Now then I demand, what is that whereby I do assent unto this proposition (in case it were true) That the Church cannot err? The Church it self it cannot be, since nothing bears record of it self, and if it should, the proof would be more ridiculous then the opinion, being but idem per idem, and petitio quaestionis. Above the Church a Priori there is not any light but the scriptures and the spirit. Therefore needs by these must I assent unto that one proposition at least. And if unto that by these, why then by the same light may I not assent unto all other divine truths, since evident it is, that the same light which enables me rightly to apprehend one object, is sufficient also to any other, for which a lesser light then that is presumed to suffice? So then a true faith hath its evidence and certainty grounded upon the Authority of the word, as the instrument, and of the spirit of God raising and quickening the soul to attend, and acknowledge ⟨p. 520⟩the things therein revealed, and to set to its own seal unto the truth and goodness of them. But how do I know either this word to be Gods Word, or this spirit to be Gods spirit, since there are sundry false and lying spirits? I answer, first, ad Hominem, there are many particular Churches, and Bishops, which take themselves to be equally with Rome members, and Bishops of the universal Church. How shall it invincibly appear to my Conscience that other Churches and Bishops all, save this only, do or may err? and that this, which will have me to believe her infallibility, is not her self an heretical and revolted Church? This is a question controverted. By what authority shall it be decided, or into what principles á priori resolved? and how shall the evidence of those principles appear to the Conscience? That the Popes are successors of Peter in his see of Rome, that they are doctrinal as well as personal successors, that Peter did there sit as moderator of the Catholic Church, that his infallibility should not stick to his chair at Antioch, as well as to that at Rome; that Christ gave him a principality, jurisdiction, and Apostleship to have to himself over all others, and to leave to his successors; who though otherwise private men, and not any of the pen-men of the holy Ghost, should yet have after him a power over those Apostles who survived Peter (as it is manifest John did.)
Now then I demand, what is that whereby I doe assent unto this proposition (in case it were true) That the Church cannot erre? The Church it selfe it cannot be, since nothing beares record of it selfe, and if it should, the proofe would be more ridiculous then the opinion, being but idem peridem, and petitio quaestionis. Above the Church a Priori there is not any light but the scriptures and the spirit. Therefore needs by these must I assent unto that one proposition at least. And if unto that by these, why then by the same light may I not assent unto all other divine truths, since evident it is, that the same light which enables me rightly to apprehend one object, is sufficient also to any other, for which a lesser light then that is presumed to suffice? So then a true faith hath its evidence and certainty grounded upon the Authoritie of the word, as the instrument, and of the spirit of God raising and quickning the soule to attend, and acknowledge ⟨p. 520⟩the things therein revealed, and to set to its owne seale unto the truth and goodnesse of them. But how doe I know either this word to be Gods Word, or this spirit to bee Gods spirit, since there are sundry false and lying spirits? I answer, first, ad Hominem, there are many particular Churches, and Bishops, which take themselves to be equally with Rome members, and Bishops of the universall Church. How shall it invincibly appeare to my Conscience that other Churches and Bishops all, save this onely, doe or may erre? and that this, which will have me to beleeve her infallibility, is not her selfe an hereticall and revolted Church? This is a question controuerted. By what autority shall it be decided, or into what principles á priori resolved? and how shall the evidence of those principles appeare to the Conscience? That the Popes are successors of Peter in his see of Rome, that they are doctrinall as wel as personall successours, that Peter did there sit as moderator of the Catholike Church, that his infallibility should not stick to his chaire at Antioch, as well as to that at Rome; that Christ gave him a principality, jurisdiction, and Apostleship to have to himselfe over all others, and to leave to his successors; who though otherwise privat men, and not any of the pen-men of the holy Ghost, should yet have after him a power over those Apostles who survivd Peter (as it is manifest Iohn did.)
