraries, seeing he never spoke as he thought. Lastly, if the Trent Council were so necessary for the confirmation of Scriptures and other Orthodoxal writings, how detestable was your Clergies backwardness to afford the Christian World this spiritual comfort? For, whether fear it were the Pope's authority should be kerbed, or mere sloth and neglect of matters divine that did detain them; their shifts to put the Emperor off, the Reader may sufficiently conjecture from * Quod tam longum fuerit mearum literarum ●nteruallum & de quaestione corrigendi anni silentium, mallem equidem aliqua mea desidia vel oblivione commissum fuisset, & in eo culpam agnoscere solicitèque deprecari, quam ex vestra, hoc est, sacerdotum Romanorum (ut liberè loquar) negligentia, veram causam afferre, quos nimirum ●rigere & nihil minus quam de cogendo concilio cogitare video, cuius, ut spes me prius acuebat, & incitabat, sic desperatio iampridem hebetat atque retardat: quos enim maximè in publicam Ecclesiae salutem excubare, atque eius dignitatis ●ugendae nullam occasionem praetermittere oportebat, abijs Concilij rei salutaris, & si unquam ali●s, nunc maximè necessariae, mentionem fieri non alio tempore video, quam cum bellum aut geritur inter Principes Christianos, aut impendet. Sepul. Lib. 2. Epist 27. In his pijs deliberationibus, illud pervetustum, & iustissimum decretum inprimis usurpari renovarique solet, ne quae haeresis in aliquo rite coacto Concilio priorum sententijs damnata in dubium ac disputationem revocetur. Cuius sacrosancti decreti ea vis est, ut hoc uno cuncta dogmata Lutheranorum corruant. Quid enim novi excogitarunt ingeniosi artifices? quid vero afferunt quod non hauserint ex veterum haereticorum damnata sententia? Haec cum ita sint, religionis morumque summam in huiusmodi controversia paucorum doctorum hominum disputationi, & quasi certamini aequatis utrinque classibus, & quidem loco nostrorum iniquiore Pontificis Maximi voluntate permitti, nun simile est, ac si quos capitalium, & manifestorum scelerum reos, quos liceat iustissimis legibus gravissime, & cum summae auctoritate damnare, summus Magistratus sic suam causam agentes audiat, ut crimina plaene confessi, in leges receptas sacro sanctas que, argute disputent, & cum justitiae, & innocentia virtutes omnes in discrimen vocent? easdemque devetere sua paternaque possessione judicibus quoque damnatis, pellere nitantur? Sepulveda L. 2. Epist. 28. Sepulueda at that time Chronicler to the Emperor in his Epistle to Cardinal Contarene one of the Pope's Legates in that Council; That my intermission of writing, and silence in that question concerning the correction of the year, hath been so long; I wish the fault had laid in my sloth or forgetfulness, that I might have been hence occasioned to acknowledge and deprecate the blame, rather than (as now I freely must) impute the true cause to the negligence of you Roman Priests, whom I perceive to wax cold and to think of nothing less than of calling the Council: with hope whereof as heretofore I was excited, so now despair hath made me dull. For I see well that such as are most bound to have a vigilant care of the Churches public welfare, and not to foreslow any opportunity of increasing her dignity; never so much as mention the Council, (at this time as necessary, as always useful) but when Christians either are already, or are likely to be at variance. In one word, never but them, when there is sure hope it may be hindered by their discord. For when peace gets it turn, and all is quiet, not a word of the Council. So as what they aim at by these unseasonable edicts, is so manifest, as will not suffer the slowest capacity to live in doubt or suspicion: 4 This great Learned Antiquaries Learned advice, in another Epistle sent to the same Cardinal, then employed by the Pope in the Council, was, not to suffer matters decreed in any former Council lawfully assembled together, to be disputed or called in question. Sufferance hereof was in his judgement no less prejudicial to the State Ecclesiastic, then unto the temporal it would be, to permit malefactors traverse the equity of public laws established and known, after sufficient proof or confession made of Capital offences committed against them. The marginal quotations of the Trent Council, compared with this grave admonition, which had antiquitie-customes Canonical, as the Author urgeth, to give it countenance, may serve as a perfect index for our instruction, with what prejudice the Bishops there assembled came to determine, by whose manuduction or set rules they drew their supposed inerrable lines of life. Now it is impossible any determination, that takes it force from multitude of voices, should be either in itself more certain, or more forcible to persuade others, than are the motives or inducements that swayed the suffragants so to determine; and these in this case could, by Bellarmine's reason, be but historical persuasions or presumptions. For no jesuit I think, will say these Bishops had the Pope's sentence ex Cathedra, to assure them before hand what Counsels had been lawfully called, and fully confirmed; or whether all the ancient Canons they afterwards re-established were already as authentic and certain as they could be made: For so it had been a labour altogether lost, yea a matter no less profane than rebaptisation, to have confirmed them by suffrages of Bishops, after their Cathedral confirmation by the Pope. Even of his Holiness himself, whose verdict (as in this case must finally be supposed) adds divine credence unto testifications in their own nature fallible and merely human, the question proposed in the former Section remains still insoluble. For without the relation of some Historian, or Register, or especial revelation from above, no Pope can divine how many Counsels have been held, much less what was finally determined in every ancient Canon confirmed by the Bishops assembled at Trent. Special revelations, such as the Prophets had, they acknowledge none. And yet distinctly to tell what hath been done in times past, or places a far off, without relying on others relations, is an extraordinary effect of special revelation, a work of higher nature and greater difficulty, then Prophetical prediction of things to come. Are then the relations of Historians, or Registers of Ancient Counsels divine and authentic. Not without the Pope's ratification with it they are? Yes, or else a great part of Roman faith by Bellarmine's reason can be but human. 5 Hence may we safely annex a corollary, as necessary, as suretable to the main conclusion proposed, for the principal subject of this section. [As the Pope's authority is, by jesuitical Doctrine made much greater than our saviours, so may the assistance or countenance of his omnipotent spirit, make the reports of any temporising Historian, or mercenary Register, as divine, authentic and certain, as any Prophetical or Apostolical testimonies of the Messiah.] Yea, if it should please him to authorize Baronius Annals, or relations of former Counsels, their credit should be no less than the Evangelists. Yea hence it follows, (as the discreet Reader, without further repetition of what hath here been said, or new suggestion of the reasons whereon the inference is grounded will (I hope) of his own accord a Cha: 6. parag. 5. Sect. 4. hereafter collect) That determinations proceeding upon any knaves or loose companions testimonies; though more loosely examined, so examined at all, or taken for examined by the Pope, shall, by his approbation, be of force as all-sufficient, either for producing Divine belief of men's spiritual worth we never heard of, or for warranting daily performance of Religious worship to their memory, as any declaration he can make upon our saviours promises unto his Apostles. For we may no more doubt of any Religion he shall authorize, or any man's salvation canonised by him (whosoever be the Relatours of their life and death,) then of Saint Peter, though our Saviour promised he should be saved. The reason is plain. The Pope is sole judge of all divine Oracles: our Saviour (as you have heard out of Valentian) is but a witness, and so may others be, whomsoever he shall admit. SECT. FOUR Containing the third branch of Romish blasphemy or the last degree of great Antichrists exaltation, utterly overthrowing the whole foundation of Christian Religion, preposterously inverting both Law and Gospel to God's dishonour, and advancement of Satan's Kingdom. THat the authority challenged by the Romish Church is altogether prejudicial to God's word, greater than either the visible Church of Israel from Moses till Christ, or Christ himself or his Apostles, either before or after his resurrection, did either practice or lay claim to; is evident from the former treatise. It remains we demonstrate, how the acknowledgement of this most absolute, most infallible authority, doth quite alienate our faith and allegiance from God and the Trinity, unto the Pope and his triple Crown. The Proposition than we are to prove is this, Whosoever steadfastly believes the absolute authority of the Romish Church, as now it is taught, doth truly and properly believe no article of Christian faith, no God, no Trinity, no Christ, no redemption, no resurrection, no heavenly joys, no hell. CHAP. I. The Jesuits unwillingness to acknowledge the Church's proposal for the true cause of his faith: of differences and agreements about the final Resolution of faith, either amongst the Adversaries themselves, or betwixt us and them. 1 THE conclusion proposed follows out of their principles before * In the beginning of the second Section. mentioned, and afterwards to be reiterated, that they may be more thoroughly sounded. But ere we come to raze the very foundation of their painted walls, a few weak forts must be overthrown, which some have erected in hope thereby to save their Church from battery. * Valentian Tom. 3. in Aquin. dis 1. q. 1. de object. fidei puncto. 1. Vide verba integra L. 2. Sect. 4. c. 5. parag. 16. & 17 Valentian (as you heard before) seeing his Mother wouldly more open to our assaults, if they should admit this manner of speech, [I believe this or that proposition or article of faith, because the holy Church doth so instruct me;] would mitigate the harshness of it, thus; [If you ask me, why I believe a Trinity, or God to be one in three persons, I would answer, because God hath revealed this mystery.] The divine revelation than is the cause of your belief in this particular. But how do you know, how can you believe, that God hath revealed this? by an other divine revelation? No. For so we should run from revelation to revelation without end. If by revelation you do not believe it, by what means else? By the infallible proposal of the Church, as a condition, without which I could not believe it. Mark the mysticalnesse of this speech, Ob propositionem Ecclesiae infallibilem, For the Churches infallible proposal. Is not this as much as if he had said, because the Church, which is infallible, proposeth it to me? Why then doth he make it but a condition necessary or requisite to this assent? Belike he meant not so, but would have us to see the condition, not the true & principal cause of his belief. The Church's authority, by his doctrine, may in divers respects be truly said both a cause and condition; Or, to speak more distinctly; the Church's proposal is a condition without which no man can ordinarily believe propositions of faith: the infallibility of her proposal is the true and only cause of every Roman Catholics belief in all points. This denial of the church's authority to be (according to their principles) the true cause of belief, Is the sconce that must first be overthrown; but after a friendly parley of the difference betwixt us. 2 Valentian, if we well observe his process in the forecited place, proves only that, which none in reformed churches did ever deny; albeit he proffer more in his premises: which whilst he seeks to perform, he hath only proved himself a ridiculous Atheist; as partly is showed, in the former treatises, & shall more fully appear in the end of this. To ease his fellows hereafter of such unnecessary, or impertinent pains, as oft times they take, I dare avouch in the behalf of all my brethren in reformed Churches, no jesuit shall be more forward to demand, than we to grant, That God in these latter days doth not teach men the Gospel in such sort, as he did S. Paul, Without the help or ministry of man * In what sense it is true: he that hath not the Church for his mother hath not God for his father. We maintain as well as they, God is not a father to such as will not acknowledge the Church for their Mother. Notwithstanding, thus we conceive and speak of the Church indefinitely taken, not confined to any determinate place, not appropriated to any individual, or singularised persons. Now to verify an indefinite speech or proposition, the truth of any one particular sufficeth: As he that should say, Socrates by man was taught his learning, doth not mean the specifical nature, or whole Mankind; but that Socrates, as others, had one man or other at the first to instruct him. The same Dialect we use, when we say, every one that truly calls God father, receives instructions from the Church his Mother, that is, from some in the Church lawfully ordained for planting faith; unto whom such filial obedience, * Lib. 2. Sect. 1. cap. 46. & 7. seq. as else where we have spoken of, is due. The difference likewise between the Romanists and us, hath a Lib 2 sect 3. cap. 1. Parag. 6. partly been discussed before. In brief, it is thus: We hold this Ministry of the Church is a necessary condition, or mean precedent, for bringing us to the infallible truth, or true sense of God's word; yet no infallible rule whereon finally or absolutely we must rely, either for discerning divine Revelations, or their true meaning. But as those resemblances of colours, which we term Species visibiles, are not seen themselves, though necessary for the sight of real colours: so this Ministry of the Church, albeit in itself not infallible, is yet necessarily require, for our right apprehension of the divine truth, which in itself alone is most infallible; yea as infallible to us as it was * The object of the Apostles faith, and ours the same, though the manner of our apprehending it differ. to the Apostles or Prophets, after it be rightly apprehended. The difference is in the manner of apprehending or conceiving it. They conceived it immediately, without the Ministry or instruction of man; so cannot we. This difference elsewhere I have thus resembled, As trees and plants, now growing up by the ordinary husbandry of man from seeds precedent, are of the same kind and quality, with such as were immediately created by the hand of God: so is the immediate ground of ours, the Prophets and Apostles faith the same, Albeit theirs was immediately planted by the finger of God, ours propagated from their seed, sown and cherished, by the daily industry of faithful Ministers. 3 Neither in the substance of this assertion, nor manner of the explication, do we much differ, if aught, from Canus in his second book, Eorum hic errorem dissimulare non possum, qui asserunt, fidem nostram eò tanquam in ultiman credendi causam reducendam esse, ut credamus ecclesiam esse veracem, cui prius (inquiunt) assen timur per fidem acquisitam, quam per infusam. Quod si verum esset, prima ratio formalis infusae fidei non esset veritas increata, sed creata. Praeterea Apost●li & Prophetae resoluebant ultimo fidem suam in divinam & authoritatem & veritatem. Ergo nos in humanam Ecclesiae authoritatem fidem nostram non res●luimus. Eadem enim fides est, idemque proinde habet obiectum, rationemque formalem. Confirmat autem hoc, vel maximè, quod ea quae per accidens contingunt, obiecto alicuius habitus, non variant illius obiecti formalem rationem: sed articulos credendos proponi per hos, aut illos homines, per accidens omnino contingit. Cum erga Prophetae & Apostoli assentirentur articulis fidei, quia Deus revelavit: eandem quoque nos credendi rationem habebimus; Nisi fortè fides nostra non est virtus Theologica, cuius videlicet prima & formalis ratio, si his credimus, non divina, sed humana verita● est. Canus. Lib. 2. de loc. Theol. where he taxeth Scotus, Durand, and others for affirming the last resolution of our faith was to be made into the veracity or infallibility of the Church. The Apostles and Prophets (sayeth he) resolved their faith into truth and authority divine: Therefore we must not resolve our faith into the human authority of the Church: For the faith is the same, and must have the same formal reason. For better confirmation of which assertion he adds this reason; Things incident to the object of any habit by accident, do not alter the formal reason of the object. Now that the Articles of faith should be proposed by these, or these men, is merely accidental: wherefore seeing the Apostles and Prophets did assent unto the Articles of faith, because God revealed them, the reason of our assent must be the same. Lastly, he concludes, that the Church's authority, miracles, or the like, are only such precedent conditions, or means for begetting faith, as sensitive knowledge, exhortations, or advise of Masters, are for bringing us to certain knowledge in demonstrative faculties. Had either this great Divine spoken consequently to this doctrine in his 5. Book, or would the Jesuits avouch no more than here he doth; we should be glad to give them the right hand of fellowship in this point. But they go all a wrong way unto the truth, or would to God any way to the truth, or not directly to overthrow it. Catharinus, though in a manner ours, in that question about the certainty of salvation, sayeth more, perhaps, than they meant, whom Canus late taxed; Avouching (as * At (inquit Catharinus) soli fidei Catholicae convenit, ut ei fallum subesse nequeat, quoniam est de obiecto probato ab Ecclesia. Fidei autem divinae particulari falsam subesse potest, quoniam est de obiecto non probato ab Ecclesia. Respondeo novam, atque inauditam hanc esse doctrinam, ut fidei divinae poss●● subesse falsum, antequam eius obiectum probatum fuerit ab Ecclesia. Probatio enim Ecclesiae facit ut omnibus innotescat, obiect●m illud esse revelatum à Deo, & propter hoc certum, & indubitatum; non autem tribuit firmitatem verbo Dei aliquid revelantis. Itaque implicat contradictionem, ut aliquid sit revelatum à Deo, & possit ei subesse falsum, sive illud ab Ecclesia probatum sit sive non sit. Alioqui quod CHRISTVS Paralitico & Magdalenae dicebat, Remittuntur tibi peccata tua, poterat esse falsum, quia nondum fuerat ab Ecclesia approbatum; quis ita desipiat ut verba CHRISTI ab Ecclesiae approbatione pendere arbitretur: Et si quis infantem baptizet, cum intentione vere baptizandi, nun hereticus censebitur, si dabi●et an 〈◊〉 ille su verè iustisi catus? Et tamen non est hoc obie●●um ab Ecclesia approbatum, etc. Bell. lib. 3. de iustific. cap. 3. Bellarmine cities his opinion) that divine faith could not be certain and infallible, unless it were of an object approved by the Church. Whence would follow, what Bellarmine there infers, that the Apostles and Prophets should not have been certain of their Revelations, immediately sent from God, until the Church had approved them; which is a doctrine well deserving a sharper censure than Bellarmine bestows on Catharinus. Albeit, to speak the truth, Bellarmine was no fit man to censure, though the other most worthy to be severely censured. Catharinus might have replied, that the Prophets and Apostles, at least our Saviour, in whom Bellarmine instanceth, were the true Church, as well as they make the Pope. Nor can * Vide ●. seq. Parag. 3. Valentia's with other late Jesuits opinions, by any pretence or show, hardly Bellarmine's own, be cleared from the same inconveniences he objects to Catharinus, as will appear upon better examination to be made hereafter. CHAP. II. That the Church's proposal is the true, immediate, and prime cause of all absolute belief any Romanist can have, concerning any determinate divine Revelation. 1 WHereas Valentian and (as he says) Caietan, deny the Churches infallible proposal to be the cause why we believe divine Revelations: This speech of his is equivocal, and in the equivocation of it (I think) Valentian sought to hide the truth. The ambiguity or fallacy, is the same which was * Sect. 2. cap. 1. disclosed in Bellarmine's reply unto us objecting, that Pontificians make the Church's authority greater than Scriptures. In this place, as in that, the word of God, or divine revelations, may be taken, either indefinitely, for whatsoever God shall he supposed to speak, or, for those particular Scriptures or Revelations which we suppose he hath already revealed and spoken. Or, Valentian may speak of the object of our belief, not of belief itself. If we take his meaning in the former sense; what he saith is most true. For the Church's infallibility is no cause why we believe that to be true which we suppose God hath revealed: nor did we ever charge them with this assertion. This is an Axiom of nature presupposed in all Religions; yet of which none ever knew to make so great secular use as the Romish Church doth. But if we speak of that Canon of Scripture which we have, or any things contained in it; (all which we and our adversaries jointly suppose to have come from God) the only cause why we do or can rightly believe them, is, by jesuitical doctrine, the Church's infallibility that commends them unto us. 2 If that Church which Valentian holds so infallible should have said unto him totidem verbis: you must believe the books of Maccabes are canonical, even for this reason, that your holy Catholic Mother tells you so: he durst not but have believed as well the reason as the matter proposed; [To wit, That these Books were Canonical, because the Church had enjoined him so to think:] albeit his private conscience, left to God's grace & itself, would rather have held the Negative. For if we believe, as the Papists generally instruct us, that we ourselves, all private spirits, may err in every persuasion of faith, but the Church which only is assisted by a public spirit, cannot possibly teach amiss in any: We must upon terms as peremptory, and in equal degree, believe every particular point of faith, because the Church so teacheth us, not because we certainly apprehend the truth of it in itself. For we may err, but this public spirit cannot. And consequently we must infallibly believe these propositions * Vide Chap. 4. Paragr. 2. [Christ is the Redeemer of the world, not Mahomet, * Vide Chap. 4. Paragr. 2. There is a Trinity of persons in the divine nature] for this reason only that the Church commends them unto us for divine revelations: seeing by their arguments brought to disprove the sufficiency of Scriptures, or certainty of private spirits, no other means possible is left us. Nay, were they true, we should be only certain, that without the Church's proposal, we still must be most uncertain in these and all other points; because the sons are perpetually obnoxious to error, from which the mother is everlastingly privileged. The same propositions and conclusions we might conditionally believe to be absolutely authentic, upon supposal they were God's word: but that they are his word, or revelations truly divine, we cannot firmly believe, but only by firm adherence to the Churches infallible authority, as was in the second * Cap. 8. Parag. 4 etc. 2. Parag. 10 Section deduced out of the adversaries principles. Hence it follows that every particular proposition of faith, hath such a proper causal dependence upon the Church's proposal, as the conclusion hath upon the premises, or any particular upon it universal. Thus much * The place is quoted in the second Annotation, Parag. 5. Sacroboseus grants. 3 Suppose God should speak unto us face to face, what reason had we absolutely and infallibly to believe him, but because we know his words to be infallible? his infallibility then should be the proper cause of our belief. For the same reason, seeing he doth not speak unto us face to face, as he did to Moses; but as our adversaries say, reveals his will obscurely, so as the Revealer is not manifested unto us: but his meaning is by the visible Church, ( * Vide Annot. cap. 4. Parag. 5. which is to us in stead of Prophets, Apostles, and Christ himself, and all the several manners God used to speak unto the world, before he spoke to it by his only son) this Panthea's infallibility must be the true and proper cause of our belief: And * Ex quo intelligitur eos qui in Scriptura reprehenduntur, quod privatis revelationibus non crediderint, ut Sara Genes 18. Zachaerias' Lucae 1. non propter infidelitatem propriè, ut est vitium contra fidem Catholicam, reprehendi, sed propter imprudentiam & duritiem ●ordis. Pertinet enim ad prudentiam infusam, & ad donum Consilij, eiusmodi revelationibus privatis assensum praebere vel negare, consideratis circumstantijs, quae docent eas esse à Deo vel non: Et illae personae commemoratae, ex prudentia & dono consilij credere illis debuissent. Valent. Disp. 1. Quaest. 1. De obiecto fidei. Punct. 