said also that Usher was a Bishop that he had made because that he had appointed him so without being sollicited to it by any person this Election was made in 1620. Returning into Ireland sometime after he was oblig'd to discourse some persons of Quality of the Roman Religion to administer to 'em the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy that they had refused to the Priest this discourse is inserted in his Life he remarks the form of this Oath is compos'd of two parts the one positive in which they acknowledge the King is Soveraign in all cases whatsoever and the other negative in which they declare they acknowledge no Jurisdiction or Authority of any strange Prince in the estates of the King he says afterwards in regard of the first part that the Scripture commands that we submit our selves to the Higher Powers and that we ought to acknowledge that the power the Kings have whatsoever it may be is Supream as they are Kings upon which he cites this verse of Martial Qui Rex est Regem maxime non habeat That one ought well to distinguish the power of the Keys from that of the Sword and the King of England does not exact an acknowledgment of the same power that is possess'd by the Bishops but nevertheless the Kings may interest themselves with Ecclesiastical Affairs in as much as it regards the body since according to the Church of Rome 't is the Magistrates duty to punish Hereticks For that which regards the second part of the Oath where it 's said that we shall not own any strange power as having any Iurisdiction Superiority Preheminence Ecclesiastical or Temporal in the Kingdom He says that if St. Peter were still alive he would willingly own that the King had this Authority in Ireland and that he us'd the same in regard of all the Apostles that the Apostleship was a personal dignity which the Apostles have not left hereditary to any but nevertheless suppose it was so he sees not why St. Peter should leave it to his successors rather than St. Iohn who outliv'd all the Apostles that there was no reason to believe that St. Peter shou'd leave the Apostolical Authority to the Bishops of Rome rather than to those of Antioch this last Church being founded before the first The King writ to Vsher to thank him for this Discourse which produced so good effect He afterwards went into England by the King's order to collect the Antiquities of the Churches of England Scotland and Ireland and publish'd two years after that his Book intituled De Primordiis Ecclesiarum Britannicarum 'T was in that time that the King made him Arch-Bishop of Armagh The Winter following he caused to be brought before him the Order for Toleration of the Roman Catholicks and the Lord Falkland then Deputy for the King in Ireland convocated and assembled the whole Nation to settle this Affair But the Bishops call'd by the Primate oppos'd it with much heat as may be seen by a Remonstrance sign'd by ten Bishops besides the Primate and which is in the 28th page They also spoke of raising some Forces by the Joynt consent both of Catholicks and Protestants to hinder any differences that might arise in the Kingdom the Protestants refus'd to consent thereto and wou'd not hearken to discourse the Primate thereupon in the Castle of Dublin altho' his reasonings were founded upon the principal Maxims of the Government of Ireland and maintain'd by Examples drawn from the Antient and Modern Histories of that Kingdom During the time our Primate stayed in Ireland after he had performed the Duties of his Charge which he acquitted with extraordinary care he employed the remaining part of his time to study the fruits whereof were to be seen in 1631. in the first Latin book which he ever published in Ireland 't is his History of Godescalch Monk of the Abby of Orbais who lived in the beginning of the 6th Age there was soon made a small abridgment of the History of Pelagianism which was then extreamly dispersed through Spain and England when he comes to the History of Godescalch he explains his Doctrine and shews by Flodoard and other Authors of that time that those sentiments whereof Hincmar Archbishop of Rhemes and Rabanus Archbishop of Maynce accused him and which were condemn'd by their Authority in two Councils were the same that St. Remigius Archbishop of Lyons and the Clergy of his Diocess defended openly many opinions and odious consequences according to Vsher were fathered upon Godescalch because that this Monk who maintained the opinions of St Augustine about Predestination and Grace did not at all understand ' em Ioannes Scotus Erygenus wrote a treatise against him in which are to be found the principal heads of Vsher but Florus Deacon of the Church of Lions answers it and censures him in the Name of all the Diocess Vsher gave an abridgment of this Censure as also of divers other treatises as that of St Remigius Pudentius Bishop of Troy Ratramus Monk of Corbi who writ against Scotus for his defence of Godescalch there had been two Councils which established the doctrine of this Monk and condemn'd that of Scotus 'T is true that Hincmar published a very large Book against these Councils which he dedicated to Charles le Chauve as Flodoard reports who shews briefly what it is that this Book treats of but that did not at all hinder St. Remigius and those of his Party to convocate another Council at Langres where they confirm'd the Doctrine established in the former Councils and condemn'd that new one of Scotus These Controversies were still agitated in the National Council of the Gauls where nothing was concluded altho' Barancus and others voted that Godescalch should be condemn'd there On the contrary Vsher maintains that in an Assembly which was in a small time after his Sentiments were approv'd of Nevertheless this wicked Godescalch was condemn'd by the Council of Maynce to perpetual Imprisonment where he was severely treated because he would never retract his Errours There are still two Confessions of his Faith by which one may see there are many things attributed to him which he never believ'd after having made a faithful report of the Sentiments of this Monk and those of his Adversaries Vsher concludes that it were better for men to be silent upon these matters than to scandalize the weak in proposing to 'em such Doctrines from which they may draw bad consequences There has been adds Mr. Parr and always will be different Opinions upon the great and abstruse Questions of Predestination and Free Will which nevertheless may be tolerated in the same Church provided those who maintain these divers Opinions have that Charity for one another which they ought to have That they condemn them not publickly That they abstain from mutual Calumnies and that they publish no Invectives against those who are not of the same Sentiments To return to the Life of our Prelate who altho' he
the Pope grew obstinate in his Sentiment they would rather quit the Priesthood than Marriage and that Gregory who despised men should take the care of providing himself with Angels to govern the Church These good men without doubt spake with much sincerity and it may be if those who have endeavoured to blacken the conduct of the Reformers in that they have introduced anew the Marriage of Priests would let nature speak they would not say less But it is a great unhappiness and a great prejudice at the same time against the deluders of Virginity to live in a Church whereof they are constrained to defend all the Sentiments unless they would dishonour and destroy themselves In fine the Authors of the time of Hildebrand and those who have written since give him several times the name of Antichrist and it cannot be denied at least but that it is he who hath established the excessive authority of Popes and who the first durst to maintain that they have the power of deposing Kings and to change what they please in the Canons It is no more than may be seen in the Decretals of the Edition of Rome whereof Vsher cites divers scandalous articles He also gives the History of the quarrels which this Pope had with the Emperor Henry IV. and relates all the evil that hath been said of the first And with this he ends the first part of his work which was to have extended to the time in which the Devil hath been let loose II. As it is in the Apocalypse that a thousand years being past the Dragon was to be unloos'd for a little time Vsher begins his second part by the explication of this place and remarks that according to the maxim of Aristotle nothing being called great or little but by relation to another thing the time in which the Dragon was to be unchain'd should be short in comparison of the time during which he had ravaged the World before he had been put in Chains Roman Catholicks demand of Protestants where the Church was then if the Pope was Antichrist Vsher answers that the Church was then in the state in which some Antients and divers Catholick Authors have said that it would be under the Reign of Antichrist St. Augustin in his XX Letter which is directed to Hesychius saith that the Church appear'd not because of the excessive cruelty of the Persecutors Ecclesiam non apparituram impiis tunc Persecutoribus ultra modum saevientibus Several ancient and modern Authors have spoken to the same effect Vsher takes occasion from hence to make a parallel of the State of the Churches which followed the Council of Nice in the times that the Arians were the strongest with that wherein the West was found in these corrupt Ages The Arians reproached others with their small Number and their Poverty as it appears by these words of Gregory of Nazianza Where are those who upbraid us with our Poverty who say that the greatest Number forms the Church and who jeer the smalness of our Flock But as there lived in the Roman Empire several People who were not Arians Vsher conceives that under the Government of the Pope there was a pretty great number of Persons who were not of these opinions To shew that he doth not advance a simple conjecture he gives the History of the Original Opinions of the Vaudois who have rejected several of the Sentiments of the Church of Rome But he speaks more of them in the sequel as being a place wherein he should properly speak of them which obligeth us to pass to the vii Chapter and afterwards we will return to the Vaudois Vsher divides the time during which the Dragon hath been delivered from his Prison into three Periods the first reacheth to the time of Innocent III. The second unto Gregory XI And the third unto Leo X. The first comprehends two Ages taking it's beginning from the year 1000. The State the Western Church hath been in during the first of these two Ages and the complaints that the Authors of that time made against Corruptions which were equally seen in the Ecclesiasticks and People There have been no less complaints made of the Disorders of the twelfth Age as is plain in our Author who relates a great number thereof amongst which is this famous distich of Hildebert Bishop of Mans who saith in speaking of Rome Vrbs foelix si vel Dominis Vrbs illa careret Vel Dominis esset turpe carere fide Happy City if it had no Masters or if those who possess it believed it a shameful thing to want Faith The Popes took great care in that Age to have paid to them from England a kind of Tribute that they called St. Peters pence which Alexander II. in a Letter written to William the Norman saith had been paid by the English ever since they had embraced Christianity It appears by this Letter that the English sent this Money at first to Rome only thro' Liberality but this Liberality becoming a Necessity because the Kings commanded absolutely to do it the Authors of those times looked upon it as a Tribute Therefore Bertold of Constance who lived towards the latter end of the eleventh Age saith that it was then that the Prophecy of the Apocalypse was accomplished which saith That no Person could sell or buy without having the Mark or Name of the Beast or the Number of its Name The Reason of this is that according to the Relation of this Author in his Appendix of Hermannus Contractus towards the year Mlxxxiv William the first King of England rendred his whole Kingdom Tributary to the Pope and suffered none to sell or buy but such as submitted himself to the Apostolick See that is to say before he paid the Rome-scot or penny of St. Peter Notwithstanding this same William refused to swear an Oath of Fealty to Hildebrand and punished Bishops and other Ecclesiasticks who had offended him as he thought fit without having any regard to the Prayers and Exhortations of this Pope Some other Kings of England resisted the Popes likewise with the same vigour and we have proofs that the opinions of Rome were not yet spread every where Here is one that is pretty remarkable which is that Frederick Barbarousse being gone into the Holy Land to fight the Infidels in Mclxxxix Niaetas Choniates observes that the Germans were welcomed by the Armenians because the adoration of the Images of Saints was equally prohibited with the Armenians and Germans Hereby it appears that they had not as yet forgotten in Germany the Council of Francfort It is also remarked that several English Authors who have written after the arrival of the Normans said that the Church had in abhorrence the worship of Images The Doctrine even of Lanfranc concerning the Eucharist which the Normans brought into this Island was contrary to divers ancient Forms and Writings of the English And this is the cause that a long time after the Condemnation of
inspire into the Greeks of the State of Venice the Sentiments of the Protestants to introduce the Reformation into Italy by that means See Letter 238. p. 2. It may be this was but a bare Report Grotius was too far from the places to be throughly inform'd in it but he had opportunities to be perfectly instructed of some other things which happened in Holland whilst he was there He saith Letter 11. p. 1. That in a Conference which Arminius and Gomarus had before the Gentlemen of the States of Holland as Oldenbarndvelt said to these two Gentlemen that he praised God for that the Controversies which was amongst them were not upon any fundamental Article Gomarus answered that the Opinions of Arminius his Collegue were of such a nature that he cou'd not appear before the Tribunal of God with ' em The whole dispute concerned Predestination and the greatest difference that was betwixt their opinions was that Gomarus believed God had resolved to create the most part of men to damn them without having any respect to their Actions only for the Manifestation of his Power whereas Arminius maintained that God damns not men but because of their unbelief and impenitence This last opinion is Melancthon's as Grotius saith Ep. 58. p. 1. and elsewhere The Gentlemen of the States of Holland made in 1614. an Edict which may be seen in the 3. Vol. of the Theological Works of Grotius by which they ordered the two parties which then were in the Reformed Churches of the Low Countries to support each other and to treat with moderation the controverted matters the then King Iames of England at first praised this order also divers Bishops approved it as Grotius saith in his Letters 28 and 29. But this Prince changing his opinion afterwards disapproved this conduct as appears by Letter 111. p. 1. to Mr. Anthony de Dominis Archbishop of Spalatro But that which was most fatal to Grotius and those of his party was that from that time divers Provincial Synods were held where they were not favoured as he himself says in Letter 64. p. 1. The Magistrates of every City promised Pastors of that party shou'd exercise their charge as before but those of the contrary party thought the same toleration ought not to be given to them Some refused to Preach in publick Churches because the other party were suffered there They assembled themselves in private Meetings so that the Magistrates feared these divers Assemblies wou'd cause trouble in the State as they had in the Church There was an attempt made at Rotterdam as Grotius relates Letter 65. p. 1. to calm these troubles by a particular conference where the reasons of those Pastors were heard who would not Preach in publick Churches with those who were not of their opinion nor communicate with them But this Conference had no good effect as may be seen in this Letter of our Author and in the following where he gives an account of what happened on both sides in this Assembly Lastly the Schism was made after such a manner as all the World knoweth and that besides many other reasons was no little hindrance according to the Judgment of Grotius to the design which several Pious persons formed some years after of reuniting all Protestants The King of Swedland too endeavour'd it a little before his Death having assembled at Leipswich divers Lutheran and Calvinist Divines The authority of this great King made this Conference end with mildness on both sides but his Death which hapned a little while after made all hopes of accommodation vanish It was at that time that an English Divine named Duraeus who had as 't were consecrated himself to endeavour this reunion ran vainly over all the Protestant States to induce them to Peace which the Archbishop of Canterbury William Laud whose Encomium Grotius makes in divers places v. p. 2. Ep. 405 406.532.540 and several Bishops of England passionately desired Grotius saith that an answer of Doctor Hois Preacher to the Elector of Saxony being too violent against the Reformation hindered it very much see Let. 444. p. 1. Protestants not being able to unite with one another there was no likelihood that the Union between them and the Roman Catholicks should succeed Yet there was a great talk on 't in France and Cardinal Richelieu if we believe Grotius Letter 531. p. 2. affirm'd that it would be agreed on Cardinalis quin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 negotium in Gallia successurum sit dubitare se negat This made several persons apply themselves to writing to propose to the publick means and projects of an Union Amongst whom none appeared that made so much noise as Theophilus Brachet dela Millitiere which seemed the more surprizing because before the taking of Rochel this Author had attacked the Kings party and all the Roman Catholicks with an extraordinary heat in a little Book which he Printed for the defence of some Assemblies held at Rochel Grotius speaks of it in divers places but particularly in Letter 373. p. 1. 385.343 345. p. 2. There was then a report at Paris which gave some hope to those who penetrated not the policy of Cardinal Richeleu that there would happen a change in the Gallican Church which would much contribute to an Union Which was that the Cardinal had a design to render himself Patriarch in France and thus to draw the Gallican Church from the obedience of the Court of Rome To this design was applied according to the relation of Grotius Letter 982. p. 1. this Tetrastich of Nostradamus Celui qui etoit bien avant dans le Regne Aiant chef range proche Hierarchie Apre cruel se fera tant craindre Succedera à sacreé Monarchie Some are so far from taking away from the obedience of the Apostolick See that they scarcely dared to defend the Liberties of the Gallican Church The King who had given orders to make a Collection of the Edicts of the Kings of France and of the Acts of Parliament by which until then the excessive power of the Court of Rome was opposed got this collection suppressed in 1639. when the impression thereof was finish'd Grotius who had promised himself much from the courage of the French on this occasion could not dissemble his grievance which he too strongly expresseth Ita sub Regibus aut ignavis aut ignaris tantum sape fit damni quantum successores aegre sarciant mirumque est pro Regibus scribi Lutetiae non licere cum Romae quotidie contra Reges eorum jura liberè fiant He speaks thereof also in as weighty terms in Letter 1105. to Lewis Camerarius Ambassador from Swedland into Holland This event and some others made Grotius doubt of the Roman Catholicks ever giving any satisfaction to Protestants concerning the complaints made of the abuses which they believe to be slipt into the Roman Religion He testifies these doubts in Letter 85. p. 2. where he saith that there is more reason to wish
