The Baptist against the papist, or, The Scripture and Rome in contention about the supream seat of judgment, in controversies of religion together with ten arguments or reasons, discovering the present papal church of Rome to be no true church of Christ : wherein it is also evinced that the present assemblies of baptized believers, are the true church of Jesus Christ / by Tho. Grantham ... Grantham, Thomas, 1634-1692. 1663 Approx. 179 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 52 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2008-09 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A41774 Wing G1527 ESTC R40005 18606510 ocm 18606510 108098 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A41774) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 108098) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 1655:7) The Baptist against the papist, or, The Scripture and Rome in contention about the supream seat of judgment, in controversies of religion together with ten arguments or reasons, discovering the present papal church of Rome to be no true church of Christ : wherein it is also evinced that the present assemblies of baptized believers, are the true church of Jesus Christ / by Tho. Grantham ... Grantham, Thomas, 1634-1692. [6], 61, [1] p. [s.n.], London printed : 1663. Errata: p. [1] at end. Imperfect: torn and faded with loss of print. Pages 25-50 from defective Union Theological Seminary Library copy spliced at end. Reproduction of original in the Bodleian Library. Includes bibliographical references. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Catholic Church -- Controversial literature. Bible -- Evidences, authority, etc. Baptists -- Apologetic works. Authority -- Religious aspects. 2007-11 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2007-11 Apex CoVantage Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2008-01 John Latta Sampled and proofread 2008-01 John Latta Text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion THE BAPTIST AGAINST THE PAPIST : OR , The SCRIPTURE and ROME in Contention about the SUPREAM SEAT of JUDGMENT , in CONTROVERSIES of RELIGION . Together with Ten Arguments or Reasons , discovering the present Papal Church of Rome , to be no true Church of Christ . WHEREIN It is also evinced , That the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers , are the true Church of Jesus Christ . By THO. GRANTHAM , a Prisoner for Truths sake . Luke 16. 29 , 31. They have Moses and the Prophets , let them hear them . — If they hear not Moses and the Prophets , neither will they be perswaded though one should rise from the dead . Ezek. 20. 18 , 19. But I said unto their children — Walk ye not in the Statutes of your fathers , &c. — I am the Lord your God , walk in my Statutes , and keep my Judgments , and do them — Joh. 12. 48. The Word that I have spoken , the same shall judge you in the last day . LONDON , Printed in the Year , 1663. THE AUTHOR TO THE READER . Courteous Reader , NOt because I envy those of the Papal Church , or desire them any evil ; Not that I desire they should be exposed to a suffering condition for matters of Religion , or that they should be denied any liberty in that respect which I desire my self , nor for any other prejudice ( God knoweth ) do I publish this small Treatise : But because I judge my self concerned at this time to give my Testimony for the Truth , against some Papal Tenents ; for divers causes : As first , I am at this time under restraint , and though nothing hath been laid to my charge , yet it is rumour'd by some that I am a Papist ; yea , in this place of my Confinement , have I been told to my face by some of the Protestant Clergie , that I am a Roman Jesuite . And indeed this is an ordinary aspersion which hath been cast upon those in general to whom I am related upon a religious account , viz. That we are all Papists , or will turn Papists , &c. and this , not so much to our personal prejudice , as to the dishonour of that antient way of Truth by us professed . Secondly , A more particular occasion of the publication of this Treatise , proceeded from the Papists themselves , in sending Seven Queries to the Baptized Congregations in this County ( commonly called Anabaptists ) To which , through the importunity of some Friends , I formed a brief Answer ; little thinking , I confess , that so much contention would have risen thereupon , as since I have met with . And I likewise confess , that the undertaking is such , as that it requireth a more fit Instrument than my self to manage it . Nevertheless , I hope I may say , that hitherto what hath come to pass in this contest , hath fallen out rather to the furtherance of the Truth ; for which cause I have thought fit to offer it to the perusal of others , so much of it I mean , as I conceive is at present needful ; and that is the substance of what hath passed about the means whereby we must decide or resolve Controversies in Religion . It now wants but few months of a year , since I sent my final Answer , containing a Review of all that had been said in way of Answer to the Queries before , in which I produced the Testimony of divers Antient Dictors , as concurring with what I had therein spoken , and , as being directly opposite to my Antagonist . But I have heard of late , that he is gone out of this Nation , so that I expect no more Reply from him . And though for divers Reasons hereafter shewed , I have not published the whole Discourse ( which , if need be , may in due time be brought to light ) yet I have thought it meet here to set down all the Seven Queries , that so if any Christian , of suitable endowments , for the Vindication of Truth , against the opposition that lyeth in the said Queries , shall think fit to lay forth his Talent in that Service , he may take hold of this occasion wherein to do it , ( for the Queries were not directed to any particular person ) however , I shall joyn to each Query , one Antiquery , which may serve at this present to blunt the edge of them , as they carry an opposition to the Truth . The QUERIES . The ANTI-QUERIES . Query 1. Antiq. 1. VVHether we are to resolve all Differences in point of Religion , only out of the written Word of God ? VVHat Differences in point of Religion can you resolve without the written Word of God ? and whether the written Word of God be a perfect Rule for matters of Religion ? Query 2. Antiq. 2. How know you precisely what is the true Word of God ? Whether some Book must not of necessity speak for it self ? and whether the Scripture doth not best deserve this priviledge ? And whether it be not a bold presumption to say , there are no holy Books but them which we or you have received for such , sith those which we have , tell us , there are other holy Writings , which never yet came to our hands , nor to yours ? Query 3. Antiq. 3. How know you that your Copies and Translations of the Bible are the true Word of God ? since the Original Writings are not come to your hands . What Copies and Translations of the Bible have you that are more true than ours ? and where are the Original Manuscripts of the Prophets and Apostles ? Qu. 4. Antiq. 4. Where we differ about the sense of the Word , by whom must we be tryed ? the dead Letter cannot explain it self . When we differ about the true Church , and about the meaning of Authors , by whom must we be tryed ? They cannot speak for themselves more than the Scripture : and whether the Scriptures , compared together , do not explain themselves ? also , whether it be not an opprobrious and ignominious speech for you to call the Scripture a dead Letter ? and whether the true lovers of the Scripture ever vouchsafed it such ill , and indeed improper language ? Qu. 5. Antiq. 5. What clear Text have you out of Scripture for the procession of the holy Ghost from the Father & the Son ? or , for changing the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday ? or prohibiting Poligamy , or Infant-Baptism ? And , whether there be not as clear Texts to prove unwritten Tradition , Purgatory , and the real Presence ? Whether the Baptism of the true Church be not one ? and whether that one be not expresly found in the Scripture ? And whether the Scripture doth not prohibit all beside that one ? And whether the Papists have not confessed in many of their Books , that Infant-Baptism is not found in , nor grounded upon the Scripture ? and then , whether it be not clear , that all the Texts which speak of Baptism , do not prohibit Infant-Baptism ? Also , whether Joh. 15. 26. and 14. 26. and 16. 7. be not clear Texts that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son ? Also , whether 1 Cor. 7. 1 , 2 , 3. do not as much prohibit one man for having two Wives , and one woman for having two Husbands ? and whether it do not clearly prohibit the latter ? Also , whether there be any that hold the first day under the notion of a Sabbath among the Baptized Churches ? and yet whether there be not clear Texts for the religious observation of it ? Act. 20. 7. Also , whether it he not absurd for you to ask for clear Texts to prove unwritten things ? Also , whether Rurgatory , and the Real Presence , as you hold them , is not plainly destructive to some Articles of the Christian Faith ? Qu. 6. Antiq. 6. VVhether Universality both for time and place , be not an evident mark of the true Church ? What Church can you name that hath that mark ? And whether the Woman that John saw , was not Rome ? And whether her Cup was not universally received , so that all Nations were drunk thereby ? Qu. 7. Antiq. 7. Whether you have really this mark , that is , whether you can fetch out of all Ages and Nations , Professors of your Religion ; in particular , you are desired to name but one or two in the first six hundred years after Christ of your Profession ; for example , such as held the sole-sufficiency of Scripture for deciding Controversies , and denied the lawfulness and usefulness of Infant-Baptism ? Whether any man can shew this mark , as it is here call'd for , without the help of humane History ? and whether humane History be a rule or ground for divine Faith ? And whether humane Histories ( especially those of the first three hundred ) after Christ , were not most , if not all , burnt , which concerned the Church ? and whether those that remain are not contradictory one to another ? Also , whether Infant-Baptism was so much as heard of in the first hundred ? and then , how could any be named that denied the usefulness thereof ? Also , whether a Church , whose gathering , constitution and government is answerable to the Scripture , be not the true Church of Christ ? And whether the Churches of the Baptists do not therein exceed all other whatsoever ? Thus , Reader , I have given thee some account of the causes why I publish this Treatise ; I desire thee to peruse it diligently . If in any thing the Truth be dishonoured , through any Error maintained by me , ( of which yet I do solemnly profess I am not conscious to my self ) then do not forbear to blame me in a christian sort : only , if thou perceivest me deficient in point of Language and Method , I desire thee to bear with that ; for I am one that gets my bread by the labour of my hands , and never saluted the Schools to gain the knowledge of their Arts. From the Common-Goal in the Castle of Lincoln , the 10th of the 11 month , ( commonly called January ) 1662. Farewel . TO THE Nameless Author OF THE VII . QUERIES ; And in him , to all the SONS of PAPAL ROME In the County of LINCOLN . HItherto the things pertaining to Religion , as they concern the Baptized Congregations , ( commonly called Anabaptists ) and you that are commonly called Papists , have been very little controverted . And whether it shall ever please God to try his Peoples Faith and Stedfastness , by your open opposition , as he hath done it by others , I may not presume to determine ; nor doubt I , but if it shall so fall out , he will advance his Truth thereby . It is most certain , that of those many wayes whereby the antient path of the Gospel hath for a long time been opposed , there is not found any more potent than yours ; and the rather , because your subtilty is utterly unknown to the generality of Christians in this Age and Nation , where your Religion hath , as it were , lain dormant for many years . The most dangerous stratagem wherewith you usually assail your opposits , is , your denyal of the Scripture , &c. the high doom of Judgment in matters of Faith ; and ascribe that dignity to your selves , under pretence of your being the Church ; wherein if you conquer any one , your work is , as it were , wholly accomplished . Whereupon , I have here presented to the world , somewhat of your skill , in this important Question , Whether we are to resolve all Differences in point of Religion , only out of the written Word of God ? yea , I have faithfully transcribed your last Reply to my Answers , which contains the sum of what you said in all your other Papers . Whereby the Reader will discern ( if I think right ) wisdom used to the hurt of them that have received it . I have forborn at this time to publish all that hath passed between us about the seven Queries ; partly , for that one thing is oft repeated in our several Papers ; and partly , and indeed especially , for that it is to little purpose to controvert any particular point of Religion , till we be agreed about the Judge , that must determine our Differences . Now , whereas you do ascribe this Prerogative to your selves , under pretence of your being the Church of Christ , I have therefore laid down several Reasons , by which it may appear , that you are not the Church , and so not that Judge , whereunto you pretend to be so willing to adhere . I have likewise shewed , that we , your opposits , have the true claim to the title of Christ's Church ; that so , if you will appeal to her , you must then appeal to us ; which yet we believe you will not be perswaded to , nor indeed do we desire you should , whilst this is the Question , Whether we , or you , be the Church ? No , we are content to say with Augustine , Ask not us in this case , we will not ask you , but let this matter be tryed by the Scripture : yea , saith he , let the Prophets , Christ , and his Apostles be Judge , Yea , we say further in his words , Let matter with matter , cause with cause , reason with reason , counted by authority of the Scriptures , not proper to any but indifferent Witnesses to both parts . My final Answer to the first of the seven Queries , I have here published , with as little alteration or addition as possibly I could , to give the Reader a true understanding of the matters in difference . And if you publish any thing hereupon , I desire no fairer dealing from you , than you have in this case from me . I have seriously considered what should be the design of your Queries ; and hitherto it appears to be chiefly , to exalt the authority of mens Traditions , above the lively Oracles of God , the Scriptures . For though it should be granted ( which you can never prove ) that there hath continued a true Church at Rome ever since it was there planted ; yet would it not follow , that all which your Church holdeth under the title of Ecclesiastical Tradition , must needs be obeyed by us ; for it is certain that the Jews did retain the state of a true Church , when yet their Traditions ( however by them accounted ) were but the Traditions of men , which both the Prophets and Christ himself , termed vain Worship ; especially such of them as made void the Commands of God , as we are sure many of yours do ▪ and therefore , as Christ said to them , Why do you transgress the Command of God by your Tradition ? the same we are humbly bold to say to you , when you ask us , why we transgress your Traditions ? for surely , of none can it more fitly be said than of you , that laying aside the Commandments of God , you hold the Tradition of men . THO. GRANTHAM . THE BAPTIST AGAINST THE PAPIST . The FIRST PART sheweth , the SCRIPTURE and ROME to be in Contention about the SUPREAM SEAT of JUDGMENT in Controversies of RELIGION . THe first of all Controversies is founded upon this Query : What is the authoritative Judge of Controversies ? And indeed till there be some agreement in this point , there can be no expectation of any fruitful issue of any Controversie . Now all Controversies amongst the sons of men , are reduceable to one of these two heads , namely , things humane , or , things divine ; things precisely pertaining to this life , or things which only pertain to that which is to come ; concerns of a secular consideration , or concerns of a religious consideration . And according to the nature of these Controversies , such ought the Judge for decision thereof to be . Concerning this Judge of Religious Controversies , there are divers opinions . Some say that the Light , or that of God in Every Man , is this only infallible Judge of all Religious Controversies . But if this be admitted , a multitude of inconveniences must needs follow , of which this is not the least , That there can be no end of Controversies , because , if every man have this Judge of all Debates in himself , and he aver , that what he saith and doth is according to the voice of this Judge ( or , that of God in him ) no man can take in hand to judge contrary thereunto , without becoming the Judge's Judge , and so violate the Rule proposed . For this opinion refers not doubtful matters to that of God in some men , or a select number of men , but to that of God in every man. There is another Opinion , which saith , That amongst all men which pretend to own Christ , and challenge to themselves the title of his Church , and yet do deny each other to have an interest in that title ; That amongst all such parties of the sons of men , the only infallible and authoritative Judge of their Controversies about Religion , is the LORD Himself , as he speaketh by his Spirit in the holy Scriptures ; together with right Reason : or thus , which is all one , The Apostles and Prophets , as they speak in their holy Writings , are the onely infallible authoritative Judge in these Controversies . Yet three things are in this Opinion allowed : first , That the living voice of the Pastors ( with the Church ) in their respective Ages wherin they live , are of great importance in order to the terminating strife in the Church , as a Church . Secondly , That Records of Antiquity are of some usefulness for the resolving some Controversies , and for the better discovery of some Errors , yet not so absolutely necessary , but that the Church may sufficiently resolve her Controversies without them . Thirdly , That there is a Judgment of Science to be allowed every man , as touching all things which he chuseth or refuseth in matters of Religion , to be used with moderation and discreet subjection . And this is the Opinion to which for my part I do adhere . There is another Opinion which saith , That the Papal Church of Rome is the Supream Judge and Catholick Moderatrix of all Disputes in matters of Faith , and that All are bound to hear and obey her Voice under pain of Damnation ; and that the Scriptures , as taken in the second Opinion , is not the Judge of Controversies . Now this is the Opinion which at this time I am to examine , which in much seriousness I humbly purpose to do , and leave it to the sober consideration of all men . And for the better discharge of this duty , it is meet we should understand what the Papists mean by the Church of Rome . And this I find , that under that title they would involve the whole Church of Christ from the Apostles dayes until this present time , at least all the Faithful since the time that Paul declares the Roman Church to have been famous , as Rom. 1. 