own Pope, and expofe themselves to all the fenceless Rallery of their admired Pax Vobis. By this they confefs, that the Scripture may be underfood by Reason, that they can back their Interpretations with fuch powerful Arguments, as are able to convince Hereticks, who reject the Authority of an infallible Interpreter: and then they must unfay all their hard Sayings against the Scriptures, That they are dark and obfcure dead Letters, unfenced Characters, meer figured Ink and Paper; they must recant all their Rallery against expounding Scripture by a private Spirit, and allowing every man to judge of the fence of it, and to chufe what he pleases : for thus they do themselves when they difpute with Hereticks about the fence of Scripture; and I am pret ty confident, they would never fpeak against Scripture nor a private Spirit more, if this private Spirit would but make us Converts; but the mischief is, a private Spirit, if it have any tincture of Sence and Reafon, feldom expounds Scripture to a Roman-Catholick fence.

So that in truth it is a vain, nay a dangerous thing for Papifts to difpute with Proteftants about the fence of Scripture; for it betrays the Cause of the Church, and vindicates the Scriptures and every mans natural Right of judging from the Ufurpations and Encroachments of a pretended Infallibility; but yet difpute they do, and attempt to prove their Doctrines from Scripture. And because it is too large a task for this prefent Undertaking, to examine all their Scripture-Proofs, I fhall only obferve fome general faults they are guilty of, which whoever is aware of, is in no danger of being. imposed on by their Pretences to Scripture: and I fhall not induftriously multiply Particulars, for there are fome few palpable mistakes, which run through most of their Scripture-Proofs.

I.. As,

1. As first, many of their Scripture-Proofs are founded upon the likeness of a word or phrase, without any regard to the fence and fignification of that word in Scripture, or to the matter to which it is applied: As for inftance, There is not a more useful Doctrine to the Church of Rome, than that of unwritten Traditions, which are of equal Authority with the Scriptures; for were this owned, they might put what Novel Doctrines they pleafed upon us, under the venerable name of ancient and unwritten Traditions. Well, we deny that there are any fuch unwritten Traditions, which are of equal Authority with the Scripture, fince the Canon of Scripture was written and perfected, and defire them to prove that there are any fuch unwritten Traditions. Now they think it fufficient to do this, if they can but find the word Tradition in Scripture; and that we confefs they do in feveral places for Tradition fignifies only the delivery of the Doctrine of the Gospel, which we grant was not done perfectly in writing, when those Epistles were written, which speak of Traditions, Theff. 2. 15. by word, as well as by Epiftle. But because the whole Doctrine of the Gospel was not written at first, but de, livered by word of mouth, does it hence follow, that after the Gospel is written, there are ftill unwritten Traditions of equal Authority with the Scripture? This is what they should prove; and the meer naming of Traditions in Scripture, before the Canon was perfected, does not prove this: for all men know, that the Gofpel was delivered by word of mouth, or by unwritten Tradition, before it was written; but this does by no means prove, that there are unwritten Traditions, after the Gospel was written. To prove this, they fhould fhew us where it is faid, that there are fome Traditions which shall never be written, that the Rule of Faith fhall alA.I

ways

ways confift partly of written, partly of unwritten Traditions.

I

Thus we know how zealous the Church of Rome is for their Purgatory-fire, wherein all men, who are in a ftate of Grace, or delivered from the guilt of their fins, must yet undergo that punishment of them, which has not been fatisfied for by other means. As profitable a Doctrine as any the Church of Rome has, because it gives great authority to Sacerdotal Abfolution, and fets a good price uponMaffes for the Dead,and Indulgences: and yet the best proof they have for this, is that Fire mentioned, 1 Cor. 3. 13, 14, 15. Every mans work fhall be made manifest for the day fhall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire, and the fire fhall declare every mans work of what fort it is.-If any mans work fhall be burnt, he shall fuffer loss: but he himself fhall be faved, but fo as by fire. Now here is mention of Fire indeed; but how does it appear to be the Popish Purgatory? Suppose it were meant of a material Fire, thô that does not feem fo proper to try good or bad Actions,a true and Orthodox or Heretical Faith, yet this Fire is not kindled till the Day of Judgment, which is eminently in Scripture called the day, and is the only day, we know of in Scripture, which fhall be revealed by fire, when the Lord Jefus fhall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, 2 Theff. 1.7, 8. So that here is nothing but the word Fire, applied to another Fire, than St. Paul ever thought on, to prove a Popish Purgatory.

