do I remember that I ever heard of any Heretick so impudent as to say that the flesh of Christ upon the Cross profited nothing Besides is this a consequence the flesh profiteth nothing therefore it is not in the Sacrament truly if that be good Logick it may as well follow in my judgement that the flesh of Christ profiteth nothing therefore it is not in heaven over and above all this it is plain our Saviour speaks not there of his own flesh for he says not my flesh profiteth nothing indeed some of the Jews there had such a foolish oppinion as to think upon our Saviours mystical words that the very flesh of Christ should be visibly under the species of flesh torn by mens teeth that sottishness of theirs our Saviour onely reproves To the third To what you alledge out of Scriptures and Articles of Faith I answer and acknowledge our Lord and Saviour to be in heaven and fitting on the right hand of his Father in visible and quantitative form yet he may lye invisibly and sacramentally under the species of Bread Nor does the verity of our Eucharist clash at all with the verity of our Articles of Faith for we know as the Scripture tells us that with God nothing is impossible His Almighty word sure can as easily make a body to be in divers places as nature his servant can make the essence of a soul to be in divers members Nay we see it plainly and positively said so nor can it chuse but be so for Jesus Christ who as we said is eternally to be at the right hand of his Father yet appeared upon earth to S. Paul Acts 9.22 1 Cor. 15. To the fourth To what you alledge out of our Saviours institution I utterly deny that he said take ye bread but taking bread he said take and eat this is my body Now I would fain know what difference there is betwixt saying take my body and taking bread to say take this is my body nor is it the mumbling or breathing of the Priests mouth that makes this miraculous change but Christ himself when the Priest according to his institution speaks the words of consecration is pleased to assist with his divine omnipotency and convert the substance of bread into his very body and wine into his blood Now this power was delivered by Christ to his Apostles when he gave them Commission to do the like and bid them so often as they did it to do it in remembrance of him and so the Apostle Paul tells us that what he received from the Lord that he delivered to us Then as to the impassibility of the body of Christ we do most humbly acknowledge it nor do our Priests say who know that our Saviour dies no more that his body shall be delivered but they relate onely that our Saviour did use those words at his last Supper which is Truth for then his body was to be delivered and his blood to be shed To the fifth For the Evangelists calling it bread it is always understood before consecration but that being done they do all unanimously call it the body of Christ In like manner the Apostles and Fathers might sometime call it so because before its change it was so as a Serpent in Scripture was called a Rod because it was a Rod but Aarons Rod devoured their Rods Exod. 7. then because the figure of bread and all its other accidents remain as things are sometimes called from their representations 1 Kings 10. so Solomon was said to make oxen and little Lions because he made the images of them Then the Eucharist may still be called bread because in it is the living bread which came down from heaven John 5. To the sixth and last To what you alledge out of the 24th of S. Matthew I answer that you are mistaken cleerly in the Text for those words you make to be spoken of the body of Christ are clearly meant of Christs kingdome of Faith His divine Majesty cleerly foresaw that the Hussits would have one Christ to stand for them the Lutherans one Christ to be for them the Annabaptists one for them the Calvinists one for them the Arminians one for them and Socinians one for them and the like of such bold challengers of Christ as those and other Hereticks are our blessed Saviour gives us a fair warning to beware which good Mrs. N. God give you grace to do Thus I have briâ—fly and punctually as I could answered your alligations out of the Scripture against the mystery of Christs Reall Presence in the Sacrament Now give me leave to mind you of some places of Scripture that do most expresly assert the Catholick doctrine against you First the words of our Saviours institution in all the four Evangelists are most significantly harmonious to a letter Mat. 14.26 27 28. as first in S. Matthew And as they were eating Jesus took bread and blessed it and brake it and gave it the Disciples and said take eat this is my body and he took the cup and gave thanks and gave it to them saying drink yee all of it for this is my bloud of the new Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins S. Mark hath it thus And as they did eat Jesus took bread Mark 14 22 23.24 and blessed and brake it and gave to them and said take eat this is my body and he took the cup and when he had given thanks he gave it to them and they all drank of it and he said unto them this is my bloud of the new Testament which is shed for many Luke 22.19 20. St. Luke thus And he brake bread and gave thanks and brake it and gave unto them saying This is my body which is given for you this do in remembrance of me Likewise also the Cup after Supper saying This cup is the New Testament in my blood which is shed for you St. John in his sixth Chapter Joh. 6.51.53 54 55 56 57. makes it his whole business to shew how our Saviour did endeavour to explain this mysterie and therefore is pleased expresly to say I am the living bread which came down from heaven if any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever and the bread that I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world Then upon the Jews murmuring he adds Verily verily I say unto you except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day for my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him As the living Father hath sent me and I live by the Father So he that eateth me even he shall live by me c. The Gospels themselves
