I cannot doubt but the Reports, which have lately ſpread concerning me, and of my change and Alteration in the great Affair of Religion, put you upon an Expectation to hear ſomething from me; and that in Print too: It having been my conſtant former Method to give an account of my ſelf to the World that way. And although I might very well excuſe my ſelf from the ſame thing now, that ſcribling humor being only in the dayes of my Ignorance; when God Almighty pleaſed to permit a Veil to hang between my eyes and his moſt glorious Truth, Namely the veile of my Pride, and Folly: Yet leaſt from a total ſilence, the world which in its own Nature is cenſorious enough, ſhould apprehend, that I either wanted Charity to my late dear Breathren, or Courage to own the Truth, or that I thought the way unjuſtifiable, wherein I now Worſhip and Adore the God of my Fathers, theſe good and Pious men, who until the pretended Reformation of Luther and his Followers, knew no other way of Worſhip or Religion, then this, by which Millions of them were ſent into the Boſome of Chriſt. I have at laſt reſolved to give you a ſhort accompt of my ſelf, and what hath befallen me ſince the Happy Reſtauration of our moſt Gracious Soveraign to his Crown and Dignities.

And indeed when I conſider the Love which I have ever had for you, and the returns of Affection, which I have received from many, and moſt of you; I think my ſelf more then ordinarily Engaged, to be free with you in theſe things, as hoping, and in Charity believing, that if I can Convince you of the reaſonableneſs of my Proceedings, you will approve of what I have done; And on the other ſide, if any of you can make it appear, wherein I have done amiſs, you will be ſo juſt (and this Juſtice I here challenge from you) as to ſhew me my Errors.

My carriage whilſt I was in Communion with you, was (I hope) alwaies ſuch, as to give you a ſufficient reaſon to beleive that I neither was, nor am byaſſable by Worldly Intereſts, and ſelfiſh Conſiderations? When I profeſt my ſelf againſt Infant Baptiſme, I had run through almoſt (if not altogether) all the ſeveral Profeſſions of Ch • iſtianity then appearing in this Kingdome, the Catholique only excepted, which as I never had any oppertunity to examine, as not meeting with any of that party who were willing to publiſh themſelves to me for ſuch, ſo neither did I think them, or their Principles worthy my Conſideration, having from the joynt and unanimous conſent of all our Pulpits, beleived thoſe of that party to be ſo groſly ignorant, that to diſcourſe with them in relation to Religion, were but to caſt away time and labour.

Being thus prejudiced againſt the Catholique party, it pleaſed Almighty God to bring me into the company of a Lay Gentleman of that perſwaſion, and to give me occaſion to ſpend ſome conſiderable time with him: I no ſooner underſtood his Profeſſion as to Religion, but I began to attempt him, in that wherein I thought (as conſcious of the weakneſs of his cauſe) he would never have engaged; but I ſoon found my miſtake by his readineſs to embrace diſcourſes of that nature. And I found alſo, that we had all embraced a moſt notorious Error, while we ſuffered our ſelves to be perſwaded, that the Catholickes were an Ignorant Generation.

The Gentleman ſeemed deſirous to examine every thing from the bottome, and to lay the Ax to the Root, and truly I thought that very reaſonable, as conceiving that where the foundation was unſound, the ſuperſtructures were not to be relyed on: He enquired of me therefore in the firſt place, whether I was ſure & certain that the Chriſtian Religion in general was more true, then the Religions of the Turks, Jews, or any other, which was oppoſite thereunto? and whether I was ſo certainly, and infallibly aſſured of this; that it was not poſſible for me, or for thoſe who taught me Chriſtianity, to be miſtaken in this? And he gave me this Reaſon for his Queſtion, namely, that if neither I my ſelf, nor thoſe who taught me that Chriſtianity was the only ſafe way to Salvation, and the only way in which Heaven was to be attained, was infallibly certain, or were capable of any miſtake, or might in any poſſibility commit an errour in this thing; then as to me, Chriſtianity could be no more, then probably true; and we could with no colour of Reaſon, condemn the Jew, Turk, or Pagan, ſince they were as well perſwaded of their ſeveral waies, as we could be of ours, upon a fallible certainty; and for ought we knew (not having any infallible certainty for our Chriſtianity) ſome of them might be in the Right, and we in the wrong way. And how could you ſay to a Jew, you muſt become a Chriſtian, if you expect to be ſaved, when as if he Examine you ſtrictly and cloſely in relation to what certaitny you have of the truth of Chriſtianity, your Anſwer will amount to no more then this, You conceive you are in the Right, and you hope and beleive you are not miſtaken: But it is poſſible you may be miſtaken in this; for every man is a Lyar, every man and all men, and every Church is fallible, and ſubject to Error, and to be miſtaken. Can ſuch Arguments as theſe invite a Jew or Turk to become a Chriſtian?

I confeſs I was extreamly troubled with this firſt difficulty, and knew not how to anſwer it plainly, and without apparent ſhuffling, and declining the queſtion, which I plainly did, by urging, that if he intended to call the Religion which Chriſt Eſtabliſhed in the world into queſtion, and to make a doubt of the mayn and Grand Principle of Chriſtianity, which we both of us agreed to be true, I ſhould treat no farther; and that if himſelf doubted of the Truth of Chriſts Religion, I was not prepared to Diſpute the point.

This Anſwer ſeemed very ſtrange even to my ſelf, but it ſeemed more ſtrange to me, that I ſhould find my ſelf Gravelled in ſuch a queſtion as was fit for every one to anſwer. However my Opponent uſed me Gently and Sweetly, and without the leaſt ſhew of inſulting over my weakneſs, he told me that in reaſon I ought to anſwer this difficulty; for (replied he) though it may be true, and is moſt certainly true, that the Chriſtian Religion, upon the true Grounds upon which it is founded, is infallibly certain and Divine; yet upon the Grounds upon which you may found your beleif thereof, it may poſſibly not be true or certain as to you: for example, ſuppoſe you are told a thing by a known or common perjured perſon, and upon his word you beleive it, you cannot be certainly aſſured that the thing is true, becauſe ſuch an Infamous, common notorious Lyer tells you ſo, but the thing is really to you doubtful, nay more probably falſe then true, and yet the thing in it ſelf is true: ſo if in the Apoſtles times one had beleived Chriſtianity to be true, not becauſe the Apoſtles taught him ſo, but becauſe Simon Magus affirmed it to him, in this caſe who ſees not that ſuch a mans faith had not been true but that the whole thing to him had been uncertain, the belief of it being grounded upon a wrong Foundation, which was no waies certain? From all which it is evident that no Heretick can have true Faith, this I ſhall farther prove, in regard the contrary is an error broached publikely by Mr. Baxter in his Treatiſe againſt Mr. William Iohnſon, This is taken out of Mr. Johnſons reply to Mr. Baxter, called Novelty Repreſſed, Fo. 142. 143 &c. who hath fully ſilenced Mr. Baxter beyond all poſſibility of replying with reaſon in relation to this perticular, the proof which I give is in this Argument. Whoſoever hath true Faith, beleiveth the thing beleived, or the material object of Faith for the Divine Authority of God revealing it. But no Heretick beleiveth ſo. Therefore no Heretick hath true Faith. The Major is granted by all, becauſe Chriſtian Faith muſt reſt upon Gods Revelation, as its formal object. The Minor is proved thus, whoſoever beleives the material object of Faith, or the thing beleived, for the Divine Authority of God revealing it, muſt beleive all things which are as ſufficiently propounded to him, to be revealed by God, as are thoſe Articles, which he doth beleive. And muſt beleive nothing as a Revelation of God, which is as ſufficiently declared to him to be erroneous, or not a Revelation, as the Articles of Faith are to be revealed. But every Heretick either refuſeth to beleive ſomething, which is ſo ſufficiently propounded to him to be revealed from God, or beleives ſomething, as a Revelation, which is ſo ſufficiently declared to him to be erroneous, or not revealed from God; Therefore no Heretick hath true Faith. The firſt part of this Major is proved thus: Whoſoever refuſeth to beleive, what is ſo ſufficiently propounded to be revealed by God, either refuſeth all, that is ſo propounded, or beleives ſome things, and refuſeth to beleive others as ſufficiently propounded, as thoſe which he beleives: If he refuſeth all, he can have no true Faith, for he belives nothing, and is therefore no Chriſtian: If he beleives ſome, and refuſeth others equally propounded, then he beleives not thoſe things, which he doth beleive for the Divine Authority revealing, (for when two things are equally propounded to the underſtanding, they ought to worke equally upon it) but upon his own wilful choice or private judgement refuſeth ſome, and aſcents to others. As to the ſecond part of the aforeſaid Major, viz. That no man can have true Chriſtian Faith, who beleives any thing as a Revelation, which is as ſufficiently propounded to him to be Erroneous, as the Articles by him beleived, are propounded to be Revelations; the very ſame Authority which affirms the one, denying the other: Suppoſe the ſame Authority acknowledged doth ſufficiently propound to a Calveniſt the Articles of Faith, as revealed from God, and at the ſame time aſſures him, that his conceit of the Popes being the great Antichriſt was never revealed from God, but is a manifeſt error in Faith: In this caſe our Calveniſt muſt disbeleive that propounding Authority, and thereby loſe his Faith in the former Articles by him beleived, and have no true faith in the firſt; or he muſt beleive the ſame Authority in the ſecond becauſe it is the ſame Authority in both▪ For that very Authority which propounds the Articles of Faith, as revealed of God, propounds the other as not revealed, and as contrary to Gods Revelation. By all which it is moſt evident, that if your Faith be built upon a wrong Foundation, it is of no value, nor doth it give you any certainty, nor is it indeed Faith, but Humor and Opinion.

This Diſcourſe ſeemed to me ſo convincing; that I could not but agree unto it; and therfore I told him as a full anſwer to his firſt queſtion, that I embraced Chriſtianity, and that ſort of Chriſtianity to which I adheared in oppoſition to all others, becauſe the Scriptures which are Gods Word, taught me ſo to do, and that I beleived the Scriptures to be Gods word from the infallible teſtimony of Gods ſpirit, bearing witneſs with my ſpirit, that they were Gods Words; and that I was fully convinced, that this proceeded from the infallible teſtimony of Gods ſpirit, from a certain knowledge and feeling which I had of the ſame within my ſelf, and in my own Conſcience.