8. But this is the very thing denied by us : for though we willingly grant that there was a very famous Church at Rome , when Paul wrote his Epistle to them ; yet it followeth not , that there is such a Church there now , or that all that ever from that time to this have walked in the steps of true Faith , must needs be supposed to have been Members of the Roman Church , or rather of the Church of Rome ( so called ) especially since it was Papal . So that in this Controversie they must be content to define the Church of Rome on this wise , ( viz. ) All that in any Age since Christ , was of the same Faith and Practice in things religious , which is at this day found in the Papal Church of Rome , and those only , are the persons of whom the Papal Church of Rome doth consist . And indeed this is as much as they can reasonably desire ; for if those holy men who lived in times past , were of a Faith and Practice contradistinct to that which Rome hath now received , Then may not the present Papal Church without wrong , challenge them to be of their Church ? As for example : Paul , who bore witness for Christ at Rome , and the Christians there in his dayes , was of the Church of Christ at Rome ; yet we deny that they were any part of the Papal Church of Rome . The Church of Rome therefore , defined as before , I do deny to be the infallible authoritative Judge of all Controversies about matters of Faith or Religion : And I do further say , That the Scriptures and right Reason , as laid down in the second opinion , much more deserves to be received for this supream Judge of Controversies , than the Papal Church of Rome : and that there is not an other Umpire that can so effectually decide the Controversies of Religion , which depend between such parties of men as lay claim to the Title of Christ's Church , and yet deny each other to have an interest therein . And how far forth the truth in this Point hath been evidenced in that pro and con Discourse ( so far as it relateth to the first of them ) which hath been occasioned by the writing of the Seven Queries I have before spoken of , is here offered to the Consideration of all sober men , that profess to own the Glorious Gospel of the blessed God and our Saviour Jesus Christ . The first Query of the Seven was this , propounded by the nameless Papist . PAPIST . Whether we are to resolve all differences in point of Religion , only out of the written Word of God ? BAPTIST . To which Question these ensuing Answers were given before I received the Adversaries last Paper , which , with the Answers thereunto , I will transcribe verbatim . I say the Answers were , That the word Controversies being understood of such Controversies only as depend between those parties of men who deny each other to be the Church ; that then there is no other way whereby WE can resolve those Controversies , but by the assistance of God's Spirit speaking to us [ through the undoubted Prophets , and Apostles , and Primitive Churches ] in the lively Oracles of God , the Scriptures of Truth , together with the help of right Reason in a way of subserviency to those divine directions . Or , if the word Controversies , shall relate only to all such Controversies as fall within the compass of the Church , that then to the former means , we are to joyn the living Voice and Authority of the Church ( in present being ) assembled with her Pastours , as the ordinary means appointed of God to terminate strife in the Churches . But if the Division in the Church be so great , as that it be not this way decissive ; or the Doubt so secret , as not this way to be resolved ; there is not then a better way , than for both Parties to reason it out till Truth and Innocency do prevail , as the two Tribes and an half did with the other Tribes of Israel , and prevailed , Joshua 22. or in some doubtful cases the use of Lots may be admitted for the resolution of them , Acts 1. PAPIST . It is worth observing , how many windings and turnings you have to avoid the difficulty of this Query ; Whether we are to resolve all differences in point of Religion , only out of the written Word of God ? First , you leave out the word [ only ] in which lay the very knot of the difficulty . 2. Then you give me a piece of an Answer , and keep in the living voice of the Church , as a reserve for your Second Paper . 3. When you are shewed how you for sake your old fort , the sole sufficiency of Scripture , as if you were afraid to come too near us , you give back again , and do your worst to discredit this living voice of the Church , so that in effect it stands but for a meer cipher , as I foresaw it would when it came once to the scanning . 4. Upon second thoughts , finding your error , by putting the Query , What is become of the living voice of the Church ? you shuffle again , and would gladly make something of it ; but this something , in the end , falls to just nothing , as I shall make it further appear by ripping up the particulars of this your last Answer . BAPTIST . I have used no windings to avoid the difficulty of the first Query ; but you are to know , that when I first answered it , I took the word Controversie to relate only to such Controversies as depend between such persons as deny each other to have any present right to either the Name or Priviledges of the Church . And indeed , I do not see how any other sense can be made of this Query : for , under that word WE , I suppose you included no more but your self and Church , on the one party ; and us , to whom you sent the Queries , on the other party ; and we well know that you account us no members of the Church ; and you likewise know that we have the same opinion of you ; but when your Observations ( or Second Paper ) took into the Query all Controversies which fall within the compass of the Church , as such , I could do no less than tell you , that my Answer did not exclude the living voice of the Church in such cases ; [ but that my Answer doth only exclude every such voice as exalteth it self above the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures : And whereas in your Third Paper , you told me , That to appeal to Councils and Fathers , is a clear way to agree all our differences ; I told you that this is a very cloudy way , and that because they are contrary to themselves , and one another . 2. Till they be agreed , they cannot agree us . 3. And sith you take not the Scripture as being of any authority , till they , as the Church , give it you ; I demanded , by what you would agree them in their divisions ? 4. And to shew you how they are divided , I gave you divers Instances concerning their divisions , as also touching the corruption which hath been found in divers Popes . ] PAPIST . 1. I had no reason to take notice of your excluding from the living voice of the Church , every voice exalting it self above the voice of Scripture , because it was a very needless Exception , since the Church arrogates no such power , but only to interpret the voice of Scripture . 2. Why this way of taking the sense of Scripture from the living voice of the Church , should be so cloudy as you say it is , I do no more understand , than that the living voice of a Judge should be a cloudy way to understand the Law by . As for your Riddles , how we are to reconcile the Fathers and Councils when they seem to clash with their own Assertions , but by having recourse to Scripture : I Answer briefly , That General Councils have no such contradictions as you speak of . And as for the holy Fathers , when there is any such difficulty in any one of them , we must look upon the rest what they say , and to follow their unanimous consent : for if we take them singly , no doubt they have erred , and these errors we know by their dissenting from the rest ; for otherwise , certainly the authority of any one of the antient Fathers , when he expounds Scripture , or relates the Christian practice of his time , and is not censured or contradicted by the rest , or condemned by the Church in a General Council , is of greater authority to decide Controversies in point of Religion , or to know the true meaning of Scripture , than any thing you have alledged , as we shall see by and by , when I have first examined what you bring to discredit the Fathers and Councils . Against the Fathers , you first bring St. Aug. retract . 21. contradicting himself by saying , that , Matth. 16. Christ built not his Church upon Peter , but upon Peter 's Faith : sure you read not St. Aug. for he there expounds that place of Christ himself , and not of the Faith of St. Peter ; nor doth he recal his expounding it elsewhere of St. Peter , but leaves both Expositions as probable , concluding thus ; Hunc autem sententiam quae sit probalitur eligat lector . Is this fair dealing ? Again , you bring in St. Aug. contra . Petil. c. 2 , 3 , 4. as contrary to himself and me , because he teaches , That the Church is to be found out by the words of Christ . But though ( I doubt ) you cannot make this appear in any of these three Chapters , yet were it nothing to the purpose ; for we deny not but the Church is to be found out by these clear marks , whereby the holy Scripture hath deciphered her . Next , you alledge St. Chrysost . in Psal . 22. and St. Ambrose de Sacrament . calling the Blessed Sacrament , a similitude or figure of Christ's Body and Blood. I Answer . 1. That it is the Opinion of the Learned , that neither St. Chrysost . nor indeed any Grecian , could be Author of that work . 2. I say , the Sacrament may be truly called the similitude of Christ's Body and Blood , because it is not given in the form of flesh and blood , of which men would have a horror , as the same St. Amb. observes , but under the Forms of Bread and Wine . The next is St. Dinis Eccl. Herarch . but quoting no place , I have not yet met with it ; I am sure that work is so clearly for us in this very point , that our Adversaries the Calvinists , and Calvin , denies it to be his : St. Aug. and Tertull. are as clear for us , and what you bring out of them clearly answered by Bellarm. de Euchar. And you are to know that it is a general rule amongst the Learned , that we are to explicate obscure places by those that are clear , if we mean to know the Opinion of any Author , it being impossible for any man to write so warily , but that sometbing may be objected out of him ( especially if he have writ much , as it is our case ) which may seem contrary to what he expresly teaches . And you had need observe this rule in expounding the Scriptures themselves , or otherwise you will meet with a thousand absurdities and contradictions . Against the Councils you produce that of Constantinople under Constant . Copron. as crying down Transubstantiation . But this was a factious Meeting , never owned for a Council , neither by the Greek nor Latine Fathers , and expresly condemned in the Nicene Council : and the jest is , this Mock-Council was so far from condemning Transubstantiation as you affirm , that they swore by the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist , to abolish the Worship of Images : [ Something should here have been said concerning Bertram , who is said to have opposed Transubstantiation ; but in the transcription of my Third Paper , there was an Errata , and the Instance is not material ; so that what is said about him , I will expunge in both Papers . ] You say further against the Authority of Councils , That they have contradicted each other in their Decrees , about the Laityes communicating in one or both kinds : But we grant that the Church may vary in Customs of this nature , which being indifferent , may be altered as she shall think fit , according to several circumstances : What we deny is , that the Church , or General Councils ever made contrary Decrees about the belief of any point of Faith. It is no wonder that you have a fling against the Pope , after you have been so bold with Holy Fathers , and General Councils ; but I must tell you , Though many of our Divines hold him infallible , when he speaks ex Cathedra , as they call it , yet is it not the Opinion of all , and consequently no Article of our Faith. Only we agree in this , That for preserving peace in the Church , all are bound so far to submit to the Popes Decrees , as not to oppose them until a General Council be called , from whose Judgment we admit no Appeal . What you say of the wicked Lives of some of them , is nothing to the purpose ; for as wicked Caiphas play'd the Prophet , so might the Bishops of Rome , with the assistance of the Holy Ghost , be true interpreters of God's Word , for all their wicked lives ; such Gratia gratis date , which are given for the good of others , do not argue his Sanctity that hath them . To make you a true Prophet , I will here cry out , What is become of the living voice of the Church , since you have done what you can to discredit her , by casting all the dirt you can in her face , as it is evident , unless you will throw out the Holy Fathers and General Councils ( the Churches Representatives ) out of the Church ! BAPTIST . I perceive our Judgments differ concerning the living voice of the Church , what it is ? I have told you , That I take it for the present Church and her Pastours , in those particular Ages wherein they live . You take this living voice to be the Decrees of Councils , and Books of the antient Fathers . And here I cannot but marvel , why you should be willing to Appeal to the Books of the Antients , and their written Decrees , as a living voice , and clear way to decide our Controversies , and yet appeal from the Books of the Prophets and Apostles , as being but dead Letters , and senceless Characters . Certainly , if any Writings now extant , may be called the Churches living voice , the Holy Scripture doth better deserve that title than any other . Nor will it suffice here to object ( as it is the Papists usual way ) that our difference is about the Scripture and the Sense thereof , &c. for the same difference is found amongst us , touching the Books and Sense of Councils and Fathers : yea , I think I may be bold to say , That even the Learned are so much divided concerning them in both respects , as that they can never be therein reconciled . But is it so ? that the voice of the Fathers , &c. who only speak in their Writings , is a means or way of equal clearing to decide our differences , as the voice of a living Judge in a Case of Law amongst men ? Then what reasonable man can render a reason , that the voices of the Prophets and Apostles , though only speaking to us in their Books and Decrees , may not be appealed to , as a clear way to decide our differences ? Sith all men , professing Christianity , must confess that the Prophets and Apostles speak with as much Life and Power , Certainty and Authority , as any that ever writ since their time : No-whither now can you turn your selves , but to your selves ( as I have formerly noted ) and take upon you to be the only living voice , that must , without controul , interpret Fathers , Councils , and Scriptures too ; and when you have done , sit down as Judge , to give Sentence for your selves , and against your opposers . Well , you have assigned us a Judge of Controversies ; To wit , the Fathers and Councils of the Church ( long ago deceased ) and this is a clear way , you say , to agree all . But I have noted that it 's a very cloudy way , and that because they could not yet agree themselves ; for they are opposite each to other to this day , insomuch as you are utterly unable to reconcile them , since ( as I have shewed ) you must not make use of the Scripture to that purpose ; because , before the Scripture can have any authority to any purpose , ( according to your Judgment ) your Councils must deliver it to us as the Word of God ; which they cannot do till they be found , First , holy Fathers and Councils of the Church ; And secondly , at unity among themselves , and each with himself . And I have asked you , How you will effect this difficult work ? To which you Answer ; First , That General Councils have no such Controversies as I talk of . Secondly , That when there is such difficulty in any one of the Fathers , we must look upon the rest what they say , and so follow their unanimous consent ; for ( say you ) if we take them singly , no doubt they have erred , and these errors we know by their dissenting from the rest . I answer first , That General Councils have erred , and that in matters of Faith , is undeniable , if Records may be credited rather than you . As first , The Council of Arimi . did err so , as to conclude for the Arrian Heresie , namely , That there was a time when Christ was not the Son of God : and sure you account that an errour in point of Faith. Secondly , The Council of Ephesus did err so , as to conclude for the Eutichian Heresie , namely , That the Body of Christ was not of one Substance with ours ; and is not this an errour in point of Faith ? Or will you say , that these things were never contradicted and censured by other Councils ? These things are not denied by your eminent Disputant . See the Book intituled , Certamen Religiosum . So then it appears , that General Councils have erred , and contradicted each another in very high points of Faith. Moreover , as to the things whereof I chiefly spake in my last Paper , it is manifest that Councils have contradicted one another about the Sacraments ; for the Council of Constance , confirmed by Pope Martin the Fifth , doth curse the Laity , or excommunicate such as receive the Sacrament in both kinds . And yet by the Council of Basil , the Laity are allowed to receive it in both ; which Council was also confirmed by a Pope , namely , Felix the Fifth . Sure one of these Councils must needs err . But you have a way to salve this errour ( such as it is ) and that is to tell me , That the Church may vary in customs of this nature . Sure this is a corrupt opinion , by which it will follow , That we have no certainty of , nor constancy in any Ordinance of Christ ; for if the Church have power to take the Cup away , she hath power also to take the Bread away ; for certainly she hath as much to do with the one , as the other . But truly this your variation , as it is clear beside the Institution of Christ , and the Doctrine of Paul , so it hath in a manner destroyed both Baptism , and the Supper of the Lord , as is evident by the practice used in divers of your Masses , where the People partake neither of the Bread nor Cup. As also your Peda-Rantism , hath in a great measure defrauded the Sons of men of the Baptism of Repentance . But be pleased to consider , that this your sacrilegious division of this Sacrament , is condemned by Cyprian , Gelasius , and others . First , Cyprian saith , How can we exhort the People to shed their blood for Christ , if we deny them the Blood of him ? The division of this Mystery cannot be without great Sacriledge , saith Gelasius . Again , you cannot be ignorant how the Council of Carthage , decreed the Books of Tobit , Judith , Ecclesiasticus , Sapience , and Maccabees , should be received for Canonical , notwithstanding they were rejected out of the sacred Canon by the Council of Laodicea ; and here by the way I may take notice , how you would have me walk by such a rule as you your self do not observe ; for you propose the Judgment of those who lived nearest to the Apostles times , as my safest rule to walk by , supposing they knew the Mind of God , or Christ , better than those that came after ; but then why do you reject the Judgment of the Laodicean Council , which is more antient than that of Carthage , which yet you follow in receiving the Books of Maccabees into your Canon of holy Scripture . Secondly , It is marvellous to see , what work you make in reconciling the Fathers without the Scriptures . And seeing you are so hardy as to undertake this task without Scripture , as undoubtedly you see you must , or else grant , that the Scripture must be that whereby we must decide all Controversies in