in the Psalms and other Scriptures Psalm that the heavens must contain him till the last day otherwise there would be a falsification of no less then three Articles of our Faith Apost Creed He ascended into heaven He there sitteth at the right hand of God the Father From thence he shall come c. Now if he be corporeally in heaven how shall he be upon the Altar for the same body cannot possibly be in two places Our Saviour in his institution does not say take my body Four Gospels but take bread nor is it to be imagined that the nature of it can be changed by the blowing mumbling a few words from a Priests mouth Besides when Christ instituted his last supper he had a mortal body now being immortal how can it be said this is my body which shall be delivered up for you We do finde all the holy Evangelists calling it bread Gospels Acts 2.41 1 Cor. 10. we finde in the Acts of the Apostles said how they continued stedfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of bread c. then in S. Paul to the Corinthians the bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ and again in the next Chapter so let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup Thus currently in Scripture is the Sacrament called bread and yet your Church will have no bread left in it Our Saviour gives us a fair warning Mat. 24 of those deceivers Mat. 24.5 that shall come and say in his name here is Christ and there is Christ and shall deceive many we are not therefore to believe those that say that Christ is in this or in that Host That it is Impious to deprive the people of the cup is proved thus Our Saviour Christ did institute the Sacrament under both kinds Mat. 26. and communicated both to his Apostles and gave a command absolutely to all drink ye all of this Our Saviour being likewise to recommed the Sacramental use to us says plainly John 6.53 that he who drinketh not his blood as well as he that eateth not the flesh of the son of man hath no life in him It is confest by all of your own side that the Primitive Christians did always communicate under both kindes by what authority then do they come now to be deprived And if the Church hath power to take away one part of the Sacrament why can it not likewise by the same reason take away the other and forbid them the use of the whole Eucharist You all confess that your Priests sin mortally if they do not communicate under both species why then should not the Laity sin as much by their omission so to receive it That your Mass is not or can be made a sacrifice is clear by these sacred Texts S. Paul speaking of the true sacrifice of Christ Heb. 10.10.12.14 says That we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Christ once for all again this man after he had offered one sacrifice c. Then afterwards the Apostle repeats and refers thus for by one offering be hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified Then again he speaks more plainly in another Chapter to this purpose Heb. 7.26 27. For such an high Priest became us c. who needeth not dayly as those high Priests to offer up sacrifice first for his own sins and then for the peoples for this he did once when he offered up himself Then the current of the whole 9th Chapter is to prove that Christ did once by his blood Heb. 9. enter into the Holy of Holies for our eternall redemption 26. and towards the latter end of it expresly says vers 26. that now once at the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself The Mass can be but a Testament at most out of our Saviours own words Mat. 26. Luke 22.20 This is my blood of the new Testament so S. Matthew and S. Luke gives them thus This cup is the new Testament in my blood which is shed for you now I would fain know how a sacrifice can be made out of a Testament Your Mass is but a remembrance at most of that sacrifice and oblation which Christ once offered therefore he saith not in his institution offer this but do this in remembrance of me and again so often as you shall do this do it in remembrance of me no word of sacrifice or offering That your Priests saying Mass in Lattine and not in English do offer abuse to God and his Church is proved thus The whole drift of the 14th Chapter 1 Cor. is to forbid the Corinthians and consequently all others 1 Cor. 14 the use of unknown tongues in Churches It is manifest likewise in the current of that Chapter Vers 19. that whatsoever is done in the Church publickly must be done to the understanding of the people but when your Mass is said in Lattine it is impossible for all the Laity to understand your service The Apostle frequently commands in other places as well as this same Chapter 1 Cor. 8. 