zealous for the Roman Religion although he wish'd they had Corrected some Abuses which insensibly slip'd into their Manners He made the Elegy upon the Council of Basil and University of Paris and defends others who have opposed themselves to the utmost Authority of the Popes 'T is apparent that all his Zeal against the Hereticks cou'd not hinder him from ranking this Work at Rome amongst Prohibited Books There is more profit in reading the great Preface of Mr. Brown where he not only makes useful Remarks upon this Collection and upon those of its Supplement but also relates some curious Pieces that had not been seen until then which hath been already spoken of There are some nevertheless since this Collection is not for the People he that publish'd it might very well have sorborn many Invectives in his Preface and Notes against the Roman Church and there are a thousand Pieces more proper to declaim against than a Work of this nature this is a fault for which Orthuinus Gratius hath been oftentimes reprehended The Christian Wife of John Mayerus Professor of Divinity or three Dissertations about Wedlock Incest and Divorces Amsterdam at Jansonius Waesburgs 1688 in Quarto page 438. SInce Laws punish Poligamy with so much severity it seemeth there was no need of the assistance of Divines to stop the disorders which might have given life to a Book call'd Poligamus Triumphans written by one Mrs. Lyserus yet this Opinion wou'd nevertheless be as dangerous to the Heart as to the Mind For if it was true that there was a Legitimate priviledge of which the Laws have deprived Man so as he cou'd act no farther except he violate them without their taking notice that he was not exempt from their Penalties Yet Industrious Love would not want means to laugh at their unjustice and enjoy a liberty which should set no limits to his desires Thus Mr. Mayerus who is a learned Professor at Harderwick finding the Question important and worthy of his utmost endeavours undertaketh here to overthrow the imaginary Triumph of Poligamy His Work is divided into three dissertations The first regards Polygamy the second treats of Incest and the last of Divorce He observes that the first care of Legislators ought to make Laws for Marriage which is the Basis and Foundation of Common-wealths Therefore after God had imprinted in Man the Inclination which induceth him to Wedlock he ordered him besides to encrease and multiply The Author grants that these words include a Command which concerneth not only Men but Women also so that no body ought to bury their Talents Yet he adds that the Obligation was much more indispensable immediately after the Creation and deluge because the World was then a vast Desert But the rule ought no more to be taken in the Rigour Yet he maintains with the Fathers of the Church that Adam looked not on Eve as his Wife nor had for her the tenderness of a Husband until after his crime This is it which hath given place to the pleasant Imaginations of the Rabins upon the Apple gathered on the Tree of Life which the Serpent tempted the Woman to taste who having found it delicious corrupted the Innocence of the first Man and made him become the Father of Mankind Doth it not seem that Mr. Sarazin hath sweeten'd this Thought to make his Sonnet so much the more famous against Women Mr. Mugerius afterwards maintains that the Polygamists can draw no advantage from the Command of God Encrease and Multiply because it bears an unlimited Licence to mix himself indifferently For this is understood only in relation to a just Marriage such as God hath instituted from the beginning of the World to wit between two persons The proof drawn from the example of Beasts cannot be applyed to Man who governs himself according to the Laws of reason which abhors this confused mixture If he was governed by a blind instinct meerly it might be maintained that there is nothing criminal in the most unlawful Copulations After all Is not the Turtle-Dove with its tender Cooings and Sighs the Symbol of Conjugal Fidelity It s true that Men sometimes resemble wild Beasts which tear one another the most powerful destroy the weakest His Passions which tyrannise over him and keep him as a Slave in Chains often overwhelm Reason which distinguishes him from them Nevertheless they enjoy say they much more than he does this precious liberty which he prostitutes to whosoever will buy it and according to Montaigne We are but the Tenants of our life But these disorders suffice not to take from Man all his Prerogatives The Arts and Sciences which enlighten his reason and enrich his mind give him a Preheminence which suffers not these odious Comparisons It is not to lose his liberty when it is limited only by reason and the Laws of Society It is on the contrary a more noble liberty which cannot be put in competition with this natural brutality which makes the liberty of Animals It followeth then that he ought not as they say to trample under foot Modesty and Chastity and being endowed with an understanding he ought to distinguish himself from Beasts in the very things which he resembles them most in to shew that he doth not behave himself like unto them by a brutish impetuosity and that he can bridle his desires Having answered the vain Declamations of the Polygamists the Author strives to shew that Polygamy is repugnant to the Law of Nature and he calls the Law of Nature the Will of God who hath fixed Laws of Nature in the Creation of one only Man and one only Woman which he hath formed upon that account He pretends also that it overturneth natural Equity because it is not just that a Wife should be constrained under the Yoak of an exact Fidelity whilst the Husband is prodigal of his Conjugal Love elsewhere Both of 'em according to him are strictly tyed by this Precept of Law To give to every one what belongs unto him Men if we believe St. Gregory of Nazianzen do abstain only because they have made Laws which take away a tyrannical authority over a Sex which hath no other power to defend its Rights but that of Charms and Natural Graces The Wanderings of a Husband then are Frauds and Stealths and directly contrary to the Fundamental Contracts of Marriage by which he obligeth himself solemnly to his Wife Mr. Myerius adds That Poligamy is opposite to the tender Union which ought to be between Marry'd Persons Diversity of Women divorces and weakeneth the Desires and Transports of the Heart It is with them as with Brooks which being divided into several Branches leave dry those Meadows from whence they arose in abundance It was for this reason that the Hebrews called him who kept himself single a sad half of Man whence it 's easie to conclude that he hath need but of another half The Jealousie which would infallibly kindle amongst the Women seems yet another important
were not forbidden the last 7. That there were few Disputes in the Church concerning Morality There are many Tables at the end some Chronological ones observing the times in which the Holy Writers and Ecclesiastick Authors Flourished with that of their Birth and Death others that serve to distinguish the true Works from the Supposititious There are also Alphabetical Indexes for Authors and for the Subjects they treat on De Antiqua Ecclesiae Disciplina dissertationes Historicae Autore Ludovico Ellies Du Pin Saerae Facultatis Theologiae Parisiensis Doctore An Historical Dissertation upon the Ancient Discipline of the Church by Mr. Du Pin Doctor of Divinity At Paris 1686 in 4to THE Author speaks very freely against the Ambition of the Court of Rome and for the Liberty of the French Church He vigorously maintains the Independence of Kings Superiority of Councils and other points which have a long time caus'd many Disputes between France and Rome which altho' it does not run into an actual Schism yet it does into a Virtual one but it wou'd be something very humbling to the Roman Communion if its Divines had not wholly betaken themselves to the Asylum of Providence For in fine never to agree upon the Principle of infallibity and to dispute eternally upon Pretensions of the greatest importance and by a fundamental Rule which the two Parties agree upon I mean Tradition is not this Eagle against Eagle and Rome against Rome It not this to discover its Nakedness to all Passengers And what will become of it if this last Remedy is wanting that God being willing to try our Faith permits this great diversity of Opinions about the Authority of his Vicar Indeed we must confess this is a great Latitude for a mans Faith But let us see Examin what Mr. Du Pin says in his 7 Dessertations which are in very good Latin He proposes in the I. to shew the Ancient Form of Church-Government and to this end he shews the division that was made of great Bodies into Metropolis's Iurisdictions ArchBishopricks Exarchats and Patriachates He tells us the Names and Privileges of those that possess'd these different dignities and as these things had not a beginning all at the same time nor have continued in their original terms he forgets not to observe their rise and different changes the name of Metropolitan he believes was not used in the same sense we take it now before the Council of Nice and he says that that of Arch-Bishop was not known before the Fourth Age when they some times gave it the Pope and some other Prelates of the greatest Towns but that afterwards it was given to all Metropolitans There were also Bishops amongst the Greeks which took upon 'em the Quality of Archbishops Not because they did not see very well that to do things in order theâ— ought to add a Title with the real thing signified but it depended not upon themselves to extend their Jurisdictions over other Bishops they must therefore accommodate themselves to an abuse that they desired to cure by joyning with the Word the thing it signify'd Simplicibus Episcopis says the Author Speciosum Archopiscopi Nomen sibi vindicare haud difficile fuit At subject as alijs Ecclesias sibi subere non iâ— a facile There are also at this time in Italy Archbishops who have no Suffragans What he says upon the word Patriarch is a very learned account of the Variations and Fortune of this Word and may be surprizing to those that imagine Ecclesiastick affairs have been always the same Tho' they will be yet more astonished says the Abridger when they shall know that Mr. Du Pin proves by very good reasons that the charge of Metropolitan or Patriarch was neither instituted by Iesus Christ nor his Apostles but that it proceeded from the rank that was held in certain Cities according to the division of the Provinces by those who in the Roman Empire had such a place in the Civil Government It s very Natural to suppose that those who were Pastors in Capital Towns had some Authority in the Province because it s very necessary that the People shew'd have recourse to them if any difference happen'd amongst 'em wherein they needed advice or determination This introduced a Custom that displeased not these Pastors and from whence they were very willing to deducea Title and Right to Possesiâ—n Natural Order requires it and when Nature wills a thing it s very rare that she does not accomplish it Thus from the First Ages the Archiepiscopal degree of Hierarchy began to form it self which afterwards passed by little and little into custom and then the Canons confirm'd it and thus the Ecclesiastical Government was divided according to the Form of Civil Government so that when some Cities were the chief of many Provinces their Prelates had also some Authority over the Metropolitans for that Reason the Churches of Rome Antioch and Alexandria became the Principal ones the First in the West the Second in the East and the Third in South Constantinople was rais'd to the same degree after it became the Seat of the Emperours As for the Church of Ierusalem it was the same but not for the greatness of the place but because of its Primogeniture Rome Antioch and Alexandria aquired Privileges beyond other Seats either by time Learning or the Liberality of their Synods Thus we may translate the words of Mr. Du Pin Vel sibi vindicarunt vel a Synodâ—s Concess a receperunt He gives many proofs for what he advances concerning the rise of Metropolis's after which he gives a particular account of the distribution of the Ecclesiastical Government which was regulated after the form of the Civil Government and when he comes to the division of the Gauls he forgets not the difference between the Archbishops of Arles and Vienna nor the Priviledg of Primate which some French Metropolitans enjoy He is very large upon the Authority of the Patriarchs and maintains that Rome had always the First Rank but that it's Jurisdiction extended no further than the Suburbicary Provinces since elsewhere he had no power to command the Metropolitans which is one of the particular Prerogatives belonging to the Patriarchs He confesses that the Popes have enlarged the limits of their Patriarchate more than they ought and that they have since ruined the Priviledgs of all Metropolitans He examins the Objections of the contrary Party and many difficulties which are represented about the Patriarchate of Constantinople the Sixth Canon of the Council of Nice and some other Passages One of these Two things cannot be deny'd when so many Innovations are Visible either that for some time the Popes remitted a part of their Right or that they have Usurped over other Prelates The First is much more unlikely than the Second But there is another Question which extreamly perplext those that are not used to dispute viz how so great a number of Learned Men can be so confidently accused of
of the Book of Samuel of the Chronicles and of Kings put together according as the order of events required Here are also many Psalms with the occasions and most difficult passages of the Canticles explained after the manner of our Author that is to say according to the method of the Rabbins who only guessed at many things in ancient History Whereof see an example in C. 58. about the explication of Psalm 58.35 but as neither the time nor the Authors of all the Psalms are not known Lightfoot could not range them in Chronological order Which has obliged him to place the Book of Psalms after the the 35 th chapter of the 1 st Book of Chronicles In this place he makes divers reflections upon the gathering together of these Sacred Songs Ps. 71. He tells us the Book of Proverbs and the Song of Songs was written when Solomon had finished the buildings he had undertaken He believes that the Song of Songs was composed by this Prince upon his Marrying the King of Egypt's Daughter who that being a very hot Country was Brown as it is Cant. 1.5 6. but his chief end was to represent the Spiritual Marriage of Jesus Christ with his Church under the sensible Type of his own with an Egyptian As for the Ecclesiastes Lightfoot places it much later and thinks it a work that he composed in the time of his Repentance see Pag. 26. from this place the Books of the Kings and Chronicles are Printed in Columns so that one may see at first view the conformity and difference which is between them as there is in this History many Chronological difficulties so Lightfoot is more exact to mark the years of every Prince 5. Being come to the Reign of Vzziah whom the Scripture also calls Azarias he saith that before that time there always had been some Prophets but that none of them had left his Prophecies in writing And according to him 't was in this time that the Prophets begun to write On this occasion he describes the order and end of the Prophecies of Hosea Ioel Amos Obadiah and Ionas he maintains that the first occasion of the Prophecies of Hosea was the death of Zacharias Son of Barachia As all that this Prophet saith cannot relate to one time only so he here mentions but the four first Chapters the others are each in their place He hath observed the same order in regard to the rest who have prophesied in divers times Those according to his Judgment whose Predictions have been delivered in the same time are inserted entire in the places where Lightfoot speaks of what happened at that time as Nahum Zephaniah c. 6. The Book of Esdras immediately followeth the first of Chronicles It was then that Cyrus published his Edict by which he permitted the Jews to return to their Countrey for tho' Darius of Media or Astyages as the Greeks call him lived at that time it was made in the name of Cyrus his Grandson Lightfoot makes divers remarks upon this Darius of Media to p. 113. in explaining the 5th Chapter of Daniel and to p. 136. he speaks of several things during the Reign of Cyrus and the Succession of the Kings of Persia. Lightfoot inserts the History of Esdras after the 4th Chapter of Esdras He believes the Assuerus mentioned in this History was also called Artaxerxes and that he was called Assuerus from the name of one of his Predecessors which is spoken of in Dan. 9.1 to wit the Grandfather of Cyrus whom the Greeks called according to Lightfoot Astyages He makes this Assuerus immediately to follow Cyrus 7. Nehemiah and Malachy end this work and the Spirit of Prophecy having ceased among the Jews the Books that they have since made have not had the same Authority as those that preceded them Lightfoot explains here the difficult Chronologies that he meets with in his way 2. The Harmony of the Old Testament is followed with some remarks upon Genesis and Exodus the first are entituled Paucae ac novellae observationes super librum Geneseos quarum pleraeque certae caeterae probabiles sunt omnes autem innoxiae ac raro antea auditae It is a Collection of divers Rabbinical Remarks or like in subtilty to those of the Rabbins They conjecture at many things according to the custom of these ingenious Doctors for example That the first natural Day in the Climat of the Garden of Eden was thirty six hours long even as the day whereof mention is made in the 10 th Chapter of Joshua That the Moon and some Stars were created before the Sun That it was at the full before the Sun appeared which then augmented its Light but that the Earth hindering the sight thereof it appeared not to Adam till six days after who saw it in its first quarter after that the Promise had cleared the darkness of the Fall That the clean Beasts were created in each kind to the number seven whereof three pairs were destined to the propagation of their kind and the seventh to be sacrificed by Adam after he had sinned but that there was but one pair of each kind of unclean Animals c. His Remarks upon Exodus bear this Title Manipulus spicilegiorum è libro Exodi ubi solutio probabilis scrupulorum quorundam manifestorum explanatio difficiliorum textuum qui hoc libro occurrunt antea ab aliis raro exhibitae These Remarks keep much of the subtilty of the preceding ones therein is nevertheless seen a method a little more conform to that which the Interpreters of the holy Scripture commonly follow Every Section contains particular Remarks which have no connexion one with the other and there are 59 Questions which we cannot undertake to make an exact Extract of We shall only bring two or three of them by which you may judge of the rest Lightfoot believes that the 88 th and 89 th Psalms are the most Antient Works that remain amongst us and are made by Heman and Ethan Sons of Zerach as hath already been remarked who lived in the time of the Egyptian Slavery He makes answer to those who oppose him therein that Ethan speaks of David 1. That this might be a Spirit of Prophecy as 't is spoken of Samuel in Psal. 99. which the Hebrews believe to be of Moses 2. That Prophet having left some Writings they have been polished and augmented by others who had also the gift of Prophecy according as certain things present past or to come required it This will plainly appear saith Lightfoot if we compare the 18th Psalm with the first of Sam. chap. 22. Obadiah with Ieremiah c. 49. v. 14. 1 Chron. c. 16. with Psal. 92. 105. 2 Pet. c. 2. with the Epistle of St. Iude. He believes that this piece of Ethan hath likewise been polished in David's time and that several times the name of David was then inserted from Section the 30th unto the end Our Author endeavours to describe the Tabernacle and
