Notes Upon Texts of Scripture and Popish Errors, Part 9
SOME PREJUDICES OF THE Church of ROME Anſwered.
SECT. I.
They accuſe our Doctrine of Novelty.
THIS the Phariſees likewiſe alledged againſt our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, and urged the ſame Prejudices. Mark 1. 27. They queſtion among themſelves, ſaying, What thing is this? What new Doctrine is this? And, Acts 17. 19. St. Paul being brought to Areopagus, they demanded of him, May we know what this New Doctrine, whereof thou ſpeakeſt, is? So likewiſe this is the Tone of the Romiſh Doctors, who call the Reformation an upſtart Religion, and ſay, that our Doctrine is new; and ſtill are inſiſting upon the thread-bare Queſtion, Where was your Religion before Luther? As the Ancient Heathens no doubt would be almoſt perpetually queſtioning the Jews in the ſame manner, Where was your Religion before Abraham?
And the ſame Anſwer for ſubſtance will ſerve for our Defence, that would do for theirs. For as our Saviour ſaid to the Phariſees, Whatever they may pretend about the Antiquity of their Religion, the like the Jews might ſay to the Heathen, and ſo we may ſay to the Church of Rome, That from the beginning it was not ſo. Idolatry, and the worſhip of Idols, was not from the beginning. So neither was the Maſs, Purgatory, worſhip of Images, Invocation of Saints, believed or taught from the beginning of Chriſtianity. But our Religion is as ancient as Chriſtianity it ſelf, as the Jewiſh Religion in worſhipping the True God, in oppoſition to the Heathen Idolatry, was as old as that of Noah, or Enoch, or Adam. For we believe and receive nothing, as abſolutely neceſſary to Salvation, but what our Saviour and his Apoſtles taught and delivered to the World, and what is contained in the Ancient Creeds. But as the Worſhip of the one True God, and the True Religion, was grea…ly corrupted in the Ancient Times, which Abraham was raiſed up to reform; and ſo his Reformation was new in compariſon of the Abuſes that were before. So indeed the Reformation of the Corruptions and Errors, which for many Ages had obtained in theſe Weſtern Parts of the World, did not begin very long ago. And if this be accuſed of Novelty, we cannot help that, but are ſorry it was no ſooner. All Reformation is new, in compariſon of the Abuſes that went before; and ſo therefore was that ſet a…oot by Luther.
But how could this be remedied, unleſs there ſhould be no Reformation at all; or becauſe things are once …ad, they ſhould never be better? For they cannot be better without being reformed; and whenever a Reformation begins, it is certainly New. So that the Queſtion is, Whether thoſe were Errors and Abuſes which the Reformation cut off? and ſo whether it were a Reformation really or no? And if this be ſo, as may appear in part by the foregoing Treatiſe, then the Reformation juſtifies it ſelf, though it was p…y it had not been ſooner. And all thoſe Negative Articles, which we hold in oppoſition to the Errors of the Church of Rome, and which now make up part of our Confeſſion of Faith in oppoſition to thoſe Errors, are only New becauſe the Reformation is New. And ſo it muſt be, whenſoever Men renounce or proteſt againſt Errors, or unleſs they will err ſtill.
SECT. II.
They ſay, That we had no Call.
THey ſay we had no Call to do as we did; we had no Call to ſeparate from the Church of Rome, or to ſet a…oot this pretended Reformation.
But were thoſe Errors or no, which the Church of Rome taught? And were they Innovations and Corruptions or no, which they practiſed? If they were, as hath appeared in part before, have we no Call to renounce Errors, or to reject Corruptions? or muſt there never be a Reformation of Things that are amiſs?
If they ſay we ſhould have ſtay'd till the Church had done it. If they mean by the Church, the Church of Rome, we ſee it is not done yet; and how long then ſhould we have ſtayed? For theſe very Things which the Reformation rejects, are ſtill defended by her; and all the Proteſtations and Applications that have been made to her, have had no effect upon her to procure a Reformation on her part; and we do not know when they will have.
But why muſt we ſtay till the Church of Rome had ordered the Reformation, (which we ſee would have been long enough?) What is the Church of Rome to us, but as a Siſter Church, whatever ſhe pretends of her Catholiciſm, and Maſterdom, or Miſtresſhip over the reſt of the Churches, which is refuted before? And what hath ſhe to do then to control our Reformation, or to oblige us to ſtay her leiſure? Or why have not Princes, and National Churches in themſelves full Power and Authority to reform what is to be reformed in their own Precincts? We ſee what the good Kings of the Jews, Aſa, Hezekiah, Joſiah did. And what did we do, but what in a like caſe they did before? And if the Church of Rome had had never ſo much an Authority over us, yet if upon due Applications ſhe would not reform Errors, and redreſs Abuſes, and yet theſe Errors and Abuſes be of a moſt peſtilent and dangerous Nature to the Souls of Men, and moſt contrary to the true Religion, muſt we therefore perſiſt in theſe falſe Beliefs and Practices, whilſt ſhe thinks fit to retain them? And hazard our Eternal Salvation in rejecting Divine Truth, and contradicting the Light of our Minds, and the true Goſpel-Doctrine, meerly out of reſpect to her? Or muſt we not provide for our own wellfare our ſelves, without which we ſhould run the hazard of Eternal Perdition, if others will not do it who ought?