1 Cor. 10.23 1 Cor. 14.3 vers 26. all things to be done to edification but where there is no understanding there can beno edification so by consequence no more fruit can follow upon the hearing of one of your Masses than the amendment of a wall is to be expected from an excellent Sermon that is made to it for that purpose Thus I have been bold to trouble your Ladyship but with a few texts yet those are pregnant ones to your purpose and so I pray the Lord to give you understanding in all things The Lady within three or four days sent a servant of hers with this Answer Sweet Mrs. N. being hindred now by very extraordinary occasions from paying your last kinde visit I thought my self never the less obliged to send you the best satisfaction I could to the Paper you left with me and so I have endeavoured to do as you will finde by the inclosed and as punctually as I could to every particular To the first To what you alledge out of S. Matthew against the mystery of the blessed Presence I answer Mat. 28.20 out of the last words of the same S. Matthews Gospel And loe I am with you unto the end of the world it is plain therefore that when our Saviour says me you have not always it is to be understood of his corporeal presence inhumane conversation for now he is not to be annointed washed and dryed as then when he spoke those words he was to be by the blessed Magdalen To the second To what you alledge out of S. John that the flesh profiteth nothing I say first that if the flesh profiteth us Catholicks nothing I am sure the bare bread must profit all Hereticks less Nor indeed
are yet more clearly explicated by St. Paul who tels us thus 1 Cor. 11.23 24 25. For I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto you that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread And when he had given thanks he brake it and said Take eat this is my body which is broken for you you this do in remembrance of me and after the same manner also he took the cup when he had supped saying This cup is the New-Testament in my blood c. And then to set the business out of all doubt concludes He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords body Can any thing be more plain Then further St. Paul begins with a Preface I speak as to wise men 1 Cor. 10.15 16 17. judge ye what I say The cup of blessing which we bless is it not the communion of the body of Christ The Bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ For we being many are one bread and one body for we are all partakers of that one bread Does not the Apostle here most clearly and expresly shew that in every particle of the consecrated bread the whole body of Christ is communicated and as he thought them only wise that could understand that mysterie so we must think them stupid that will not and worse then Jews that go about to pervert and torment this and other Texts to any other sense Over and ahove all this consider a little more upon that Text before cited 1 Cor. 11.28 29. But let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that Cup for he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords body Here it is clear that by reason of the presence of the body of Christ the unworthy Receiver is damned because he sins against that body There is no man can deny but the unworthy eater be it what it will that is eaten must be guilty of that which is eaten Here St. Paul most clearly instructs the Corinthians that it is no simple bread or ordinary nourishment that is set upon the Altar but the very body of Christ that who ever eats thereof should be guilty of it therefore the Apostle adds not discerning the Lords body that is not distinguishing it from other food This I am likewise informed by the Learned to be the sence of the Church in all Ages no Primitive Christian ever daring to oppose the clearness of so much express Scripture till one Berengarius as they call him had the impudence to do it but afterwards recanted and abjured it before the Pope thirteen Arch-bishops and an hundred Bishops which God grant all those that have followed his footsteps to do likewise Now that this Transubstantiation Gen. 2. or transelementation is no way impossible to be done no nor for you to conceive as you alledge see what God hath done in the like kinde first in the beginning of the world God form'd man of the dust of the earth here God changed dust into flesh in the same chapter we finde how God turn'd the rib of man into woman a bone into flesh Gen. 19. Exod. 4. Then Lots wife looking back is turn'd into a pillar of salts then Moses threw down his Rod and it was turn'd into a Serpent Then I will strike the water of the River with my Rod and it shall be turn'd into blood Exod. 7. and divers more such mutations there are in the Old Testament As for the New we find that our Saviours first publick miracle was to turn water into wine and this great omnipotency of his the Devil full well knew when he to tempt him said If thou beest the son of God turn these stones into bread Thus you dispute that power in him which the Devils themselves acknowledge Now as Christ with five little Breads did feed five thousand men by making of bread by his Almighty multiplication so now he feeds his whole Church of the faithful with one Bread that is his body Sacramentally Then that Jesus Christ did do some things miraculously with his body whilest he was upon the earth which we cannot do with our bodies nor can any humane reason comprehend you will not dare to deny as that he pierced the grave and Tombstone afterwards when he rose from the dead that he pierced a house the doors and windows being shut and that he pierced the Highest Heavens with his body when he ascended all these things I say you will not dare to deny yet this which is enjoyned you by the same Authority to believe you are pleas'd to dispute What is this but to pick and choose what you please your selves to believe and from being such a chooser