Religion ; for certainly , if we must decide all the Fathers Controversies in Religion with or by the Scripture , it is not then very likely that either we or they should decide ours without them : but I say , sith you have undertaken to decide the Fathers Differences without Scripture , pray tell me , before you meddle with their Differences , how you know them to be holy Fathers of the Church ? can you prove them Church-members without Scripture ? I believe this is as hard a task as to reconcile their Differences without Scripture ; and yet this also must you do , before you can look upon the Scripture as any Rule for either them , or your self . You tell me , if I take the Fathers singly , no doubt they have erred : yet you say I must follow their unanimous Consent , ( a pretty Paradox ) Follow their Consent ! in what ? why say you , in their Interpretation of Scripture . Of Scripture ! Why there is no such thing as yet for them to interpret ; for you know ( that by your own direction ) we have laid by the Scripture , and must reconcile these Fathers by themselves . Miserable Guide ! hast thou not led me into a Labyrinth , and run thy self into a sufficient Maze ? I 'le back again and see how these Fathers themselves direct me in this difficult point . And first I meet with famous Augustine , who tels me how he took notice of the Fathers that were before him . Saith he , My consent without exception I owe not to any Father , were he never so well learned , but only to the Canonical Scripture : For whereas the Lord hath not spoken , who of us can say it is this or that ? and if he do say so , how can he prove it ? Yea , saith he , I require the voice of the Shepherd reade me this matter out of the Prophets , Psalms , the Gospel , or the Apostles Epistles . Neither ( saith he ) ought we to take the dispensations OF ALL MEN , how CATHOLICK SOEVER they be , or be they never so commendable as we take the canonical Scriptures , as though we may not ( saving the honour that 's due to such men ) reprove or refuse any thing of their Writings , if we find they meant otherwise than the Verity doth allow , by the help of God found by us , or by others . Again , he saith , I am not moved with Cyprian's Epistles ; for I do not take the Letters of Cyp. as the Canonical Scripture , but I do try his Writings BY THE CANONICAL SCRIPTURE ; and whatsoever in them doth agree with the Authority of the holy Scripture , I do receive it with his Commendation ; and whatsoever doth not — — I do by his good leave refuse it . And for further testimony of Augustine's integrity , hear what he saith of himself : Trust not me , ( saith he ) nor credit my Writings , as if they were Canonical Scripture , but whatsoever THOU findest in the Word , although thou didst not believe it before , yet ground thy Faith on it now ; and whatsoever thou readest of mine , unless thou know it certainly to be true , give no certain assent unto it . Again , he thus teacheth , We must be partakers of other mens Writings , wholly after the manner of Bees ; for they flie not alike to all Flowers , nor where they sit do they snatch all quite away , but snatching so much as may serve to their honey-making , they take their leave of the rest . Even so we , if we be wise , having gotten so much of others as is sound and agreeable to Truth , we will leap over the rest . Which rule , if we keep in reading and alledging the Fathers words , we shall not swerve from our Profession , the Scriptures shall have the sovereign place , and yet the Doctors of the Church shall lose no part of their due estimation . And saith Origen , We have need to bring the Scriptures for witness , for our Meanings and Expositions without them , have no credit , — — the discussing of our Judgements must be taken ONLY of the Scriptures . Thus you see the Fathers were not of your mind , that the Readers of their Books should not try them by the Scripture , but the contrary ; and that as we find them consenting to , or dissenting from Scripture ( not one another as you teach ) accordingly they advise us to believe , or not believe them . As I have said , it is a cloudy way to appeal to Councils and Fathers , so you now prove my saying true : for I alledged Augustine , as being opposite to you and your Church , touching the meaning of Matth. 16. Upon this Rock , &c. and , first , you tell me I read him not ; but I must tell you , I read him after a Scholar sufficient : and though your reading differ something from his , yet they both destroy the received Opinion of your Church concerning that Text ; for if Christ be that Rock , as you confess Augustine there teacheth , then it cannot be meant positively of Peter , and so not consequently of your Popes . My quotation out of Chrysostom in Ps . 22. you invalidate , by telling me , that Book was not writ by him . And this I find to be the usual way of Learned-men , when the passage alledged is clear and convincing , then a suspition must be cast upon the Book , &c. I could instance the best part of a thousand Books , Epistles , &c. which are intituled under the names of the Antient Fathers ; amongst which , as you observe , is reckoned the Book of Dynis the Areopagite , which I alledged in my Rejoynder . And do not these things contribute something towards the proof of my Assertion , namely , That it is a cloudy way to appeal to Fathers and Councils to decide Controversies in Religion . If then your way be cloudy , mine must needs be clear , unless you can assign a third way , opposit to both ; for undoubtedly there is a clear way to decide Controversies . You again prescribe me a way to find the meaning of the Fathers , and that is , to explicate their obscure places by such as are plain , &c. But by your leave , we can neither know which of their speeches are obscure or plain , without some rule whereby to know this . And now , what can supply this our necessity ? For example , Augustine is sometimes read , affirming the Sacrament to be the real Body and Blood of Christ ; otherwhiles he is read directly opposit to this : And how can you , or any body else , tell which of these sayings is clear or obscure , fith none must be permitted the use of his reason ( by you ) in this Controversie ; and how he should judge according to Faith , I know not , sith you , as yet , debar us of that by which Faith NOW cometh , namely , the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles as contained in the Scriptures . PAPIST . Something you would say for this living Voice of the Church you once had required as necessary to resolve Differences in Religion , but this signifies nothing in our present Query : for , after all your shifting , I cannot perceive that you make use of her Authority in point of Faith , ( which is our Qu. ) but only to take up other quarrels , by exhorting , reproving , &c. and in this also it seems you will be your own Judge , whether she follow Christ or no. Three things you affirm in relation to the Churches Authority . 1. That she is to rule her self according to Scripture ; which no body denies . 2. That the Church in former Ages is not to be a Rule for after Ages to rule themselves by ; because she could not foresee the Controversies that rise up afterwards . What if the same Errors be revived now , which in their times were condemned , is not the Judgment of the Church in those dayes a safe President for us to condemn the same Errors ? Besides , Is it not evident that the Pastors of the Church , the nearer they were to Christ's time , were the better able to judge of Christ's Doctrine ? You say , 3dly . That the Church is to be no Rule for those that are out of her communion . A strange Assertion . As if a clear light ( as the Church is in holy Scripture ) with so many marks to know her by ; as Unity , Sanctity , Universality , Miracles , &c. were not a good means for him that gropes in the dark to find out his way . Look well upon these marks , and you will find them to agree Only to the Roman Catholick Church , and to no upstart Congregation , and consequently , that you ought in all reason to give her the hearing in matters of Faith , and to have recourse unto her , as to the pillar and ground of Truth , 1 Tim. 3. which place you let slip , and this under pain of being accounted a Heathen , &c. Matth. 18. for though this place doth point out chiefly the obedience which Members of the Church owe her in point of Discipline , as you say well enough , yet hath it no small force in our present Debate , since those that will not hear her Voice when she ecchoes out the Voice of God , may well be esteemed by her as a Heathen . And in your own sence I suppose you will have your proviso , That the Church is to be obeyed only when she ruleth according to God's Word , of which you will be Judge too : So in conclusion all comes to this , That you and your spirit must be Judge of all Disputes . And then have not I reason to ask again ( since I , or any body else , may challenge as large a share in the Spirit and right Reason as you ) who shall take up the Quarrel ? And is not my comparison here very pat , That there must needs be as great confusion in your Church , as in a Kingdom where every one were left to decide his own case ? This was not the old way , as you may see , Deut. 17. 8 , 9. and Malach. 2. 7. which places you had no mind to take notice of : and yet you charge me for letting pass your Instance of St. Stephen , concerning the Libertines , Alexandrians , &c. which makes nothing at all for your pretended Evidence of God's Word : For though his Judgment might be well taken in expounding Scripture , as being full of the holy Ghost , and confirming what he said by Miracles , as the Scripture tells us he did , yet this is not your case , for I think you will not arrogate so much to your self . What you say of Christ and his Apostles vindicating their Doctrine out of Scripture , is very true , and our Church doth the same : but it is not true , that either Christ , or the primitive Saints were alwayes wont to send their Proselytes to the Scripture , to regulate their Faith. Did not Christ himself send St. Paul to Ananias for instruction ? Had you been of his counsel , you would have rather wished him to look into the Word of God , and see there what he was to do . And when there arose a Debate , even in the Apostles dayes , about the necessity of Circumcision , Act. 15. did they not assemble the Church , and so pronounce Sentence conciliariter , with a visum est Spiritui sancto & nobis ? BAPTIST . [ It is here worth noting how you dispute beyond the due bounds of the Query , which , as it concerns you Papists and us Baptists , hath no relation to the Differences which arise in the Church , as such , and indeed you go amiss in this matter throughout the whole Discourse . ] Here you seem to acknowledge , that the Church ought to rule according to Scripture ; but you will allow me to judge whether she do so or not . But I answer , that there is a Judgment of Science , as well as a Judgment Authoritative ; the latter I know cannot be exercised by me , nor any other Member of the Church , because this Power lyeth in the Church as imbodied together ; but the former , to wit , a Judgment of Science or Knowledge , is particular to each individual , and so my self , if a Member of the Church , am allowed the exercise thereof , even in matters of Religion , 1 Cor. 10. 15. I speak to wise men : judge ye what I say . The Apostle doth not here give , any wise man at Corinth leave to judge of that which he said , so as to censure what he had delivered , yet he must exercise his understanding to judge of what Paul had said , thereby to find out the verity of what was spoken . But yet I do confess , that our case , and the case of Christians then , do differ : for Paul was a Foundation-layer , a Master-builder , ( so that the Members might not so well judge then , as now , yet ) the Church now is to build upon the Foundation which is laid already : and you know that I have in my Rejoynder acknowledged , that it very nearly concerns particular Members of the Church , to have great regard to the Judgment of the Church , when , after serious debate , they deliver their Sentence in any point disputable . And further ( as touching your Church ) you tell me anon , that even a Heathen may judge of the holiness of your Church , by the Law of Conscience ; and then , why may he not by the same Law judge your Church concerning her unholiness ? nay verily , he must be able to speak both wayes , or else he hath no Judgment . And if a Heathen have this priviledge and ability , then why not a man professing Christianity , who hath not only the Conscience-Law , but also the written Law of God , by which he understands things more excellent , Rom. 2. From all this I only conclude , that each particular ought to have the free exercise of his Judgment in what he chuseth or refuseth , sith without this he cannot chuse or refuse any thing with confidence , nor to his comfort . And concerning Controversies in the Church , I do not see that ( in these dayes ) we are bound to follow the sentence of a multitude , ( though assembled in Council ) SO , as to hold their Sentence absolutely infallible ; for the promise of infallibility is not made to a certain select number * of Bishops , but to the Church , taken collectively ; and we may remember that a great Assembly of Prophets in the old Church , erred in Judgment with unanimous consent , when yet the Lord had one Micaiah at home which understood the truth of his Will. Wherefore I here conclude , although the Members of the Church ought to weigh with great respect the things concluded of by their Pastors , yet so may it be that they may swerve from the Truth , whilst God clears it up by some particular rather than by such an Assembly . And to this agrees very well a saying of Gerson , If it should so happen that there should be a General Council assembled , in which such a man were present as is well instructed , If the greatest part should decline through Malice or IGNORANCE , to the opposition of the Gospel , such a LAY-Man may be objected , against the said General Council . And saith Panormitan , In matters WHICH , CONCERN FAITH , the saying of a LAY-Man ought to be preferred before that of the Pope , if his saying be more probable by better authority of Scripture than that of the Pope . You often tell me , that to appeal to the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures , &c. is not a sufficient way to decide OUR Controversies , and that because you may challenge them to be for you , &c. To which I answer , by retorting your Argument thus , That which you call the living Voice of the Church , to wit , Volumns of Fathers , and Decrees of Councils , is therefore insufficient to decide OUR Controversies , because your opposites do say they are for them , and against you : and now you must answer your own Query , viz. Who must take up this Quarrel ? You answer , that we must explicate them one by another ; the places which are obscure , by such as are plain . And then I still ask you , why we may not as well agree our selves this way by the Volumns of the Prophets and Apostles ? I shewed before , how you misapply that Text , Matth. 18. and though the case is so plain , as that you cannot defend your self , yet you seem loth to decline your error , and would fasten a very gross passage upon me ; namely , that I should say , That the Church is no Rule for those that are out of her Communion , as not to be a light for such as grope in the dark . A manifest wrong ; I only say and prove , That those that are not of the Church , are not within the power of her Discipline ; nor can she reasonably desire unconverted ones to appeal to her Judgment-seat in Controversies between them and her . And I asked you , If you would not scorn us , if we should call upon you to appeal unto us as your Judges , Whether we , or you , be the Church ? and not doubting but you would , I concluded , that it is equally absurd for you , to desire us to appeal to you as our Judges . But you may find it plain enough in my Papers , That I do believe the Church SO to be a Rule to the world , as to shew them the way of Life , and so a good means for their Illumination and Conversion . — As for your three Texts , 1 Tim. 3. Deut. 17. 8 , 9. Malachi 2. 7. As they do your cause no good , so they do mine no harm : I grant the Church is the pillar and ground of the Truth , and that she hath Power to hear and determine all Controversies among her Members , as aforesaid ; and that it is the duty of the Members , to enquire of their Pastors , what is the way of God concerning them : But what of all this ? Ergo , The Papal Church of Rome is the only infallible Judge , and Moderatrix of all Contention about Religion . Ergo , we must all appeal to the Papal Church of Rome , as our Judge , in this Question , Whether we be of the Church , or not ? though we be in doubt , Whether she her self be a true Church , or not ? yea , though we are satisfied she is not . Are not these Monstrous Consequences ? Be it here observed , That I do believe the Church of Christ to be the Pillar of Truth , so , as that she was never so over-clouded with error , but that she hath enjoyed the fruition of that Promise , Matth. 16. in some good measure ever since it was made : Nor shall she ever so close with the gates of Hell , as by general consent , and full authority to dissert that Faith , which having Christ for its object , is the Rock she is built upon : and therefore you see , I hold the Church cannot err ( in some sense ) and indeed , he that holds the contrary , must ( for ought I see ) raze out that Promise , Matth. 16. and many other . And yet nothing from all this accrues to the Papal Church of Rome . I alledged Stephen , as defending the Truth by the authority of Scripture Only , &c. Nor can it be groundedly imagined , that ( had it been the mind of God , that such as are not of the Church , should be summoned to her Tribunal ) Stephen ( being full of the holy Spirit , the leader into all truth ) would have omitted the use of that means , but he knew that such authority the Church had none , as I shewed from 1 Cor. 5. What have I to do to judge them that are without ? do not ye also judge them that are within ? And therefore he could not mention any such power . And though Stephen did many wonders among the People , yet at this time when he so powerfully vanquished his adversaries , he did none at all , but only overcame them by the assistance of the Spirit speaking in the Scripture , &c. I desired you to shew me but one Instance , where ever any of the Primitive Saints did appeal to the Church , of which they were present Members , as Judge between them and such as never received their Doctrine : but you have not done it , nor indeed can it be done . As I shewed , that Stephen appealed to Scripture ONLY , &c. so I also shewed , That it was the way of Christ and his Apostles , frequently to vindicate their Doctrine against such as were not of their Church , by appealing to the Scriptue ( especially amongst such as owned the Scripture ) this you confess ; and also you tell me , that your Church doth the same : But this cannot be true of All your Doctrine , because you have told me , That many Points of your Faith are resolved without the written Word of God ; or else you never answered my first Antiquery , which demandeth , What Controversie in Religion you can resolve without the written Word of God ? And in your Answer you assigned , The Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son , Sabbath , Infant-Baptism , and MANY OTHER POINTS OF FAITH ; and I shall shew anon , that we have it pro confesso , from your Champions , that there be some Points of your Faith , which is not GROUNDED UPON , nor MENTIONED IN the SCRIPTURES ; and therefore your Church cannot vindicate such Points of her Faith and Doctrine by the Scripture . Although Christ sent Paul to Ananias for instruction , yet it followeth not , that we must take Romes instructions without Scripture . Is there no difference between the time that now is , and then was ? Much of the Scripture ( if not all the New Testament ) was then unwritten . Again , Ananias was immediatly sent of God. If you are so sent , prove it to us , as Ananias did , by shewing the Miracle of restoring Paul's sight . If you are not so sent , to what purpose do you alledge this Text ? I believe I might form you a monsirous Consequence here . PAPIST . You that will not trust the Churches Judgment , lay down four wayes of resolving Doubts ; The first , To argue it out till Truth prevail . But if we must argue only out of Scripture , and be our own Interpreters of it , there can be no end of arguing , as I have often shewed . The second , To appeal to God as the two Tribes did , Josh . 