Chapter 9: Jews' Objections

Jews Objections.

The title of this Third Chapter is that, No Religion, or Sect, or Way, has any advantage over another, nor all of them over Popery. To this we excepted before in general, that that way which has the truth with it, has in that wherein it has the truth, the advantage against all others. Truth turns the scales in this business, wherever and with whomever be found; and if it lie in any way distant from Popery, it gives all the advantage against it that need be desired. And with this only enquiry, With whom the Truth abides, is this disquisition, What ways in Religion have advantage against others, to be resolved. But this course and procedure, for some reasons which he knows, and we may easily guess at, our Author liked not; and it is now too late for us to walk in any path but what he has trodden before us, though it seem rather a maze, than a way for Travellers to walk in, that would all pass on in their Journey.

His first Section is entitled, Light and Spirit; the pretence whereof, he treats after his manner, and cashiers from giving any such advantage as is inquired after. But neither yet are we arrived to any concernment of Protestants. That which they plead as their advantage, is not the empty names of Light and Spirit; but, the truth of Christ revealed in the Scripture. I know there are not a few who have impertinently used these good words, and Scripture-expressions, which yet ought no more to be scoffed at by others, than abused by them. But that any have made the plea here pretended as to their settlement in Religion, I know not. The truth is, if they have, it is no other upon the matter, but what our Author calls them to; to a naked Credo he would reduce them, and that differs only from what seems to be the mind of them that plead Light and Spirit, that he would have them resolve their faith irrationally into the Authority of the Church, they pretend to do it into the Scripture.

But what he aims to bring men to, he justifies from the examples of Christians in ancient times, who had to deal with Jews and Pagans, whose disputes were rational and weighty, and puzzled the wisest of the Clergy to answer, so that after all their ratiocination ended, whether it sufficed or no, they still concluded with this one word, Credo; which in Logic and Philosophy, was a weak answer, but in Religion, the best and only one to be made. What could be spoken more untruely, more contumeliously, or more to the reproach of Christian Religion, I cannot imagine. It is true indeed, that as to the resolution, satisfaction, and settlement of their own souls, Christians always built their faith, and resolved it into the Authority of God in his word; but that they opposed their naked Credo to the disputes of Jews or Pagans, or rested in that for a solution of their objections, is heavenly-wide; as far from truth, [illegible]. I wonder any man who has ever seen, or almost heard of the Disputes and Discourses of Justin Martyr, Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Theophilus Antiochenus, Athenagoras, Tertullian, Lactantius, Chrysostom, Austin, Theodoret, and innumerable others, proving the faith of the Christian Religion against the Jews from Scripture, and the reasonableness of it against the Pagans, with the folly and foppery of theirs, could on any account be induced to cast out such a reproach against them. But it seems Jacta est alea, and we must go on; and therefore to carry on the design of bringing us all to a naked Credo, resolved into the Authority of the present Church, a thing never heard of, spoken of, nor that it appears dreamed of, by any of the ancient Christians. The objections of the Jews against the Christian Religion are brought on the stage, and an enquiry made, how they can be satisfactorily answered. His words are Pag. 142: In any age of the Christian Church a Jew might say thus to the Christians then living; Your Lord and Master was born a Jew, and under the jurisdiction of the High Priests; these he opposed, and taught a Religion contrary to Moses, (otherwise how comes there to be a faction?) but how could he justly do it? No human Power is of force against God's, who spoke (as you also grant) by Moses and the Prophets; and Divine Power it could not be, for God is not contrary to himself. And although your Lord might say, as indeed he did, that Moses spoke of him as of a Prophet to come, greater than himself; yet, Who shall judge that such a thing was meant of his person? For since that Prophet is neither specified by his name, nor characteristical properties (well said Jew) who could say it was he more than any other to come? And if there were a greater to come than Moses were, surely born a Jew, he would, being come into the world, rather exalt that Law to more ample glory, than diminish it. And if you will further contest, that such a Prophet was to abrogate the first Law, and bring in a new one, Who shall judge in this case? the whole Church of the Hebrews, who never dreamed of any such thing; or one member thereof who was born a subject to their judgments. This, says he, is the great Ecumenical difficulty, and he that in any age of Christianity could either answer it, or find any bulwark to set against it, so that it should do no harm; would easily either salve, or prevent, all other difficulties, &c.