subject could bear II. After these Sermons of which we have spoke there is a small work Intituled a brief exposition of the Lords Prayer and the Decalogue with the Doctrine of the Sacraments these treaties have been already published in Twelves they are extreamly short but one may there find the Lords Prayer and the ten Commandments explained in a good and correct method yet there is almost nothing essential which is forgot Altho the Author took pains for the Vulgar yet he did not omit to cite in the Margin the Fathers and Heathen Authors where he found it for his purpose as when he expounded these words in the Lords Prayer thy Will be done c. he cites Epictetus Plato Antoninus and Seneca Epictetus says in his Enchiridion if God will have it so let it be so and Plato in his Dialogue Intituled Citron affirms that Socrates being in Prison pass'd the time whilst he tarried there as one that resigned himself to God in every thing which should happen to him The Emperor Antoninus says that we must chearfully receive every thing that happens to us and the words of Seneca are no less remarkable Ego Secundum Naturam vivo si totum me illi dedo optimum est Deum quo auctore cuncta proveniunt sine murmuratione comitari c. hic est magnus Animus qui se Deo tradidit I live according to Nature when I resign my self entirely to him nor is there any thing better than to follow without murmuring that God that is the cause of every thing It belongs only to great Souls to commit themselves wholly to God Mr. Barrow in the beginning of his Exposition of the Decalogue says it seems at first sight That it rather contains the Laws of the Iewish State than their Moral Precepts since there 's nothing spoke of the manner how we ought to live in regard of our selves as to the Continency Sobriety or Devotion and which we owe towards God as to Prayer Thanksgiving Confession of sins c. It seems to have a particular respect to the Jews who were a chosen people and that God govern'd them after a more peculiar manner than other Nations in giving 'em Laws for every particular thing which was only accommodated to the State of the Israelites to whom God only made himself known and that so this Law does not oblige all Nations in that especial sense wherein it was given by the Holy Ghost After this he gives divers Reasons for which we yet ought to have the Decalogue in the greatest Veneration and to observe it exactly except the 4th Commandment which doth not oblige the observation of Christians in this that it is Ceremonial no more than the first Patriarchs who also were not the less pleasing to God notwithstanding the testimony of Iustin and St. Ireneus but Reason it self dictates that it is necessary to set some time apart in which we may more particularly apply our selves to Divine Service and in which Servants may rest themselves from Labour 't is this the Heathens themselves observed witness Plato who says that the Gods are touch'd with pity towards Men and because of the Labour which they are obliged to he permits 'em some repose and days of rest Legum Conditores says Seneca festos instituerunt dies ut ad hilaritatem homines publicè cogerentur tanquam necessarium laboribus Mr. Barrow says nothing of the Sacraments since there is enough spoken of them by the most able Protestant Divines In the beginning there is one thing worthy of remark Besides other Washings which he speaks of he shews that it was a Custom amongst the Jews that those who were dedicated to God were exhorted to repentance for transgressing the Law and were wash'd in publick Testimony that they should change their Life He maintained this assertion upon the success which the Baptism of St. Iohn the Baptist had for it wou'd have been without doubt rejected as an Innovated Ceremony in a time when the Jews had such an extravagant respect to their own Traditions that they wou'd have opposed it if not upheld upon an Antient Custom If this is so one might also conjecture that the Lustrations of the Heathens gave birth to this extraordinary Baptism for 't is well known that those who had committed some Crimes were to be washed by some publick person and even by Princes themselves whereof we find an infinite number of Examples in the most Antient History of the Greeks III. The third piece which is in this Volume is a Treatise of the Pope's Supremacy to which is added a Discourse concerning the Vnity of the Church There has been already published in quarto in 1679. by Dr. Tillotson to whom the Author had committed the Care of the Impression at his death the first Testimony in a small Preface He believes that Dr. Barrow has omitted nothing essential or what might be of any consequence in this Controversie he believes that there is enough to decide for ever all the difficulties and to disswade all wise men of either Party from writing any more upon this Subject We shall remark in few words the method of his Treatise to the end that we may have a general Idea of what is contained in it we have at the first sight a preface wherein the Author relates the different sentiments of the Doctors of the Roman Church touching the Authority of the Pope which some make Inferiour to that of the Councils whilst others are of a contrary perswasion yet he briefly gives us the History of the Original and progress of the Papal Power Mr. Barrow having remarked that all that is said on this Power can only be founded upon seven suppositions he divides his Work into seven parts and examines them one after another these are the suppositions 1. That St. Peter received from Iesus Christ the Preheminence amongst the Apostles and had given to him an Authority and Sovereign Iurisdiction over the rest 2. That the rights and advantages of this Soveraignty were not personal but might be transmitted to others and left to their Successors 3. That St. Peter was the Bishop of Rome 4. That St. Peter continued to be Bishop of Rome after he had left Judea and that he remained so till his death 5. That 't is from thence that the priviledges of the Pope do come as Successor to St. Peter to wit Vniversal Iurisdiction over the whole Church of Iesus Christ. 6. That the Popes have effectually enjoy'd this Power and have exercised it without discontinuations from St. Peter till now 7. That this Power could not be lost nor be lessened by any means whatsoever The Author admits that St. Peter might be the first of the Apostles in regard of personal qualities esteem and reputation but he questions his precedency in order or dignity It appears too great a vanity for a man that had the Vertue and Humility of St. Peter He supposes it is very probable
that the Apostles insisted upon no points of Ceremonies amongst themselves which should oblige 'em to a certain order as to precedency in walking c. he confesses that one might oppose to this the Authority of some Fathers but he maintains that their Authority is not of so great weight in these things which are not essential to Faith because that upon these occasions they followed their own thoughts and conjectures being as much actuated by the dictates of their imaginations as other-men altho St. Cyprian and other African Doctors assure us that St. Peter had only this Preheminence because that we might learn thereby to keep the Unity of the Church Mr. Barrow omits not to tell us that one might assent to the Priority of St. Peter and he gives there the same reasons for example he was call'd to the Apostleship before the others he was older c. That which can't be granted to St. Peter according to our Author is a Superiority of Iurisdiction whereof nothing is to be found in Holy Writ and which ought to be there contained and very clearly if it were a Doctrine of Faith according to this Rule of St. Austin Credo etiam hic Divinorum eloquiorum clarissima auctoritas esset si homo sine dispendio promissae salutis ignorare non posset The Author is very large in proving that St. Peter had not any Authority like to this over the Apostles and carefully answers the passages of the Fathers which the Roman Catholicks use to object to the Protestants on this occasion and he brings divers of the same Fathers frequently opposing themselves and very strongly confutes those arguments brought for the Superiority of St. Peter Mr. Barrow endeavours in the sequel to shew that the Priviledges of the Apostleship were personal and died with the Apostles according to that Maxim of the Law Privilegium personale personam sequitur cum persona extinguitur That if the Fathers say that Bishops are Successors of the Apostles they also say it indifferently of all Bishops They cou'd not say any thing more than this that the Apostles have established them to govern the Christian Church after 'em not that any of them has succeeded in the utmost extent of the Apostles Charge but because that every Bishop governs the Flock which is committed to him Singulis Pastoribus says St. Cyprian portio gregis adscripta est quam regat unusquisque gubernet c. Episcopatus unus as he adds in another place cujus à singulis in solidum pars tenetur He afterwards attempts to shew that the Episcopacy of St. Peter is incompatible with his Apostleship and that none of the Antients believed that he was the Bishop of Rome where he could not stay long altho' it is pretended he continued many years 'T is said on this occasion that he who wrote the Letter by some supposed from St. Peter to St. Iames does not misrepresent the personage of this Apostle since it makes him to say If whilst I am alive they dare raise so many falsities upon me what will not posterity undertake He maintains yet farther that St. Peter was not Bishop of Rome because there were others there in his time to wit Linus established by St. Paul and Clement established after Linus by St. Peter himself There are yet brought many other Reasons drawn from Antiquity After having refuted the four first Suppositions of the Roman Catholicks he remarks that since they are the only foundation upon which the fifth can be upheld it must necessarily be false since the preceding ones are so which he believes he has sufficiently proved He yet maintains farther which is more than needful that when they grant to St. Peter all the Roman Catholicks attribute to him it would not follow that the Bishop of Rome should be his Successor This he shews all along by many Reasons and by the Testimony of the Fathers as well as by Sacred Writ he much enlarges upon the Inconveniencies which would be in obeying the Bishop of Rome as the only Successor of the Priviledges of the Apostles and he says amongst many other things that the Popes have render'd that definition true which Scioppius has given to the Roman Church viz. Ecclesia est Mandra sive grex aut multitudo Iumentorum sive Asinorum He also mentions the History of the Establishment and the Jurisdiction of the Metropolitans or Primates and maintains that as they were established by Humane Prudence so they might also be abolished by the same Power and other things of this nature which entirely ruine the Authority of the Pope The Author after this applies himself to shew that the Popes since St. Peter have not enjoyed without discontinuation this Soveraign Authority which they usurp since they have not had the power to convocate general Councils nor to preside there nor to make Laws or oppose themselves to the Canons of the Councils and lastly that they enjoy'd not for many Ages the other Rights of this Soveraignty There is in this Chapter the History of the Convocation of General Councils and the oppositions which have been made divers times against the power of the Bishop of Rome In fine Mr. Barrow engages the last supposition of the Roman Catholicks to wit that the Supremacy of the Popes could not be ruined He brings many reasons to evince that it might cease and that when it was granted to the Pope it might happen that he could lose it by the faults he should commit or personal defects as if he turn'd a Heretick because St. Ambrose says those who have not the faith of St. Peter cannot be his Successors Non habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri fidem non habent quam Impia divisione discerpunt and this frequently happens as Dr. Barrow says acccording to the Ancients and is yet seen to this day if we may believe the Protestants whose reasons the Author proposes very strongly in enumerating the sentiments of the Roman Church which are considered as very erroneous 'T is this which contains the treaties of the Popes Supremacy the other follows to wit the Vnity of the Church where Dr. Barrow designs to prove that Vnity may well subsist without the necessity of the Christian Churches having a visible head He engages to shew that the Unity of the Church consists in this that all the Christians do agree in Fundamentals particularly in those which have a necessary connexion with Piety and the Practice of good works and in this that they be joined in the bond of mutual charity c. He afterwards shews in what manner the Christian Churches may root out Heresie and Schism without the assistance of a Visible Head and keep at the same time a Conformity of Discipline in things of the highest consequence even when it cou'd not be established but by Humane Prudence but he yet maintains that this last Union is possible in supposing certain things which are
in Holland and his Letter was shewn to Peter du Moulin as then Minister of Charenton who had made some Reflections upon this Letter which were sent to Grotius This gave him occasion to write to the same Ambassador the 62 Letter of the 1. p. Where he treats of some of these Controversies and amongst others those which respect the Authority of the Magistrate in Ecclesiastical things It seems by what Grotius saith that du Moulin should believe that a Magistrate ought to be Learned to have some Authority in Ecclesiastical things Grotius refutes this thought He applyes himself again to shew that the Authority of a Prince depends not on the truth of his opinions in matters of Religion He brings the words of St. Augustin in the Letter ad Vincentium Reges cum in errore sunt pro ipso errore leges contra veritatem ferunt cum in veritate sunt similiter contra errorem pro ipsa veritate decernunt He cites besides the example of the Emperor Aurelian who at the prayer of the Christians drove from his Bishoprick Paul de Samosate who would not submit himself to the Authority of the Councils w ch had condemned his Doctrine Grotius saith several things upon the Power of Princes in the regulating of Controversies which arise in matter of Religion But he hath treated on all this more fully in his Book de Imperio summarum Potestatum circa sacra We find in the Letter 329. the solution of another question which belongs to the Canon Law It was to know if the Religious to whom the Pope permitted to Preach and Confess can do it without consulting the Bishops and without asking their Permission Mr. de S. Cyran under the Name of Petrus Aurelius maintain'd they could not and the Jesuites pretended that these priviledged Fryars needed no permission from the Bishops Mr. des Cordes Canon of Limoge and a great friend to Grotius had demanded of him his opinion thereupon He answers that the Antiquity of Mr. de S. Cyran was certainly reasonable and that even where these Commissions are received they ought to be interpreted in such wise that they make the least prejudice to the Canons and received Uses But he adds that he cannot tell how Mr. de S. Cyran as well as the Jesuits attributing to the Pope an almost absolute Authority can maintain that he has not the power to do what Bishops do every day to wit to give the permission of Preaching and Confessing He saith that in giving the Pope the power that is given him they ought to fall into the same inconveniency wherein the Romans were under an Emperour who would have all the questions of Law to be sent to his Oracle In Letter 693. directed to a Polish Lord who had asked him his opinion concerning Torments he answers that there is nothing less certain than a Confession extorted by Torments upon which he cites this word of an ancient mentietur quiferre non potuerit mentietur qui ferre potuerit I have saith he infinite examples of People who were unjustly put to Death upon so uncertain a foundation I do not wonder that there have been grave persons who believed that Christians should not make use of Torments to extort Confessions seeing it's certain there is no such thing in the Law of Moses That in England Men live in as great security as any where tho' Tortures are not in use there and that whilst Rome conserv'd it's Liberty the Citizens were never tortured William Grotius had made some questions to his Brother concerning the publick Law upon which occasion our Author shews in his Letter 4. P. 2. the difference which is betwixt particular and publick Laws and sheweth that they are equally founded upon Nature the Law of Nations and the Civil Law He treats afterwards on this Question If natural Right can suffer some change He divides this Law into divers branches and shews in what sense there may happen some change He also treats on the same matter in Letter 6. It had been it seems objected against him that the Civil Laws do sometimes alter the Law of Nature when they make void all the promises that a Pupil might make without the consent of his Guardian seeing he violates this Right of the Law of Nature that one must keep his promises Grotius shews how Civil Law agrees herein with the Law of Naâ—ure and also expounds some like cases as if a Pupil having borrow'd without the consent of his Tutour and being become rich by this borrowing whether he is oblig'd to pay Grotius answers that although by the Ancient Civil Law of the Romans a Creditor could not have an action against a Pupil altho ' the Pupil is bound to pay by the Law of Nature whereof here is an inviolable Law That none ought to enrich himself with the damage of another He cites divers Laws upon this subject He treats in Letter 4. of the same Part of Servitudes and sheweth that it is a Right established by Men against Liberty and Natural Freedom He expounds the Law in fine ff de aqua where it is said that the low possessions have commonly this Servitude that they receive their waters which run from those that are highest In Letter 12. He speaks fully enough of Conventions in general and of Stipulations in particular He shews that the Law of Nature necessarily obligeth one to keep his word whence several Philosophers have given the name of Truth to justice and Simonides said that Justice consisted in speaking the truth and in giving what one hath received notwithstanding Plato and Theophrastus were of opinion that no body ought to have the power of forcing any one to keep his word by virtue of the Laws but that it should be free not to keep it as it is free not to be generous But this Philosophy saith our Author agrees not with our Age wherein few Folks are virtuous by their own motion without the fear of Laws He enters after that upon a great Question to wit how Civil Law can derogate from the Law of Nature in matters of agreement and promises He expounds in a few words in what manner the Roman Laws have taken away from those who submitted themselves thereto the Liberty of promising certain things so that on these occasions they have rendered contracts void as well as when they were not extorted after the manner which these Laws prescribed He shews that the Laws have not in all that injured the Law of Nature We find besides in Letter 352. p. 2. The examination of this Question Vtrum voluntas testatoris coram septem testibus ad id convocatis declarata nolle se Testamentum ante factum valere habenda sit pro Testamento tali quale esset si haeredes ab intestato instituisset disertè Grotius answers yes and that it is thus he understands those terms Voluitque intestato decedere in l. 1. § Si haeres D. si tabulae Testamenti nullae extabunt