22. A rare way to end Controversies , to look for Miracles in our Disputes . The third , To appeal to Scripture , and right Reason : But if I challenge them to be on my side , who must take up the difference ? The fourth , To cast Lots . But though the Apostles did it , who certainly were inspired to do so , yet must not we presume to tempt God , or to look for the like Miracles , or to build our Faith upon such doubtful events . BAPTIST . You here wrong us , to say , that we will not trust the Judgment of the Church ; for the Church , truly and universally taken , we do credit , as her that is appointed of the Father , to be the Pillar and Ground of the Truth ; of which Church , we take the Prophets and Apostles to be the principal Members , and so in all Points of Faith , to be credited in the first place . But if by Church , you mean the Papal Church of Rome , I confess we dare not trust her Judgement , at least , not in all that she saith ; for example these following : 1. Your Church tells us , That it is not needful for the Scriptures to be read to , or by the Laity , in a tongue which they understand : and that though they Pray ( after another ) in Latine , though they understand not what they say , yet such prayer is sufficient , Rhem. Test . Annot. in 1 Corinthians . 2. Your Church tells us , That the Sacrifice of your Masse , is available to take away , or obtain remission of sins by the work wrought . Con. Trident. Sess . 22. That the whole Masse is a propitiatory Sacrifice for the quick and dead ; and whoso saith , it is only a commemoration of Christ's Death , &c. is accursed . Con. Trent . 3. Your Church holds , That such as deny that the real Flesh and Blood of Christ , is in the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament , ought to be burnt to death . 4. Your Church holds , and tells us , That Images , and old clothes of Saints , ought to be worshipped with religious Worship . 5. That men are AS FULLY Justified by good Works , AS THEY ARE DAMNED BY evil Works . 6. That it is unlawful for Ministers of Christ to Marry . 7. That the Scripture doth not contain all things necessary to Salvation . To omit many other , these are Points of your Churches Judgment , which we dare not trust , till by you , or some other , proved to be Truths . I assigned the use of Lots as lawful in some doubtful cases to end Controversies , and for proof , I quoted Acts 7. and this you will not allow for two Reasons . 1. Because ( you say ) the Apostles were inspired to use them ; but were it so ( as that you cannot prove ) yet it cannot be denied , but we may do some things which they were inspired to do : for the Holy Ghost was to lead them into all Truth , and they were to lead us into the same Truth , by their Example and Doctrine , Joh. 16. 13. 1 Cor. 11. 1 , 2. And be it here observed , That the Holy Ghost led those , our Teachers , to ordain the Ministry by Prayer , and laying on of Hands , Acts 6 , and Acts 13. which practice of theirs , is a good president to act by ; a president I say ; for this practice is not expresly commanded in Scripture , no more than the use of Lots in the election of Ministers . If it here be objected , That Christ might give laying on of hands in Precept when he was with his Apostles . I Answer , So also might he give them the other to be used , when there might be persons found of seemingly equal fitness to serve the Church . 2. You reckon the use of Lots , Acts 1. amongst Miracles , as your other Reason , why we may not use them to decide any Controversie ; but why you should so do , I see no more reason , than to say Josh . 22. mention'd any Miracles towards the composure of the difference between the two Tribes , and Israel ; where in truth no such thing can be found , though you seem to affirm it . PAPIST . In my last Paper , I took notice how you sent us to Heaven for Miracles , to take up our Quarrels after the Example of Moses , whose cause was cleared that way : Here you deny you brought in the Instance of Moses to this purpose , which , how true it is , every one that can reade must needs see . For , are not these your words ? But you say , Reason is on my side , &c. and demand by whom we must be tryed , who must take up the quarrel ? I answ . Even the same that took up quarrels of this nature in times past , Exod. 7 , &c. Do you not here tell us plainly , That God must take up our quarrels * AS he did those of Moses ? And truly otherwise I might ( as you foresaw ) very possibly tell you , that your Allegation was nothing to the Question , Who must take up the quarrel ? It is pretty to see what stuff you make of it , and then how you digress , to rail at our Baptism and Pastours ; I say , rail : for you bring no proof at all . BAPTIST . I have said enough to satisfie any reasonable man , that it doth not follow from my alledging Exod. 7. that I send you , or any body else , to Heaven for Miracles to decide our Controversies . For at the first I shewed , that in the case of Moses there was Miracle against Miracle ; only God gave a note of distinction between those signs , insomuch as the Serpent that came of Moses Rod devoured the other : from whence I only noted , That it's God's way to give some powerful note of distinction , between the Witness of his Servants , and Deceivers . And now , is not this my Observation very pertinent to our case ? You say , you are the Church . We say , we are the Church . Here is Testimony against Testimony , as there was Miracle against Miracle ; and if the Lord do not now give some powerful note of distinction between our Doctrine and yours , concerning the Church , as he did between Stephen's and the Alexandrians , I pray , who must take up the quarrel between U S ? Is it fit that you should be Judge in your own case here ? If so , why may not we ? If the Councils and Fathers were of the Papal Church , then it is not any more reasonable that you should summon us to their Arbitriment , than it is for us to summon you to the Judgment of our Predecessors ; but forasmuch as you and we are agreed , that the Prophets and Apostles were infallibly assisted to write the Mind of God for us to observe ; therefore it 's most reasonable that we should both appeal to them . If you object , the Prophets , &c. are not alive to interpret their Writings , and that our difference is about the sense thereof ; I Answer , This objection is every way as forceable against the Decrees of Councils , and Volumns of Fathers ; for their Writings must be interpreted , expounded , &c. and we differ about the meaning of them . Secondly , the way you assign us to agree them , is to consult them together , &c. Now I would know , why we may not be allowed this way to seek out the meaning of the Prophets and Apostles ? In a word , there is not one Objection which yet I have met with , levelled against our appealing to holy Scripture , &c. as the only infallible means to decide all Controversies between YOU and US ; but the same objections are more forceable against all that you appeal to , for decision of the said Controversies . PAPIST . You except against our Miracles , because we bring them to prove our Church by ; but if it appear as it doth , that God works Miracles upon those that actually call upon his Blessed Mother , and his other Saints , or whilst they are performing some of our Religious practices , which you abhor , is it not an argument that God approves them ? It is God then , and not we , that brings Miracles to prove our Church . BAPTIST . You will still have your Miracles to be an infallible mark of the truth of your Church , especially those of the Blessed Virgin ( you mean the Image so called at Loreto ) or as you phrased it in your third Paper , The Lady of Loreto . But let me tell you , that there is small cause you should refer me to what is done there , as an infallible mark that your Church is the Church of Christ . For by the relation of two eye-witnesses , which I have read , it is a place of most gross Idolatry , blind devotion , and deceit . One of which Authors , was once a Teacher of your Church , who , before his separation from you , travelled to Loreto , to see if the Image of the Virgin would inform him of the truth or falshood of the Roman Church , as it is now constituted ; for he was doubtful in this matter , and had been informed , that if any person were guilty of Mortal sin ( which if the Papal Church be the Church of Christ , he concluded he must needs be guilty of , in questioning her , at least in the Judgment of the Fryers , who waited there upon that Image ) he had been informed ( I say ) that if such as were guilty of Mortal sin , did but pray before the Lady of Loreto , the said Image would either blush , or fall into a sweat , and so resolve the Petitioner in the affirmative . But if we may believe the Lady of Loreto , and this Informant , then it is no Mortal sin to think , that the Papal Church is not the Church of Christ : For this doubtful man prayed earnestly , and beheld the Lady as stedfastly , but no sweat nor change befel her at all . Therefore , according to the Fryers rule , it is no Mortal sin to think the Papal Church of Rome is not the Church of Christ . But this one thing is especially observable here , That whereas you would perswade your self , and others , that I send men to Heaven for Miracles to decide Controversies ; it is manifest that you are the man that is herein guilty : For the Controversie is , Whether the Papal Church of Rome , be the Church of Christ ? You affirm ; I deny . To decide this Controversie , you refer me to Miracles , as the special means , or chief mark , whereby I may be resolved in this matter , as is evident in this , and your two former Papers ; So that what you would cast upon me , falls clearly upon your self , save that , instead of sending me to Heaven , you send me to Loreto . [ In my Rejoynder I urged , that of necessity the Scripture must decide all our Controversies , as aforesaid ; because , as things now stand , the Word ( or Scripture ) is antecedent to the Church , so that inasmuch as it is impossible to find the Church without the Scripture , it supposes clearly that the Scripture must be found before the Church : and so , if the Scripture must of necessity resolve this great Controversie about the Church , it consequently followeth that they must resolve all Controversies ; because all Religious Controversies are involved in this one general Query , Where is , and who are the Church ? ] Something here , which the Adversary doth further write , is omitted , because it may be more fitly taken notice of afterward . PAPIST . I had reason to take notice of your general saying , that the Word was antecedent to Faith and the Church , since there was a Church , and consequently Faith before the Scripture was written . Now it seems you meant not the Scripture by the Word , but I know not what Word , which was afterward committed to writing . It is past my understanding what Word you mean ; for since it cannot be Verbum Scriptum before it be written , It must either be Verbum Traditum , and I suppose you will not allow that ; or Verbum Dei Patris ; and that cannot be the Word you speak of , as committed to writing . BAPTIST . By that Word which was antecedent to Faith and the Church , as it relates to the Church under the Patriarchs , &c. I mean the Word which God spake to them , and by them , at sundry times , and in divers manners . And if you take that term [ Word ] to relate to the Church of Christ in its plantation , then I speak partly of the written Word of God , and partly of that which was ( at that time ) only spoken by word of mouth , by Christ and his faithful Stewards ; and if you will call this part of the word , Verbum Traditum , I say , that is the Word I speak of . And I do also say , this Word was afterward committed to writing ; which Word , together with the former , I mean that of the Prophets , is that whereon the Church ( as now considered ) is founded * , by which she must be known . And in this sense , I say , the holy Scripture is now antecedent to the Church . And therefore well spake that Learned person , Chrysostom , when he forewarned the sons of men , that if they took heed to any thing , in order to their knowing the Church ( in the latter times ) beside Scripture , they would fall headlong into the Abomination which maketh desolate , and not be able to know the true Church . BAPTIST . I Think it meet here to give the Reader some account of my Judgment of these five Texts , which I brought to justifie my Answer to the first Query ; which , with my Answer , was as followeth . Qu. Whether we are to resolve all Differences in point of Religion , only out of the written Word of God ? Answ . The Spirit speaking in the Scripture , together with right Reason as truely subservient , is that whereby we are to resolve all Differences , &c. For proof I cited , Isa . 8. 20. 1 Tim. 6. 3. 1 Joh. 4. 6. 2 Joh. 9 , 10. 2 Thess . 3. 2. where note , that under the term We , ought not to be understood , any person but the Papists on the one part , and the Baptists on the other , who do deny each other to be the Church of Christ . Now that the Church is to defend her self against all that come to spoil her of her Church-state , by the Scripture onely ( as that which includes her whole strength ) is that which I brought these Texts to prove . And first for that place , Isa . 8. 20. The Prophet foreseeing a Judgment coming upon Israel , even such , as God would hide himself from them ; and the Law and Testimony should be like a Book bound and sealed up ; as ver . 16 & 17. compared with ch . 29. 11 , 12. The Prophet likewise foreseeing , that when God should hide his face , Israel would enquire of Wisards , and such as spoke from familiar Spirits ( as Saul did , when under the like judgment , as 1 Sam. 28. 6 , 7 , 8. ) wherefore the Prophet , that he might warn the remnant of faithful ones , whom he foresaw would be as wonders amongst the rest , commands them , as from the Lord , that WHEN men should say unto them , Seek unto such as have familiar spirits , &c. to go to the LAW , as being their way to go to God himself : for saith he , Should not a People seek unto their God ? To the LAW , &c. and certifies them that by that they should know Deceivers ; for , saith he , If they speak not according to This Word , [ the Law ] there is no light in them : So that I infer thus much , that when such as are enemies to the Church come to invade the Saints with their deceit , the only infallible way to know them to be Deceivers , is , to enquire of God's Law and Testimony . I know that Israel had the Testimony or standing Oracle , beside the written Law. And the Church now hath the new Testimony open in the Church , beside the Law & Prophets ; & hereunto , I say , the Church is only to apply her self , as aforesaid , to find out the deceit of those who would rob her of that inheritance , which she holdeth by the deeds of God's Law , and Promises , contained in Scripture ; by these , as the only infallible Rule , she knows those to be lyars , who say they are the Church , and are not . And to this agrees the next three Scriptures , the very reading whereof sheweth , that when the Controversie is between the Church and such as pretend falsly to that Title , the onely infallible means to refel them , is , the Spirit speaking in Scripture , &c. For thus saith the first of them : If any man teach otherwise , and consent not to wholsom words , even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ , and the Doctrine that is according to Godliness , he is proud , knowing nothing , but doting about questions , &c. Thus saith the second , He that knoweth God , heareth us : he that is not of God , heareth not us . Hereby know we the Spirit of Truth , and the spirit of Error . The third saith thus , Whoso transgresseth , and abideth not in the Doctrin of Christ , hath not God. He that abideth in the Doctrine of Christ , hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you , and bring not this Doctrine , receive him not into your house , neither bid him God-speed . From these Texts it appears , that unless the Papists can produce something which they can infallibly prove to be Christ's Doctrine , beside what is contained in holy Scripture ; or , that the Apostles may be heard as infallibly by some other means , as by the holy Scripture ; or , that the Saints received some Doctrine for Christs , that is not contained in the Scripture ; I say , unless they can infallibly shew something of this nature , my Answer is good . But if they can produce any other thing of such authority , then I acknowledge my Answer to be deficient . Howbeit , if any man , or the Church her self , do decide a Controversie , by insisting upon the Scripture , this is no more than my Answer included ; for I do not imagine that the Church must not pronounce what is contained in the Scripture : but if she hath power to speak as from the Lord ( in these dayes ) when yet the Scripture saith no such thing , then I profess my self short of understanding the power of the Church . 2 Thess . 3. 2. I only made use of this Text thus far , that in Religious Controversies the Apostle gives Reason her place , and therefore desired to be delivered from unreasonable men . PAPIST . ONce more you offer to justifie your Consequences drawn out of the five Texts . But I ask once more , To what purpose did you bring them ? was it not to prove what you had said in your Answer to my Query , That the Scripture , so we took right Reason along with us , was sufficient to resolve all Controversies in matters of Faith ? No rational man can reade your first Paper but must think so ; and indeed , otherwise you must have brought them to prove something that was not under debate , which had been impertinent . Must not that very Assertion of yours be the Consequence to these five Texts ? and them , have I not reason to cry out , that there never appeared such Monstrous Consequences ? But , to avoid this inconvenience you fall into the other , and will have some of your Texts brought to prove certain Propositions , which you had not mentioned in your Answer . Howsoever , let us now see what you make of them . Isa . 8. 20. God's People are commanded to have recourse rather to the Law , &c. than to superstitious Oracles , Ad Legem magis , &c. And they have a sign given them to convince such Oracles of falshood , if they speak not according to the Word or Prophesie of Isaiah . This is the clear sense of that place , out of which you draw this strange consequence . Ergo , the Scripture , &c. is to resolve all matters of Faith. A strange Consequence , I say , as will appear , if we turn your Euthymeme into a Syllogism , thus : Recourse is to be had rather to the Law ; than to false Oracles , whose falsehood appears , if they speak not according to the Word or Prophecy of Isaiah . But if this be so , the Scriptures , &c. are to resolve all points of Faith. Ergo , &c. What a prodigious minor have we here ? How doth it follow , that because God's Word is to be more credited than superstitioas Oracles ; or , that such Oracles are not to be credited , when they speak against God's Word : Therefore the Scriptures , &c. are to resolve all points of Faith. I know you have not the word rather in your English Translation as we have in ours , but the clear sense of the place bears as much . 