1. The ground of this Position is, because, Sola Divina Revelatio ab Ecclesia proposita est obiectum fide. Valentian himself thinks that Sara and others of the old world, to whom God spoke in private, either by the mouth of Angels, his son, or holy spirit, or by what means soever; did not sin against the doctrine of faith, or through unbelief, when they did not believe God's promises. They did herein unadvisedly, not unbelievingly. Why not unbelievingly? because the visible Church did not propose these promises unto them. 4 If not to believe the visible Church's proposals, be that which makes distrust or diffidence to God's promises, infidelity: then to believe them, is the true cause of believing Gods promises: or if Sara and others did (as Valentian saith) unadvisedly or imprudently, in not assenting to divine truths proposed by Angels: surely they had done only prudently and advisedly in assenting to them; their assent had not been truly and properly belief: So that by this assertion, the Church's proposal hath the very remonstrative root & character of the immediate and prime cause, whereby we believe and know matters of faith. For whatsoever else can concur without this, our assent to divine truths proposed is not true Catholic belief; but firmly believing this infallibility, we cannot err in any other point of faith. 5 This truth * Vide lib; 2. Sec. 4. cap. 5. Parag. 19 Ratio credendi est causa credendi Valentian elsewhere could not dissemble, howsoever in his professed resolution of faith he sought to cover it by change of apparel; Investing the Church's proposal only with the title of a condition requisite, & yet withal (so dissonant is falsity to itself) making it the reason of believing divine Revelations. If a reason it be why we should believe them, needs must it sway any reasonable mind to embrace their truth. And whatsoever inclines our minds to the embracement of any truth, is the proper efficient cause of belief or assent unto the same: Yea efficiency or causality itself doth formally consist in this inclination of the mind. Nor is it possible this proposal of the Church should move our minds to embrace divine Revelations by any other means then by belieeving it: And belief itself being an inclination or motion of the mind, our minds must first be moved by the Church's proposal, ere it can move them at all to assent unto other divine truths. Again, * Valent. Tom. 3, in Aquin. Disp. 1 Quaest. 1. De obtest. fidei, Punct. 1. His words are quoted. lib. 2. sect. 4. cap. 5, Parag. 16. Valentian grants that the orthodoxal or catechistical answer to this interrogation; [Why do you believe the doctrine of the Trinity to be a divine revelation?] is [because the Church proposeth it to me for such.] He that admits this answer for sound and Catholic, and yet denies the Church's proposal to be the true and proper cause of his belief in the former point, hath smothered, doubtless, the light of nature, by admitting too much artificial subtlety into his brains. For if a man should ask, why do you believe there is a fire in yonder house? and answer were made, Because I see the smoke go out of the Chimney: should the party thus answering in good earnest, peremptorily deny, the sight of the smoke to be the cause of his belief there was a fire; he deserved very well to have either his tongue scorched with the one, or his eyes put out with the other. Albeit if we speak of the things themselves, not of his belief concerning them, the fire was the true cause of the smoke, not the smoke of the fire. But whatsoever it be, [Cause, Condition, Circumstance, or Effect,] that truly satisficeth this demand, [Why do you believe this or that] it is a true and proper cause of our belief, though not of the thing believed. If then we admit the Church's proposal to be but a condition annexed to divine revelations: yet if it be an infallible [medium] or mean; or as our adversaries all agree the only mean infallible, whereby we can rightly believe this or that to be a divine revelation; it is the true and only infallible cause of our belief. That speech of Valentian, which to any ordinary man's capacity includes as much as we now say, was * Lib. 2, Sect. 2. Cap. 5. §. 8. before alleged. [That Scripture which is commended and expounded unto us by the Church, is, eo ipso, even for this reason, most authentic and clear] He could not, more emphatically, have expressed the Church's proposal to be the true and prime cause, why particular or determinate divine revelations become so credible unto us. His second, Sacroboscus, hath many speeches (to be inserted hereafter) to the same effect. Voluit igitur de fide supernaturali indistin●le l●qui prout differt à fide naturali & acquisita: & vim generandi fidem habere, quicquid ad actum sive ex part potentiae, sive ex part obiecti est necessarium. Verum tunc, ut Scripturae vis haec concedi potest; sic nequaquam debet excludi Ecclesia, quae respectu nostri est causa proponens, ut est supra explicatum. And a little after; authoritas Ecclesiae proponentis, & loquentis Dei in Scriptura respectu actus fidei, se habent ut lumen, & colour, respectu visionis albi; vel quemadmodum potentia, & dispositiones in materia se habent, respectu actus informationis formae substantialis: & quod consequens est, quae habetur fides à Scriptura Dei mentem continente, eadem habetur ab Ecclesia & qui libri sint verbum Dei, & quis sit verus scripturae sensus indicante. Sacroboscus Det. Decr. Trid. & Sentent. Bellarm. Cap. 6 Parag. 1. Pag. 105. Amongst others, where Doctor Whittaker objects, that the principal cause of faith, is by Papists ascribed unto the Church; he denies it only thus far [What we believe for the Church's proposal, we jointly believe for God speaking either in his written word, or by tradition:] Yet, if a man should have asked him why he did, or how possibly he could, infallibly believe that God did speak all the words either contained in the Bible, or in their traditions: he must have given either a woman's answer, [because God sp●ke them] or this, [because our holy mother the Church doth say so.] For elsewhere he plainly a Vide Annot. Cap. 5. Parag. 4. Viget (Whittakerus) qui sensum aliquem amplectitur propter nullam aliam causam, risi quia sit Ecclesia statuit, non propter Propheticam & Apostolicam Scriptur●m in, tribuit ●ugustiorem authoritatem Ecclesiae quam Scripturae: sed cum in fide haec du● sint, quid & propter quid, Pap●stis, propter quid, est sola authoritas Ecclesiae. Veruns espondetur, id esse falsum: quae enim credimus propter Ecclesiam proponentem, simul etiam credimus propter Deum loquentem, verbo suo scripto vel tradito▪ ut est aliàs explicatum. Sacrobos. pag. 125. avows, the Books of Canonical Scripture need not be believed without the Church's proposal, whose infallible authority was sufficiently known before one title of the New Testament was written, and were to be acknowledged, though it had never been; he plainly confesseth withal, that he could not believe the Scriptures taught some principal Articles of faith most firmly believed by him unless the church's authority did thereto move him, against the light of natural reason. Now if for the church's proposal, he believe that, which otherwise to believe he had no reason at all, but rather strong inducements to the contrary, as steadfastly as any other truth: the Church's infallibility must be the true and only cause, both why he believes the mystery proposed, and distrusts the natural dictates of his conscience to the contrary. In fine, he doth not believe there is a Trinity, (for in that Article is his instance) because God hath said it, but he believes that God hath said it, because his infallible Mother the Church doth teach it. This is the misery of miseries, that these Apostates should so bewitch the World, as to make it think they believe the Church, because God speaks by it, when it is evident they do not believe God, but for the Church's testimony: well content to pretend his authority, that her own may seem more sovereign. Thus make they their superstitious, groundless magical faith, but as a wrench, to wrest that principle of nature, [Whatsoever God saith is true,] to countenance any villainy they can imagine, as will better appear hereafter. But first the Reader must be content to be informed, that by some of their * At inquies, quando Papistae dicunt se certo statuere, id quod Ecclesia definit esse verum: propositiones ipsas statuunt esse vera●, vel quia Ecclesia id illis dicit, vel non quia Ecclesia dicit, sed quia Scriptura dicit. Si primum, nullum discrimen inter Deum & Ecclesiam statuetur, nam hoc proprium solius Dei est, ut id verum esse credamus quod ille dicit, nullam aliam quaerendo rationem. Sin secundum: summa authoritas desiniendi, non Ecclesiae, sed scripturae defertur. Verum ne in aere disputemus, ut saepe solet adversarius, Catholici omnes firma fide credunt Ecclesiam in nulla fidei quaestione determinanda errare posse: ubi igitur Ecclesia desinit aliquid esse de fide, id illi hoc Theologico discursu concludunt esse certum. Ecclesia non potest aliquid non verum profidei dogmate credendum proponere. At hoc Ecclesia pro d●gmate fidei proponit credendum: est hoc ergo certum. In qua ratiocinatione medius terminus est determinatio Ecclesiae, atque ita, quo sensu medius terminus dicitur causa cognoscendi conclusionem, dici potest definitio Ecclesiae causa, propter quam haec conclusio, ut est terminus praedicti discursus, cert● persuadeatur. Ab sit vero ut quicquid per modum medij est causa certae cognitionis, eo ipso aequetur Deo. Secus enim angulus externus foret Deo aequalis, nam per hunc cognosco omne triangulum habere tres angulos aequales duobus rectis. Atque haec solutio perspicua est, solum advertat, qui minus exercitatos habet sensus, dictam conclusionem, ut pendet ex discursu facto. pertinere ad habitum Theologiae (qui quidem certus est; quemadmodum est habitus fidei & scientiae: est tamen ab utroque distinctus; ut verior tenet Theologorum sententia) nam aliae ratione pertinere potest ad habitum fidei, quatenus assensu simplici sine discursu creditur, & tunc Ecclesiae definitio non se habet per modum medij termini, sed per modum sufficientis propositionis; & authoritas Dei loquentis verbo suo scripto vel tradito in loco ex quo petitur desinitio, est formalis ratio credendi: ita ut istae duae rationes subordinatae, sunt causae coniunctae actus fidei, qui exercetur circa propositionem definitam, sicque, quemadmodum ait Aristoteles, non Policletus nec statuarius, sed Policletus statuarius est causa statuae, dicere possumus: non definitio Ecclesiae per se & solitariè, nec solus locus ex quo petita est definitio Ecclesiae, est causa assensus fidei. Sed definitio & locus, illa ut causa si●e qua non, authoritas Dei loquentis in hoc, ut formalis ratio obiecti. Sacrobos. def. Decr. Trid. & Sent. Bellarum, c. 6. §. 1. p. 115. tenants the same Divine revelations may be assented unto by the Habit either of Theology or of faith; both which are most certain, but herein different; That the former is discursive and resembles science properly so called; the latter not so, but rather like unto that habit or faculty by which we perceive the truth of general Maxims, or unto our bodily sight, which sees divers visibles all immediately, not one after, or by another. Whilst some of them dispute against the certainty of private spirits, their aguments suppose Divine revelations must be believed by the Habit of Theology, which is as a sword to offend us. Whiles we assault them, and urge the unstability of their resolutions, they fly unto the non discursive Habit of faith infused, as their best buckler to ward such blows as the Habit of theology cannot bear off. 6 Not here to dispute either how truly or pertinently they deny faith infused to be a discursive habit; the Logical Reader need not (I hope) my admonition to observe, that faith or belief whether habitual or actual, unless discursive, cannot possibly be resolved into any pre-existent Maxim or principle. From which grant, this emolument will arise unto our cause; that the Church's authority cannot be proved by any divine revelation, or portion of Scripture; seeing it is an Article of faith, and must be believed eodem intuitu with that Scripture or part of God's word, whether written or unwritten, that teacheth it; as light and colours are perceived by one and the same intuition in the same instant. And by this assertion we could not so properly say, we believe the divine revelation because we believe the church (nor do we see colours because we see the light;) but we may truly say, that the objects of our faith, (divine revelations) are therefore actually credible, or worthy of belief, because the infallible Church doth illustrate or propose them; as the light doth make colours though invisible by night, visible by day. This similitude of the light and colours is not mine, but Sacroboscus; whom in the point in hand I most mention, because Doctor Whittakers Objections against their Church's Doctrine, as it hath been delivered by Bellarmine and other late controversers, hath enforced him clearly to unfold, what Bellarmine, Stapelton, and Valentian left unexpressed, but is implicitly included in all their writings. But ere we come to examine the full inconveniences of their opinions, I must request the Reader to observe, that as oft as they mention resolution of faith, they mean the discursive habit of theology. For all resolution of belief or knowledge, essentially includes discourse. And c See the annotations. Sect. 2. c. 2. Par. 1. Bellarmine directly makes, * His words are quoted in the Annotat. §. 6. of this chapter. Sacroboscus expressly avoucheth, the Church's authority the medius terminus, or true cause, whence determinate conclusions of faith are gathered. From which and other equivalent assertions, acknowledged by all the Romanists this day living, it will appear that Valentian was either very ignorant himself, or presumed he had to deal with very ignorant adversaries, when he denied, that the last resolution of Catholic faith was into the Church's authority, which comes next in place to be examined. CHAP. III. Discovering either the gross ignorance, or notorious craft of the jesuit in denying his faith is finally resolved into the Church's veracity or infallibility: that possibly it cannot be resolved into any branch of the first truth. 1 IT were a foolish question, as Caietan (sayeth * Rectè illud quidem à Caietano dictum est, Fatuam esse quaestionem, si quis alterum interroget, cur credat primae veritati revelanti. Name in primam veritatem ultimò f●t resolutio assensus Fidei, atque aedeo propter illam ultimò fides assentatur. Itaque non est quaerend● ulterius ratio, quare fides assentiatur. Sed solum potest quaeri ulterius, unde habeat illa prima veritas, ut sit prima veritas ● Et tunc respondendum est, id habere secundum nostrum intelligendi modum ex divinitate, cuius attributum et quasi passio est, & quae neque falli neque sallere potest. Valent. tom. 3. in Aquinat. Disp 1 quaest: 1. de object. fidei. punct. 1. Valentian) hath well observed, if one should ask another why he believes the first truth revealing. For the assent of faith is finally resolved into the first truth. It may be Caietan was better minded towards Truth itself first or secondary, than this jesuit was, which used his authority to colour his former rotten position, [That the Church's proposal by their doctrine is not the cause of faith:] but our former distinction between belief itself & it object (often confounded,) or between God's word indefinitely, and determinately taken, if well observed, will evince this last reason to be as foolish as the former assertion was false. No man, sayeth he, can give any reason, besides the infallibility of the Revealer, why he believes a divine Revelation. It is true, no man can give, nor would any ask, why we believe that which we are fully persuaded as a divine Revelation. But yet a reason by their positions must be given why we believe either this or that truth, any particular or determinat portion of Scripture, to be a divine revelation. Wherefore seeing Christian faith is always of definite and particular propositions or conclusions, and, as Bellarmine sayeth, (and all the Papists must say) these cannot be known but by the Church: As her infallible proposal is the true and proper cause why we believe them to be infallibly true, because the only cause whereby we can believe them to be divine revelations: so must it be the essential principle into which our assent or belief of any particular or determinate proposition must finally be resolved. Every conclusion of faith (as is before observed out of * Sect. 2. cap. 2. §. 1. Bellarmine) must be gathered in this or like Syllogism [Whatsoever God or the first Truth sayeth, is most true: But God said all those words, which Moses the Prophets and the Evangelists wrote: Therefore all these are most true,] The Mayor in this Syllogism, is an Axiom of Nature, acknowledged by Turks and Infidels: nor can Christian faith be resolved into it, as into a Principle proper to itself. The Minor, say c Bellar. loco citato. our adversaries, must be ascertained unto us by the Church's authority, and so ascertained, becomes the first and main principle of faith, as Christian; * Vide Arnob. & Sacrobosco, c. 4. Parag. 5. whence all other particular or determinate conclusions are thus gathered. [Whatsoever the Church proposeth to us for a divine Revelation, is most certainly such: * Vide Sect. 1. Parag. 7. But the Church proposeth the books of Moses and the Prophets, finally, the whole volumes of the old and new Testament, with all their parts, as they are extant in the vulgar Roman Edition, for divine revelations; Therefore we must infallibly believe they are such.] So likewise must we believe, that to be the true and proper meaning of every sentence in them contained, which the Church, to whom it belongs to judge of their sense, shall tender unto us. 2 For better manifestation of the Truth, Resolution twofold: either of objects believed, or of our belief, or persuasions concerning them. we now teach: the young Reader must here be advised of a twofold resolution; One of the things or matters believed, or known, into their first parts or Elements; Another of our belief, or persuasions concerning them, into their first causes or motives. In the one, the most general or remotest cause; In the other, the most immediate or next cause always terminates the resolution. The one imitates, the other inverts, the order of composition; so as what is first in the one, is last in the other, because that which is first intended, or resolved upon by him, that casteth the plot, is best effected by the executioner or manual composer. In the former sense, we say mixed bodies are lastly resolved into their first Elements; houses into stones, timber and other ingredients; particular truths into general maxims: conclusions into their immediate praemises; all absurdities into some breach of the rule of contradiction. Consonantly to this interpretation of final resolution; the first verity, or divine infallibility, is that into which all faith is lastly resolved. For (as we said before) this is the first step in the progress of true belief, the lowest foundation whereon any Religion, Christian, jewish, Mahometan, or Ethnic can be built. And it is an undoubted Axiom, quod primum est in generatione, est ultimum in resolution; when we resolve any thing into the parts whereof it is compounded, we end, in the undoing or unfolding it, where nature begun in the composition or making of it. But he that would attempt to compose it again, or frame the like aright, would terminate all his thoughts or purposes by the end or use, which is farthest from actual accomplishment. Thus the Architect frames stones and timber, and lays the first foundation according to the platform he carries in his head; & that he casts proportionably to the most commodious or pleasant habitation: which, though last effected, determines all cogitations or resolutions precedent. Hence, if we take this ultima resolutio, as we always take these terms, when we resolve our own persuasions, that is, [for a resolution of all doubts or demands, concerning the subject whereof we treat] A Roman Catholics faith must, according to his Principles, finally be resolved into the Church's infallibility. For this is the immediate ground, or first cause of any particular or determinate point of Christian faith; and the immediate cause is always that, into which our persuasions concerning the effect is finally resolved, seeing it only can fully satisfy all demands, doubts or questions concerning it. As for example, if you ask why men, or other terrestrial Creatures, breath, when fishes do not: to say they have lungs, and fishes none, doth not fully satisfy all demands or doubts concerning this Subject. For it may justly further be demanded, what necessity there was the one should have lungs rather than the other. If here it be answered, that men and other perfect terrestial creatures, are so full of fervent blood, that without a cooler their own hear would quickly choke them, and in this regard, the God of nature who did not make them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or give them life in vain to be presently extinct, did with it give them lungs, by whose respiration their natural temper should be continued: This answer doth fully satisfy all demands concerning the former effect. For no man of sense would further question, why life should be preserved, whose preservation immediately depends upon respiration, or exercise of the lungs, & is therefore the immediate cause of both, and that whereunto all our persuasions, concerning the former subject, are lastly resolved. Or, if it should be demanded, why only man of all other creatures hath power to laugh; to say, he were endued with reason, doth not resolve us; for a Philosophical wit would further question, [Why should reasonable substances have this foolish faculty rather than others?] A good * Laurentin. de Risu. Philosopher would persuade us the spirits which serve for instruments to the rational part, are more nimble & subtle, and so more apt to produce this motion, than the spirits of any other creatures are. But this I must profess resolves not me: for how nimble or subtle soever they be, unless man had other corporeal Organs for this motion, the spirits alone could not produce it: and all organical parts are framed for the operation or exercise of the faculty, as their proper end. Whence, he that would finally resolve the former problem, must assign the true final cause why reasonable substances, more than others, should stand in need of this motion. Now seeing unto reason only it is proper to forecast danger, and procure sorrow and contristation of heart by preconceit of what yet is not, but perhaps may be: it was requisite that our mortality through reason obnoxious to this inconvenience, should be able to correct this contristant motion by the contrary, and have a faculty to conceive such pleasant objects as might dilatate the heart and spirits; that as man hurts his body by conceited sorrow, whereto no other Creature is subject, so he might heal it again by a kind of pleasance, whereof he alone is capable. 3 Answerable to this latter acception of final resolution, That according to the Jesuits own Principles, the Church's infallibility doth so terminate all doubts or demands in matters of faith, as the immediate or prime cause, doth all doubts or questions concerning any demonstrable effect. if you demand a Roman Catholic [why he believes there is a Trinity, there shall be a resurrection, or life everlasting;] his answer would be, because God, or the first verity hath said so: but this doth not fully satisfy; for we might further question him, as he doth us, why do you believe that God did say so? Here it sufficeth not to say, This truth is expressly taught in Canonical Scriptures; for the doubt whereby he hopes to stagger us most, is this, [Why do you believe, or how can you know, those Books which ye call Scriptures were from God.] The last and final answer (according to the jesuitical Catechisms) wherein (as you heard before out of * Sect. 2. cap. 2. §. 