that St. Peter rose up first open'd the Subject of their Meeting discours'd upon the Conversion of the Gentiles by his Ministry shew'd the Unreasonableness of that Yoke the Jews wou'd fain put upon them and concluded with a peremptory Sentence to that purpose which 't is manifest St. James and the rest did but follow and if this be not sufficient Evidence of his Superiority even over St. James let the World judge As for St. Paul's declaring himself equal to St. Peter it moves me not For so may any Bishop lawfully ordain'd do to the Pope without the least diminution of his Supremacy the Equality meant by St. Paul respecting only the Power of preaching the word of God to those to whom he was sent of administring the Sacraments and of ordaining Ministers for the use and benefit of the Faithful To do all which I readily grant every Apostle's Power to be equal to St. Peter's and every lawfully ordain'd Bishop's to that of the Pope's As to his Question Where doth it appear that St. Peter 's Power was deriv'd to his Successors I am almost unwilling to honour it with a Confutation being in my sense one of the simplest Expressions that ever drop'd from a Man of his parts If I shou'd ask where doth it appear that he was by Divine Institution Archbishop of Canterbury I believe he wou'd be puzel'd a little to give a good Answer Yet he did not scruple to stile himself John by the Grace of God Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Did ever any Man question whether the Authority and Power of the Bishop of any See was deriv'd to his Successor Was not Christ's Power deriv'd to his Apostles As the Father hath sent me even sâ— sâ—nd I you Was not the Apostle's Power deriv'd to their Successors Else how cou'd we pretend to be Christians In short that Heirs and Successors shou'd Inherit the Power and Authority of their Ancestors unless there be a positive Law or Exception to the contrary is surely a self evident Maxim grafted in our Hearts by the Law of Nature and confirm'd by the Common Consent of Mankind What shou'd then hinder Peter's Authority to be deriv'd to his Successors whom all the World before the rise of Protestanism did believe to be the Bishops of Rome and not those of Antioch as the Dr. seems here to suggest 2. To make good that the Roman Church is the Catholic Church they are oblig'd to affiirm says the Dr. That the Churches of Asia and Affrica which were Excommunicated by the Bishops of Rome for celebrating Easter after the Jewish manner and upon the point of Rebaptizing Heretics were cut off from the Catholic Church and from a possibility of Salvation This the Church of Rome themselves will not affirm continues he and yet if to be cast out of the Communion of the Roman and the Catholic Church be all one they must affirm it Answ This Argument is grounded upon a Fallacy and therefore the Inference is False Had the Bishop of Rome and the Roman Church been convertible Terms the Inference wou'd then indeed have been Right and the Argument True but surely Dr. Tillotson knew very well we never understood these Terms so The Fallacy then consists in this that he joyns together the two different Notions of Roman Church and Bishop of Rome and makes them pass for one and the same thing and so by a cunning piece of Sophistry concludes that whatever is done by the Bishop of Rome is likewise the Act and Deed of the whole Roman Church 3. In consequence of this Proposition that the Church of Rome is the Catholic Church they ought to hold that all Baptism out of the Communion of their Church is void and of none effect For if it be good pursues the Dr. then it makes the Persons Baptiz'd Members of the Catholic Church and then those that are out of the Communion of the Roman Church may be true Members of the Catholic Church And then the Roman and the Catholic Church are not all one But the Church of Rome holds the Baptism of Heretics to be good consequently the Roman Church is not the Catholic Church Answ His Inference is likewise here false and so is his Consequence The Roman Catholics following the Ancient Fathers and Councils of the Primitive Church do believe that the Baptism confer'd by Heretics with due Matter and Form is good and vallid and that it makes the Baptiz'd True Members of the Catholic and consequently of the Roman Church provided there be no impediment of Heresie or Schism on the part of the Persons thus Baptiz'd but if they are engag'd in any Heresie or Schism they hold indeed that they receive a true Character of Baptism but this alone neither makes them Members of the Catholic Church nor availes any thing to their Salvation For as St. Austin says all the Sacraments may be had out of the Church but Salvation cannot Now the Doctor to make good this Inference shou'd do these two things 1. He shou'd have prov'd that Infants and such as are not capable of Heresie or Schism being Baptiz'd by Heretics are out of the Communion of the Roman Church For this we utterly deny and on the contrary affirm they are true Members of it untill they forsake or renounce it by actual Profession of Heresie or by Schism 2. That those who are actually engag'd in Heresie or Schism being Baptiz'd in that State and persisting in it are notwithstanding by virtue of their Baptism made true Members of the Catholic Church Cou'd the Dr. but prove this he wou'd I own both gain his Point and render glorious Service to several Thousands of Ancient Heretics who denied the Divinity of Jesus Christ as well as to the present Protestants by making them all True Members of the Catholic Church in spite of all the General Councils and their Authority But alas This is what neither he nor any body else will ever attempt And indeed if it were possible to be effected we shou'd I am sure be as glad of it and as willing to contribute to the Salvation of these Men as he or any body else but we have learn'd from the Word of God and from the Principles of true Charity not to flatter any Society of Men with a false Peace and Security when we have no grounds for it 4. In consequence of this Proposition all the Christians in the World which do not yield Subjection to the Bishop of Rome and acknowledg his Supremacy are no true parts of the Catholic Church nor in a possibility of Salvation And this does not only exclude those of the Reform'd Religion from being Members of the Catholic Church but the Greeks and the Eastern Churches i. e. four of the five Patriarchal Churches of the Christian World Hence the Dr. concludes that the Roman Church is not the Catholic Church because it has not more Charity than this comes to Answ This Argument is founded upon an Inconveniency and a great
is the Word of God and the Scripture again bears witness that the Church is Infallible and yet this way of Reasoning is not in the least defective because the Church has sufficient Credentials for the truth of its Evidence before it rereceives a Testimony from the Scripture viz. The Universal Consent of the whole Catholic Church which as is already proved is undoubtedly certain The Testimony then of Scripture bearing witness of the Church is properly speaking Argumentum ad hominâ—â— that is an Argument from a Concession or a Principle agreed upon by both Parties And now since the Protestants do agree that the Scripture is Infallibly true I hope they will hear it if it bears witness of the Infallibility of the Church Let us see then what it says upon this Subject Christ saith Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it Matth. 16. verse 18. Again Go ye therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and so I am with you alway even unto the End of the World cap. 28. ver 19 20. And again I have yet many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now â— howbeit when the Spirit of Truth is come he will guide you into all Truth John 16. ver 12 13. St. Paul writes to Timothy But if I tarry long that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thy self in the House of God which is the Church of the Living God the Pillar and Ground of the Truth 1 Tim. â— ver 15. You see Christian Reader that Christ promi'sd to build his Church upon a Rock and that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it that he himself continues with it â—â—â—o the end of the World That the spirit of Truth shall guide it into all Truth And St. Paul says that the Church of God is the Pillar and Ground of the Truth Now if any Man that believes the Goodness and Power of Jesus Christ to perform what he promises can shew me any Text in Scripture more Plain and Evident to prove any thing else than these do the Infallibility of the Church I shall hold my self highly oblig'd to him for that Favour If the Gates on Power of Hell for they are both the same shall not prevail against the Church surely then it shall not fell into Error For there are but two Ways of prevailing against it viz. by destroying all the Members that compose it as to their temporal Being or by corrupting their Souls with Error That the Gates of Hell hath not prevail'd as to the former our own Being is a sufficient Evidence and that they shall not as to the latter methinks a sober modest man ought to be content with the Insurance of Christ's Promise If Christ continues with the Church unto the end of the World can it be imagined that he shou'd suffer it to fall into Error since we cannot suppose him to have any other bus'ness to continue with it than to preserve it from that If the holy Ghost or as the Teâ—t calls him the Spirit of Truth will guide the Church into all Truth we must surely renounce all pretence to Reason and Christianity if we believe that any Power whether Earthly or Infernal can be able to make it err Lastly if the Church be the Ground and Pillar of Truth as St. Paul calls it certainly neither Rain nor Floods noâ— Wind can shake or throw down an Edifice so firmly founded I shall now add three or four Testimonies of the Primitive Fathers in savour of this Truth and so conclude this chapter Saint Ireneus a Father of the second Age writes thus of the Church where the Church is there is the Spirit and where the Spirit of God is there is all Grace lib. 3. c. 40. Praes in lib. per. Ar. In the third Age Origen That only is to be believed for Truth which in nothing disagrees from the Tradition of the Church And a little after We must not believe otherwise than as the Church of God has by Succession deliver'd to us In the same Age St. Cyprian Whoever divides from the Church and cleaves to the Adultress is separated from the Promises of the Church he cannot have God his Father that has not the Church his Mother Again To Peter's Chair and the Principal Church Infidelity or false Faith cannot have access Epist 55. In the fourth Age St. Jerom The Roman Faith commended by the Apostles cannot be changed in Apolog. cont Ruffin In the beginning of the fifth Age St. Augustin I know by Divine Revelations that the Spirit of Truth teacheth it the Church all truth Lib. 4. de Bap. c. 4. Again To dispute against the whole Church is insolent Madness and I my self would not believe the Gospel were it not that the Authority of the Church moves me to it cont Epist fundam c. 5. I shall not trouble the Reader with any Reflections upon these Sentences but will let them stand or fall by their own Weight perswaded as I am that no Comment or Gloss whatsoever can make them speak plainer or more to my purpose I will only mind him that these Great and Eminent Men who shin'd in the Church like so many Lights as well by the Lustre of their extraordinary Piety as by the profoundness of their Learning cou'd not be ignorant of the Doctrine of the Catholic Church of their Time Consequently wou'd never have taught so peremptorily the Infallibility of the Church unless it had been the Opinion of all the Christian World There is then an Infallible Church that is to say a Congregation of Faithful that believes holds and teaches the Doctrine of Jesus Christ 1. Upon the Universal Consent of the Christian World 2. Upon clear and plain Texts of Scripture declaring the Assistance of the Holy Ghost to guide it into all Truth 3. Upon the unanimous Consent of the Fathers of the Primitive Times a Triple Cord which neither the Power of Hell nor the Subtility of Heretics nor the Malice of the World shall ever be able to break Let us now examine what Society of Christians can justly lay claim to or be truly call'd the Catholic Church CHAP. II. The Congregation of Faithful in Communion with the Bishop of Rome and no other is the Catholic Church TO prove this Assertion I shall lay down some Principles known either by their own Light or sufficiently proved by plain Texts of Scripture and the Consent of our Adversaries I. That in the Catholic Church there is and shall be a Continued Succession of Bishops Priests and Teachers from Christ to the End of the World II. That there is but one Catholic Church III. That one Communion as well as one Faith is Essential to the Being of one Church IV. That whosoever separates from or
Reason upon the consent of Mankind and the concession of our Adversaries and upon such known and evident matters of Fact as the most Impudent Wrangler wou'd be asham'd to deny As to the first That the Church of England is Heretical I prove thus Whatsoever Society of Christians obstinately denies any Doctrine believ'd by the Catholic Church to be of Faith is Heretical but the Church of England denies obstinately some Doctrines believ'd by the Catholic Church to be of Faith Therefore the Church of England is Heretical The Major or first Proposition is a known Principle which no Christian in his wits ever denied The Minor or second Proposition I demonstrate thus The Church of England obstinately denies Transubstantiation the Sacrifice of the Mass and many other Points but these are believ'd by the Catholic Church to be of Faith Therefore the Church of England denies obstinately some Doctrines believ'd by the Catholic Church to be of Faith That the Church of England obstinately denies the said Doctrines or Points is matter of Fact and what She very much glories in That the same Points or Doctrines were all in the begining of the Reformation believed by the Catholic Church to be of Faith we have besides the unanimous consent of the Roman Greek and all the Eastern Churches the Testimony of several Learned Protestants who surely wou'd never have told a thing so favourable to their Adversaries if it had not been manifestly True And to shew that this is not said gratis I will Instance in some Hospinian faith Luther's Separation was from all the World Epist 141. White Popery was a Leprosie breeding so universally in the Church that there was no Visible Company of Men appearing in the World free from it Defence c. 37. p. 136. The aforesaid Doctrineâ— is what this good man is pleas'd to call Popery as all the World knows Bishop Jewel The Whole World Princes Priests and People were overwhelm'd with Ignorance and bound by oath to the Pope Sermon on Luke 11. Whitaker In times past no Religion but the Papistical had place in the Church Controv. 4.9 5. c. 3. Bucer All the World err'd in that Article of the real presence p. 660. Calvin They made all the Kings and People of the Earth Drunk from the First to the Last Justit 4. c. 18. Perkins During the space of 900 years the Popish Heresie had spread it self over the Whole World Exposit symb p. 266. The Sum of this cloud of Witnesses which yet is not the twentieth Part of what may be brought from the Reformation-treasure amounts to this that before the Reformation there was no other Religion in the Whole Christian World but the Roman Catholic or as they are pleas'd to term it the Papistical and that the aforesaid Points and many more which they call Popery Leprosie and Ignorance were universally believed as Articles of Faith by all the visible Companies of Christians in the World And if this be true the Church of England which obstinately denies these Points and many more must necessarily deny some Doctrines believ'd by the Catholic Church as of Faith and by consequence the Church of England is Heretical Touching the second viz. that the Church of England is Schismatical This is no less evident than the former For if Schism be a willful Separation from the Church as it is defined by all Mankind as well Protestants as Catholics the Church of England is doubly guilty of this Crime First for separating from the Pope and their own Immediate Heads the Bishops of England Secondly for separating from the Communion of all other Bishops in the World besides The Bishop of Rome in the begining of the Reformation was acknowledg'd by all the World to be at least Patriarch of the West and by the Protestants themselves to have exercis'd Jurisdiction over the Church of England for 900 years and more even from the time of its Conversion to Christianity and surely so long a prescription is a sufficient Title tho' no other cou'd be shewn We find in the Acts of the third General Council held at Ephesus Binius Tom. 2. Apend 1. Cap. 4. a complaint exhibited by the Bishop of Constantia in Cyprus against the Patriarch of Antioch who wou'd force that Iland to submit to his jurisdiction and oblige its Metropolitian to receive the Grace of Ordination from him as the Council phrases it To this Complaint the Council answers That if the Bishops of Cyprus cou'd make out that the Patriarch of Antioch had never conferr'd Orders upon their Metropolitan it was unjust to pretend to it now And the Bus'ness being fairly prov'd in favour of the said Bishops the Council decreed That the Patriarch of Antioch had no Jurisdiction over them nor ought to pretend to any Whence it is manifest that if the Patriarch of Antioch cou'd prove that he had conferr'd Orders upon their Metropolitan at any time or exercis'd Lawful Jurisdiction over them the Council wou'd have Decreed the said Iland to be subject to him and that as it was a manifest Usurpation in the Patriarch of Antioch to pretend to any such Jurisdiction since he was not in Possession of it nor cou'd prove to have ever had it so likewise it wou'd be perfect Rebellion and Schism in them to withdraw from his Jurisdiction if he were Legally possess'd of it Now I would fain know if the same Council were to judge the Church of England and the Pope's cause what they wou'd think of it Pope Eleutherius sent some of his own Clergy to Convert the Brittans in King Lucius his Time St. Gregory sent Augustin the Monk and others to convert the Saxons and exercis'd Jurisdiction over them ordaining their Metropolitan or causing him to be ordained by his Orders and the Popes his Successors continued in peaceable Possession of this Prerogative and they the Clergy and People of England receiving and obeying his lawful Commands not only as Patriarch of the West but even as Head of the Church for the Space of 900 Years and more what wou'd this Council I say think of the Church of England's rising up against the Pope's Authority after so long a Prescription Certainly it wou'd look upon them to be Rebels against the Authority the best establish'd in the World Nor will it any way help them to say as they usually do that the King of England has Power to Transfer the Papal or Patriarchal Power from Rome and confer it upon the Archbishop of Canterbury For besides that it is most absurd to suppose such a Power in a King since it cannot be imagin'd whence such an Ecclesiastical Authority can be deriv'd to a Secular Prince we have an express Decree to the contrary in the fourth General Council held at Calcedon What gave Occasion to it was this The Bishop of Tyre was anciently Metropolitan of Phaenicia Concil Calced Act. 6. and as such exercis'd Jurisdiction over all the Bishops in that Province Marcianus the Emperor contrary to