The second has a superintendance over the Customs and Tributes and in general over the King's Treasure The third has the Direction of the Rites and Ceremonies of Sciences and Arts. The fourth has for its share all that belongs to War and to Arms in all the Kingdom The fifth of the Crimes and Punishments of Criminals among which by the by there is none look'd upon to be so base and ignominious as to be beheaded The sixth over-looks the Works and Building of the King so that there is no business of any nature but is subject to these 6 Supream Tribunals and as they have jurisdiction over almost all the Court and over all them of the Provinces there can none be more respected nor better obeyed than they are where-ever they go The 5 Tribunals of Arms are governed by great Lords as Marquesses Counts c. and have above them one Supream Tribunal called the High Tribunal of War the President whereof is always one of the greatest Lords of the Kingdom the Authority of this President seems very considerable since his Jurisdiction reaches over the five other Tribunals and over all the Officers and Souldiers of the Kingdom But lest he might abuse so great a Power he has given him for an Assister a Mandarin of Sciences under the Title of High Regent of Arms and two Syndicks or Royal Overseers who take part in all Affairs Moreover it may be said That all these Tribunals of War have more Show and Appearance than real Authority because in all things that belong to Execution they depend necessarily upon the Supream Tribunal of Arms which is the fourth of the six that we spoke of this was one of the cunningest of the Politicks of the Kings of China and an effect of the Knowledge they had of the Humour of their Subjects whose ruling Passion is to grow rich and to command To have thus ordained so great a number of Tribunals or Courts that a great many might have the means to content their Ambition by the Honours and Profits of the Imployments they are in whilst the little Power they have takes away from them the means of abusing their places And the same measures within a very little were observed by the other Supream Tribunals whose Power seems greater and less limited For as it might be feared that any one of them might render himself absolute if he were left to the entire disposal of the Matters belonging to him all their Employments were distributed and their Functions were ordered with so much Prudence that not one among them is absolute in the Affairs of his Office but all have a dependence upon one another All the Eleven Tribunals are placed according to their Rank in magnificent Palaces on both sides of that of the King 's the first six upon the left which is the place of Honour and towards the East the other five on the right towards the West and whereas each of the Six has under it several Subaltern Tribunals to prepare and order Business so have these inferiour Tribunals their Palaces within the great one of which they depend these lesser Tribunals are in greater or lesser number in each of the great ones proportionably to the business they have and according to our Authors Calculation there are in all 44 in such sort that it seems business should be treated of exactly passing through so many different Tribunals and yet it must be known that in the Palace of each Supream Tribunal there is always a Hall and an Apartment for a Mandarin who is called Overseer or Supervisor who examines publickly or secretly all that is done and as soon as he knows of any Disorder or Injustice he is obliged to acquaint the King with it all other Tribunals whether of the Court or belonging to the Provinces which are joyned to these Supream Tribunals are governed with no less Policy Those of the Court which are established at Pekin are so numerous that we shall take no care to mention them here for there are some for every kind of business among others there are some that make up a Royal Academy and which consists of the best Wits of all the Kingdom They are as it were the King 's Learned men with whom he discourses very often upon several Sciences and makes choice of many to be his Counsellors and for other Tribunals that which is called the Visitors or that belongs to the general Supervisors Oversees all the Court and Empire it 's charge is to see the Laws observed and Justice executed and to see that both the Mandarins and People do their Duty this Tribunal is much feared and has under it 25 Tribunals and is placed in a huge Palace every three Years it causes a general Visit to be made sending Visitors into each Province who no sooner enter into them than they become above all Vice-Roys and Mandarins and do all with an Authority that inspires no little Fear But there is yet another Tribunal the Functions whereof is not less considerable nor of less importance which is that of the Overseers which we have spoken of already which are divided into six Orders as the six Supream Tribunals which they oversee their Authority goes so far that they may reprehend the King himself when he commits any fault in the Government of the State and there are found some generous enough to expose themselves resolutely to a Banishment or even to Death it self in acquainting him of his faults sometimes by a Memorial and sometimes by telling him them to his Face In fine every Province has its Tribunals as well general as particular and above all there is one that is Chief and oversees all the rest and gives the King and the six Supream Tribunals of the Court an account of all important Affairs It may be easily judged that all their Imploys have a great many Mandarins and so there are 32000 in the Roll which the Court sends from time to time into the Provinces and though this number may seem very strange yet our Author says That the distribution distinction and subordination is much more marvellous and surprising It seems the Law-makers have not forgot any thing for the establishing of things upon the best bottom that it was possible to put them and that they have prevented all the inconveniences that might be feared but by ill looking to the Conduct and Goodness of the Officers does not correspond to so good an order for as they all have an inâ—atiable desire of raising themselves and becoming Rich they transgress for these ends all Human and Divine Laws and Justice and whil'st they counterfeit in their Exterior the exact observers and are very nice in Formalities they do not make the least scruple to commit the greatest Injustices in the bottom and to tread upon Reason Religion Honesty and Equity which does not hinder the form of Government from being in it self very excellent Because as our Author says the Knavery of the Men
in his Historical Dissertations p. 45 c. fol. IV. Bom after that takes another turn to Answer the Question of Episcopius touching the Institution of a Soveraign Judge over Controversies who succeeded the Apostles He asks of him a formal passage Wherein Iesus Christ hath ordered the Apostles that if there arose Disputes in the Church they should Convocate a Synod and make Decisions thereupon to which the Faithful should be obliged in Conscience to submit There is no appearance adds he that the Apostles should do it if they had not believed this Action conformable to the Will of their Master nor that the Primitive Church should so soon imitate them if the Apostles had ordered nothing thereupon It must then be that either the Institution of Synods is an Apostolical Tradition or that it is an inseparable Sequel of the Ministery and Promises that Iesus Christ hath made to those who exercise it I am always with you until the end of the World and other Passages which tho they are at every moment in the mouth of Catholicks seem not the stronger for that to Protestants Episcopius confesseth that Iesus Christ hath commanded no where his Disciples to convocate Synods and that notwithstanding they have done it He adds That according to their Example Ecclesiastical Assemblies may be held but that it followeth not that these Assemblies where none less than the Holy Ghost presides have as much Authority as the Apostolick ones The reason hereof is that the Authority of the Apostolick Synods depended not so much on the consent and conformity of their Opinions as on the quality of their persons and of the Authority which God had clothed them with by the Revelations he had made unto them and the Orders he had given them This will appear evident if we take notice of the conduct of the Apostles When they have an express command from God they expect not the Resolutions of a Synod for to act and St. Peter understood no sooner the meaning of the Vision which he had had but he went to Cornelius But when they speak of their own head they say I advise you 1 Cor. vii 25. On these occasions they took advice of one another Sometime they agreed not as it happened to Paul and Barnabas Act. xv 39. But commonly the spirit of Mildness and Peace which fill'd them and which shewed them all the Principles and all the Consequences of the Gospel brought them mutually to consult each other So that their actions being thus conducted by the Spirit of God they could say It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us But tho it was granted that the Convocation of Synods is of a divine Institution doth it follow that all the Synods and Councils which have been held after the Apostles have made good Decisions A Catholick denyes it and if he is asked the reason He must of necessity answer that what distinguisheth true Synods from false ones is that there have been some which have had all the Conditions necessary for a true Synod and have made good Decisions and the others wanting these Conditions have been but Conciliabula But how can it be known that these Conditions are assured marks of the Truth of Synods seeing that there is not one which is not equivocate according to some Doctors of the Roman Church And how can one tell what Synod hath them Will it be known by its Decisions But they should be examined and so to deny the Principle to wit that it might have pronounced a definitive Sentence Is it enough to assure it lawful that it be general Yes for the Gallican Church which receives the Council of Basil but not for Italy It must besides be confirmed by the Pope but who hath given him this Right Is it a Priviledge of the Successors of St. Peter How have they obtained it and whence comes it that the Bishops of Antioch who have succeeded this Apostle as well as those of Rome have had no share in it After all what needs there any trouble to prove the Authority of Synods when People are of the sentiment of Bom and the Iesuites And seeing that St. Peter and his Successours are the Soveraign Judges of Controversies what need is there of these Ecumenick Assemblies convocated with so much difficulty and Expences It 's not enough to interrogate this infallible Judge and to receive his Decisions as Oracles from Heaven The Passages which the Catholick alledgeth here in his behalf and the Answers which he hath made to those of the Protestants have been so often repeated that tho Episcopius refutes them sufficiently after a new manner we notwithstanding do not think it worth while to stop at them We shall only relate the manner wherewith our Professour translates the famous passage of the First Epistle to Timothy III. 15 16. because it is not common and that it destroyeth at once all the proofs which the Roman Church could draw thence Episcopius having proved against his Adversary as an illiterate Person that the Division of the Canonical Books into Chapters and Verses is not of the Sacred Writers and that it is not they who have put the Points and Comma's thereto he sheweth him that it is much more natural and more conformable to the aim of the Apostle to point this place otherwise than the common Copies are And to Translate it thus I have written this unto you That if I delay to come you may know how Men ought to behave themselves in the House of God which is the Church of the living God The stay and prop of Truth and the Mystery of Piety is certainly great God manifested in the Flesh c. When there is want of clear Reasons and convincing Arguments people are constrained to have recourse to Prejudices to Comparisons and to the Reasons of Convenience Therefore the Roman Catholicks say incessantly to us That God who well knew that there would arise Disputes in the Church upon Matters of Faith as there are Processes formed amongst Citizens of one State touching the Goods which they possess ought to establish a Judge who should be consulted at all times and who might instruct us in the true sense of Scripture in contested places and thus end the Differences It seemeth that Iesus Christ otherwise would not have taken care enough of his Church and the faithful who compose it seeing he would not have given them means of assuring themselves perfectly that the Doctrine which appears most conformable to Scripture is true if they might be in doubt as to several Articles of Faith and that what they should most determinately believe thereupon could not pass but for a a greater likelihood of Truth It must be granted that there would be nothing better understood nor more commodious than a Judge of this nature There would be no more need for one to break his Head in examining all things and to seek for truth it should be all found and People would go to Heaven
Paris Sold by William des Prez 1679. IN the Design which this Author hath proposed of giving us an Abridgment of Vniversal History he hath begun these Three First Volumes with an Ecclesiastical History which contains the First General one He divides it as he hat done the Preface into Antient and Modern The first treats of what passed in Religion since the Creation of the World unto Iesus Christ and the second from Iesus Christ unto the end of the 16th Age that is to say this last contains the Establishment of the Gospel the Life of Popes the Schisms Heresies Persecutions of the Church the General and Provincial Councils and finally the Elogiums and Characters of Saints and of the Illustrious Writers of all these Ages As the Principal events which have happened in all these Revolutions are no more known we shall touch here but certain particular things which Mr. le Bret takes occasion to expound from time to time For example Upon occasion of the division which Pope Marcellus Successor to Marcellinus made of Rome into 25 parts which Pope Evaristus and Denis had begun he speaks of the Establishment of Parishes which succeeded after that The Priests whom this Pope Commissioned to govern them were named by the duty of the charge which was imposed on them to Administer the Sacraments and the Word of God to the Faithfull Parochi from certain Magistrates which the Romans called thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a praebendo because they furnished at Rome to the Ambassadors even of strange Princes Salt Wine and such like things He remarks that the Chief amongst the Priests were afterwards named at Rome Carthage and in several other places Cardinals because that as a Door regitur a Cardine each Church was so by its Bishop and the Principal of his Clergy This name was given them after the same manner in France in all the Cathedral Churches which he confirms by a Synod as Learned Coquille cites held in 893 by Franco Bishop of Navarre with his strange Canons Cardinals Arch-Priests and Foreign Priests to which he adds that this name is still in use only at Rome where saith he The Curates of the Principal Parishes are called Cardinal Priests the Benefactors of the other Churches which are not Parochial Cardinal Deacons and the Bishops who are Suffragans of Rome in the quality of Metropolitans Cardinal Bishops In speaking of the Right which Alberic had obliged Iohn the Eleventh to give the Patriarchs of Constantinople to use for ever the Pallium he explains what this Episcopal Ornament was Eusebius of Caesarea attributes the Institution thereof to Linus immediate Successor to St. Peter and he adds That as the Ephod was the Mark of the Authority of the Priests of the Synagogâ—â— so the Pallium was to Christian Priests of their Pastoral Power It was White and of Lamb's-wooll made into a Circle and of about four fingers broad having four Bandelets hanging before and behind two on the right and two on the left with four Red Crosses which were not without a Mystery The term of Corovesque which is found in one of the Canons of the Council of Ancyra gives him occasion of expounding what this dignity was in times past which is still us'd in the Church but under another title for it was only for the Bishops properly which we call now in Partibus which in quality of Suffragans are obliged to the administration of the Diocesses when the Bishops are absent at least the Institution of the Corovesques seems to have given place to that of other Bishops who have notwithstanding some advantages which the Corovesques had not All the World knows