may be dispensed with and whilst there is no neglect or contempt of it prove neither damnable nor dangerous PART III. ARTICLE XXIII Of the Written and Vnwritten Word AS to this Article Vindic. p. 100. there is indeed an Agreement between Monsieur de Meaux and Me so far as We handle the Question and keep to those general terms Of the Traditions being universally received by all Churches and in all Ages for in this Case We of the Church of England are perfectly of the same Opinion with them and ready to receive whatever we are thus assured to have come from the Apostles with a like Veneration to that we pay to the written Word it self But after all this there is as the Vindicator observes a very material difference betwixt us viz. Who shall be judge when this Tradition is Vniversal He tells us Vind ibid. they rely upon the judgment of the present Church of every Age declaring her sense whether by the most General Council of that Age or by the constant practice and uniform voice of her Pastors and People And this is that to which he conceives every private person and Church ought to submit without presuming to examine how ancient that Tradition does appear to be or how agreeable it is to the Written Word of God Now here we must own a dissent as to this method of judging of Traditions for these two reasons 1. Because whether there were any such particular Doctrine or Practice received by the Primitive Church is a matter of fact and as such is in many cases distinctly set down by such Writers as lived in or near that first Age of the Church Now where the case is thus the Accounts that are given by these Writers are certainly to those who are able to search into them a better Rule whereby to judge what was an Ancient Doctrine and Tradition than either the Decree of a Council of a latter Age or the Voice and Practice of its Pastors and People For let these agree as much as they will in voting any Doctrine or Practice to have been Primitive yet they can never make it pass for such among wise and knowing Men if the authentick Histories and Records of those times shew it to have been otherwise And this being plainly the case as to several instances decreed by the Councils and practised by the Pastors and People in the Roman Church we cannot look upon her late Decrees and Practices to be a good or a safe Rule for judging of the Antiquity or Vniversality of Church-Traditions But 2. There is yet a more cogent Reason against this Method which is that it is apt to set up Tradition in competition with the Scriptures and to give this Vnwritten Word the upper hand of the Written For according to this Method if the Church in any Age does but decree in Council or does generally Teach and Practice any thing as an ancient Tradition then this must obtain and be of force with all its Members tho' many of them should be perswaded that they cannot find it in nay that it is contrary to the Written Word of God Now this we cannot but look upon as an high affront to the Holy Scriptures And let them attribute as much as they please to the Decrees and Practices of their Church We cannot allow that any particular Church or Person should be obliged upon these grounds to receive that as a matter of Faith or Doctrine which upon a diligent and impartial search appears to them not to be contained in nay to be contrary to the written Word of God In this Case we think it reasonable that the Church's Sentence should be made void and the Voice of her pretended Traditions be silenced by that more powerful one of the lively Oracles of God ARTICLE XXIV XXV Of the Authority of the Church IN the two next Articles Vind. p. 101. concering the Authority of the Church I was willing to allow as much and come up as near to Mons de Meaux as Truth and Reason would permit This it seems made the Vindicator to conceive some great hopes from my Concessions But these his hopes are soon dasht when he finds me putting in some Exceptions and not willing to swallow the whole Doctrine as it is laid down in the Exposition Now the Exceptions that seem most to offend him are these 1. That the Church of Rome should be taken for a particular and not the Catholick Church 2. That She should be supposed as such either by Error to have lost or by other means to have prevaricated the Faith even in the necessary points of it 3. That any other Church should be allow'd to examine and judg of the Decisions of that Church 4. That it should be left to private or individual Persons to examine and oppose the Decisions of the whole Church if they are evidently convinced that their private belief is founded upon the Authority of God's Holy Word These are the Exceptions at which he is the most offended Vind. p. 103. The 1. of these he calls an Argument to elude the Authority of the Church of Rome and to shew the Fallacy of it he thinks it sufficient to say That they do not take the Church of Rome as it is the Suburbican Diocess to be the Catholick Church but all the Christian Churches in Communion with the Bishop of Rome Now if this in truth be that which they mean when they stile the Church of Rome the Catholick Church then surely every other National Church which is of that Communion has as good a title to the name of Catholick as that of Rome it self For seeing it is the Purity or Orthodoxness of the Faith which is the bond of this Communion this renders every distinct Church professing this Faith equally Catholick with the rest and reduces the Church of Rome as well as others within its own Suburbican Diocess and so makes it only a particular not the Vniversal Church But now should we allow the Church of Rome as great an extent as the Vindicator speaks of and that it were proper to understand by that name all those other Churches which are in Communion with her yet all this would not make her the whole or Catholick Church unless it could be proved that there was no other Christian Church in the World besides those in Communion with her and that all Christian Churches have in all Ages profess'd just the same Faith and continued just in the same Worship as She hath done And this we conceive will not easily be made out with reference to the Grecian Armenian Abassine Churches all which have plainly for several Ages differed from the Church of Rome and those in her Communion in points relating both to Faith and Worship So that in respect of these and the like Christian Churches which were not of her Communion She could not be looked upon as a Vniversal but only as a Particular Church Now if this be
