ROME'S CONVICTION OR A VINDICATION OF THE Original Institution OF Christianity In Opposition to the Many USURPATIONS OF THE CHVRCH of ROME And their frequent VIOLATION of DIVINE RIGHT Cleerly Evinced By Arguments Drawn from their Own PRINCIPLES And Undeniable Matter of Fact By John Savage Gent. London Printed by T. N. for Gabriel Kunholt at the King's Head over against the Mews near Charing-Cross MDCLXXXIII TO THE MOST RENOWNED MONARCH Charles the II. OF England Scotland France and Ireland KING Defender of the Faith c. Most Dread Soveraign WHither should This TREATISE of Religion Fly for Protection but under the Wings of Your Most Sacred Majesty Duely Intituled to the Glorious Prerogative of Defender of the FAITH Hither therefore it Connaturally tends but makes its Approach in an Humble Posture Dazled as it were with the Glory of so much Majesty It s Author likewise Falls Prostrate at Your Royal Feet earnestly Imploring Your PRINCELY Protection of these his weak Endeavors He comes Full Fraught with a Confident Hope that where such Power and Goodness Reigns he cannot suffer a Repulse And being sway'd by the Memory of Your Past Favors the sense of Gratitude as well as Duty hath Immutably Fixt him in this Resolve That a Deep-Rooted Loyalty Animated with a Fervent Zeal for Your Majesties Royal Person Government and Prerogatives shall ever be the Indeleble Character of Your Majesties Most Loyal Most Submissive and Most Addicted Subject John Savage TO THE Reader HAving had a more then ordinary inspection into the Doctrine and PRINCIPLES of the Church of Rome I have upon this Account been earnestly mov'd by some Persons of Honor and Worth to Write something in Opposition to that Church and at length I was wrought to a Compliance In the pursuit whereof I have had no consideration of the Unkindness and Ingratitude of some of the Church of Rome towards me but have proceeded with all imaginable Candor and Sincerity wholly devested of all Ranker Spleen and Animosity against their Persons But I deem'd it no way repugnant to Christian Charity to use my best endeavors to open a way to Truth And if sometimes my Pen seems to be Dipt in Gall yet this only is a product of Zeal for the Doctrine I have undertaken to defend in opposition to theirs without the least intending to infringe the Laws of Morality The Heads of Doctrine contained in each Disputation of this Treatise I have several times Proposed to the Learnedst Doctors of the Church of Rome that I could meet with of several Religious Orders quasi tentando by way of Discourse P. Worsleus Soc. Jesu Leodii One tells me That these Difficulties were indeed insuperable if scann'd by the Light of Reason but yet we were all oblig'd to captivare intellectum in obsequium fidei to captivate our Vnderstanding in Obedience to Faith P. Haseur Recollecta Namurci Another Answers by way of Admonition That it was not safe but on the contrary very dangerous to penetrate too deep into the Mysteries of Faith A Third Alleadgeth P. Derkennis Soc. Jesu Lovanii That I had as good Question the Verity of Scripture as submit the Definitions of Councils to the Scrutiny of Reason because the Scripture also contains very great Difficulties and seeming Contradictions To all these I Reply That Divine Faith consists of Two parts the Material Object which is the thing we Believe and the Formal Object which is the Motive why we Believe and that is dictio Dei God's saying or revealing it Wherefore when a Mystery is proposed to be Believed as an Article of Faith though I have no Evidence in attestato in the thing Revealed because I cannot demonstrate the Truth of it by Human Reason yet if I have Evidence or Certainty in attestante that is I am sure God says it then with a Blind Obedience and with a firm Adhesion I assent to it But if it be Doubtful and Ambiguous whether it be a Divine Revelation or no then to Institute a strict Inquiry Whether it be truly and really attested by Divine Autority or no is an act of Prudence and therefore not dangerous but secure and laudable But how shall we know assuredly whether it be a Divine Revelation or not First I Answer That no New Revelations are to be admitted but such as are contained in Holy Writ in the Canonical Scripture Secondly I Answer That if the Mystery proposed drive us to such Extremities that no Assent can be given to it without denying some one of the Prima Principia Lumine Naturae nota First Principles known by the Light of Nature which the Wit of Man cannot avoid then we may certainly conclude that if it be a new Doctrine not contained in Scripture or if it be evidently inconsistent with the Light of Nature in both cases it comes not from God but is a meer Human Invention And we ought not to Believe by Divine Faith that which is backt only by Human Authority As for the Difficulties of Scripture those which are Seeming Contradictions are most Historical and are Solved by those Authors who ex professo have Written so many Large Tomes of the Interpretation of Scripture Other Mysteries which are Speculative and Doctrinal as a Virgin to Conceive the Incarnation of the Divine Word and the Hypostatical Union the Mystery of the Sacred Trinity c. there is no one of all these that is destructive of the Light of Human Reason or that will reduce us to a necessity of denying the Truth of any of the First Principles Since therefore we admit of all Canonical Scripture as the Word of God we ought to Believe it by Divine Faith For certain it is that as God's Infinite Veracity is uncapable of asserting such things as are impossible so likewise by the same Rule God who is the Author of Human Reason is uncapable of Imposing upon Man's Understanding a necessity of Believing that which is false or impossible for if false it is destructive of his Veracity which would un-God him if Impossible it is inconsistent with Human Reason And yet all things are to be granted to the Divine Omnipotence that involve not a manifest Contradiction And this may serve as a Reply to the Answers of the aforementioned Doctors I shall therefore proceed in order to examine the Controverted Difficulties which this Treatise contains as they are digested under their respective Heads whereof each hath his Peculiar Disputation and the Disputations I Subdivide into Sections In the Second Disputation of this Treatise I have Inserted most of the Antient Rituals and Liturgies of the Latine Greek and the Eastern Churches which Morinus Translated out of the Greek and Syrian into Latine And as this Translator was tyed to give the Literal Sense of the Originals without Mutation so also I deem'd it Illegal to make any change or alteration in the Latin Version which in some places is obscure and obsolete but I have rendered the true and genuine sense
and in many other cases of like nature then are Councils both profitable and necessary as a Physitian is to a sick Patient then ought they by their opportune Remedies to salve the Sores to make up the breaches to reforme the abuses and to redintegrate the whole body of the Church and purge the Wheate from the Cockle and Darnel which by the depraved will of Man and the suggestion of Sathan began to take root But if Councils should spend their endeavors in debating certain abstruse and hidden Mysteries and frame Articles of Divine Faith upon them without any warrant in Scripture or Antiquity nay against the Original Belief of the Church and by their annexed Anathema's drive Men to confusion and desperation and yet reap no benefit thereby for it neither promotes Vertue nor curbs Vice nor any way conduceth to the institution of a Moral and Christian Life but on the contrary it puts Mens Consciences upon the Rack it disturbs the peace and quiet of their Minds it hinders their due application to Vertue and Morality it perplexes their Souls with Scruples and disposeth them to despair In this case I appeal to the Judgment of the whole World Whether the multiplying of such decisions be not fruitless and pernicious To what is added in the Objection I grant that Councils have been always in use not to decide such speculative points of Divinity and reduce them to Articles of Faith but to solve practical doubts which may arise among the vulgar concerning their practise and manners c. which may be instrumental to facilitate their progress towards Heaven but as for Divine Faith it ought to be said to them as St. Paul said to the Galatians That if an Angel should come from Heaven and Teach them otherwise then they had been Taught by Christ and his Apostles they ought not to believe him but let him be Accursed saith the Apostle Gal. 1.8 9. The Second Objection We are Taught by experience that several Heresiarchs have often attempted to make a breach in the Church by their new Heterodox Doctrine and the most efficacious remedy in the Church to prevent such inconveniences is to Anathematize the Authors and condemn their Errors as Heretical which hath been alwayes practised in the Church with good success for the extirpating of Heresie and establishing Orthodox Doctrine To this Objection I Answer First That when the Definitions of Councils are grounded in Scripture in the Doctrine and Practise of Christ and his Apostles or otherwise by true Revelations made manifest to be of Divine Autority such definitions are warrantable and useful to extinguish Heresie but nothing of all this will quadrate with the forecited definitions of the Church of Rome which are no way proved by Autority nor Reason nay rather they are repugnant to both yet are obtruded to the Credulous Believers under a Curse to be by them received by a blind assent without examining the truth of them Secondly I Answer That the most apposite and efficacious way to suppress Heresie is to evince the Error of it by solid and convincing Arguments drawn from Divine Autority or evident Principles of Reason These are the Armes with which the Antient Fathers wag'd War against the respective Heresies of their times So St. Ambrose with his Preaching and solid Principles drew the great St. Augustine from his Heresie to imbrace the Orthodox Doctrine of Christianity and the same Augustine being fully convinced thereof with no less industry and zeal then learning efficaciously refelled the Errors of the Manichaeans the Pellagians the Massilienses the Donatists c. he alledged not the Autority of Councils but convinced the Broachers and Abetters of those Errors with solid Arguments whereby he detected the Fallacy of their irregular Tenets And so by Divine Autority and strength of Reason refelled their illegal Assertions The Reason of this proceeding is manifest for the first Authors of such Erroneous Doctrines and they who greedily give their assent to them make it their business to maintain them against all opposition and glory in their undertakings hugging their Errors as the happy products of their own understanding whence they so tenaciously adhere to them that no Curse nor Censure can make any impression upon them If you cite the Definitions of Councils against them they alledge their Reasons against you