1 Tim. 6. 3. saith , they are proud that teach contrary to the Doctrine of Christ . Ergo , you infer that the Scripture is to judge whose Doctrine is of pride . This is as mad a conclusion as the last ; for when there is no clear Text of Scripture for either side , as it often happens , or Scripture brought on both sides ; How can the Scripture judge whether party be proud ? or , how can it be judge of its own sense , when it is alledged on both sides , who both pretend to have the Spirit and Reason on their sides ? 1 John 4. 6. Those that hear not the Apostles , are not of God , nor have his Spirit . Ergo , say you , the Scripture resolves who are religious : Doth it follow out of this Text , that when parties contend , that they hear the Apostles , the Scripture , can resolve the difference , and pronounce who are religious ? &c. Not at all . 2 John 9. 10. Gives Judgement against those that follow not Christ's Doctrine . You infer ergo the Scripture must try whether men bring this Doctrine . Strange Logick : for unless your Text proved that the Scripture containes all Christ's Doctrine , which it doth not , your Consequence must needs be faulty . 2 Thess . 3. 2. you say proves , that Reason is some wayes necessary to decide Controversies in Religion . I will not examine the goodness of this Consequence , but I am sure you need not have brought Scripture to have proved so manifest a Truth , which cannot be denied by any , but such as pretend to have so much of the Spirit , that me-thinks they should have little need of the use of Reason . BAPTIST . Concerning my five Texts , and what I infer thence , I need not speak much here ; yet it is worthy observing how apparantly you miss the clear sense of Isa . 8. 20. whilst you restrain the relatives [ this word ] to the Word or Prophecy of Isaiah , whereas it is as clear as the Sun at noon , that they ought to be referr'd to the Law and Testimony ; for thus I read , To the Law and to the Testimony , if they speak not according to This Word . Having thus missed the sence of the Text , then in all that you say further , you discover a taunting spirit , endeavouring to bespatter me with what dirt comes next to hand . I did not quote any one of the five Texts , as taking it singly to prove the whole Assertion ; and therefore you did injure my understanding , to argue from them apart , as brought to prove the whole Position ; but I brought them to prove such Propositions , as being laid together , do amount to so much as my Assertion ( as I explicate it ) doth contain . For the first four Texts do all of them shew , how God's People ought to try and defend themselves against such as oppose the Church and Truth of God , as I shewed in my Rejoynder : and the fifth , gives Reason her place in Religious Contests . But there is not one of the Arguments which I formed from my five Quotations , but you deprave and abuse it , by both adding terms of your own , and omitting mine ; yea , sometimes whole sentenoes : and when you have so done , you flout at the Conclusions . Which dealing is too bad for a sober Disputant , It were a very easie thing to turn all your Objections here against the Scripture as insufficient to resolve differences in Religion , upon the Church as therefore insufficient to resolve them . For , whereas you say , That when both Parties pretend to have Scripture and Reason on their sides , then the Scripture cannot decide the Controversie ; Might not I as well say , when both parties pretend to have the Church on their side ( as that 's the case between us ) the Church then cannot decide our difference ? Again , where you seem to say , that when both parties contending , do say they hear the Apostles , that then the Apostles cannot ( as they speak in the Scriptures ) decide the Controversie : Hath not this the same force against the Church , when both parties contend they hear the Church ? See how you can defend your self , and I doubt not but therein you will defend my Arguments for the Scripture . And because you do cry up the Fathers , &c. for so clear a way to decide all our Controversies , I will therefore shew you , that they do clearly avouch the Answer which I have given to this your first Query , as will evidently appear to the impartial Reader of the several Quotations which I have before alledged , and which do here follow . The ANSWER to the FIRST QUERY , Avouched sufficient by the Sentence of divers DOCTORS , both Antient and Modern . VVHether of us be Schismaticks ? ask not me , I will not ask you . Let Christ be asked , that he may shew us his Church . Neither must I alledge the Nicene Council ; nor you the Arimi . I am neither bound to the one , nor you to the other ; let the matter be tryed by the Scripture . Augustine saith , Let the Scriptures judge ; let Christ judge ; let the Apostles judge . Yea , it is confessed by the Papists , that Aug. Optatus , and Basil , summoned their Adversaries to the arbitriment of holy Scriptures , and did allow the sufficiency of holy Scripture to decide the Controversies depending between them . In time past , saith Chrysostome , there were many wayes to know the Church of Christ ( viz. ) by good Life , by Miracles , by Chastity , &c. but from the time that Heresies did take hold of the Church , it IS ONLY known by the Scripture , which is the true Church . Again , he saith , The Lord then knowing that so great confusion would come in the latter dayes , therefore willed the Christians that would take to the sureness of true Faith , to have refuge to nothing but to the Scripture ; otherwise , saith he , if they regard other things they shall perish , not understanding what the true Church is . [ Thus my Answer is avouched good , as it respects the means to decide the differences which are about the Church . Next , hear what they say touching such differences as are in the Church . ] Iren. If there be any disagreement risen up among Christians concerning Controversies in Religion , what better course is there to be taken , than to have our recourse into the Most antient Churches , [ which must needs be those planted by the Apostles , considering the time when he lived ] and to receive from thence , what shall be certain and manifest . Augustine . Because the Scripture cannot deceive , whoso feareth to be misled in the obscurity of this Question , let him ask COUNSEL of that Church which the SCRIPTURE , without any ambiguity pointeth out . Constantine Mag. There are the Gospel , the Prophets and Apostles , which do teach us what to hold in Religion ; wherefore expelling all hostile and bitter contention , let us seek the Solution of these Questions out of the Scriptures . Thus spake this famous Emperor in the Council of Nice , at what time the Bishops had like to have jarred into pieces . THus have I given an impartial Relation of what hath passed between the Popish Querist and my Self , in our two last Papers , ( which contains the sum of what passed in the other ) as touching this Question about the Judge of Controversies . And now , for further satisfaction , That the Scripture , as aforesaid , ought to be admitted the high Prerogative of Judge in our Debates ; consider , that of necessity it must be so . My reason is , because either the Scripture , or some other Writings , must be our Judge , especially in this important Question , WHICH IS THE TRUE CHURCH ? For when we contend about her , it is very unreasonable , that any party contending for that title , should be permitted to give Judgment in their own cause : As for example , The present Assembly of Papists say , That they are the true Church : and the present Assemblies of Baptists say , That they are the true Church . Is it fit that either party contending , should here give Judgment decissive ? What then must we do ? why of necessity we must to some Writings , whereby to be decided or agreed in this Controversie . These Writings must be either the Scriptures , or some other ; but no other can compare with those , so that they do deserve this Prerogative better than any other . The Papists ordinary way in this difficulty , is to tell us , that we must here be tryed by the Tradition of our Fore-fathers ; in which they say , we cannot be deceived : which Tradition , they say , is the only thing that is unquestionable , and needs no other ground to stand upon , but it self . And against the Scripture's being received , upon its own evidence or authority , they usually do thus object , that before we can receive what it teacheth , we must be assured of its truth . And again , they say , the Scripture may not be the Judge of Controversie , because it may be corrupted , translated , ill interpreted , not rightly understood . And by these , and other like objections , they usually in all their Writings , invalidate the Scriptures certainty , authority , and sufficiency , that so they advance the authority of their Traditions . But let it be seriously considered , whether these Objections have not the same force against what they rest upon , which they have against the holy Scripture ? First then , whereas they tell us , the Scripture cannot teach us any thing , till we be assured of its truth : Doth not this conclude against any other thing as strongly ? Ought we not to be assured of the truth of the Church before we receive her documents ? Ought we not to be assured of the truth of that Tradition which we receive for the Rule of our Faith ? But how must we be assured of the truth of the Papal Church , and Tradition ? There is not a man living , that can remember when either began , and so avouch its beginning to be of divine Institution , and the continnance of the same ever since its beginning , to have been without any corruption : What then must we do ? Why we must search Romes Records . And then I ask , are they not as questonable , and liable to mis-interpretations , as easily mis-understood as the Records of God ? What is now become of these Objections , the force whereof is evidently against the Papal Church and her Traditions , of the truth whereof we must be assured BEFORE we can be taught by either of them . I say again , There is not a man of all the Papists that can evidence Rome to have been a Church two hundred years ago , and then much less one thousand six hundred years ago . So that OF NECESSITY we must to the Writings of some men ( whom we never saw write one word ) to find the Church . And then I would know why we may not make enquiry at the Pen of Paul , what the Church was at first , and what it ought to be now , as well as at the Pen of Augustine . Cannot the Pen of Peter the Apostle give us as good information in this matter , as the Pen of any Pope , pretending to be his Successor ? If the Papists answer , That we know not the Pen of Peter or Paul : We answer , as well as they know the Pen of Augustine or Gregory . If they say Paul's Writings may be corrupted , and must be interpreted , may be mis-understood . I return the same Answer of all other Books whatsoever ; yea , those which contains Romes Tradition . See therefore what is gained by devising objections against the authority or certainty of the holy Scriptures . Such doings do only tend to the destruction of all Faith , making every thing doubtful , and the effect is the ushering in of all uncleanness on the one hand , or if men miss this snare , they are catched in another , viz. to walk at random as their own , or other mens fancy leads them . This is evident by what we have seen in the Ranters on the one hand , and the Papists and Quakers on the other . Let us trace this matter a little further , thus . The Papists Traditions ( most , if not all of which , have been committed to Writing several hundreds of years ago ) must speak for themselves , are unquestionable of themselves , must challenge no ground but themselves to stand upon : But the sacred Scripture which hath especial Promise from God for its preservation , Psal . 12. must have none of these high priviledges allowed it ; Is not this a most peccant Assertion ? Again , Peter and Paul must be no Judges of Controversies in Religion , as they speak to us in their Epistles ; but the Popes of Rome , dead long ago , and now only speak in their Writings , yet they must be our infallible Judges in these Controversies . The great Council of Apostles , Elders , and Brethren , Acts 15. can be no Judge of any Controversie , though their Decrees are yet extant among us ; but the Council of Trent , who only speak in their Decrees , must be our Judge , and that so as from their Judgments no appeal can be admitted . The Apostolical Council sends forth their Decrees in the Name of the holy Ghost , and themselves ; and in those their Decrees , they prohibit the eating of blood , and strangled things , &c. But the Papal Councils will send forth a Decree directly opposite to this , and yet sign'd with these powerful words ; Visum est Spiritui Sancto & nobis . If we appeal in this matter to the Apostolical Council , they may not be permitted to pronounce a Sentence decissive . But from the sentence of the Papal Council we must in no wise appeal . Can any thing be said more unworthily ? Thus then , First , the godly Reader may perceive , That whether he be able to answer all the cunning Objections that men , by reason of the long experience they have had in the wayes of deceit , have found out ; yet he hath an Argument of NECESSITY wherewith to oppose their subtilty . And , Secondly , he hath the advantage of all their own objections , against themselves ; yea , against their Church , Tradition , and all that they stand upon . Being seasonably retorted upon them . Wherefore I shall conclude with the Psalmist's words , Psal . 64. 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9. They encourage themselves in an evil matter : they commune of laying snares privily ; they say , Who shall see them ? They search out iniquities , they accomplish a diligent search : both the inward thoughts of every one of them , and the heart is deep . But God shall shoot at them with an arrow , suddenly shall they be wounded . So they shall make their own tongues to fall upon themselves : all that see them , shall flee away . And all men shall fear , and shall declare the work of God : for they shall wisely consider of his doings . THE SECOND PART , SHEWETH , That the present Papal Church of Rome , is not the Church of Christ , for divers important Causes or Reasons . VVE have heard of how dangerous a Consequence that Papal Opinion is , which leads them to set up their own Authority ( under pretence of their being the Church ) above the holy Scripture ; insomuch as they allow it no Authority , till it be delivered to us for God's Word , by their Church ; so that by this Doctrine , we must find their Church , before we can find the Word of God , as it is contained in the Scripture . Upon which Consideration , we shall endeavour to shew , That the present Papal Church , is not the true Church of Christ ; and therefore what Power soever the Church hath , yet they cannot have it ; Because they are not the Church of Christ . The First Reason . The present Papal Church of Rome , cannot possibly prove her self to be the Church of Christ : Therefore she is not the Church of Christ . The First Reason maintained . THe Consequence of the Argument no understanding man can deny ; for unless a party pretending to be the Church of Christ , can some wayes sufficiently prove that they are his Church , they cannot reasonably blame any body that refuses so to account of them . And for the Antecedent , namely , that it is impossible for the present Papal Church to prove her self the Church of Christ , it is evident from this ground , viz. They make both the Scripture , and all other Writings , depend on their Church for their Authority ; and therefore they must prove themselves to be the Church without the help of any authentical or authoritative Writings ; which thing is impossible for them to do . Being thus divested of the help of all Records , as is more fully shewed above , there remains now nothing for them to lean upon but their own Evidence , or the Tradition of their Fore-fathers ; not that which is contained in any Records , but only that which hath been delivered by word from man to man , &c. But alas ! what Tradition is this they speak of ? Not the Tradition of the Church to us , till the persons delivering the same , be found to be the Church ; which , as before , they cannot be found to be , without the Scripture . And for their own Evidence , that may not prove them to be the Church to those that contend with them ; it cannot avail them , sith each party contending in this case , will , and may , as reasonably as the Papists , look that their own Testimony should be as available for these , as the other for those . It is as vain here to tell us , they are the Church , because the true marks of the Church do agree to the Papal Church , and none else . For , first , the true marks of the Church are confessed by the Papists , to be found in the Scripture ; which Scripture they receive not , but from the authority of their Church ( yea , their present Church ) so that till the Scripture can tell us authoritatively which be the marks of the Church , no Church can be found by those marks ; nor can the Scripture tell us of those marks authoritatively , till Rome , as a Church , give it us for God's Word : So then Rome must be found the Church , before there be any marks to find her by ; which is impossible . As for example : To clear this matter further , the Papists say , That Holiness is a mark of the true Church : But now set the Holy Scripture aside , and how shall I know holiness from unholiness , without the Scripture ? Here the Papists being in a strait , rather than they will let the Law of God , or the Scripture , have the preheminence , do Answer thus ; That we have a Law in our Consciences , which dictates what is good , and what is otherwise ; and by this Law , even a Heathen may judge our Church holier than any other Congregations of Christians . What a miserable plunge ( of Heathenism or Quakerism ) are they brought to here ? How do they know that a Heathen may , by the Law of Conscience , judge their Church to be more holy than ANY other Congregation of Christians ? Were they ever Heathens to know this ? But alas ! what holiness can a Heathen judge of ? Surely not that which is an infallible mark of the true Church ; for this Spiritual matter is foolishness to the Natural man , nor can he know it , because 't is spiritually discerned . It is true , there is a Holiness discernable by the Law of our Consciences . But this only , is not an infallible mark , that any Society is the Church of Christ ; nor did ever any man ( I am perswaded ) hold forth such a Doctrine , that was a faithful Minister of the New Testament , or Spirit . Again , What of this kind of Holiness , whereof a Heathen ( as such ) can judge , is there found among the Papists , which may not be found among the Baptists ? yea , among those that are opposite to both , as the Quakers , and others ; yea , among the very Jews and Turks may be found as much of this kind of Holiness as among the Papists , if any credit may be given to Histories . Sometimes the Papists do object the * Creed as sufficient , to demonstrate a man to be a Member of the Church , though he know not whether there be any Scripture . But I Answer , How shall this be proved to be the Creed ? it must not be its own evidence ; for then the Scripture may as well speak for it self , which the Papists will not allow ; nor can the Church of Rome confer any authority upon the Creed , till they be found to be the Church : So then this is the Conclusion , Rome must be found to be the Church , before there be a Creed . I do therefore humbly desire these few Observations may be seriously thought upon by all sober men , but especially the Papists , that so men may give to the holy Scriptures , that which is proper to them ; that is , That they may speak , without controul , both for themselves , and every thing else of a Religious consideration ; or else all Volumns of the Antients , and Societies of men , pretending to Christianity ( as things stand in our dayes ) must depart into utter silence . The Second Reason . The present Papal Church of Rome , hath no Baptism : Therefore she is not the Church of Christ . The Second Reason maintained . BY the word Baptism in the Argument , I mean only the Baptism of Water in the Name of the Father , &c. or , which is all one , the Baptism of Repentance for the Remission of sins . Now that the present Papal Church of Rome hath not this Baptism , is evident by this Argument , taken from their own Confession , viz. The Baptism of the true Church is found in the Scripture . But the Baptism of the present Papal Church of Rome is not grounded upon , nor mentioned in the Scripture . Therefore the present Papal Church of Rome hath no Baptism . The first Proposition is most clear , from Matth. 