A key for Catholics, to open the juggling of the Jesuits, and satisfy all…A key for Catholicks, to open the jugling of the Jesuits, and satisfie all…
A key for Catholics, to open the juggling of the Jesuits, and satisfy all that are but truly willing to understand, whether the cause of the Roman or reformed churches be of God ... containing some arguments by which the meanest may see the vanity of popery, and 40 detections of their fraud, with directions, and materials sufficient for the confutation of their voluminous deceits ... : the second part showeth (especially against the French and Grotians) that the Catholic Church is not united in any merely humane head, either Pope or council / by Richard Baxter, a Catholic Christian and Pastor of a church ...A key for Catholicks, to open the jugling of the Jesuits, and satisfie all that are but truly willing to understand, whether the cause of the Roman or reformed churches be of God ... containing some arguments by which the meanest may see the vanity of popery, and 40 detections of their fraud, with directions, and materials sufficient for the confutation of their voluminous deceits ... : the second part sheweth (especially against the French and Grotians) that the Catholick Church is not united in any meerly humane head, either Pope or council / by Richard Baxter, a Catholick Christian and Pastor of a church ...
Richard Baxter 1615–1691London: printed by R.W. for Nevil Simmons, 1659
[21], 26, [2], 460 p. · 204k words · Wing B1295 · ESTC R19360
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Argum. 11. If such a visible Head were essential to the Church, and so to our Christianity, then should we all be Baptized into the Pope or a General Council, as truly and necessarily as we are baptized into the Church. But we neither are nor ought to be so baptized into the Pope or a General Council; therefore they are not essential to the Church or our Christianity.
The Major (viz. the Consequence) is clear, and not denied by the Papists, who affirm that Baptism engageth the baptized to the Pope. He that is united to the body, is united to the head: he that is listed into the Army, is listed to and under the General. He that is entered into the Common-wealth, is engaged to the Sovereign thereof.
The Major (viz. the Consequence) is clear, and not denyed by the Papists, who affirm that Baptism engageth the baptized to the Pope. He that is united to the body, is united to the head: he that is listed into the Army, is listed to and under the General. He that is entred into the Common-wealth, is engaged to the Soveraign thereof.
But that we are not baptized to the Pope or a General Council, is proved, 1. Because neither the form of Baptism, nor any word in Scripture doth affirm such a thing. 2. No persons in Scripture times were so baptized: Men were baptized before there was a Pope at Rome, or a General Council. And afterward none were baptized to them, at least for many hundred years: otherwise then as they were entered into the particular Church of Rome, who were Inhabitants there. 3. Never any was baptized to Peter or Paul, or any of the Apostles saith Paul, 1 Cor. 1. 13. was Paul crucified for you, or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? They must be baptized into the name of no visible Head, but him that was crucified for them. 4. The Apostle fully resolveth all the doubt,
. describing the body into which we are baptized, ver. 13. And he entitleth it from the head, Christ, vers. 12. but acknowledgeth no other head, either co-equal with Christ, or subordinate: The highest of the other members are called by Paul but eyes and hands, and thus Apostles, Prophets, Teachers, Miracles, gifts of healing, helps, Governments, are only said to be set in the Church, as eyes and hands in the body; but not over the Church as the Head or Sovereign Power: ver. 17, 18, 19, 28, 29. so that though he that is baptized into the Church, is baptized into an Organical body, and related to the Pastors, as to hands and eyes, yet not as to a head, nor as to a representative body neither. And me thinks neither Pope nor Council should pretend to be more then
⟨p. 428⟩
Apostles, Prophets, and Teachers, and Governments. If the form of baptism had but delivered down the authority of the Pope or a Council, as it did the authority and name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, Tradition would have been a tolerable Argument for them, though Scripture had been silent. But when the Baptismal Tradition it self is silent, and it is a doctrine so monstrously strange to the Primitive Church, that all the baptized are baptized to the Pope or a General Council, I know no remedy but they must both put up their pretences.