of the Merits of Christ and partly of the superabundant Sufferings of the Blessed Virgin and the Saints who have suffer'd more than their Sins required The Pastors of the Church have obtain'd from God the power of granting Indulgences Ibid. c. 3. p. 19 27. and dispensing of the Merits of Christ and the Saints for this end out of the Sacraments The Punishments remitted by these Indulgences Ibid. c. 7. p. 47. are all those which are or might have been enjoyn'd for Sins and that whether the Persons be alive or dead WE believe there is a Power in the Church of granting Indulgences which concern not at all the Remission of Sins either Mortal or Venial but only of some temporal Punishments remaining due after the guilt is remitted So that they are nothing else but a Mitigation or Relaxation upon just Causes of Canonical Penances which are or may be enjoyn'd by the Pastors of the Church on Penitent Sinners according to their several degrees of demerit Papist Represent n. viii p. 10. M. de M. Expos § 8. p. 14. Of the Mass Old Popery New Popery THe * Concil Trid. Sess 22. Can. 1. 3. p. 196. ibid. c. 2. p. 191. Mass is a true and proper Sacrifice A Sacrifice not only Commemoratory of that of the Cross but also truly and properly propitiatory for the dead and the living Conc. Trent Art 16. †Verum reale Sacrificium veram realem mortem aut destructionem rei immolatae desiderat Bell. de Missa l. 1. c. 27. p. 1062. C. Vel in Missa fit vera realis Christi mactatio occisio vel non fit Si non fit non est verum reale Sacrificum Missa Sacrificium enim verum reale veram realem occisionem exigit quando in occisione ponitur essentia Sacrificii 1063. A. And again Per consecrationem res quae offertur ad veram realem externam mutationem destructionem ordinatur quod erat necessarium ad rationem Sacrificii ib. l. D. Sect. Tertio Every true and real Sacrifice requires a true and real Death or Destruction of the thing sacrificed So that if in the Mass there be not a true and real Destruction on there is not a true and real Sacrifice Bellarmin To offer up Christ then in the Eucharist is not only to present him before God on the Altar but really and truly to Sacrifice i. e. destroy him Bellarmin THe Sacrifice of the Mass was instituted only to represent that which was accomplish'd on the Cross to perpetuate the memory of it to the end of the World and apply to us the saving Vertue of it for those Sins which we commit every day Vindicat. pag. 95. When we say That Christ is offered in the Mass we do not understand the word Offer in the strictest Sense but as we are said to Offer to God what we present before him And thus the Church does not doubt to say That She offers up our Blessed Jesus to his Father in the Eucharist in which he vouchsafes to render him himself present before him Vindicat. ibid. p. 96. Of the Popes Authority Old Popery New Popery WE acknowledg the Holy Catholick and Roman Church to be the Mother and Mistress of all Churches and we Promise and Swear to the Bishop of Rome Successor of St. Peter Prince of the Apostles and Vicar of Jesus Christ a true Obedience Concil Trid. Jur. Pii 4ti p. xliv in fine The Pope has Power to depose Princes Si dominus temporatis requisitus monitus ab Ecclesia terram suam purgare neglexerit ab Haeretica foeditate Excommunicationis Vinculo innodetur Et si satisfacere contempserit infra annum significetur hoc summo Pontifici ut ex tunc Ipse Vassallos ab ejus fidelitate denuntiet absolutos terram exponat Catholicis occupandam Salvo jure Domini Principalis dummodo super hoc ipse nullum praestet obstaculum nec aliquod impedimentum opponat Eadem nihil ominus lege servata circa EOS qui NON HABENT DOMINOS PRINCIPALES and absolve Subjects from their Allegiance So the Council of Lateran If the Temporal Lord shall neglect to purge his Land of Heresie let him be Excommunicated and if within a year he refuses to make satisfaction to the Church let it be signified to the Pope that from thenceforth He may declare his Vassals absolved from their Allegiance and expose his Land to be seised by Catholicks yet so as not to injure the right of the Principal Lord. Provided that he puts no stop or hindrance to this And the same Law is to be observed with reference to those who have no Principal Lords Concil Later 4. Can. 3. de Haeret. p. 147. This is no Scholastick Tenet but the Canon of a Council received by the Church of Rome as General WE acknowledg that Primacy which Christ gave to St. Peter in his Successors to whom for this cause we owe that Obedience and Submission which the holy Councils and Fathers have always taught the faithful As for those things which we know are disputed of in the Schools it is not necessary we speak of them here seeing they are not Articles of the Catholick Faith It is sufficient we acknowledg a Head Establish'd by God to conduct his whole Flock in his Paths which those who love Concord amongst Brethren and Ecclesiastical Unanimity will most willingly acknowledg Expos Monsieur de Meaux p. 40. Such is the difference of the present Controversies between us from what they were when it pleased God to discover to our Fathers the Errors they had so long been involved in Were I minded to shew the division yet greater there want not Authors among them and those approved ones too from whence to collect more desperate Conclusions in most of these Points than any I have now remark'd And the Practice and Opinion of the people in those Countries where these Errors still prevail is yet more Extravagant than any thing that either the One or Other have written What now remains but that I earnestly beseech all sober and unprejudiced Persons of that Communion seriously to weigh these things And consider what just reason we had to quit those Errors which even their own Teachers are ashamed to confess and yet cannot honestly disavow It has been the great business of these new Methodists for some years past to draw over ignorant men to the Church of Rome by pretending to them that their Doctrines are by no means such as they are commonly mis-apprehended to be This is popular and may I believe have prevailed with some weak persons to their seduction tho' we know well enough that all those abroad who pretend to be Monsieur de Meaux's Proselytes were not so upon the conviction of his Book but for the advantages of the Change and the Patronage of his Person and Authority But surely would men seriously weigh this Method there could be nothing more