To all which it was mildly replyed, that upon the Grounds which I had laid, and whereon I founded my ſelf, it was impoſſible for me, to be infallibly aſſured, that this teſtimony which I mentioned was infallibly the teſtimony of the ſpirit of God: For having granted the Proteſtant Principle, that I was not infallible, that no man or number of men was or were infallible; this ſpirit which I talked of, might (for ought I knew) be the ſpirit of error. And for farther evincing thereof, I was deſired to reflect on theſe Scriptures, Jer. 17. 9. The heart of Man is deceitful above all things, who can know it? Eccleſ. 9. 1. No man knoweth Love or Hatred by all that is before them. And to conſider the ſtrange deluſion, which bewitched the Angel, or Biſhop of Laodicea, Revel. 3. 17. Becauſe thou ſayeſt I am Rich and encreaſed with goods, and have need of nothing, and knoweſt not that thou art wretched, and miſerable, and poor, and blind, and naked. How much was he deceived in his own jupgement of his own Eſtate! In fine what would you (ſaid he) anſwer to an Arrian, or Jew, or Turk, ſhould they urge the like knowledge, and feeling, with the like confidence, to prove they were in the truth, and Chriſtianity a deluſion? What you would reply to them, ſuppoſe as ſaid unto your ſelf, and ſee if it will not ſatisfie.

In the mean time (ſaid he) you ſeem to imply and ſo to grant that we ought to have an infallible certainty of what we beleive with Divine Faith; this the Apoſtles had in the time of our bleſſed Saviours converſing with them upon earth, they had ſufficient to prevail with their wills, to command their underſtandings into the beleif of his being God conſequently infallible, and conſequently that whatſoever he taught was to be aſſented unto as infallibly true, without being queſtioned by our little feeble limited Reaſons. And this was neceſſary for the Church then, otherwiſe they could not have been ſufficiently aſſured that what Chriſt taught them was true, conſequently it would not have been a ſin in them to have doubted. This infallible aſſurance alſo the Chriſtians who lived in the Apoſtles times, and after the Aſcenſion of our Lord, enjoyed; they had ſufficient to enduce them to a beleif, that the Holy Apoſtles were infallible guides and reachers; and that whatſoever they taught and commanded them, was as infallible true, as if God had immediately ſpoken to them the ſame things, and no more to be doubted, contradicted, or diſputed againſt by their reaſons (which doubtleſs were as good and ſtrong as ours) then the immediate words, commands, or dictates of Almighty God; otherwiſe thoſe who refuſed to hear and obey them had been in no fault, and it would have been an unſufferable Pride and preſumption in St. Paul to have required ſuch an abſolute ſubmiſſion to what he taught, as to oblige the Chriſtians of his time not to have beleived an Angel from Heaven teaching contrary to what he taught them. Hence it is, that the remaining writings (for ſo much as we have of them) of the Bleſſed Apoſtles, are by all Chriſtians eſteemed, as the Words of God. And this was neceſſary in the Age after Chriſt for the Church of God, namely in the Apoſtles times, to have a living infallible way of direction, in ſo much as had we then lived, and had encountred with any doubts or difficulties relating to Religion, and to the true meaning of what was either ſpoken or written by any Apoſtle, or by all the Apoſtles, we ſhould without all doubt have made our immediate recourſe to them, ſome or one of them, for the ſolving of ſuch doubts, and the explayning of ſuch difficulties; and ſhould have received and ſubmitted unto ſuch ſolutions as made by God himſelf, without ever interpoſing our own reaſons or ſenſes in oppoſition. This we ſee was the courſe taken in the fifteenth of the Acts▪ when certain doubts were ariſen amongſt Chriſtians, the Apoſtles met in a Council they conſidered the things, they determined with an It ſeemeth good unto the Holy Ghoſt and to us. Their Decrees and Canons were obeyed, and ſubmitted unto by the whole, and the Diſputes were at an end. But ſuppoſe ſome diſpute had ariſen touching the ſence and meaning even of ſome of thoſe Decrees, muſt not it have been interprited by ſome judicial Authority? Doubtleſs yes. And queſtionleſs the then Chriſtians would have appealed or applyed to the ſame Authority that made thoſe Canons and Decrees, for the interpretation of them, and would have ſubmitted to ſuch interpretations; otherwiſe it would have been with the Primative Chriſtians then, as it is with you now, every one would have framed his own interpretation, thoſe who had been Maſters of the greateſt Wit, power, or intereſt, would have framed Parties or Churches to themſelves; and in fine the Sword of the Fleſh and not the Spirit of God muſt have given the Rule and Law to Chriſtianity, they would have been ſo far from any poſſibility of maintaining The Unity of the ſpirit in the bond of Peace, from being One body, that they would have divided into as many parts (to ſpeak without grateing) as you now are, and have gone to Cuffs, and raiſed Wars for the decideing of Controverſies, as we have ſeen you do ſince you divided your ſelves from the Holy Catholick Church of Chriſt.

It is not hard for you to imagine into what confuſion theſe Diſcourſes put my poor ſoul, to hear ſuch things, ſo great evidences of Reaſon produced by a private Gentleman of that party, whom I had beleived ſo ignorant. I had oftentimes in Diſputations, both publickly and privately encountred, and (I thought) worſted ſeveral of the Engliſh Clergy in thoſe points wherein I differed from them. But I found nothing now to ſay againſt theſe Principles, which I had yet hitherto ſuppoſed the moſt ridiculous, that any people could imagine to ſet up.The Books which I here intend are. The Queſtion of Queſtions, the before mentioned Novelty repreſſed with Fiat Lux, and that Elaborate Treatiſe called Infidelity Unmasked or a Confutation of a Book Publiſhed by Mr. Wil. Chil. Fagworth. Well I could no longer conteſt, but reſolved to have recourſe unto Almighty God by Prayer for his Divine Aſſiſtance, and to make it my buſineſs according to the utmoſt of my poor skill and underſtanding, to take a full view of the Grand Principles of the Catholick Faith, and of Chriſtianity; and laying aſide all Prejudices, Pride, and Humour, I reſolved by the aſſiſtance of God to embrace and ſubmit unto whatſoever I ſhould underſtand to be moſt agreeable with his moſt holy will and pleaſure, without taking any regard to worldly intereſt, or the cenſures of men, which I had reaſon to beleive would run high againſt me. And the better to enable me in this ſearch and examination, I borrowed from this Gentleman ſeveral books and treatiſes, from whence I made ſeveral Collections, the Heads of which I recommend to your conſiderations, they being ſuch, as had (by the Gracious aſſiſtance of Almighty God) ſuch a prevailing power upon my underſtanding, as to convince me of the errors of the way, wherein I then was, and to bring me to the Knowledge of the Divine truths of the Catholick and Chriſtian Faith.

I gathered from the true interpretation of that Text of Scripture, Heb. 11. 6. Without Faith it is impoſſible to pleaſe God. And of that Mar. 16. 16. He that beleiveth not, ſhall be damned. And of that other Epheſ. 4. 5. There is but one Faith, and one Baptiſme, one Lord Ieſus. That the faith which was to ſave me, and by the which I was to pleaſe God, muſt certainly be the true Faith, which cannot be found in contrary Opinions, it being but One▪ and of contraries, One only can be true. I alſo collected from that Text, 2. Cor. 10. 5. Bringing into Captivity every thought, to the Obedience of Chriſt, That this Faith or beleiving was to be ſeated in the underſtanding, that the underſtanding was to ſubmit, not diſpute. And that this Act To beleive, was a Command or Precept of Almighty God, who will have his Will obeyed by all his Subjects, and the not obeying of which is puniſhed with eternal Damnation. Laſtly I found from that Text Heb. 10. 23. Let us hold faſt the profeſſion of our Faith without wavering, for he is faithful that hath promiſed. That Faith, if truly Divine, muſt be an infallible aſſent of our underſtanding, ſubmitting it ſelf obediently to beleive the Revelations of God. For otherwiſe Faith and conſequently all Religion, may be no more then fancy, or Opinion, and then no waies certain, and if ſo, then no Obligation.

From whence I thought it did very naturally follow, firſt that there muſt be ſome means appointed by God, by which we may know this one true Faith from all falſe Opinions for to require us to beleive upon pain of Damnation, and not to give us any means whereby we may know what to beleive, were to require us to make Bricks without Straw. Secondly that theſe means muſt be infallible, for we cannot be brought to an infallible aſcent by fallible and uncertain means, and God would not require us to aſſent to an Authority which may deceive us. Thirdly, that the underſtanding muſt ſubmit to theſe means under pain of Damnation; for if the underſtanding were at liberty to ſubmit, or not to ſubmit, to the means by which Faith is conveyed unto us, it would be no fault not to beleive, conſequently God could not juſtly damne us for not beleiving. Beſides, whoſoever ſhall refuſe to be governed by their means, and that Authority which God hath appointed to govern him, is a Rebel againſt God. Fourthly, that two men of two differing Faiths or beliefs cannot be ſaved: for they both of them, knowing that they are bound to be guided and governed by thoſe means which God hath appointed to convey faith unto them, and one of them flatly refuſing to ſubmit, this perſon who refuſeth, muſt be guilty of diſobedience to Gods command, and conſequently cannot be ſaved. Fifthly, that ignorant people by ſuch reaſonable diligence, as is very tollerable to humane frailty, and very poſſible for them may come to the knowledge of theſe means. For otherwiſe God would have appointed means which would be unprofitable to the end, and the far greater number of Souls for whom Chriſt dyed, would not be ſufficiently provided for; by the ſweet Providence of God. By which that Propheſy would be ineffectual, Eſay. 35. Say to them that are of a fearful heart, be ſtrong, fear not, behold your God will come and ſave you, then the eyes of the blind ſhall be opened and the Ears of the deaf unſtopped, &c. And one high way ſhall be there, and a way, and it ſhall be called the Holy way, the way faring men, though Fooles ſhall not err therein.

And thus far I met with nothing but what I eſteemed very agreeable with all ſorts of people, profeſſing themſelves Chriſtians. All that I ever met with ſeemed to grant that there muſt be a way, and a Rule; there muſt be means appointed, there muſt be a governing power to judge and decide all doubts, and teach us the true way to Heaven with certainty. But who this Rule or Iudge is, that is the difficulty, for when once we have found it, I think all perſons will agree that they are obliged to ſubmit unto it, as to the Apoſtles if they were actually living, or to Chriſt himſelf: This therefore I thought to be the only queſtion that I was to gain ſatisfaction unto: I therefore ceaſed to enquire after this doctrine, or the other Article, as beleiving, that if I could once find out this Rule, this Judge which God had appointed as the means to direct me, and to which I was to ſubmit, as to that Authority which God had appointed to Rule and Govern me, to teach me what I was, and what I was not to beleive; I ſhould no more ſcruple to beleive what that Authority ſhould teach me to be revealed by God, then if I heard God himſelf ſpeaking: And I was no way diſcouraged in my reſolution to ſearch, when I conſidered, that as God ſpoke in Antient times by the mouthes of his Prophets, before and after the Scriptures were written; and by the mouthes of his Apoſtles before, and after the New Teſtament was written; and that the writing of what God directed to be written, did not leſſen the power of God, but that he might ſtill direct by▪ the mouthes of his Prophets, and Apoſtles, ſo poſſibly I might find God ſtill ſpeaking by an Authority, which hitherto I had not been acquainted with.

