Examination of those Plausible Appearances in the Romish Church, Chapter 20
CHAP: XX. That they of the Church of Rome vse a perverse and ridiculous manner of Argumentation, while they conclude from the promis…s made to the Church, that they nei…her hauehave erred, nor can erre
IT is a friuolous tricke then, that they insist somuch vponupon the promi…es made to the Church, and to b…ing vsus newes that f…ee a.Math. 16.18is built vp…n a rocke, t…at the gates of he…l shall not preuaile against her. It is to no purpose, that they alledge those priuiledges, that shee is b1. Tim. 3.15.the pillar and prop of …ruth, the spouse of Christ, c.Ephes. 1.32.his dCant. 2.16. & 6.3onelyonly spouse, that he is, and will be alwaies in the mi…dest of her, that his f.Iohn 16.spirit guideth her into all true…h. e.Math. 28.20.The pith of our controuersie lyes not in all this. Let him which denieth the truth of these promises, or envieth the church these elogies be Anathema Maranatha; let him be as a Iew, or a Turke. But as he is not truely a Iew which is one outwardly, said the Apostle: so neither is shee alwaies the true church which is so in the account of men; but shee which gRom. 2.28.29.is so inwardly, whose glory and praise is of God, and not of men, hIb.sealed by his spirit, i1. Cor. 1.2. Ephes. 1.13.knowne of him, & him onelyonly certainly and k2. Tim. 2.19.distinctly. All the question is, whether shee bee the true church, whom the world graceth with this title. If wee should graunt that the church of Rome is the true church, doubtlesse we should confesse too, that she never erred fundamentally. Let it then be verified vntounto vsus that shee is so, and we will giuegive way to all the rest, we will ingeniously confesse our selues to hauehave beene schismatiques, in separating our selues from her communion.
The principall question then betweene vsus and them is, whether they are the true church or no. This being so, is not their proceeding perverse and ridiculous, when they take that for granted, which is the maine point of our cōtroversie? For alleadging that they are the Church, they thence inferre, that they neither hauehave erred, nor can erre. This argument should runne backward, they hauehave not erred, therefore they are the true Churc…. If a woman accused of adultery, of being taken even in the vile act of her vnchastity, insteed of answering directly to her accusation, and of acquitting her selfe, by this meanes to recover her good name now tainted, for all her defence, should onelyonly make a bare protestation, that shee were an honest, chast woman, might it not be presumed, that she were either mad as well as dishonest, or else as impudent as vnchast? What should that Physitian bee thought of, which being examined about a fact of impoisonment obiected against him, instead of iustifying his prescriptions, and his application of them according to the rules of Physicke, would onelyonly cry out that hee was a Physitian of much skill, experience, and fidelity? We accuse the church of Rome (she who will needs be called so) of being the whore, and the Babylon in the Revelation. We accuse her Doctors of impoisoning soules; she answereth vsus that she is chast, and that she is the spouse of Christ: her Doctors tell vsus that they are the successours of the Apostles, and the servants of God; contenting themselues with this poore silly answer, without any other proofe to iustifie themselues. Truely if we should accord that the Papacy is the spo…se of Christ; and that its Doctors are the heires of the Apostles, they would hauehave gained the ca…s…: but what man is there so stript of reason which seeth not, that when we accuse the Church of Rome for having erred, and plaied the Apostate, wee accuse her of not being the true Church: That when wee accuse the teachers of the church of Rome for being seducers, we deny them to be the successours of the Apostles. So then, when for their compleat defence, they only oppose against vsus these glittering titles, they doe no more then simply affi…me that, which was principally called in question; a pretty defence for them who hauehave none at all. True it is, that their proceeding would hauehave some equitie in it, if our accusation consisted in a naked assertion, and if we barely affirmed that, which we were not able to proue: for to a simple yea, it is enough to oppose as simple a nay, You say it, we deny it. Yet he that is innocent will not content himselfe with this easie come off, couragious as he is, he will doe more then acquit himselfe. But here the question is not about a bare affirmation, but a rationall proofe, so strongly backed, that there is no shift in sophistry, no wrangling devise which they hauehave not recourse to, that they may not be bound to answer directly. Wee offer to lay open the whoredomes of the Church of Rome, and the impoisonments of her teachers. We propound this accusation fortified with reasons and proofes. Is not this on our part to proceed as we should? and on theirs by this vaunting, as vaine as it is bold, of the venerable title of the Church, the Pastors and Teachers of the Church, which they oppose vsus with, to make themselues rather more suspected, then any whit iustified? Yet when they are prosecuted and driven even into the vttermost corner of their evasions, their last mine, as it were, by which they blow all vp is, We are the Church of Catholike Doctors. As if we disputed not with them about the truth of this title, as if this were not the summe and substance of our accusation, that they are not such as they would make vsus beleeue they are. In doing which, they are like vntounto a company of vnlearned Professors, who when they are puzled & nonplust by their auditors, for want of other reply, betake themselues to the authority of the chaire, and prerogatiue of the square cap.