division nor discontent Lay the Churches peace upon no new humane Impositions if you would have it hold Peruse Rom. 14. and the other Text last cited 1 Cor. 6. 12. 11. The Churches Peace or Unity must not be laid on any bare words of mans devising It 's not a work for Councils or Prelates to form the Christian doctrine in new methods and terms and then to force others to subscribe or use those very terms If the same men that refuse this be willing to subscribe to the whole Scripture or to a Confession in Scripture terms you may force him to no more Object But Hereticks will subscribe to Scripture Answ 1. They must wrest it then or wrest their Consciences And by either or both these shifts they may also subscribe to any of your Confessions 2. If his Heresie be latent in his mind you know it not nor can call him an Heretick nor doth it hurt the Church If it he published or preached to others let civil Governors question him for corporal punishment and let the Associate Pastors question him to his Reformation or Rejection You will have a better ground to reject him for delivering falsehood in his own words then for not subscribing to Truth in your words when he subscribed the same Truth in Gods Words There is no Unity to be expected if you will so far depart from the Scripture sufficiency as to make any more for sense or phrase of absolute necessity to our peace By phrase or terms I mean either the same numerically as in the Original or equipollent as in translations And I say not that it 's necessary to the unity of the Church that every word in Scripture Original or Translations be subscribed to for some may doubt of the corruption of a word or Book But that no more is necessary If all Scripture be not of that degree of Necessity much less humane additions Isa 8. 20. 1 Tim. 3. 17. 2 Tim. 1. 13. 1 Cor. 9. 5. 1 Tim. 6. 20. Act. 20. 32. 12. The Churches Unity Peace must not be laid upon all Divine Truths as not on lesser darker points which neither the being nor well-being of Christianity is concerned in so much as to rest upon them Phil. 3. 15 16. Rom. 14. 15 17 20. Heb. 5. 11 12 13 14. 1 Cor. 7. 19. Gal. 5. 6. 6. 15. Col. 3. 11. 13. We ought to love and esteem as Christians and members of the Catholick Church all those that profess to believe the Essentials of Christianity and to be sanctified by the Spirit of God and lead a holy upright life so they make a credible profession not evidently contradicted by words or deeds though these persons may differ from us in many lower points of Doctrine Worship or Government 1 Cor. 1. 2. Eph. 6. 24. Gal. 6. 15 16. Phil. 3. 16. Rom. 15. 1 2. 14. 1 2. 1 Cor. 8. 9. 14. We ought so to manage the Worship of God in our particular solemn Assemblies that no sober peaceable Christian may be repulsed or forced from our local Communion through differences in things of indifferent nature Heb. 8. 5. Mat. 15. 9. Rom. 14. 13. 14 1. 2 Cor. 11. 3. Joh. 4. 23 24. 15. If any Churches differ from us in Ceremonies or smaller things or if any particular Christians differ so that they cannot in conscience hold local Communion with us in the same Assemblies for Worship E. G. if we sit at the Lords Supper and they dare not take it without kneeling if we sing a version of the Psalms which they scrup'e to joyn in If we permit none to joyn that will not conform in disputable things in such cases though it be first our duty to do our best to remove all offences yet if that cannot be done we may and ought in several Assemblies to take each other for Brethren and of the same Catholick Church so be it we all hold the same essentials of Faith and Godliness and walk accordingly and especially if we also hold those weighty superstructures that the welfare of the Church is most concerned in Though here were few or no instances of this case in the days of the Apostles when divisions were not so great as now yet the general rules in the fore-cited Texts do prove it 16. Ecclesiastical Ministerial Government by whomsoever exercised must not degenerate into a secular coercive Government nor may we use carnal weapons nor meddle by force with mens bodies or estates nor yet can we oblige the Magistrate to do it meerly to execute our censures or without sufficient Evidence to prove it his duty nor can we oblige the people against the Word of God clave errante so that neither Bishop nor Council hath any such power as is properly decisively Judicial obliging to execution be the sentence right or wrong But our people must know that though we be their Guides or Rulers yet are we but Ministers and that they have a higher power to regard and must not obey us against the Lord but in and for him The Power of Pastors therefore is not like Magistrates or absolute Judges as is said before but like a Physitian in his Hospital or in an infected City among his Patients and like a Reader of any Science to voluntary Scholars in his School and as an Embassador to them to whom he is sent So that our Governing being but by the Word and on the Conscience is of the same nature with our Directing 1 Pet. 5. 3. Luke 22. 25 26. 3 Joh. 9. 10. 1 Cor. 4. 1 2. 17. Magistrates are Governors of the Church even as a Church and of Christians as Christians though not Absolutely nor in the same respects by the same means to the same neerest Ends as Pastors Magistrates must force us to our duty and punish us if we be wicked or negligent even as Pastors and cast us out of our Benefices and deny us encouragements if we be insufficient so that ad hoc the Magistrate is the only Judge what is sound doctrine and what heresie what Ministers are sufficient or insufficient culpable or not I say ad hoc so far as to Judge who shall have publick Liberty and Countenance and who shall be punished restrained and discountenanced Thus far the Mastrate is Judge in Religion besides that Judgement of Choice which every private man hath And therefore the Princes of the Christian world should hold some correspondencies like General Councils among themselves by their agents for carrying on the work of Christ and much of the unity and prosperity of Christians lyeth on their hands Isa 49. 23. Psal 2. 12. Rom. 13. 1 2 3 4. 1 King 2. 27 35. 2 King 18. 4. 2 King 23. 8 20. 2 Chron. 14. 3 5. Josh 1. 8. 1 Tim. 2. 2. 18. Yet are the Pastors of the Church in their places Rulers or Guides of Princes and Magistrates that is we Guide them by Doctrine and Church discipline as they Rule us
only by vertue or meer desert But now this Right side and Left side and Middle and Lower Degree and Presidency and Concomitancy have begot us many Contritions to no purpose and have driven many into the Ditch and have led them away to the region of the Goats What Hierom saith both in his Epistle to Evagrius and on Tit. cap. 2. is commonly known The many plain Testimonies of Anselmn are commonly Cited as plain as Hieroms Alphons à Castro advers Haeres lib. 6. in nom Episcop had more ingenuity then to joyn with them that would wrest Hieroms words to a sence so contrary to their most plain importance Tertullian cap. 17. de Bapt. thought Lay-men in Necessity might Baptize and so doth the Church of Rome now Why then may not Presbyters in such a case at least Ordain when as he there saith Quod ex aequo accipitur ex aequo dari potest And ibid. he saith that it is but propter Ecclesiae honorem that Bishops Rule in such matters and that peace may be kept and Schism avoided But that probati quique seniores did exercise Discipline in the Assembly he testifieth in Apologet. Mr. Prin hath cited you abundance of Fathers that were for the parity of the Ministry or against Prelacy jure Divino Isidore Pelusiat lib. 3. Epist 223. ad Hieracem Episcopatum fugientem saith And when I have shewed what difference there is between the ancient Ministry and the present Tyranny why do you not Crown and Praise the Lovers of equality If you would see more of the Antients making Presbyters to be Bishops and Consenting with Hierom read Sedulius on Tit. 1. Anselm Cantuar in Enarrat in Phil. 1. 1. Beda on Act. 20. Alcuinus de Divinis officiis c. 35 36. and on John lib. 5. Col 547. c. Epist 108. And that Presbyters may Ordain Presbyters see Anselmn on 1 Tim. 4. 14. And Institut in Concil Colon. de sacr Ordin fol. 196. see also what 's said by our Mart. Bucer script Anglic. pag. 254 255 259 291. sequ Pet. Martyr Loc. Commu Clas 4. Loc. 1. sect 23 pag. 849. And Wickliffes Arguments in Waldensis Passim And your own Cassander Consult Artic. 14. saith It is agreed among all that of old in the Apostles dayes there was no difference between Bishops and Presbyters but afterwards for Orders sake and the avoiding of Schism the Bishop was set before the Presbyters And Ockam determineth that by Christs Institution all Priests of what degree soever are of equal Authority Power and Jurisdiction Reynold Peacock Bishop of Chichester wrote a Book de Ministrorum aequalitate which your party caused to be burnt And Richardus Armachanus lib. 9. cap. 5. ad Quest Armen saith There is not found in the Evangelical or Apostolical Scriptures any difference between Bishops and simple Priests called Presbyters whence it follows that there is one Power in all and equall from their Order cap. 7. answering the Question Whether any Priest may Consecrate Churches c. he saith Priests may do it as well as Bishops seeing a Bishop hath no more in such matters then any simple Priest though the Church for reverence to them appoint that those only do it whom we call Bishops It seems therefore that the restriction of the Priests Power was not in the Primitive Church according to the Scripture I refer you to three Books of Mr. Prins viz. his Catalogue his Antipathy of Lordly Prelates c. and his unbishoping of Timothy and Titus where you have the Judgements of many writers of these matters And also to what I have said in my Second Disputation of the Episcopal Controversiès of purpose on this point 7. The chief error of the Papists in this cause is expressed in their reason No man can give the Power that he hath not wherein they intimate that it is Man that giveth the Ministerial Power whereas it is the gift of Christ alone Man doth but design the person that shall receive it and then Christ giveth it by his Law to the person so designed and then man doth in vest him and solemnize his introduction As a woman may choose her an husband but it is not she that giveth him the Power over her but God who determineth of that Power by his Law affixing it to the person chosen by her and her action is but a condition fine qua non or cause of the capacity of the matter to receive the form And so is it here When do but obey God in a right choice and designation of the person his Law doth presently give him the Power which for orders sake he must be in a solemn manner invested with But matters of Order may possibly vary and though they are to be observed as far as may be yet they alwayes give place to the Ends and substance of the work for the ordering whereof they are appoineed 8. Temporal power is as truly and necessarily of God as Ecclesiastical and it was at first given immediately by him and he chose the person And yet there is no Necessity that Kings must prove an uninterrupted Succession God useth means now in designing the persons that shall be Governors of the Nations of the earth But not alway the same means nor hath he tyed himself to a successive Anointing or Election else few Kings on earth would hold their Scepters And no man from any diversity in the cases is able to prove that a man may not as truly be a lawful Church-governor as a lawful Governor of the Commonwealth without an uninterrupted succession of Ministerial Collation 9. If Bellarmine be forced to maintain that with them it is enough that a Pastor have the place and seem lawfull to the people and that they are bound to obey him though it should prove otherwise Then we may as well stand on the same terms as they 10. In a word our Ordination being according to the Law of Christ and the Popes so contrary to it we are ready at any time more fully to compare them and demonstrate to any impartial man that Christ doth much more disown their Ordination then ours and that we enter in Gods appointed way Mr. Eliot in New England may better Ordain a Pastor over the Indians converted by him then leave them without or send to Rome or England for a Bishop or for Orders But again I must refer you of this subject to the Books before mentioned and the Sheet which I have written lest I be over-tedious CHAP. XXXIV Detect 25. ANother of their Deceits is In pretending the Holiness of their Churches and Ministry and the unholiness of ours This being matter of fact a willing and impartial mind may the easier be satisfied in it They prove their Holiness 1. By the Canonized Saints among them 2. By the devotion of their Religious Orders and their strictness of living 3. By their unmarried Clergy 4. By their sanctifying Sacraments and Ceremonies In all which they
the Soveraign or chief Governour of it self or the Church Representative of the Church reall as they use to call them As to them that Head it with the Pope I have said enough already and others much more especially Blondell unanswerably Yet I shall partly take them also in my way though I deal principally with the other And these brief Arguments may serve to confute the Vice-christship or Soveraignty of the Pope 1. There is no such Head Instituted by Christ The Scripture pretenses for it I have before confuted and they are so poor that they vanish of themselves 2. The Popes Soveraignty is against the Judgement of the Ancient Fathers and practise of the Primitive Church as I have proved in this and a former Book 3. It is against Tradition as brought down to us by the greatest part of the Church on earth by far as is before proved 4. It is against the Judgement of the far greatest part of the present Catholick Church as is proved 5. It is the the meer effect of pride and tyranny a plain design to set up one man over all the world for his greatness and their hurt 6. The pretense of this Soveraignty is the consequent only of Romes greatness and the will of Emperours that to conform the Ecclesiastical state to the civil did give a Primacy to the Bishop of Rome within the Empire 7. It is a meer impossibility for one man to be the Soveraign of all the Churches in the world and do the work of a Soveraign for them He had need of many millions and millions of Treasure to defray the charge which Peter had not While he pretends to govern all the world he doth but leave them ungoverned or not by him How can he govern all those Churches in the Dominions of Infidels that will not endure his Government There are more then all the Papists in the world now from under his Government voluntarily that could not be governed by him if they would 8. There are yet visible many great Churches that were planted by the Apostles or in their dayes and never were under Romes Soveraignty to this day as the Aetheopians Persians Indians and most that were without the verge of the Roman Empire 9. There is no use for such an Head as I shall shew anon of Councils 10. There is not so much Reason for it or possibility of it as that One man must be King or Monarch of all the world Considering that spiritual Government requireth residency and can less be done by Deputies then temporal And that Princes are truly Church-Governours also in their kind and way 11. It is an intolerable usurpation of the Power of all Christian Princes and Pastors who conjunctly in their several wayes are intrusted by God with the