The Introduction .

WHile so many Learned Pens are employed to such excellent purpose , in answering the Writings , and confuting the Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome , I cannot but think it a very useful Work to give some plain Directions to those , who are Vnlearned , who have neither Time to Read , nor Money to Buy , nor Abilities to Vnderstand more Learned Controversies . Our Divines indeed have taken great care to write short Tracts , with great Plainness and Perspicuity , and with as little unnecessary shew of Learning as may be , to fit them the better for Vnlearned Readers ; and they have had , by the blessing of God , wonderful Success ; Popery was never so generally understood , as it is at this day ; the meanest Tradesmen can now dispute against Popery with sufficient Skill and Judgment , and need not be beholding to the prejudices of Education to secure them : and therefore my business shall not be at present downright to state any one Controversie between us , and the Church of Rome , but to direct our people , how to secure themselves against the Attaques of our Roman Adversaries , to check their conferring and disputing humour , or to baffle them . I shall reduce all into as plain a Method and as short a compass as I can , and show .

First , How to stop them at the beginning of their Dispute .

Secondly , Give some Rules about the Topicks , from which they dispute , such as Reason , Scripture , and the Authority of the Ancient Fathers and Writers of the Church .

Thirdly , How to answer some of their most popular pretences , such as the Vncertainty of the Protestant Religion , the Misrepresentations of Popery , &c.

Fourthly , To give some short Directions as to particular Controversies .

CHAP. I. How Protestants may prevent Disputing with Papists .

NOw I do not by this mean , that they should always avoid their company , and run away from them where-ever they meet them , which is very ill Manners ; though it is not adviseable neither to court such acquaintance , or to make them our Intimates , when neither the obligations of Nature , nor other Civil or Political Reasons make it necessary ; for Conversation many times prevails more than Arguments can do , and will as soon corrupt Mens Faith , as Manners .

Nor do I mean , that Protestants should obstinately refuse to discourse with Papists when they meet them ; to hear what they have to say for themselves , and to give a Reason for their own Faith ; this is not agreeable to Protestant Principles , to prove all things , and to hold fast that which is good ; and yet this ought to be done with great prudence and caution too ; for there are a sort of perverse Disputers , who are to be avoided according to the Apostolick Precept , if any man teach otherwise and consent not to wholsome words , even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ , and to the Doctrine which is according to godliness , he is proud , knowing nothing , but doting about questions and strife of words , whereof cometh envy , strife , railings , evil surmizing , perverse disputing of men of corrupt minds , and destitute of the truth , supposing , that gain is godliness , from such withdraw thy self , 1 Tim. 6. 3 , 4 , 5.

Men of weak judgments , and who are not skilled in the Laws of Disputation , may easily be imposed on by cunning Sophisters , and such as lie in wait to deceive : The Church of Rome is very sensible of this , and therefore will not suffer her people to dispute their Religion , or to read Heretical Books , nay not so much as to look into the Bible itself ; but though we allow all this to our people , as that which God not only allows , but requires , and which all considering men will allow themselves , whoever forbids it ; yet we do not allow them to be perpetual Seekers , to be always doubtful of their Religion , to be like children tossed too and fro with every wind of Doctrine . And therefore the liberty of Judging and Inquiring , which we allow , is only that they may understand the true Reasons of their Faith , and be well grounded in it , which Men may be , who are not able to answer every cavilling objection ; but it is an abuse of this liberty , when men have itching ears , and hearken after all Novelties of Opinions , and grow wanton and Seeptical Disputers ; and therefore it is very consistent with that liberty , which Protestants allow , to advise Christians to be very careful , how they , hearken to such , as Preach any new Doctrine , which they have not been taught , that the weak in Faith and knowledge , should not venture upon doubtful Disputations : that they should not be hasty to question , what they have believed , nor to give heed to new Doctrines ; that they should not rely on their own understanding in these matters , but when they meet with any difficulties , should consult their Spiritual Guides , not to be finally determined by their Authority , as the Church of Rome requires , but to hear their Reasons , and what Answers they can give to such difficulties , as they themselves cannot answer : with such cautions as these , we dare venture our people to hear and read , and enquire , as much as they please , and have not found yet , that our Roman Adversaries have been able to make any great impression upon such honest and prudent Inquirers . But that which I intend at present is of another nature , to teach our people a way to make these men sick of Disputing themselves , to make them leave off those Impertinent and noisy squabbles , with which they disturb all company they come into : and this is no such mighty secret neither , as may be expected , but is very plain and obvious at the first proposal .

