Full and easy satisfaction which is the true and safe religion in a conference…Full and easie satisfaction which is the true and safe religion in a conference…

R. Such Confusion may cheat a heedless hearer: But any one that will take heed, may quickly perceive, that you here fraudulently play with the ambiguity of the word [Religion] and quite turn to another question. For you now speak of subjective Religion, that is, of the Acts and habits of the person: whereas we are disputing only of objective Religion, which is Gods Revelation and our Rule. If I understand any Texts of Scripture amiss, my faith is so far defective in my selves ▪ But Gods Word, which is my Rule, is never the more imperfect. I pray you consider how justly you have spoken. 1. Is a mans Act of faith, Gods Word or Revelation? 2. What need you dispute of the Protestants Religion, if we have as many Religions as persons? For it is as certain that we have as many degrees of our understanding many Texts of Scripture? 3. Would not this prove also as many Religions as persons among your selves? Is it not most certain that no two Papists in the world, have just the same sense or conceptions of the Scriptures and Councils in each particular. The Law of God is my only Religion, objectively, as how disputed of: If I mistake any essential part of it, so as to deny it, I am personally a Heretic: If I mistake any Integral part, I so far err from the Rule of my Religion or faith. But I still profess, that I take Gods Word or Law only for my sure unchangeable Rule or objective Religion, and I am daily learning to understand it better, and as soon as I see my error I will reform it, and blame my self and not my Rule. And I think you will say the same of your Rule and of your personal errors.

R. Such Confusion may cheat a heedless hearer: But any one that will take heed, may quickly perceive, that you here fraudulently play with the ambiguity of the word [Religion] and quite turn to another question. For you now speak of subjective Religion, that is, of the Acts and habits of the person: whereas we are disputing only of objective Religion, which is Gods Revelation and our Rule. If I understand any Texts of Scripture amiss, my faith is so far defective in my selfs ▪ But Gods Word, which is my Rule, is never the more imperfect. I pray you consider how justly you have spoken. 1. Is a mans Act of faith, Gods Word or Revelation? 2. What need you dispute of the Protestants Religion, if we have as many Religions as persons? For it is as certain that we have as many degrees of our understanding many Texts of Scripture? 3. Would not this prove also as many Religions as persons among your selves? Is it not most certain that no two Papists in the world, have just the same sense or conceptions of the Scriptures and Councils in each particular. The Law of God is my only Religion, objectively, as how disputed of: If I mistake any essential part of it, so as to deny it, I am personally a Heretick: If I mistake any Integral part, I so far err from the Rule of my Religion or faith. But I still profess, that I take Gods Word or Law only for my sure unchangeable Rule or objective Religion, and I am daily learning to understand it better, and as soon as I see my error I will reform it, and blame my self and not my Rule. And I think you will say the same of your Rule and of your personal errors.