Government of the Churches under them 12. To make such a Soveraign is to make a new Catholick Church that Christ never made 13. And it s the most notorious schism dividing themselves from all the Catholick Church that are not their subjects 14. And inhumane cruelty to damn all as much as Heathens at least that believe not in the Pope be they never so holy 15. To set up a Vice-god as Pope Julius paraphrastically called himself and a Vice christ on earth over all the Church as the Papist commonly do maintaining that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ is to set up an Idoll and a name of Blasphemy against Jesus Christ whose prerogative it is to be the sole Universal Head And therefore he must needs be an Antichrist whether he be The Antichrist or not This much to the Pope Thes The Catholick Church of Christ is not one Visible Political body as joyned to one Universal Visible Head or Soveraign save only Christ And consequently it is not the way to heal the Churches divisions to draw all into such a body or endeavour such an Union This I make good by these following Arguments which reach both the Italian Papists that would have the Pope to be the Head or Soveraign and the French and Cassandrian who would have a General Council to be the Head and the Pope only to be the chief Patriarch and the Principium Unitatis For if I prove that the Body is not one as Headed by any except Christ I shall say enough against both these opinions But yet as is said it is principally against the later who are for the Headship of a Council that I shall direct my Arguments because they are the busie Reconcilers and because the rest are so largely confuted already on both sides Argument 1. That which is the true form of the Catholick Church of Christ it retaineth de facto at this day But it retaineth not a Political Union under a Visible Terrestrial Universal Head therefore this is not the true form of the Catholick Church Or what the Catholick Church is quoad essentiam that it is also quoad existentiam But it is not such a Body quoad existentiam therefore not quoad essentiam If any will grant the conclusion quoad essentiam vel formam and say that this Policy Head and Union are not essential to the Church but separable accidents tending only ad melius esse he will give away his cause For the Pars Imperans and pars subdita are the two essential parts of a body Politick or Republick whether Civil or Ecclesiastical as a soul and body are the parts of man and if it want either part the essence is destroyed It hath lost its Political form But I need not stand on this because the case is past controversie and I know not of any that make the objection or will go on such terms I am sure those do not that I have now to deal with Another thing there may be that is called a Church without this Form or Head but not this same thing or body that now we speak of The Major proposition I prove thus The Church of Christ is a true Church at this day or retaineth its essential parts therefore it retaineth its form If its essentials were not in existence the Church were extinct or did not exist But that the Church is not extinct or nulled the opponents will easily grant and the promise of Christ will easily prove The gates of Hell shall not prevail against it The Minor I prove thus If the Catholick Church be now Headed with one Visible Head beside Christ then it is either the Pope or a General Council But it is neither of these That it is not the Pope the French will grant And 1. It s proved at large by many a volume of Protestant writers and 2. By the present visible state of the Church The greatest part of the Church on Earth and all those in Heaven disown the Universall Soveraignty or Headship of the Pope The Greeks Abassines Armenians Protestants c. That it is not a General Council appeareth in that there is no such thing in Natural or Moral Existence Not in
false So that here we must break with a Papist even where we might join in dispute with a heathen And how will Papists deal with Heathens if they will deny the proofs from sense and reason 3. But will they stand to the Validity of Proofs from Scripture No For 1. They take it to be but part of Gods word so that we may nor argue Negatively It is not in the holy Scripture therefore it is not an Article of faith or a Law of God For they will presently appeal to Tradition 2. And even so much as is in Scripture though they confess it to be true yet they confess it not to be by us intelligible and will not admit of any proof from it but with this limitation that you take it in that sense as the Church takes it For they are sworn by the Trent Oath to take it in that sence as the Holy Mother Church doth hold and hath held it in and never to take or interpret it but according to the unanimous sense of the Fathers So that they must know what sense all the Fathers are unanimous in before they can admit a proof from Scripture And before that can be done above a Cart-load of books must be read over or searched and when that 's done they will find that most texts were never medled with by most of those Fathers in their writings and in those that they did meddle with they disagreed in multitudes and where they disagree they are not unanimous and there the Papists are sworn to believe no sense at all And if they would have come down to a Major vote it is no short or easie matter to gather the votes And if they know the Fathers unanimous consent yet must they have the sense of the present Church too And is it not all one to make your adversary the Judge of your cause as the Judge of your Evidences and all your proofs 4. Well but at least may we not hope that they will stand to the Judgement of the Catholick Church And if so we will not take it for our adversary No they will not do so neither For 1. When they deny proof from sense and reason they must needs deny all that 's brought from the Church For the Church cannot judge it self but on supposition of the infallibility of sense 2. And when you argue from the judgement and practice of the greater part of the Church they presently disclaim them all as Hereticks or Schismaticks and will have no man be a Valid witness but themselves The Greeks the Aethiopians the Armenians the Protestants all are Hereticks or Schismaticks save they and therefore may not be witnesses in the case So that you see upon what terms we stand with the Papists that will admit of no proofs upon the Infallibility of Sense or Reason or the sufficiency of Scripture or the testimony of the Catholick Church but only from themselves CHAP. XIII Detect 4 UNderstand what the Papists mean when they are still calling to you for a Judge of Controversies If you would dispute with them they are presently asking you Who shall be the judge and perswading you that it is in vain to dispute without a living Judge for every man will be the Judge himself and every mans cause will be right in his own eyes and all the world will be still at odds till we are agreed who shall be the Judge To help you to see the sense of this deceit and then to confute it 1. You may easily observe that this is the plain drift of all to perswade you to make them your judges and yield the cause instead of disputing it For it is no other judge but themselves that they will admit Yield first that the Pope or his Council is the judge of all controversies and then its folly to dispute against them so that if you will yield them the cause first they will then dispute with you after 2. But what is to be said to the pretence of the Necessity of a Judge I answer 1. It s against all reason and experience to think that all enquiries or disputes are vain unless there be a Judge to decide the case A Judge is a Ruling decider not to satisfie mens minds so much as to preserve Order and Peace and Justice in the Society But there are thousands of cases to be privately discussed that we never need to bring to a Judge Every Husbandman and Tradesman and Navigator and other Artificer doth meet with doubts and difficulties in his way which he laboureth to Discern and satisfieth himself with a Judgement of Discretion without a Ruling Judge We eat and drink and clothe our selves and follow our daily labours without a Judge though we meet with controversies in almost all what meat or drink is best for quality or quantity and a hundred like doubts Men do marry and build and buy and sell and take Physick and dispatch their greatest worldly business without a Judge Judges are only for such controverted cases as cannot well be decided without them to the attaining of the Ends of Government 2. Is it not against the daily practice of the Papists to think or say that all disputes and controversies must have a Judge Who is the Judge between the Nominals Reals and Formalists the Dominicans Franciscans and Jesuites in all those controversies which have Cartloads of Books written on them Their Pope or Councils dare not Judge between them Do they not daily dispute in their Schools among themselves without a Judge and still write books against one another without a Judge 3. Understand well the use and differences of Judgement The sentence is but a means to the execution and Judges cannot determine the mind and will of man but preserve outward Order if men will not see the truth themselves Me thinks the Jesuits that are so eager for free will should easily grant that the Pope by his definition cannot determine the Will of man And they see that Hereticks remain Hereticks when the Pope hath said all that he can And if he can cure them all by his determinations he is much too blame that he doth not And if a mans mind be to be settled an Infallible Teacher is fitter then a Judge Judgement then being for Execution when you ask Who shall be the Judge I answer that Judgement is either total absolute and final or it is only to a certain particular end limited and subordinate from which there is an Appeal In the former case there is no Judge but Christ and the Father by him No absolute decision can be made till the great Judgement come and then all will be fully and finally decided And for the limited present Judgements of men they are of several sorts according to their several Ends. When the question is Who shall be corporally punished as an Heretick the Magistrate is Judge For coercive punishment being his work the Judgement must be his also But when the question is Who
many others so like to the Arguments and Language of the Seekers and Infidels that we can scarcely know whom we hear when they speak to us For the discovery of their desperate fraud in this point and the right confuting of them 1. You must distinguish them out of their confusion 2. You must grant them all that is true and just which we shall as stiffly defend as they 3. You must reject their errors and confute them And 4. You may turn their own principall weapon against them to the certain destruction of their cause Of all these briefly in course 1. For the first two I have spoke at large in the Preface to the second part of the Saints Rest and in the determination in the first part of my Book against Infidelity But briefly to touch some of the most necessary things here 1. We must distinguish the Tradition of the Scriptures or the Scripture doctrine from the Tradition of other doctrines pretended to be the rest of the word of God 2. We must distinguish between a certain proved Tradition and that which is unproved and uncertain if not grosly feigned 3. We must distinguish between the Tradition of the whole Catholick Church or the greater part and the Tradition of the lesser more corrupted selfish part even the Roman part 4. We must distinguish between a Tradition of necessary doctrine or practice and the Tradition of mutable Orders 5. And we must distinguish between Tradition by way of Testimony or History or by way of Teaching Ministry and Tradition by way of Decisive Judgement as to the Universal Church suffer them not to jumble all these together if you would not be cheated in the dark 2. And then concerning Tradition we grant all these following Propositions so that it is not all Tradition that we deny 1. We grant that the Holy Scriptures come down to us by the certain Tradition of our fathers and Teachers and that what the seeing and hearing of the Apostles was to them that lived with them that Tradition and belief of certain Tradition is to us by reason of our distance from the time and place So that though the Scripture bear its own evidence of a Divine author in the Image and superscription of God upon it yet we are beholden to Tradition for the Books themselves and for much of our knowledge that these are the true writings of the Apostles and Prophets and all and not depraved c. 2. We thankfully acknowledge that the Essentials of the faith and more hath been delivered even from the Apostles in other wayes or forms besides the Scriptures as 1. In the Professions of the Churches faith 2. In the baptismal Covenant and signs and whole administration 3. In the Sacrament of the Lords Supper 4. In Catechisms or Catechizings 5. In the prayers and praises of the Church 6. In the hearts of all true believers where God hath written all the Essentials of the Christian saith and Law So that we will not do as the Papists perversly do when God delivereth us the Christian Religion with two hands Scripture compleatly and Verbal Tradition in the essentials they quarrell with the one hand Scripture on pretence of defending the other so will not we quarrell with Tradition the other hand but thankfully confess a Tradition of the same Christianity by unwritten means which is delivered more fully in the Scripture and this Tradition is in some respect subordinate to Scripture and in some respect co-ordinate as the spirits left hand as it were to hold us out the truth 3. We confess that the Apostles delivered the Gospel by voice as well as by writing and that before they wrote it to the Churches 4. By this preaching we confess there were Christians made that had the doctrine of Christ in their hearts and Churches gathered that had his ordinances among them before the Gospel was written 5. And we confess that the Converted were bound to teach what they had received to their children servants and others 6. And that there was a setled Ministry in many Churches ordained to preach the Gospel as they had received it from the Apostles before it was written 7. And that the said ordinances of Baptism Catechizing Professions Eucharist Prayer Praise c. were instituted and in use before the Gospell was written for the Churches 8. And that when the Gospel was written as Tradition bringeth it to us so Ministers are commissioned to deliver both the Books and the doctrine of this Book as the Teachers of the Church and to preach it to those without for their conversion 9. And that Parents and Masters are bound to teach this doctrine to their children and servants yea if a Minister or other person were cast into the Indies or America without a Bible he must teach the doctrine though he remembred not the words 10. We grant that to the great benefit of the Church the writers of all ages have in subserviency to Scripture delivered down the Sacred Verities and Historians the matters of fact 11. And that the unanimous Consent of all the Churches manifested in their constant professions and practices is a great confirmation to us 12. And so is the suffering of the Martyrs for the same truth 13. And the Declarations of such consent by Councils is also a confirming Tradition 14. And the Confessions of Hereticks Jews and other Infidels are Providentiall and Historical Traditions for confirmation 15. And we profess that if we had any Certain proof of a Tradition from the Apostles of any thing more then is written in Scripture we would receive it All this we grant them for Tradition 3. But in these points following we oppose them 1. We take the holy Scriptures as the Compleat universal Rule or Law of faith and Holy living and we know of no Tradition that containeth another word of God Nay we know there is none such because the Scripture is true which asserteth its own sufficiency Scripture and unwritten Tradition are but two wayes of acquainting the world with the same Christian doctrine and not with divers parts of that Doctrine so as that Tradition should add to Scripture yea contrarily it is but the substance of greatest verities that are conveyed by unwritten Tradition but that and much more is contained in the Scripture where the Christian doctrine is compleat 2. The manner of delivery in a form of words which no man may alter and in so much fullness and perspicuity is much to be preferred before the meer verbal delivery of the same doctrine For 1. The Memory of man is not so strong as to retain as much as the Bible doth contain and preserve it safe from alterations or Corruptions Or if one man were of so strong a memory no man can imagine that all or most should be so Or if one Generation had such wonderfull memories we cannot imagine that all their posterity should have the like If there were no statute Books Records or Law-books in
