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…

5. We need no Judge to decide any controversies among us in the points of Absolute necessity to salvation: both because the Scripture is so plain in those points, as to serve for decision without a Judge; and because we abhor to make a controversy of any of them; and where there is no controversy, there needs no Judge. We are all agreed, through the plainness of the Scripture, that there is but one, Eternal, most Wise, and Good, and Omnipotent God; and that there is one Mediator between God and man, who is himself both God and man, that was crucified, dead, buried, went to [Greek or Hebrew], rose again, ascended, intercedeth for us, and is King and Head of the Church: and will raise the dead, and judge the world, some to Heaven, and some to Hell: These and all the rest of the Essentials of our faith, and many more points that are not essentials, are so plain in Scripture that we are past making them matter of Controversy. If any man deny an Essential point of faith, he is none of us, no more then of you. But you are it seems so deep in infidelity, that you must have a judge to decide your Controversies in the necessary Articles of Faith. For whatever is de fide, you make to be of such equal necessity, that you deride our distinguishing the Fundamentals from the rest, (as may be seen in Knots Infidelity unmasked against Chillingworth) Seriously tell us, Do you think Christians need a Judge, or must put it to a Judge to decide, whether Christ be the Messiah or not? whether he died and ⟨p. 48⟩rose again or not? Whether he will judge the world or not? or any such points. If he be a Judge, he must have power to oblige you to stand to his Determination on which side soever he determine. And what if John 22. determine that the soul is not immortal, or John 23. that there is no resurrection or life to come, but a man dieth like a beast: would you stand to this decision?

5. We need no Judge to decide any controversies among us in the points of Absolute necessity to salvation: both because the Scripture is so plain in those points, as to serve for decision without a Judge; and because we abhor to make a controversie of any of them; and where there is no controversie, there needs no Judge. We are all agreed, through the plainness of the Scripture, that there is but one, Eternal, most Wise, and Good, and Omnipotent God; and that there is one Mediator between God and man, who is himself both God and man, that was crucified, dead, buried, went to 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, rose again, ascended, intercedeth for us, and is King and Head of the Church: and will raise the dead, and judge the world, some to Heaven, and some to Hell: These and all the rest of the Essentials of our faith, and many more points that are not essentials, are so plain in Scripture that we are past making them matter of Controversie. If any man deny an Essential point of faith, he is none of us, no more then of you. But you are it seems so deep in infidelity, that you must have a judge to decide your Controversies in the necessary Articles of Faith. For whatever is de fide, you make to be of such equal necessity, that you deride our distinguishing the Fundamentals from the rest, (as may be seen in Knots Infidelity unmaskt against Chillingworth) Seriously tell us, Do you think Christians need a Judge, or must put it to a Judge to decide, whether Christ be the Messias or not? whether he died and