libly foresee the unchangeable Allegiance of his Subjects, as Chrift forefaw the unalterable Faith of his Church, when he promised, that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it, the Gifts and Favours of fuch a Prince might be wholly Unconditional.

I anfwer 2dly, that God's infinite Bounty is not to be measured by our short Line. And therefore allowing it to be true, that a Prince cannot beftow a Title or Honour, but that a Condition is implied, must this be a Law to the Almighty, and tie up his Hands from beftowing an Abfolute, and Unconditional Favour?

» G. God faid to Eli the high Priest of the Jewish » Church, I faid indeed that thy House, and the House

of thy Father should walk before me for ever: But now » the Lord fays, be it far from me. For them, that ho»nour me, I will honour, and them that defpife me, shall » be lightly esteem'd. 1. Sam. 2. v. 30. And he faid, » Num. 14. V. 34. Te shall know my Breach of Promife, » or, as our Margin reads it, the Altering of my Purpofe. And God has told us plainly, that we are » thus to understand his Promifes as well as Threatnings. Jer. 18. v. 7. &c. At what inftant I shall Speak concerning a Nation (or Church) to pluck up, » and to destroy it. If that Nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their Evil, I will repent of the Evil I thought to do unto them. And at what Inftant » I shall Speak concerning a Nation (or Church) 10 » build and plant it, if it do evil in my Sight, that it obey not my Voice, then will I repent of the Good, » wherewith I faid I would benefit them.

» This was the Language of the Prophets to the » Jewish Church, but she understood it not, but »leant upon the Promises made to her as uncondi» tional and indefeasible, let her be as wicked as she would. And this harden'd her against her Prophets,

121 whom she perfecuted for this Reason as Enemies «< to the Church; as we find, Jer. 18. v. 18. Come, c and let us devife Devices against Jeremiah, for the Law « shall not perish from the Prieft. Here the Jewish Church « ftuck; and here the Church of Rome sticks at this « Day. pag. 29.30. «

L. Sr, as to the Texts, you have quoted, I shall let you know my Mind concerning them immediatly. But your Obfervations, particularly upon Je remy, are fomewhat extraordinary. For firft you remark, that this was the Language of the Prophets to the Jewish Church. Tis true, the Prophet Jeremy spoke to the Jews: But their Church is not once mention'd in the whole Text: And what he threaten'd them with on the Part of God was the Ruine and Defola-. tion of their Country, but not the Fall or Apoftacy of their Church; which fubfifted no lefs in their Captivity, than when they were in the most flourishing Condition. So that your joining the Word Church twice with the Text without having Jeremy's Leave for it, is making too bold with him.

2dly, you obferve, that the Jews understood not the Prophet's Language, but leant upon the Promifes as unconditional and indefeasible. And you add, that this made them perfecute Jeremy as an Enemy to the Church. Now I cannot very well conceive how they could perfecute Jeremy for a Language, which, as you tell me, they understood not. Tho in Reality the Text quoted by you is fo plain, that the meaneft Capacity may understand it ; and I prefume you think you understand it, for otherwife you would not have quoted it.

But I defire you to answer this Dimma, Either the Jews understood the Prophet Jeremy's Language, or they understood it not. If not, they could not perfecute him for it. But if they understood it, as

Q &

undoubtedly they did, they could not lean upon God's Promifes as unconditional and indefeasible; Since feremy taught them fo plainly the contrary. Nay the fad Experience of the many Calamities, that had befaln them both under their fudges and Kings, had sufficiently taught them, that the Effect of the Promifes, which God had made to profper and protect them depended on their Obedience to his Commands: and that therefore they could not lean on them as unconditional and indefeasible.

G. But why then did they perfecute Jeremy Saying Come let us devife Devices against Jeremy, for the Law shall not perish from the Priest?

L. They perfecuted him, because he told them ungrateful Truths, reproach'd them with their Crimes, and threaten'd them with God's Judgments, if they did not mend their Lives. This made them confpire against him, and refolve upon his Death, Because (faid they) tho he should perish, the Law will not perish from the Priest; and they hoped his Suc ceffor would be lefs troublefome to them.

