Pax vobis, or, Gospel and liberty against ancient and modern papists / by a preacher of the word.

Sixth Dialogue.

ISMAEL.

I am weary of hearing such hor∣rid Blasphemies; my Heart trembles to hear you say, that such abominable Tenets may be believed according to our Rule of Faith and Principles of the Reformation: I beseech you let me hear no more of such stuff: I conceive very well that Mens Judgments and Consci∣ences are not to be constrain'd to believe or deny, this or that Tenet, because the Pope, or his Infallible, forsooth, Church, will have it so.

Isaac.

And must they be constrain'd to deny or believe, because the fallible Church of Eng∣land or France will have it so?

Ismael.

No, I do not say they must, have Pa∣tience, and hear me speak a while: I say that Scripture must be our Rule of Faith, and not any Pope, or Church, or Congregation; and that we are not to be forced by any to believe, but what we understand to be true by Scripture; and that if we Judge by Scripture, any Doctrine to be false, and contrary to Gods Word, we must not be forced to believe it: But we must not abuse this Liberty; That we should have Liberty for to believe or deny Suprema∣cy, Figurative Presence, Communion in one or

both Kinds, and such other inferiour Truths controverted among Christians; and that each Congregation may in such Articles, believe as it understands by Scripture to be true, may pass, and it's practised in our Reformed Churches; But that we should run so far, as to have Liber∣ty by our Rule of Faith to believe or deny the Fundamental and Chief Articles of Christianity, as the Trinity, Incarnation, Divinity of Christ, amp;c. That Liberty ought not to be given: Our Re∣formation very wisely and piously permits the Lutherans to believe one thing, the Presbyterians another, the Protestants another, and so of the rest: And all are true Reformed Children, because each of them believes as they Judge by Scripture to be true: But the Reformation has never given, nor never will give Liberty to interpret Scripture against the fundamental Ar∣ticle of Christianity: We must be moderate, and keep our rambling Fancies within Compass, and if any should judge and interpret Scripture in favour of any scandalous and abominable Tenets against Christianity and good Manners, he must be checked and not commended. This Moderation the Church of England uses, and will never permit to the contrary.

Isaac.

I perceive a great deal of Popish Blood to run in your Veins, and that if you and your Church of England, were in Power at the be∣ginning of our Reformation, we should never have

had a Luther, Calvin, Beza, or such other no∣ble and renowned Reformers. By what I gather from your discourse, I do not see the breadth of an Inch's difference betwixt the Church of Rome, and you and your Church of England, for the Church of Rome will not stick to grant, that Gods Word alone is her Rule of Faith, but so that none must believe any sense of it, but as she believes it, nor Interpret any Text, but receive her Interpretation of it. The Church of Eng∣land has Scripture for her Rule of Faith, and gives us Liberty for to Interpret, Understand, and Believe some Text of it, as each one thinks best; and so permits Presbyterians to deny Epis∣copacy, Lutherans to deny Figurative Presence, &c. and confesses they are all her Brethren of the Reformation, but she will give no Liberty at all for to Interpret other Texts, but all must un∣derstand them as she does, or all must Hereticks and damn'd Men? No, that Text My Father, and I are one, must be Interpreted to signifie the Uni∣ty In Nature of the Father and Son, as the Church of England believes, none must Interpret it o∣therwise: So that the difference betwixt the Popish Church and that of England, is, the first gives us no Liberty at all, the second gives us some Liberty, the first robs us of all; the se∣cond but the one half. The Rule of Faith in Popery is Scripture as Interpreted by the Pope and Councils; the Rule of Faith in England; as to

some Articles is Scripture as Interpreted by the Church of England; and as to other Articles, Scri∣pture as each person of sound Judgment un∣derstands it, And thus Protestants are but half Papists, and half Reformed, and both these ingredients will never make a good com∣pound.