in matter of Faith shall be ever a part of my Letany Good Lord deliver me for that I am told is to be a true Heretick To what you alledge of Impiety against the Church of Rome for depriving the people of the Cup I answer thus To the first Argument I shall clearly grant what you say that Christ being then to Consecrate did Institute the Sacrament under both kinds and gave it to his Apostles in both kinds who now were Priests Therefore the Priest to this day that celebrates takes it likewise in both kinds but what is this to the Laity For those words Drink ye all of this was said only to his Apostles and Priests who do it still that is Consecrate in the Commemoration of Christ for no other were present at his most holy Supper but the Apostles no not his own blessed Mother as it is clear out of all the Gospels Nay St. Mark tells us Mar. 1â— 23 that they all drank of it which shews clearly that that all was only meant of the Apostles for it was impossible to be true of the Laity To the second I shall likewise grant that he that drinketh not his blood as well as he that eateth not his flesh hath no life in him but to a Sacramental eating and drinking there is required still a Spiritual intelligence according to what our Saviour himself said the words that he spake they were spirit and they were life From whence we may conclude that since the whole Christ both body and blood is comprehended under one Species a Lay man may be said to drink the blood of Christ though not under its proper species yet under the species of Bread Again our Saviour in that Chapter of St. Johns Gospel treats principally of our incorporation into him which is sufficiently effected by our Communion in one kind the whole Christ being there and the other Species is not at all to be said necessary to that incorporation with Christ To the third I shall grant likewise that it hath been permitted to the Laity to participate of the blessed Sacrament under both kinds
the Covenant whom you delight in saith the Lord of Hosts c. And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver and he shall purifie the sons of Levi and purge them as gold and silver that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness Then shall the offerings of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the Lord as in the days of old and as in former years What can be more plain then this Prophecy that the Saviour of the world should purifie his Priests that is our Evangelical ones to offer Sacrifices not in blood but in righteousness which can be nothing but our most holy Eucharist The Prophet Daniel comes yet if possible Malach. 3.1 2 3. closer to the purpose saying Many shall be purified and made white and tryed but the wicked shal do wickedly none of the wicked shall understand but the wise shall understand And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away the abomination that maketh desolate set up there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days This is a clear Prophecy of the coming of Antichrist and how long he shall reign during which time the continual Matth. 24. or daily Sacrifice and this our Saviour himself affirms shall be sulfilled that upon the coming of Antichrist there shall be an universal Cessation of our great sacrifice for almost four years and nothing but desolation of Churches Let them look to it therefore that are hinderers of this glorious and continual Sacrifice from being offered in private Churches least they be convinced to be the forerunners of Antichrist But yet more plainly let us hear what St. Heb. 5.1 2 3. Paul says in the Epistle to the Hebrews For every High Priest taken from amongst men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins Who can have compassion on the ignorant and on them that are out of the way for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity And by reason hereof he ought as for the people so also for himself to offer for sins Can any thing be more plain here the Apostle being to define the duty of a Priest declares it to be principally to offer for sins and whereas you say that no one man can offer for another St. Paul sure was of another Religion for he says the Priest ought to offer for the Peoples as well as for his own sins and to this purpose I have been told by those that are skil'd in Antiquity that it has been call'd the Sacrifice of the Mass ever since the beginning of Christianity So enough I conceive said as to this point To what you alledge of abuse in our Church by our Mass being said in Latine and not in English I answer thus To the first I shall for your satisfaction reserr you to the current of that whole Chapter of St. Paul to the Corinthians which you so urge against our Mass where it is plain that he speaks of Prophesying that is of preaching interpreting and expounding the Scriptures and sure it would be a very absurd thing that any man should undertake to preach to the people in an unknown tongue therefore the Apostle in the 19. verse explains himself thus Yet in the Church I had rather speak five words with my understanding 1 Cur. 14.19 that by my voice I might teach others also then ten thousand words in an unknown tongue I pray you mark those words that I might teach others which must be understood of Preaching not of celebration of the Mass or publick Liturgy of the Church To the second I answer as before that the understanding so required by the Apostle is principally meant of prophecying and preaching As for praying I shall not enter into the dispute for it is too nice a one for me whether prayers though not