Now this was the very Caſe: The Corruptions of the Church of Rome were ſo very great, both in Faith and Worſhip, (as may appear partly by this little Treatiſe) and were ſo very dangerous and fatal to Mens Souls, and ſo univerſally ſpread, and ſo ſtifly maintained, that there was no hope of a Reformation of them by that Church; but the Council that was aſſembled to remove Corruptions, ſetled them the ſtronger. Becauſe they could not be brought to a better mind to renounce theſe Errors, muſt we therefore continue to err for company? Or, when we could no longer hold Communion with them, without having a Communion in theſe Corruptions, had we not a juſt cauſe then of ſeparation from them?
Jer. 51. 9. We would have healed Babylon, and ſhe is not healed: forſake her, and let us go every one to his own Country. It is juſt the ſame in our Caſe; we have remonſtrated to the Church of Rome her Errors, and ſhe hath not reformed them; but on the contrary, ſhe hath excommunicated and perſecuted with Fire and Sword, thoſe that have publiſh'd the Truth; and therefore we had juſt cauſe to abandon her Communion.
2 Cor. 6. 17, 18. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye ſeparate, ſaith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and be a Father unto you, and ye ſhall be my Sons and Daughters, ſaith the Lord Almighty. And, Rev. 18. 4. Come out of her my People, that ye be not partakers of her Sins, and that ye receive not of her Plagues. Here is our Call to do as we have done; when we could no longer abide in the Communion of the Church of Rome, without being defiled with her Sins, and partaking of the Torment which is prepared for her, we were then obliged to come out of her.
Rom. 16. 17. I beſeech you, Brethren, mark them which cauſe Diviſions and Offences, contrary to the Doctrine which ye have learned, and avoid them. This, we ſay, the Church of Rome hath done; ſo that we are required by the Apoſtle to mark and avoid them. For, Gal. 1. 9. Whoſoever preacheth, ſaith he, another Goſpel than that which ye have received, let him be accurſed. And we have ſeen that the Church of Rome hath corrupted the Doctrine of the Goſpel in many and very great Inſtances, ſo that it looks like another Goſpel than what was preach'd by our Saviour and his Apoſtles.
1 John 5. 21. Little Children, keep your ſelves from Idols. And if the Church of Rome be guilty of Idolatry, as hath been proved, and we cannot keep to them without keeping to her Idolatry, muſt we not then keep our ſelves from both?
For it is in vain to pretend that their Doctrines, that is, we ſay their Corruption is antient. This was no warrant to the Jews formerly to follow the old Heathen Cuſtoms, becauſe of their Antiquity. But, ſaith Joſhua, Chap. 24. 14, 15. Put away the Gods which your Fathers have ſerved on the other ſide of the Flood, and is Egypt, and ſerve the Lord. And if it ſeem evil to you to ſerve the Lord, chuſe you this day whom you will ſerve, whether the Gods which your Fathers ſerved, that were on the other ſide of the Flood, or the Gods of the Amorites, in whoſe Land ye dwell: but as for me, and my Houſe, we will ſerve the Lord. The like, we ſay, doth concern us: And if others will perſiſt ſtill in their falſe Worſhip, it doth not follow that we ſhould do ſo too. And therefore if the Worſhip of the Church of Rome be ſuch, as we prove it is in many Inſtances, we are bound to renounce it, though it were never ſo Ancient, yea, though it were older than Noah's Flood.
SECT. III.
They object to us the Diviſions that are among the Reformed.
BUT what do they get by this? Becauſe there are Diviſions among the Reformed, is therefore the Reformation it ſelf evil? Or, becauſe we are divided among our ſelves in ſome things, and ſome of us then muſt be in the Wrong, doth it therefore follow that they are in the Right?
If this be an Argnment againſt the Reformation, the ſame might have been an Argument againſt Chriſtianity it ſelf: For as ſoon as Chriſtianity ſpread it ſelf abroad, were there not Diviſions then too amongſt thoſe that embrac'd it? Some were for retaining the legal Ordinances, and mixing the Ceremonies of the Law with the Goſpel of Chriſt, with whom the Apoſtles had great contention. Some very famous Churches were leavened with this Error, as that was which was in Galatia. Other ſtrange Hereſies were broach'd in the Church of Corinth, and obtained amongſt many, even in the Apoſtles Days. And there ſoon aroſe many others that corrupted the Faith of the Goſpel, both in the Apoſtolical and following Ages; Gnoſticks, Valentinians, Marcionites, Arians, &c. which ſpread far and wide, and continued a long time. Was this now a juſt Objection againſt Chriſtianity, that there were Diviſions and Hereſies among thoſe that profeſs'd themſelves Chriſtians? And how comes it then to be ſo mighty an Argument now againſt the Reformation?