1. Bellarmine) they think they have great advantage of us, would be this: The holy Church our Mother doth so instruct▪ giving us this express admonition withal, * Ecclesiastes, 12. ver. 11. Hoc loco Salomon docet, inquit Bellarminus, non esse ulterius inquirendum, sed quiescendum penitus, quando sententia data est à summo Pastore, adiuncto praesertim consilio sapientum. Quod si haec dicuntur de Sacerdote veteris Testamenti, quanto m●gis dici possunt de Sacerdote Testamenti novi, qui long maiores promissiones à Deo accepit. Bellar, de verb. Dei, lib. 3. c. 4. his amplius fili mine requiras. Here (upon God their Father, and the infallible Church their mother's blessing,) their souls are bound to rest without further doubt or demand. Whence unless they use so me mental reservation, or seek to shroud themselves in the former equivocation hitherto unfolded, they must of necessity account themselves accursed, if they deny the last or final resolution of their belief to be into the Church's infallibility or veracity. Again, what reasonable man would demand further resolution of any doubts incident to his faculty, be it real or verbal, speculative or practic, then into the prime and immediate rules? He should surely be lashed in a Grammar school, that either for quantity of syllables, right accent, construction of words, or the like, would seek a further reason, than a known general rule which admitteth no exception. So should he with disgrace be turned over the Bar amongst the Lawyers, that would demur or seek a devolution of an evident ruled case, which by his own confession, could never alter. Much more gross would his absurdity appear, that in the Mathematics or other demonstrative science, should attempt to resolve a problem or conclusion, further than into an unquestionable theorem or definition. Finally, might we have a centum●irall Court of all professions under the sun, our adversaries would be condemned with joint consent, either of intolerable folly, or impudence, if they should, with Valentian, deny the last resolution of their faith to be into the Church's infallibility; seeing they make it such a Catholic inerrable perpetual rule of Christian faith, as admits no exception, no devolution from it, no appeal. It is to them more than he said of Logic, Ars artium, & scientia scientiarum, a faculty of faculties, a Rule of Rules, able, rightly to resolve all doubts concerning the very Canon of Scriptures, or God's word, written or unwritten, or the true sense or meaning of both; briefly able most authentically to determine & define all controversies in Religion of what kind soever. 4 Nor will it boot them aught to say, that God's word in the Church's mouth is the Rule whereinto faith is finally resolved, seeing the Church defines nothing but by God's word either written or unwritten. For this is more than the party which believes it can know, nor hath he any other motive to believe it, besides the Church's definition or assertion. Suppose then we should conceive so well of a temporal judge, as to presume he did never speak but according to the true meaning either of statute or customary law: yet if we could not know either the one or the other, or their right interpretation, but only by his determinations; the law were little beholden to him (unless for a flout) that should say, he were resolved jointly by the judge and it. For, seeing the Law is to him altogether uncertain, but by the judges auouchment or interpretation, his last resolution of any act of justice, must be only into the judges skill and fidelity. This inference * At dices, quando Ecclesia definite, ex verbo Dei scripto, vel tradito, semper definite: neque enim amplius accipit novas revelationes & assistentia spiritus sancti ibi promissa, est tantum ad ea, quae iam revelata sunt, cognoscenda: ergo à primo ad ultimum, quod terminat controversias, & quod judex est quaestionum fidei, est verbum Dei. Respondeo: quoniam nobis non constat certò, quis sit verus Scripturae sensus, nisi per vocem Ecclesiae, quae nostras audit contentiones, & respondet, Ecclesia judex est, quamuis judicet ex Dei verbo, quod illa scrutando et examinando, propter assistentiam spiritus sancti, semper rectè intelligit. Si autem quilibet nostrum haberet infallibile donum intelligendi verbum Dei, alio judice non indigeremus. Nam hoc, fidei veritates continet, sed quoniam ita non est, verbum Dei respectu nostri, non habet rationem judicis: non quasi certam & veram non contineat sententiam, sed quia de eius sensu per nos ipsi nequimus infallibiliter esse certi, sicut certi sumus de mente Eccles●ae, quae & audire & refer potest voces; unde liquet deesse aliquid scripturae comparatione nostri, quo minus noster judex esse queat, quod non deest Ecclesiae. Sacrobos. Def. Decr. Trid. & sentent. Bellarm. cap. 6. §. 1. These words immediately f●llow upon the last quotation (out of the same author) cap. 2 § 5. Sacroboscus would nor deny, he himself hath made the like, to prove that not the Scripture but the Church must be the infallible rule of faith. You will object (saith he) when the Church defines, it always defines according to the word of God, either written or unwritten. New revelations it receives none: the promised assistance of the spirit helps it only to know what is already revealed: Therefore from the first to the last, that which determines controversies, and is the judge in all questions of faith, is the word of God. To this objection thus he answers, because we cannot be certain of the true sense of God's word, but by the voice of the Church which hears our controversies, and answers them: The Church is judge although it judge according to God's word, which upon examination and by the spirits assistance it always understands a right. And if every one of us should have the infallible gift of understanding God's word, we should not need any other judge. The Reader, I hope, will remember what was said before; that those flouting hypocrites would fain believe the Pope saith nothing but what God saith, that God may be thought to say all he says; which is the most abominable blasphemy, that ever Hell broached, worse than worshipping of Devils as shall appear hereafter. 5 It may be some Novice in Arts that hath late read some vulgar Logicians upon the demonstrations, might here frame this doubt in favour of the Romish Churches Doctrine. As the final cause may be demonstrated by the efficient, and the efficient by the final: so may the Church be infallibly proved by Scriptures, and the Scriptures again by the Church's authority, both infallibly believed each for others sake, as both the former demonstrations are true and certain, and yet mutually depending one upon the other. 6 This objection, had some late Logicians understood what they said, would carry some show of truth to countenance Valentians' former circular resolution; but they lace their Mrs. rule, uttered by him Pingui Minerva, too too straightly. For taking it as they do, we should admit * A rule in Logic by some much misconstrued. Whose misconstruction not impeched might in some sort shroud the Romanists sottishness in this Argument. of circular demonstrations, the conceit whereof can have no place but in a giddy brain. To demonstrate the final cause in any work of Nature, were to assign a Counsellor to the infinite wisdom of the God of Nature; in whose intention the end is first, and is the cause of all operation or efficiency. Who could give, or who would demand a natural cause why life should be prescribed? for this is the will of him that gave it. If question were made of the manner how the life of man and other creatures is preserved, when as their heat might seem to choke them? A man might truly answer, by respiration: and respiration is from the lungs. But it is one thing to ask how or by what means, another, for what end any effect is produced. The former is an inquiry of the efficient, within these precincts of means or motions always prime and independent; The later of the final cause absolutely, indemonstrable, becauses it implies a contradiction to give a reason why that should be, for whose sake all other things of that rank have being. Nor is the end itself (to speak properly) ever produced, though oftimes in common speech, we take the effect immediately thereto destinated (because most sensible) for the end itself, as we do the star next to the pole, because visible, for the pole or point immovable. Thus we confound respirations or actual preservation of life with the final cause why men have lungs; when as both are effects of the lungs, both means of accomplishing Natures or rather the God of natures purpose, in whose will or pleasure the final cause of any natural effect always consists. And seeing nothing in Nature can preoccupate his will, no cause can be precedent to the final. This consideration of natural effects tending as certainly to their proposed end, as the arrow flies to the mark, caused the irreligious * Aueroes. Philosopher to acknowledge the direction of an intelligent supernatural agent in their working, the accomplishment of whose will and pleasure (as I said) must be the final cause of their motions; as his will or pleasure which bestows the charges, not the Architect (unless he be the owner also) is the final cause why the house is built. Finally, every end supposeth the last intention of an intelligent agent, whereof to give a reason by the efficient which only produceth works or means thereto proportioned, would be as impertinent, as if to one demanding why the bell rings out, it should be answered, because a strong fellow pulls the rope. 7 Now that which in our adversaries Doctrine answers unto the cause indemonstrable whereinto final resolution of Nature's works or intentions of intelligent agents must be resolved, Faith cannot be resolved into any definite branch of the First Truth. is the church's authority. Nor can that, if we speak properly, be resolved into any branch of the first truth; for this reason (besides others alleged before) that all resolutions, whether of our persuasions or intentions, or of their objects (works of Art or Nature) suppose a stability or certainty in the first links of the chain which we unfold; the latter always depending on the former, not the former on the latter. As in resolutions of the latter kind lately mentioned (imitating the order of composition) actual continuation of life depends on breathing, not breathing on it: breathing on the lungs, not the lungs mutually on breathing: so in resolutions of the other kind (which invertes the order of composition) the use or necessity of lungs depends upon the use or necessity of breathing; the necessity or use of breathing upon the necessity or use of life, or upon his will or pleasure that created one of these for another. Thus again, the sensitive faculty depends upon the vital, that upon mixtion, mixtion upon the Elements, not any of these mutually upon the sensitive faculty; if we respect the order of supportance or Nature's progress in their production. Whence he that questions whether some kinds of plants have sense, or some stones or metals life, supposeth as unquestionable, that the former have life, that the second are mixed bodies. But if we respect the intent or purpose of him that sets nature a working; all the former faculties dpend on the sensitive, the sensitive not on any of them. For God would not have his creatures endued with sense, that they might live; or live, that they might have mixed bodies: but rather to have such bodies that they might live, to live that they might enjoy the benefit of sense, or the more noble faculties. 8 Can the jesuit thus assign any determinate branch of the first truth, as stable and unquestionable, before it be ratified by the Church's authority? Evident it is, by his positions, that he cannot; and as evident, that belief of the church's authority cannot depend upon any determinate branch of the first truth, much less can it distinctly be thereinto resolved. But chose, press him with what Divine precept soever, written or unwritten, though in all men's judgements (the church's authority set aside) most contradictory to their approved practices: for example, [That the second Commandment forbids worshipping Images or adoration of the consecrate host;] he strait inverts your reason thus, Rather the second commandment forbids neither, because the holy Church, which I believe to be infallible, approveth both. Lastly he is fully resolved to believe nothing for true, which the Church disproves, nothing for false or erroneous, which it allows Or, if he would answer directly to this demand, [To what end did God cause the Scriptures to be written?] He could not (consonant to his tenants) say [That we might infallibly rely upon them,] but rather [upon the Church's authority which it establisheth.] For God's word whether written or unwritten, * Vide annor. cap. 15. Sect 3. paragr. 2. is by their Doctrine, but as the testimony of some men deceased, indefinitely presumed for infallible, but whose material extent the Church must first determine, and after wards judge, without all appeal, of their true meaning. Thus are all parts of Divine truths, supposed to be revealed, more essentially subordinate to the Church's authority, then ordinary witnesses are to royal or supreme judgement. For they are supposed able to deliver what they know, in terms intelligible to other men's capacities, without the Prince or judges ratification of their sayings, or expositions of their meanings; and judgement is not ordained for producing witnesses; but production of witnesses, for establishing judgement. Thus by our adversaries Doctrine, God's word must serve to establish the Church's authority: not the Church's authority, to confirm the immediate sovereignty of it over our souls. 9 Much more probably might the jew or Turk resolve his faith unto the first truth, than the modern jesuited Papist can. For though their deductions from it be much what alike, all equally sottish: yet these admit a stability or certainty of what the first Truth hath said, no way dependent upon their authority that first proposed or commended it unto them. The Turks would storm to hear any Mufti profess he were as well to be believed as was Mahomet in his life time; that without his proposal they could not know either the old testament or the Alcoran to be from God. So would the jews if one of their Rabbins should make the like comparison betwxit himself and Moses, as the jesuit doth betwixt Christ and the Pope: who, besides that he must be as well believed as his Master, leaves the authority of both testaments uncertain to us, unless confirmed by his infallibility. But to speak properly, the pretended derivation of all three heresies from the first truth, hath a lively resemblance of false petigrees, none at all of true doctrine and resolutions. Of all the three the Romish is most ridiculous, as may appear by their several representations. As, imagine there should be three Competitors for the Roman Empire; all pleading it were to descend by inheritance, not by election; all pretending lineal succession from Charles the Great. The first, like to the jew, allegeth an authentic pedigree, making him the eldest. The second, resembling the Turk, replies, that the other indeed was of the eldest line, but long since disinherited, often conquered and enforced to resign; whence the inheritance descended to him as the next in succession. The third, like the Romanist, pleads it was bequeathed him by the emperors last will and testament, from whose death his Ancestors have been entitled to it, and produceth a pedigree to this purpose, without any other confirmation than his own authority; adding withal, that unless his competitors and others will believe his records and declarations (written or unwritten) to be most authentic, they cannot be certain whether ever there had been such an Emperor as they plead succession from, or at least how far his Dominions extended, or where they lay. This manner of plea in secular controversies, would be a mean to defeat him that made it. For albeit the Christian World did acknowledge there had been such an Emperor, and that many parts of Europe of right belonged unto his lawful heir: Yet if it were otherwise unknown what parts these were, or who this heir should be; no judge would be so mad as finally to determine of either upon such motives. Or if the Plaintiff could by such courses as the World knows oft prevail in judgement, or other gracious respects, effect his purpose: he were worse than mad that could think the final resolution of his right were into the emperors last will and testament, which by his own confession, no man knows besides himself; and not rather, into his own presumed fidelity, or the judges apparent partiality. So in this controversy whatsoever the Pope may pretend from Christ, all in the end comes to his own authority; which we may safely believe, herein to be most infallible, that it will never prove partial against itself, or define aught to his Holiness disadvantage. 10 Here again, it shall not be amiss to admonish younger Students of another gull, which the * Secundum legem Dei ordinariam, ut quis per habitum fidei Christianae alicui veritati revelatae assentiatur, praeter ipsam revelationem, necesse est huiusmodi veritatem ab Ecclesia proponi, tanquam à Dèo revelatam, & side credendam: non quia haec Ecclesiae propositio sit de ratione formali obiecti fidei, sed quiae est conditio quaedam requisita: sine qua ordinariè assensus fidei Christianae non elicitur. Valent. Tom. 3. in Aquinat. Disp. 1. Quaest. 1. de obiecto Fidei. Punct. 1. Assert. 3. jesuit would put upon us, to make their Church's doctrine seem less abominable in this point, lest you should think they did equalize the authority of the Church with divine revelations. Valentian would persuade you, it were no part of the formal object of faith. It is true indeed, that the Church's authority by their doctrine is not comprehended in the object of belieefe, whilst it only proposeth other Articles to be believed. No more is the Sun comprehended under the objects of our actual sight, whilst we behold colours, or other visibles, by the virtue of it. But yet, as it could not make colours, or other things become more visible unto us, unless itself were the first and principal visible, [that is, unless it might be seen more clearly than those things which we see by it, so we would direct our sight unto it:] so would it be impossible the Church's infallible proposal could make a Roman Catholics belief of Scriptures or their orthodoxal sense the stronger; unless it were the first and principal, credible or primary object of his belief; or that which must be most clearly, most certainly, and most stead fastly believed; so as all other Articles beside, must be believed by the belief or credibility of it. This is most evident out of Sacroboscus and Bellarmine's resolution, or explication of that point, how the Church's proposal confirms a Roman Catholics belief. To give this doctrine of their Church's infallibility, the right title, according to the truth: it is not an Article of Catholic belief, but a Catholic Axiom of Antichristian unbelief: which from the necessary consequences of their assertions, more strictly to be examined, will easily appear. CHAP. FOUR What manner of causal dependence Romish belief hath on the Church: that the Romanist truly and properly believes the Church only, not God or his word. 1 THe 2. main assertions of our adversaries, whence our intended conclusion must be proved, are these, often mentioned heretofore. First, that we cannot be infallibly persuaded of the truth of Scriptures, but by the Church's proposal. Secondly, that without the same, we cannot be infallibly persuaded of the true sense or meaning of these scriptures, which that Church and we both believe to be God's word. How we should know the Scriptures to be God's word, is a problem in Divinity, which in their judgement cannot be assoiled without admission of Traditions, or divine unwritten verities, of whose extent and meaning the Church must be infallible judge. It is necessary to salvation (saith * Quarto, necesse est nosse, extare libros aliquos verè divinos, quod certè nullo modo ex Scripturis haberi potest. Nam etiamsi scriptura dicat, libros Prophetarum, & Apostolorum esse divinos, tamen non certo id credam, nisi prius credide ro Scripturam, quae hoc dicit, esse divinam. Nam etiam in Al●orano Mahumeti passim legimus, ipsum alcoranum de coe●o à Deo missum, & tamen ei non eredimus. Ita que hoc dogma tam necessarium, quod scilicet aliqua sit Scriptura divina, non potest sufficienter haberi ex sola Scriptura. Proinde cum fides nitatur verbo Dei, nisi habemus verbum Dei non scriptum, nulla nobis erit fides. Bellar. lib. 4. de verbo Dei. Cap. 4. Bellarmine,) that we know there be some books divine, which questionless cannot by any means be known by Scriptures. For albeit the Scriptures say, that the Books of the Prophets or Apostles are divine: yet this I shall not certainly believe, unless I first believe that Scripture, which saith thus, is divine. For so we may read every where in Mahomet's Alcoran, that the Alcoran itself was sent from heaven; but we believe it not. Therefore this necessary point [that some Scripture is divine,] cannot sufficiently be gathered out of Scriptures alone. Consequently, seeing faith must rely upon God's word; unless we have God word unwritten, we can have no faith. His meaning is, we cannot know the Scriptures to be divine, but by Traditions; and what Traditions are divine, what not, we cannot know, but by the present visible Church: as was expressly taught by the same Author before. And the final resolution of our believing what God hath said, or not said, must be the Church's authority. To this collection, * Dices Catholicos quosdam reiecisse nonnullas Scripturae veras parts, quas caruisse Spiritu sancto nos inde non affirmamus: Respond, quod si illi caru●ssent propositione Ecclesiae pro al●s libris sicut pro illis, potuissent quoque de tota Scriptura sive peccato dubitare, juxta illud Augustini: Ego evangelio non crederem, nisi me Ecclesiae commoneret authoritas. Et pari modo, vos qui Ecclesiae authoritatem in praescribendo, & de fi niendo, quae sunt fidei, facilis insuff●cientem, qua ratione aliquas Scripturae partes sine scclere (ut dicilijs) repudiatis; eadem possetis & reliquas. Sacrobos. Def. Decr. Tried, & Sent. Bellar. cap. 6. §. 1. Par. 85. Vide eundem pag. 109. Sacroboseus thus far accords: Some Catholics rejected divers Canonical Books without any danger, and if they had wanted the Church's proposal for others, as well as them, they might without sin have doubted of the whole Canon. This he thinks consonant to that of Saint Austin; I would not believe the Gospel, unless the Church's authority did thereto move me. He adds, that we of reformed Churches making the visible Church's authority in defining points of faith unsufficient, might disclaim all without any greater sin or danger to our souls, than we incur by disobeying some parts of Scripture, to wit, the Apocryphal books, canonised by the Romish church. The Reader (I hope) observes by these passages, How Bellarmine ascribes that to Tradition, which is peculiar to God's providence: Sacroboscus, that to blind belief, which belongs unto the holy Spirit, working faith unto the former points, by the ordinary observation of God's providence, and experiments answerable to the rules of Scriptures. 2 Consequently to the * Vide Sect. 1. § 2, etc. et 7. Trent Counsels decree, concerning the second assertion, a Septimo necesse est, non solum Scripturam posse legere, sed etiam intelligere. At saepissimè Scriptura ambigua et perplexa est, ut nisi ab aliquo, qui errare non possit, explicetur, non possit intelligi, igitur sola non sufficit. Exempla sunt plurima: nam aequalitas divinarum personarum, processio spiritus sancti à Patre & Filio, ut ab uno principio, peccatum originis, descensus Christi ad inferos, et multa similio deducuntur quidem ex sacris literis, sed non adeo facile, ut sisolis pugnandum sit Scripturae testimonijs, nunquam lites cum proteruis finiri possint. Notandum est enim, duo esse in Scriptura, voc es scriptas, et sensum in cis inclusum; voces sunt quasi vagina, sensus est ipse gladius spiritus. Ex huduobus primum habetur ab omnibus, quicuuque enim novit literas, ●otest ligere Scripturas: at secundum non habent omnes, nec possumus in plurimis locis certi esse de secundo, nisi accedat traditio, Et hoc fortè dicere voluit Basilius de spiritu sancto, cap. 27. Cum ait, sine traditionibus non scriptis evangelium esse purum nomen, id est, esse tantum voces & verba sine sensu. Bellar. lib. 4. de verbo Dei cap. 4. Bellarmine thus collects: It is necessary not only to be able to read Scriptures, but to understand them: but the Scripture is often so ambiguous and intricate, that it cannot be understood, without the exposition of some that cannot err: therefore it alone is not sufficient. Examples there be many. For the equality of the divine persons, the Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and the Son, as from one joint original Original sin, Christ's descension into Hell, and many like, may indeed be deduced out of scriptures, but not so plainly as to end controversies with contentious spirits, if we should produce only testimonies of Scriptures. And we are to note there be two things in Scripture, the Characters or the written words, and the sense included in them. The Character is as the sheath, but the sense is the very sword of the spirit. Of the first of these two all are partakers; for whosoever knows the Character, may read the Scripture: but of the sense all men are not capable, nor can we in many places be certain of it, unless Tradition be assistant. It is an offer worth the taking that here he makes, That the sense of Scriptures is the sword of the spirit. This is as much as we contend that the sense of the Scripture is the Scripture. Whence the inference is immediately necessary, That if the Romish Church bind us to believe, or absolutely practise, ought contrary to the true sense and meaning of Scriptures, with the like devotion we do Gods express, undoubted commandments: she prefers her own authority above God's word, and makes us acknowledge that allegiance unto her which we owe unto the spirit. For suppose we had as yet no full assurance of the spirit, for the contradictory sense to that given by the Church: we were in christian duty to expect God's providence, and invoke the spirits assistance for manifestation of the truth; from all possibility whereof we desperately exclude ourselves, if we believe one man's testimony of the spirit, as absolutely & irrevoucably, as we would do the manifest immediate testimony of the spirit: yet * Quod caput religionis maius aut celebrius est; quam mysterium sanctiss●mae Trinitatis; quae trium personarum astruitur divinitas? hoc tamen tam parum clarè in sinuatur in scriptura, ut contrarium è sacris literis ita probabiliter atque ut videbatur verè docuerint Ariani; ut totos 300. annos vexarint Ecclesiam, orbisque aliquando universus se fuerit (Hieronymo teste) miratus Arianum. Immo hody docetur in Transiluania, & tum scriptis libris, tum publicis disputationibus, defenditur, multo acrius & melius, quam in hoc regno Parlamentarianismus. Atque ut liberè fatear quod res est, nisi me Ecclesiae authoritas commoveret, quam certissimè credo in vero Scripturae sensu assignando errare non posse, non facile ex Scriptura c●lligerem eum sensum; qui habet Deum esse natura unum, & personis trinum, ita ut naturae unitas, numerosa sit, & personarum distinctio realis: praesertim vero cum pugnare planè cum naturae lumine videatur, ut personae sint inter se realiter distinct, & simil realiter identisicatae, divinae essentiae, uni & simplicissime. Sacrob. Def. Decr. Tried, cap. 6. Par. 1. Sacroboscus acknowledgeth he believes the mystery of the Trinity, as it is taught by their Church, only for the Church's authority; and yet this he believes as absolutely as he doth, yea as he could believe any other divine Revelation, though extraordinarily made unto himself. 