Christianismus primitivus, or, The ancient Christian religion, in its nature, certainty, excellency, and beauty, (internal and external) particularly considered, asserted, and vindicated from the many abuses which have invaded that sacred profession, by humane innovation, or pretended revelation comprehending likewise the general duties of mankind, in their respective relations : and particularly the obedience of all Christians to magistrates, and the necessity of Christian-moderation about things dispensible in matters of religion : with divers cases of conscience discussed and resolved / by Thomas Grantham ...

The Ninth Reason maintained.

THat the present Papal Church cannot have the true Mark of Antiquity, is thus evidenced; viz. The Papal Church is a National Church; But no Gospel-Church was National in the first Age: Therefore no Na∣tional Church hath the true Mark of Antiquity.

The strength of this Argument lieth in the clear difference of the state of the Church under Abraham and Moses, to what it was under Christ and his Apostles. For,

The Jewish Church, which was to be National, took its form in a Na∣tional way, even in the very first Family where it began; as appears, Gen. 17. where Parents, Children, and Servants too, must all be brought in∣to that Church-state forthwith, or not be suffered to co▪habit together. Which order must be kept in all the Families of the Jews, as well in re∣spect of their Servants, such as they bought with Money, as their Chil∣dren, or any other. And so the Jewish Church, both in its beginning and its continuance, acted forth it self in a way suitable to it self.

But when the Gospel-Church began, it is very evident, that it took its beginning in the division of Families, and that by vertue of Christ's Do∣ctrine; * 1.1 who affirms, That he came to send Fire on the Earth; not Peace, but rather Division: For saith he, * 1.2 From henceforth there shall be fire, in one House divided three against two, and two against three; the Father against the Son, and the Son against the Father; the Daughter against the Mother, and the Mother against the Daughter, &c. and all this for the Gospel-sake.

Here a Man must leave Father, Mother, Wife and Children; For this cause ye shall be betrayed, both by Parents and Kinsfolks. For this cause the unbelieving Husband will put away his believing Wife. And for this cause the Servant may refuse to follow his unbelieving Master, being Christ's Freeman, and yet dwell in his Service as a Servant notwith∣standing.

Thus it's evident, That the Gospel Church took its beginning in a way quite contrary to the Form of a National Church, even by turning the World (or Church of the Jews) up-side down, which caused the Jews to cry out, Men of Israel, Help.

This is yet more evident, by that thundring Doctrine of the Baptist, when he said, * 1.3 Think not, or begin not to say within your selves, We have Abra∣ham to our Father. No, saith Paul, * 1.4 We (meaning the Gospel-Church) which are of Faith, are the Seed of Abraham, and Heirs according to Pro∣mise. For the Promise, which chiefly is enjoined in the Gospel, was not made to such as were born after the Flesh, but to such as are born after the Spirit; Whereupon he saith, * 1.5 We henceforth know no Man after the Flesh, [or because he descends from the Loins of Abraham, or any other.] * 1.6 For if any Man be in Christ (so as to be a demonstrable, or visible Member of his Gospel-Church) he is a new Creature. Old things are passed away, [yea, the old priviledg of standing in the Church by the Father's inte∣rest, though the Seed of Abraham himself] is [now] passed; Behold, all things [in this respect] are become new. Whereupon Peter contributeth his Sentence, and saith, Of a truth, I perceive God is no respecter of Persons; [but] the Persons accepted upon a Gospel account, so as to be his Church, are such as in every Nation fear him, and work Righteousness, [which no Infant can do.] But what? Hath God rejected Infants wholly, that now he will not shew them so much favour as afore-time? God forbid. He hath not shut up his tender Mercies from them wholly, or in part: For as they are such, and dying in their Infancy through Adam's transgression, so in Christ shall they be made alive. * 1.7 Wherefore look how far soever they fall in the first Man of the Earth, so far they shall be restored by the Lord from Heaven; yea, the Gift to them by Christ, shall exceed the loss they had by Adam. But if they live to years of understanding, and be∣come actual sinners against God, then the way appointed for the Remissi∣on of their Sins, is, * 1.8 To repent, and be Baptized, every one of them, that they may receive the Holy Ghost, and so be by it led into all Truth; and at∣tain at the end the salvation of their souls, through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Another Argument whereby it appears the Church of Christ cannot be National, is this; No Man is bound to become a Christian under pain of Corporal Punishment, as Death, &c. but living peaceably as Men, no Man hath power to compel them to be Baptized, or to walk in the Chri∣stian Profession, as is clear from the Texts before recited. Now take away Force in matters of Religion, and a National Church cannot stand in an absolute National Form; this is all Experience can testifie.

Again, That the Church of Christ at the first, or in the first Ages, was not Narional (in the first method or way wherein a Church beginneth to be so, namely, by the admission of Infants into the Church) is very evi∣dent;

because it is utterly incredible, that the many thousands of In∣fants, of such as in those days believed, should be admitted into the Church, and not so much as the whisper of such a thing to be found in all the Holy Writings of the Apostles. And besides, I have shewed from the Testimony of Vives, (Augustin's Commentator) That the Church had not the custom to baptize Infants in old time.