28. 19 , 20. Act. 2. Act. 8. Act. 9. Act. 16. Act. 18. Act. 19. Act. 22. 16. Rom. 6. Gal. 3. 27. Col. 2. 11 , 12. Heb. 6. 1 , 2. 1 Pet. 3. 21. And , that the Papists Baptism is not found in the Scripture , I prove thus . Because they themselves do confess , that Infant Baptism is not mentioned in the Scripture , nor grounded upon the Scripture , nor any Scripture for it . See to this purpose , the Works of Bellarmine ; and a Book , entituled , An Antidote , written by S. N. a Popish Doctor ; as also T. B. his End to Controversie . In which Books you will find the very words which I have repeated . Adde hereunto the Answer which I received from the Author of the Seven Queries , when I asked him what Controversies in Religion he could resolve without the written Word of God ? he assigned Infant Baptism , as one that was so to be resolved . So then , we have it pro confesso from the Papists own mouths , That their Baptism ( which is Infant Baptism ) is a Scriptureless-Baptism : Therefore say I , it is no Baptism . No Baptism , I say ; because the Church hath but one Baptism of Water , and it is mentioned in the Scripture , and grounded upon it , and much Scripture found for it ; so is not Infant Baptism , which is the Baptism of the present Papal Church . Therefore the Papal Baptism , is no Baptism . How can they defend themselves ? Will they say , the Church hath a Scripture-Baptism , and an unwritten Baptism ? This they must say and prove , or else deny their Infant Baptism . But , secondly , The present Papal Church is so adulterated in the manner of the Administration of Baptism , as that , had they a true subject for Baptism , yet , they would be found to have no Baptism . This will appear as clear as the Light , from the Papists own confession ; for they grant , that the antient and primitive way of baptizing , was , by dipping the party baptized , over the head and ears in Water ; and that it was their Church which changed this way , to a little sprinkling upon the forehead . This is plainly to be seen in a Book , entituled , Certamen Religiosum . This bold Change , which men , without any allowance from God , have made in this Ministration of Baptism , is directly against the Scripture . Mat. 3. 16. Mark 15. 9. John 3. 23. Act. 8. 38 , 39. Rom. 6. In all which places it's evident , that our Lord Jesus , John Baptist , and the other Baptists of those times , did so understand the mind of God in respect of the manner of the Administration of Baptism , as that they thought it could not be done without so much Water as they might go into ( both the Person baptizing , and the Person to be baptized ) And now , do not all that will presume to satisfie themselves in this thing with a few drops of Water put on the face only , from a Man's fingers ends , or out of a Glass in the Midwifes pocket , lay great folly and ignorance to the charge of Christ and his primitive followers ? doubtless such , as is not less than the folly of that man , that hath occasion only for one Gill of Water , and he may take it up at the side of the Brook , and yet will needs wade into the middle of a River to take it up ; or a man that hath occasion to wash his hands only , which he may perform very commodiously without wetting his foot , and yet is so simple that he will needs go into the middle of the River to that purpose , especially such a River where there is much Water . I say , the practice of Sprinkling which the Papists and others use , if that answer the mind of God in the case of Baptism , doth even thus reflect upon Christ and the Christians in those dayes . But let our Saviours practice herein be justified , and all such practices as tend to the rendring it ridiculous , condemned . The Papists only Reserve for the defence of Infant Baptism , is this : They say it is an Apostolical Tradition , that is , a Precept delivered by the Apostles Word , but not mentioned in their Writings . This I shall shew to be utterly false , for divers important Reasons . First , No Apostolical Tradition , tends to the making null or void any Apostolical Writing . But Infant Sprinkling makes null and void all that is written in the Scriptures , concerning the subject and manner of Baptism , in all that part of the World where the Papists ( or such as they ) get the Civil Power on their side : yea , we see that by this means the sons of men are great enemies to the way of God in this matter . How long have many Nations lain destitute of the knowledge of the Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins , by reason of the interposition of this cloudy Tradition of Pedo-Rantism ? How have men , pretending to be Ministers of Christ , never , in many Generations , preached Peter's Doctrine , Repent , and be baptized , every one of you , for the Remission of sins ? Note this Observation well ; for although the Baptism of Repentance , &c. hath not been cryed down in the Nations of Christendom , ( by such as counted themselves the only Preachers of the Gospel ) yet it was not for that these Nations had no need of the practice of Baptism ; for they daily have practised something under that notion , which is rheir Infant-sprinkling ; So that it 's plain , Infant-Baptism makes void the Apostolical Writings : Therefore Infant-Baptism is no Apostolical Tradition . Secondly , Infant-Baptism is not an Apostolical Tradition , because no mention is made of it in the first hundred of years after Christ . Although I am not much read , yet I have used the utmost of my diligence to know the Truth in this Point , and I have attained to sufficient satisfaction , that the greatest favourer of Infant-Baptism that yet I have met with , durst not say that ever he saw any Record of Antiquity that mentioned such a thing , and that the Scriptures do not mention it , the Papists grant . And because the Papists make such boast of the consent which they have in this matter from Antiquity , I will therefore here put in something by way of Evidence to the contrary . For it is certain that Infant Baptism , as it was not heard of in the first hundred , so neither was it generally received till above half a thousand years revolved from Christ , as is undeniable ; for that it is plain , that the most famous ( or at least , very famous ) Christian Parents brought up their Children without having them baptized ; such were the Parents of Greg. Nazianzen , Ambrose , Augustine , and others ; yea , the Emperour Constantius , born of Christian Parents , was not baptized till he was about thirty years of age * . See also these ensuing Testimonies . I will declare unto you , how we offer up our selves unto God in Baptism . After that we are renewed through Christ , such as are instructed in the Faith , and believe that which we teach them , being to live according to the same ; we admonish to fast and pray , and we fast and pray with them ; then they are brought to the Water , and there calling on the Name of the Father , &c. they are washed in it . So saith Erasmus , paraphrase on Matth. 28. If they believe that which you teach them , and begin to be repentant of their former life , then dip them In Water , In the Name , &c. The Lord commanded his Apostles , that they should first instruct all Nations , and afterward baptise those that were instructed : for it cannot be that the body should receive the Sacrament of Baptism , unless the soul have received before the true Faith. Our Saviour did not slightly command to baptize , but first of all he said , teach , and then baptize , that true Faith might come by teaching , and Baptism be perfected by Faith. Haimo saith , In this place ( Matth. 28. ) is set down a Rule rightly how to baptize , that is , that Teaching should go before Baptism : for , he saith , Teach all Nations , ( and then he saith ) and baptize them : for , he that is to be baptized , must be before instructed , that he first learn to believe , that which in Baptism he shall receive : For , as Faith without Works is dead ; so Works , if they have no Faith , are nothing worth . Beda saith , All they that came to the Apostles to be baptized , were instructed of them , and when they were instructed concerning the Sacrament of Baptism , they received the holy administration thereof . Tertullian , who lived about the time when Infant-Baptism began to appear , did dispute against it , as an unnecessary practice , for divers causes . 1. For that it is not meet to commit heavenly things , to those who are not capable of keeping treasure of an earthly nature . 2. For that the Sponsors might be endangered . 3. For that it became them that were to be baptized , to fast , pray , and confess their sins . 4. Because they that receive Christ , must ask him ; let them ( that is , little ones ) come therefore , saith he , while they are youths , whilst wherein they come , they are taught , &c. Augustine saith , We spend much time in exhorting those whom we baptize — Ludovicus vives , commenting upon this place , saith , Lest any man should mistake this place of Augustine , let him know that in old time it was the custom to baptize NONE , except they were of full age , and did desire Baptism in their own persons , and that several times , and did understand what that Mystical Water meant , which we see resembled in our baptizing of Infants . [ Lo here your Pedo-baptism is not the old custom of the Church . ] The Third Reason . The present Papal Church of Rome , is a National Church : Therefore she is not the Church of Christ . The third Reason maintained . 1. TO make the Gospel-Church National , consequently destroyes the Doctrin of Conversion , as it is a principle of the Doctrin of Christ appertaining to the beginning of a Christian man : For , if men can regenerate , or beget persons to God in their infancy , then the Word of Regeneration or new-birth is needless in order to our admission into the Church of Christ , and so the preaching of Faith and Repentance must cease ( as it is a Principle pertaining to a Christian man ) in all those Nations which are called Christendom , which is a great part of the World. And indeed , Experience hath long ago proved this Conclusion to be most true ; for since the Church ( as they term it ) was National , the Word , or Work of Conversion , hath been little known in the life and power of it : nay , verily , the very term [ Conversion ] is become a reproach among our National-Churchmembers . But thus to make the Word of Conversion unnecessary , in order to persons admission into the Church of Christ , is contrary to the Scripture , John 3. 5. Luke 24. 47. Matth. 20. 19. 2 Cor. 5. 16 , 17. Heb. 8. 10 , 11. Gal. 3. 26 , 27 , 28. Matth. 3. 8 , 9 , 10. 2. To make the Gospel-Church National , puts an end to the Doctrine of Christ touching that Separation , and those Divisions , which for the Gospel-sake must be in Nations and Families , as appears from these Scriptures ; John 15. 19. and 17. 14 , 16. Acts 2. 40 , 47. 1 Cor. 6. Luke 12. 49 , to 54. And therefore in vain doth any person think to do God service , by compelling Families , Towns , Countries , Nations , or many Nations , to be of one mind in matters of Religion . I say , it is in vain , because the Scripture foresees , and also foreshews , that the contrary effects must follow the preaching of the Gospel ; and yet they may , yea , and ought to live in one form of Civil Government : for that is the will of God concerning every soul , Rom. 13. 1 , to 8. 3. The Gospel-Church cannot be National ; because that takes away from her , Persecution for the Gospel-sake , & makes her become a Persecutor : For it is impossible for a Church to be National without penal Laws , whereby to force men to that kind of Worship which the greater part approveth , which may as possibly be false as true . But the true Church must not look to be free from Persecution , if she live godly in Christ Jesus ; nor is any thing more † uncomly for her than to punish or persecute men into a Conformity to her Faith or religious practice , John 15. 19 , 20. Mat. 10. 22. 2 Tim. 3. 12. Luke 9. 56. And the greatest part of the Revelations do shew , that the Church was to be in a suffering condition , and are therefore bid to be patient , until the coming of the Lord , Jam. 5. 4. A National-Church cannot observe the discipline of the Church of Christ ; for , in the case of withdrawing from disorderly persons , they do not only separate men of disorder from the Church , both in Civil and Religious concerns , but they cast them wholly out of the World , from all Markets and Fairs , yea , quite out of their Livelihoods , &c. which kind of Excommunication the Scripture foresees to be proper to the Churches Adversary , Rev. 13. 16 , 17. 5. If the Gospel-Church ought to be National , then she was imperfect in point of Power in the Apostles dayes : for she had not then any Power to put Hereticks to death for their Heresie . But to say , that the Primitive Church wanted any Power to punish any sin , as it concerns the Church to punish it , is to disparage the Apostolical Churches , and is also contrary to the Scriptures , which plainly shew they had Power then to revenge all disobedience , 2 Cor. 10. 4 , 5 , 6. The Fourth Reason . The Papal Church encreaseth her self more by the Carnal Sword , than by the Spiritual Word : Therefore she is not the Church of Christ . The fourth Reason maintained . THat such Churches as are National , do most encrease their numbers , and keep them also when they have them , by the terror of Death and Penal Laws , both Experience shews , and Reason tels that it cannot be otherwise . How often hath our Nation changed their Religion , with the breath of a Prince ? sometime to Popery , and otherwhiles to Protestancy , and under O. Cromwel to a compound of half Presbytery and half Independency , according to the temper of those that sat at the Stern of Affairs ? And now , how are they turn'd again to Prelacy ? Of which last change , I say , if any have conformed , as judging it their duty to God so to do , those ( though this doth not justifie their way to be good , yet ) are honest men : But if any for self-interest have done it , they are the very dregs of men , and will be any thing , and so nothing . 2. I remember a notable saying of Hillary , who lived about the 4th or 5th hundred , and in his dayes the Church was a degenerating from her Regeneral Constitution into a National Form , where he saith , Ambition doth aid it self by the Name of CHRIST ; the Church doth fear and compel the People through Banishments and Imprisonment , to believe her in those things , which she had received through being imprisoned — She that could not be beloved of Christ if the World had not hated her , now glorieth to be extolled and beloved of the World , &c. And that the Papal Church hath ordinarily encreased her self more by terror of the Carnal Sword than the Word of God , doleful Histories do declare ; namely these , Sleidan Comment . A Book entituled , The Indians Tears , or , Inquisition for Blood : as also , Fox his Acts and Monuments . And here I think it meet to give an instance from one of their own Historiagraphers , namely Fabinus . He tells us that after Austin the Monk had gotten a considerable settlement in England , it happened that there was a Council assembled in this Nation , where Austin proposed several things , to which the other Bishops could not consent ; but , by your leave , when Austin could not prevail by the Word ( or rather , his words ) he told them , If they would not submit , they should be compelled , by the wasting that should be made in their Country through War and Misery . This was not Paul's way , 2 Cor. 5. 20. The Fifth Reason . The present Papal Church of Rome , labours to keep the World in darkness , and the Church also : Therefore she is not the Church of Christ . The fifth Reason maintained . THe Consequence of this Argument no man can deny ; for there is nothing more opposit to the true Church , than to love , or cause darkness to seize upon any . And that the present Papal Church of Rome labours to keep all men in darkness , is thus proved . 1. She forbids almost all men to reade the Scriptures , and thereupon hath greatly withstood the Translation of them into every Tongue , as is evident , partly from what History declares , and partly from that which themselves do say . To omit History , hear what they say themselves . In their Preface to the Reader in the Rhemist Testament , thus they speak : Order was taken by the Deputies of the late famous Council of Trent in this behalf , and confirmed by supream Authority , That the Scripture , though truly translated into the vulgar Tongues , yet may not be indifferently read of all men , nor of any other than such as have express Order thereunto of their lawful Ordinaries . So that we see the Liberty here given , is unlike the Liberty given by Christ to his enemies , whom he commanded to search the Scripture , John 5. 39. And the rich Glutton's Friends are said to have the Prophets and Moses , Luk. 16. 29. Israel was of old indifinitly required to lay up the Book of the Law in their heart ; to talk of it as they sate in their houses ; as they went abroad ; they must teach them to their children , and write them upon the posts of their doors , Deut. 6. 