and Challenge you to Solve them How earnestly did Nestorius insist upon the Force of his Argument to prove two Persons in Christ And the whole stress of his Proofe he reduced to this one Sillogisme Omnis Natura Rationalis Completa est Persona sed in Christo sunt duae Rationales Naturae completae ergo duae Personae In English thus All Compleat Rational Natures are Persons but in Christ there are two compleat Rational Natures ergo in Christ there are two Persons With this Argument Nestorius perplext the Fathers whereof none durst deny either of the Premises and yet the Conclusion was Erroneous And certainly Nestorius would have slighted any definition of a Council against his Assertion without solving his Argument Wherefore the most efficacious way to Refute an Heretick is to Instruct his Reason and Convince his Judgment that his Principles are Erroneous to this end Arguments are to be drawn from Scripture and Divine Autority seconded by cleer and evident Reason and from these two Premises you may infer a conclusion contradictory to the Error And hereby you encrease the Authors Adhesion to his Error for there are none so obstinate as to deny that which is establisht by known Divine Autority and Evident Reason SECT V. When and from whom this Doctrine of the Real Presence took its first rise ALl Dogmatical Assertions which are pretended to be matters of Divine Faith if they be so it s rigorously necessary that they be backt by Divine Autority and therefore must be traced immediately from Christ himself or else attested by those Hagyographers the old Prophets Apostles c. who were immediately inspired by the Holy Ghost and so could not erre by whose Mediation it must ultimate be resolved into Divine Autority The reason hereof is because all acts of Divine Faith consist essentially of two parts the Material and the Formal Object the Material Object is the thing believed the Formal Object is dictio Dei Gods saying it which is the only motive that induceth us to believe it as Divine Faith And herein Faith differs from Science and Opinion because Science though invested with certainty yet derives it from the evidence of Human Reason which is inductive to the assent Opinion hath neither certainty nor evidence but a meer probability grounded on a weak foundation of Reason cum formidine partis oppositae it is always accompanyed with an ambiguity either formal or virtual that the contrary may be true But Faith if it be Divine relyes upon Divine Autority if Human on Human Authority For instance we believe that the Divine Word is Incarnate because God hath assured it this is an
the regulating of their Consciences yet these Men though never so Heterogeneal in Dialect and National differences make but one complex or collection of the Popes Negotiators whose main scope and design is to maintain and improve the Prerogatives of their great Master by all the subtle arts and sedulous industry they are capable of What plausible Arguments do they use to persuade people that their Church cannot Err and the illiterate Vulgar greedily swallow this Bait which confirms them in their servitude and slavery and makes them prompt to submit to all the Prescripts of the See of Rome not regarding the arduity thereof And among other marks of the Popes greatness this of Infallibility is chief for upon this Link hangs immediately his Supremacy his Temporal pretended Power over Kings and Princes c. because these Titles are deduced from his being universal Pastor which the non-erring Councils have declared him to be so that the Councils Infallibility is the Root of those Prerogatives it is the main Pillar which supports the Magnificence and Greatness of the Church and Court of Rome and if this should fail that Superstructure would fall to utter Ruine and Desolation This therefore is the great Bulwark which dreads no opposition this is the main Fort that still remains immoveable against all attempts this is the Ship of St. Peter which though tossed and agitated upon the swelling Billows by Raging and Tempestuous Storms yet never sinks Well may there be some attempts upon the out-works by light Skirmishes and Velitations in Controversies of less moment which if by immediate Arguments they cannot repel recourse may still be had to the main Fort and if that begins to open upon the Enemy by Thundring Infallibility in his Ears Lord who can withstand it This will soon defeat him and dissipate all his attempts But upon what grounds doth the Church of Rome arrogate to it self this high Character First Proof in exclusion of all others Why this is drawn from an irrefragable Testimony it being grounded on the Promises of Christ himself for this is the Church to whom Christ hath promised That the Gates of Hell should never prevail against it This is the Church to whom Christ's word is engaged to send it another Paraclite the Spirit of Truth that should lead it into all Truth This is the Church to whom Christ said I will be with you till the end of the World And finally this is the Church committed to the care of St. Peter first Pope thereof to whom Christ said Thy Faith shall never fail which is meant of all other Popes that by a lineal descent succeed him And who dare attempt to evacuate Christ's Promises Hence it comes to pass that the Bishops and Fathers assembled in a general Council though of themselves weak and subject to Error yet being the chief Members of the Church for Doctrine and Dignity and being the Representative of the whole are render'd Infallible as being backt by Divine Authority by virtue of Christ's Promise they do not now determine matters of Faith and dogmatical points as meer Men but are as it were Deifi'd in order to this Function by a supernatural quality infused into them and inherent in their Intellects or else by a previous disposition and concomitant operation of the Holy Ghost which determines them to Truth and protects them from Error They are but the Organ to deliver Truth but the Divine Oracle is the Dictator they are but the instruments which convey those Mysteries to the knowledge of Mankind but the Spirit of God is the principal Agent so that thâ—â— Canons and Decrees come from them full fraught with the Divinity which renders them Infallibly certain for the Holy Ghost every Session attends the motion of those great Men to regulate all their Proceedings by the never erring Rule of his infinite Veracity whence it ensues that to pick quarrels with their Definitions is a high Temerity it is to wage War with Heaven or by the weak scrutiny of humane discourse to examine the truth of such Mysteries as Heaven hath revealed which if they should contain any seeming Error or Contradiction yet our understanding must adhere to them as infallibly true because our Reason is guided only by obscure Notions and abstractive Acts which draws in foreign Species by the mediation of the Senses which give but a glimmering light to the Understanding and often suggest Falsity for Truth but the Decrees of Councils are sacred and carry the Seal of the Holy Spirit enstampt upon them by whose directions they are framed wherefore it is no less than a Sacrilegious Presumption to Question the Truth of them for this is to oppose Human Reason against Divine Authority This is the substance of their first Proof drawn from the Authority of Scripture which at first appearance seems great and glorious a specious pretence to work upon the credulity of the ignorant Vulgar The second Proof is grounded in Reason but before we propose it we must open the way by putting the Reader in mind that the Divine Word the Second Person of the Sacred Trinity considering the deplorable condition of Mankind by the Fall of Adam resolved upon an efficacious Remedy to assume Human Nature and by an Hypostatical Union to be Phisically United and become on with Flesh and Bloud and in that Nature to suffer death and thereby to offer to his Eternal Father an infinite Treasure of Merits and Satisfaction to make an attonement between God and Man and to satisfie for Mans transgressions even to the rigor of Justice because the satisfaction was made in the same specifical nature that offended and it was made to the full equality of the Crime because the Meritorious Cause thereof was a Divine Person of infinite Dignity and therefore his Actions were of infinite Worth But because it was not permitted to every individual Person to draw from that infinite Mass of Satisfaction and Merit in what measure he pleased this priviledge being reserved for the Pope alone to grant out of this stock by his Indulgences what quantity and to whom he deemed expedient therefore a Church must be ordained and a method prescribed how to apply the benefit of Christ's Passion to each one in particular To this end our great Redeemer instituted Sacraments to be the organs and vehicles to convey the Fruit of his Passion to the Receiver and this is secunda post naufragium tabula whence the Church of Rome saith in her Publick Office O felix culpa quae talem meruit Redemptorem This being supposed The second Proof is grounded on this consideration that the principal design of our Redeemer was to draw Souls to Heaven notwithstanding the loss sustained by Original Sin for to this end he offered his satisfaction to this end he merited habitual and sanctifying Grace transient and actual Graces prevenient concomitant and subsequent Graces to illuminate the Understanding to move and incline the Will to embrace Good and