It is likewise certain, (if History be true) That the Gospel-Church used no compulsion in matters of Faith for more than three hundred years after Christ. About which time Constantine ordained grievous punishments for such as spake against Christ; and allowed the Christians to use the Unbelievers hardly. * 1.9 But God did not bless these doings; for Constantine became an Arrian Heretick, and persecuted the Bishop that Baptized him, as also others that continued faithful.

Hence then I conclude, That seeing the present Papal Church of Rome hath not the true Mark of Antiquity; Therefore they lose at once, the next three, Succession, Universality, and Visibility: For, Antiquity being wanting, no true Succession can be found; because the Root of Succession, if good, must be the Antiquity of it. So take Antiquity from them, and then wanting that first Age, they cannot be found in every Age; and not being found in every Age, especially the first Age, then they lose Visibili∣ty, as themselves propose it for a Mark of the Church. And for their Ho∣liness, I have spoken to that before, and surely it is but like their Neigh∣bours. And for their Miracles, I have given you a taste of them from Loretto: And besides, others do claim that Mark as well as they; * 1.10 Yea, the Turks produce Miracles; and the Protestants do the like; and others, as the Quakers, the like: And the Baptists can say of a truth, that God hath done for and amongst them, some things which have exceeded the course of Nature. And so their Miracles will not more prove them a Church, than the Miracles of others will prove the contrary, unless they can prove the others to be Illusions.

And that they have not the Mark of Unity, is evident, if History may be heeded; for, saith my Author, there is an hundred Sects of Monks and Fryars amongst them, and some of them so divided, as they burnt one another for Matters of Religion. And for different Opinions, there are no less than three hundred. See Fox Act. and Mon. p. 260. and Wil∣lit, in his Book called Tetrastilon Papis.

I know the Papists do make a great deal of noise about their Pastoral Succession, as if they could derive it from Man to Man, up to the Apostle Peter. But I find the learned Protestants making it a great Question, whether ever Peter was Bishop of Rome, or not. And Jerom is said to have seen some old Books, * 1.11 which shew, that Narcissus ruled the Roman Church, when Paul saluted him and his Family, in his Epistle to the Ro∣mans.

No small contention is there likewise among the Learned, Whether Linus or Clement were the second Bishop of Rome; So that this Pastoral Succession the Papists pretend to, meets with shrewd Objections in the ve∣ry first and second Person of that Line.

Against the uninterrupted continuance of their pretended Succession,

many things are objected: as, That there were sometimes three, and sometimes two Popes, and that for more than twenty years time together; so that no Man could tell where the true Pastoral Authority lay. And then comes in that strange disaster of Joan the Female Pope, who for al∣most three years cut the Chain of this pretended Succession. This thing is famous in History.

Lastly, Although the Papists could prove a continued Succession of Persons claiming the Title of Universal Bishop, yet this would not justifie them all to be the Pastors of Christ's Church. For these two Rules are given us even by the Ancients; 1. That Peter left his Innocency here∣ditary as well as his Seat; and that he which hath not the one as well as the other, is not Peter's Successor. 2. That it is not the Chair, but the Doctrine that maketh a Bishop. Now, 3. add but Paul's Rule in this Matter, 1 Tim. 3. and Titus 1. and then I am bold to affirm, That many Popes of Rome were not the true Successors of Peter in Pastoral Autho∣rity. For I find it laid to the charge of divers Popes, that they were Drunkards, Whoremongers, Theeves, given more to War than Christ; rooted in unspeakable Sin; furious Men, prophane Scoffers of Christ; incestuous Persons, Murderers, poysoners of their own Parents and Kin∣dred; open Sodomites or Buggerers; Blasphemers, incorrigible Here∣ticks, Enchanters; Callers upon the Devil to help them to play at Dice; Drinkers of the Devil's Health, and Traitors to Princes. These things are so notorious and evidently true of the Popes of Rome, as that the Pa∣pists do not deny them. T. B. End to Controversie, and the Author of the Seven Queries, as you may see in part before. Yea, Bernard was not a little moved with the wickedness of the Popes of Rome, when he called them, Tyrants, Defrauders, Raveners, Traytors, Darkness of the World, Wolves and Devils. And, can we think that Succession to be good which is derived from such? I need say no more. See, for the proof of all that I have said, these Books; Fox, Act. & Mon. Willit's Synops. Prideaux's Introduct.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Luke 12. 51, 52, 53.
• * 1.2

  Mat. 10. 34, 35. Luke. 21. 16. 1 Cor. 7. 11, 13, 15, 21, 22, 23.
• * 1.3

  Mat. 3. 9.
• * 1.4

  2 Cor. 5. 16, 17, 18.
• * 1.5

  Gal. 3. 2, 6, 29.
• * 1.6

  Acts 10. 35. Rom. 9. 6, 7, 8.
• * 1.7

  Rom. 5. 16, 18.
• * 1.8

  Acts 2. 38. to 41.
• * 1.9

  Fab. Chron. 4th Part. Yet this Eusebius doth seem to contradict.
• * 1.10

  Willit Synop. Papis.
• * 1.11

  Jerom in Ep. ad Rom.