For when you are assaulted by such troublesome Disputers , only ask them , whether they will allow you to judge for yourselves in matters of Religion ; if they will not , why do they trouble you with Disputing ? for the end of Disputing is to convince , and you cannot be convinced , unless you may judge too : would they Dispute with a stone , that can neither hear , nor understand ? or would they make a Speech to convince a Horse , that he is out of his way , and must take another Road , if he would return home ? and do they not talk to as little purpose , and spend their breath as vain upon a man , who can hear indeed , and understand somewhat , but must not follow his own understanding ? if they say , that you must judge for your selves , ask them , whether this be the Doctrine of their Church , that private men may judge for themselves ? whether this do not resolve our Faith into a private Spirit , which they say , is the Protestant Heresie , and the foundation of Protestant uncertainty ? if they once open this gap to Hereticks into the Church , there is great danger , that more will run out at it , than will come in ; and it is well if the Church itself staies behind ; for what becomes of the Church of Rome , if all their glorious Cant of the Infallibility of Church , and Popes , and General Councils , be at last resolved into a private Spirit ! while these men go about to Dispute Hereticks into their Church , they unavoidably give up the Cause of the Church , and of Infallibility , which is the way to Dispute a great many good Catholicks out of it , who are kept there only by the power of a blind and implicite Faith. Here then let our Protestant fix his foot , and not stir an inch , till they disown Infallibility , and confess , that every man can and must judge for himself in matters of Religion , according to the proofs , that are offered to him . For will a wise man Dispute with one , who , he knows , banters him all the while ? who appeals to his private judgment ( as all men do , who dispute with one another ) and at the same time cries down this private Spirit as the cause of Schisms , and Heresies , and Blasphemies , and every thing that is evil : no man of any spirit , but will scorn to dispute with one , who intends only to put a trick on him , and to out wit him if he can ; and in truth it is no more to endeavour to dispute a man into Popery , when the Fundamental Principle of Popery is , that we must not Reason and Dispute , but believe ; that we must take our Faith upon the Authority of the Church , without asking any questions about it . There are two or three things , which may be answered to this .

1. That though Disputing be not a proper way for Papists to take , yet it is the only way , that can be taken with Protestants , who are all for Disputing , and will believe nothing without a Reason , and therefore Protestants ought not to blame Papists for Disputing , unless they would be good Catholicks without it . Now in answer to this , I have something to say to Papists , and something to Protestants .

1. As for the Papists , what necessity soever they be in of Disputing , I desire to know with what face they can reproach Protestants with adhering to their own private judgments , when they themselves are such zealous Disputants , which is an Appeal to every private mans judgment : if ever they make any Converts , they must be beholden to mens private judgments for it , for I think men cannot change their Opinions without exercising a private judgment about it ; and I suppose when they dispute with men to make them Papists , they intend to convert them by their own private judgments . Now what difference is there between mens using their private judgments to turn Papists , or to turn Protestants : one indeed may be false , and the other true , but private judgment is private judgment still , and if it be so great a fault for men to use their own private judgments , it is as great a fault in a Papist , as it is in a Protestant . So that at least as to Converts , the Church of Rome has no advantage in this particular over Protestant Churches ; some by the exercise of their own Reason and judgment go over to the Church of Rome , and some to the Church of England ; some are disputed into Popery , and some into Protestantism : and therefore for the sake of their beloved Converts , and their beloved Disputations , they ought to be more favourable to a private Spirit : The truth is , by Disputing with Hereticks , they give up their Cause , and confess , that in all Disputes of Religion , there lies an Appeal to every mans private Judgment and Conscience ; and should they lose this point by their Disputing , all the Converts they make , cannot recompence such a loss .