the Canon of the Council of Nice by which it was provided That there shall be but one Metropolitan in each Province made a Pragmatic Sanction whereby he Constituted the Bishop of Berithum Metropolitan in the same Province and submited a great many of the former Metropolitan's Suffragans to him which when the Bishop of Tyre expos'd to the Council it was unanimously Decreed That the said Bishop of Tyre should be restor'd to all his Privileges and Jurisdiction notwithstanding the Emperor's Sanction which the Council declar'd to be of no Force or Virtue against the Canons of the Church So that it is evident this General Council knew nothing of any such Ecclesiastical Power vested in the Emperor tho' Lord of almost all the World much less in a Prince of a few Provinces 'T is true there is a Canon of a Council held long after in Constantinople called Quinisexta-synodus which provides that if the Emperor shou'd Erect or raise any City to the Dignity of Metropolis of a Province the Ecclesiastical Power ought to follow the Temporal The Sense of which Canon I conceive must be this that either the Bishop of the City thus dignifi'd was to have the Jurisdiction of a Metropolitan over all the Bishops in the Province the former Metropolitan being reduc'd to the condition of a private Bishop or that the same Province ought to be divided into Two and Governed by two Metropolitans with distinct Limits and Jurisdictions Whether of the two be the Sense of those Fathers 't is manifest this Canon does not exempt the one or the other from the Jurisdiction of the Patriarch much less from that of the Pope as Head of the Church And indeed to give it the most rigorous Interpretation it is impossible to stretch it any further than this That when a City is made Metropolis or Head of a Kingdom the Bishop of that City ought to have Jurisdiction over all the Bishops in the same Kingdom But this does not give the least colour to any Exemption from the Ecclesiastical Power to which this Kingdom was subject before Besides this same was not enacted by the Emperor or any Secular Prince but by a Council of Bishops in favour doubtless of the Episcopal Dignity because it was proper that the first Bishop or Metropolitan shou'd have his Seat in the Metropolis of the Kingdom and take his Denomination from thence And yet we see this never took place in the West otherwise the Bishops of Paris in France of London in England of Edenburg in Scotland and others might as justly pretend to a Primacy in these several Kingdoms which I am confident the Archbishop of Canterbury wou'd as much oppose as any of the Rest Now that the Church of England did wilfully separate from the Pope from their own immediate Heads the Bishops of England and from the Communion of all the Bishops in the World besides Stow Baker Dr. Heilen Dr. Burnet is plain matter of fact equally attested by all Writers as well Protestants as Catholics K. Henry VIII did separate from the Pope and assum'd to himself the Title of Head of the Church of England persecuting and putting to death all such who oppos'd his Supremacy After the Death of Queen Mary in whose Reign the Church of England was again reconcil'd to Rome Queen Elizabeth call'd a Parliament in order to settle Matters of Religion In this Parliament all the Bishops of England were depriv'd of their Episcopal Seas some cast into Prison others banish'd the Country all violently forc'd away from their Flocks and Pastoral Functions Nor will it at all relieve the Protestant Cause to say which yet is their only plea that the Bishops were depriv'd because they wou'd not take the Oath of Supremacy reviv'd by that Parliament For beside that it is an unheard of Thing that any Society of Laymen shou'd take upon them to determin Spiritual Matters for such was the Tenure of that Oath and to impose them upon Bishops to whom it chiefly belong'd to determin such matters This Proceeding was contrary to the Ordinary Methods of Parliament both before and ever after that Time For all things relating to Ecclesiastical and Spiritual Matters are first determin'd and agreed upon in the Convocation of the Bishops whose province and care it is to declare what is Spiritual and what not and then refer'd to both Houses of Parliament to pass into Law But here is a Spiritual Matter past into a Law which vests the Supreme Spiritual Power in the Queen and which all the Bishops in the Kingdom solemnly protest against as a thing as monstrously absurd as it was ever before unheard of And yet they must be all depriv'd because they wou'd not swear to the Truth of nor assert this Spiritual Power lodg'd in a Person whose very Sex rendred her incapable of Indeed they might as well deprive them for not believing and swearing to the truth of the Alcaron But this is too absurd to need a Confutation That the Church of England separated from the Communion of all other Bishops in the World is evident even to this day since they never were able to shew as much as one single Bishop in the whole World who professeth to be of their Communion Now if all this be not Schism I confess I know not what is To separate from the Pope and all in Communion with him To separate from their own Bishops and raise Altars against their Altars or rather to pull down all Altars as they have done to separate from all the Bishops in the World If this be not in the highest degree Schismatical farewel Reason and Religion And here I may justly make the same Intercession as St. Paul calls it against the Church of England with that of Elijah against the Schismatical Church of Israel whose perfect Image I am sorry they bear Lord they have killed thy Bishops and Priests and digged down thine Altars and we poor persecuted Sheep are left alone and they seek our lives to take them away 4. As to the Roman Catholics I need not urge any more Reasons than what has been already offer'd to prove that this Society of Christians is the True Catholic Church For since it is manifestly prov'd that neither the Nestorian nor the Eutychian nor the Greek nor yet the Church of England is the Catholic Church it remains that the Roman Catholics must necessarily be it However I shall lay down some Notes agreed on by all sides to pertain to the Catholic Church which upon Examination will be found to be peculiar to the Roman Catholic Church 1. The Roman Catholic Church is a Great Body of the Faithful spread over all the known parts of the World there being but few Kingdoms known where some Believers in communion with the Bishop of Rome are not to be found Hence She justly claims the Title of Catholic 2. If we except the Protestants there are but few material Points in which all other Sects differ from Her
reads it but may be as Infallible in what is clear and plain as any Church or Churches in the World For what is clear and plain to a Man that he is as Sure and Certain of as if all the Mathematicians in the World had demonstrated it to him since a Demonstration serves for no other end than to make a thing clear and plain So that this worthy grave Doctor necessarily vests in every private Man that Infallibility which he endeavours with so much earnestness to deny to the whole Catholic Church And surely if one single Man be Infallible when he interprets Scripture concerning necessary Articles of Faith how much surer can the same privilege be ascrib'd to a learned assembly of Divines compos'd of the whole Church The Dr. is then forc'd volens nolens even by his own Principles to admit an Infallibility 2. He Justifies in a great measure all the Heretics that ever denied any Points of Faith on pretence that they are not plain in Scripture For Instance the Socinians are Generally Men of Learning and their Ingenious Writings do sufficiently witness to the World they want neither sense nor judgment yet they solemnly declare they do not find one Text in Scripture which proves clearly and plainly the Divinity of Jesus Christ or a Trinity of Persons in One God in a True and proper sense which notwithstanding is one of the Greatest Mysteries of our Faith What must we say of these Men Can we imagin they wou'd be so great Enemies to their own Salvation as to deny this great Mystery if it were clearly and plainly set down in Scripture And if it be not with what face can Protestants condemn the Socinians who openly profess to follow their Principles and do for that very Reason reject this Mistery because it is not plain in Scripture Or how will they be able to convince them upon this Principle since they are ready as they have often declar'd to believe the Mystery of the Trinity if it cou'd be made out that it is clearly and plainly contain'd in the Scripture But why do I say convince them Alas They are so far from any such thing that the Absurd and Ridiculous Systems of many of their Doctors in their Answers to the accute and Ingenious Pamphlets of these Heretics proclaim loudly to the World that the Socinians have got the better and fairly beat them at their own Weapons And thus in rejecting the Authority of the Church which Christ commands us to hear on no less penalty than of being reputed Heathens and Publicans they have open'd a door for these and all other Sects who are daily cutting their Throats with those very weapons Themselves have put into their Hands CHAP. III. Of the Pope's Supremacy VVHat we believe to be of Faith concerning this Point is this That the Pope or Bishop of Rome is the Successor of St. Peter and as such Head of the Catholic Church That the Bishop of Rome is Successor of St. Peter I hope I need not prove since there is nothing in History more universally attested by all Ancient and Modern Writers Nor was it ever yet question'd that I cou'd find 'till some Protestants in this and in the last Age without the least Grounds in Antiquity had the Assurance to dispute it whose Opinions notwithstanding are exploded by most of their own Learned Writers See Dr. Cave in the Life of St. Peter The main Bus'ness then is to shew that this Prerogative was confer'd upon St. Peter And for this we have several Texts of Scripture in which it is plain 1. That Christ confer'd this Dignity upon Him 2. That the Evangelist giving the Names of the 12 Apostles marks particularly his Primacy And 3. That after Christ's Ascension he took upon him this Character always speaking first and moving to the Rest of the Apostles whatever was to be debated 1. Christ confer'd this Dignity upon him I say unto thee that thou art Peter or â—as the Greek has it a Rock and upon this Rock I will build my Church Mat. 16. Jesus saith to Simon Peter Simon Son of Jonas Lovest thou me more than these John 21. And a little after feed my Lambs again feed my Sheep feed my Sheep And the Lord said Luke 22.31 32. Simon Simon behold Satan hath desir'd to have you that he may sift you as Wheat but I have prais'd for thee that thy Faith fail not and when thou art converted confirm thy Brethren The English Translators carrying no doubt an Eye upon this Controversie have rendred it strengthen thy Brethren because a Charge of Confirming others does too plainly denote a Superiority I shall make no other Reflections upon these Texts only desire the Reader to observe that this particular pointing out of Peter as a Rock to build the Church upon the especial Charge of feeding Christ's Lambs and Sheep by which the Holy Fathers have always understood both People and Pastors and the Confirming of his Brethren viz. The Rest of the Apostles must surely denote some particular Mark and Character above the Rest 2. The Evangelist in giving the Names of the 12 Apostles marks particularly St. Peters's Primacâ— Now the Names of the twelve Apostles are these the first Simon Mat. 10. who is called Peter 'T is certain that Peter was not the first Disciple of the twelve nor yet the eldest Man for his Brother Andrew was sooner a Disciple and older than Peter And most certainly Christ did not design the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a Primacy of Ceremony or Civility but for that of Order and Jurisdiction at least as far as it was requisite to found the peace and unity of the Church 3. After Christ's Ascension Peter took upon him this Character Acts of the Apostles cap. 1. He stands up discourses at large upon the fall of Judas and lays before the Apostles and Disciples the Necessity of substituting an other in his Room chap. 2. When the Disciples were fill'd with the Holy-Ghost and spoke with other Tongues and the Multitude thought they were drunk Peter lifts up his voice and gives an account of that miraculous Gift His Spâ—ech in the Temple cap. 3. His defence before the Rulers and Elders in Jerusalem cap. 4. His Sentence upon Ananias and Saphira cap. 5. And many other passages to this purpose found in the same Volum are convincing Proofs of this Truth but more especially that famous Council of the Apostles related cap. 15. Where after much disputing Peter rose up first shew'd the Apostles what conduct they were to keep in regard of the converted Gentils and concluded in a manner the debate with this Sentence Now therefore why tempt ye God to put a Yoke upon the neck of the Disciples which neither our Fathers nor we were able to bear c. So that if we had never been taught any thing else concerning Peters Primacy his conduct in these affairs were enough for any unprejudic'd Man to conclude that either
he was qualified by Jesus Christ for that Office or that he must be a very arrogant Man in taking so much upon him to the Diminution of the Honour and Esteem of his Fellow Apostles And if we put these three things together viz. 1. Christ's building his Church upon Peter giving him the Charge of feeding his Lambs and Sheep and the Power of Confirming his Brethren 2. The Evangelist pursuant to this Power not only reckoning him first amongst the Apostles but also calling him the First 3. Peter's exercising the Office and Charge of Head or Chief among the Apostles as aforesaid We shall plainly see that this Superiority is no Imaginary thing as our Adversaries wou'd make the World believe but a Real Truth grounded upon the Word of God And if this was confer'd upon Peter it is granted by all that the same Prerogative must necessarily devolve upon his lawful Successors the Bishops of Rome And indeed this was so publickly taught and profess'd by the Primitive Fathers and Councils as a necessary and fundamental Truth that many Learned Protestants have been forc'd to own it I shall instance in one Monsieur Blondel one of the most learned Protestants that ever writ against the Pope's Supremacy gives it this Testimony The Titles of the Apostle St. Peter saith he ought not to be put in debate since the Grecians and Pâ—otestants also do confess that it has been believ'd and that it might indeed be that he was the President and Head of the Apostles the Foundation of the Church and Possessor of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Again pag. 107. Rome being a Church consecrated by the Residence and Martyrdom of St. Peter whom Antiquity has acknowledg'd to be the Head of the College Apostolic having been honour'd with the Title of the Seat of the Apostle St. Peter might without Difficulty be consider'd by one of the most renowned Councils viz. that of Chalcedon as Head of the Church Thus far this Learned Man and surely nothing but the Evidence of this Truth cou'd extort so ingenuous a Confession from an Adversary in favour of â—â—me whose Supremacy he chiefly aim'd to pull down Now how far this Title gives him Superiority and Jurisdiction over all other Bishops I will not take upon me to determine This only I shall undertake to prove that the Fathers of the Primitive Church did believe St. Peter and his Successors the Bâ—shops of Rome to be by virtue of this Prerogative St. Peter Head and Chief amongst the Apâ—stles and the Bishop of Rome the same among all other Bishops and Center of Catholic Vnity and that the Bishop of Rome did exercise Jurisdiction as occasion offer'd over the Eastern as well as the Western Bishops even in the Primitive Times such as Excommunication receiving of Appeals Confirming and Deposing of Bishops c. For the Truth of all which we have besides the general Consent of the Church as Authentic Records next to the Scripture as for any matter of Fact whatsoever happening at so great a distance I shou'd never end if I shou'd cite all the Passages of Fathers and Councils and Ecclesiastical Writers which may be brought to prove this Point I will therefore Instance in a few only but they shall be such as will by the Greatness of their Authority and Clearness of Expression I hope be abundantly sufficient to compose this Difference And 1. St. Irenaeus speaks thus of the Church of Rome ad hanc Ecclesiam propter potentierem principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam hoc est eos qui undiquâ— sunt Fideles Every Church that is the Faithful on every side must have recourse to this Church by reason of her more powerful Principality lib. 3. c. 3. 2. St. Cyprian thus of St. Peter Hoc erant utique caeteri Apostoli quod erat Petrus pari consortio praediti Potestatis Honoris Primatus tamen Pâ—tro datur ut una Christi Ecclesia Cathedra una monstretur The Rest of the Apostles were the same that St. Peter was endued with a like Fellowship of Power and Honour yet the Primacy is given to Peter that the One Church of Christ and one Chair might appear lib. de Unitat. Eccles 3. St. Ambrose Andreas prius secutus est Dominum quam Petrus tamen principatum non accepit Andreas sed Petrus Andrew follow'd Christ sooner than Peter yet Andrew did not receive the Principality but Peter in 2 Cor. 12. 4. St. Jerom. Propterea inter duodâ—cem unus eligitur ut capite constituto Schismatis toâ—latur occasio One is chosen among the twelve Apostles to the end that a Head being constituted all occasion of Schism may be taken away Cont. Jovin 5. St. Chrysostom The Pastor and Head of the Church was a Fisherman Hom. 55. in Cap. 16. Mat. 6. St. Augustin In Ecclesia Romana semper viguit Apostoliâ—ae Cathedrae Principatus The Principality of the Apostolic Chair has always flourish'd in the Church of Rome Epist 162. 7. The General Council of Chalcedon We throughly consider that all Primacy and Chief Honour is to be kept for the Bishop of old Rome Act. 16. This was the General Language not only of the Fathers of this Council but even of all Antiquity both in public Assemblies and private Writings the primitive Fathers and Councils always deferring the chief Honour and Primacy to the See of St. Peter as they generally phrase it And indeed tho' the Bishops of Constantinople have always been observ'd to be very ambitious to advance their own See above all others and to have procur'd in two General Councils viz. in the first Council of Constantinople and in that of Chalcedon to have that See prefer'd to Alexandria and Antioch and plac'd next after Rome yet we do not find that any Council or Father did ever dispute with the Bishop of Rome in Point of Primacy or Jurisdiction in so much was all Antiquity perswaded and convinc'd that he was the Chief and Supreme visible Head of the whole Catholic Church Thus much concerning the Primacy of St. Peter and his Successors which yet is not the one half of what may be alledg'd for this Point Now I wou'd willingly beg of any of our Adversaries to Answer me to these few Queries Whether these Holy Fathers did not believe the Primacy of St Peter and his Successors when they spoke so plainly in favour of it Whether they did not understand and were well instructed in the Doctrine of the whole Catholic Church touching this Point Whether they had a mind to flatter the Bishop of Rome or to grant him any more Authority and Power over themselves than was justly due to him And whether it be not an excess of Folly and Weekness to say no worse in the Protestants now fifteen hundred Years after to dispute that Prerogative which is so manifestly acknowledg'd by so many Eminent Martyrs and Confessors and great Doctors of the Primitive Church That the Bishop of
