both often and many ways The Council was in the year 305. of 19. Bishops who in the 36. Canon decreed this placuit picturas in Ecclesiis esse non debere It hath pleas'd us that pictures ought not to be in Churches That 's the decree The reason they give is ne quod colitur adoratur in parietibus depingatur lest that which is worshipped be painted on the walls So that there are two propositions 1. Pictures ought not to be in Churches 2. That which is worshipped ought not to be painted upon walls E. W. hath a very learned Note upon this Canon Mark first the Council supposeth worship and adoration due to pictures ne quod colitur adoratur By which Mark E. W. confesses that pictures are the object of his adoration and that the Council took no care and made no provision for the honour of God who is and ought to be worshipp'd and ador'd in Churches illi soli servies but only were good husbands for the pictures for fear 1. they should be spoiled by the moisture of the walls or 2. defaced by the Heathen the first of these is Bellarmines the latter is Perrons answer But too childish to need a severer consideration But how easie had it been for them to have commanded that all their pictures should have been in frames upon boards or cloth as it is in many Churches in Rome and other places 2. Why should the Bishops forbid pictures to be in Churches for fear of spoiling one kind of them they might have permitted others though not these 3. Why should any man be so vain as to think that in that age in which the Christians were in perpetual disputes against the Heathens for worshipping pictures and images they should be so curious to preserve their pictures and reserve them for â—doration 4. But then to make pictures to be the subject of that caution ne quod colitur adoratur and not to suppose God and his Christ to be the subject of it is so unlike the religion of Christians the piety of those ages the Oeconomy of the Church and the analogy of the Commandment that it betrays a refractory and heretical spirit in him that shall so perversly invent an Unreasonable Commentary rather than yield to so pregnant and easie testimony But some are wiser and consider that the Council takes not care that pictures be not spoil'd but that they be not in the Churches and that what is adorable be not there painted and not be not there spoiled The not painting them is the utmost of their design not the preserving them for we see vast numbers of them every where painted on walls and preserved well enough and easily repaired upon decay therefore this is too childish to blot them out for fear they be spoiled and not to bring them into Churches for fear they be taken out Agobardus Bishop of Lions above 800. years since cited this Canon in a book of his which he wrote de picturis imaginibus which was published by Papirius Massonus and thus illustrates it Recte saith he nimirum ob hujusmodi evacuandam superstitionem ab Orthodoxis patribus definitum est picturas in Ecclesia fieri non debere Nec quod colitur adoratur in parietibus depingatur Where first he expresly affirms these Fathers in this Canon to have intended only rooting up this superstition not the ridiculous preserving the pictures So it was Understood then But then 2. Agobardus reads it Nec not Ne quod colitur which reading makes the latter part of the Canon to be part of the sanction and no reason of the former decree pictures must not be made in Churches neither ought that to be painted upon walls which is worshipped and adored This was the doctrine and sentiment of the wise and good men above 800. years since By which also the Unreasonable supposition of Baronius that the Canon is not genuine is plainly confuted this Canon not being only in all copies of that Council but own'd for such by Agobardus so many ages before Baronius and so many ages after the Council And he is yet farther reproved by Cardinal Perron who tells a story that in Granada in memory of this Council they use frames for pictures and paint none upon the wall at this day It seems they in Granada are taught to understand that Canon according unto the sence of the Patrons of images and to mistake the plain meaning of the Council For the Council did not forbid only to paint upon the walls for that according to the common reading is but accidental to the decree but the Council commanded that no picture should be in Churches Now then let this Canon be confronted with the Council of Trent Sess. 25. decret de S. S. invoc Imagines Christi Deiparae virginis aliorum sanctorâ—m in templis praesertim habendas retinendas that the images of Christ and of the Virgin Mother of God and of other Saints be had and kept especially in Churches and in the world there cannot be a greater contradiction between two than there is between Eliberis and Trent the old and the new Church for the new Church not only commands pictures and images to be kept in Churches but paints them upon walls and neither fears thieves nor moisture There are divers other little answers amongst the Roman Doctors to this uneasie objection but they are only such as venture at the telling the secret reasons why the Council so decreed as Alan Cope saith it was so decreed lest the Christians should take them for Gods or lest the Heathen should think the Christians worshipped them so Sanders But it matters not for what reason they decreed Only if either of these say true then Bellarmine and Perron are false in their conjectures of the reason But it matters not for suppose all these reasons were concentred in the decree yet the decree it self is not observ'd at this day in the Roman Church but a doctrine and practice quite contrary introduced And therefore my opinion is that Melchior Canus answers best aut nimis duras aut parum rationi consentaneas à Consiliis provincialibus interdum editas non est negandum Qualis illa non impudenter modo verum etiam impie à Concilio Elibertino de tollendis imaginibus By this we may see not only how irreverently the Roman Doctors use the Fathers when they are not for their turns but we may also perceive how the Canon condemns the Roman doctrine and practice in the matter of images The next inquiry is concerning matter of History relating to the second Synod of Nice in the East and that of Francfurt in the West In the Dissuasive it was said that Eginardus Hincmarus Aventinus c. affirmed 1. That the Bishops assembled at Francfurt and condemned the Synod of Nice 2. That they commanded it should not be called a General Council 3. They published a book under the name of the
the Pope in the Arian Controversie why was the Bishop of Rome made a party and a concurrent as other good Bishops were and not a Judge and an Arbitrator in the Question why did the Fathers prescribe so many Rules and cautions and provisoes for the discovery of Heresy why were the Emperours at so much charge and the Church at so much trouble as to call and convene Councils respectively to dispute so frequently to write so sedulously to observe all advantages against their Adversaries and for the truth and never offered to call for the Pope to determine the Question in his Chair Certainly no way could have been so expedite none so concluding and peremptory none could have convinc'd so certainly none could have triumphed so openly over all Discrepants as this if they had known of any such thing as his being infallible or that he had been appointed by Christ to be the Judge of Controversies And therefore I will not trouble this Discourse to excuse any more words either pretended or really said to this purpose of the Pope for they would but make books swell and the Question endless I shall onely to this purpose observe that the old Writers were so far from believing the Infallibility of the Roman Church or Bishop that many Bishops and many Churches did actually live and continue out of the Roman Communion particularly Saint Austin who with 217 Bishops and their Successors for 100 years together stood separate from that Church if we may believe their own Records So did Ignatius of Constantinople S. Chrysostome S. Cyprian Firmilian those Bishops of Asia that separated in the Question of Easter and those of Africa in the Question of Rebaptization But besides this most of them had Opinions which the Church of Rome disavows now and therefore did so then or else she hath innovated in her Doctrine which though it be most true and notorious I am sure she will never confess But no excuse can be made for S. Austin's disagreeing and contesting in the Question of Appeals to Rome the necessity of Communicating Infants the absolute damnation of Infants to the pains of Hell if they die before Baptism and divers other particulars It was a famous act of the Bishops of Liguria and Istria who seeing the Pope of Rome consenting to the fifth Synod in disparagement of the famous Council of Chalcedon which for their own interests they did not like of renounced subjection to his Patriarchate and erected a Patriarch at Aquileia who was afterwards translated to Venice where his name remains to this day It is also notorious that most of the Fathers were of opinion that the Souls of the faithfull did not enjoy the Beatifick Vision before Doomsday Whether Rome was then of that opinion or no I know not I am sure now they are not witness the Councils of Florence and Trent but of this I shall give a more full account afterwards But if to all this which is already noted we adde that great variety of opinions amongst the Fathers and Councils in assignation of the Canon they not consulting with the Bishop of Rome nor any of them thinking themselves bound to follow his Rule in enumeration of the Books of Scripture I think no more need to be said as to this particular 15. Eighthly But now if after all this there be some Popes which were notorious Hereticks and Preachers of false Doctrine some that made impious Decrees both in Faith and manners some that have determined Questions with egregious ignorance and stupidity some with apparent sophistry and many to serve their own ends most openly I suppose then the Infallibility will disband and we may doe to him as to other good Bishops believe him when there is cause but if there be none then to use our Consciences Non enim salvat Christianum quòd Pontifex constanter affirmat praeceptum suum esse justum sed oportet illud examinari se juxta regulam superiùs datum dirigere I would not instance and repeat the errours of dead Bishops if the extreme boldness of the pretence did not make it necessary But if we may believe Tertullian Pope Zepherinus approved the Prophecies of Montanus and upon that approbation granted peace to the Churches of Asia and Phrygia till Praxeas perswaded him to revoke his act But let this rest upon the credit of Tertullian whether Zepherinus were a Montanist or no some such thing there was for certain Pope Vigilius denied two Natures in Christ and in his Epistle to Theodora the Empress anathematiz'd all them that said he had two natures in one person S. Gregory himself permitted Priests to give Confirmation which is all one as if he should permit Deacons to consecrate they being by Divine Ordinance annext to the higher Orders and upon this very ground Adrianus affirms that the Pope may erre in definiendis dogmatibus fidei And that we may not fear we shall want instances we may to secure it take their own confession Nam multae sunt decretales haereticae says Occham as he is cited by Almain firmiter hoc credo says he for his own particular sed non licet dogmatizare oppositum quoniam sunt determinatae So that we may as well see that it is certain that Popes may be Hereticks as that it is dangerous to say so and therefore there are so few that teach it All the Patriarchs and the Bishop of Rome himself subscribed to Arianism as Baronius confesses and Gratian affirms that Pope Anastasius II. was strucken of God for communicating with the Heretick Photinus I know it will be made light of that Gregory the seventh saith the very Exorcists of the Roman Church are superiour to Princes But what shall we think of that Decretall of Gregory the third who wrote to Boniface his Legate in Germany quòd illi quorum uxores infirmitate aliquâ morbidâ debitum reddere noluerunt aliis poterant nubere Was this a doctrine fit for the Head of the Church an infallible Doctor It was plainly if any thing ever was doctrina Daemoniorum and is noted for such by Gratian Caus. 32.4.7 can quod proposuisti Where the Gloss also intimates that the same privilege was granted to the English-men by Gregory quia novi erant in fide And sometimes we had little reason to expect much better for not to instance in that learned discourse in the Canon-Law de majoritate obedientia where the Pope's Supremacy over Kings is proved from the first chapter of Genesis and the Pope is the Sun and the Emperour is the Moon for that was the fancy of one Pope perhaps though made authentick and doctrinall by him it was if it be possible more ridiculous that Pope Innocent the third urges that the Mosaicall Law was still to be observed and that upon this Argument Sanè saith he cùm Deuteronontium Secunda lex interpretetur ex vi vocabuli comprobatur ut quod
authorem antecessorem hoc modo Ecclesiae Apostolicae census suos deferunt c. And when S. Irenaeus had reckoned twelve successions in the Church of Rome from the Apostles nunc duodecimo loco ab Apostolis Episcopatum habet Eleutherius Hâc ordinatione saith he successione ea quae est ab Apostolis in Ecclesiâ traditio veritatis praeconiatio pervenit usque ad nos est plenissima haec ostensio unam eandem vivatricem fidem esse quae in Ecclesiâ ab Apostolis usque nunc sit conservata tradita in veritate So that this succession of Bishops from the Apostles ordination must of it self be a very certain thing when the Church made it a main probation of their faith for the books of Scripture were not all gathered together and generally received as yet Now then since this was a main pillar of their Christianity viz. a constant reception of it from hand to hand as being delivered by the Bishops in every chair till we come to the very Apostles that did ordain them this I say being their proof although it could not be more certain than the thing to be proved which in that case was a Divine revelation yet to them it was more evident as being matter of fact and known almost by evidence of sense and as verily believed by all as it was by any one that himself was baptized both relying upon the report of others Radix Christianae societatis per sedes Apostolorum successiones Episcoporum certâ per orbem propagatione diffunditur saith S. Augustin The very root and foundation of Christian communion is spread all over the world by the successions of Apostles and Bishops And is it not now a madness to say there was no such thing no succession of Bishops in the Churches Apostolical no ordination of Bishops by the Apostles and so as S. Paul's phrase is overthrow the faith of some even of the Primitive Christians that used this argument as a great weapon of offence against the invasion of Hereticks and factious people It is enough for us that we can truly say with S. Irenaeus Habemus annumerare eos qui ab Apostolis instituti sunt Episcopi in Ecclesiis usque ad nos We can reckon those who from the Apostles until now were made Bishops in the Churches and of this we are sure enough if there be any faith in Christians SECT XIX So that Episcopacy is at least an Apostolical Ordinance Of the same Authority with many other points generally believed THE summe is this Although we had not proved the immediate Divine institution of Episcopal power over Presbyters and the whole flock yet Episcopacy is not less than an Apostolical ordinance and delivered to us by the same authority that the observation of the Lords day is For for that in the new Testament we have no precept and nothing but the example of the Primitive Disciples meeting in their Synaxes upon that day and so also they did on the saturday in the Jewish Synagogues but yet however that at Geneva they were once in meditation to have changed it into a Thursday meeting to have shown their Christian liberty we should think strangely of those men that called the Sunday Festival less than an Apostolical ordinance and necessary now to be kept holy with such observances as the Church hath appointed * Baptism of infants is most certainly a holy and charitable ordinance and of ordinary necessity to all that ever cried and yet the Church hath founded this rite upon the tradition of the Apostles and wise men do easily observe that the Anabaptist can by the same probability of Scripture inforce a necessity of communicating infants upon us as we do of baptizing infants upon them if we speak of immediate Divine institution or of practice Apostolical recorded in Scripture and therefore a great Master of Geneva in a book he writ against the Anabaptists was forced to flye to Apostolical traditive ordination and therefore the institution of Bishops must be served first as having fairer plea and clearer evidence in Scripture than the baptizing of infants and yet they that deny this are by the just anathema of the Catholick Church confidently condemned for Hereticks * Of the same consideration are divers other things in Christianity as the Presbyters consecrating the Eucharist for if the Apostles in the first institution did represent the whole Church Clergy and Laity when Christ said Hoc facite do this then why may not every Christian man there represented do that which the Apostles in the name of all were commanded to do If the Apostles did not represent the whole Church why then do all communicate Or what place or intimation of Christ's saying is there in all the four Gospels limiting Hoc facite id est benedicite to the Clergy and extending Hoc facite id est accipite manducate to the Laity This also rests upon the practice Apostolical and traditive interpretation of H. Church and yet cannot be denied that so it ought to be by any man that would not have his Christendom suspected * To these I add the communion of Women the distinction of books Apocryphal from Canonical that such books were written by such Evangelists and Apostles the whole tradition of Scripture it self the Apostles Creed the feast of Easter which amongst all them that cry up the Sunday-Festival for a divine institution must needs prevail as Caput institutionis it being that for which the Sunday is commemorated These and divers others of greater consequence which I dare not specifie for fear of being misunderstood relye but upon equal faith with this of Episcopacy though I should wave all the arguments for immediate Divine ordinance and therefore it is but reasonable it should be ranked amongst the Credenda of Christianity which the Church hath entertained upon the confidence of that which we call the faith of a Christian whose Master is truth it self SECT XX. And was an office of Power and great Authority WHAT their power and eminence was and the appropriates of their office so ordained by the Apostles appears also by the testimonies before alledged the expressions whereof run in these high terms Episcopatus administrandae Ecclesiae in Lino Linus his Bishoprick was the administration of the whole Church Ecclesiae praefuisse was said of him and Clemens they were both Prefects of the Church or Prelates that 's the Church-word Ordinandis apud Cretam Ecclesiis praeficitur so Titus he is set over all the affairs of the new-founded Churches in Crete In celsiori gradu collocatus placed in a higher order or degree so the Bishop of Alexandria chosen ex Presbyteris from amongst the Presbyters Supra omnia Episcopalis apicis so Philo of that Bishoprick The seat of Episcopal height above all things in Christianity These are its honours Its offices these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. To set in order whatsoever he sees
chief Bishops assembled in the Council of Antioch in quibus erant Helenus Sardensis Ecclesiae Episcopus Nicomas ab Iconio Hierosolymorum praecipuus Sacerdos Hymenaeus vicinae huic urbis Cesareae Theotecnus and in the same place the Bishops of Pontus are called Ponti provinciae Sacerdotes Abilius apud Alexandriam tredecim annis Sacerdotio ministrato diem obiit for so long he was Bishop cui succedit Cerdon tertius in Sacerdotium Et Papias similiter apud Hierapolim Sacerdotium gerens for he was Bishop of Hierapolis saith Eusebius and the Bishop of the Province of Arles speaking of their first Bishop Trophimus ordained Bishop by S. Peter says quod prima inter Gallias Arelatensis civitas missum à Beatissimo Petro Apostolo sanctum Trophimum habere meruit Sacerdotem *** The Bishop also was ever design'd when Antistes Ecclesiae was the word Melito quoque Sardensis Ecclesiae Antistes saith Eusebius out of Irenaeus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the name in Greek and used for the Bishop by Justin Martyr and is of the same authority and use with Praelatus and praepositus Ecclesiae Antistes autem Sacerdos dictus ab eo quod antestat Primus est enim in ordine Ecclesiae supra se nullum habet saith S. Isidore *** But in those things which are of no Question I need not insist One title more I must specify to prevent misprision upon a mistake of theirs of a place in S. Ambrose The Bishop is sometimes called Primus Presbyter Nam Timotheum Episcopum à se creatum Presbyterum vocat quia Primi Presbyteri Episcopi appellabantur ut recedente eo sequens ei succederet Elections were made of Bishops out of the colledge of Presbyters Presbyteri unum ex se electum Episcopum nominabant saith S. Hierome but at first this election was made not according to merit but according to seniority and therefore Bishops were called Primi Presbyteri that 's S. Ambrose his sence But S. Austin gives another Primi Presbyteri that is chief above the Presbyters Quid est Episcopus nisi Primus Presbyter h. e. summus Sacerdos saith he And S. Ambrose himself gives a better exposition of his words than is intimated in that clause before Episcopi Presbyteri una ordinatio est Vterque enim Sacerdos est sed Episcopus Primus est ut omnis Episcopus Presbyter sit non omnis Presbyter Episcopus Hic enim Episcopus est qui inter Presbyteros Primus est The Bishop is Primus Presbyter that is Primus Sacerdos h. e. Princeps est Sacerdotum so he expounds it not Princeps or Primus inter Presbyteros himself remaining a meer Presbyter but Princeps Presbyterorum for Primus Presbyter could not be Episcopus in another sence he is the chief not the senior of the Presbyters Nay Princeps Presbyterorum is used in a sence lower than Episcopus for Theodoret speaking of S. John Chrysostome saith that having been the first Presbyter at Antioch yet refused to be made Bishop for a long time Johannes enim qui diutissimè Princeps fuit Presbyterorum Antiochiae ac saepe electus praesul perpetuus vitator dignitatis illius de hoc admirabili solo pullulavit *** The Church also in her first language when she spake of Praepositus Ecclesiae meant the Bishop of the Diocess Of this there are innumerable examples but most plentifully in S. Cyprian in his 3 4 7 11 13 15 23 27 Epistles and in Tertullian his book ad Martyres and infinite places more Of which this advantage is to be made that the Primitive Church did generally understand those places of Scripture which speak of Prelates or Praepositi to be meant of Bishops Obedite praepositis Heb. 13. saith Saint Paul Obey your Prelates or them that are set over you Praepositi autem Pastores sunt saith Saint Austin Prelates are they that are Pastors But Saint Cyprian summes up many of them together and insinuates the several relations expressed in the several compellations of Bishops For writing against Florentius Pupianus ac nisi saith he apud te purgati fuerimus .... ecce jam sex annis nec fraternitas habuerit Episcopum nec plebs praepositum nec grex Pastorem nec Ecclesia gubernatorem nec Christus antistitem nec Deus Sacerdotes and all this he means of himself who had then been six years Bishop of Carthage a Prelate of the people a governour to the Church a Pastor to the flock a Priest of the most high God a Minister of Christ. The summe is this When we find in antiquity any thing asserted of any order of the hierarchy under the names of Episcopus or Princeps Sacerdotum or Presbyterorum Primus or Pastor or Doctor or Pontifex or Major or Primus Sacerdos or Sacerdotium Ecclesiae habens or Antistes Ecclesiae or Ecclesiae sacerdos unless there be a specification and limiting of it to a parochial and inferior Minister it must be understood of Bishops in its present acceptation For these words are all by way of eminency and most of them by absolute appropriation and singularity the appellations and distinctive names of Bishops SECT XXVIII And these were a distinct Order from the rest BUT 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Philosopher and this their distinction of names did amongst the Fathers of the Primitive Church denote a distinction of calling and office supereminent to the rest For first Bishops are by all antiquity reckoned as a distinct office of Clergy Si quis Presbyter aut Diaconus aut quilibet de numero Clericorum .... pergat ad alienam parochiam praeter Episcopi sui conscientiam c. So it is in the fifteenth Canon of the Apostles and so it is there plainly distinguished as an office different from Presbyter and Deacon above thirty times in those Canons and distinct powers given to the Bishop which are not given to the other and to the Bishop above the other The Council of Ancyra inflicting censures upon Presbyters first then Deacons which had fallen in time of persecution gives leave to the Bishop to mitigate the pains as he sees cause Sed si ex Episcopis aliqui in iis vel afflictionem aliquam .... â—iderint in eorum potestate id esse The Canon would not suppose any Bishops to fall for indeed they seldome did but for the rest provision was made for both their penances and indulgence at the discretion of the Bishop And yet sometimes they did fall Optatus bewails it but withal gives evidence of their distinction of order Quid commemorem Laicos qui tunc in Ecclesiâ nullâ â—uerant dignitate suffulti Quid Ministros plurimos quid Diaconos in tertio quid Presbyteros in secundo Sacerdotio constitutos Ipsi apices Principes omnium aliqui Episcopi aliqua instrumenta Divinae Legis impiè tradiderunt The Laity the Ministers the Deacons the Presbyters nay the Bishops
witness 2. I consider that necessity may excuse a personal delinquency but I never heard that necessity did build a Church Indeed no man is forced for his own particular to commit a sin for if it be absolutely a case of necessity the action ceaseth to be a sin but indeed if God means to build a Church in any place he will do it by means proportionable to that end that is by putting them into a possibility of doing and acquiring those things which himself hath required of necessity to the constitution of a Church * So that supposing that ordination by a Bishop is necessary for the vocation of Priests and Deacons as I have proved it is and therefore for the founding or perpetuating of a Church either God hath given to all Churches opportunity and possibility of such Ordinations and then necessity of the contrary is but pretence and mockery or if he hath not given such possibility then there is no Church there to be either built or continued but the Candlestick is presently removed There are divers stories in Ruffinus to this purpose When Aedesius and Frumenâ—ius were surprized by the Barbarous Indians they preached Christianity and baptized many but themselves being but Lay-men could make no Ordinations and so not fix a Church What then was to be done in the case Frumentius Alexandriam pergit rem omnem ut gesta est narrat Episcopo ac monet ut provideat virum aliquem dignum quem congregatis jam plurimis Christianis in Barbarico solo Episcopum mittat Frumentius comes to Alexandria to get a Bishop Athanasius being then Patriarch ordained Frumentius their Bishop Et tradito ei Sacerdotio redire eum cum Domini Gratiâ unde venerat jubet ex quo saith Ruffinus in Indiae partibus populi Christianorum Ecclesiae factae sunt Sacerdotium coepit The same happened in the case of the Iberians converted by a Captive woman Posteà verò quà m Ecclesia magnificè constructa est populi fidem Dei majore ardore sâ—â—â—ebant captivae monitis ad Imperatorem Constantinum totius Gentis legatio mittitur Res gesta exponitur Sacerdotes mittere oratur qui coeptum erga se Dei munus implerent The work of Christianity could not be compleated nor a Church founded without the Ministery of Bishops * Thus the case is evident that the want of a Bishop will not excuse us from our endeavours of acquiring one and where God means to found a Church there he will supply them with those means and Ministeries which himself hath made of ordinary and absolute necessity And therefore if it happens that those Bishops which are of ordinary Ministration amongst us prove heretical still Gods Church is Catholick and though with trouble yet Orthodox Bishops may be acquir'd For just so it happened when Mauvia Queen of the Saracens was so earnest to have Moses the Hermite made the Bishop of her Nation and offered peace to the Catholicks upon that condition Lucius an Arian troubled the affair by his interposing and offering to ordain Moses The Hermite discovered his vileness Et ita majore dedecore deformatus compulsus est acquiescere Moses refus'd to be ordain'd by him that was an Arian So did the reform'd Churches refuse ordinations by the Bishops of the Roman Communion But what then might they have done Even the same that Moses did in that necessity Compulsus est ab Episcopis quos in exilium truserat Lucius sacerdotium sumere Those good people might have had order from the Bishops of England or the Lutheran Churches if at least they thought our Churches Catholick and Christian. If an ordinary necessity will not excuse this will not an extraordinary calling justifie it Yea most certainly could we but see an ordinary proof for an extraordinary calling viz. an evident prophesie demonstration of Miracles certainty of reason clarity of sence or any thing that might make faith of an extraordinary mission But shall we then condemn those few of the Reformed Churches whose ordinations always have been without Bishops No indeed That must not be They stand or fall to their own Master And though I cannot justifie their ordinations yet what degree their necessity is of what their desire of Episcopal ordinations may do for their personal excuse and how far a good life and a Catholick belief may lead a man in the way to Heaven although the forms of external communion be not observed I cannot determine * For ought I know their condition is the same with that of the Church of Pergamus I know thy works and where thou dwellest even where Sathans seat is and thou heldest fast my faith and hast not denied my Name Nihilominus habeo adversus te pauca Some few things I have against thee and yet of them the want of Canonical ordinations is a defect which I trust themselves desire to be remedied but if it cannot be done their sin indeed is the less but their misery the Greater * I am sure I have said sooth but whether or no it will be thought so I cannot tell and yet why it may not I cannot guess unless they only be impeccable which I suppose will not so easily be thought of them who themselves think that all the Church possibly may fail But this I would not have declared so freely had not the necessity of our own Churches required it and that the first pretence of the legality and validity of their ordinations been buoyed up to the height of an absolute necessity for else why shall it be called Tyranny in us to call on them to conform to us and to the practice of the Catholick Church and yet in them be called a good and a holy zeal to exact our conformity to them But I hope it will so happen to us that it will be verified here what was once said of the Catholicks under the fury of Justina Sed tantafuit perseverantia fidelium populorum ut animas prius amittere quà m Episcopum mallent If it were put to our choice rather to dye to wit the death of Martyrs not rebels than lose the sacred order and offices of Episcopacy without which no Priest no ordination no consecration of the Sacrament no absolution no rite or Sacrament legitimately can be performed in order to eternity The summe is this If the Canons and Sanctions Apostolical if the decrees of eight famous Councils in Christendom of Ancyra of Antioch of Sardis of Alexandria two of Constantinople the Arausican Council and that of Hispalis if the constant successive Acts of the famous martyr-Martyr-Bishops of Rome making ordinations if the testimony of the whole Pontifical book if the dogmatical resolution of so many Fathers S. Denis S. Cornelius S. Athanasius S. Hierom S. Chrysostom S. Epiphanius S. Austin and divers others all appropriating ordinations to the Bishops hand if the constant voice of Christendom declaring ordinations made by Presbyters to be null and void in
misery 5. But that which is of special concernment is this that the Liturgy of the Church of England hath advantages so many and so considerable as not only to raise it self above the devotions of other Churches but to endear the affections of good people to be in love with Liturgy in general 6. For to the Churches of the Roman Communion we can say that ours is reformed to the reformed Churches we can say that ours is orderly and decent for we were freed from the impositions and lasting errors of a tyrannical spirit and yet from the extravagancies of a popular spirit too our reformation was done without tumult and yet we saw it necessary to reform we were zealous to cast away the old errors but our zeal was balanced with consideration and the results of authority Not like women or children when they are affrighted with fire in their clothes we shak'd off the coal indeed but not our garments lest we should have exposed our Churches to that nakedness which the excellent men of our sister Churches complained to be among themselves 7. And indeed it is no small advantage to our Liturgy that it was the off-spring of all that authority which was to prescribe in matters of Religion The King and the Priest which are the Antistites Religionis and the preservers of both the Tables joyn'd in this work and the people as it was represented in Parliament were advised withal in authorizing the form after much deliberation for the Rule Quod spectat ad omnes ab omnibus tractari debet was here observed with strictness and then as it had the advantages of discourse so also of authorities its reason from one and its sanction from the other that it might be both reasonable and sacred and free not only from the indiscretions but which is very considerable from the scandal of popularity 8. And in this I cannot but observe the great wisdom and mercy of God in directing the contrivers of the Liturgy with the spirit of zeal and prudence to allay the furies and heats of the first affrightment For when men are in danger of burning so they leap from the flames they consider not whither but whence and the first reflexions of a crooked tree are not to straightness but to a contrary incurvation yet it pleased the Spirit of God so to temper and direct their spirits that in the first Liturgy of King Edward they did rather retain something that needed further consideration than reject any thing that was certainly pious and holy and in the second Liturgy that they might also throughly reform they did rather cast out something that might with good profit have remained than not satisfie the world of their zeal to reform of their charity in declining every thing that was offensive and the clearness of their light in discerning every semblance of error or suspicion in the Roman Church 9. The truth is although they fram'd the Liturgy with the greatest consideration that could be by all the united wisdom of this Church and State yet as if Prophetically to avoid their being charg'd in after ages with a crepusculum of Religion a dark twilight imperfect Reformation they joyn'd to their own Star all the shining tapers of the other reformed Churches calling for the advice of the most eminently learned and zealous Reformers in other Kingdoms that the light of all together might shew them a clear path to walk in And this their care produced some change for upon the consultation the first form of King Edwards Service-book was approved with the exception of a very few clauses which upon that occasion were review'd and expung'd till it came to that second form and modest beauty it was in the Edition of MDLII and which Gilbertus a German approved of as a transcript of the ancient and primitive forms 10. It was necessary for them to stay some-where Christendom was not only reformed but divided too and every division would to all ages have called for some alteration or else have disliked it publickly and since all that cast off the Roman yoke thought they had title enough to be called Reformed it was hard to have pleased all the private interests and peevishness of men that called themselves friends and therefore that only in which the Church of Rome had prevaricated against the word of God or innovated against Apostolical tradition all that was par'd away But at last she fix'd and strove no further to please the people who never could be satisfied 11. The Painter that exposed his work to the censure of the common passengers resolving to mend it as long as any man could find fault at last had brought the eyes to the ears and the ears to the neck and for his excuse subscrib'd Hanc populus fecit But his Hanc ego that which he made by the rules of art and the advice of men skill'd in the same mystery was the better piece The Church of England should have par'd away all the Canon of the Communion if she had mended her piece at the prescription of the Zuinglians and all her office of Baptism if she had mended by the rules of the Anabaptists and kept up Altars still by the example of the Lutherans and not have retain'd decency by the good will of the Calvinists and now another new light is sprung up she should have no Liturgy at all but the worship of God be left to the managing of chance and indeliberation and a petulant fancy 12. It began early to discover its inconvenience for when certain zealous persons fled to Frankford to avoid the funeral piles kindled by the Roman Bishops in Queen Maries time as if they had not enemies enough abroad they fell soul with one another and the quarrel was about the common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book and some of them made their appeal to the judgment of Mr. Calvin whom they prepossessed with strange representments and troubled phantasms concerning it and yet the worst he said upon the provocation of those prejudices was that even its vanities were tolerable Tolerabiles ineptias was the unhandsome Epithete he gave to some things which he was forc'd to dislike by his over-earnest complying with the Brethren of Frankford 13. Well! upon this the wisdom of this Church and State saw it necessary to fix where with advice she had begun and with counsel she had once mended And to have altered in things inconsiderable upon a new design or sullen mislike had been extreme levity and apt to have made the men contemptible their authority slighted and the thing ridiculous especially before adversaries that watch'd all opportunity and appearances to have disgraced the Reformation Here therefore it became a Law was established by an Act of Parliament was made solemn by an appendant penalty against all that on either hand did prevaricate a sanction of so long and so prudent consideration 14. But the common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book had the fate of S. Paul for when it had scap'd the storms of