persists in them as I shall prove in the following Disputations of this Treatise ergo The Church of Rome is not Infallible for that Church that actually doth erre hath a power to erre because bene valet ab actu ad potentiam and it is evident that that Church which hath power or capacity to erre is not Infallible for Infallibility excludes a power of failing There yet remains to solve such Objections as may be proposed against our Assertion contained in the beginning of this Section SECT IV. An Answer to the Objections proposed against the nullity of the Church of Rome's Infallibility THe first Objection None can Question but that such Promises as our Redeemer hath truly made to his Church shall be fulfilled but we have a Moral certainty that the Promises specifyed in the Second Section were truly made by Christ for we admit a Moral certainty That the Holy Scripture is truly the Word of God Whence it ensues that we are Morally certain that the Church of Rome is Infallible First I Answer That this Objection destroys it self for it contends for an Infallibility and proves it by a Reflex act of Moral certainty whereas Infallibility excludes a power of Erring and Moral certainty includes that power so that the result of both would be a Fallible Infallibility which involves a Contradiction This is much of the nature of a Sillogisme wherein the conclusion semper sequitur debiliorem partem so that if one of the premises be scientifical the other only probable the conclusion will be only probable the reason is because in the conclusion the two extreams are therefore identifi'd between themselves because they were in the premises identifi'd with a third wherefore if one extream be certainly identifi'd with a third the other only probably they can but be probably identifi'd with each other for this identity is destroyed by separating either of the extreams from the third For application The Infallibility of the Church depends upon these two Principles First That we are Infallibly certain that Christ's Promises are performed Secondly That we are Infallibly certain of the thing of fact that Christ did Promise if either of these fail the Infallibility faileth and if either of these be only probable the Infallibility is reduced to a probability only now though Moral certainty be the highest degree of Probability yet it comes as far short of Infallibility as this Argument doth of proving it Secondly I Answer That the Church of Rome is too forward in arrogating to themselves alone such Promises as Christ made to his Church for to say nothing of the Church of Rome in Primitive times yet since their manifold Innovations and Superstructures the Protestant Church is the purer and freer from Error and consequently hath more right to lay hold of those Promises then the Church of Rome The Second Objection Though the Church taken barely by it self and without the support of that Testimony from Holy Writ should not be Infallible yet backt by the Motives of Credibility it will be rendred absolutely unerrable for these Motives do so peculiarly affect it and as it were point it out to be the True Church of Christ that it dissipates all the Clouds of Ambiguity which blind the incredulous For who can consider the lineal descent and succession of Chief Pastors the austerity and holiness of life exercised in Monasteries of both Sexes the Miracles wrought by the Members of this Church with the Blood of so many Martyrs the effusion whereof doth daily irrigate the same and renders it more fertile with other Motives of this nature which all are the Badges of this Church Who I say can seriously ponder this without framing an Infallible Judgment that the Church of Rome is the True Church of Christ There is certainly a strict and Metaphysical connexion between these Motives and the True Church for it is not consistent with the Divine Goodness and veracity of God to co-operate to such a Delusion as this would be if these Motives should indicate a False Church subject to Error which would make God himself the Author of this Error We may therefore hence conclude the Church of Rome in which such great Wonders are so frequently wrought to be the True and Infallible Church of Christ The First Answer Among all the Doctors and Divines of the Church of Rome I never knew of any that asserted this strict and metaphysical connexion of the Motives of Credibility with the True Church but only Cardinal Lugo Yet I have seen a whole Torrent of Autority of other Doctors of the same Church of the contrary opinion who all affirm that the collection of these Motives may possibly affect a false Church wherefore let these Authors solve this Objection The Second Answer All these Motives of credibility are fallacious as depending upon Humane Autority and being subject to many casualties and deceits and first for the succession of Chief Pastors whose Jurisdiction by an Illegal Usurpation extends it self de facto over the whole Body but is limited de jure to the Diocess of Rome only and how long together hath the Body been without a head as if it had been defunct and then Monster-like it appeared with two heads it being hard to decide which of them had most right And what is to be said of Liberius Pope who subscribed the Arians Heresie and joyned with them and of Vigilius who approved and condemned the same Doctrine in the three Chapters Must these also be links of continuation in the Succession Surely they were not Infallible Consider the manner of their Election when there occurs a vacancy there will not be wanting those in the Colledge of Cardinals who have ambition enough to aspire to such a dignity whereto is annexed a Temporal Principality a Triple Crown with many splendid Titles which makes the Succession sure But how few are there in the Consistory who are swayed by Piety and Religion to give their Suffrage only for such a Person as is duely qualified for so high a Prelacy But when they have entred the Conclave What a Bundle of Ambition is there shut up together How many are there that take their Measures from By and Sinister ends some from Ambition others from Humane Policy others again from Self-interest some give their Votes for such a Cardinal because he is of the Spanish Faction they having a Pension to uphold that Faction Others chuse another because he is of the French Faction whose Pensioners they are Others chuse one who is most addicted to themselves hoping that by his Promotion they shall become great and powerful another again who conceives himself fit to be elected casts away his own Vote upon one that is most unlike to be chosen lest his Suffrage by making access to the Party of his Competitor should promote him and deprive himself of so high a Dignity What stuff is this to have an influence upon the Electors of a Chief Pastor nay How remote is all
Intrenchments of the Church of Rome upon Divine Right by changing the Essentials of their pretended Sacraments The Preface MAny Censures of the highest strain hath the Church of Rome thundered out against the Protestants for Separating from her Communion and deserting her Tenets in that Latitude as she professeth them whereas notwithstanding the Protestant Church did most Religiously imbrace all the Doctrine and Practise instituted by Christ and exprest in Holy Writ and rejected only the Corruptions and Innovations which had no Autority but Humane she separated the pure Gold from the Dross and the Wheat from the Cockle and by this means continued the true Church of Christ pure and undefiled But what Censure doth the Church of Rome deserve who by a bold and a high attempt endeavoureth to incroach upon Divine Right by making a change and reformation in the Original Institutions of Christ himself as shall appear by the several Sections of this Disputation SECT I. Of the Doctrine of the Church of Rome relating to this present Controversie THere are various Principles and Dogmatical Decisions of the Church of Rome much conducing to this present Discourse whereof some are defined by their General Councils others are promiscuously Taught and Asserted by their Divines And because I here intend to argue ad hominem that is out of their own Doctrine I shall therefore do them no wrong by drawing such illations from thence as shall clearly evince their violating of Divine Right by endeavouring as much as in them lyeth to make an Essential change in their Sacraments which they acknowledge Instituted by Christ himself First therefore They admit Seven Sacraments to wit Baptisme Confirmation Eucharist Pennance Extreme Vnction Order and Matrimony And though they ground themselves upon several Texts of Scripture misunderstood for the practice of them yet it is a business of greater arduity to prove them all Sacraments but to satisfie their Sectators they need no more then to tell them that these are all defined to be Sacraments by the Council of Trent in these words Si quis dixerit Sacramenta novae legis non fuisse omnia à Jesu Christo Domino Nostro instituta Trid. Sess Can. 1. aut esse plura vel pauciora quam septem videlicet Baptismum Confirmationem Eucharistiam Poenitentiam Extremam Vnctionem Ordinem Matrimonium aut etiam aliquod horum septem non esse verè propriè Sacramentum Anathema sit If any one shall say That the Sacraments of the New Law were not all Instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord Or that they are more or fewer then Seven namely Baptisme Confirmation Eucharist Pennance Extreame Vnction Order and Matrimony or also that any one of these is not truly and properly a Sacrament let him be Accursed But because it is not the drift of my present design to examin the truth hereof I shall therefore wave it and only suppose it to be their Doctrine Secondly They admit that all Sacraments were Instituted by Christ himself for as much as concerns the Essence and Substance of them and consequently it exceeds the limits of any Humane Power either to abrogate or to alter any thing of that which is by Divine Right established and that they were all Instituted by Christ is also defined by the Council of Trent as above and Asserted by their Divines Thirdly In every Sacrament they distinguish between the Essential and Accidental parts of it the Essential parts they place in the matter and forme the Accidental parts are the Ceremonies Prayers Unctions and Actions which are used in the Administration of them which they call not Sacramenta but Sacramentalia And whensoever the Essential parts are daily applyed to the Receiver though the Accidental parts are omitted yet the Sacrament is valid But if either of the Essential parts be wanting that is if either the true matter or the true forme which Christ instituted be not applyed then the Sacrament is void as their Divines Teach For example in the Sacrament of Baptisme there is materia proxima and materia remota a remote and an immediate matter the remote is the natural Element of Water the immediate is the Lotion or the action whereby the Baptiser applyes the Water to the Baptised during which action the Essential Form is to be pronounced by the Baptiser in these words I Baptize thee in the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost In this matter and forme consists the whole Substance and Essence of this Sacrament and therefore if by reason of the weakness of the Child or by any other incident casualty the other Ceremonies cannot be performed yet the Child is Truly Baptized though performed by the Midwife or any other person because all the essential parts of Baptism instituted by Christ are duly applyed to the Child though the Unctions Prayers and other Ceremonies be omitted and they insist so earnestly upon these essential parts that in case no other Water could be had but Rose-water or some other Liquor that hath affinity with Water they hold the Sacrament not valid because the Matter instituted by Christ is wanting which is the natural Element of Water Fourthly They hold that though the Matter and Form be the whole Essence of the Sacrament yet if they be not conjoined so as to make up one thing the Sacrament is nul and of no effect for the form must be applied to the matter and have a moral concomitance with it or else it cannot have a moral union with the same if therefore the Water in Baptism be applyed to day to the Baptised and the form pronounced to morrow there will be no Baptism nor Sacrament for the words would be false which signifie a present Lotion Fifthly Of all the seven Sacramentss which they admit they assert that only three to wit Baptism Confirmation and Order do imprint upon the Soul of the Receiver an indelible spiritual Character never to be blotted out so as those Souls which receive any of these three Sacraments after separation from the Body will appear in the next World with these characteristical Notes instampt upon them some with one some with two others with all three according to their respective differences they having an essential discrepation from one another each of them denoting the Sacrament from whence they proceeded Hence they infer that none of these three Sacraments when once validly conferr'd can be reiterated or received twice by the same Person and that it would be a Sacriledge to attempt it because they frustrate the effect of the Sacrament yet if there arise any doubt of the validity of the former collation then a strict inquiry is to be made how grounded that doubt is and if it be still found ambiguous then that Sacrament is to be again conferr'd sub conditione But if it be evident that there was wanting either the true matter or the true forme which are all the essentials or the right intention of the Administrer