3 In both parts of belief above mentioned, the causal dependence of our faith upon the Church's proposals, may be imagined three ways: either whilst it is in planting; or after it is planted: or from the first beginning of it to it full growth; or from it first entrance into our hearts, until our departure out of this world. How far, and in what sort the Ministry of men in the Church is available, for planting faith; hath been declared heretofore. Either for the planting or supporting it, the skill or authority of the teachers reaches no further, then to quicken or strengthen our internal taste or apprehension of the divine truth revealed in Scriptures; or to raise or tune our spirits, as Music did Elishahs', the better to perceive the efficacy of God's spirit, imprinting the stamp of those divine Revelations in our hearts, whose Characters are in our brains. The present Churches proposals, in respect of our belief, is but as the Samaritan woman's report was unto the men of Sichars: Many (saith the Evangelist) * john 4. believed in him for the saying of the woman which testified he hath told me all things that ever I did. But this belief was as none, in respect of that which they conceive immediately from his own words. For they said unto the woman, Now we believe not because of thy saying, for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ. * job. 34. v. 3. The ear (sayeth job) trieth the words, as the mouth tasteth meats. Consonant hereto is our Church's doctrine, that as our bodily mouths taste and try meats immediately, without interposition of any other man's sense or judgement of them: so must the ears of our souls try and discern divine truths, without relying on other men's proposals or reports of their relish. No external means whatsoever, can in either case have any use: but only either for working a right disposition in the Organ, whereby trial is made; or by occasioning the exercise of the faculty rightly disposed. How essentially faith by our adversaries doctrine depends upon the church's authority, is evident out of the former discourses: that this dependence is perpetual, is as manifest, in that they make it the judge and rule of faith, such an indefectible rule, and so authentic a judge, as in all points must be followed, and may not be so far examined, either by Gods written law, The principal difficulties in the Romists opinion, whereto no sufficient answer can be given. or rules of nature, whether it contradict not itself or them. 4 It remains we examine the particular manner of this dependence, or what the Church's infallibility doth or can perform, either to him that believes, or to the object of his belief; whence a Roman Catholics faith should become more firm or certain then another man's. It must enlighten either his soul, that it may see; or divine revelations, that they may be seen more clearly: otherwise he can exceed others only in blind belief▪ The cunningest Sophister in that school, strictly examined upon these points, will bewray that monstrous blasphemy which some shallow brains have hitherto hoped to cover. We have the same Scriptures they have; and peruse them in all the languages they do. What is it then can hinder, either them, from manifesting; or us, from discerning, their Truth or true meaning manifested? Do we want the Church's proposal? we demand how their present Church itself can better discern them then ours may? what testimony of antiquity have they, which we have not? But it may be, we want spectacles to read them, our Church hath but the eyes of private men, which cannot see without a public light: Their Church's eyes are Cat-like, able so to illustrate the objects of Christian faith, as to make them clear and perspicuous to itself, though dark and invisible unto us. Suppose they could: Yet Cats-eyes benefit not bystanders a whit for seeing colours in darkness, albeit able themselves to see them without any other light then their own. The visible Church (saith the jesuit) is able to discern all divine truth by her infallible public spirit. How knows he this certainly, without an infallible public spirit? perhaps as men see Cats-eyes shine in the dark, when their own do not. Let him believe so. But what doth this belief advantage him, or other private spirits, for the clear, distinct, or perfect sight of what the Church proposeth? Doth the proposal make divine Truths more perspicuous in themselves? Why then are they not alike perspicuous to all, that hear, read, or know the Church's testimony of them? Sacroboscus hath said all that possibly can be said on their behalf in this difficulty; * Aduerte Sectarios, ut supra insinuavi, nullius Ecclesiae authoritate, tanquam sufficiente proponente uti, ne quidem suae; Sed tanquam proponente nudè: nam sibi assumunt Ecclesiae sententiam corrigere quando libet, & tunc opponunt Christum Ecclesiae, quasi Ecclesia aliud proponeret, Christus vero aliud doceret; si autem illam Ecclesiam pro sufficiente haberent, oporteret in omnibus suam sententiam cum illa conformare. unde si quando verae Ecclesiae authoritate ●tuntur: ne tunc quidem de veritate revelata fidem habent, sicut non habet ille scientiam, qui medio quidem utitur necessario, existim●t tamen illud solum esse probabile. Nam ad fidem non solum opus est ut Ecclesia sufficienter credenda proponat infallibili illa sua authoritate, quam à Christo habet nos docendi, & qui libri doctrinam divinam contineant, & quis ve●us sit eorum locorum qui in controversiam vocantur sensus: sed etiam necesse est utatur homo Ecclesiae propositione formaliter, & s●fficiens est, scilicet in illam tendendo ut in infallibilem. Sacrobos. Def. Decret. Trid. & Sent. Bell. Cap 6. par. 1. pag. 94. The Sectaries, albeit they should use the authority of the true Church, yet cannot have any true belief of the truth revealed. If the use of it be as free to them as to Catholics: what debars them from this benefit? They do not acknowledge the sufficiency of the Church's proposal. And as a necessary proof or medium is not sufficient to the attaining of science, unless a man use and acknowledge it formally as necessary: so for establishing true faith, it sufficeth not that the Church sufficiently proposeth the points to be believed, or avoweth them by that infallible authority, wherewith Christ hath enabled her to declare both what books contain Doctrines Divine, and what is the true sense of places controversed in them; but it is further necessary that we formally use this proposal as sufficient, and embrace it as infallible. 5 The reason then, why a Roman Catholic rightly believes the Truth or true meaning of Scriptures, when a Protestant that knows the Church's testimony as well as he, in both points uncertain, is, because the Catholic infallibly believes the Church's authority to be infallible, whereof the Protestant otherwise persuaded, reaps no benefit by it, but continues still in darkness, labouring in vain to see the truth of Divine revelations without it, as much in vain as if a man should strive to see colours without light. Ad discernendam doctrinam orthodoxam praeter habitum fidei in intellectu, & supernaturalem spiritus sancti concursum, habenti habitum fidei debitum, quae se tenent ex part subiecti: requiruntur praeterea alia duo ex part obiecti, quorum si desit alterutrum, facultas nunquam obibit proprium actum. Horum unum est, ut propositio credenda, sit revelata à Deo; alterum, ut nobis sufficienter proponatur, Deum illum revelasse: necessitas prioris hinc ostenditur, quoniam illa qualitas sive habitus, quae dicitur fides divina, & supernaturalis, & inter virtutes theologi●as est origine prima, suapte natura ad hoc est determinata, & ●imitata, ut inclinet tantum ad ea, quae sunt à Deo dicta, & quidem obscurè. Secus enim, si evidens nobis foret mysteria fidei à Deo esse revelata, eum lumine naturae notum sit illum non posse mentiri, aut falsum dicere, de iis haberemus scientiam. §. Posterioris verò causa est, quòd cum non videamus fidei mysteria esse à Deo testificata, necesse est nobis proponantur tanquam à Deo revelata, idque suffi●i●●t●r. Quoniam insufficiens propositio obiecti, perinde est ac nulla propositio, ut patet exemplo luminis, quod oculo proponit videndos colores. Quando enim lumen est in gradu valdè remisso, colores discernere nequimus: non quod desit obiectum; sed quoniam deest sufficiens lumen in medio, illustrans obiectum. For this is Sacroboscus instance. Besides the habit of faith seated in the understanding, and the supernatural concourse of the Holy Spirit, due to all endued with the habit of faith, but necessary in respect of the subject or party, two things more are requisite on the behalf of the object, of which if either be wanting, the faculty can never perform it proper function. Of these two, the one is, that the proposition to be believed, be revealed by God; the other, that there be a sufficient proposal made to us that God hath revealed it. For an unsufficient proposal of any object is as none, as may appear by the example of light, which proposeth Colours to be seen. For when the light is weak or scant, we cannot discern Colours, not that we want a visible object, but because we want light sufficient to illuminate the object, or the space betwixt us and it. * jan igitur qui ab authoritate Ecclesiae recedu●t, & contenti sunt veritates fidei esse in Scriptures à Deo revelatas, sibi promittentes spiritus sancti concurium ad actus fidei eliciendos, sufficient proponente carent, atque similiter faciunt, ac qui sine lumine sibi promitteret conspectum colorum in area, eo quod ha●eat colores ante ●culos positos et praeditus sit facultate videndi, cum qua Deus paratus est quoties volumus concurrere. Nam nunc mortui sunt Prophetae, mortui Apostoli, Christus in coelum recessit, & nobis omnium loco reliqu●t Ecclesiam; cuius authoritatem cum ad●uc in terris ageret ipse stabilivit, & tum miraculis, tum aliis rationibus confirmavit, & quantum opus est etiam nunc confirmat. §. Haec nostra vult magistra sit, hanc audiamus, ab hac quid à Deo per Prophetas, & Apostolos dictum sit, & quo sensu unumquodque intelligendum sit, accipiamus: ●●que expectandum est, ut Deus temere, & passim per interni luminis copiam nobis suppleat vt●●m propositionis externae, ut fecit primo parenti, & Paulo, qui neque ab homine, neque per hominem, sed per revelationem jesu Christi accepit evangelium: haec enim privilegia sunt. Sacroboscus pag 93. & 94. Def. Decret. Trid. & Sent. Bellarm. Cap. 6 part. 1. He adds withal, such as disclaim the Church's authority, and are content with this [That Truths of faith are revealed by God in his Word] and hence promise themselves the supernatural concourse of the Holy Ghost for producing acts of faith, are destitute of a sufficient proposer, and their presumption such, as if a man should persuade himself, because he hath Colours before his eyes and God ready to afford his ordinary concourse as oft as he is disposed to exercise his visive faculty, he should be able to see them without light. For (saith this jesuit) the Prophets are dead, Apostles dead, Christ go●e to Heaven, and in stead of all (Prophets, Apostles, or himself) hath left us his Church. Nor is it to be expected that God will every where, upon all occasions, supply the want of the external proposals by the abundance of internal illuminations, as he did to our first parent, or Saint Paul who had his Gospel neither from man, nor by man, but by the revelation of jesus Christ. For those are privileges. 6 The calumny intended in this last instance, hath often heretofore been prevented. We never denied either the necessity, or sufficiency of the Church's proposal, as an external mean: we account no other of that rank and nature, is, or could be, either more necessary, or more sufficient. Saint Paul we grant, had an extraordinary privilege, and yet for his private information, had the Truth proposed unto him by * Act. 9 v. 17. Ananias, though the gifts of his public Ministry were immediately from God. Both the measure of his faith, and manner of attaining it, were unusual: but his faith itself, once attained, no otherwise independent of any external proposal than ours is and all Christians must be. We should have been more beholden to this professor, had he distinctly told us, what it is in their language, to have a sufficient proposer: albeit this we may gather from his words late cited, and these b The latin are quoted §. 4. following; The sectaries take upon them to correct the Church's sentence as oft as they list, and then they oppose Christ to the Church, as if the Church did propose one thing, and Christ teach another. If they admitted any Church as a sufficient proposer, they were bound to conform their opinions to it, in all things. As you heard before out of * Sect. ●. cap. 8. parag. 12. Bellarmine, That the Pope's decrees may not be examined whether consonant or contrary to God's word or the foundations of faith already laid in our hearts: and out of a Sect. 1. §. 11. Canus, That we must believe the Church absolutely without ifs or and's. Thus believing we have God's Word sufficiently proposed; without this belief or acknowledgement of such authority in the Church, we have no sufficient proposal of it, but strive as foolishly to hear God speak, as if we sought to see Colours without the light. 7 It appears, I hope, as clearly to the Reader as to me, that the Church's testimony or authority by our adversaries Doctrine, benefits none but such as steadfastly and absolutely believe it in all things. But he that so believes it, may by it easily believe all other points, as he that can perfectly see the light, may see Colours by it. Want of this radical belief in us, makes our faith in their opinion, so unstable, or rather blind and dead. Yet can I hardly persuade myself, all of them will grant the Church adds any inherent or participated splendour to divine revelations, whereby they become perspicuous in themselves, as Colours are made visible by irradiation of the Sun. Thus much notwithstanding all of them, I know, willingly would subscribe unto: A Protestant can neither of himself be infallibly persuaded of the Truth of Scriptures, or other conclusions of faith; nor doth he asolutely believe any others, that are infallible in their determinations: but a Roman Catholic, albeit by his private spirit he cannot infallibly believes them▪ yet he infallibly believes the Church which cannot err in belief. All then that a Papist hath more than a Protestant is this; Vide sect. 2. c. 2. par. 12. & 13. his belief of the Church: if once he doubt of this, he is where he was: Which in plain terms is as much as to say, he believes the Church concerning Scriptures; not Scriptures. That this is the true interpretation of their tenant, may easily be gathered from their own writings. For * Bellar. L. 3. de verbo Dei. c. 8. Sacrob. p. 132. Bellarmine expressly contends, and all of them suppose that saying of Saint Austin [ a Sacrobos●us instances to elude Doctor Whittakers argument (as he proposed it) do plainly confirm our inference. At urget Whitakerus: cum Augustinus ita erat dispositus ut non crederet, nisi ipsum Eccle. authoritas commoveret; authoritas Ecclesiae erat sola causa fidei ipsius, ergo fides quam tunc habebat non erat divina: Nam hac praeter authoritatem Eccl▪ respicit etiam authoritatem Dei. Probat antecedens, nam particula (nisi) omnes alias causas removet, praeter eam cuius fit expressa mentio: Huius autem rei testes vocat omnes Grammaticos. Verum meminisse debuisset regulae D. Dionisij: Bonum ex integra causa, malum autem ex quolibet defectu. Vt ponatur effectus, necesse est omnes causas concurrere; At ut impediatur satis est unam deesse. Itaque omnes istae propositiones sunt verae. Nisi Augustinus (quem etiam ipse fatetur sanctum, imo sanctissimum) habuisset intellectum, non fuisset beatus. [Nisi fuisset Deus, Augustinus non fuisset beatus] [nisi habuisset fidem Augustinus, non fuisset beatus.] Pag. 133. Now as the particle (nisi) in his first instance, excludes all Creatures save intelligent: in the second all intelligent, save such as shall enjoy the sight of God: in his third all save the faithful, from blessedness: So in this our instance, the same particle excludes all credence of the Gospel, beside that credence we give unto the Church. Non crederem evangelio, nisi me commoveret Ecclesiae authoritas; I would not believe the Gospel, unless the Church's authority did thereto move me] to be true as well after faith is produced, whilst it continues, as whiles it is in planting. Now if a man should say, Non crederem Francisco; nisi me commoveret Petri fidelitas; I would not trust Frances, but for Peter's word: this speech resolved into it natural or proper sense, is aequivalent unto this; I do not trust Frances, but Peter that gives his word for him. And in case Peter should prove false, or be disinherited by him that took his word for Frances, as yet not believed but for Peter's sake; the creditor could have no hold of either. Thus if Bellarmine and his fellows be (as they would seem to make Saint Austin,) minded, not to believe the Gospel but for the Church's authority, or proposal of it: let them speak plainly and properly, not in parables or metaphors; and so we shall know their meaning to be, That they indeed believe not the Scriptures, but the Church; or, the Church truly and really; the Scriptures only by extrinsical denomination. 8 Nor can they reply either consequently to Sacrobos●us instance or their general tenants, that as he which sees colours by the light, truly sees colours; not the light only▪ so he that believes Scriptures by the Churches infallible proposal, believes not the Church's proposal only, but Scriptures as truly and properly. The diversity of reason in these two consequences, ariseth from the diverse manner of seeing colours by the suns light, and believing Scriptures by the Church: which we are now to gather from this short catechism containing the sum of Roman faith. CHAP. V. Declaring how the first main ground of Romish faith leads directly unto Atheism: the second, unto preposterous Heathenism or Idolatry. 1 IT is a pretty sophism (as a judicious and learned Divine, in his public exercise for his first degree in Divinity, late well observed) wherewith the jesuit deludes the simple, making them believe their faith, otherwise weak and unsettled, is most firm and certain, if it have once the visible or representative Church's confirmation; when as the Church so taken, seldom or never instructs or confirms any, at least not the hundred thousandth part of them, unto whose salvation such confirmation is by a Cum dicimus propositionem Ecclesiae esse conditionem necessariam ad assensum fidei, N●mine Ecclesiae intelligimus eius Caput, i. Romanum Pontificem per se, vel unà cum Concilio, ex praedicta authoritate propositiones fidei fidelibus declarantem. Valent. Tom. 3 in Aq. Dis. 2. Q. 1. De obiecto fidei, Punct. 1. Vide Annot. ex Bell. Sect. 3. c. 15. Parag. 2. jesuitical persuasions most absolutely necessary. But suppose the visible Church or Romish Consistory; the Pope & his Cardinals, should vouchsafe to catechize any; the Dialogue between them and the catechised would thus proceed. Cons. Do ye believe these sacred volumes to be the word of God? Catech. We do. Cons. Are you certain they are? Catech. So we hope. Cons. How can your hope be sure? for Mahomet saith, His Koran is, sundry other heretics say, their feigned revelations or false traditions are God's word? How can you assure us, ye may not be deceived as well as they? Are not many of them as good Scholars as you? Catech. Yes indeed, and better. Cons. Are not you subject unto error as well as they? Cat. Would God we were not. Cons. What must you do then to be ascertained these are divine Revelations? Cat. Nay, we know not▪ but this is that which we especially desire to know, and would bind ourselves in any bond to such, as could teach us. Cons. Well said: do ye not think it reason then to be ruled in this case, by such as cannot be deceived? Cat. It is meet we should. Cons. Lo, we are the men: we are the true visible Church, placed in authority by Christ himself for this purpose. These Scriptures tell you plainly as much * Ad Quintum dico, nos non gloriari in templis, & successione Episcoporum, & Apostolica sed e secundum se, sed propter Christi promissionem, qui ait, Tu es Petrus, & super hanc Petram, etc. & portae inferi non praevalebunt, etc. Qualem promissionem judaei nunquam habuerunt. Bell. lib. 3. de Eccl. militant. cap. 6 Tues Petrus, & super hanc Petram, etc. His Holiness whom here you see, is Peter's Successor; sole heir of that promise, far more glorious than the jewish Church ever had any. 2 This c Fides divina (quod omnes norunt) licet obscura sit, certa tamen est & quidem magis quam scientia. Isti vero desuis dogmatibus sint oportet incerti: nam quicquid credunt, hac sola de causa ex part obiecti credunt, quod ita putant Scripturam sentire; in quo judicio cum sint obnoxij errori, non possunt certò statuer●, se reipsa non errare. Confirmatur: nam sib plus tribuere nequeunt, quam Luthero, Caluino, aut sanctis Patribus; horum autem judicio se dicunt non teneri, & hoc ideo quod homo quilibe●, quantum●is sanct●s, & spiritu plenus, errare possit. Quare cum generalis sententia ab illis data, ipsos quoque comprehe●dit, quip qui 〈◊〉 hominum numerum non sunt, sequi●ur eos adeo incertos esse de ●uis, ac de aliorum interpretationibus. Sacrob. Def. Dec. Trid. cap. 6. Pa●, 1. is the very quintessence and extraction of huge and corpulent volumes written in this argument, which our English Mountebanks, sent hither from the Seminaries, venditate as a Paracelsian medicine, able to make men immortal. The sum of all others write, or they allege, is this; Every one may pretend, what writings he lists, to be the word of God; who shall be the infallible judge, either of written or unwritten revelations? Must not the Church? for she is Magistra & judex fidei. These are the words, and this is the very Argument, wherein Valentians' soul, it seems, did most delight, he useth them so oft. But to proceed: the parties chatechized thus by the visible Church itself, should any Protestant enter Dialogue with them how they know those received scriptures to be the word of God, could answer, I trow, sufficiently to this question, thus: Marry sir, woe know better than you: for we heard the visible Church which cannot err, say so, with our own ears. Prot. You are most certain than that these are the Oracles of God▪ because the visible church (Gods living oracle) did bear testimony of them? Catech. Yea, Sir, and their testimony is most infallible. Prot But, what if you doubt again of their infallibilities? How will you answer this objection. Mahomet saith his Alcoran is scripture; the Turkish Priests will tell you as much, viva voce, and show you if you be disposed to belieeve them, evident places therein, for his infallibility? Manes could say that he had divine revelations. The Pope pretends he hath this infallibility, which neither of them had. Who shall judge? the Consistory? But why should you think they may not err as well as others? Did they show you any evidence out of scriptures, or did they bring you to such entire acquaintance with their public spirit, as to approve yourselves divine Critics of all questions concerning the Canon, as oft as any doubt should arise? Catech. Oh no, these audacious Criticisms of private men they utterly detest, and forewarned us upon pain of damnation to beware of. For there is no private person but may err, and for such to judge of Scriptures were presumption justly damnable. Rely they must for this reason upon the church's infallibility, and that continually. It alone cannot; without it, all others may err, as well as Manes, Mahomet, Nestorius, or Eutyches: undoubtedly believing it cannot err, we ourselves are as free from error, as he that follows such good counsel given by others as he cannot give himself, is more secure than he that altogether follows his own advise, albeit better able to counsel others than the former. Prot. Then I perceive your only holde-fast in all temptations, your only anchor when any blasts of vain doctrine arise, is this; The present Remish Church cannot err: for if you doubt of any doctrine taught to the contrary, ask her and she will resolve you; or if you cannot see the truth in itself, yet believe without all wavering as she believes that sees it, and you shall be as safe, as if you road in the harbour in a storm. Catech. Ah yes, God's holy name be praised, who hath so well provided for his church: for otherwise heretics and schismatics would shake and toss her, even in this main point or ground of faith, as evil spirits do ships in tempests: we must either hold this fast sure, or else all is gone. God hath left off speaking unto men, and we cannot tell, * Vide chap. 4. Parag. 