Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

119 their lawful Sovereign, the one being of Divine, the other of human Institution only.

What you add, that there was none to dispute the Supremacy with the Jewish Church: if you mean, that the Jewish Church itself was fupreme, I have not Penetration enough to make Sense of it. For fince, as you fay, she was the only visible Church of God upon Earth, how could she be call'd fupreme, which implies a Comparison? She had indeed a high Prieft, who govern'd her as Head; and in whom we may fay the Supremacy was lodg'd. But let me tell you, Sr, this was difputed by the Schifmatical Churches, that were amongst the Jews as thofe of the Samaritans and Saducees, who difown'd the fupreme Authority of the high Prieft, as much as you do that of the Pope. The Argument, you conclude with, is wholly built upon the Suppofition, that a Promise of perpe tual Infallibility was made to the Jewish Church, which never has been, nor ever will be proved. For, if fuch a Promife had been made, it would certainly have had it's Effect; unless you will fay, that God's

Promises can fail.

[ocr errors]

G. No that's impoffible. But we may mistake « his Promifes, and not understand them aright. « And we may not perform the Conditions required. pag. 28. «

[ocr errors]

L. But, Sr, the Promises of Infallibility made to the Church of Chrift are Pofitive and Unconditional.

G. There is ftill a Condition implied. That is, of e Obedience which our Saviour has fully exempli- « fied in the Parable of the Husbandmen, who did « not render the Fruits of the Vineyard. pag. 28.

S. 23.

All God's Promifes are not Conditional,

Defire

L.I and Verfe, that we may examine the Parable,

Sr, to quote the Gospel, Chapter,

you mention.

G. The Parable is related both by St Mathew. C. 21. V. 33. &c. and by St Luke. C. 20. V. 9. &c.

L. Very well, Sr. And you produce this Parable as a full Example, that all Promifes made to the Chri ftian Church are conditional.

G. I do, My Lord.

L. And truly, Sr, you must have a good Affurance to do it. For the Chriftian Church is not the least concern'd in that Parable, as the very Jewish Priests and Scribes, to whom it was spoken, will inform you. Luke 20. .19.

The whole Drift of the Parable was to forewarn the Jews of their approaching Reprobation, and Ruine: But particularly the Priests and Scribes, who came to Chrift in the Temple to question him concerning his Authority and Doctrine, faying to him, by whofe Authority dost thou thefe Things? Or who is be, who gave thee this Authority? Math. 21. . 23. Luke 20. V. 2. Whereupon our Saviour propofed the foremention'd Parable, which contains a prediction of two Things. 1. That the Jews should foon after treat him, as the Husbandmen in the Parable treated the Heir of the Vineyard. And 2. That they should be punish'd by God, as the Husbandmen were punish'd by the Lord of the Vineyard. And the Jewish Priests and Scri bes were fo fully convinced, that they themselves were the Perfons pointed at in the Parable, that (as St. Luke tells us, v. 19.) from that very Hour they fought

to

to lay Hands on Chrift, for they perceived that he had fpoken that Parable against them. And is not this now a wonderful Example to convince us, that all the Promifes made to the Christian Church are conditional? You may as well quote it for a Prediction of the Fall of the Monument. For it has full as much Connection with it.

There is indeed a Part added to the Application of the Parable made by Chrift himself, which belongs to the Chriftian Church. But it implies the very Reverse of what you maintain. Chrift's Words are these. Therefore I say unto you, the Kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a Nation bringing forth the Fruit thereof. Math. 21. V. 43. Which Words plainly infinuate this Difference between the Synagogue, and the Church of Chrift; that whereas the Kingdom of God was to be taken from the former which did not bring forth the Fruits thereof, it should not be taken from the latter, which would bring forth the Fruits thereof. Whence it follows, that the Church of Chrift will never imitate the Apoftacy and Fall of the Jewish Synagogue. And, by Confequence, the Promife of Infallibility made to her is abfolute and Unconditional. Because no Condition of Obedience can be implied, when Obedience itself is a Part of the Promife; as it muft certainly be to verify our Saviour's Words faying, that the Nation or People, to which the Kingdom of God was to be given, should bring forth the Fruit thereof.

[ocr errors]

G. My Lord, As Treafon forfeits an Estate or «< Honours given by a Prince, tho in never fo pofitive Terms, and without any Condition exprefs'd, « but that of Allegiance to the Prince is always im- « plied; fo the Church may forfeit her Charter. pag. «

28.29. "

L. I answer first, that if a Prince could as infals

Q

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 bestow a Title or Honour but that a Condition is implied, muft this be a Law to the Almighty, and tie up his Hands from bestowing an Abfolute, and Unconditional Favour?

دو

»or,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

» G. God faid to Eli the high Prieft 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. ¥. 30. And he said, » Num. 14. V. 34. Te shall know my Breach of Promife, 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) to » build and plant it, if it do evil in my Sight, that it ohey not my Voice, then will I repent of the Good, wherewith I faid I would benefit them.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

"

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

12! whom she perfecuted for this Reafon as Enemies « to the Church; as we find, Jer. 18. v. 18. Come, « 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 immediat ly. But your Obfervations, particularly upon Jeremy, are somewhat 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 Defolation 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 moft 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.

zdly, you obferve, that the Jews understood not the Prophet's Language, but leant upon the Promises 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 meanest Capacity may understand it; and I prefume you and I prefume you think you understand it for otherwife you would not have quoted it.

[ocr errors]

But I defire you to answer this Dilemma. 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 &

« AnteriorContinuar »