the Roman Sea yet a viper sprung out of Queen Maries sires which at Frankford first leap'd upon the hand of the Church but since that time it hath gnawn the bowels of its own Mother and given it self life by the death of its Parent and Nurse 15. For as for the Adversaries from the Roman party they were so convinc'd by the piety and innocence of the common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book that they could accuse it of no deformity but of imperfection of a want of some things which they judged convenient because the error had a wrinkle on it and the face of antiquity And therefore for ten or eleven years they came to our Churches joyn'd in our devotions and communicated without scruple till a temporal interest of the Church of Rome rent the Schism wider and made it gape like the jaws of the grave And let me say it adds no small degree to my confidence and opinion of the English Common-Prayer-Book that amongst the numerous Armies sent from the Roman Seminaries who were curious enough to enquire able enough to find out and wanted no anger to have made them charge home any error in our Liturgy if the matter had not been unblameable and the composition excellent there was never any impiety or Heresie charg'd upon the Liturgy of the Church for I reckon not the calumnies of Harding for they were only in general calling it Darkness c. from which aspersion it was worthily vindicated by M. Deering The truth of it is the Compilers took that course which was sufficient to have secur'd it against the malice of a Spanish Inquisitor or the scrutiny of a more inquisitive Presbytery for they put nothing of controversie into their prayers nothing that was then matter of question only because they could not prophesie they put in some things which since then have been called to question by persons whose interest was highly concerned to find fault with something But that also hath been the fate of the Penmen of holy Scripture some of which could prophesie and yet could not prevent this But I do not remember that any man was ever put to it to justifie the Common-Prayer against any positive publick and professed charge by a Roman Adversary Nay it is transmitted to us by the testimony of persons greater than all exceptions that Paulus Quartus in his private entercourses and Letters to Queen Elizabeth did offer to confirm the English Common-Prayer-Book if she would acknowledge his Primacy and authority and the Reformation derivative from him And this lenity was pursued by his Successor Pius Quartus with an omnia de nobis tibi polliceare he assured her she should have any thing from him not only things pertaining to her soul but what might conduce to the establishment and confirmation of her Royal Dignity amongst which that the Liturgy new established by her authority should not be rescinded by the Popes power was not the least considerable 16. And possibly this hath cast a cloud upon it in the eyes of such persons who never will keep charity or so much as civility but with those with whom they have made a league offensive and defensive against all the world This hath made it to be suspected of too much compliance with that Church and her Offices of devotion and that it is a very Cento composed out of the mass-Mass-Book Pontifical Breviaries Manuals and Portuises of the Roman Church 17. I cannot say but many of our Prayers are also in the Roman Offices But so they are also in the Scripture so also is the Lords Prayer and if they were not yet the allegation is very inartificial and the charge peevish and unreasonable unless there were nothing good in the Roman Books or that it were unlawful to pray a good prayer which they had once stain'd with red letters The Objection hath not sence enough to procure an answer upon its own stock but by reflection from a direct truth which uses to be like light manifesting it self and discovering darkness 18. It was first perfected in King Edward the Sixths time but it was by and by impugned through the obstinate and dissembling malice of many They are the words of M. Fox in his Book of Martyrs Then it was reviewed and published with so much approbation that it was accounted the work of God but yet not long after there were some persons qui divisionis occasionem arripiebant saith Alesius vocabula pene syllabas expendendo they tried it by points and syllables and weighed every word and sought occasions to quarrel which being observed by Archbishop Cranmer he caused it to be translated into Latin and sent it to Bucer requiring his judgment of it who returned this answer That although there are in it some things quae rapi possunt ab inquietis ad materiam contentionis which by peevish men may be cavill'd at yet there was nothing in it but what was taken out of the Scriptures or agreeable to it if rightly understood that is if handled and read by wise and good men The zeal which Archbishop Grindal Bishop Ridly Dr. Taylor and other the holy Martyrs and Confessors in Queen Maries time expressed for this excellent Liturgy before and at the time of their death defending it by their disputations adorning it by their practice and sealing it with their bloods are arguments which ought to recommend it to all the sons of the Church of England for ever infinitely to be valued beyond all the little whispers and murmurs of argument pretended against it and when it came out of the flame and was purified in the Martyrs sires it became a vessel of honour and used in the house of God in all the days of that long peace which was the effect of Gods blessing and the reward as we humbly hope of an holy Religion and when it was laid aside in the days of Queen Mary it was to the great decay of the due honour of God and discomfort to the Professors of the truth of Christs Religion they are the words of Queen Elizabeth and her grave and wise Parliament 19. Archbishop Cranmer in his purgation A. D. 1553. made an offer if the Queen would give him leave to prove All that is contained in the common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book to be conformable to that order which our blessed Saviour Christ did both observe and command to be observed And a little after he offers to joyn issue upon this point That the Order of the Church of England set out by authority of the innocent and godly Prince Edward the Sixth in his high Court of Parliament is the same that was used in the Church fifteen hundred years past 20. And I shall go near to make his words good For very much of our Liturgy is the very words of Scriptures The Psalms and Lessons and all the Hymns save one are nothing else but Scripture and owe nothing to the Roman Breviaries for their production or authority So that the matter of them is out
omnium In obsequio scil quotidiano perpetuoque divinae religionis ritu Atque id noverunt fideles quomodo diebus singulis mane vespere orationes fundantur ad Dominum quomodo pro omni mundo Regibus omnibus qui in sublimitate positi sunt obsecrationes in Ecclesia fiant Sed forte quis dixerit pro omnibus quod ait tantum fideles intelligi voluisse At id verum non esse quae sequuntur ostendunt Denique ait pro Regibus neque enim tunc Reges Deum colebant It is evident by this that the custom of the Church was not only in the celebration of the holy Communion but in all her other Offices to say this Prayer not only for Christs Catholick Church but for all the world 25. And that the charity of the Church might not be misconstrued he produces his warrant S. Paul not only expresly commands us to pray for all men but adds by way of instance for Kings who then were unchristian and heathen in all the world But this form of Prayer is almost word for word in S. Ambrose Haec regula Ecclesiastica est tradita à Magistro gentium qua utuntur Sacerdotes nostri ut pro omnibus supplicent deprecantes pro Regibus orantes pro iis quibus sublimis potestas credita est ut in justitia veritate gubernent postulantes pro iis qui in necessitate varia sunt ut eruti liberati Deum collaudent incolumitatis Authorem So far goes our form of Prayer But S. Ambrose adds Referentes quoque gratiarum actiones And so it was with us in the first Service-books of King Edward and the Preface to the Prayer engages us to a thanksgiving but I know not how it was stoln out the Preface still remaining to chide their unwariness that took down that part of the building and yet left the gate standing But if the Reader please to be satisfied concerning this Prayer which indeed is the longest in our service-Service-book and of greatest consideration he may see it taken up from the universal custom of the Church and almost in all the words of the old Liturgies if he will observe the Liturgies themselves of S. Basil S Chrysostome and the concurrent testimonies of Tertullian S. Austin Celestine Gennadius Prosper and Theophylact. 26. I shall not need to make any excuses for the Churches reading those portions of Scripture which we call Epistles and Gospels before the Communion They are Scriptures of the choicest and most profitable transaction And let me observe this thing That they are not only declarations of all the mysteries of our redemption and rules of good life but this choice is of the greatest compliance with the necessities of the Christian Church that can be imagined For if we deny to the people a liberty of reading Scriptures may they not complain as Isaac did against the inhabitants of the land that the Philistines had spoiled his well and the fountains of living water If a free use to all of them and of all Scriptures were permitted should not the Church her self have more cause to complain of the infinite licentiousness and looseness of interpretations and of the commencement of ten thousand errors which would certainly be consequent to such permission Reason and Religion will chide us in the first reason and experience in the latter And can the wit of man conceive a better temper and expedient than that such Scriptures only or principally should be laid before them all in daily Offices which contain in them all the mysteries of our redemption and all the rules of good life which two things are done by the Gospels and Epistles respectively the first being a Record of the life and death of our blessed Saviour the latter instructions for the edification of the Church in pious and Christian conversation and all this was done with so much choice that as obscure places are avoided by design as much as could be so the very assignation of them to certain festivals the appropriation of them to solemn and particular days does entertain the understandings of the people with notions proper to the mystery and distinct from impertinent and vexatious questions And were this design made something more minute and applicable to the various necessities of times and such choice Scriptures permitted indifferently which might be matter of necessity and great edification the people of the Church would have no reason to complain that the fountains of our Saviour were stopp'd from them nor the Rulers of the Church that the mysteriousness of Scripture were abused by the petulancy of the people to consequents harsh impious and unreasonable in despight of government in exauctoration of the power of superiours or for the commencement of Schisms and Heresies The Church with great wisdom hath first held this torch out and though for great reasons intervening and hindering it cannot be reduced to practice yet the Church hath shewn her desire to avoid the evil that is on both hands and she hath shewn the way also if it could have been insisted in But however this choice of the more remarkable portions of Scripture is so reasonable and proportionable to the nature of the thing that because the Gospels and Epistles bear their several shares of the design the Gospel representing the foundation and prime necessities of Christianity and the mysterious parts of our Redemption the summ the faith and the hopes of Christianity therefore it is attested by a ceremony of standing up it being a part of the confession of faith but the Epistles containing superstructures upon that foundation are read with religious care but not made formal or solemn by any other circumstance The matter contains in it sufficient of reason and of proportion but nothing of necessity except it be by accident and as authority does intervene by way of sanction 27. But that this reading of Epistles and Gospels before the Communion was one of the earliest customs of the Church I find it affirmed by Rabanus Maurus Sed enim initio mos iste cantandi non erat qui nunc in Ecclesia ante sacrificium celebratur Sed tamen epistolae Pauli recitabantur sanctum Evangelium The custom of reading S. Paul's Epistles and the holy Gospel before the Sacrament was from the beginning Some other portions of Scripture were read upon emergent occasions instead of the Epistle which still retain the name of Epistle but it is so seldom that it happens upon two Sundays only in the year upon Trinity Sunday and the 25. Sunday after upon Saints days it happens oftner because the story requires a particular rememoration and therefore is very often taken out of the Acts of the Apostles but being in substitution only of the ordinary portion of the Epistle of S. Paul or other the Apostles it keeps the name of the first design though the change be upon good reason and much propriety 28. There remains
Testament whose sence and meaning the event will declare if we by mistaken and anticipated interpretations do not obstruct our own capacities and hinder us from believing the true events because they answer not those expectations with which our own mistakes have prepared our understandings as it hapned to the Jews in the case of Antiochus and to the Christians in the person of Antichrist 38. Well! thus as it was framed in the body of its first Constitution and second alteration those excellent men whom God chose as instruments of his honour and service in the Reformation to whom also he did shew what great things they were to suffer for his Names sake approved of it with high testimony promoted it by their own use and zeal and at last sealed it with their blood 39. That they had a great opinion of the piety and unblameable composure of the Common-Prayer-Book appears 1 in the challenge made in its behalf by the Archbishop Cranmer to defend it against all the world of Enemies 2 by the daily using it in time of persecution and imprisonment for so did Bishop Ridley and Dr. Taylor who also recommended it to his wife for a legacy 3 by their preaching in behalf of it as many did 4 by Hulliers hugging it in his flames with a posture of great love and forwardness of entertainment 5 besides the direct testimony which the most eminent learned amongst the Queen Mary Martyrs have given of it Amongst which that of the learned Rector of Hadley Dr. Rowland Taylor is most considerable his words are these in a Letter of his to a friend But there was after that by the most innocent King Edward for whom God be praised everlastingly the whole Church Service with great deliberation and the advice of the best learned men of the Realm and authorized by the whole Parliament and received and published gladly by the whole Realm Which Book was never reformed but once and yet by that one reformation it was so fully perfected according to the rules of our Christian Religion in every behalf that no Christian conscience could be offended with any thing therein contained I mean of that Book reformed 40. I desire the words may be considered and confronted against some other words lately published which charge these holy and learned men but with a half-fac'd light a darkness in the confines of Egypt and the suburbs of Goshen And because there is no such thing proved of these blessed Men and Martyrs and that it is easie to say such words of any man that is not fully of our mind I suppose the advantage and the out-weighing authority will lie on our part in behalf of the Common-Prayer-Book especially since this man and divers others died with it and for it according as it hapned by the circumstance of their Charges and Articles upon which they died for so it was in the cases of John Rough John Philpot Cutbert Simson and seven others burnt in Smithfield upon whom it was charged in their Indictments that they used allowed preached for and maintained respectively the Service-book of King Edward To which Articles they answered affirmatively and confessed them to be true in every part and died accordingly 41. I shall press this argument to issue in the words of S. Ambrose cited to the like purpose by Vincentius Lirinensis Librum sacerdotalem quis nostrum resignare audeat signatum à Confessoribus multorum jam martyrio consecratum Quomodo fidem eorum possumus denegare quorum victoriam praedicamus Who shall dare to violate this Priestly book which so many Confessors have consigned and so many Martyrs have hallowed with their blood How shall we call them Martyrs if we deny their faith how shall we celebrate their victory if we dislike their cause If we believe them to be crown'd why shall we deny but that they strove lawfully So that if they dying in attestation of this Book were Martyrs why do we condemn the Book for which they died If we will not call them Martyrs it is clear we have chang'd our Religion since then And then it would be considered whether we are fallen For the Reformers in King Edwards time died for it in Q. Elizabeths time they avowed it under the protection of an excellent Princess but in that sad interval of Q. Maries reign it suffered persecution and if it shall do so again it is but an unhandsome compliance for Reformers to be unlike their Brethren and to be like their Enemies to do as do the Papists and only to speak great words against them and it will be sad for a zealous Protestant to live in an age that should disavow King Edwards and Queen Elizabeths Religion and manner of worshipping God and in an age that shall do as did Queen Maries Bishops persecute the Book of Common-Prayer and the Religion contained in it God help the poor Protestants in such times But let it do its worst if God please to give his grace the worst that can come is but a Crown and that was never denied to Martyrs 42. In the mean time I can but with joy and Eucharist consider with what advantages and blessings the pious Protestant is entertained and blessed and arm'd against all his needs by the constant and Religious usage of the Common-Prayer-Book For besides the direct advantages of the Prayers and devotions some whereof are already instanc'd and the experience of holy persons will furnish them with more there are also forms of solemn benediction and absolution in the Offices and if they be not highly considerable there is nothing sacred in the Evangelical Ministery but all is a vast plain and the Altars themselves are made of unhallowed turf 43. Concerning Benediction of which there are four more solemn forms in the whole Office two in the Canon of the Communion one in Confirmation one in the Office of Marriage I shall give this short account that without all question the less is blessed of the greater and it being an issue spiritual is rather to be verified in spiritual relation than in natural or political And therefore if there be any such thing as regeneration by the Ministery of the word and begetting in Christ and Fathers and Sons after the common faith as the expressions of the Apostle make us to believe certain it is the blessings of Religion do descend most properly from our spiritual Fathers and with most plentiful emanation And this hath been the Religion of all the world to derive very much of their blessings by the Priests particular and signal ministration Melchisedech blessed Abraham Isaac blessed Jacob and Moses and Aaron blessed the people So that here is benediction from a Prince from a Father from the Aaronical Priest from Melchisedech of whose order is the Christian in whose Law it is a sanction that in great needs especially the Elders of the Church be sent for and let them pray over him that is distressed That is the
confidents 16 an office that still permits children in many cases of necessity to be unbaptized making no provision for them in sudden cases 17 that will not suffer them to be confirmed at all ut utroque Sacramento renascantur as S. Cyprians phrase is that they may be advantaged by a double rite 18 that joyns in marriage as Cacus did his Oxen in rude inform and unhallowed yokes 19 that will not do piety to the dead nor comfort to the living by solemn and honorary offices of funeral 20 that hath no forms of blessing the people any more 21 than described forms of blessing God which are just none at all 22 an office that never thinks of absolving penitents or exercising the power of the Keys after the custom and rites of Priests 23 a Liturgy that recites no Creed no Confession of Faith so not declaring either to Angels or men according to what Religion they worship God but entertaining though indeed without a symbol Arrians Macedonians Nestorians Manichees or any other Sect for ought there appears to the contrary 24 that consigns no publick Canon of Communion but leaves that as casual and phantastick as any of the lesser offices 25 an office that takes no more care than chance does for the reading the holy Scriptures 26 that never commemorates a departed Saint 27 that hath no Communion with the Church Triumphant any more than with the other parts of the Militant 28 that never thanks God for the redemption of the world by the Nativity and Passion Resurrection and Ascension of our blessed Saviour Jesus but condemns the memorial even of the Scripture Saints and the memorial of the miraculous blessings of redemption of mankind by Christ himself with the same accusation it condemns the Legends and portentous stories of the most suspected part of the Roman Calendar 29 an office that out of zeal against Judaism condemns all distinction of days unless they themselves distinguish them that leaves no signature of piety upon the Lords day and yet the Compilers do enjoyn it to a Judaical superstitition 30 an office that does by implication undervalue the Lords Prayer for it never injoyns it and does but once permit it 31 an office that is new without authority and never made up into a sanction by an Act of Parliament an order or Directory of devotion that hath all these ingredients and capacities and such a one there is in the world I suppose is no equal match to contest with and be put in balance against the Liturgy of the Church of England which was with so great deliberation compiled out of Scriptures the most of it all the rest agreeing with Scriptures and drawn from the Liturgies of the ancient Church and made by men famous in their generations whose reputation and glory of Martyrdom hath made it immodest for the best of men now to compare themselves with them and after its composition considered by advices from abroad and so trimm'd and adorn'd that no excrescency did remain the Rubricks of which Book was writ in the blood of many of the Compilers which hath had a testimony from Gods blessing in the daily use of it accompanying it with the peace of an age established and confirmed by six Acts of Parliament directly and collaterally and is of so admirable a composure that the most industrious wits of its Enemies could never find out an objection of value enough to make a doubt or scarce a scruple in a wise spirit But that I shall not need to set a night-piece by so excellent a beauty to set it off the better it s own excellencies are Orators prevalent enough that it shall not need any advantages accidental 47. And yet this excellent Book hath had the fate to be cut in pieces with a pen-knife and thrown into the fire but it is not consumed at first it was sown in tears and is now watered with tears yet never was any holy thing drowned and extinguished with tears It began with the Martyrdom of the Compilers and the Church hath been vexed ever since by angry spirits and she was forced to defend it with much trouble and unquietness but it is to be hop'd that all these storms are sent but to increase the zeal and confidence of the pious sons of the Church of England Indeed the greatest danger that ever the Common-Prayer-Book had was the indifferency and indevotion of them that used it but as a common blessing and they who thought it fit for the meanest of the Clergy to read prayers and for themselves only to preach though they might innocently intend it yet did not in that action consult the honour of our Liturgy except where charity or necessity did interpose But when excellent things go away and then look back upon us as our blessed Saviour did upon S. Peter we are more mov'd than by the nearer embraces of a full and an actual possession I pray God it may prove so in our case and that we may not be too willing to be discouraged at least that we may not cease to love and to desire what is not publickly permitted to our practice and profession JER TAYLOR AN APOLOGY FOR AUTHORIZED and SET FORMS OF LITURGY AGAINST THE PRETENCE OF THE SPIRIT 1. For ex tempore PRAYER AND 2. Forms of Private composition By JER TAYLOR D. D. and Chaplain in Ordinary to King CHARLES the First The third Edition Enlarged The Compilers of the Common-Prayer Book of the Church of England as it now is were Doctor CRANMER Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Doctor GOODRICK Bishop of Ely Doctor SKIP Bishop of Hereford Doctor THIRLBY Bishop of Westminster Doctor DAY Bishop of Chichester Doctor HOLBECK Bishop of Lincoln Doctor RIDLEY Bishop of Rochester Doctor TAYLOR Dean of Lincoln Doctor HEYNES Dean of Exeter Doctor REDMAN Dean of Westminster Doctor COX K. Edwards Almoner Doctor Mr. Robinson Arch-Deac of Leicester Mense Maio 1549. Anno Regni Edwardi Sexti tertio LONDON Printed for R. Royston Bookseller to the King 's most Excellent MAJESTY M DC LXXIII TO HIS MOST SACRED MAJESTY IT is now two years since part of these ensuing Papers like the publick issue of the people imperfect and undressed were exposed without a Parent to protect them or any hand to nourish them But since your Most Sacred Majesty was pleased graciously to look upon them they are grown into a Tract and have an ambition like the Gourd of Jonas to dwell in the eye of the Sun from whence they received life and increment And although because some violence hath been done to the profession of the doctrine of this Treatise it may seem to be verbum in tempore non suo and like the offering Cypress to a Conqueror or Palms to a broken Army yet I hope I shall the less need an Apologie because it is certain he does really dis-serve no just and Noble interest that serves that of the Spirit and Religion And because the sufferings of a KING and a
may please to see one observ'd to have been made in Heaven for a set form of Worship and address to God was recorded by St. John and sung in Heaven and it was composed out of the Songs of Moses Exod. 15. of David Psal. 145 and of Jeremy Chap. 10.6 7. which certainly is a very good precedent for us to imitate although but revealed by St. John by way of vision and extasie that we may see if we would speak with the tongue of Men and Angels we could not praise God in better Forms than what are recorded in holy Scripture Sect. 90. BUT besides the metrical part the Apostle hath described other parts of Liturgy in Scripture whose composition though it be in determined forms of words yet not so bound up with numbers as Hymns and these Saint Paul calls supplications prayers intercessions and giving of thanks which are several manners of address distinguished by their subject matter by their form and manner of address As appears plainly by intercessions and giving of thanks the other are also by all men distinguished though in the particular assignment they differ but the distinction of the Words implies the distinction of Offices which together with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lectionarium of the Church the Books of the Apostles and Prophets spoken of by Justin Martyr and said to be used in the Christian congregations are the constituent parts of Liturgy and the exposition of the words we best learn from the practice of the Church who in all Ages of whose publick offices any record is left to us took their pattern from these places of Scripture the one for Prose the other for Verse and if we take Liturgy into its several parts or members we cannot want something to appply to every one of the words of St. Paul in these present allegations Sect. 91. FOR the offices of prose we find but small mention of them in the very first time save only in general terms and that such there were and that St. James St. Mark St. Peter and others of the Apostles and Apostolical men made Liturgies and if these which we have at this day were not theirs yet they make probation that these Apostles left others or else they were impudent people that prefixed their names so early and the Churches were very incurious to swallow such a bole if no pretension could have been reasonably made for their justification But concerning Church Hymns we have clearer testimony in particular both because they were many of them and because they were dispersed more soon got by heart passed also among the people and were pious arts of the Spirit whereby holy things were instilled into their souls by the help of fancy and a more easie memory The first civilizing of people used to be by Poetry and their Divinity was conveyed by Songs and Verses and the Apostle exhorted the Christians to exhort one another in Psalms and Hymns for he knew the excellent advantages were likely to accrue to religion by such an insinuation of the mysteries Thus St. Hilary and St. Ambrose composed Hymns for the use of the Church and St. Austin made a Hymn against the Schism of Donatus which Hymns when they were publickly allowed of were used in publick Offices not till then For Paulus Samosatenus had brought Women into the Church to sing vain and trifling songs and some Bishops took to themselves too great and incurious a license and brought Hymns into the Church whose gravity and piety was not very remarkable upon occasion of which the Fathers of the Councel of Laodicea ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No Psalms of private composition must be brought into the Church so Gentian Harvet renders it Isidore Translates it Psalmos ab idiotis compositos Psalms made by common persons Psalms usually sung abroad so Dionysius Exiguus calls them Psalmos Plebeios but I suppose by the following words is meant That none but Scripture Psalms shall be read there for so the Canon addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing to be read in the Church but Books of the Old and New Testament And this interpretation agrees well enough with the occasion of the Canon which I now mentioned Sect. 92. THIS only by the way the reddition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Isidore to be Psalms made by common persons whom the Scripture calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ignorant or unlearned is agreeable enough with that of Saint Paul who intimates that prayers and forms of Liturgies are to be composed for them not by them they were never thought of to be persons competent to make Forms of Prayers themselves For S. Paul speaks of such an one as of a person coming into the Church to hear the Prophets pray and sing and interpret and prophesie and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he is reproved of all and judged of all and therefore the most unfit person in the world to bring any thing that requires great ability and great authority to obtrude it upon the Church his Rulers and his Judges And this was not unhandsomely intimated by the word sometimes used by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Greek Church calling the publick Liturgie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies Prayers made for the use of the Idiotae or private persons as the word is contradistinguished from the Rulers of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies contum and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to live in the condition of a private person and in the vulgar Greek sayes Arcudius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie a little man of a low stature from which two significations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may well enough design a short form of Prayer made for the use of private persons And this was reasonable and part of the Religion even of the Heathen as well as Christians the presidents of their Religion were to find prayers for the people and teach them forms of address to their Gods Castis cum pueris ignara puella mariti Disceret unde preces vatem ni Musa dedisset Poscit opem chorus praesentia numina sentit Coelestes implorat equas docta prece blandus Carmine dii superi placantur carmine Manes But this by the way Sect. 93. BUT because I am casually fallen upon mention of the Laodicean Council and that it was very ancient before the Nicene and of very great reputation both in the East and in the West it will not be a contemptible addition to the reputation of set forms of Liturgy that we find them so early in the Church reduced to a very regular and composed manner The XVth Canon suffers none to sing in the Church but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that sing by book and go up into the Pulpit they were the same persons and the manner of doing their office was their appellative which shews plainly that the known
custom of the Church was for them who were in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Pulpit to read their offices and devotions They read them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that 's the word in the Canon Those things which signifie the greatest or first Antiquity are said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was spoken proverbially to signifie ancient things And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that if these Fathers chose these words as Grammarians the singers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were such as sung ancient Hymns of Primitive antiquity which also is the more credible because the persons were noted and distinguished by their imployment as a thing known by so long an use till it came to be their appellative * The 17th and 18th Canons command that Lessons and Psalms should be said interchangeably 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the same Liturgy that 's the word or office of prayers to be said always at Nones and Vespers This shews the manner of executing their office of Psalmists and Readers they did not sing or say ex tempore but they read Prayers and Psalms and sung them out of a Book neither were they brought in fresh and new at every meeting but it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 still the same form of prayers without variation Sect. 94. BUT then if we remember how ancient this office was in the Church and that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Readers and Singers were Clerical offices deputed for publick ministry about prayers and devotions in the Church for so we are told by Simeon Thessalonicensis in particular concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he does dictate the hymns to the singers and then of the singers there is no question and that these two offices were so ancient in the Church that they were mentioned by St. Ignatius who was contemporary with the latter times of the Apostles We may well believe that set and described forms of Liturgy were as early as the days of the Apostles and continued in the continuation of those and the like offices in all descending ages Of the same design and intimation were those known offices in the Greek Church of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Socrates speaks of as of an office in the Church of Alexandria 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Their office was the same with the Reader they did ex praescripto praeire ad verbum referre the same which ab Alexandro notes to have been done in the religious rites of Heathen Greece The first read out of a Book the appointed prayers and the others rehearsed them after Now it is unimaginable that constant officers should be appointed to say an office and no publick office be described Sect. 95. I SHALL add but this one thing more and pass on ad alia And that is that I never yet saw any instance example or pretence of precedent of any Bishop Priest or Lay person that ever prayed ex tempore in the Church and although in some places single Bishops or peradventure other persons of less Authority did oftentimes bring prayers of their own into the Church yet ever they were compositions and premeditations and were brought thither there to be repeated often and added to the Liturgy and although the Liturgies while they were less full than since they have been were apt to receive the additions of pious and excellent Persons yet the inconvenience grew so great by permitting any forms but what were approved by a publick Spirit that the Church as She always had forms of publick Prescription so She resolved to permit no mixture of any thing but what was warranted by an equal power that the Spirits of the Prophets might be subject to the Prophets and such Spirits when they are once tried whether they be of God or no tryed by a lawful superiour and a competent Judge may then venture into the open air And it were a strange imprudence choosingly to entertain those inconveniences which our wiser Fore-fathers felt and declar'd and remedied For why should we be in love with that evil against which they so carefully arm'd their Churches by the provision and defence of Laws For this produc'd that Canon of the Councel of Mileuis in Africa Placuit ut preces quae probatae fuerint in Concilio ab omnibus celebrentur nec aliae omnino dicantur in Ecclesiâ nisi quae à prudentioribus factae fuerint in Synodo That 's the restraint and prohibition publick Prayers must be such as are publickly appointed and prescribed by our superiors and no private forms of our conceiving must be used in the Church The reason follows Ne fortè aliquid contra fidem vel per ignorantiam vel per minus studium sit compositum lest through ignorance or want of deliberation any thing be spoken in our prayers against faith and good manners Their reason is good and they are witnesses of it who hear the variety of Prayers before and after Sermons there where the Directory is practised where to speak most modestly not only their private opinions but also humane interests and their own personal concernments and wild fancies born perhaps not two daies before are made the objects of the peoples hopes of their desires and their prayers and all in the mean time pretend to the holy Spirit Sect. 96. THUS far we are gone The Church hath 1 power and authority and 2 command 3 and ability or promise of assistances to make publick forms of Liturgy and 4 the Church always did so in all descents from Moses to Christ from Christ to the Apostles from them all to all descending Ages for I have instanced till St. Austin's time and since there is no Question the people were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Balsamon sayes of those of the Greek Communion they used unalterable forms of Prayers described out of the Books of publick Liturgy it remains only that I consider upon what reason and grounds of prudence and religion the Church did so and whether she did well or no In order to which I consider Sect. 97. FIRST Every man hath personal needs of his own and he that understands his own condition and hath studied the state of his Soul in order to eternity his temporal estate in order to justice and charity and the constitution and necessities of his body in order to health and his health in order to the service of God as every wise and good man does will find that no man can make such provision for his necessities as he can do for his own caeteris paribus no man knows the things of a man but the spirit of the man and therefore if he have proportionable abilities it is allowed to him and it is necessary for him to represent his own conditions to God and he can best express his own sence or at least best sigh forth his own meaning and if he be a good
we may venture to offer it to God Sect. 132. FOURTHLY There is a latitude of Theology much whereof is left to us so without precise and clear determination that without breach either of faith or charity men may differ in opinion and if they may not be permitted to abound in their own sence they will be apt to complain of tyranny over Consciences and that Men Lord it over their faith In prayer this thing is so different that it is imprudent and full of inconvenience to derive such things into our prayers which may with good profit be matter of Sermons Therefore here a liberty may well enough be granted when there it may better be denied Sect. 133. FIFTHLY But indeed If I may freely declare my opinion I think it were not amiss if the liberty of making Sermons were something more restrain'd than it is and that either such persons only were intrusted with the liberty for whom the Church her self may safely be responsive that is to men learned and pious and that the other part the Vulgus Cleri should instruct the People out of the fountains of the Church and the publick stock till by so long exercise and discipline in the Schools of the Prophets they may also be intrusted to minister of their own unto the people This I am sure was the Practice of the Primitive Church when preaching was as ably and religiously performed as now it is but in this I prescribe nothing But truly I think the reverend Divines of the Assembly are many of them of my mind in this particular and that they observe a liberty indulg'd to some Persons to preach which I think they had rather should hold their peace and yet think the Church better edified in their silence than their Sermons Sect. 134. SIXTHLY But yet methinks the Argument objected so far as the ex tempore Men make use of it if it were turned with the edge the other way would have more reason in it and instead of arguing Why should not the same liberty be allowed to their spirit in praying as in preaching it were better to substitute this If they can pray with the Spirit why do they not also preach with the Spirit And it may be there may be in reason or experience something more for preaching and making Orations by the excellency of a mans spirit and learning than for the other which in the greatest abilities it may be unfit to venture to God without publick approbation but for Sermons they may be fortunate and safe if made ex tempore Frequenter enim accidit ut successum extemporalem consequi cura non possit quem si calor ac spiritus tulit Deum tunc adfuisse cùm id evenisset veteres Oratores ut Cicero dicit aiebant Now let them make demonstration of their spirit by making excellent Sermons ex tempore that it may become an experiment of their other faculty that after they are tried and approved in this they may be considered for the other And if praying with the Spirit be praying ex tempore why shall not they preach ex tempore too or else confess they preach without the Spirit or that they have not the gift of preaching For to say that the gift of prayer is a gift ex tempore but the gift of Preaching is with study and deliberation is to become vain and impertinent Quis enim discrevit Who hath made them of a different Consideration I mean as to this particular as to their Efficient cause nor Reason nor Revelation nor God nor Man Sect. 135. TO summe up all If any man hath a mind to exercise his Gift of prayer let him set himself to work and compose Books of Devotion we have need of them in the Church of England so apparent need that some of the Church of Rome have made it an objection against us and this his Gift of Prayer will be to edification But otherwise I understand it is more fit for ostentation than any spiritual advantage For God hears us not the sooner for our ex tempore long or conceived Prayers possibly they may become a hinderance as in the cases before instanced And I am sure if the people be intelligent and can discern they are hindred in their Devotion for they dare not say Amen till they have considered and many such cases will occur in ex tempore or unlicenced Prayers that need much considering before we attest them But if the people be not intelligent they are apt to swallow all the inconveniences which may multiply in so great a licence and therefore it were well that the Governours of the Church who are to answer for their souls should judge for them before they say Amen which judgment cannot be without set Forms of Liturgy My sentence therefore is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let us be as we are already few changes are for the better Sect. 136. FOR if it be pretended that in the Liturgy of the Church of England which was composed with much art and judgment by a Church that hath as much reason to be confident She hath the Spirit and Gift of Prayer as any single person hath and each learned man that was at its first composition can as much prove that he had the Spirit as the Objectors now adays and he that boasts most certainly hath the least If I say it be pretended that there are many errors and inconveniences both in the Order and in the matter of the Common-Prayer-Book made by such men with so much industry how much more and with how much greater reason may we all dread the inconveniences and disorders of ex tempore and conceived Prayers Where respectively there is neither conjunction of Heads nor Premeditation nor Industry nor Method nor Art nor any of those Things or at least not in the same Degree which were likely to have exempted the Common-prayer-book from errors and disorders If these things be in the green tree what will be done in the dry Sect. 137. BUT if it be said the ex tempore and conceived Prayers will be secured from error by the Directory because that chalks them out the matter I answer it is not sufficient because if when men study both the matter and the words too they may be and it is pretended are actually deceived much more may they when the matter is left much more at liberty and the words under no restraint at all And no man can avoid the pressure and the weight of this unless the Compilers of the Directory were infallible and that all their followers are so too of the certainty of which I am not yet fully satisfied Sect. 138. AND after this I would fain know what benefit and advantages the Church of England in her united capacity receives by this new device For the publick it is clear that whether the Ministers Pray before they Study or Study before they Pray there must needs be infinite deformity in the publick Worship and