G. However I perceive you grant, that God's Promifes to the Jews were Conditional.

L. Sr, there are unconteftable Inftances of Conditional Promifes in holy Writ. So Allowing the Texts, you have quoted, I should be glad to know what Advantage you can make of them in Order to prove, that all God's Promifes are Conditional. Is this a Good Confequence, fome Men are born blind, therefore all are born under that Misfortune? No furely. Yet your Confequence is nothing better when from a few Inftances of Conditional Promifes you conclude that all God's Promifes are fo. What do you think of God's Promife to Noah, that the World shall not perish by a fecond Deluge? Or the great Promife of the Messias? I defy you with all

your Skill to tack the Condition of Obedience to either of them, or many others, which I omit for Bre ivity-fake.

G. But are not all God's Threats Conditional?

L. They certainly are. Because God is infinitly Juft. And Punishments cannot be justly inflicted, un lefs they be firft deserved.

6. And why then are not all his Promises equally Conditional?

may

bea

L. Because he is infinitly Bountiful, and flow his Favours whether they be deserved, or not. That is, where, and in what Manner he pleases. So that, tho Promises may be charged with Conditions, their Nature or Effence requires no fuch Thing.

G. The Apostle of the Gentiles fays to the Gentile Church, thou shall't also be cut off, if thou con- « tinueft not in the Goodneß of God. And that the Jews, if they abide not ftill in Unbelief, shall be graff'd in. « For God is able to graff them in again. Rom. 9. V. 22. « 23. This shews, that the Promises made either to « the Jewish or the Gentile Church are Conditional, a viz, if they continue in the Goodneß of God. Otherwise, « fays St Paul, to the Gentile Church, thou shall't also « be cut off. And of all the Gentile Churches this was e faid more particularly to the Church of Rome. For a this is in the Epiftle wrote to her, and to her it was said, thou shall3t also be cut off, pag. 30. ".

L. Surely now or never the Church of Rome must be cut off, and deftroy'd Root and Branch. However I obferve first, that when St Paul wrote his Epiftle to the Romans, that Church was a mix'd Society of converted Jews and Gentiles brought into one Fold. So that your Calling them fo often the Gentile Church. as if the converted Gentiles at Rome were a different Church from that of the converted Jews, is fomewhat oddly exprefs'd

I obferve 2lly, (for you have taken Care to advertise me of it) that St Paul's Epistle to the Romans was particularly addrefs'd to the Church of Rome as diftinguish'd from the other Gentile Churches (as you call them) which plainly marks out the Diocess of Rome, (that dearly beloved Equivocation, whereof you are fo fond) and shews, that the diffufive Body of the Catholick Church, whereof the Dioceß of Rome is but a Part, is wholly out of the Reach of this Cutting Objection.

Suppofe then that the Church, or Dioceẞ of Rome should be cut off (for I know of no Promises of Infallibility made to one Dioceß more than another) or fuppofe the whole Dioceß of Rome should be fwallow'd up by an Earthquake, would this deftroy Chrift's Myftical Body, the Church? Or would she want a Head, tho there were no fuch Town as Rome?

G. But why were thofe Words, thou shall't also be cut off, if thou continueft not in the Goodneß of God, particularly addrefs'd to the Church of Rome?

:

L. Because the whole Epiftle was writ to the Ro mans, and the chief Motive of St Paul's Writing to them was, to put a Stop to the Disputes, that were between the converted Jews and Gentiles, that dwell'd at Rome each Party arrogating to itself an Advantage over the other. So that if those Disputes had happen'd amongst Chriftians at Corinth, or any other Town, the Apostle, whofe zeal was not confined to any particular Place, would in all Probability have writ the fame Epistle to them. And then your Argument would have made a moft wretched Figure by. being ftript of the Equivocation, which is it's main Support,

I answer then directly, that as no Promife of In fallibility was ever made to any particular Diocess or Nation, but to the Church in Geneal, fo any parti