Which is the True Church, Title page – Preface
WHICH IS THE True Church? The whole Christian World, as Headed only BY CHRIST, (Of which the Reformed are the soundest part) OR, THE POPE of ROME And his SUBJECTS as such?
IN THREE PARTS.
I. The Papists Confusion in explaining the terms of the Questions; not able to bear the light.
II. A Defence of a Disputation concerning the continued Visibility of the Church of which the Protestants are members.
III. A Defence of the several Additional proofs of the said Visibility.
By RICHARD BAXTER..
Written especially to instruct the younger unexperienced Scholars how to deal with these Deceivers in these dangerous times.
LONDON; Printed, and are to be sold by Richard Ianeway, in Butcher-hall Lane. 1679.
The Preface to the Lovers of Truth.
ABove eighteen years past I received a Paper (by the mediation of one Mr. Langhorne) from one that called himself VVilliam Iohnson, to prove the Papal Church to be the Catholick, because no other had been visible in all Ages. I answered it, and received a Reply, and wrote a Rejoinder. But being not rich enough to pay either an Amanuensis or Transcriber, I never (to my remembrance) took a Copy of any Book which I wrote, except this Rejoinder to him, and one other; and I never (to my remembrance) lost any but those two. When I had sent this by the ordinary Carrier, he lost it, but took on him that he never knew how. Whereupon when I lookt for a Reply, I receiv'd an insulting Letter for not answering. But when I sent my Rejoinder the second time, I could never have any Reply thereto. Above a year after, coming up to London at the Kings Restoration, I enquired after the Disputer, and called yet for some Reply, but could get none: and I was there informed, that his name was Terret, and that he usually lived with the Earl of Shrewsbury (within seven miles of me, when I was told he lived near an hundred miles off): But that he was one of the greatest of their Disputers about London, where he spent much of his time, and had lately disputed with Mr. Pet. Gunning, and Mr. Pierson (now both Bishops), and had printed the Dispute without their consent. And lest he should do so by any part of mine, I sent him word, That if he would not prosecute the Dispute, I would publish what was done. Whereupon he offered to do it rather by Conference than by Writing: Which I accepted, and he came to me, and we agreed to begin with the true explication of some terms which were likest to be most used in our Controversie. I offered to give him my sense of any terms of which he would desire it, and desired the like of him, which he granted. He desired none at all of me; but such terms as I offered to him, he wrote me immediately his explication of; which because it rather encreased the darkness and uncertainty, I excepted against it, and desired fuller explication. By this time our hour was at an end, and I expected him to prosecute the Dispute, but could never see him more. Whereupon after urgency and expectation, I published what had passed between us.
The next year the Countess of Balcarres (now Countess of Argyle) a person to whom I had extraordinary obligations, sent for me, being in great affliction for her eldest Daughter turned Papist. Whereupon I offered a Conference with the person that had perswaded her, or any other whom she would chuse: which the Lady accepted, and undertook to bring one speedily to perform it. But at last she said the person was afraid of the danger of the Law. I urged her still, and then she told me, that when he knew who it was that he was to speak with, he professed that he feared no danger from me, and greatly honoured me, being one that knew me; but refused the Dispute. I provoked her to get some other, though it was the ablest that then attended on the Queen mother (who then encourag'd her:) But she would have none but him that did refuse it. Whereupon (her mother being in danger of death by grief) I was forced to speak more harshly to her, and ask her, Whether she dealt wisely to follow such as durst not let her hear what was to be said? I told her, that if he would spend but one hour in giving the reasons why she should turn Papist, and let me spend another hour in giving her my reasons to the contrary, I would leave the issue to her Conscience. After long denial, at last she told me, that the person did consent, on condition that there might be no speaking, but only writing ex tempore, and nothing done but by syllogism, according to the Laws of Disputation. I asked her, Whether that way was most suitable to her understanding and patience? And whether she would stay till we had done our writings, which might possibly be some years? And whether she might not as well read what is written already? But when nothing else would be consented to, I yeilded to such writing, so be it she would but hear our several Reasons one hour or two first. And when that could not be obtained, I consented to meet him, and only to write. But just when the time came, the Lady was stoln away; and when they followed and overtook her, she told them that she was but going on some business, and would presently return (her mother professed that before her perversion she scarce ever found her in a Lye or disobedience, and after could scarce believe any thing that she said). But she went to a Nunnery in France, and her Mother saw her no more; but ere long received Letters of the Reasons of her Religion, which at her Mothers desire I answered, but you may suppose that they suffered her not to see the Answer.