2. As for Protestants , though they have no other way to satisfie themselves , or to convince others , but by Reason and Discourse ; yet this is no reason why they should Dispute with those men who disown the judgment of Reason , as a private Spirit . For why should I Dispute with any man who uses such Arguments to convince me , as he himself does not think a sufficient Reason of Faith ? Ask then one of these Disputers , who alledges Scripture , Reason , and Antiquity , to prove any Doctrines of the Romish Faith ; Do you , Sir , believe Transubstantiation , the Worship of Images , the Invocation of Saints , Purgatory , Mass for the Dead , upon the bare Authority of these Scriptures and Fathers , you have produced for them ? If these Doctrines were not Defined by the Church , should you think these Arguments sufficient to prove them ? or could you suppose , the Church had Defined the contrary , should you think the Arguments good still ? In short , can any Reason , any Authority of Scripture , or Fathers , be any Foundation for a Divine Faith , but onely the Authority of the Church ? He that says , they can , is no Papist ; and he that says , they cannot , confesses , that he uses such Arguments , as he himself does not build his Faith upon : If you will believe them , you may ; but though you do , you are no sound Believer , without resolving your Faith solely into the Authority of the Church . And , I think , he must love Disputing well , who will Dispute with such men as these ; and those must have a good degree of assurance , who will be troublesome with their Disputes , after such a discovery . The end of Disputing , I suppose , is either toconvince , or to be convinced : but should you Answer and baffle all such a man's Arguments , if he be modest , it may be he may blush a little , but is not to be moved ; for his Faith , after all , is not built upon these Arguments , but upon Church-Authority : and it is to no purpose for you to suffer your self to be convinced by these Arguments , for it will not make you a good Catholick , without resolving your Faith wholly into the Authority of the Church . It is certainly a very surprizing thing for a Protestant to be disputed into Popery ; for as soon as he is converted , he must renounce the very means of his Conversion : He must use his own Judgment to turn Papist , and as soon as he is turned , he must renounce his own Judgment , and confess it to be of no Authority : Now though it may be such a private Judgment as leads a man to Popery , may as well deserve to be renounced , as any ; yet it is an odd kind of contradiction , to renounce our own private Reason and Judgment , and yet to own our Conversion ; methinks such men should renounce their Conversion too at the same time they renounce their Reason : for if their Conversion be good , it is a sign their Judgment was so ; but if their Judgment be not fit to be trusted , methinks this should make them question their Conversion : And therefore they should either maintain the Reputation of their Judgment and Conversion together , and then they cannot be good Catholicks , while they adhere to their own Judgment , or they should renounce them both together : nay , they must not onely renounce their own Judgments , as soon as they are Converted , but they must renounce the Authority and Validity of those very Arguments whereby they are Converted , whether from Scripture , Reason , or Fathers ; they must confess , that these Arguments are not a sufficient Foundation for a Divine Faith , without the Authority of the Church ; for it is a dangerous thing to allow any Authority to Scripture or Fathers , without the Church , for that may make men Hereticks ; and yet , I suppose , when Hereticks are converted by these Arguments , it must be the force of the Arguments , and not the Authority of the Church , which converts them , unless they believed the Authority of the Church before they were converted ; and that was a little to early for it . Now methinks when Protestants turn Papists , as they pretend , from the conviction of their own Reason and Judgment , and as soon as they are converted , are taught , that there is no relying upon their own Judgment , and that the Reasons whereby they were converted , are not good in themselves without Church Authority ; if it were possible for them ever to use their Reason more after such a change , it would certainly make them disown their Conversion ; which , it seems , was the effect of a very fallible Judgment , and very uncertain and inauthentick Reasons .