several Changes and Alterations that are placed at the end of my Preface That this Book with these differences is at this time in the hands of the Reverend Editor of my former Treatise and that whosoever of either Communion is pleased to Examine them may when ever he will have free liberty so to do This I the rather declare because Monsieur de Meaux is so positive in it as to charge me with no less than the pure Invention of those passages I have cited from it Vindicat. Pag. 12 13. As for those passages says he which they pretend I have corrected in a second Edition for fear of offending the Sorbonne it is as you see a Chimerical Invention and I do here once more repeat it That I neither publish'd nor connived at nor caused to be made any Edition of my Book but that which is well known in which I never altered any thing For answer to which I must beg leave once more to repeat it too That these passages are for the most part Chimerical Inventions indeed but yet such as He once hoped to have put off as the Doctrine of his Church and as such sent them into the World in that first Edition we are speaking of out of which I have transcribed them in as just and proper terms as I was able to put them in and I appeal to any one that shall please to examine them for the truth and sincerity that I have used in it But here Monsieur de Meaux has got an Evasion which if not prevented may in some Mens Opinion take off this seeming contradiction betwixt us and leave us both at last for the main in the right 'T is true says he this little Treatise being at first given in Writing to some particular Persons for their Instruction many Copies of it were dispersed and IT WAS PRINTED without my Order or Knowledge No body found fault with the Doctrine contain'd in it and I my self without changing any thing in it of Importance and that only as to the Order and for the greater neatness of the Discourse and Stile caused it to be printed as you now see So that now then it is at last confess'd that an Edition there was such as I charged them with different very much from what we now have But that it was an Edition printed without Monsieur de Meaux ' s Knowledge and the changes which he made afterwards were only as to the Order and for the greater neatness of the Discourse and Stile As to this last particular the Reader will best judge of what kind the differences were by that short Specimen I have given of them If to say in One Collect. n. â— That the Honour which the Church gives to the Blessed Virgin and the Saints is Religious nay that it ought to be blamed if it were not Religious In the Other to doubt whether it may even in some sence be called Religious If to tell us in the One Ibid. n. 12. That the Mass may very reasonably be called a Sacrifice In the Other that there is nothing wanting to it to make it a true Sacrifice If to strike out totally in several places Positions that were absolutely of Doctrine or otherwise very material to the Points that were so as in several instances it appears he has done If this were indeed only for the advantage of the Order and for the greater neatness of the Discourse and Stile I am contented I accuse not Monsieur de Meaux of any other alterations than such as these And thus far we can go certainly in Reply to his Allegations beyond a possibility of denial For what remains though I do not pretend to the like Evidence of Fact yet I will offer some Reasons why I cannot assent to his pretences even there neither That the Impression was made with Monsieur de Meaux ' s Knowledge if not by his express Order whoever shall consider the circumstances of Monsieur Cramoisy who printed it either as a Person of his Reputation and Estate or as Directour of the King 's Imprimerie or finally as Monsieur de Meaux ' s own Bookseller will hardly believe that he would so far affront a Bishop of his Church and one especially of Monsieur de Meaux ' s interest and authority at that time at Court as to make a surreptitious Edition of a Book which he might have had the Author's leave to publish only for the asking But further This pretended surreptitious Edition had the Kings Permission to it which could hardly have been obtain'd without Monsieur de Meaux ' s knowledge It was approved by the Bishops of France in the very same terms that the other Editions have been since which seems more natural to have been procured by Monsieur de Meaux himself than by a Printer underhand and without his knowledge and connivance In a word so far was Monsieur de Meaux from resenting this injury of setting out his Book so uncorrectly and without his leave that the very same Cramoisy the same Year Printed the Exposition with his leave and has continued to Print all his other Books ever since and was never that I could hear of censured for such fraudulent dealing till this time by the Bishop or any other All which put together I must beg leave still to believe as I did before that there was not only a first impression which is at length allow'd but that this first impression was not made without Monsieur de Meaux ' s Order or Knowledge As for the other Point and I think the only remaining in this matter concerning the occasion I mentioned for the suppressing that first Edition the Reader may please to know That a Person by many relations very intimate with one of the Mareshal de Turenne ' s Family upon the publishing of the pretended first Edition of Monsieur de Meaux ' s Exposition first discover'd to him the mystery of the former and shew'd him out of the Mareshal ' s Library the very Book which as he then assured him had been mark'd by some of the Doctors of the Sorbonne and lent it him for some time as a great Curiosity The knowledge of this raised the desire of endeavouring if it were possible to retrieve a Copy of it But the Edition was so carefully dispatch'd that the most that could be done was to get so many scatter'd Sheets of it as to make at last a perfect Book except in some few places in which it was transcribed from the Original of the Mareshal word for word page for page and examined by the Person himself who was so kind as to bestow it on me This is the Book to which I refer the Reader and for this I have the Attestation of the same Person under his hand at the beginning of the Book that it is in every part a perfect Copy of Monsieur de Turenne ' s mark'd by the Sorbonne Doctors and I have been besides so just to