Nothing but that which Christ Instituted is the Essential Matter and Forme of the Order of Priesthood But Christ never Instituted the Touching of the Vessels and the words annexed to it ergo the Touching of the Vessels and the Words annexed to it are not the Essential Matter and Forme of the Order of Priesthood the Premises have been here clearly proved and the Conclusion is legally inferr'd For a farther Proof of this Assertion we must drive it a little higher and consider the fatal consequences that would ensue from their Doctrine were it true For if the Matter and Forme specifyed in the Title of this Section be the Essentials of the Order of Priesthood then it inevitably follows that the Greeks and all the Christians disperst over all the East yea and the Latin Church also for a Thousand years after Christ had never any Valid Ordination because they all wanted the Essentials of Priesthood for al these never made use of the Vessels nor the Forme annexed to them as appears by their Rituals And to this day none but the Latines ever applyed this Matter and Forme to him that was to be Ordained Priest and therefore could have no True Patriarchs not Bishops nor Priests among them A very sad Illation and of vast consequence for no Priest no Church What then Must the Church of Rome to keep up and Maintain their Innovation which is a Meer Humane Invention Un-Church all the Professors of Christianity in the World for a Thousand years together and a considerable part of them to this day and leave them destitute of either Bishop or Priest Where was all this while the provident care that our great Master and Redeemer ever had of his Church which he had Established by the Price of his Precious Blood Where was that tender love that he ever testified to his Endear'd Spouse Could heabandon his whole Church so soon after he had Instituted and so firmly Founded it that the Gates of Hell should never prevail against it What Christian can without a Sacred Horror entertain a thought of such a general devastation and deplorable desolation But this being so obvious could not but work the Church of Rome into an anxiety and sedulous industry to find a remedy wherefore to salve this Sore they would never Reordain their Proselites that had deserted the Communion of the Greek Church and imbraced theirs but on the contrary in all occasions declared the Ordinations of the Greek Church to be valid and consequently granted to those Greeks that were now Incorporated into their Church the free use of all their Priestly Functions though they had been created Priests according to the Rites of the Greek Church and never attempted to Re-ordain them By this they endeavor to evade this last imputation which otherwise would lye heavy upon them But in plain terms this evaasion is no better then a meer contradiction for How is it possible that the Ordination of the Greeks could be valid without the Essentials of Ordination which the Roman Church placeth in the Touching of the Holy Vessels with this Forme Accipe potestatem c. Receive a power to offer Sacrifice c. for these the Greeks never used You were as good tell me That one may be truly and properly a Man without either Body or Reasonable Soul which are the Essentials of Man If you should Reply That there may be Two Essences of Ordination so that each taken apart from the other makes the Ordination valid So when the Greeks Ordain they use for Matter the Imposition of Hands and for Forme these words Divina gratia c. The Divine Grace which always heals that which is infirm and supplies that which is defective promotes this most holy Deacon to be a Priest By this Matter and Forme the Greeks do validly confer the Order of Priesthood And when the Romanists Ordain they do the like by their peculiar Matter and Forme So that neither is rigorously necessary but either may suffice This Doctrine is very Paradoxical for in substance it asserts that one and the same thing may have two compleat and adequate Essences specifically and generically different from each other which is impossible for a thing and his adequate Essence is the same and nothing can be specifically or generically different from its self But you 'l say These are not two Essences of the same thing but two different causes of the same effect To solve this I must distinguish between the Order it self and the Ordination the Order is that Spiritual Power which is given to the Ordained by vertue of his Ordination from whence results the Order together with its concomitant Supernatural effects which are the Character and Sacramental Graces that are inseparable from it The Ordination is made up of those Actions and Words which the Ordainer exerciseth and applyeth to the Ordained so that the Ordination participates more of the nature of a causality then of a cause And the whole Essence of this Ordination is the Matter and Forme instituted by Christ for whatsoever was assum'd by the Original Instituter and by him elevated and impower'd to produce such admirable supernatural and Sacramental effects is the Essence of Ordination So that Order is the Effect and Ordination the Cause wherefore if you appoint new Essentials of Ordination you not only grant two Causes of the same effect but two Essences of the same thing whereby you render Ordination specifically and Essentially distinct from its self And because none but an Omnipotent Power can raise Natural Causes to such vigor and energy as to produce such extraordinary effects therefore that Matter and Forme which Christ hath Instituted to this end is the total Essence of Ordination And herein the Greeks have the advantage for they ever used the Imposition of Hands with the Forme above mentioned which the Primitive Church received from the Apostles and they from Christ so the Greeks are sure that their Ordination hath a legal and valid Institution But where shall we find another adequate Essence of Ordination by Divine Institution That of the Church of Rome hath no such Prerogative for we know its Origine and have scan'd its Pedigree whereby we find that there is nothing but Human Autority to authorise it which hath no proportion to such wonderful effects which are out of the reach of Nature and none but an Omnipotent Power can produce Hence we groundedly conclude that there is but one valid Ordination which hath but one certain and determinate Nature and Essence neither is there any power upon Earth that can add to it or take from it So that in vain you assign the Touching of the Vessels with its Forme for a second total and adequate Essence of Ordination For all Antiquity was a stranger to this the Apostles never heard of it Christ never mentioned it neither by word nor action Who then dares obtrude this as belonging to the Essence of Ordination which is of Divine Right as all
Sacraments are Certainly none will attempt it but such whose ambition prompts them to intrench upon Divine Right and God it here upon Earth not knowing or not acknowledging that their power is limited and confin'd within its certain bounds Besides were there two Formes of Ordination one Instituted by Divine Autority the other by Human and both valid by the same Rule you might institute Two hundred yea every Diocess might have one peculiar to it self there is no more difficulty for the Third then there was for the Second nor for the Fourth then the Third and so of all the rest Wherefore if such a power were delegated to meer Humanes What a confusion might they bring into the Church which would be the ground of Discord and Dissention for one Bishop might contend with another whose Ordination was best Having thus proved the Invalidity of Ordination according to the Present Roman Pontifical and General Approbation of that Church I shall now imploy my endeavors to solve the Objections which may be proposed in vindication thereof SECT VI. An Answer to the Objections Proposed by the Doctors of the Church of Rome against the Invalidity of their Ordination THe Roman Divines who earnestly endeavor to compose this difficulty find so much arduity in it that they cannot agree among themselves but what expedient one finds out as accommodated to this end another disapproves and so with great anxiety they cast about by several windings and turnings to compose the Difference between both Churches but in the execution they impugne each other and by this means divide themselves into several Classes Whereof I shall here give you an account The most considerable Party as well for number as for autority and reputation are those who absolutely exclude all Imposition of Hands from the Essentials of Ordination and place the whole Essence thereof in Touching the Holy Vessels with the Forme accommodated thereunto And indeed this is generally received in the Church of Rome as an undoubted Truth Some of the Authors of this Opinion I have cited in the Fourth Section and practised as such This is conformable to the Doctrine of the Council of Florence and Pope Gregory the 9th which I have cited in the beginning of the Fourth Section This Opinion needs no Answer for the Authors hereof are so far from reconciling both Churches that they Unchurch both and in stead of solving the difficulty they sink under the burthen thereof They destroy the Greek Church by denying the Imposition of Hands to be Essential to Ordination which the Greeks ever used as the only Essential Matter thereof They destroy the Latines by relying wholly upon the Touching of the Vessels and the Forme annexed as the only Essential Matter and Forme of Ordination excluding all other and yet this Matter and Forme are wholly uncapable of giving any validity to the Order of Priesthood because they want the Essence the very life and soul of being Instrumental to Ordination which is the Divine Institution as I have manifestly proved in the precedent Section A Second Objection The Divine Institutor of the Order of Priesthood did not determine the specifical Matter and Forme thereof but only in general that the Church should appoint some sensible Matter and some Forme of Words whereby to signifie the