Rome did exercise Jurisdiction by way of Excommunication over the Eastern Bishops of which alone there remains any difficulty We have besides Innumerable Examples from the Fourth to the Tenth Century as that for instance Innocent the First excommunicated â—â—eâ—phiâ—us Bishop of Alexandria Celestinus the First Nestorius of Constantinople Agapâ—tus Anthimius another Bishop of Constantinople Nicholas the First Pâ—otius the intruded Bish p of Constantinople besides these I say we have two memorable Facts to this purpose in the begining of the Second and about the midle of the Third Century The first is related by two Eminent Witnesses St. Irenaeus Eusebius Casariensis by St. Ireâ—aeus in a Letter to Pope Victor and by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History lib. 5. cap. 25. This Historian tells us that Victor Bishop of Rome excommunicated Polycrates and the Rest of the Asiatic Bishops because they wou'd not be induc'd to celebrate Easter after the Roman Custom And St. Irenaeus in his Leter to this Pope complains most grievously of his Severity in cutting off so many Members from the Body of the Church for a matter of Discipline which no way respected the Faith 'T is true St. Irenaeus and Eusebius do not approve of Victor's Proceedings in this Bus'ness because they look'd upon his Sentence to be too severe yet neither the one nor the other did ever say that Victor had no power to do so And as St. Irenaeus took the liberty to reprehend the Pope for his too great Severity as he thought in this matter so no doubt he wou'd have told him that he exceeded his Commission by such a Procedure if he had not been convinc'd that the like Power had been vested in him And most certainly Eusebius who was an Asiatic Bishop himself wou'd never have complemented the Bishop of Rome but wou'd have plainly here inserted that the Pope had no power to Excommunicate the Bishops of Asia had there been the least question of his Authority in that particular The Second is that famous Controversie between Pope Stephen and St. Cyprian touching the Baptism confer'd by Hereties Many learned Writers are of opinion that St. Stephen Excommunicated St. Cyprian and his Adherents and all do agree that he threatn'd at last to Excommunicate Them Yet we do not find that St. Cyprian or any other Ecclesiastical Writer did ever say that the Bishop of Rome exceeded his Power in so doing 'T is true St. Cyprian and his Adherents as well as the Asiatic Bishops persisted in their Error notwithstanding the Pope's Excommunication as it usually falls out Men being hardly ever diswaded from the Opinions they once undertake to maintain but the Council of Nice has Justifi'd the Pope's Conduct in both these particulars branding with Heresie such as maintain'd the said Errors That there were Appeals made to the Bishop of Rome by the Eastern Bishops is no less manifest St. Athanasius and Paul Bishop of Constantinople appeal'd to Pope Julius for redress of the Violence offer'd them by the Arians St. Chrys stom to Innocent the First Theodoretus to Leo besides many more which I shall at present omit Socrates a famous Ecclesiastical Writer of the Primitive Times tells us lib. 2. cap. 15. How St. Athanasius and Paul with several other Bishops came to Rome and complain'd to Julius of the Violence offer'd them by the Arians and how he had undertaken their Patronage Among other things he adds this concerning the Pope's Authority in this particular 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But he the Pope because the Church of Rome had that Priviledge warranted them with his Letters wherein he freely spoke his mind and sent them back to the East restoring Each to his own Place and severely reprehending those who rashly turn'd them out The Learned Theodoretus informs us Hist Eccles lib. 2. cap. 4. that St. Athanasius being a second Time turn'd out by the Arians appeal'd again to Rome And that Pope Julius following the Canon of the Church commanded the Arians to come to Rome and cited Athanasius to appear at his Consistory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let us now put both these Testimonies together Here are two of the greatest Bishops of the East violently thrust out of their Bishopricks and flying to the Bishop of Rome for Redress Here are two of the most famous and most Eminent Historians of Antiquity who tell us that the Church of Rome had a peculiar Priviledge to protect and restore Bishops that the Bishop of Rome did but act according to or follow the Canon or Law of the Church as Thedoretus words it when he commanded the Aâ—ians to appear before him and summon'd Athanasius to answer their Charge If these be not Aâ—ts of Legal Jurisdiction if this be not the formal and proper Process of an Appeal we are as yet to Learn the meaning of these Terms Palladius Bishop of Helenopolis in the Life of St. Chrysostom tells us that this great Patriach sent four Bishops to Rome to plead his Cause and we have two Letters of Theodoretus setting forth his Appeal to the Bishop of Rome the first to the Pope and the second to Renatus Dean or Arch-Deacon of the Church of Rome in which he has these Words They have spoil'd me of my Bishoprick they did not reverence my Age consum'd in Religion nor my Gray Hairs Wherefore I beseech you to perswade the most Holy Arch-bishop to use his Apostâ—lic Authority and to command us to come to your Consistory for that Holy See sitteth at the Helm and hath the Government of the whole World Besides all these we have an express Canon of the General Council of Sardica held in or about the Year 347. wherein it is manifestly Decreed That if any Bishop be accus'd or condemn'd or depriv'd of his Bishoprick by the Bishops of his Province and that the Bishop thus depriv'd will Appeal or fly to the Bishop of Rome and desire to be heard the Bishop of Rome may either commit the Cognizance of his Cause to the Bishops of the Neighbouring Province or send Legats clâ—ath'd with his own Authority to be present at the Judgement or do whatever shall seem best in that behalf to his own most prudent Counsel Now let any Impartial Man judge if the single Authority of this Council be not sufficient to establish the Pope's Authority in Point of Appeals tho' there were nothing else to prove it That the Bishop of Rome exercis'd Jurisdiction over the Eastern Bishops by way of Confirmation and Deposition is too well known to need much Proof St. Leo tells us Epist 13. That he was earnestly desir'd by Theodosius the Emperor to confirm Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople which yet he refus'd to do unless Anatolius had first profess'd the same Doctrine with Cyrillus and the Rest of the Catholic Bishops in Opposition to the Heresie of Nestorius The same Pope gives us to understand in his Epist 82. That he had constituted the Bishop of Thessalonica as his Vicegerent in that part of
the East for the Corfirmation and Depâ—sition of Bishops and for such other Acts of Jurisdiction as depended of the Apostolic See I might bring more Instances to this purpose from the most approv'd Writers of ancient and modern History but let these suffice for the Proof of a thing so universally attested by all Antiquity And now if neither plain Texts of Scripture declaring this Prerogative to have been confer'd upon St. Peter and plainly shewing his exercising of it on several Occasions nor the Authority of so many Holy Fathers and Councils of the Primitive Times manifestly defferring the same Privilege to his Successors nor the Testimony of two of the most celebrated Historians of Antiquity publicly witnessing that the Church of Rome had the Priviledge to hear and restore the Patriarchs and Bishops of the East and that the Bishop of Rome follow'd or acted according to the Laws of the Church when he commanded or cited the Eastern Bishops Patriach and all to appear before him nor yet the Consent which the Evidence of the thing has extorted from some Ingenuous and Learned Protestants in favour of this Truth If all this I say will not open our Adversaries Eyes to see the Pope's Supremacy all I can do for their Service is to pray to Almighty God that he wou'd be pleas'd to take away from their Hearts that vail of Prejudice which hinders them to see so manifest a Truth But of this enough let us now see the Objâ—ctions Against this Tenet the Doctor objects 1. That the Bishop of Rome as Successor of St. Peter there Vol. 6. pag. 155. cannot be the Supreme and universal Pastor of Christ's Church by Divine Appointment because saith he there is not the least mention of this in Scripture 2. That it is against reason to found the Pope's Supremacy in being Successor of St. Peter pag. 156. at Rome whereas it shou'd rather pertain to the Bishop of Antioch where Peter was first Bishop To the first I answer that by all these Titles is only meant that the Pope is Head of the Church and the Center of Catholic Unity and no more is requir'd of any Man to believe concerning this Point Now that there is not only mention but even Texts of Scripture clearly proving St. Peter whose undoubted Successor all the World knows to be the Bishop of Rome to have been made the Head of the Church of Christ is already made out 'T is true the Scripture makes no mention of these Words supreme and universal Pastor no more does it of the Word consubstantial yet the Fathers of the Nicene Council did not scruple to make a Fundamental Article of Faith of it and carefully inserted it in their Creed because they judg'd it very proper to express their Belief concerning the Divinity of Jesus Christ In like manner tho' some Catholic Writers call the Bishop of Rome Supreme and Vniversal Pastor c. yet I do not see what Grounds the Doctor had to quarrel with them for that since all Catholics agree that they mean nothing else by these Words but that the Pope is Head of the Church and use them for no other end than to express more fully what it is to be Head of the Church But 't is very remarkable that no Sect ever separated from the Church who did not follow this Maxim They take hold of some words invented by the Church to declare more expresly such Articles of Faith as were contested and because these very Terms are not found in Scripture they cry immediately Victory as if our Faith consisted meerly in Words and not in what is meant by them To the Second I answer That it is much more against Reason nay altogether absurd to imagine that St. Peter whom the Dr. as well as I must in this case suppose to be Head of the Church shou'd come to Rome place his Chair in that City and yet leave his Authority behind him at Antioch This aiery Notion I am sure none of the Holy Fathers and Councils in the Primitive Times ever thought of on the contrary they have always consider'd the Bishop of Rome as Successor of St. Peter Head of the Church and Principle of Catholic Unity There are several Objections more of this Nature in the same Volume Pag. 244 245. c. And tho' most of them are levell'd at the Church of Rome yet I chuse to take notice of them under this Head rather than the former both because of their Affinity with this and for the Reader 's Satisfaction who I suppose won't be sorry to find them answer'd in the same order they lie 1. The Doctor grants that If the Roman Church be the Catholic Church it is necessary to be of that Communion because saith he out of the Catholic Church there is ordinarily no Salvation to be had But how do they prove continues he that the Roman Church is the Catholic Church They wou'd fain have us to be so civil as to take it for granted because if we do not they do not well know how to go about to prove it And after some pleasant Sallies of Rallery he concludes that to prove a part to be the whole is all one as to prove that the Roman Church is the Catholic Church To answer this Objection I say first that the Doctor here does very courteously justifie the Roman Catholics from that odious Imputation of Uncharitableness wherewith he elsewhere most grievously charges them for not allowing Protestants Salvation out of their Communion He grants that out of the Catholic Church there is ordinarily no Salvation to be had Now the Roman Catholics do sincerely believe that the Roman Church is the Catholic Church consequently when they say that there is ordinarily no Salvation out of it they cannot justly be charg'd with the least Uncharitableness since they have as it is already prov'd the greatest Assurance for that Belief that any thing of that Nature is capable of And if it be True as most certainly it is that the Roman Church is the Catholic Church then surely the Roman Catholics are so far from being uncharitable in this particular that it is one of the greatest Marks of their Charity to have that Love for their Erring Brethren as to mind them of the Hazard they run and exhort them to avoid it tho' they are sure they shall be hated for their Pains 2dly That he must be a great Stranger to our Divines and Controveâ—tists if he thinks as he here writes they do not well know how to go about to prove it Surely he must have been very ill read in the Writings of Bellarmin Peron Richelieu and hundreds of Catholic Divines who wrote on this subject when he advances so groundless shall I call it a Story And what as yet renders the thing more intollerable is that this is spoken out of a Pulpit where nothing but Truth and Sincerity shou'd as much as be mention'd In short this is matter of Fact The Catholic
Divine's Books on this subject are still extant and let even our Adversaries be the Judges whether this be not one of the most groundless Mistakes that ever any serious Man cou'd fall into 3dly That he is as far out when he says that to prove a part to be the whole is all one as to prove the Roman Church to be the Catholic Church Had we said that the particular Church and Diocess of Rome were the Catholic Church his Comparison wou'd then indeed have been Reasonable but surely he cou'd not be ignorant that we understand by the Roman Church all the Christian Churches over the World in Communion with the particular Church and See of Rome which we therefore call the Roman Catholic Church because Rome being the Seat of St. Peter's Successor is the Center and Principlâ— of Catholic Unity If the Doctor had a mind to make good his Thesis he shou'd have prov'd that all other Societies of Christians who are not in Communion with the Church of Rome are notwithstanding their Heresies and Schisms a Part of the Catholic Church he shou'd have prov'd that the Nestorians and Eutychians which take up the greatest part of the Eastern Christians are a Part of the Catholic Church notwithstanding they were excommunicated and cut off from the Body of the Catholic Church by the lawful Authority of two General Councils whose Decrees he and all other learned Protestants do profess to embrace that the Grecians are still Members of the Catholic Church notwithstanding their willful Schism from its Communion their ancient Error concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost their having been so often reconcil'd and united to it yet still returning to their Vomit but more especially their self-condemn'd Perverseness in their late Separation from the Communion and Fellowship of the Church of Rome which they solemnly and in the most Authentic manner gave under their Hands in the Council of Florence they wou'd hold and maintain he shou'd have prov'd that Luthor Calvin and all those who adher'd to their new broach'd Opinions are a part of the Catholic Church notwithstanding their being excommunicated by the Church and their own Confession of holding these Opinions in Opposition to all the World besides All this I say the Doctor shou'd have prov'd to shew that the Roman Church is but a part of the Catholic Church But neither he nor any Body else did ever so much as attempt it on the contrary most of the learned Men of the Church of England have readily given up the Cause in regard of all the aforesaid Sects and most of all other Sects do as censoriously condemn those of the Church of England With what colour of Reason then can the Doctor suggest that the Roman Church is but a part of the Catholic Church Nay can any thing be more plain than that the Roman Church as it is understood by Catholics is the whole Catholic Church since none of the aforesaid Sects can with the least colour of Reason pretend to be a part of it since they themselves do unchurch one another since they own that the Church of Rome is a Part at least of the Catholic Church and that one Faith and one Communion are equally essential to the being or Constitution of the one Catholic Church in both which Essential they own themselves to be different from the Church of Rome So that if we had no other Proof besides this last Reason is a plain Demonstration that either the Church of Rome is the whole Catholic Church or that it is no part or member of it 'T is a known Truth and even vouch'd by all Protestants whatsoever that the Church of Rome is at least a Part of the Catholic Church That one Faith and one Communion are equally essential to the Constitution of the Catholic Church of Christ is a Doctrine generally receiv'd by the Church of England and I suppose by all the Divines in the World besides now there is none of all the aforesaid Sects as they all unanimously agree that holds either the same Faith or Communion with the Church of Rome which yet they hold to be a Part of the Catholic Church and which together with the said Sects make up the whole Body of Christians It is then most evident that either the Church of Rome is the whole Catholic Church or that it is no Part or Member of it But the latter no Protestant ever yet durst affirm for if they shou'd affirm that the Church of Rome is no part of the Catholic Church this would vacate all their Pretences to be a Church since it is from the Church of Rome they pretend to derive their Mission Ordination and spiritual Power if any they have We are then sure even to a Demonstration that if what the Protestants say be true the Roman Church is the whole Catholic Church and no less sure that neither the Protestants nor any other Sect whatsoever can be any part or member of the Catholic Church whilst they continue out of the Communion and Faith of the Roman Church 2. To prove the Roman Church to be the Catholic Church the Doctor requires the following Particulars shou'd be clearly shewn and made out 1. A plain Constitution of our Saviour whereby St. Peter and his Successors at Rome are made the Supreme Head and Pastors of the whole Christian Church Of this says he we have not the least Intimation in the Gospel nor in the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles nay there is clear Evidence adds he to the contrary that in the Council of Jerusalem St. James was if not superior at least equal to him And St. Paul upon several Occasions declares himself equal to St. Peter But suppose it were true continues the Doctor That St. Peter were Head of the Church where doth it appear that this Authority was deriv'd to his Successors And if it were why to his Successors at Rome rather than at Antioch where â—e was first and unquestionably Bishop Answ Touching a plain Constitution c. methinks a modest good Christian might well be content with one plain Text of Scripture produc'd to that purpose much more with a great many and this surely is already done a hundred times over both from the Gospel and Acts of the Apostles where we plainly find this Charge committed to St. Peter and his frequent Exercise of it as occasion offer'd 'T is true the Scripture makes no mention of his Successor at Rome Nor do we say it is necessary he shou'd be there rather than any where else For St. Peter might if he pleas'd for ought we know have as well plac'd his Chair in Canterbury but it is matter of Fact that he did not place it there but in Rome His making St. James equal if not superior to St. â—eter in the Councâ—l of Jerusalem needs no other Confutation than a bare recital of the matter of Fact which pass'd there I am sure it is as plain as words can make it