Let any unbyass'd and impartial Man Judge if the Church of England proceeds justly in this: For if our Rule of Faith be Scripture, as each Person of sound Judgment understands it, as she mentions in her 39. Articles; and as the whole Reformation believes, if we are not to be constrained, to believe any Church, Council, or Mans sense of Scripture, if we do not Judge by the Word of God it's true, by what Autho∣rity, Rule or Reason, can the Church of Eng∣land give me Liberty to understand and believe some Texts as I please, and deny me Liberty for to understand and believe others, as I Judge by Scri∣pture they ought to be understood? I pray ob∣serve well this Discourse; here are Luther, Calvin, Beza, Zuinglius, and our other first Reformers; they Interpret some Texts against the Doctrine of Rome, and others against the Doctrine of the Church of England. They are praised for the first, and esteemed Apostolical Reformers, be∣cause without any regard of what the Church of Rome said, they freely taught and believed what they Judged by Scripture to be true; why

must not they be praised and esteemed true Re∣formers also, for not regarding what the Church of England or any other says, but teach the im∣possibility of Gods Commandments, the suffi∣ciency of Faith alone, and all those other Te∣nets which you so much mislike, since they Judge by Scripture that to be the true Doctrine? Are they bound to submit their Judgments to the Church of England, more than to that of Rome?

Ismael.

But in those Tenets they do not only contradict the Church of England, but all Christian Churches and Congregations; for all will say those are wicked and scandalous. Do∣ctrines.

Isaac.

And if they Judge by Scripture that those Tenets are not such, but found and good Doctrine, may not they believe them, tho' all the World and ten Worlds did gainsay them? Is not Scripture our Rule of Faith, and are we to regard what any Church or all Churches say, further than we find by Scripture that they say well? But being these Tenets, which you call horrid Blasphemies displease you, I'll change my discourse; and because I see you are Popishly inclin'd, I will shew you how by the Principles of our Reformation, you can be as good a Papist as the Pope; one Principle, excepted, wherein you must dissent from the Church of Rome, if you intend to remain a true Reformed Child.

Ismael.

You promise too much, and more than I desire to know, I don't desire to have any Communication with the Pope; I know by the Writings of our Authors what kind of Beast he is.

Isaac.

By your favour, you may believe the Popes are Worthy, Honest, and Godly Men: many Doctors of our Reformation, and our Travellers to the Court of Rome give this Testi∣mony of them. You may also believe, that Popes and Cardinals are Knaves and Atheists, who look on Scripture as a Romance, and deny the Incarnation of Christ, for Calvin says l so, and would never have said it, if it had not been true: But beware not to speak so in Rome, or they'll lodge you where Honest Taylor the Quaker was; nor in Spain, or they'll stop your Mouth with an Inquisition faggot.

Ismael.

I care not what the Pope or Cardinals are; but I would gladly know, what Religion and Congregation you are of, for whereas you are my immediate Instructer, it behoves me to know what Religion you have.

Isaac.

As to my Religion, I doubt not but that my Readers will be divided in their Judg∣ments of me; if a Papist reads me, he'll swear I am an Atheist; but I hope he will not pre∣tend to be infallible as his Pope: if a Protestant, he'll say I am a Papist, and that my drift is to cast

dirt upon his Church; the honest Quaker will say, I am a profane man; others perhaps will say, I am of no Religion, but a Despiser of all; and our Congregations are so uncharitable that likely none will accept of me, because I say all Religions are very good: a sad thing that a man must be hated for speaking well of his Neighbours, and that each one must have all the World to be naught but himself: This then is my Religion, To suffer Persecution for Justice and Truth; to render good for evil, to bless those who curse me, and speak well of all Con∣gregations, whilst they speak all evil against me: reflect well upon what I discoursed hither∣to, and you will find, I am as great a Lover of the Reformation as they who may think me it's Enemy: and read my following discourse, and you will find I love Popery as well as the Reformation: The Spirit of God makes no ex∣ceptions of Persons.