so then the Vindicator himself allows Vind. p. 102. 2dly That a Particular Church may either by Error lose or by other means prevaricate the Faith even in the necessary points of it Indeed that promise of our Saviour Matt. 16.18 That the gates of Hell should not prevail against his Church seems on all hands acknowledged to refer to his whole Church not to any one particular Branch or Portion And therefore tho' the particular Church of Rome should have fallen into gross Errors both in matters of Faith and Practice yet the Catholick Church of Christ may still as to other of its members retain so much Truth and Purity as to keep it from falling away or being guilty of an intire Infidelity And then for the 3d. Exception The allowing any other Particular Church to examine and judg of the Decisions of this Church of Rome If She her self be but a particular Church and has no more Command or Jurisdiction over the Faith of other Churches than they have over hers then every other National Church is as much impow'red to judg for her self as She is and has an equal right to examine her Decisions as those of other Churches and may either receive or reject what by Gods Grace directing her She Judges to agree or disagree with his Holy Word Nor do's one Branch of Christ's Church in this respect invade the Prerogative of another since they do herein only follow the Apostles Rule in trying all things and holding fast that which is good But the 4th Exception he says Vind. p. 102. is yet more intollerable than all the rest That it should be left to every individual Person not only to examine the Decisions of the whole Church but also to glory in opposing them if he be but evidently convinced that his own belief is founded upon the undoubted Authority of God's Holy Word Ibid. p. 103. This he says is a Doctrine which if admitted will maintain all Dissenters that are or can be from a Church and establish as many Religions as there are Persons in the World These indeed are very ill Consequences but such as do not directly follow from this Doctrine as laid down in my Exposition For 1st I allow of this Dissent or Opposition only in necessary Articles of Faith where it is every Mans concern and duty both to judg for himself and to make as sound and sincere a Judgment as he is able And 2dly As I take the Holy Scriptures for the Rule according to which this Judgment is to be made so do I suppose these Scriptures to be so clearly written as to what concerns those necessary Articles that it can hardly happen that any one man any serious and impartial Enquirer should be found opposite to the whole Church in his Opinion Now these two things being supposed that in matters of Faith a man is to judg for himself and that the Scriptures are a clear and sufficient rule for him to judg by it will plainly follow That if a man be evidently convinced upon the best Enquiry he can make that his particular Belief is founded upon the Word of God and that of the Church is not he is obliged to support and adhere to his own belief in Opposition to that of the Church And the Reason of this must be very evident to all those who own not the Church but the Scriptures to be the ultimate rule and guide of their Faith For if this be so then individual Persons as well as Churches must judg of their Faith according to what they find in Scripture And tho it be highly useful to them to be assisted in the making of this Judgment by that Church of which they are Members yet if after this Instruction they are still evidently convinced that there is a disagreement in any necessary point of Faith between the Voice of the Church and that of the Scripture they must stick to the latter rather than the former they must follow the superior not inferior Guide And however this method may through the Ignorance or Malice of some men be liable to some Abuse yet certainly in the main it is most Just and Reasonable and most agreeable to the Constitutions of the Church of England which do's not take upon her to be Absolute Mistress of the Faith of her Members See Article 20. but allows a higher Place and Authority to the guidance of the Holy Scripture than to that of her own Decisions As to the Authority by which I back'd this Assertion viz. that of St. Athanasius tho' it is not doubted but that that Expression of his being against the whole World and the whole World against him did refer chiefly to the Eastern Bishops and was not so literally true as to those of the West yet if we consider what compliances there were even of the Western Bishops at Ariminum and Sirmium and how Pope Liberius himself tho' he refused to subscribe the form of Faith sent to him from Ariminum and was for that reason deposed from his Bishoprick and banished out of Italy yet afterwards when the Emperor Constantius sent for him to Sirmium and required his assent to a form of Faith in which the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was purposely omitted Sozomen Eccl. Hist lib. 4. cap. 15. he yielded thus far and was thereupon restored to his Bishoprick I say if we consider these and the like Particulars related by the Church Historians we shall have little reason to believe that the Western Bishops or even the Pope himself did throughly adhere to the Faith of St. Athanasius and therefore that neither was He or I much in the wrong in affirming That he stood up in defence of Christs Divinity when the Pope the Councils and almost the whole Church fell away ARTICLE XXVI Of the Authority of the Holy See and of Episcopacy IN this Article the Vindicator is pleased to declare that he has nothing to say against the Opinion of the Church of England Vindic. p. 106. only he thinks fit to advise me to enquire What that Authority is which the Ancient Councils of the Primitive Church have acknowledged and the holy Fathers have always taught the faithful to give the Pope Indeed a very little inquiry will serve the turn to let a man see that their Pope do's at this day lay claim to a great deal more than those Councils or Fathers did ever allow him And we should be glad he would direct us to those places either in the first Councils or the Primitive Fathers where the Pope is stiled the Vniversal Bishop or the Supreme Head on Earth of the whole Christian Church where it is said That he is Christs immediate Vicar and that all other Bishops must derive their Authority from him These are things which he do's now pretend to but we can find no Footsteps of them in the first Councils or Fathers of the Church On the contrary we find innumerable passages which