But that we are not baptized to the Pope or a General Council, is proved, 1. Because neither the form of Baptism, nor any word in Scripture doth affirm such a thing. 2. No persons in Scripture times were so baptized: Men were baptized before there was a Pope at Rome, or a General Council. And afterward none were baptized to them, at least for many hundred years: otherwise then as they were entred into the particular Church of Rome, who were Inhabitants there. 3. Never any was baptized to Peter or Paul, or any of the Apostles saith Paul, 1 Cor. 1. 13. was Paul crucified for you, or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? They must be baptized into the name of no visible Head, but him that was crucified for them. 4. The Apostle fully resolveth all the doubt, 1 Cor. 12. describing the body into which we are baptized, ver. 13. And he entitleth it from the head, Christ, vers. 12. but acknowledgeth no other head, either co-equal with Christ, or subordinate: The highest of the other members are called by Paul but eyes and hands, and thus Apostles, Prophets, Teachers, Miracles, gifts of healing, helps, Governments, are only said to be set in the Church, as eyes and hands in the body; but not over the Church as the Head or Soveraign Power: ver. 17, 18, 19, 28, 29. so that though he that is baptized into the Church, is baptized into an Organical body, and related to the Pastors, as to hands and eyes, yet not as to a head, nor as to a representative body neither. And me thinks neither Pope nor Council should pretend to be more then ⟨p. 428⟩Apostles, Prophets, and Teachers, and Governments. If the form of baptism had but delivered down the authority of the Pope or a Council, as it did the authority and name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, Tradition would have been a tolerable Argument for them, though Scripture had been silent. But when the Baptismal Tradition it self is silent, and it is a doctrine so monstruously strange to the Primitive Church, that all the baptized are baptized to the Pope or a General Council, I know no remedy but they must both put up their pretenses.
Argum. 12. The Essence of the Church into which they were baptized, was part of the doctrine which the Catechumeni were taught, (and all at age should learn) before their baptism. The Sovereignty or Headship of Pope or Council was no part of the Doctrine which (by the Primitive Church) the Catechumeni were taught, and ought to learn, before their baptism. Therefore the Sovereignty or Headship of Pope or Council was not then taken to be of the Essence of the Church.
Argum. 12. The Essence of the Church into which they were baptized, was part of the doctrine which the Catechumeni were taught, (and all at age should learn) before their baptism. The Soveraignty or Headship of Pope or Council was no part of the Doctrine which (by the Primitive Church) the Catechumeni were taught, and ought to learn, before their baptism. Therefore the Soveraignty or Headship of Pope or Council was not then taken to be of the Essence of the Church.
The Major is evident, 1. In that the Catholic Church was in the Creed: and it's essentials there briefly expressed in those terms [Holy Catholic Church, and Communion of Saints.] 2. In that Church History fully acquainteth us that it was the practice of the Catethists and other Teachers to open the Creed to them before they baptized them, and therein the Article of the Catholic Church, and the Communion of Saints.
The Major is evident, 1. In that the Catholick Church was in the Creed: and it's essentials there briefly expressed in those terms [Holy Catholick Church, and Communion of Saints.] 2. In that Church History fully acquainteth us that it was the practice of the Catethists and other Teachers to open the Creed to them before they baptized them, and therein the Article of the Catholick Church, and the Communion of Saints.
The Minor is proved by an induction of all the Records of those times, which in gross may now suffice according to our present intended brevity to be mentioned. There is no one Writer of many hundred years, no not Origen, Tertullian, Irenaeus, or any other that purposely recite the Churches belief which the Catechumeni were taught, nor Cyril, (or John) Hierosol. or any other who open those Articles to the Catechumens, that ever once mention the Doctrine of the Headship of the Pope or Council, when they open the Article of the Catholic Church; nor yet at any other time. If they affirm that they did, let them prove it if they can.