collation of Order by their application So that here is a latitude in Christ's Institution and a Power left to the Church to determine what particular Matter and Forme she should think fit and by this Power the Church may alter the Matter and Forme of Order at her pleasure she may abrogate what was before in use and Institute a new Matter and Forme and the Order will still be valid So Isambertus the Kings Professor of Divinity at Paris Treating at large of the Sacrament of Order Disput 3. art 3. his words are these Christus Dominus instituendo Ordines determinavit tantum eorum materias in genere nimirum ut ea esset legitima cujuslibet Ordinis materia quae existens sensibilis sui Traditione debitè sufficienter facta tam ex parte Ministri quam intentionis significaret tune de facto potestatem tali Ordini propriam dari ei qui materiam istam sensibilem seu signum istud sensibile acciperet in sua Ordinatione particularem autem istius signi determinationem seu imponere veluti affigere significationem practicam illius potestatis huic vel illi rei sensibili in particulari reliquit faciendum Ecclesiae prout quando illa judicaret esse conveniens Our Lord Christ Instituting Orders did only determine their Matter in General which being sensible duly and sufficiently apply'd as well in reference to the Minister as the Intention might signifie then in effect the power proper to that Order to be given to him that in his Ordination should receive this sensible Matter or Sign But to determine this Sign in particular and to Impose and as it were affix to it a Practical Signification of that Power given to this or that Sensible Thing in Particular he hath left to be done by the Church when and how she should judge it convenient And having Proved out of the Constitutions of Clement and the Fourth Council of Carthage That the Imposition of Hands by the Bishop and the assisting Priests used in the beginning of Ordination was formerly the Essential Matter of Priesthood he adds Igitur cum hoc nostro tempore haec Impositio manuum sit tantum accidentalis illa posterior quae fit à solo Episcopo simul dicente ei quem Ordinat Accipe Spiritum Sanctum Quorum c. sit nunc Essentialis ut supra ostendimus aliqua mutatio est facta per Ecclesiam in ista materia Ordinum Therefore since in this our time this Imposition of Hands is only accidental and that last which is performed only by the Bishop saying to him whom he Ordains Receive the Holy Ghost whose sins c. is Essential as I have shewn above some change is made by the Church in this matter of Orders Thus he The same saith Gammacheus de Sacramento Ordinis Cap. 4. Hallerius S. Bonaventura Prepositus Atrebas de materia forma Ordinationis n. 109. There are Three Reasons that this Objection is grounded on Lugo D 2. de Sacramentis in genere S. 5. n. 85. The first is because the Church hath changed the matter of Subdeaconship which was formerly conferr'd by the Imposition of Hands but now by the Ordination and Practise of the Church that Imposition of Hands doth not at all belong to the Essence of Subdeaconship Secondly Clandestine Marriage was ever valid before the Council of Trent but now is rendred invalid by that Council Thirdly The Apostles Confirmed by Imposition of Hands without Unction but now if the Unction be omitted the Confirmation is invalid To this Objection my first Answer is That it is all gratis dictum it is said without ground It is mera
Divine which still makes the Church a joynt Institutor with Christ and so as that the Church hath the greatest hand in it for the Church Orders Appoints and Determines all and Christ is to be ready at the Churches beck to execute what she appoints as though the Omnipotent Power of the Divine Word were subservient to the Church for it is the powerful hand of Christ that elevates the sensible Signs to produce Sacramental effects which are out of the reach of nature But the Church determines what the Signs shall be and summons the Divine Words Omnipotency when and where to elevate them and so she hath the greatest share in the Institution of Sacraments 'T is strange how such a Thought could find admittance into any true Christians understanding to devest Christ of this Prerogative and give it the Roman Church which so much derogates from the high Power and Wisdom of the Incarnate Word My Fourth Answer is grounded on Autority And first I begin with the Council of Trent in these words Trident Sess 7. Can. 1. Si quis dixerit Sacramenta novae legis non fuisse omnia à Jesu Christo Domino nostro Instituta c. Anathema sit If any one shall say that the Sacraments of the New Law were not all Instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord let him be Accursed St. Thomas of Aquine their great Divine saith Aquinas 3 Part. q. 60. ar 5. corpore In Sacramentis novae legis quibus homines Sanctificantur oportet uti rebus ex Divina Institutione determinatis In the Sacraments of the New Law by which Men are Sanctify'd it is necessary to use things that by Divine Institution are determined Consonant to this is the testimony of Bellarmine Bellarminus L. 1. de Sacramentis in genere C. 21. Ibid. in these words Res certae determinaiae ab ipso Deo in Sacramentis esse debent Things certain and determined by God himself must be used in the Sacraments And again saith he Non solum res sed etiam verba in Sacramentis novae legis à Deo determinatae sunt ut non liceat quidquam immutare Not only the things saith he but also the words in the Sacraments of the New Law are determin'd by God so that it is not lawful to change any thing All this is confirmed and attested by Suarez that great Divine whose Autority bears such sway in the Church of Rome who first lays his Ground-work in these words Suarez 3 Part. To. 3. D. 2. S. 2. citans D. Thomam Omnia Sacramenta quae consistunt in usu constant rebus verbis seu materia forma tanquam ex partibus quibus componuntur All Sacraments which consist in use contain things and words or matter and forme as parts whereof they are composed And afterwards he adds these words Ibid. S. 3. Dico 1. materias formas Sacramentorum determinatas esse ex Christi Domini Institutione eo modo quo definitae sunt esse necessarias ad Sacramenta conficienda First I assert saith Suarez that the Matters and Forms of Sacraments are determined by the Institution of Christ our Lord and in that manner as they are defin'd they are necessary to the validity of the Sacraments But this is not all for of this very Opinion he adds these words Est communis Theologorum absolute loquendo est de fide This is the common Doctrine of the Divines and absolutely speaking it is an Article of Faith Ile adds one Text more out of Suarez because his Autority is so renowned In the Fourth Section he thus declares his Opinion Ibid. S. 4. Si mutatio materiae aut formae essentialis seu substantialis sit nullum efficitur Sacramentum If any change be made in the Matter or Forme that is Essential or Substantial it renders the Sacrament void and ineffectual Hence I conclude that the Authors and Abetters of the Doctrine contained in the Objection do not only impugne the common Opinion of Divines but they also erre in matter of Faith as Suarez observes And it is to be observed that all these Autorities agree in this That Christ not only Instituted but also Determined the Matter and Forme of all Sacraments which the Authors of this Objection deny To this I le annex the Judgment of Maldonatus Maldonatus Tom. 2. de Sacramentis Tract de Ordine q. 3. part 2. a Famous Divine of the Jesuits whose words are these Impositio manuum non est habenda tanquam ceremonia non necessaria scd tanquam pars Essentialis Sacramenti idque videtur tenendum side Catholica Primum quia in Scriptura ubicunque fit montio de Ordinatione declaratur per impositionem manuum Et videtur mihi esse temerarium scripturam deserere consectari chymeras id est rationes naturales Secundò quia veterem Ecclesiam nunquam ordinasse sine impositione manuum ex omnibus autoribus antiquis perspicuum est De traditione autem calicis hostiae nulla est mentio apud illos Tertiò quia videtur durum nimis esse ceremoniam quam nobis perspicuè tradunt Apostoli excludere à natura Sacramenti inducere illam de qua nulla mentio fit in Scriptura In English thus The Imposition of hands is not to be esteemed as a Ceremony not necessary but as an Essential part of the Sacrament and this ought to be held as an Article of Faith First Because in Scripture wheresoever mention is made of Ordination it is declar'd by the Imposition of hands and it seems to me temerarious to desert the Scripture and follow Fictions that is Natural Reasons Secondly Because it is evident by all Antient Writers that the Primitive Church never Ordained without the Imposition of hands but they make no mention of delivering the Chalice and the Hoast Thirdly Because it seems too hard to exclude from the nature of a Sacrament a Ceremony which is clearly delivered to us by the Apostles and to induce that of which there is no mention made in the Scripture Thus Maldonatus 'T is well that some of our Antagonists cannot be swayed neither by hope nor fear nor any way deterr'd from uttering Truth He tells us That it is an Article of Faith that the Imposition of hands is Essential to Ordination and that it is a temerity to deny it and he proves both by solid Arguments So that they who adhere to the practise and perswasion of the Church of Rome must to defend this Doctrine desert both Scripture and Tradition SECT VII The Solution of other Objections against the same Doctrine A Third Objection endeavors a Reconciliation by joyning the delivery of the Instruments or Vessels and their Forme with the last Imposition of hands and this Forme Accipe Spiritum Sanctum c. So that of these two Matters they make one entire Matter and of these two Forms they frame one entire and adequate Forme Yet so as that by