understood be not profitable and meritorious I am sure some of the most Learned Doctors have concluded that they are But to our present purpose I say that though the Laity do not all of them understand the words of the Mass yet they do perfectly all the Mysteries of it which they learn from their Cradles either by instruction of their Parents and Masters or by the preaching and catechising of their Pastors and Curats then having the words of the Mass in their own Mother Tongue delivered to them in their private Primars and other books they perfectly understand by those mysterious actions and Ceremonies that the Priest useth whereabouts in the Mass he is and what words he is about to say and this is manifest by the peoples actions there who sometimes kneel and sometimes stand up sometimes bow sometimes beat their brests and other times sign themselves with the sign of the Cross as the several passages in the Mass shall require By which external actions of theirs it is notorious that they understand more of the mysteries of the Mass then the most Learned Latinist in the world could not being instructed in the mysteries To the third and last As to this I might refer you for further answer to what has been said before for all your arguments upon this point touch but upon one string but I will yet shew you how much use and edification more the people doe receive by our Masse though in Latin First there is very much of the Holy Scripture in it and by that the Holy Ghost speakes and instils instruction into our hearts though delivered in any tongue Then the scope of the whose Masse is unknown to no body though never so ignorant for the end of the Masse and principal intention of the Church who ever hears must know whether he understand the words more or lesse to be the offering of the sacrifice for the living and the dead in the memory of the passion and death of our Saviour to the glory of God edification of his Church and the honour of our Blessed Lady and all his Saints And why should not so much understanding in a Lay person be enough to his edification Nay I I am confident that by their scantling of understanding their devotions are usually raised to a greater height than the most learned and intelligent Auditors who please themselves with a dry understanding of the words Nay it is evident that the devotion of a man may be very much hindered by too much attention to words So much I conceive enough to your Arguments to conclude a Latin Masse to be sufficient for the people but yet if this were all in difference between us I am perswaded the Church would easily permit you to have it in your own Mother tongue for in what language it is said is onely matter of Discipline But yet I have thought good to send you some Arguments likewise to convince you of the congruitie and conveniencie if not necessitie that the celebration of those Divine Mysteries should be still in Latin The Scripture tels
back is fit for the Kingdome of God And again Remember Lots Wife Luk. 9.17 Gen. 19. Matth. 10. chap. 24. 2 Thes 2.7 Prov. 20.25 Matth. 22.31 who looking back was turn'd into a pillar of Salt Again he that perseveres to the end shall be saved that is till death The wise King Solomon assures us it is a snare to the man who devoureth that which is holy and after vows to make inquiry Our Translation reads it thus It is a ruine to man to devoure the Saints and after vows made to retract them Let all pious Votaries therefore according to our Saviours Words in St. Matthews Gospel Renden unto God the things which are Gods that is their Vows that through his mercy they may deserve to be saved To the second I freely grant that Vows of themselves and all the externall works of piety dictated from the severest Rules of Monastick life cannot renew the inward man yet doubtlesse they are very helpfull to the spirit and keep the body from too much oppressing the soul nay I 'le grant too that if those externall works as you call them be done that they make seen of men they are Hypocriticall if done clearly to the glory of God you must sure grant them at least to be laudable Besider the Apostle says not that bodily exercise profiteth nothing but grants that it profiteth a little if it be imployed to piety To the Third Whereas you say that externall works are enemies to Christianity and do extinguish faith and weaken hope c. They are so far from that that they are the very life and nourishment of faith for St. James tells us that faith without works is dead Jam. 2. and it must strengthen his hope for by works both his faith and he must be justified as was sufficiently proved to you in my last Paper Luk. 17. But indeed if he dare to presume in his works then he is not only guilty but condemned already For when we have done all that we can we must say that we are but profitable Servants To the Fourth Whereas you say it is grand presumption in our Votaries to oblige themselves beyond the Rule of Baptisme and the Evangelicall Rule c. It is plain that they make their Vows to no other intent or purpose then to dispose themselves to perfect the Evangelicall precepts and what they promis'd in Baptisme with more commodiousnesse and greater facility they undertake their Rules only to promote in their way to perfection and to enable themselves with more expedients in the service of God To what you alledge against our vows of chastity and restraining of Priests from Marriage I answer thus To the first I grant that it was indulg'd to the Priests and Levites in the Old Law to have Wives because they had a long time of vacancy from the