5. & Arnob. & Sacrob. whether ever he spoke to them or no; but as the present church, which speaks viva voce, tells us. 3 But the Reader perhaps expects what inconvenience will hence follow. First, hereby it is apparent, that belief of Scriptures, divine Truth, and their true sense, absolutely and immediately depends upon the church's proposal, or rather upon their belief of what it proposeth, as well after they are confirmed in that general point [That they are God's word,] as in the instant of their confirmation in it. The first necessary consequence of which opinion, is; That the church must be more truly and properly believed, than any part of Scripture or matter contained in it. For in this manner of dependence, that transcendent rule of nature, * Aristot. l. 1. post. cap. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hath it proper force: Whether we speak of the Essence, Existence, or quality of things being, or existing: that upon which any other thing thus absolutely and continually depends, doth more properly & really exist, and hath much firmer interest in it essence and existence, than aught can have which depends upon it. One there is, and no more, that can truly say, my Essence is mine own, and my existence necessary. Whatsoever is beside, is but a shadow or picture borrowed from his infinite being. Amongst created entities, all essentially depending on Him, Accidents have a kind of existence peculiar to themselves; yet cannot so properly be said to exist, as their subjects, on whom they have such double dependence. Nor can the Moon so truly say, my beauty is mine own, as may the Sun, which lends light and splendour to this his sister, as it were upon condtion she never use it but in his sight. For the same reason, that for which we believe another thing, is always more truly, more really, and more properly believed, then that which is believed for it, if the one belief necessarily depend upon the other, tam in facto esse quam in fieri, from the first beginning to the latter end. For of beliefs thus mutually affected, the one is real and radical, the other, nominal, or at the most by participation only real. This consequence is unsound. [Intellective knowledge depends on sensitive: therefore sensitive, is of these two the surer.] The reason is, because intellective knowledge depends on sensitive, only in the acquisition: not after it is acquired. But this inference is most undoubted; [We believe the conclusion for the premises: therefore we believe the premises the better,] because belief of the Conclusion absolutely depends upon the premises, during the whole continuance of it. This is the great Philosophers rule, and a branch of the former Axiom. And some justly question, whether in Scholastic propriety of speech, we can truly say there is a belief of the conclusion, distinct from the belief of the premises; or rather, the belief of the premises, is by extrinsical denomination attributed unto the conclusion. This latter opinion, at least in many Syllogisms, is the truer: most necessarily true in all, wherein the conclusion is a particulall, essentially subordinate to an universal of truth unquestionable. As he that infallibly believes every man is a reasonable creature, infallibly believes Socrates is such. Nor can we say, there be two dictint beliefs: one of the universal; another of this particular: for he that sayeth, All, excepteth none. If Socrates then make one in the Catalogue of men, he that formerly knew all, knew him to be a reasonable Creature: all he had to learn, was what was meant by this name Socrates, a man or a beast; After he knows him to be a man, in knowing him to be a reasonable creature, he knows no more than he did before, in that universal, Every man is a reasonable Creature. The like consequence holds as firm in our present argument; He that believes this universal, [Whatsoever the Church proposeth concerning Scriptures, is most true,] hath no more to learn but only what particulars the church proposeth. These being known, we cannot imagine there should be two distinct beliefs: one of the churches general infallibility; another, of the particular Truths or points of faith (contained in the Scripture) proposed by it. For as in the former case, so in this, He that from the church's proposal believes or knows this particular, The Book of Revelations was from God, receives no increase of former belief: for before, he believed all the church did propose; and therefore this particular, because one of all. 4 The truth of this conclusion may again, from a main pinciple of Romish faith be thus demonstrated. * Sacrosancta, Oecumenica, & generalis Tridentina Synodus in spiritu sancto legitimè congregata, praefidentibus in ea eisdem tribus Apostolicae sedis legatis, hoc sibi perpetuò ante oculos proponens, ut sublatis erroribus, puritas ipsa evangelii in Ecclesia conseruetur: quod promissum ante per Prophetas in Scriptures sanctis, Dominus noster jesus Christus, Dei filius, proprio ore primùm promulgavit; deinde per suos Apostolos, tanquam fontem omnis, & salutaris veritatis, & morum disciplinae, omni Creaturae praedicari jussit: perspiciensque hanc veritatem, & disciplinam contineri in libris scriptis, & sine scripto traditionibus, quae ipsius Christi ore ab Apostolis acceptae, aut ab ipsis Apostolis, Spiritu Sancto dictant, quasi per manus traditae, ad nos usque pervenerunt, orthodoxorum Patrum exempla secuta, omnes libros tam veteris quam novi Testamenti, cum utriusque unus Deus sit auctor, nec non traditiones ipsas, tùm ad fidem tùm ad mò●es perimentes, tanquam vel ore tenus à Christo, vel à Spiritu Sancto dictatas, & continua successione in Ecclesia Catholica conseruatas, paripietatis affectu, ac reverentia suscipit, & veneratur. Concil. Trident. Sess. 4. Decret. de Canonicis Scriptures. And a little after having reckoned up the Apoctyphall Books with the Canonical, they thus conclude. Si quis autem libros ipsos integros cum omnibus suis partibus, prout in Ecclesia Catholica legi consueverunt, & in veteri vulgata Latina editione habentur, pro Sacris & Canonicis non susceperit; & traditiones praedictas sciens & prudens contempserit; anathema sit. Omnes itaque intelligant, quo ordine, & via, ipsa Synodus, post iactum fidei confessionis fundamentum, sit progress●ra, & quibijs potissinum testimonijs, ac praesidijs in confirmandis dogmatibus, & instaurandis in Ecclesia moribus, sit usura. The Council was very wise in not expressing as well what unwritten traditions, as written books, they meant to follow. Whatsoever unwritten traditions the Church shall propose, though yet unheard of or unpossible otherwise to be known then only by the Church's asseveration, all Romanists are bound as certainly to believe, as devoutly to embrace, as any truths contained in the written word, acknowledged by us, the jews, and them, for divine. Now if either from their own experience, the joint consent of sincere antiquity, or testimony of God's spirit speaking to them in private, or what means soever else possible or imaginable, they gave any absolute credence unto the written word or matters contained in it, besides that they give unto the churches general veracity: the Scriptures by addition of this credence (were it great or little) arising from these grounds peculiar to them, must needs be more firmly believed and embraced, than such unwritten traditions, as are in themselves suspicious, uncapable of other credit then what they borrow from the Church. For in respect of the Church's proposal, Which is one and the same, alike peremptory in both; Scriptures, and traditions (of what kind soever) must be equally believed. And if such traditions as can have no assurance besides the Church's testimony, must be as well believed as Scriptures, or divine truths contained in them: the former conclusion is evidently necessary, that they neither believe the Scriptures nor the Truths contained in them; but the Church's proposal of them only. For the least belief of any Divine truth, added to belief of the Church's proposal, which equally concerns written and unwritten verities, would dissolve the former equality. But that, by the Trent Council, may not be dissolved. Therefore our adversaries in deed and verity, believe no Scriptures, nor Divine written Truth, but the Church's proposal only concerning them. And * Respondeo: orthodoxos omnes certos esse Ecclesiam circa fidem non posse errare, proindeque nec dubitare eius sententiae acquiescere. Hoc enim inter caetera revelata tanquam à Deo dictum, ab ipsa matre Ecclesia acceperunt: quae quidem veritas, ante scriptam ullam novi testamenti part & dicta à Deo, & ab Ecclesia proposita, & à fidelibus credita fuit: & hody quoque crederetur, etiamsi novi testamenti ne unus quidem apex scriptus extaret; quemadmodium revelatae veritates à fidelibus credebantur per annos bis mill in statu legis naturae ante exaratum à Mose Pentateuchum. Sacrob def Decr. Trid. & Sent. Bell. C. 6. Par. 1. pa. 109. Sacroboscus bewrays his readiness to believe the Church as absolutely as any Christian can do God or Christ, though no title of the New-testament were extant. For, that the Church cannot err, was an Oracle revealed by God, proposed by the Church, and believed by the faithful before any part of the New testament was written. Now he that without the Gospel of jesus Christ, would believe the Doctrines of faith as firmly as with it, believes not the Gospel which now he hath, but their authorities only, upon which, though we had it not, he would as absolute rely, for all matters of doctrine supposed to be contained in it. 5 Or further to illustrate the truth of our conclusion with this jesuits former comparison, which hath best illustrated the Romish churches tenant That Church, in respect of the Canon of Scriptures or any part thereof, is as the light is to colours. As no colour can be seen of us but by the light: so, by his doctrine, neither the Canon of Scriptures, or any part thereof, can be known without the Church's testimony. Again, as remoueall of light presently makes us lose the sight of colours: so doubt o● denial of the Church's authority deprives us of all true and steadfast belief concerning God's Word or any matter contained in it, God (as they plead) hath revealed his will obscurely: and unto a distinct or clear apprehension of what is obscurely revealed, the visible church's declaration is no less necessary, then light to discernment of colours. The reason is one in both, and is this. As the actual visibility of colours wholly depends upon the light, as well for existence, as duration: so, by jesuitical Doctrine, true belief of Scriptures wholly depends on the visible Church's declaration, as well during the whole continuance, as the first producing of it. By the same reason, as we gather that light in itself is more visible than colours, seeing by it alone colours become actually visible: so will it necessarily follow, that the church's declaration (that is, the Pope's privilege for not erring) is more steadfastly to be believed, as more credible in itself, then either the Canon of Scriptures or any thing therein contained: because these become actually credible unto us only by the church's declaration, which cannot possibly ought avail for their belief, unless it were better believed. 6 Perhaps the Reader will here challenge me, that this last instance proves not all that I proposed in the title of this chapter. For it only proves the Pope's supremacy is better to be believed; then that Christ is come in the flesh; that God did ever speak to men in former ages by his Prophets, and in later by his son. But this infers no absolute alienation of our belief from Christ, seeing even in this respect that we believe the Church or Pope so well, we must needs believe that Christ is come in the flesh and that God hath spoken to us sundry ways: for thus much the Pope avoucheth. Yea, but what if the church teach us that Christ is our Lord and Redeemer, and yet urge us to do that which is contumelious to his Majesty? What if it teach us that these Scriptures are God's Word: and yet bind us by her infallible decrees to break his Laws, and give his spirit the lie? Should we make profession of believing as the Pope teacheth, and yet take his meaning to be only such as Marnixius, whom we better believe, would make it: His Holiness would quickly pronounces us Apostates from the Catholic faith. Or if this suffice not the indifferent Reader for satisfying my former promise: let him have patience but for a while, and I will pay him all. 7 Their first main position, The two main branches of Romish infidelity springing from her former two positions. [That no private man can certainly know the Canon of Scriptures to be God's word, but by relying upon the present Church,] infers as much as hath been said: much more will follow from their second, [That no man can certainly be persuaded of the true sense and meaning of particular propositions contained in the general Canon, without the same Church's testimony, unto whom the authentic interpretation or dijudication of Scriptures wholly belongs] Imagine the former parties, now fully persuaded of the Scriptures divine truth in general, should by the Consistory which late catechised them, be questioned about the meaning of some particular places. Cons. We hope you adore the consecrated host with divine worship, as oft as you meet it in procession. Cat. Desirous we are to do any thing that becomes good Christians, and obedient sons unto our holy mother the Church: but we cannot satisfy out conscionces how this may stand with the principles of Christianity. Your Holinesses (for which we rest yours unto death) have assured us these sacred volumes are the very words of God, and his words we know must be obeyed. Now since we know these to be his words, we have found it written in them: Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Math. 4. v. 5. It is, we doubt, our simplicity that will not suffer us to conceive how the consecrated Host can be adored as God without open breach of his commandment. For, to our shallow understanding, there is no necessity to persuade us Christ God and man should be hid in it. These words, Hoc est corpus meum, mny bear many interpretations no way pregnant to this purpose. And it is doubtful, whether Christ's body, though really present in the Sacrament, should retain the same presence in procession: whereas the former commandment is plain, We must worship the Lord our God, and him only must we serve. Consist. Ye think this Text is plain to your late purpose: we think otherwise. Whether is more meet? ye to submit your private opinions to our public spirits: or us that are Pastors, to learn of you silly sheep? Cat. Therefore are your servants come unto you, that they may learn how to obey you in this decree without idolatry: well hoping, that as ye enjoin us absolutely to obey you in it; so ye can give us full assurance we shall not disobey the spirit of God, in the former great commandment, whose exposition we most desire. 8 Would these or like supplications, though conceived in Christian modesty, though proposed with religious fear, and awful regard of their persons, though presented with tears and sighs, or other more evident signs of inward sorrow, find any entrance into Romish Prelates ears, or move the Masters of the Inquisition house to forbear exaction of obedience to the former, or other decree of the Trent Council: Were the form of the decree itself, unto private judgements, never so contradictory to Gods express written laws; or the consequence of practising as it prescribes, never so dreadful to the doubtful conscience? How much better than were it for such silly souls, had they never known the Books of Moses to have been from God? for so committing idolatry with stocks and stones, or other creatures, they had done what was displeasing to their Master, & justly punishable: * Luke 12. 48. yet with fewer stripes, because his will was not made known unto them. But now they know it, and acknowledge the truth of this commandment. To what end? That they may be left without all excuse for not doing it. They see the general truth of God's Oracles, that they may be more desperately blinded in wilful perverting the particulars. For what glory could the allurement of silly ignorant men to simple idolatry be unto great Antichrist? Let them first subscribe to the written Laws of the everliving God, and afterwards wholly submit themselves to his determinations for their practice, and so the opposition betwixt him and the Deity, betwixt his injunctions and the decrees of the Almighty, may be more positive, more directly contrary. The Heathen or others not acknowledging God's word at all, are rightly termed unbelievers: men thus believing the Scriptures in general to be God's word, from the testimony of the Church, and yet absolutely relying upon her judgement for the meaning of particular places, are transported from unbelief to misbelief, from gross ignorance to wilful defiance of God & his laws. Finally, they are brought to know God's word, that they may doubt in this and like fearful practices enjoined: that so first doubting, and afterwards desperately resolving absolutely to follow the Church's injunction, against that sense and meaning of the divine decrees which the holy spirit doth dictate to their private consciences, they may without doubt be damned, for not abiding in the truth. Like their first parents they hear God's sentence, but prefer the interpretations of Satan's first borne before their own, because it must be presumed he is more subtle than they. Or to refer the two main streams of this iniquity to their proper heads: The first, [That we cannot know the old or new Testament to be God's word, but by relying upon the Church] makes all subscribers to it, real Atheists or Infidels, and Christians only in conceit or upon condition, [If the Church, whose authority they so highly esteem, be as infallible as is pretended.] Heretofore I have much grieved at the Trent Counsels impiety: but now I wonder at these grave Father's folly, that would trouble themselves with prescribing so many Canons, or overseeing so large a Catechism, when as the beginning of Protogoras book, one or two words altered, might have comprehended the entire confession of such men's faith, as rely upon their fatherhoods, The Atheist thus began his book; De dijs non habeo quod dicam, utrum sint necne: Concerning the Gods or their being, I can say nothing. A private Roman Catholic might render an entire account of his faith in terms as brief: De Christo & Christiana fide non haebeo quod dicam, utrum sint necne: Whether there be a Christ, or Christian Religion be but a politic fable, I have nothing to say peremptorily, yea, or no, the Church or Council can determine: whom in this, and all other points wherein God is a party, I will absolutely believe, whilst I live: if at my death I find they teach amiss, let the devil and they (if there be a devil) decide the controversy. Yet this conceit or conditional belief of Christ and christianity conceived from the former, serves as a ground colour for disposing men's souls, to take the sable dye of Hell, wherewith the second main stream of Romish impiety will deeply infect all such as drink of it. For once believing God's word from the Church's testimony, this absolute submission of their consciences to embrace that sense it shall suggest, sublimates them from refined Heathenism of Gentilism to diabolisme or symbolizing with infernal spirits, whose chiefest solace consists in acting greatest villainies, or wresting the meaning of Gods written laws to his dishonour. For just proof of which imputation, we are to prevent what (as we late intimated) might in favour of their opinion be replied to our former instance of light and colours. An objection which might be made in favour of the Romanists, answered and retorted. 9 Some perhaps, well affected, would be resolved, why, as he that sees colours by the sun, sees not only the sun but colours with it, so he that believes the Scriptures by relying upon the Church, should not believe the Church only, but the Scriptures too, commended by it. The doubt could hardly be resolved, if according to our adversaries tenant, the Church's declarations did confirm our faith by illustrating the Canon of Scriptures, or making particular truths contained in it, inherently more perspicuous: as if they were in themselves but potentially credible, and made actually such by the Church's testimony, which is the first and principal credible; in such sort as colours become actually visible, by illumination of the principal and prime visible. But herein the grounds of Romish doctrine, and the instance brought by Sacroboscus, to illustrate it, are quite contrary. For the light of the Sun, though most necessary unto sight, is yet necessary only in respect of the object, or for making colours actually visible; which, made such, or sufficiently illuminated, are instantly perceived without further intermediation of any other light then the internal light of the Organ, in discerning colours always rather hindered then helped by circumfusion of light external. For this reason it is, that men in a pit or cave may at noon day see the stars, which are invisible to such as are in the open air: not, that they are more illuminated to the one, than the other; but because plenty of light doth hinder the organ or eyesight of the one Generally all objects, either actually visible in themselves, or sufficiently illuminated, are better perceived in darkness then in the light. But so our adversaries will not grant, that after the church hath sufficiently proposed the whole Canon to be God's word, the distinct meaning of every part is more clear and facile to all private spirits, by how much they less participate of the visible Churches further illustration. For (quite contrary to the former instance) the Church's testimony or declaration is only necessary, or available to right belief, in respect not of the object to be believed [Scriptures;] but of the party believing. For (as hath been observed) no man in their judgement can believe God's word, or the right meaning of it, but by believing the Church: Vide Sect. 2. cap. 1. & Sect. 4. c. 4. and all belief is inherent in the believer. Yea this undoubted belief of the Church's authority, is that, which in Bellarmine and Sacroboscus judgement, makes a Roman Catholics belief of Scriptures, or divine truths taught by them, much better than a Protestants. If otherwise the church's declaration, or testimony, could without the belief of it infallibility, which is inherent in the subject believing, make Scriptures credible, as the light doth colours visible in themselves: a Protestant that knew their church's meaning, might as truly believe them as a Roman Catholic, albeit he did not absolutely believe the church, but only use her help, for their Orthodoxal interpretation, as he doth ordinary expositors, or as many do the benefit of the Sun for seeing colours, which never think whether colours may be seen without it or no. For though it be certain that they cannot, yet this opinion is merely accidental to their sight: and if a man should be so wilful as to maintain the contrary, it would argue only blindness of mind, none of his bodily sight. Nor should distrust of the Romish churches authority, ought diminish our belief of any divine truth, were her declarations requisite in respect of the object to be believed, not in respect of the subject believing. 