Thus they make Confeffion to a Prieft ordinarily necessary to obtain the Forgiveness of our fins; and have no better Scripture-Proofs for it, but that we are often commanded to confefs our fins, fometimes to God, and fometimes to one another, but never to a Priest.

They have made a Sacrament of Extream Unction,
I

where

6 James 14, 15.

wherein the fick Perfon is anointed for the Forgiveness
of Sins; and though a Sacrament ought to have the most
plain and express Inftitution, both as to the matter, and
form, and use, and end of it, yet the only Proofs they
produce for this, is the Difciples working Miraculous
Cures by Anointing the Sick with Oyl, 6 Mark 13.
which methinks is a little different from the Sacrament
of extream Unction,which is not to cure their sickness,but
to forgive their fins; and St. James his Command, Is any
fick among you, let him call for the elders of the Church, and
let them pray over him, anointing him with oyl in the name
of the Lord: and the prayer of faith shall fave the fick,
and the Lord fhall raise him up; and if he have committed
fins, they fhall be forgiven him. Where anointing with
Oyl, joyned with fervent Prayer, is prescribed as a
means of restoring the fick perfon to health again; and
therefore is not the Popish Extream Unction, which is
to be adminiftred onely to thofe who are dying: And
though St. James adds, And if he have committed fins,
they fhall be forgiven him; yet, 1. This is not faid to be
the effect of Anointing, but of the fervent Prayer: and
2. This
very Forgiveness of Sins does not refer to a ple-
nary Pardon of fins in the other World, but fignifies the
removal of the vifible and fenfible punishments of Sin,
in reftoring the fick Perfon to health again. That
though fuch ficknefs was inflicted on him for his fins,
and poffibly were the effects of Church-cenfures, which
in those days were confirmed and ratified by bodily pu-
nishments, yet upon his Reconciliation to the Church,
and the Prayers of the Elders, and the Ceremony of A-
nointing, he should be reftored to health again, which
was an external and visible Remiffion of his fins, and
fhould be a plenary Pardon, if he brought forth the true
and genuine fruits of Repentance: This is very natural,

and

and very agreeable to the fcope and defign of the Text, and differs as much from the Popish Extream Unction, as their greatest Adversaries could with. Such kind of Proofs as these, are meerly the work of Fancy and Imagination, and can impofe upon no man who will but attend to the different ufe and fignification of words.

2. Another grand fault our Roman Adversaries are guilty of is, that their Scripture-proofs are always very lame and imperfect, that is, that they never prove their whole Doctrine from Scripture, but only fome little part of it: They draw very fine and artificial Schemes, and if they can find some little appearance in Scripture to countenance any one part of it, they take that for a Proof of the whole. As for inftance :

Thus they tell us, that Chrift made Peter the Prince of the Apostles, and the Head of the Universal Church, his own Vicar upon Earth; and that the Bishops of Rome, who are St. Peter's Succeffors, fucceed not only to his Chair, but to all the Rights and Prerogatives of St. Peter; and therefore the Bishop of Rome alfo is the Head of the Church, the Oecumenical Pastor, who neither wants St. Peter's Keys nor Sword. This is a very notable point, if it were well proved; but as I obferved before, this being a matter of pure Inftitution, which depends wholly upon the Will of God, it can be proved only by Scripture: How much then of this do they pretend to prove from Scripture? Why, they will prove by Scripture, that St. Peter was the Prince of the Apostles, because Chrift faid unto him, Thou art Peter, and on this Rock will I build my Church: and I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven; and feed my Sheep; which indeed are lamentable Proofs, for the fame Power was given to all the Apostles, 20 John 21, 22, 23. Then faid Jefus unto them, Peace be unto you, as my Father fent

I 2

me,