I found all the Rules and meanes propoſed by every party to amount to four in the whole. One party would ſet up a claim to the Spirit directing them, and ſpeaking to their ſpirits. Another will have Reaſon to be this Rule and Judge. A third will ſet up ſole Scripture. And the fourth aſſigneth the Holy Catholick Church of Chriſt Viſible here on Earth, to be that Judge and Director. And finally that medium appoynted by God himſelf for the ends before mentioned, and to which all Chriſtians were to ſubmit. Other then theſe I never heard of any, for I alwaies eſteemed the Quakers Light to be either the Spirit or natural Reaſon, and I reſolved to rank it under one of thoſe conſiderations by a name more known to the world, then that which they have given it. And therefore theſe I reſolved moſt carefully to examine.

As to the firſt touching the Spirit, bearing witneſs in ſecret with our ſpirits, or in plainer terms the Private Spirit, I conſidered that there is no man in the world Jew or Turk, Pagan or Chriſtian, but may (if he will put on confidence enough) affirme that he is taught inwardly by God; many of all ſorts do this and yet teach contradictions, ſome therefore muſt be deceived, therfore this not the Rule. Nor hath this any effect amongſt thoſe who pretend it, for by this none of them ever as yet reconciled any differences, but each pretender grows perverſe and obſtinate, and ſeperates from all who pretend to have the ſpirit as well as himſelf, and ſo endleſs Hereſies▪ and Schiſms ariſe without any poſſibility to allay them, or for either the Learned, or the Ignorant to judge which of theſe bold pretenders hath a true ſpirit: In the mean time it will not (poſſibly) be hard for a ſober man to find that they are all of them governed by the Spirit of Error, who pretend thus audaciouſly, if he conſiders well the Rule which St. Iohn gives for diſcerning the ſpirit of truth from the ſpirit of error. 1 Ioh. 4. 6. v. We are of God, he that knoweth God heareth us, he that is not of God heareth not us: Hereby know we the Spirit of Truth from the Spirit of Error. As if he ſhould have ſaid, Chriſt hath placed Apoſtles, and Teachers, and Doctors, to govern and teach his Church, we are thoſe, and therefore of God; therefore whoever pretends to know the Will of God, muſt hear and obey and ſubmit unto us, or it is evident what he ſaith, is but a pretence, and he doth not indeed know God, nor is he of God; for if he did know God, or were of God, he would certainly hear us. Here therefore is your Rule to know true from falſe ſpirits: The ſpirit of truth is alwaies remaining with that Authority which God hath placed in the World, to teach truth to the world, and bring them to the Faith; and all that are actuated and lead by this ſpirit, are taught by it to ſubmit to this Authority, and to hear thoſe whom God hath ſent and doth ſend by this Authority, ſince Faith only comes by hearing thoſe who are truly ſent; but the ſpirit of error is a ſpirit of Pride, which refuſeth to ſubmit to that Authority which God hath ſet up, and heaping to themſelves Teachers, having itching eares, turn away their ears from the Truth, 1 Tim. 4. v. 3. 4. By this I ſaw, that although the Rule and the Judge, which I looked for, muſt have the aſſiſtance and influence of the Holy Ghoſt, the Spirit of Truth, yet it could not be every private man or woman who laid claim to ſuch influences, and who could no more ſatisfie another that they are guided by the Spirit of Truth, then many who are caſt into Bedlam for affirming themſelves to be God, can evince themſelves to be ſo, and whoſe affirmations (for ought I know) are as concluding as the other. In this therefore I was ſatisfied.

The next thing which I conſidered was Reaſon, which I found could not poſſibly be this Rule and Judge that I ſought for, becauſe firſt, it was to ſubmit as a Subject and Vaſſall to that Rule and Judge, therefore it could not be it. Secondly, it was fallible, and ſtrangely apt to miſtake, which is againſt the Nature of this Rule and Judge to be; For if God ſhould obliege us upon pain of damnation to ſubmit unto, and to be governed & ruled by an Authority that might deceive us, and might teach us that for a truth which is not, we ſhould be bound to beleive that for true which is not ſo, and yet be damned for not beleiving the truth.

Thirdly if Reaſon were to be this Rule and Judge, then it would follow contrary to the Scripture, that it is not impoſſible to pleaſe God without Faith, for Reaſon would teach us ſufficiently how to pleaſe God, yea it would be a breach of this rule to beleive what we do not underſtand, and then every Religion would be the truth, conſequently contradictions would be true, conſequently there would be many Religions, and not only not one faith but no faith at all; for there is ſcarce a man living but his reaſon differs from anothers, underſtandings and judgements differing as much as Faces, and Reaſon excludes faith: Therefore no one that followes his own Reaſon could in juſtice be condemned by God, conſequently all men would be ſaved, unleſs peradventure you will ſay, that in a buſineſs of ſuch conſequence, as the ſalvation of our ſouls, our private Reaſon perſwades us to prefer the Authority of ſuch as are wiſer then our ſelves before our own judgements, which is moſt true; But then I inferr that Roman Catholicks are the moſt rational people in the world, and conſequently have the beſt Religion as acting moſt conformably to Reaſon; for they rely upon the Authority of General Councels, conſiſting of the ableſt and moſt Learned men of all Nations, which is the greateſt Authority to be found on earth, eſpecially if they have the aſſiſtance of the Holy Ghoſt, as it appears they have both by the teſtimony of Scripture, and the conſtant tradition of all Ages. Laſtly, that would probably be the truth, and the true faith to one man this year, which ſeven years hence would be an error, and a falſe faith, to the ſame perſon; for in ſuch a compaſs of time a mans reaſon hath ſuch an alteration. Upon theſe grounds I concluded, that certainly God in his good Providence, had appointed a more ſure Guide, Rule and Judge to bring me to the infallible faith of Chriſtianity, then my own Reaſon.

The next thing in order to be conſidered, was the Scriptures, whether theſe were ſolely ſufficient to teach us the true Faith, and from time to time to direct Rule and Govern us, and to be this Rule and Jude, to whoſe ſentence and determination, to whoſe directions and Authority all were to ſubmit, and which was to ſupply unto us the place of Chriſt and the Apoſtles. And indeed I found this highly contended for, and ſeveral Reaſons urged for it.

Firſt the words of our Saviour, Joh. 5. 39. Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have Eternal Life, and they are they which teſtify of me. But to this I found ſeveral anſwers given, which to me were a ſatisfaction. For firſt, it doth not appear whether this in the Original be the Imparative or Indicative Mood. St. Ciril with whom Beza agrees, takes it in the Indicative Mood, and then the ſence runs thus; You do ſearch the Scriptures, becauſe in them you have an Opinion that you have Eternal Life, and yet even thoſe Scriptures are ſo far from being againſt me, that they teſtify of me; ſo that I ſhall be no waies prejudiced if I ſhould joyne iſſue with you, and try my cauſe by your own Rule. And in this ſence they are ſo far from proving what they are produced for, that they prove directly the contrary; they are ſo far from being a command to all to read, or ſearch, or make Scripture the ſole Rule and Judge, that they rather ſeem a reprehenſion to all who ſhall frame that conceit of the Scriptures. Secondly theſe words cannot extend to prove this concluſion, if they were in the Imparative Mood (which can never be proved infallibly) becauſe they cannot be profitable to work Faith in thoſe who cannot read, who are the far greater part of mankind. Thirdly, this cannot be the ſence of theſe words, becauſe they would then have excluded Chriſt Jeſus himſelf, and after him his Apoſtles, from being the Infallible means by which true faith was to be taught to the world, and who were doubtleſs in their time the infallible Judges for the deciding of all Controverſies, and the determining true Faith, from falſe Opinions, and to whoſe judgements all upon pain of Damnation were to ſubmit.

The ſecond Reaſon urged for ſole Scripture was, 2 Tim. 3. v. 15. 16. From a child thou haſt known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wiſe unto ſalvation through Faith which is in Chriſt Jeſus. All Scripture is given by Inſpiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for Reproof, for Correction, for Inſtruction in Righteouſneſs, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furniſhed to all good works. But I found that neither would this Text (ſo much and indeed ſo totally relyed upon) ſerve as a proof for what it was pretended, namely to prove that the Scripture alone was the way, the Rule, the Means, the governing power appointed by God to judge, and to decide all doubts, and to teach us the true Faith, and the true way to Heaven with certainty. The Reaſons why this Text would not prove this were theſe. Firſt, that which is ſpoken there of Scriptures is, that they were able through or by faith in Chriſt Ieſus to make wiſe, and that they are profitable to the ends there mentioned: But this Profitable is not ſole ſufficient, and this Able through or by Faith is not ſolely able, but ſuppoſeth Faith already, and therefore pretends not that they are the means preceding faith to beget faith. It was agreed by all▪ that the Scriptures to one that had faith already, and to the Man of God, who would ſubmit to ſuch Interpretations of Scriptures as God ſhould teach him, and hold forth unto him by that Authority which God had appointed to Guide, Rule, Teach and Govern him, and to whom God had appointed him to ſubmit, were extreamly profitable and able to make him wiſe unto ſalvation. But to one who had not the faith, and who did not already beleive them to be the word of God, they were no way uſeful or profitable, for faith comes by hearing, not by reading. Secondly, thoſe Scriptures here meant, were thoſe which St. Timothy had known from his youth, which were the Old Teſtament only; conſequently by this Rule they are ſolely ſufficient, conſequently the New Teſtament at the beſt not neceſſary, nor the Preaching of Chriſt, or the Apoſtles, nor the Sacraments of the New Teſtament, ſo that this Scripture either proves too much, if admitted in the ſence for which it is produced, or it proves nothing to this purpoſe. Thirdly, the word All Scripture muſt ſignifie either every Scripture as the Original word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ought to be rendred; or All the Scriptures that ever were, or All the Scriptures that were when this Text was written, or All the Scriptures that we now have. If it be every Scripture, then it proves too much, and conſequently nothing to the preſent intent, for then all the Scriptures ſave only one book are uſeleſs. If it be All that ever were, we have them not, as I ſhall ſhew hereafter, conſequently our rule is maymed, and God hath not given us ſufficient means for the ends propoſed. If All the Scriptures that were when this Text was written, then at leaſt all that have been written ſince were ſuperfluous, at leaſt not neceſſary. If All that we now only have, and that the Apoſtle foreſaw what would come to our hands in England, I would gladly have ſome aſſurance why the Text muſt be thus underſtood and no otherwiſe?

