Page images
PDF
EPUB

of Rome: We may dispute on about an Infallible Judge, but they cannot, with any fence, difpute with us about the particular Articles of Faith, fuch as Tranfubftantiation, the Sacrifice of the Mafs, the Worship of Images, and the like; for these are to be learnt onely from the Church, and cannot be proved by Scripture or Fathers, without the Authority of the Church. And if they would confefs this, they would fave us, and themselves, a great deal of trouble: For why should they be at the trouble of writing fuch Arguments, or we to anfwer them, when they themselves confefs, that the Arguments are not good, unless they be confirmed by the Churches Authority? I confess, I have often wondered to see such Volumes of Controverfies written by the Roman Divines, for I could never imagine to what end they are writ. Is not their Faith wholly refolved into the Authority of the Church? what need Reasons and Arguments then, which cannot work Faith in us? Either these Arguments are fufficient to confirm the Articles of their Faith without the Authority of the Church, or they are not: If they are, then there is no need of Infallibility, fince all the Articles of Faith are confirmed by fuch Rea fons, as are a fufficient Foundation for Faith without it: And thus they give up all their Arguments for an Infallible Judge, from the neceffity of fuch a Judge. If they be not, of what ufe are they? does the Decifion of the Church need to be confirmed by fuch Arguments? If they are not good Arguments without the Authority of the Church, they can no more give Authority to the Church, than an Infallible Church can want any Autho rity, but its own: Are they to convince Hereticks? But how if Hereticks fhould confute them? If they be not in themselves good Arguments, they may be confuted; and they know, by fad experience, that there are Here

ticks,

[ocr errors]

ticks, as they call them, who have Wit and Learning e nough to confute, what is to be confuted; and if they fall into fuch hands (which has been their hard fate of late) they are fure to be confuted; and, I doubt then, they had better have let them alone; for the Catholick Cause may fuffer much in the Opinion of the World, when all their Arguments are confuted: All then that they can defign by fuch Arguments, is to impose upon the Weak and Ignorant, when Learned Men are out of the way, which is no very commendable defign; and that defign will be spoiled too, if Unlearned Men do but learn to ask them the Question, Whether they build their Faith upon fuch Arguments? For then they must either quit the Authority of their Church, or the strength of their Arguments: The first reduces them to Proteftant Uncertainty, for then they have no other Foundation for their Faith than Proteftants have; which refolves it self into the Reasons and Arguments of Faith: The fecond puts an end to Difputing about these matters; for no man needs answer any Arguments, which the Difputant himself acknowledges not to be good.

2. There is nothing then left for Difputation, and the Exercife of our private Reason and Judgment, but the inquiry after an Infallible Judge. And here alfo, before you Difpute, it will be neceflary to ask them, Whether the belief of an Infallible Judge, must be refolved into every mans private Judgment? whether it be not neceffary to believe this with a Divine Faith and whether there can be any Divine Faith without an Infallible Judge? Certainly if ever it be neceffary to have an Infallible Faith, it is fo to be infallibly affured of an Infallible Judge, because this is the foundation of all the reft: for though the Judge be Infallible, if be not infallibly affured of this, I can never arrive to Infallibility in any thing; for

[blocks in formation]

I cannot be more certain, that his Determinations are Infallible, than I am, that he himself is Infallible; and if I have but a Moral affurance of this, I can be but moral

afsured of the rest; for the Building cannot be more firm than the Foundation is: and thus there is an end to all the Roman Pretences to Infallibility. Now if we must beheve the Infallibility of the Church, or Pope of Rome, with an infallible Faith, there is an end of Difputing; for no Reasons or Arguments, not the Authority of the Scripture it felf, without an infallible Judge, can beget an infallible Faith, according to the Roman Doctors: For this reason they charge the Proteftant Faith with Uncertainty, and will not allow it to be a Divine, but Humane Faith, though it is built upon the firmest Reasons, the best Authority, and the most exprefs Scripture that can be had for any thing; but becaufe we do not pretend to rely on the Authority of a Living Infallible Judge, therefore, forfooth, our Faith is Uncertain, Humane, and Fallible: and this, they fay, makes an Infallible Judge necessary, because without him we have no Infallible Certainty of any thing.