that the White Horse which the King of Spain payeth every year in quality of King of Naples to the Pope is a Right which is due unto them for the Remise which Sixtus IV. generously made to Ferdinand King of Naples of the yearly Quit-Rent which he owed to the Holy See but few know perhaps what this Author remarks after Father Morin of the Oratory upon the Subject of Pope Iohn XV. That the Predecessors of this Pope who dated all their Acts from the years of the Emperors thought expedient to change this date after Charlemagne had made 'em Soveraigns and as at first they dated from the Indictions so afterwards from the years of their Pontificate as at this day See the Synod of Rome held by this Pope in 993. The discovery of the Canaries under the Pontificate of Clement VI. towards the year 1347. The Extirpation of the Order of Templars who were condemned to be burned at the Council of Vienna under Clement V. The permission which Innocent VIII gave the Priests of Norwegue to Celebrate under the only Species of Bread because there are no choice Wines and that those which are carried thither cannot come without becoming sour and an infinite other things of this kind render this Reading very acceptable and assure this Author with whom notwithstanding all the World will not agree in what he saith on certain things as upon the Nile upon Abbot Gerseu c. with what impatiency the Abridgment of his Political History is expected A Collection of several Relations with many singular and Curious Treatises of T. B. Tavernier Esq Baron of Aubone Divided into Five Parts In Quarto At Paris Sold by Gervais Clouzier 1679. THE difficulty which there is of getting into Iapan is the reason that we can learn nothing beyond what the Hollanders have Written thereof in their Relations They are alone permitted to go and Traffick in these Isles which the Portuguese discover'd in 1542 since a poor Cook of a Ship which parted from Amsterdam for the Indies being come to the Charge of President of the Comptoir of Iapan put into his head to exclude the Portuguese from this Commerce for he invented to this end such black Calumnies against them and all the Christians of this Country in general that the Emperor of Iapan resolved to Banish the first and to Extirpate the others whose number which augmented every day in this Empire was come to more than 400000. It 's what Mr. Tavernier describes in the First of the Five Parts which compose this Volume The Second is but a Relation of what passed in the Negotiation of the Deputies who have been in Persia and in the Indies as well from the King as the French Company for the establishing of Commerce In the Third which contains the Observations of this Author upon the Commerce of the East-Indies and upon the Frauds which may be committed therein there are three or four singular things The First he assures us he had learned of several old People in the Kingdom of Bengall that Sugar kept 30 years becomes Poison and that there are few sorts more dangerous All the World assuredly will not agree upon it The 2. is the manner wherewith the Inhabitants of Kasaubasar use to whiten their Silk which is yellowish by the means of a Lye made of the
of Solid Piety and very fit to remove the Abuses whereunto Superstition wou'd engage ' em The Bishop of Mysia Suffragan of Cologne the Vicar General of that City the Divines of Gant Malines and Lovain all approved it Nevertheless the Iesuite assures that That Writing scandalized the good Catholicks that the Learned of all Nations refuted it that the Holy See condemned it and that in Spain it was prohibited to be printed or read as containing Propositions suspected of Heresie and Impiety tending to destroy the particular Devotion to the Mother of God and in general the Invocation of Saints and the Worship of Images There are now near 10 Years past since M. Meaux kept us in Expectation of Mr. Noguier and M. Bastides Refutation but at length instead of an Answer in form there only appeared a second Edition of his Book bigger by half than the first by an Addition of an Advertisement in the beginning of it One may soon judge that it does not cost so much pains to compose 50 or 60 pages in Twelves as the taking of the City of Troy did But tho' the time was not very long it was too long to oblige all that time the Pope and the Court of Rome to give their Approbation to a Book so contrary to their Maxims Without doubt the Secret was communicated to them and they were assured That as soon as the Stroke was given and the Hugonots converted either by fair or foul means what seemed to be granted would be recalled Some Roman Catholicks worthy of a better Religion suffered thro' the ignorance of this Mystery A Prior of Gascogne Doctor in Divinity called M. Imbert told the People that went to the Adoration of the Cross on Good Friday in 83. That the Catholicks adored Iesus Christ crucifyed on the Cross but did not adore any thing that they saw there The Curate of the Parish said it was the Cross the Cross but M. Imbert answered No no it is Iesus Christ not the Cross. This was enough to create trouble this Prior was called before the Tribunal of the Arch-bishop of Bordeaux and when he thought to defend himself by the Authority of M. Meaux and by his Exposition what was said against that Book was objected to him that it moderated but was contrary to the Tenets of the Church After which he was suspended from Ecclesiastical Functions the Defendant provided an Appeal to the Parliament of Guienne and writ to M. de Meaux to implore his protection against the Arch-Bishop who threatned him with a perpetual Imprisonment and Irons it is not known what became of it The History of M. de Witte Priest and Dean of St. Mary's of Malines is so well known that I need not particularize upon it Our Author refers us here to what the Journals have said It is known what Persecutions he has suffered for expressing the Popes Supremacy and Infallibility according to M. de Meaux's Doctrine He did not forget to alledge that Bishops Authority and to say That his Exposition required no more of a Christian and an Orthodox but this did not hinder the University of Lovain to judge that Proposition pernicious and scandalous that intimates that the Pope is not the Chiefest of Bishops In the mean time the Reformed did not forget M. de Meaux his Advertisement did no sooner appear but it was refuted by Mr. de la Bastide and Mr. Iurieâ— a little after made his Preservative against the change of Religion in opposition to that Bishops Exposition But all these Books and those that were writ against his Treatise of the Communion under the two Kinds had no Answer this Prelate expecting booted Apologists who were to silence his Adversaries in a little time The Roman Catholicks of England notwithstanding their small number flattered themselves with hopes of the like Success having at their head a bold couragious Prince and one that would do any thing for them They had already translated M. Condom's Exposition of 1672 and 1675 into English and Irish and as soon as they saw King Iames setled on his Brothers Throne they began to dispute by small Books of a leaf or two written according to the method of the French Bishop The Titles with the Answers and the several Defences of each Party may be had in a Collection printed this present Year at London at Mr. Chiswells which is Entituled A Continuation of the present State of Controversy between the English Church and that of Rome containing a History of the printed Books that were lately published on both sides The Gentlemen of the Roman Church did begin the Battel by little Skirmishes but found themselves after the first or second firing without Powder or Ball and not able to furnish scattered Sheets against the great Volumes made against them said at last instead of all other answer that the little Book alone entituled The Papist Misrepresented and there represented a-new was sufficient to refute not only all the Dissertations which the English Divines lately published against Papists but all the Books and Sermons that they ever preached against Catholicks It is to no purpose to take the trouble of Disputing against people that have so good an Opinion of their Cause And in consequence of this the English answer to M. de Meaux's Exposition and the Reflections on his Pastoral Letter of 1686. met with no Answer as well as several other Books But Dr. Wake had no sooner published his Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England but these Gentlemen which know better to assault than to defend made a Book Entituled A Vindication of the Bishop of Condom 's Exposition with a Letter of that Bishop Because we do not design to enter on the particulars of these Controversies we will only take notice as to what past That First M. de Meaux denyed that any Roman Catholick writ against or did design to write against it Secondly That Sorbonne did not refuse approving his Book Thirdly He says his Exposition was reprinted to alter those places which the Censurers had improved and maintains that it was put into the Press without his knowledge and that he had a new Edition made only to change some expressions that were not exact enough Fourthly That he neither read nor knew any thing of Father Cresset's Book Dr. Wake published the Defence of his Exposition about the middle of the same year 1686 where he shews First That the deceased Mr. Conrait a Man acknowledged by both Parties to be sincere had told many of his Friends that he saw this Answer in Manuscript and other persons of known honesty that are still living assured the Author that they had this Manuscript in their hands Dr. Wake justifies his Accusations on the 2d and 3d heads by so curious a History that it seems worthy of being believed He says that one of his Acquaintance who was very familiar with one of Marshall de Turenne's Domesticks was the first that discover'd this Mystery For this
that Iesus Christ Interceded not for us and takes no care of his Church and that he pities not our Infirmities having suffered them himself and that he will not come at last to Judge all Mankind then there would be Reason to call the one Atheists and the other no Christians but every one knows that they are far from these impious thoughts The Protestants accuse the Romish Church of Idolatry and for having recourse to other Saviours besides Iesus Christ but the Moderators make a noise of that as if it were a hainous Calumny and maintain that it is only God that is to be worshiped with Religious Worship and that we are not saved but through the Merits of Iesus Christ. The Reformed shew them that they invoke Saints and that they worship them and the Cross Images and Relicks as the Pagans did their Heroes their Demons and inferiour Gods their Statues their Idols c. That they believe they satisfie Divine Justice by Indulgences Vows and Pilgrimages and that according to them the Merit of these Actions and of the Saints together with them of Iesus Christ reconcile Sinners to God They prove that this is the Doctrine which their Divines Popes and Councils teach not only in their great Volumes for the Learned but also for the rest in their Catechisms and Prayer Books and other Books of Devotion for the use of the People that it is not only the practice of the Laity and of some ignorant and superstitious Priests but also of all the Roman Church in their Rituals Breviaries Missals and other Publick Offices that it never punished such as pushed the Superstitions to an Excess which the Moderator seems to blame But that far from having a mind to redress these Abuses she prosecutes such as are suspected to have a design to abolish them as the Iansenists and Quietists tho' these two at bottom are but idle People and of little sincerity Would a Magistrate set a Murderer at liberty simply because he denyed a Deed that is well proved or because he has the face to maintain that the killing a Man at 12 a Clock is neither Murder nor a Crime punishable by Law On the contrary this Criminal would deserve a double Chastisement as a Murderer and as a Disturber of the Publick Peace in teaching a Doctrine that is contrary to Civil Society Because M. Daille acknowledges the Fundamental Points which the Reformed teach M. de Meaux pretends to justifie his Church and prove it's Purity tho this acknowledgement serves only to state the Question between both Parties and to shew that the Question is not whether the Fundamental Doctrine of Protestants be true seeing that is confessed on both sides but the Question is to know whether what the Roman Catholicks hold over and above be Articles necessary to Salvation as they pretend or whether they are contrary to the truth that both hold as Divine and whether they ought to be cast away for this reason as the Reformed have done It is according to this method that Dr. Wake explains the Articles exposed by M. de Condom marking in each what the Protestants approve and what they condemn in the Tenets of Rome and bringing some of the chief reasons that make them remark these Distinctions V. We said before that we were not willing to enter upon the particulars of Controversies but because the Roman Church continually fomenting the Divisions of Protestants have persuaded some illiterate People that the Church of England agrees in a great many more Points with it than with the other Protestants We shall mention her Sentiments here according to Dr. Wake 's Exposition upon the Articles wherein the Roman Catholicks brag of this pretended Conformity As First The Invocation of Saints Secondly Justification Thirdly The Necessity of Baptism Fourthly Confirmation Fifthly Orders Sixthly Real Presence Seventhly Tradition Eighthly Authority of the Church Ninthly That of the Fathers Tenthly The Question if one can be saved in the Roman Church Eleventhly If it be Idolatry First The Invocation of Saints Dr. Wake speaking in the name of his Church says it is an extravagant Practice invented at pleasure and so far from being contained in Scripture that it is several ways contrary to it It is true that according to an innocent ancient Custom we make mention before the Communion Table of Saints that dyed in the Communion of our Church thanking God for the grace he did them and praying him to give us the grace to follow their Example But this respect we bear their Memory does not hinder us from condemning a Practice that M. de Meaux seems to have omitted and which cannot agree with us at all which is that Roman Catholicks recommend the Offering of the Host to God by the Merit of the Saints whose Reliques are upon the Altar as if Iesus Christ whom they pretend to Sacrifice needed S. Bathilde or Potentiana's Recommendation to become agreeable to his Father Secondly Iesus by his Passion has satisfy'd Divine Justice for us and therefore God pardons us all our Sins thro' the Merits of his Son and by an Effect of his Good Will treats us with an Allyance of grace and by Vertue of this Allyance solely founded on the Death and Passion of Iesus Christ he sends us his Holy Spirit and calls us to Repentance If we answer this Calling God justifies us thro' his pure Goodness that is to say he forgives us all our past faults and gives us the grace to obey his Precepts better and better and will Crown us in Heaven if we persevere in his Alliance he grants us all these Graces not for any good Quality that he sees in us or for any good we do but only in vertue of the Satisfaction and Merits of his Son that are applyed to us by Faith Thirdly Tho' our Church take all manner of care to hinder Childrens dying without Baptism rather than to determine what would become of them they died without it we cannot nevertheless but condemn the want of Charity of Roman Catholicks that excludes them from Salvation Fourthly The Church of England does not believe that Confirmation is a Sacrament nor that the use of Chrism tho' of an antient Custom was an Apostolical Institution but because the Imposition of Hands is an antient Custom and comes from the Apostles the English have kept it and according to their Discipline the Bishops only have liberty to administer it The Prelate that does it addresses his Prayer to God to beg of him to strengthen with his Spirit him that he puts his Hands upon and that he may protect him from Temptations and that he may have the grace to fulfill the Conditions of his Baptism which he that he prays for ratifies and confirms with his Promises Fifthly Nor are the Orders a Sacrament according to the Church of England because they are not common to all Christians but she believes that no one ought to put himself upon the Function of a Minister without