In fine if from thoſe words of our deareſt Lord▪ Theſe things I ſay that ye might be ſaved, Joh. 5. 34. We are not to conclude that thoſe very words or things then ſpoke, were ſole ſufficient for Salvation, but only that they were conducing to our ſalvation; ſo from neither of the Texts before urged, or any other that can be urged, can we conclude, that the Scriptures are ſolely ſufficient, but only that they are conducing to our ſalvation, and that the directions therein included if followed truly, and according to the intent of the Holy Goſt, are able to make him who is already a good Chriſtian, wiſe unto ſalvation.

And now that I clearly found that no Arguments which were urged for the ſole ſufficiency of Scripture, and to prove that the Scripture alone is this infallible judge, or rule or means, appointed by God as aforeſaid, did prove the Scriptures to be ſo, or ſatisfie the point for which they were produced. I reſolved to ſee what could be ſaid againſt this common general Opinion of all who oppoſe the Church of Rome, why the Scriptures could not be this Rule and Judge.

The firſt reaſon that I found was, that it did never yet appear to anſwer this end; for thoſe who pretend the moſt to conſult the Scriptures, do moſt of all men diſagree in matters of faith, and in interpreting theſe Scriptures. Luther the firſt beginner of Proteſtants, gathered a Flock of followers, which divided into ſeveral other ſub-diviſions, contradicting each other. So Iohn Calvin rayſed a party in Geneva of whom Luther ſaith expreſly, Tom. 7. Fo. 380. I ſcarce ever read of a more deformed Hereſy, which preſently in the beginning, was divided into ſo many heads, ſuch a number of Sects, not one like another, and ſuch variety and diſagreeing of Opinions. And have we not diviſions enough in this poor Kingdome, and amongſt thoſe who call themſelves Proteſtants? Are there not (beſides the Church of England which I pretend not to treat of becauſe eſtabliſhed) Presbyterians, Independents, Anabaptiſts, Fifth Monarchy men, Quakers, &c. Maintaining Doctrines contrary to each other? Do not all or moſt of theſe pretend the Scriptures alone to be the Rule and Judge? and doth this Rule or Judge anſwer the end for which they pretend it was delivered to the World? I remember it is excellently well inferred by the Learned Author of the Book Intituled Fiat Lux, That it is impoſſible for any one of theſe partyes (which I muſt now crave leave to call Sects) with reaſon to cenſure or condemn any of the others, although never ſo different from themſelves even in points by them eſteemed fundamentals; ſince each of them have their uncontroulable Plea for themſelves, that their faith is in every reſpect conformable to what they underſtand to be the true ſence and meaning of the Scriptures, which they all agree to be the ſole and only Rule and Judge. Nay which of theſe Parties can deny the others the Title of Proteſtant, or convince them of Hereſy, ſince to be a Proteſtant, no more is required (or if it be I would gladly know what it is) then to admit of the Scriptures interpeted according to their beſt underſtandings and Conſciences to be the ſole and only rule of Faith and judge of controverſies? is not he that profeſſeth to follow this principle, allowed by all to be a perfect good Proteſtant though never ſo much differing in faith from others who make the ſame profeſſion? Good God? haſt thou told us that Hereſies muſt be, and yet left us without all poſſibility of convincing or condemning them, or knowing who are, and who are not Hereticks? But thoſe who pretend this Rule and Judge to be Scripture, do in truth as little intend it as any who oppoſe them: for if they will pleaſe but to ſpeak their conſciences clearly, it would ſoon appear that it is not the Holy Scriptures which byaſs them, but their own private reaſons, puting private ſences and gloſſes upon thoſe Scriptures, which were eaſily quitted if they would once give themſelves the liberty to ſee how eaſy it is for their reaſon to erre in divine things, which are as far above the reach of reaſon as Heaven is above the Earth, as it is for the ſame reaſon to miſtake ſo much in humane affairs as we ſee it to do.

The ſecond reaſon was that the Letter of Scriptures was to be conſtrued and applyed by men, wherefore as mens Judgements and intereſts differ, ſo will their Expoſitions of written words; from hence differing ſences will be rayſed, and from thence different faiths. For Example, If I were to diſpute againſt an Arrian, and to prove that God the Father, and God the Son are of the ſame ſubſtance, I ſhould urge that Text; Joh. 10. 30. I and my Father are one thing. And by this, according to my judgement. I ſhould think I had proved the queſtion. But then my Arrian comparing this with Joh: 17. 22. Where Chriſt prayeth to his Father, that his Diſciples might all be one thing, as thou Father in me and I in thee, concludes that this One or One thing in both theſe Texts are to be intended One in Affection, not in ſubſtance; for, (ſaith he) it can never be underſtood that Chriſt intended to pray that his Diſciples might be One in ſubſtance. If I ſhould urge the Arrian farther, and ſay that the Council of Nice gave the ſame interpretation which I do, to the Text which I urge, he would anſwer as Proteſtants generally do, that he hath a Worthy eſteem of Councils and Fathers, ſo far as they agree with Scriptures, but he doth not think them infallible, he beleives they may miſtake and therefore where he finds them diſagreeing with the Word of God, he muſt contradict them all.

The third Reaſon which I thought forcible, was, that thoſe who are thus far from for the ſole Scriptures, do not ſay that One or any perticular number of the Books of Scriptures, but All the works of Scripture, which were written by Inſpiration of God, do, being joyned together, make up this Rule and Judge to be a compleat Rule and Judge. I concluded therefore, if any of theſe Books be now loſt, this Rule is not perfect; and then Man is left by God without means to beleive, conſequently muſt be damned for that which is not his fault. Now that many of theſe books are loſt, I found clear from thoſe which remain, there is mentioned Num. 21. v. 14. The Book of the Warrs of the Lord. This is loſt. It is ſaid of Solamon. 1 Kings 4. 3. 2. That he ſpoke three thouſand Proverbs, and his Songs were a thouſand and five. I conceive ſome of theſe upon a juſt reckoning, will be obſerved to be wanting. We find named. 2 Chron. 9. 29. The book of Nathan the Prophet, the Prophecy of Ahijah, and the Viſions of Iddo. Theſe are loſt, as alſo thoſe named 1 Chro. 29. 29. The book of Samuel, the book of Nathan, the book of God. It is clear from Mat. 27. 9. That part of Ieremy is loſt, for that Evangeliſt cites a Text of Ieremy not to be found in any of Ieremies books which we have. So alſo are the Books of that Prophet mentioned Matt. 2. 23. who foretold that Chriſt ſhould be called a Nazarene. We ſhall find by 1 Cor. 5. 9. That the Epiſtle which our Canon calls St. Paul's firſt Epiſtle to the Corinthians was not truly his firſt to them, for there he ſaith, I wrote to you in an Epiſtle not to company with Fornicators; wherefore if he hid the written an Epiſtle to them, this was not his firſt to them. St. Paul wrote alſo an Epiſtle from Laodicea, which he mentions thus, Col. 4. 16. Read the Epiſtle from Laodice. It ſeems there was ſomething in it which was material, yet we do not find that Epiſtle; the concluſion I think falls out very naturally.

The fourth Reaſon was this, nothing can be a ſole ſufficient Rule to all, or the only way and means to convey Divine and infallible Faith to all, or a Judge to whoſe Sentence all are to ſubmit on pain of Damnation, which cannot be certainly and truly underſtood by all; But the Scriptures cannot be certainly underſtood by all. Nay they are very ſubject to be deſperately miſunderſtood, if you beleive the ſecond Epiſtle of St. Peter, (and beleive it we muſt for it is Gods word) 2 Pet. 3. 16. where ſpeaking of all St. Pauls Epiſtles in general, he ſaith, In which are ſome things hard to be underſtood, which they that are unlearned and unſtable, wreſt as they do alſo the other Scriptures unto their own deſtruction. It is in vain to ſay, that the Scriptures are eaſy in Fundamentals, and in what concerns our ſalvation, for we have here a teſtimony that they are hard and wreſted by the unlearned and unſtable to their deſtruction, that is to their Damnation: Now if they were only hard in things not appertaining to Salvation, the wreſting of ſuch things could not bring men to Deſtruction. It followes that they cannot be a ſafe and infallible ſecure Rule, nor indeed any Rule at all the ignorant, who are infinitely the greater part of thoſe for whom Chriſt dyed.