The difficulty, as is evident, lay in this, That the authority and judgment of the whole Church of the Hebrews, lay against Christ and the Gospel. That Church when Christ conversed on earth, was a true Church of God, the only Church on earth, and had been so for 2000 years without interruption in itself, without competition from any other. It had its High Priest confessedly instituted by God himself in an orderly succession to those days. The interpretation of Scripture, it pretended, was trusted with it alone; and traditions they had good store, whose original they pleaded from Moses himself, directing them in that interpretation; Christ and his Apostles, whom they looked upon as poor ignorant contemptible persons, came and preached a doctrine, which that Church determined utterly contrary to the Scripture and their traditions: what shall now be answered to their authority which was unquestionably all that ever was, or shall be, entrusted with any Church on the earth. Our Author tells us, that this great argument of the Jews could not be any way warded or put by, but by recourse to the Church's infallibility, pag. 146. Which, sit verbo venia, is so ridiculous a pretence, as I wonder how any block in his way could cause him to stumble upon it. What Church, I pray? The Church of Christians? When that argument was first used by the Jews against Christ himself, it was not yet founded; and if an absolute infallibility be supposed in the Church, without respect to her adherence to the rule of infallibility, I dare boldly pronounce that argument indissoluble; and that all Christian Religion must be therein discarded. If the Jewish Church which had at that day, as great Church-power, and prerogative, as any Church has or can have, were infallible in her judgment, that she made of Christ and his doctrine; there remains nothing but that we renounce both him and it, and turn either Jews or Pagans, as we were of old. Here then, by our Author's confession, lies a plain judgment, and definition of the only Church of God in the world, against Christ and his doctrine; and it is certainly incumbent on us to see how it may be warded. And this, I suppose, we cannot better be instructed in, than by considering, what was answered to it by Christ himself, his Apostles, and those that succeeded them in the profession of the faith of the Gospel. (1) For Christ himself; it is certain he pleaded his miracles, the works which he wrought, and the doctrine that he revealed: but withal, as to the Jews with whom he had to do, he pleads the Scriptures, Moses and the Prophets, and offers himself and his doctrine to be tried, to stand or fall by their verdict (John 5:39, 46; Matthew 22:42; Luke 24:27). I say, besides the testimony of his works and doctrine, to their authority of the Church, he opposes that of the Scripture, which he knew the other ought to give place to. And it is most vainly pretended, by our Author, in the behalf of the Jews, that the Messiah, or great Prophet to come, was not in the Scripture specified by such characteristical properties, as made it evident that Jesus was the Messiah; all the descriptions given of the one, and they innumerable, undeniably centering in the other. The same course steered the Apostle Peter (Acts 2 and 3), and expressly in his second Epistle, chap. 2, v. 17, 18, 19. And Paul (Acts 13:16, 17, etc.). And of Apollos, who openly disputed with the Jews upon this argument, it is said, that he mightily convinced the Jews, publicly showing by the Scripture, that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 18:28). And Paul persuaded the Jews concerning Jesus at Rome, both out of the Law of Moses, and out of the Prophets, from morning until evening (Acts 28:23). Concerning which labor and disputation, the censure of our Author, p. 149, is very remarkable. There can be no hope, says he, of satisfying a querent, or convincing an opponent, in any point of Christianity, unless he will submit to the splendor of Christ's authority in his own person, and the Church descended from him: which I take to be the reason, why some of the Jews in Rome, when Saint Paul labored so much to persuade Christ out of Moses and the Prophets, believed in him, and some did not. Both the coherence of the words and design of the Preface, and his whole scope manifest his meaning to be, That no more believed on him, or that some disbelieved, notwithstanding all the pains he took with them.

