Romanism discussed, or, An answer to the nine first articles of H.T. his Manual of controversies. Whereby is manifested, that H.T. hath not (as he pretends) clearly demonstrated the truth of the Roman religion by him falsly called Catholick, by texts of holy scripture, councils of all ages, Fathers of the first five hundred years, common sense, and experience, nor fully answered the principal objections of protestants, whom he unjustly terms sectaries. By John Tombes, B.D. And commended to the world by Mr. Richard Baxter.

SECT. IV.

It is notoriously false that the Romanists are perfectly one, or have better unity, or means of unity than Protestants, and H. T. his argument for the truth of the Roman church from its unity proves the contrary.

H. T. adds. The minor is made evident (even to the weakest understanding) by the present manifold Schisms and divisions, which are now among Pro∣testants and all other Sectaries, as well in doctrine as government, whereas Catholicks are perfectly one both in disciplin and doctrine, all the world over, even to the least Article or point of faith, being all united to one supreme invisible head, Christ Jesus, and all subordinate to one visible and ministerial head, the Pope his Vicar on earth; we all resolve our selves in points of faith into one safe and most unchangeable principle, I believe the holy Catholick church, we look on her as the immediate and authorized proponent of all revealed verities, and the infallible Judge of controversies; God himself being the prime Author, and his authority the formal motive and object of our faith.

Answ. 1. The Protestants are not Sectaries nor divided from the Catho∣lick church, but from the now Roman party, who are really a faction divided from the Catholick church holding a new faith never established till the Tri∣dentin council, though with an impudent face H. T. avouch a most palbable falshood of the Romanists universality, and arrogates to the Roman the title of Catholick church. Nor are the now divisions of Protestants in doctrine or government such as cut them off from the unity of the Catholick church, they own Christ their head, and faith in him, which is sufficient to save them, and even by this Authors next argument, enough to make them members of the Catholick church. 2. The Schisms and divisions of the Papists have been and are as great as the divisions of the Protestants. In former ages there were many Schisms even in the church of Rome between the several Popes at one time, and the factions among the people about Popes and Emperours and other quarrels. Onuphrius reckons up thirty. Bellarmin himself twenty six Schisms one after another, sometimes one Pope condemning what another had done, and excommunicating and persecuting Emperours, Antipapes, and all that have adhered to them. Besides the contentions about the Virgin Maries immaculate conception, about the superiority of a council above the Pope, about Priests marriages, election of Popes, investiture of Bishops have been so great, and frequent, and of long continuance, as their own histories shew, that they far exceed the Protestants divisions. The divisions in this last age, and some at this day, to wit, in and since the council of Trent between Catha∣rinus, Soto, Vega, Andradius about certainty of salvation; Pighius and others about inherent righteousness, the Spanish and other Bishops and the Papalins about the divine right of Bishops and their residence, not deriving their Epis∣copacy from the Pope; the French churches not acknowledging the Bishop of Rome above a council, nor yet receiving the Trent council: the two Popes Sixtus the fifth and Clement the eighth, about the vulgar translation both en∣joyning each of their editions and no other, as the right copy to be received under penalty of a curse, though one in many places contradict the other (as