plainly shew that no such Title or Authority was anciently claimed by or allow'd to the Bishop of Rome And therefore we say That these new and groundless pretences must be laid aside before we can be content to yield him that Honour which has been sometimes given to his Predecessors As to that new Question he has hookt in at the end of this Article Vindic. p. 106. Whether the first four General Councils might not be term'd neither General nor Free with as much reason as the Council of Trent I suppose it may easily be answer'd in the Negative 1st It was not so General because it was not call'd by so great and just an Authority as those were That was an Authority to which Christians of all Places and all Ranks acknowledged themselves bound to submit and attend where they were summon'd by it whereas this was a meer Vsurpation and being so was not regarded by a great part of the Christian World who were sensible that they ow'd no Subjection to it 2dly It was not so Free because those who had most to say in defence of the Truth durst not appear at Trent being sufficiently forewarn'd by what others had lately suffered in a like case at Constance Add to this That those who being present did set themselves most to oppose Error and Corruption were perpetually run down and outvoted by Shoals of new made Bishops sent out of Italy for that purpose So that such a Council as this could not with any shew of Reason be termed either Free or General much less ought it to be compared with those first four Councils which were in all these Respects most opposite to it CLOSE XXVII AND now Vindic. p. 106. that I have gone through the several Articles of the Vindication and found the Pretensions of this Author against me as false as I think I have shewn his Arguments to have been frivolous what shall I say more Shall I complain of his Injuries or rather shall I yet again beseech him to consider the little grounds he had for them and see whether he has been able in any one Instance to make good that infamous Character which he has told the World I have deserved in almost every Article of my Expoposition Have I Calumniated them in any thing Have I Misrepresented their Doctrines I have already said I do not know that I have I think I may now add I have made it appear that I have not Where are the Vnsincere dealings the Falsifications the Authors Miscited or Misapplied Excepting only an Error or two that 's the most of the Press has he given any one Example of this Some words now and then I omitted because I thought them impertinent and was unwilling to burden a short Treatise with tedious Citations And I am still perswaded that they were not material and that he might as well have found fault with me for not Transcribing the whole Books from whence they were produced as for leaving out those Passages which he pretends ought to have been inserted And for this I appeal to the foregoing Articles to be my Vindication But our Author has well observed That nothing can be so clearly expressed Vind. p. 120. or so firmly established let me add or so kindly and charitably performed but that a person who intends to cavil may either form a seeming Objection against it or wrest it into a different sense I never had the vanity to fancy my Exposition to be Infiallible or that the sight of an Imprimatur should make me pass for an Oracle But yet I was willing to hope that amidst the late pretences to Moderation such a peaceable Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England might at least have been received with the same civility by them as that of the Church of Rome was by us and that our new Methodists had not so wholly studied the palliating part of their Master as not to have learnt something of his fairness and civility also This I had so much the greater reason to expect for that it has been esteemed not the least part of the artifice of Monsieur de Meaux not only to mollifie the Errors of his Church but to moderate that passion and heat that for the most part occurs in the defenders of it And by the temper and candidness of his Stile insinuate into his Reader a good Opinion of his Doctrine But this is an Artifice that our late Controvertists seem resolved we shall have no great cause to apprehend Who therefore have not only wholly laid aside the Modenation of this Prelate but have in some of their last Pieces fallen into such a vein of lightness and scurrility as if their Zeal for their Church had made them forget that Religion is the Subject and Christians and Scholars to say no more of them their Antagonists I am ashamed to say what mean Reflections and trivial Jestings make up almost the sum of their latest attempts The Papist Represented which seemed to promise something of seriousness and moderation expiring in a FANATICK Sermon done indeed so naturally as if the once Protestant Author had dropt not out of the Church of England but a Conventicle into Popery His late Majesties Papers Answered with Reason and whatever is pretended with respect too by Us instead of being Vindicated ridiculed in the Reply In which it is hard to say whether the Author has least shewn his charity to us or his respect to the Persons and Church that he defends These are the new Methods that are now taken up but sure such as neither Church I suppose will be very well satisfied with And which seem more accommodated to the Genius of those Sceptics who divert themselves at the expence of All Religion on both sides than designed to satisfie the sober and conscientious of either It is not improbable but that some such ingenious Piece may in a little time come forth against what I have now publish'd to call me a few ill names pass a droll or two upon the Cause tell the World how many Sheets there were in my Defence and put the curious to another Shilling expence Amicab'e Accommodation as a late Author has very gravely observed If this be the Case I hope I shall need no Apology to men of sense and sobriety if I here end both their trouble and my own together Let those who have been always used to it rally on still with Holy things if they think good for my part I esteem the Salvation of mens Souls and the Truth of Religion to be a more serious Subject than to be exposed to the levity of a Jest and made the subject of a Controversial Lampoon And if an account shall hereafter be given for every idle word that we now speak I profess I cannot but tremble to think what shall be the judgment of those men who in the midst of such unhappy differences as the Church now labours under whilst our common