Ismael.

You promised to prove by the princi∣ples of the Reformation, that we may believe all the Tenets of Popery, and remain still of the Reformation: how can this be?

Isaac.

You remember I excepted one Princi∣ple of Popery, wherein you must necessarily dissent from them: and if you deny this one Principle, you may believe all their other Te∣nets as well as the Pope, and be as good a Child of the Reformation as Luther.

Ismael.

What Principle is this, which you seem to make the only destinctive sign of a Reform∣ed, from a Papist?

Isaac.

Listen a while: a Papist is not a Papist because he believes Purgatory, Transubstantia∣tion, Indulgences, and the rest of Popish Te∣nets, but because he believes them upon the Te∣stimony of the Pope and Church, because they assure him they are revealed Truths: If a Pa∣pist did say, I believe these Tenets, because I my self do judge by Scripture, that they are reveal∣ed, and not because the Pope and Church say they are, he would be no Papist. The Papist believes the Mystery of the Trinity, the Incar∣nation and Passion of Christ, the Protestant be∣lieves the same Mysteries, yet the one is a Pa∣pist and no Protestant, the other is a Protestant and no Papist. And why? because the Papist believes them upon the Testimony of the Pope and Church; the Protestant believes them upon the Testimony of Gods written Word. Believe then whatever you please of Popery, provided you believe it; because you judge by Scripture it's true, and not because the Pope or the Church says it; you'll never be a Papist but a perfect Reformed.

Ismael.

If this discourse be solid, you may hedge in all the Articles of Popery into our Re∣formation.

Isaac.

If you peruse the works of our Refor∣med Doctors, you'll hardly find any Article of Popery, but has been judged by many, or some of our best Reformed Doctors, to be the true Doctrine of Scripture; and whereas any Do∣ctrin which any Person of sound Judgment un∣derstands by Scripture to be the true, may be justly called the Doctrin of the Reformation; it follows that hardly is there any Article of Po∣pery, for which we see so many persecutions a∣gainst Subjects, and such troubles in our Parlia∣ments, but is truly the Doctrin of the Reforma∣tion.

Ismael.

Shew me some Examples of this.

Isaac.

The Veneration of Relicks and Saints dead Bones, is generally believed by us to be meer Popery and Superstition, therefore we made no store of Luther and Calvins Bones, tho we know them to be as great Saints as any in the Popish Church: but Veneration of Relicks and Saints Bones, is the Doctrin of our Reformation; for whatever is set down and commended by our Common-Prayer-Book, must be undoubtedly esteemed our Reformed Doctrin and Practice, and our Common-Prayer-Book, aprinted since our Kings happy Restauration, in it's Kalendar sets down a day to the Translation of S. Edward King of Saxons Body in the month of June, and dedicates another to the Translation of the Bo∣dies of St. Martin and Swithin, in the month of July.

The Veneration and use of the sign of the Cross, is flat Popery in the Judgment of all our Congregations; yet any Reformed Child may laudably and piously use it; whereas our Com∣mon-Prayer Book in the Administration of Bap∣tism, Commands the Minister to use it, saying, We sign him with the sign of the Cross, in token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed, to confess the Faith of Christ crucified, and Manfully to fight under his Bannar against Sin, the World and the Devil. And in our Kalender, printed since his Majesties Re∣stauration, it's called the Holy Cross.

Our Congregations generally believe, it's Po∣pery to keep Holy-days (except the Sabbath day) and Saints days; to fast in Lent, Vigils commanded, Ember-days, and Fridays; and all this is recommended to us in our Common-Payer Book, and the Minister is commanded, in the Administration of the Lords Supper, to pub∣lish the Holy-days of the week, and exhort us to Fast; and surely, he is not commanded to teach, or exhort us to any thing, but to the Do∣ctrin of the Reformation: it's true, the Students of our Colledges of Oxford and Cambridge, are much troubled with scruples in this point: these Pauperes de Lugduno, are compelled to fast all Fridays throughout the year; and it's not hun∣ger that makes them complain, but tenderness of Conscience, because they fear it's Popery.