in fair priviledges and honour and God hath blest and honour'd Episcopacy with the conjunction of a loyal people As if because in the law of Nature the Kingdom and Priesthood were joyned in one person it were natural and consonant to the first justice that Kings should defend the rites of the Church and the Church advance the honour of Kings And when I consider that the first Bishop that was exauctorated was a Prince too Prince and Bishop of Geneva methinks it was an ill Omen that the cause of the Prince and the Bishop should be in Conjunction ever after 2. A second return that Episcopacy makes to Royalty is that which is the Duty of all Christians the paying tributes and impositions And though all the Kings Liege people do it yet the issues of their duty and liberality are mightily disproportionate if we consider their unequal Number and Revenues And if Clergie-subsidies be estimated according to the smallness of their revenue and paucity of persons it will not be half so short of the number and weight of Crowns from Lay Dispensation as it does far exceed in the proportion of the Donative 3. But the assistance that the Kings of England had in their Councils and affairs of greatest difficulty from the great ability of Bishops and other the Ministers of the Church I desire to represent in the words of K. Alvred to Walfsigeus the Bishop in an Epistle where he deplores the misery of his own age by comparing it with the former times when the Bishops were learned and exercised in publick Councils Foelicia tum tempora fuerunt inter omnes Angliae populos Reges Deo scriptae ejus voluntati obsecundârunt in suâ pace bellicis expeditionibus atque regimine domestico domi se semper tutati fuerint atque etiam foris nobilitatem suam dilataverint The reason was as he insinuates before Sapientes extiterunt in Anglica gente de spirituali gradu c. The Bishops were able by their great learning and wisdom to give assistance to the Kings affairs And they have prosper'd in it for the most glorious issues of Divine Benison upon this Kingdom were conveyed to us by Bishops hands I mean the Vnion of the houses of York and Lancaster by the Counsels of Bishop Morton and of England and Scotland by the treaty of Bishop Fox to which if we add two other in Materia religionis I mean the conversion of the Kingdom from Paganism by St. Augustin Arch-bishop of Canterbury and the reformation begun and promoted by Bishops I think we cannot call to mind four blessings equal to these in any Age or Kingdom in all which God was pleased by the mediation of Bishops as he useth to do to bless the people And this may not only be expected in reason but in good Divinity for amongst the gifts of the spirit which God hath given to his Church are reckoned Doctors Teachers and helps in government To which may be added this advantage that the services of Church-men are rewardable upon the Churches stock no need to disimprove the Royal Banks to pay thanks to Bishops But Sir I grow troublesome Let this discourse have what ends it can the use I make of it is but to pretend reason for my boldness and to entitle You to my Book For I am confident you will own any thing that is but a friends friend to a cause of Loyalty I have nothing else to plead for your acceptance but the confidence of your Goodness and that I am a person capable of your pardon and of a fair interpretation of my address to you by being SIR Your most affectionate Servant JER TAYLOR The goodly CEDAR of Apostolick Catholick EPISCOPACY 〈…〉 d with the moderne Shoots Slips of divided NOVELTIES in the Church 16â—â— Place this Figure at Page 43. OF THE SACRED ORDER and OFFICES OF EPISCOPACY BY Divine Institution Apostolical Tradition and Catholick practice c. IN all those accursed machinations which the device and artifice of Hell hath invented for the supplanting of the Church Inimicus homo that old superseminator of heresies and crude mischiefs hath endeavoured to be curiously compendious and with Tarquins device putare summa papaverum And therefore in the three ages of Martyrs it was a rul'd case in that Burgundian forge Qui prior erat dignitate prior trahebatur ad Martyrium The Priests but to be sure the Bishops must pay for all Tolle impios Polycarpus requiratur Away with these pedling persecutions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lay the axe at the root of the tree Insomuch that in Rome from Saint Peter and Saint Paul to Saint Sylvester thirty three Bishops of Rome in immediate succession suffered an Honourable and glorious Martyrdom unless Meltiades be perhaps excepted whom Eusebius and Optatus report to have lived all the time of the third Consulship of Constantine and Lucinius Conteret caput ejus was the glorious promise Christ should break the Devils head and though the Devils active part of the Duel was far less yet he would venture at that too even to strike at the heads of the Church capita vicaria for the head of all was past his striking now And this I say he offered to do by Martyrdom but that in stead of breaking crowned them His next onset was by Julian and occidere Presbyterium that was his Province To shut up publick Schools to force Christians to ignorance to impoverish and disgrace the Clergie to make them vile and dishonourable these are his arts and he did the Devil more service in this fineness of undermining than all the open battery of the ten great Rams of persecution But this would not take For that which is without cannot defile a man So it is in the Church too Cedunt in bonum all violences ab extrá But therefore besides these he attempted by heresies to rent the Churches bowels all in pieces but the good Bishops gathered up the scattered pieces and reunited them at Nice at Constantinople at Ephesus at Chalcedon at Carthage at Rome and in every famous place of Christendom and by Gods goodness and the Bishops industry Catholick religion was conserved in Unity and integrity Well however it is Antichrist must come at last and the great Apostasie foretold must be and this not without means proportionable to the production of so great declensions of Christianity When ye hear of wars and rumors of wars be not afraid said our Blessed Saviour the end is not yet It is not War that will do this great work of destruction for then it might have been done long ere now What then will do it We shall know when we see it In the mean time when we shall find a new device of which indeed the platform was laid in Aerius and the Acephali brought to a good possibility of compleating a thing that whosoever shall hear his ears shall tingle an abomination of desolation standing where it
was an Angel-Minister and this his office must make him the guide and superiour to the Rest even all the whole Church since he was charged with all 3. By the Angel is meant a singular person for the reprehensions and the commendations respectively imply personal delinquency or suppose personal excellencies Add to this that the compellation is singular and of determinate number so that we may as well multiply Churches as persons for the seven Churches had but seven stars and these seven stars were the Angels of the seven Churches And if by seven stars they may mean 70 times seven stars for so they may if they begin to multiply then by one star they must mean many stars and so they may multiply Churches too for there were as many Churches as stars and no more Angels than Churches and it is as reasonable to multiply these seven Churches into 7000 as every star into a Constellation or every Angel into a Legion But besides the exigency of the thing it self these seven Angels are by Antiquity called the seven Governours or Bishops of the seven Churches and their names are commemorated Unto these seven Churches S. Iohn saith Arethas reckoneth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an equal number of Angel-Governours and Oecumenius in his Scholia upon this place saith the very same words Septem igitur Angelos Rectores septem Ecclesiarum debemus intelligere eò quòd Angelus nuntius interpretatur saith S. Ambrose and again Angelos Episcopos dicit sicut docetur in Apocalypsi Iohannis Let the woman have a covering on her head because of the Angels that is in reverence and in subjection to the Bishop of the Church for Bishops are the Angels as is taught in the Revelation of S. Iohn Divinâ voce sub Angeli Nomine laudatur praepositus Ecclesiae so S. Austin By the voice of God the Bishop of the Church is commended under the title of an Angel Eusebius names some of these Angels who were then Presidents and actually Bishops of these Churches S. Polycarpe was one to be sure apud Smyrnam Episcopus Martyr saith Eusebius He was the Angel of the Church of Smyrna And he had good authority for it for he reports it out of Polycrates who a little after was himself an Angel of the Church of Ephesus and he also quotes S. Irenaeus for it and out of the Encyclical Epistle of the Church of Smyrna it self and besides these authorities it is attested by S. Ignatius and Tertullian S. Timothy was another Angel to wit of the Church of Ephesus to be sure had been and most likely was still surviving Antipas is reckoned by Name in the Revelation and he had been the Angel of Pergamus but before this book was written he was turned from an Angel to a Saint Melito in all probability was then the Angel of the Church of Sardis Melito quoque Sardensis Ecclesiae Antistes Apollinaris apud Hierapolim Ecclesiam regens celeberrimi inter caeteros habebantur saith Eusebius These men were actually living when S. Iohn writ his Revelation for Melito writ his book de Paschate when Sergius Paulus was Proconsul of Asia and writ after the Revelation for he writ a Treatise of it as saith Eusebius However at least some of these were then and all of these about that time were Bishops of these Churches and the Angels S. John speaks of were such who had jurisdiction over their whole Diocess therefore these or such as these were the Angels to whom the Spirit of God writ hortatory and commendatory letters such whom Christ held in his Right hand and fixed them in the Churches like lights set on a candlestick that they might give shine to the whole house The Summe of all is this that Christ did institute Apostles and Presbyters or 72 Disciples To the Apostles he gave a plenitude of power for the whole commission was given to them in as great and comprehensive clauses as were imaginable for by vertue of it they received a power of giving the Holy Ghost in confirmation and of giving his grace in the collation of holy Orders a power of jurisdiction and authority to govern the Church and this power was not temporary but successive and perpetual and was intended as any ordinary office in the Church so that the successors of the Apostles had the same right and institution that the Apostles themselves had and though the personal mission was not immediate as of the Apostles it was yet the commission and institution of the function was all one But to the 72 Christ gave no commission but of preaching which was a very limited commission There was all the immediate Divine institution of Presbyterate as a distinct order that can be fairly pretended But yet farther these 72 the Apostles did admit in partem solicitudinis and by new ordination or delegation Apostolical did give them power of administring Sacraments of Absolving sinners of governing the Church in conjunction and subordination to the Apostles of which they had a capacity by Christs calling them at first in sortem ministerii but the exercise and the actuating of this capacity they had from the Apostles So that not by Divine ordination or immediate commission from Christ but by derivation from the Apostles and therefore in minority and subordination to them the Presbyters did exercise acts of order and jurisdiction in the absence of the Apostles or Bishops or in conjunction consiliary and by way of advice or before the consecration of a Bishop to a particular Church And all this I doubt not but was done by the direction of the Holy Ghost as were all other acts of Apostolical ministration and particularly the institution of the other order viz. of Deacons This is all that can be proved out of Scripture concerning the commission given in the institution of Presbyters and this I shall afterwards confirm by the practice of the Catholick Church and so vindicate the practises of the present Church from the common prejudices that disturb us for by this account Episcopacy is not only a Divine institution but the only order that derives immediately from Christ. For the present only I summe up this with that saying of Theodoret speaking of the 72 Disciples Palmae sunt isti qui nutriuntur ac erudiuntur ab Apostolis Nam quanquam Christus hos etiam elegit erant tamen duodecim illis inferiores postea illorum Discipuli sectatores The Apostles are the twelve fountains and the LXXII are the palms that are nourished by the waters of those fountains For though Christ also ordained the LXXII yet they were inferior to the Apostles and afterwards were their followers and Disciples I know no objection to hinder a conclusion only two or three words out of Ignatius are pretended against the main question viz. to prove that he although a Bishop yet had no Apostolical authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I do not
themselves the Princes and chief of all proved traditors The diversity of order is here fairly intimated but dogmatically affirmed by him in his 2d book adv Parmen Quatuor genera capitum sunt in Ecclesiâ Episcoporum Presbyterorum Diaconorum fidelium There are four sorts of heads in the Church Bishops Presbyters Deacons and the faithful Laity And it was remarkable when the people of Hippo had as it were by violence carried S. Austin to be made Priest by their Bishop Valerius some seeing the good man weep in consideration of the great hazard and difficulty accruing to him in his ordination to such an office thought he had wept because he was not Bishop they pretending comfort told him quia locus Presbyterii licèt ipse majore dignus esset appropinquaret tamen Episcopatui The office of a Presbyter though indeed he deserved a greater yet was the next step in order to a Bishoprick So Possidonius tells the story It was the next step the next descent in subordination the next under it So the Council of Chalcedon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is sacriledge to bring down a Bishop to the degree and order of a Presbyter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so the Council permits in case of great delinquency to suspend him from the execution of his Episcopal order but still the character remains and the degree of it self is higher * Nos autem idcirco haec scribimus Fratres chariss quia novimus quà m Sacrosanctum debeat esse Episcopale Sacerdotium quod clero plebi debet esse exemplo said the Fathers of the Council of Antioch in Eusebius The office of a Bishop is sacred and exemplary both to the Clergy and the People Interdixit per omnia Magna Synodus non Episcopo non Presbytero non Diacono licere c. And it was a remarkable story that Arius troubled the Church for missing of a Prelation to the order and dignity of a Bishop Post Achillam enim Alexander .... ordinatur Episcopus Hoc autem tempore Arius in ordine Presbyterorum fuit Alexander was ordained a Bishop and Arius still left in the order of meer Presbyters * Of the same exigence are all those clauses of commemoration of a Bishop and Presbyters of the same Church Julius autem Romanus Episcopus propter senectutem defuit erántque pro eo praesentes Vitus Vicentius Presbyteri ejusdem Ecclesiae They were his Vicars and deputies for their Bishop in the Nicene Council saith Sozomen But most pertinent is that of the Indian persecution related by the same man Many of them were put to death Erant autem horum alii quidem Episcopi alii Presbyteri alii diversorum ordinum Clerici And this difference of Order is clear in the Epistle of the Bishops of Illyricum to the Bishops of the Levant De Episcopis autem constituendis vel comministris jam constitutis si permanserint usque ad â—inem sani bene .... Similiter Presbyteros atque Diaconos in sacerdotali ordine definivimus c. And of Sabbatius it is said Nolens in suo ordine nanere Presbyteratus desiderabat Epiâ—opatum he would not stay in the order of a Presbyter but desired a Bishoprick Ordo Episcoporun quadripartitus est in Patriarchis Archiepiscopis Metropolitanis Episcopis saith S. Isidore Omnes autem superius designati ordines uno eodémque vocabulo Episcopi Nominantur But it were infinite to reckon authorities and clauses of exclusion for the three orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons we cannot almost dip in any tome of the Councils but we shall find it recorded And all the Martyr Bishops of Rome did ever acknowledge and publish it that Episcopacy is a peculiar office and order in the Church of God as is to be seen in their decretal Epistles in the first tome of the Councils I only summ this up with the attestation of the Church of England in the preface to the Book of ordination It is evident to all men diligently reading holy Scripture and Ancient Authors that from the Apostles times there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christs Church Bishops Priests and Deacons The same thing exactly that was said in the second Council of Carthage 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But we shall see it better and by more real probation for that Bishops were a distinct order appears by this SECT XXIX To which the Presbyterate was but a degree 1. THE Presbyterate was but a step to Episcopacy as Deaconship to the Presbyterate and therefore the Council of Sardis decreed that no man should be ordained Bishop but he that was first a Reader and a Deacon and a Presbyter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That by every degree he may pass to the sublimity of Episcopacy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But the degree of every order must have the permanence and trial of no small time Here there is clearly a distinction of orders and ordinations and assumptions to them respectively all of the same distance and consideration And Theodoret out of the Synodical Epistle of the same Council says that they complained that some from Arianism were reconciled and promoted from Deacons to be Presbyters from Presbyters to be Bishops calling it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a greater degree or Order And S. Gregory Nazianz. in his Encomium of S. Athanasius speaking of his Canonical ordination and election to a Bishoprick says that he was chosen being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most worthy and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 coming through all the inferior Orders The same commendation S. Cyprian gives of Cornelius Non iste ad Episcopatum subito pervenit sed per omnia Ecclesiastica officia promotus in divinis administrationibus Dominum saepè promeritus ad Sacerdotii sublime fastigium cunctis religionis gradibus ascendit ... factus est Episcopus à plurimis Collegis nostris qui tunc in Vrbe Româ aderant qui ad nos literas .... de ejus ordinatione miserunt Here is evident not only a promotion but a new Ordination of S. Cornelius to be Bishop of Rome so that now the chair is full saith S. Cyprian quisquis jam Episcopus fieri voluerit foris fiat necesse est Nec habeat Ecclesiasticam ordinationem c. No man else can receive ordination to the Bishoprick SECT XXX There being a peculiar manner of Ordination to a Bishoprick 2. THE ordination of a Bishop to his chair was done de Novo after his being a Presbyter and not only so but in another manner than he had when he was made priest This is evident in the first Ecclesiastical Canon that was made after Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Priest and Deacon must be ordained of one Bishop but a Bishop must be ordained by two or three at least And that we may see it yet more to be Apostolical S. Anacletus in his second Epistle reports Hierosolymitarum primus
himself hath not can he give what himself hath not received * I end this point with the saying of Epiphanius Vox est Aerii haeretici Vnus est ordo Episcoporum Presbyterorum una dignitas To say that Bishops are not a distinct order from Presbyters was a heresy first broached by Aerius and hath lately been at least in the manner of speaking countenanced by many of the Church of Rome SECT XXXII For Bishops had a power distinct and Superiour to that of Presbyters As of Ordination FOR to clear the distinction of order it is evident in Antiquity that Bishops had a power of imposing hands for collating of orders which Presbyters have not * What was done in this affair in the times of the Apostles I have already explicated but now the inquiry is what the Church did in pursuance of the practice and tradition Apostolical The first and second Canons of Apostles command that two or three Bishops should ordain a Bishop and one Bishop should ordain a Priest and a Deacon A Presbyter is not authorized to ordain a Bishop is S. Dionysius affirms Sacerdotem non posse initiari nisi per invocationes Episcopales and acknowledges no ordainer but a Bishop No more did the Church ever Insomuch that when Novatus the Father of the old Puritans did ambire Episcopatum he was fain to go to the utmost parts of Italy and seduce or intreat some Bishops to impose hands on him as Cornelius witnesses in his Epistle to Fabianus in Eusebius To this we may add as so many witnesses all those ordinations made by the Bishops of Rome mentioned in the Pontifical book of Damasus Platina and others Habitis de more sacris ordinibus Decembris mense Presbyteros decem Diaconos duos c. creat S. Clemens Anacletus Presbyteros quinque Diaconos tres Episcopos diversis in locis sex numero creavit and so in descent for all the Bishops of that succession for many ages together But let us see how this power of ordination went in the Bishops hand alone by Law and Constitution for particular examples are infinite In the Council of Ancyra it is determined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Rural Bishops shall not ordain Presbyters or Deacons in anothers Diocess without letters of license from the Bishop Neither shall the Priests of the City attempt it * First not Rural Bishops that is Bishops that are taken in adjutorium Episcopi Principalis Vicars to the Bishop of the Diocess they must not ordain Priests and Deacons For it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is anothers Diocess and to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is prohibited by the Canon of Scripture But then they may with license Yes for they had Episcopal Ordination at first but not Episcopal Jurisdiction and so were not to invade the territories of their neighbour The tenth Canon of the Council of Antioch clears this part The words are these as they are rendred by Dionysius Exiguus Qui in villis vicis constituti sunt Chorepiscopi tametsi manus impositionem ab Episcopis susceperunt ut Episcopi sunt consecrati tamen oportet eos modum proprium retinere c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the next clause ut Episcopi consecrati sunt although it be in very ancient Latine copies yet is not found in the Greek but is an assumentum for exposition of the Greek but is most certainly implyed in it for else what description could this be of Chorepiscopi above Presbyteri rurales to say that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for so had countrey Priests they had received imposition of the Bishops hands Either then the Chorepiscopi had received ordination from three Bishops and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be taken collectively not distributively to wit that each Countrey Bishop had received ordination from Bishops many Bishops in conjunction and so they were very Bishops or else they had no more than village Priests and then this caution had been impertinent * But the City Priests were also included in this prohibition True it is but it is in a Parenthesis with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the midst of the Canon and there was some particular reason for the involving them not that they ever did actually ordain any but that since it was prohibited to the Chorepiscopi to ordain to them I say who though for want of jurisdiction they might not ordain without license it being in alienâ Parochiâ yet they had capacity by their order to do it if these should do it the City Presbyters who were often dispatched into the Villages upon the same imployment by a temporary mission that the Chorepiscopi were by an ordinary and fixt residence might perhaps think that their commission might extend farther than it did or that they might go beyond it as well as the Chorepiscopi and therefore their way was obstructed by this clause of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * Add to this The Presbyters of the City were of great honour and peculiar priviledge as appears in the thirteenth Canon of the Council of Neo-Caesarea and therefore might easily exceed if the Canon had not been their bridle The sum of the Canon is this With the Bishops license the Chorepiscopi might ordain for themselves had Episcopal ordination but without license they might not for they had but delegate and subordinate jurisdiction And therefore in the fourteenth Canon of Neo-Caesarea are said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 like the 70 Disciples that is inferior to Bishops and the 70 were to the twelve Apostles viz. in hoc particulari not in order but like them in subordination and inferiority of jurisdiction but the City Presbyters might not ordain neither with nor without license for they are in the Canon only by way of parenthesis and the sequence of procuring a faculty from the Bishops to collate orders is to be referred to Chorepiscopi not to Presbyteri Civitatis unless we should strain this Canon into a sence contrary to the practice of the Catholick Church Res enim ordinis non possunt delegari is a most certain rule in Divinity and admitted by men of all sides and most different interests * However we see here that they were prohibited and we never find before this time that any of them actually did give orders neither by ordinary power nor extraordinary dispensation and the constant tradition of the Church and practice Apostolical is that they never could give orders therefore this exposition of the Canon is liable to no exception but is clear for the illegality of a Presbyter giving holy orders either to a Presbyter or a Deacon and is concluding for the necessity of concurrence both of Episcopal order and jurisdiction for ordinations for reddendo singula singulis and expounding this Canon according to the sence of the Church and exigence of Catholick custome the Chorepiscopi are excluded from giving orders for want of jurisdiction and the Priests of
meddle with causes Ecclesiastical nor oppose themselves to the Catholick Church or Councils Oecumenical They must not meddle for these things appertain to the cognizance of Bishops and their decision And now after all this what authority is equal to this Legislative of the Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Aristotle They are all evidences of power and authority to deliberate to determine or judge to make laws But to make laws is the greatest power that is imaginable The first may belong fairly enough to Presbyters but I have proved the two latter to be appropriate to Bishops SECT XLII And the Bishop had a propriety in the persons of his Clerks LASTLY as if all the acts of Jurisdiction and every imaginable part of power were in the Bishop over the Presbyters and subordinate Clergy the Presbyters are said to be Episcoporum Presbyteri the Bishops Presbyters as having a propriety in them and therefore a superiority over them and as the Bishop was a dispencer of those things which were in bonis Ecclesiae so he was of the persons too a Ruler in propriety * S. Hilary in the book which himself delivered to Constantine Ecclesiae adhuc saith he per Presbyteros meos communionem distribuens I still give the holy Communion to the faithful people by my Presbyters And therefore in the third Council of Carthage a great deliberation was had about requiring a Clerk of his Bishop to be promoted in another Church Denique qui unum habuerit numquid debet illi ipse unus Presbyter auferri saith Posthumianus If the Bishop have but one Presbyter must one be taken from him Id sequor saith Aurelius ut conveniam Episcopum ejus atque ei inculcem quod ejus Clericus à quâlibet Ecclesiâ postuletur And it was resolved Vt Clericum alienum nisi concedente ejus Episcopo No man shall retain anothers Bishop without the consent of the Bishop whose Clerk he is * When Athanasius was abused by the calumny of the hereticks his adversaries and entred to purge himself Athanasius ingreditur cum Timotheo Presbytero suo He comes in with Timothy his Presbyter and Arsenius cujus brachium dicebatur excisum lector aliquando fuerat Athanasii Arsenius was Athanasius His Reader Vbi autem ventum est ad Rumores de poculo fracto à Macario Presbytero Athanasii c. Macarius was another of Athanasius his Priests So Theodoret Peter and Irenaeus were two more of his Presbyters as himself witnesses Paulinianus sometimes to visit us saith S. Hierome to Pammachius but not as your Clerk Sed ejus à quo ordinatur His Clerk who did ordain But these things are too known to need a multiplication of instances The summ is this The question was whether or no and how far the Bishops had Superiority over Presbyters in the Primitive Church Their doctrine and practice have furnished us with these particulars The power of Church goods and the sole dispensation of them and a propriety of persons was reserved to the Bishop For the Clergy and Church possessions were in his power in his administration the Clergy might not travel without the Bishops leave they might not be preferred in another Diocess without license of their own Bishop in their own Churches the Bishop had sole power to prefer them and they must undertake the burden of any promotion if he calls them to it without him they might not baptize not consecrate the Eucharist not communicate not reconcile penitents not preach not only not without his ordination but not without a special faculty besides the capacity of their order The Presbyters were bound to obey their Bishops in their sanctions and canonical impositions even by the decree of the Apostles themselves and the doctrine of Ignatius and the constitution of S. Clement of the Fathers in the Council of Arles Ancyra and Toledo and many others The Bishops were declared to be Judges in ordinary of the Clergy and people of their Diocess by the concurcurrent suffrages of almost 2000 holy Fathers assembled in Nice Ephesus Chalcedon in Carthage Antioch Sardis Aquileia Taurinum Agatho and by the Emperor and by the Apostles and all this attested by the constant practice of the Bishops of the Primitive Church inflicting censures upon delinquents and absolving them as they saw cause and by the dogmatical resolution of the old Catholicks declaring in their attributes and appellatives of the Episcopal function that they have supreme and universal spiritual power viz. in the sence above explicated over all the Clergy and Laity of the Diocess as That they are higher than all power the image of God the figure of Christ Christs Vicar President of the Church Prince of Priests of authority imcomparable unparallell'd power and many more if all this be witness enough of the superiority of Episcopal jurisdiction we have their depositions we may proceed as we see cause for and reduce our Episcopacy to the Primitive state for that is truly a reformation Id Dominicum quod primum id haereticum quod posterius and then we shall be sure Episcopacy will lose nothing by these unfortunate contestations SECT XLIII Their Jurisdiction was over many Congregations or Parishes BUT against the cause it is objected super totam Materiam that Bishops were not Diocesan but Parochial and therefore of so confin'd a jurisdiction that perhaps our Village or City Priests shall advance their Pulpit as high as the Bishops throne * Well! Put case they were not Diocesan but parish Bishops what then yet they were such Bishops as had Presbyters and Deacons in subordination to them in all the particular advantages of the former instances 2. If the Bishops had the Parishes what cure had the Priests so that this will debase the Priests as much as the Bishops and if it will confine a Bishop to a Parish it will make that no Presbyter can be so much as a Parish-Priest If it brings a Bishop lower than a Diocess it will bring the Priest lower than a Parish For set a Bishop where you will either in a Diocess or a Parish a Presbyter shall still keep the same duty and subordination the same distance still So that this objection upon supposition of the former discourse will no way mend the matter for any side but make it far worse it will not advance the Presbytery but it will depress the whole Hierarchy and all the orders of Holy Church * But because this trifle is so much used amongst the enemies of Episcopacy I will consider it in little and besides that it does no body any good advantage I will represent it in its fucus and shew the falshood of it 1. Then It is evident that there were Bishops before there were any distinct Parishes For the first division of Parishes in the West was by Evaristus who lived almost 100 years after Christ and divided Rome into seven Parishes assigning to every one a Presbyter So Damasus reports of him in the
before a particular congregation But if a Diocess be taken collectively as now it is for a multitude of Parishes united under one Bishop then one must needs be before 20 and a particular congregation before a Diocess but then that particular congregation was not a parish in the present sence for it was not a part of a Diocess taking a Diocess for a collection of Parishes but that particular Congregation was the first fruits of his Diocess and like a Grain of Mustard-seed that in time might and did grow up to a considerable height even to a necessity of distinguishing titles and parts of the Diocess assigning several parts to several Priests 2. We see that the Primitive Bishops before the division of parishes had the City and Country and after the division of Parishes had them all under his jurisdiction and ever even from the Apostles times had several provinces some of them I mean within their limits and charges * The 35 Canon of the Apostles gives power to the Bishop to dispose only of those things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are under his Diocess and the Neighbour villages and the same thing is repeated in the ninth and tenth Canons of the Council of Antioch calling it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ancient Canon of our forefathers and yet it self is elder than three of the general Councils and if then it was an Ancient Canon of the Fathers that the City and Villages should be subject to the Bishop surely a Primitive Bishop was a Diocesan But a little before this was the Nicene Council and there I am sure we have a Bishop that is at least a Diocesan 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let the old Customes be kept What are those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let the Bishop of Alexandria have power over all Egypt Libya and Pentapolis It was a good large parish And yet this parish if we have a mind to call it so was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the old custome of their forefathers and yet that was so early that S. Anthony was then alive who was born in S. Irenaeus his time who was himself but second from the Apostles It was also a good large parish that Ignatius was Bishop of even all Syria Caelosyria Mesopotamia and both the Ciliciae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Bishop of Syria he calls himself in his Epistle to the Romans and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so Theodoret and besides all these his Successors in the Council of Chalcedon had the two Phaeniciae and Arabia yielded to them by composition These alone would have made two or three reasonable good parishes and would have taken up time enough to preambulate had that been then the guise of Christendome But examples of this kind are infinite Theodorus Bishop of Cyrus was Pastor over 800 parishes Athanasius was Bishop of Alexandria Egypt Thebais Mareotis Libya Ammoniaca and Pentapolis saith S. Epiphanius And his predecessor Julinianus successor of Agrippinus was Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Churches about Alexandria Either it was a Diocess or at least a plurality S. Chrysostome had Pontus Asia and all Thrace in his parish even as much as came to sixteen prefectures a fair bounds surely and so it was with all the Bishops a greater or a lesser Diocess they had but all were Diocesan for they had several parishes singuli Ecclesiarum Episcopi habent sub se Ecclesias saith Epiphanius in his Epistle to John of Jerusalem and in his book contra haereses Quotquot enim in Alexandriâ Catholicae Ecclesiae sunt sub uno Archiepiscopo sunt privatimque ad has destinati sunt Presbyteri propter Ecclesiasticas necessitates ita ut habitatores vicini sint uniuscujusque Ecclesiae All Italy was the parish of Liberius saith Socrates Africa was S. Cyprians parish saith S. Gregory Nazianzen and S. Bazil the great was parish-Priest to all Cappadocia But I rather believe if we examine their several stories they will rather prove Metropolitans than meer parochians Thirdly The ancient Canons forbad a Bishop to be ordained in a Village Castle or Town It was so decreed in the Council of Laodicea before the first Nicene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Villages or Countreys Bishops must not be constituted And this was renewed in the Council of Sardis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is not lawful to ordain Bishops in Villages or little Towns to which one Presbyter is sufficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Bishops must ordain Bishops in those Cities where Bishops formerly have been * So that this Canon does not make a new constitution but perpetuates the old sanction Bishops ab antiquo were only ordained in great Cities and Presbyters in little Villages Who then was the Parish Curate the Bishop or the Priest The case is too apparent Only here it is objected that some Bishops were of small Towns and therefore these Canons were not observed and Bishops might be and were parochial as S. Gregory of Nazianzum Zoticus of Comana Maris in Dolicha The one of these is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Eusebius and another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Theodoret a little Town This is all is pretended for this great Scarcrow of parochial Bishops * But first suppose these had been parishes and these three parochial Bishops it follows not that all were not those to be sure which I have proved to have been Bishops of Provinces and Kingdomes Secondly It is a clear case that Nazianzum though a small City yet was the seat of a Bishops throne so it is reckoned in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 made by Leo the Emperour where it is accounted inter thronos Ecclesiarum Patriarchae Constantinopolitano subjectarum and is in the same account with Caesarea with Ephesus with Crete with Philippi and almost fourscore more As for Zoticus he indeed came from Comana a Village town for there he was born but he was Episcopus Otrenus Bishop of Otrea in Armenia saith a Nicephorus And for Maris the Bishop of Dolicha it was indeed such a small City as Nazianzum was but that proves not but his Diocess and teritory was large enough Thus was Asclepius vici non grandis but yet he was Vagensis territorii Episcopus His seat might usually be in a little City if it was one of those towns in which according to the exigence of the Canons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which Bishops anciently were ordained and yet the appurtenances of his Diocess large and extended and too great for an hundred Parishâ—Priests Fourthly The institution of Chorepiscopi proves most evidently that the Primitive Bishops were Diocesan not Parochial for they were institued to assist the Bishop in part of his Countrey-charge and were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Visiters as the Council of Laodicea calls them But what need such Suffragans such coadjutors to the managing of a Parish Indeed they might possibly have