which they quote the Arch-bishop Laud Iackson Feilding Hâ—ylin Hammond and M. Thorndike There is not one but has writ the contrary These are the Points whereon the Enemies of Protestants would make the Church of England pass for half Papists tho there is not one but was taught by other Reformed excepting Episcopacy And this Government is so ancient that even those who think Presbytery better ought not to condemn for some little difference in Discipline a Church that is otherwise very pure unless they are minded to anathematize St. Ignatius St. Clement St. Polycarp St. Irenaeus St. Cyprian and the whole Church of the second and third Age and a great part of the first Without question the Episcopal Clergy of England have the like Charity for Presbyterians I will not alledge the Testimonies of Modern Doctors nor of such as were accused of having favoured the pretended Puritans we see the Marks of its mildness and moderation towards all excepâ—ing some turbulent Spirits amongst 'em which indeed are too common in all Societies If there ever was a time wherein the Church of England differed from Presbytery and had reason so to do it was in the middle of the Reign of K. Iamss the First and notwithstanding you may see how the Bishop of Eli speaks writing for the King and by his Order against Cardinal Bellarmin One may see how much the Protestants of this Country agree by Harmony of their Confessions where each Church acknowledges wherein she agrees with the rest Then lay aside those odious Names seek our Professions of Faith in our Confessions The Reproach you make us concerning the Puritans is altogether absurd because their number is but small and the most moderate among them agree with us in the chief Articles of Religion The Scotch Puritans Confession has no Error in Fundamental Points so that the King might say with reason That the Establish'd Religion of Scotland was certainly true And as for the rest there 's no reason to suspect Dr. Wakes Testimony for the Bishop of London and the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury have approved his Books None of the other Doctors contradicted him and some sided with him against Roman Catholicks And these last have not accused him of swerving from the common Doctrine of the Church of England only in the Article of the necessity of Baptism and he proves by several Authorities in his Defence of his Exposition what he therein advanced At the end of this Defence are several curious Pieces 1. A Comparison betwixt the Ancient and Modern Popery 2. An Extract of the Sentiments of Father Cresset and Cardinal Bona concerning the Devotion to the Blessed Virgin 3. The Letter of Mr. Imbert to Mr. de Meaux 4. The Epistle of St. Chrysostom to Caesarius with the Preface of Mr. Bigot which was suppressed at Paris in 1680. and a Dissertation of Dr. Wake upon Apollinarius's Sentiments and Disciples A DISCOURSE of the Holy EUCHARIST wherein the Real Presence and Adoration of the Host is treated on to serve for an Answer to two Discourses printed at Oxford upon this Subject With a Historical Preface upon the same Matter At London 1687. p. 127. in 4to DR Wake Minister of the Holy Gospel at London who is said to be the Author of this Book gives First In few words the History and Origine of Transubstantiation as it hath been ordinarily done amongst Protestants Secondly He names several Illustrious Persons of the Romish Church who have been accused of not believing the Real Presence or Transubstantiation to wit Peter Picherel Cardinal du Perron Barnes an English Benedictine and Mr. de Marca Arch-Bishop of Paris who gave his absolute Sentiment hereon in one of his Posthume Dissertations tho' in the Edition of Paris the places wherein he said it have been changed or blotted out But it could not be hindered but that this Work having appeared before Persons took notice of these Sentiments some entire Copies thereof have fallen into the hands of Protestants who got it printed in Holland in 1669. without cutting off any thing To these Authors are joined F. Sirmond the Iesuite who believed the Impanation and who had made a Treatise upon it which hath never been printed and whereof some persons have yet Copies M. de Marolles who got a Declaration printed in form in 1681. by which he declared that he believed not the Real Presence and which was inserted here in English And in short the Author of the Book Entituled Sure and honest means of Converting Hereticks whom we dare not affirm to be the same who published a Treatise of Transubstantiation which the Fifth Tome of the French Bibliotheque speaks of p. 455. The Cartesians and several others are suspected of not believing the same no more than the Protestants So that if the Catholicks cite some Reformed for them Protestants also want not Catholick Authors who have been of their Opinion Thirdly The Author sheweth the dangerous Consequences which arise according to the Principles of the Romish Church from the incredulity of so many Men of Knowledge be it in respect to Mass or in respect of the Infallibility and Authority of the Church The Treatise it self is divided into two parts The first contains two Chapters and an Introduction wherein is expounded the Nature and Original of the Eucharist much after the Ideas of Lightfoot In the first Chapter Transubstantiation is at large refuted by Scripture by Reason and the Fathers We shall make no stay at it because this Matter is so well known The Second Chapter is imployed to refute what Mr. Walker said concerning the Opinions of several Doctors of the Church of England upon the Real Presence Dr. Wake at first complains That his Adversary in that only repeats Objections which his Friend T. G. had before proposed in his Dialogues and which a Learned Man had refuted in an Answer to these Dialogues printed at London in 1679. As to what concerns the Faith of the Church of England which he maintains to have been always the same since the Reign of Edward He reduces it to this according to the Author who refuted T. G. viz. That she believes only a Real Presence of the invisible Power and grace of Iesus Christ which is in and with the Elements so that in receiving them with Faith it produces Spiritual and real Effects upon the Souls of Men. As Bodies taken by Angels continueth he may be called their Bodies whilst they keep them and as the Church is the Body of Iesus Christ because his Spirit animates and liveneth the Souls of the Believing so the Bread and Wine after the Consecration are the Real Body of Iesus Christ but spiritually and mystically He gives not himself the trouble to prove the solidity of this comparison by Scripture and when he comes to the Examination of the Authors that Mr. Walker hath quoted he contents himself to produce other Passages where they do not speak so vigorously of the participation of the substance of Iesus
Judges that were not suspected of Partiality and desired them to go to the places where these Judges should be with the Informations they had taken against Athanasius The Bishops of the East would not hearken to it whereupon those of the West received Athanasius Marcellus and other Bishops of their Party into their Communion Those of the East were extreamly affronted at it there were many Complaints on each side and at last the two Emperours Constantius and Constantine agreed to call a General Council at Sardis to decide this Difference There went Bishops to it from all parts but the Western Bishops were willing that the deposed Bishops should be admitted to the Communion and take place in the Council the Eastern would not suffer it and withdrew to Philippopolis where they protested against the Proceedings of Sardis as contrary to the Canons of Nice The Bishops of the West notwithstanding continued their Session and made new Canons to justifie their Conduct The Eastern Bishops complained that the Discipline established at Nice was manifestly violated and the Western Bishops said That there was Injustice done to the deposed Bishops that Athanasius had not been heard in Aegypt and that it was just that all the Bishops of the Empire should re-examine this Affair The Bishops of Sardis had no respect to the reasons of their Brethren they renounced not the Communion of Athanasius and made divers Canons the chief of which are the III. the IV. the V. which concern the Revisal of the Causes of Bishops In the third they declared that the causes should first come before the Bishops of the Province and if one of the Parties was grieved by the Sentence he should be granted a Revision Our Author makes divers Remarks upon two Canons of the Council of Antioch to which its commonly believed that that of the Council of Sardis has some affinity which we have spoken of our Author discovers the Irregularities of the Councils of Antioch and Tyre He also remarks that to obtain the Revision of an Ecclesiastial cause an Address was made to the Emperor who convocated a greater number of Bishops to make this new Examination The Council of Sardis made an Innovation in this for it seems that it took away as much as it could the Right of reviewing these sorts of Causes from the Emperor to give it to Iulius Bishop of Rome in honour to St. Peter He might by the Authority of this Council if he thought fit Convocate the Bishops of the Province to revise the Process and to add Assistant Judges to them as the Emperor used to do Besides this the Fourth Canon enjoyn'd that no Bishop should enter into a vacant Bishoprick by the deposition of him who was in it nor should undertake to Examin a-new a Process until the Bishop of Rome had pronounced his Sentence thereupon The Fifth Canon signifies That if he judges the Cause worthy of Revising it belongs to him to send Letters to the Neighbouring Bishops to re-examine but if he thinks it not fit the Judgment pronounced shall stand This is the Power which the Council of Sardis grants to the Pope upon which our Author makes these Remarks 1. That there was somewhat new in this Authority without which these Canons would have been useless Thus de Marca and he who published the Works of Pope Leo have established this Power of the Pope upon the Canons of the Council of Sardis But an Authority given by a particular Council in certain Circumstances as appears by the name of Iulius which is inserted in the Canon cannot extend it self to the following Ages upon the whole this Authority has changed nature so much that now it passeth for an Absolute and Supream Power founded upon a Divine Right and not upon the Acts of one Council 2. These Canons do not give this Bishop the Right of receiving Appeals in quality of Head of the Church but transport only unto him the Right of a Revision which the Emperor enjoyed before It is a great question if the Council of Sardis had the Power of so doing but there is a great likelihood that the Protection which Constantius granted the Arian Party engaged it thereunto 3. These Canons cannot justifie the conduct of those who should carry Causes to Rome by way of Appeal because they return the second Examination to the Bishops of the Province 4. The Council of Sardis it self took knowledge of a Cause which had been decided by the Bishop of Rome 5. This Council could not be justified by the antient Canons in that it received Marcellus to the Communion he who before had been Condemned for Heresie as also afterwards even by Athanasius himself 6. The Decrees of this Assembly were not universally received as it appeared by the Contestations of the Bishops of Africk against that of Rome seeing the first knew nothing of it some years after as our Author sheweth IV. Arianism being spread every where and afterwards Pelagius and Celestius being gone out of England the Clergy of this Isle were accus'd of having been Arians and Pelagians in those Ages Our Author undertakes to justifie them from these suspicions and afterwards describes the Publick Service of the British Churches But as the Ecclesiastical Antiquities of England afford no great matter he hath supplyed them by digressions He immediately refutes I know not what Modern Author who hath been mistaken in some facts concerning the History of Arianism since the Council of Nice at which we shall not make a stay After that there is an Abridgment of this History until the Council of Rimini The Arians being condemned at Nice and vainly opposing the term of Consubstantial thought they could not better save themselves than by yielding to the times They also suffered themselves to be condemned by the Council and to be Banished by the Emperor Arius with Theones and Secondus his Friends Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nice Chief Heads of the Arian Faction Signed as the rest yet without changing their Opinion Afterwards they in like manner endeavoured to hide themselves under Equivocations The Circumstances of this History may be seen as Dr. Stillingfleet relates them in the Tenth Tome of the Vniversal Bibliotheque p. 447. and the following ones Yet there are these differences that our Bishop is larger in Reflections drawn from St. Athanasius concerning the Address of the Arians who expressed themselves almost as the Orthodox of that time to deceive the simple Moreover the Relation which we have cited was not made on design to justifie the Orthodox and to get those of the Arians Condemned but to give an Idea of these confusions without taking any Party whereas the design of our Author is to inform the Publick against the Arians without reprehending any thing whatever in the conduct of their Adversaries And our Author hath not applyed himself so much to the order of years which he doth not mark as hath been done in the Life of Eusebius of Caesarea
Dr. Stillingfleet goes also further then any seeing the History of Arianism was left off at the death of Eusebius Here is an Abstract of what he adds and which is chiefly drawn from St. Athanasius The Falsities of the Arians were not discovered until after the Council of Rimini and it was chiefly at the Council of Seleucia where they declared themselves more openly It was then that the Followers of Basil of Ancyre who rejected the word Consubstantial as well as the Arians would separate themselves from them But the Arians had still recourse in this occasion to their old Artifices and consented to Sign any Creed whatever excepting that of Nice They caused Athanasius to be banished a second time but he was soon re called and his greatest Enemies were obliged to make him Reparation if he may be believed A little while after the Persecution began against him and all the rest who professed the Faith of Nice as our Author describes at large until the Council of Rimini whose Bishops were constrained to abandon the Terms of Hypostasis and Consubstantial The Orthodox Bishops would willingly depose all those who refused to Sign the Symbol of Nice and the Arians did not treat their Adversaries better when they could not prevail with them so that they ceased not Persecuting each other reciprocally Councils declared both for the one and the other which makes our Author reasonably conclude that we must not yield to the Authority of any Council whatever till having well examined the reasons of its Conduct If it was not lawful to do it in times past the Faith of Nice could not be re-established which would have received an irreparable breach at Rimini if the Orthodox Bishops were not restored to their Churches after the death of Constantius and had not re-established in smaller Assemblies what so numerous a Council had destroyed We find a remarkable example hereof in the Fragments of St. Hilary where we see that a Council Assembled at Paris declares that it abandons the Council of Rimini for assenting to that of Nice Dr. Stillingfleet conjectures that the British Churches did as much because St. Athanasius St. Ierome and St. Chrysostom do in divers places praise their Application to the Orthodox Faith Sulpicius Severus speaking of the Bishops of the Council of Rimini saith they refused to be entertained by the Emperor excepting those of England who were to poor too bear this charge Thereupon Dr. Stillingfleet makes divers Reflections whereof these are the Principal 1. That it followeth from thence that what Geoffrey of Monmouth saith of Riches which King Lucius gave the Church of England is false 2. That it is notwithstanding strange that the Bishops of England should not have wherewithal to maintain them at Rimini since before Constantine the Churches had divers Funds besides the Offerings of the People which were considerable in the numerous Churches and since Constantine had granted them great Priviledges as is shewn at length by divers Edicts of this Emperor which are in the Theodosian Codicil and elsewhere He comes thence to the Accusation of Pelagianism which Beda and Gildas had before raised against the Clergy of England He remarks first that Pelagius and Celestius were both born in Great Britain and not in the Armorick Britain as some have believed and Refutes at the same time some places of F. Garnier who hath spoken of Pelagius in his Notes upon Marius Merâ—ator 2. That the Monastick History makes him Abbot of the Monastery of Bangor but that there is little likelyhood that Bangor had had a Monastery famous in that time because the Convents of England are no antienter than the time of St. Patrick and if Pelagius was a Monk he was of such an Order as were Pammachius Paulinus Melanius and Demetriades who were pious persons withdrawn from the Commerce of the World but without Rule 3. That the Occupation of these Men after the Exercises of Piety consisted in the study of Scripture and that it was in such a Retreat that Pelagius Writ his Commentary upon the Epistles of St. Paul and his Letters to Melanius and Demetriades 4. That since he was accused of Heresie he was imployed to defend himself and that after having been Condemned in Africk and Banished he was yet Condemned in a Council at Antioch under Theodotus as Marius Mercator tells us and all that because the Sentiments of Pelagius were not well understood as the Bishop of Worcester justly saith 5. That wretched Pelagius passed the remnant of his Life in obscurity and dyed according to all likelihood without returning into England 6. That without the extraordinary cares of the Bishops of Africk Pelagianism would have been established by the Authority of the See of Rome Though Pelagius had been Condemned by the Emperor and the Councils Agricola Son to Severian Bishop who had embraced Pelagianism brought it into England It was perhaps the severe Edict of Valentinian III. Published in CCCCXXV against the Pelagians who were amongst the Gauls which drove him thence Prosper witnesseth that there were several of them in England which made some believe that Celestius was returned hither but our Author shews that this Opinion has no ground The Adversaries of the Pelagians not being able to defend themselves against so subtil Controvertists sent to demand aid of the Bishops of the Gauls who sent them Germain and Loup two Bishops of great Reputation but suspected to be Semi Pelagians the first being a great Friend to Hilary of Arles and the second being brother to Vincent of Lerins Semi Pelagians It 's found in a certain Writing that is attributed to Prosper Disciple of St. Augustin that it was Celestinus Bishop of Rome who sent him but our Author shews that there is reason to suspect this to be the writing of some other Prosper and that though it were his we have reason to believe that he was deceived Germain and Loup being arrived in England had a publick Conference at Verulam and acted so that they left England in the old Opinions as they believed but they were forced to return sometimes after Our Author relates no Head of the Doctrine of St. Germain and Loup by which we may know whether they Taught Semi Pelagianism or the Predestinarionism in England to free themselves from the suspicions which might be had of them He passeth to the Justification of Fastidius an English Bishop suspected of Pelagianism and of whom there is yet a Book de vita Christiana published by Holstenius It is not so easie to justifie Faustus of Riez from Semi Pelagianism though in his time he passed for a Saint and that he was Prayed to in this quality during many Ages in the Church of Riez Sidonius Apollinaris gives him this fine Encomium Cui datum est soli melius loqui quam didicerit vivere melius quam loquatur To whom alone it hath been given to speak better than he had Learned and to Live better