The fift Reaſon is this, if the Scriptures that is the writings of the Prophets, Evangeliſts and Apoſtles, &c. be this Rule and Judge, it can only be meant of their true, Authentical and Original writings, not of corrupted copies: Therefore if we have not their true Originals our Rule is imperfect; Obſerve what the moſt learned Proteſt. Chamier ſaith in this perticular of Scripture Tranſlations, We acknowledge them to be made but by a private Spirit, as far as every mans judgement, skilfulneſs in Languages, dilligence and ſincerity were able to reach. Therefore there is none either in our own tongue or in any other, unto which we think meet to ſubiect either our ſelves or other men. As for Tranſlations the ſence of Proteſtants is this, that all of them, of what ſtanding name, or credit ſoever they be and with what diligence, ſincerity or Learning ſoeuer they were made, are only ſo far certain as they agree with the firſt Context, I mean as far as they expreſs that ſence which is certainly manifeſt (and how ſhall that appear) to be the ſence of the Hebrew and Greek words (he muſt intend here the true Originals) but if they vary and ſwerve never ſo little from hence (i. e. from the true Originals) that ſence which they give or expreſs, we judge neither to be Divine nor Authentick, nor Canonical, but merely humane, Cham. Panſtr. Tom. 1. l. 1. 2. c. 2. S. 3. 5. So then we muſt have the true Originals, or we have no perfect Rule of the Scriptures, and therefore I would gladly ſee and ſpeak with that man, who can aſſure me infallibly, that the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures which we have, are theſe Originals; Nay who will adventure to make Oath, that theſe which we have do agree with the true Originals. And yet if we could be ſecure of this, I doubt it will be hard to finde any perſon who doth ſo infallibly underſtand the Originals, as to give us a true Tranſlation, on which we may with as much infallible aſſurance rely, as upon God interpreting: And yet if this cannot be had, we muſt confeſs that we are not certain whether we have this Rule pure or not. Sure I am the Apoſtles did not tranſlate theſe books into Engliſh, we are ſo far from having St. Matthews Original, that we know not in what Language it was written, or whether he who tranſlated it into Greek were an honeſt man or not, we all agree that our Engliſh Tranſlatours were fallible men, they might be miſtaken, and have miſtaken in multitudes of places; themſelves ſay they were careful to get the beſt Copies of the Hebrew and Greek they could find, but were not infallibly certain that thoſe they had were true. Have we then in theſe a ſufficent certainty to venture our ſoules upon, ſuppoſing God to have appointed the Scriptures as our ſole Rule, Guide and Judge? I think no man who hath any modeſty, or any conſideration of his Souls good, will ſay that we have. But ſure I am, whoever ſhall dare to ſay it, will never be able to prove it infallibly. Give me leave to Expoſtulate thus with you, who are for ſole Scripture. What Scriptures would ye have me to ſubmit unto, who am a meer Engliſh man? If you ſay the Originals, neither you nor I know where to find them: If you ſay to ſuch Copies as you have, I ask by what Authority do you require this, ſince they are but Copies of Copies, which you cannot certainly tell me that th •… are not corrupted,See Jus Divinum upon Preſbytery, P. 69. 70, ſince the moſt Learned do affirm that there are variety of theſe Copies, in ſome of which whole Verſes are omitted which are ſound in others: and that there arē at leaſt ſixteen various Greek Copies of the New Teſtament. If you tell me I muſt ſubmit to your Engliſh Tranſlations, I aske farther, to which of them,See Anſworths Advertiſement to the Reader in the end of his Anotations upon Deute. touching objections made againſt the Heb. Text. for they have differences alſo, the 9. and 18. verſes of the 7th. Chapter of Daniel, of the Geneva Tranſlation, are directly contrary to the ſame Verſes in the Tranſlation put forth by the command of King Iames. Nay the Miniſters of the County of Lincoln in King Iames his time, in their grievances, delivered unto his Majeſty Pag. 11. 13. 14. do ſay that the Engliſh Tranſlation of the Bible takes away from the Text, and adds to the Text, to the changing and obſcuring the very ſence and meaning of the Holy Ghoſt. Our late great Linguiſt M. Broughton in his Advertiſements of Corruptions, affirms to the then Biſhops of England, That their publick Tranſlation of Scripture into Engliſh is ſuch, as that it perverts the Text of the Old Teſtament, in 848 places, and that it cauſeth million of millions to reject the New Teſtament, and to run into Eternal Flames. And Dr. Daniel Feately in his Treatiſe Entituled The Dippers Dipped, hath theſe words pag. 1. No Tranſlation is ſimply Authentical, or the undoubted word of God. In the undoubted word of God there can be no error, but in Tranſlations there are and may be errors. The Bible Tranſlated therefore is not the undoubted word of God but ſo far only as it agreeth with the Original. As touching the Engliſh Tranſlations and the Hebrew and Greek Copies which are now extant amongſt us See John Goodwin his Treatiſe upon Divine Authority of Scripture aſſerted, from Page 4. unto pag. 19 &c. I pray conſider how you will anſwer when thus preſſed, and how you will be able to ſatisfie me with certainty, that what you would have me rely upon and ſubmit unto is the undoubted word of God pure and uncorrupted. And by what Rule ſhall I with certainty ſatisfie my ſelf what books thoſe are which are the Word of God, for if that be not known, I ſee not but that it is as poſſible for me to have other books impoſed upon me, then what I have yet heard of or at leaſt ſeen, as part of this Word of God as well as former Chriſtians, ſome Ages after the Apoſtles times had the Epiſtle to the Hebrews, thoſe of St. Iames, St. Iude, the latter of St. Peter, the ſecond and third of St. Iohn, with the Apocalips, or Revelation impoſed upon them by Councils, where the Pope was chief? theſe things are fit to be clearly known, and that with certainty too before a man ſubmit in ſo high a meaſure as you require.

The ſixt Reaſon which I met with was; whatſoever is a ſole ſufficient Rule muſt be plain, and clear, in all neceſſary points (atleaſt) which relates unto Faith, or the means by which Salvation is to be had which the Scripture is not; and above all things it muſt not contradict it ſelf, which the Scriptures ſeem to do; to prove theſe I ſhall give ſome few Inſtances, which I think can never be infringed, that they are not plain and clear as is beforeſaid, conſider.

1. All Chriſtians generally (except ſome few) do agree that the Sacraments of the Goſpel are neceſſary in order to ſalvation; now as to theſe, the Scriptures are ſo far from being clean, that they do not ſo much as determine what a Sacrament is, how many Chriſt ordained, or whether there be any Sacraments or not.

2. It is neceſſary to Salvation to beleive all the Books of the Holy Scriptures to be the word of God, and to beleive nothing written, to be the Word of God, which is Apocryphall. But by the Scriptures it cannot be made out plainly and clearly which Books are the Word of God, and which are Apocriphall.

3. It is neceſſary to beleive the Scriptures to be the Word of God; but there is no Text or Texts of Scripture to prove that the Scriptures which we have, are Gods word.

4. It is neceſſary to know that the Scriptures are not corrupted, for if they are corrupted, they ceaſe to be the word of God, ad then they cannot be any Rule or ſure guide unto us, But of this we can have no aſſurance in Scripture.

5. It is neceſſary in order to the knowing the true mind, meaning and will of God, and what he intended by ſuch a Text, that we know when a Text is to be underſtood liberally, when figuratively, when miſtically; but this cannot be underſtood from ſole Scripture, as dayly experience informs us.

6. It is neceſſary to know, that the very Copies and Tranſlations of the Scriptures which we have, & upon which we ground our ſelves, are certainly true; for if they are not, we build upon uncertainties; and conſequently have no ſure foundation for our Faith; yet we cannot be aſſured, nor have ſo much as any information as to this perticular from the Scriptures.

7. It is neceſſary that the many manifeſt controverſies about the true ſence of Scripture ſhould be decided, becauſe where two contrary ſences are impoſed, or urged, and both affirmed to be the meaning of God, and his Revelation, one only can be true, and he who refuſeth to beleive that which is true, ſhall be damned; yet theſe controverſies cannot be decyded by Scripture.

8. It is neceſſary to know what is purely and abſolutely neceſſary to ſalvation to be beleived, and what not, that is as you ſay what is fundamental and what not fundamental, and to be informed of this plainly, leſt we err and thereby be damned, but in this the Scripture is ſilent.

9. It is neceſſary to beleive that God the Father is not begotten' that God the Son is not made, but begotten, by his Father only; That God the Holy Ghoſt is neither made nor begotten, but doth proceed, and that from the Father and the Son, That Chriſt is of one ſubſtance with the Father, and that theſe three are One, and that One, Three: I refer to conſideration whether all theſe points be plainly and clearely to be found in Scripture, if they were it had been almoſt impoſſible, for ſo many diviſions to have hapned about them, as have done amongſt perſons on all ſides, admitting the Scriptures to be the word of God.

10. It is neceſſary (the Church of England ſaith) that Infants ſhould be Baptiſed, that women ſhould receive the Holy Sacrament of the Euchariſt, that Chriſtians ſhould obſerve the Lords day, yet none of theſe points are clearly or perticularly proved by Scripture.

11. It is a Sin, and (as the Generality of Chriſtians agree) an Hereſy to Re-baptiſe any one who hath been Baptiſed by an Heretick where doth the Scripture ſay ſo?

That there are in the Scriptures ſeveral places which ſeem Contradictions, and conſequently ſome part of the Scriptures ſeem untrue, is eaſily proved; and I ſhall here give you ſome few plain Inſtances for example, to which many more might be added.

1. In the 2. Kings C. 8. v. 26. You read thus. Two and twenty years old was Ahazia when he began to reigne, and he reigned one year in Ieruſalem, and his mothers name was Athaliah the daughter of Omri. But in 2 Chron. c. 22. v. 2. You will read thus, Forty and two years old was Ahazia when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Ieruſalem, his mothers name was Athaliah the daughter of O •… ri. Now againſt the infallibility of Scripture, Reaſon convinceth her ſelf to have this infallible demonſtration, viz. No one who ſpeaketh two things, the one contrary to the other, can be ſaid to be infallible in ſpeaking; but to affirm of the ſame perſon that he began to reign when he was two and twenty years old, and that he was two and forty years old when he began to reigne; is to ſpeak two things the one contrary to the other, therefore ſaith Reaſon the Scripture is not infallible in ſpeaking.

2. In St. Matthews Goſpel, Chap. 1. v. 17. you read thus, All the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations, and from David till the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations, and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Chriſt are fourteen generations; Now if you pleaſe to conſider that three fourteens muſt make forty and two, and then pleaſe to reckon up all the perſons named, you ſhall find them demonſtrably to be but one and forty and no more, which is but two fourteens and one thirteen. Now Reaſon asketh whether this can be infallibly true.

3. In St. Lukes Goſpel Ch. 3. v. 35. 36. you ſhall read thus, Salah, which was the ſon of Cainan which (Cainan) was the ſon of Arphaxad, & if you read Ge. c. 11. 12. you ſhall not find that Cainan was the Son of Arphaxad as St. Luke ſaith, but that Arphaxad lived five and thirty years & begat Salah. Now according to St. Luke this Salah was the ſon of Cainan not of Arphaxad. 'If it be anſwered that Salah was Arphaxads ſon, becauſe Arphaxad was his Grandfather: I pray obſerve that Arphaxad is ſaid to have begotten him, and that when he was five and thirty years old. And if you remark that Chapter in Geneſis, no one is ſaid to have had a ſon before he was thirty years old: But the greateſt difficulty will be here, It is ſaid Arphaxad lived five and thirty years and begat Cainan. If then Arphaxad was Granfather to Salah, becauſe he begat Cainan, when he was five & thirty years old, (in which year of his age he begat Salah then Salah his Grandchild, and Cainan his ſon muſt be both born in the ſame year, which ſaith Reaſon is impoſſible. Now if Scripture can determine all controverſies, I hope you will ſhew me how to ſolve theſe difficulties by the Scripture which how to do I profeſs moſt ſeriouſly I do not underſtand.