not in this last on which Eternity depends Holy Michaël Archangel who camest to help the People of God Prince of the Heavenly Host Deliver me from the Snare of unclean Spirits and bring my Soul into a Place of comfort and refreshment And thou Holy Angel to whose Safeguard and Protection I unworthy Sinner have been committed Assist me in this moment Drive far from me all the Power of Satan Save me from the Mouth of the Lion Draw me out of the Snare which they have laid for me and Preserve my soul from their evil designs Assist me you also O my Patrons and turelary Saints Thou first of all O St. JOHN forerunner of Christ Make my Paths straight and Direct my way in the sight of the Lord. Blessed PETER Key-Bearer of the Heavenly Kingdom Prince of the Apostles by the Power that is committed to thee Loose thou the Bonds of my Sins and Open unto me the Gate of Paradise And thou O Glorious Father of the Monks of St. Benedict impute not thou unto me to my Damnation the innumerable transgressions that I have made of thy Rule O ye Captains and Heads of the Holy Order of the Cistercians St. ROBERT St. ALBERIC St. STEPHEN and St. BERNARD who have so long patiently endured me an unfruitful Tree in this your Vineyard O Forsake me not in this Hour But Remember that I am your Son tho' unworthy the Name The Cardinal goes still further on with the rest of his Patrons for he had taken care to provide enough of them but I fear I have tired the Reader with these I have already transcribed Monsieur de Meaux I know will tell us that all this is no more than if he had desired as many of the good Company that were about him at this time to have done the same and for his Expressions though they are some of them a little Extraordinary yet the Cardinal's intention no doubt like that of the Church was to have them all reduced to this one and the same Catholick meaning PRAY FOR ME. And for those who are resolved to believe this fond Pretence there is no hopes of conviction But for unprejudiced Persons who see the Vanity indeed the unreasonableness and absurdity of this Evasion I doubt not but they will find a plain Opposition between Monsieur de Meaux's Principles and the Cardinal 's and that this good Man needed a very great Apology to his Patrons for having approved a Doctrine so derogatory to their Power and Honour as that of the Exposition in his Opinion undoubtedly was But I shall say no more to shew the unsincerity of Cardinal BONA in this matter I might have added a yet greater instance than either of these Cardinals of the same pious Fraud in the Approbation of the POPE himself See the Procez verbal de l'Assembleé eatraordinaire des Messeigneurs l'Archeveques Eveques en Mars May 1681. Mr. de Meaux himself was one of this Assembly and signed with the rest the Report of the A. B. of Reims in which there is abundantly sufficient to shew how repugnant his Holiness's Proceedings were to the Doctrine of the Exposition approved by him at the very same time that he was engaged in these attempts so contrary to it I know not whether it be worth the observing that the very same day the Pope sent his complementing Brief to Monsieur de Meaux in approbation of his Exposition he sent another to the Bishop of Pamiéz to approve his defending the Rights of his Church against the King which was judg'd in the Assembly of which Mr. de Meaux was one to be an interposing in an Affair which neither the Holy Councils nor Fathers had given him any Authority to meddle with whose Briefs with reference to the Affairs of France and which this Bishop who has had so great a part in them could not be ignorant of however publish'd at the same time that he sent his Complement to Mr. de Meaux do but ill agree with his Exposition Indeed they run in such a strain as plainly shews that were but his Power equal to his Will he would soon convince the World that not this Mans Pretences but the Dictates of Pope GREGORY VII the UNAM SANCTAM Bull and the Canon of LATERAN were the true Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church And of this I am ready to make an ample proof from the several pieces set out by publick Authority in France when ever Mr. de Meaux or his Vindicator shall think fit to question the truth of what I now say NUM IV. Copie d'une Lettre ecrite à Monsieur l'Evêque de Meaux cy devant Evêque de Condom Au Port de St. Marie ce 13. Juin 1683. Monseigneur VOtre Grandeur rapellera sans doute mieux l'Ideé de mon nom lors que je luy dirai que je suis celuy pour qui elle a eu la bonté de parler il y a environ 16 ans à Madame de Chaune pour avoir son consentement d'une Chapelle comme tutrice de Monsieur de j ' eûs l'Honneur de la voir plusieurs fois à St. Thomas du Louvre avec Messeigneurs de Perigueux de Xainte Depuis ce tems la j'ai souffert la Persecution particulierement depuis l'Exposition de la Foi que vôtre grandeur a publiée Ses Enemis qui n'osent pas se declarer contre Elle se declarent contre ceux qui disent la même chose Et aujourdui Monseigneur l' Archevêque de Bourdeaux me fait faire le Proces pour avoir expliqué à l' Epargne le jour de Vendredi Saint Que nous adorions Jesus Christ crucifié en presence de la Croix que nous n'adorions rien de ce que nous voyons Et parce que le Curé dit sur le champ assez haut Le Bois Le Bois j ' ajoutai Non non C'est Jesus Christ non pas le Bois Et comme il ajouta Ecce Lignum Venite Adoremus je le relevai en luy disant Auquel le Salut du Monde a eté ataché Venez adorons ce Salut de Monde J ' ajoutai que le sentiment de l'Eglise etoit que si par impossible nous pouvions separer la Divinité da Fils de Dieu d'avec son humanité nous n' adorerions pas l'humanité puis qu'il est certain qu'il n' y a rien d'adorable que Dieu qu' ainsi nous devions nous persuader que nous allions au Calvaire adorer Jesus Christ sans nous arreter au Crucifix Que l'Eglise comme une bonne Mere nous l'avoit donné par une sainte Invention pour aider à nôtre Foi pour fraper plus vivement nôtre imagination non pour etre l'Objet de nôtre Culte 〈◊〉 se termine à Jesus Christ Voila Monseigneur tout mon crime ce que l'on me
