Word perish for being unfound (fuppofe it could be taken fo?) For, how could I fuppofe for true, that the Church of Chrift could not grow unfound, to them, who ground their Reformation upon this very reafon, that he was corrupted and unfound? Out of all which it appears manifeftly, that he had no reason to doubt of the fense of this Word perifh.

III. His fecond Cavil is upon these Words, the Church of Chrift: For, fays he, they may be taken in two fenfes; one as large as Chriftianity; the other for fome part of it greater or lefs, but not for the univerfal Church. Here I might pay him in his own Coin, and ask him, What he means by Chriftianity? whether thofe Faithful only, that are baptized, as we mean it; or all thofe, that believe in Chrift, whether baptized or no? But not intending to wait for his anfwer, I muft tell him, that both thefe fenfes are abfolutely falfe. And firft, that the Church of Chrift is not taken for all Christianity, I prove out of their own Definition of the Church, in the 19th Article of the XXXIX. which fays thus; The vifible Church is a Congregation of Faithful Men, in the which the pure Word of God is preach'd, and the Sacraments be duly miniftred. It is but too apparent, that this Definition cannot poffibly be applied to innumerable Sects, who neither preach the pure Word of God, nor duly minifter the Sacraments. Therefore 'tis falfe that the Church of Chrift can be taken to fignifie all Chriftianity. Befides, fuppose it might be taken in that large fenfe, yet he had no reafon to fufpect, but that I took it here for the true Church only, to which the promifes of perpetual Duration were given, and for the One, Holy, Catholick, and Apoftolical Church, (which foever it be) not including fuch pitiful Sects, as

rife and fall in every Age. Therefore it's evident he shut his Eyes here again for fear of feeing the true Senfe of the Word. But yet, fays he, The Church of Chrift may be taken for one or more particular Churches, but not the univerfal Church. Behold, Sir, the difingenuous trifling of this Gentleman, who is refolv'd to take the Word in all other Senfes but the right one. Suppofe I fhould fay, the Kingdom of England is a rich and glorious Nation; fee how he would raise Difficulties upon these clear Words, What means he by the Kingdom of England? Does be mean Somersetihire alone? Or Somersetshire, Wiltshire, and Berkshire? Or England, Denmark, and Norway? Just so, when I had faid, the Church of Chrift cannot perish; he answers, What means he by the Church of Chrift? One, or two, or more particular Churches? Or the Church of Chrift and all Hereftes befides? As if the most extravagant Herefies were a part of the Church; or as if one or two particular Churches were the Church of Chrift, and not rather a part of the Church of Chrift. But thefe Gentlemen are grown fuch Strangers to Chrift's Church, that when it is named they lift up their Heads, and know not what it means. Therefore, if he had been fo minded, he might eafily have known, that by the Church of Chrift I mean the holy Catholick Church, which his Creed ought to have put him in mind of.

1

IV. Now then come we to the Question, which he takes in pieces thus, I defire to know (if the Proteftant Church be the true one) where it was many Hundreds of Years before Luther? This, fays he, is not one Queftion but two.. I refer it to any Man; there is evidently but one Question. But, fays he, an accurate Adverfary would have propos'd it in two, thus: I defire to know, if the Proteftant Church be the true Church? If fo, I de

H

fire to know, where it was many Hundreds of Years before Luther? Had I done fo, I fhould have reckoned my felf to have been very formally impertinent. For what Reafon had I to make a Que ftion of it, whether he would fay the Proteftant Church was the true one or no? Things fo clear are to be fuppofed, not asked, by all who would not multiply Questions without end, and I do not conceive, why he fhould be fo angry with me for not taking him to be fuch a Knave, as to be of a Religion which she would not fay was the true one. Surely Faults of this Nature may eafily find a Pardón.