2. There is another pretence for these Disputes , which may seem to answer this difficulty , that the intention of these Disputes , is onely to lead you to the Infallible Church , and set you upon a Rock ; and then it is very natural to renounce your own Judgment , when you have an Infallible Guide . Our own Judgment then must bring us to the Infallible Guide , and when we have found him , we have no farther use for our own Judgment . I answer ,

1. Should we grant this , it puts an end to all the particular Disputes of Religion between us and the Church of Rome : We may Dispute on about an Infallible Judge , but they cannot , with any sence , Dispute with us about the particular Articles of Faith , such as Transubstantiation , the Sacrifice of the Mass , the Worship of Images , and the like ; for these are to be learnt onely from the Church , and cannot be proved by Scripture or Fathers , without the Authority of the Church . And if they would confess this , they would save us , and themselves , a great deal of trouble : For why should they be at the trouble of writing such Arguments , or we to answer them , when they themselves confess , that the Arguments are not good , unless they be confirmed by the Churches Authority ? I confess , I have often wondered to see such Volumes of Controversies written by the Roman Divines , for I could never imagine to what end they are writ . Is not their Faith wholly resolved into the Authority of the Church ? what need Reasons and Arguments then , which cannot work Faith in us ? Either these Arguments are sufficient to confirm the Articles of their Faith without the Authority of the Church , or they are not : If they are , then there is no need of Infallibility , since all the Articles of Faith are confirmed by such Reasons , as are a sufficient Foundation for Faith without it : And thus they give up all their Arguments for an Infallible Judge , from the necessity of such a Judge . If they be not , of what use are they ? does the Decision of the Church need to be confirmed by such Arguments ? If they are not good Arguments without the Authority of the Church , they can no more give Authority to the Church , than an Infallible Church can want any Authority , but it s own : Are they to convince Hereticks ? but how if Hereticks should confute them ? If they be not in themselves good Arguments , they may be confuted ; and they know , by sad experience , that there are Hereticks , as they call them , who have Wit and Learning enough to confute , what is to be confuted ; and if they fall into such hands ( which has been their hard fate of late ) they are sure to be confuted : And , I doubt then , they had better have let them alone ; for the Catholick Cause may suffer much in the Opinion of the World , when all their Arguments are confuted . All then that they can design by such Arguments , is to impose upon the Weak and Ignorant , when Learned Men are out of the way , which is no very commendable design ; and that design will be spoiled too , if Unlearned Men do but learn to ask them the Question , Whether they build their Faith upon such Arguments ? For then they must either quit the Authority of their Church , or the strength of their Arguments : The first reduces them to Protestant Uncertainty , for then they have no other Foundation for their Faith , than Protestants have ; which resolves it self into the Reasons and Arguments of Faith : The second puts an end to Disputing about these matters ; for no man needs answer any Arguments , which the Disputant himself acknowledges not to be good .

2. There is nothing left then for Dis●utation , and the Exercise of our private Reason and Judgment , but the inquiry after an Infallible Judge . And here also , before you dispute , it will be necessary to ask them , Whether the belief of an Infallible Judge , must be resolved into every mans private Judgment ? whether it be not necessary to believe this with a Divine-Faith ? and whether there can be any Divine Faith without an Infallible Judge ? Certainly if ever it be necessary to have an Infallible Faith , it is so to be infallibly assured of an Infallible Judge , because this is the Foundation of all the rest : for though the Judge be Infallible , if I be not infallibly assured of this , I can never arrive to Infallibility in any thing ; for I cannot be more certain , that his Determinations are Infallible , than I am , that he himself is Infallible ; and if I have but a Moral assurance of this , I can be but morally assured of the rest ; for the Building cannot be more firm than the Foundation is : and thus there is an end to all the Roman Pretences to Infallibility . Now if we must believe the Infallibility of the Church , or Pope of Rome , with an Infallible Faith , there is an end of Disputing ; for no Reasons or Arguments , not the Authority of the Scripture it self , without an Infallible Judge , can beget an Infallible Faith , according to the Roman Doctors : For this reason they charge the Protestant Faith with Uncertainty , and will not allow it to be a Divine , but Humane Faith , though it is built upon the firmest Reasons , the best Authority , and the most express Scripture that can be had for any thing ; but because we do not pretend to rely on the Authority of a Living Infallible Judge , therefore , forsooth , our Faith is Uncertain , Humane , and Fallible : and this , they say , makes an Infallible Judge necessary , because without him we have no Infallible Certainty of any thing .

