Animadversions on a treatise entitled Fiat lux, or, A guide in differences of religion,…Animadversions on a treatise intituled Fiat lux, or, A guide in differences of religion,…

If he hath spoken any thing, of their sins and failings, but what God hath left upon record on set purpose in his Word, that they might be examples of humane frailty, and testimonies of his grace and mercy in Christ towards them, for the encouragement of others that shall be overtaken in the like temptation, as some of them were, let him bear his own burden. If he have said no more, but what the Holy Ghost hath recorded, for him and others to make use of, I envy not their cheer, who triumph in falsely accusing of him. But is this indeed the difference between Papists and Protestants about the Saints? Is this the doctrine of the Papists concerning them? Is their practice confined within the limits of these principles? Are these the things, which in their principles and practice, are blamed by Protestants? The truth is, this is the very Doctrine, the very Practice of Protestants. They all jointly bear a due ⟨p. 389⟩respect to the memorial of all the Saints of God, concerning whom they have assurance that they were so indeed. They praise God for them, admire his grace in them, rejoice in the fruits of their labours and sufferings for Christ, and endeavour to be followers of them in all things wherein they were followers of Christ; and hope to come to be made partakers with them of that glory and joy which they are entered into. Is this the Doctrine of the Council of Trent, or of the Harmony of Confessions? Doth this represent the practice of Papists, or Protestants? It is very seldom, you shall hear a Sermon of a Protestant, wherein the example of one Saint or other, is not in one thing or other, insisted on, and proposed to imitation. If this venerable esteem, and sedulous imitation of Saints, with praising God, for his Graces in them, his mercy towards them, and an endeavour to obtain the crown they have received, be the doctrine, and the whole doctrine of the Church of Rome about the Saints departed, why should we contend any longer? All parties are agreed. Let us contend no more ⟨p. 390⟩about that which is not; but if it be otherwise, and that neither are these things, all the things that the Papists assert and maintain in this matter, nor are these things at all opposed by the Protestants, a man may easily understand, to what end our Author makes a flourish with three or four leaves of his Book; as though they were in difference between us.

If he hath spoken any thing, of their sins and failings, but what God hath left upon record on set purpose in his Word, that they might be examples of humane frailty, and testimonies of his grace and mercy in Christ towards them, for the encouragement of others that shall be overtaken in the like temptation, as some of them were, let him bear his own burden. If he have said no more, but what the Holy Ghost hath recorded, for him and others to make use of, I envy not their chear, who triumph in falsly accusing of him. But is this indeed the difference between Papists and Protestants about the Saints? Is this the doctrine of the Papists concerning them? Is their practice confined within the limits of these principles? Are these the things, which in their principles and practice, are blamed by Protestants? The truth is, this is the very Doctrine, the very Practice of Protestants. They all joyntly bear a due