Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors][ocr errors]

manner, although they be agreed in the generall, that the Church must judge, so long as they continue at variance, and have implacable feuds about it who this Church is, they are not one whic nearer agreement. Suppofe in former cimes a question arose berween the Senate and Emperor of Rome, which was the cbief power, and fuo preme Judge of all Civill controversies; and the Subjects of the Empire were highly divided about it, fome ascribing the supremacy to the Emperor, ochers to the Senate: would Mr Crely say, 'the Romanes are agreed, because they were all united in this, That the supreme power was to end all their controversies ? Suppose 3 or 4 Competra tors to a Kingdome, and the inhabitants chereof feveTally divided about them; will any man on this fide BedJam say,chey are all agreed, because agreed in this gencrall

, that the King mult rule? or must not every man acknowledg, that this agreement fignifies but little, so long as they differ about this which is chat King? And is roc this che very case of the Church of Rome? They are all agreed(forsooth)nor one dissenting voice among them:buc how? why they are agrécd char che Church is the judge.

But Mr Crely the great difference is behind, who is -the Church the Pope , say fome, a Councel fay'others, a Pope and Councel together say a third fort, (and the

(feverall assertors of each opinion confuce and destroy the rest, and all that hold any of these opinions are univina Jally effeemeid sood. Carbolicks, faith Mr Crelj in his Append. ch.4. num. 7.

So they are good Catholicks thac dispute down the Pope's Infallibilicy, and they good Catholicks too that dispute down the infallibility of Councels, and (for the reason before mentioned), they good Catholicks, that reje&t the Infallibility of both together. And therefore 'uis a molt impudent position, which Mr. Crelly layes down, ( and the Papilts are obliged to own,) That the ductrine of the Churches Infallibility is so evident,

sbar

that the Protestants, are inexcusable, and dutoratargraui; that do not receive it:: out of thy mouth will God judge thee, thou unfaithfull Servant, who hast thus ex pressed thy self in another place; to my understanding there is fome inhum anity in urging Protestants to more then Catholicks will be abliged to , or to think that to Protestants prepellered with passion and partiality, that can be made evident, which is so far from being evident to fome Catholicks, that they'renounce its i Appendix to che Exomolagefis , cb.4. num.7. . ş. To this might be added, as a farther demonftration of the inevidence of this point even to the Romanists tbem. felves, chofe secret checks which they meet with from their own consciences in the assertion of this supposed In fallibility , discovered by their haldings, and corrections, and tergiversations, and self contradictions in explication of this new phænomenon: For however Mr Crefy mounts this Infallibility so high, tbac. it must not yield co Scrip ture it felf, yet both himself elfewhere, and their other Authors every where are contented with a far lower proporcion: Bellarmine whom Mr Crily recites and

ар. proves) in his comparison of the Infallibility of the Church and Scripture, gives che preħeminence to Scripture in five several respects. See Crelly feet. 2o ch.2I. Truth, and our abligation to believe it, is in an bigben' degree in Scripture, then in the decisions of the Church. Crely Appendix

, chap. 5.2.2, And this Infallibility of the Church, chough they will not fuffer us to call it humane and moral yep they dare not assert it to be Divine, buc onely after a sort, and in some manner. Divine, as the Author of Laud's labyrinth informes us. And this infalJibility they farther confeffe is not in way of immediate revelation or inspiration from God, but in the way of als gumencationjand discourse. And here too they are wonderful cautious for it is acknowledged by Bellarmine and

Stapleton

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

ů Stapleton, and fubscrib’d by Mr Crelly, Tha the Cburch

is fallible in the premises, but infallible in the conclufion.
Grolyubi fuprà, and feet.2, chap.3.2. and Append.chap.s.
Intberdecisions of the Church, the simple conclufion ducid d
is onely accounted infallibly true , nos so the Principl. s upon
which it depends, or reasons by which it is provid. Really
these Romilh Priests are admirable fellowes in all things:
Admirable Builders! Vitruvius himself might learn Ar.
chitecture from them, for they can ceach bim how to

build a solid and durable Edifice upon a rotten foundaçidi on. Admirable Logitians! Aristotle might go to School

to them and learn such Lessons as were above his appre. me benfion, for it is resolved, he must blot out his Axiomes, to Soxclmfeq Sequitur partem debiliorem, and, Non deber elle A plus in conclufione quàm in præmiffis, and Ex falfis nil nifi io falfum: The Colledge of Jefuites at Rome are ready to

make good the contrary against him, when Plato's great

year fhall bring him and them together upon the Stage. ] Admirable Divines, chat have ourdone their Lord and