Now if nothi●● but an Infallible Judge can be the Foundation of an Infallible Faith , then it is to no purpose to dispute about such a Judge ; for Disputing is nothing else but weighing Reason against Reason , and Argument against Argument , or Scripture against the pretence of Scripture ; but whoever gets the better of it this way , no Reasons , or Arguments , or Scripture Proofs can beget an Infallible Certainty , which is necessary in this case ; and therefore this is all lost labour , and they do but put a trick upon you , when they pretend to dispute you into the belief of an Infallible Judge ; for they themselves know , and must confess , if you ask them , that the best and must convincing Arguments cannot give us an Infallible assurance of this matter ; and yet unless we are infallibly assured of an infallible Judge , it is all to no purpose .

3. I can think but of one thing more , that can be said in this cause , viz. that it is manifestly unreasonable not to grant to the Church of Rome , that Liberty which all men and Churches challenge , to dispute for themselves , and against their Adversaries : for when two men , or two Churches differ in matters of Faith , there is no other way to end the Controversie , but by disputing it out ; whereas this Discourse will not allow them to dispute , nor any Protestants to dispute with them .

In answer to this , I grant , that the Charge is in a great measure true , and shews the absurdity of that Church and Religion , but does not disprove the reasonableness of this method . If men will embrace such a Religion as will not admit of disputing , it is their own and their Religions fault , not the fault of those men who will not dispute with them . Now a Religion which leaves no room for the exercise of Reason and private Judgment , leaves no place for Disputes neither ; for how shall men dispute , who must not use their own Reason and Judgment ? They ought not to dispute themselves , if they be true to their own Principles ; and no man ought to dispute with them , who will not be laugh'd at by them , and by all the World : For to dispute without Reason , is a new way of disputing , ( though it is the only thing that can justifie the Romanists , and our late Disputants have been very careful to observe it ; ) and to dispute with Reason , is to use our private Reason in Religion , which is Protestant Heresie . Infallible men ought not to dispute , for that is to quit their Infallibility ; and fallible men are very unwise to dispute with them , because no good can come of it : for Reason can never confute their infallible Adversaries , nor make themselves infallible Believers .

But for the better understanding of this , I have two things to say . 1. That Papists may dispute against Protestant Heresies , as they call them , but cannot dispute for their own Religion . 2. Protestants may dispute against Popish Doctrines , and to vindicate their own Faith , but cannot reasonably be disputed into Popery .

1. That Papists may dispute against Protestant Heresies , but cannot dispute for their own Religion : And the reason of this difference is plain , because Protestants allow of Reason and Discourse in matters of Religion ; and therefore they may be confuted , if good Reasons can be produced against them : And here the Romanists may try their skill ; but the Religion of Rome is not founded on Reason , but on Infallibility ; and therefore is not the subject of a Dispute , because the truth and certainty of those Doctrines , is not resolved into the Reasons of them . They ought to alledge no other ground of their Faith , but the Infallibility of the Church ; and they ought not to dispute about this neither : but those who will believe it may , and those who won't , may let it alone , because Infallibility is not to be proved by Reason ; for Reason proves nothing infallibly , and therefore cannot give us an infallible certainty of the Churches Infallibility .

But you will say , if they have other Arguments for the truth of their Faith , besides the Infallibility of the Church , why may they not urge those other Reasons and Arguments to convince those , who will not own the Churches Infallibility ? I answer , Because whatever other Reasons they have , their Faith is not resolved into them ; and therefore it is not honest in them to urge those for the Reasons of their Faith , which are not the Reasons why they believed : For let me ask them , Suppose they may have very good Reasons for some of their Doctrines , do they believe them meerly because they are reasonable ? If they say they do , then they believe just as Protestants believe ; and there is no need of Infallibility , when men believe nothing but what is reasonable ; and it is pity that so good a thing as Infallibility should serve only to support an unreasonable Faith.

Let me ask them again , Can they have a sufficient certainty , that these Reasons are good , without an infallible Judge ? If they can , then the Faith of Protestants , which is grounded upon rational Evidences , may be very certain too , though it be not infallible ; if they cannot , then their Reasons are none , since the very certainty of them is resolved into an infallible Authority ; and therefore they are no certain Reasons , that is , not such as a man may rely on , when they are separated from Infallibility ; and consequently they ought never to be urged apart from Infallibility , because they themselves do not think them good Reasons , that is , not a sufficient foundation of Faith alone : and then I know not why they should be urged at all ; for Infallibility can stand by it self , without the support of any Reasons .