The ſeventh Reaſon which I found againſt this Opinion of ſole Scripture was, that if the Scriptures had been appointed by God for this end of being our ſole Rule, Guide and Judge, in all our doubts, and the ſole means to bring faith unto our ſouls, they would have been ſo in the Apoſtles times (at leaſt) after all the books of the New Teſtament were written; but that they were ſo we do not find, for then the Authority of the Apoſtles muſt have ceaſed ſo ſoon as they had made an end of Writing, which I beleive no one will ſay, much leſs prove: And then even in the times of the Apoſtles, if a controverſie had ariſen touching the true ſence of any Text, no addreſs ſhould have been to the Apoſtles to decide the doubt, but to the book which every one muſt have judged, though in oppoſition to the then preſent interpretation of the Apoſtles, if they had then taken upon them to explain their own writings, which to ſay, I think, will appear ſufficiently abſurd to all men. Nay if the Scriptures had been intended for this, it muſt have followed in all probability, that our Lord Chriſt would have left his own law and doctrines in writing under his own hand which he hath not done: at leaſt he would have obleiged all his Apoſtles to write, which he did not that we know of. It ſhould alſo follow, that to write had been the chief part of the Apoſtles Miniſtry, conſequently that moſt part of the Apoſtles neglected to perform the chiefeſt part of their Miniſtry, & were negligent to do that which above all things was their duty, will any of you preſume to affirm this? yet if you ſpeak conſequently, it will be hard to avoid it.

The laſt Reaſon which I ſhall recount unto you is this, that to make the Scripture this ſole Rule and Judge, is in effect not to make the Scripture ſo▪ but to make every individual man and woman, who take upon them to read and underſtand the Scriptures, ſuch a Rule and Judge unto themſelves; for what difference is there between judging by my own Reaſon and judging by a Law to be Interpreted by my own Reaſon: This is to make the Scripture not Gods Word, but the word of every private man. Hence I concluded, that if Chriſt be God, as certainly and infallibly he is, and if he truly loved thoſe ſoules for which he dyed, he hath certainly provided for them ſome more aſſured means by which to know the true Faith, without which he will not ſave them, then by leaving them to the Scriptures to be interpreted by each one as he thinks beſt; for what Law maker was there ever found ſo ridiculous, as to gather a people into a body, and give them a Law book in writing to govern them, and to be their only judge in all their differences, without appointing, nay expreſly prohibeting, that there ſhould be any living judge or Judges, or any Court to expound this Law, and to have the Executive Authority and jurisdiction, from whence there ſhould be no appeal?

Having conſidered after this manner what could be ſaid, for the private Spirit, Reaſon, and the ſole ſufficiency of Scripture, I was in the laſt place to ſee what could be ſaid on the behalf of the Catholick Church, reſolving from theſe premiſes, that if here I could not find a ſatisfaction in point of certainty, and an infallible aſſurance, I was not to expect it, (as far as I yet underſtood) from the Principles of Chriſtianity, and conſequently muſt conclude, that Religion, and Faith, were no more then Fancy and Opinion.

I thought it not unreaſonable, and other perſons would doubtleſs have thought the Argument ſtrong enough, if I had ſought no further, but concluded, the Private ſpirit is not, Reaſon is not, the Scriptures are not this Rule and Judge; therefore the Church is. But I reſolved to examine farther, and having agreed the point that ſuch a Rule and Judge there muſt alwaies be of neceſſity, and therefore there hath alwaies been, and ever ſhall be ſuch a One, unleſs we ſhall ſay (which I hope none will) that God is defective in neceſſaries. I found firſt, for the firſt 2000 years, before any Scriptures were written, the Church of God was this Rule and Judge: Was not Circumciſion and other Rights brought in by Abraham, and practiſed by the Church then without any Scripture to try them by? what would you have ſaid if you had then lived? would you have diſobeyed the then Church, and rejected thoſe Ordinances becauſe there were then no Scriptures to warrant them?

Secondly the Church of the Jews was ſo to the Jews after that the Scripture was written; and this by the expreſs direction of Scripture Deut. 17. 8. Thou ſhal come to the Prieſts, the Levites, and unto the Iudge, that ſhall be in thoſe daies, and enquire, and they ſhall ſhew thee the ſentence of Iudgement, &c. And according to the judgement which they ſhall tell thee, you ſhall do, Thou ſhalt not decline from the ſentence which they ſhall ſhew thee, to the right hand, nor to the left hand; And the man that will do preſumptuouſly, and will not hearken unto the Prieſt or unto the Iudge, even that man ſhall dye. Therfore our Bleſſed Lord, whilſt the Jewiſh Church was yet in being, gave directions, Mat. 23. 2. 3. The Scribes and Phariſees ſit in Moſes Chair; all therfore whatſoever they bid you obſerve, that obſerve and do. Would God direct them unto, & puniſh with Death for not obeying an Authority, which might deceive them, would our Lord command the doing of whatſoever ſhould be done by an Authority when that Authority was capable of miſtaking?

From hence I concluded, that it was poſſible for the Church of God to be ſuch a Rule and Judge, and to be the means appointed by God, to give infallible inſtructions in the Truth. Now as concerning the Church in the new Law under Chriſt, I found.

Thirdly, that God had promiſed ſuch a Church, ſuch an Authority by the mouthes of his Prophets, Iſa. 2. v. 2. 3, &c. It ſhall come to paſs in the laſt dayes (ſo the Apoſtles called the time of the New Law). That the Mountain of the Lords houſe ſhall be Eſtabliſhed in the top of the mountains, (behold its viſibility) All Nations ſhall ſlow unto it, (ſee its Univerſality and extent) and ſay come ye and let us goe up to the mountain of the Lord, to the houſe of the God of Jacob; And He (that is God) will teach us his waies, (in this his houſe or Church) for out of Sion ſhall go forth the Law, (as by the Apoſtles on Whitſunday) and the Word of God from Ieruſalem (where the firſt Preaching of the Goſpel begun) And he ſhall judge amongſt the Nations; Not perſonally for Chriſt went not of Iewry, but) by his Churches Tribunal, erected amongſt all Nations ſo conſpicuouſly, that they may all flow to it. Will any one ſay this judgement, which is Gods judgement, can be fallible? Or that in this Tribunal, he that teacheth can teach us Errors? Iſa. 35. 8. where God promiſeth to eſtabliſh a way of holineſs ſo direct unto us, that Fooles ſhould not erre therein Iſa. 54. 3. 13, 17. Thy ſeed ſhall inherit the Gentiles, thy children ſhall be taught of the Lord, and every tongue that ſhall riſe againſt thee in Iudgement, thou ſhall condemne, Iſa. 56. 21. As for me, this is my Covenant with them ſaith the Lord my ſpirit (infallible) that is upon thee and my words (infallible alſo) which I have put in thy mouth (the mouth by which the Church teacheth and judgeth) ſhall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy Seeds ſeed, ſaith the Lord from henceforth and forever. Behold here the ſpirit of Truth, intailed upon the Church to preſerve it from Error, Iſa. 60. 10. 12 &c. The ſons of ſtrangers ſhall build up thy walls, their Kings ſhall miniſter unto thee, thy Gates ſhall be open continually, they ſhall not be ſhut day nor night, that men may bring unto thee the forces of the Gentiles, and that their Kings may be brought, For the Nation and Kingdome which will not ſerve thee, (by ſubmitting to thy doctrine) ſhall periſh, I will make the place of my feet glorious, they ſhall call thee the City of the Lord, I will make thee an eternal Excellency, thy ſun ſhall no more go down, nor ſhall thy moon withdraw it ſelf, but the Lord ſhall be unto thee an everlaſting Light. If thoſe ſhall periſh who refuſe to ſubmit to this Authority, to whom God is an everlaſting Light, and whom he makes an everlaſting Excellency, we need not fear that it can deceive us, or that it can ever ſo be Eclipſed, as to be at any time inviſible. Many more promiſes might be collected out of the Old Teſtament, but I come to ſhew.

Fourthly, that Chriſt by his own mouth, and by the mouthes of his Apoſtles hath promiſed to us likewiſe ſuch a Church, Mat. 16. 19. Upon this Rock I will build my Church, (which he had foretold by his Prophets ſhould be of ſo vaſt extent) And the Gates of Hell ſhall not prevail against it, Mat. 18. 17. He that will not hear the Church, let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publican, but if Chriſt by his ſpirit doth not preſerve this Church from all poſſibility of teaching me error inſtead of a truth, I may from this Church which Chriſt obligeth me to hear, and unto which obligeth me to ſubmit, receive ſuch errors as may damn me. Mat. 28. 20. And Loe I am with you alwaies even unto the end of the World. this muſt be meant of the viſible Church which was to be in every Age, for the Apoſtles were not to live and to Baptiſe and teach alway unto the end of the world. And therefore if the ſame aſſiſtance and preſence of Chriſt was promiſed to the Church after the Apoſtles, I think we ſhall not doubt but that it is the ſame that is infallible. But that it may clearely appear that the Aſſiſtance promiſed by Chriſt to his Church extended to an infallible ſecurity from all errors, conſider Iohn 14. 16. I will pray the Father and he ſhall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever, even the ſpirit of Truth, whom the world cannot receive, and v. 26. The Comforter which is the Holy Ghoſt, whom the Father will ſend in my Name, he ſhall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatſoever I ſhall ſay unto you, and ch. 16. 12. I have many things yet to ſay unto you, but you cannot hear them now, howbeit when the Spirit of Truth is come, he will guide you into all truth. But all Truth excludeth all Errors, and this for ever which was longer then the Apoſtles were to live: If we therefore enquire, by what means this teaching ſhall be, by whom the people ſhall be taught all Truths? and how preſerved from all errors? St. Paul will tell us, Eph. 4. 11. He gave ſome Apoſtles (ſucceeding in full Apoſtolical Authority) ſome Prophets (expounders of the Prophets) ſome Evangeliſts (Preachers of the Goſpel) ſome Paſtors and Teachers, to what end? For the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the Miniſtry, for the edifying of the body of Chriſt. For what time? Till we all come in the Union of the faith. But will theſe ſecure us? the next verſe will tell you, That we henceforth be no more children, toſſed to and fro, and carryed about with every wind of Doctrine by the ſleight of men, and cunning craftineſs, whereby they lye in waite to deceive. Gods intent then was, to provide ſuch means for mankinde, as might ſecure them in their beleif in every Age, that they might not be deceived by the cunning craft of falſe Teachers, ſuch as now think themſelves able by pretending inward Lights, Private Spirits, and evidence of Scripture, by themſelves Interpreted, to teach us a doctrine contrary to all thoſe, who for almoſt fifteen Ages before them have been (and none others, teaching a contrary Faith can be named, who have been) the Apoſtles, Prophets, Evangeliſts, Paſtours, and Teachers, in the Viſible Church of Chriſt. In the laſt place I ſhall urge that Text of St. Paul to Timothy, 1. Tim. 3. 15. The Church of the Living God, the Pillar and ground of Truth. And may we not ſecurely rely upon that Pillar, which God hath erected for us? and found our Faith upon that Ground of truth, which the God of all truth hath given us for that end?

