stoutly cast down before. It is this, "That we must take the words. from Christ and his gospel; but the proper sense, which the words of themselves cannot carry with them, our own reason must make out.” If it be the doctrine of Protestants which he intendeth in these words, it is most disadvantageously and uncandidly represented; which becomes not an ingenious and learned person. This is that which Protestants affirm:-religion is revealed in the Scripture; that revelation is delivered and contained in propositions of truth. Of the sense of those words that carry their sense with them, reason judgeth, and must do so, or we are brutes; and that every one's reason, so far as his concernment lies in what is proposed to him.

Neither doth this at all exclude the ministry or authority of the church, both which are intrusted with it by Christ, to propose the rules contained in his word unto rational creatures, that they may understand, believe, love, and obey them. To cast out this use of reason, with pretence of an ancient sense of the words, which yet we know they have not about them, is as vain as any thing in this section, and that is vain enough. If any such ancient sense can be made out or produced,—that is, a meaning of any text that was known to be so from their explication who gave that text,--it is by reason to be acquiesced in; neither is this to make a man a bishop, much less a chief bishop, to himself. I never heard that it was the office of a bishop to know, believe, or understand for any man but for himself. It is his office, indeed, to instruct and teach men; but they are to learn and understand for themselves, and so to use their reason in their learning. Nor doth the variableness of men's thoughts and reasonings infer any variableness in religion to follow; whose stability and sameness depends on its first revelation, not our manner of reception. Nor doth any thing asserted by Protestants, about the use of reason in the business of religion interfere with the rule of the apostle about "captivating our understandings to the obedience of faith," much less to his assertion that Christians "walk by faith, and not by sight," seeing that without it we can do neither the one nor the other: for I can neither submit to the truth of things to be believed, nor live upon them or according unto them, unless I understand the propositions wherein they are expressed; which is the work we assign to reason. For those who would resolve their faith into reason, we confess that they overthrow not only faith but reason itself; there being nothing more irrational than that belief should be the product of reason, being properly an assent resolved into authority; which, if not divine, is so also. I shall, then, desire no more of our author nor his readers as to this section but only this, that they would believe that no Protestant is at all concerned in it; and so I shall not farther interpose as to any contentment they may find in its review or perusal.

CHAPTER VIII.

Jews' objections.

THE title of this third chapter is, that "No religion, or sect, or way, hath any advantage over another, nor all of them over Popery." To this we excepted before, in general, that that way which hath the truth with it, hath, in that wherein it hath the truth, the advantage against all others. Truth turns the scales in this business, wherever and with whomsoever it be found; and if it lie in any way distant from Popery, it gives all the advantage against it that need be desired. And with this only inquiry, " With whom the truth abides?" is this disquisition, "What ways in religion have advantage against others?" to be resolved. But this course and procedure, for some reasons which he knows, and we may easily guess at, our author liked not; and it is now too late for us to walk in any path but what he has trodden before us, though it seem rather a maze than a way for travellers to walk in that would all pass on in their journey.

His first section is entitled, "Light and Spirit," the pretence whereof he treats after his manner, and cashiers from giving any such advantage as is inquired after. But neither yet are we arrived to any concernment of Protestants. That which they plead as their advantage is not the empty names of light and spirit, but the truth of Christ revealed in the Scripture. I know there are not a few who have impertinently used these good words and Scripture expressions, which yet ought no more to be scoffed at by others than abused by them; but that any have made the plea here pretended as to their settlement in religion, I know not. The truth is, if they have, it is no other upon the matter but what our author calls them unto. To a naked "Credo" he would reduce them; and that differs only from what seems to be the mind of them that plead light and spirit [in this], that he would have them resolve their faith irrationally into the authority of the church; they pretend to do it into the Scripture.