4 , to 9. Notwithstanding all this and much more liberty given by the Lord both to his Enemies and Friends , to reade his Word , you see the Council of Trent will have none permitted , but whom the Ordinaries permit , to reade the Scripture , and they are only such as they judge discreet , &c. Pref. Rhem. Test . Is it not strange that men , pretending to be Christ's true Followers , should thus contradict him ? He allowed that to his Enemies , which they will not allow to his Friends . Sure they have neither heard his Voice , nor seen his Shape , or , at least , not learned of him . Miserable is the Gospel-Church by the Council of Trents Doctrine , they have not that priviledge which Israel under the Law was allowed ; and yet they are as strictly bound to bring up their Children in the admonition of the Lord ; which they cannot do , unless they have the Law in their heart , that so they may talk of it to their Children . But surely , those that will not let the Law come within the sight of our eyes , have no mind it should ever come in our hearts : So then they labour to keep us in the dark . What can they say against mens reading the Scripture , which hath not the same force against the hearing of it preached ? Did not some conceive as gross opinions concerning Christ's saying , men must eat his flesh , as some have by reading them ? The Jews thought they were so to be understood , as that they might eat his real flesh ; and that was not a greater nor a lesse Error , than is found in the Papists , who read the same word . It is doubtless a shrewd sign that those who will not suffer us to see the Law of God , do not intend that we shall hear very much of it ; peradventure such Points as talk of Tythes , &c. Yea , it is evident , that they intend not to let us hear much that shall profit us ; for they have devised , that the very Prayers and Services of their Church , be said and sung in a tongue which the People understand not . Yea , they tell us , That it is enough for the People to understand that the Prayer is made to call upon God in all our desires ; and more than this is not necessary ( they say : ) So that the poor People in the Papacy , know not what are the things desired ; only they are told , The Prayer is made to God in all that is therein desired . Are not these People kept in darkness ? But saith Paul , How should the unlearned say , Amen ? 1 Cor. 14. That which is most strange , is , That the Papists should deliver this dark Doctrine , from 1 Cor. 14. then which no Scripture more requireth an understanding in those that pray , and in those that joyn with them ; nor doth any Scripture more clearly shew us , to how little purpose it is to perform any Service in the Church in an unknown tongue . Read the Chapter ; saith Paul , If I come unto you speaking with tongues , what shall I profit you ? — but in the Church I will speak five words with my understanding , that I may instruct others also , rather than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue . These are Paul's words , as the Papists themselves translate them . Another way whereby they keep men in darkness is this , They cumber mens minds with such a MULTITUDE of Ceremonies , and Repetitions in their Prayers , that the mind is sufficiently charged to remember how many times over they must say some two or three words ; nay , it 's evident this is no wrong , witness their Beads which serve to supply the defect of their memories . As I remember , there is not less than fifty Orations and Postulations , &c. which the Priest is to make , and act , before the Bread be Consecrated when they say Mass ; and the like doings they have in the most of their Services , which I can more desire the Lord would deliver them from , than mention . The Sixth Reason . The present Papal Church , is generally ( if not only at this day ) gathered of persons unregenerate , or not new born , as the Scriptures do require new-birth in that case : Therefore she is not the Church of Christ . The Sixth Reason maintained . 1. THe Scripture saith , That except a man ( or any one ) be born again ( SO ) as to be like the winde THAT BLOWETH , and that bloweth in such sort , as the sound thereof IS HEARD , he cannot enter into the Kingdom ( or Church ) of God : But the many millions of Infants , whereof the Papal Church consists mostly ( if not only ) in respect of her Members Initiation , are not thus regenerate . So that the Papal Church is gathered ( generally ) of such Persons as are not so regenerate , as Persons ought to be , and must of necessity be , before they be admitted into the Church of Christ . The Seed of the Woman ( or Gospel-Church ) are all such as have the Faith of Jesus , and keep the Commandments of God , at least in Profession ; for that is the thing that is absolutely necessary , in order to any Person 's admission into the Church of Christ , John 3. 5 , 6. 2 Cor. 5. 16 , 17. Rev. 12. ult . Gal. 3. 26 , 27 , 28. 2. All the Children of the new Covenant , or Church of Christ , do DIFFER from the Church under Moses , SO , as that they , each individual , do so know the Lord , as that they need not , in some sort , teach one another , saying , Know the Lord , Heb. 8. Jer. 31. But either all , or the generality of the Papal Church , differ nothing from the Church under Moses , in respect of their KNOWLEDGE , when admitted into their Church , Being such as are not capable of the first , or least degree of the knowledge of him . 3. There appears no more sign of Regeneration , or new-Birth , in the Infants , or Members of the Papal Church , at their admission , than there appears in such as the Papists say are not regenerate . Now where the Spirit of regeneration is , it is not without some demonstrable operation ; for saith Christ , The wind bloweth , &c. and thou hearest the sound thereof , &c. SO IS EVERY One that is born of the Spirit . So that I conclude , That the Infants whom the Papists say they baptize , are not born of the Spirit , unless they can give some demonstrative sign of it . 4. There can be no Regeneration in an ordinary way , without preaching the Doctrine of Christ , Rom. 10. But the Papal Church is generally ( if not only ) gathered without the Word preached , in order to the regeneration of the Members , before their admission . Therefore they are not regenerate in an ordinary way . And if they have an extraordinary regeneration , let them shew it . The Seventh Reason . The present Papal Church of Rome , maintaineth the Doctrine of Devils , and that so violently , as that they punish the Non-observation thereof with Excommunication and Death : Therefore she is not the Church of Christ . This Argument maintained . THis Reason , or Argument , may seem to be harshly laid down ; yet if it be true , there is necessity to propound it . And for the truth of it , I desire you weigh what followeth . 1. To forbid Marriage , and to command to abstain from Meats which God hath created to be received , of such as believe and obey the Truth ; this is the doctrine of Devils . But it is well known that the Papists do forbid the whole Calling of their Clergy to Marry , and thousands beside of those that live in their Monasteries and Nunries , &c. and this under pain of Cursing and Death . You shall hear them speak their own words , wherein they do not only prohibit Marriage for ever to such as enter into the Ministry ; but if any be married , and afterwards come into the Ministry , they wholly deprive such of the enjoyment of their Yoke-fellows . Thus they speak ; The cause why the Church requireth chastity in the Clergie , and forbiddeth not only fornication , but all carnal copulation , even in lawful wedlock , is to the end , that God's Priests be not divided from him by the clogs of Marriage , but be clean and pure from all the fleshly acts of copulation : And this doctrine they teach from 1 Cor. 7. where if you reade the 4 , 5 , 6 , 7. verses , you may easily learn the quite contrary Doctrine . Again , They teach from 1 Tim. 3. 2. That none shall Marry that come into holy Orders . And , that if any of the Clergie , in other Countries , had been permitted , in times past , to enjoy their Wives , yet they now declare it to be against the Apostles Rule ; And this they say is the Sentence of the Council of Nice . But surely Paul's words are clear contrary ; for he saith , A Bishop must be the Husband of one Wife , having his Children in subjection , &c. In further proof of this matter , it is upon Record , That Greg. 7. An. 1070. did enforce Ministers by Excommunication , to leave their Wives . And Vrban 2. Anno. 1066. Decreed , That it might be lawful to make the Ministers Wives bond-women . And Fox recordeth , That it was made Felony , by the Act of the Six Articles , for Ministers to marry Wives , Fox , p. 1135. And this cruelty Bellarmine defends by a saying of Jerome , That a Bishop begetting Children , shall be condemned as an Adulterer . Now whereas I say they forbid Meats , &c. I do not mean , that it is not meet for the Church to Fast and Pray , and in such a sense to forbid meat . But for their Church to forbid one kind of meat above another ; as that we may not eat Eggs in Lent , and divers other creatures which God hath created , to be received of such as believe . For the true way of Fasting , is a total fasting for the time ( unless necessity deny . ) And truly the Papal Fast of Lent is in a manner no Fast , which allows the drinking of Wines , and the eating to the full of such delicacies as do inflame the flesh as much as Eggs , &c. which yet the Papists by no means will permit men to eat . For my Author tells me , That they make the eating of Eggs in Lent , a damnable sin . Fox , p. 1043. I might fill much Paper about their forbidding meats . But to proceed : The Eighth Reason . The present Papal Church of Rome , is Mystery Babylon : Therefore she is not the Church of Christ . The Eighth Reason maintained . 1. I Know , that generally all that dissent from Rome , do account her as in her present state to be Mystery Babylon ; And truly for my part , I have considered of this matter , and I find it is so clearly meant of Rome , that even the Papists do not wholly exempt her from this Name . Yet they deny that Rome , as now considered , is Mystery Babylon ; only , say they , it is to be referred to Rome in her Heathenish estate . But thus I reason ; 2. If the present Papal Church of Rome be not Mystery Babylon , then either the Papists , or some body else , can shew us a People which better deserves that title . But this no man can do ( so far as yet I have learned ) and therefore ( as yet ) I must say , The present Papal Church of Rome ( together with her Daughter Churches ) is Mystery Babylon . And for further proof in this Point , I thus reason : 3. The present Papal Church hath the Marks of Mystery Babylon ; therefore she is Mystery Babylon . I prove it thus : One Mark of Mystery Babylon , is a Regiment over the Kings of the Earth , Rev. 17. The Woman which thou sawest , is that great City which reigneth over the Kings of the Earth . This Mark the present Papal Church of Rome hath above all other ; Witness the Papists own Books , T. B. End to Controv. chap. 26 , 27. where he sets up the Pope above all Kings and Emperors ; and plainly calls the Popes , Kings and Monarchs ; and the Papal Church , he terms an invincible Empress , &c. Another Mark of Mystery Babylon , is great Riches and wordly Pomp. That Rome , in her present Church-state , hath this Mark , her Doctor , T. B. is my witness . So is Helen . Geog. p. 192 , 193. and Napier , Rev. 9. which Authors shew her Riches ( even of the Clergy only ) to be quite out of the reach of the best Arithmaticks to pass an Entrado upon it . Add to all other witnesses that of Expeperience , and it will shew us , That when their Church had her domination in this Land , they knew where the best Ground lay ; as the Ruins of their Abbeys do evince . Compare all these with Rev. 18. and see if they do not agree . Another Mark of Mystery Babylon is , She sits upon Nations , Tongues , and Peoples . Rome hath this Mark ; T. B. in his End to Controversies , chap. 26 , 27. Another Mark of Mystery Babylon is , She enslaves the Souls of men , and is drunk with blood . Now that the Papal Church of Rome hath this Mark , I need only to refer my Readers to those large Histories of Sleidan , Fox , and Benzo the Italian . Lastly , As I noted , it is confessed by the Papists , That Mystery Babylon , Rev. 17. & 18. chapters , is meant of Rome ; only they think to free themselves from the force of that blow , by telling us , That it 's meant of Rome in her Heathenism , and under the persecuting Emperors . But this is but a poor shift , as may appear , by shewing , That the Antients do write against Rome , as Mystery Babylon , after the persecuting Emperors were down ; for the Papists say , That Constatine put an end to the Persecution , when he was converted , which was about the year 300 , and a few odd years ; at which time the Papists say , That Rome was given up to the Pope . 1. Jeroms , who lived about the fourth hundred , writing to Eustoch . & Marcelus , doth apply these words to Rome , viz. Fly out of Babylon , let every man save his own Soul , for Babylon is fallen , and is become the Habitation of Devils . Yea , he saith further , as he is quoted by the Protestants , That Rome IS the Babylonical Harlot , according to the Revelation of St. John , appointed for the birth of Antichrist , which there should arise , and exercise all tyranny ; and from thence should deceive the whole world with his wicked Wiles . And Augustine is most clear in this matter , in his Book of the City of God ; where he calls Rome another Babylon in the West . And Babylon in the East , first Rome : and Rome of Italy , second Babylon . Willing men to consider , That in the beginning of the City of God , which was in Abraham's time , the first Rome , that was , Eastern Babylon was builded in Chaldea . And about what the first Babylon was destroyed , lest the City of God should want her Enemy , the second Babylon , which is Rome in Italy , was erected . Chrysostome saith , Antichrist shall invade the vacant Empire of Rome , and assay to draw unto himself the Empires both of God and man. Thus it seems that Rome was accounted Mystery Babylon , four or five hundred years after Christ ; and if she be not now , what she was then in that respect , I desire to be informed where that blood-drunken Fornicatrix , mentioned , Revelation 17. is now to be found . The Ninth Reason . The present Papal Church hath not those Marks , which they themselves assign as the Marks by which the true Church can only be known infallibly : Therefore the present Papal Church of Rome , is not the Church of Christ . Those Marks are ; 1. ANTIQUITY . 2. SUCCESSION . 3. VNIVERSALITY ( of Time and Place . 4. VISABILITY . 5. SANCTITY . 6. VNITY . 7. MIRACLES , &c. These are the Principal . The Ninth Reason maintained . THat the present Papal Church cannot have the true Mark of Antiquity , is thus evidenced ; viz. The Papal Church is a National Church ; But no Gospel Church was National in the first Age : Therefore no National Church hath the true Mark of Antiquity . The strength of this Argument lyeth in the clear difference of the state of the Church under Abraham and Moses , to what it was under Christ and his Apostles . For , The Jewish Church , which was to be National , took its form in a National way , even in the very first Family where it began , as appears , Gen. 17. where Parents , Children , and Servants too , must all be brought into that Church-state forthwith , or not be suffered to co-habit together . Which order must be kept in all the Families of the Jews , as well in respect of their Servants , such as they bought with money , as their Children , or any other . And so the Jewish Church , both in its beginning and its continuance , acted forth it self in a way suitable to it self . But when the Gospel Church began , it is very evident , that it took its beginning in the division of Families , and that by vertue of Christ's Doctrine ; who affirms , That he came to send fire on the Earth ; not Peace , but rather Division : For saith he , From henceforth there shall be fix●● in one house divided three against two , and two against three ; the Father against the Son , and the Son against the Father ; the Daughter against the Mother , and the Mother against the Daughter , &c. and all this for the Gospel sake . Here a man must leave Father , Mother , Wife and Children ; For this cause ye shall be betrayed , both by Parents and Kinsfolks . For this cause the unbelieving Husband will put away his believing Wife . And for this cause the Servant may refuse to follow his unbelieving Master , being Christ's freeman , and yet dwell in his Service as a Servant notwithstanding . Thus it 's evident , That the Gospel-Church took its beginning in a way quite contrary to the Form of a National Church , even by turning the World ( or Church of the Jews ) up-side down , which caused the Jews to cry out , MEN OF ISRAEL , HELP . This is yet more evident , by that thundring Doctrine of the Baptist , when he said , Think not , or begin not to say within your selves , We have Abraham to our Father . No , saith Paul , We ( meaning the Gospel-Church ) which are of Faith , are the Seed of Abraham , and Heirs according to Promise ; For the Promise ( which chiefly ) is enjoyed in the Gospel , was not made to such as were born after the Flesh , but such as are born after the Spirit ; Whereupon he saith , We henceforth know No man after the Flesh [ or because he descends from the loins of Abraham , or any other . ] For if any man be in Christ ( so as to be a demonstrable or visible Member of his Gospel-Church ) he is a new-creature . Old things are passed away , [ yea , the old priviledge of standing in the Church by the Father's interest , though the Seed of Abraham himself ] is [ now ] passed , behold all things [ in this respect ] are become new . Whereupon Peter contributeth his sentence , and saith , Of a truth I perceive God is no respecter of Persons , [ but the Persons accepted upon a Gospel-account , so as to be his Church , are such as in every Nation fear him , and work Righteousness [ which no Infant can do . ] But what ? Hath God rejected Infants wholly , that now he will not shew them so much favour as afore-time ? God forbid . He hath not shut up his tender Mercies from them wholly , or in part ; For as they are such , and dying in their infancy through Adam's transgression , so in Christ shall they be made alive . Wherefore look how far soever they fall in the first man of the Earth , so far they shall be restored by the Lord from Heaven ; yea , the Gift to them by Christ shall exceed the Loss they had by Adam . But if they live to years of understanding , and become actual sinners against God , then the way appointed for the remission of their sins , is , to repent , and be baptized , every one of them , that they may receive the holy Ghost , and so be by it led into all Truth ; and attain at the end the salvation of their souls , through Jesus Christ our Lord. Another Argument whereby it appears the Church of Christ cannot be National , is this ; No man is bound to become a Christian under pain of corporal punishment , as Death , &c. but living peaceably as men , no man hath power to compel them to be baptized , or to walk in the Christian Profession , as is clear from the Texts before recited . Now take away Force in matters of Religion , and a National Church cannot stand in an absolute National Form ; this all experience can testifie . Again , That the Church of Christ at the first , or in the first Ages was not National ( in the first method or way wherein a Church beginneth to be so , namely , by the admission of Infants into the Church ) is very evident ; because it is utterly incredible , that the many thousands of Infants , of such as in those dayes believed , should be admitted into the Church , and not so much as the whisper of such a thing to be found in all the holy Writings of the Apostles . And beside , I have shewed from the Testimony of Vives , ( Augustines Commentor ) That the Church had not the custom to baptize Infants in old time . It is likewise certain ( if History be true ) That the Gospel-Church used no compulsion in matters of Faith for more than three hundred years after Christ . About which time Constantine ordained grievous punishments for such as spake against Christ ; and allowed the Christians , to use the Unbelievers hardly . But God did not bless these doings : for Constantine became an Arrian Heretick , and persecuted the Bishop that baptized him , as also others that continued faithful . Hence then I conclude , That seeing the present Papal Church of Rome hath not the true Mark of Antiquity , Therefore they lose at once , the next three , Succession , Universality , and Visibility : For , Antiquity being wanting , no true Succession can be found ; because the Root of Succession , if good , must be the Antiquity of it . So take Antiquity from them , and then wanting that first Age , they cannot be found in every Age ; and not being found in every Age , especially the first Age , then they lose Visibility , as themselves propose it for a Mark of the Church . And for their Holiness , I have spoken to that before , and surely it is but like their neighbours . And for their Miracles , I have given you a taste of them from Loreto : and beside , others do claim that mark as well as they ; Yea , the Turks produce Miracles ; and the Protestants do the like ; and others , as the Quakers , the like : and the Baptists can say of a truth , that God hath done for and amongst them , some things which have exceeded the course of Nature . And so their Miracles will not more prove them a Church , than the Miracles of others will prove the contrary , unless they can prove the others to be Illusions . And that they have not the mark of Unity , is evident , if History may be heeded ; for , saith my Author , there is an hundred Sects of Monks and Fryars amongst them , and some of them so divided , as they burnt one another for matters of Religion . And for different Opinions , there are no less than three hundred . See Fox Act. and Monument . p. 260. and Willit , in his Book called , Tetrastilon Papis . I know the Papists do make a great deal of noise about their Pastoral Succession , as if they could derive it from man to man , up to the Apostle Peter . But I find the learned Protestants making it a great Question , whether ever Peter was Bishop of Rome , or not . And Jerom is said to have seen some old Books , which shew , that Narcissus ruled the Roman Church , when Paul saluted him and his Family , in his Epistle to the Romans . No small contention is there likewise among the Learned , Whether Linus or Clement were the second Bishop of Rome : So that this Pastoral Succession the Papists pretend to , meets with shrewd Objections in the very first and second person of that Line . Against the uninterrupted continuance of their pretended Succession , many things are objected : as , That there were sometimes three , and sometimes two Popes , and that for more than twenty years time together ; so that no man could tell where the true Pastoral Authority lay . And then comes in that strange disaster of Joan the female Pope , who for almost three years cut the chain of this pretended Succession . This thing is famous in History . Lastly , Although the Papists could prove a continued Succession of persons claiming the Title of Universal Bishop , yet this would not justifie them all to be the Pastors of Christ's Church . For these two Rules are given us even by the Antients ; 1. That Peter left his Innocency hereditary as well as his Seat ; and that he which hath not the one as well as the other , is not Peter's Successor . 