I think I may reasonable conclude that the common people wou'd do the same were they never so well read in the Scriptures unless we suppose that the Protestant Religion has some Virtue to attract the common people upon the readding of Scripture in a vulgar Tongue which is incommunicable to Men of Letters when they read the same But methinks the stand the Protestant Religion has been at now upwards of an hundred Years without gaining one Foot of Ground nay hardly keeping what it had notwithstanding all the liberty and Indulgence it gives to Flesh and Blood is an evident Argument that it was not a serious Meditation and Study of Scripture but rather a popular fury and something like madness that brought over so many of the common People to embrace it in the Begining And indeed if the Fences and Bulworks wherewith the Protestant Religion is fortified were taken away if the Tests and Penal-Laws and other grievous Burdens laid upon R. Catholics were taken off if all the scandalous and opprobrious Language which Ministers thunder out in their Pulpits against the Church and Bishop of Rome all the False and Ridiculous Tenets which are ascrib'd to R. Catholics and manag'd with all the Art and Industry proper to inflame the People's hatred and to give them a perpetual aversion to R. Catholics and their Religion all the marks of Infamy and Dishonour put upon them being not permitted to bear any Civil or Military Office nay scarce allow'd in some Countries to exercise such honest Professions or Callings as may enable them to get their Bread if all these fatal Engins I say were laid aside and every Man left to chuse his Religion without the hopes of Reward on the one side or the Fear of loss of Goods and Temporal Punishment on the other I doubt the Protestant Religion wou'd soon fall to pieces and many a Prodigal Child wou'd return to their Father's Houses whence they have so long stray'd But these Fences and Barriers shall I call them of Religion being so Rivetted and interwoven with the Temporal Laws and Constitutions of most Governments where the Protestant Religion sways I fear all Reasons and Arguments tho' never so Evident are too weak to encounter them unless God of His Mercy be pleas'd to put His Hand to the Work To whose infinit Goodness and Mercy I do from my Heart most earnestly recommend it CHAP. VII Of the Invocation of Saints WHat we believe to be of Faith on this Head is thus declar'd by the Council of Trent That the Saints who Reign with Jesus Christ offer up to God their Prayers for Men that it is Good and Profitable to Invocate them after an Humble Manner and to have Recourse to their Prayers Aid and Assistance to obtain of God His Benefits thro' our Lord Jesus Christ His Son who is our only Saviour and Redeemer Sess 25. This the Council declares to be the Faith of the Church concerning this point but does not Command or Oblige any of the Laity to pray to the Saints or Invocate them 'T is a Practice receiv'd from the Primitive Church and us'd by the Greatest and most Learned and virtuous of the Holy Fathers of those Times as appears by their Works and handed Down to us by an uninterrupted Tradition But because it is not absolutely necessary the Church leaves every one the liberty to make use of it or not aâ— they think fit Yet to see how Dr. Tillotson lays about him upon this Subject and what pains he takes to confute it one wou'd think we have nothing in our Liturgies and public Prayer-books but Prayers to Saints and that we do nothing else in the public and solemn Service of the Church but pray to Saints and worship them Here it may be expected I shou'd give a Specimen of his Laborious Endeavours in this matter but I think a Pattern wou'd not do and therefore I shall refer the Reader to three intire Sermons Vol. 2. edit post obit Ser. 2 3 4. where this Bus'ness is handled to some purpose Now to justifie our Proceedings from these imputations and to shew the Reasonableness of this Practice as by us us'd I shall do these Four Things 1. I will endeavour to shew that to invocate the Saints by which Words we protest and declare and 't is hard if we may not be allow'd to interpret our own Words that we mean nothing else but to desire them to pray for us is not repugnant to the Word of God 2. that in the public and solemn Service of the Church excepting the Litanies of the Saints which are read or sung solemnly four times a Year the General Confession of Sins in the begining of the Mass a few Hymns Anthems and Versicles which are not Prayers strictly and properly so call'd and most of which are read only once a Year excepting these I say we put up no Prayers to Saints or Angels but all our Prayers are address'd to Almighty God and to Jesus Christ our Mediator and Redeemer Not but that we hold it lawful even in the public and solemn Service of the Church to pray to the Saints that is to desire them to pray for us since all the Addresses we make to the Saints do finally Terminate in Jesus Christ in virtue of whose Death and Passion we believe the Saints are enabled to pray for us but because it is matter of Fact that we do not address our Prayers in the solemn Service of the Church but to God alone 3. I will make it appear from the very Words of the Holy Fathers that the Practice of praying to Saints was us'd in the Primitive Church And Lastly I shall endeavour to return a brief Answer to what the Dr. thought fit to bring against this Point 1. I will endeavour to shew that to invocate the Saints or which is the same thing to desire them to pray for us is not repugnant to the Word of God The Texts of Scripture which seems to be against this Practice and which the Doctor urges are taken out of St. Paul 1 Tim. 2.5 where he says There is one God and one Mediator between God and Men the Man Christ Jesus And again Heb. 9.15 For this Cause He Christ is the Mediator of the New Testament c. Hence the Doctor concludes that it is contrary to the Word of God and which he mostly insists upon derogatory to the Mediatorship of Jesus Christ to pray to any Saint or Angel since to do so were to constitute them Mediators between God and Men contrary to the Express Words of St. Paul But sure he was not aware how far this Inference wou'd carry him else he wou'd be a little more reserv'd We are exhorted by the Scriptures and by the Rules of Charity we are bound to pray to God for one another Eph. 6.19 1 Tim. 2. Yea and St. Paul himself desires the Ephesians to pray for him and exhorts Timothy to have Prayers and
says We pray to the Saints in Heaven in the same order of Brotherly Society with which we intreat our Brethren upon Earth to pray for us But that this says he is not a true Representation of their Doctrine will appear by these Considerations 1. That they pray continues He to the Saints and Angels in Heaven with the same solemn Circumstances of Religious Worship that they pray to God himself 2. That in their Prayers and Thanksgiving they joyn the Angels and the B. Virgin and the Saints together with God and Christ 3. That in the Creed of Pope Pius 4. it is expresly said the Saints which reign with Christ are to be Worship'd and Invocated 4. That in the Public Offices of their Church they do not only pray to the Saints to pray for them but they direct their Prayers and Thanksgivings immediately to them for all those Blessings and Benefits which they ask of God and thank Him for of which innumerable Examples adds He might be given out of their Public Offices particularly in the Office of the B. Virgin they pray to the Angels thus deliver us we beseech you by your command from all our Sins To which I answer 1. That there never was a Book more universally commended and approv'd in the Latin Church than the Bishop of Meaux's Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholic Church The Pope highly commended and approv'd it as appears by his Brief to this Bishop annex'd to the said Book All the Cardinals and Consistory in Rome approv'd it as the Letters of the Master of the Sacred Palace and the Consultor of the Holy Office do witness And all the Learned Bishops and Prelates of the R. Catholic Church have very much approv'd and commended t as appears by the Letters of many of them to the said Bishop and his Friends all which are likewise annex'd to the said Book it has been translated into almost all the Vulgar Tongues in Europe and is read and perus'd by all R. Catholics with all the satisfaction and content imaginable so that to say this Exposition is not a true Representation of the Doctrine and Practice of the R. Catholic Church in this matter is as Unreasonable in it self as it is injurious to that Great and Learned Prelate and to the whole Catholic Church which hath so universally approv'd it 2. As to his first Consideration I have already prov'd that we address no Prayers to Saints or Angels in the Public Service of the Church but that all our Prayers are directed to God only and as to our Posture in the Church or at our private Devotions whether kneeling or standing or bowing we declare our intention is to adore God alone and none else Touching his second Consideration viz. that in their Prayers and Thanksgiving ibid pag. 80 81. they join the Angels and the B. Virgin and the Saints together with God and Christ Of this He gives us in an other place these instances Nothing so frequent with them says He as to joyn the blessed Virgin with God and our Saviour in the same breath nothing so common in their Mouth as Jesus Maria glory to God and the B. Virgin and in the Roman Missal adds He they make Confession of their Sins to God-Almighty and the blessed Virgin and to St. Michael the Arch-Angel and to all the Saints To which I answer 3. That it is very True we join God and his Saints together in the same breath as the Dr. saith but then our Plea is that we are taught both by the Old and New Testament so to do For Instance All the Congregation blessed the Lord God of their Fathers and bowing their Heads Worship'd the Lord and the King 1 Chron. 29.20 Here at the same time and in the same act and in the same breath too 't is said that the Israelites Worship'd God and the King Had we but any such thing in our Public Offices what work wou'd the Dr. make on 't Again The people greatly feared the Lord and Samuel 1 Kings 12.18 Here again God and Samuel are join'd together in the same Breath Again It seem'd good to the Holy Ghost and to Vs to lay upon you no other Burthen Acts 15.28 Again I charge thee before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the Elect Angels 1 Tim. 5.21 St. John writes to the Seven Churches in Asia Grace be unto you and Peace from Him which is and which was and which is to come and from the Seven Spirits which are before His Throne and from Jesus Christ Rev. chap. 1. Had we offer'd Peace from the Angels to our Flocks and placed them before Jesus Christ how loud wou'd He Cry Yet no less than an Apostle of Jesus Christ hath done it What will the Doctor say to all this Is not God here join'd with Angels and Saints and Men in the same Breath And must it be a Crime in us to do that whereof we have such manifest Precedents in the very words of the Scripture Truely to weigh well the matter one wou'd almost swear the Doctor was not in earnest but were I of councel for him I shou'd have advis'd Him if He had a mind to exhibit such Ridiculous Scenes not to make the Religion of Jesus Christ a Theatre of Laughter and Sport for God is not mock'd As to his third Consideration I answer 4. That Pope Pius 4. his worshiping and invocating the Saints is to be understood in the same order of brotherly Society in which we worship and reverence our holy Brethren on Earth upon Account of their Piety and Virtue and in which we intreat them to pray for us as the Bishop of Meaux saith and as St. Austin said long since Colimus Martyres eo cultu dilectionis societatis quo in hac vita coluntur sancti Deì homines We worship the Martyrs with that Worship of Love and Fellowship wherewith the holy Men of God are worshipped in this Life Lib. 20. cap. 22. contra Faust All the difficulty then of these and the like Phrases which we read in Scripture in the Fathers and in the Decrees of Councils and Popes consists in the Ambiguity of these Words Worship and Invocate which I have on purpose explain'd in the beginning of this Dispute to avoid Confusion and which the Catechism publish'd by Order of the Council of Trent and many other learn'd Divines have so clearly and fully explain'd So that nothing but an Itch of Contention and a Spirit of Wrangling cou'd make any Man doubt of our Sense of these Words But the Passage of St. Austin is so clear and full to the purpose that I hope the Reader will not be sorry to have it at large tho' it be something long and the rather because it is in answer to a Certain Manichee who about twelve Hundred Years since reproach'd St. Austin with what the Doctor and his Party charge the Roman Catholics at present The Christian People says this Father do celebrate the Memory of
them for which they ought to be worship'd On the contrary we are expresly forbid to give these Pictures or Images any manner of Worship for their own Sake but that the respect which we shew them is to be referr'd to the Originals namely to Christ and his Saints And sure these things which represent Christ and his Saints to our Eyes and put us in mind of the Death and Passion of the One and of the Patience and Sufferings of the Others are worthy of some Respect and may very well be honour'd upon Account of what they represent without any Danger of Idolatry as the Pictures of Kings and Princes and other Men by whom we receive Benefits are in their own degree confessedly respected and had in Esteem without any such Suspition In one Word the Heathens call'd all their Heroes or Saints Gods sacrific'd to them as such worship'd them as such call'd upon them as such but we do not call the Christian Saints Gods we do by no means sacrifice to them nor worship them as Gods nor call upon them as Gods So that upon the whole matter the Doctor might as well resemble Sea to dry Land or Light to Darkness or the obscurest Night to the brightest Day as compare the Worship we give the Christian Saints to that which the Heathens paid to their Heroes or Saints as the Doctor is pleas'd to call them CHAP. VIII Of Images WHat the Council of Trent declares concerning Images is this That the Images of Christ of the Virgin Mother of God and of other Saints are to be had and kept especially in Churches and that due Honor and Respect is to be given them not that we believe any virtue or Divinity to be in them for which they ought to be worship'd or that we shou'd ask any thing of them or put any trust or confidence in them as was formerly done by the Gentils who put their trust in Idols but because the Honor done to them is refer'd to the Originals which they represent So that by those Images which we kiss and before which we uncover our Heads and bow down we adore Christ and reverence the Saints whose likeness they bear Ses 25. Dec. de invocat Sanct. Here you see this Council only requires that we give duâ— honor and respect to Images which signifies no more than that we ought to give them the honor which is due to them But this is not all for the Council adds that when we uncover our Heads or bow towards Images we adore Christ and reverence the Saints whose likeness these Images bear So that it is not so much the Images we honor as Christ and His Saints And since 't is confess'd that the Types and Figures of all sacred things are worthy of some Respect in propotion to what they represent how mnch more ought the Types and Figures of Jesus Christ who is the Source and Fountain of all Holiness and Sanctification and of the Saints to whose Charity and goodness we owe under God our Faith and Religion to be had in Honor and Esteem We honor and respect the Bible more than ordinary Books tho' it is but Paper and Ink like other Books because the Characters therein contain'd are sacred Signs which represent to us the Word and Will of God And even Nature teaches us to honor and respect the Pictures and Images of Kings and Princes and of our Friends for the Excellency of these Persons and the Benefits we receive by them And why may not we likewise honor and respect those Signs or Images which represent to us that which is most Excellent and most August in the Christian Religion namely Christ and His Saints The Chief End of Images and Pictures is to adorn our Churches to put us in mind of the Passion of Christ and of the Piety and Virtue of the Saints and to be Books to the Ignorant And what Ornament so proper for the Church of God as the Picture of Jesus Christ who planted it with His Blood What in the next Place as the Pictures of Saints who water'd it with their's and are now in their own Degree the great Ornaments of the Heavens What can be more powerful to excite us to a greatful Remembrance of the Passion of Jesus Christ then to behold a Crucifix which represents Him to us with Arms stretch'd out as it were to embrace us and Hands and Feet and Side pierc'd for our Sins What pious Christian can then abstain from expressing the Sense of his Heart by some exteriour Act of Honor and Respect to such a Representation if not for its own at least for the sake of that which it represents And as to the Ignorant it cannot be denied but that when they are taught that such a Picture represents Jesus Christ who in that posture Sacrific'd Himself for their Sins that such other Pictures represent the Apostles and Saints who preach'd and deliver'd that Faith and Religion to them by which they are to be eternally happy it cannot be denied I say but that such lessons are easily retain'd and create in their Minds a greatful acknowledement of the Mercies of their Redeemer and a desire to imitate the Virtue and Piety of the Saints And then the Respect which they shew to these Pictures is but the Natural Result of their Sense of the Benefits they receive by the Passion of Christ and by the Piety and Charity of the Saints These were the chief motives that induc'd the Church in all Ages to have and to keep the Pictures of Jesus Christ and His Saints I say in all Ages Eusebius the Great and Famous Ecclesiastical Historian â—ist Eccles lib. 7. cap. 18 edit vol. who flourish'd in the Begining of the fourth Age tells us that the Christians had from the Begining the Pictures of Christ and of St. Peter and St. Paul that he himself had seen the Statue which the Woman whom Christ had heal'd of the bloody flux erected for Him at Paneas that at the Foot of this Statue there grew an Herb which when it touch'd the Skirt of the Statue had a virtue of curing Diseases And Helena's seeking and finding the Cross on which our Lord suffer'd and the Miracle by which it was discover'd are too well known to be question'd But what need I insist upon proofs of the lawfulness of Pictures and Images in Churches or of the respect that is due to them since the Protestants themselves acknowledge both They say they only exclaim against the Abuses committed in the Church of Rome upon this account But for the Thing it self they say they willingly own it This is the Declaration The Ingenious Author of The Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England in answer to the Bishop of Meaux makes in the Name of that Church page 18. It may not be amiss to subjoin his very Words We will honor says he the Relicks of the Saints as the primitive Church did We will respect the Images
Repentance that to encourage others to follow their Examples they were admitted to the Communion and Fellowship of the Faithful tho' they had not compleated the Time prescrib'd by the Canons Partly but more especially at the Intercession of the Martyrs For when any Martyrs were to be executed and had begg'd of the Bishops to indulge those Penitents whom they recommended to them the Bishops who cou'd not in Reason refuse any thing in their Power to Men who were ready to lay down their Lives and shed their Blood for the Christian Faith did commonly grant their Requests And this the Fathers call'd as in very deed it is Indulgence It were endless to instance in all the Examples which might be brought from the Fathers of the second and third Age upon this Subject St. Cyprian is most remarkable in this Bus'ness We have several of his Epistles wherein he tells us that having very often granted Indulgences to Penitents at the request of Martyrs he was forc'd at last being too much importun'd for People who did not deserve that Favor to write to the Martyrs themselves to beg of them that they wou'd not recommend but such as were worthy of that Grace at least that they shou'd not take it ill if he shou'd not grant their Request lest the Discipline of the Church shou'd be enervated upon that Score The same Father complains in his Letters to the Clergy of Rome and to others that some of his own Priests in his Absence had presum'd to give Indulgences which the Bishops only cou'd do In short there is nothing more frequently mention'd both by Fathers and Ecclesiastical Writers or more universally practic'd for the four first Ages than these Indulgences Now the Roman Catholic Church neither means by Indulgences nor pretends to any more than the same Power which the Primitive Fathers both had and practic'd that is of dispensing with or remitting the Ronances prescrib'd by the Canons nor did she ever pretend to dispense with any Man from Repentance for Sins or Obedience to the Law of God On the contrary the R. C. Church teaches and has always taught that all the Indulgences in the World do signifie nothing without a hearty Contrition and sincere Sorrow for Sin which is the Spirit and Essence of Christian Devotion But Canonical penances being meerly of Ecclesiastical Institution and pertaining to Discipline it cannot be denied but that the Church has Power to Intend or Remit them according to the different Circumstances of Time Place and Persons especially since Christ himself has given her Power to remit and retain Sins in which Power this Relaxation is manifestly implied 'T is true the R. C. Church does not now impose such rigorous Penances upon Sinners as the primitive Church did Nor does she expose them publickly in the Church in Penitential Weeds as was practic'd in the primitive Times but then the Reason on 't is because no Body now wou'd undertake these Penances because she is convinc'd that Men wou'd sooner break off with Christ and turn Heathens than purchase Heaven at so dear a Rate So far has Wickedness and Dissolution prevail'd in the World In the Infancy of the Church Piety Devotion Mortification Austerity were lovely Things Christians affected them very much of themselves and therefore readily undertook them when they had the misfortune to fall into any grievous Sin Besides they had before their Eyes frequent Examples of the Constancy and Resolution of their Pastors They saw them expose their Lives with the greatest contempt of the World and bear the Torments of Racks Gridirons Wheels and other hellish