England our Laws would be but sorrily kept and obeyed and executed 2. If all the world had such miraculous memories yet men are apt to be negligent either in learning or keeeping of holy doctrine All have not that zeal that should excite them to such wonderfull diligence without which such a treasure could not be preserved 3. When matter and so much matter is commited to bare memory without a form of unalterable words new words may make an alteration before men are aware The change of one word sometimes doth make a whole discourse seem to have another sense 4. There are so many carnal men in the world that love not the strictness of that doctrine which they do profess and so many hereticks that would pervert the Holy Doctrine that it would purposely be altered by them if it could be done and it might much more easily be done if it lay all upon mens memories For one party would set their memory against the others and as it was about Easter a publick matter of fect tradition would be set against tradition especially when the far greater part of the Church turn Hereticks as in the Arrians dayes then Tradition would be most at their keeping and interpretation and if we had not then had the unalterable Scriptures what might they not have done 5. A whole Body of Doctrine kept only in Memory will be soon disjoynted and dislocate and if the matter were kept safe yet the method and manner would be lost 6. And there could not be such satisfactory Evidence given to another of the Integrity or Certainty of it as when it is preserved in writing We should all be diffident that the Laws of England were corrupted or that Lawyers might combine to do it at their pleasure if there were no Law Books or Records but all lay in their memories If they were never so faithfull yet they could not give us such evidence of it I do not think any man of common reason can heartily believe that all the holy Truths of God Historical Doctrinal Practical Prophetical c. could without a course of miracles or extraordinary means have been kept through all ages as well without writing as with it 7. And if writing be not necessary why have we so many Fathers Histories and Canons And why do they fetch their Tradition from these and ridiculously call them unwritten verities Are they unwritten when they turn us to so many volumes for them And if mans writing be necessary for their preservation me thinks men should thankfully acknowledge that God hath taken the best way in giving it us in his own unalterable phrase 3. If they do prove that some matters of fact are made known to us by Tradition that are not in the Scripture or that any Church Orders or Circumstances of worship then used are so made known to us which yet we wait for the proof of it will not follow that any of these are therefore Divine Institutions or universal Lawes for the unchangable obligation of the whole Church If there be some things Historically related in the Scripture that were obligatory but for a season and ordained occasionally and ceased when the occasion ceased as the Love-feasts the Kiss of Love the washing of feet the abstaining from things strangled and blood the anointing the sick the Prophesyings one by one mentioned 1 Cor. 14. 31. miraculous gifts and their exercise c. then it will not follow if they could prove that the Apostles fasted in the Lent or used the sign of the Cross in Baptisme or holy Ordinances or confirmed with a Cross in Chrysme c. that therefore they intended these as universal Laws to the Church though I suppose they will never prove that they used the things themselves 4. We will never take the Popes Decision or bare word for a Proof of Tradition nor will we receive it from pretended Authority but from rational Evidence It is not their saying we are the authorized keepers of Tradition that shall go with us for proof 5. And therefore it is not the Testimony of the Papists alone who are not only a lesser part of the Church but a part that hath espoused a corrupt interest against the rest that we shall take for certain proof of a Tradition but we will prefer the Testimonie of the whole Catholick Church before the Romish Church alone 6. They that can produce the best Records of Antiquity or rational proof of the Antiquity of the thing they plead for though they be but a few Learned Antiquaries may yet be of more regard in the matter of Tradition then millions of the vulgar or unlearned men so that with us universal Tradition is preferred before the Tradition of the Romish sect and Rational proof of Antiquity is preferred before ignorant surmises But where both these concur both universal consent and records or other credible evidence of Antiquity it is most valid And as for the Romish Traditions which they take for the other part of Gods word 1. In all Reason they must produce their sufficient proof that they came from the Apostles before we can receive them as Apostolick Traditions And when they have done that they must prove that it was delivered by the Apostles as a perpetual universal doctrine or Law for the whole Church and when they have well proved both these we shall hearken further to them 2. Either these Traditions have Evidence to prove them Apostolical or no Evidence If none how can the Pope know them If they have Evidence why may not we know it as well as the Pope at least by the helps that his charity doth vouchsafe the world 3. If there be any Proof of these Traditions it is either some Antient Records or Monuments and then our Learned Antiquaries may better know them then a multitude of the unlearned Or it is the Practice of the Church And then 1. How shall we know how long that practice hath continued without recourse to the writings of the ancients The reports of the people is in many cases very uncertain 2. But if it may be known without the search of Antient Records then we may know it as well as they 4. If the Pope and Clergy have been the keepers of it have they in all ages kept it to themselves or declared it to the Church I mean to all in common If they have concealed it 1. Then it seems it belonged not to others 2. Or else they were unfaithfull and unfit for the office 3. And then how do succeeding Popes and Clergy know it If they divulged it then others know it as well as they We have had abundance of Preachers from among the Papists that were once Papists themselves as Luther Melancthon Zuinglius Calvin Beza Peter Martyr Bucer c. and yet these knew not of your truly Apostolical Traditions 5. And it mars your credit with us because we are able to prove the beginning of some of your traditions or a time
my Lecture-day from Thursday to Friday that I change my Religion or the worship of God These are our great changes Well I will you now hear whether the Papists or we be the greatest Changlings 1. Some just changes they have made themselves that they know well enough are as great as ours It was so common in the antient Church to Pray only standing on every Lords day and not to kneel at all in any part of the worship of that day that it was taken for an universal Tradition and to kneel was taken for a great sin and condemned by General Councils many hundred years after Christ and yet the Church of Rome and other Churches as well as we have cast off this pretended Tradition violated this Decree of General Councils and forsaken this universal Custom of the Church And the Papists receive the Eucharist kneeling for all this Law and Custome In the primitive Church and in Tertullians dayes a Common Feast of the Church was used with the Lords Supper and the Sacrament taken then But now this Custom is also changed It was then the Custom to sing extempore in the Congregation to Gods praise But now Rome it self hath no such Custom It was once the Custom to give Infants the Lords Supper but now Rome it self hath cast off that Custom Once it was a Canon that Bishops must not read the books of Gentiles Concil Carthag 4. which yet Paul made use of and the Papists now do too much value Abundance such changes might be mentioned greater then ours in which we are justified by the Papists themselves 2. But they have yet other kind of changes then these They have changed the very Essence of the Catholick Church in their esteem they have changed the Officers the Doctrine the Discipline the Worship and what not as though they had been born for change to turn all upside down In the Primitive times the Church had no universal Monarch but Christ but they have set up a new universal Monarch at Rome In the primitive times the Catholick Church was the Universality of Christians and they have changed it to be only the subjects of the Pope In the Primitive times Rome was but a particular Church as Jerusalem and other Churches were but they have changed it to be the Mistris of all Churches For many hundred years after Christ the Scripture was taken to be a sufficient Rule of faith but they have changed it to be but part of the Rule In the antient Church all sorts were earnestly exhorted to read or hear and study the Scripture in a known tongue but they have changed this into a desperate restraint proclaiming it the cause of all Heresies In the antient Church the Bread and Wine was the Body and Blood of Christ Representative and Relative but they have changed it into the real Body and Blood Heretofore there was Bread and Wine remaining after the words of Consecration but they have changed so that there remaineth neither Bread nor Wine but the qualities and quantity without the substance and this must be believed because they say it against Scripture and Antiquity and in despight of sense it self In the antient Church the Lords Supper was administred in both kinds bread and wine to all but they have lately changed this into one kind only to the people denying them one half of the Sacrament Of old the Lords Supper was but the Commemoration of the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross and a Sacrament of our Communion with him and his members but now they have changed it into a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the quick and dead and in it they adore a piece of Bread as very God with Divine worship Of old men were taught to make daily confession of sin and beg pardon and when they had done all to confess themselves unprofitable servants but now they are so changed that they pretend not only to be perfect without sin and to Merit by the Condignity of their works with God but to supererogate and be more perfect then innocency could make them by doing more then their duty Of old those things were accounted sins deserving Hell and needing the blood of Christ for pardon which now are changed into venial sins which properly are no sins and deserve no more then temporal punishment Of old the Saints had no proper merits to plead for themselves and now men have some to spare for the buying of souls out of Purgatory Of old the Pastors of the Churches were subject to the Rulers of the Commonwealth even every soul not only for wrath but for Conscience sake was obliged to be subject but now all the Clergy are exempted from secular Judgement and yet the secular power is subject to them for the Pope hath power to depose Princes and dispossess them of their Dominions and put others in their rooms and dissolve the bonds of Oaths and Covenants in which the subjects were obliged to them and to allow men to murder them by stabbing poysoning c. If you do not believe me stay but till I come to it and I shall give you yet some further proof Would you have any more of the Popish Changes Why I might fill a volume with them Should I but recite all the changes they have made in Doctrines and all that they have made in Church Orders and Discipline and Religious Orders and their Discipline and in Worship and Ceremonies I should be over tedious their very Liturgy or mass-Mass-book hath been changed and made by changes such abundance of additions it hath had since the beginning of it What changes Sixtus the fift and Clement the eighth made in their Bibles I told you before as also what changes they have had in the election of their Popes And now I am content that any impartial man be judge whether Papists or the Reformed Churches are the more mutable and unsetled in their Religion and which of them is at the greater certainty firmness and immutability CHAP. XXIV Detect 15. ANother fraud of the Papists which they place not the least of their confidence in is this They perswade the people that our Church and Religion is but new of the other dayes invention and that theirs is the only old Religion And therefore they call upon us to give them a Catalogue of the professors of our Religion in all ages which they pretend we cannot do and ask us where our Church was before Luther To this we shall give them once more a brief but satisfactory answer I. We are so fully assured that the oldest Religion is the best since the date of the Gospell that we are contented that our whole cause do stand or fall by this tryall Let him be esteemed of the true Religion that is of the oldest Religion This is the main difference between us and the Papists We are for no Religion that is not as old as the dayes of the Apostles but they are for the Novelties and Additions of