2. That it is not the Chair , but the Doctrine that maketh a Bishop . Now , 3dly , add but Paul's Rule in this matter , 1 Tim. 3. and Titus 1. and then I am bold to affirm , That many Popes of Rome were not the true Successors of Peter in Pastoral Authority . For I find it laid to the charge of divers Popes , that they were Drunken-Whoremongers , Theeves , given more to War than Christ , rooted in all unspeakable sin ; furious men , prophane Scoffers of Christ ; Incestuous persons , Murderers , Poysoners of their own Parents and Kindred ; open Sodomites or Buggerers ; Blasphemers , incorrigible Hereticks , Enchanters ; callers upon the Devil to help them to play at Dice ; Drinkers of the Devil's Health , and Traitors to Princes . These things are so notorious and evidently true of the Popes of Rome , as that the Papists do not deny them . T. B. End to Controvers . and the Author of the Seven Queries , as you may see in part before . Yea , Bernard was not a little moved with the wickedness of the Popes of Rome , when he called them , Tyrants , Defrauders , Raveners , Traytors , Darkness of the World , Wolves and Devils . And , can we think that Succession to be good which is derived from Devils ? I need say no more . See , for the proof of all that I have said , these Books ; Fox Act. & Monument . Willit Synops . Prediaux's Introduct . The Tenth Reason . The present Assemblies of Baptized Believers , and they only , are the true visible Church of Jesus Christ : Therefore the present Papal Church of Rome , is not the Church of Christ . The Explanation of this Reason , or Argument . THis Reason or Argument is not so to be understood , as if we do shut all men out of Heaven who are not Members of our Church . No verily : This is the express Doctrine of the Papists : for they say , that out of the Church is no Salvation ; and by Church they mean , only those that adhere to the Papal Church of Rome : and hereupon they teach expresly ( and so do some Protestants also ) That without Baptism , or the desire of Baptism , &c. none can be saved : And therefore it is that they give power to Midwives to baptize Children sometimes between the Womb and the World. That which we teach , is this , That the ordinary way appointed for men to receive Salvation in , is , The preaching of Repentance and Remission of sins to all Nations , in the Name of Jesus Christ ; and the administration of Baptism , as a pledge thereof , to all that give acceptance to these Glad-tydings ; and upon this account this Ministration is called , The Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins . And we do teach , as a most infallible Doctrine , That without profession of Faith , manifestation of Repentance , and being baptized with Water in the Name of Jesus Christ , &c. no person can be orderly admitted into the Church or Kingdom of God on Earth . And that therefore it concerns every man , living to years of understanding , and having the Gospel tendred to him , only to look for Salvation this way , as he will answer it before the Lord , for contemning God's ordinary way , and presuming to challenge the Grace of Eternal Life in a way of his own devising . Nevertheless , we do not hence conclude , That all persons shall be damned that seek not Life in this way . For , first , No Infant can seek for it in the way which the Gospel proposeth Life to men of years : Yet surely it is a most cruel Doctrine to say , that any Infants dying in their infancy shall be damned in Hell , because ( as one very well said ) God will not damn any persons for that which they cannot help . Again , in Rom. 1st . and 2d . chapters , Paul teacheth , That if the sons of men act forth themselves in a way of Love , Fear , Obedience , and Reverence to their Creator , according to the means of Light vouchsafed to them , that this shall be as much as shall be required of them , in the day when God shall judge the secrets of all men by Jesus Christ ( for God will not gather where he hath not strewed ) at which time , God will not judge them by the Law that never had it . Howbeit , let all that have it ( I mean his written Law ) expect to be judged by it . And therefore , though we will not presume to judge of the final state of this or that Society of men professing conscionably this or that Form of Worship , but leave that wholly to the Lord ; yet we will not cease humbly to beg of all such persons in the Name of Jesus Christ , that they having his Law , would carefully observe the terms whereupon Life is held forth unto them , and become such glad receivers of the Word , as is mentioned , Acts 2. 41. Then they which gladly received the Word , were baptized : and the same day were added to the Church about three thousand souls . The Argument thus explained , I shall now endeavour to make it good . The Tenth Argument maintained . That the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers , and no other present Assemblies of men , are the true Church of Christ , I prove , thus : Either the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers , or else some other Assemblies now in the practice of Infant * Baptism , must be the true Church of Christ ; because without Baptism , the Papists say ( and say truly too ) there can be no true Church of Christ at this day : Now these two wayes of Baptizing only ( I mean of Water-Baptism ) is pretended as necessary in order to a visible Church-state : viz. the dipping or baptizing persons upon their personal profession of Faith , as the present Assemblies of the Baptists do practise ; or baptizing ( or rather sprinkling ) of Infants without personal profession of Faith , as the present National Churches do practise . For most undoubtedly , the true and legitimate claim to this Title of Christ's Church , must be found in one of these two Parties : And that no National Assembly , gathered together by Pedo-baptism , can fairly claim this Title , I have shewed before , whither now I refer my Reader . And for the evincing yet further , that the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers are the true visible Church of Christ , I thus argue : They , and they only , have the true Ecclesiastical Marks of truly Antient Primitive or Apostolical Gathering , Constitution and Government : Therefore they , and they only , are the true Church of Jesus Christ . These three points , namely , Gathering , Constitution and Government , I take ( if right ) to be the infallible Marks of a true Church . And that the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers , and they only , have them , will be evident to him that considereth what they were at first , and how they agree with what in these respects is only found in the Assemblies of the Baptized Congregations . The truly Antient , Primitive and Apostolical Gathering , in respect of the first means used in order thereunto , was the preaching Repentance and Remission of sins , or the Gospel unto every Creature ; and upon their conviction , to command them , as from the Lord , to be baptized , every one of them , in the Name , &c. as appears , Matth. 28. 19 , 20. Mark 16. 15 , 16. Acts 2. 38. Acts 8. 37. Acts 10. 47 , 48. And herein onely the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers do closely follow Christ's Primitive Ministers . The Primative and Apostolical Gathering of the Church of Christ in respect of the subjects gathered , were only such , as through the virtue and prevalency of the Word preached , or made known , did give a demonstration of their Regeneration by the profession of Faith , and manifestation of Repentance , and being dipped in Water in the Name of the Father , &c. For the proof whereof I appeal to those several Scriptures alledged against the gathering of Christ's Church of such persons , as of whose Regeneration no demonstration is or can be given , answerable to what the Scripture doth require , in order to persons admission into the Kingdom of God or Church on Earth . And , secondly , I appeal to the practice of the Apostles acting , in pursuance of that Commission given them in that behalf . And , thirdly , I do appeal to the Churches themselves , which were gathered by the Apostles , as they are described to us in these several Texts following . These Texts do shew to the diligent Reader , that here is such things spoken of this numerous Church , as is necessarily exclusive of any Infants being admitted into their Society , as to participate of any Church Ordinance : And the like will appear to the Scripture-searching Soul , in all those other Churches ; as the respective places will sufficiently convince . I have it freely granted , under the hand of a learned Clergy-man , That Churches , at the first , were gathered only as we affirm : but he tells me , That when Persecution ceased , God took in all Nations , or whole Nations ; which hitherto he hath not proved . The Church at Jerusalem . Acts 1. 15 , 21 , 22. Acts 2. 41 , 42. Heb. 5 , 6 , & 8 , Chapters . The Church at Samaria . Acts 8. 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17. The Church at Cesaria . Acts 10. 33 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48. The Church at Antioch . Acts 11. 20 , 21 , 23 , 26. Acts 13. 12. with Acts 9. 38. The Church at Philippi . Acts 16. 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 40. Phil. 1. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10. The Church at Thessalonica . Acts 17. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4. 2 Thess . 1. 3 , 10 , 11. The Church at Colosse . Coloss . 1. 4 , 5 , 6. Coloss . 2. 10 , 11 , 12. The Church at Corinth . Acts 8. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8. 1 Cor. 1. 2. The Church at Rome . Acts 28. 24. Rom. 6. 3 , 14. The Church at Ephesus . Acts 19. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7. Ephes . 1. 13 , 14 , 15. The Church at Galatia . Gal. 3. 26 , 27 , 28 , 29. Gal. 3. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6. These Scriptures , duely considered , shew , That all those famous Churches were gathered in a way contrary to that of the National Churches , and consonant to the way of the present Baptized Churches . And be it here observed , that no man ever yet could shew by any Record of such Authority as may suffice to be a Foundation of Faith in this case , that by the Apostles any were ever admitted into the Church in their infancy . Wherefore look well upon the Scripture , and then upon the gathering of the Churches of the Baptists , and you will find that they , and they only , have the true Antient Primitive or Apostolical-mark of Church-gathering . Of CONSTITUTION . THey onely can be truly constituted that are rightly gathered , which the Baptized Churches onely are . The Primitive Constitution of the Church consisted principally in these two heads ; viz. Free-fellowship in the Doctrine of the Apostles ; Acts 2. 40 , 41 , 42 , 47. Job . 1. 11 , 12 , 13. Act. 17. 4. 1 Thess . 1. 5 , 6 , 9. 1 John 1. 3. Rev. 22. 17. No force of a worldly nature was used in the begetting or continuing her Fellowship , for it was a mutual consent . The second thing pertaining to the Constitution , consists in the disposing of her Members to those places to which they are fitted to serve in the body , 1 Cor. 12. 27. with vers . 18. 28. Acts 6. 3 , 4. Now that the present Assemblies of the Baptized Believers , have this form of Constitution in both respects , is evident to all that will take knowledge of their Constitution . Of GOVERNMENT . THe true Ancient Primitive and Apostolical Government of the Church , was only Spiritual , and did recide not in the Pastors apart from the Church , but in the Pastors together with the Church ; yet so , as that those to whom the Church hath committed her Power , are the Instruments , that in the Name of Christ and his Church , are to exercise Government , Matth. 18. 17 , 18. 1 Cor. 5. 3 , 4 , 5. 1 Tim. 1. 20. & 5. 20. This Government consisteth in these things ; Exhortations , Rebukes , Reproofs , &c. with all long-Suffering and Doctrine , 2 Tim. 1. 2. And if this prevail not with the Offenders , then is the power of Excommunication to be exercised , to the with-holding their Priviledges in the Church , and to the delivering them up to Satan for the destruction of the Flesh ; and for saving the sinner from his sin . And if this prevail not , then the sinners sin is retained , till the day of Judgment . But if the sinner be humbled , the sin is by the Church to be remitted , and the Offender restored , Matth. 18. 17 , 18. 1 Cor. 5. 3 , 4 , 5 , 11 , 13. 2 Thess . 3. 6 , 14 , 15. Tit. 3. 11. Joh. 20. 23. And this Government is to be exercised without partiality , 1 Tim. 5. 21. and without respect to filthy lucre , 1 Pet. 5. 2. and without domination or lordship , 2 Cor. 1. 24. 1 Pet. 5. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4. 1 Thess . 5. 6 , 7 , 8. Now that this Goverment is only found in the present Assemblies of Baptized Believers , is thus proved ; Out of the Church it cannot be , and in the Church it must be , Ephes . 4. till all the Saints be perfected ; and that this Society , and no other , can be the Church , I have also proved ; and for further evidence I refer every one to the exercise of the present Churches of baptized Believers , in point of Ecclesiastical Government . As for other Marks , it is needless to insist upon them ; for that Church which hath these , cannot be without the other , so far as they are necessary . Yea , let it be well observed , That that Church which hath true Antiquity , is the Church alone , which hath the Promise of Succession , or whatsoever else is needful in a way of necessity in order to her being : And therefore , though we could not prove by History , those things which many make great boast of ; yet , having the most certain Mark [ Antiquity ] we have the other in Promise , and therefore must believe that the Church hath not failed of the accomplishment of them ; for Histories ( some of them ) be quite lost ; and others , partly silent , and partly contradictory about these things . Again , if History did mention an un-interrupted continuance of Baptized Churches , such , I mean , as we contend for , yet it would be but Testis humano , and so no foundation of Faith : And beside , it would suppose , that the Church of Christ is so beholding to humane History , as it 's impossible for her to prove her self the Church of Christ without it , though she have the holy Scripture . But this is surely to make the Church to stand upon too sandy a foundation . THE END . The Printer to the Reader . Courteous Reader . THe Author being at a great distance , so that he could not attend the Press , this Treatise was hastily read over by a Friend of his , who having observed these few faults , desires thee to correct them with thy Pen , as also any other which thou shalt meet with , that probably he hath overseen . Page 16. line 19. for will allow , reade , will not allow . P. 20. l. 23. f. these following , r. in these things following . P. 31. l. 22. f. they advance , r. they might advance . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A41774-e1350 August . contra Max. l. 3. c. 14. Mar. 7. Notes for div A41774-e1720 These were both General Councils Mat. 26 1 Cor. 11 Cyprian Serm. Penet . Gelas . consec . Dist . 2. Aug. de Nat. & Grat. Aug. in Iohn . Tract . 94. Aug. ad Fortunat . August . Prolog . l. 3. de Trin. Orig. in Jer. hom . 1. * The Apostles are here excepted Gerson exam . of Doct. Panor . chap. signif . * Note , there is not the word AS in my words , only I say the same , that is , God must take up our quarrels ; and how that must be , is shewed in my Answer following . Heb. 1. 1. * Not denying Christ to be her foundation in the main . Eph. 2. 20. Chrisost . Hom. in Mat. 24 Aug. cont . Petil . c. 85 Aug. cont . Max. l. 3. c. 14 S. N. Antidot . Chrysost . Hom. in Matth. Iren. l. 3 cap. 4. Aug. 7. Tome cont . Ere 's . Author 7. Qu. T. B. End to Contro . Author of the 7. Queries Author of the 7. Queries * It would be here noted , That neither the marks of Unity , Universality , &c. nor the Creed , do prove a People that hath them all , to be the Church ; because none of them mention Baptism , without which there cannot be a visible Church . * See a Book , entituled , A well grounded Treattise concerning Baptism . Justin Mart. in or at . ad Autho. pium . Jerom. super Mat. 28 Athan. in serm . 3. cont . Arrian . Haimo . in postil . sup . text Beda super Act. 19. Tertul. qui sunt Bapt. parvil . Aug. de Civitat . Dei. † 2 Cor. 5. 20. Hillar . contra Auxen . Willit . Synops . Rhem. Test . Annot. Rhem. Test . Annot. Dist . 32 cap. 10. Fab. Chron. Rhem. Test . Annot. in Rev. 17. Aug. de Civitat . Dei , lib. 18. Chrys . in Rev. 13. Luk. 12 51 , 52 , 53. Mat. 10 34 , 35. Luke , 21. 16. 1 Cor. 7. 11 , 13 , 15 , 21 , 22 , 23. Mat. 3. 9. 2 Cor. 5. 16 , 17 , 18. Gal. 3. 2 6 , 29. Acts 10 35. Rom. 9. 6 , 7 , 8. Rom. 5. 16 , 18. Acts 2. 38 , to 41. Fab. Chron. 4th part . Yet this Eusebius doth seem to contradict . Willit . Synops . Papis . Jerome , in ep . ad Rom. Luk. 24 * Alias , Rantism