Christ the Sins which were committed before his coming and which he bore by his patience and that God hath declared in the Gospel how much he loves Justice since he has pardoned Sinners after that his Son their Surety had expiated their Crimes and has even pardoned those which sinn'd before his coming It was objected to Mr. Alting that the sense he gave to the term Paresis was unknown to all Greece He answers to this it is the Custom with the Writers of the New Testament to give Hebrew Significations to Greek Words and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answers to the Hegnebbir of the Hebrews nor is it strange that St. Paul has taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Transport To confirm his Opinion the Author brings many Examples of a very extraordinary Signification of the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for which answering to that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chi In Hebrew is employed for although in the following passages Iohn 4.44 Two days after Iesus returned into Galilee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 altho' Iesus had testified himself that no Prophet would be well received in his own Country Rom. 5.7 One would scarce die for a just Man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 altho' for a good Man some wou'd even dare to die There are infinite Examples of these Hebraisms Thus the passage of St. Iohn 8.25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which has given so much trouble to the Interpreters is a phrase of the Rabbins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lebitchilla tascher ani omer Lachem I am really what I tell you The same Apostle doth not commonly take the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a Greek sense but in a signification which the Rabbins give to their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beparhesia which signifies Publickly 50 27 42 44 52. In the 45.50 Mr. Alting proves the necessity of studying the Hebrew Tongue against a Professor who durst maintain in his Publick Lessons that that Tongue was not necessary for Ministers nor for Students in Divinity because St. Augustine and all the Doctors of his time were ignorant of it except St. Ierome who drew upon himself the hatred of all his Contemporaries The same Author writing against the Jew Athias p. 4. according to the citation of Mr. Alting Libros veteris Testamenti partem Bibliorum inutilem dixit potiorem vero sanctiorem novi Testamenti libros that is the Books of the Old Testament are the unprofitable Part of the Bible but that those of the New Testament are the most holy and most considerable Mr. Perizonius designing to refute Spinosa consulted Mr. Alting upon some difficulties which our Professor resolves in his 59. and 50. The first relates to the Authors of the Canon of the Old Testament and 't is asked whether it was Esdras Mr. Alting saith That 't is commonly believed upon the Testimony of Buxtorf who assures us in his Tyberiade That the Members of the great Synagogue assembled to bring into one Body the Canonical Books and that Esdras presided in that Assembly and that the three last Prophets were there accompanied with Mordocheus But Gans David remarks that Simeon the Just who is said to have been the last of the Assembly of this great Synagogue lived eight Generations after Ioshuah Son to Iosadack Add to this that there is no likelyhood that Malachy was Contemporary with Esdras since he doth not speak of the rebuilding of the Temple nor return of the Iews and that he chiefly sticks to reprehend the Priests who corrupted the Law by their Interpretations So that this Prophet seems to have lived about the time of Hillel when the Sect of the Pharisees began to flourish and their Traditions to be in Vogue Parker has remarked that the Fathers of the Church pass'd for Apostolical Traditions customs established by long use whereof the first Author was not known and to which they had a mind to give some Authority The same Remark may be made concerning the Iews There were amongst them Institutions whereof the Authors were uncertain which they attributed to the Members of the great Synagogue and made them come from inspired Men which were but Traditions of the Pharisees The Members of the Synagogue never lived in the same time nor in the same place and that consequently there never hath been such an one It is an invention of the Sticklers for Tradition to give some likelihood to their System The second difficulty regards the numbering of Iews who returned from Babylon to Ierusalem Esdras and Nehemiah agree in a Total Sum which was 42360. but when we our selves will muster up the number of each Family there will be only found 29818 in Esdras and 31089 in Nehemiah There is yet this thing remarkable that Nehemiah mentions 1765 Persons which are not in Esdras and that Esdras has 494 whereof Nehemiah doth not all speak The Difference that seems to make it impossible to reconcile these two Authors is what makes them agree for if you add the Over-plus of Esdras to the number of Nehemiah and the Surplus of Nehemiah to that of Esdras the same Number will come of them both Which being substracted from 42360 there remains 10777. which were not mentioned perhaps because they lost their Genealogical Books being of the Posterity of the Priests Chabaja Cotzi Barzillai or of the Israelites of the Ten Tribes In the sixtieth Letter our Author makes the History of the Canon of the Old Testament Moses saith he committed the keeping of his Books to the Levites Deut. 31.25 and the following and created them as 't were Doctors of the People Deut. xxxiii 10 And it seems that Malacby alludes to this charge Ch. 2. vers 4 5 6 7. Yet these Doctors did not much increase this Bibliotheque until the time of David The Prince assisted with some Prophets divided the Priests and Levites into divers Classes who were to serve by turns But this Order was the cause of a great confusion amongst the holy Levites whereof none took care but when his turn was come Thence proceeds the disorder which is remarked in the Collection of the Psalms David gave them to the Levites who were in their Week according as he composed them each Classis kept those which had been remitted to it In fine there was a Collection made joyning together what each Classis had received without having regard to the Order or time in which they were Written The same thing sometimes hapened in regard to the Sermons of the Prophets Habac. 2.2 which having been intrusted to divers Priests were gathered according to this Method and put into the number of the Sacred Books As in the time of Malachy they began to have too much esteem for Traditions and to attribute unto them an Authority which weakned that of the Sacred Writings this Prophet discover'd the Imposition of the Levites who gave way to these Traditions because it augmented their credit He prohibited for the future that any Writing whatever should be put
into the Sacred Volumes upon their Word and before it had been compared with the Law of Moses which he would have to be as the Rule to all Books Thence it cometh that after him nothing was added to the Canon of the Holy Writings I cannot believe that this was done by the advice or order of some Ecclesiastical Assembly There are no Footsteps of these sorts of Assemblies in Scripture and 't is evident that God would not suffer that there should be any least it should be thought that the Authority of his Word depended on the Will of Man or that the Church under this pretence should attribute to it self the right of Pronouncing upon the Canon and to reject or admit the Books as it should think fit If the Church had this power there are many Prophetical Writings which we should miss undoubtedly we should not have the Prophesies of Ieremiah to whom the whole Colledge of Priests and all the ordinary Prophets were opposed and it is absurd to say that the Church had this Power one time and not another God gave Credit enough to Moses in speaking to him in the sight of all Israel Exod. xix 14. and his Writings never wanted the Authority of any Assembly to be received As to the other Prophets Do you ask how their Books were received or how they have been preserved It is a conduct of Providence which I adore without comprehending its ways It hath not yet been proved that we owe this obligation to the Pharisees or Rabbins in particular It is to the Jewish People in General that St. Paul gives the Title of Depositors of the Divine Oracles Rom. 3. Several other Questions of Criticks are treated of in these Letters of Divinity and Morality If Boaz Espoused Ruth by vertue of the Right of Next-a-Kin What Motive compelled the Gibeonites to feign that they were come from a far Countrey If the Seven Nations of the Canaanites were not of the number of those to whom God had commanded Peace to be offer'd It 's Answer'd That these Seven Nations were excepted and not contain'd amongst those to whom Peace was to be offered That the Gibeonites being of their number saw themselves obliged to put a Guile upon the Israelites to be received amongst their Allies that this having been Sworn it was not permitted to break it because it was not the Israelites who had offered Peace but the Gibeonites which had demanded it a Conjuncture upon which God pronounced nothing and which seemed even to exempt them also Submission being a mark of Faith see Ioshua 11.9 and compare the example of Rahab Ios. 2. Yet as the Gibeonites had obtained this Alliance by deceit and remained in the midst of Palestine for fear they should corrupt the People they were obliged to Abjure Idolatry and an Employment was given them which kept them with the Priests As for the other People which the Israelites Conquered they were suffered to live in their Religion as it appears by the Example of the Neighbouring Nations whom David made Tributaries It is Asked if the Daughter of Iephtha ought to have been Sacrificed and it 's Answer'd Yes Divers Questions are put about the Baptism of little Children if it canbe Administred without the Temples and set Hours or by Laicks upon which occasion our Author makes the History of this Sacrament and concludes that we ought to Conform our selves in this to the use of the Church wherein we live that it is absurd to have the Publick stoop to our own particular Customs and that a Protestant who threatens to separate himself for these things from the Communion of a Church hath already abandoned it seeing he has a design to trouble the Peace thereof and that he can suffer no Order but that which he establisheth L.LXX. Other Questions upon Baptism of Infidels may be seen in L. XCVIII Those who would have it that the Prophets who followed Moses made alterations in his Writings and those who suspect that the Pentateuch is a Collection of some other Prophet who lived a long while after and composed it upon the Memoirs of this Lawgiver commonly do cite to prove their Hypothesis the Passages of the Five Books of Moses where there are Names which were not in use in his time That of Genesis Chap. xiv 14 where it is said that Abraham pursued the Five Kings unto Dan seems one of the strongest seeing it is evident by Iosh. xix 47 and Iudges xviii 29 that this City was called before Leschem or Lais. Mr. Alting Answers 'T is likely there were Three Cities of this Name Leschem and Lais being perhaps different Cities to which the Danites gave the Name of their Father and that of Genesis being it may be a Third City scituate near the source of Iordan If we may not rather say that it is at the very source of Iordan And this source was but Ten Miles from Sidon whereas Lais seems to be distant enough from it Iudg. xviii 7 28. This same source was very distant from the Territories of the Tribe of Dan being at the South of Naphtali and Asher There is no likelyhood that these two Tribes should permit the Danites to seize upon Cities which were fallen unto them by Lott nor that the Idol of Micah to which the Tribe of Dan gave Publick Adorations was erected so far from their Land Iudg. xviii 18 30 31. All this makes our Author believe that Lais was scituate near Ioppe more than Forty Miles from Sidon since it is said it lived after the Fashion of the Sidonians because it was washed with the Sea that it subsisted by Commerce and that its Government was Democratick as well as that of that Famous Republick L. lxxx and the Letters lxxxiii lxxxiv lxxxvii lxxxviii are Burman's and Alting's and Treat of several Questions wherein these Two Divines differ'd in their Opinion concerning the duration of the Sanhedrin and the Scribes of the Old Testament What the Face of God signifies in the first Precept of the Decalogue If the Seven Epistles of the Apocalypse are Prophetical The CXIV contains Two Curious Questions of Morality Whether it be lawful for a Christian to wear Modest Ornaments and to get his Livelyhood in making Lace Ribbands Perukes c. After the Letters are Two Dissertations upon the Hebrew Tongue the first Treats of its Names Iudaic Hebraic and Holy The Second shews that 't was God himself who Taught Man this Tongue The Manner of Thinking well as it has a Relation to the Operations of the Mind In Dialogues At Paris Sold by the VVidow of Sebastian Mabre-Cramoisy 1687. in Quarto p. 402. And at Rotterdam by Reinier Leers IT is not difficult to find out the Author of the Dialogues of Aristus and Eugenius Here we find the same Form and Politeness with a Collection of the finest places of the best Authors done by a delicate Hand Yet we are not more charmed with the choice of things than with the pleasant
and Masoret Hammasoret Pref. 3. 4. But the most of the Jews affirm that Ezra and the Men of the Great Synagogue first invented and placed the Shapes of the Points to the Text as Elias Levita himself in Masoret Hammasoret at the beginning of Pref. 3. observes and Ephodeus cap. 5. cap. 7. Now all these several Opinions agree in this That the Shapes of the Points were placed to the Text by the Time of Ezra and that they are of Divine Original and Authority therefore which is all we are concern'd to prove And herein we have the universal Consent of the Jews one only Elias excepted as hath been proved in the First Part for had another been of his Opinion either himself or his Followers would have produced him which they have not done to this day Now if we consider this Testimony in all its Circumstances it will appear very full and pertinent First As to its quantity 'T is the universal Consent of all the Jews in all Places Times and Ages Secondly As to its quality they are of all sorts 1. The ancient Caballistical Writers and Philosophers 2. The Talmudists 3. The Grammarians they are the most Learned both ancient and modern Thirdly As to the History and the Age of these Witnesses none are so fit for from them we have received the Hebrew Bible by them it is preserved and they are fittest to give the best Account of their own Affairs Fourthly As to the Form of this Testimony here is their plain loud full and open Voice for the Antiquity of the Points and their deep Silence as to the Novelty of the Points So that in all respects the Testimony is full plain and Authentick § 3. But hereunto it is objected That there are express and mute Testimonies of the Jews against the Antiquity of the Points 1. As to express Testimony 't is said and objected That Aben Ezra R. D. Kimchi Cosri and the Author of Tsak Sephataim together with Elias Levita are against the Antiquity of the Points Resp. We have at large proved in the First Part that all these Testimonies are wrested and that all these Rabbins are for the Antiquity of the Points Elias Levita only excepted which proves the universal Consent of the Jews for the Antiquity of the Points seeing Elias Levita and his Followers cannot pick up one single Iew that doth so much as question or doubt of it Object But the Iews are partial to the Praise of their own Nation and so unfit Witnesses only Elias speaking against their Glory is of more moment than six hundred on the other side Resp. 1. Elias speaks most in his own Cause and for the Glory of his own Nation in ascribing the Punctation to the Masorites A. D. 500. when we say the Jews were rejected and under the Curse of God that as such a time they should be owned of God so as to be able to produce so excellent a Work as the Punctation which is the Rule of all our Translations and Expositions of Scriptures This Opinion is most their interest to espouse and most to their Praise whereas the other Opinion belongs not to their Praise any more than ours for the Christian Church succeeded the Church of the Jews What Ezra did was whilst they were God's Church and People which not the Jews but the Christians now are And Ezra had as much Honour as that did amount to besides as being one of the Pen-men of the Scripture and did not so need it as the poor Masorites who had nothing else to boast of 2. But if the Jewish Nation were herein partial to their own Glory yet still they are fittest to give the best Account of their own Affairs All Nations are partial to their own Praise and yet the Records of every Nation are the best Evidences of their Affairs and their own Transactions § 4. Secondly 'T is objected by Capellus and Others That the Iews preserve the Law which they publickly read in the Synagogue without Points thereby to represent the Autographon of Moses being without Points which 't is said Buxtorf confesseth doth prove that the Autographon of Moses was without Points Vid. Considerat Consid. pag. 242. Resp. Buxtorf doth not confess any such thing but the contrary Vid. Buxâ— de Punct Orig. pag. 49 50. And tells the several Opinions of the Jews about the Law of Moses Some suppose it was Pointed at first Others suppose there were two Copies in Moses's his time one Pointed the other without Points That the Law is judged polluted if one Point be put to it is owned but that it was without Points to represent the Autographon of Moses doth not appear They who would know why the Jews read and keep it without Points may hear what themselves say to it who own the Antiquity of the Points and therefore if their Testimony be good in one thing 't is so in another But the Jews give Three Reasons why the Law is kept without Points in the Synagogue 1. Because of the difficulty of Transcribing Copies so exactly as is required for publick use the least defect rendring it profane which indeed with Points were almost impossible to be done 2. That they might have the liberty of drawing many and divers sences whereas the Points consine it to one only but they wouâ—d have many more mysterious 3. That all Learners might be kept in dependance upon their Teachers and 't is not unlikely but they preserve the Law Unpointed that none might be permitted to read it in the Synagogue until he were able to read it perfectly without Points Moreover if it were so this hinders not but that it might be Pointed by Ezra as Megilla or Esther read without Points which yet they own that Ezra Pointed and is of Divine Authority However the rest of the Scripture is read in their Synagogue with Points and the Law it self is read exactly according to the Punctation to a tittle which sufficiently sheweth their esteem of the Punctation as being of Divine Authority Object 'T is said If the Iews did believe that Moses or Ezra either had Pointed the Law they would not have used it without Points Resp. They all believe that Moses or else Ezra Pointed the Law yet none of them Point it in the Synagogue but give other Reasons why they omit the Points though they read by them And had Elias thought there had been any Argument in this Objection 't is like he would have used it which he doth not but acknowledgeth the Jews own their Antiquity § 5. Thirdly T is objected That the ancient Caballistical Writings make no mention of the Points or their Names nor yet do they draw any Mysteries from them as they do from the Letters which if they had been of Divine Authority no doubt but they would have done Also the Mishna and Gemara yea both the Talmuds are very silent about the Points even there where they had necessary occasion to have made mention of them if they