souls are acquainted with the sincerity of it whatever any that know not our hearts may say against it 5. All that are truly Baptized and own their Baptismal Covenant are visible members of the true Catholick Church For it is the very nature and use of Baptisme to enter us into that Church But Greeks Abassines Georgians Armenians c. and Protestants are all truly Baptized and own their Baptismal Covenant therefore we are all of the true Catholick Church What is ordinarily said against this succession of our Church I have answered in my safe Religion I now add an answer to what another viz H. Turbervile in his Manuall saith against us in the present point The easiness of his Arguments and the open vanity of his exceptions will give me leave to be the shorter in confuting them His first Argument pag. 43. is this The true Church of God hath had a continued Succession from Christ But the Protestant Church and so of all other Sectaries hath not a continued Succession from Christ to this time therefore c. Answ 1. I pray thee Reader be an impartial Judge what this man or any Papist ever said with sense and reason to prove that the Eastern and Southern Churches have no true Succession Let them talk what they please of their Schisme the world knows they have had as good a Succession as Rome Are they not now of the same Church and Religion as ever they have been All the change that many of them have made hath been but in the entertaining of some fopperies common to Rome and them And if any of these which you call Sectaries can prove their Succession it destroyes your Argument and Cause Me thinks you should not ask them where their Church was before Luther 2. But how doth this Disputer prove his Minor that we have no Succession Only by a stark falshood forsooth by the Concession of the most Learned Adversaries who freely and unanimously Confess that before Luther made his separation from the Church of Rome for nine hundred or one thousand years together the whole world was Catholick and in obedience to the Pope of Rome Answ O horrid boldness that a man that pleads for the sanctity of his Church dare thus speak so notorious an untruth in the face of the world At this rate of Disputing the man might have saved the labour of writing his Book and have as honestly at once have perswaded his Disciples that his Adversaries unanimously consess that the Papists cause is best What if the fifteen cited by him had said so when I can bring him one thousand five hundred of another mind and cite him fifteen for one of another mind is that the unanimous confession of his Adversaries But unless his Adversaries were quite beside themselves there is not one of them could say as he feigneth them to say For doth not the world know that the Eastern and Southern Churches far exceeding the Romanists in number did deny obedience to the Pope of Rome Would this perswade his poor Disciples that we all confess that there are or were no Christians in the world but Protestants and Papists His first cited Confession is Calvins that all the Western Churches have defended Popery A fair proof Doth this Disputer believe in good sadness that the Western Churches are all the world or a sixth part of the world But this is the Popish arguing What Calvin speaks of the Western Churches that is the prevailing power in each Nation of them he interprets of all the world So he deales with Dr. White who expresly in the words before those which he citeth affirmeth the visibility of the Churches of Greece Ethiope Armenia and Rome but only saith that at all times there hath not been visible distinct companies free from all corruption which one would think every penitent man should grant that knows the corruption of his own heart and life It would be tedious to stand to shew his odious abuse of the rest when they that say most of the word world but as it is used Luk. 2. 1. so much of his first argument His second is this Without a continued number of Bishops Priests Laicks succeeding one another in the profession of the same faith from Christ and his Apostles to this time a continued succession cannot be had But Protestants have no continued number c. Answ And how proves he the Minor No how at all but puts us to disprove it and withall gives us certain Laws which we will obey when they grow up to the honour of being reasonable His first Law is that We must name none but only such as held explicitely the thirty nine Articles all granting and denying the same points that the late Protestants of England granted or denyed for if they differ from them in any one materiall point they cannot be esteemed Protestants Answ A learned Law And what call you a material point You may yet make what you list of it If they differ in any point Essentiall to Christianity we grant your imposition to be necessary But there is not the least Chronologicall or Geographicall or other truth in Scripture but is a Materiall Point though not Essential Must you needs know which these Essentials are In a word Those which the Apostles and the ancient Church pre-required the knowledge and profession of unto Baptism And because all your fond exceptions are grounded on this one point I shall crave your patience while I briefly but sufficiently prove that Men that err and that in points materiall may yet be of the same Church and Religion Argum. 1. If men that err in points material that is precious truths of God which they ought to have believed may yet be true Christians and hold all the Essentials of Christianity then may they be of the same true Church and Religion But the former is true therefore so is the later The Antecedent is proved in that all truths which may be called Materiall are not of the essence of Christianity Argum. 2. The Apostle Thomas erred in a Materiall point which is now an essentiall when he would not believe Christs Resurrection and yet was a member of the true Church therefore c. Argum. 3. The Papists err in material points and yet think themselves of the same true Church therefore they must confess that differing in Material points may be the case of members of the same true Church For proof of the Minor I demand Are none of the points Material that have been so hotly agitated between the Jesuites and Dominicans and Jansenists the Papall party and the Councill party The Thomists Scotists Ockamists c. At least review the Jesuite Casuists cited by the Jansenists Mysterie of Jesuitism and tell us whether it be no whit Material Whether a man may kill another for a Crown or may kill both Judge and witnesses to avoid an unjust sentence Or whether a man should go with good meanings into a Whore-house to perswade them
colo c. 1 worship neither the Image nor a Spirit in it but by the bodily likeness I behold the sign of that which I ought to worship Yea that many of them renounced the worshipping of Devils appeareth by Augustines report of their words in Psal 96. Non colimus mala daemonia c. We worship not evil spirits It is those that you call Angels that we worship who are the powers of the great God and the Ministers of the great God To whom Austin answers Would you would worship them that is honour them aright then you would easily learn of them not to worship them And doubtless few could be so silly as to think there were as many Jupiters or Apollos as there were Images of them in the world So that you see here that some of the Pagans as to Image-worship disclaimed that which the Papists ascribe to them viz. Divine worship Oh but saith H. T. tell us not of particular Doctors but of the Doctrine of Gods Church Answ What not of Saint Thomas What! not of the Army of School Divines before mentioned What! not of the Communis sententia Theologorum the common judgement of Divines for so they call it What not of that which is de fide or consonant to it and whose contrary is heresie or savours of Heresies as they say of Durandus opinion what not of Pope Clement the eighth and the Romane Pontifical pag. 672. wonderful are all these no body in your Church O admirable harmony that is in your united Church But you can agree to leave out the second commandment lest the very words should deter the people from Image worship and to make an irrational division of the tenth to blind their eyes And yet you cry up the Testimony of the Fathers when you are fain to hide one of the ten commandments so that thousands of your poor seduced followers know not that there is such a thing No wonder if you cast away Gregory Nyssen's Epistle against Pilgrimages and Epiphanius his words in the end of his Epistle to Johan Herosol against Images and if Vasquez in 3 Thom. disp 105. c. 3. contrary to the plain words do fain that it was the Image of a prophane or common man that Epiphanius puld down and Al. Cope Dial. 5. c. 21. say that the epistle is counterfeit and not Epiphanius's and if Bellarmine de Imag. c. 9. and Baronius ad an 392. say that this part of the Epistle is forged and if Alphons a Castro cont Haeres de Imag. reproach Epiphanius for it as an Iconoclast so well are you agreed also in the confutation of the Fathers Testimonies that any way will serve your turn though each man have his several way Fair fall Vasquez that plainly confesseth that indeed the Scripture doth forbid not only the worship of an Image for God but also the worshiping of the true God in an Image but saith that this commandment is now repealed and therefore under the Gospel we may do otherwise Vasq li. 2. de Adorat Disp 4. c. 3. Sect. 74. 75. c. 4. Sect. 84. But of this point I shall say no more now but this 1. Many Christian Churches do reject Images from their Churches and worship as well as Protestants 2. More reject statues that reject not pictures 3. Many that keep them worship not them nor God in them or by them as by a mediate object 4. General Councils have been against Images that want nothing but the pleasure of the Pope to make them of as good authority as the Council that was for them 5. That Council that was for them Nice 2. condemneth the Schoolmen and Pope Clement himself as Hereticks for worshiping them or the Cross with Divine worship 6. I again urge any Papist to answer Dallaeus book rationally that can 7. To spare me the labour of saying more of the judgement of the ancient Catholick Church against the Popish use of Images I desire the Reader to peruse what Cassander an honest Papist hath written to that end Consultat de Imag. et simulac who begins thus Ad Imagines vero sanctorum quod attinet certum est initio praedicati Evangelii aliquanto tempore inter Christianos praesertim in ecclesiis imaginum usum non fuisse ut ex Clemente Arnobio patet Tandem picturas in ecclesiam admissas ut rerum gestarum historiam exprimentes c. And he produceth abundance from antiquity against the present Popish use of them 4. Another point in which the Papists pretend to better Countenance from Antiquity then we is the point of the Corporal presence with Transubstantiation But of this there is so much said by multitudes of our Divines that I shall now say no more but desire the studious to Read at least Bishop Ushers Answ to the Jesuite of it and Edmundus Abertinus de Eucharistia a Treatise so full of evidence from Scripture Reason and the judgement of the Fathers that I boldly challenge all the Papists in the world to give a tolerable answer to it that is a better then that is given When we have thus shewed them the stream of Antiquity to have been against them they pass us by and thrust into the ignorant peoples hands a few musty scraps of abused words which are answered and cleared over and over Thus do H. T. D. Baily and others 5. In the point of Satisfaction and Purgatory besides what Sadeel Chamier and others have said Usher and the foresaid Dallaeus in a full Treatise have shewed the Papists nakedness from Antiquity so that modesty should forbid them to pretend the Fathers for them any more if any modesty be left 6. About their Fasts though that be no essential of Religion both the time manner c. is so fully spoak to by the said Dallaeus in another just volume de Jejuniis that Popery in this also is openly condemned by the Fathers in the view of the impartial considerate world The point of Free will and most of the rest in which they imagine that we dissent from Antiquity or the Eastern Churches I have spoak to already in my first Book against Popery I had thought to have gone through the rest particularly at least the rest mentioned by H. T. and D. Baily but finding them so frequently and fully handled already I will forbear such labour in vain CHAP. XXVI Detect 17. ANother of the Papists Deceits and one of the Principal that they support their cause with is A false interpretation and application of all the sayings of the Fathers which they can but force to a shew of countenancing their supremacy That you may find out their jugling in this I shall shew you some of of their Footsteps more particularly 1. Any claim that their own ambitious Bishops have made to a further power then was due to them they use as an Argument for their universal soveraignty when as we deny not but that there was too much pride and Ambition in their Prelates
that their Molanus calleth A barbarous impostor Histor Imag. l. 3. c. 36. about the miracles of Hierom where Purgatory and other errors are befriended When as Ciril himself dyed thirty years before Hierome And yet Binsfield Suarez and other of the most learned Papists stick not to make use of this forgery for all that But it would be tedious to recite their particular forgeries The studious Reader may find many of them discovered up and down by Bishop Usher and other of our Writers And for his fuller help I advise him to read Dr. Reignolds de Libris Apocryph and Dr. Th. James his corruptions of the Fathers and Scultetus his medulla patrum yea of the Papists themselves read Sixtus Senensis his Bibliothec. and Bellaerm de Scriptorib Eccles and Possevines Apparatus and Erasmus censures on the Fathers which he dealt with But especially let him not be without Cooks censura Patrum and Blondell on the Decretals to which also add Rivets Critica Sacra and Dallaeus de Pseudepigraphis Of their abominable Legends I shall say nothing but that the wiser sort of themselves are ashamed of them And if any Ancients have abused the Church by shameless forgeries the Papists make use of such as confidently as if they were the word of God For instance Let any man but read over the Books of Basil Bishop of Seleucia if it be his indeed of the life Miracles of Thecla and try his faith upon it whether he be able to believe that Thecla stood so long at the window to hear Paul while all those daily applications and orations were made to her that Demas and Hermogenes were there to stir up the people against Paul as a deceiver under the cloak of being his companions that any of those Orations recited are true when the Author like a professed fabler useth to say I suppose thus or thus they said that her Mother Theoclaea and her lover Thamiris were on the sudden so cruel as to burn her while they are said so much to burn in Love to her that when Thecla had formed her body like a Cross and cast her self into the flaming pile the flames in reverence of the Cross became as a Chamber to her covering her like a vault from the peoples sight and not approaching her and that the earth making a grievous noise the showrs and hail destroyed the people and Thecla went her way without observance finding Paul and Onesiphorus hid in a Sepulcher at prayer for her that Paul permitted her to cut her hair and change her habit and become his fellow travailer that Alexander the Governour was so inflamed with her beauty at Antioch even before she came in full sight of the people in the City Gate that he could not forbear but presently must leap upon her like a mad dog that she tore his Cloak and threw off his Crown and so saved her Virginity that for this she was cast and tyed to wild beasts and the Lyons couched to her and one Lyoness fought for her and killed the rest that assaulted her that yet they turned more upon her that she leaped into the Fish pond among the devouring Sea Calvs and that fire from Heaven came down into the Water and there made her a chamber and saved her from those Sea-beasts that Falconilla's soul appeared to her Mother Tryphaena to beg Thecla's prayers that she might be admitted into heaven telling