Now if nothing but an Infallible Judge can be the Foundation of an Infallible Faith, then it is to no purpofe to difpute about fuch a Judge; for Difputing is nothing elle but weighing Reafon against Reason, and Argument against Argument, or Scripture against the pretence of Scripture; but whoever gets the better of it this way, no Reasons, or Arguments, or Scripture-proofs can beget an Infallible Certainty, which is neceflary in this cafe; and therefore this is all loft labour, and they do but put a trick upon you, when they pretend to dispute you into the belief of an Infallible Judge; for they themfelves know, and must confefs, if you ask them, that the best and moft convincing Arguments cannot give us an Infal

lible

lible affurance of this matter; and yet unless we are infallibly affured of an Infallible Judge, it is all to no purpofe.

3. I can think but of one thing more, that can be faid in this Caufe, viz. that it is manifeftly unreasonable, not to grant to the Church of Rome, that liberty which all men and Churches challenge, to Difpute for themselves, and against their Adverfaries: for when two men, or two Churches differ in matters of Faith, there is no other way to end the Controverfie, but by difputing it out; whereas this Difcourfe will not allow them to difpute, nor any Protestants to difpute with them.

In anfwer to this, I grant, that the Charge is in a great measure true, and fhews the abfurdity of that Church and Religion, but does not difprove the reasonableness of this method. If men will embrace fuch a Religion as will not admit of difputing, it is their own and their Religion's fault, not the fault of thofe men who will not difpute with them. Now a Religion which leaves no room for the exercife of Reafon and private Judgment, leaves no place for Disputes neither; for how fhall men difpute, who must not use their own Reason and Judgment? They ought not to dispute themselves, if they be true to their own Principles; and no man ought to difpute with them, who will not be laugh'd at by them, and by all the World: For to difpute without Reason, is a new way of difputing, (though it is the only thing that can juftifie the Romanifts, and our late Difputants have been very careful to observe it;) and to difpute with Reafon, is to use our private Reason in Religion, which is Proteftant Herefie. Infallible men ought not to difpute, for that is to quit their Infallibili ty; and fallible men are very unwife to difpute with them, because no good can come of it: for Reason can

never

never confute their infallible Adverfaries, nor make them felves infallible Believers.

But for the better understanding of this, I have two things to fay. 1. That Papifts may Dispute against Proteftant Herefies, as they call them, but cannot difpute for their own Religion. 2. Proteftants may difpute against Popish Doctrines, and to vindicate their own Faith, but cannot reasonably be difputed into Popery.

1. That Papifts may difpute against Proteftant Herefies, but cannot difpute for their own Religion: And the reason of this difference is plain, because Proteftants allow of Reason and Difcourfe in matters of Religion; and therefore they may be confuted, if good Reafons can be produced against them: And here the Romanifts may try their skill; but the Religion of Rome is not founded-on Reason, but on Infallibility; and therefore is not the fubject of a Difpute, because the truth and certainty of those Doctrines, is not refolved into the Reasons of them. They ought to alledge no other ground of their Faith, but the Infallibility of the Church; and they ought not to difpute about this neither: but thofe who will believe it may, and those who won't, may let it alone, because Infallibility is not to be proved by Reason; for Reafon proves nothing infallibly, and therefore cannot give us an infallible certainty of the Churches Infallibility.

But you will fay, if they have other Arguments for the truth of their Faith, befides the Infallibility of the Church, why may they not urge those other Reasons and Arguments to convince thofe, who will not own the Churches Infallibility? I anfwer, Because whatever other Reasons they have, their Faith is not refolved into them; and therefore it is not honeft in them to urge

thole

« PreviousContinue »