Instruments Episcopacy in those days being but one remove from Martyrdom with as much chearfulness and as little concern as if these cruel Engins had been Bays and Laurels and therefore it is not to be admir'd that the Blood of Martyrs then reeking hot shou'd warm their inclinations to sufferings and mortification and stir them up to a contempt of the allurements and pleasures of a wicked World not knowing how soon they themselves shou'd be call'd to the like Fiery Tryal But no sooner did the Blood of Martyrs grow cold and the Terrors of Death were taken away by the Peace and Quiet which Constantine the Great restor'd to the Church when the Primitive Piety and Devotion began to decay and Christians multiplied their Sins as they did their Riches No sooner were the Sangninary Laws and cruel Edicts of Pagan Emperors repeal'd and Christians put in Possession of great Fortunes and promoted to Honors and Dignities when they forgot their former Condition wax'd wanton against Christ and spurn'd at Discipline So that in a few Ages after you might as well expect Grapes from Thorns or Figs from Thistles as the primitive Penances from modern Christians And therefore it was necessary to mitigate the Severity of that Discipline lest the generality of I may say all Christians shou'd throw off all care of their Salvation and either return to Pagan Idolatry or follow the Delusions of their own Fancies However since the Apostles and Apostolical Bishops whose Conduct ought to be the Rule and Measure of all future Ages have prescrib'd and declar'd what Penances ought to be impos'd upon Sinners according to the degree of their Sins the Church hath always taught that all Christians who have been or are so unfortunate as to fall into grievous Sins are still lyable to these Penances unless they are dispens'd with by the Church or Commuted for some other Works of Piety And that the discipline of the Church might be preserv'd and upheld as much as the Wickedness of the Times will bear all Pastors and Confessors are commandded to impose such Penances upon Sinners as will bear some proportion with the greatness of their Sins tho' not to that degree as the primitive Canons require Leaving the rest to be dispens'd with or Indulg'd by the Chief Pastors of the Church according to the power which Christ has given them and as general Councils have determin'd And this in as few Words as I cou'd well deliver it is truly and plainly the Case of Indulgences and the reason why they are so often given is the great decay of Piety and Devotion in Christians and the tender affection of the Church for their eternal Welfare not a desire of Money or any filthy Lucre as our Adversaries do most injustly suggest On the contrary I am confident that there is not one Divine or Casuist in our Church who does not hold that it is Sinful and Diabolical even the Sin of Simon Magus to give or receive any Money for Indulgences And several General Councils and Pope's Decrees have expresly declar'd that to give or receive any sort of Gift either directly or indirectly for either Indulgences or any other Spiritual Grace is perfect Sâ—mony which surely is sufficient to justifie us from any sinister dealing in this particular As to the Abuses of Indulgences which I do not deny to have sometimes happen'd we
of all Articles of Faith Secondly That this Congregation and no other is that which is in Communion with the Bishop of Rome Thirdly I shall answer the Objections which Dr. Tillotson brings in his Sermons against this Point First I will endeavour to shew that there is a Church or Congregation of Faithful which is Infallible in her Decisions and Declarations of all Articles of Faith To prove this I shall lay down these Grounds 1. That Jesus Christ planted his Doctrine in the Hearts of a certain number of Men by working True and Real Miracles in their presence which no other but an Omnipotent Power cou'd effect and that in order to the propagating of this Doctrine he chose twelve Men whom he called Apostles and made them his chief Ministers vesting in them his own Power and Authority for that End 2. That these twelve Apostles and other Disciples went into several Countries and preached the same Doctrine to Jews and Gentiles confirming it with true and real Miracles 3. That the Apostles ordained and constituted other Ministers of this Doctrine to succeed in their own Room to whom they delegated the same Power they received from Jesus Christ and These Others and so on from Generation to Generation to continue to the end of the World 4. That this Power of working Miracles continued in the Preachers of this Doctrine at least till a considerable number of people had embraced the same Doctrine in most of the then known Countries of Asia Europe and Africa This supposed I say 1. That the people who heard the Apostles preach and saw them confirm their Doctrine with true and real Miracles were infallibly sure that this Doctrine was True because they were sure the doing of such Miracles required an Omnipotent Power and that according to the Notion all Men naturally have of God he would not exert his Omnipotence in Favour of a Lye 2. That whatever Articles the Universal Consent of so many Nations was agreed upon to have been received from the Apostles it is impossible it should be false that they had received them because it is impossible that so many Nations of different Interests Tongues and Manners should all conspire and agree to relate the same thing as received from the Apostles if it had not been so And as this is most assuredly true in regard of those who saw the Miracles of the Apostles and delivered their Doctrine to the next Generation so it is for the same Reason equally impossible it should be false in respect of any succeeding Generation That there was such a Man in England as King Henry the VIII or that there is or was such a Man as the Grand Signior or such a City as Constantinople I am as certainly sure as of any thing I see with my Eyes for it is as evident to my Understanding that it is impossible in practice that so many Nations as relate these things different in their Humours Manners and Interests should all conspire to tell an Untruth which can be of no Advantage to them as it is evident to my Senses that I see the Paper and feel the Pen wherewith I write For since no Cause imaginable can be assigned to cause so many different Nations to conspire together in the Belief of an Untruth no interest as we suppose moving them thereunto and no Cause put it is impossible an Effect should follow it is as evident to my Reason that they cannot thus conspire as it is to my Senses that I perceive their proper Objects unless we have recourse to God Almighty and say that he might put it in their Hearts to act thus But if we should suppose this not inconsistent with his Divine Attributes may we not likewise suppose that he might impose upon my Senses and make me think I see and feel when I do not Yes undoubtedly Yet I suppose no Body will say but that I may be certainly sure that I both see and feel And whatever reason his unsearchable Wisdom might have to impose upon my Senses I am sure it does not stand with his Goodness to put into any Man's Heart to tell a Lye If it be then impossible that the universal Consent of all the Nations in Europe should be liable to err in delivering to posterity things of an indifferent Nature how much more must the Universal Consent of all the Christian World be certain in conveying the Truth of the Gospel upon which our eternal Welfare depends One single Man may and has often declared the Truths that were committed to him but because he is obnoxious to Error no Man is bound to believe him any further than he shews good Credentials for what he says It was therefore necessary the Apostles and other Disciples who first preached the Gospel each apart should be endued with a power of working Miracles to gain themselves credit A small Body of Men such as a City or Corporation is less obnoxious to Error than one Man however no Man is obliged to believe them no further than they shew good Reason for what they say because it is easy for such a Body of Men for some private End to conspire in the Belief of an Untruth Thus in some time after the Flood the Son of Cham erected Idols and perswaded the rest of their Kindred Men simple indeed but very much abandoned by God that these were the Gods they must adore And for all this false Worship prevailed in succeding Ages as Men increased so as to spread almost over the whole Earth Yet because it was not only destitute of all Rational Motives to perswade its Belief in the beginning but even contrary to the Light of Nature the very Philosophers and learned Men that seem'd to promote its Profession gave no Credit to it Thus a small number of Sarazens perswaded the rest of their Rude and Barbarous Countrymen to believe the Impostures of Mahomet And however this Barbarous Nation forced their Passage with Fire and Sword thro' many spacious Countries and planted their Religion in most parts of Asia and Affrica Tho' their Principles be not altogether so absurd as those of the Pagans yet as they have not the least Rational Motive to induce any Man to believe them so neither were they obtruded on the Believers the Progeny of those who first embraced them excepted by any other means than Cruelty and Slaughter I have on purpose mentioned these two false Religions that swayed in the World for a long time to obviate an Objection which might be made against the Unanimous Consent of Christians in their Belief of the Doctrine of Jesus Christ For if it be said that several Countries and Nations of Pagans and Mahometans have conspired in the Belief of the Faith they received from their Ancestors yet that this Faith or Religion was false This Objection is so far from impairing the Truth of the Christian Religion that it rather confirms it For it is most certain the Pagans and Mahometans received
that of those One or Two who first oppos'd it III. That these Authors of Sects did not all oppose this universal Consent at the same time but some in different Ages and all at different Times IV. That they did not all oppose the same Points of Faith 1. That the Contradiction of each of the said Sects began first in one or two at most This is so manifest in History and in all Records both innocient and Modern that it were superfluous to go about to prove it 2. That the Contradiction of all such as adher'd to the Heads of each Sect be they never so many amounts to no more than that of those one or two who first oppos'd it This is evident for if Arius for instance err'd in denying the Consubstantiality of the Son with the Father no number of Adherents to his Opinion can make it True Now that Arius err'd in this Point 't is easy to see because the universal Consent of all the Christian World was against him And as this is manifest in respect of Arius and his Sectators so it is no less convincing in regard of Nestorius Eutyches and all other Sects whatsoever 3. These Authors of Sects did not oppose the universal Consent at the same time but some in different Ages and all at different Times This is so plain that it needs no Proof for no body who is never so little read in Antiquity can be Ignorant that Arius for instance opposed it in the Beginning of the fourth Age Nestorius in the Beginning of the fifth Age Eutiches in some Years after and so of all the rest 4. They did not all oppose the same Points of Faith This is no less evident than the former our Adversaries themselves being the Judges Indeed if they had all denied the same Articles of Faith at the same time and in different parts of the World I must confess it would in some Measure lessen the Authority of those that asserted them for it is natural to think that several Men of different Tongues and Interests would without any mutual Participation of their Thoughts never agree to assert or deny the same things unless there had been some Reason for it But when one Man denies one Point or more if you please in one Age and an other denies an other in another Age or at least at a different Time what is this but one Man against all the World To answer this Objection then I say 1. That tho' it were true that all these Heads of Sects had always opposed the universal Consent of the Church as aforesaid viz. One in one Age and another in an other or at a different time this Opposition can no more prejudice the Faith which we hold upon the universal Consent of all the Christian World than if one Man in the last Age and an other in this had denied the being at any time of King Henry the VIII or of the City of Constantinople such Impudence could lessen our Belief concerning that King or this City 2. 'T is not true that these Heads or Ringleaders of Sects did always oppose the universal Consent of the Church For since they were the first as I shall prove by and by that opposed the Doctrine of the Church and taught new Opinions contrary to what was believed before they must have been for some time before they broached their new Doctrine of the same Opinion with the rest of the Church who taught them their Faith consequently they did not always oppose the universal Consent but concurred with the rest in it till they took up their new Opinions and even still continue to own that the Doctrine which they opposed was universally believed at the Time of their Separation So that we have the Universal Consent of the Christian World for the Truth of our Faith even the Consent of those who afterwards opposed it not excepted Now that these Heads or Ring-leaders of Sects to wit Arius Nestorius Eutyches Luther c. were the first that opposed the universal consent of the Church in respect of the several Opinions wherein they are said to contradict it may easily be proved first by the confession of their own Parties who ingenuously own that they follow the Opinions of those Men in the Things wherein they differ'd from the rest of the World and have therefore got the Apellation of Arians Nestorians Eutychians Lutherans c. whereas if any Churches or Societies of Christians had held these Opinions before they wou'd have continued in Communion with them and not have separated from all the World as 't is manifest they have even by the acknowledgment of their own Writers Secondly By an Induction of all these Sects in particular and of the Councils held in several Ages wherein they were proscribed But in this I am happily prevented by the ingenuous confession Dr. Tillotson was pleased to make of this Truth as far at least as relates to my purpose Thus says he in the heigth of Popery Ser. 1. Vol. 5. Wickliff appear'd here in England and Hierom of Prague and John Huss in Germany and Bohemia And in the Beginning of the Reformation when Popery had quite over-run the Western Parts of the World and subdued her Enemies on every side and Antichrist sate securely in the quiet possession of his Kingdom Luther arose a bold and rough Man but a fit wedge to cleave in sunder so hard and knotty a block and appeared stoutly against the gross errors and corruptions of the Church of Rome and for a long time stood alone and with a most invincible spirit and courage maintained his ground and resisted the united malice and force of Antichrist and his Adherents and gave him so terrible a blow that he is not yet perfectly healed and recovered of it So that for a man to stand alone or with a very few adhering to him and standing by him is not a mear immaginary supposition but a case that hath really and in fact happen'd in several Ages and places of the World Thus he and indeed enough to prove what I said For you seâ— he ingenuously owns these Authors of Sects stood alone each in his Time and he might as well have said the same thing of the Authors of all other Sects that ever rose in the Church Wickliff says he appeared here in England and Hierom of Prague and John Huss two of Wickliff's Disciples in Germany and Bohemia There was none then of their Opinion before them Luther stood alone for a long time all the World was then against him And must this single Man be believed upon hiâ— bare Word delivering a new Doctrine in opposition to all the World without the least Mark or Character of a Man sent by God These are surely harder terms than God ever required of the very Pagans for their Conversion from Idolatry But to give this more weight Let us compare the Jews which received the Law and the Prophets with the Christians who received
the Gospel Tho' the Scribes and Pharisees were notoriously known to be very wicked and had enjoyn'd the Jews the observance of some Traditions of their Fathers together with the Law of Moses yet Christ was so far from advising the Jews to separate from them that he expresly commanded them to observe and do whatsoever the Scribes and Pharisees bid them Mat. 23.2 And that because they sate in the Chair of Moses Nay what is more he says if I had not done among them the works John 15.24 which none other man did they had not had sin Intimating that it was neither Reasonable to depart from that Religion which they received from their Ancestors the Truth whereof was at several times confirm'd by True and Real Miracles nor sinful not to hear his Doctrine to the prejudice of their own unless he had done greater Works that is had wrought greater Miracles in confirmation of the Truth of it than any man before had done in confirmation of theirs And shall the Catholic Religion the Religion of Jesus Christ which is grounded upon surer and better promises than that of the Jews even upon the promise of that Word which abideth for ever shall this Religion I say be abandon'd at a Signal given by one single man rising up in opposition to all the World without a Sign or Miracle or the least reasonable pretence to it Surely this is so monstrously absurd that were we not convinced of the truth of it by our own woful experience we shou'd rather believe the whole frame of nature wou'd dissolve and all things run counter to their usual course than that any man in his wits shou'd be guilty of such a folly Obstupâ—cite Coell super hoc That one Profligate Monk who as all the World knows debauched a professed Nun whom he kept till his death contrary to his and her solemn vows of Chastity and for ough that ever I cou'd hear or learn never shewed any marks of Repentance for this his Incestuous and Crimminal Commerce That this wretched man I say without the least Mark or Character of a Divine Commission on the contrary that was branded with all the Marks wherewith Christ and his Apostles point us out the Ministers of Satan shou'd prevail upon the Credulity of so many Great and in other matters Wise and Learned Men is surely so surprising that nothing in Nature can parallel it But did the first Authors of the Reformation work no Miracles As for true Miracles I do not find they did any but somthing like Miracles or rather surprising wonders I find recorded by their own Writers but the mischief on 't is they are such as overthrow the whole Reformation if they were believed Luther tells us in his Book do missa angulari that what he wrote against the Mass was suggested to him by the Devil This Book was printed and published by his own Reformed Doctors of Wittenberg but becauses it looks now somthing scandalous to pious reformed Ears it must pass for an Imposture Bolsec a Protestant Writer tells us that Calvin agreed to give a certain man named Bruleus a sum of mony on condition he wou'd feign himself dead that he might come to Resuscitate him and when all thingâ— were prepared for this farce the new Apostle had no sooner commanded the Living to rise when his words had that strange efficacy as to strike him dead but Bruleus his poor Wife who lost both her Husband and the hopes of her Money reviled the Apostle and discovered the Imposture But this is still so offensive to the Reformation that it is meet it shou'd likewise pass for a Fable But to return Luther arose saith the Dr. and appear'd stoutly against the gross Errors and Corruptions of the Church of Rome and resisted the united malice and force of Antichrist and his Adherents And what are these gross Errors and Corruptions of the Church of Rome Even that Faith which was preach'd to his Ancestors at their first Conversion to Christianity as the best of his own Protestant Writers do confess the Truth whereof was confirm'd not by Impostures but by true Miracles as venerable Bede and all the Historians of those Times do witness As to his unchristian Railing in this Place I will say nothing to it but leave him to his own Master to account for it And indeed if Railing were the subject of our Dispute I wou'd freely yield him the Palm for I own I have no Talent that way You see then Christian Reader upon how fickle and sandy a bottom the Faith of all Sectaries stands and how firm and solid that Basis and Foundation are whereon the Catholic Faith is built namely the Universal Consent of all the Christian World which if lyable to Error we may justly doubt of the Truth of any thing in the World even of what we see with our Eyes since as 't is already prov'd it is as impossible that the Universal Consent of so many Nations shou'd conspire to declare they had received that Faith from their Ancestors if they had not as that a Wall for example shou'd not be white when I see it to be so Here I foresee it will be objected that clear Evidence destroys the Virtue of Faith which is essentially obscure as St. Gregory saith Nec bides habet meritum cui Ratio humana prebeâ— Experimentum Nor hath that Belief any merit to which humane Reason gives Experience But this is easily answer'd viz. That the Obscurity of Faith is well consistent with Evidence that the Faith was reveal'd tho' not with the Evidence of the Thing reveal'd by Faith that is one may have Evidence of the Existence of a Thing tho' his Reason can neither understand nor comprehend the Thing it self else the Apostles must have been in worse Circumstances than any other Christian for having seen with their Eyes Epist 1. chap. 1. and felt with their Hands as St. John saith most of the Mysteries of our Redemption they had the Evidence of their Senses for the Truth of their Existence consequently could have no Faith concerning them if there be any Force in this Objection This Answer is agreeable to the Definition St. Paul gives of Faith viz. That it is an Evidence of things not seen Fides est sperandarum substantia rerum Argumentum non apparentium Faith is the Substance of things hoped for the Evidence of things not seen that is grounded upon the Evidence of things not seen nor understood And thus St. Gregory's Words are to be understood for he comments upon these Words of St. John cap. 20. When the Doors were shut where the Disciples were assembled for Fear of the Jews came Jesus and stood in the midst Quomodo saith he post resurrectionem corpus Dominicum verum fuit quod clausis januis ingredi potuit Sed sciendum nobis est quod divina operatio si râ—tione comprehenditur non est admirabilis nec fides habet meritum cui ratio