her how much Thecla was admired in Heaven She knew who was admired in Heaven before she could be let in that at Thecla's prayers she was admitted into heaven but tells us not where she was before that when Thecla was again tied to wild bulls and fire set to their posteriors to enrage them the fire killed them and burnt the bonds and she was unhurt That Thecla again puts on mans cloaths and seeks Paul whether she wore breeches I find not that Paul hereupon pronounceth her an Apostle a predecessor of Pope Joan and ordaineth her to go and preach the Gospel and appointeth her to one Pagan City as if either women were Apostles or ordained to be preachers of the Gospel that by Paul were forbidden to speak in the Church or Apostles were confined to a City that she fixed at Seleucia and there converted and baptized many and at last after many miracles did not die but entred alive into the earth which opened it self for her in the place where the holy Table stood that after her death she wrought those one and thirty miracles that fill a second Book and many more appearing to this Basil and encouraging him when he was weary to go on in the writing of her praises and plucking him by the ear and so curing his headach which else would have prevented his Oration in her praise the next day with abundance more that are more strange then this I have instanced but in this one case of Thecla because it would be endless to tell you of all the rest of their fictions were I acquainted with them all Nor do I mention this as one of their Legends no nor as a piece of Metaphrastes but as the works of St. Basil not Basil the great an ancient Father Now either this is Basils work or it is not If it be not then you see what trust is to be given to the Papists Antiquities and supposed Fathers For this is one of them and this story vindicated by Petrus Pantinus yea by no less a man then the Great Baronius the Master of Antiquities who Annal. Tom. 1. ad An. D. 47. bringeth a whole Army of Fathers to attest the Acts of Thecla and approveth of this of Basils and the like of Metaphrastes Two Testimonies trouble him shrewdly One is no later then Tertullian who de Baptis cap. 18. saith thus But if any women read the pretended writings of Paul and defend the example of Thecla for womens Liberty to teach and baptise let them know that a Presbyter in Asia that framed that writing putting Pauls name instead of his own was cast out of his place being convicted of it and confessing that he did it in love to Paul The other is Hieroms testimony de Script Eccless who citing the fore-cited words saith The travails therefore of Paul and Thecla and the whole fable of the baptized Lyon we reckon among Apocryphal writings For how can it be that the inseparable companion of the Apostle Luke was ignorant of this only among all his matters But yet Baronius thinks that these are not the same Books that Tertullian and Hierom speak against and why so Because 1. Here is no mention of Theclaes Preaching and Baptizing nor of the Lyon baptized 2. Because so many Fathers attest the story But the first is a visible falshood contrary to the express words of the story which feign Paul to have sent her to preach as a true Apostle and mention her baptizing the people of Seleucia And for the baptized Lyon perhaps Hierom spoke de baptismate sanguinis and
meant the Lyon that dyed in the defence of Thecla And in that place Thecla is brought as calling Death a Baptism However that word which might easily be mistaken is no great disproof that this is the same story And for the Fathers Testimony as we believe that a famous Martyr called Thecla there was from whence the occasion of the story rose so it doth but shew how unfit the Fathers are to be the Authors of our Faith or to be esteemed infallible that so easily believe and recite the forged stories of an Asiatick Presbyter even when Tertullian had before revealed the deceit But if really this Book was written by Basil of Seleucia and was not spurious then we yet further see that they that rest upon the Holy Scriptures alone for the matters of their faith do take a surer wiser way then they that build all on the credit of such credulous imprudent fabulous Fathers as this author was By this little taste you may see how their Records and Testimonies from Antiquity are to be trusted Even as Zosimus report of the Nicene Canon to the African Council was who proved it a forgery and so rejected it when the writings are only in their keeping and their interest calleth them to deprave them they are little to be trusted who dare venture to corrupt those that are in the hands of the Christian world CHAP. XXVIII Detect 19. ANother of the Popish devices is when they have laid their own cause upon so many forgeries and uphold it by so many false reports to make the people believe that it is we that are the lyars and that we are not to be believed in any thing that we say of them and that we misreport the Fathers belye the Roman Catholicks and therefore no man should read our Books or discourse with us so as to afford us any credence So that indeed they get as much by meer perswading the people that we are Lyars as by any way that I know We cannot tell them what is in their own Writers but the ignorant people are commonly taught to say we slander them Though we cite the book and page and line and tell them that they were printed at Rome or Colen or Antwerp or Paris by men of their own Profession yet they believe us not for they are instructed to hold us for lyars that we may be uncapable of doing them good If we cite any of the Fathers they tell us that we misalledge them or have corrupted them or they say no such thing If we shew them the books published by their own Doctors and licensed by their Superiors and printed by Papists yet they will not believe us And so they are taught the easiest way in the world to repell the truth and confute those that would do them good It is no more but say you lye and all 's done In such a case as this what is there to be done Ignorance and Incredulity thus purposely conjoyned are the wall of brass that is opposed to our endeavours To what purpose should we speak to them that will not hear In such a case I know but one of these two wayes 1. To endeavour to revive the stupified humanity and Reason of these men and ask them Is Religion the work of a man or of a beast Of a wise man or of a mad man Is it a Reasonable or an Unreasonable course If it be Reasonable why then will you go without Reason upon other mens bare words But if you are so little men as to venture your souls without Reason me thinks you should not venture against it Would you rest on the bare word of one of these men if it went against Reason If so then you renounce your manhood But suppose you will be so unreasonable yet I hope you have your five senses still What if a Priest shall tell you that the Crow is white and the snow is black or that you see not when you know you see will you believe him If you will believe them before your eyes and taste and feeling then I have done with you who can dispute with stocks and stones or men so far forsaken of God as to renounce all their senses But if you will not believe a Priest against your eyes and other senses then why do you believe him that Bread is not Bread and Wine is not Wine when the eyes and smell and taste of all men say it is And if your senses tell you that your Priests deceive you in one thing me thinks you should not be so confident of them in other things as to believe and hearken to none but them 2. If this will not serve try whether you can procure their Priests to discuss those points before the incredulous people that so they may hear both sides speak together Get a conference between them and some experienced judicious Divine But this will hardly be obtained For if it be to dispute with one that is able they 'l presently pretend a danger of persecution and no promise of security will satisfie them But if it be a weak unexperienced man that challengeth them then they will venture and take the advantage If nothing else can be done it is the best way to offer them some small Book against Popery to read If they are so captivated that they will neither Hear nor Read and their Leaders will not be drawn to a Dispute I know not what to do but leave them and let them take what they get by their unreasonable obstinacy They are unworthy of truth that set no more by it CHAP. XXIX Detect 20. A Nother of their deceits is by pretended Miracles If they do but hear of a Wench that hath the strangulatus uteri or furor uterinus or such hysterical Passions in any violent degree they presently go to cast the Devil out of her that so they may make deluded people think that they have wrought a Miracle And usually the Countrey people and perhaps the diseased woman her self may be so much unacquainted with the disease as verily to believe the Priests that they have a Devil indeed and so turn Papists when the cure is wrought as thinking it was done by the finger of God The nature of this disease is to cause such strange symptoms that most ignorant people that see them do think that the persons are either bewitched or have a Devil At this very time while I am writing this I am put to disswade a man from accusing one of his neighbours of witchcraft because his daughter hath this disease and cryeth out of her Lest the Papists get further advantage by this ignorance of the people I shall acquaint them briefly with some of the symptoms of this disease It usually seizeth upon young women between the Age of seventeen and thirty two years And most commonly on those that are of a sound complexion somewhat sanguine or at least fleshly and strong and but seldom on the weaker sort in this
the Intention of the Ordainers And therefore Bellarmine is fain to take up with this that though we cannot be sure that he is a true Pope Bishop or Presbyter that is ordained yet we are bound to obey him But where then is the Certainty of succession 4. What succession of Episcopal Consecration was there in the Church of Alexandria when Hierom Epist ad Evagrium tells us that At Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist even till Heraclus and Dionysius their Bishops the Presbyters did alwayes name one man that Bishop whom they chose from among themselves and placed in a higher degree Even as if an Army make an Emperour or the Deacons choose one of themselves whom they know to be industrious and call him the chief Deacon Thus Hierom shews that Bishops were then made by meer Presbyters And in the same Epistle he proves from Scripture that Presbyters and Bishops were then all one And if so there were no Prelatical Ordinations then at all And your Medina accusing Hierom of error in this saith that Ambrose Austin Sedulius Primasius Chrysostom Theodoret Oecumenius Theophilact were in the same heresie as Bellarmine himself reporteth him So that Presbyters now may either ordain or make themselves Bishops as those of Alexandria did to do it And as Hierom there saith All are the successors of the Apostles and our Bishops or Presbyters are such as much at least as yours yet Apostles as Apostles have no Successors at all as Bellarmine well teacheth lib. 4. de Pontif. cap. 25. saying Bishops do not properly succeed the Apostles because the Apostles were not ordinary but extraordinary and as it were delegate Pastors who have no Successors Bishops have no part of the true Apostolick Authority Apostles could preach in the whole world and found Churches but so cannot Bishops The Apostles could write Canonical Books but so cannot Bishops Apostles had the gifts of tongues and miracles but so have not Bishops The Apostles had Jurisdiction over the whole Church but so have not Bishops And there is no Succession but to a Predecessor but Apostles and Bishops were in the Church both at once as appeareth by Timothy Titus Evodius and many more If therefore Bishops succeed Apostles to what Apostle did Titus succeed and whom did Timothy succeed To conclude Bishops succed Apostles but in the same manner as Presbyters succeed the seventy two Disciples But its manifest that Presbyters do not properly succeed the seventy two Disciples but only by similitude For those seventy two Disciples were not Presbyters nor did they receive any Order of Jurisdiction from Christ Philip Stephen and others that were of the seventy two had never been after Ordained Deacons if they had been Presbyters before Thus Bellarmine See now what 's become of the Popish Apostolical Successors among their Bishops And the scope of all this is to prove that all Bishops receive their Power from the Pope and so their succession is confined to him alone and therefore as oft as there have been interruptions in the Papal Succession so oft the Succession of all their Church was interrupted But if Bishops succeed not Apostles and have not any of the Apostolick Power who then doth the Bishop of Rome succeed Why Bellarmine hath a shift for this but how sorry an one it is you shall bear cap. 25. he saith that The Pope of Rome properly succeedeth Peter not as an Apostle but as an Ordinary Pastor of the whole Church Let us then have no more talk of the Apostolick seat or at least no more Arguing from that name You see then that Peter was not the Universal Vicar as an Apostle nor doth the Pope so succeed him And do you think this doth not give away the Vicarship Which way hereafter will they prove it But an Objection falls in Bellarmines way that If this be so then none of the Bishops of Africk Asia c. were true Bishops that were not made by the Pope To which he answers as well as he can that its enough that the Pope do Consecrate them Mediately by making Patriarchs and Arch-bishops to do it and so Peter did Constitute the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch who thus receiving authority from the Pope did Rule almost all Asia and Africk But 1. That almost marreth the whole Cause For where now is the universal Headship 2. Did Bellarmine think in good sadness that Alexandria and Antioch were made at first the seats of Patriarchs having as large Jurisdiction as afterward they attained 3. How will he prove that Peter made these two Patriarchates and that not as an Apostle but as an Ordinary Vicar General 4. Who made the Patriarchate of Constantinople and gave them that vast Jurisdiction Did Peter many hundred years after his death Or did the Pope of Rome that tooth and nail resisted and still sought to diminish his Power Or rather did not the General Councils do it by the Emperors Commands the Pope excepting and repining at it 5. Who made the Patriarch of Jerusalem and who made James Bishop of Jerusalem did Peter And who made Timothy and Titus Bishops did Peter or Paul And who gave Paul that Power not Peter certainly Reader do not these men jest with holy things Or is it like that they believe themselves 6. Bellarmine confesseth that the Potestas Ordinis interioris jurisdictionis are both as immediately from God to every Bishop as to the Pope cap. 22. And why then should it be denyed of the power of exterior Jurisdiction 1. Is one part of the Essence of the Office given by the Pope and the rest without him 2. And what if it be proved that exterior and interior Jurisdiction of a Pastor is all one Though the matter of obedience be exterior yet the Jurisdiction is exercised only on the soul directly in one case as well as another it being the mind on which the obiglation lyeth and the Pastoral Rule is powerful and effectual and further then you procure consent you are despised For it s the Magistrates work to use violence Bishops as Bishops can but perswade and deal by words with the inner man And thus you see what is become of the Papists Succession 5. Most of the Ministers in England till within these few years were ordained by Bishops If that were of Necessity they have it 6. He that is ordained according to the Apostles directions or prescript in Scripture hath the true Apostolical Ordination but so are we Ordained therefore The Apostles never Confined Ordination to Prelates much less to those Prelates that depend on the Pope of Rome The Bishops to whom the Apostles committed this Power are the same that are called Presbyters by them and they were the Overseers or Pastors but of one single Church and not of many Churches And such are those that Ordain among us now Gregor Nazianzen Orat. 18. saith thus I would there were no Presidency nor Prerogative of Place and Tyrannical Priviledges that so we might be known