10 Hence ariseth that difference which plainly resolves the former doubt. For seeing the Sun makes colours actually visible, by adding virtue or lustre to them: we may rightly say, we see colours, as truly as the light, by which we see them. For though without the benefit of it, they cannot be seen: yet are they not seen by seeing it, or by relying upon it testimony of them. Again, because the use of light is only necessary in respect of the object, or for presenting colours to the eye; after once they be sufficiently illuminated or presented, every creature endued with sight, can immediately discern each from other, without any further help or benefit of external light, than the general, whereby they become all alike actually visible at the fame instant. The suns light then is the true cause, why colours are seen: out no cause of our distinguishing one from another being seen, or made actually visible by it. For of all sensible objects sufficiently proposed, the sensitive faculty, though seated in a private person, is the sole immediate supreme judge, and relies not upon any others more public verdict of them. On the contrary, because the Romanists supposed firm belief of Scriptures, or their true meaning ariseth only from his undoubted belief of the church's veracity which is in the believer as in it subject, not from any increase of inherent credibility, or perspicuity thence propagated to the Scriptures: Hence it is that consequently to his positions, most repugnant to all truth, he thinks, after the church hath sufficiently avouched the Scriptures divine truth in general, we cannot infallibly distinguish the true sense and meaning of one place from another, but must herein also rely upon the church's testimony; and only believe that sense to be repugnant, that consonant to the analogy of faith, which she shall tender, albeit our private consciences be never so well informed by other Scriptures to the contrary. The truth then of our former conclusion is hence easily manifested. For seeing they hold both the Scriptures and their distinct sense to be obscure and unable to ascertain themselves, unless the Church add perspicuity or facility of communicating their meaning to private spirits: such, after the Church's proposal, cannot possibly discern them any better, or more directly in themselves, than they did before, but must wholly rely upon their Prelates, as if these were the only watchmen in the Tower of God's church, that could by virtue of their place discern all divine truth. Others must believe there is an omnipotent God, which hath given his law; a Mediator of the new Testament: but what the meaning either of Law or Gospel is, they may not presume otherwise to determine, then weak sights do of things they see confusedly a far off, whose particular distance or difference they must take only upon other men's report, that have seen them distinctly, and at hand. 11 To illustrate these deductions with the former similitude of the prime and secondary visibles. Let us suppose for disputations sake, that the Sun which illuminates colours by its light, were further endued (as we are) with sense and reason, able to judge of all the differences between them, which it can manifest to us, and hence challenge to be a Pope or infallible proposer of colours. This supposition the Canonist hath made less improbable. For Deus fecit duo luminaria, God made two lights, that is, by his interpretation, the Pope and the Emperor. Or, if you please to mitigate the harshness of it, let the Man in the Moon, whom we may not imagine speechless, be supposed the sun or Pope of colours, Mercury or Nuncio. As the Papists say, we cannot know Scriptures to be Scriptures, but by the infallible proposal of the Church: so it is evident we cannot see any colour at all, unless illuminated or proposed by the suns light. But after by it we see them, suppose we should take upon us to discourse of their nature, or determine of their distinct properties as now we do, and the sun or Pope of colours, by himself or his Nuncio should take us up, as Duke Humphrey did the blind man restored to sight, which he never had lost; Yea? who taught you to distinguish colours? were you not quite blind but now? as yet you cannot discern any colours without my public light, and yet will you presume to desine their properties, and distinguish their natures against my definitive sentence known? Must not he that enables you to see them, enable you to distinguish them seen? Must you not wholly rely upon my authority; whether this be white, or that black? If a man upon these Motives should absolutely believe the suns determinations, renouncing the judgement of his private senses: could he truly say, that he either knew this colour to be white or that black, or another green? Rather were he not bound to say, I neither know white from black, nor black from blue, nor blew from green: but I know that to be white which the Sun, the only infallible judge of colours, saith is white; that only to be black, that blue, and that green which he shall determine so to be. I may think indeed that the snow is white, or coals black: but with submission to the suns determination. 12 And yet, as you have heard at large out of the Trent Council, and best Apologies can be made for it, the Church must be the infallible judge of all Scripture sense, and must absolutely be believed without all appeal to scriptures, not conditionally as she shall accord with them. The conclusion hence issuing, is most infallible, and on their parts most inevitable: [Whosoever absolutely acknowledgeth this authority in the Church or Consistory, & yields such obedience unto it in all determinations, concerning the Canon of Scriptures, doth not believe either this or that determinate proposition of faith, or any definite meaning of God's word. The best resolution he can make of his faith is this; [I believe that to be the meaning of every place, which the Church shall define to be the meaning:] which is all one, as if he had said, I do not believe the Scriptures or their meaning, but I believe the Church's decision and sentence concerning them. He that believes not the Church (saith * Nihil igitur efferunt, qui Ecclesiae authoritatem non absolute, sed ex conditione ponunt. Si namque ad cum mod● res habet, & mihi quoque fides habenda est, quando pronunciavero secundum Scripturas rectè intellectas. Id enim est non mihi, sed Scripturae credere. Canus lib. 4. cap. 4. Vide lib. 4. sec. 2. chap. 5. Canus) but with this limitation, [if it give sentence according unto Scriptures;] doth not believe the Church but the scriptures. By the same reason it follows most directly; he that believes not the true sense and meaning of scriptures, but with this reservation, (If the Church so think or determine:) doth not believe them, but the Church only. For, as the Schoolmen say, Vbi unum propter aliud, ibi unum tantum. He that serves God, only because he would be rich, doth not serve God but his riches, albeit he perform the outward acts of obedience. Or if, we love a man only for his affinity with another whom we dearly love: we truly and properly love but the one, the other only by way of reflection or denomination, in such a sense as we say, a man appears by his proxy, that is, his proxy appears, not he. In like sort, believing the sense of Scriptures only from the supposed authentic declaration of the church, or because we believe it: we infallibly believe the Church alone, not the Scriptures, but only by an extrinsical denomination. 13 Yet as a man may from some reasons less probable, The greater moral or historical belief the Romanist hath of the truth or true meaning of Scriptures, the greater his condemnation by subscription to this doctrine of the Churches absolute infallibility. have an opinion of what he certainly knows, by motives more sound; or as we may love one in some competent measure for his own sake, and yet affect him more entirely for another's, whom we most dearly love: so may an absolute Papist, in some moral sort believe the Scriptures for themselves, or hold their orthodoxal sense as probable to his private judgement; albeit he believe them most for the Church's sake, and that sense best which it commends. But this his belief of the Church, being by their doctrine more than moral or conditional, doth quite overthrow all moral or probable belief, he can possibly have from what ground soever, of scriptures themselves. For as I said before, when the * This argument holds (as we say) à fortiori of faith infused: for no man can be so fully persuaded, that he hath divine faith infused of any point, but must renounce his persuasion, when the church defines the contrary: whose definition or asseveration, be it a cause or condition of believing, will fully persuade the Romanist, that he now hath divine infused saith of the contrary 〈◊〉 that he believed before. For his divine infused saith & his habit of Theology may not disagree, and yet in this case his habit of Theology may not yield unto the other, because it hath the Church's testimony, which (it is supposed) the other wanteth, Sect. 2. Chap. 2● Porag. 9 Annot. Church shall determine aught contrary to his preconceived opinion, the more probable or strong it was, the more it increaseth his doubt, and makes his contrary resolution more desperate, yea more damnable if habitual, because, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 extremely contrary to the doctrine of faith. Bellarmine's prescription in this case, is just as if a Physician or Surgeon should seek to ease the pain by ending of the Patient's days. Lest a man should sin against his conscience, this a Doctor adviseth him to believe the Church cannot teach amiss. 14 To conclude then: He that absolutely believes the Pope, as Christ's Vicar general in all things, without examination of his decrees by evangelical precepts, neither believes Christ nor his Gospel; no not when this pretended Vicar teacheth no otherwise then his Master's laws prescribe For thus believing a divine truth only from this man's authority, he commits such Idolatry with him (for the kind or essence) as the Heathen did with Mercury, their false Gods supposed messenger, though so much more heinous in degree, as his general notion of the true God is better, whose infinite goodness, cannot entertain an interpreter no better qualified than most Popes are, did his wisdom stand in need of any. But if when the Pope shall teach the doctrine of Devils, men absolutely believe it to be Christ's, because his pretended Vicar commends it to them: in thus believing, they commit such preposterous Idolatry, as those of calicut, which adore the Devil, upon conceit, doubtless, of some celestial or divine power in him; as the absolute Papist doth not adore the Pope, but upon persuasion he is Christ's Vicar, and teaches as Christ would do, viva voce, were he again on earth. And less it were to be lamented, did these Pseudo Catholics profess their allegiance to Satan's incarnate Agent, as to their supreme Lord, by such solemn sacrifices only as the inhabitants of Calicute perform to wicked spirits. That this doctrine emboldens such as embrace it, to glory in villainy But this their blind belief of whatsoever he shall determine upon a proud and foolish imagination he is Christ's Vicar, emboldens them to invert the whole law of God and nature, to glory in villainy, and triumph in mischief, even to seek praise and honour eternal; from acts so foul and hideous, as the light of nature would make the Calicutians or other Idolaters blush at their very mention. It is a sure token he hath not yet learned the Alphabet of their religion, that doubts whether jesuitical doctrine concerning this absolute belief, extend not to all matters of fact. And if out of simplicity, rather than policy, so they speak: I cannot but much pity their folly, that would persuade us it were not the fault of Romish Religion, but of the men that profess it, which hath enticed so many unto such devilish practices of late. I would the jesuit were but put to instance what kind of villainy either hath been already acted on earth, or can yet possibly be hatched in the region under the earth, so hideous and ugly, as would seem deformed or odious to such as are wholly led by this blind faith, if it should but please the Romish Clergy, to give a mild or favourable censure of it. No brat of hell, but would seem as beautiful to their eyes, as young toads are to their dams, if their mother once commend the feature of it, or acknowledge▪ it for her darling. Did not some of the Powder-plotte, after God's powerful hand had overtaken them, and sentence of death had passed upon them, even when the Executioner was ready to do his last office to them, make a question whether their plot were sinful or no? So modest were some of them, and so obedient sons to the Church of Rome, that they would not take upon them to say either the one or other, but referred the matter to their mother's determinations; hereby testifying unto the world, that if the Church would say, they would believe so great an offence against their Country were none against God. One of them was so obstinate, as to solicit his fellow, whilst both were drawn upon one hurdle to the gallows, not to acknowledge it for any sin. Or if these must be reputed but private men, not well acquainted with their Church's tenants, and therefore no fit instances to disapprove her doctrine: let the ingenuous Reader but peruse their best Writers answers to the objections usually made against the Pope's transcendent authority, and he shall easily perceive how matters of fact are included in the belief of it; how by it all power is given him in heaven and earth, to pervert the use and end of all laws human or divine. I will content myself for this present with some few instance out of Valentian. CHAP. VI Proving the last assertion, or generally the imputations hitherto laid upon the Papacy, by that authority the Jesuits expressly give unto the Pope in matters of particular fact; as in the canonizing of Saints. 1 HOw oft soever the Pope, Quotiescunque Romanus Pontifex in sidei quaestionibus definiendis, illa qua est praeditus authoritate utitur, ab omnibus fidelibus tanquam doctrina fidei recipi divino pr●cepto debet eu sententia, quam ille decern●t esse sententiam fidei. Toti●s autem eum ipsa authoritate uti credendum est, quoties in controversia fidei sic alterutram sententiam determinat, ut ad eam recipiendam obligare velit universam Ecclesiam. Valent. tom. 3. in Aquinat. Disp. 1. Quaest. 1. De object. fidei. Punct. 7. §. 39 in defining questions of faith, shall use his authority: that opinion which he shall determine to be a point of faith, must be received as a point of faith by all Christian people. If you further demand, howshall we know when the Pope useth this his absolute authority. this Doctor in the same place thus resolves you. It must be believed, that he useth this his authority, as often as in controversies of faith, he so determines for the one part, that he will bind the whole Church to receive his decision. Lest stubborn spirits might take occasion to calumniate the Pope for taking, or the Jesuits for attributing tyrannical authority unto him: this * Distinguendi sunt modi, quibus potest contingere Pontificem aliquid asserere. Primo enim potest sibi persuadere aut asrere aliquid, ut privata persona quaedam, vel doctor alius, quispiam, ut si nollet Ecclèsiam universam ad recipiendam suam assertionem obligare, sed tantum sententiam ipse suam reputaret veram. Hoc modo Innocentius 3. & nonnulli alij Pontifices opuscula varia ediderunt. Ac illa quidem, quae sic Pontifex asseverat, communis sententia omnium Theologorum est, non oportere esse omnia vera & infallibilia, quasi à Pontificia authoritàte profecta. Quin imo à plerisque authoribus conceditur, sieri posse; ut Pontifex tanquam quaedam privata persona in haeresim labatur Ibidem. jesuit would have you to understand that the Pope may avouch some things which all men are not bound to hold as Gospel; nay he may err, though not when he speaks ex Cathedra, as head of the Church, yet when he speaks or writes as a private Doctor or expositor, and only sets down his own opinion without binding others to think as he doth. Thus did Innocent the third, and other Popes, write divers books, which are not in every part true and infallible, as if they had proceeded from their Pontificial authority. Yea but what if this present Pope, or any of his successors, should bind all Christians to believe, that Pope Innocents' books, were in every part infallibly true; whether must we in this case believe Valentian, or the Pope thus determining, better? If Valentian in the words immediately following deserve any credit, we must believe the Pope better than himself: yea, he himself must recant his censure of Pope Innocents' works. For so in the other part of his distinction he adds; * Secundo modo potest Pontifex aliquid asserere obligando universam Ecclesià ut illud recipiat, nec quisquam audeat sibi persuadere contrarium. Et quaecunque Pontifex aliqua de religione controversia sic asserit, certa side credendum est, illum infailibilter, ac preinde ex authoritate Pontificia, hoc est, ex divina assissentia, id asserere. Ibidem. Secundo, potest Pontifex asserere, The Pope again may avouch something, so as to bind the whole Church to receive his opinion, and that no man shall dare to persuade himself to the contrary: And whatsoever he shall thus avouch in any controversy of Religion, we must assuredly believe he did avouch it without possibility of error, and therefore by his Pontificial authority. His proof is most consonant to his assertion. I will not recite it in English, lest the mere English Reader should suspect any, able to understand Latin, could be possibly so ridiculous. 2 These lavish prerogatives of the Pope's authority, the Jesuits see well to be obnoxious to this exception. When the Pope doth canonize a Saint, he binds all men to take him for a Saint. Can he not herein err? As for canonizing of Saints (saith * Itaque quod ad Canonizati: onem Sanctorum attinet, ami●ino, nego id, quod communiter doctores Catholici iure optimo negant, vide●●●et posse Pontificem hac in part errare. Quamuis enim testimonia, quae pro ali●uius hominis sanctitate esseruntur, siut humana, id●oque natura sua faltibilia: tamen posito quod Pontifex illis inducati● tendem ad pronunciandum, quempiam sanctum at que beatum iam essè, certa fide credendùm est, testimoni●●lla (quatenus in genere saltem probant piè atque sanctè quenquam ex hac v●ta excessesse) vera esse, et hommem ei●smodi ex eorum esse numcro, quos per revelationes Scripturae generales in communi constat, divinae gratiae beneficio conseq●● aeternae vitae beatitudinem. Quae sa●● certitundo issdem illis Dei promissionibus nititur, ex quibus compertum habemus, nunquam esse futurum, ut universa Ecclesia in rebus religionis fallatur. ●●●loretur autem 〈…〉, si sen sum reputaret, ac pro tali veneraetur eum, qui sanctus non est. Hic autem illud, quund 〈…〉 ab orthodoxis probatum atque defensum est, tanquam ex fide certum pono, nemperem esse amnino, quae ad Ecclesie aedificationem, adenque ad off tium Pontificis pertineat, ut Sancti quidam aliquando canoni●●ntur: ac 〈…〉 Ecclesiam debere ut sanctum venerari illum, quem sam●us Pontifex num no sanctorum adseribit sicut etiam usus ipse perpetuus, atque traditio Ecclesiae confirmat. Valent. ibidem. § 40. Valentian) I absolutely deny, (as the Catholic Doctors upon good reasons generally do) that the Pope can err in such a business. The certainty of this his belief he would ground upon those promises, by which we are assured it shall never come to pass that the universal Church can be deceived in points of Religion. But the whole church should err very grossly in such matters, should, it repute and worship him for a Saint which is none. Here it would be observed, how Satan instigates these men unto such tenants, as may occasion God and his Gospel to be blasphemed. First, they would make it an Article of faith, that all must believe as the Pope teacheth▪ Whence it follows, that either he cannot teach amiss, or else faith may perish from off the earth. Which if it could, God were not true in his promises. The surest pledge the Christian world can have of his fidelity in them, must be the Pope's infallibility, so as from the first unto the last, he must be held as true in his dealings, as God in his sayings. If he fail in canonizing a Saint, whom he cannot possibly know to be such, unless he knew his heart, which belongs wholly unto his maker: God must be a liar, and there is no truth in him. The final issue intended by Satan in these resolutions is this; When men have been a long time led on with fair hopes of gaining heaven by following the Pope's direction, and yet in the end see (as who not blind sees not) his gross errors and detestable villainies, they may be hence tempted to blaspheme God as if he had been his copartner in this consenage. From this root (I take it) hath Atheism sprung so fast in Italy. For whilst faith is in the blade, and their hopes flourishing, they imagine God and the Pope to be such friends as their blind guides make them: But afterwards coming to detestation of this man of sin, & his treachery, holding his spiritual power as ridiculous, they think either as despitefully, or contemptuously of the Deity; or say with the * Psal. 14. v. 1. fool in their hearts, there is no God. 3 Thus Antichrists followers still run a course quite contrary to Christian Religion. The fearful manner of Jesuits tempting God in maintaining this argument. For if it be true (as it is most true) that faith cannot utterly perish from off the earth; what damnable abuse of God's mercy and favour toward mankind is this, in seeking, as the Jesuits do, to make all absolutely rely upon one in matters of faith? For so if he fail, all others must of necessity fail with him. That is, the whole world must be as kind supernatural fools to him, as that natural idiot was to his Master, who being demanded, whether he would go to heaven with him or no, replied he would go to Hell with so good a Master, seeing any man would be willing to go to heaven with an ordinary friend, yea with his enemy. Though we should use no other argument but that, Avoid ye sons of Satan; for it is written, ye shall not tempt the Lord your God: It should, me thinks, be enough to put all the Jesuits in the world unto silence in this point, did they not as far exceed their father in impudence, as they come short of him in wit. For this manner of tempting God is more shameless than the devils suggestion unto our Saviour, when he was instantly silenced with this reproof. A presumption it is more damnable to expect the protection or guidance of God's spirit, in such desperate resolutions as Valentian here brings, than it were for a man to throw himself headlong from an high Tower, upon hope of Angelical supportance. For seeing (as I said) God hath promised, that true faith shall not perish from off the earth; for all men to adventure their faith upon one man's infallibility, who may have less saving faith in him then Turk or Infidel, is but a provoking or daring of God to recall his promise. Or what more damnable doctrine can be imagined, then that all men should worship him for a Saint, whom the wickeddest man on earth doth commend unto him for such? 4 But to proceed. As the doctrine is most impious, so are the grounds of it most improbable. For how can the Pope or Papists infallibly know this or that man to be a Saint; Seeing there is no particular revelation made of it, either to the Pope or others? I answer (saith Valentian) that the general revelation, whereby it is evident, that whatsoever the Pope shall decree, as pertaining to the whole Church, is most true, may suffice in this case. Moreover (saith he) unto the canonizing of Saints appertain these revelations of Scripture, in which heanenly joys are generally proposed to all such as lead a godly life. For by the Pope's determination, we know the Saint which he hath canonised, to be contained in the foresaid universal proposition. Whence it is easy to frame an assent of faith; by which we may persuade ourselves, that such a Saint hath obtained eternal bliss. 5 I would request the Reader by the way to note the Jesuits injurious partiality, in scoffing at such of our Writers, as without express warrant of particular revelation, hold a certainty of their own salvation: when as they, only by Gods general promises to such as lead a godly life, and the Pope's infallibility, in declaring who have so lived, can be certain (de fide) others are saved. But the former doubt is rather removed then quite taken away by this his answer, if it stand alone. As yet it may be questioned, how any can infallibly know the truth of what he cannot possibly know at all, but only by other men's testimonies, in their nature (the jesuit being judge) not infallible, and in whose examination it is not impossible his Holiness may be negligent? For how men live or die in England, Spain, or the Indies, no Pope can tell but by the information of others no Popes. The Reader perhaps will prognosticate Valentians' answer, as in truth I did. For when I first framed the doubt before I read it in him, me thought it stood in need of such a reply, as * Lib. 2. Sect. 4. chap. 6, Parag. 