6. Orall Tradition hath deceived I. There was no certame way for the third age to know the Do&rines of the second. ib. Inftances given of mens mifunderftanding the Doarine of the precedent Age. Sect. 14. The words of our predeceffors may be remem bred and the fence perverted. Sect.15. 4. Some ages were horribly ignorant and careleffe Exemplified in the tenth Age. Sect. 16,17,18. And few Writers Sea.19. Chriftians might knowingly recede from the Doctrines of their Ancestors. 1. From Gods juft judg ment: Selt.21. Because they did believe their predeceffors erred. Sec.22. 3. Eminent perfons might corrupt the Doctrine received from their Anceftors and did fo. Sect.23, Exemplified in a forgery of the Popes. ib. This way of Tradition difproved by the practice of the Church of Rome which intro. duceth Doctrines, not defcending by Tradition but new. Sect. 24. Exemplified in two Doctrines СНА Р. 6. ibid. cially confidered and their argument thence confured. 1. Chrifts Miracles prove Romes Fallibility. Sect.12 Miracles are not fimply and univerfally to be believed. Proved by Arguments.Sect. 13, 14,15,16,17,18 3. Miracles onely prove the veri ty of the Doctrine not the Infallibility of the perfon. Sect.19 Miracles do not alwayes prove the verity of a Doctrine, for they may be, and have beene tdone by Heathens and Here icks Which is acknowledged by the 22 learned Papifts. Sect. 20. 5. Miracles are pleaded by the Romanifts either inpertinently or falfely. Sact.21. 6. Proteftants may plead Miracles as well as Papifts. Sect. A briefe recapitulation of the feverall pretenfions and refolutions of Faith among the Romanifts. Sect. 23 Another plea from Gods pro: vidence, and the fuppofed neceffity of a living infal. lible judge, Sect. 25, 26. 27. Of the Solidity of the Proteftants Foundation of Faith. The Proteftants have a folid foun dation of Faith in the Scrip tures the Papifts themselves be ing judges. Sect.1. 3. 3. Their Learned men acknowledg That the Scripture is, and may be known to be the word of God without the Churches Teftimony and by its own light. Sect. 2. 2. That the Books of Scripture are not corrupted in effentiall and neceffary points. Sect.3. That the fence of Scripture in things neceflary may be un derstood. Sect.4. Except: Proteftants build upon au humane Tranfiation anfwered. §.5,6,7,8. Proteftants freed from the pretended circle of proving Scripture by the spirit, and the fpirit by the Scripture. Sect.9. 1 The The APPENDIX. He occafion of it. pag. 1. The occafion of Everards pretended converfion to Popery 5. The Argument which perverted him, viz.that a Proteftant cannot be infallibly affured of the truth of Chriftian Religion: confidered and examined. p.8. to the 12. Of the Doctrine of Infallibility as ftated by Mr Creffy. Papifts and Proteftants grant that fuch a Doctrine ought to have the greatest evidence that fuch things can bear, Whether the Doctrine of Infalli. bility be evidently proved. The negative defended. 12 14. 15 1. Because it is not evident to 30. lity. Other confiderations against ing fallibility. 1. The Texts and arguments al ledged, either prove nothing or more then Mr. Crefy would have. 33. 2. If a Pope and Councell toge ther were infallible, yet now they have no infallibility in the Church of Rome. ib. A Character of the laft Pope drawn by a Papift, and the Popes confeffion that he never ftudied Divinity." 34. The grounds of the Faith of Proteftants ftated, and the preten ded differences among Pro teftants reconciled: pag. 36. to.45. 45. Captain Everarde arguments ac 47. 2. Some books of Scripture are loft. 23 3. 3. From the promifes of Infalli. bility made to the Church. pag.25 to 30 4. No unity without Infallibi ར.. 52. 52. A rule must be plain but Scripture is darke. 2 Pet. 3. 16. Vindicated. Severall particulars wherein the Scripture is faid to be darke, confidered. P.71 ture were written upon parti cular occafions Rushworth's two great and applauded arguments in his DiaJogues refuted. Mr The first taken from the great uncertainty and corruption of the Texts in our Bibles. P.75 to 8z The second from the Methods of Lawes and Law-givers. p. 82. white's argument, viz. That Scripture was not Written about the prefent Controverfies, confidered and answered. p.88 The Scriptures autority and fuf ficiency, argued onely from ..one Text 2 Tim.3.15, 16. Vindicated from diverfe exceptions of Captain Everard, Mr Creffy, and Mr white 1 192. ad finem. The Authors distance from the Prefs hath Pag. 3. 1. 14. blot out the first is, p. 24. 1. 12. read Succeflors, p 31. 1. 15, for and r. bad, p. 41. 1. 33. for aliis r. alii, p. 54. 1. 1. r. declamatorio, p.60,1.27.5. alit & pasfcit, p. 80. 1.35. after fanita adde anima, p. 84.1.32. r. epis, p. 88. 1. 20. r. Proverb. 16. 10, p. 89. 1. 30. г. 1 Cor. 3. p. 98. 1. s. r. Hof. z. p. 103. 1, 28, г.lix bac 3. P. 104.1..31. for fec. 23. r. 19. p. 108. l. 31. г.nullâ, p. 118. 1. laft r. coram, p. 120. I. 4. г. x' a'yatoì, p. 149. 1. laft r. Chriftianorum, p177-1. 3. 5. unquestionable, p.186. 1.3 13 r.volumus, p.187.1.17.5. part of, p. 191. 1. 31. r. accepiffe, p. 201. 1. antepen: blot out out non, p. 206. 1. 16.1.thefe, p: 207.1. 32. r. had, p. 215. 1. last r. f. 533. P. 217.1,21. r. judgments, p. 223. 1. 27, s. are not, p. 151. 1-9.5. עמורי Appendix. p. 29. I. 31. for ufuvers x. ufurpers, p. 31. l. 15. r. or worldly, p. 45. 1. 10, for to r. in, p. 60. 1. 27. r. Church, p. 71. for as r. and, p. 79. 1. 30 r. confultors, p. 90. 1. so, г. the opinion. |