The Minor is proved by an induction of all the Records of those times, which in gross may now suffice according to our present intended brevity to be mentioned. There is no one Writer of many hundred years, no not Origen, Tertullian, Irenaeus, or any other that purposely recite the Churches belief which the Catechumeni were taught, nor Cyril, (or John) Hierosol. or any other who open those Articles to the Catechumens, that ever once mention the Doctrine of the Headship of the Pope or Council, when they open the Article of the Catholick Church; nor yet at any other time. If they affirm that they did, let them prove it if they can.
Argum. 13. As it is high Treason in a Republic to deny the Sovereign, and to be cut off from him, is to be cut off from the Common-wealth; so it would be a damning unchristening sin to deny the Headship of the Pope or General Council, if they were indeed ⟨p. 429⟩the Head of the Church. But it is no such damning unchristening sin: Therefore they are not the Head of the Church.
Argum. 13. As it is high Treason in a Republick to deny the Soveraign, and to be cut off from him, is to be cut off from the Common-wealth; so it would be a damning unchristening sin to deny the Headship of the Pope or General Council, if they were indeed ⟨p. 429⟩the Head of the Church. But it is no such damning unchristening sin: Therefore they are not the Head of the Church.
The Major is plain from the Nature of Sovereignty. The Minor is certainly proved, 1. Because it is never mentioned in Scripture, nor any ancient Writer for many hundred years, as a state of Apostasy, nor as a damning sin, nor as any sin, to deny the said Headship of the Pope or Council. 2. Because else most of the Christians of the world at this day are Apostates and unchristened: Or if that seem a tolerable conclusion to the Romanists; Yet 3. Because then Christ had no Church for some hundreds of years, which I know they will not think so tolerable a conclusion; For to dream that the ancient Christians did know any Head of the Church but Christ, or were engaged in loyalty to the Pope or Council, is a disease that few are liable to, except such as are strangers to the writings of those times, or such as read them with Roman spectacles, resolved what to find in them before hand.
The Major is plain from the Nature of Soveraignty. The Minor is certainly proved, 1. Because it is never mentioned in Scripture, nor any ancient Writer for many hundred years, as a state of Apostasie, nor as a damning sin, nor as any sin, to deny the said Headship of the Pope or Council. 2. Because else most of the Christians of the world at this day are Apostates and unchristened: Or if that seem a tolerable conclusion to the Romanists; Yet 3. Because then Christ had no Church for some hundreds of years, which I know they will not think so tolerable a conclusion; For to dream that the ancient Christians did know any Head of the Church but Christ, or were engaged in loyalty to the Pope or Council, is a disease that few are lyable to, except such as are strangers to the writings of those times, or such as read them with Roman spectacles, resolved what to find in them before hand.
Argum. 14. All Christians are bound to study or labour to be acquainted with the Laws of the Sovereign power of the Church: All Christians are not bound to study or labour to be acquainted with the Laws of Popes and Councils: Therefore the laws of Popes and Councils are not the Laws of the Sovereign power of the Church.
Argum. 14. All Christians are bound to study or labor to be acquainted with the Laws of the Soveraign power of the Church: All Christians are not bound to study or labor to be acquainted with the Laws of Popes and Councils: Therefore the laws of Popes and Councils are not the Laws of the Soveraign power of the Church.
The Major is proved, in that all subjects must obey the Laws of the Sovereign power: But they cannot obey them unless they know them. Therefore they are bound to endeavour to know them.
The Major is proved, in that all subjects must obey the Laws of the Soveraign power: But they cannot obey them unless they know them. Therefore they are bound to endeavour to know them.
The Minor is proved, 1. In that they being written in Latin and Greek which a very small part of the Christians of the world do understand, and their Teachers not sufficiently expounding them, and they being more copious and voluminous, more obscure and uncertain (of which next) then for all private Christians to understand, the people cannot learn these, having enough to do to learn Gods Word. 2. The Papists that deny the use of the Holy Scriptures to the people in a known tongue, and deny the necessity of understanding them, will sure say the same of their Decretals and Canons, unless they mean to set them up above the Scripture, as well as equal them thereto.