is excommunicated by the Church for the Obstinate Denial of any Article of the Faith which the Church professes cannot justy be call'd a Member of the Church 1. In the Catholic Church there is and shall be a Continued Succession of Bishops Priests and Teachers from Christ to the End of the World This is manifest from these Words of St. Paul He gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints for the Work of the Ministry for the edifying of the Body of Christ till we all come in the Vnity of the Faith c. Eph. 4.11 12. 2. There is but one Catholic Church This is evident from Christ's own Words I have other Sheep which are not of this Fold Them also I must bring and they shall hear my Voice and there shall be one Fold and one Shepherd John 10.16 And from these Words of the Nicene Creed I believe One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church 3. One Communion as well as one Faith is Essential to the Being of one Church This is no less evident from the aforesaid Words of Christ who says that his Sheep will not only hear his Voice but also shall be brought all into one Fold than from the very Notion which as well protestants as Catholics have of a Church namely That it is a Congregation of the Faithful believing and practicing the same Things with due Subjection and Subordination to their Lawful Pastors This Truth the Gentlemen of the Church of England are very loth to own in their Disputes with the Roman Catholics and not without Reason For they are Sensible that all their Authority and Mission if any they have are deriv'd from the Church of Rome and that if Unity in Communion which as aforesaid implies a Due Subjection and Subordination to Lawful Pastors be essential to the Being of the Catholic Church they quite unchurch themselves since it is Manifest that in the Beginning of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth They shook off all Obedience and Subjection to their Bishops who were all R. Catholics and Drove them all away and in some Years before in King Henry the VIII his Time what with Death and other Cruelties they compell'd most of Them to divide and separate from the Pope and all other Bishops in the World besides They wou'd therefore willingly pass by this sore place if possible but when the Dispute is with the Presbyterians this Truth is highly magnified These they look upon to be Schismatics because they separated from their Communion and erected Altars against their Altars and so far indeed they are in the Right if a Separation from a Separation may be called Schism However this I cannot but admire that they do not observe that in charging the Presbyterians with Schism they condemn themselves since it is notoriously known they are highly guilty of what they charge them with namely of separating from their own and all other Bishops in the World Whoever desires farther Satisfaction in this matter may consult Dr. Heilin's History of the Presbyterians Intitul'd Aerius Redivivus and the History of the Reformation by the same Author but more especially an Ingenious Treatise lately publish'd by a Learned Divine of the Church of England under this Title The Principles of the Cyprianic Age. In this the Author proves excellently well the Necessity of One Communion as well as of One Faith for the being of One Church I will transcribe some of his Words and leave the Reader to judge how well he proves my Postulatum Now they were thus united saith he speaking of all the Bishops in the Catholic Church by the Great and Fundamental Laws of one Faith and one Communion That the One Holy Catholic Faith is essential in the Constitution of One Holy Catholic Church is even this day a receiv'd Principle I think amongst all sober Christians But then I say that the Christians in St. Cyprian's Time reckon'd the Laws of one Communion every whit as forcible and indispensable to the Being of one Church as the Laws of One Faith It was a Prime a Fundamental Article of their Faith that there was but one Church and they cou'd not understand how there cou'd be but One Church if there was more than One Communion By their Principles and Reasonings a multiplication of Communions made unavoidably a multiplication of Churches and by consequence seeing there cou'd be but one true Catholic Church there cou'd be likewise but one true Catholic Communion All other Churches or Communions were false i. e. not at all Christian Churches or Communions Thus far this Learned Man and indeed very right For it was the constant Principle as well of all as of the Primitive Ages of the Church that One Communion was no less Essential to the being of One Church nor less necessary to Salvation than One Faith And here I cannot but observe two things by the way 1. How unjust that intolerable charge of uncharitableness is wherewith the Protestants incessantly Traduce the R. Catholics for denying them Salvation out of their Communion since it is manifest as this Learned Man says that one Faith and one Communion are equally necessary to Salvation And no less evident that the Protestants separated themselves from that Communion and Faith which the R. Catholics believe and maintain to be the true Church How is it then consistent with their Principles to allow Salvation to the Protestants whilst they persist in their Separation Or how can they be deem'd uncharitable for judging according to the known Principles of the Primitive Christians who knew but one Faith and one Communion wherein Salvation was to be had 2. What miserable shifts the Church of England Gentlemen are driven to being forc'd to deny to the R. Catholics in their own justification what they so earnestly press upon the Presbyterians in order to reclaim them as constant and fundamental Principles in the Primitive Church 4. Whosoever separates from or is excommunicated by the Church for the obstinate Denial of any Article of the Faith which it professeth cannot reasonably be call'd a Member of the Church This is Self-evident as to the first part for to separate from the Church is to go away from it as the very Word imports and by consequence to be no more a Member of it It is likewise no less evident as to the second for to Excommunicate is to put out of Communion or to cut off from the Body of the Church So that whoever is Excommunicated for the Denial of any Article of Faith can no more be said to be united to the Church than an Arm cut off from a Man or a Branch from a Tree can be said to be united to the same Man or Tree All such then who wilfully separate from the Communion of the Catholic Church let their Pretence be never so plausible are properly Schismatics I say let their pretence be never so plausible for Dr. Hammond tells us as aforesaid that
it is Impossible the Church shou'd give them such Provocation as might justifie a Separation in like manner All those who are excommunicated by the Church for their obstinate Refusal to assent to any Truth declar'd to be an Article of Faith are properly call'd Heretics Now Protestants as well as Catholics agree that neither Schismatics nor Heretics are Members of the Catholic Church nor any way within its Pale There only remains then to examine who those are on whom these Marks of Schism and Heresie are justly chargeable and who on the other Hand are free from that charge which if plainly made out it will be easy to see what Congregation of Faithful can be justly call'd the Catholic Church Now all the Societies of Christians who with any colour of Reason can pretend to the Name of Catholic are these 1. The Nestorians and Eutychians 2. The Greek Church 3. The Church of England And lastly the R. Catholics I have on purpose omitted the Waldenses Socinians Hussites Lutherans Calvinists and all those almost Innumerable Sects continually shooting out of the Trunck of the Reformation and spreading far and near over our own unfortunate Ilands as Anabaptists Independents Quakers Mugoltonians Seekers Familists Philadelphians c. because all these are destitute of even the least Pretence to the Name of Catholic Church having neither lawful Pastors lawful Mission nor Right Ordination which as all the Christian World before the Reformation and as the Church of England still grants cannot be given without Imposition of Hands performed by Bishops This they Ingenuously own they have not consequently nor the least Pretence to the Catholic Church no nor if we believe some Learned Divines of the Church of England to the Name of Christian For as these Gentlemen Reason no Man can be call'd Christian unless he is Baptiz'd Baptism cannot be conferr'd but by such who have Authority to administer the Sacraments no Man can have this Authority but by lawful Ordination and this is not conferr'd nor cannot without Imposition of Hands by Lawfully ordain'd Bishops Bishops all these Sects own they have not consequently nor true Baptism nor Christianity This I confess cannot be said of the four Societies aforesaid For every one of them hath always retain'd the Hierarchy of the Church Bishops Priests and Deacons at least have pretended to it and think it Essential to the being of the Catholic Church But since this is not enough unless they have likewise the Catholic Faith and Communion which together with the said Hierarchy make up the essential parts of Catholic Religion our present Bus'ness shall be to try each of them by this Touchstone and see which will abide the Test 1. Touching the Nestorians and Eutychians Under this Appellation I comprehend the Jacobites Cophtes Armenians and all other Sects who follow the Opinions of Nestorius and Eutyches touching the Person and Natures in Christ all the Rest of the Eastern Christians either adhereing to the Roman or Greek Church What I have to say concerning these Sects shall be dispatch'd in a few Words Dr. Tillotson and all the Learned Men of the Church of England do receive the Definitions of the four first General Councils whereof the two last excommunicated and condemn'd as Heretics the Authors of these Sects and their Adherents Nâ—storius for asserting two persons Eutyches for denying two Natures in Christ consequently all those Sects who took up their Opinions are justly excluded from the number of True Catholics As to the Points in Controversie betwixt the Church of Rome and the Protestants viz. Transubstantiation Sacrifice of the Mass Prayers for the Dead Invocation of Saints c. they are as firmly believ'd by the said Sects as by the R. Catholics 2. As for the Greek Church It is notoriously known that the Chiefest Reason of their Separation from the Church of Rome was because this Church asserted the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son which yet the Protestants hold to be Orthodox Doctrine And no less evident that the Greek Church did Recant their Error concerning this Point and all other things wherein they differ'd from the Church of Rome many times but more especially in three General Councils First in the Council of Lâ—theran where the Patriarch of Constantinople assisted in Person 2dly In the Council of Lyons where the Greek Emperor and other Representatives of the Greek Church were present And lastly in the Council of Florence where the Emperor the Patriarch of Constantinople and a great many Greek Bishops were present and disputed the Point for a long time which at last came to this Issue There were Letters of Vnion drawn up wherein the Grecians do acknowledge the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and Son the Popes Supremacy and some other Points of no great Weight before debated These Letters were signed by the Emperor and by all the Greek Bishops the Bishop of Ephesus only excepted and stand upon Record to this day Whence it is manifest that by their own Act and Deed they are convicted of Schism for their wilful and causeless Separation afterwards from the Church of Rome whom they own'd by this Authentick Instrument to be the Catholic Church and themselves likewise to be Members of it Touching the main Points in Controversie betwixt the Protestants and the Church of Rome what the Greek Church holds and professes let us hear from the Pen of an Ingenious Protestant Gentleman Sir Edwin Sandys in his Europae Speculum pag. 233. With Rome saith he they concur in the opinion of Transubstantiation and generally in the Sacrifice and whole body of the Mass in praying to Saints in Auricular Confession in offering of Sacrifice and Prayer for the Dead and in these without any or no material Difference They hold Purgatory also and the Worshiping of Pictures Thus far Sandys So that tho' the Greeks were a true Church it wou'd but very little help the Protestant Cause nay rather it wou'd very much prejudice it since the Grecians hold those points to be Orthodox on the pretended falsity whereof the Protestants ground their Separation But of this more in its proper Place 3. Touching the Church of England This is of so Great Importance to our present Controversie or rather the only necessary Point to be Rightly understood that it is requisite it shou'd be handl'd with all the clearness and perspicuity imaginable And if it be possible to make it Evident that this Church is branded with Heresie and Schism two things sufficient to unchurch any Society of Christians whatsoever I hope I may without vanity say that I have gained my Point To prove then that the Church of England is both Heretical and Schismatical I am heartily sorry I must use such hard Expressions to so many Ingenious and Great Men whose Learning and other good Qualities I very much honor and respect I shall make use of no Arguments but such as are grounded upon the clear Light of natural
And most of these are condemned by the Protestants as are most if not all the Points wherein the Protestants differ from Her condemned by all other Sects An Evident Argument that she alone hath the Truth since if these things which they ground their Separation upon had been Evident as they pretend they wou'd all agree in them 3. All other Sects separated from the Communion of the Church of Rome begining each Sect in One or Two in opposition to the whole World And we are able to point at the Age and Year of their Separation and at the Name and Character of each Sect's Author and Promotor An Argument that She is the Mother Church or Root of the Tree and those Sects some Branches fallen or cut off 4. The Roman Catholic Church was never Condemn'd by any General Council nor yet by any Council of Bishops whether National or Provincial for the Points of Faith which the Protestants contest if we except the Bishops made in England by Secular Power when the true Bishops were all discarded But the Opinions held by the Protestants and all other Sects in Opposition to the Church of Rome were Condemn'd by several General Councils as every Learned Man can tell 5. It cou'd never be made out in what Age or Year or in whose Reign or by Whom any of the Points in Dispute were introduc'd into the Catholic Belief An Evident Argument that they were believ'd from the Begining it being impossible to conceive how all the Christian World cou'd be induc'd to believe those things contrary to what they held before and yet that no Man should perceive it Nay it is Absurd and Ridiculous to imagine that the greatest part of Mankind shou'd not be allarm'd at the Novelty of a Doctrine which if we believe the Protestants shocks so much both Sence and Reason whereas the New Doctrine of Arius Nestorius Luther Calvin and the Rest of his Tribe so violently shook the whole Earth that to this very day our own woful Experience is but too sensible a Testimony of its direful Effects Lastly the R. Catholic Church hath the universal Consent of all the Christian World for her Tenets in matters of Faith if we except that of the different Sects which sprung up at different Times which as it is before prov'd amounts to no more than the Dissent or Contradiction of one single Man concerning One Point in one Age and of another concerning an other Point or more in a different Age at least at different Times and that in Opposition to all the Rest of Mankind A Prerogative which no other Society of Christians can pretend to it being evident and even confest by themselves that the Opinions which they hold in Opposition to the R. Catholics were taken up by certain Men in different Ages and Times by Luther in the 16th Century by Wiclief in the 13th by De Waldo in the 12th c. I will then conclude That since the R. Catholic Church is as universal in its Communion as almost the Bounds of the Earth as Ancient in its Doctrine as the Apostles of Christ since it was it alone that adher'd to the Ancient Faith and rejected the Novelty of all Heresies and can only glory in having the Universal Consent of the Christian World as before explain'd for the Truth of its Doctrine This Society and no other is the True Catholic Apostolic Church I shall now proceed to answer Dr. Tillotsou's Objections to this Point The first is taken out of Vol. 2. Serm. pag. 50 61 62. which in Substance is this Tho' the R. Catholics be very Stiff and Peremptory in asserting their Infallibility yet they are not agreed among themselves where it is seated whether in the Pope alone or in a Council alone or in both together or in the Diffusive Body of Christians They are sure they have it says he tho' they do not know where it is Then he adds There is not the least Intimation in Scripture of this Priviledge confer'd upon the Church of Rome and it is strange the Ancient Fathers in their Disputes against Heretics shou'd never Appeal to this Judge it being so short and expedite a way of ending Controversies and this very Consideration concludes the Dr. is to a Wise Man instead of a Thousand Arguments to satisfie him that in those days no such thing was believ'd in the World Answer I may say of these Three Propositions the first is neither True in it self nor in most of its Circumstances The second is perfectly of the same Nature if you except the Word Rome The third is grounded upon a Negative and proves nothing I begin with the first They are not agreed saith he among themselves where it is seated c. For my own part I never yet read or heard of any Catholic Divine that ever said That the Catholic Church taken for the Diffusive Body of Christians was not Infallible in declaring Matters of Faith Therefore I think All agree that the Infallibility is seated in the Diffusive Body of Christians And I challenge any Protestant in the World to name me One who says the contrary The Pope is One and the Chief Member of that Diffusive Body The Pope and Council together make a Great many Members and if you add to these All the Rest of the Faithful they make up the intire Diffusive Body of Christian If the Pope be Infallible surely the Concurrence of a Council will rather confirm than diminish his Infallibility If the Pope and Council together be Infallible the Consent of the Diffusive Body of Christians must surely strengthen and confirm it But if neither the Pope nor the Council alone be Infallible the Diffusive Body of Christians must necessarily be if any such Thing as Infallibility may be ascrib'd to any of the Three seeing both Pope and Council are included in it We are sure then the Infallibility consists at least in the Diffusive Body of Christians But to illustrate this a little more let us propose this familiar Example If I shou'd ask where my Lord Major of Londâ—n is at this Time And that some shou'd tell me He is in his own House Others not in his own House but some where in London and others neither in his own House nor in London but in England I wou'd willingly know whether these three sorts of People do not all agree that my Lord Mayor is in England Certainly they do because the assent of the two former is necessarily implied in the Latter In like manner tho' some say the Pope is Infallible Others not the Pope alone but together with a General Council and others neither Pope nor Council alone without the Concurrence of the Diffusive Body of Christians yet all do 〈◊〉 in this that the Diffusive Body of Christians is Infallible The Dr. then is very much out when he says they do not know where it is tho' they are sure they have it Touching the second Proposition There is not the least