6. Bellarmine brought for defence of the vulgar interpreter. Altogether as foolish it were to think any private man's information of another's uprightness in the sight of God, as to hold Theodotion the heretic could not err in translating of the Bible. But though they may be deceived in testification of another's sanctity; yet * His words be cited, Parag. 2. Valentian tells you, supposing the Pope is once induced by their testimonies, though in nature fallible, to pronounce him a blessed Saint, all must infallibly believe their testimonies (at least so far as they prove in general, that he died a godly and religious death) are true, and that the party commended by them is of that number, which as we may gather from the general revelations of Scriptures, shall be made partakers of everlasting life. * Obij●i potest, quod ut postea dicturi sumus, ut Pontifex in definiendo authoritate sua rectè utatur, study & diligentia in inquirenda veritate opus habet. Nihil autem obstare videtur, quo minus possit interdum ille ciusmodi diligentia praetermissa, controversiam definire. Poterit igitur tunc sattem err●re. Respondeo, sive Pontifex in definiendo studium adhibeat, sive non adhibeat: modo tamen controversiam definiat, infallibiliter certè defi●iet, atque adeo reipsa utetur authoritate sibi à Christo contessa. Quod in promissionibus divinis de veritate per magisterium vn●us Pastoris Ecclesiae factis certissime colligimus; ut saepius argumentati sumus. Itaque studium ac diligentia Pontif●i necessaria est, non ut omnino definiat, atque infallibili sua authoritate v●atur, sed ut convenienter ac recte (hoc est, sine peccato) cautatur: sicut pa●ebit etiam ex iis, quae post dicemus. Huc accedit, quod si maximè diligentia Pontifici necessaria esset, ut emnino definiat; tamen eadem fide credere deberemus, illum quando rem controversam definite, ●●ssicientem adh●●uisse diligentiam; qua supra demonstratum est, debere nos credere, quod tunc ille infallibiliter ac verè definiat. Cae●cr●m non est ratio ulla firma, quam obrem existimare debeamus, study diligentia● Pontifici necessariem esse non modo ut 〈◊〉 ac sine culpa, 〈…〉 sua in 〈…〉 utatur, verum etiàm ut 〈◊〉 illa utatur. Quare quod à nobis ante responsum est 〈…〉 quod 〈◊〉 Valent. t● n: 3. in Aquinat. Quaest. 1. de obiecto fidei. Punct 7 § 40. Again, whether the Pope in defining a controversy use diligence or no, yet without all question he shall define infallibly, and consequently use the authority Christ hath given him. Wherefore in his judgement care and diligence are necessary to the Pope, not so as if he could not define aright, or rightly use his authority without them: but that he do not sin himself, whilst he defines an infallible truth for others to believe. Hereto may be added, that albeit a diligent care were necessarily required for the infallibility of the Pope's decisions; yet the same faith, which binds us to believe he decides the controversy infallibly, binds us also to believe that he used as much diligence as was requisite. As for example, in like case, If God should promise that the next year should be a plentiful year of corn, we would conceive he promised withal good and seasonable wether, & whatsoever else were necessary for effecting of his promise, as Canus well notes. But Valentiaus last conclusion is, that no sure arguments can be brought, why we should think study or diligence are necessary for the right use of the Pope's authority; so far as it concerns other men's faith that must rely upon it. Rely upon it they must, whether he determine ex tempore, or upon deliberation, and (for aught I can see) whether he give his sentence drunk or sober, raving or in his right mind, so he have the wit to charge all upon pain of damnation to believe it. But what if some foreigner should of set purpose send a deadman's water to try this grand-Phisitions skill: could he without either care or diligence, in examining their testimonies, or special revelation from above (which in such businesses Valentian disclaims) discover their knavery? Or would his prognostication of life & health▪ redeem the party deceased from the land of death, as some say Pope Gregory by his prayers did trajan? These and many like questions might here be made, which fall not within the reach of Valentians answers hitherto recited: and yet these must abundantly suffice for resolution of all doubts concerning the canonizing of Saints, or approbation of religious orders; * And yet some religious orders authorized by Popes have proved nought, but we must believe their rules were good whilst one Pope approves them, but grew out of date and unfitting those times wherein succeeding Popes did disannul them. See Valentian in the place above cited. in which businesses likewise we must believe the Pope cannot err. Let the Reader pausea while, look on their madness, and laugh his fill at their apish drunkenness in this argument, that when his mirth hath found a vent, and his heart is well settled, he may with a sober, unpartial, steadfast eye behold the mystery of this iniquity. CHAP. VII. What danger by this blasphemous doctrine may accrue to Christian States: that of all heresies, blasphemies, or idolatries, which have been since the world began, or can be imagined till Christ come to judgement: this Apostasy of the Jesuits, is the most abominable and contumelious against the blessed Trinity. 1 WHat the consequences of these positions may be, none can doubt. No less they are then I have said; a resigning up of men's souls and consciences into the Pope's hands, a consecration of hearts, minds and bodies, to work any mischief imaginable at his appointment. For what if the Pope upon the relation of Ravilliackes stubborness (they would say constancy) in his torture, or Catesbyes praying to the virgin Mary at his death, should canonize both for Saints, and enjoin the Christian world so to honour them: Every bloody Assassinate would pray unto the one for good success in acting his bloodthirsty designs on Prince's bodies. * Tibi nos Rulle, & istis tuis, 〈◊〉 omnium rerum machinatoribus, totam Italiam inermem tradituros existimasti, quam praefidijs confirmaret●? colonijs occuparetis? omnibus vinclis devinctan & obstrictam teneretis? ubi enim cavetur, ne in janiculo coloniam constituatis? ne urbem hanc urbe alia premere, atque urgere possitis? non faciemus, inquit. Primum nescio, etc. De leg. Agrar. Orat. 15. And if it should please the Pope so to determine, all men should stand bound to give such solemn worship, as by their doctrine is due to sacred relics, unto that bloody knife which hath been sheathed in Ravilliackes Sovereign's breast: Every deep dissembling Politician, or ambitious choleric discontented spirit, would burn incense, saltpeter, sulphur & brimstone to the others image, in hope of better speed in undermining states. 2 If any jesuit or other brazen faced favourer of their order, or this doctrine, should here reply: This dreamer casts doubts beyond the Moon; for is there any likelihood his Holiness will ever canonize such wicked Imps for Saints? I must answer him as Tully did Rullus, utterly disclaiming all purpose of doing such wrong unto the Roman state, as his petition unto it once granted might enable him to effect, and from my soul I wish every Christian Prince, every Prince's counsellor would take that grave Senators words for his motto, Primum nescio, deinde timeo, postremo non committam ut vestro beneficio potius quam nostro consilio salui esse possimus. First, whether the Pope would canonize such miscreants for Saints or no, is more than we know. Secondly, his former practises minister so just cause of fear to Christian states, that it stands them upon rather in wisdom to prevent his power of doing, then rely upon his fidelity for not doing them some inestimable mischief, by putting this practise in execution, if opportunity serve, and ability be lest him thereby to strengthen his faction. Did not his * Dum haec in Belgio agerentur, Fabius Vrsinus Cardinalis à Pontifice, post acceptum de Parisiensi tumultu nuncium, Legatus in Gallian venit. ●gitur ille ubi Lugdunum venit, more solemni acceptus, multis laudibus cinium fidem extulit, & Boidono illo lanienae immanis antesignano palam laudato, etiam ei potestatis plenitudine gratie beneficium impertivit; & quanquam à Regijs ministris ex johannis Moruillerij Consilio monitus, ut sobriè & parcè de eare loqueretur, non potuit sibi temperare, quin Regis in eo negotio prudentiam, patientiam, animi magnitudinem, publice & in privatis colloquijs ubique apud omnes etiam cum delectu verborum commendaret. Thuan. l. 54. Anno 72. Legate into France, upon notice of the Parisian massacre, bestow his Holinesses best blessing, cum plentitudine potestatis; With absolute and plenary power derived from himself, upon the notorious assassinate Boydon, chief Ringleader of that immane and wolvish massacre committed at Lions; begun without any warrant of public authority, only at this hellish miscreant's instigation, desirous to follow, or rather outgo his Superiors in cruelty? Was not that villainy itself authorized from Rome, where it found such extraordinary approbation? Never did that City rejoice so much in memory of Christ's birth or Saint Peter, as at the hearing of this more than Herodian butchery of so many thousands noble-minded Gentlemen, with other Innocents' and Saints of God. So full was this Legates heart of joy hence conceived, that after he came into France, out of the abundance of it his mouth did sound the praises of the bloody actors and contrivers of this shameful Tragedy, etiam cum delectu verborum; With such choice and affected words, as caused them blush to hear him, that had not been ashamed to act the villainy. And as if this excellent exploit had been effected by virtue of the holy Catholic Church; the a Postea cum Rege collacutus inter alia multis & enixis precibus ac rationibus ab eo contendit, ut Concilium Tridentinum, cuius publicationem, totum iam novennium in Gallia magna cum univerfis Christiani Orbis offension suspensam ag●bat, in regni curijs promulgaretur, & recentis facti omnibus saeculis depraedicandi, quod ad Dei gloriam, & S. R. E. dignitatem pertineret, memoria Sacro sanctae Synodi approbatione veluti obsignaretur. Sic enim apud omnes tam qui sunt, qaam qui postea erunt, constituetur, non odio, aut ultione, aut privatae iniuriae sensu Regem in tot capitum perniciem consensisse, sed ardenti Dei gloriae propagandae studio à Christianissimo Principe datum, ut quod stante Protestantium factione sperari non poterat, iis sublatis, majorum religio, hoc est, Catholica Apostolica Romana, quae per Synodum Tridentinam à sectario veneno asseritur, citra controversiam ac sine exceptione per vniu●sas Franciae ditionis provincias constitueretur. Ibid. Unless the French King had been enforced to make a contrary Apology before this Legate came into France, this bloody massacre had been authorized by the Sea Apostolical; as appears from the same Author's words immediately following. His & aliis rationibus saepius apud Regem repetitis, quae magni in Aula Romana ponderis, pleris● etiam apud nos speciosae videbantur, quo minus Rex ac Regina acquiescerent, obstabantiam sumpta ad excusandum factum consi●●a. Nam diplomatis postea promulgatis Rex contra contestabatur, non odio religionis, sed ad reuin●●ndam Colinij ac sequacium 〈…〉, que jussu suo Lutetiae acta essent, accidisse, exemplumque ad 〈…〉 suo cum dolore grassatum essè: idque literis, orationibus ac libellis illis, de quibus diximus, ubique inculcabatur. Pope's petition to the French King was, that the Trent Council might, upon that good success, begin to be of force in France, and be thus sealed with blood. Yet can any man doubt, whether this Church would authorize murder, or canonize assassinates, for her own advantage? Publicly suppose she would not; yet if the Pope's decrees, when they expressly bind all, must, as Valentian contends, be believed by all upon such terms, as he annexeth: no question but if he give any special eniunction to the order of Jesuits, or such as they shall adjudge sit Associates to whom these secrets may be imparted; it shall be as devoutly entertained by them whom it concerns, as if it were universal. If charged they be, under pain of damnation, secretly to worship this or that damned villain; it will be held a formal denial of faith, either not to perform what is enjoined, or to bewray what they perform. We may well suppose the Jesuits, and others of their instruction, have more Saints in their private Calendars than all the world knows of. * Notandum est, duobus ●od●s posse aliquem canonizari, uno modo particulariter, ita ut solum in una Provincia, aut Dioecesi habeatur Sanctus, & colatur pro Sancto. Alio modo gèneraliter, ita ut in tota Ecclesia habeatur pro Sancto, nec ulli liceat de eius sanctitate dubitare. Primo modo canonizare poterat quilibet Episcopus, ut docet Thomas walden's. lib. de Sacramental. tit: 14. c. 122. & paret ex Cypriano l. 3. Epist 6. Tamen hoc, quod olim licuit, modo non licet. Siquidem Alexander 3. & postea Innocentius 3. videntes abusus, qui oriebantur circa Sanctorum cultum, prohibuerunt, ne deinceps aliquis pro Sancto coli inciperet, sine Romani Pontificij approbatione, ut patet cap. 1. & 2. de Reliquijs & Sanctorum veneratione. Secundo modo canonizare; id est, ita ut in tota Ecclesia Sancti habeantur, communis sententia est, pertinere ad summum Pontificem: nam id habetur c. Audivimus, etc. Cum ex eo de Reliquijs, & veneratione Sanctorum, & venerabile, de testibus & attestationibus, & patet etiam ratione; nam ad eum spectat proponere toti Ecclesiae quid sit credendum, & quid agendum in iis, quae sunt religionis, qui Ecclesiae praeest. Dices, plurimi Sancti sunt, qui in tota Ecclesia coluntur, quos non canonizanit summus Pontifex: Prinius enim Pontifex (ni sort sallor) qui Sanctos legatur canonizasse, videtur fuisse Leo Papa 3. Respondeo, Sanctos veteres caepisse coli in Ecclesia universali, non tam lege aliqua, quam consuetudine. Sed sicut consue●udines aliae vim habent legis ex tacito consensu Principis, & sine eo nullam habent, ut patet ex B. Thoma, 1. 2. quaest 97. art. 3. Ita Sancti alicuius cultus, ex consuetudine Ecclesiarum generaliter introductus, vim habet ex approbatione tacita vel expressa summi Pontificis. Bellarm. cap. 7. de Sanct. Beat lib. 1. Vide eundem cap. 7. scilicet, San●tos non canonizatos privatim posse coli & coram aliis, sed non inomni totius Ecclesiae. Bellarmine grants the Pope may commend some under the title of Saints unto a set Province or Diocese, though he enjoin not the whole Church so to esteem, or at least not so to entertain them: That Saints reputed, not canonised, may be privately adored; That in this case a general custom may prescribe, and breed just presumption of the Pope's tacit approbation, though he give no direct injunction for the practise, nor positive signification of his consent. For many were adored as Saints before the solemnity of canonizing was in use, first practised (as far as this great Clerks reading serves him) by Pope Leo the third. 3 Now as their projects are of another mould, and their means to effect them more desperate than heretofore: so these intimations make it more than suspicious, least secretly they crown such of every sort, as have been best qualified for their purposes, or have adventured farthest for the Church's dignity, with the titles of Saints, to encourage others to like attempts. And if turbulent or ambitious spirits, greedy of same, may be fed with hopes of being eternised in jesuitical calendars; if men malcontented with this present, may have sweet promises of everlasting happiness in the life to come; upon what mischiefs will they not adventure? when as the one sort is weary of life, the other kerbed only with fear of present shame or disgrace after death, otherwise ready to rush into any danger, or avow most desperate outrages Albeit the parties proposed to be worshipped had been in their life times no so bad, but rather incited to bold enterprises by their ardent zeal: yet who would not desire to imitate the adventurous actions of them whose memory he adores? And yet this longing desire of imitating such extraordinary enterprises, as others of noble spirits have been thrust upon by secret instinct, is always dangerous, and in men not so well qualified as their Authors were, preposterous. For it will find occasions of like practise when ●one is given; virtue shall be the object of despite, because in factious oppositions, contempt of it may afford matter of glory; Hatred and malice to Prince's persons shall be accounted zeal and devotion to the Church. But if powder-plotters, or public Assasinats may be dignified with titles of Saints, or proposed for imitation: the Christian world may perceive the height whereto this mischief may grow, when it will be too late to controuse it. It is an excellent caveat which old * 〈◊〉 Caeterum de locis ab exemplo & simili, tot sunt experimenta fallaciarum, quet hominum capita, dum quilibet assequi vult quem●ibet, dum exemplo dicit se vivere talium & ta●um quos approbat aut canonizat Ecclesia, vel qui superiores eorum sunt. Qui Rectores, qui Doctores, qui Laudati. Quid facit silius, aiunt nisi quod viderit patrem sacientem? Patres tamen optimos ipsi nolunt sed pessimos hoc exemplo sequi. Vox aliorum, est Paulus se laudavit. Paulus visiones in raptu suscepit, cur non potest modo Dominus in talibus & talibus similia operari▪ Hinc consictio p●●phetiarum, hinc miraculorum admonitio Hinc etiam adoratio damnatorum heminum in populis, Testis est mihi legenda imo de aderatione Canij mortui v●sum est in Vierna. Caneat igitur sancta sedes Romana, caveat in ea sedens Papa, quibus argumentis & ●ansis & medijs canoviz● tio alicuius sit facienda, Gerson. Tractat. 8. De custodia Angelorum partitio 3. super Magnificat. Gerson hath, not impertinent to this purpose, though intended by him especially for private use. Amongst other sophisms used by Satan to ensnare men's fowls, That Topicke of examples, or similes, affords as many experiments of fallacies as there be men; whilst every one seeks to imitate any one, and professeth to frame his life by the example of such, as either the Church doth Canonize, or their Superiors, Governors, Doctors, or men of same approve. What doth the son (say they) but what he sees the father do: and yet these mates follow not the best, but the worst Fathers; (at least that in them which is worst for them to follow) by this example: some of them stick not to say, Paul commended himself, Paul had visions in a trance, and why may not God in these days work the like effects in others? Hence are prophecies feigned, hence are admonitions by miracles, hence are damned persons adored by the multitude; witness the Legend, yea and Vienna can bear witness of a dead dogs adoration. Let the sacred Roman See therefore beware, Let the Pope that sits therein beware, upon what grounds or motives they canonize any. 4 Rather let all Christian States beware, lest they give such authority to either. For if the danger were not always imminent from their traitorous and blood-thirsty minds, that profess this doctrine in any Kingdom: yet from divine justice the plagues upon Prince and People, that authorise or permit the profession of it, will be one day public and grievous. For better might they nurse all other kinds of enchantments, or magical practises; That jesuitical doctrine in this argument is truly and properly wicthcraft or sorcery. better might they give harbour to all other heresies broached since the world began; then suffer this Ocean of all mischiefs, whether flowing from errors in manners, or matters of doctrine, to encroach upon their coasts. And here let not the Reader deceive himself by imagining the holy Ghost had used a Metaphor, rather than strict propriety of speech, when he called the whore of Babylon a Witch or Enchantress. For the faith whereby the Romanist boasts he believes the Scriptures, (as elsewhere God willing shall be showed) is merely magical: this doctrine we now dispute against, the very Idea of infernal superstition, or, as they term it, vana obseruantia, in respect of the essence and quality, and for the extent of mischief whereto it leads, as the main Sea of sorcery, and all other kinds of magical superstition, as so many Brooks or Rivers. For whence springs Sorcery properly so called? Either from express compact with evil spirits, or from the solemn performance of certain blind ceremonies, which are but sacrifices unto infernal Powers; whereby they gain interest in the sacrificers souls, in witness whereof they sometimes bear their marks in their bodies. But if we look into the mystery of this iniquity, the Jesuits by subscribing unto this doctrine of the Churches transcendent authority, and taking the solemn oath of their order; enter a covenant, though not so express or immediate, yet more firm and desperate than other Magicians usually do. For they swear, and teach others to swear absolute obedience to the Pope: they think themselves bound, and would bind others not to examine his decrees: to esteem of his pardons, though destitute of all warrant from God's word, as highly as the Magicians do of Charms, for which they can give no reason either in art or nature: to offer up their prayers and other religious worship unto such as he shall appoint them, albeit, for aught they know, or as they justly may suspect, damned miscreants; which is a more hellish sacrifice then any other Magicians use. And though Witches do, yet all sorts of Sorcerers enter not express covenant with the Prince of darkness. And it is all one, whether like Witches they give their souls to him immediately; or thus absolutely betroath them to his Proxy or principal Agent here on earth. For as the Apostle instruct us, by thus worshipping the Beast they worship the Dragon his Master. 