« AnteriorContinuar »
nies of his own Producing, that the Truth is against bim.
There is one Thing very remarkable in the Gentleman's Case stated. For in the Title page of his Book he promises to show two Things. i. Thas the Doubt and Danger of Salvation is in the Communion of the Church of Rome. And 2dly, that the Certainty and Safeay is in che Communion of the Church of England. Now Í must own he has labour'd hard to prove the former. Nay he has gone much farther. For he has employ'd near 30 pages (I hope it will nor do him much Honour) to prove us as rank Idolaters as the Heathens ever were. And so instead of Doubt and Danger of Salvation, he ought to have promised to shew, that nothing but Hell and Damnation can be hoped for in the Church of Rome ; since these will su, rely be the just Reward of heathen Idolatry practised by Christians themselves.
But as to the latter Point, vir his Shewing ebe Certainty and Safety of Salvation in the Church of En. gland, the Gentleman has been pleased to superseda that Part of his Task ; as Judging it much easier to lampoon and traduce the Church of Rome , than defend his own. For there is not one single Argument in the Gentleman's whole Book to convince the Reader, that the Communion of the Church of England is preferable to that of any ocher reform'd Church. And why then is the Church of England alone mencion'd in the Title-page with this pompous Elogium , that the Certainly and Safery of Sal. varion is in her Communion. Will not every one, who reads this Title expect to find some positive Proofs to convince him that he ought to prefer her Communion before any other? And will he not be strangely disappointed to find nothing but a mece
Saryr upon the Church of Rome , and not onc folid Argument to induce him to embrace the Genileman's Church rather than that of Lutherans , Çalviniffs, Independents, Anabaptists, lisakers, &c. in Cale he either has his Religion yet to chose, or is disposed to leave that, in which he has till then been educated ?
If the Gentleman had declared that his whole Delign was to make a Non-Papist of his Lordship, I should have own'd his Book and Title were exactly of a Piece. For I confefs I never read a more artful Lampoon upon Popery in my whole Life. But to make a solemn Profession of shewing that the Certainty and Safery of Salvation ar: in the communion of the Church of England without giving one fingle Reason to prove her Communion to be preferable to that of any diffenring Protestant Church, or Offering at one distinctive Mark to shew her to be that One , Holy, Catholick and Apoftolick Church.profess'd in the Nicene Creed , is such an Omillion as will not casily be excused.
What! Did he design to laugh his Lardship out of all reveald Religion? If so, I cannot bur approve of the Method he has taken. But if he intended to make him a Convert to the Church of England preferably to any other Church, why did he noc set forth her peculiar Advantages over other Proteftant Communions all differing from one another, to the End that when his Lordship should be resol. ved to renounce Popery, he might not curn Atheist or Deift for Want of knowing where to find the troe Church of Christ? Why did he not endeavour to convince him of the Antiquity of the reform’d Church of England : her perpetual Visibility from the first Preaching of the Gospel in Great Britain ; her uninterrupted Succession of Protestant Bishops derived from the Apostles themselves ; Her Catholiciry, that is, her having always been a Part of that Church which has Universaliry both of Time and Place; And lastly, the wonderful Miracles her Protestanı Children have wrought in Confirmation of her Doctrine , as it is distinguish'd both from Popery , and that of other reformod Churches ? For these are the external Marks of the true Church of Christ, which convinced St Austin of the Truth of her Doctrine. And if the Gentleman had but remember'd to shew these Marks in the Church of England, his Lordship could not have refifted the Force of fuch Evidence against him. I leave the Reader to consider the Reasons why he did not. I believe they are all comprised in his short Sentence , ulira poffe non datur effe; which may be english'd thus, a Man can do no more than he can do.
But there seems to be another Omillion in the Gentleman's Cafe ftated. For tho the Pope's Supremacy
be the Article singled out by him, against which he was employ'd the best part of his Time and Skill; tho he begins and ends with it ; nay tho he resumes it several Times, and even drags is in by Head and Shoulders, yet he has not vouchsafed in the whole Conversation to mention so much as once the visible Head of his own Church. This surely was not fair. For suppose he should have lampoon'd his Lordship into a Resolution to throw off his former Head, was it not an, Act of Justice to supply him with another? Or was he so ashamed of him that he durft not name him? For my Part I will not resolve the Question, but leave it to the Reader to do it for me.
These are the most material Things, of which
I thought it necessary to inform the Reader. I shall only add, that tho this new Conversation betwixt his Lordship and the Gentleman was finish'd a considerable Time ago, there occurr'd Reasons not necessary to be mention'd, which retarded the Publication of it.
E R R A T A.
Pag. 296. lin. 17. Instead of Catholick Christ, read
These are all the Mistakes of Moment in this first Part, which the Reader is desired to correct with his Pen.
of the first Part.
St Gregory's Judgment relating to the Subject under