Clement 2. If Clement had said that Sovereign Reason had been Created 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we ought to observe that to create to produce to beget signifie the same thing in Plato and that it followeth not that he believed that Reason was begotten or produced from nothing 3. It is one of the Opinions of Plato that in a certain number of Years the Form of the World would intirely change and that several of these changes have happen'd afore the Revolution begun which now comprehends us One may see in his Politicks that he maintains the Revolution of all the Stars will cause an universal Change in the World Thus in his Opinion what was said of Mens deriving their Original from the Earth happened in the beginning of a Revolution That is it adds he which our Predecessors have said who have lived at the latter end of the first Revolution and who drew near the second as well as those who were born at the beginning of this It is they who have assured us thereof and several are to blame for not believing it now The Stoicks also believed the same thing according to the Relation of Clement who seems not to disprove their thought and who faileth not to confirm it by the Authority of Plato This Philosopher believed that the first Men were Androgynes and that they had four Feet two Heads and so of the other Members but that God afterwards divided them into two as may be seen in his Banquet Some Rabbins have advanced some such thing and grounded their Sentiment upon this that it 's said God created Man Male and Female This seems to be but a Diversion of the Mind and not an Opinion which these Authors seriously embraced Parhaps Clement sported himself to make some Reflections on the thought of Plato with so much the more liberty that perhaps he believed as his Disciple Origen that there were many Allegories in the beginning of Genesis 4. As to what concerns Angels falling in love with Women Clement testifies in more than one place that he hath been of this thought and most of the ancient Greek and Latin Fathers have thus expounded the beginning of the 6 th Chap. of Genesis Photius cannot reprehend this Opinion without censuring at the same time all Antiquity but it 's his Custom to abuse the most ancient Authors when he finds Sentiments in them which were not received in his time or ways of speaking which are not strong enough to express those Thoughts which he believed Antiquity should have had because it would have been a Heresie in his Age not to have them 5. Incarnation being a Mystery which we comprehend not and Clement's Stile being not commonly very clear it might happen that he expresses himself after a manner which Photius did not well understand and this is the more probable because this Patriarch ordinarily Expounds the Thoughts of the Ancients in reference to the Opinions and Manners of speaking of his time The Writings of the Ancients are full of Equivocate Terms which they use in such Senses as the following Ages were ignorant of Terms which express Spiritual obscure things and the most composed Ideas are necessarily hard to be understood because they took no care of defining them or making an exact Enumeration of the Ideas which they applied thereto Perhaps it came not once into their Mind that this would have been very necessary to be well understood At least we see that when they strive to Expound themselves upon these obscure Subjects they use as obscure Terms 6. An Example may be remarked thereon in regard to two Reasons whereof Photius speaketh Those who shall carefully Read the Second Tome of Origen upon St. Iohn may observe that he establishes a first or supreme Reason which is the Divinity of Jesus Christ and several inferiour Reasons which are made after the Image of the precedent It might be said in this sense that there are only Second Reasons which are become Flesh because there are only they which animate Human Bodies for though the first was united to the Humanity of Jesus Christ it was not in stead of a Soul to him Thus though Clement had said what Photius makes him say he could not be accused of Heresie for that but he did not say so as it appears by the Passage which Photius himself cites The Son is called Reason as well as the Paternal Reason but it was not that which was made Flesh and yet it is not Paternal Reason neither but Divine Power which is as an Emanation of this same Reason which is become Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and which is come into the Hearts of Men. By these Terms the Son we must not understand the only Son of God but Man as is clearly seen by the Sequel Perhaps Clement had called it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 simply because he might have sufficiently intimated before whom he understood by this word Photius who has not well apprehended the end of this Passage might easily have equivocated concerning the Sequel of the Discourse as the Jesuit Schotus otherwise a Learned Man was altogether mistaken in the Latin Version of these words as we shall soon observe by comparing it with that which we have already made thereof But we have another Latin Work which is attributed to Clement and which is Entituled Commentariolam primam Canonicam S. Patri in Epistolam Iudae tres Epistolas S. Ioannis Apostoli There are indeed divers things in these Notes which are not far from the Doctrin of Clement but it cannot be known whether it be a whole Version of a part of the Hypotyposes or only Extracts corrected according to the Pleasure of the Interpreter It is known that when the Latins translated something of the Greeks they were very subject to make Changes therein as they thought fit as has been objected to Ruffinus It is even needless to seek so far for Examples of this Ill Custom seeing we have one concerning a part of the Hypotyposes of Clement whereof Cassiodorus speaks thus Clement of Alexandria hath expounded in Greek the Canonick Epistles that is to say the First Epistle of St. Peter the First and Second of St. John and that of St. James where there are not only many subtil things but also some things which he hath advanced without well taking heed of them We have translated him into Latin so that having taken away what would Scandalize his Doctrin thus purified may with more safety be Read Ubi multa quidem subtiliter sed aliqua incaute loquutus est quae nos ita transferri fecimus in Latinam ut exclusis quibusdam offendiculis purificata Doctrina ejus securior posset hauriri Besides this Clement composed five Treatises which are lost 1. The Rule or the Canon of the Church against the Iudaizers 2. Of the Passover 3. Of Backbiting 4. Disputes concerning Fasting 5. An Exhortation to Patience directed to the Neophytes After the particular Remarks which are made
the Syriack Tongue did insensibly mix with the Hebrew Dialect and became common to the Iews and hath since been called the Hebraick Language IV. He Examins in the Fourth Article the Works of many Authors who make mention of the Old Testament as those of Philon Iosephus Iustus c. in speaking of the Writers of the New Testament he Remarks after St. Ierom that the last Chapter of the Gospel of St. Mark is but in a very few Copies and that we may reject it almost with all the Greeks because it seems to mention several things contrary to those which are spoken of by the other Evangelists Besides he assures us upon the Credit of this Father that that which obliges St. Iohn to write his Gospel after all the rest was that having read the rest he remarked that they had only confined themselves to write the History of one Year of the Life of Jesus Christ viz. from the Imprisonment of St. Iohn the Baptist to the death of our Saviour and thereupon he resolved to give the Church an account of what happned in the preceeding Years He does not precisely find in the Acts of the Apostles the time when St. Paul changed his Name from Saul Mr. Du Pin conjectures that it was after the Conveâ—tion of Sergius Paulus because he says it was the custom of the Romans to give their own Names in Testimony of Friendship It might also be said as Budeus proves in his Pandects that it was to honour their Patrons and Benefactors for these they had obliged to take their Names He ends this Dissertation with the Books of the New Testament which were at first doubted but that were soon after placed in the Canon of Holy Writ by the consent of all Churches to wit the Epistle to the Hebrâ—ws the Epistle of St. Iames the Second Epistle of St. Peter the Second and Third of Saint Iohn that of Saint Iude and the Apocalypse The Bibliotheque it self he begins with Criticisms upon the Letters of Agbar to Iesus Christ and Iesus to Agbar which he shews to be Supposititious as well as the Gospel according to the Egyptians The Gospel according to the Hebrews and many other pieces that some wou'd have to pass under the name of the Apostles There were Persons in St. Ierom's time that pretended the Gospel according to the Hebrews was originally that of St. Matthews because it was written in Syraick and Chaldaick Characters Mr. Du Pin proves here that they were different not only by the passages of this Gospel according to the Hebrews which has nothing in it like the History of the Adulterous Woman in Saint Matthew But also because Eusebius and after him St. Ierom absolutely distinguisheth them that this last had translated the Gospel according to the Hebrews whereas the Author of the Version of St. Matthew is wholly unknown and that in the Gospel according to the Hebrews the Scripture is cited there after the Hebrew and St. Matthew in his follow'd the Translation of the Septuagint Yet there is room to doubt of this last Argument since the same St. Ierom which distinguishes these Two Gospels here confounds them in another place according to the relation of our Author in the 39. pag. of his Dissertation And it is not only Contradiction of that Father which he has observ'd Always saith Mr. Du Pin when St. Jerom Treats expresly of Canonical Books he rejects as Apocryphal all those that are not in the Iews Canon but when he speaks without making any reflection he often cites these same books as Holy Scripture Ib. p. 72. speaking diversly by Economie and according to the Persons with whom he had to do The Epistle of St. Barnabas which we have also an entire Latin Translation of and great part of the Greek Original is certainly his since we see in it the same passages that St. Clement of Alexandria Origen Eusebius and St. Ierom cite out of it But says he if this Letter was really St. Barnabas's it ought not to be added to the other Books of the New Testament That follows not according to our Author for if 't is true that a Book is Canonical when we are certain 't was writ by an Author who had the Authority of making it Canonical Who is it that hath said St. Barnabas must be of this Number rather than St. Clement or Hermas 'T is the business of the Church to declare it and it 's sufficient that it has not done it therefore his Letter is look'd upon as Apocryphal altho ' 't was certainly his own He adds that this Letter is unbecoming this Saint being full of all Stories and Allegories But we must know a little the Genius of the Iews and the first Christians who were nourisht and brought up in the Synagogue to believe that these kind of Opinions cou'd not come from 'em On the contrary this was their Character they Learned from the Iews to turn all the Seripture into Allegories and to make Remarks upon the Properties of Animals which the Law had forbidden 'em to eat of We must not be surprised then if St. Barnabas who was Originally a Iew writing to the Iews has Allegorically explain'd many passages since every body knows that the Books of the first Christians were full of these sorts of Fables and Allegories He rejects the Liturgies attributed to the Apostles Because he cou'd not but make a little Reflection upon what is read in the Celebration of the Eucharist in the First Epistle to the Corinthians and upon what St. Iustin and the first Fathers of the Church have said to perswade us that the Apostles and those which succeeded them have celebrated the Sacrifice of the Mass with great simplicity He only relates a small Number of Orisons but by little and little he adds some Prayers and a few External Ceremonies to Render the Sacrifice more venerable to the People In fine the Churches have regulated all abuses in the Sacrament and wrote down the way of celebrating it as may be found in the Liturgy The Apostles Creed the Canons and Apostolick Constitutions are none of theirs Ruffinus was the first and only Author of the Fifth Age who wrote that the Apostles composed the Creed and he only advanced it as a popular Tradition Mr. du Pin to confirm his Opinion and prove that the Creed was not the Apostles as to the Words and Form gives us a Table of the Four ancient Creeds the Vulgar the Aquilean the Eastern and Roman where one might compare them together and observe considerable Differences between them for Instance the Terms Catholick Communion of Saints and Life everlasting which are in the Vulgar or Common Creed are wanting in the other Three As for the Canons which are attributed to the Apostles he defends the opinion of Aubespinus and Beoregius who believ'd 'em very ancient and who pretend that they were properly a Collection of many Councels held before that of Nice the
suspected places viz. the Roman Libraries in quorum MSS. certum est pleraque eorum quae Curiae Romanae placitis adversabantur esse erasa aut omissa It is certain that almost every thing which was contrary to the Maxims of the Roman Court was either taken away or omitted in the Manuscripts of their Libraries I shall speak more fully to the last Dissertation of Mr. Du Pin where he pretends to prove that neither Pope nor Church have any power either direct or indirect over the Temporalties of Kings 1. Because our Lord exercised no Temporal Jurisdiction 2. That all the power that he gave to his Apostles was only to publish the Gospel'Baptize to Bind and Unbind Sinners to Celebrate the Eucharist to separate the Wicked from the Church and Establish a Discipline 3. Because Christ and his Apostles forbid the Church to exercise any Temporal Authority 4. That according to the opinions of the Ancient Popes and Holy Fathers the power of the Church extended no farther than Spiritual Affairs 5. Because the Primitive Church exercised over its Members only the pain of Deposition and Excommunication for when She desired to put an end to her Rebellions by Penalties and Exiles She had recourse to a Secular power Mr. Du Pin adds that if in the following Ages the Church had the power of Condemning to Temporal punishments it was by the Concession of Princes To prove this first he shews that Jesus Christ suffered not his Apostles to make use of the Sword or to wish for fire from Heaven upon those that resisted them Secondly he relates a hundred fine passages of the Fathers who say very positively that Religion ought to constrain no one These are the same passages that the Refugees alledge to the French Converters to shew them the great difference between the Maxims of the first Ages and these Dragooning Missioners who compell'd the Protestants to Sign another Confession of Faith But what use wou'd Mr. Du Pin make of this Does not he see that M. Schelstrate will answer him 't is a mocking of the World to refer 'em to such Maxims as the Fathers themselves laughed at when instead of suffering Persecution they were in a Condition of making others suffer Does not he see that if these Maxims were good the Clergy of France cou'd not justify the Approbation which he has given of the Conduct he maintains In a word these Maxims are perfect Burlesk if the Church can have recourse to a Secular power forcibly to constrain Hereticks to enter into its Communion Common sense plainly says that if Jesus Christ forbid his Church to use Violence he has also forbidden their desiring such Assistance from Kings and if he had permitted them to compel Persons by the Intervening of Kings he has not command them in case of Necessity to make use of all the power they can furnish themselves with I mean by the credit they may have with the Multitude But all this is inconclusive Thus Mr. Schelstrate ruins his Adversaries if we come to Arguments ad hominem But it s true the proofs of Mr. Du Pin considered abstractedly are very solid I mean those which I have already spoken of and those that he founds upon the Nature of the Royal Power for he plainly shews by Scripture and the Fathers that it depends upon God Almighty that its only justifiable in him and that the Church is only obliged to suffer with patience where Princes abuse their Power These Maxims were so evident to the Holy Fathers that St. Ambrose who durst not abandon them in retaining a Church contrary to the Orders of the Emperour nevertheless he set a great value upon himself because he practised no other Resistance than that of Sighs and Tears See how Witty Men are mistaken if they are not Orthodox in their Actions they are at least so in their Words The Answering these Objections it seems Mr. Du Pin has found much difficulty in for altho' he proves very evidently the opinion that he wou'd refute is New yet he cannot Demonstrate it to his Antagonists because they may maintain that they are Truths that have continued a long time undiscovered and now are made manifest to the Church The Mystery of Transubstantiation is of this Number since M. Allix has shewn us that before the Council of Trent it was strongly rejected This is therefore indeed what was never revealed as an Article of Faith till the 16 th Age. Why may not they also say that the Power of the Church over the Temporalties of Kings is another Truth that lay undiscovered till Gregory the Seventh This is a little perplexing but the Council of Constance the Terrible Shield of the French Church is yet more difficult I shall only speak a little to that of all the Learned Disputes of the Author against Cardinal Bellarmin who to prove that the Temporalties of Moriarchs ought to submit to the Tribunals of the Church has Collected in one Piece all matter of Fact that he has found in Ecclesiastick History and the Old Testament with all the Reasons that his great Wit and Learning cou'd furnish him with From whence it appears that we may learn a thousand curious things in the answer of Mr. Du Pin to this Famous Cardinal We find many places in the Acts of the Council of Constance where it attributes to the Church the Right of Deposing Princes but we shall content our selves with relating the words of the 14 th Session where 't is Decreed that all those who observe not its determinations shall be eternally Infamous and deprived of all Dignity Estate Honour Charge and Benefice Ecclesiastical and Civil altho it should even be a King an Emperor a Cardinal or a Pope The Council of Basil Decreed the same thing Mr. Du Pin answers to that 1. That 't is a Menace without effect 2. That we may understand it shou'd be done only with the consent of Princes and by their Voluntary Submission 3. That as it was done in a time when the general Opinion attributed to the Church any power over Kings so these Decrees were rash 4. That these Councils determined it not in Form since they did not examin it but spoke only according to the General Style of the Prelates of that time so that this cannot be a Decision made Conciliariter It wou'd be needless to tell the Reader that these Answers neither taken together nor separately can any way injure this Decree from whence it follows either that the Church has a Right to depose Soveraigns or that it has made a very false Decision I say Decision fâ—r 't is as impossible to make a Decree without defining the the Doctrin which is the Insparable foundation of this Decree as it is to declare this particular Proposition for an Article of Faith We ought to believe St. Peter because he was inspired of God without declaring this General Proâ—osition as an Article of Faith we must believe all those that speak by the