Christ said Non designando officium but Sortem not their duty but their lot intimating that their future condition should not be honorary but full of trouble not advanc'd but persecuted But I had rather insist on the first answer in which I desire it be remembred that I said seeking temporal Principality to be forbidden the Apostles as an Appendix to the office of an Apostle For in other capacities Bishops are as receptive of honour and temporal principalities as other men Bishops ut sic are not secular Princes must not seek for it But some secular Princes may be Bishops as in Germany and in other places to this day they are For it is as unlawful for a Bishop to have any Land as to have a Country and a single Acre is no more due to the Order than a Province but both these may be conjunct in the same person though still by vertue of Christ's precept the functions and capacities must be distinguished according to the saying of Synesius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To confound and intermix the Kingdom and the Priesthood is to joyn things incompossible and inconsistent Inconsistent I say not in person but absolutely discrepant in function 3. Consider we that Saint Peter when he speaks of the dutious subordination of Sarah to her Husband Abraham he propounds her as an example to all married women in these words She obeyed Abraham and called him Lord why was this spoken to Christian women but that they should do so too And is it imaginable that such an honourable compellation as Christ allows every woman to give to her Husband a Mechanick a hard-handed Artisan he would forbid to those eminent Pillars of his Church those Lights of Christendom whom he really indued with a plenitude of power for the Regiment of the Catholick Church Credat Apella 4. Pastor and Father are as honourable titles as any They are honourable in Scripture Honour thy Father c. Thy Father in all sences They are also made sacred by being the appellatives of Kings and Bishops and that not only in secular addresses but even in holy Scripture as is known Add to this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are used in Scripture for the Prelates of the Church and I am certain that Duke and Captain Rulers and Commanders are but just the same in English that the other are in Greek and the least of these is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Lord. And then if we consider that since Christ erected a spiritual Regiment and us'd words of secular honour to express it as in the instances above although Christ did interdict a secular principality yet he forbad not a secular title He us'd many himself 5. The voice of the Spouse the holy Church hath alwayes expressed their honourable estimate in reverential Compellations and Epithets of honour to their Bishops and have taught us so to do * Bishops were called Principes Ecclesiarum Princes of the Churches I had occasion to instance it in the question of jurisdiction Indeed the third Councel of Carthage forbad the Bishop of Carthage to be called Princeps Sacerdotum or summus sacerdos or aliquid hujusmodi but only primae sedis Episcopus I know not what their meaning was unless they would dictate a lesson of humility to their Primate that he might remember the principality not to be so much in his person as in the See for he might be called Bishop of the prime See But whatsoever fancy they had at Carthage I am sure it was a guise of Christendom not to speak of Bishops sine praefatione honoris but with honourable mention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To our most blessed Lord. So the Letters were superscribed to Julius Bishop of Rome from some of his Brethren in Sozomen Let no man speak Untruths of me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nor of my Lords the Bishops said Saint Gregory Nazianzen The Synodical book of the Councel of Constantinople is inscribed Dominis Reverendissimis ac piissimis Fratribus ac Collegis Damaso Ambrosio c. To our most Reverend Lords and holy Brethren c. And the Councel of Illyricum sending their Synodal letters to the Bishops of Asia by Bishop Elpidius Haec pluribus say they persequi non est visum quòd miserimus unum ex omnibus Dominum Collegam nostrum Elpidium qui cognosceret esset ne sicut dictum fuerat à Domino Collegâ nostro Eustathio Our Lord and Brother Elpidius Our Lord and Brother Eustathius * The Oration in the Councel of Epaunum begins thus Quod praecipientibus tantis Dominis meis ministerium proferendi sermonis assumo c. The Prolocutor took that office on him at the command of so many Great Lords the Bishops * When the Church of Spain became Catholick and abjured the Arian heresie King Recaredus in the third Councel of Toledo made a speech to the Bishops Non incognitum reor esse vobis Reverendissimi Sacerdotes c. Non credimus vestram latere Sanctitatem c. Vestra Cognovit Beatitudo c. Venerandi Patres c. And these often Your Holiness your Blessedness Most Reverend Venerable Fathers Those were the Addresses the King made to the Fathers of the Synod Thus it was when Spain grew Catholick but not such a Speech to be found in all the Arian Records They amongst them used but little Reverence to their Bishops But the instances of this kind are innumerable Nothing more ordinary in Antiquity than to speak of Bishops with the titles of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Domine verè Sancte suscipiende Papa So Saint Hierom a Presbyter to Saint Austin a Bishop Secundùm enim honorum vocabula quae jam Ecclesiae usus obtinuit Episcopatus Presbyteria major est saith Saint Austin Episcopacy is greater than the office and dignity of a Presbyter according to the Titles of Honour which the custom of the Church hath introduced But I shall sum up these particulars in a total which is thus expressed by Saint Chrysostom Haeretici à Diabolo Honorum vocabula Episcopis non dare didicerunt Hereticks have learned of the Devil not to give due titles of honour to Bishops The good Patriarch was angry surely when he said so * For my own particular I am confident that my Lords the Bishops do so undervalue any fastuous or pompous title that were not the duty of their people in it they would as easily reject them as it is our duty piously to use them But if they still desire appellatives of honour we must give them they are their due if they desire them not they deserve them much more So that either for their humility or however for their works sake we must highly honour them that have the rule over us It is the precept of S. Paul and S. Cyprian observing how curious our blessed Saviour was that he might give honour to the Priests of the Jews even then
the Bishops authority but it excludes the assistance of Lay-men from their Consistories Presbyter and Episcopus was instead of one word to S. Hierom but they are alwayes Clergy with him and all men else * But for the main Question Saint Ambrose did represent it to Valentinian the Emperour with confidence and humility In causa fidei vel Ecclesiastici alicujus ordinis eum judicare debere qui nec Munere impar sit nec jure dissimilis The whole Epistle is admirable to this purpose Sacerdotes de Sacerdotibus judicare That Clergy-men must only judge of Clergy-causes and this Saint Ambrose there calls judicium Episcopale The Bishops judicature Si tractandum est tractare in Ecclesiâ didici quod Majores fecerunt mei Si conferendum de fide Sacerdotum debet esse ista collatio sicut factum est sub Constantino Aug. memoriae Principe So that both matters of Faith and of Ecclesiastical Order are to be handled in the Church and that by Bishops and that sub Imperatore by permission and authority of the Prince For so it was in Nice under Constantine Thus far Saint Ambrose * Saint Athanasius reports that Hosius Bishop of Corduba President in the Nicene Council said it was the abomination of desolation that a Lay-man shall be Judge in Ecclesiasticis judiciis in Church-causes And Leontius calls Church-affairs Res alienas à Laicis things of another Court of a distinct cognisance from the Laity To these add the Council of Venice for it is very considerable in this Question Clerico nisi ex permissu Episcopi sui servorum suorum saecularia judicia adire non liceat Sed si fortasse Episcopi sui judicium coeperit habere suspectum aut ipsi de proprietate aliquâ adversus ipsum Episcopum fuerit nata contentio aliorum Episcoporum audientiam non saecularium potestatum debebit ambire Aliter à communione habeatur alienus Clergy-men without delegation from their Bishop may not hear the causes of their servants but the Bishop unless the Bishop be appealed from then other Bishops must hear the cause but no Lay-Judges by any means * These Sanctions of holy Church it pleased the Emperour to ratifie by an Imperial Edict for so Justinian commanded that in causes Ecclesiastical secular Judges should have no interest Sed sanctissimus Episcopus secundum sacras regulas causae finem imponat The Bishop according to the sacred Canons must be the sole Judge of Church-matters I end this with the decretal of Saint Gregory one of the four Doctors of the Church Cavendum est à Fraternitate vestrâ ne saecularibus viris atque non sub regulâ nostrâ degentibus res Ecclesiasticae committantur Heed must be taken that matters Ecclesiastical be not any wayes concredited to secular persons But of this I have twice spoken already Sect. 36. and Sect. 41. The thing is so evident that it is next to impudence to say that in Antiquity Lay-men were parties and assessors in the Consistory of the Church It was against their faith it was against their practice and those few pigmy objections out of Tertullian S. Ambrose and S. Austin using the word Seniores or Elders sometimes for Priests as being the Latine for the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes for a secular Magistrate or Alderman for I think Saint Austin did so in his third Book against Cresconius are but like Sophoms to prove that two and two are not four for to pretend such slight aery imaginations against the constant known open Catholick practice and Doctrine of the Church and History of all ages is as if a man should go to fight an Imperial Army with a single bulrush They are not worth further considering * But this is That in this Question of Lay-Elders the Modern Arrians and Acephali do wholly mistake their own advantages For whatsoever they object out of Antiquity for the white and watery colours of Lay-Elders is either a very misprision of their allegations or else clearly abused in the use of them For now adayes they are only us'd to exclude and drive forth Episcopacy but then they misalledge Antiquity for the men with whose Heisers they would fain plough in this Question were themselves Bishops for the most part and he that was not would fain have been it is known so of Tertullian and therefore most certainly if they had spoken of Lay-Judges in Church matters which they never dream'd of yet meant them not so as to exclude Episcopacy and if not then the pretended allegations can do no service in the present Question I am only to clear this pretence from a place of Scripture totally misunderstood and then it cannot have any colour from any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 either Divine or Humane but that Lay-Judges of causes Ecclesiastical as they are unheard of in Antiquity so they are neither nam'd in Scripture nor receive from thence any instructions for their deportment in their imaginary office and therefore may be remanded to the place from whence they came even the Lake of Gehenna and so to the place of the nearest denomination The Objection is from Saint Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Let the Elders that rule well be accounted worthy of double honour especially they that labour in the word and doctrine especially they therefore all Elders do not so Here are two sorts of Elders Preaching Ministers and Elders not Preachers Therefore Lay-Elders and yet all are Governours 1. But why therefore Lay-Elders Why may there not be diverse Church-officers and yet but one or two of them the Preacher Christ sent me not to Baptize but to Preach saith S. Paul and yet the commission of baptizate was as large as praedicate and why then might not another say Christ sent me not to Preach but to Baptize that is in S. Paul's sence not so much to do one as to do the other and if he left the ordinary ministration of Baptism and betook himself to the ordinary office of Preaching then to be sure some Minister must be the ordinary Baptizer and so not the Preacher for if he might be both ordinarily why was not Saint Paul both For though their power was common to all of the same Order yet the execution and dispensation of the Ministeries was according to several gifts and that of Prophecy or Preaching was not dispensed to all in so considerable a measure but that some of them might be destin'd to the ordinary execution of other Offices and yet because the gift of Prophecy was the greatest so also was the Office and therefore the sence of the words is this That all Presbyters must be honoured but especially they that Prophesie doing that office with an ordinary execution and ministery So no Lay-Elders yet Add to this that it is also plain that all the Clergy did not Preach Valerius Bishop of Hippo could not well skill in the Latine tongue being a Greek born
Countries of Christendom till by Crusado's massacres and battels burnings and the constant Carnificia and butchery of the Inquisition which is the main prop of the Papacy and does more than Tu es Petrus they prevail'd far and near and men durst not oppose the evidence whereby they fought And now the wonder is out it is not strange that the Article hath been so readily entertained But in the Greek Church it could not prevail as appears not only in Cyril's book of late dogmatically affirming the Article in our sence but in the Answer of Cardinal Humbert to Nicetas who maintained the receiving the holy Sacrament does break the fast which it could not do if it were not what it seems bread and wine as well as what we believe it to be the body and blood of Christ. And now in prosecution of their strange improbable success they proceed to perswade all people that they are fools and do not know the measures of sence nor understand the words of Scripture nor can tell when any of the Fathers speak affirmatively or negatively and after many attempts made by diverse unprosperously enough as the thing did constrain and urge them a great Wit Cardinal Perron hath undertaken the Question and hath spun his thread so fine and twisted it so intricately and adorned it so sprucely with language and sophisms that although he cannot resist the evidence of truth yet he is too subtle for most mens discerning and though he hath been contested by potent adversaries and wise men in a better cause than his own yet he will alwayes make his Reader believe that he prevails which puts me in mind of what Thucydides told Archidamus the King of Sparta asking him whether he or Pericles were the better wrastler he told him that when he threw Pericles on his back he would with fine words perswade the people that he was not down at all and so he got the better So does he and is to all considering men a great argument of the danger that Articles of Religion are in and consequently mens perswasions and final interest when they fall into the hands of a witty man and a Sophister and one who is resolved to prevail by all means But truth is stronger than wit and can endure when the other cannot and I hope it will appear so in this Question which although it is managed by weak hands that is by mine yet to all impartial persons it must be certain and prevailing upon the stock of its own sincerity and derivation from God And now R. R. though this Question hath so often been disputed and some things so often said yet I was willing to bring it once more upon the stage hoping to add some clearness to it by fitting it with a good instrument and clear conveyance and representment by saying something new and very many which are not generally known and less generally noted and I thought there was a present necessity of it because the Emissaries of the Church of Rome are busie now to disturb the peace of consciences by troubling the persecuted and ejecting scruples into the infortunate who suspect every thing and being weary of all are most ready to change from the present They have got a trick to ask where is our Church now What is become of your Articles of your Religion We cannot answer them as they can be answered for nothing satisfies them but being prosperous and that we cannot pretend to but upon the accounts of the Cross and so we may indeed rejoyce and be exceeding glad because we hope that great is our reward in Heaven But although they are pleased to use an Argument that like Jonas Gourd or Sparagus is in season only at some times yet we according to the nature of Truth inquire after the truth of their Religion upon the account of proper and Theological Objections Our Church may be a beloved Church and dear to God though she be persecuted when theirs is in an evil condition by obtruding upon the Christian world Articles of Religion against all that which ought to be the instruments of credibility and perswasion by distorting and abusing the Sacraments by making error to be an art and that a man must be witty to make himself capable of being abused by out-facing all sence and reason by damning their brethren for not making their understanding servile and sottish by burning them they can get and cursing them that they cannot get by doing so much violence to their own reasons and forcing themselves to believe that no man ever spake against their new device by making a prodigious error to be necessary to salvation as if they were Lords of the Faith of Christendom But these men are grown to that strange triumphal gaety upon their joy that the Church of England as they think is destroyed that they tread upon her grave which themselves have digged for her who lives and pities them and they wonder that any man should speak in her behalf and suppose men do it out of spight and indignation and call the duty of her sons who are by persecution made more confident pious and zealous in defending those truths for which she suffers on all hands by the name of anger and suspect it of malicious vile purposes I wonder'd when I saw something of this folly in one that was her son once but is run away from her sorrow and disinherited himself because she was not able to give him a temporal portion and thinks he hath found out reasons enough to depart from the miserable I will not trouble him or so much as name him because if his words are as noted as they are publick every good man will scorn them if they be private I am not willing to publish his shame but leave him to consideration and repentance But for our dear afflicted Mother she is under the portion of a child in the state of discipline her government indeed hindered but her Worshippings the same the Articles as true and those of the Church of Rome as false as ever of which I hope the following book will be one great instance But I wish that all tempted persons would consider the illogical deductions by which these men would impose upon their consciences If the Church of England be destroyed then Transubstantiation is true which indeed had concluded well if that Article had only pretended false because the Church of England was prosperous But put the case the Turk should invade Italy and set up the Alcoran in S. Peters Church would it be endured that we should conclude that Rome was Antichristian because her temporal glory is defaced The Apostle in this case argued otherwise The Church of the Jews was cut off for their sins be not high-minded ô ye Gentiles but fear lest he also cut thee off it was counsel given to the Romans But though blessed be God our afflictions are great yet we can and do onjoy the same religion as the good Christians
the mystical signes recede from their nature for they abide in their proper substance figure and form and may be seen and touched c. So the humanity of Christ and a little after So that body of Christ hath the ancient form figure superscription and to speak the summe of all the substance of the body although after the resurrection it be immortal and free from all corruption Now these words spoken upon this occasion to this purpose in direct opposition to a contradicting person but casting his Article wholly upon supposition of a substantial change and opposing to him a ground contrary to his upon which only he builds his answer cannot be eluded by any little pretence Bellarmine and the lesser people from him answer that by nature he understands the exterior qualities of nature such as colour taste weight smell c. 1. I suppose this but does he mean so by Substantia too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Does he by substance mean accidents but suppose that a while yet 2. If he had answered thus how had Theodoret confuted the Eutychians For thus says Eranistes As the bread is changed in substance into the body of Christ so is the humanity into the divinity yea but says Theodoret according to Bellarmine The substances of bread is not changed for the colour the shape the bigness and the smell remain or thus the accidents remain which I call substance for there are two sorts of substances substances and accidents and this latter sort of substances remain but not the former and so you are confuted Eranistes But what if Eranistes should reply if you say all of bread is changed excepting the accidents then my argument holds for I only contend that the substance of the humanity is changed as you say the substance of bread is To this nothing can be said unless Theodoret may have leave to answer as otherwise men must But now Theodoret answered that the substance of bread is not changed but remains still and by substance he did mean substance and not the accidents for if he had he had not spoken sence Either therefore the testimony of Theodoret remaineth unsatisfied by our adversaries or the argument of the Eutychians is unanswered by Theodoret. 3. Theodoret in these places opposes Nature to Grace and says all remains without any change but of Grace 4. He also explicates Nature by Substance so that it is a Substantial Nature he must mean 5. He distinguishes substance from form and figure and therefore by substance cannot mean form and figure as Bellarmine dreams 6. He affirms concerning the body of Christ that in the resurrection it is changed in accidents being made incorruptible and immortal but affirms that the substance remains therefore by substance he must mean as he speaks without any prodigious sence affixed to the word 7. Let me observe this by the way that the doctrine of the substantial change of bread into the body of Christ was the perswasion of the Heretick the Eutychian Eranistes but denied by the Catholick Theodoret So that if they will pretend to antiquity in this doctrine their plea is made ready and framed by the Eutychian from whom they may if they please derive the original of their doctrine or if they please from the elder Marcosites but it will be but vain to think the Eutychian did argue from thence as if it had been a Catholick ground reason we might have had to suppose it if the Catholick had not denied it But the case is plain as the Sadduces disputed with Christ about the Article of no Spirits no Resurrection though in the Church of the Jews the contrary was the more prevailing opinion so did the Eutychians upon a pretence of a Substantial conversion in the Sacrament which was then their fancy and devised to illustrate their other opinion But it was disavowed by the Catholicks 31. Gelasius was ingaged against the same persons in the same cause and therefore it will be needful to say nothing but to describe his words For they must have the same efficacy with the former and prevail equally Certè Sacramenta c. Truly the Sacraments of the body and blood of Christ which we receive are a Divine thing for that by them we are made partakers of the Divine nature and yet it ceases not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine And truly an image and similitude of the body and blood of Christ are celebrated in the action of the mysteries These are his words concerning which this only is to be considered beyond what I suggested concerning Theodoret that although the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek which we render substantia might be apt to receive divers interpretations though in his discourse he confined it to his proper meaning as appears above yet in Gelasius who was a Latin Author the word substantia is not capable of it and I think there is no example where substantia is taken for an accidental nature It may as all other words can suffer alterations by tropes and figures but never signifie grammatically any thing but it self and his usual significations and if there be among us any use of Lexicons or Vocabularies if there be any notices conveyed to men by forms of speech then we are sure in these things and there is no reason we should suffer our selves to be out-faced out of the use of our senses and our reason and our language It is usually here replied that Gelasius was an obscurer person Bishop of Caesarea and not Pope of Rome as is supposed I answer that he was Bishop of Rome that writ the book out of which these words are taken is affirmed in the Bibliotheca PP approved by the Theological faculty in Paris 1576 and Massonius de Episcopis urbis Romae in the life of Pope Gelasius saith that Pope John cited the book de duabus naturis and by Fulgentius it is so too 2. But suppose he was not Pope that he was a Catholick Bishop is not denied and that he lived above a 1000 years ago which is all I require in this business For any other Bishop may speak truth as well as the Bishop of Rome and his truth shall be of equal interest and perswasion But so strange a resolution men have taken to defend their own opinions that they will in despite of all sence and reason say something to every thing and that shall be an answer whether it can or no. 32. After all this it is needless to cite authorities from the later ages It were Indeed easie to heap up many and those not obscure either in their name or in their testimony Such as Facundus Bishop of Hermian in Africa in the year 552. in his ninth book and last Chapter written in defence of Theod. Mopsuest c. hath these words The Sacrament of his body and blood we call his body and blood not that bread is properly his body or the cup his blood
but that they contain in them the mystery of his body and blood Isidore Bishop of Sevil says Panis quem frangimus c. The bread which we break is the body of Christ who saith I am the living bread But the wine is his blood and that is it which is written I am the true vine But bread because it strengthens our body therefore it is called the body of Christ but wine because it makes blood in our flesh therefore it is reduced or referred to the blood of Christ. But these visible things sanctified by the holy Ghost pass into the Sacrament of the Divine body Suidas in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ calls the Church his body and by her as a man he ministers but as he is God he receives what is offered But the Church offers the symbols of his body and blood sanctifying the whole mass by the first fruits Symbola i. e. Signa says the Latin version The bread and wine are the signs of his body and his bloud 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so Suidas Hesychius speaking of this mystery affirms Quòd simul panis caro est It is both bread and flesh too Fulgentius saith Hic calix est novum Testamentum i. e. Hic calix quem vobis trado novum Testamentum significat This cup is the new Testament that is it signifies it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Procopius of Gaza He gave to his disciples the image of his own body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said the scholiast upon Dionysius the Areopagite These things are symbols and not the truth or verity and he said it upon occasion of the same doctrine which his Author whom he explicates taught in that Chapter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Divine symbols being placed upon the Altar by which Christ is signified and participated But this only I shall remark that Transubstantiation is so far from having been the Primitive doctrine that it was among Catholicks fiercely disputed in the time of Charles the Bald about the year 880. Paschasius wrote for the Substantial conversion Rabanus maintain'd the contrary in his answer to Heribaldus and in his writing to Abbot Egilo There lived in the same time in the Court of Charles the Emperor a country-man of ours Jo. Scot called by some Jo. Erigena who wrote a book against the substantial change in the Sacrament He lived also sometimes in England with King Alfred and was surnamed the wise and was a Martyr saith Possevinus and was in the Roman Calender his day was the fourth of the Ides of November as is to be seen in the Martyrologie published at Antwerp 1586. But when the controversie grew publick and noted Charles the Bald commanded Bertram or Ratran to write upon the question being of the Monastery of Corbey he did so and defended our doctrine against Paschasius the book is extant and may be read by him that desires it but it is so intire and dogmatical against the substantial change which was the new doctrine of Paschasius that Turrian gives this account of it to cite Bertram what is it else but to say that Calvins heresie is not new and the Belgick expurgatory Index professeth to use it with the same equity which it useth to other Catholick writers in whom they tolerate many errors and extenuate or excuse them and sometimes by inventing some device they do deny it and put some fit sence to them when they are opposed in disputation and this they do lest the Hereticks should talk that they forbid and burn books that make against them You see the honesty of the men and the justness of their proceedings but the Spanish expurgatory Index forbids the book wholly with a penitus auferatur I shall only add this that in the Church of England Bertrams doctrine prevailed longer and till Lanfrancks time it was permitted to follow Bertram or Paschasius And when Osbern wrote the lives of Odo Arch-bishop of Canterbury Dunstan and Elphege by the command of Lanfranck he says that in Odo's time some Clergy-men affirmed in the Sacrament bread and wine to remain in substance and to be Christs body only in figure and tells how the Arch-bishop prayed and blood dropped out of the Host over the Chalice and so his Clerks which then assisted at Mass and were of another opinion were convinced This though he writes to please Lanfranck who first gave authority to this opinion in England and according to the opinion which then prevailed yet it is an irrefragable testimony that it was but a disputed Article in Odo's time no Catholick doctrine no Article of Faith nor of a good while after for however these Clerks were fabulously reported to be changed at Odo's miracle who could not convince them by the Law and the Prophets by the Gospels and Epistles yet his successor he that was the fourth after him I mean Aelfrick Abbot of S. Albans and afterwards Arch-bishop of Canterbury in his Saxon Homily written above 600 years since disputes the question and determines in the words of Bertram only for a Spiritual presence not natural or substantial The book was printed at London by John Day and with it a letter of Aelfrick to Wulfin Bishop of Schirburn to the same purpose His words are these That housel that is the blessed Sacrament is Christs body not bodily but spiritually not the body which he suffered in but the body of which he spake when he blessed bread and wine to Housel the night before his suffering and said by the blessed bread This is my body And in a writing to the Arch-bishop of York he said The Lord halloweth daily by the hand of the Priest bread to his body and wine to his blood in spiritual mystery as we read in books And yet notwithstanding that lively bread is not bodily so nor the self same body that Christ suffered in I end this with the words of the Gloss upon the Canon Law Coeleste Sacramentum quod verè repraesentat Christi carnem dicitur corpus Christi sed impropriè unde dicitur suo modo scil non rei veritate sed significati mysterio ut sit sensus vocatur Christi corpus i. e. significatur The heavenly Sacrament which truly represents the flesh of Christ is called the body of Christ but improperly therefore it is said meaning in the Canon taken out of S. Austin after the manner to wit not in the truth of the thing but in the mystery of that which is signified so that the meaning is it is called Christ body that is Christs body is signified which the Church of Rome well expresses in an ancient Hymn Sub duabus speciebus Signis tantùm non rebus Latent res eximiae Excellent things lie under the two species of bread and wine which are only signs not the things whereof they are signs But the Lateran Council struck all dead before which Transubstantiatio non
fuit dogma fidei said Scotus it was no Article of Faith and how it can be afterwards since Christ is only the Author and finisher of our Faith and therefore all Faith was delivered from the beginning is a matter of highest danger and consideration But yet this also I shall interpose if it may do any service in the question or help to remove a prejudice from our adversaries who are born up by the authority of that Council That the doctrine of Transubstantiation was not determined by the great Lateran Council The word was first invented by Stephen Bishop of Augustodunum about the year 1100 or a little after in his book De Sacramento Altaris and the word did so please Pope Innocentius III. that he inserted it into one of the 70 Canons which he proposed to the Lateran Council A. D. 1215. which Canons they heard read but determined nothing concerning them as Matthew Paris Platina and Nauclerus witness But they got reputation by being inserted by Gregory IX into his Decretals which yet he did not in the name of the Council but of Innocentius to the Council But the first that ever published these Canons under the name of the Lateran Council was Johannes Cochlaeus A. D. 1538. But the Article was determined at Rome 36 years after that Council by a general Council of 54 Prelates and no more And this was the first authority or countenance it had Stephen christened the Article and gave the name and this Congregation confirmed it SECT XIII Of Adoration of the Sacrament WHEN a proposition goes no further than the head and the tongue it can carry nothing with it but his own appendages viz. to be right or to be wrong and the man to be deceived or not deceived in his judgment But when it hath influence upon practice it puts on a new investiture and is tolerable or intolerable according as it leads to actions good or bad Now in all the questions of Christendom nothing is of greater effect or more material event than this For since by the decree of the Council of Trent they are bound to exhibit to the Sacrament the same worship which they give to the true God either this Sacrament is Jesus Christ or else they are very Idolaters I mean materially such even while in their purposes they decline it I will not quarrel with the words of the decree commanding to give Divine worship to the Sacrament which by the definition of their own Schools is an outward visible sign of an inward Spiritual grace and so they worship the sign and the grace with the worship due to God But that which I insist upon is this That if they be deceived in this difficult question against which there lie such infinite presumptions and evidence of sense and invincible reason and grounds of Scripture * and in which they are condemned by the Primitive Church and by the common principles of all Philosophy and the nature of things * and the analogy of the Sacrament * for which they had no warrant ever till they made one of their own * which themselves so little understand that they know not how to explicate it * nor agree in their own meaning nor cannot tell well what they mean * If I say they be deceived in their own strict Article besides the strict sence of which there are so many ways of verifying the words of Christ upon which all sides do rely then it is certain they commit an act of Idolatry in giving Divine honour to a meer creature which is the image the Sacrament and representment of the body of Christ and at least it is not certain that they are right there are certainly very great probabilities against them which ought to abate their confidence in the Article and though I am perswaded that the arguments against them are unanswerable for if I did not think so then I shall be able to answer them and if I were able to answer I would not seek to perswade others by that which does not perswade me yet all indifferent persons that is all those who will suffer themselves to be determined by some thing besides interest and education must needs say they cannot be certain they are right against whom there are so many arguments that they are in the wrong The Commandment to worship God alone is so express The distance between God and bread dedicated to the service of God is so vast the danger of worshipping that which is not God or of not worshipping that which is God is so formidable that it is infinitely to be presumed that if it had been intended that we should have worshipped the holy Sacrament the holy Scripture would have called it God or Jesus Christ or have bidden us in express terms to have adored it that either by the first as by a reason indicative or by the second as by a reason imperative we might have had sufficient warrant direct or consequent to have paid a Divine worship Now that there is no implicit warrant in the Sacramental words of This is my body I have given very many reasons to evince by proving the words to be Sacramental and figurative Add to this that supposing Christ present in their sences yet as they have ordered the business they have made it superstitious and Idololatrical for they declare that the Divine worship does belong also to the symbols of bread and wine as being one with Christ they are the words of Bellarmine That even the Species also with Christ are to be adored So Suarez which doctrine might upon the supposal of their grounds be excused if as Claudius de Sainctes dreamed they and the body of Christ had but one existence but this themselves admit not of but he is confuted by Suarez But then let it be considered that since those species or accidents are not inherent in the holy body nor have their existence from it but wholly subsist by themselves as they dream since between them and the holy body there is no substantial no personal union it is not imaginable how they can pass Divine worship to those accidents which are not in the body nor the same with the body but by an impossible supposition subsist of themselves and were proper to bread and now not communicable to Christ and yet not commit idolatry especially since the Nestorians were by the Fathers called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or worshippers of a man because they worshipped the humanity of Christ which they supposed not to be personally but habitually united to the Divinity 2. But secondly Suppose that the Article were true in Thesi and that the bread in consecration was changed as they suppose yet it is to be considered that that which is practicable in this Article is yet made as uncertain and dangerous as before For by many defects secret and insensible by many notorious and evident the change may be hindred and the symbols still remain as very bread