To elude their plain and evident Texts, I know you are wont to ſay, in the firſt place, that they may have other Interpretations, and therefore this is not the truth. But will not the ſame reaſon hold, the Apoſtles cited many Texts of Scriptures, and interpreted them ſo as to prove Chriſt the Meſſias; and his Doctrines to be true, whereas thoſe Texts might have had other interpretations; therefore the Interpretation put on them by the Apoſtles were not true? Who ſees not the weakneſs of this Argument. Can you ſhew with any aſſurance, that theſe Texts are not capable of theſe interpretations? If not, then according to your own principles theſe interpretations may be true, for you who ſay the contrary are not infallible, but may be miſtaken.

Another anſwer which you uſe to give is, that you are willing to agree, that ſo long as the Church of Chriſt teacheth conformable to Scripture, ſhe is infallible, and ſo long as ſhe doth her Duty ſhe may and ought to be beleived. But this is as weak as the former; for who ſees not, that it gives the Church no more priviledge, nor allowes it to have any more benefit from theſe promiſes then the Divel hath? for ſo long as he teacheth conformable to Scripture he may be beleived. A ſtraw may be a Pillar until it bends, and Quick-ſands ſure ground until they yield. What aſſurance can we have that the Holy Apoſtles did their duty in writing what the Holy Ghoſt did dictate unto them? For if they did not, their writings are not to be beleived; conſequently we are not, nor can we be infallibly ſecure; that the Scriptures which we have were dictated by, and are by Inſpiration from God: If you can anſwer this, ſo as to be ſecure that the Apoſtles did their duty, the ſame will be our anſwer, that the preſent Viſible Catholick Church of Chriſt at all times doth her Duty.

The fift Argument is; that the Church of God was this Rule and Judge, this only means to convey Faith, and this infallible Guide and Authority when our Bleſſed Saviour was alive, and before the New Teſtament was written, and alſo in the Apoſtles times both before and after the whole New Teſtament was written. If not I obliege you to ſhew ſome evident Text which proves certainly, that after the New Teſtament was written, the Church in the Apoſtles time was deprived of this priveledge and Authority, and that it had been no ſinne, then to oppoſe, or not ſubmit to the guidance, direction, government, and authority of the Apoſtles. But if notwithſtanding this you ſhall (without giving any other Reaſon) inſiſt that the Apoſtles were this infallible Rule and Judge, in their times only, until the Canon of Scriptures was finiſhed, and then loſt their Authority when they had compleated the Canon. I pray conſider what will be the conſequence in caſe it ſtands proved that the Canon of Scripture which they finiſhed, is now uncompleated by the loſs of thoſe Epiſtles and parcels of the Apoſtles writings which I have proved to be loſt? Will it not follow, that for the ſame Reaſon that an infallible living rule and Judge was neceſſary before the Canon was compleat, the ſame is now neceſſary ſome part of the Canon being loſt? And what will the conſequence be if it ſtand proved alſo that ſuppoſing the Canon were compleat, yet it is not ſufficient to decide the controverſies now a foot amonſt Chriſtians in matters of Faith? Will it not follow that then it is neceſſary to have ſuch a Rule and Judge as is before mentioned? The late Learned Dr. Ferne a great Champion for ſole Scripture, confeſſeth Sext. 27. That Indeed ſuch a Iudge or Umpire in Chriſtendome would (if to be had) be a ready means to compoſe all differences and to reſtore truth and peace. But ſhall we think that our bleſſed Redeemer when he firſt founded his Holy Church did not ſee this as clearly as Dr. Ferne? certainly he did, and for this reaſon he appointed the Holy Apoſtles and their Succeſſors to be this Judge and Umpire, and if you deſire or expect to ſee an end of thoſe differences wherein ye are now involved, by relying on your own private Interpretations of the Scriptures, you muſt addreſs your ſelves to this Judge and be content to ſtand the determination of their Umpire which is infallible; I ſay infallible, for as the Apoſtles though as men were ſubject to error in their own private affairs, and actings, and as ſuch might one withſtand the other and reprove the other, yet were they by the aſſiſtance of Gods Holy ſpirit in defining and delivering matters of Faith; ſo the Prelates of the Holy Catholick Church though as men they were fallible in their own private actings and affairs, yet when aſſembled in a General Council with their Supream Paſtor, they are ſtill made infallible in defining matters of Faith by the aſſiſtance of the ſame Holy Ghoſt, who was as well promyſed to them as to the Apoſtles.

The laſt reaſon is, that none of the difficulties that were propoſed to prove the Scriptures not to be the Rule, and Judge before mentioned, are capable of being objected againſt the Church. For firſt, this Judge and Rule is capable of anſwering the end for which it is appointed and propoſed, all who ſubmit unto the Church agreeing in matters of Faith: Secondly, it is not capable of being miſunderſtood or miſinterpreted by the various Reaſons Judgements and Intereſts of men; but is alwaies in being, and capable upon demand to explain and declare its own ſence, and intention upon any difference ariſing. Thirdly, it is capable of being underſtood by All. Fourthly, it is capable of being certainly known by all. Fifthly, it is capable of determining what plaineſs and clearneſs in every Article of Faith, and hath alwaies appeared to do ſo to the condemation and confuſion of all oppoſers. Sixthly, this was the ſaid Rule and Judge in Chriſts time, and in the times of the Apoſtles. Laſtly, this doth not ſet up every individual man and woman to be a Judge and Rule unto themſelves, but preſerves the unity of the ſpirit in the Bond of Peace; by teaching all underſtandings to become Captives to this Rule and Judge appointed by God, for their guidance and direction.

But I know there will be yet an Objection made by you of the ſeperation, whether theſe Texts which ſpeak ſo amply of the Church, are to be underſtood of the Church Militant and viſible in this World? or of the Church Triumphant? For certainly did you apprehend that God had a Church in this world, that is, a viſible body politique diſtinct from that inviſible Church which is Chriſts Miſtical body Triumphant, you would not (as I in Charity beleive) divide your ſelves into ſo many Congregations, independent of each other or any other body or Government whatſoever in relation to Religion. Now to ſatisfy you in this I ſhall deſire you to conſider, Acts the 20. 28. Where the Text ſpeaks of a Church governed by High Paſtors which can only be meant of the Viſible Church, and that of the whole Flock, or Church which Chriſt redeemed with his blood, which cannot be meant of any perticular Congregational Church 1 Cor. 10. 32. Give none offence, neither to the Iews nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God even as I pleaſe all men in all things, where he ſpeaks clearly of the ſole and entire viſible Church, 1 Cor. 12. 28. where mention is made of the Governours and Prieſts which are extended throughout the whole viſible Church only. God hath ſet ſome in the Church, firſt Apoſtles, ſecondly Prophets, &c. and Epheſ. 4. 11. before cited, Col. 1. 24. 25. Where Church is taken for the Militant only, for St. Paul was not made a Miniſter of the Church Triumphant, 1 Tim. 2. 15. before cited, muſt ſignifie the ſole and whole viſible Church, for no perticular Church can be ſtiled The pillar and ground of truth, ſince they may fall, and often have fallen from truth. Iam. 5. 14. Where he ſpeaks in general to all beleiving Chriſtians, and of a Church uſing viſible Ceremonies, and Prieſts or Elders, which is not the Church Triumphant, Mat. 16. 18. where the Church of Chriſt is to be built upon Peter, and therefore muſt be meant of the viſible Church Militant; for it is built, whilſt Militant and transferred when it is Triumphant. Nor can this be any other then a viſible Church founded upon a viſible Rock or Foundation: for that Rock there ſpoken of is not Chriſt, but St. Peter, as the words clearly ſignifie, for our Saviour ſaies, upon this Rock I will build my Church, immediatly after he had named St. Peter, where as if he had meant himſelf, or St Peters confeſſion of his being the Son of the ever living God, this being the remote or mediate antecedent, he ſhould have ſaid according to Grammer and true conſtruction and upon that Rock. Beſides he ſaies, I will build my Church, whereas if by Rock he had intended himſelf, or St. Peters aforeſaid confeſſion, he would have ſaid, upon this Rock I have built or I do build my Church, not I will build: For when our Lord ſpoke theſe words, his Church was then actually built upon him, and upon his being the Son of the Living God. He ſpoke then therefore of what he intended to do and of what was to be after his Reſurrection and Aſcenſion into Heaven, and promiſeth here that for thoſe future times his viſible Church ſhould be built upon St. Peter. Laſtly, that I may ſpeak not as to the word only, but alſo as to the thing it ſelf, viz. The Divine conſtitution of the Catholick viſible Church, by the Ordinance of our deareſt Saviour. Conſider, 1 Cor. 12. where it is at large deſcribed by the Holy Apoſtle to be One body with different parts fitly diſpoſed, ordered and connected together in one and the ſame body. Whereof One, he ſaith is the Head, and that muſt be as viſible as the reſt of the body, (for a viſible body without a viſible head would be a Monſter) and ſuch a viſible Head as ſtands in need of the foot, which Chriſt cannot do being God, and ſo wanting nothing. And this the Apoſtle applies to the Apoſtolical Church in his time, and the ſame is alſo deſcribed again Epheſ. 4. from v. 4. to the 17. But I ſuppoſe you will be asking? Is not then Chriſt the Head of his Church, can the Church have another Head beſides Chriſt? I anſwer Chriſt is the Head of his Church, and yet the Church of Chriſt by his appointment may have in its external Government another Head, that is an external Head, by the appointment of Chriſt. I ſay Chriſt is the only abſolute independent Head, but he may appoint a dependent Head derived from him. Chriſt is the ſole Head that Governs all both Paſtors and People, and the cheif Paſtor alſo. Thus God is the King of the World; may not he therefore have other Kings Reigning under him? Now how oppoſite and contrary your Congregational Churches, and all Churches divided from the true Viſible Church are to this conſtitution, is eaſy for you to ſee. What are thoſe Congregational Churches but a confuſed Rabble of Itching Ears, heaping up Teachers to themſelves, without any either ſingle Perſon, or Aſſembly of them endowed with power to govern or direct all of their Congregations diſperſed in divers Provinces and Countries, but every one ſtands upon its own bottome, and hath no dependance of the reſt, as do the Common-Wealths of Venice, Geneva, Holland, &c. ſo that they have no viſible unity amongſt them, either of coordination or ſubordination, but are politick bodies, wholly ſeperate and disjoyned the one from the other. Can you think this the conſtitution of Chriſts viſible Church on earth? Is this One Body? Is this a compaction and conjunction by joynts and Nerves, mentioned by the Apoſtles? The firſt and Original Chriſtian Church in our Saviour time was ſuch an united body, as St. Paul mentions, having then our Saviour for its viſible Head, and his Diſciples for its Members, all united together in one viſible Communion; and was not this Original Church the Model and Platform laid by our Saviour to be imitated and followed in its manner of Government by all ſucceeding Ages? The Apoſtolical Church next to that of our Saviours time, was like unto it, where St. Peter was the chief Paſtor, and the Apoſtles under him, over the whole Church diſperſed both amongſt Jews and Gentiles, as appears Acts 15. and who had power to change this Original and Apoſtolical manner of union and Government in after Ages into a quite oppoſite digeſtion, and to bring in a perfect Anarchie?