And what was the reason of this failure? Why Saint Paul fixed on an unsuitable means of persuading them, namely Moses and the Prophets, when he should have made use of the Authority of the Church. Vain, and bold man, that dares oppose his prejudices to the Spirit and Wisdom of Christ in that great and holy Apostle, and that in a way and work wherein he had the express pattern and example of his Master! If this be the Spirit that rules in the Roman-Synagogue, that so puffs up men in their fleshly minds, as to make them think themselves wiser than Christ and his Apostles, I doubt not, but men will every day find cause to rejoice, that it is cast out of them; and be watchful, that it return to possess them no more. But this is that which galls the man; the difficulty which he proposes as insoluble by any ways but an acquiescing in the Authority of the present Church, he finds resolved in Scripture on other principles. This makes him fall foul on Saint Paul, whom he finds most frequent in answering it from Scripture, not considering, that, at the same time he accuses Saint Peter of the like folly, though he pretend for him a greater reverence. However, this may be said in defence of Saint Paul, that by his arguments about Christ and the Gospel from Moses and the Prophets, many thousands of Jews all the world over were converted to the faith; when it's hard to meet with an instance of one in an age, that will any way take notice of the Authority of the Roman Church. But to return; this was the constant way used by the Apostles, of answering that great difficulty pleaded by our Author from the Authority of the Hebrew Church. They called the Jews to the Scripture, the plain texts and contexts of Moses and the Prophets, opposing them to all their Church's real or pretended authority; and all her interpretations pretended to be received by tradition from of old; so fixing this for a perpetual standing rule to all generations, that the doctrine of the Church is to be examined by the Scripture, and where it is found contradictory of it, her authority is of no value at all, it being annexed to her attendance on that rule. But it may be replied, that the Church in the days of the Apostles was not yet settled, nor made firm enough to bear the weight that now may be laid upon it, as our Author affirms, pag. 149. So that now the great resolve of all doubts must be immediately upon the Authority of the present Church; after that was once well cleared, the fathers of old pleaded that only in this case, and removed the objections of the Jews by that alone. I am persuaded, though our Author be a great admirer of the present Church, he is not such a stranger to antiquity, as to believe any such thing. Is the Authority of the Church pleaded by Justin Martyr, in that famous dispute with Trypho the Jew, wherein these very objections instanced by our Author are thoroughly canvassed? Does he not throughout his whole disputation prove out of the Scriptures, and them alone, that Jesus was the Christ, and his doctrine agreeable to them? Is any such thing pleaded by Origen, Tertullian, Chrysostom, or any one that had to deal with the Jews? Do they not wholly persist in the way traced for them by Paul, Peter, and Apollos, mightily convincing the Jews out of Scripture? Let him consult their answers, he will not find them such poor empty jejune discourses, as that he supposes they might make use of, pag. 148, and to the proofs whereof, by texts of Scripture, he says, the Rabbis could answer by another interpretation of them. He will find another spirit breathing in their writings, another efficacy in their arguments, and other evidence in their testimonies, than it seems he is acquainted with; and such as all the Rabbis in the world are not able to withstand. And I know full well, that these insinuations, that Christians are not able justifiably to convince, confute, and stop the mouths of Jews from the Scripture, would have been abhorred as the highest piece of blasphemy by the whole ancient Church of Christ: and it is meet it should be so still by all Christians.

Is there no way left to deny pretences of light and spirit, but by proclaiming, to the great scandal of Christianity, that we cannot answer the exceptions of Jews to the person and doctrine of our Savior out of the Scriptures? And has Rome need of these bold sallies against the vitals of religion? Is she no other way capable of a defence? Better she perished 10000 times, than that any such reproach should be justly cast on the Lord Jesus Christ, and his Gospel. But whatever our Author thinks of himself, I have very good ground to conjecture, that he has very little acquaintance with Judaical antiquity, learning, or arguments; nor very much with the Scripture: and may possibly deserve on that account some excuse, if he thought those exceptions insoluble, which more learned men than himself know how to answer and remove, without any considerable trouble.

This difficulty was fixed on by our Author, that upon it there might be stated a certain retreat, and assured way of establishment against all of the like nature. This he assigns to be, the Authority of the present Church; Protestants, the Scripture: wherein, as to the instance chosen out as most pressing, we have the concurrent suffrage of Christ, his Apostles, and all the ancient Christians; so that we need not any further to consider the pretended pleas of light and spirit, which he has made use of, as the Orator desired his Dialogist would have insisted on the stories of Cerberus and Cocytus, that he might have showed his skill and activity in their confutation. For, what he begs in the way, as to the constitution of Saint Peter, and his successors in the rule of the Church, as he produces no other proof for it, but that doughty one, that, it must needs be so; so, if it were granted him, he may easily perceive by the instance of the Judaical Church that himself thought good to insist upon, that it will not avail him in his plea, against the final resolution of our faith into the Scripture, as its senses are proposed by the ministry of the Church, and rationally conceived or understood.