say that we are wanting and so far wanting that being out of the Church there is no true Holiness among us When in the Preface of my Book against Popery called The Safe Religion I had truly spoken my experience that I had never the happiness to be acquainted with any Papist of a serious spiritual temper and holy life but only some of a Ceremonious formall kind of Religion and but with very few that lived not in some gross sin I was passionately censured by some of the Papists as one that condemned all for some When as 1. I only spoke of my own acquaintance 2. And I added withall that yet I was confident that God had his servants among them though I had not the happiness to know them 3. And is it not a ridiculous business that these same men should be so passionate with me for speaking but the truth concerning the ungodliness of some of them when at the same time they make it an Article of their faith and an essential point of Popery That no one Protestant hath charity or can be saved yea that no Christian in the world is sanctified really and can be saved but a Papist O the partiality of these men 4. Yea when they necessitate us to mention their ungodliness by calling us to it and laying the stress of all our cause upon the point yea laying the very Christian faith it self upon the Holiness of their Church For we must not know that Scripture is Gods word or that Christianity is the true Religion till we first know that the Church of Rome is the true Church that we may receive it on their credit And we must know that they are the true Church by being the only Holy people in the world I must profess that if my faith lay on this foundation I know so much of the falshood of it that I must needs turn infidell and I can no more believe this then I can believe that the snow is not white They confess I thank them for nothing that their common people are bad but yet say they there is some good ones among us Inter haereticos autem nullus est bonus but among the hereticks not one is good So saith Thom. Ã Jesu de convers omn Gent. pag. 531. And saith H. Turbervile Manual p. 84. But I never yet heard of any Protestant Saints in the world O wonderfull perverseness of the hearts of Sectaries O wonderfull Patience of God! Did not this mans heart tremble or smite him to write so horrid so impudent a reproach against so many precious Saints of God Durst he thus attempt to rob the Lord of the fruit of his blood and to vilifie his Jewels and as Rabshakah to reproach the Israel of God to attempt to pluck them out of Christs hand that are given him by his Father and to shut them out of heaven that are redeemed and made heirs by so dear a Price and to spit in their faces whom Christ hath washed with his blood Did he not fear that dreadfull threatning of Christ Mat 18. 6. but who so shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me it were better for him that a milstone were hanged about his neck and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea Though I see so much impiety among the Papists I dare not say I dare not think that God hath not some Holy ones among them It s dangerous condemning those that Christ will Justifie and making his members to be the members of the Devil and abusing so grosly the apple of his eye If I see a man live wickedly I dare say that he is of a wicked life but I dare not say that All are so unless it be among men whose principles I am sure are inconsistent with godliness and I know that they hold those principles practically or prevalently And therefore I must say again that I have been acquainted with some Papists learned and unlearned The unlearned few of them knew what Christianity was nor whether Christ were God or Man Male or Female nor whether ever he was the King Prophet or Priest of the Church nor for what end he dyed nor what faith or repentance is but were infidels under the name of Papists or Catholicks The learned and unlearned live in some gross sin or other either all or neer all that I have been acquainted with The better sort would ordinarily swear by their Lady and by the Mass and sometime greater oaths The rest were some fornicators or adulterers some drunkards or revellers and gamesters or such like And never had I the happiness to be acquainted with one that would speak experimentally and savourily of the work of Grace upon his soul of the life of faith of communion with God and of the life to come but their Religion lay in being the Popes subjects and in fasting on Fridayes and in Lent from some sorts of meat and in saying over so many Ave Maries Pater Nosters or the like and in observing dayes and hours and Cereremonies Yet I again say I fully believe that there be better among them though I am not acquainted with them But if these men that never heard of a Protestant Saint and that conclude there is no one saved but a Papist and build their salvation on this as an Article of their faith had known but those that I have known and yet know they would either have been of another mind or have been left unexcusable in a malicious reproaching of the Saints of the most high I bless the Lord that I can truly say that I know many and many that as far as the heart of another can be known by words and a holy life do live in much communion with God whose souls are daily longing after him and some of them that have vacancy from worldly necessities spending much of their lives upon their knees having had many a special extraordinary return to their importunate requests whose delight is in the Law of the Lord in which they meditate day and night which is lockt up among the Papists Whose hearts smite them for vain words or thoughs or the loss of a few minutes of time that live in exemplary humility meekness and self-denyal bearing wrongs patiently and doing good to as many as they can as the servants of all contemning the Riches and Honours of the world mortifying the flesh and some of them longing to be dissolved and to be with Christ in whom the world never knew either once drunkenness fornication or one rash oath or any other gross sin that I could ever hear of And is it certain that all these shall be damned because they believe not in the Pope Nay is it not certain by Promise that all such shall be saved I must again profess that when the Papists lay their faith and cause on this that their Church is Holy and ours and all other are every man unholy it s almost all one to me
Whorehouse to exhort them from Whoredom though he hath found by experience that when he comes among them he is overcome and playes the Whoremonger with them Lest the vices of your Clergy should be laid open and punished you exempt them from the secular power and will not have a Magistrate so much as question them for whoredom drunkenness or the like crimes It is one of Pope Nicolas Decrees as Caranza pag. 395. recites them that No Lay man must judge a Priest nor examine any thing of his life And no secular Prince ought to judge the facts of any Bishops or Priests whatsoever And indeed that is the way to be wicked quietly and sin without noise and infamy But for our parts we do not only subject our selves and all our actions to the tryal of Princes and the lowest Justice of Peace as far as the Law gives him power but we call out to Rulers daily to look more strictly to the Ministry and suffer not one that is ungodly or scandalous in the Church And if one such be known our Godly people will all set against him and will not rest till they cast him out in times when there is opportunity for it and get a better in his stead The whole Countrey knows the Truth of this If you say as the Quakers do that yet the most among us are ungodly I answer that Those among us that are known ungodly and scandalous are not owned by us nor are members of our Church or admitted to the Lords Supper in those Congregations that exercise Church-discipline but they are only as Catechuments whom we preach to and instruct if not cast out Your eighth General Council at Constantinople Can. 14. decreed that Ministers must not fall down to Princes nor eat at their Tables nor debase themselves to them but Emperors must take them as Equals But we are so far from establishing Pride and Arrogancie by a Law that though we hate servile flattery and man-pleasing yet we think it our duty to be the servants of all and to condescend to men of low estate and much more to honour our Superiors and God in them The same Council decreed Canon 21. that None must compose any Accusations against the Pope No marvail then if all Popes go for Innocents But we are lyable to the accusations of any And because you charge our Churches with Unholiness and that with such an height of Impudency as I am certain the Divel himself doth not believe you that provokes you to it even that there is not One Good among us nor one that hath Charity nor can be saved unless by turning Papist I shall therefore go a little higher and tell you that I doubt not but the Churches in England where I live are purer far than those were in the dayes of Augustine Hierom c. yea and that the Pastors of our Churches are less scandalous then they were then what if I should compare many of them even to St. Augustine St. Hierom and such others both in Doctrine and Holiness of Life should I do so I know you would account it arrogancy but yet I will presume to make some comparison and leave you to Judge impartially if you can As for the Heavenliness of their writings let but some of ours be compared with them and you will see at least that they spake by the same spirit and for their Commentaries on Scripture did we miss it as oft as Ambrose Hierom and many more we should bring our selves very low in the esteem of the Church Even your Cajetane doth more boldly censure the Fathers Commentaries then this comes to And as to our lives the Lord knows that I have no pleasure in opening any of the faults of his Saints nor shall I mention any but what are confessed by themselves in Printed Books and mentioned by others and to boast of our own Purity I take to be a detestable thing and contrary to that sense of sin that is in every Saint of God But yet if the Lords Churches and servants are slandered and reproached as they were by the Heathens of old the vindicating them is a duty which we owe to Christ Those Ministers that I Converse with are partly Marryed and partly unmarryed The Marryed live soberly in Conjugal Chastity as burning and shining lights before the people in exemplary Holiness of Life The unmarryed also give up themselves to the Lord and to his service and I verily think that of many such that converse with me there is not one that ever defiled themselves by incontinency and I am confident would be ready to take the most solemn Oath of it if any Papist call them to it And for the people of our Communion through the mercy of God such sins are so rare that if one in a Church be guilty once we all lament it and bring them to penitence or disown them And were the Churches better in the third fourth fift sixt or following Ages I doubt not And I judge by these discoveries 1. By the sad Histories of the Crimes of those times 2. By the lamentable complaints of the Godly Fathers of the Bishops and people of their times What dolefull complaints do Basil Gregory Nazianz. and Greg. Nyssen and Chrysostom Austin c. make it were too long to recite their words What complaints made Gildas of the Brittish Church What a doleful description have we of the Christian Pastors and People in his dayes from Salvian through his whole Book de Gubernat 3. I judge also by the Canons and by the Fathers directions concerning Offendors For example Gregory Mag. saith of drunkards Quod cum venia suo ingenio sunt relinquendi ne deteriores fiant si à tali consuetudine evellantur And was this the Roman Sanctity even then And was this St. Gregories Sanctity that Drunkards must be let alone with pardon lest if they be forced from their custome they be made worse Then fairfall the Ministers of England If such advice were but given by one of us it would seem enough to cast us out of our Ministry We dare not let one drunkard alone in our Church-communion where Church-discipline is set up So Augustine saith that Drunkenness is a mortal sin Si sit assidua if it be daily or usual And that they must be dealt with gently and by fair words and not roughly and sharply If one of us should make so light of Drunkenness what should we be thought I cite these two from Aquinas 22. q. 150. art 1. 4. ad 4 m art 2. 1. Many Canons determine that Priests that will not part with their Concubines shall be suspended from officiating till they let them go Whereas with us a man deserveth to be ejected that should have a Concubine but one night in his life Gratian Distinct 34. citeth c. 17. of a Toletane Council saying that he that hath not a Wife but a Concubine in her stead shall not be put from the Communion His