Monsieur de Meaux as to cite scarce any thing out of those places that were in the Manuscript part but have chosen such rather where the printed Copy gave me full Assurance and Authority to do it But to argue the improbability of all this Monsieur de Meaux observes That the Sorbonne is never used to License Books in Body And I desire Monsieur de Meaux to tell us Vindicat. Pag. 8. who ever said or thought they did That that venerable Company knows better what is due to Bishops who are naturally and by their Character Doctors of the Church than to think they have need of the Approbation of her Doctors I doubt not but the Sorbonne very well knows the respect that is due to Bishops but that it should be any argument of disrespect to approve a Bishop's Book when it was sent to them for that purpose I cannot conceive In short we understand the Reputation and Authority of that venerable Company too well to believe it at all improbable that Monsieur de Meaux should desire their Approbation nor are we so little acquainted with their Books as not to know That it is no unheard of thing to see Doctors of the Sorbonne setting their approbation to a Book approved and authorized by Bishops before The next Exception Monsieur de Meaux makes is Vindicat. Pag. 9. That I should confirm what had before been urged against him of a Papist's answering his Book in the truth of which I am as little concern'd as himself can be Only the assurance I have had of it from a Person of undoubted sincerity makes me still believe that it was so and Monsieur de Meaux may remember that Monsisieur Conrart often profess'd that he had seen it in Manuscript who was not only his old Friend but as himself characteriseth him M. de M's Advert p. 3. One endowed with all that the Catholics themselves could desire in a Man excepting a better Religion For what relates to Father Crasset it is not for me to contradict Monsieur de Meaux ' s Declaration Vindicat. pag. 10. that he never read his Book But that he never heard it mentioned that there was any thing in it contrary to his Exposition this I must confess is admirable whether we consider the notoriety of the thing as it related to the Salutary Advertisements and the Bishop of Tournay ' s Pastoral Letter which made so great a noise in France or that it was particularly proved in the Answer to his own Advertisement dedicated to Monsieur de Ruvigny above five Years since Seconde Reponse p. 79 c. to be directly opposite to his Exposition And for the rest For all this see the Appendix num 2. I must beg leave to believe whatever Monsieur de Meaux flatters himself with that that Father would be so far from being troubled that any Body should think his Principles contrary to Monsieur de Meaux ' s that I dare say he would rather think his pains but ill spent in Writing of so large a Book did he not believe he had convinced the World that he looks upon them nay and has proved them too to be little less than Heretical As for Cardinal Capisucchi Vindicat. pag. 10. Monsieur de Meaux tells us he is so far from being contrary to the Doctrine of the Exposition that his express Approbation has been prefix'd to it This indeed were a good presumption that he should not have any Principles contrary to Monsieur de Meaux See Appendix num 3. where I have shew'd Cardinal Bona another of his approvers to be nevertheless in his own Writings contrary to Monsieur de M's Exposition but if what I have alledged out of his Controversies be really repugnant to what he approved in the Exposition it may indeed speak the Cardinal not so consistent with himself as he should be but the contradiction will be never the less a contradiction for his so doing The next thing Monsieur de Meaux takes notice of is The relation of Monsieur Imbert and Monsieur de Witte The Stories are matters of Fact and the Papers from whence they were collected published by themselves Vindicat. p. 10 11. If they alledged Monsieur de Meaux ' s Authority for Principles that he maintained not For what concerns Mr. Inbert see his own Letter to Monsieur de Meaux Appendix num 4. For Monsieur de Witte 's case it has been already printed and I have nothing new to add to it this concerns not us nor whatever the little Comment on the Bishop ' s Letter pretends was it at all needful to be shewn by me that they did not in the recital of the propositions held by them 'T is sufficient that they both declared themselves to stand to Monsieur de Meaux ' s Exposition and were both condemned without any regard had to Monsieur de Meaux ' s Authority or being at all convinced or so much as told that they were mistaken in their pretences to it The last thing Monsieur de Meaux takes notice of is Vindicat. p. 14. That I reflect upon him for being fertile enough in producing new Labours but steril in answering what is brought against his Works I do not at all envy Monsieur de Meaux ' s fertility his productions have not been many and those so short and with such an ingenuous Character of temper and moderation as ought to be acknowledged even in an Enemy But I must confess I do admire as many others do that no Reply has been made by him to those Answers that have been sent abroad not only against his Exposition but even against the Advertisement it self which he says can bear no Reply See de la B's Answer to the Advertisement p. 5. This we so much the rather wonder at for that an Answer was openly promised by Monsieur de Turenne and not without some kind of boasting too And that several of his own Communion were so well satisfied with the pieces that had been publish'd against Him as to expect no less than We some such Vindication And here I shall take my leave of Monsieur de Meaux for whom I must yet again profess that I still retain all that respect that is due to a Person whose Character I honour and whom I hope I have treated with all the caution and civility that the necessary defence of my self and of the truth would permit me to do For what remains my business now must be wholly with his Vindicator who has been pleased to fix such an odious Character upon me as I hope to make it appear I have as little deserved as I shall desire to return it upon him Had he charged me with Ignorance had he loaded me with mistakes arising from thence or had he imputed to me the faults only of Carelesness and Incogitancy All this might have pass'd without my Censure and I should have been so far from vindicating