exercise of their Ministry or Priesthood For there was a great multitude of them and they served by course The case is not the same now for our Priests are in dayly service of the Altar and commanded to be always ready and without delay to attend their Ministry so it would be very inconvenient for them to be clog'd with Wives besides the indecency of it Again they were to be only of one Tribe the Tribe of Levi that were to bee taken into their Priesthood it was therefore necessary for the conservation of the Tribe and propagation of the Priesthood it self which otherwise in one age would have fayled that their Priests should marry Besides we find that those that were to sacrifice in the Old Law did abstain somtime from their Wives likewise so that St. Luke testifies of Zacharias And then it came to pass that so soon as the days of his Ministration were accomplished Luke 1.23.24 he departed to his own house and after those days his Wife Elizabeth conceiv'd c. Over and above all this the Priests of the Old Testament did handle but their proposition bread with the flesh of Goats Oxen Lambs and the like but ours do dayly handle the precious body and blood of Christ As to the other part of your Argument that the Greeks and other Christians have a liberty for their Priests to marry I say you are mistaken for no Priest amongst them is permitted to marry after he is a Priest but one that has taken a Virgin to Wife may be afterwards made a Priest and if his Wife dye he must remain single So a married man may be made a Priest but no Priest can be made a married man To the Second That command of the Almighty which you insist upon to increase and multiply was given when the earth was to be replenish'd heaven too for then then there were but few to procreate now they are innumerable Therefore that command is not to be taken amongst those permanent Laws which were to oblige all Mankind and every particular person for then St. John the Baptist had been a sinner who liv'd and dy'd a Virgin Our blessed Lady had sinned who is the grand Example of Virginity Paul himself had sinned who was the great Counsellour of Virginity and out Saviour Christ had never commended Eunuchs for the Kingdome of Heaven In like manner that precept and repeated by our Saviour Whom God hath joyned let no man separate concerns not sure every one in the World though it be given to every one multitude of the World So the command concerning Tillage and Husbandry does not make it necessary that all the World should bee Husbandmen though some must bee Neither is it necessary for every individuall of mankind to imploy himself in procreation though it is necessary that some must make it their businesse to propagate And so it is in an infinity of other things that are necessary for a whole community and yet not at all for every single person but it sufficeth that it be done by some To the third I deny perfectly that the Church forbids marriages at all but when any man is ty'd by his own voluntary Vow to the contrary the Church prohibits the violation of that Vow for before his vow it was as free for him to marry as for a married man it is impossible to contract again The Church takes a care in this point onely that hee whosoever hee is that vowes shall not deliver up the power of his body to another which was before delivered up to Christ And the Hereticks which you speak of Mark 15. 1 Cor. 10. which Saint Paul mentions were those that succeeded presently after as I am inform'd that did absolutely condemn Matriages for unlawfull To the Fourth That Saint Paul commands Titus to choose a Bishop that was the Husband of one Wife we do not deny but sure you do not believe that hee commanded that a Bishop should of necessity be a married man for then neither he himself nor Titus neither had been Bishops nor many of your own whom you would take it ill if we
Moses thus Exod. 25.18 And thou shalt make two Cherubims of Gold of beaten work shalt thou make them in the two ends of the mercy seat It would likewise follow 1 King 7 that Solomon had sinnd in his Architecture of the Temple when he made twelve litle Lions and set them over the Throne And when he made Oxen Lions and Cherubims or brasen bases Thus we see the end to which those Images are made and erected does alltogether alter the case To the Second I grant that Hezekiah broke the brasen serpents Image therefore must the Image of Christ and his saints be broken I deny it First because the Image of the brazen serpent was made by Moses 2 Kings 18. that they which were bitten by the firey serpents should look upon it and be healed so long as that end lasted the Image lasted but that ceasing it was fit for nothing else but to be broken Then the brazen serpent began to be an occasion of idolatry and they burnt incense to it so then it ought to be broken but the Image of Christ and his saints cannot be occasions of that amongst Christians for we retain the use of Images only as they are the representations of him from whom we have received so great benefits and of those his blessed servants who are to be our examples To the Third I grant to you that God is and ought to be worshipt in Spirit and in truth which that we may do the better we make use of images for they put us in mind of our duties and call us to a remembrance of those benefits we have received which cannot but inspire a devotion into a heart of stone And why I would fain know or wherein a spiritual worship should be at all hindred by the sight of an image more then the opperation of Sacraments be taken off by the sensible signes