Dr. James in his Bellum Papale shews, from which no Papists have or can vindicate the two Popes) the divisions in England and Ireland between the secular Priests and the Jesuits about Episcopal jurisdiction and visitations, between Papists in Italy, at Venice, and in England about the Popes power in temporal things over Princes, in France and England about the lawfulness of killing Kings excommunicated by the Pope, in England and France about Jesuitical equivocation, at this day between Dominicans and Jesuits, Janse∣nists and Mol••nists about Gods predeterminations, efficacious and sufficient grace, and mans freewill have been and are at this day as great or greater in respect of the things in which they differ, the continuance of them, the par∣ties differing and their bitterness one to another, then the Protestants divisions, and therefore the brag of H. T. concerning the Popish unity, that Catholicks are perfectly one both in discipline and doctrine all the world over, even to the least article or point of faith, is a falshood apparent to all well read scholars, though the simple English Papists, from whom the truth of these things is con∣cealed, are made to believe by their Priests disguises and pretences as if it were so. Nor doth that which H. T. here saith, salve the matter, and if it did, the Protestants have as good a plea for themselves, notwithstanding their divisions, in respect of means for unity. For, 1. The Papists all the world over are not so subordinate to the Pope as to acknowledge his superiority to a council, but that they have and think they may appeal from the Pope to a general coun∣cil, which may judge the Pope an heretick and depose him, yea and take away the Pope altogether if they see it necessary, nor do the Jansenists acquiesce in the late Pope Innocents determination at this day, nor do the Sorbonists in France acknowledge the Popes power in temporals, or the Venetians the Popes power to interdict their state and meddle with their government in exempting Ecclesiasticks from their jurisdiction. 2. That which he saith of the Catholick church as the immediate and authorized proponent of all revealed verities, and the infallible Judge of controversies is either nonsense or false, or that which Papists reject in Protestants. If they mean by the Catholick church the Pope, or the Pope with his Cardinals, or a council, it is ridiculous nonsense to call any or all of them the Catholick church, which, according to their own Triden∣tin Catechism, contains all believers from Adam to this day, or that shall be here∣after, and according to this Author, p. 59. is coexistent with all times, and spread or diffused over all places: or if it be understood according to good sense, it is most false. For the Catholick church properly so called as it is in the Creed, is neither mediate nor immediate proponent of all revealed verities, much less authorized thereto, nor do Papists so look on them. For many of the Papists go no further than the present Pope or council, or their Priests, (who only are to most the immediate proponents) but rest in their determi∣nations and adhere to what they determine with an implicite faith and blind obedience, never enquiring what all believers have held or done before them. Nor is it possible they should have resolution from the Catholick church pro∣perly understood as in the Creed it is believed: for it is invisible, they never did together express their determination in all points of faith, have varied in many, nor could it be known to others of their own time if they had, much less to the believers of this age. Nor is the Catholick church fit to be the mediate or immediate proponent of all revealed verities, nor fit for such an authority

as to be infallible Judge of controversies: for to say the Catholick church is such, is to say the university of believers is such, of whom a great part are wo∣men, a great part ignorant persons altogether uncapable of such an office: yea it is contrary to the Apostle Pauls resolution, 1 Cor. 12. 28, 29. who tells us, that God hath set some in the Church, first Apostles, then Prophets, thirdly Teachers, not the church to be teachers, which is all one with proponents of revealed verities, but teachers in the church: and these are denied to be all the church, when he saith, ver. 29. Are all teachers? And to make them infalli∣ble is contrary to the Apostle. Rom. 3. 4. where he saith, let God he true, and every man a lyar, surely then not an infallible Judge of controversies: yea should this be granted, it would bring all confusion into the churches of God. Nor can the speech have any good sense, that the Catholick church is Judge in controversies, but this which Protestants indeed rightly teach, that every man is to judge for himself, not for others with a judgement of discerning what doctrine or points of faith he hears, and receives, yet requiring upon pain of damnation that they be careful in examining what they embrace, which the Papists do so much inveigh against falsly, as if it were a leaving every man to his private spirit, though they do in this no otherwise than Papists must of necessity, yeild to each man when the determinations of Popes and councils are ambiguous, as they were in the council of Trent, and are often in the De∣crees, Breves and other edicts of Popes, as is manifest by the writers on the Canon law, and disputes about the councils and Popes meaning, in which are so many ambiguities that there is scarce a point in which there are not many opposite opinions. If Pappus have overcounted, who reckons out of Bellarmin alone two hundred thirty seven contradictions in Popish writers; yet he that reads Bellarmins controversies, shall finde very few questions, in which the Schoolmen and other Papists do not gainsay each other. And as for their resolution into the principle, I believe the Catholick church. They are not agreed what the church is from whom they may have resolution, whether the Pope, who is with them the church virtual, or a general council, which is either never, or very rare, which they call the church representative, or the uniform consent of the Fathers, according to which only the profession of faith of Pope Pius the fourth requires all Papists to receive and expound the holy Scriptures: and yet this uniform consent of Fathers is either a nullity, it being scarce found in any point, or it is impossible to be known. H. T. by his words pag. 108. resolves his faith into the next precedent age and so upwards, and here pag. 30. into the church, and this church is, pag. 70. not the whole church (which yet is all one with the Catholick) but a council approved by the Pope, into whose authority they finally resolve their faith; for though they pretend to resolve it into the Scripture, yet as it is expounded by the church, pag. 109, 113. which is the Pope. So that whatever pretence they make of resolving their faith into the church as the proponent, or God as the Author; in conclusion they acquiesce in what the Pope dictates by himself or with a council approved by him. As for the Scriptures the Papists are not all agreed which be the Canonical Scri∣ptures, which not: nor can they set down certain rules to know what are the unwritten traditions of the church, which they are to admit and embrace with a like affection of piety as the written Word, as the Trent council decreed, sess. 4. nor can they have any bottom to rest on by their principles; sometimes one