But what he aims to bring men unto, he justifies from the examples of Christians in ancient times, "who had to deal with Jews and Pagans, whose disputes were rational and weighty, and puzzled the wisest of the clergy to answer. So that after all their ratiocination ended, whether it sufficed or no, they still concluded with this one word, 'Credo;' which in logic and philosophy was a weak answer, but in religion the best and only one to be made." What could be spoken more untruly, more contumeliously, or more to the reproach of Christian religion, I cannot imagine. It is true, indeed, that as to the resolution, satisfaction, and settlement of their own souls, Christians always built their faith [on], and resolved it into, the authority of God in his word; but that they opposed their naked "Credo" to

the disputes of Jews or Pagans, or rested in that for a solution of their objections, is heavenly-wide,—as far from truth is oupavós sor' àñò yaíns. I wonder any man who hath ever seen, or almost heard, of the disputes and discourses of Justin Martyr, Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Theophilus Antiochenus, Athenagoras, Tertullian, Lactantius, Chrysostom, Austin, Theodoret, and innumerable others, proving the faith of the Christian religion against the Jews from Scripture, and the reasonableness of it against the Pagans, with the folly and foppery of theirs, could on any account be induced to cast out such a reproach against them. But it seems "jacta est alea," and we must go on; and, therefore, to carry on the design of bringing us all to a naked "Credo," resolved into the authority of the present church,—a thing never heard of, spoken of, nor, that it appears, dreamed of, by any of the ancient Christians, the objections of the Jews against the Christian religion are brought on the stage, and an inquiry made how they can be satisfactorily answered. His words are, p. 142, "In any age of the Christian church a Jew might say thus to the Christians then living, 'Your Lord and Master was born a Jew, and under the jurisdiction of the high priests; these he opposed, and taught a religion contrary to Moses (otherwise how comes there to be a faction?) But how could he justly do it? no human power is of force against God's, who spake (as you also grant) by Moses and the prophets; and divine power it could not be, for God is not contrary to himself. And although your Lord might say, as indeed he did, that Moses spake of him as of a prophet to come, greater than himself, yet who shall judge that such a thing was meant of his person? For since that prophet is neither specified by his name nor characteristical properties' (well said, Jew), 'who could say it was he more than any other to come? And if there were a greater to come than Moses were, surely born a Jew, he would, being come into the world, rather exalt that law to more ample glory than diminish it. And if you will farther contest that such a prophet was to abrogate the first law and bring in a new one, who shall judge in this case?-the whole church of the Hebrews, who never dreamed of any such thing? or one member thereof who was born a subject to their judgments?' This," saith he, "is the great oecumenical difficulty; and he that in any age of Christianity could either answer it, or find any bulwark to set against it, so that it should do no harm, would easily either salve or prevent all other difficulties," etc.

The difficulty, as is evident, lay in this, that the authority and judgment of the whole church of the Hebrews lay against Christ and the gospel. That church, when Christ conversed on earth, was a true church of God, the only church on earth, and had been so for two thousand years, without interruption in itself, without competition from any other. It had its high priest, confessedly instituted by