I ask them again , Would they reject those Doctrines which they think they can prove by such evident Reasons , did they see those Reasons as evidently confuted ? If they would not , then it is plain , they do not believe them for the sake of those Reasons ; for if they did , they would reject them , when all their Reasons were confuted : They only impose upon the World with a pretence and flourish of Reason , and set up a Man of Straw for Protestants to shoot at ; but whatever becomes comes of their Reasons , they have a safe Retreat into Infallibility .

If they believed any Doctrine because it is reasonable , if they will be true to themselves , they ought to reject all Doctrines , which are unreasonable , or contrary to Sense and Reason : He who believes for the sake of Reason , can never believe against it ; for if Reason makes a thing credible , then what is unreasonable is incredible too ; and we may as reasonably dis-believe what is confirmed by Reason , as believe what Reason contradicts : and therefore it is not very modest to hear men talk of Reason in any case , who can believe such an absurd and unreasonable Doctrine as Transubstantiation .

Now whatever Opinion Protestants have of Reason , Papists ought not to pretend to it , because their Faith has nothing to do with Reason : it is a Reproach to an infallible Church and infallible Faith , to need the supports of Reasons . And the truth is , those who will have nothing to do with Reason , Reason commonly has as little to do with them , but owes them a Shame , whenever they pretend to her ; and therefore they had as good let her alone .

2. Protestants may dispute against Popish Doctrines , and to vindicate their own Faith , but they cannot reasonably be disputed into Popery . When Papists alledge Scripture , Reason , or humane Authority for any Doctrines of their Religion , Protestants , who allow of the use of Reason in Religion , may examine and confute them : when Papists dispute against Protestant Doctrines , Protestants are concerned to vindicate their own Faith , or to renounce it ; but if a Protestant understands himself and his own Principles , all the Disputes in the World can never make him a Papist . For to be a Papist does not signifie meerly to believe Transubstantiation , or the Worship of Saints and Images , and such-like Popish Doctrines ; but to resolve our Faith into the Infallible Authority of the Church , and to believe whatever the Church believes , and for no other reason , but because the Church teaches it . This is the peculiar and distinguishing Character of the Church of Rome , which divides it from all other Churches and Sects of Christians ; and therefore our late Popish Writers are certainly in the right , to endeavour to bring the whole Controversie to this issue ; not to dispute about particular Doctrines , which follow on course , when once you believe the Church to be Infallible ; but to perswade men that the Church is Infallible , and that the Church of Rome is that Infallible Church . Now I say , no understanding Protestant can be disputed into this kind of Popery , and that for two plain Reasons . 1. Because no Arguments or Disputations can give me an infallible certainty of the Infallibility of the Church . 2. Because it is impossible by Reason to prove , that men must not use their own Reason and Judgment in matters of Religion .

1. No Arguments can give me an infallible certainty of the Infallibility of the Church . The great Motive to any man to forsake the other Communions of Christians , and to go over to the Church of Rome , is to attain an Infallibility in Faith , which is a wonderful good thing , if it were to be had ; but though the Church of Rome were Infallible , and I should be convinced that there were some reason to think so , yet unless I can be infallibly assured of it , my Faith is still as fallible as the Protestant Faith is ; and I am no nearer to Infallibility in the Church of Rome , than in the Church of England . For as I observed before , unless I can have an infallible certainty of the Infallibility of the Church , I can have no Infallibility at all : Though the Church were infallible in all her Decrees , I can never be infallibly certain of the truth of her Decrees , unless I be infallibly certain that she is Infallible . It is a known Rule in Logic , that the Conclusion must follow the weaker part , and therefore it is impossible to infer an infallible Faith from the fallible Belief of the Churches Infallibility .