themselves more oblig'd by swearing on the mass-Mass-book than the four Gospels and S. Patricks mass-Mass-book more than any new one swearing by their Fathers soul by their Gossips hand by other things which are the product of those many Tales are told them their not knowing upon what account they refuse to come to Church but only that now they are old and never did or their country-men do not or their Fathers or Grandfathers never did or that their Ancestors were Priests and they will not alter from their Religion and after all can give no account of their Religion what it is only they believe as their Priest bids them and go to Mass which they understand not and reckon their Beads to tell the number and the tale of their prayers and abstain from Eggs and flesh in Lent and visit S. Patricks Well and leave Pins and Ribbons Yarn or Thread in their holy Wells and pray to God S. Mary and S. Patrick S. Columbanus and S. Bridget and desire to be buried with S. Francis's Cord about them and to fast on Saturdays in honour of our Lady These and so many other things of like nature we see daily that we being conscious of the infinite distance which these things have from the spirit of Christianity know that no charity can be greater than to perswade the people to come to our Churches where they shall be taught all the ways of godly wisdom of peace and safety to their souls whereas now there are many of them that know not how to say their prayers but mutter like Pies and Parrots words which they are taught but they do not pretend to understand But I shall give one particular instance of their miserable superstition and blindness I was lately within a few months very much troubled with Petitions and earnest Requests for the restoring a Bell which a Person of Quality had in his hands in the time of and ever since the late Rebellion I could not guess at the reasons of their so great and violent importunity but told the Petitioners If they could prove that Bell to be theirs the Gentleman was willing to pay the full value of it though he had no obligation to do so that I know of but charity but this was so far from satisfying them that still the importunity increased which made me diligently to inquire into the secret of it The first cause I found was that a dying person in the Parish desired to have it rung before him to Church and pretended he could not die in peace if it were deni'd him and that the keeping of that Bell did anciently belong to that Family from Father to Son but because this seem'd nothing but a fond and an unreasonable superstition I enquired further and at last found that they believ'd this Bell came from Heaven and that it used to be carried from place to place and to end Controversies by Oath which the worst men durst not violate if they swore upon that Bell and the best men amongst them durst not but believe him that if this Bell was rung before the Corps to the Grave it would help him out of Purgatory and that therefore when any one died the friends of the deceased did whilest the Bell was in their possession hire it for the behoof of their dead and that by this means that Family was in part maintain'd I was troubled to see under what spirit of delusion those poor souls do lie how infinitely their credulity is abused how certainly they believe in trifles and perfectly rely on vanity and how little they regard the truths of God and how not at all they drink of the waters of Salvation For the numerous companies of Priests and Friars amongst them take care they shall know nothing of Reliligion but what they design for them they use all means to keep them to the use of the Irish Tongue lest if they learn English they might be supplied with persons fitter to instruct them the people are taught to make that also their excuse for not coming to our Churches to hear our advices or converse with us in religious intercourses because they understand us not and they will not understand us neither will they learn that they may understand and live And this and many other evils are made greater and more irremediable by the affrightment which their Priests put upon them by the issues of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction by which they now exercising it too publickly they give them Laws not only for Religion but even for Temporal things and turn their Proselytes from the Mass if they become Farmers of the Tithes from the Minister or Proprietary without their leave I speak that which I know to be true by their own confession and unconstrain'd and uninvited Narratives so that as it is certain that the Roman Religion as it stands in distinction and separation from us is a body of strange Propositions having but little relish of true primitive and pure Christianity as will be made manifest if the importunity of our Adversaries extort it so it is here amongst us a Faction and a State-party and design to recover their old Laws and barbarous manner of living a device to enable them to dwell alone and to be Populus unius labii a people of one language and unmingled with others And if this be Religion it is such a one as ought to be reproved by all the severities of Reason and Religion lest the people perish and their souls be cheaply given away to them that make merchandize of souls who were the purchase and price of Christs blood Having given this sad account why it was necessary that my Lords the Bishops should take care to do what they have done in this affair and why I did consent to be engaged in this Controversie otherwise than I love to be and since it is not a love of trouble and contention but charity to the souls of the poor deluded Irish there is nothing remaining but that we humbly desire of God to accept and to bless this well-meant Labour of Love and that by some admirable ways of his Providence he will be pleas'd to convey to them the notices of their danger and their sin and to de-obstruct the passages of necessary truth to them for we know the arts of their Guides and that it will be very hard that the notice of these things shall ever be suffer'd to arrive to the common people but that which hinders will hinder until it be taken away however we believe and hope in God for remedy For although Edom would not let his brother Israel pass into his Country and the Philistims would stop the Patriarchs Wells and the wicked Shepherds of Midian would drive their neighbours flocks from the watering-troughs and the Emissaries of Rome use all arts to keep the people from the use of Scriptures the Wells of Salvation and from entertaining the notices of such things which from the Scriptures we teach yet as God
thanks for them or praying to them but a direct praying for them even for holy Bishops Confessors Martyrs that God meaning in much mercy would remember them that is make them to rest in the bosom of Abraham in the Region of the living as Saint James expresses it And in the Liturgies of the Churches of Egypt attributed to Saint Basil Gregory Nazianzen and Saint Cyril the Churches pray Be mindful O Lord of thy Saints vouchsafe to receive all thy Saints which have pleas'd thee from the beginning our Holy Fathers the Patriarchs Prophets Apostles Martyrs Confessors Preachers Evangelists and all the Souls of the Just which have died in the faith but chiefly of the holy glorious and perpetual Virgin Mary the Mother of God of Saint John Baptist the Forerunner and Martyr Saint Stephen the first Deacon and first Martyr Saint Mark Apostle Evangelist and Martyr Of the same spirit were all the Ancient Liturgies or Missals and particularly that under the name of Saint Chrysostom is most full to this purpose Let us pray to the Lord for all that before time have laboured and performed the holy Offices of Priesthood For the memory and remission of sins of them that built this holy House and of all them that have slept in hope of the resurrection and eternal life in thy society of the Orthodox Fathers and our Brethren 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O thou lover of men pardon them And again Moreover we offer unto thee this reasonable service for all that rest in Faith our Ancestors Fathers Patriarchs Prophets and Apostles Preachers Evangelists Martyrs c. especially the most holy and unspotted Virgin Mary and after concludes with this prayer Remember them all who have slept in hope of Resurrection to Eternal life and make them to rest where the light of thy countenance looks over them Add to these if you please the Greek Mass of Saint Peter To them O Lord and to all that rest in Christ we pray that thou indulge a place of refreshing light and peace So that nothing is clearer than that in the Greek Canon they prayed for the souls of the best of all the Saints whom yet because no man believes they ever were in Purgatory it follows that prayer for the dead us'd by the Ancients does not prove the Roman Purgatory To these add the Doctrine and Practice of the Greek Fathers Dionysius speaking of a person deceased whom the Ministers of the Church had publickly pronounced to be a happy man and verily admitted into the society of the Saints that have been from the beginning of the world yet the Bishop prayed for him That God would forgive him all the sins which he had committed through humane infirmity and bring him into the light and region of the living into the bosoms of Abraham Isaac and Jacob where pain and sorrow and sighing have no place To the same purpose is that of Saint Gregory Nazianzen in his Funeral Oration upon his Brother Caesarius of whom he had expresly declar'd his belief that he was rewarded with those honours which did befit a new created soul yet he presently prayes for his soul Now O Lord receive Caesarius I hope I have said enough concerning the Greek Church their Doctrine and practice in this particular and I desire it may be observed that there is no greater testimony of the Doctrine of a Church than their Liturgy Their Doctors may have private Opinions which are not against the Doctrine of the Church but what is put into their publick devotions and consign'd in their Liturgies no man scruples it but it is the Confession and Religion of the Church But now that I may make my Reader some amends for his trouble in reading the trifling Objections of these Roman Adversaries and my Defences I shall also for the greater conviction of my Adversaries shew that they would not have oppos'd my Affirmation in this particular if they had understood their own mass-Mass-book for it was not only thus from the beginning until now in the Greek Church but it is so to this very day in the Latin Church In the old Latin Missal we have this prayer Suscipe sancta Trinitas hanc oblationem quam tibi offerimus pro omnibus in tui nominis confessione defunctis ut te dextram auxilii tui porrigente vitae perennis requiem habeant à poenis impiorum segregati semper in tuae laudis laetitia perseverent And in the very Canon of the Mass which these Gentlemen I suppose if they be Priests cannot be ignorant in any part of they pray Memento Domine famulorum famularumque tuarum qui nos praecesserunt cum signo fidei dormiunt in somno pacis Ipsis Domine omnibus in Christo quiescentibus locum refrigerii lucis pacis ut indulgeas deprecamur Unless all that are at rest in Christ go to Purgatory it is plain that the Church of Rome prayes for Saints who by the confession of all sides never were in Purgatory I could bring many more testimonies if they were needful but I summ up this particular with the words of Saint Austin Non sunt praetermittendae supplicationes pro spiritibus mortuorum quas faciendas pro omnibus in Christiana Catholica societate defunctis etiam tacitis nominibus quorumque sub generali commemoratione suscepit Ecclesia The Church prayes for all persons that died in the Christian and Catholick Faith And therefore I wonder how it should drop from Saint Austin's Pen Injuriam facit Martyri qui orat pro Martyre But I suppose he meant it only in case the prayer was made for them as if they were in an uncertain state and so it is probable enough but else his words were not only against himself in other places but against the whole practice of the Ancient Catholick Church I remember that when it was ask'd of Pope Innocent by the Archbishop of Lyons why the Prayer that was in the old Missal for the soul of Pope Leo Annue nobis Domine animae famuli tui Leonis haec prosit oblatio it came to be chang'd into Annue nobis Domine ut intercessione famuli tui Leonis haec prosit oblatio Pope Innocent answered him that who chang'd it or when he knew not but he knew how that is he knew the reason of it because the Authority of the Holy Scripture said he does injury to a Martyr that prayes for a Martyr the same thing is to be done for the like reason concerning all other Saints The good man had heard the saying somewhere but being little us'd to the Bible he thought it might be there because it was a pretty saying However though this change was made in the Mass-books and prayer for the soul of Saint Leo was chang'd into a prayer to Saint Leo and the Doctors went about to defend it as well as they could yet because they did it so pitifully they had reason to
can be understood where it is said who shall endure the day of his coming c. 3. Saint Austin speaks things expresly against the Doctrine of Purgatory Know ye that when the soul is pluck'd from the body presently it is plac'd in Paradise according to its good deservings or else for her sins is thrown headlong in inferni Tartara into the hell of the damned for I know not well how else to render it And again the soul retiring is receiv'd by Angels and plac'd either in the bosom of Abraham if she be faithful or in the custody of the infernal prison if it be sinful until the appointed day comes in which she shall receive her body pertinent to which is that of Saint Austin if he be Author of that excellent Book de Eccles. dogmatibus which is imputed to him After the ascension of our Lord to the Heavens the souls of all the Saints are with Christ and going from the body go unto Christ expecting the resurrection of their body But I shall insist no further upon these things I suppose it very apparent that Saint Austin was no way confident of his fancy of Purgatory and that if he had fancied right yet it was not the Roman Purgatory that he fancied There is only one Objection which I know of which when I have clear'd I shall pass on to other things Saint Austin speaking of such who have liv'd a middle kind of an indifferent pious life saith Constat autem c. but it is certain that such before the day of judgment being purg'd by temporal pains which their spirits suffer when they have receiv'd their bodies shall not be deliver'd to the punishment of Eternal fire here is a positive determination of the Article by a word of confidence and a full certificate and therefore Saint Austin in this Article was not a doubting person To this I answer it may be he was confident here but it lasted not long this fire was made of straw and soon went out for within two Chapters after he expresly doubts as I have provâ—d 2. These words may refer to the purgatory fire at the general conflagration of the world and if they be so referred it is most agreeable to his other sentiments 3. This Constat or decretory phrase and some lines before or after it are not in the old Books of Bruges and Colein nor in the Copies printed at Friburg and Ludovicus Vives supposes they were a marginal note crept since into the Text. Now this Objection being remov'd there remains no ground to deny that Saint Austin was a doubting person in the Article of Purgatory And this Erasmus expresly affirm'd of him and the same is said of him by Hofmeister but modestly and against his doubting in his Enchiridion he brings only a testimony in behalf of prayer for the dead which is nothing to the purpose and this is also sufficiently noted by Alphonsus à Castro and by Barnesius Well! but suppose Saint Austin did doubt of Purgatory This is no warranty to the Church of England for she does not doubt of it as Saint Austin did but plainly condemns it So one of my Adversaries objects To which I answer That the Church of England may the rather condemn it because Saint Austin doubted of it for if it be no Catholick Doctrine it is but a School point and without prejudice to the Faith may be rejected But 2. I suppose the Church of England would not have troubled her self with the Doctrine if it had been left as Saint Austin left it that is but as a meer uncertain Opinion but when the wrong end of the Opinion was taken and made an Article of Faith and damnation threatned to them that believed it not she had reason to consider it and finding it to be chaff wholly to scatter it away 3. The Church of England is not therefore to be blamed if in any case she see more than Saint Austin did and proceed accordingly for it is certain the Church of Rome does decree against divers things of which Saint Austin indeed did not doubt but affirm'd confidently I instance in the necessity of communicating Infants and the matter of appeals to Rome The next Authority to be examin'd is that of Otho Frisingensis concerning which there is a heavy quarrel against the Dissuasive for making him to speak of a Purgatory before whereas he speaks of one after the day of Judgment with a Quidam asserunt some affirm it viz. that there is a place of Purgatory after death nay but you are deceiv'd sayes E. W. and the rest of the Adversaries he means that some affirm there is a place of Purgatory after the day of judgment Now truly that is more than I said but that Otho said it is by these men confess'd But his words are these I think it ought to be search'd whether the judgment being pass'd besides the lower hell there remain a place for lighter punishments for that there is below or in hell a Purgatory place in which they that are to be savâ—d are either affected afficiantur invested punish'd with darkness only or else are boiled in the fire of expiation some do affirm What is or can be more plainly said of Purgatory for the places of Scripture brought to confirm this Opinion are such which relate to the interval between death and the last judgment Juxta illud Patriarchae lugens descendam ad inferos illud Apostoli ipse autem salvus erit sic tamen quasi per ignem I hope the Roman Doctors will not deny but these are meant of Purgatory before the last day and therefore so is the Opinion for the proof of which these places are brought 2. By post judicium in the title and transacto judicio in the Chapter Otho means the particular judgment passing upon every one at their death which he in a few lines after calls terminatis in judicio causis singulorum 3. He must mean it to be before the last great day because that which he sayes some do affirm quidam asserunt is that those which are salvandi to be sav'd hereafter are either in darkness or in a Purgatory fire which therefore must be meant of the interval for after the day of judgment is pass'd and the books shut and the sentence pronounc'd none can be sav'd that are not then acquitted unless Origen's Opinion of the salvation of Devils and damned souls be reintroduc'd which the Church before Otho many Ages had exploded and therefore so good and great a person would not have thought that fit to be then disputed and it was not then a Question nor a thing Undetermin'd in the Church 4. Whether Otho means it of a Purgatory before or after the day of the last judgment it makes very much against the present Roman Doctrine for Otho applies the Question to the case of Infants dying without Baptism now if their Purgatory be before the day of judgment
peculiar grace and vertue was signified by the symbol of wine and it was evident that the chalice was an excellent representment and memorial of the effusion of Christs blood for us and the joyning both the symbols signifies the intire refection and nourishment of our souls bread and drink being the natural provisions and they design and signifie our redemption more perfectly the body being given for our bodies and the blood for the cleansing our souls the life of every animal being in the blood and finally this in the integrity signifies and represents Christ to have taken body and soul for our redemption For these reasons the Church of God always in all her publick communions gave the chalice to the people for above a thousand years This was all I would have remarked in this so evident a matter but that I observed in a short spiteful passage of E. W. Pag. 44. a notorious untruth spoken with ill intent concerning the Holy Communion as understood by Protestants The words are these seeing the fruit of Protestant Communion is only to stir up faith in the receiver I can find no reason why their bit of bread only may not as well work that effect as to taste of their wine with it To these words 1. I say that although stirring up faith is one of the Divine benefits and blessings of the Holy Communion yet it is falsely said that the fruit of the Protestant Communion is only to stir up faith For in the Catechism of the Church of England it is affirmed that the body and blood of Christ are verily and indeed taken and received of the faithful in the Lords Supper and that our souls are strengthened and refreshed by the body and blood of Christ as our bodies are by the bread and wine and that of stirring up our faith is not at all mention'd So ignorant so deceitful or deceiv'd is E. W in the doctrine of the Church of England But then as for his foolish sarcasm calling the hallowed Element a bit of bread which he does in scorn he might have considered that if we had a mind to find fault whenever his Church gives us cause that the Papists wafer is scarce so much as a bit of bread it is more like Marchpane than common bread and besides that as Salmeron acknowledges anciently Olim ex pane uno sua cuique particula frangi consueverat that which we in our Church do was the custom of the Church out of a great loaf to give particles to every communicant by which the Communication of Christs body to all the members is better represented and that Durandus affirming the same thing says that the Grecians continue it to this day besides this I say the Author of the Roman order says Cassander took it very ill that the loaves of bread offered in certain Churches for the use of the sacrifice should be brought from the form of true bread to so slight and slender a form which he calls Minutias nummulariarum oblatarum scraps of little penies or pieces of money and not worthy to be called bread being such which no Nation ever used at their meals for bread But this is one of the innovations which they have introduc'd into the religious Rites of Christianity and it is little noted they having so many greater changes to answer for But it seems this Section was too hot for them they loved not much to meddle with it and therefore I shall add no more fuel to their displeasure but desire the Reader who would fully understand what is fit to be said in this Question to read it in a book of mine which I called Ductor dubitantium or the Cases of Conscience only I must needs observe that it is an unspeakable comfort to all Protestants when so manifestly they have Christ on their side in this Question against the Church of Rome To which I only add that for above 700. years after Christ it was esteemed sacriledge in the Church of Rome to abstain from the Cup and that in the ordo Romanus the Communion is always describ'd with the Cup how it is since and how it comes to be so is too plain But it seems the Church hath power to dispence in this affair because S. Paul said that the Ministers of Christ are dispensers of the mysteries of God as was learnedly urg'd in the Council of Trent in the doctrine about this question SECT V. Of the Scriptures and Service in an unknown Tongue THE Question being still upon the novelty of the Roman doctrines and Practices I am to make it good that the present article and practice of Rome is contrary to the doctrine and practice of the Primitive Church To this purpose I alledged S. Basil in his Sermon or book de variis scripturae locis But say my adversaries there is no such book Well! was there such a man as S. Basil If so we are well enough and let these Gentlemen be pleas'd to look into his works printed at Paris 1547. by Carola Guillard and in the 130. page he shall see this Book Sermon or Homily in aliquot scripturae locis at the beginning of which he hath an exhortation in the words placed in the Margent there we shall find the lost Sheep The beginning of it is an exhortation to the people congregated to get profit and edification by the Scriptures read at morning prayer the Monitions in the Psalms the precepts of the Proverbs Search ye the beauty of the history and the examples and add to these the precepts of the Apostles But in all things joyn the words of the Gospel as the Crown and perfection that receiving profit from them all ye may at length turn to that to which every one is sweetly affected and for the doing of which he hath received the grace of the Holy Spirit Now this difficulty being over all that remains for my own justification is that I make it appear that S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Austin Aquinas and Lyra do respectively exhort to the study of the Scriptures exhorting even the Laity to do so and testifie the custom of the Ancient Church in praying in a known tongue and commending this as most useful and condemning the contrary as being useless and without edification I shall in order set down the doctrine they deliver in their own words and then the impertinent cavils of the adversaries will of themselves come to nothing S. Chrysostom commenting upon S. Pauls words concerning preaching and praying for edification and so as to be understood coming to those words of S. Paul If I pray with my tongue my spirit prayeth but my mind is without fruit you see saith he how a little extolling prayer he shews that he who is such a one viz. as the Apostle there describes is not only unprofitable to others but also to himself since his mind is without fruit Now if a man praying what he understands not does
not cannot profit himself how can he that stands by who understands no more be profited by that which does him that speaks no good For God understands though he does not and yet he that so prays reaps no benefit to himself and therefore neither can any man that understands no more The affirmation is plain and the reason cogent To the same purpose are the words of S. Chrysostom which A. L. himself quotes out of him If one speaks in only the Persian tongue or some other strange tongue but knows not what he saith certainly he will be a barbarian even to himself and not to another only because he knows not the force of the words This is no more than what S. Paul said before him but they all say that he who hears and understands not whether it be the speaker or the scholar is but a Barbarian Thus also S. Ambrose in his Commentary upon the words of S. Paul The Apostle says It is better to speak a few words that are open or understood that all may understand than to have a long oration in obscurity That 's his sence for reading and preaching Now for prayer he adds The unskilful man hearing what he understands not knows not when the prayer ends and answers not Amen that is so be it or it is true that the blessing may be established and a little after If ye meet together to edifie the Church those things ought to be said which the hearers may understand For what profit is it to speak with a tongue when he that hears is not profited Therefore he ought to hold his peace in the Church that they who can profit the hearers may speak S. Austin compares singing in the Church without understanding to the chattering of Parrots and Magpies Crows and Jackdaws But to sing with understanding is by the will of God given to man And we who sing the Divine praises in the Church must remember that it is written Blessed is the people that understands singing of praises Therefore most beloved what with a joyn'd voice we have sung we must understand and discern with a serene heart To the same purpose are the words of Lyra and Aquinas which I shall not trouble the Reader withall here but have set them down in the Margent that the strange confidence of these Romanists out-facing notorious and evident words may be made if possible yet more conspicuous In pursuance of this doctrine of S. Paul and the Fathers the Primitive Christians in their several Ages and Countries were careful that the Bible should be translated into all languages where Christianity was planted That the Bibles were in Greek is notorious and that they were us'd among the people S. Chrysostom homil 1. in Joh. 8. is witness that it was so or that it ought to be so For he exhorts Vacemus ergo scripturis dilectissimi c. Let us set time apart to be conversant in the Scripture at least in the Gospels let us frequently handle them to imprint them in our minds which because the Jews neglected they were commanded to have their books in their hands but let us not have them in our hands but in our houses and in our hearts by which words we may easily understand that all the Churches of the Greek communion had the Bible in their vulgar tongue and were called upon to use them as Christians ought to do that is to imprint them in their hearts and speaking of S. John and his Gospel he says that the Syrians Indians Persians and Ethiopians and infinite other nations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they grew wise by translating his S. Johns doctrines into their several languages But it is more that S. Austin says The divine Scripture by which help is supplied to so great diseases proceeded from one language which opportunely might be carried over the whole world that being by the various tongues of interpreters scattered far and wide it might be made known to the Nations for their salvation And Theodoret speaks yet more plainly We have manifestly shown to you the inexhausted strength of the Apostolick and prophetick doctrine for the Vniversal face of the Earth whatsoever is under the Sun is now full of those words For the Hebrew books are not only translated into the Greek idiom but into the Roman tongue the Egyptian Persian Indian Armenian Scythian Sauromatick languages and that I may speak once for all into all tongues which at this day the Nations use By these authorities of these Fathers we may plainly see how different the Roman doctrine and practice is from the sentiment and usages of the Primitive Church and with what false confidence the Roman adversaries deny so evident truth having no other way to make their doctrine seem tolerable but by out-facing the known sayings of so many excellent persons and especially of S. Paul who could not speak his mind in apt and intelligible words if he did not in his Epistle to the Corinthians exhort the Church to pray and prophesie so as to be understood by the Catechumens and by all the people that is to do otherwise than they do in the Roman Church Christianity is a simple wise intelligible and easie Religion and yet if a man will resolve against any proposition he may wrangle himself into a puzle and make himself not to understand it so though it be never so plain what is plainer than the testimony of their own Cajetan That it were more for the edification of the Church that the prayers were in the vulgar tongue He says no more than S. Paul says and he could not speak it plainer And indeed no man of sence can deny it unless he affirms at the same time that it is better to speak what we understand not than what we do or that it were better to serve God without that noble faculty than with it that is that the way of a Parrot and a Jackdaw were better than the way of a man and that in the service of God the Priests and the people are to differ as a man and a bird But besides all this was not Latin it self when it was first us'd in Divine service the common tongue and generally understood by many Nations and very many Colonies and if it was then the use of the Church to pray with the understanding why shall it not be so now however that it was so then and is not so now demonstrates that the Church of Rome hath in this material point greatly innovated Let but the Roman Pontifical be consulted and there will be yet found a form of ordination of Readers in which it is said that they must study to read distinctly and plainly that the people may understand But now it seems that labour is sav'd And when a notorious change was made in this affair we can tell by calling to mind the following story The Moravians did say Mass in the Slavonian tongue for
did give veneration and worship to the Image even of the cross it self but no words of S. Cyril were quoted for the denial is not in express words but in plain and direct argument for being by Julian charg'd with worshipping the cross S. Cyril in behalf of the Christians takes notice of their using the cross in a religious memory of all good things to which by the cross of Christ we are ingag'd that is he owns all that they did and therefore taking no notice of any thing of worship and making no answer to that part of the objection it is certain that the Christians did not do it or that he could not justifie them in so doing But because I quoted no words of S. Cyril I now shall take notice of some words of his which do most abundantly clear this particular by a general rule Only the Divine Nature is capable of adoration and the Scripture hath given adoration to no nature but to that of God alone that and that alone ought to be worshipped But to give yet a little more light to this particular it may be noted that before S. Cyrils time this had been objected by the Pagans particularly by Caecilius to which Minutius answers by directly denying it and saying that the Pagans did rather worship crosses that is the woodden parts of their Gods The Christians indeed were by Tertullian called Religiosi crucis because they had it in thankful use and memory and us'd it frequently in a symbolical confession of their not being asham'd but of their glorying in the real cross of Christ But they never worshipped the material cross or the figure of it as appears by S. Cyrils owning all the objections excepting this only of which he neither confessed the fact nor offered any justification of it when it was objected but professed a doctrine with which such practice was inconsistent And the like is to be said of some other of the Fathers who speak with great affections and veneration of the cross meaning to exalt the passion of Christ and in the sence of S. Paul to glory in the cross of Christ not meaning the material cross much less the image of it which we blame in the Church of Rome And this very sence we have expressed in S. Ambrose Sapiens Helena egit quae crucem in capite regum levavit ut Christi Crux in Regibus adoretur The figure of the material cross was by Helena plac'd upon the heads of Kings that the cross of Christ in Kings might be ador'd How so He answers Non insolentia ista sed pietas est cum defertur sacrae redemptioni It is to the holy redemption not to the cross materially taken this were insolent but the other is piety In the same manner also S. Chrysostom is by the Roman Doctors and particularly by Gretser and E. W. urg'd for the worshipping Christs cross But the book de cruce latrone whence the words are cited Gretser and Possevine suspect it to be a spurious issue of some unknown person It wants a Father and sometimes it goes to S. Austin and is crouded into his Sermons de Tempore But I shall not trouble my discourse any farther with such counterfeit ware What S. Chrysostoms doctrine was in the matter of Images is plain enough in his indubitate works as is and shall be remark'd in their several places The famous testimony of Epiphanius against the very use of Images in Churches being urg'd in the Disswasive as an irrefragable argument that the Roman doctrine is not Primitive or Catholick the contra-scribers say nothing but that when S. Hierom translated that Epistle of S. Epiphanius it appears not that this story was in that Epistle that S. Hierom translated which is a great argument that that story was foisted into that Epistle after S. Hieroms time A likely matter but spoken upon slight grounds It appears not saith the Objector that this story was in it then To whom does it not appear To Bellarmine indeed it did not nor to this Objector who writes after him Alan Cope denied that Epiphanius ever wrote any such Epistle at all or that S. Hierom ever translated any such but Bellarmine being asham'd of such unreasonable boldness found out this more gentle answer which here we have from our Objector well but now the case is thus that this story was put into the Epistle by some Iconoclast is vehemently suspected by Bellarmine and Baronius But this Epistle vehemently burns their fingers and the live-coal sticks close to them and they can never shake it off For 1. who should add this story to this Epistle not any of the reformed Doctors for before Luthers time many ages this Epistle with this story was known and confessed and quoted in the Manuscript copies of divers Nations 2. This Epistle was quoted and set down as now it is with this story by Charles the great above DCCC years ago 3. And a little after by the Fathers in the Council of Paris only they call the Author John Bishop of C. P. instead of Jerusalem 4. Sirmondus the Jesuit cites this Epistle as the genuine work of Epiphanius 5. Marianus Victor and Dionysius Petavius a Jesuit of great and deserved same for learning in their Editions of Epiphanius have published this whole Epistle and have made no note given no censure upon this story 6. Before them Thomas Waldensis and since him Alphonsus à Castro acknowledge this whole Epistle as the proper issue of Epiphanius 7. Who can be suppos'd to have put in this story The Iconoclasts Not the Greeks because if they had they would have made use of it for their advantage which they never did in any of their disputations against images insomuch that Bellarmine makes advantage of it because they never objected it Not the Latins that wrote against images for though they were against the worship of images yet they were not Iconoclasts Indeed Claudius Taurinensis was but he could not put this story in for before his time it was in as appears in the book of Charles the great before quoted These things put together are more than sufficient to prove that this story was written by Epiphanius and the whole Epistle was translated by S. Hierome as himself testifies But after all this if there was any foul play in this whole affair the cosenage lies on the other side for some or other have destroyed the Greek original of Epiphanius and only the Latin copies remain and in all of them of Epiphanius's works this story still remains But how the Greek came to be lost though it be uncertain yet we have great cause to suspect the Greeks to be the Authors of the loss And the cause of this suspicion is the command made by the Bishops in the seventh Council that all writings against images should be brought in to the Bishop of C. P. there to be laid up with the books of
Emperor confuting that Unchristian Assembly These things were said out of these Authors not supposing that every thing of this should be prov'd from every one of them but the whole of it by its several parts from all these put together 1. That the Bishops of Francfurt condemned the Synod of Nice or the seventh General Whether the Dissuasive hath said this truly out of the Authors quoted by him we need no further proof but the confession of Bellarmine Auctores antiqui omnes conveniunt in hoc quod in concilio Francofordiensi sit reprobata Synodus VII quae decreverat imagines adorandas Ita Hincmarus Aimonius Rhegino Ado alii passim docent So that if the objector blames the Dissuasive for alledging these authorities let him first blame Bellarmine who confesses that to be true which the Dissuasive here affirms Now that by the VII Synod Bellarmine means the II. Nicene appears by his own words in the same chapter Videtur igitur mihi in Synodo Francofordiensi vere reprobatam Nicaenam II. Synodum sed per errorem materialiter c. And Bellarmine was in the right not only those which the Dissuasive quoted but all the Ancient Writers saith Bellarmine So the Author of the life of Charles the Great speaking of the Council of Francfurt Their Queen Fastrada died Pseudosynodus Graecorum quam falso septimam vocabant pro imaginibus rejecta est à pontificibus The same is affirmed by the Annals of the Francks by Adhelmus Benedictinus in his Annals in the same year by Hincmarus Rhemensis in an Epistle to Hincmarus his Nephew by Strabus the Monk of Fulda Rhegino Prumiensis Vrspergensis and Hermanus Contractus in their Annals and Chronicles of the year 794. By Ado Viennensis sed pseudosynodus quam septimam Graeci appellant pro adorandis imaginibus abdicata penitus the same is affirmed by the annals of Eginhardus and by Aimoinus and Aventinus I could reckon many more if more were nececessary but these are they whom the Dissuasive quoted and some more against this truth nothing material can be said only that Hincmarus and Aimonius which are two whom the Dissuasive quotes do not say that the Synod of Francfurt rejected the second Nicene but the Synod of C. P. But to this Bellarmine himself answers that is is true they do so but it is by mistake and that they meant the Council which was kept at Nice so that the Dissuasive is justified by his greatest adversary But David Blondel answers this objection by saying that C.P. being the head of the Eastern Empire these Authors us'd the name of the Imperial city for the provinces under it which answer though it be ingenious yet I rather believe that the error came first from the Council of Francfurt who called it the Synod at C. P. and that after it these Authors took it up but that error was not great but always excusable if not warrantable because the second Nicene Council was first appointed to be at C.P. but by reason of the tumults of the people was translated to Nice But to proceed That Blondus whom the Dissuasive also quotes saith the Synod of Francfurt abrogated the seventh Synod the objector confesses and adds that it confuted the Felician heresie for taking away of images concerning which lest the less wary Reader should suppose the Synod of Francfurt to have deternin'd for images as Alan Cope Gregory de Valentia Vasquez Suarez and Binius would fain have the world believe I shall note that the Synod of Francfurt did at the same time condemn the Heresie of Felix Vrgetitanus which was that Christ was the adopted son of God Now because in this Synod were condemned the breakers of images and the worshippers of images some ignorantly amongst which is this Gentleman the objector have suppos'd that the Felician Heresie was that of the Iconoclasts 2. Now for the second thing which the Dissuasive said from these Authors that the Fathers at Francfurt commanded that the second Nicene should not be called a general Council that matter is sufficiently cleared in the proof of the first particular for if they abrogated it and called it pseudosynodum and decreed against it hoc ipso they caused it should not be or be called a General Synod But I shall declare what the Synod did in the words of Adhelmus Benedictinus Synodus etiam quae paucos ante annos C. P. sub Helena Constantino filio ejus congregata ab ipsis non tantum septima verum etiam Vniversalis est appellata ut nec septima nec Vniversalis diceretur habereturque quasi supervacua in totum ab omnibus abdicata est 3. Now for the third thing which the Dissuasive said that they published a book under the name of the Emperor I am to answer that such a book about that time within three or four years of it was published in the name of the Emperor is notoriously known and there was great reason to believe it was written three or four years before the Synod and sent by the Emperor to the Pope but that divers of the Church of Rome did endeavour to perswade the world that the Emperor did not write it but that it was written by the Synod and contains the acts of the Synod but published under the Emperors name Now this the Dissuasive affirm'd by the authority of Hincmarus who does affirm it and of the same opinion is Bellarmine Scripti videntur in Synodo Francofordiensi acta continere synodi Francofordiensis enim asserit Hincmarus ejus temporis Author So that by all this the Reader may plainly see how careful the Dissuasive was in what was affirm'd and how careless this Gentleman is of what he objects Only this I add that though it be said that this book contained the acts of the Synod of Francfurt though it might be partly true yet not wholly For this Synod did indeed do so much against that of the Greeks and was so decretory against the worship of Images quod omnino Ecclesia Dei execratur said Hoveden and Matthew of Westminster that it is vehemently suspected that the Patrons of Images the objector knows whom I mean have taken a timely course with it so that the monuments of it are not to be seen nor yet a famous and excellent Epistle of Alcuinus written against the Greek Synod though his other works are in a large volume carefully enough preserved It was urg'd as an argument à minori ad majus that in the Primitive Church it was accounted unlawful to make images and therefore it was impossible that the worship of images should then be the doctrine or practice of the Catholick Church To this purpose Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian and Origen were alledged First for Tertullian of whom the Letter says that he said no such thing sure it is this man did not care what he said supposing it sufficient to