God himself, in an orderly succession to those days. The interpreta tion of Scripture, it pretended, was trusted with it alone; and traditions they had good store, whose original they pleaded from Moses himself, directing them in that interpretation. Christ and his apostles, whom they looked upon as poor, ignorant, contemptible persons, came and preached a doctrine which that church determined utterly contrary to the Scripture and their traditions. What shall now be answered to their authority, which was unquestionably all that ever was, or shall be, intrusted with any church on the earth? Our au- · thor tells us that this great "argument of the Jews could not be any way warded or put by, but by recourse unto the church's infallibility," p. 146; which," sit verbo venia," is so ridiculous a pretence, as I wonder how any block in his way could cause him to stumble upon it. What church, I pray?—the church of Christians? When that argument was first used by the Jews against Christ himself, it was not yet founded; and if an absolute infallibility be supposed in the church, without respect to her adherence to the rule of infallibility, I dare boldly pronounce that argument indissoluble, and that all Christian religion must be thereon discarded. If the Jewish church,— which had at that day as great church power and prerogative as any church hath or can have,-were infallible in her judgment that she made of Christ and his doctrine, there remains nothing but that we renounce both him and it, and turn either Jews or Pagans, as we were of old. Here, then, by our author's confession, lies a plain judgment and definition of the only church of God in the world against Christ and his doctrine; and it is certainly incumbent on us to see how it may be waived. And this, I suppose, we cannot better be instructed in than by considering what was answered unto it by Christ himself, his apostles, and those that succeeded them in the profession of the faith of the gospel. 1. For Christ himself: it is certain he pleaded his miracles, the works which he wrought, and the doctrine that he revealed; but withal, as to the Jews, with whom he had to do, he pleads the Scriptures, Moses and the prophets, and offers himself and his doctrine to be tried, to stand or fall by their verdict, John v. 39, 46; Matt. xxii. 43; Luke xxiv. 27. I say, besides the testimony of his works and doctrine, to their authority of the church he opposeth that of the Scripture, which he knew the other ought to give place unto. And it is most vainly pretended by our author, in the behalf of the Jews, that the Messiah, or great prophet to come, was not in the Scripture specified by such characteristical properties as made it evident that Jesus was the Messiah; all the descriptions given of the one, and they innumerable, undeniably centring in the other. 2. The same course steered the apostle Peter, Acts ii. iii., and expressly in his second epistle, chap. i. 17-19; and Paul, Acts xiii. 16, 17, etc. And of Apollos, who openly disputed with the Jews upon this argu

ment, it is said that he "mightily convinced the Jews, publicly, showing by the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ," Acts xviii. 28. And Paul persuaded the Jews concerning Jesus at Rome, "both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening," Acts xxviii. 23; concerning which labour and disputation the censure of our author, p. 149, is very remarkable. "There can be no hope," saith he, " of satisfying a querent, or convincing an opponent, in any point of Christianity, unless he will submit to the splendour of Christ's authority in his own person, and the church descended from him; which I take to be the reason why some of the Jews in Rome, when St Paul laboured so much to persuade Christ out of Moses and the prophets, believed in him, and some did not." Both the coherence of the words and design of the preface, and his whole scope, manifest his meaning to be, "That no more believed on him, or that some disbelieved," notwithstanding all the pains he took with them.

And what was the reason of this failure? Why, St Paul fixed on an unsuitable means of persuading them,—namely, Moses and the prophets,-when he should have made use of the authority of the church. Vain and bold man, that dares oppose his prejudices to the Spirit and wisdom of Christ in that great and holy apostle, and that in a way and work wherein he had the express pattern and example of his Master! If this be the spirit that rules in the Roman synagogue, that so puffs up men in their fleshly minds as to make them think themselves wiser than Christ and his apostles, I doubt not but men will every day find cause to rejoice that it is cast out of them, and be watchful that it returns to possess them no more. But this is that which galls the man: the difficulty which he proposeth as insoluble by any ways but an acquiescing in the authority of the present church, he finds assoiled in Scripture on other principles. This makes him fall foul on St Paul, whom he finds most frequent in answering it from Scripture; not considering that at the same time he accuseth St Peter of the like folly, though he pretend for him a greater reverence. However, this may be said in defence of St Paul, that by his arguments about Christ and the gospel from Moses and the prophets, many thousands of Jews, all the world over, were converted to the faith; when it is hard to meet with an instance of one in an age that will any way take notice of the authority of the Roman church. But to return. This was the constant way used by the apostles of answering that great difficulty pleaded by our author from the authority of the Hebrew church: They called the Jews to the Scripture, the plain texts and contexts of Moses and the prophets, opposing them to all their church's real or pretended authority, and all her interpretations pretended to be received by tradition from of old: so fixing this for a perpetual standing rule to all generations,-That the doctrine of the church is to be examined by the Scripture;