It's a Popish errour, we say to believe that Pennance, or our penal works of Fasting, Alms∣deeds, or corporal Austerities, can avail and help for the remission of our sins, and satisfying Gods Justice: No, we say, penal works serve for no∣thing, all is done by Repentance; that's to say, by sorrow of heart for having offended God. This is the Doctrin of Danaeus, Willit, Junius and Calvin, who says, Francis, Dominick, Bernard, Antony, and the rest of Popish Monks and Fryers, are in Hell for their Austerities and penal works for all that, you may very well believe; and it's the Doctrin of the Reformation, that Pen∣nance and penal works, do avail for the remission of our sin, and are very profitable to the Soul; for, our Common-Prayer Book in the Commination against sinners, says thus, In the Pri∣mitive Church, there was a Godly Discipline, that at the beginning of Lent, such as were notorious sinners, were put to open Pennance, and punish'd in this World, that their Souls may be saved in the day of the Lord. And our Common-Prayer Books wishes that this Discipline were restored again; and surely it does not wish that Popery were re∣stored; therefore it's no Popery to say that Pen∣nance, or Penal works, do satisfie for our sins in this World, and avail to save us in the other.

Ismael.

I know many of our Congregation mislike much our Common-Prayer Book, for these Popish-Tenets; but what do you say of the

grand errours of Popery? can a man be a true Child of the Reformation, and yet believe the Popes Supremacy? deny the Kings Supremacy; be∣lieve Transubstantiation and Communion in one kind; are these Tenets the Doctrin of the Reforma∣tion, or consistent with its principles?

Isaac.

The Kings Supremacy is undoubtedly the Doctrin of the Reformation, because it's judged by the Church of England to be of Scri∣pture, yet not only the Quakers, Presbyterians, A∣nabaptists, and other Congregations, judge it's not of Scripture, but as erroneous a Tenet as that of the Popes Supremacy; Calvin 6. Amos, says, They were unadvised people and Blasphemers, who rai∣sed King Henry the VII. so far as to call him the head of the Church; but also that no Civil Magi∣strate can be the head of any particular Church, is the Doctrin of the Centuriators, cent. sept. pag. 11. of Cartwright, Viretus, Kemnitius, and many others; who doubts then but that in the prin∣ciples and Doctrin of the Reformation, you may deny the Kings Supremacy, tho' the Church of England believes it. The Popes Supremacy is the Doctrin of Popery, who doubts it? but it's also the Doctrin of the Reformation, for many of our Eminent Doctors have judged it to be the Doctrine of Scripture, as Whitgift a who cites Calvin and Musculus for this opinion; but it's needful we relate some of their

express words, I do not deny, says Luther, b but the Bishop of Rome, is, has been, and ought to be first of all; I believe, he is above all other Bishops, it's not lawful to deny his Supremacy: Melancthon c says no less, that the Bishop of Rome is above all the Church, that it is his office to go∣vern, to Judge in controversies, to watch over the Priests, to keep all Nations in conformity and unity of Doctrin: Somaisius, d The Pope of Rome has been without controversie the first Metropolitan in Italy, and not only in Italy, nor only in the West, but in all the World, the other Metropolitans have been chief in their respective districts, but the Pope of Rome has been Metropolitan and Primate, not only of some particular Diocess, but of all, Grotius e has expresly the same Doctrin, and proves this Su∣premacy belongs to the Pope de Jure Divino. I pray consider if these Doctors be not men of sound Judgment, and of eminent learning and credit in our Reformation, and if our Doctrin be Scripture as such men understand it, consi∣der, I say, with what Justice can this Doctrin be called Popery more than Reformed Doctrin.