upon what confidence I know not says that Theodoret hath nothing like it either under the title de Simone or Carpocrate And he says true but with a shameful purpose to calumniate me and deceive his Reader as if I had quoted a thing that Theodoret said not and therefore the Reader ought not to believe me But since in the Dissuasive Theodoret was only quoted lib. 5. haeret fabul and no title set down if he had pleased to look to the next title Simonis haeresis where in reason all Simons heresies were to be look'd for he should have found that which I referred to But why E. W. denies S. Austin to have reported that for which he is quoted viz. that Simon Magus brought in some images to be worshipped I cannot conjecture neither do I think himself can tell but the words are plain in the place quoted according to the intention of the Dissuasive But that he may yet seem to lay more load upon me he very learnedly says that Irenaeus in the place quoted by me says not a word of Simon Magus being Author of images and would have his Reader believe that I mistook Simon Magus for Simon Irenaeus But the good man I suppose wrote this after supper and could not then read or consider that the testimony of Irenaeus was brought in to no such purpose neither did it relate to any Simon at all but to the Gnosticks or Carpocratians who also were very early and very deep in this impiety only they did not worship the pictures of Simon and Selene but of Jesus and Paul and Homer and Pythagoras as S. Austin testifies of them But that which he remarks in them is this that Marcellina one of their sect worshipped the pictures of Jesus c. adorando incensumque ponendo they did adore them and put incense before them I wish the Church of Rome would leave to do so or acknowledge whose disciples they are in this thing The same also is said by Epiphanius and that the Carpocratians placed the image of Jesus with the Philosophers of the world collocatasque adorant gentium mysteria perficiunt But I doubt that both Epiphanius and S. Austin who took this story from Irenaeus went farther in the Narrative than Irenaeus for he says only that they placed the images of Christ c. Et has coronant No more and yet even for this for crowning the image of Christ with flowers though they did not so much as is now adays done at Rome S. Irenaeus made an outcry and reckoned them in the black Catalogue of hereticks not for joyning Christs image with that of Homer and Aristotle Pythagoras and Plato but even for crowning Christs image with flowers and coronets as they also did those of the Philosophers for though this may be innocent yet the other was a thing not known in the religion of any that were called Christians till Simon and Carpocrates began to teach the world 2. We find the wisest and the most sober of the Heathens speaking against the use of images in their religious rites So Varro when he had said that the old Romans had for 170. years worshipped the Gods without picture or image adds quod si adhuc mansissent castius Dii observarentur and gives this reason for it qui primi simulachra Deorum populis posuerunt civitatibus suis metum dempsisse errorem addidisse The making images of the Gods took away fear from men and brought in error which place S. Austin quoting commends and explicates it saying he wisely thought that the Gods might easily be despised in the blockishness of images The same also was observed by Plutarch and he gives this reason nefas putantes augustiora exprimere humilioribus neque aliter aspirari ad Deum quam mente posse They accounted it impiety to express the Great Beings with low matter and they believed there was no aspiring up to God but by the mind This is a Philosophy which the Church of Rome need not be ashamed to learn 3. It was so known a thing that Christians did abominate the use of images in religion and in their Churches that Adrian the Emperor was supposed to build Temples to Christ and to account him as God because he commanded that Churches without images should be made in all Cities as is related by Lampridius 4. In all the disputations of the Jews against the Christians of the Primitive Church although they were impatient of having any image and had detested all use of them especially ever since their return from Babylon and still retained the hatred of them even after the dissolution of their Temple even unto superstition says Bellarmine yet they never objected against Christians their having images in their Churches much less their worshipping them And let it be considered that in all that long disputation between Justin Martyr and Tryphon the Jew in which the subtle Jew moves every stone lays all the load he can at the Christians door makes all objections raises all the envy gives all the matter of reproach he can against the Christians yet he opens not his mouth against them concerning images The like is to be observed in Tertullians book against the Jews no mention of images for there was no such thing amongst the Christians they hated them as the Jews did but it is not imaginable they would have omitted so great a cause of quarrel On the other side when in length of time images were brought into Churches the Jews forbore not to upbraid the Christians with it There was a dialogue written a little before the time of the seventh Synod in which a Jew is brought in saying to the Christians I have believed all ye say and I do believe in the crucified Jesus Christ that he is the son of the living God Scandalizor autem in vos Christiani quia imagines adoratis I am offended at you Christians that ye worship images for the Scripture forbids us every where to make any similitude or graven image And it is very observable that in the first and best part of the Talmud of Babylon called the Misna published about the end of the second Century the Christians are not blamed about images which shews they gave no occasion but in the third part of the Talmud about the 10. and 11. age after Christ the Christians are sufficiently upbraided and reproached in this matter In the Gemara which was finished about the end of the fifth Century I find that learned men say the Jews call'd the Christian Church the house of Idolatry which though it may be expounded in relation to images which about that time began in some Churches to be placed and honoured yet I rather incline to believe that they meant it of our worshipping Jesus for the true God and the true Messias for at this day they call all Christians Idolaters even those that have none and can endure no images in
not So that it may be only a private opinion of some Doctors and then I am to blame to charge Popery with it To this I answer that Bellarmine indeed says Non esse tam certum in Ecclesia an sint faciendae imagines Dei sive Trinitatis quam Christi Sanctorum It is not so certain viz. as to be an article of faith But yet besides that Bellarmine allows it and cites Cajetan Catharinus Payva Sanders and Thomas Waldensis for it this is a practice and doctrine brought in by an unproved custom of the Church Constat quod haec consuetudo depingendi Angelos Deum modo sub specie Columbae modo sub Figura Trinitatis sit ubique inter Catholicos recepta The picturing Angels and God sometimes under the shape of a Dove and sometimes under the figure of the Trinity is every where received among the Catholicks said a great Man amongst them And to what purpose they do this we are told by Cajetan speaking of Images of God the Father Son and Holy Ghost saying Haec non solum pinguntur ut ostendantur sicut Cherubim olim in Templo sed ut adorentur They are painted that they may be worshipped ut frequens usus Ecclesiae testatur This is witnessed by the frequent use of the Church So that this is received every where among the Catholicks and these Images are worshipped and of this there is an Ecclesiastical custom and I add In their mass-Mass-book lately printed these pictures are not infrequently seen So that now it is necessary to shew that this besides the impiety of it is against the doctrine and practice of the Primitive Church and is an innovation in religion a propriety of the Roman doctrine and of infinite danger and unsufferable impiety To some of these purposes the Disswasive alledged Tertullian Eusebius and S. Hierom but A. L. says these Fathers have nothing to this purpose This is now to be tried These men were only nam'd in the Disswasive Their words are these which follow 1. For Tertullian A man would think it could not be necessary to prove that Tertullian thought it unlawful to picture God the Father when he thought the whole art of painting and making Images to be unlawful as I have already proved But however let us see He is very curious that nothing should be us'd by Christians or in the service of God which is us'd on or by or towards Idols and because they did paint and picture their Idols cast or carve them therefore nothing of that kind ought to be in rebus Dei as Tertullian's phrase is But the summ of his discourse is this The Heathens use to picture their false Gods that indeed befits them but therefore is unfit for God and therefore we are to flee not only from Idolatry but from Idols in which affair a word does change the case and that which before it was said to appertain to Idols was lawful by that very word was made Unlawful and therefore much more by a shape or figure and therefore flee from the shape of them for it is an Unworthy thing that the Image of the living God should be made the Image of an Idol or a dead thing For the Idols of the Heathens are silver and gold and have eyes without sight and noses without smell and hands without feeling So far Tertullian argues And what can more plainly give his sence and meaning in this Article If the very Image of an Idol be Unlawful much more is it unlawful to make an Image or Idol of the living God or represent him by the Image of a dead man But this argument is further and more plainly set down by Athanasius whose book against the Gentiles is spent in reproving the Images of God real or imaginary insomuch that he affirms that the Gentiles dishonour even their false Gods by making Images of them and that they might better have pass'd for Gods if they had not represented them by visible Images And therefore That the religion of making Images of their Gods is not piety but impious For to know God we need no outward thing the way of truth will direct us to him And if any man ask which is that way viz. to know God I shall say it is the soul of a man and that understanding which is planted in us for by that alone God can be seen and Vnderstood The same Father does discourse many excellent things to this purpose as that a man is the only Image of God Jesus Christ is the perfect Image of his Glory and he only represents his essence and man is made in the likeness of God and therefore he also in a less perfect manner represents God Besides these if any many desires to see God let him look in the book of the creature and all the world is the Image and lively representment of Gods power and his wisdom his goodness and his bounty But to represent God in a carved stone or a painted Table does depauperate our understanding of God and dishonours him below the Painters art for it represents him lovely only by that art and therefore less than him that painted it But that which Athanasius adds is very material and gives great reason of the Command why God should severely forbid any Image of himself Calamitati enim tyrannidi servienâ—es homines Vnicum illud est nulli Communicabile Dei nomen lignis lapidibusque imposâ—runt Some in sorrow for their dead children made their Images and fancied that presence some desiring to please their tyrannous Princes put up their statues and at distance by a phantastical presence flattered them with honours And in process of time these were made Gods and the incommunicable name was given to wood and stones Not that the Heathens thought that Image to be very God but that they were imaginarily present in them and so had their Name Hujusmodi igitur initiis idolorum inventio Scriptura â—este apud homines coepit Thus idolatry began saith the Scripture and thus it was promoted and the event was they made pitiful conceptions of God they confined his presence to a statue they worshipped him with the lowest way â—maginable they descended from all spirituality and the noble ways of Understanding and made wood and stone to be as it were a body to the Father of Spirits they gave the incommunicable name not only to dead men and Angels and Daemons but to the Images of them and though it is great folly to picture Angelical Spirits and dead Heroes whom they never saw yet by these steps when they had come to picture God himself this was the height of the Gentile impiety and is but too plain a representation of the impiety practised by too many in the Roman Church But as we proceed further the case will be yet clearer Concerning the testimony of Eusebius I wonder that any writer of Roman controversies should be ignorant and being
so should confidently say Eusebius had nothing to this purpose viz. to condemn the picturing of God when his words are so famous that they are recorded in the seventh Synod and the words were occasioned by a solemn message sent to Eusebius by the sister of Constantius and wife of Licinius lately turned from being Pagan to be Christian desiring Eusebius to send her the picture of our Lord Jesus to which he answers Quia vero de quadam imagine quasi Christi scripsisti hanc volens tibi à nobis mitti quam dicis qualem hanc quam perhibes Christi imaginem Vtrâ—â— veram incommutabilem natura characteres suos portantem An istam quam propter nos suscepit servi formae schemate circumamictus Sed de forma quidem Dei nec ipse arbitror te quaerere semel ab ipso edoctam quoniam neque patrem quis novit nisi filius neque ipsum filium novit quis aliquando digne nisi solus pater qui eum genuit And a little after Quis ergo hujusmodi dignitatis gloriae vibrantes praefulgentes splendores exarare potuisset mortuis inanimatis Coloribus scripturis Vmbraticis And then speaking of the glory of Christ in Mount Thabor he proceeds Ergo si tunc incarnata ejus forma tantam virtutem sortita est ab inhabitante in se Divinitate mutata quid oportet dicere cum mortalitate exutus corruptione ablutus speciem servilis formae in gloriam Domini Dei commutavit Where besides that Eusebius thinks it unlawful to make a picture of Christ and therefore consequently much more to make a picture of God he also tells Constantia he supposes she did not offer at any desire of that Well for these three of the Fathers we are well enough but for the rest the objector says that they speak only against representing God as in his own essence shape or form To this I answer that God hath no shape or form and therefore these Fathers could not speak against making Images of a thing that was not and as for the Images of his essence no Christian no Heathen ever pretended to it and no man or beast can be pictured so no Painter can paint an Essence And therefore although this distinction was lately made in the Roman Schools yet the Fathers knew nothing of it and the Roman Doctors can make nothing of it for the reasons now told But the Gentleman saith that some of their Church allow only and practise the picturing those forms wherein God hath appeared It is very well they do no more but I pray in what forms did God the Father ever appear or the Holy and Mysterious Trinity Or suppose they had does it follow they may be painted We saw but now out of Eusebius that it was not esteemed lawful to picture Christ though he did appear in a humane body And although it is supposed that the Holy Ghost did appear in the shape of a Dove yet it is forbidden by the sixth General Council to paint Christ like a Lamb or the Holy Spirit like a Dove Add to this where did ever the Holy and Blessed Trinity appear like three faces joyned in one or like an old man with Christ crucified leaning on his breast and a Dove hovering over them and yet however the objector is pleas'd to mince the matter yet the doing this is ubique inter Catholicos recepta and that not only to be seen but to be ador'd as I prov'd a little above by testimonies of their own The next charge is concerning S. Hierom that he says no such thing which matter will soon be at an end if we see the Commentary he makes on these words of Isaiah Cui ergo similem fecisti Deum To whom do you liken God Or what Image will ye make for him who is a Spirit and is in all things and runs every where and holds the earth in his fist And he laughs at the folly of the Nations that an Artist or a Brasier or a Goldsmith or a Silversmith makes a God viz. by making the Image of God But the objector adds that it would be long to set down the words of the other Fathers quoted by the Doctor and truly so the Doctor thought so too at first but because the objector says they do not make against what some of his Church own and practise I thought it might be worth the Readers pains to see them The words of S. Austin in this question are very plain and decretory For a Christian to place such an Image to God viz. with right and left-hand sitting with bended knees that is in the shape of a man is wickedness but much more wicked is it to place it in our hearts But of this I have given account in the preceding Section Theodoret Damascen and Nicephorus do so expresly condemn the picturing God that it is acknowledg'd by my adversaries only they fly for succour to the old mumpsimus they condemn the picturing the essence of God but not his forms and appearances a distinction which those good old writers never thought of but directly they condemned all Images of God and the Holy Trinity And the Bishops in the seventh Synod though they were worshippers of Images yet they thinking that Angels were Corporeal believ'd they might be painted but denied it of God expresly And indeed it were a strange thing that God in the old Testament should so severely forbid any Image to be made of him upon this reason because he is invisible and he presses it passionately by calling it to their memory that they heard a voice but saw no shape and yet that both he had formerly and did afterwards shew himself in shapes and forms which might be painted and so the very reason of the Commandment be wholly void To which add this consideration that although the Angels did frequently appear and consequently had forms possible to be represented in Imagery yet none of the Ancients did suppose it lawful to paint Angels but they that thought them to be corporeal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Philo. To which purpose is that of Seneca Effugit oculos cogitatione visendus est And Antiphanes said of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God is not seen with eyes he is like to no man therefore no man can by an Image know him By which it appears plainly to be the General opinion of the Ancients that whatever was incorporeal was not to be painted no though it had appeared in symbolical forms as confessedly the Angels did And of this the second Synod of Nice it self is a sufficient witness the Fathers of which did all approve the Epistle of John Bishop of Thessalonica in which he largely discourses against the picturing of any thing that is incorporeal He that pleases to see more of this affair may find much more and to very great purpose in a little book de imaginibus
of Valentinian hath these words Blessed is he truly who even in his old age hath amended his error Blessed is he who even just before the stroke of death turns his mind from vice Blessed are they whose sins are covered for it is written Cease from evil and do good and dwell for evermore Whoever therefore shall leave off from sin and shall in any age be turned to better things he hath the pardon of his former sins which either he hath confessed with the affections of a penitent or turned from them with the desires of amends But this Prince hath company enough in the way of his obtaining pardon For there are very many who could in their old age recal themselves from the slipperiness and sins of their youth but seldom is any one to be found who in his youth with a serious sobriety will bear the heavy yoke And I remember that when Faustus Bishop of Rhegium being asked by Paulinus Bishop of Nola from Marinus the Hermit whether a man who was involved in carnal sins and exercised all that a criminous person could do might obtain a full pardon if he did suddenly repent in the day of his death did answer peevishly and severely and gave no hopes nor would allow pardon to any such Avitus the Archbishop of Vienna reproved his pride and his morosity and gave express sentence for the validity of such a repentance and that Gentleness hath been the continual Doctrine of the Church for many Ages insomuch that in the year 1584. Henry Kyspenning a Canon of Xant published a Book intituled The Evangelical Doctrine of the meditation of death with solid exhortations and comforts to the sick from the currents of Scripture and the Commentaries of the Fathers where teaching the sick man how to answer the objections of Satan he makes this to be the fifteenth I repent too late of my sins He bids him answer It is not late if it be true and to the Thief upon the Cross Christ said This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise And afterwards a short prayer easily pierceth Heaven so it be darted forth with a vehement force of the spirit Truly the history of the Kings tells that David who was so great a sinner used but three syllables for he is read to have said no more but Peccavi I have sinned For S. Ambrose said The flame of the sacrifice of his heart ascends up to Heaven Because we have a merciful and gentle Lord and the correction of our sins needs not much time but great fervour And to the same purpose are the words of Alcuinus the Tutor of Charles the Great It behoves us to come to repentance with all confidence and by faith to believe undoubtedly that by repentance our sins may be blotted out Etiamsi in ultimo vitae spiritu commissa poeniteat although we repent of our sins in the last breath of our life Now after all these grounds of hope and confidence to a sinner what can be pretended in defiance of a sinful life and since men will hope upon one ground though it be trifling and inconsiderable when there are so many doctrinal grounds of hopes established propositions parts of Religion and Articles of faith to rely upon for all these particulars before reckoned men are called upon to believe earnestly and are hated and threatned and despised if they do not believe them what is there left to discourage the evil lives of men or to lessen a full iniquity since upon the account of the premises either we may do what we list without sin or sin without punishment or go on without fear or repent without danger and without scruple be confident of Heaven And now if Moral Theologie relie upon such notices as these I thought my work was at an end before I had well finished the first steps of my progression The whole summ of affairs was in danger and therefore I need not trouble my self or others with consideration of the particulars I therefore thought it necessary first to undermine these false foundations and since an inquiry into the minutes of conscience is commonly the work of persons that live holily I ought to take care that this be accounted necessary and all false warrants to the contrary be cancell'd that there might be many idonei auditores persons competent to hear and read and such who ought to be promoted and assisted in their holy intendments And I bless God there are very many such and though iniquity does abound yet Gods grace is conspicuous and remarkable in the lives of very many to whom I shall design all the labours of my life as being dear to God and my dear Brethren in the service of Jesus But I would fain have the Churches as full as I could before I begin and therefore I esteem'd it necessary to publish these Papers before my other as containing the greatest lines of Conscience and the most general cases of our whole life even all the doctrine of Repentance upon which all the hopes of man depend through Jesus Christ. But I have other purposes also in the publication of this Book The Ministers of the Church of Rome who ever love to fish in troubled waters and to oppress the miserable and afflicted if they differ from them in a proposition use all the means they can to perswade our people that the man that is afflicted is not alive that the Church of England now it is a persecuted Church is no Church at all and though blessed be God our Propositions and Doctrines and Liturgie and Communion are sufficiently vindicated in despite of all their petty oppositions and trifling arrests yet they will never leave making noises and outcries which for my part I can easily neglect as finding them to be nothing but noise But yet I am willing to try the Rights and Excellencies of a Church with them upon other accounts by such indications as are the most proper tokens of life I mean propositions of Holiness the necessities of a holy life for certainly that Church is most to be followed who brings us nearest to God and they make our approaches nearest who teach us to be most holy and whose Doctrines command the most excellent and severest lives But if it shall appear that the prevailing Doctrines in the Church of Rome do consequently teach or directly warrant impiety or which is all one are too easie in promising pardon and for it have no defences but distinctions of their own inventing I suppose it will be a greater reproof to their confidence and bold pretensions than a discourse against one of their immaterial propositions that have neither certainty nor usefulness But I had rather that they would preach severity than be reprov'd for their careless propositions and therefore am well pleased that even amongst themselves some are so convinc'd of the weakness of their usual Ministeries of Repentance that as much as they dare they call upon the Priests to be
he reveres And this liberty I now take is no other than hath been used by the severest Votaries in that Church where to dissent is death I mean in the Church of Rome I call to witness those disputations and contradictory assertions in the matter of some articles which are to be observed in Andreas Vega Dominicus à Soto Andradius the Lawyers about the Question of divorces and clan destine contracts the Divines about predetermination and about this very article of Original sin as relating to the Virgin Mary But blessed be God we are under the Discipline of a prudent charitable and indulgent Mother and if I may be allowed to suppose that the article means no more in short than the office of Baptism explicates at large I will abide by the trial there is not a word in the Rubricks or Prayers but may very perfectly consist with the Doctrine I deliver But though the Church of England is my Mother and I hope I shall ever live and at last die in her Communion and if God shall call me to it and enable me I will not refuse to die for her yet I conceive there is something most highly considerable in that saying Call no man Master upon earth that is no mans explication of her articles shall prejudice my affirmative if it agrees with Scripture and right reason and the doctrine of the Primitive Church for the first 300 years and if in any of this I am mistaken I will most thankfully be reproved and most readily make honourable amends But my proposition I hope is not built upon the sand and I am most sure it is so zealous for Gods honour and the reputation of his justice and wisdom and goodness that I hope all that are pious unless they labour under some prejudice and prepossession will upon that account be zealous for it or at least confess that what I intend hath in it more of piety than their negative can have of certainty That which is strain'd and held too hard will soonest break He that stoops to the authority yet twists the article with truth preserves both with modesty and Religion One thing more I fear will trouble some persons who will be apt to say to me as Avitus of Vienna did to Faustus of Rhegium Hic quantum ad frontem pertinent quasi abstinentissimam vitam professus non secretam crucem sed publicam vanitatem c. That upon pretence of great severity as if I were exact or could be I urge others to so great strictness which will rather produce despair than holiness Though I have in its proper place taken care concerning this and all the way intend to rescue men from the just causes and in-lets to despair that is not to make them do that against which by preaching a holy life I have prepar'd the best defensative yet this I shall say here particularly That I think this objection is but a mere excuse which some men would make lest they should believe it necessary to live well For to speak truth men are not very apt to despair they have ten thousand ways to flatter themselves and they will hope in despight of all arguments to the contrary In all the Scripture there is but one example of a despairing man and that was Judas who did so not upon the stock of any fierce propositions preach'd to him but upon the load of his foul sin and the pusillanimity of his spirit But they are not to be numbred who live in sin and yet sibi suaviter benedicunt think themselves in a good condition and all them that rely upon those false principles which I have reckoned in this Preface and confuted in the Book are examples of it But it were well if 〈◊〉 would distinguish the sin of despair from the misery of despair Where God hath 〈◊〉 us no warrant to hope there to despair is no sin it may be a punishment and to hope 〈◊〉 may be presumption I shall end with the most charitable advice I can give to any of my erring Brethren 〈◊〉 no man be so vain as to use all the wit and arts all the shifts and devices of the world 〈…〉 may behold to enjoy the pleasure of his sin since it may bring him into that condition that it 〈◊〉 be disputed whether he shall despair or no. Our duty is to make our calling and electioâ—â— sure which certainly cannot be done but by a timely and effective repentance But they that will be confident in their health are sometimes pusillanimous in their sickness presumptious in sin and despairing in the day of their calamity Cognitio de incorrupto Dei judicio in multis dormit sed excitari solet circa mortem said Plato For though 〈◊〉 give false sentences of the Divine judgments when their temptations are high and their 〈◊〉 pleasant yet about the time of their death their understanding and notices are awakened 〈◊〉 they see what they would not see before and what they cannot now avoid Thus I have given account of the design of this Book to you Most Reverend Fatâ—â—â— and Religious Brethren of this Church and to your judgment I submit what I have here discoursed of as knowing that the chiefest part of the Ecclesiastical office is conversant about Repentance and the whole Government of the Primitive Church was almost wholly imployed in ministring to the orders and restitution and reconciliation of penitents and therefore you are not only by your ability but by your imployment and experiences the most competent Judges and the aptest promoters of those truths by which Repentance is made most perfect and unreprovable By your Prayers and your Authority and your Wisdom I hope it will be more and more effected that the strictnesses of a holy life be thought necessary and that Repentance may be no more that trifling little piece of duty to which the errors of the late Schools of learning and the desires of men to be deceiv'd in this article have reduc'd it I have done thus much of my part toward it and I humbly desire it may be accepted by God by you and by all good men JER TAYLOR VNVM NECESSARIVM OR The DOCTRINE and PRACTICE OF REPENTANCE CHAP. I. The Foundation and Necessity of Repentance SECT I. Of the indispensable Necessity of Repentance in remedy to the unavoidable transgressing the Covenant of Works IN the first entercourse with Man God made such a Covenant as he might justly make out of his absolute dominion and such as was agreeable with those powers which he gave us and the instances in which obedience was demanded For 1. Man was made perfect in his kind and God demanded of him perfect obedience 2. The first Covenant was the Covenant of Works that is there was nothing in it but Man was to obey or die but God laid but one command upon him that we find the Covenant was instanced but in one precept In that he fail'd and therefore he was lost
state not at all fitted for Heaven but too much disposed to the ways that lead to Hell For even in innocent persons in Christ himself it was a hinderance or a state of present exclusion from Heaven he could not enter into the second Tabernacle that is into Heaven so long as the first tabernacle of his body was standing the body of sin that is of infirmity he was first to lay aside and so by dying unto sin once he entred into Heaven according to the other words of S. Paul Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God it is a state of differing nature and capacity Christ himself could not enter thither till he had first laid that down as the Divine Author to the Hebrews rarely and mysteriously discourses 9. This is the whole summ of Original sin which now I have more fully explicated than formerly it being then only fitting to speak of so much of it as to represent it to be a state of evil which yet left in us powers enough to do our duty and to be without excuse which very thing the Belgick Confession in this Article acknowledges and that not God but our selves are authors of our eternal death in case we do perish But now though thus far I have admitted as far as can be consonant to Antiquity and not unreasonable though in Scripture so much is not expressed yet now I must be more restrained and deny those superadditions to this Doctrine which the ignorance or the fancy or the interest or the laziness of men have sewed to this Doctrine SECT II. Adam's Sin is in us no more than an imputed Sin and how it is so 10. ORIGINAL sin is not our sin properly not inherent in us but is only imputed to us so as to bring evil effects upon us For that which is inherent in us is a consequent only of Adam's sin but of it self no sin for there being but two things affirmed to be the constituent parts of Original sin the want of Original righteousness and concupiscence neither of these can be a sin in us but a punishment and a consequent of Adam's sin they may be For the case is thus One half of Christians that dispute in this Article particularly the Roman Schools say that Concupiscence is not a sin but a consequent of Adam's sin The other half of Christians I mean in Europe that is the Protestants generally say That the want of original righteousness is a consequent of Adam's sin but formally no sin The effect of these is this That it is not certain amongst the Churches that either one or the other is formally our sin or inherent in us and we cannot affirm either without crossing a great part of Christendom in their affirmative There have indeed been attempts made to reconcile this difference and therefore in the conference at Wormes and in the book offered at Ratisbon to the Emperor and in the interim it self they jumbled them both together saying that Originale peccatum est carentia justitiae originalis cum concupiscentiâ But the Church of England defines neither but rather inclines to believe that it consists in concupiscence as appears in the explication of the Article which I have annexed But because she hath not determined that either of them is formally a sin or inherent in us I may with the greater freedom discourse concerning the several parts The want of original righteousness is not a thing but the privation of a thing and therefore cannot be inherent in us and therefore if it be a sin at all to us it can only be such by imputation But neither can this be imputed to us as a sin formally because if it be at all it is only a consequent or punishment of Adam's sin and unavoidable by us For though Scotus is pleased to affirm that there was an obligation upon humane nature to preserve it I doubt not but as he intended it he said false Adam indeed was tied to it for if he lost it for himself and us then he only was bound to keep it for himself and us for we could not be obliged to keep it unless we had received it but he was and because he lost it we also missed it that is are punished and feel the evil effects of it But besides all this the matter of Original righteousness is a thing framed in the School Forges but not at all spoken of in Scripture save only that God made man upright that is he was brought innocent into the world he brought no sin along with him he was created in the time and stature of reason and choice he entred upon action when his reason was great enough to master his passion all which we do not It is that which as Prosper describes it made a man expertem peccati capacem Dei for by this is meant that he had grace and helps enough if he needed any besides his natural powers which we have not by nature but by another dispensation 11. Add to all this that they who make the want of ORIGINAL Righteousness to be a sin formally in us when they come to explicate their meaning by material or intelligible events tell us it is an aversion from God that is in effect a turning to the creature and differs no otherwise from concupiscence than going from the West directly does from going directly to the East that is just nothing It follows then that if concupiscence be the effect of Adam's sin then so must the want of original righteousness because they are the same thing in real event and if that be no sin in us because it was only the punishment of his sin then neither is the other a sin for the same reason But then for Concupiscence that this is no sin before we consent to it appears by many testimonies of Antiquity and of S. Austin himself Quantum ad nos attinet sine peccato semper essemus donec sanaretur hoc malum si nunquam consentiremus ad malum Lib. 2. ad Julianum And it is infinitely against reason it should for in infants the very actions and desire of concupiscence are no sins therefore much less is the principle if the little emanations of it in them be innocent although there are some images of consent much more is that principle innocent before any thing of consent at all is applied to it By the way I cannot but wonder at this that the Roman Schools affirming the first motions of concupiscence to be no sin because they are involuntary and not consented to by us but come upon us whether we list or no yet that they should think Original sin to be a sin in us really and truly which it is certain is altogether as involuntary and unchosen as concupiscence But I add this also that concupiscence is not wholly an effect of Adam's sin if it were then it would follow that if Adam had not sinned we should have no concupiscence that is no