Priests puts his Hands upon the Head of him that is to be Ordained he pronounceth this Forme Receive the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of a Priest in the Church of God now committed unto thee by the Imposition of our Hands Whose sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose sins thou dost retain they are retained Aud be thou a faithful dispenser of the Word of God and of his Holy Sacraments in the Name of the Father c. Here are both the Essentials duely applyed and punctually observed Whereas the Church of Rome applyes neither as an Essential part and therefore their Ordination of Priests according to their own Doctrine can in no way be Valid SECT IX Consectaries drawn from the Proofes of the precedent Assertion HOw many false Aspertions and querulous Cavillations have been raised by the Jesuits and other Romanists against the Bishops of the Church of England under that frivolous pretence of their being Consecrated at the Naggs head Tavern in Cheapside by one single Bishop or at most by two and they not Canonically Elected and Consecrated in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign All which were false and Malitious Calumnies invented for no other end then to depress the Autority of the Bishops of England thereby to facilitate their access to draw Proselites from the Church of England and seduce them to their Communion Which scandalous and ungrounded Comments have been fully Answered and the Canonical Ordination and Consecration of the Bishops of England cleerly vindicated from the false Imputation of all such Detracters by that Worthy and Learned Prelate John Bramhall D. D. and late Lord Primate of Ireland But What judgment shall we frame of the Ordination of Bishops and Priests in the Church of Rome there being at present neither Pope nor Cardinal nor Bishop nor Priest but such as have been Ordained according to their new Model of Ordination we shall not need here to have recourse to frivolous and feigned Stories where such grounded Truths strike at the very Essentials of their Ordination and evince the invalidity thereof Neither can they raise a Battery of Arguments against us without destroying themselves for the Proofes of the nullity of their Ordination are grounded on their own Doctrine They all Teach That Ordination is a Sacrament Instituted by Christ. The Council of Trent hath defined it so to be as we see above Sect. 7. They all assert the Matter and Forme of all Sacraments to be determined by Divine Autority which Suarez saith is de fide See their words Sect. 6. They hold moreover that any substantial change either in Matter or Forme renders the Sacrament invalid 3 Part. Tom. 3. D. 2. S. 4. Si mutatio materiae aut formae Essentialis seu substantialis sit nullum essicitur Sacramentum saith Suarez which is the current opinion of their other Divines It is likewise certain that the matter which they use in the Collation of Priesthood is essentially and more then Specifically different from the matter which Christ Instituted and which was constantly used in Ordinations many Centuries after Christ before Ordination was new molded It is also certain that the Forme of Ordination determined by Christ and a long time in use in the Church is now utterly rejected and cast out All this being duely ponder'd we must of necessity conclude that their Ordination is invalid except some other grounded expedient can be found out and proved to uphold the validity of their Ordination which hitherto I cannot discover but wish I could But no quibbles nor quirkes nor nice distinctions can any way avail them for the matter of Fact is uncontroleable and the Doctrinal part is evidenced by their own Words and Writings which it is now too late to retract It is time therefore for them seriously to consider what expedient may be found out to reinvalidate their Ordination and to qualifie themselves so as they may be in a capacity to prevent this grand inconvenience for the future for this shakes the very foundation and renders the whole Hierarchy of their Church ruinous If there are no Priests there can be no Bishops since Episcopacy is no new Order superadded but only a farther extension of the Order and Character of Priesthood as they teach well then may the Bishops exercise their potestatem jurisdictionis but can no way exercise nor communicate to others their potestatem Ordinis for none can exercise nor confer upon another a power which he neither formally nor virtually nor radically contains in himself jure communi but their Jurisdiction they distinguish from the Order of Presbitery since divers Bishops and Cardinals in the Church of Rome are only Deacons or Subdeacons and yet their Jurisdiction is as ample and hath as great an extension as if they were Priests who commonly make use of other Suffraganean Bishops to Officiate Confirm and confer Orders in their Diocess Hence it ensues that those putative Bishops which are presumed to be Canonically indued with Presbytery and Episcopacy yet in reality are not so when they personally exercise the Functions of Episcopacy their Confirmation is void yea their very Consecration of Chrisme and other Holy Oyles is of no effect but after Consecration they retain nothing but the Natural Elements of Oyle and Balsome as they were before and so are uncapable of rendring any Spiritual Emolument to those to whom they are applyed their Imposition of Hands and Benedictions are no way available to the Confirmed no more than if they were performed by a Lay-person for where the radical power of Order is wanting none of these Spiritual and Supernatural effects can ensue And when they Officiate in Mass and attempt to Consecrate the Body and Blood of Christ and having Consecrated the Hoaste they kneel down to adore it and then elevate it and shew it to the People that they also may adore it both they themselves and many Thousands of the People do daily commit at least a Material Idolatry though it may be that Invincible Ignorance may excuse them from a Formal one for they exhibit a worship of Latria to a supposed Deity under the species of Bread when in reality no such Deity is there so as they give to the meer substance of Bread a Worship due to God alone And this is daily repeated thorough the whole extent of the Roman Jurisdiction And the same happens when any other inferior Priest Officiates for the Order of Priesthood is equally defective in them all and where there is no power of Order to qualifie them for Consecration this must of necessity be void So when they administer the Communion to the People who present themselves in hopes to receive the Body and Blood of Christ and consequently those Graces which from thence accrew to the worthy Receivers Poor Souls How are they deluded and their hopes frustrated for whereas they came full fraught withthe expectation of Spiritual and Supernatural Graces they are dismist with a bare
was before valid though unlawful is now made void and of no effect Were Matrimony only a Civil Contract and not defin'd by the Church of Rome to be elevated to the dignity of a Sacrament and to produce Grace here would be little ground of altercation for it is not my intent in this Discourse to call in question the power of Ecclesiastical or Secular Law-givers in matters of this nature But they acknowledge Marriage to be a Sacrament and the Matter and Forme thereof wherein consists the whole Essence of it to be instituted and determin'd by Divine Autority whence it becomes Juris Divini Hence ariseth the difficulty How the Church of Rome can make any alteration or change or how they can declare that to be ineffectual and void which Jure Divino is determinately setled and establisht as valid Clandestine Marriage before the Council of Trent was ever held an Essential and a valid Matrimony though unlawful factum valet sed fieri non licet yea and notwithstanding the Councils Decree they still hold it valid in England and Saxony where the Council of Trent was never received nor promulged for they Teach That no Human Law can induce an Obligation to the observance of it but in such places where it hath been sufficiently intimated and accepted Here I suppose with them that the whole Essence and Substance of each Sacrament consists purely in the two Essential parts the Matter and the Forme The Matter of this Contract is the Internal Consent of the Persons Contracting exprest by some External and sensible sign The Forme is the words de praesenti I take thee c. which signifie a Mutual Tradition of themselves to each other for term of life Hence I Argue against them ad hominem supposing the Institution as the Origine and Cause of all Sacraments The whole Essence of Matrimony necessarily Constitutes a valid Marriage but the Matter and Forme are the whole Essence of Matrimony ergo the Matter and Forme necessarily constitute a valid Marriage The Major is universally true in all things for the whole Essence of a thing and the thing it self are convertible the Minor is their own Dectrine as appears by their own words above cited Whence I subsume The Matter and Forme necessarily constitute a valid Marriage but Clandestine Matrimony contains the Matter and Forme ergo Clandestine Matrimony contains a valid Marriage The Major is the conclusion of the last sillogisme The Minor I prove First because Clandestine Matrimony was valid before the Council of Trent and yet it contains now the same Matter and Forme it did then Secondly I prove it because Clandestine Marriage is still valid where the Council of Trent was never received ergo it hath the whole Matter and Forme of Marriage which was Instituted and determin'd by Christ as the whole Essence of it for they that Contract Clandestinè have the same Internal consent made sensible which is the Matter and use the same words by way of Forme as they that Contract in facie Ecclesiae wherefore if the one hath the same Matter and Forme with the other wherein consists the whole Essence of Marriage if the one be valid the other must be valid also And this Argument proceeds in like manner against all other impedimenta dirimentia such impediments as Jure Ecclesiastico are introduced to render Matrimony void and of no effect but if there be any impediment jure naturae destructive of the validity of Matrimony In this case it is most like that the Original Instituter excepted it As many of the Roman Divines conceive Consanguinity in the First Degree to invalidate Matrimony jure naturae by reason of the horror and aversion that Nature hath against a Fathers Marrying his own Daughter or a Mothers taking her own Son for a Husband or for a Brother to Marry his own Sister And therefore Marriage in the first degree of Consanguinity was ever held invalid in the Evangelical Law But this administers matter for an instance against what hath been said for Marriage contracted in the first degree hath all the Essentials of Matrimony and only the proximity of Blood hinders the validity of it therefore it is not enough to have all the Essentials as Matter and Forme to make Matrimony valid I Answer that all Sacraments do necessarily suppose the Original Institution upon which they Essentially depend for the Essential parts of all Sacraments are in themselves natural things but by the Omnipotent Power of the Divine Instituter the Complex which results of these parts is elevated per potentiam obedientialem to produce Grace in the Receiver in that quality and degree as Christ hath setled and establisht without which they are no Sacraments And who can deny but that it was in the free power and election of the Divine Instituter to affix his Supernatural Graces where and when and to what Instruments he pleased for Sacraments are by Institution but instruments to convey the Graces Merited by Christ to our Souls wherefore it being incongruous that a Contract made in the first degree of Consanguinity from which Nature hath so great a horror should be an instrument of conveying Grace to the Souls of the contracters grounded Reason dictates that this was excepted and never Instituted for a Sacrament which the constant practice of the Church from Christ's time sufficiently confirms But it may bereply'd That if Christ in the Original Institution Ordained that all complexes resulting from such a determinate Matter and Forme should be Sacraments and yet an exception may be made in one case Why not in another I Answer That this Reply is grounded on a false Principle for it supposeth Christ to have confused acts such as are proper to Men when they determine things in general and make an universal without distinguishing or distinctly knowing the particulars contained under that universal which argues the imperfection of Human understanding and therefore such obscure and imperfect acts have no place in Christ for the understanding of the Divine Word is infinite and consequently exempt from the least imperfection And the understanding of his Sacred Humanity was indued with an infused knowledge whereby he saw and knew clearly and distinctly all that concerned at least himself as Redeemer of Mankind so that when he Instituted the Sacraments he did it not by a general notion but reflected upon every particular individual cleerly and distinctly Wherefore in the Case proposed he Ordained such and such particular Contracts to be instruments of conveying Grace and no others so as those only which Christ hath so determin'd are valid Contracts by Divine Institution and no others and by this means the cleerness and perspicuity of Christ's understanding hath partioularly determin'd every individual Contract of Marriage that ever hath been or ever will be and decreed its validity or non validity in his Original Institution so as all Declarations and Decrees as are meerly Human have no power at all to alter or change
