LI Papifts profefs to refolve their Faith in to, and to ground it upon the Churches infallible Teftimony and supreme Authrity. But when they come to explicate what they mean by the Church, and on what account they ground their Faith upon her, then they fall into diverfe opinions. By the Church fome underftand the ancient Church, whofe Teftimony is expreffed in the writings of the Fathers; others, the prefent Church, whofe living Teftimony, and Authority they say is fufficiens without any further enquirie: and this prefent Church too they cannot yet agree what it is: Some say the Pope, others ageneral Councel, and others the Pope and a Councell to gether. Nor are they leffe at variance about the grounds on which they build the Churches Authority-This fome lay in the Teftimenie of Scripture, others in the Authority of the Fathers,others in universal oral Tradition, others in the motives of credibility (as we shall fee in the proceffe of this diScourfe. My purpose is to difcover the rottenneffe of these fevral foundations as they make use of them, and to shew that they have no folid foundation for their Faith in any of thefe recited particulars: and for more orderly proceeding I Shalt lay down fix propofitions.

I That a Papiffs faith bath no folid foundation in the authoritie and infallibilitie of the Pope. 2. Nor in the fcria psures according to their principles. 3. Nor in the author

rity of Fathers. 4. Nor in the Infallibility of the Church and Councels. 5. Nor in unwritten Tradition, and the authority of the prefent Church. 6. Nor in the motives of Credibility. Of which in order.

Set. 1.

CHAP. 1.

of the Popes Authority and Infallibility.

THe

TH He Popes infallible authority is in it self of no Propof. I validity, and is a meer nullity further then it is established or corroborated by the reft. This needs no great proofe. For if I fhould ask any Papift why he rather reHes upon the decifions of the Bishop of Rome, then the Bishop of York, the onely plea is,that the Bishop of Rome is St. Peters fucceffor, and established by God in thofe royalties and jurifdictions, which St. Peter is fuppofed to have been invefted with. But if I aske how this appears, what proofes and evidences there are of this affertion fupon which bangs the whole Mafs, and Fabrick of Popery.) There is no man fo grofly abfurd to believe himfelf,or to affirm, that I am bound to believe this barely upon the Popes affertion, that he is Peters facceffor. But for the proof of this, I am by the learned Romaniit referred unto fome paffages of Scripture, as,Thou art Peter,Feed my sheep &c. unto Tradition and the Teftimony of Fatbers and acts of Councels, that have either devolved this power upon or acknowledged and confirmed it in the Bishops of Rome: from whence it undeniably fol. lowes,that the Popes,or naked affirmation of his own Authority(though delivered ex Cathedra, and with. all imaginable formalities) is of no weight in it felf, and hath no strength, nor vertue in it further then it is fup ported and demonstrated from fuch Teltimonies of fcrip

ture

ptures, Fathers,or Councels. Which will further appear from this confideration: That upon fuppofition, that the Scripture had been filent as to Peters fupremacy, and the Fathers and Councels had faid nothing concerning the fucceffion of the Bifhops of Rome in St. Peter's chaire, but had afcribed the fame priviledges, which they are pretended to attribute to the Pope, to the Bishop of Antioch. I fay upon this fuppofition, the Pope's pretences would have been adjudged extremely prefùmptuous, and wholly ridiculous. From this then we have gained thus much: That the Popes Authority and Infallibility being the thing in queftion, and but a fuperftruction upon those other fore mentioned foundations; and not 'auTOST, Or credible for it self, that is, it is not in it felf a fufficient foundation for a Papifts faith.And fo that must be quitted as impertinent to the prefent enquiry, and we muft go to the other particulars, and examine whether a Papift without any reference to or dependance upon the Popes Authority or Infallibility can find a folid foundation for his faith either in Scriptures, Fathers, Councels, Tradition, or the motives of Credibility: And if I can fhew, that the Papifts according to their own principles cannot have a folid and fure ground for their faith in any of the now mentioned particulars, or if I can fhew that all their other pretenfions according to the principles of the most and learned'ft Papiits, depend upon this Authority of the Pope, and without it are no folid foundation of faith, that Scriptures, Fathers, Councels and Tradition, are not conclufive nor obliging to me to believe, without the Popes Authority and interpretation (which I think will be made evident in the following difcourfes) then I may truely conclude that they have no foundation for their faith. Therefore 1 paffe on to the fecond head.

B 2.

CHAP.

CHAP. II.

of the Authority of Scripture according to
Romish Principles:

Prop.2.
Sect.-1,

Hat the Scripture in it felfe, without the In terpretation, Teftimonie, and Authority of the Church, is not a fufficient foundation of Faith for private Chriftians, according to the Doctrine of the Romanifts: This is fo plaine, fo often afferted by them, fo univerfally owned, fo vehemently urged in all their Treatifes, that if there were rot an horrible perverfneffe and tergiverfation in that fort of men (who indeed by the badneffe of their ca ufe are forced to fay and unfay, give and recall, affirme and denie the fame things as occafion requires, and the ftrength of an Argument forceth them:) I might fuperfede from any further paine or trouble therein; I fhall therefore onely obferve two Principles of the Popifh Creed, either of which (and much more both put together) do plainly, and undeniably evince, that according to their Hypothefes the Scripture in it felfe is no folid ground nor foundation of a Chriftian Faith. 1. That a Chriftian cannot know, and is not bound to believe any, or all of the Books of Scripture to be the Word of God, without the Churches Witneffe and Authority. 2. That the fence of Scripture is fo obfcure and ambiguous in the Articles of Faith, that a Chriftian cannot discover it without the Churches interpretation.

§. 2. For the first of thefe, it may fuffice at present to mention two or three paffages out of their approved Writers. Baily the Jefuite, in his Catechifme of Controverfies made by the command of the Archbishop of

Burdeaux,