World by Adam's sin was Death Eternal that is God then decreed to punish sinners with the portion of Devils It is likely he did so but that this was the death introduced for the sin of Adam upon all Man-kind is not at all affirmed in Scripture but temporal death is the effect of Adam's sin in Adam we all die and the Death that Adam's sin brought in is such as could have a remedy or recompence by Christ but Eternal Death hath no recompence and shall never be destroyed but temporal death shall But that which I say is this that for Adam's sin alone no man but himself is or can justly be condemned to the bitter pains of Eternal Fire This depends also upon the former accounts because meer Nature brings not to Hell but choice Nihil ardet in inferno nisi propria voluntas said S. Bernard and since Original sin is not properly ours but only by imputation if God should impute Adam's sin so as to damn any one for it all our good we receive from God is much less than that evil and we should be infinitely to seek for justifications of God's justice and glorifications of his mercy or testimonies of his goodness But now the matter is on this side so reasonable in it self that let a man take what side he will he shall have parties enough and no prejudices or load of a consenting authority can be against him but that there shall be on the side of reason as great and leading persons as there are of those who have been abused by errour and prejudice In the time of S. Augustine Vincentius Victor and some others did believe that Infants dying without Baptism should never the less be saved although he believed them guilty of Original sin Bucer Peter Martyr and Calvin affirmed the same of the children of faithful Parents but Zuinglius affirmed it of all and that no Infant did lose Heaven for his Original stain and corruption Something less than this was the Doctrine of the Pelagians who exclude Infants unbaptized from the Kingdom of Heaven but promised to them an eternal and a natural beatitude and for it S. Augustine reckons them for Hereticks as indeed being impatient of every thing almost which they said But yet the opinion was imbraced lately by Ambrosius Catherinus Albertus Pighius and Hieronymus Savanarola And though S. Augustine sometimes calls as good Men as himself by the Name of Pelagians calling all them so that assign a third place or state to Infants yet besides these now reckoned S. Gregory Nazianzen and his Scholiast Nicetes did believe and reach it and the same is affirmed also by S. Athanasius or whoever is the Author of the Questions to Antiochus usually attributed to him and also by S. Ambrose or the Author of the Commentaries on S. Paul's Epistles who lived in the time of Pope Damasus that is before 400. Years after Christ and even by S. Augustine himself expresly in his third Book de libero arbitrio cap. 23. But when he was heated with his disputations against the Pelagians he denied all and said that a middle place or state was never heard of in the Church For all this the opinion of a middle state for unbaptized Infants continued in the Church and was expresly affirmed by Pope Innocent the third who although he says Infants shall not see the face of God yet he expresly denies that they shall be tormented in Hell and he is generally followed by the Schoolmen who almost universally teach that Infants shall be deprived of the Vision Beatifical but shall not suffer Hell torments but yet they stoop so much towards S. Augustin's harsh and fierce Opinion that they say this deprivation is a part of Hell not of torment but of banishment from God and of abode in the place of torment Among these they are also divided some affirming that they have some pain of sense but little and light others saying they have none even as they pleased to fancy for they speak wholly without ground and meerly by chance and interest and against the consent of Antiquity as I have already instanced But Gregorius Ariminensis Driedo Luther Melancthon and Tilmanus Heshusius are fallen into the worst of S. Augustine's opinion and sentence poor Infants to the flames of Hell for Original sin if they die before Baptism To this I shall not say much more than what I have said otherwhere But that no Catholick Writer for 400. Years after Christ did ever affirm it but divers affirmed the contrary And indeed if the Unavoidable want of Baptism should damn Infants for the fault which was also unavoidable I do not understand how it can in any sence be true that Christ died for all if at least the Children of Christian Parents shall not find the benefit of Christ's Death because that without the fault of any man they want the ceremony Upon this account some good men observing the great sadness and the injustice of such an accident are willing upon any terms to admit Infants to Heaven even without Baptism if any one of their Relatives desire it for them or if the Church desires it which in effect admits all Christian infants to Heaven Of this opinion were Gerson Biel Cajetan and some others All which to my sence seems to declare that if men would give themselves freedom of judgment and speak what they think most reasonable they would speak honour of God's mercy and not impose such fierce and unintelligibe things concerning his justice and goodness since our blessed Saviour concerning infants and those only who are like infants affirms that of such is the Kingdom of Heaven But now in the midst of this great variety of Opinions it will be hard to pick out any thing that is certain For my part I believe this only as certain That Nature alone cannot bring them to Heaven and that Adam left us in a state in which we could not hope for it but this I know also that as soon as this was done Christ was promised and that before there was any birth of Man or Woman and that God's Grace is greater and more communicative than sin and Christ was more Gracious and effective than Adam was hurtful and that therefore it seems very agreeable to God's goodness to bring them to happiness by Christ who were brought to misery by Adam and that he will do this by himself alone in ways of his own finding out And yet if God will not give them Heaven by Christ he will not throw them into Hell by Adam if his goodness will not do the first his Goodness and his Justice will not suffer him to do the second and therefore I consent to Antiquity and the Schoolmens opinion thus far that the destitution or loss of God's sight is the effect of Original sin that is by Adam's sin we were left so as that we cannot by it go to Heaven But here I differ Whereas they
Original Sin is the lust or concupiscence that is the proneness to sin Now then I demand whether Concupiscence before actual consent be a sin or no and if it be a sin whether it deserves damnation That all sin deserves damnation I am sure our Church denies not If therefore concupiscence before consent be a sin then this also deserves damnation where-ever it is and if so then a man may be damned for Original Sin even after Baptism For even after Baptism concupiscence or the sinfulness of Original Sin remains in the regenerate and that which is the same thing the same viciousness the same enmity to God after Baptism is as damnable it deserves damnation as much as that did that went before If it be replied that Baptism takes off the guilt or formal part of it but leaves the material part behind that is though concupiscence remains yet it shall not bring damnation to the regenerate or Baptized I answer that though baptismal regeneration puts a man into a state of grace and favour so that what went before shall not be imputed to him afterwards that is Adam's sin shall not bring damnation in any sence yet it hinders not but that what is sinful afterwards shall be then imputed to him that is he may be damn'd for his own concupiscence He is quitted from it as it came from Adam but by Baptism he is not quitted from it as it is subjected in himself if I say concupiscence before consent be a sin If it be no sin then for it Infants unbaptized cannot with justice be damn'd it does not deserve damnation but if it be a sin then so long as it is there so long it deserves damnation and Baptism did only quit the relation of it to Adam for that was all that went before it but not the danger of the man * But because the Article supposes that it does not damn the regenerate or baptized and yet that it hath the nature of sin it follows evidently and undeniably that both the phrases are to be diminished and understood in a favourable sence As the phrase the Nature of sin signifies so does Damnation but the Nature of sin signifies something that brings no guilt because it is affirm'd to be in the Regenerate therefore Damnation signifies something that brings no Hell but to deserve Damnation must mean something less than ordinary that is that concupiscence is a thing not morally good not to be allowed of not to be nurs'd but mortifi'd fought against disapprov'd condemn'd and disallowed of men as it is of God And truly My Lord to say that for Adam's sin it is just in God to condemn Infants to the eternal flames of Hell and to say that concupiscence or natural inclinations before they pass into any act could bring eternal condemnation from Gods presence into the eternal portion of Devils are two such horrid propositions that if any Church in the world would expresly affirm them I for my part should think it unlawful to communicate with her in the defence or profession of either and to think it would be the greatest temptation in the world to make men not to love God of whom men so easily speak such horrid things I would suppose the Article to mean any thing rather than either of these But yet one thing more I have to say The Article is certainly to be expounded according to the analogy of faith and the express words of Scripture if there be any that speak expresly in this matter Now whereas the Article explicating Original Sin affirms it to be that fault or corruption of mans nature vitium Naturae not peccatum by which he is far gone from Original righteousness and is inclin'd to evil because this is not full enough the Article adds by way of explanation So that the flesh lusteth against the spirit that is it really produces a state of evil temptations It lusteth that is actually and habitually it lusteth against the spirit and therefore deserves Gods wrath and damnation So the Article Therefore for no other reason but because the flesh lusteth against the spirit not because it can lust or is apta nata to lust but because it lusteth actually therefore it deserves damnation and this is Original Sin or as the Article expresses it it hath the nature of sin it is the fomes or matter of sin and is in the Original of mankind and deriv'd from Adam as our body is but it deserves not damnation in the highest sence of the word till the concupiscence be actual Till then the words of Wrath and Damnation must be meant in the less and more easie signification according to the former explication and must only relate to the personal sin of Adam To this sence of the Article I heartily subscribe For besides the reasonableness of the thing and the very manner of speaking us'd in the Article it is the very same way of speaking and exactly the same doctrine which we find in S. James Jam. 1.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concupiscence when it is impregnated when it hath conceiv'd then it brings forth sin and sin when it is in production and birth brings forth death But in Infants concupiscence is innocent and a virgin it conceives not and therefore is without sin and therefore without death or damnation * Against these expositions I cannot imagine what can be really and materially objected But my Lord I perceive the main out-cry is like to be upon the authority of the Harmony of Confessions Concerning which I shall say this That in this Article the Harmony makes as good musick as Bells ringing backward and they agree especially when they come to be explicated and untwisted into their minute and explicite meanings as much as Lutheran and Calvinist as Papist and Protestant as Thomas and Scotus as Remonstrant and Dordrechtan that is as much as pro and con or but a very little more I have not the book with me here in prison and this neighbourhood cannot supply me and I dare not trust my memory to give a scheme of it but your Lordship knows that in nothing more do the Reformed Churches disagree than in this and its appendages and you are pleased to hint something of it by saying that some speak more of this than the Church of England and Andrew Rivet though unwillingly yet confesses De Confessionibus nostris earum syntagmate vel Harmonia etiamsi in non nullis capitibus non planè conveniant dicam tamen melius in corcordiam redigi posse quà m in Ecclesia Romana concordantiam discordantium Canonum quo titulo decretum Gratiani quod Canonistis regulas praefigit solet insigniri And what he affirms of the whole collection is most notorious in the Article of Original Sin For my own part I am ready to subscribe the first Helvetian confession but not the second So much difference there is in the confessions of the same Church Now whereas your Lordship adds that though they
are fallible yet when they bring evidence of holy Writ their assertions are infallible and not to be contradicted I am bound to reply that when they do so whether they be infallible or no I will believe them because then though they might yet they are not deceived But as evidence of holy Writ had been sufficient without their authority so without such evidence their authority is nothing But then My Lord their citing and urging the words of S. Paul Rom. 5.12 is so far from being an evident probation of their Article that nothing is to me a surer argument of their fallibility than the urging of that which evidently makes nothing for them but much against them As 1. Affirming expresly that death was the event of Adam's sin the whole event for it names no other temporal death according to that saying of S. Paul 1 Cor. 15. In Adam we all die And 2. Affirming this process of death to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is and ought to be taken to be the allay or condition of the condemnation It became a punishment to them only who did sin but upon them also inflicted for Adam's sake A like expression to which is in the Psalms Psalm 106.32 33. They angred him also at the waters of strife so that he punished Moses for their sakes Here was plainly a traduction of evil from the Nation to Moses their relative For their sakes he was punished but yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for as much as Moses had sinn'd for so it follows because they provoked his spirit so that he spake unadvisedly with his lips So it is between Adam and us He sinn'd and God was highly displeased This displeasure went further than upon Adam's sin for though that only was threatned with death yet the sins of his children which were not so threatned became so punished and they were by nature heirs of wrath and damnation that is for his sake our sins inherited his curse The curse that was specially and only threatned to him we when we sinn'd did inherit for his sake So that it is not so properly to be called Original Sin as an Original curse upon our sin To this purpose we have also another example of God transmitting the curse from one to another Both were sinners but one was the Original of the curse or punishment So said the Prophet to the wife of Jeroboam 1 Kings 14.16 He shall give Israel up because of the sins of Jeroboam who did sin and who made Israel to sin Jeroboam was the root of the sin and of the curse Here it was also that I may use the words of the Apostle that by the sin of one man Jeroboam sin went out into all Israel and the curse captivity or death by sin and so death went upon all men of Israel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in as much as all men of Israel have sinned If these men had not sinned they had not been punished I cannot say they had not been afflicted for David's child was smitten for his fathers fault but though they did sin yet unless their root and principal had sinned possibly they should not have so been punished For his sake the punishment came Upon the same account it may be that we may inherit the damnation or curse for Adam's sake though we deserve it yet it being transmitted from Adam and not particularly threatned to the first posterity we were his heirs the heirs of death deriving from him an Original curse but due also if God so pleased to our sins And this is the full sence of the 12. verse and the effect of the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But your Lordship is pleased to object that though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does once signifie For as much as yet three times it signifies in or by To this I would be content to submit if the observation could be verified and be material when it were true But besides that it is so used in 2 Cor. 5.4 your Lordship may please to see it used as not only my self but indeed most men and particularly the Church of England does read it and expound it in Mat. 26.50 And yet if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the same with in or by if it be rendred word for word yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 twice in the Scripture signifies for as much as as you may read Rom. 8.3 and Heb. 2.18 So that here are two places besides this in question and two more ex abundanti to shew that if it were not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but said in words expresly as you would have it in the meaning yet even so neither the thing nor any part of the thing could be evicted against me and lastly if it were not only said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that that sence of it were admitted which is desired and that it did mean in or by in this very place yet the Question were not at all the nearer to be concluded against me For I grant that it is true in him we are all sinners as it is true that in him we all die that is for his sake we are us'd as sinners being miserable really but sinners in account and effect as I have largely discoursed in my book But then for the place here in question it is so certain that it signifies the same thing as our Church reads it that it is not sence without it but a violent breach of the period without precedent or reason And after all I have looked upon those places where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is said to signifie in or by and in one of them I find it so Mat. 2.4 but in Acts 3.16 and Phil. 1.3 I find it not at all in any sence but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indeed is used for in or by in that of the Acts and in the other it signifies at or upon but if all were granted that is pretended to it no way prejudices my cause as I have already proved Next to these your Lordship seems a little more zealous and decretory in the Question upon the confidence of the 17 18 and 19. Verses of the 5. Chapter to the Romans The summ of which as your Lordship most ingeniously summs it up is this As by one many were made sinners so by one many were made righteous that by Adam this by Christ. But by Christ we are made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 just not by imputation only but effectively and to real purposes therefore by Adam we are really made sinners And this your Lordship confirms by the observation of the sence of two words here used by the Apostle The first is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies a sentence of guilt or punishment for sin and this sin to be theirs upon whom the condemnation comes because God punishes none but for their own sin Ezek. 18.2 From the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 clear from sin so your Lordship renders
are Nestorian Where then shall we fix our confidence or joyn Communion To pitch upon any one of these is to throw the Dice if Salvation be to be had onely in one of them and that every errour that by chance hath made a Sect and is distinguished by a name be damnable If this consideration does not deceive me we have no other help in the midst of these distractions and dis-unions but all of us to be united in that common term which as it does constitute the Church in its being such so it is the Medium of the Communion of Saints and that is the Creed of the Apostles and in all other things an honest endeavour to find out what Truths we can and a charitable and and mutual permission to others that disagree from us and our Opinions I am sure this may satisfie us for it will secure us but I know not any thing else that will and no man can be reasonably prswaded or satisfied in any else unless he throws himself upon chance or absolute predestination or his own confidence in every one of which it is two to one at least but he may miscarry Thus far I thought I had reason on my side and I suppose I have made it good upon its proper grounds in the pages following But then if the result be that men must be permitted in their Opinions and that Christians must not persecute Christians I have also as much reason to reprove all those oblique Arts which are not direct Persecutions of mens persons but they are indirect proceedings ungentle and unchristian servants of faction and interest provocations to zeal and animosities and destructive of learning and ingenuity And these are suppressing all the monuments of their Adversaries forcing them to recant and burning their Books For it is a strange industry and an importune diligence that was used by our fore-fathers of all those Heresies which gave them battel and imployment we have absolutely no Record or Monument but what themselves who are adversaries have transmitted to us and we know that Adversaries especially such who observed all opportunities to discredit both the persons and Doctrines of the Enemy are not alwaies the best records or witnesses of such transactions We see it now in this very Age in the present Distemperatures that parties are no good Registers of the actions of the adverse side And if we cannot be confident of the truth of a story now now I say that it is possible for any man and likely that the interessed adversary will discover the imposture it is far more unlikely that after-Ages should know any other truth but such as serves the ends of the representers I am sure such things were never taught us by Christ and his Apostles and if we were sure that our selves spoke truth or that truth were able to justifie herself it were better if to preserve a Doctrine we did not destroy a Commandment and out of zeal pretending to Christian Religion lose the glories and rewards of ingenuity and Christian simplicity Of the same consideration is mending of Authors not to their own mind but to ours that is to mend them so as to spoil them forbidding the publication of Books in which there is nothing impious or against the publick interest leaving out clauses in Translations disgracing mens persons charging disavowed Doctrines upon men and the persons of the men with the consequents of their Doctrine which they deny either to be true or to be consequent false reporting of Disputations and Conferences burning Books by the hand of the hang-man and all such Arts which shew that we either distrust God for the maintenance of his truth or that we distrust the cause or distrust our selves and our abilities I will say no more of these but only concerning the last I shall transcribe a passage out of Tacitus in the life of Julius Agricola who gives this account of it Veniam non petissem nisi incursaturus tam saeva infesta virtutibus tempora Legimus cùm Aruleno Rustico Paetus Thrasea Herennio Senecioni Priscus Helvidius laudati essent capitale fuisse neque in ipsos modo authores sed in libros quoque eorum saevitum delegato Triumviris ministerio ut monumenta clarissimorum ingeniorum in comitio ac foro urerentur scil illo igne vocem populi Rom. libertatem Senatus conscientiam generis humani aboleri arbitrabantur expulsis insuper sapientiae professoribus atque omni bona arte in exilium acta ne quid usquam honestum occurreret It is but an illiterate policy to think that such indirect and uningenuous proceedings can among wise and free men disgrace the Authors and disrepute their Discourses And I have seen that the price hath been trebled upon a forbidden or a condemn'd Book and some men in policy have got a prohibition that their impression might be the more certainly vendible and the Author himself thought considerable The best way is to leave tricks and devices and to fall upon that way which the best Ages of the Church did use With the strength of Argument and Allegations of Scripture and modesty of deportment and meekness and charity to the persons of men they converted misbelievers stopped the mouths of Adversaries asserted Truth and discountenanced errour and those other stratagems and Arts of support and maintenance to Doctrines were the issues of Heretical brains The old Catholicks had nothing to secure themselves but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of truth and plain dealing Fidem minutis dissecant ambagibus Ut quisque lingua est nequior Solvunt ligantque quaestionum vincula Per syllogismos plectiles Vae captiosis Sycophantarum strophis Vae versipelli astutiae Nodos tenaces recta rumpit regula Infesta discertantibus Idcirco mundi stulta deligit Deus Ut concidant Sophistica And to my understanding it is a plain art and design of the Devil to make us so in love with our own Opinions as to call them Faith and Religion that we may be proud in our understanding and besides that by our zeal in our Opinions we grow cool in our piety and practical duties he also by this earnest contention does directly destroy good life by engagement of Zealots to do any thing rather then be overcome and lose their beloved Propositions But I would fain know why is not any vitious habit as bad or worse then a false Opinion Why are we so zealous against those we call Hereticks and yet great friends with drunkards fornicatours and swearers and intemperate and idle persons Is it because we are commanded by the Apostle to reject a Heretick after two admonitions and not bid such a one God speed It is good reason why we should be zealous against such persons provided we mistake them not For those of whom these Apostles speak are such as deny Christ to be come in the flesh such as deny an Article of Creed and in such odious things it is not safe
neither expressed nor involved I understand not But then if you extend the analogie of Faith further than that which is proper to the rule or Symbol of Faith then every man expounds Scripture according to the analogie of Faith but what His own Faith which Faith if it be questioned I am no more bound to expound according to the analogie of another mans Faith than he to expound according to the analogie of mine And this is it that is complained on of all sides that overvalue their own opinions Scripture seems so clearly to speak what they believe that they wonder all the world does not see it as clear as they do but they satisfie themselves with saying that it is because they come with prejudice whereas if they had the true belief that is theirs they would easily see what they see And this is very true For if they did believe as others believe they would expound Scriptures to their sence but if this be expounding according to the analogie of Faith it signifies no more than this Be you of my mind and then my arguments will seem concluding and my Authorities and Allegations pressing and pertinent And this will serve on all sides and therefore will doe but little service to the determination of Questions or prescribing to other mens consciences on any side 5. Lastly Consulting the Originals is thought a great matter to Interpretation of Scriptures But this is to small purpose For indeed it will expound the Hebrew and the Greek and rectifie Translations But I know no man that says that the Scriptures in Hebrew and Greek are easie and certain to be understood and that they are hard in Latine and English The difficulty is in the thing however it be expressed the least is in the language If the Original Languages were our mother tongue Scripture is not much the easier to us and a natural Greek or a Jew can with no more reason or authority obtrude his Interpretations upon other mens consciences than a man of another Nation Add to this that the inspection of the Original is no more certain way of Interpretation of Scripture now than it was to the Fathers and Primitive Ages of the Church and yet he that observes what infinite variety of Translations of the Bible were in the first Ages of the Church as S. Hierom observes and never a one like another will think that we shall differ as much in our Interpretations as they did and that the medium is as uncertain to us as it was to them and so it is witness the great number of late Translations and the infinite number of Commentaries which are too pregnant an Argument that we neither agree in the understanding of the words nor of the sence 6. The truth is all these ways of Interpreting of Scripture which of themselves are good helps are made either by design or by our infirmities ways of intricating and involving Scriptures in greater difficulty because men do not learn their doctrines from Scripture but come to the understanding of Scripture with preconceptions and idea's of doctrines of their own and then no wonder that Scriptures look like Pictures wherein every man in the room believes they look on him only and that wheresoever he stands or how often soever he changes his station So that now what was intended for a remedy becomes the promoter of our disease and our meat becomes the matter of sickness And the mischief is the wit of man cannot find a remedy for it for there is no rule no limit no certain principle by which all men may be guided to a certain and so infallible an Interpretation that he can with any equity prescribe to others to believe his Interpretations in places of controversie or ambiguity A man would think that the memorable Prophecy of Jacob that the Scepter should not depart from Judah till Shiloh come should have been so clear a determination of the time of the Messias that a Jew should never have doubted it to have been verified in Jesus of Nazareth and yet for this so clear vaticination they have no less than twenty six Answers S. Paul and S. James seem to speak a little diversly concerning Justification by Faith and Works and yet to my understanding it is very easie to reconcile them but all men are not of my mind for Osiander in his confutation of the book which Melancthon wrote against him observes that there are twenty several opinions concerning Justification all drawn from the Scriptures by the men only of the Augustan Confession There are sixteen several opinions concerning original sin and as many definitions of the Sacraments as there are Sects of men that disagree about them 7. And now what help is there for us in the midst of these uncertainties If we follow any one Translation or any one mans Commentary what rule shall we have to chuse the right by or is there any one man that hath translated perfectly or expounded infallibly No Translation challenges such a prerogative to be authentick but the Vulgar Latine and yet see with what good success For when it was declared authentick by the Council of Trent Sixtus put forth a Copie much mended of what it was and tied all men to follow that but that did not satisfie for Pope Clement revives and corrects it in many places and still the Decree remains in a changed subject And secondly that Translation will be very unapt to satisfie in which one of their own men Isidore Clarius a Monk of Brescia found and mended eight thousand faults besides innumerable others which he says he pretermitted And then thirdly to shew how little themselves were satisfied with it divers learned men among them did new translate the Bible and thought they did God and the Church good service in it So that if you take this for your precedent you are sure to be mistaken infinitely If you take any other the Authors themselves do not promise you any security If you resolve to follow any one as far only as you see cause then you only do wrong or right by chance for you have certainty just proportionable to your own skill to your own infallibility If you resolve to follow any one whithersoever he leads we shall oftentimes come thither where we shall see our selves become ridiculous as it happened in the case of Spiridion Bishop of Cyprus who so resolved to follow his old book that when an eloquent Bishop who was desired to Preach read his Text Tu autem tolle cubile tuum ambula Spiridion was very angry with him because in his book it was tolle lectum tuum and thought it arrogance in the preacher to speak better Latine than his Translator had done And if it be thus in Translations it is far worse in Expositions Quia scil Scripturam sacram pro ipsa sui altitudine non uno eodemque sensu omnes accipium ut penè quot homines tot illic sententiae erui posse
〈◊〉 and yet there was no such Tradition but a mistake in Papias but I find it nowhere spoke against till Dionysius of Alexandria confuted Nepo's Book and converted Coracian the Egyptian from the opinion Now if a Tradition whose beginning of being called so began with a Scholar of the Apostles for so was Papias and then continued for some Ages upon the meer Authority of so famous a man did yet deceive the Church much more fallible is the pretence when two or three hundred years after it but commences and then by some learned man is first called a Tradition Apostolical And so it happened in the case of the Arrian heresie which the Nicene Fathers did confute by objecting a contrary Tradition Apostolical as Theodoret reports and yet if they had not had better Arguments from Scripture than from Tradition they would have fail'd much in so good a cause for this very pretence the Arrians themselves made and desired to be tryed by the Fathers of the first three hundred years which was a confutation sufficient to them who pretended a clear Tradition because it was unimaginable that the Tradition should leap so as not to come from the first to the last by the middle But that this trial was sometime declined by that excellent man S. Athanasius although at other times confidently and truly pretended it was an Argument the Tradition was not so clear but both sides might with some fairness pretend to it And therefore one of the prime Founders of their heresie the Heretick Arâ—emon having observed the advantage might be taken by any Sect that would pretend Tradition because the medium was plausible and consisting of so many particulars that it was hard to be redargued pretended a Tradition from the Apostles that Christ was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that the Tradition did descend by a constant succession in the Church of Rome to Pope Victors time inclusively and till Zephyrinus had interrupted the series and corrupted the Doctrine which pretence if it had not had some appearance of truth so as possibly to abuse the Church had not been worthy of confutation which yet was with care undertaken by an old Writer out of whom Eusebius transcribes a large passage to reprove the vanity of the pretender But I observe from hence that it was usual to pretend to Tradition and that it was easier pretended than confuted and I doubt not but oftener done than discovered A great Question arose in Africa concerning the Baptism of Hereticks whether it were valid or no. S. Cyprian and his party appealed to Scripture Stephen Bishop of Rome and his party would be judged by custome and Tradition Ecclesiastical See how much the nearer the Question was to a determination either that probation was not accounted by S. Syprian and the Bishops both of Asia and Africk to be a good Argument and sufficient to determine them or there was no certain Tradition against them for unless one of these two doe it nothing could excuse them from opposing a known truth unless peradventure S. Cyprian Firmilian the Bishops of Galatia Cappadocia and almost two parts of the World were ignorant of such a Tradition for they knew of none such and some of them expresly denied it And the sixth general Synod approves of the Canon made in the Council of Carthage under Cyprian upon this very ground because in praedictorum praesulum locis solum secundum traditam eis consuetudinem servatus est they had a particular Tradition for Rebaptization and therefore there could be no Tradition Universal against it or if there were they knew not of it but much for the contrary and then it would be remembred that a conceal'd Tradition was like a silent Thunder or a Law not promulgated it neither was known nor was obligatory And I shall observe this too that this very Tradition was so obscure and was so obscurely delivered silently proclaimed that S. Austin who disputed against the Donatists upon this very Question was not able to prove it but by a consequence which he thought probable and credible as appears in his discourse against the Donatists The Apostles saith S. Austin prescribed nothing in this particular But this custome which is contrary to Cyprian ought to be believed to have come from their Tradition as many other things which the Catholick Church observes That 's all the ground and all the reason nay the Church did waver concerning that Question and before the decision of a Council Cyprian and others might dissent without breach of charity It was plain then there was no clear Tradition in the Question possibly there might be a custome in some Churches postnate to the times of the Apostles but nothing that was obligatory no Tradition Apostolical But this was a suppletory device ready at hand when ever they needed it and S. Austin confuted the Pelagians in the Question of Original sin by the custome of exorcism and insufflation which S. Austin said came from the Apostles by Tradition which yet was then and is now so impossible to be proved that he that shall affirm it shall gain only the reputation of a bold man and a confident 4. Secondly I consider if the report of Traditions in the Primitive times so near the Ages Apostolical was so uncertain that they were fain to aym at them by conjectures and grope as in the dark the uncertainty is much increased since because there are many famous Writers whose works are lost which yet if they had continued they might have been good records to us as Clemens Romanus Egesippus Nepos Coracion Dionysius Areopagite of Alexandria of Corinth Firmilian and many more And since we see pretences have been made without reason in those Ages where they might better have been confuted than now they can it is greater prudence to suspect any later pretences since so many Sects have been so many wars so many corruptions in Authors so many Authors lost so much ignorance hath intervened and so many interests have been served that now the rule is to be altered and whereas it was of old time credible that that was Apostolical whose beginning they knew not now quite contrary we cannot safely believe them to be Apostolical unless we do know their beginning to have been from the Apostles For this consisting of probabilities and particulars which put together make up a moral demonstration the Argument which I now urge hath been growing these fifteen hundred years and if anciently there was so much as to evacuate the Authority of Tradition much more is there now absolutely to destroy it when all the particulars which time and infinite variety of humane accidents have been amassing together are now concentred and are united by way of constipation Because every Age and every great change and every heresie and every interest hath increased the difficulty of finding out true Traditions 5. Thirdly There are very many Traditions which are lost and
that he hath been in great esteem with posterity And if that be all why the opinion of the following Ages shall be of more force then the opinion of the first Ages against whom Saint Austin in many things clearly did oppose himself I see no reason Or whether the first Ages were against him or no yet that he is approved by the following Ages is no better Argument for it makes his Authority not be innate but derived from the opinion of others and so to be precaria and to depend upon others who if they should change their opinions and such examples there have been many then there were nothing left to urge our consent to him which when it was at the best was onely this because he had the good fortune to be believed by them that came after he must be so still and because it was no Argument for the old Doctors before him this will not be very good in his behalf The same I say of any company of them I say not so of all of them it is to no purpose to say it for there is no Question this day in contestation in the explication of which all the old Writers did consent In the assignation of the Canon of Scripture they never did consent for six hundred years together and then by that time the Bishops had agreed indifferently well and but indifferently upon that they fell out in twenty more and except it be in the Apostles Creed and Articles of such nature there is nothing which may with any colour be called a consent much less Tradition Universal 4. But I will rather chuse to shew the uncertainty of this Topick by such an Argument which was not in the Fathers power to help such as makes no invasion upon their great reputation which I desire should be preserved as sacred as it ought For other things let who please reade M. Daillé du vray usage des Peres But I shall onely consider that the Writings of the Fathers have been so corrupted by the intermixture of Hereticks so many false books put forth in their names so many of their Writings lost which would more clearly have explicated their sense and at last an open profession made and a trade of making the Fathers speak not what themselves thought but what other men pleased that it is a great instance of God's providence and care of his Church that we have so much good preserved in the Writings which we receive from the Fathers and that all truth is not as clear gone as is the certainty of their great Authority and reputation 5. The publishing books with the inscription of great names began in Saint Paul's time for some had troubled the Church of Thessalonica with a false Epistle in Saint Paul's name against the inconvenience of which he arms them in 2 Thess. 2.1 And this encreased daily in the Church The Arians wrote an Epistle to Constantine under the name of Athanasius and the Eutychians wrote against Cyril of Alexandria under the name of Theodoret and of the Age in which the seventh Synod was kept Erasmus reports Libris falso celebrium virorum titulo commendatis scatere omnia It was then a publick business and a trick not more base then publick But it was more ancient then so and it is memorable in the books atributed to Saint Basil containing thirty Chapters De Spiritu Sancto whereof fifteen were plainly by another hand under the covert of Saint Basil as appears in the difference of the style in the impertinent digressions against the custome of that excellent man by some passages contradictory to others of Saint Basil by citing Meletius as dead before him who yet lived three years after him and by the very frame and manner of the discourse and yet it was so handsomly carried and so well served the purposes of men that it was indifferently quoted under the title of Saint Basil by many but without naming the number of Chapters and by Saint John Damascen in these words Basilius in opere triginta capitum de Spiritu Sancto ad Amphilochium and to the same purpose and in the number of 27 and 29 Chapters he is cited by Photius by Euthymius by Burchard by Zonaras Balsamon and Nicephorus But for this see more in Erasmus his Preface upon this book of Saint Basil. There is an Epistle goes still under the name of Saint Hierom ad Demetriadem virginem and is of great use in the Question of Predestination with its appendices and yet a very learned man 800 years agone did believe it to be written by a Pelagian and undertakes to confute divers parts of it as being high and confident Pelagianism and written by Julianus Episc. Eclanensis but Gregorius Ariminensis from Saint Austin affirms it to have been written by Pelagius himself I might instance in too many There is not any one of the Fathers who is esteemed Authour of any considerable number of books that hath escaped untouched But the abuse in this kind hath been so evident that now if any interessed person of any side be pressed with an Authority very pregnant against him he thinks to escape by accusing the Edition or the Authour or the hands it passed through or at last he therefore suspects it because it makes against him both sides being resolved that they are in the right the Authorities that they admit they will believe not to be against them and they which are too plainly against them shall be no Authorities And indeed the whole world hath been so much abused that every man thinks he hath reason to suspect whatsoever is against him that is what he pleaseth which proceeding onely produces this truth that there neither is nor can be any certainty nor very much probability in such Allegations 6. But there is a worse mischief then this besides those very many which are not yet discovered which like the pestilence destroys in the dark and grows into inconvenience more insensibly and more irremediably and that is corruption of particular places by inserting words and altering them to contrary senses a thing which the Fathers of the sixth General Synod complain'd of concerning the Constitutions of Saint Clement quibus jam olim ab iis qui à fide aliena sentiunt adulterina quaedam etiam à pietate aliena introducta sunt quae divinorum nobis Decretorum elegantem venustam speciem obscurârunt And so also have his Recognitions so have his Epistles been used if at least they were his at all particularly the fifth Decretall Epistle that goes under the name of Saint Clement in which community of Wives is taught upon the Authority of Saint Luke saying the first Christians had all things common if all things then Wives also says the Epistle a forgery like to have been done by some Nicolaitan or other impure person There is an Epistle of Cyril extant to Successus Bishop of Diocaesarea in which he relates