to these witnesses some more of your worthies August Triumph de Ancon q. 5. art 1. saith To make a new Creed belongs only to the Pope because he is the Head of the Christian faith by whose authority all things belonging to faith are confirmed and strengthened Et Art 2. As he may make a new Creed so he may multiply new Articles upon Articles And in Praefat. sum ad Johan 22. he saith that the Popes power is Infinite because the Lord is great and his strength great and of his greatness there is no end And q. 36. ad 6. he saith that the Pope giveth the Motion of Direction and the sense of Knowledge into all the members of the Church For in him we live and move and have our being And the Will of God and consequently the Popes Will who is his Vicar is the first and chief cause of all motions corporall and spiritual And then no doubt may change without blame Abbas Panormitan in cap. C. Christus de haeret n. 2. saith The Pope can bring in a new Article of faith And Petr. de Anchoran in idic The Pope can make new Articles of faith that is such as now ought to be believed when before they ought not to be believed Turrecremat sum de Eccl. lib. 2. cap. 203. saith that the Pope is the Measure and Rule and Science of things to be believed And August de Ancona shews us that the Judgement of God is not higher then the Popes but the same and that therefore no man may appeal from the Pope to God qu. 6. art 1. And therefore be not offended if we suppose you to have changes A Confutation of a Popish Manuscript on this point Just as I was writing this I received another Popish M. S. sent from Wolverhampton to Sturbridge to which I shall return an answer before I go to the next point Pap. M. S. An Argument for the Church IT will not be denyed but that the Church of Rome was once a most pure excellent flourishing and Mother Church and her faith renowned in the whole world Rom. 1. 8. 6. 16. Whites Def. p. 555. King James speech to the Parliament Whitaker in his Answer to Dr. Sanders Fulk cap. 21. Thes 7. Reynolds in his fifth Conclusion This Church could not cease to be such but she must fall either by Apostacy Heresie or Schism Apostacy is not only a renouncing of the faith of Christ but of the name and Title of Christianity No man will say that the Church of Rome had such a fall or fell so Heresie is an adhesion or fast cleaving to some private or singular Opinion or error in faith contrary to the generally approved doctrine of the Church If the Church of Rome did ever adhere to any singular or new opinion disagreeable to the common received doctrine of the Christian world I pray you satisfie me in these particulars 1. By what General Council was she ever condemned 2. Which of the Fathers ever writ against her 3. By what Authority was she otherwise reproved For it seems to be a thing very incongruous that so great a Church should be condemned by every private person who hath a mind to condemn her Schism is a departure or division from the unity of the Church whereby the bond and Communion held with some former Church is broken and dissolved If ever the Church of Rome divided her self from any body of faithfull Christians or broke Communion or went forth from the Society of any Elder Church I pray you satisfie me in these particulars 1. Whose company did she leave 2. From what body went she forth 3. Where was the true Church she forsook For it appears not a little strange that a Church should be accounted Schismatical when there cannot be assigned any other Church different from her which from age to age since Christs time hath continued visible from whence she departed Thus far the Papists Manuscript An Answer to the foregoing Argument IF the Author of this Argument thinks as he speaks it s a case to be lamented with tears of blood that the Church of Christ should be abused and the souls of men deluded by men of so great ignorance But if he know that he doth but juggle and deceive it s as lamentable that any matter of Salvation should fall into such hands 1. This Argument I have before answered Detect 13. The word Church here is ambiguous and either signifieth 1. A particular Church which is an Association of Christians for personal Communion in Gods worship 2. Or divers such Associations or Churches Associated for Communion by their officers or delegates for unity sake 3. Or else it may signifie some one Mistris Church that is the Ruler of all the rest in the world 4. Or else it may signifie the Universal Catholick Church it self which containeth all the particular Churches in the world The Papist should not have plaid either the blind man or the Jugler by confounding these and never telling us which he means 1. For the first we grant him that Rome was once an excellent flourishing Church And so was Ephesus Hierusalem Philippi Colosse and many more 2. As to the second sence it is humane or from Church custom so to take the word Church for Scripture that I find doth not so use it But for the thing we are indifferent Though it cannot be proved that in Scripture times Rome had any more then a particular Church yet it s all one as to our cause 3. As to the third and fourth senses we deny as confidently as we do that the Sun is darkness that ever in Scipture times Rome was either a Mother to all Churches or the Ruler and Mistris of all or yet the Universal Church it self Prove this and I will turn Papist But there 's not a word for it in the Texts cited but an intimation of much against it Paul calleth Rome a Church and commendeth its faith True but doth he not so by the Thessalonians Colossians Ephesians Philippians c. and John by the Philadelphians Pergamus Thyatira and others as well And will not this prove that Rome was but such a particular Church as one of them The citation of Protestants are done it seems by one that never read them nor would have others read them which makes him turn us to whole books to search for them if we have nothing else to do and to miscited places But we know that all our Divines confess that Rome was once a true and famous particular Church but never the Universall Church nor the Ruler of the world or of all other Churches in Pauls dayes Would you durst lay your cause on this and put it to the tryal Why else did never Paul make one word of mention of this Power and honour nor send other Churches to her to be Governed And now I pray consider to what purpose is the rest of your reasoning What is it to me whether Rome be turned either
a just Reconciliation as men that are Studious of Peace may prosecute with hope of some success And because I have lately met with a Paper called An Explanation of the Roman Catholick Belief c. which pretendeth to much moderation in divers points I purpose next to enquire whether it mean as it pretends that if it do we may give it welcome if not we may Detect its Fraud For as I should much rejoice to hear of so much amendment of the Roman Belief which I thought had been supposed by themselves to be incorrigible So I must confess that I am so much for plain and open dealing that I think it my duty to help to bring their works into the Light and try how they agree with the Truth and among themselves that men may judge of them as they are FINIS The Second Part PROVING That the Catholick Church is not a Political Body Headed by any Earthly Soveraign nor any such Unity to be Desired or endeavoured by any that would not Blaspheme Divide and Destroy under the pretence of Unity SPECIALLY Directed against the Soveraignty and Necessity too of General Coucnils to the followers of Grotius and others of that Party that at least would give them a Part in the Soveraignty with the Pope And propounding the true grounds and means of the Churches Unity and Peace By Rich. Baxter LONDON Printed by Robert White for Nevil Simmons Bookseller in Kederminster Anno Dom. 1659. Quest Whether the way to heal any Divisions in the Churches of Christ be by drawing them all into One Universal Visible Political Body under One Universal Visible Head or Government Or Whether the Catholick Church be a Body so United and Governed Neg. CHAP. I. Shewing the Occasion and Reasons of this Writing especially as from the Grotians which are Vindicated from the frivolous exceptions of Mr. Tho. Pierce I HAVE already in the first Part of this Book and formerly in another disproved the Popes Universal Headship and answered what Bellarmine Boverius and some others say for the maintaining of it And it is a work already done so fully by Chamier Whitaker and many others but most triumphantly and copiously by David Blondell in a French Treatise in Folio de primatu in Ecclesia against Cardinal Perron that I need not and therefore intend not to say much here upon that subject But this Disputation I principally intend 1. For the subverting of the Foundation of Popery which is the supposition that the Visible Catholick Church must needs be united in some Humane Visible Head 2. To confute the Opinion of the moderate sort of French Papists and Grotians that take a General Council to be the Legislative Head and the Judicial Head while they are in Being and the Pope ruling by the Laws of Councils to be the ordinary Judicial Head 3. To deliver some persons from a dangerous Temptation that by Grotius or his followers here in England are drawn into a conceit that the Catholick Church is such a Body as we here deny and think that the unity that the Scripture so commendeth to us cannot be attained without an Universal Visible Head which Temptation of theirs is much increased by observing the differences of Opinions in the world which every good man doth lament as we do all the sins and frailties that on earth accompany us in the state of imperfection As I blame not those that desire perfect Knowledge or Holiness but blame them that promise it to the Church on Earth when it is the prerogative of Heaven and much more should blame him that would say we shall be perfectly Wise and Holy if we will but be of this Opinion that the Church hath an Infallible Humame Head even so I blame not them that desire perfect Concord the Consequent of perfect Knowledge and Holiness for this is to desire Heaven But I blame them that promise us this Heaven on Earth and them much more that tell us we shall have it if we will but believe that a Pope or Council is the Universal Head and so will condemn the Church on Earth because it hath not attained that Celestial perfection which they have once fancied that it may and should attain Concerning Grotius his opinion design and great endeavours to reduce the Churches to Popery under the pretence of a Conciliation I have lately by the Invitation of Mr. Thomas Pierce given in my Evidence I think beyond all further question out of his own writings in his frequent and express assertions And Rivet in his Dialysis and his Apologet. and other writings hath sufficiently confuted him The mistakes of many in their judging of Grotius are caused by their supposition that the man was the same in his first Conciliatory enterprises and in his last which is not true He oft professeth his mutations himself and how apt he was to dislike that which he had but lately thought or said At first he thought out of Reconciling the Protestants among themselves But afterwards his design was to Reconcile them with the Papists and that by drawing them all to be Papists that is to unite in the Pope of Rome as the Universal Governour ruling according to Canons and Decrees and this he thought was the only way to the union of the Churches The Truth of this and the Mischiefs of the Enterprise must be apprehended by him that will understand my endeavours in this dispute and escape the snare that 's laid for their perversion And for the Truth of it I refer you to my foresaid writing of the Grotian Religion Since which it pleased Mr. Pierce to publish a sheet containing not any thing that hath the least aptitude to perswade a rational man that Grotianism is not Popery but some Reasons why he doth not at least as yet perform the vindication with a General profession how easily he can do it and make me a Winding sheet at least as sutable as that which I made for Popery which when he hath confuted I shall better know his mind and strength This with two or three frivolous Exceptions and many swelling words of Vanity with certain Squibs and empty jeers according to the manner of the man is the matter of his Advertisement Nothing could have been easier for him then to say or almost to say that I am very liable in every line and that his advantages are too many and that I am an advocate for the crimson sins of others and an encomiast of my own Nothing more vain then his ostentation of the mild discharge of his Censorship and his sensless intimation that I take the Virtues of Episcopal Divines for glittering sins when he never had a word from me of such a sence or tendency But Grotians will now be but Episcopal Divines and their glittering sins must be their Virtues Because I had acknowledged how civilly he dealt with me no doubt on a supposition that I was neerer his conceits then those that he had so copiously reproached he takes it
hath Articles besides those of the Creed But the Synod of Dort hath more But those in the Bull are new as Dr. Rivet will have it But very many learned men think otherwise that they are not new if they be rightly understood and that this appeareth by the places both of holy Scripture and of such as have ever been of great authority in the Church which are cited in the Margin of the Canons of Trent Pag. 35. And this is it which the Synod of Trent saith that in that Sacrament Jesus Christ true God truly man is really substantially conteined under the form of those sensible things yet not according to the naturall manner of existing but Sacramentally and by that way of existing which though we cannot express in words yet may we by cogitation illustrated by faith be certain that to God it is possible And the Council hath found words to express it that there is made a change of the whole substance of the bread into the Body and the whole substance of Wine into the Blood which conversion the Catholick Church calleth Transubstantiation Pag. 79. When the Synod of Trent saith that the Sacrament is to be adored with Divine worship it intends no more but that the Son of God himself is to be adored I le add no more but that which tells you who is a Papist with the Grotians and who is none Pag. 15. In that Epistle Grotius by Papists meant those that without any difference do approve of all the sayings and doings of Popes for honor or lucre sake as is usual Ibid. He tells us that by Papists he meaneth not them That saving the right of Kings and Bishops do give to the Pope or Bishop of Rome that Primacy which ancient custom and Canons and the Edicts of ancient Emperors and Kings assign them Which Primacy is not so much the Bishops as the very Roman Churches preferred before all other by common consent It 's well it hath so mutable a foundation so Liberius the Bishop being so lapsed that he was dead to the Church the Church of Rome retained its right and defended the cause of the Universal Church This and much more I had given the Reader before in Latine but because Mr. Pierce thinks that I wrong Grotius if you have it not in English I have born so much respect to his words and to the Reader as to remove the wrong and thus far to satisfie his desire Having told you some of the Occasion of this writing I shall add somewhat of the Reasons of it but the less because I have given you so much of them already in my foresaid Discovery of the Grotian Religion 1. My principal Reason is that before expressed that Popery may be pulled up by the very roots For Italians French and all build on this that the Church must have one visible Head 2. That I might take in those parties of the Papists that I have past by or said less to in the former Part of the Book 3. Because I see what Influence the conceit that I dispute against hath on the minds of many well-meaning less judicious people 4. Because I perceive in part what influence the design of Grotius had upon England in the changes that were the occasion of our late wars He saith himself Discuss pag. 16. That the labors of Grotius for the Peace of the Church were not displeasing to many equal men many know at Paris and many in all France many in Poland and Germany and not a few in England that are placid and lovers of peace For as for the now-raging Brownists and others like them with whom Dr. Rivet better agreeth then with the Bishops of England who can desire to please them that is not touched with their venom So that he had Episcopal Factors here in England And whereas some tell me that Grotius was no Papist because he professed his high esteem of the Church of England and say they had Church-preferment here offered him and thought to have accepted it I answer 1. Either it was Grotius in the first Edition or the Church of England in the second Edition then in the Press that this must be spoken of if true 2. Was not Franciscus a Sancta Clara still the Queens ghostly Father a Papist for all he reconciled the Doctrine of the Church of England to that of Rome Grotius and he did plainly manage the same design 3. Mr. Pierce assures you by his Defence that Grotius hath still his