Unsincerity and shew what a kind of Religion that must be Vind. p. 222. that is not maintainable without such sinister doings But I shall remit him wholly to the Reader 's Censure and his own Conscience for Correction As for my last Assertion Vindic. p. 88. That Transubstantiation was no matter of Faith till the Council of Lateran 1200 years after Christ They are the very words of Scotus cited by Bellarmine See p. 64. and all his Sophistry will not be able to prove that they make but little for my purpose Thus notwithstanding all the little Endeavours of the Vindicator to evade the truth of those Concessions made by the greatest of his own Communion in favour of our Doctrine my Argument still stands good against them and Transubstantiation appears to have been the monstrous Birth of these last Ages unknown in the Church for almost 1200 years Vind. p. 92 93. For what remains concerning the Adoration of the Host since he has thought fit to leave my Arguments in their full force I shall not need say any thing in defence of that which he has not so much as attempted to destroy ARTICLE XIX Of the Sacrifice of the Mass IF I affirmed Vindic. p. 94. The Sacrifice of the Mass to be one of those Errors that most offends us I said no more than what the Church of England has always thought of it And had the Vindicator pleased to have examined my Arguments instead of admiring them he would perhaps have found I had reason to do so * Canon 1. Siquis dixerit in Missa non offerri Deo verum proprium Sacrificium aut quod offerri non fit aliud quam nobis Christum ad manducandum dari Anathema fit * Canon 3. Siquis dixerit Missae Sacrificium tantum esse laudis gratiarum actionis aut nudam commemorationem Sacrificii in Cruce peracti non autem Propitiatorium vel soliprodesse sumenti neque pro Vivis Defunctis pro peccatis paenis satisfactionibus aliis necessitatibus offerri debere Anathema sit The Council of Trent affirms Concil Trid. Sess 22. p. 196. de Missa That the Mass is a true and proper Sacrifice offered to God a Sacrifice not only of Praise and Thanksgiving nor yet a bare Commemoration of the Sacrifice offered on the Cross but truly Propitiatory for the Dead and the Living and for the Sins Punishments Satisfactions and other Necessities of both of them †Ibid. Cap. 2. p. 191. Una eademque est Hostia idem nunc offerens Sacerdotum Ministerio qui seipsum tunc in cruce obtulit sola offerendi ratione diversa A Sacrifice wherein the same Christ is now offered without Blood that once offer'd himself in that bloody Sacrifice of the Cross the same Sacrifice the same Offerer Christ by his Priests now who then did it by himself offering himself only differing in the manner of Oblation This is in short what their Council has defined as to this Mass-Sacrifice and what we think we have good reason to be offended at That there should be any true and proper Sacrifice truly and properly Propitiatory after that of the Cross that Christ who once offer'd up himself upon the Tree for us should again be brought down every day from Heaven to be Sacrificed a new in ten thousand places at a time on their Altars And by all these things so great a dishonour done to our Blessed Lord as most evidently there is and our Writers have unanswerably proved in the whole design Practice and Pretences of it How little the Doctrine of the real Presence Vindicat. ib. as understood by the Church of England will serve to support this Innovation is at first sight evident from the Exposition I before gave of it That those who are ordained Priests ought to have power given them to Consecrate the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ and make them present in that holy Eucharist after such a manner as our Saviour appointed and as at the first Institution of this Sacred Mystery they certainly were this we have always confessed and our †In the ordering of Priests when the Bishop imposes his hands he bids him be a faithful Dispenser of the Word of God and of his Holy Sacraments And again when he delivers him the Bible Take thou Authority to Preach the Word of God and to minister the Holy Sacraments c. Sparrow Collect. p. 158. Rituals shew that our Priests accordingly have such a Power by Imposition of Hands conferred on them But that it is necessary to the Evangelical Priesthood that they should have power to offer up Christ truly and properly as the Council of Trent defines this we deny and shall have reason to do so till it can be proved to us that their Mass is indeed such a Sacrifice as they pretend and that our Saviour left it as an Essential part of their Priesthood to offer it For the rest Vindic. p. 95. If with the Council of Trent he indeed believes the Mass to be a true and proper Sacrifice he ought not to blame us for taking it in that Sence in which they themselves understand it For certainly it is impossible for words to represent a Sacrifice more strictly and properly than the Council of Trent has defined this ARTICLE XX. Of the Epistle to the Hebrews TO elude the authority of this Epistle Vindicat. p. 96 97. the Vindicator after Monsieur de Meaux thinks it sufficient to tell us That they understand the word Offer when they apply it to the Mass Mr. de M's Expos p 31. in a larger signification than what the Apostle there gives it as when we are said to offer up to God whatever we present before him And that 't is thus they pretend to offer up the Blessed JESVS to his Father in the Mass Vind. p. 96. in which he vouchsafes to render himself present before him That this is to prevaricate the true meaning of that phrase the Doctrine of the foregoing Article plainly shews If Christ be in the Mass a true and proper sacrifice as was there said it will necessarily follow that then he must be truly and properly sacrificed ‖ Sacrificium verum reale veram realem Occisionem exigit quando in Occisione ponitur Essentia Sacrificii Bellarm. de Miss l. 1. cap. 27. p. 1663. A. And one essential Propriety and which they tell us distinguishes a Sacrifice from any other Offering being the true and real destruction of what is offered insomuch that where there is not a true and proper destruction neither can there be as they themselves acknowledg a true and proper Sacrifice It must be evidently false in these men to pretend that by Offering in this matter is meant only a presenting of Christ before God and not a real change and destruction of his Body offered by them If in this Exposition of their Doctrine