any thing or to make this valid and that invalid these things being already immutably determin'd by Christ himself in his Original Institution which consequently is Juris Divine Note that though there be no warrant in Holy Writ to conclude Matrimony a Sacrament yet because I Dispute ad hominem I have hitherto supposed it to be a Sacrament and shall so do for the future the better to detect their Error and the inconsequence of their Principles for the Church of Rome will needs have it a Sacrament producing Grace and hath defin'd it so to be and argumentandi gratiâ I suppose it so with them And so I proceed to Answer their Arguments for the Nullity of Clandestine Marriage SECT XI The Arguments to vindicate the Nullity of Clandestine Marriage Answered THe First and Principal Objection is That though the Church of Rome pretends no Right directly to alter or change any thing appointed by Christ yet it may have an indirect power by subtracting the validity of that contract which is the groundwork and foundation of Christ's Institution for none but a civil contract was elevated by Christ to be a Sacrament so that the validity of the contract and the mutual obligation which it induced was presupposed to Divine Institution and such a contract Christ elevated to the dignity of a Sacrament and enabled it to produce Grace Wherefore the Church of Rome having ample power to declare that and other such contracts to be valid or invalid The Council of Trent in persuance to this power hath declar'd Clandestine Marriage to be no Civil Contract by taking away the mutual obligation and consequently the validity of it And in all this the Council never toucheth the Ordination of the Primitive Instituter but precisely alters the contract which is only Juris Humani and therefore intrencheth not in the least upon Divine Institution This is the full strength of this Objection The First Answer This is a subtil and a plausible speculation to vindicate their trespassing upon Divine Right by pretending nothing but an indirect Power whereby they wholly evacuate Christ's Institution as much as if they had a direct power to do it 'T is not unlike the indirect power which his Holiness pretends to have over the Territories and Dominions of Kings and Secular Princes For it cannot be deny'd as they pretend but that he hath a direct power to exercise his Jurisdiction to suppress heresie and propagate his Church therefore he must necessarily have a power to use such means as are requisite to this end and to remove all obstacles that may impede the attaining of it Now suppose that a King or Secular Prince connives at Hereticks and permits Heresie within his Dominions the Legate first admonisheth him of the danger of it but in vain then he informes his Master the Pope whereupon a gentle Brief comes to the Prince from his Holiness minding him of his duty and endeavoring to stir up his zeale to promote the Holy Church and suppress its enemies If this will not do then comes a Comminatory and Menacing Briefe capable to seize him with a Pannick Fear and dread of what will ensue If no effect follows then an Excommunication is thundered out against him reserved to the Pope himself and it may be is backt by an Interdict Then the Legate or Nuncius again exhorts him to withdraw himself out of that deplorable condition and pretends Power from the Pope to absolve him from those execrable Censures notwithstanding the reservation and to withdraw the Interdict if he will at last acquiesce and comply with his Holiness reasonable intentions And if he will not yet yield but perseveres in his first resolution then the Legate is called home and then follows Deposition he is devested of his Right to the Kingdom his Subjects are Absolved from their Allegiance to him and he declared Criminal Laesae Majestatis Divinae so that to Assassinate him in this State should not be deem'd a Crime And yet all this argues but an indirect Power on the Temporal Estates of Secular Princes So it is in our present case they pretend only an indirect power to change the nature of the Contract and whereas it was before mutually obligatory they declare that this obligation ceaseth and that for the future it shall not be held a Civil Contract without any reflection made upon the Sacramental Institution and yet the Council without any distinction renders all persons uncapable of contracting Clandestinely and declares all such Contracts to be void Prout eos praesenti decreto irritos facit annullat which in effect devests them of their Sacramental Vertue to which they were by the Original Institution deputed and by this means destroys both Contract and Sacrament and hinders its production of Grace which argues a Supreme Power to annihilate a Sacrament at pleasure under pretence of an indirect power and therefore Secondly I Answer That this power which they pretend to is nothing but a groundless usurpation which I prove evidently for the original Instituter of Marriage did not ordain it by a general and confus'd notion leaving the determination of particulars to the Church to declare some to be void and others to be valid as they should deem expedient But he foresaw plainly and distinctly every particular individual and numerical contract that in process of time should be made between such particular and individual persons with the particular circumstances of time and place c. and these very particular Contracts he Instituted so Sacraments and impower'd them to produce Grace not conditionally but absolutely without having a regard to what the Council of Trent should do so as that they did not hang in suspense to expect till the Council of Trent should approve or disapprove of them for such an imperfect Institution were unworthy of Christ's Infinite Perfections and would make his will subordinate to the will of the Council and his Institution would be subservient to the Councils determination for by this means Christ would stand obliged to give or refuse his Sacramental Graces where and when and to whom the Council should determine him which in effect is no other then to make the Omnipotent subject and obedient to the Council of meer Men liable to Ignorance and Error Now supposing Christ's Institution to be of this nature which none in his right wits can deny here is an absolute and irrevocable decree establish'd by Divine Autority that every particular contract so Instituted shall be elevated to a Sacrament and produce Grace which no subsequent Council can alter or frustrate Christ's Decree and that for Two Reasons First For want of Power Secondly For want of due Order The Power is wanting because all Human power is finite and limited and therefore cannot be in competition with the power of the Omnipotent due Order is also wanting because Christ's Decree was firmly setled and establish'd above Sixteen hundred years since so this modern Decree of the Council comes too
late to make any change or alteration in it or any way to repeal or abrogate it So they may talke of an indirect power of degrading the contract and depriving it of its wonted obligation and making it no civil contract but all in vain for Christ's Institution must stand Yet it may be Reply'd That those clandestine contracts which were to be after the Decree of the Council are no civil contracts and therefore not comprehended under the number of those that Christ Instituted as Sacraments I Answer That the Supreame Legislator in the Institution of Sacraments did not regulate himself by any subsequent and human Law made in prejudice of his Institution but well knowing those Clandestine Contracts to be of their own nature obligatory he confirm'd that mutual obligation in them by erecting them to the dignity of Sacraments which no human Decree can change for otherwise the Councils might prescribe him what Rules they pleased to regulate his proceeding The Second Objection Since we are destitute of any certain knowledge what those Contracts were that Christ Instituted as Sacraments we ought in this to take the testimony of the Church for the Rule of our Belief who by reason of her Infallibility is best able to informe us and secure us from Error Wherefore since the Church declares all succeeding Clandestine Contracts to be no Sacraments nor Civil Contracts we have no reason by our own fallible discourse to call in question the verity of the Churches Declaration I Answer That the Church of Rome not only declares those subsequent contracts to be void but as much as in her lies makes them so Prout eos presenti decreto irritos facit annullat which notwithstanding before this Decree were valid and obligatory As for the Church of Romes Infallibility we have in the precedent Disputation examin'd it and found it defective and shall hereafter prove it erroneous and therefore have no grounds to confide in it But in this case we have made it appear that the determination of those Contracts which of their own nature were Obligatory was made by Divine Institution and that such Contracts were deputed to be Sacraments long before this Decree of the Council yea and are still reputed Sacraments inducing a mutual obligation here in England and other places where the Council of Trent was never received which the Church of Rome acknowledges How then could this subsequent Decree of the Council have any influence upon those contracts which were establisht as valid and indued with a Sacramental vertue by a Divine Decree that was precedent to this human Decree of the Council This being but a fruitless attempt