When she was gone, I understood that it was this same Mr. W. Iohnson, alias Terret, who was the man that had seduced her, and refused the Dispute.
But not long after he Printed a Reply to the Book which I had published, and called it, Novelty represt: which when I perused, I saw that a Rejoinder would be of little use, because it must consist for the far greatest part, of the detection of his fallacious words, and of the vindication of a great deal of Church-History; and the former would rather tire than edisie the Reader, and the later would profit none but those that were already well acquainted with Church-History, or such as would fully search the Authors cited, till they understood by them who it is that citeth them aright: He that will not do this cannot judg of our case, and he that will do it needeth not my help. Wherefore having much better work, and no time to spare, expecting that my change was near, my Conscience forbad me such a frivolous expence of time as a Rejoinder to his Reply would prove. But having since written many Books against Popery, to none of which I can procure yet a word of answer, and hearing that they are obliged not to answer me till I am dead, (which they may shortly expect) by the perswasions of some I have attempted to make this Return to this one Reply, which is all that ever they published against me, that I know of.
And because true Order requireth first that we understand each others terms, I must begin with that, though it be the last thing in his Book; in which you will see what a sandy fabrick it is which is adorned by them with the great Epithetes of Apostolical, Ancient, Universal, Infallible, and how little they know, or can make others know what it is of which they do dispute, or what that Church is, to which so many hundred thousand Christians (called by them Hereticks) have been sacrificed by sword and flames.
In the second Part I defend the Visibility of the Church which the Protestants are members of, against his vain Objections. And in the third Part I defend those Additional arguments by which I proved it.
In all which I doubt not but the impartial understanding Reader may see, that their Terrestrial Universal Monarchy, and their condemnation of the greatest part of the Church of Christ, are contrary to Sense, Reason, Tradition, Consent, Antiquity and Scripture; and that their Kingdom standeth but on three Legs, IGNORANCE and deceit, worldly INTEREST, and the SWORD and violence. And when these (and especially the sword of Princes) do cease to uphold it, it will presently die and come to nothing. For though Melchior Canus say, that the Roman Priviledges (as he calleth them) have stood, though the greater number of Bishops and Churches, and the Arms of Emperours have been against them, yet was it upheld against all these by no better means than those aforesaid. The greater number of Churches and Bishops (viz. of East and South) being against them; and all the other four Patriarchates renouncing them (as they do to this day) they laid the faster hold of the West, and by mastering Italy, flattering and advancing France, promising Kingdoms and Empire to their Adherents, threatning the deposition of others, dividing Germany and all Europe, that many might need the Pope, and few be able to resist him, and by keeping men ignorant that they might be capable of their Government, by these means they overcame the Arms of Emperours, and made them their Subjects, whose Subjects they had been.
If there were nothing else to satisfie the Reader against Popery but these following Particulars, it were a shame to humane nature to receive it. 1. The natural incapacity of one man to be a Church-Monarch, ☞any more than to be a Civil Monarch of the whole Earth. 2. That Bellarmine confesseth that the Pope succeedeth not Peter as an Apostle (but as an Universal Pastor): But Peter never had any higher office than to be the first, Apostle, 1 Cor. 12. 28. God hath set in the Church first Apoctles, (not first a Vice-Christ.) 3. That they affirm that it is not de fide that the Pope is Peter's Successor. 4. That none of the other Apostles had Successors as in superior seats; nor did any Patriarch (much less twelve) claim power as Successors of any Apostle, save Antioch and Rome, and Antioch as from the same St. Peter, but no Universal Soveraignty. 5. That whoever will turn Papist, must confess that he was an ungodly hypocrite before, and that all professed Christians are so, save the Papists, that know their doctrine. 6. That he must renounce the senses of all sound men, and believe them all deceived by Miracle.