that he was asked by Budus Bishop of Emessa whether he did approve of the Epistle of Athanasius to Epictetus Bishop of Corinth and that his answer was Si haec apud vos scripta non sint adultera Nam plura ex his ab hostibus Ecclesiae deprehenduntur esse depravata And this was done even while the Authours themselves were alive for so Dionysius of Corinth complain'd that his writings were corrupted by Hereticks and Pope Leo that his Epistle to Flavianus was perverted by the Greeks And in the Synod of Constantinople before quoted the sixth Synod Macarius and his Disciples were convicted quòd Sanctorum testimonia aut truncârint aut depravârint Thus the third Chapter of Saint Cyprian's book De unitate Ecclesiae in the Edition of Pamelius suffered great alteration these words Primatus Petro datur wholly inserted and these super Cathedram Petri fundata est Ecclesia and whereas it was before super unum aedificat Ecclesiam Christus that not being enough they have made it super illum unum Now these Additions are against the faith of all old Copies before Minutius and Pamelius and against Gratian even after himself had been chastised by the Roman Correctors the Commissaries of Gregory XIII as is to be seen where these words are alledged Decret c. 24. q. 1. can Loquitur Dominus ad Petrum So that we may say of Cyprian's works as Pamelius himself said concerning his writings and the writings of other of the Fathers Vnde colligimus saith he Cypriani scripta ut aliorum Veterum à librariis variè fuisse interpolata But Gratian himself could doe as fine a feat when he listed or else some-body did it for him and it was in this very Question their beloved Article of the Pope's Supremacy for De poenit dist 1. c. Potest fieri he quotes these words out of Saint Ambrose Non habent Petri haereditatem qui non habent Petri sedem fidem not sedem it is in Saint Ambrose but this errour was made authentick by being inserted into the Code of the Law of the Catholick Church And considering how little notice the Clergy had of antiquity but what was transmitted to them by Gratian it will be no great wonder that all this part of the world swallowed such a bole and the opinion that was wrapped in it But I need not instance in Gratian any farther but refer any one that desires to be satisfied concerning this Collection of his to Augustinus Archbishop of Tarracon in emendatione Gratiani where he shall find fopperies and corruptions good store noted by that learned man But that the Indices expurgatorii commanded by Authority and practised with publick licence professe to alter and correct the sayings of the Fathers and to reconcile them to the Catholick sense by putting in and leaving out is so great an Imposture so unchristian a proceeding that it hath made the faith of all books and all Authours justly to be suspected For considering their infinite diligence and great opportunity as having had most of the Copies in their own hands together with an unsatisfiable desire of prevailing in their right or in their wrong they have made an absolute destruction of this Topick and when the Fathers speak Latine or breathe in a Roman Diocese although the providence of God does infinitely over-rule them and that it is next to a miracle that in the Monuments of Antiquity there is no more found that can pretend for their advantage then there is which indeed is infinitely inconsiderable yet our Questions and uncertainties are infinitely multiplied in stead of a probable and reasonable determination For since the Latines alwaies complain'd of the Greeks for privately corrupting the ancient Records both of Councils and Fathers and now the Latines make open profession not of corrupting but of correcting their writings that 's the word and at the most it was but a humane Authority and that of persons not alwaies learned and very often deceived the whole matter is so unreasonable that it is not worth a farther disquisition But if any one desires to enquire farther he may be satisfied in Erasmus in Henry and Robert Stephens in their Prefaces before the Editions of the Fathers and their Observations upon them in Bellarm. de scrip Eccl. in D. Reynolds de lib. Apoc. in Scaliger and Robert Coke of Leeds in Yorkshire in his Book De censura Patrum SECT IX Of the incompetency of the Church in its diffusive capacity to be Judge of Controversies and the impertinency of that pretence of the Spirit 1. AND now after all these considerations of the several Topicks Tradition Councils Popes and ancient Doctors of the Church I suppose it will not be necessary to consider the Authority of the Church apart For the Church either speaks by Tradition or by a representative body in a Council by Popes or by the Fathers for the Church is not a Chimaera not a shadow but a company of men believing in Jesus Christ which men either speak by themselves immediately or by their Rulers or by their proxies and representatives Now I have considered it in all senses but in its diffusive capacity in which capacity she cannot be supposed to be a Judge of Controversies both because in that capacity she cannot teach us as also because if by a Judge we mean all the Church diffused in all its parts and members so there can be no controversie for if all men be of that opinion then there is no Question contested if they be not all of a mind how can the whole diffusive Catholick Church be pretended in defiance of any one Article where the diffusive Church being divided part goes this way and part another But if it be said The greatest part must carry it Besides that it is impossible for us to know which way the greatest part goes in many Questions it is not always true that the greater part is the best sometimes the contrary is most certain and it is often very probable but it is always possible And when paucity of followers was objected to Liberius he gave this in answer There was a time when but three Children of the Captivity resisted the King's Decree And Athanasius wrote on purpose against those that did judge of truth by multitudes and indeed it concerned him so to doe when he alone stood in the gap against the numerous armies of the Arians 2. But if there could in this case be any distinct consideration of the Church yet to know which is the true Church is so hard to be found out that the greatest Questions of Christendom are judged before you can get to your Judge and then there is no need of him For those Questions which are concerning the Judge of Questions must be determined before you can submit to his judgement and if you can yourselves determine those great Questions which consist much in universalities then also you may determine the
God the Father and the holy Trinity to the great dishonour of that Sacred mystery against the doctrine and practice of the Primitive Church against the express doctrine of Scripture against the honour of a Divine Attribute I mean the Immensity and Spirituality of the Divine Nature You are gone to a Church that pretends to be Infallible and yet is infinitely deceived in many particulars and yet endures no contradiction and is impatient her children should enquire into any thing her Priests obtrude You are gone from receiving the whole Sacrament to receive it but half from Christ's Institution to a humane invention from Scripture to uncertain Traditions and from ancient Traditions to new pretences from Prayers which ye understood to Prayers which ye understand not from confidence in God to rely upon creatures from intire dependence upon inward acts to a dangerous temptation of resting too much in outward ministeries in the external work of Sacraments and of Sacramentals You are gone from a Church whose worshipping is Simple Christian and Apostolical to a Church where mens consciences are loaden with a burden of Ceremonies greater than that in the days of the Jewish Religion for the Ceremonial of the Church of Rome is a great Book in Folio greater I say than all the Ceremonies of the Jews contained in Leviticus c. You are gone from a Church where you were exhorted to read the Word of God the holy Scriptures from whence you found instruction institution comfort reproof a treasure of all excellencies to a Church that seals up that Fountain from you and gives you drink by drops out of such Cisterns as they first make and then stain and then reach out And if it be told you that some men abuse Scripture it is true For if your Priests had not abused Scripture they could not thus have abused you But there is no necessity they should and you need not unless you list any more than you need to abuse the Sacraments or decrees of the Church or the messages of your friend or the Letters you receive or the Laws of the Land all which are liable to be abused by evil persons but not by good people and modest understandings It is now become a part of your Religion to be ignorant to walk in blindness to believe the man that hears your Confessions to hear none but him not to hear God speaking but by him and so you are liable to be abused by him as he please without remedy You are gone from us where you were only taught to worship God through Jesus Christ and now you are taught to worship Saints and Angels with a worship at least dangerous and in some things proper to God For your Church worships the Virgin Mary with burning Incense and Candles to her and you give her Presents which by the consent of all Nations used to be esteemed a Worship peculiar to God and it is the same thing which was condemned for Heresie in the Collyridians who offered a Cake to the Virgin Mary A Candle and a Cake make no difference in the worship and your joyning God and the Saints in your worship and devotions is like the device of them that fought for King and Parliament the latter destroys the former I will trouble you with no more particulars because if these move you not to consider better nothing can But yet I have two things more to add of another nature one of which at least may prevail upon you whom I suppose to have a tender and a religious Conscience The first is That all the points of difference between us and your Church are such as do evidently serve the ends of Covetousness and Ambition of Power and Riches and so stand vehemently suspected of design and art rather than truth of the Article and designs upon Heaven I instance in the Popes power over Princes and all the World His power of dispensation The exemption of the Clergy from jurisdiction of Princes The doctrine of Purgatory and Indulgences which was once made means to raise a portion for a Lady the Neece of Pope Leo the Tenth The Priests power advanced beyond authority of any warrant from Scripture a doctrine apt to bring absolute obedience to the Papacy But because this is possibly too nice for you to suspect or consider that which I am sure ought to move you is this That you are gone to a Religion in which though through God's grace prevailing over the follies of men there are I hope and charitably suppose many pious men that love God and live good lives yet there are very many doctrines taught by your men which are very ill friends to a good life I instance in your Indulgences and Pardons in which vicious men put a great confidence and rely greatly upon them The doctrine of Purgatory which gives countenance to a sort of Christians who live half to God and half to the world and for them this doctrine hath found out a way that they may go to Hell and to Heaven too The Doctrine that the Priests absolution can turn a trifling Repentance into a perfect and a good and that suddenly too and at any time even on our death-bed or the minute before our death is a dangerous heap of falshoods and gives licence to wicked people and teaches men to reconcile a wicked debauched life with the hopes of Heaven And then for Penances and temporal satisfaction which might seem to be as a plank after the shipwrack of the duty of Repentance to keep men in awe and to preserve them from sinking in an Ocean of Impiety it comes to just nothing by your doctrine for there are so many easie ways of Indulgences and getting Pardons so many Con-fraternities Stations priviledg'd Altars little Offices Agnus Dei's Amulets Hallowed devices Swords Roses Hats Church-yards and the fountain of these annexed Indulgences the Pope himself and his power of granting what and when and to whom he list that he is a very unfortunate man that needs to smart with penances and after all he may chuse to suffer any at all for he may pay them in Purgatory if he please and he may come out of Purgatory upon reasonable terms in case he should think it fit to go thither So that all the whole duty of Repentance seems to be destroyed with devices of men that seek power and gain and find error and folly insomuch that if I had a mind to live an evil Life and yet hope for Heaven at last I would be of your Religion above any in the world But I forget I am writing a Letter I shall therefore desire you to consider upon the Promises which is the safer way For surely it is lawful for a man to serve God without Images but that to worship Images is lawful is not so sure It is lawful to pray to God alone to confess him to be true and every man a lyar to call no man Master upon Earth but to rely upon God
16 17 18. explained 782 n. 32. and Chap. 5.24 He that is in Christ hath crucified the flesh with the affections explained 794 n. 58. and Chap. 5.17 The spirit lusteth against the flesh explained 810 n. 40. Gelasius Bishop of Rome was the authour of the Book de duabus naturis contra Eutychetem 265 § 12. His words about Transubstantiation considered Genesis Chap. 6. v. 5. Every imagination of the thoughts of man's heart onely evil explained 720 n. 47. and Chap. 8. v. 21. The imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth explained 721 n. 48. H. Ghost The Divinity of the Holy Ghost was not decreed at Nice 424. The procession of the Holy Ghost may be proved by Scripture without Tradition 427 428. What is the sin against the Holy Ghost 810 n. 43. Final impenitence proved not to be the sin against the Holy Ghost 811 n. 42. That the sin against the Holy Ghost is pardonable 812 n. 48. In what sense it is affirmed in Scripture that the sin against the Holy Ghost shall not be pardoned in this world nor in the world to come 812 n. 52 53. Glory Concerning the degrees of eternal glory 968 n. 5. God Of his power to doe things impossible 233 § 11. Ubiquity an incommunicable attribute of God's 237 § 12. and 241. To picture God the Father or the Trinity is against the Primitive practice 307. The Romanists teach that the Pope hath power to dispense with all the laws of God 342. No man is tempted of God 737 n. 90. Gospel The difference between it and the Law 574. Of the possibility of keeping the Evangelical Law 576. What is required in the Gospel 588 n. 9. It is nothing else but faith and repentance 599 n. 1 2. The righteousness of the Law and Gospel how they differ 673 n. 46. Grace Pope Adrian taught that a man out of the state of Grace may merit for another in the state of Grace 320 321. The Romanists attribute the conveying of Grace to things of their own inventing 337 § 11. They teach that the Sacraments do not onely convey Grace but supply the defect of it 337. To be in the state of Grace is of very large signification 643 n. 31. The just measures and latitude of a man's being in the state of Grace 643 n. 32. How it works 679. n. 52. ad 56. What it signifieth to be in the state of Grace 643 n. 31. There is a transcendent habit of Grace and what it is 685. n. 68. How the necessity of Grace is consistent with the doctrine of Free-will 754 n. 15. By the strengths of mere Nature men cannot get to heaven 885. Greek Photius was the first authour of the Schism between the Greek and Latine Church 109 § 33. The Greek Church receive not the Article of Transubstantiation Ep. Ded. to Real Pres. 175. The Greek Church disowns Purgatory 297. The opinion of the Greek Church concerning Purgatory 510. Gregory Gregory Bishop of Rome reproved the Patriarch of Constantinople for calling himself Universal Bishop 310. Guilt It cannot properly be traduced from one person to another 902 915. Against that notion That guilt cleaveth to the nature though not to the person 910. H. Habits A Single act of sin without a habit gives a denomination 641 n. 25. Sins are damnable that cannot be habitual 641 n. 24. A sinful habit hath a guilt distinct from that of the act 659 n. 1. Sinful habits require a distinct manner of repentance 669 n. 31. Seven objections against that Assertion answered 675 n. 51. Of infused habits 676. The method of mortifying vicious habits 690 691 n. 9 10. How and in what cases a single act may be accounted habitual 648 n. 50. Of sinful habits and their threefold capacity 659 n. 4. 'T is not true to affirm That every reluctancy to an act of vertue that proceeds from the habit of the contrary vice if it be overcome increases the reward 661 n. 6. ad 9. A vicious habit adds many degrees of aversation from God 669 n. 9. Evil habits do not only imply a facility but a kind of necessity 662 n. 11. A vicious habit makes our repentances the more difficult 663 n. 14. A vicious habit makes us swallow a great sin as easily as the least 664 n. 15. It keeps us always out of God's favour 665 n. 18. A sinful habit denominates the man guilty though he exert no actions 666 n. 23. Smaller sins if habitual discompose our state of Grace 667 n. 24. Habitual concupiscence needs pardon as much as natural 667 n. 26. Saint Augustine endeavours to prove that a sinful habit has a special sinfulness distinct from that of evil actions and Pelagius did gainsay it 667 n. 26. Every habit of vice is naturally expelled by a habit of vertue 669 n. 34. Though to extirpate a vicious habit by a contrary habit is not meritorious of pardon yet it is necessary in order to the obtaining pardon 670 n. 36. To oppose a habit against a habit is a more proper and effectual remedy then to oppose an act of sorrow or repentance against an act of sin 670 n. 38. In re morali there is no such thing as infused habits 676 n. 53. Hands Of laying on of hands in absolution 838 n. 54. Imposition of hands was twice solemnly had in repentance 840 841 n. 57. Heathen Their practice in their hymns and prayers to their gods pag. 3 n. 11. They could not worship an Image terminativè 338. The Heathens did condemn the worship of Images 546. Heaven In a natural state we cannot hope for Heaven 737 n. 85. Epistle to the Hebrews Chap. 6. v. 1 2. Of the foundation of laying on of hands explained 10 11 b. That the Apostle there in speaking of the laying on of hands means Confirmation and not either Absolution or Ordination 10 11 b. Chap. 9.28 expl 712 n. 15. Chap. 7.27 expl 712. n. 17. Chap. 5.23 explained 712. Chap. 6.4 5 6. explained ibid. Chap. 10.26 explained 809 n. 36. Hell The Article of Christ's descent into Hell was not in the ancient copies of the Creed 943 n. 8. Heresie How Aërius could be an Heretick seeing his errour was against no fundamental doctrine 150 § 48. The notion of Heresie was anciently more comprehensive then now it is ibid. In the first Council of Constantinople he is declared an heretick that believes right but separates from his Bishop 151 § 48. The Heresie of the Acephali what it was ibid. A Son or Wife they absolve from duty if the Father or Husband be heretical 345. The Pope takes upon him to depose Kings not heretical 345. The Fathers style some hereticks that are not 376. An heretical Pope is no Pope 401. What Popes have been heretical ibid. and 402. The validity of Baptism by hereticks is not to be proved by Tradition without Scripture 426 427. Divers hereticks did worship the picture of our Lord and were reproved for it 545. Pope John XXII
wave reade have 4. l. 13. reade ever more l. 15. r. and it is 6. l. 33. r. mutual concurse 19. l. 5. r. bind 22. l. 11. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 23. l. 11. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 23. margin l. 18. r. ad Sect. 88.24 l. 4. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 26. l. 19. r. in the principle l. 22 23. r. who are not Rulers are 28. l. 57. r. into the judgement 35. l. 45. r. Adde to this Epist. before Episc. p. 2. l. 28. dele are 46. l. 11. r. procellosissimae 51. l. 18. r. were of the number 57. l. 33. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 79. l. 44. r. than Ecclesiae 90. l. 58. for hath r. have 101. l. 32. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 122. l. 5. r. preside 133. l. 3. f. r quinque r. quique 135. l. 10. r. blundering 152. l. 47. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 52. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 162. l. 6. r. Sicut 165. l. 60. r. Aërians 167. l. 51. r. distinct 182. l. 42. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 184. l. 59. r. impossible 185. l. 38. r. suspects 190. l. 38. r. ineffective 191. l. 8. r. confutation l. 39. r. instrumenta 193. l. 53. r. Banquet 208. l. 55. r. Tropical 211. l. 49. r. body 218. l. 15. r. corradere l. 57. r. Statues 222. l. 60. r. conversing 232. l. 62. r. exitum 236. l. 57. r. in thesi 268. l. 46. r. Hoc est corpum meum Pref. to Dissuasive p. 3. l. 30. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 314. l. 24. r. weakens and. 320. l. 4. r. or no. 322. l. 53. r. is the true 328. l. 51. r. fil'd upon 352. l. 43. r. hath proved 356. l. 52. r. is it reasonable 397. l. 41. r. conciliariter 431. l. 43. r. baptized 438. l. 9. r. for no more 466. l. 37. r. infinite 469. l. 45. r. Sacrament 472. l. 20. r. publick 487. l. 47. r. judge 515. l. 55. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 518. l. 18. r. change 524. margin l. 24. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 525. l. 10 11. for satisfaction r. falsification 529. l. 46. r. no difference 534. l. 34. r. that made Hebrew 553. l. 32. for many r. man l. 40. r. nulli 572. l. 28. r. may be bold 579. l. 59. r. dispassionate 580. l. 16. r. impossible 596. l. 50. r. same chapter 617. l. 21. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 626. l. 46. r. unavoidable 632. marg l. 1. r. See chap. 8.676 l. 44. r. is so far 713. l. 28. r. inflicted 728. l. 61. for Ninth r. Tenth 735. l. 24. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 855. l. 39. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 872. l. 39. r. Nemo est tam prope tam procâ—lque nobis 873. l. 14. r. chiefs 903. l. 29. for healed r. treated 904. l. 3. r. treated like 952. l. 19. for subscribe r. prescribe 960. l. 43. r. Damasus 969. l. 7. r. higher 975. l. 13. r. reviews 982. l. 9. for useless r. useful 998. l. 3. r. causally THE END Books Printed and Reprinted for Richard Royston at the Angel in Amen-corner Written by Dr. JER TAYLOVR THE Great Exemplar of Sanctity and Holy life according to the Christian Institution Described in the History of the Life and Death of the ever-Blessed JESUS CHRIST the Saviour of the World With Considerations and Discourses upon the several parts of the Story and Prayers fitted to the several Mysteries In three Parts In Folio Ductor Dubitantium or The Rule of Conscience in all her general measures Serving as a great Instrument for the determination of Cases of Conscience In Folio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Course of Sermons for all the Sundays of the Year Fitted to the great Necessities and for the supplying the wants of Preaching in many parts of this Nation With a Supplement of Eleven Sermons preached since His MAJESTIE's Restauration Whereunto is adjoyned a Discourse of the Divine Institution Necessity Sacredness and Separation of the Office Ministeriall With Rules and Advices to the Clergy In Folio The Rules of Holy Living and Dying in 8o. The Golden Grove in 12. being a choice Manuall of Prayers The Worthy Communicant Printed for John Martin in 8o. Written by Dr. HENRY HAMMOND in IV Volumes Vol. I. A Collection of Discourses chiefly Practicall In a large Folio newly printed Vol. II. A Collection of Discourses in Defense of the Church of England 1. Against the Romanists 2. Against other Adversaries Vol. III. A Paraphrase and Annotations upon all the Books of the New Testament Vol. IV. A Paraphrase and Annotations upon the Books of the Psalms A Paraphrase and Annotations upon the Ten first Chapters of the Proverbs M S. ΒΑΣΙΛΙΚΑ The Works of KING CHARLES the Martyr With a Collection of Declarations Treaties and other Papers concerning the Differences betwixt His said MAJESTY and His Two Houses of Parliament The Works of the Pious and profoundly-Learned M r Joseph Mede sometime Fellow of Christ's College in Cambridge in a large Folio The Christian Sacrifice 12. Advice to a Friend 12. By the Authour of the Devout Christian. Reflexions upon the Devotions of the Roman Church in large Octavo New A Friendly Debate between a Conformist and a Non-conformist the first and second Parts in Octavo Animadversions upon a Book intituled Fanaticism Fanatically Imputed to the Catholick Church by Dr. Stillingfleet and written by a Person of Honour New Colos. 3. Tortura Tâ—rti p. 142. Camb. Annal. A. D. 1560. 2 Chron. 29. Apoc. 15. Exod. 15. Psal. 145. Jer. 1â— 6 7 a De Spir. Sanct. c. 27. b Dâ— celebratione Missarum c. cuâ— Matâ—h c In gemma anum l. 1 c 86. d De Dâ—vin Offic. e Super Act. 20 Vna autem Sabba hi. f L. 8. c. 17. * Mystagog Catechis 5. Hâ—m 6. in 1 Epist. ad Tim. In Comment a Apologeta 14 b Ep. 59. ad Paulin. c Ep. 1. d De dogmat Eccles. cap. 30. e L. 1. de vocat gâ—nt c. 4. f In Commenâ— Institut Cleric â— 1. c. 32. 1 Tim. 2. Epist. 59. ad Paulin. q. 5. De instit Cleric lib. 1. c. 32. Acts and Monuments pag. 1385. pag. 1608 1565. pag. 1840. pag. 1844. alibi Pag. 1848 1649 1840. Contra haeres c. 7. Num. 6.23 * Directory Isocrat in Panathen Eccles. 5.2 Alex. ab Alex. l. 2. c. 14. Idem l. 4 c 17. ibid. In vita Proâ—resâ—i Ephes. 2.8 1 Cor. 12.9 2 Cor. 4.13 〈◊〉 Jud. v. 1.20 1 Tim. 4.14 2 Tim. 1.6 * So as that hereby they become not slothful and negligent in stirring up the gifts of Christ in them But that each one by meditation by taking heed c. may be careful to furnish his heart and tongue with further or other materials c. Preface to the Directory Rom. 8.26 * Eph. 5.18 19 ‖ Col. 3.16 Vid. Act. 19.21 16.7 8 9 10. Etiam Veteres Propheta disposuerunt se ad respondendum propheticé Et
Pontifical book Hic titulos in urbe Româ divisit Presbyteris septem Diacons ordinavit qui custodirent Episcopum praedicantem propter stylum veritatis He divided the Parishes or titles in the City of Rome to Presbyters The same also is by Damasus reported of Dionysius in his life Hic Presbyteris Ecclesias divisit coemiteria parochiásque dioeceses constituit Marcellus increased the number in the year 305. Hic fecit coemiterium viâ Salariâ 25 Titulos in urbe Roma constituit quasi dioeceses propter baptismum poenitentiam multorum qui convertebantur ex Paganis propter sepulturas Martyrum He made a Sepulture or coemitery for the burial of Martyrs and appointed 25 Titles or Parishes but he adds quasi Dioeceses as it had been Dioâ—esses that is distinct and limited to Presbyters as Diocesses were to Bishops and the use of Parishes which he subjoyns clears the business for he appointed them only propter baptismum poenitentiam multorum sepulturas for baptism and penance and burial for as yet there was no preaching in Parishes but in the Mother-Church Thus it was in the West * But in Aegypt we find Parishes divided something sooner than the earliest of these for Eusebius reports out of Philo that the Christians in S. Mark 's time had several Churches in Alexandria Etiam de Ecclesiis quae apud eos sunt ita dicit Est autem in singulis locis consecrata orationi domus c. But even before this there were Bishops for in Rome there were four Bishops before any division of Parishes though S. Peter be reckoned for none And before Parishes were divided in Alexandria S. Mark himself who did it was the Bishop and before that time S. James was Bishop of Jerusalem and in divers other places where Bishops were there were no distinct Parishes of a while after Evaristus's timâ— for when Dionysius had assigned Presbyters to several Parishes he writes of it to Severus Bishop of Corduba and desires him to do so too in his Diocess as appears in his Epistle to him * For indeed necessity required it when the Christians multiplied and grew to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Cornelius called the Roman Christians a great and an innumerable people and did implere omnia as Tertullians phrase is filled all places and publick and great assemblies drew danger upon themselves and increased jealousies in others and their publick offices could not be performed with so diffused and particular advantage then they were forced to divide congregations and assigned several Presbyters to their cure in subordination to the Bishop and so we see the Elder Christianity grew the more Parishes there were At first in Rome there were none Evaristus made seven Dionysius made some more and Marcellus added 25 and in Optatus's time there were 40. Well then The case is thus Parishes were not divided at first therefore to be sure they were not of Divine institution Therefore it is no divine institution that a Presbyter should be fixt upon a Parish therefore also a Parish is not by Christ's ordinance an independant body for by Christs ordinance there was no such thing at all neither absolute nor in dependance neither and then for the main issue since Bishops were before Parishes in the present sence the Bishops in that sence could not be Parochial * But which was first of a private congregation or a Diocess If a private congregation then a Bishop was at first fixt in a private congregation and so was a Parochial Bishop If a Diocess was first then the Question will be how a Diocess could be without Parishes for what is a Diocess but a jurisdiction over many Parishes * I answer it is true that Diocess and Parish are words used now in contradiction And now a Diocess is nothing but the multiplication of many Parishes Sed non fuit sic ab initio For at first a Diocess was the City and the Regio suburbicaria the neighbouring towns in which there was no distinction of Parishes That which was a Diocess in the secular sence that is a particular Province or division of secular prefecture that was the assignation of a Bishops charge Ephesus Smyrna Pergamus Laodicea were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 heads of the Diocess saith Pliny meaning in respect of secular jurisdiction so they were in Ecclesiastical regiment And it was so upon great reason for when the regiment of the Church was extended just so as the regiment of the Commonwealth it was of less suspicion to the secular power while the Church regiment was just fixt together with the political as if of purpose to shew their mutual consistence and its own subordination ** And besides this there was in it a necessity for the subjects of another Province or Diocess could not either safely or conveniently meet where the duty of the Commonwealth did not ingage them but being all of one prefecture and Diocess the necessity of publick meetings in order to the Commonwealth would be fair opportunity for the advancement of their Christendom And this which at first was a necessity in this case grew to be a law in all by the sanction of the Council of Chalcedon and of Constantinople in Trullo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let the order of the Church follow the order and guise of the Commonwealth viz. in her regiment and prefecture * But in the modern sence of this division a Bishops charge was neither a Parish nor a Diocess as they are taken in relation but a Bishop had the supreme care of all the Christians which he by himself or his Presbyters had converted and he also had the charge of endeavouring the conversion of all the Country So that although he had not all the Diocess actually in communion and subjection yet his charge his Diocess was so much Just as it was with the Apostles to whom Christ gave all the world for a Diocess yet at first they had but a small congregation that did actually obey them And now to the Question Which was first a particular congregation or a Diocess I answer that a Diocess was first that is the Apostles had a charge before they had a congregation of converts And S. Mark was sent Bishop to Alexandria by S. Peter before any were converted * But ordinarily the Apostles when they had converted a City or Nation then fixt Bishops upon their charge and there indeed the particular congregation was before the Bishop's taking of the Diocess But then this City or Nation although it was not the Bishops Diocess before it was a particular congregation yet it was part of the Apostles Diocess and this they concredited to the Bishops respectively S. Paul was ordained by the prophets at Antioch Apostle of the Uncircumcision All the Gentiles was his Diocess and even of those places he then received power which as yet he had not converted So that absolutely a diocess was
other hereticks It is most likely here it might go away But however the good providence of God hath kept this record to reprove the follies of the Roman Church in this particular The authority of S. Austin reprehending the worship of images was urg'd from several places of his writings cited in the Margent In his first book de moribus Ecclesiae he hath these words which I have now set down in the Margent in which describing among other things the difference between superstition and true religion he presses it on to â—ssue Tell not me of the professors of the Christian name Follow not the troops of the unskilful who in true religion it self either are superstitious or so given to lusts that they have forgotten what they have promis'd to God I know that there are many worshippers of sepulchres and pictures I know that there are many who live luxuriously over the graves of the dead That S. Austin reckons these that are worshippers of pictures among the superstitious and the vitious is plain and forbids us to follow such superstitious persons But see what follows But how vain how hurtful how sacrilegious they are I have purpos'd to shew in another volume Then addressing himself to the Manichees who upon the occasion of these evil and superstitious practices of some Catholicks did reproach the Catholick Church he says Now I admonish you â—hat at length you will give over the reproaching the Catholick Church by reproaching the manners the of these men viz. worshippers of pictures and sepulchres and livers riotously over the dead whom she her self condemns and whom as evil sons she endeavours to correct By these words now cited it appears plainly that S. Austin affirms that those few Christians who in his time did worship pictures were not only superstitious but condemned by the Church This the Letter writer denies S. Austin to have said but that he did say so we have his own words for witness Yea but 2. S. Austin did not speak of worshippers of Pictures alone what then Neither did he of them alone say they were superstitious and their actions vain hurtful and sacrilegious But does it follow that therefore he does not say so at all of these because he says it of the others too But 3. neither doth he formally call them superstitious I know not what this offer of an answer means certain it is when S. Austin had complained that many Christians were superstitious his first instance is of them that worship pictures and graves But I perceive this Gentleman found himself pinch'd beyond remedy and like a man fastned by his thumbs at the whipping-post he wries his back and shrinks from the blow though he knows he cannot get loose In the Margent of the Dissuasive there were two other testimonies of S. Austin pointed at but the Letter says that in these S. Austin hath not a word to any such purpose That is now to be tryed The purpose for which they were brought is to reprove the doctrine and practice of the Church of Rome in the matter of images It was not intended that all these places should all speak or prove the same particular but that which was affirmed in the text being sufficiently verified by the first quotation in the Margent the other two are fully pertinent to the main inquiry and to the condemnation of the Roman doctrine as the first was of the Roman practice The words are these Neither is it to be thought that God is circumscribed in a humane shape that they who think of him should fancy a right or a left side or that because the Father is said to sit it is to be supposed that he does it with bended knees lest we fall into that sacriledge for which the Apostle execrates them that change the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of a corruptible man For for a Christian to place such an image to God in the Church is wickedness but much more wicked is it to place it in our heart So S. Austin Now this testimony had been more properly made use of in the next Section as more relating to the proper matter of it as being a direct condemnation of the picturing of God but here it serves without any sensible error and where ever it is it throws a stone at them and hits them But of this more in the sequel But the third testimony however it pleases A. L. to deny it does speak home to this part of the question and condemns the Roman hypothesis the words are these See that ye forget not the testimony of your God which he wrote or that ye make shapes and images But it adds also saying Your God is a consuming fire and a zealous God These words from the Scripture Adimantus propounded Yet remember not only there but also here concerning the zeal of God be so blames the Scriptures that he adds that which is commanded by our Lord God in those books concerning the not worshipping of images as if for nothing else he reprehends that zeal of God but only because by that very zeal we are forbidden to worship images Therefore he would seem to favour images which therefore they do that they might reconcile the good will of the Pagans to their miserable and mad sect meaning the sect of the Manichees who to comply with the Pagans did retain the worship of images And now the three testimonies are verified and though this was an unnecessary trouble to me and I fear it may be so to my Reader yet the Church of Rome hath got no advantage but this that in S. Austins sence that which Romanists do now the Manichees did then only these did it to comply with the Heathens and those out of direct and meer superstition But to clear this point in S. Austins doctrine the Reader may please to read his 19. book against Faustus the Manichee cap. 18. and the 119. Epistle against him chap. 12. where he affirms that the Christians observe that which the Jews did in this viz. that which was written Hear O Israel the Lord thy God is one God thou shalt not make an idol to thee and such like things and in the latter place he affirms that the second Commandment is moral viz. that all of the Decalogue are so but only the fourth I add a third as pregnant as any of the rest for in his first book de consensu Evangelistarum speaking of some who had fallen into error upon occasion of the pictures of S. Peter and S. Paul he says Sic nempe errare meruerunt qui Christum Apostolos ejus non in sanctis codicibus sed in pictis parietibus quaesiverunt The Council of Eliberis is of great concern in this Question and does great effort to the Roman practices E. W. takes notice of it and his best answer to it is that it hath often been answered already He says true it hath been answered