And yet the best Reasons in the World ( which is all that disputing can do , to offer Reasons for our Faith ) cannot give us an infallible certainty , because Reason it self is not an infallible Principle , at least the Church of Rome dares not own , that any mans private Reason and Judgment is infallible ; for then Protestants may set up for Infallibility as well as Papists . No man , by Reason and Argument , can arrive at a greater Certainty than Protestants may have , and yet no man can arrive at greater certainty in the way of disputing , than Reason and Argument can give him ; and then a Popish Convert , who is reasoned into the belief of Infallibility , though he has changed his Opinion , yet has no more Infallibility now , than he had when he was a Protestant . Protestants , without an Infallible Church , may have all the Certainty that Reason and Argument can give them ; and a Convert has no greater Certainty ( if he have no more than what Disputing could give him ) for his Infallible Church : And how is it possible then , that a reasonable man can be disputed out of the Church of England into the Church of Rome , upon such vain hopes of a more infallible certainty ? for let him go where he will , if he be lead to Rome it self by his own fallible Reason and Judgment , ( which is the only Guide he has in disputing ) he will be the same fallible Creature that ever he was . But to represent this the more familiarly , let us hear a short Conference between a sturdy Protestant , and a new Convert .

Prot.

O , my old Friend ! I am glad to meet you , for I have longed to know what change you find in your self , since you are become an Infallible Believer .

Conv.

I find , Sir , what I expected , very great ease and satisfaction of mind , since I am delivered from all doubtful Disputes in such an important concernment as the salvation of my Soul , and have a firm and sure Rock to trust to , such an Infallible Church as cannot err it self , nor mis-guide me .

Prot.

This , I confess , is a very great advantage ; and therefore as we have been formerly of the same Church and Communion , I would be glad to keep you company also in so advantageous a change . Pray therefore tell me , how you came to be so infallibly perswaded of the Infallibility of your Church .

Conv.

With all my heart ; and I shall be very glad of such company : and indeed there are such powerful Reasons for it , as I am sure must convince so free and ingenuous a mind , as you always carry about with you . For Christ has promised to build his Church upon St. Peter , and that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it —

Prot.

Hold , good Sir ! Reason ! Are you got no farther than Reason yet ? Will Reason ever make a man infallible ? I have considered all the Reasons that are used to this purpose , and know what to say to them , if that were our business ; and the truth is , I have a great deal of unanswerable Reason , to stay where I am ; and am a little surprized , to think that you , or any man , should leave the Church of England for want of Reason , or go to the Church of Rome for it : and therefore pray tell me the Secret , for there must be something else to make Converts , besides Reason .

Conv.

Then I perceive you take me for a Knave , who have changed my Religion for base secular Ends , without Reason .

Prot.

You know that best ; but that was not my meaning : but the reason of my Question was , because you changed for an infallible Faith. Now if you rely still upon Reason , I don't see how your Faith is more infallible than mine : for I am as confident , as you can be , that I have as good Reasons for my Faith , and in my opinion much better , than you have for yours .

Conv.

I beg your pardon for that : I rely upon the Authority of an Infallible Church , you trust to your private Reason .

Prot.

And I beg your pardon , Sir : for I rely on the Authority of Scripture , which is as infallible as your Church .

Conv.

But you rely on your own Reason for the Authority of Scripture , and those particular Doctrines you draw from it .

Prot.

And you rely on your own Reason and Judgment , for the Infallibility of your Church , and consequently of all the Doctrines of it ; and therefore your infallible Faith is as much resolved into your own fallible Judgment , as the Protestant Faith is : so that the difference between us is not , that your Faith is infallible , and ours fallible ; for they are both alike , call it what you will , fallible or infallible ; but the Dispute is , whether your Reason and Judgment , or ours , be best : and therefore if you think your Reason better than ours , you did well to change ; but if you changed your Church , hoping to grow more infallible by it , you were miserably mistaken , and may return to us again : for we have more rational Certainty than you have , and you have no more infallible Certainty than we . You think you are reasonably assured that your Church is infallible , and then you take up your Religion upon trust from your Church , without , and many times against Sence and Reason , according as it happens ; so that you have onely a general assurance of the Infallibility of your Church , and that no greater than Protestants pretend to in other cases , viz. the certainty of Reason and Argument ; but have not so much as a rational assurance of the truth of your particular Doctrines : that if you be mistaken about the Infallibility of your Church , you must be miserably mistaken about every thing else , which you have no other evidence for . But now we are in general assured , that the Scriptures are the Word of God , and in particular are assured , that the Faith , which we profess , is agreeable to Scripture , or expresly contained in it , and does not contradict either Sence or Reason , nor any other Principle of Knowledge . So that we have as much assurance of every Article of our Faith , as you have of the Infallibility of your Church ; and therefore have at least double and trible the assurance that you have . But if you know the Reasons of your Conversion , I desire to know of you , What made you think , that you wanted Certainty in the Church of England ?