As for Transubstantiation, it contains two dif∣ficulties; first, if the Body of Christ be really in the Sacrament; and this real presence, the

Lutherans defend to be the Doctrin of Scripture, as well as the Papists, why then should it be cal∣led Popish, more than Reformed Doctrin? The second is, if the substance of Bread be in the Sacrament together with Christ's Body: Luthe∣rans say it is, Papists say it is not, but that there is a Transubstantiation, or change of the whole substance of Bread, into the Body of Christ; but hear what Luther f says of this that we call Po∣pish Doctrin; I give all Persons liberty to believe in this point, what they please, without hazard of their Salvation, either that the Bread is in the Sacrament of the Altar, or that it is not? would Luther have given this liberty if Transubstantiation had not been the Doctrin of the Reformation as well as any other? Calvin also and Beza h affirm, that Luthers Doctrin of the co-existence of Christ's. Body and the Bread, is more absurd than the Popish Doctrin of the existence of the Body a∣lone; if therefore we be true Reformed, and safely believe the Doctrin of Luther, which is the most absurd; much more will we be of the Reformation, by believing that of the Papists which is less.

Communion in one kind, is the Doctrin of the Reformation, no less than Communion in both; for besides that Luther says, i They Sin notg

against Christ who use one kind only, seeing Christ has not commanded to use both; and again, k though it were an excellent thing to use both kinds in the Sacrament; and Christ has commanded nothing in this as necessary, yet it were better to follow peace and unity, than to contest about the kinds, but also Melancthon l who in the opinion of Luther sur∣passes all the Fathers of the Church, expresly teaches the same Doctrin: and the Church of England Statute I. Edward VI. command, That the Sacrament be commonly administr'd in both kinds, if necessity does not require otherwise; mark, he says, but commonly, and that for some necessity it may be received in one; lastly, the sufficiency of one kind in the Sacrament, is plainly set down by our Reformed Church of France, in her Ec∣clesiastical Discipline, printed at Saumur, Chap. 12. Art. 7. The Minister must give the Bread in the Supper to them, who cannot drink the Cup, provided it be not for contempt. And the reason is because there are many who cannot endure the taste of Wine; wherefore it often happens among them, that some persons, do take the Bread alone; and truly if some of our Ministers in England, do not give better Wine than they are accustom∣ed, who very irreverently serve that Holy Ta∣ble with naughty trash, it's much to be feared,

that our flock will also petition to be dispenc'd with in the Cup; because there are some of so delicate Palats, that they cannot endure the taste of bad Wine. Now, you may admire the injustice of the Papists in Condemning our Re∣formed Doctrin and Doctors as Hereticks, whereas those Tenets are believed by many of us, as well as by them; and the groundless se∣verity of our Congregations in exclaiming against that Doctrin; it being the Doctrin of the Re∣formation, whereas so many eminent men of our own, judge it to be of Scripture.

Ismael.

Whereas I see people persecuted by the Church of England for these Tenets, I can hardly be perswaded they are the Doctrin of the Reformation: at our next meeting we will persue this discourse, the Bell rings for Morning Prayers, A Dieu.

Notes

• l

  4. Inst. c. 7. Sect. 27.
• a

  In Defens. &c. pag. 373.70. & 395.
• b

  In Respons. tredecem. Propos.
• c

  In Epist. ad Card. Belay Episc. Pariens.
• d

  In Tract. Euchar. ad. p. Sarmunm.
• e

  In Annot. super Novum Testam. cap. 10. Matth. & sa∣pe alibi.
• f

  To. 1. Edit. Jonah. l. de cap. Babyl.
• h

  Lib. de caena Domini.
• i

  Lib▪ de cap. Babyl. c. de Euchar.
• g

  Almonit. 2. ad. Westph. defens. Oxthod. fit.
• k

  Epist. ad Bahemos in declarat. Euch. & in serm. de Euch.
• l

  In Concil. Theol. ad March. Elect. de usu utrius∣que speciei pag. 141.