Master, and in spight of wbatsoever is said by him Luk: 6.43,44 will

; if he please, maintain a dispute with him # upon chis Thesis, That: a corrupt tree can bring forik guod & fruit, and that of tbornes min may gather figs, and of a

Bramblebujh grapes: and this shall be not probibly defended, bot infalibly demonstrated." For it were a silly thing to think,, that they that are infallible Divines shogid be bur fallible Disputancs, But to return: The inevidence of this notion of the Churches Infallibility may fufficiently appear from MreCreļly's own expreflions, (which have been observed by others) who by the evic denceof the Truth was forced to chis acknowledgment, That Infallibility is an införınnate word, that Mr Chilling. worth bath.combated it with too great success, so that I could wish (saich he) the word were forgotten or at least laid by, whereas all, that understand any thing, know that it

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

was not the word, but the thing wbich he combated; and his arguneats were not nominal against the Title, but real against the thing it self. It is true, fince this pare Lage was published and caken notice of, Mr.Cressy Chaving doubciesle been feverely school'd by bis Superiors for luch a dangerous paffage ) "is grown more cautious, and hath stretched his wit and I fear his conscience too) to palliare bis assertion, and make an honourable retreat: and he honestly acquaints us with his design, i.e. being crafty to catch the Protestants mich guite.Sed 2.ch.21. He that reads the Appendix to che second Edicion of his Exomologesos, will easily difcern the trepidacions of a guilty conscience, wbilst sometimes you shall find him racicly denying the Churches Infallibility properly so called, and contencing himself with great Probability in the room of it: at ocher times you will meet bim crying up this infatJibility in expresse or equivalent terms, and in most places having no salvo for bimselt but this ; Thac his assertion, and the Proteftants difputation did proceed upon the mistaken notion of Infallibility, which the Protestants advanced to an higher pitch then ever the Church of Rome did, and so fought against an imagerbat chemselves bad ser up: which is lo notorious a falsehood, char is Mr.Creff's wit, and memory, and conscience had not all fais led him together, he could hardly have run into it, fince all Procestants of any note ever did, and particularly Mr. Chillingwrth doth difpuce against the Churches Infalli. bilicy, onely in that sense and degree which Mr. Cressy apon matureit advice in this second Edition bach chought fic to expresse in chefe words: That God will preserve bis Church in all truth, so as to secure all believers, that she can neither deccive them, nor be deceived her self. Sect.2. Chap. 21. Did ever any Protestant, that understood himself, or the point pretend to more? Not Mr.Chillingworth I am tyre. They all knew and granced, chaç absolute infallibi

lity was Gods Prerogative, and neither prétended by the Church of Rome, nor was that opinion by Protestants fastned upon chem: The onely question was wbecher God did vouchfafe fuch infallible guidance to the Church, that she could not erre in her decrees, and decisions; This Papists affirmed, and Protestants denied : and let me adde, that this Infallibility is as high as was ever ascribed to the Prophecs or Apostles and Penmen of the Holy Scripture: And although their infallibility be faid to be larger or greater extenfivè, because in them it reached to all sentences, and words, and Arguments, yer the Romanists themselves cannot say it is higher or greacer intensive, and the Articles of Faith or conclusive decifions decreed by Councels, are in their opinion as infallible, as the same are when they are laid down in che Scripture. This was the Notion Mr. Chillingworsh combaced against, with fo great successe as Cressy confeffeth,

The second Argument to prove the inevidence of this notion of the Churches infallibility, I fhall cake from the impercinency and feeblenesse of those crucches or reasons wherewith they indeavour to support it : l'observe the summe and strength of what he hath co say in this point is reducible to five heads.

The first and great presence is this, Take away Infallibility and you d:stroy all Authority; all Authority, that is not Infallible is meer Faktion and Rebellion, and Authority that reacherhonely to the outward appearance, or the purse Cressy Appen.ch.7.num.2. And elsewhere infallibility and Authority are in effect all one as applied to the Church, Ibid. c.5.4.14. And the assertions of the Churches Au

thority which are frequent in the Fachers Mr Crelly urJbimbiény seth as if they had been directly levelled at the Churches

infallibility, Exomolog. Seet-2.chap. 19. Nay, fo daring is this.man in his Argument, that not contented with bis

[ocr errors]

roll

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

own

« PreviousContinue »