Conv.

Because with you every man is left to his own private Reason and Judgment , the effects of which , are very visible in that infinite variety of Sects among you , which shews what an uncertain thing your Reason is , that so few judge alike of the power and validity of the same Reasons .

Prot.

And were you not sensible at the same time , that you were left to your own Reason and Judgment , when you turned Papist ? Are you not sensible , that men do as little agree about your Reasons for Infallibility , as they do about any Protestant Reasons ? Do not I know the Reasons alledged by you for the Infallibility of your Church , as well as you do ? And do we not still differ about them ? And is not this as much an Argument of the uncertainty of those Reasons , which make you a Papist , that they cannot make me a Papist , as the dissent of Protestants in other matters , is of the uncertainty of their Reasons ? Could you indeed be infallibly assured of the Infallibility of your Church , I grant you would have the advantage of us , but while you found your belief of Infallibility upon such an uncertain Principle , as you think Reason is ; if certainty had been your onely aim , you might as well have continued in the Church of England , as have gone over to Rome .

This abundantly shews what a ridiculous thing it is for a Protestant to be disputed out of his Church and Religion , upon a pretence of more infallible certainty in the Church of Rome : Were they indeed inspired with an infallible assurance , that the Church of Rome is Infallible , there might be some pretence for this ; but an Infallibility which has no better foundation than mens private Reason , and private Judgment , is no Infallibility , but has all the same uncertainties , which they charge on the Protestant Faith , and a great deal more , because it is not founded upon such great and certain Reasons .

The plain truth is , men may be taught from their Infancy to believe the Church Infallible , and when they are grown up , may take it , without examination , for a first and self-evident Principle , and think this an infallible Faith : but men who understand the difference between the evidence of Reason and Infallibility , can never found an infallible Faith on Reason , nor think that a man who is reasoned into the belief of the Infallibility of the Church , is more infallible in his Faith , than a Protestant is : And such a man will see no reason to quit the Church of England , for the sake of an infallible Faith ; for though they had an infallible Guide , yet Reason cannot give them an infallible assurance of it , but can rise no higher at most than a Protestant certainty .

2. It is impossible also by Reason to prove , that men must not use their own Reason and Judgment in matters of Religion . If any man should attempt to perswade you of this , ask him , Why then he goes about to dispute with you about Religion ? whether men can dispute without using their own Reason and Judgment ? whether they can be convinced without it ? whether his offering to dispute with you against the use of your Reason , does not prove him ridiculous and absurd ? For if you must not use your Reason , why does he appeal to your Reason ? And whether you should not be as ridiculous and absurd as he , if by his Reasons and Arguments you should be perswaded to condemn the use of Reason in Religion ? Which would be in the same act to do , what you condemn , to use your Reason when you condemn it . If you must not use your Reason and private Judgment , then you must not by any Reasons be perswaded to condemn the use of Reason ; for to condemn is an act of Judgment , which you must not use in matters of Religion . So that this is a point which no man can dispute against , and which no man can be convinced of by disputing , without the reproach of self-contradiction .

This is an honourable way of silencing these troublesome and clamorous Disputants , to let them see , that their Principles will not allow of Disputing , and that some of their Fundamental Doctrines , which they impose upon the World , are a direct contradiction to all Disputes , for the very admitting of a Dispute , confutes them ; and the meanest man may quickly say more in this Cause , than their greatest Disputants can answer .