The Minor is proved, 1. In that they being written in Latine and Greek which a very small part of the Christians of the world do understand, and their Teachers not sufficiently expounding them, and they being more copious and voluminous, more obscure and uncertain (of which next) then for all private Christians to understand, the people cannot learn these, having enough to do to learn Gods Word. 2. The Papists that deny the use of the Holy Scriptures to the people in a known tongue, and deny the necessity of understanding them, will sure say the same of their Decretals and Canons, unless they mean to set them up above the Scripture, as well as equal them thereto.
Argum. 15. The Sovereign Head of the visible Church and ⟨p. 430⟩Centre of our unity, must be evident, that all the Christian world may know it: The Pope and General Council are not such. Therefore neither of them are the Head of the Visible Church.
Argum. 15. The Soveraign Head of the visible Church and ⟨p. 430⟩Center of our unity, must be evident, that all the Christian world may know it: The Pope and General Council are not such. Therefore neither of them are the Head of the Visible Church.
The Minor is known by common experience. For many a year together (by Bellarmines confession) learned and wise men could not tell which was the true Pope; yea their Councils could not tell. Most of the Christian world to this day cannot discern his Commission for that power which he pretendeth to. A true General Council now no man can know, because it is a non ens. Their pretended General Councils are so ravelled in confusion, that they are not agreed among themselves which are indeed such, and which not: but many are rejected, and many suspected (of which Bellarmine giveth us a list) and those that one receiveth, another rejecteth; and the most by far are rejected by most of the Christian world. And when some would take up with the four first, and some with six, and some with eight, the Papists deridingly ask them, whether the Church hath not as much authority now as it had then? And how shall the Christian world know whether it were a true General Council or not? Of which see the difficulties first to be resolved, which I have recited in my Disputations against Popery.
Argum. 16. The Laws of the Sovereign Power of the Church must be certain (or else how shall we know what to obey) The Laws of Popes and General Councils are not certain: Therefore, &c.
Argum. 16. The Laws of the Soveraign Power of the Church must be certain (or else how shall we know what to obey) The Laws of Popes and General Councils are not certain: Therefore, &c.
The Minor is proved by experience. The Popes Decretals are many unknown, and many proved forgeries (by Blondell ubi sup. and many others) beyond all question: and none of them proved Laws to the Church. The Canons of the first Council of Nice are not agreed on among the Papists. Many others are proved forged: Many are flatly contrary to each other (as I have showed ubi sup.) and how then shall Christians know what to obey? The ancient Canons condemned the gesture of kneeling on the Lords day (and consequently then at the Lords Supper) the reading of the Heathens Books, and many such things which are now taken for lawful: The later Councils that contradict the former, do seem to most of more questionable ⟨p. 431⟩authority then they. And what Councils are to be received and what rejected, they are not agreed among themselves, nor have any certain Rule to know by on which they are agreed: Nor will their Popes or Councils yet resolve them this great question. So that Christians are at a loss concerning these Laws, and know not which of them they are obliged by, and which not.
The Minor is proved by experience. The Popes Decretals are many unknown, and many proved forgeries (by Blondell ubi sup. and many others) beyond all question: and none of them proved Laws to the Church. The Canons of the first Council of Nice are not agreed on among the Papists. Many others are proved forged: Many are flatly contrary to each other (as I have shewed ubi sup.) and how then shall Christians know what to obey? The ancient Canons condemned the gesture of kneeling on the Lords day (and consequently then at the Lords Supper) the reading of the Heathens Books, and many such things which are now taken for lawful: The later Councils that contradict the former, do seem to most of more questionable ⟨p. 431⟩authority then they. And what Councils are to be received and what rejected, they are not agreed among themselves, nor have any certain Rule to know by on which they are agreed: Nor will their Popes or Councils yet resolve them this great question. So that Christians are at a loss concerning these Laws, and know not which of them they are obliged by, and which not.