whereunder they lye and as under those visible signs we receive an invisible grace so are we led by the visible images of Christ and his Saints to the true and spiritual worship of those things invisible of which they are but the representations To the fourth I say there can be no danger at all of Idolatry amongst Christians for there is none so simple but knows that the veneration that is used referres not at all to the image of wood Stone or Brass but to the prototype or person represented and that is enough to rectifie their intentions then for the danger of unclean thoughts there is care sufficiently taken by the Church to inhibite Painters and Carvers all manner of laciviousness or probable dispositions towards it Then as to your argument that you think is so strange and in your opinion caries horns with it you will finde upon better examination that they are but a pair of ears You say either images are commanded or they are not if they be then we are to shew it in Scripture if they be not then you say it must follow that it must be a will worship or Idolatry I answer some things are commanded in Scripture and yet not to be observed as the observation of the Sabbath day holy or sanctifying it as the Scripture speaks as also the forbearing of things strangled and of blood c. It is enough to satisfie any reasonable Christian that the Church hath appointed images to be set up for the use of Christians as I say for profitable and almost necessary expedients to their devotion So I return your horn'd argument upon your self thus either to sanctifie or celebrate the Lords day that is the first day of the week is commanded or it is not if it be let Scripture be shew'd for it if it be not then it is will worship a fond and a vain thing to do it and that I am sure none of your Church will ever yeeld to That the use of Images is lawfull and profitable in the Church of God I prove by Scripture thus I must confess we have nothing express in the the new Testament for it and the reason I conceive was the fierceness of the primitive persecution which would hardly permit the persons of Christians to meet much less to adorn their meeting places with images or any thing else And yet we have it by universal Tradition that the use of images is Apostolicall and that we have our authority for the use of them from the Apostles themselves Then we have in our Ecclesiastical histories as how our Saviour sent his picture to Abagarus King of the Edessens which is yet as I am informed preserved and to be seen at Genoa Then we have again in the same story that our Saviour himself imprest the picture of his countenance upon a piece of linen cloth which he gave to Veronica by the virtue of which picture the Emperour Tiberius was recovered from a dangerous disease and for that reason Cesar would have decreed to Christ divine honours Then again we have in history and clear Tradition that S. Luke the Evangelist did draw the picture of the blessed virgin which was for many ages preserved in great veneration and to say that there were no Painters Mark 22 Carvers or Engravers in that age is most extreamly false for we finde our Saviour asking in the Gospel whose image and superscription is this But all this I must pass by because we have resolved to insist onely upon Scripture and in the old Testament we finde enough First we finde in Exodus as a foresaid Exod. 25.18 and thou shalt make two Cherubims of gold of beaten work shalt thou make them in the two ends of the mercy-seat Numb 21.8 Then we finde the Lord saying to Moses make thee a fiery Serpent and set it upon a Pole and it shall come to pass that every one that is bitten when he looketh upon it be shall live and Moses did so and it was a certain cure to them Now this Brazen Serpent was the figure or Type of Christ hanging upon the Cross for as they that were bitten by the fiery Serpents were cured by looking upon the Brazen Serpent so all they that are bitten by the devil are cured by a faithful looking upon Jesus Christ Crucified as we finde in the Gospel of S. John from whence I think I may conclude The figure must of necessity be of less value than the thing that is figured as Moses who was likewise the figure of Christ was of much less value then Christ himself the Paschal Lamb less to be esteemed then our Eucharist and circumcision than Baptism If then the image of the Brazen Serpent was honour'd as we know it was how much more ought the image of Christ be honoured nay it is plain that the Serpent had not been honoured at all but as it was the figure or shadow of the image of Christ upon the Cross nor had it cured those that were bitten by the fiery Serpents but by the virtue of Christ who cures still
Romane from the most noble part the head of it and that she must be that Universal and for ever visible Church of Christ is plain because she ever has been so Let any man shew that any other Church has continued without errour or interruption and I will grant you all that you have said and can more require of me But if it be manifest that no one Church of Christ in the world has continued without errour or interruption but onely she it must follow that she is the onely true Church of Christ First the Jewish Church has been long since more then interrupted quite abrogated The Turkish or Mahumetan has not always been The Liaheran Calvinian and reformed Church of England are all new for they began with pretended reformation which was made by them and other particular Doctors so must of necessity imply novelty The Roman onely has persevered in its own place and ancient