Intimation in Scripture of this Priviledge confer'd upon the Church of Rome and it is strange the Ancient Fathers in their Disputes against Heretics shou'd never Appeal to this Judge c. That there is not only Intimation but even plain Texts of Scripture which denote the Churche's Infallibility is what I think is already sufficiently Prov'd And since it is likewise Prov'd that the Roman Church or which is the same thing the Congregation of Faithful in Communion with it is the Catholic Church I think it is a necessary ' Consequence that there are plain Texts of Scripture that prove the Infallibility of the Church of Rome Nor is it less certain that the Ancient Fathers in their Disputes against Heretics did Appeal to this Judge For in those days there was no other Means to convince Heretics of their Errors but by the Authority of the Church In the primitive Times New Heresies sprung up as many if not more than in any of our latter Ages yet there was no other Rule or Standard to judge these Errors by the Canonical Books of Scripture not being collected or put together at least in 150 Years after the Foundation of the Church and then not one Book of it all whose Authority or Credit was not question'd by some Heretic or other How was it then possible for the Ancient Fathers to confute these Hereties unless they had Appeal'd to the Authority of the Church and told them that this is the Doctrine of the Catholic Church this is what we receiv'd from our Fore-fathers And this is what all the Christian World believes Neither is it true that the ancient Fathers did not Appeal to this Judge even when the Scripture was collected and receiv'd as the Word of God Read but St. Ireneus Contra Haeres Tertul de Praescript Epipha de Haeres St. Austin cont Epist Fund and many more and you shall find how much the Doctor was mistaken in this bus'ness I do not cite the passages of these Fathers because they are so well known and so often quoted by Others who wrote upon this Subject But let this of St. Austin to use the Doctors own Phrase be instead of a thousand I wou'd not believe the Gospel Cont. Epist Funda were it not that the Authority of the Church moves me to it The second Objection is in Answer to a Certain Passage in the Canon Law Vol. 3. pag. 94. where it is said That if every Man may judge for himself there will be nothing but Confusion in Religion there will be no End of Controversies And that our Lord had not seem'd to be Discreet * The Drs Translation of the Latin has it so if he had not provided for the Assurance of Men's Faith by giving them an Infallible Judge To this he says that if this Reasoning be good we may as well conclude that there is an Universal Infallible Judge in Temporal Matters but it is evident in Fact and Experience says he that there is no such Judge in Temporal Matters consequently nor in Matters of Faith Answ Had there been an Universal Infallible Judge appointed in Temporal Matters it wou'd doubtless contribute very much to the Peace and Tranquility of the World if He were Obey'd but very little to the Means wherewith God Almighty designs to bring his chosen People to the Kingdom of Heaven which is to exercise them with Fiery Tryals and make them pass thro' much Tribulation And therefore He permits the Cruelty of Tyrants to try the patience of Martyrs and suffers the Oppression of the Poor on Earth to enhance their Reward in Heaven So that the Cruelty or Errors of a Temporal Judge do rather increase than diminish the Happiness of the Just But the Case is far otherwise in spiritual Matters If the Judge shou'd spoil us of our Faith or err in Judging for us it wou'd cause our Eternal ruine our Damnation being necessarily consequent upon a False Belief And for that Reason the goodness of God seems to be so much the more engag'd to secure the Spiritual than the temporal Judge from error by how much the danger is the greater on that side and the Ruin more inevitable if we shou'd chance to Err. Christ threatens Damnation to all those that will not believe his Doctrine which how it can stand with his Infinit Goodness unless he had provided Infallible Means of conveying the Truth of this Doctrine to them it is hard to conceive In short Temporal Ease and Tranquility is of very little Moment even in this Life but of none at all in the next and therefore generally speaking God leaves Men in the Counsel of their own Hands and permits Them very often to disturb the public Peace and quiet of this World But the true Knowledge of his Divine Law and of the Mysteries of our Redemption are of so great importance to our Eternal Happiness that his Goodness will Infallibly secure it for us if it be not our own Fault Object 3. An Infallible Judge pag. 95 96. if there were one is no certain way to end Controversies and to preserve the Vnity of the Church unless it were likewise Infallibly Certain that there is such a Judge and who he is For till Men were sure of both these there wou'd be still a Controversie whether there be an Infallible Judge and who he is And if it be true which they tell us that without an Infallible judge Controversies cannot be ended then a Controversie concerning an Infallible judge can never be ended And there are two Controversies actually on foot about an Infallible Judge One whether there be an Infallible Judge or not Which is a Controversie between Vs and the Church of Rome And the other who this Infallible Judge is Which is a Controversie among themselves which cou'd never yet be decided And yet till it be decided Infallibility if they had it wou'd be of no use to them for the ending of Controversies Thus far the Drs. own Words Answ That there is an Infallible Judge is already prov'd Who that Judge is I have likewise manifestly shewn namely the Living Voice of all the Catholic Pastors and People agreeing in the same Points of Faith And if it be farther ask'd who those Pastors and People are I answer The same in Communion with the Pope as it is prov'd before And surely none will doubt but we may be Infallibly certain that these agree in the same Points of Faith Consequently we may be Infallibly certain both that there is an Infallible Judge and who that Judge is And if it be True which they tell us says the Doctor that without an Infallible Judge Controversies cannot be ended then a Controversie concerning an Infallible Judge can never be ended And why so Why may not an Infallible Judge end it Is not an Infallible Judge sufficient to end any Controversie whatsoever If the Church be Infallible and assisted by the Spirit of God for no other End than to
guide it into all Truth surely it will not be wanting to it in this Point which is the most material of all others But I suppose the Dr. grounds his Argument upon this Axiom no Man ought to be Judge in his own Cause If he shou'd hence conclude that the supreme Judge cannot decide a Controversie concerning his own Prerogative he must certainly be a great Stranger to all Civil Laws and Constitutions in the World The King and Parliament together are the Supreme Judge of all Causes in England Now if we suppose the Rest of the people of England shou'd Dispute that Prerogative this Controversie according to the Doctor 's Principles can never be ended Not by the King and Parliament for it is their Own Cause nor yet by the Rest of the People of England for it is not Reasonable they shou'd be Judge and Party Who must judge it then No Body So that if we stretch that Axiom thus far we must leave undecided that without which nothing can be lawfully decided The true Sense of it then is this No Man ought to be Judge in his own Cause that is no Private Man who lives under Laws and Government ought to Judge for himself or be his own Carver but must have Recourse to the ordinary Judges whose Sentence he and his Adverse Party are bound to obey But this is by no means to be extended to the Supreme Legislative Power whose very Essence is to Judge all others and to be Judg'd by None As to what he says that a Controversie Who this Infallible Judge is cou'd never yet be decided in the Church of Rome I answer there never was any Controversie in the Church of Rome concerning what is of Faith in this Point namely that the Church is this Infallible Judge and what the Church is surely no Roman Catholic ever disputed Vol. 3. Edit post obit pag. 32. Object 4. If God had thought it necessary That there shou'd be an Infallible Church he wou'd have reveal'd this very thing more plainly than any particular Point whatsoever but this he has not done therefore he did not think it necessary Answ Let the Socinians for once answer or rather Retort this Argument upon the Doctor Had God say they thought the Knowledge of Three Persons really distinct each of them perfect God and yet but One God necessary to be believ'd by the Faithful he wou'd have reveal'd this very Thing more plainly than any particular Point whatsoever because it is look'd upon to be the Chiefest Mystery of Christianity but this He has not done Therefore he did not think it necessary to be believ'd Will the Doctor allow this Argument to be good If not I hope he will give me leave to have the same Thoughts of his Argument For I am certain there is no Text in Scripture that proves a Real Distinction of Three Persons whereof each is Perfect God and all but One God so plainly as it proves many other things which are not so necessary to Salvation But has not God plainly reveal'd that the Church is Infallible Tell the Church and if he will not hear the Church let him be to thee as an Heathen and Publican When the Spirit of Truth cometh He shall guide you into all Truth Go teach all Nations And lo I am with you alway even unto the End of the World The Church is the Ground and Pillar of Truth Are not all these clear and plain Has not Christ's own Mouth and his Apostle's reveal'd all These concerning the Church Surely then he judg'd the Infallibility of the Church necessary to be believ'd And this is to a Reasonable Man instead of a Thousand Arguments that He thought it not only necessary but even laid it down as the Chief Fundamental Point of our Belief because this once firmly establish'd wou'd easily clear the Obscurity of any other Object 5. pag. 77. We have as great need of Infallible Security against Sin and Vice in matters of Practice as against Errors in matters of Faith but we have no Infallible Security against Sin and Vice in matters of Practice consequently nor against Errors in matters of Faith Answ This Comparison is in one sense Just and Reasonable and in that sense I will be content to stand or fall by it viz. That as the assistance of the Holy Ghost infallibly secures the Church from Error so the assistance of God's Grace together with the cooperation of our Wills which is always in our power is an infallible security against Sin if put in ure For is not every Sin voluntary And if voluntary surely we may abstain from it it wou'd not be voluntary else For if we cannot abstain from it it is no more voluntary but necessary and therefore no Sin and have not we in several places of the Scripture a promise of the Assistance of God's Grace which is never wanting to our sincere Endeavours and if we have God's Grace and are able at least by this assistance to abstain from sin certainly we have an infallible Security against Sin and Vice or if we have it not how can it stand with the infinit goodness of God to condemn us eternally for that which we cannot avoid In short as it is most agreeable to his infinit goodness and mercy to condemn no Man for what he cannot help so it is but reasonable we shou'd believe he has given us such means as will infallibly secure us if it be not our own fault both from Errors in matters of Faith and from Sin and Vice in matters of Practice But with this difference that Free-will without which there can be no reward or punishment by not cooperating with Grace falls into Sin and Vice whereas the assistance of the holy Ghost depending of no such condition as to its effect infallibly attains its end and preserves the Church from Error in matters of Faith Object 6. All things necessary to be known either in Faith or Practice are clear and plain in Scripture therefore there is no need of an Infallible Church Answ This is a Fundamental Principle I think I may truly say with all Protestants The Dr. I am sure repeats it several Times and lays great Stress upon it But in establishing this Principle he does two things which I suppose he wou'd not willingly allow of had he but well consider'd them 1. He makes any Man of sense that can read the Scripture as infallible as the whole Catholic Church pretends to be 2. He justifies in a great measure all the Heretics that ever denied any Points of Faith on pretence that they are not plain in Scripture 1. He makes any Man of sense that can read the Scriptures as Infallible as the whole Catholic Church pretends to be For the Catholic Church pretends only to be Infallible in necessary Articles of Faith Now if all things necessary to be known in Faith and Practice be clear and plain in Scripture there is no Man of sense that
Inconvenience I confess it is but if we shou'd conclude the Existence or non-Existence the Truth or Falshood of things from their conveniency or inconveniency the World wou'd be brought to a sine pass 'T is very inconvenient that God shou'd condemn all Mankind to death to all the other miseries and infirmities to which human Nature is now obnoxious for the eating of one single Fruit yet it is never the less True 'T is very inconvenient that a Man shou'd be condemn'd to eternal Flames for one only Sin wherein he dies unrepented yet no Man ever question'd this Truth We must not then conclude from the inconvenience that attends a Thing that is therefore false but we ought to weigh the Reasons and Motives whereby we are induc'd to believe it is so Now the Roman Catholics believe that those among the Greeks and Eastern Churches which are not in communion with the Church of Rome together with the Protestants are no true Members of the Catholic Church because they have the most Authentic Records and the most invincible Proof that any matter of Fact is capable of that the said Greeks Eastern Churches and Protestants fell into Heresie and Schism in which they do as yet actually persist What allowance God-almighty may make for the invincible Ignorance and want of Capacity in a great many of these People and how far he will be merciful and pardon the other defects of those who endeavour to live up to what they know and want necessary means to come to the knowledg of the Truth He alone knows None I am sure is more willing to judge favourably of their Salvation than Roman Catholics But to flatter them with hopes of Salvation whilst they persist in their Errors and have necessary means to come to the knowledg of the Truth and to tell them they may be saved with such Errors when we are convinc'd in our Consciences they cannot is surely no Christian Charity but the greatest of Heathenish Cruelty 5. In consequence of the Truth of this Proposition and of the importance of it to the Salvation of Souls they ought to produce express mention of the Roman Catholic Church in the ancient Creeds of the Christian Churches But this says the Dr. they are not able to do on the contrary Aeneas Sylvius who was afterwards Pope Pius the second says that before the Council of Nice little Respect was had to the Roman Church Answ Just so the Arians used to object to the Catholics that if the word Consubstantial were of that importance as it was pretended they ought to produce express mention of it in the ancient Creed of the then present Church but as the Catholics then answer'd that it was enough the thing meant by that Word was in the Creed tho' not the Word it self so say we to the Protestants that in these Words of the Creed I believe the holy Catholic Church is implied what we mean by the Words Roman Catholic Church tho' the Word Roman be not there What Aeneas Sylvius might in passion or upon some private quarrel with the Pope have Written against the Roman Church consider'd with respect only to the Diocess of Rome I am not much concern'd For I am sure he never said nor writ that the Roman Church as it includes all the Christian Churches in communion with the See of Rome in which sense the Dr. cou'd not be ignorant we always take it was not the true Catholic Church Besides if it be true that Aeneas Sylvius said what the Dr. makes him here speak let the Holy and Learn'd Martyr St. Irenaeus who liv'd very neer two hundred years before the Council of Nice teach him the contrary Every Church says he that is the Faithful on every side must have recourse to this Church the Roman by Reason of her more powerful Principallity Loco sup cit CHAP. IV. Of Transubstantiation WHat we hold to be of Faith concerning this Point is this That the whole Substance of the Bread and Wine is after Consecration chang'd into the Body and Blood of Christ without any Alteration in the Accidents or outward Forms This is to all our modern Sectaries a Stone of Stumbling and Rock of Offence Against this they have whetted their Pens and Tongues and pointed all the Shafts of their Art and Eloquence in order to pull down an Edifice whose Builder and Maker is God himself But however they agree to destroy this mysterious Fabrick yet what to substitute in its Room or how to expound those Texts of Scripture on which it is founded none can with greater Heat and Passion even to the most injurious and provoking Language be divided nor fall into more manifest Absurdities and Contradictions than these Pretenders to Reformation And indeed if the Disagreement of Witnesses be an Argument of their Falshood as the Evangelists assure us it is we have all the Reason in the World to conclude that these are false Witnesses For I am sure none ever disagreed more not only in the Circumstances but even in the very Nature and Substance of their Evidence Martin Luther and his Adherents expound these Words This is my Body litterally and therefore believe the Real Presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament but being however resolv'd to Incommode the Pope Epist ad Calvin as Luther says they add that the Substance of the Bread and Wine is likewise there And to extricate themselves from a difficulty which attends the Real Presence they affirm moreover that the Body of Christ is every where And thus they have brought forth two New Points of Faith never before heard of namely Consubstantiation and Vbiquitie And this the Church of England Writers call an absurd and monstrous Doctrine Calvin and his Sectators in Contradiction to this expound the same Words Figuratively and therefore believe a Real Absence or which is all one that the Eucharist is but a Type or Figure of the Body and Blood of Christ Zuinglius tells us himself was the first that found out this Exposition by the help of a certain Angel which appear'd to him but whether he was black or white he says he cannot tell So that for ought he knew it may be the Doctrine of a Devil I am sure Luther at least did think it so for he calls Calvin a Devil Epist ad Calvin and worse than a Devil for offering to obtrude this Doctrine upon the World and for wresting the plain Words of our Saviour to such a Sense The Church of England neither expounds those Words litterally nor yet figuratively for She neither believes Transubstantiation nor Consubstantiation neither Real Presence nor yet Real Absence And to deal ingenuously I do not well know what she believes in this particular And what is worse to the best of my Understanding nor she herself For in the Catechism which is put into the Children and common people's Hands where surely the Articles of Faith must if any where be clearly and plainly expounded she teaches