Pope and one council crossing another, some having been condemned in gener∣al councils as hereticks: nor can they tell, but by information of others, as Priests or Carriers, of their Bulls or Breves (which are many of them not only fallible, but also false, as some of their own have complained) what the Popes determin, and what fraud is used in procuring Popes Bulls or Breves sometimes is many ways testified, as that the Bull of Pius the fifth, wherein Queen Eli∣zabeth was excommunicated and deprived, was gotten in a fraudulent way by Morton and Webb;* 1.1 there is no cer∣tainty from the reports of others what the Pope determins, except a man hear him preach, or pronounce sentence, or see him write and seal, he must rely on the testimony of those that may▪ and are like enough to deceive. Nor if a man see or hear the Pope decree, can he be certain whether he spake from Peters chair, or determine what is to be believed by the whole church (out of which case they say he is fallible) or give his opinion as a private Doctor. So that it is most false, that either Papists agree as H. T. saith, or resolve themselves into one safe and most unchangeable prin∣ciple, or have any infallible judge of controversies, or have God himself for the prime Author, and his authority the formal object and motive of their faith: but their faith in what they differ from us rests only on mens sayings, for the most part ignorant and wicked (for such have been most of the Popes for a thousand years) whom they follow against the plain and confessed words of the Scripture, as in their communion under one kinde, worshipping of Images, and ascribe to them power by their authority to declare new Scriptures and Articles of faith, and make the Scripture only to be believed because of the churches determination, that is the Popes, which in respect of us they make of more authority than the Scripture, and so make the churches, not Gods authority, the formal motive and object of their faith. So that if unity be a note of the church, of all others the Popish church can lay least claim to it, and H. T. his argument may be retorted. The Catholick church is one, the Roman church is not one, therefore the Roman church is not the Catholick church. On the other side the Protestants have better unity and means of unity than Papists. For however they differ in ceremonies and disciplin, yet in points of faith they differ little, as may appear by the harmony of their con∣fessions, which shews agreement in their churches; however in explication of points private Doctors differ, and they have a more sure principle and safe in owning one Master even Christ, and one certain rule to know the minde of God, to wit the holy Scripture, which the Papists themselves make the object of faith, and the translation into the English tongue makes plain in the chief points to be believed, so that every ordinary man may be certain what it deli∣vers concerning them, and this translation appears to be certain in those things, by comparing it even with the Papists own English translation at Rhemes and Dow••y, which had they left out their corrupt Annotations and permitted it to be read (as God requires) by all sorts of persons, the falshood and errors of Po∣pish Priests would soon appear, and be rejected by all that love truth.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Watson quodlib. p. 252, 260, 343.