profession so must be for ever the Mother and Mistress of our faith as taught by the Spirit of God If any of you will say that your Church or any other their Church has continued visible and without errour I beg the favour onely to know by what name she was called and is what parts of the world she has possest does what pastors and Bishops she has had and still has what Kings and Emperours have adhered to her and still do What Hereticks have been condemned by her What Universities she hath confirmed What Churches and Monasteries built If none of this can be shown you must give me leave to persist in my former perswasion Now though I conceive enough said in my answer before as to the business of the popes being Anti-christ and that no obligation at all lyes upon me to prove a negative yet because that is so great a gudgeon and so vulgarly swallowed I shall undertake the taske a little further That you may better understand this controversie concerning Anti-christ you must know that the name of Anti-christ signifies as I am informed an enemy or adversary to Christ and that must be understood in a two fold manner first generally for any enemy of Christ as all Hereticks are and in that sense we are to understand the Apostle who tells us that even now there are many Antichrists that is many Hereticks that think evilly and maliciously of Christ of whom it follows in the Text They went cut from us but they are not of us and again in another chapter of the same Epistle And every spirit that confesseth not 1 John 4.3 that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God and this is that spirit of Antichrist whereof you have heard that it should come and even now already it is in the world Secondly it is taken specially for the principall and grandest adversary of Christ of whom all the rest before spoken of are but forerunners and of this grand Antichrist it is that S. Paul speaks when he says 2 Thess 2 3 4. unless that man of sin be revealed the son of perdition who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God c. Now first I shall prove that this special Antichrist is not yet come at all for it is agreed upon by all the learned that the Antichrist shall not come till after the overthrow and desolation of the Roman Empire and they ground themselves upon those express places in Daniel and the Revelations Dan 2.7 Rev. 17. but now we know that the Roman Empire is not yet over thrown therefore Antichrist cannot be yet come Then we finde in the Revelation Rev. 11.3.6 I will give power unto my two witnesses and they shall prophesie a thousand two hundred and threescore dayes clothed in sackcloath who shall have power to shut up heaven that it rain not in the dayes of their prophesie and have power over waters to turn them into blood c. but these two witnesses are not yet come fore Antichrist cannot yet be come himself In the second place I am to prove that the Pope is not Antichrist and first as before Antichrist is not to come but after the ruine of the Romane Empire but the Pope came and still is in the flourishing condition of the Romane Empire Then Antichrist is to kill those two witnesses or Prophets before spoken of but this the Pope has not done therefore Then again Antichrist is not to reign above three years and a half Dan. 7.25 Re. 11.2 Rev. 5.3 as first the Prophet Daniel informes us for a time and times and half a time and in the Revelation it is said for forty and two moneths in one place and a thousand two hundred and threescore dayes in another place but now the Pope has raigned for many ages Again the Antichrist is to be received by the Jews for their Messiah John 7.43 2 Thess 10. as both S. John and S. Paul do testifie but the Pope I am sure never yet was and very improbable it is that he will ever be received by them for their Mossiah Lastly Antichrist is to make fire come down from Heaven Rev. 13.13 as we see said in the Revelation but none of this has the Pope ever done therefore he can never be thought to be Antichrist Thus I have been bold to inlarge upon this particular it being so vulgar an errour and the grand pretext of all the schisme and heresie in the whole world for to justifie their defection from the Bishop of Rome and indeed it was a very artificial trick of the Devil and some of your Doctors to fasten that dirt upon him for who will be so mad to keep in communion with that man of sin or the Antichrist as most of your common people do most ignorantly presume him to be And so I have done with all your Papers but I hope I have not yet done with you and presume that you will do me the honour very speedily to see me that we may sit and discourse something further upon these particulars so the Lord give you understanding in all things and enable me to prove more fully that I am Mistress N. your most faithfull friend to serve you M. Postscript I pray you dear Mistress N. do me the favour to come and dine with me to morrow and bring your Husband with you so you shall more obbige your true friend M. So my Lady immediately closed up the Papers into one Packet which she sealed and presently sent it away by her servant FINIS THE DIPPER DROWNED By endeavouring to wade in the unfathomable depths of SCRIPTVRE Whilst the FEMALE DUELLISTS Swim over him 1 Cor. 27. God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise London Printed by Peter Lillicrap 1661. THE DIPPER DROWNED By endeavouring to wade in the unfathom'd depths of Scripture c. Mris N. had no sooner received these papers but she went immediately with them to her husband the Doctor imploring his