5 Lastly, in respect of this mouth of blasphemy, Mahumetism and Gentilism are as a toy. The ancient Heathen, out of their inbred ignorance, and want of external means for right information of their understanding, changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of corruptible things; often taxed by mere Philosophers for their grossness. These blasphemers, though professing the worship of the everliving, true, and only God, though partakers of his written word, and all the helps his gracious providence from time to time hath afforded for manifestation of it right sense and meaning, abuse philosophy (wherein they excel) with all other gifts of art and nature, to transform the most essential attributes of the divine nature; to turn his truth into lies, his goodness into all abomination. For having this natural notion in their brain, [Whatsoever God saith is true, whatsoever he approves most just and good,] their next presumptuous assumption is, [But God saith whatsoever the Romish Church or Pope saith ex Cathedra, whatsoever he allows God allows the same.] That this doctrine inverts the whole foam of Christian Religion, And this assertion, which thus confounds the limits of God's truth and the Popes, that the Christian world cannot discern one from another, once wrought in men's hearts, what untruth or falsehood, what heresy can be hatched so dangerous? what villainy conceived so abominable; but may be presently fathered upon that holy One, from whom proceeds nothing but good? Thus may bloody and prodigious massacres be invested with the most glorious titles the best of Christ's Saints ever enjoyed for their best deeds. Just reward for matchless impieties that benefit them, may be set forth to the world as the crown of Martyrdom. Finally, their gain is hereby made the measure of goodness, their pomp and glory the rule of piety, and end of every Christians faith, unto which he must not stick to sacrifice his soul, as an Holocauslum ever burning, never consuming in that brimstone lake. If it shall please the Pope to authorize murder, though of the Lords anointed; God the Son must be the chief Assassinate to give power and strength, and heaven for the reward unto the Actor. If pleased he be to give way to incest, as for the Uncle to marry the Niece, a fornication not named but with distaste amongst the ancient Heathens, (I would abhor to speak it, would they be ashamed to give just occasion:) the holy Ghost must not disdain to be his Bawd or Pander. If disposed to dispense with perjury; God the Father must be as his Vassal, to suffer disgrace at his appointment, to recall the sentence of vengeance, which the party swearing by his name did imprecate upon his own head, if he relented. Though this be the greatest injury that can be offered to so great a Majesty (unto whom execution of just vengeance properly belongs) yet must the Almighty, at the Pope's appointment, be content to put it up. 6 It is a quality in Kings very commendable, saith Paulus Quartus, * Sed multos, ut auctio, qui apud te plurimum possunt, fidei datae ac iusiurandi pactis interpositi religio monet, qua ut nihil Principi antiquius esse debere minimè inficias ierim ita eos, qui pietatem suae opinioni praetexunt videre etiam atque etiam oportet, ne dum rigidi religionis auctores haberi volunt, religionem ipsam in discrimen ad ducant, quod procul dubio accidet, si Pontificem tam necessario tempore deseras, ad cuius defensionem & maiorum exemplum, & Fides nuper data, & tua denique te pietas obligat; quae omnia prius viols, & divina atque humana iura confundas necesse est, si induciarum pactis stare velis. Thuan●s Hist. l. 17. anno 1556 Legate and Nephew unto Henry of France, Religiously to observe their oaths: but, when the Pope's dignity comes into danger, religion itself is in hazard, and a preposterous course it were religiously to observe an oath, unto the overthrow of Religion. With these and the like suggestions, impiously acute, did this sweet Cardinal, by commission from the c Tandem bellum pro Pontisicis desensione decretum; postquam Carafa Regem iusiurandi induciarum pactis interpositirel gione, potestate sibi à Pontifice tradita, soluit, libertatemque ei fecit, in Caesarem & eius F. etiam sine praecedenti belli denunciatione impetum facere. Ibidem paulo post. Pope his Master, authorise, and animate this French King to violate the league lately confirmed by solemn oath, betwixt him and Philip of Spain. Might he not as justly, though not so politicly, in plain terms have told him, either you must dishonour God, or suffer the Pope to be disgraced: choose which you list. Doubtless in the language of God's spirit, which searcheth the heart, he that dispenseth with an oath (of this nature especially) solemnly taken, is greater than he by whom men swear; and is in heart and deed so esteemed, by such as acknowledge his authority in thus dispensing, or sue unto him for like dispensations: But as if wilful and open perjury, without deep and hellish hypocrisy, were a sin too plain and simple for the Man of sin to countenance: the * Hac ●iducia ●retus Carasa Regem aggr●ditur, & gladio sacrato Pontificis nomine ei ut Ecclesiae R. De●ensort magna pompa ac ●●●monia porrecto ad pri●atum colloquium admiss●s, quo in statures Romana ac familiae suae, fortuna sit, demonstrat, Ibidem paulo ante jocum primo citatum. Legate first invests this besotted Prince with the glorious title of Defensor Ecclesiae Romanae; and in witness hereof delivers him a sword, consecrated by his Holiness own hand, ere he make him forswear himself, and forsake his God, who hath now forsaken him, and for his sin (scarce expiated unto this day) plagued the Realm of France. For as the judicious Historian (who hath the Articles of this perfidious confederacy yet in his custody) well observes, d Nunc ingredimur 〈◊〉 57 supra quingentessimun & millessimum, juxta Caroli sapientissimi Principis augurium Galliae ●unest●ss●num: quo res nostrae per inducias in tuto collo●atae, improbe Carasarum sugges●●one, & amb●tiosa quorundam levi ▪tate in manifostum exitium praecipitatae sunt, & regnum hoc hactenus slorentissimum ab eo tempore bellis civilibus diu iactatum, tandem per illos ipsos belli auctores Hispanorum praedae, & ludibrio patuit. Thuanus lib. Hist: 18. in initio anno 1557. this was the root of all the miseries have since befallen that flourishing Kingdom, and by God's just judgements exposed it to the insolences of the Spaniard, through their means especially, that wrought the King to breach of his oath with Spain for entering this new confederacy with the Pope. 7 Whilst reading this story I called to mind the perfidious, and cruel usage of that renowned e Rex à Carafis sollicitatus negotium dederat Cosinio maris praefecto & Picardy Praesidi, ut in hus●ico ex improviso aliquid conaretur. Is quanquam invitus faceret, ut ●nducias, quas solemni jure iurando ipse firma●crat, violaret, tamen cum res eo deductas videret, ut bello inter Hispanos & Pontisicem exardescente Reges necessario ad arma descensuri essent, antevertendum duxit, & insigni aliquo facinore hostem praeveniendum. Itaque noctum cum prope oppidum 8. Eid. janu. Marcentibus vivo oppidanis insidias struxisset, à vetula tamen insomm proditus est, quae vix tandem improbo clamore excitatis vigilijs contum nostrorum irritum reddidit, inde Colinius Lentium, cum medium inter Insulam & Regiacum Atrebatum municipium, quod Nimeta-cum olim suisse antumant, vi capit, diripit, & licentiose habitum postremo incendit, ingentique praeda abacta cum plusculos dies in limit exe●●risset, ad suos revertitur, hoc ruptarum induciarum initium fuit. etc. Ibidem. Admiral in the Parisian massacre: the treacherous impiety of his politic enemies seemed highly to extol the wisdom and justice of his God calling him to suffer his chastisement in this life, that he might not perish with the wicked, or such as were impenitent for their former grievous sin; wherein this worthy Counsellor had in some sort (though with grief, yet for the good of others I must utter it) communicated with the Pope, and his perjured Sovereign. For knowing the breach of peace was fully resolved upon by the State of France, he thought it a point of warlike wisdom to begin with the enemy in his own Land, rather than expect his onset upon notice of war proclaimed: and fair opportunity (as he apprehends it) being offered from an insinuating hermits discovering of the situation, and readiest way of expugning Douai, he attempts the surprisal of it; but prevented of his purpose by an old woman that awaked the Garrison, he deemed it a shame to return home with empty hands; though fill them he could not, but with just imputation of being the first that had actually broken the league, as afterwards his venerable person was the first, upon whom those perfidious assassinates, and Actors in the Parisian massacre did practise their intended butchery, contrary to the oath and faith which they had given him. God grant such, as in reformed Churches do most detest, be never tempted by like opportunities to imitate the worldly policies of the Papacy; that all our consultations to prevent their malice, may always relish more of the doves innocency and integrity, then of the Serpent's subtlety. 8 He that would accurately observe the weak supportance of the Roman See at that time, when the French could not relieve it; how since that time the Popes have shuffled themselves into the Spaniards favour, to the great prejudice of France, who in love to them had brought itself so low; may by these modern stories easily discern, the Papacies advancement in times past to have been wrought by such means, as our Writers out of ancient records have deciphered. Especially by sowing enmity betwixt Christian Princes, by seeking supportance now from one then from another, as several Popes, for the most part bystanders in such broils, yet skilful to bet always on the fairest side, saw fittest occasions; until at length they got both feet on Prince's shoulders, and being once mounted, learned cunning to sit fast, and ride them safely. For most of that succession being still of several lines, and different parentages, none of them were disposed to continue any ancient, or hereditary fohood with the posterity of their predecessors greatest enemies, as lineal descents of royal Families, out of their personal love unto their Ancestors, usually do, unto the great damage of their state and Country. It is significantly spoken by the Evangelist, That the ten Kings should give their authority unto the beast; Revel. 17. 12. 1● thereby instructing us, that Antichrist should grow great by Prince's favours, and gracious privileges bestowed upon him, not as the jesuit absurdly imagines, by taking authority unto himself by strong hand before it was given, as the Turks, or Saracens, or other Barbarians have done. But to proceed; not the Infidelity of Turk, of jew, or Saracen, not malignant Apostasy is to be compared with this kind of Idolatry, and blasphemy we now dispute against. The Turk calumniates the Cross, the jew accuseth Christ himself as an impostor: but neither make him Author, or approver of such impieties as they commit. The jesuit Fathers such prodigious villainies, as his soul from Satan's suggestion hath conceived, upon his Saviour: all other Heretics, or Idolaters, Turks, Infidels, or Apostates do then only, or principally offer contumelies unto Christ and Christianity, when they open their mouths, and vent their bitterness against him. But of this Whore and her attendants, that proverb is most truly verified, Sive scortum bened●cat sive maledi●●t perinde est. The contumelies offered by them to Christ are all one, (always most grievous) whether they bless or curse; whether they magnify or blaspheme his holy Name. Whilst they profess such absolute allegiance to the Pope, the Son of perdition, Christ's greatest enemy; in taking our Redeemers praises in their mouths: they do but add profane scurrility unto blasphemy, using him herein more contemptuously than the Soldiers, which bowed their knees unto him, but buffet his face; salute him as king, and yet wound his head by putting a crown of thorns upon it. 9 But some out of charity, not to be blamed, will here demand: Do all the Maintainers of this strange doctrine expressly and wittingly conceive as meanly, or despitefully of Christ, as these dissolute Roman Soldiers did, though willingly (for their own advantage) to cloak their secret scoffs, and mockery of his spiritual Kingdom with outward demeanour, more decent and reverent than the others used? Do all the learned of that Religion in heart approve that commonly reported saying of Leo the tenth, Quantum profuit nobis fabula Christi; and yet resolve, as Cardinal * Ind Carasa Lu●ctiam regni Metropolum tanquam Pontificis ●egatus so●ita pompa ingreditur, ubi cum signum crucis, ut fit, ederet, verborum, quae proferri mos est, loco, serunt eam, ut era● se●uro de numine animo & summus relig●●nis derisor, occusate passim populo & in genua ad ipsi●s conspectum procumbente, saepius. se●reta murmuratione haec verba ingeminasse. Quamdoquidem populus iste vult decipi, decipiatur. Thuanus lib. Hist. 17. Anno 1556. Carafa did, quoniam populus iste vult decipi decipiatur, to nussle the people in their credulity? For mine own part, as yet I cannot think so, though I have been friendly censured for saying the contrary. Many of them, I am persuaded, think they honour Christ as much, as the best in reformed Churches do. But doth this their conceit, or imaginary love to him, lessen their wrong, in respect of those contumelies offered him by the Heathen? Rather (in the learned) it is a symptom of that grievous plague, inflicted upon the jews, That seeing, they should not see, that hearing, they should not hear, nor understand: no sign at all of better real affection towards Christ, but rather a token of greater servility unto Satan, or of that strange spiritual drunkenness spoken of by the Evangelist. Their hearts and heads are not acquainted; the one endites what Satan suggests, and moves their outward members to act what he commands; the other interprets all done in honour of Christ, as if a man should be so deeply intoxicated with some pleasant poison, as to enforce it upon his dearest friend, for an extraordinary dainty. Finally, that these great clerk should thus acknowledge Christ for the Redeemer of the world, and yet admit every Pope for his compear, and thus devoutly embrace the doctrine of Devils, is an undoubted document, they are the sworn followers of Him, whose coming is by the working of Satan, with all power and signs, and lying wonders, and in all deceiveableness of unrighteousness amongst them that perish. That which especially causeth many of us to doubt, whether the Jesuits do not equivocate, when they speak well of Christ, is, because their learning and judgement are, on the one side so great, and this imagination on the other so prodigiously absurd and sottish, as one cannot possibly better brook the others company in the same heart or brain, than the most flourishing Prince, or Potentate in the world could the beastliest sluttish shee-foole living for the only consort of his bed; howsoever these cunning Panders in pride of their nimble wits may hope to betrothe more simple souls into this outcast of hell. And though experience in some sort hath proved it true, that no opinion was ever proposed so absurd, but found some Philosopher for it Patron: yet this imagination of the Pope's transcendent authority, far exceeds the limits of any experiments or observation made in Philosophers, answerable to the former axiom. Notwithstanding the more their infatuation, of whom we speak, exceeds the bounds of all folly or vanity merely natural, the more it ascertaines to us the truth of the Apostles prediction in the place late cited. 2. Thes. 2. 10. 11. Doubtless because they received not the love of the truth, therefore hath God sent them strong delusions, that they should believe lies. The fulfilling of which prophecy is most conspicuous in the modern Jesuits, the principal maintainers of this doctrine. For were they not men of rare wit and exquisite learning, were not this opinion withal of all that are or can be imagined the most sottishly improbable, and preposterously impious; the print of God's finger, thus confounding their brain, could not be so eminent or discernible. The first bait, cast out by Satan, was but to draw the Romish Clergy unto practices, so suspicious amongst the people that they could not be justified, but by a conceit of infallibility: and not checking their pride, being challenged of error in doctrine, and impiety in their dealings; the Lord gave them over to believe this monster of falsehood and untruth, a bottomless pit of hypocritical preposterous blasphemies. 10 Would to God the daily ambitious practices of many, that are or would be in great place amongst us, the proneness of most to transgress the bounds of lawful authority, and their unreadiness to recall their errors though never so gross, their extreme impatience of all impeachment by men, as far their Superiors in spiritual graces, as their inferiors in secular dignity; did not plainly show the passage from that point, where these men's resolutions anchor, unto this new tire, the Rock of honour, and seat of pride, to be but short, and the transportation easy, if opportunities of Time and Tide did serve them. But of the particular temptations, and opportunities that did first drive the Romanists into this harbour, as also of inveterate errors in other points, and relics of Heathenish dispositions, whereby they two others after them, elsewhere (according to my promise) if God permit. At this time it shall suffice to have waded thus far in these unpleasant passages, for discovering the enemy's weakness in his new Fortifications, or Repalliations rather of such breaches, as our ancient Worthies have made in their imaginary Rock of strength. Now as my soul and conscience in the sight of God, and his holy Angels can assure me, these imputations of blasphemy, sorcery, and preposterous Idolatry, I have laid upon this fundamental point of Romish faith, are most true, though much less exaggerated than it deserves: so again, I must confess, it hath in some sort ever gone against my conscience, publicly to decipher or display her abominations. For my little experience of this present ages temper too well instructs me, what great offence is oftimes hereby given to men, as weak in faith as strong in their persuasions of it, to slatter themselves in their hypocrisy, or make them seem unto themselves, men rightly religious or thoroughly sanctified, whilst they measure their love to true religion by their hatred unto this doctrine of Devils, or compare themselves with Priests and Jesuits, as they are painted out in their native colours by eloquent and learned Pastors. But his iniquity be upon his own head, that thus perverts my labours, undertaken for his good, unto his harm. For unto a quite contrary purpose have I set forth this survey of Romish blasphemy, in a larger volume than first I meant it, even to stir up myself, and every Professor of true religion, unto serious amendment of our lives, to hold fast our faith, by holding up hands pure from bribery and corruption, by lifting up hearts and minds void of all guile and hypocrisy, ardently zealous of every good work, unto the Lord our God continually; lest such swarms of Caterpillars and Locusts, as have chosen Beelzebub for their God, devour this land, Mortis modus morte peior. To think such should be the instruments of our woe, will unto most of us, I know far surpass all conceit of any other woe itself, or misery that in this life can befall us. And yet whilst I consider what God hath done of old to Israel his first borne, and judah his own inheritance: the overplus of our ingratitude towards him for all his goodness, especially our wilful continual abusing these days of peace, more and more sweet and gracious than jerusalem itself, the vision of peace, did ever see so long together without interruption; I am, and have been, as my public meditations can testify, for these few years of my ministery, possessed with continual dread, lest the Lord in justice enlarge his threatenings denounced against judah upon this Land. Fearful was that message unto Jerusalem, I will bring the most wicked of the Heathen, and they shall possess their houses: but more terrible is our doom, if this sentence be gone out against us, I will plague you by the wickedest amongst the Christians, by men more cruel, proud, and insolent, then Babylonian, Turk or Insidell, or any other enemy of Christ's Church hath been, or could be, unless Christians or Jesuits in name or show, they were mere Antichristians, or Bariesus' heart and affection. Such titles we readily give, and willingly hear given unto Loyolacs' infamous brood. But if our ways shall continually prove as odious unto our God, as these terms import that Society is unto us: what have we done? Surely tied our bodies to the stake of justice, by the wickedness of our hands, and proud imaginations of our polluted hearts; whiles our tongues, in the mean while, have set our cruel executioners hearts on fire, more grievously to torment, to consume and devour us. 11 But though likelihood of their prevailing against us be, without our repentance, great, and their cruelty, if they should prevail, more than likely to be most violent: yet this their hope it cannot be long. Tu quoque crudelis Babylon dabis impia paenas, Et rerum instabiles experiere vices. The Lord in due time will turn again the captivity of his people, and the now living may live to see these sons of Babel rewarded, as they have long sought to serve us. Their shameless Apologies for equivocation, and this old charm of Templum Domini, which like unlucky birds always flocking, or frogs croaking against ill weather, they have resumed of late with joint importunate cries (albeit with these they bewitch the simple, & choke the worldling or careless liver, that accounts all serious thought of Religion his greatest trouble) sound unto hearts settled in grace, or minds illuminated with the spirit of truth, but as the last cracklings of Lucifer's candle, sometimes shining in the Roman Lanthernes as the morning star, or an Angel of light, but now so far spent and sunk within the socket, that it recovers it wont brightness but by flashes; nor can his nostrils, that is able with the least breath of his displeasure from heaven in a moment to blow it out, any long time endure the smell. Even so, O Father, for thy son Christ jesus sake; even so, O Christ, for thine Elect and chosens sake, impose a period to our grievous sins against thee, and our enemy's malice against us: infatuate their policies, enfeeble their strength, and prevent them in their Devilish purposes, that seek to prevent thee in thy judgements, by setting the world in combustion before thy coming. Amen. The continuation of matters prosecuted in the first BOOK. THe ingenious Reader, I trust, rests fully satisfied, that for planting true and lively faith in every private Christians heart, experiments answerable to the rules of Scripture, without absolute dependence upon any external rule thereto equivalent, are sufficient; the assistance of the holy spirit (whose necessity, for the right apprehension of divine truths revealed, the Romanist nor doth nor dare deny) being supposed. That Valentians heart did tell him thus much, and secretly check him for his ridiculous curiosity to make way unto his circular resolution of faith * Lib. 2. Sect. 4. Chap. 5. §. 16 & sequent. Si autem quis demum rogetur, cum & revelatio & propositio infallibilis obscurae & inevidentes sint, quid ipsum impulerit, ut hunc quasi labyrinthum rerum obscurissimarum ingressus sit ad fidem modo dicto acceptandam hoc est, ad credendum revelationem propter Ecclesiae propositione, tanquam propter condicionem requisitan, & hanc vicissim propter revelationem tanquam propter causam credendi: veniat tum ad illum alterum secundum processum & rationes, atque motiva clariora exponat, quibus & ipse inductus fuit, & quivis prudens indu●● possit, ad acceptandam ciusmod● fidem, quantumuis secundum se inevidentem & obscuram. Id quod luculenter disserere licebit, co●nitis conmunibus motivis nostrae sidei. Valent. Tom 3. in Aquinatem disput 1. qu. est. 1. de object 〈◊〉 punct. 1. §. ult. before refuted, his diffident speeches immediately thereto annexed, (upon consciousness no doubt of it insufficiency) will give the Reader, though partial, just cause of suspicion. If a man (saith he) be yet further questioned, seeing aswell the divine revelations, as the Churches infallible proposal; are obscure and inevident; what should impel him to enter into such a labarynth of obscurities, as to embrace the doctrine of faith by the former method, [to wit believing the revelation for the Church's proposal, as for a condition unto belief requisite; and the Church's proposal again for the revelation, being the cause of his belief] then let him come unto the second process (or method) and expound the reasons and clearer motives, whereby he was, and every discreet man may be, induced to embrace faith, though of itself inevident and obscure. Thus do they traduce the grace of God, as if there were no difference betwixt mid-day-light and mid-night-darkenesse; as if the dawning of that day star in our hearts, or light of Prophets our a 2. Pet. 1. 19 Apostle speaks of, were not a mean betwixt that more than demonstrative evidence of divine Truths which glorified Saints enjoy, and obscurity or jewish blindness. The particular manner how God's spirit works lively faith, by such experiments as partly I did and hereafter must acquaint him withal, the Reader I hope will gather, of his own accord, out of the discourses following, concerning the nature of Christian faith, and the principal objects thereof, whereunto my meditations are now addressed, my long durance in this unpleasant subject having bred in my soul a more eager thirst after these well springs of life. FINIS. Errata. In the Preface page 3, line 3, for Author of, read Author. pag. 7, lin. 2, for Damnable Idolaters, read damnably Idalatrous. Page 13, line 31, there, read their. p. 14, l. 30, should, if any should. p. 24, l 27, go, ergo. p. 28, l. 17, ort, sort. p. 48, l 17, lest, left, ibid. l. 31, such, 0. p. 50, l. 9, fuutre, future. p. 52, l. 13, our confession, 0. ibid. l. 16, exceptions, exception? p. 53, l. 5, of, or of. ibid. l. 18, cause, can. p. 54, l. 11, no, 0. p. 56, l. 8, his and, and his. p. 57, l 6, same, omit. p. 60, l. 11 or super, & super. p. 62, l. 12, thereto, though. p. 63, l. 32, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, p. 70, l. 14, offence, of offence. p. 73, l. 22, so, do. p 75, l. 21, it is, it is evident. p. 77, l. 19, lest left. p. 79, l. 17, disabundantly, this abundantly. p. 80, l. 20, be, can be. p. 83, l 34, representive, representative. p. 84, l. 11, interrupted, uninterrupted. ibid. 25, his, this. p. 85, l. 29 that, they. p. 86, l. 6, continued, all things continue. ibid. l. 14, approved, an approved. ibid. l. 23, they, omit, ibid. l. 33, with them, within them. p 90, l 25, cords, records. p 93 l. 14, thy, they. p. 109, l. 10, untruths, truths. p. 110, l. 18, skill, still. ibid. l. 24, only, om. p. 112, l. 27, sins, such. p. 113. l. 22, of, or. p. 116, l. 13, Minister, Master. p. 117, l. 21, former, form. p. 122, l. 3, would have, had. p. 127, l. 7, mes, mens. ibid. l. 11, death, to death. p. 133, l. 28, conseruancie, consonancy. p. 140, l. 32, tropics, topickes, p. 141, l. 22, the, om. p. 144, l. 15, revive, review. p. 151, l. 18, of, om. ibid. l. 19, the, of the. p. 153, l 11, this, they. p. 155, l. 37, matters, meats. p 156, l. 13, thy, they. ibid. l. 19, mine, wine. p. 168, l. 26, remembrance, Remembrancer. p. 173, l. 34, uniformally, uniformly. pag. 183, l. 15, mist King, mistaking. p. 192, l. 26, in, om. p. 204, l 4, irriation, irritation. ibid. l. 7. former, formal. p. 205, l. 2, deal hebraica aut suppone vera ex Deut. etc. p. 207. l. 22, ruled, could. p. 251, l. 33, root, note. p. 258, l. 3, best, last. p. 279, l. 20, fast, fest.