We are ſorry indeed to ſee it fall out ſo, that there ſhould be no better agreement amongſt the Reformed, and that there ſhould any Hereſies ſpring out of thoſe that pretend to the Reformation. But we are not at all ſurprized at it, or moved to think e're the worſe of the Reformation from the Church of Rome, becauſe we don't agree in ſome things amongſt our ſelves: For we are foretold that ſo it ſhould come to paſs, Rom. 16. 17. Mark them which cauſe Diviſions: It implies, that Diviſions there would be. And, 1 Cor. 11. 9. For there muſt be Hereſies, that they which are approved, may be made manifeſt. Hereſies are ſome of the Works of the Fleſh, Gal. 5. 20. And therefore as long as the Fleſh is ſo predominant with many, it is no wonder that there ſhould be Hereſies which are the Works of it. If Chriſtianity at firſt could not prevent it, we can have no expectation that the Reformation ſhould do it. 2 Pet. 2. 1. There were falſe Prophets among the People, even as there ſhall be falſe Teachers among you, who privily ſhall bring in damnable Hereſies, even denying the Lord that bought them. And they doing it privily, it may not be preſently diſcerned neither, till after ſome tract of time.
But, ſay they, You have not the means of Ʋnity among you, for you want a Judg of Controverſies, which is abſolutely neceſſary in a Church, and therefore there are ſo many Hereſies and Diviſions among you. But this pretended means of Unity is refuted before in the Chapter of the Infallibility of the Church, &c. where it is proved, that there is no ſuch thing or means appointed. We have as much the means of Unity as the Primitive Church had, which was as much as God thinks fit to appoint in the Church. They had infallible Teachers to teach them the Doctrine of God; and we have the Doctrine which was taught by theſe infallible Teachers recorded in the Scriptures, which is of the ſame uſe to us as it was to them. But neither they nor we have an infallible Judg to dermine our Aſſent; nor can have, unleſs you will put out the Eyes of humane Nature. But every one is left to judg for himſelf, by the Rule of the Doctrine delivered. God hath given us a plain Rule, as hath been proved, and is ready to aſſiſt us with his Spirit in all things neceſſary to our Salvation, if we be humble and teachable. And then we ſhould do well enough without an infallible Judg. But yet theſe means were not effectual in the Primitive Church to prevent Diviſions and Hereſies, becauſe Men did not uſe them aright (for all Men will never be ſo ſincere, and honeſt and diligent as they ſhould be) though they were ſufficient to have done this, if Men had uſed them as they ought. And therefore how can we expect now they ſhould be of better ſucceſs?
The Church of Rome indeed pretends to ſuch a means of Unity, which we prove that Chriſt never appointed, viz. An Infallible Judg of all Controverſies. But then as they pretend to that which they think is a greater means of Unity, ſo one would think that they ſhould have a greater Unity too among themſelves. But is it ſo indeed? Is there nothing but Unity in the Church of Rome? Are there no Diviſions? or were there never any Schiſms? Hath this pretended Judg of Controverſies determined and put an end to all Controverſies? No, he neither hath done it, nor dares attempt it.
But we agree, ſay they, in all the fundamental Points. In what? Is not the Doctrine of the Infallible Judg, a fundamental Point it ſelf? And do they all agree in that, and who this is? And if they did, ſo do we agree in the ſame Rule of Faith, the Holy Scriptures. And why is not our agreement in the ſame Rule of Faith, as good as their agreement about the Infallible Judg? But they all agree likewiſe, that Proteſtants are in the wrong. And we all agree as much, that Papiſts are in the wrong. So that if this Point of agreement ſignify any thing, here we are even with them. But do they agree among themſelves in other things? No, no more than Proteſtants do among themſelves, but have differences, the ſame, or as great as any Proteſtants can have whatſoever they be. And notwithſtanding the deciſions of their pretended infallible Judg, they do as much differ in particular Doctrines, in the ſenſe of thoſe deciſions, which are for the determining of the ſenſe of Scriptures, as the Proteſtants do about the ſenſe of Scripture, without the deciſions of ſuch a determining Judg?
Therefore we think it very reaſonable, that the Church of Rome ſhould do as our Saviour directs, when they cry out ſo much upon our Diviſions, that they would firſt pull out the Beam out of their own Eyes, and reconcile all Differences at Home; and then they ſhall ſee the more clearly to caſt out the Mate out of their Brother's Eye. Which they can never do, whilſt the Beam is in their own; or at leaſt, I hope, we ſhall never go to them to do it.
FINIS.