to render that invalid which was constituted as valid Jure Divino The Third Objection Clandestine Marriage was ever hold unlawful and therefore they who contract so commit a sin in doing it because they transgress against a precept of their lawful Superiors and it is not likely that Christ would affix his Supernatural Graces to a sinful action nay it is impossible that a Mortal sin and Grace can stand together in the same subject And therefore the Church might prudently presume that such sinful contracts were not Instituted by Christ as Sacraments First I Answer That the Romanists themselves must solve this Objection for they all grant that clandestine Marriages were Sacraments and valid contracts ever before the Council of Trent and are so still in England and Saxony and yet they ever were and still are unlawful which circumstance they must reconcile with Christ's Institution for notwithstanding the sin they acknowledge them to have been Instituted by Christ as Sacraments But Secondly I Answer That the circumstance of contracting clandestinely is wholly extrinsecal to the contract and therefore can never alter the nature nor essence of it for circumstances make no change in the substance and this is common to all Sacraments for whoever receives any Sacrament may out of the pravity of his own will add some unlawful circumstance to it or receive it when his Soul is contaminated with sin but we must not hence conclude that this deordinate proceeding of the Receiver layes any infection upon the Sacrament whose compleat substance and essence is wholly independant of the circumstances which are extrinsecal to it True it is that all Sacraments produce Grace as also that Grace and deadly sin are wholly inconsistent and therefore whosoever receives a Sacrament when he is actually in sin puts an Obstacle to the effect of the Sacrament and cannot then receive any Grace by it because sin makes him liable to the pains of Hell and Grace gives him whose Soul it informs a right to Glory and because these two are incompatible therefore Grace and Sin that are the necessary causes of them mutually exclude each other from the same Soul Yet they generally Teach in the Church of Rome That when the obstacle is removed and the Soul purged from sin that then the Sacrament revives and produceth that Grace which by the original Institution was annexed to it and this Doctrine they also apply to Moral actions in reference to Inherent and Sanctifying Grace which they Merit for when one falleth into sin he loseth all that habitual Grace which he possest before his fall it being inconsistent with sin but when he is again restored to the state of Grace then his Merits revive to render him the same quantity of Sanctifying Grace which he before had lost by sin So is it in those that contract clandestine Marriage if invincible ignorance doth not excuse them they sin and receive no Inherent and Sanctifying Grace till sin which is the obstacle be removed and in the same moment that this is done the Sacrament revives and produceth in their Souls its due proportion of habitual and inherent Grace See Suarez Opuscul 5. D. 2. S. 2. 3. And thus have I vindicated the Validity of Clandestine Marriage against the Church of Rome by the Principles of their own Doctors and consequently that Decree of the Council of Trent is but a vain attempt to render that void which by Divine Autority is establisht as valid which proceeding is originally drawn from a presumption of their pretended Infallibility And therefore whatsoever they decree though against Divine Right is held as Sacred and not liable to error as in this case it happens But this is certain that these private Matrimonial Contracts were by Christ appointed as Sacraments or they were not if not then the Church of Rome erred by ever acknowledging them as such if they were then the Council of Trent errs by endeavoring to repeal them You 'l say That those Contracts that proceeded the Council were Instituted by Christ because they were civil contracts but they which succeeded were not because they were no Civil contracts Yes because the Council will have it so But Who sees not that according to this Doctrine it is the Council and not Christ that is the proper Instituter of this Sacrament for the
Council determines what contracts shall be Sacraments and what shall not the Council determines to what contracts Grace shall be affixt and to what not which is all that Institution imports for they would have Christ to take his measures from them and would impose a Law upon the Will of God to accommodate himself to their will they order all and the Word Incarnate must regulate himself accordingly which makes them the principal Instituters and Christ only the Instrumental Which is too great an indignity and detracts very much from the perfection of Christ's Institution For I demand What reason can be alleag'd Why Christ could not or would not determine all this himself He had a perfect comprehension of all that concern'd his Church which the Council had not neither can they deny but that Christ was the Principal nay the only Instituter of Sacraments Who then can deny but that Christ by an Irrevocable Decree determin'd all things relating to the Sacraments independant of the Council of Trent many Ages before this Instituting Decree was framed But an Error once committed per fas nefas must be maintained I might here annex an Account of the proceedings of the Church of Rome in some others of their pretended Sacraments for whereas the Order of Subdeaconship was ever conferr'd in the Primitive Church by the Imposition of Hands this is now wholly omitted and in lieu thereof they have Instituted the Tradition of an empty Chalice and an empty Pattene to the Ordained which argues a total change So likewise in Consirmation the Apostles and their Successors ever Confirmed by the Imposition of Hands without any Unction but now without the application of Chrisme they deem Confirmation invalid and the Forme would be false which is this Signo te signo crucis Confirmo te Chrismate salutis In nomine c. I Sign thee with the Sign of the Cross and Confirm thee with the Chrisme of health In the Name c. But this I leave to others consideration for enough hath been already said to my designed end Dispute III. Of Communion in One Kind The Preface ALL Humane Laws though never so well Constituted are liable to be subverted either by the change of circumstances or by the capricious humors of Governors How happy were the Lacedemonians as long as they were govern'd by those wholsome Laws which Lycurgus had established amongst them but when those Laws were gradually repealed or per non usum antiquated then their Commonwealth began to be ruinous and tended to destruction But Divine Laws ought to be Sacred as being framed by an irrefragable Autority whose Legislator is omniscient neither hath his wisdom and prudence any bounds who knows and foresees all future changes and circumstances as perfectly as if they were present and whose infinite providence is best skilled in fencing against all adverse accidents that may happen and yet these Laws also must undergo the Test of Human Policy and suffer change and Reformation Our Great Redeemer furnished his Church with such Laws as he thought most convenient obliging all Christians to receive those Sacred Rites of his Body and Blood in both Kinds yet in process of time the Church of Rome upon some pretended inconveniences hath alter'd that Law and denyes the Laytie the use of the Chalice but whether groundedly or illegally is the drift of this Disputation to Examine SECT I. The Grounds of the Church of Rome for denying the Chalice to the Laity THat Pure and Soveraign Doctrine which was Taught and Practised by Christ himself attained its Original Purity for the space of many Centuries after Christ and his Apostles during which time the Sacrament of the Eucharist was Administred to the faithful Receivers under both Kinds but the continuance of it drew it insensibly more remote from its Origine and so exposed it to the danger of being Adulterated for the Romanists pretend that it was observed that when the Communicants lips were separated from the Chalice some small particles of the Consecrated Species fell from the Chalice which it was not possible to prevent or to collect the Particles so dispersed wherefore another expedient was instituted that they who presented themselves to participate of those Sacred Mysteries should suck the Consecrated Species out of the Chalice by a Silver Quil fitly adapted and prepared for that purpose yet all in vain for this also was found liable to the same inconvenience wherefore finding no remedy for so great a difficulty it was at last resolved That none of the Seculars nor the Clergy except such as were Priests should receive the Blood under the Species of Wine So the Council of Trent Trid. Sess 21. C. 2. Quarè agnoscens Sancta mater Ecclesia hanc suam in Administratione Sacramentorum Auctoritatem licet ab initio Christianae Religionis non infrequens utriusque speciei usus fuisset tamen progressu temporis latissimè jam mutata illa consuetudine gravibus justis causis adducta hanc consuetudinem sub altera specie communicandi approbavit pro lege habendam decrevit quam reprobare aut fine ipsius Ecclesiae Auctoritate pro libito mutare non licet And then layes a Curse upon those that should not submit to this Doctrine in these words Si quis dixerit Sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam non justis causis rationibus adductam fuisse ut Laicos atque etiam Clericos non conficientes sub panis tantummodo specie communicaret aut in eo errasse Sess 22. Can. 2. Anathema sit The First Reason Because it was a great irreverence and a high Contempt of the Sacred Blood of Christ which was the price of our Redemption to see it fall to the ground and trampled under foot by those who receive so great a benefit by it and whereunto they stand indebted for the Graces they receive here and the hope of Glory hereafter wherefore the high Veneration and Adoration which we owe to the Incarnate Word present in this Sacrament ought to preponderate all other Considerations which certainly our Redeemer expects from us The Second Reason Because whosoever receives the Holy Eucharist under the Species of Bread only receives all Christ as well the Blood as the Body together with the Divine Word and all the Sacred Trinity for though ex vi verborum by the words of Consecration only the Body of Christ be Sacramentally Constituted under the Species of Bread yet per concomitantiam by a necessary Connexion of the parts of Christ with each other the Blood of Christ the Soul c. are all rendred present under the Species of Bread so that if this Sacrament be once Administred under the Species of Bread it were a needless repetition to administer the same under the Species of Wine for this were no other then to Administer to the same person one and the self-same thing twice without addition or diminution which would not be available to the Receiver The Third Reason