2 The Teftimonies of thofe Authors are undoubtedly fufficient for that end for which I alledge them, which is to shew the falfeness of those doctrines, and the weakness of those ar 7. guments which are disbelieved and difproved by their own learnedest and ftouteft Champions, by which it may appear to all impartial perfons that it is not the ignorance nor prejudice of Proteftants, (as fome of their Writers have the Effrontery to affert) which makes them reject the Popish Tenets, but meerly the want of Truth and evidence therein, confeffed (as you will fee all along in the following Treatife) by their own Brethren, and that it is a defperate madness in any Papift to hazard his everlasting concernments upon fuch principles as fo many of their acuteft Scholars do publickly disavow: And that this is really the cafe of the unhappy Romanist I refer thee to the fubfequent Difcourfe.
Scripture is no fufficient founda- tion of Faith to a Papist ac- cording to their principles pro- ved out of their prime Authors. Sect. 1.2,3,4. The Scriptures alledged by them for the Popes infallible Aus thority examined in generall Sect. 5. 6,
In particular Matth.16.18. Thou art Peter
Sec. 7,8,9. John 21.Feed my sheep.9.10. Luk 22. I have prayed, &c. S.11.
Of the Infallible Authority of the Fathers
Afferted by the Papifts. Sect. 1. Difproved,
Becaufe Infallibility is the Churches prerogative. Set 4. 3. The Fathers difclaime it. §.5. Exc. But Fathers where they agree are Infallible Answered.
S.6.p.46. 4. The Papifts themselves dif own the Infallibility of the Fathers though confenting. S. 7, 8, 9.
cels, they might do it upon the account of Scripture not Tradition. §. 6. 3. It doth not appear that the Fathers believed the Infalli bility of Councels.
Proved by answering the arguments of Bellarm. and 8. Clara.
§. 7, 8, 9, 10. Of St Auflins judgment. S. 10, 11. 4. It appears that the Fathers believed the Fallibility of Councels. S. 12. 2. There is no foundation for this Infallibility in Scripture. Proved in generall. 3.13. In particular by the exami- nation of the Texts urged for it.
1. That they be generall.S.23. 2. That they have the confent and approbation of the whole Church. S. 247 9.24r 3. That they be rightly con- ftituted and ordered and guided by honesty, piety, and love to Truth. 9.25. Exe. Pope, Councels, Fathers, Scripture conjoyned make the Church Infallible.
Refured, 1. Hereby they both fettle the Proteftant foundation of Faith and overthrow their own.§.2, 3. 2. This makes Orall Tradition more certain then writing gainst the judgment of God and all men. §.4.pag. 140. 3. Errors may come in and have come in to the Church under pretence of Tradition. §.5.
An examination of that eva- 4. Traditionary proofs difowned, fion and pretended agreement. By the Prophets and Jewes
6. Orall Tradition hath deceived the Romanifts themselves. Sect.10.pag. 158. Exc. They are not decei- ved in great points de fide Anfwered. ibid. Though experience fufficient. ly proves the deceit of this gument, yet it is particularly thewed how error might creep in this way. Sect.11. It might creep in by degrees. Sect.1. 1. Chriftians might mistake the mind of their Predecef- fors. Sect.13.pag.166. 1. There was no certame way for the third age to know the Do&rines of the fecond. ib. Inftances given of mens mifunderftanding the Do- Arine of the precedent Age. Sect. 14.
3. The words of our pre- deceffors may be remem- bred and the fence per- verted. Sect.15. 4. Some ages were horribly ignorant and careleffe
3. Eminent perfons might corrupt the Doctrine re- ceived from their Ance- ftors and did fo. Sect.23, Exemplified in a forgery of the Popes. ib. This way of Tradition difpro ved by the practice of the Church of Rome which intro duceth Doctrines, not defcen- ding by Tradition but new. Sect. 24.
Exemplified in two Doctrines The immaculate conception of the Bleffed Virgin. And the Canon of the Scripture.
cially confidered and their at- gument thence confured. 1. Chrifts Miracles prove Romes Fallibility. Sect.11 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 ry of the Doctrine not the In- fallibility 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 learned Papifts. Sect. 2. 5. Miracles are pleaded by the Romanifts either im- pertinently or falfely. Sact.21. 6. Proteftants may plead Mi- racles as well as Papifts.
Sect. 22 A briefe recapitulation of the feverall pretenfions and re- folutions 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 Protestants Foundation of Faith. The Proteftants have a folid foun dation of Faith in the Scrip tures the Papifts themselves be ing judges. Sest.1. 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 Tranfla- tion anfwered. §.5,6,7,8. Proteftants freed from the pre- tended circle of proving Scrip- ture by the fpirit, and the fpi- rit by the Scripture. Sect.9.
« PreviousContinue » |