"

V. Hrs next trifling is his defiring to know, what I mean by the Proteftant Church. For, fays he, there be true Proteftant Churches, and not true ones. Here, Sir, pray take notice that he has nothing to complain of, but that I gave him too much Liberty; I bid him name any which he will call the Proteftant Church, and he has a mind to be confin'd; fo that you fee a fmall Subject ferves us to wrangle about. But I'm content, let him be confin'd to the Church of England, and fhew me where there was a Church holding all the Articles of the Church of England for 900 or Tooo Years before Luther. And fince the Word Luther gives Offence, let it be blotted out; I'm glad he's fo much afhamed of the great Captain and Patriarch of the pretended Reformation, The Chariot of Ifrael and the Horsemen thereof, as fome have been pleased to call him, and a most excellent Infrument of God, as great Doctors of his own Church have term'd him. His Name I put down, only because he marks beft the great Epoch of the Proteftant Religion, by Reafon of his Priority in Time and Fame above others. But fince he defires it, let his Name be remov'd, and that of Cranmer's

Cranmer's be put down, or any other whom he thinks he needs not be ashamed of.

VI. YET ftill he finds more Difficulties in underHanding this Phrafe, as he calls it, the Proteftant Church. For, fays he, it may either fignifie the Clergy and People of the Church, or the Faith, Worship, and Polity of it. Why had we not this Difficulty ftarted before, when we had the former Difpute about the Word Church, that we might have done with it once for all? I defy him to give a Reason, except that the Fancy bit now and not then, or else perchance because he was refolved to have a new Cavil in referve for this Place, and when it's done the Difficulty's none. For by the Word Church is properly meant a Congre gation of faithful Men, &c. and this by all fides; fo it is in the nineteenth Article of his Church, fo it is in all our definitions of the Church, fo it is in divers other even heretical definitions of the Church; and I do not remember to have read any where, that Church is taken for the Faith, Worship, and Polity of the Church. And if he have any where read it, yet he ought to reflect that in reafon he fhould have taken it in that Senfe, which Divines of all fides take it commonly in, in this Difpute of the Church, viz. For a Congregation of faithful Men, &c. and not for the Faith, &c. of thofe Men. Thus you may guefs, Sir, that it is a harder thing to bring this Gentleman to the Bar, and make him speak out plainly Guilty or not Guilty, than perchance it would be to convict him, after he had once made his Plea.

VII. Now come we to the laft Words of iny Paper, which are thefe, Name your Bishops, Writers, Churches, nay one fingle Congregation or Vilage of Proteftants for 900 or 1000 Years before C 2

your

your Separation from the Roman Catholick Church, for thofe are my Words, Roman Catholick Church, as is to be feen in the Paper I fent you, and not thefe, [Holy Catholick Church] as he is pleased to mistake; fo there's an end of that Quarrel. Let us now to the purpose.

VIII. THIS Challenge, fays he, is fallacious and fophiftical, in asking us to Name our Bishops, Writers, and Churches,&c. i. e. Our reformed Bishops, Writers, and Churches before the Reformation. I'm fure this Anfwer is fophiftical, and a great impofition both upon you and me. Have I any fuch Words, as reform'd Bishops, Writers? &c. No, but he puts the Queftion in his own fophiftical Words, because he cannot answer it in mine? What, had they no Bithops or Churches, before they were reform'd? How did they do then to reform them? For to reform is to give a better Form to fomething, which before was under a worse. I demanded, where his Church was at all, whether reform'd or deform'd matters not? Cannot he tell me, where her flovenly dirty Face (according to his own Phrafe) once was, becaufe 'tis now wafhed? Or is it fophiftical to ask a fick Man where he was, when he was well and lufty? Away, away, this is too vifibly idle. Let the Gentleman know then, that by the Word Proteftant I mean Chriftians profeffing their Religion; and I cannot imagine what elfe he could fancy I meant, except he thought me fo foolish, as to take it for People prorefting against the Decrees of the Diet of Spire, according to the Original Senfe of the Word.

IX. THUS far, forfooth, was it neceffary to difpute like Grammarians, concerning the meaning of clear Words: But, because it's fo difficult a Thing to draw him to a direct Answer, I will en deavour to gather one from his Words, which

are