I hope from the grounds here laid, it will appear as clear to you as I profeſs it did to me, that the viſible Church of God on Earth which in the Creed is called the Holy Catholick Church, was and is that Rule and Judge, that means appointed by God, for the conveying of the Chriſtian Faith to the World, and to whom all on pain of Damnation, were and are by Gods Ordinance to ſubmit, as to the Authority appointed by God to teach them what they ought to beleive in order to the attaining of Salvation, and that without diſputing any more then they would have diſputed the decrees and directions of the Holy Apoſtles, were they now living upon Earth, conſequently that this Authority was infallible.

It will onely remain that we conſider which amongſt all thoſe congregations now on Earth, which pretend themſelves to be this Church of Chriſt is really and truly this Holy Church and Spouſe of Chriſt. For having once found her, and knowing that ſhe is ſo aſſiſted by the Holy Ghoſt, that ſhe cannot teach us an Error, inſtead of a Truth, we ſhall no more diſpute the verity of her Doctrines, then we ſhould have queſtioned the Articles of Faith taught by the Holy Apoſtles, or the words of Chriſt himſelf? Wherefore if this Church this infallible Guide ſhall teach us, that Infants are to be Baptiſed, that it is as lawful to deſire the Saints departed to pray for us, as to deſire the Prayers of thoſe who are living on our behalfs, That the body of Chriſt our Saviour is really and truly preſent in the Sacrament of the Altar (or the Lords Supper) or any the like Article of Faith, we ſhall no more doubt of it then, the firſt Chriſtians did diſpute the verity of what the Apoſtles taught them; when they informed them that they were to beleive that Chriſt whom they had ſeen as man was true and very God, that a Virgin ſtill remaining a Virgin, might by the power of the Holy Ghoſt bring forth a child. That the body of Chriſt ſpirituallized might paſs through a Dore, the Dore being ſhut: That three could be One, and One three. For who ſhall dare to queſtion what God ſhall tell him to be true. And if God now ſpeaks by the mouth of his preſent Church as he did by the mouth of his Church in the times of the Apoſtles, who ſhall doubt the truth of thoſe words, which proceeded from his mouth?

Wherefore as to this laſt queſtion, which is now this preſent Church of Chriſt, which is our infallible Guide and Judge appointed by God for our direction, and to whom we are to ſubmit, as aforeſaid. I ſhall in brief give you that anſwer, which I profeſs gave me a full and clear ſatisfaction; and it is ſhortly this. The Proteſtant Church of England and all other Churches different from the Roman, do judge and declare and profeſs themſelves to be fallible, even according to the infallible word of God. If then the ſaid Proteſtant Church of England or any other Churches different from the Roman be infallible in all that they judge, and in that they declare and profeſs to be true according to the word of God; they doubtleſs are then infallible, and ſpeak then the infallible truth, when they judge, declare and profeſs that even according to the Word of God, they are fallible. Therefore infallibly they are fallible. Hence again it being thus proved that no Church different from that Roman is infallible: And it being before proved that God hath appointed ſome Church upon earth to be our infallible Judge, it demonſtratively followeth that the Roman Church muſt needs be this infallible Judge, becauſe no church different from it (that is none but the Roman Church) can be this infallible Church. But I pray you do not miſtake this Argument, as ſome have pleaſed to do, who think the force of it to lye thus, viz. The Roman Church claimeth infallibility, therefore ſhe is infallible. This is nothing like the Argument which I put, the force of which lies thus. That the Church truly appointed by God for this infallible Judge of controverſies cannot poſſibly be any of thoſe Churches, which teach themſelves not to be this infallible Judge, becauſe they teach themſelves to be Fallible: if then they be infallible in the doctrine they teach, they are infallible when they teach themſelves to be fallible. Therefore infallibly they are fallible. Now the Church which is truly appointed by God to be this infallible Judge, muſt needs have this condition that ſhe doth own her infalibility; but this is far from ſaying that meerly her owning of infallibility doth make infallibility her own. It is a very different thing to ſay. He that muſt be a Miniſter muſt needs be a man and not a woman, and to ſay▪ That ſuch a one muſt needs be a miniſter becauſe he is a man and not a woman. So it is one thing to ſay, the Church which is the infallible Judge muſt be a Church judging and holding, and profeſſing her ſelf to be infallible; and cannot be a Church, which judgeth and profeſſeth her ſelf to be fallible. And another quite different thing to ſay, that ſuch a Church is the infallible Judge becauſe ſhe teacheth and profeſſeth her ſelf to be ſo.

Not be not (I pray) ſo far miſtaken, as ſome are uſually, and wilfully, if not maliciouſly, to think that when I ſpeak of the Roman Church, I intend the Church of the Dioceſs of Rome, and ſo pretend to make a perticular Church to be an Univerſal, and the Univerſal or Catholick Church of Chriſt. No, I entend by the Roman Church, all that vaſtly extended community of chriſtians, which liveth in communion with, and in ſubjection and Obedience unto the Biſhop of Rome, as to their Supream Paſtour and Governour on Eearth in things appertaining unto faith next under Chriſt. This is the Flock of Chriſt adhering to the true Shepheard appointed them by God.

And now (deareſt Friends) I have no more to ſay, but only entreat you in the bowels of Charity to learn by heart that moſt pretious leſſon of our ſweet Saviour, viz. Learn of me for I am meek and humble of heart. And that you may be in a ready way to learn this, remember (in order to it) that Leſſon (which I mentioned before) of his beloved Apoſtle St. John. 4. 6. We are of God, he that knoweth God heareth us, he that is not of God heareth us not, hereby know we the ſpirit of truth and the ſpirit of error. There was nothing then required to diſtinguiſh theſe two ſpirits, but to hear or to refuſe to hear the Apoſtles, and ſeeing St. Paul ſaith, Faith comes by hearing; It will be as neceſſary now to hear in our times, thoſe who are lawfully ſent to teach it, as it was in the times of the Apoſtles. If therefore ye hear no body, or follow thoſe who at firſt, and in their beginning heard no body, you refuſe to hear thoſe who are ſent to teach you And then according to St. Iohn, it is evident you are lead by the ſpirit of error. Conſider theſe things and be happy, according to the Prayers of,

I apprehend that it is not impoſſible but that ſome of you will be attempting to anſwer this Letter, and endeavouring to ſhake theſe Principles, which have by Gods Grace proved of ſtrength to win me to the Holy Catholick Faith. To ſuch I ſhall only give theſe cautions. Firſt that they will be pleaſed in their Anſwer, to ſet down my own words as they lye intirely and without maiming them: If they ſhall pleaſe to anſwer by Paragraphs, and to ſet down each of my Paragraphs wholly and ſincerely before their Anſwer to the ſame Paragraph, I ſhall own their Candor and Iuſtice; But if they Anſwer by ſetting up a Puppit of their own, pretended to be mine, they will not make mine, but their own Arguments ridiculous; and will not deſerve a Reply from me, or to be regarded by any one. Secondly, that they will forbear all Reproaches and Slanders, againſt the Catholick Church, or Catholicks in general or in perticular, this is a fault to which Proteſtants are too much addicted in general; but moſt Perticularly thoſe of the Presbiterian and Independent perſwaſions, they have alwaies uſed to deal with Catholicks; as they did with His late Majeſty of glorious memory, and with our moſt dread Soveraign that now is, and their party, viz. to impute crimes to them without end, and errors innumerable; without taking care to examine whether what they charged them with was true or falſe: So if they can throw Dirt enough upon the Catholicks, and impute Opinions unto them ſufficiently monſtrous, all is well, they know the major part of the Nation to be byaſſed with intereſt, and ready enough to beleive what ever is ſuggeſted againſt thoſe whom they call the Common Enemy, and that thouſands will admit a thing for truth if they find it in Print, rather then take the pains to examine whether it be true or not, and therefore have no difficulty to caſt forth untruths, with as much confidence as if themſelves were ſatisfied, that all they publiſh is dictated by the Holy Ghoſt: As for thoſe who are and ſhall be guilty of theſe crimes, I only wiſh them the like Repentance which St. Auguſtine had for the like errors committed by himſelf whilſt he was a Manichaean, of which he makes this mention, St. Aug. the 6. book of his Confeſ. c. 3. towards the end. I bluſh even full of Joy in regard that I found my ſelf thereby not to have barked againſt the Catholick Faith, but againſt the Fancies and Fictions of carnal thoughts. But yet I have been raſh and impious in that I had ſaid thoſe things accuſingly which I ought to have learnt inquitingly. Nor do not (I beſeech you) take a liberty to upbraid me as if I had ſome private ends in my preſent Change; but be pleaſed to conſider, that I am now united to a Communion whoſe portion in this Kingdome is to ſuffer, to be poor and ſcorned, to want preferments and ſuffer affronts from every hand who ſhall pleaſe to give them. Whilſt I was at the head of a Troop of Horſe in the Rebellious Army (a ſin which I hope my deareſt Saviour hath forgiven me, I having heartily asked pardon of my God as I here do of my Soveraign for the ſame) I was in a condition to riſe, and thrive, and glut my ſences with what this world called good and pleaſing; But I thank my Saviour I am now brought home to that Church of His, which teacheth me to ſuffer and be humble, to give Obedience to Authorities for Conſcience ſake, to become a ſervant and a learner, not a maſter or a Teacher, to hear thoſe that are lawfully ſent to take care of my Soul, and not to uſurps the Office of the Prieſts, or proudly to intrude my ſelf into that Sacred Function. I muſt for ever hereafter ceaſe to be contentious, and let my Prince or thoſe who are in Authority under him determine what they pleaſe in relation to my body or Eſtate, I hope I ſhall at all times hereafter follow the bleſſed Precepts of God, which I receive from the mouth of his Church, and from the Holy Scriptures, namely To make Supplications, and Prayers, and Interceſſions, and giving of thanks for all men, for Kings and all that are in Authority, that I may lead a quiet life in all godlineſs and honeſty, 1 Tim. 2. v. 1. 2. And to thoſe who ſhall be otherwiſe minded I ſhall only ſay, We have no ſuch cuſtome amongſt us in the Church of God.