followers in England of the party that he called the Church of England And is it any more proof that Grotius was a Protestant for joyning with them then that they are Papists that joyn with him Is not his Doctrine here given you in his Englished words Do you doubt whether the Council of Trent were Papists This makes me remember the words of the late King to the Marquess of Worcester when the Marbuess came into the room to an appointed conference about religion with him leaned on D. Bayly's arm he told the King that he came leaning on a Doctor of his own Church and the King replyed My Lord I know not whether I should think the better of you for the Doctors sake or the worse of the Doctor for your sake or to this purpose And indeed the Doctor quickly shew'd by professing himself a Papist what an Episcopal Divine he was And I think we have as fair advantage to resolve us whether to think the better of Grotius for the Church of Englands sake or the worse of those that he called the Church of England and that were of his mind for Grotius sake In a late Treatise De Antiqua Ecclesiae Brittanicae libertate Diatribe written by I. B. a Divine of the Church of England and printed at Bruges 1656 pag. 34 35. Thes 4. it is averred That since the ancient liberty of the British Church was by the consent of the whole Kingdom resumed remaining Catholick in all other things it may retain that Liberty without losing its Catholicism and without any note of Schism or Heresie This Liberty then was the Reformation And this he saith was maintained by Barnes a Papist and Benedictine Monk and Priest in a M. S. entituled Catholico-Romanus Pacificus c. 3. and that for this sober work of his the Peaceable Monk though of unblamed life and unspotted fame was snatch out of the midst of Paris and stript of his habit and bound on a Horse-back like a Calf and violently carryed into Flanders and so to Rome and so to the Inquisition and then put among the Bedlams where he dyed and not contented with his death they defamed him to have dyed mad Though Rome give Peace no better entertainment the Learned Author thinks that France will and therefore adds concerning the French Church Quâcum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 optanda foret etiamnum veteris redintegratio concordiae quam constat plus mille ab hinc annis amicissime intercessisse inter
which is most sufficient and most cleare in it self but for us This we all yield The second way is necessary to sciences diminutely and insufficiently delivered by their authors for their supplement so Aristotle is supplemented by Albertus Magnus c. The third way specially if it be not excessive is tolerable to the well being though it be not necessary The fourth way assertively is to be rejected as Poyson Thus are the authorities to be understood that forbid to add to or diminish from the Scripture Deut. 12 32. Well! by this time you may see that when such doctrine as this for Scripture sufficiency and perfection as the Rule of faith and life admitting no addition as necessary but explication nor any other as tolerable but moderate ampliation which indeed is the same I say when this doctrine past so lately in a Popish General Council you may see that the very Doctrine of Traditions equaled with Scripture or being another word of God necessary to faith and salvation containing what is wanting in Scripture is but lately sprung up in the world And sure the Traditions themselves be not old then when the conceit of them came but lately into the world 4. Well I have done the three first parts of this task but the chief is yet behind which is to shew 1 How little the Papists get by their Argument from Tradition 2. And how â—uch they lose by it even all their cause 1. Two things they very much plead Tradition for the one is their private doctrines and practices in which they disagree from other Christians and here they lose their labour with the judicious 1. Because they give us no sufficient proof that their Tradition is Apostolical 2. Because the dissent of other Churches sheweth that it is not universal with other Reasons before mentioned 2. The other Cause which they plead Tradition for is the Doctrine of Christianity it self And this they do in design to lead men to the Church of Rome as if we must be no Christians unless we are Christians upon the credit of the Pope and his Subjects And here I offer to their Consideration these two things to shew them the vanity of their arguing 1. We do not strive against you in producing any Tradition or Testimony of Antiquity for the Scripture or for Scripture Doctrine we make as much advantage of such just Tradition as you What do such men as White Vane Cressy c. think of when they argue so eagerly for the advantage of Tradition to prove the Scripture and Christian faith Is this any thing against us Nothing at all We accept our Religion from both the hands of Providence that bring it us Scripture and Tradition we abhor the contempt which these partial Disputers cast upon Scripture but we are not therefore so partial our selves as to refuse any collateral or subordinate help for our faith The more Testimonies the better The best of us have need of all the advantages for our faith that we can get When they have extolled the Certainty of Tradition to the highest we gladly joyn with them and accept of any certain Tradition of the mind of God And I advise all that would prove themselves wise defenders of the faith to take heed of rejecting Arguments from Providences or any necessary Testimony of man especially concerning matter of fact or of rejecting true Church History because the Papists over value it under the name of Tradition left such prove guilty of the like partiality and injuriousness to the truth as the Papists are And whereas the Papists imagine that this must lead us to their Church for Tradition I answer that in my next observation which is 2. We go beyond the Papists in arguing for just Tradition of the Christian faith and we make far greater advantage of it then they can do For 1. They argue but from Authoritative Decision by the Pope under the name of Church-Tradition excepting the French party whereas we argue from true History and certain Antiquity and prove what we say Where note 1. That their Tradition is indeed no Tradition for if it must be taken upon the credit of a man as supposed Infallible by supernatural if not miraculous endowment this is not Tradition but Prophesie And if they prove the man to be such a man it s all one to the Church whether he say that This was the Apostles doctrine or This I deliver my self to you from God For if he were so qualified he had the power and credit of a prophet or Apostle himself And therefore they must prove the Pope to be a Prophet before their kind of Tradition can get credit and when they have done that there is no need of it this their honest Dr. Holden was ware of upon which he hath so handsomely canvassed them 2. Note also that such as Dr. Holden Cressy Vane White and other of the French way that plead for Tradition mean a quite other thing then the Jesuited Italian Papist meanes and while they plead for universal Tradition they come nearer to the Protestants then to their Brethren if they did not contradict themselves when they have done by making meer Romish Tradition to be universal 3. Note also that when Papists speak of Tradition confusedly they give us just reason to call them to Define their Tradition and tell us what they mean by it before we dispute with them upon an ambiguous word seeing they are so divided among themselves that one party understands one thing by it and another another thing which we must not suffer these juglers to jumble together and confound 2. Another advantage in which we go beyond the Papists for Tradition is that as we argue not from the meer pretended supernatural Infallibility or Authority of any as they do but from rational Evidence of true Antiquity so we argue not from a sect or party as they do but from the Universal Church As far as the whole Church of Christ is of larger extent and greater credit then the Popish party so far is our Tradition more Credible then theirs And that is especially in three things 1. The Papists are fewer by far then the rest of the Christians in the world And the testimony of many yea of all is more then of a part 2. The Papists above other parties have espoused an interest that leads them to pretend and corrupt Tradition and bend all things to that interest of their own that they may Lord it over all the world But the whole Church can have no such Interest and Partiality 3. And the Papists are but one side and he that will judge rightly must hear the other sides speak too But the Tradition that we make use of is from all sides concurring yea Papists themselves in many points Yea our Tradition reacheth further then the Universal Church for we take in all rational Evidence even of Jews Heathens and Hereticks and Persecutors that bear witness to the matters of fact
and what was the doctrine and practice of the Christians in their times and what Books they made the ground of their faith so that as true Universal impartial naturally-or-rationally-infallible History or Testimony differeth from a private pretended-prophetical assertion or from the Testimony of one party only so doth our Tradition excell both the sorts of Popish Tradition both that of the Papal and that of the Councill party And now judge who may better boast of or extol Tradition they or we and to what purpose Cressy White and such men do bring their discourses of Tradition 2. But yet we have not so done with them till Tradition have given them their mortal stroak You appeal to Tradition to Tradition you shall go But what Tradition mean you The Tradition of the Catholick Church And where is this to be found and known but in the profession and practice of the Church and in the Records of the Church Well then of both these let us enquire The first and great Question between you and us is Whether the Pope be the Head and Soveraign Ruler of the whole Catholick Church and then whether the Catholick Church and the Roman are of equal extent What saith Tradition to this 1. Let us enquire of the present Church and there we have the profession and practice of all the Greek Church the Syrians the Moscovites the Georgians and all others of the Greek Religion dispersed throughout the Turks Dominions with the Jacobites Armenians Egyptians Abassines with all other Churches in Europe c. that disclaim the Headship of the Roman Pope all these do with one mouth proclaim that the Church of Rome is not and ought not to be the Mistriss of the world or of all other Churches but that the Pope for laying such a claim is an usurper if not the AntiChrist This is the Tradition of the Greeks this is the Tradition of the Abassines the far greatest part of the Church on earth agree in this Mark then what is become of the Roman Soveraignty by the verdict of Tradition even from the vote of the greatest part of the Church Rome hath no right to its pretended Soveraignty Babylon is faln by the judgement of Tradition If you have the faces again to say that all these are Hereticks or Schismaticks and therefore have no vote we answer If a minor party and that so partial and corrupt seeking Dominion over the rest may step into the Tribunal and pass sentence against the Catholick Church or the greatest part of it blame not others if on far better grounds they do so by that part And for shame do not any more hereafter use any such self-condemning words as to ask any Sect How dare you condemn the Catholick Church Do you think all the Church is forsaken but you c And let us ask you as you teach your followers to ask us If we must turn from the Universal Church to any Sect why rather to yours then another why not as well to the Anabaptists or other party as to the Papists But your common saying is that the Greeks Protestants and all the rest were once of your Church and departing from it they can have no Tradition but yours for their spring is with you To which we answer 1. The vanity of this your fiction shall by and by be answered by it self 2. You say so and they say otherwise why should we believe you that are a smaller partial and corrupted part 3. Well then let us go to former ages seeing it is not the present Church whose voice you will regard only by the way I pray forget not 1. That you do ill then to call us still to the Judgement of the present Church and dare not stand to it 2. And that you do ill to perswade men that the greater part of the Church cannot err if you sentence the greater part as Schismaticks or Revolters But how shall we know the way and mind of the ages past If by the present age then the greater part giveth us in their sence against you If by the Records of those times we are content to hear the Testimony of these And first when we look into the Antients themselves we find them generally against you and we find in that which is antiquity indeed no footsteps of your usurped Soveraignty but a contrary frame of Government and a consent of antiquity against it 2. When we look into later History we find how by the advantage of Romes temporal greatness and the Emperors residence there your greatness begun and preparation was made to your usurpation and how the translation of the Imperial Seat to Constantinople made them your Competitors yea to begin in the claim of an universal Headship and we find how it being once made a question you got it by a murdering Emperor resolved on your side for his own advantage We find that it was long even till Hildebrands dayes before you could get any great possession for all this sentence It would but be tedious here to recite our Historical Evidence we refer you to what is done already by Goldastus and Bishop Usher de statu success Ecclesiar and in his Answer to the Jesuits Challeng and in his Discourse of the Antient Religion of Ireland c. specially by Blondel in his French Treatise of Primacy and Dr. Field and many others that have already given you the testimony of Antiquity More then you can give a reasonable answer to I have produced in my Book called the safe Religion In plain English instead of Apostolical Tradition for your Soveraignty we find that eight hundred years after the dayes of Christ you had not neer so much of the Catholick Church in your subjection as you have now that at four hundred or five hundred if not till six hundred years after Christ you had no known part of the world that acknowledged your universal Soveraignty but only the Latine Western Church submitted to the Pope as their Patriarch and the Patriarch primae sedis the first in order among the Patriarchs and that before the dayes of Constantine and the Nicene Council he was but a Bishop of the richest and most numerous Church of Christians and we see no proof that of an hundred years after Christ he was any more then the chief Presbyter of a particular Church If all this will not serve we have National Evidences beyond all exception that the Ethiopian Churches of Habassia the Indians Persians c. were never your subjects to this day That England Scotland and Ireland here in your Western Circuits were not only long from under you but resisted you maintaining the Council of Calcedon against you and joyning with the Eastern Churches against you about Easter day c. And that the Eastern Churches and many great Nations as Tendue Nubia c. that now are revolted were never your subjects and some of them had little to do with you And yet if all this will not serve