Is the C/mrcl> of Rome atnte C/mrcb 1 ~ell:. 2. W/,et/,erwe mt~ft efteemt!Je Church of Rome a tme Clmrc/, ~ Andin w);at Jimje fol/le 'Divines affirm it, a11d fome dory it. See·Mr. nw- wAnt of fomc eafie difl:inguiOling hath made that fcem a Conrroverfiehen, which is fo plain, ro'ft.'s nnd that it can hardly be any at all to Protd\ants, if the qucJlion had been bur truly flared. ~e·t~ht:~~~~~~. R:mcrr~bcr therefore t.hat by a~ G_hurcb_is meant, no~ a mcer company of ChtiHians, any how rdateJ to each o;;ner ; bur afuc~ety cm;ld\wg of an Ecchfi:dllcal Head :1nd Body, (uch as we eaUa Political fociety. 2 , And that we fpcak not of an Accidental Hc.u:l ( fuch as the King is, blco~..ufc. he Governcth them[up modo by the (word) ; for that is not an EJJeftti~l Conftitutivt Pur : But of a Gmjfitutivt E~ chfiajiic,(l Head and bad)'. 3· That the qudlion is Jlor, fVIuthcr the Cburcb fl[ Rome, be a Part of the Church, but n·lmhi.'r it be a true Churcb. And now I anfwcr; · I· To affirm the Church of Rome to be [tbe Catbolick._ or Vniverftd ChurchJ is more than ro affirni it to be [a truzC!Jtholick._ Church J that is, a true p.1rt ot rhe Catholick Church :, :~nd is as much as to f.-:y chat ic is the whole and only Cburch, and that there is no dther; which is odious fallhood and u!urp.~t<nn, and fiJnder againfl all other Churchc:s. · 2. The Cb:1rchof Kome isC!1 called in the: ~dlion, as it is a Policy or Church in a general fenfe; And the meaning of the ~c:fiion is, Whether H be a Divine or a HHm:mt or VitJbolical Policy; A L"" ful Church. 3· ThCCburcbof Rome is confidered, z, Formally, as a Churcb or Policy, 2. A1atcrially as the fin– [,Ul.:u pnCons ate qualified. lr is the Form thit denorninareth•. Theref~rc the ~eftion mufi be taken of the Roman_Policy, or of the CburciJ of Rl}mt as fuch ; thatJs, A1 if~ one Ruler pretending to be the Vtcariom CM{fiiutive Governh;g flead of all Cbrijls Vijible. Cburcb OJJ tartb, aml the Body which owmth him in tli? 1\.ef.ttion· 4 . T h<rcf,,c I conclude (and fo do all Protd\ants) that this Policy or Church of Rome is no ir•rr 'cluuch of Ch1 ijtJ [JijliJHJii1g or approbation, but a Humane jinji1l Policy formed by the Temptation ut ;:,~t;;.h thr Prince of Pride, deceit and darkncfs. The proof of which is the maacr of whole loads of Protelbnt VVrit ings. And indeed the proof of their Policy being incumbent on them((:Jves, they fail in ir, and are flill fain to fly topretended falfc: Tradition for proof, in which tht Sophiflers know that either they muf\: be Judges themldves,and it mufi go for truth becaule they fay it; or elfe that if they c;.n cany the Conlrovetfie into a Thicket or \Voo? of Fathers and Churcl} Hifiory 1 at leafi they c:m confcund rhc ignorant, and evade rhemfe!ves. Of this fee my Di[put. wirh John[on, and my Key["' C,Jtbolick.J, C."c. 5· The B 01op of rhe Engli01 P•pills, Smith called BiOwp of Chalctdon in his Survey, cap. 5· faith, a:::;=- [ 1 o~fit fufficet!J that the Bij11op of Rome U St. Perers fucceffour; and thH aU tilt Fathtrl trjiifie, 4nd aU the C.;tbJlitk._ Clmrcb btllrvctb: But r:dmhtr it be jure D1vinoor humano H no point of faith. J The • S;·1tn. Fid.i. like h.lth ¥- Davrnp:~rt Clllcci Fr.mf:. a SanUa Clarfi morclargely. Br this let the Reader judge whc-– . ·' thcr we need mort wmds to prove (heit Church to be [uch as Chrtfi never injlitufed, when the be. Jicf of their Divine right, is no part of their own f1irh. . 6. If the Church ot Rome in ics formal Po~icy_be ?ut ot. hztmant infiituti~n, it is I· V'meceff.~ry ta falvation ; 2· Vnl.Jwful : B;:caufc they that full mfl!tuted 1t had no Authonry fo to do, and were Ufurptrs. 1-'or either the makers of it were thcmfdves aChurch or no Church. If no Church, they coukl not lawfully make a Chmch. lntideis or ·Heathens are not to be our Chutch-rnakers; If a ChurciJ, then there was a Church before the Church of Rome, and that of another form. And if that former fmm were of Chrifts inHitution, man might not change it ; If nor, who made that form~ And fo on. . 7 • Our Divin~s thetefore that fay that the Church of Rome is a True Clmrcb, though corrupt, do not fpeak of it formally as to the Papal Policy or Head!hip, but m.rerially, •· That all Papifis that are viiible Cluilliar.s art vifible Parts of the univcrfal Church. 2. That their particular Congregati– OnS contidered abltra6tedly from the Roman Headfhip may Oe true particular Churches, though cor~ rupt: which yet being the only difficulcy !hall be rhe matrcr of our next enquiry.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=