the main End and Design of their meeting and what is more to the eternal damnation of their own Souls they shou'd unanimously agree to declare as an Article of their Faith what they neither receiv'd nor knew nor believ'd before In a word is it possible that any Man of sense cou'd imagin that in any Age of the Church the Pope Patriarchs Bishops Kings Princes and People shou'd all agree to receive as an Article of Faith that which the Apostles never deliver'd to their Ancestors nor their Ancestors to them And if this be absurd and not to be suppos'd as most certainly it is with what colour of Reason can any Man refuse the Evidence of this Council What shall we believe if we do not believe so great and so grave an Assembly Here are from all parts of the Christian World so many hundreds of Learned Prelats attesting on no less penalty than their eternal Damnation if false that this is the Faith which the Apostles deliver'd to the Church that this is the Doctrine which they receiv'd from their Fore-fathers Here are all the Rest of the Prelats and People of the whole Catholic Church likewise declaring by their ready Acceptance and Submission to this Doctrine that it is the same they receiv'd from their Predecessors And now if after all this Men will be so much in love with their fancies as to believe that the whole Catholic Church both in its Representatives and in the diffusive Body of Christians cou'd be induc'd to conspire together to deceive their Posterity against their own plain and True Interest against the Trust and Confidence repos'd in them the Duty and Piety of Parents to their Children the tender Care they ought to have for their Welfare and contrary to the main End and Design of the Divine goodness who put his Word into their Mouths to the end they might faithfully deliver it to succeeding Generations and all this notwithstanding the terrors of the Lord and the wrath of God reveal'd from Heaven against all impious Lyars notwithstanding the dreadful Woes and Curses pronounc'd in Scripture against false Seducers and the horrible aggravation of their own Guilt for having led so many millions into Error and Perdition Add to this the promise of the Holy-Ghost's guiding the Church into all Truth the assistance of the Divine Spirit with it to the End and consumation of the World the dear and tender Love of the great Shepherd of our Souls for his Flock and the great care and concern he has for the preservation of his Church for which he shed his most precious Blood If after all this I say Men will be so far deluded as to believe such dreams I shall only say to them as Joshua did to the Children of Israel If it seem evil to you to serve the Lord chuse you this day whom you will serve but for me and my House Josh 24. we will serve the Lord and believe his holy Word Thus much concerning the Proof of this Mystery Let us now see what the Doctor Objects Never Roman Conqueror sung more Pâ—ans after Victory nor insulted over his Enemy with more Ostentation than Dr. Tillotson has on this Subject over the Roman Catholics and the Church of Rome and to compleat the Parallel if his Railing Eloquence and Unchristian Contumelies I am sorry he extorts such Words from me were of equal force to bind with that of Roman Chains no Barbarous Captives were ever worse us'd by their Insulting Conquerors than the Sons of that Mother whose Piety and Zeal brought forth in Christ his Ancestors have the fortune to be treated by the Unchristian Slanders and Calumnies of his bitter Tongue and Pen. Besides that invincible Argument if we believe him that Achilles the Evidence of Sense which he pretends to be against this Mystery and which he repeats over and over in more places of his Sermons than I can at present reckon he has oblidg'd us with a Treatise written on purpose upon this Subject which he calls a Discourse against Transubstantiation It begins vol. 3. pag. 297. In this Piece I meet with as copious a Collection of scrurrilous injurious Language of Notorious and Manifest Impositions with so much disingenuity in citing of Authors and managing their Authorities as I believe was ever possible for any Man who had never so little esteem for his Credit to bring within so narrow a Compass Now to Answer all this Discourse and to lay open all its Disingenuity to set these Passages of the Fathers which he mangles and dismembers in their due Light and to shew the Scope and End at which those Fathers aim'd woud alone require a volum of no small bulk which in no wise agrees with my design'd Brevity nor yet will my present Affairs I shall therefore be content at present to answer his main Objection taken from the Evidence of Sense which is the only Objection I find in all his Sermons but with as many faces as Protheus was said to have and some three or four more taken out of this Discourse which are the only Real Difficulties in it being resolv'd however to lay hold on the next Opportunity to answer the whole Paragraph by Paragraph Vol. 3. pag. 80 81. Vol. 5. p. 20. c. Vol. 6. pag. 165. 1. His main Objection is this Transubstantiation is contradicted by Sense The Evidence of our Senses is against it 'T is contrary to the common Sense and Reason of Mankind c. Answ This He repeats over and over and to enforce the Belief of it he tells us in several places that it destroys the External Means of Confirming the Truth of Christianity But he only repeats it for I cou'd never yet find in all his Books that he has made the least offer to prove it He wou'd have us it seems be so civil as to take it for granted For without this I believe nay I am sure he did not well know how go about to prove it And 't is a thing I often admir'd with how much Confidence his Good Man and Others wou'd press this Argument upon us without ever offering the least Proof for it when at the same time they knew very well we firmly deny it And this seems so much the more strange because the more Evident any thing is as they pretend this to be the easier it is to find Mediums to prove it But neither He nor all the Philosophers that ever were or are to come shall ever be able to make one good Argument to prove that Transubstantiation is contradicted by Sense For what is Transubstantiation The Change of one Substance into another Of what Sense then is Substance the Object that such a Change may be discover'd by it 'T is of no Sense sure but of the Vnderstanding as all the World knows How can that then contradict Sense which is not the Object of any Sense since no Faculty can be employ'd but about its proper Object They might as well
prove to him that the Symbols taken in that Sense were not chang'd But this he is so far from doing that the Reason he offers to evince that he was so caught proves no more than that the Accidents or Objects of Sense still remain namely that which may be seen and handled which the Hetetic Eranistes never denied 'T is then evident that he understood the Word Symbol in a different Sense from that of Eranistes Consequently his meaning must have been that the Accidents which he calls Symbols did not pass out of their Nature c. And all his Advantage consisted in the Equivocation of the Word Symbol which his Adversary took in a vulgar Sense and by that gave him an Opportunity to perplex him and tell him he was caught in his own Net And God knows he must be hard put to it who would fain squeez Proof for his Faith from such intricate Disputes I have nothing to add in answer to Gelasius his Passage to what is here said For 't is plain from the Scope and Design of this Father who likewise disputed with an Entychian Heretic that he meant by substance or nature of Bread the Qualities of it which we confess remain still in the Sacrament nothing being more usual in common Discourse than to give the name of Nature to the Quality as we commonly say a Man of ill nature that is of ill Qualities One Word more with the Doctor and I take leave of this Subject He tells us Discourse against Transubstantiation pag. 328 329. That Transubstantiation was first introduc'd into the Catholic Religion about the latter End of the Eight Century in the Second Council of Nice And pag. 333. that it was almost 300 Years before this Mishapen Monster as he Religiously terms it cou'd be Lick'd into that Form in which it is now settl'd and establish'd in the Church of Rome What I shall say to the matter of Fact here mention'd leaving the Doctor to his own Master to account for his civil Language is that I cou'd wish he were alive that he might now at least consult his own Protestant Authors to correct his Error since he was then in two much haste to do it Doctor Humfrey a Famous Divine of his own Country and perswasion wou'd better inform him that Austin the great Monk as he calls him Jesuitiâ—mi part â— sent by Gregory the Great Pope taught the English a Burthen of Ceremonies Purgatory Mass Prayer for the Dead Transubstantiation Reliques c. Now all the World knows that Austin the Monk taught the English about the latter end of the sixth Century and the Begining of the seventh almost two hundred Years before the Second Council of Nice Cent. 6. de Oper. Sti. Greg. The Centuriators of Magdeburg the Doctor 's own good Friends wou'd tell Him that the same Gregory the Great wrought a Miracle in the presence of an uncredulous Woman to confirm her in the Belief of the substantial Change of the Bread into the Body of Christ as the Centurists Phrase it And surely it was no less these Gentlemens Interest than his cou'd they but dâ—vest themselves of all honesty and sincerity to make it of a Fresher Date than even the Council of Nice But the Doctor was so intent upon baffling Monsieur Arnauld's Demonstration of the Impossibility of obtruding this Doctrine upon the Faithful without Great and Violent Commotions both in Church and State which he saw he cou'd not well effect unless he had fix'd a certain Epocha whence this Doctrine shou'd take its rise that rather than fail he wou'd hit at a venture upon the Second Council of Nice and there fix his Foot Being perswaded as he says that this was the fittest Time for such a Change And is not this a miserable Shift to which this Ingenious Man is reduc'd when he is forc'd to make good his undertaking to have recourse to such known and manifest I am asham'd to say it falshoods Which surely do better become Impostors than Grave Divines whose very Names and Character shou'd prompt them to candor and sincerity it being evident that disingenuity and false dealing whatever they may do for a time serve to no other end at last than to discredit the Cause and confound its Patrons CHAP. V. Of the Communion in one kind TO give the Communion in one or in both kinds is no matter of Faith but respects the Discipline of the Church which according to the different Circumstances and Exigencies of Affairs for the increase of Piety and Devotion and in Condescension to the Infirmity of her Children is often necessitated to alter some things in her Discipline it being Evident that what in one Age was good and profitable an other Age will in no wise bear And since it is agreed upon that the care of feeding the Flock was committed to the Church that she alone is Commission'd to dispence the Divine Mysteries and hath a peculiar promise of the Assistance of the Holy Spirit to guide her into all Truth none can reasonably doubt but She is the most Competent Judge what in her Discipline to change what to retain Now the main stress lyes upon this whether or no it be in the Power of the Church to alter her Discipline in a matter of this Importance so as to restrain the Faithful to the receiving of the Sacrament in one kind only It being acknowledg'd by our selves that in the Primitive Times this Sacrament was indifferently administred sometimes in Both sometimes in one kind Tho 't is hard to conceive why Men shou'd rather conclude that it is not in the Power of the Church to restrain the Faithful to one kind because the Communion was somtimes given in Both than the contrary that it is in the Power of the Church so to do because it was likewise sometimes given in one kind To justifie then the conduct of the Church in this particular I shall only examin whether the Receiving of the Eucharist in both kinds be Essential to a True and Real Participation of the Sacrament For if both kinds be Essential then 't is certain the Church cannot take away any Essential part of the Sacrament without destroying the whole and consequently in giving but part wou'd give nothing at all Therefore cou'd not restrain the Faithful to one kind it being evident that the Church is only impower'd to dispense and not to destroy the Mysterys of God But if I can make out that the Participation of the Euchurist in Both Kinds is not Essential to the worthy receiving of the Sacrament then it will evidently follow that the Church may lawfully command the forbearance of one kind For if you shou'd ask any of our Learned Protestants why they do not give the Communion at night or after Supper or sitting down or lying on Couches as 't is confess'd Christ gave it They will tell you because 't is not Essential to the Sacrament to give it so Or why they do not
and Blood which surely is all that is requisite to the Essence or Nature of the Sacrament And now who wou'd believe that the R. Catholics had such grounds in Scripture for the Communion in one kind considering the loud and clamorous accusations yea and the horrible Sacrileges they are charg'd with upon this Subject Well! And who are those who charge us thus Why they are Great and Eminent Men Great indeed not only for the Rank and Station wherein the Powers of this World have placed them but also Great for their Learning and other Excellent Endowments But then 't is that they must so do The Protestant Religion as all the World knows was planted in these Kingdoms by open Force and Violence These Gentlemen's Predecessors possess'd Themselves of the Rich Benefices of the Church and when Men's Interest and Honor are once engag'd 't is hard if they do not stand by them Now there is no way left to justifie these Proceedings but by railing at the Church of Rome and exposing her pretended Corruptions and therefore 't is no marvel they shou'd lay these and a great deal more to her charge But take away these Fatal Byasses Let Benefices be laid a side Let the Riches of the Church be propos'd as the Reward of Virtue and Merit and then we shall see how many Eyes this will open then we shall see the Scales fall off and those who have been hitherto our Greatest Persecutors become like St. Paul the most Zealous Assertors of our Faith and Religion But this by the way There is an other Passage in St. Luke which favours the Communion in One Kind This Evangelist tells us that Christ after his Resurrection appear'd to two of his Disciples as they went to Emans who adds St. Luke constrain'd Him to aâ—ide with them and when he sate at Meat He took Bread and bless'd it and brake and gave to them and their Eyes were open'd and they knew him and he vanish'd out of their sight Now 't is certain that if this Bread which Christ bless'd and brake was the Eucharist we have at least one instance in which Christ himself gave the Communion in one kind For 't is said that after he had broke the Bread and gave it to them he vanish'd out of their sight And indeed it is very hard to conceive how the breaking of ordinary Bread as 't is usually done at Meat shou'd open these Disciples Eyes so as to know him that did it to be Christ Besides the breaking of Bread in the Acts of the Apostles is always understood of the Communion and St. Chrisostom St. Augustin venerable Bede and Theophilactus in their comments upon this place teach us that this Bread which Christ brake was the Eucharist which surely they wou'd not have done had there been the least doubt of the lawfulness of the Communion in one kind However because it is not thus interpreted by the universal consent of the Church I shall lay no more weight upon it than it can reasonably bear leaving the Reader to judge what impression the Authority of four such Great Men so well read in Antiquity is apt to make upon an unprejudic'd Mind I now proceed to shew that the Communion in Both Kinds is not Essential to the Sacrament 2. from the general practise of the Church in all Ages even in those days wherein the Protestants do confess the Pure Word of God was preach'd and the Sacraments duly administred The Protestants do pretend to pay a great deal of Respect and veneration to Antiquity and in all their Debates and Controversies of Religion whether with Us or among Themselves they are willing to Appeal to the Primitive Church which they look upon as the Rule and Measure of their Faith and Practice Now if it appears by the Practice of the Primitive Church that the Communion was given in One Kind without the other and that this was neither prohibited by the Governours of the Church nor found fault with by the People nor yet wrote against by any Man whatsoever then 't is but reasonable to hope that every Ingenious Protestant will easily be perswaded that neither the Pastors nor the People of the Primitive Church did ever believe that both kinds were Essential to the worthy participation of the Sacrament This I shall by God's Assistance endeavour to evince from the best Records and the most unquestionable Witnesses and Writers of the Primitive Times And here I find four sorts of Communion the Communion of the Sick the Communion of Infants and little Children the Communion of Private Families commonly call'd the Domestic Communion and the Public and Solemn Communion of the Church And in regard of all these I shall undertake to prove that for the first six hundred Years the Eucharist was given 1. in the Communion of the Sick under the Species of Bread alone 2. In the Communion of Infants and little Children under the species of Wine alone 3. In the Domestic or Private Communion under the species of Bread but so as to be sometimes given tho' seldom in both kinds And lastly in the public and solemn Communion of the Church sometimes in one sometimes in both kinds as the Piety and Devotion of the People carry'd them to participate of one or Both. Touching the Communion of the Sick Eusebius One of the Best Hist Eccles lib. 6. cap. 44. and most Celebrated Historians of the Primitive Church gives us an intire Letter of the Great Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria upon this Subject In this Letter Dionysus relates the Story of a certain Old Man call'd Serapion who being under Publick Pennance and falling Sick sent a Boy to a Priest that was at some distance from him to desire him to come to him and give him the sacred Communion before he had departed this Life but the Priest happening at the same time to be sick and not able to go so far gave a Piece of the sacred Bread to the Boy and order'd him to carry it to Serapion and enjoyn'd him moreover to moisten it in some Liquor and then to give it to him as his last Viaticum which when he had done saith Dionysius the good Old Man immediately gave up the Ghost Here is a Communion in one kind related by a Man who was as Great a Saint as he was a Bishop and Recorded by an other Great and Learned Bishop Both very ancient Witnesses both much celebrated by Antiquity Yet neither the one nor the other finds any fault with the Priest nor with Serapion for this Communion which our Adversaries wou'd now abhor as sacrilegious and detestable on the contrary they both admire the Goodness of God as the said Letter witnesseth in sparing this poor Man's Life 'till he had receiv'd the sacred Pledge of his Redemption And now can it be imagin'd that these two Great Men who liv'd so near the Times of the Apostles and were so well instructed in the Faith and Discipline of the Church shou'd
Sermon in which the people are instructed in their Duty to God and their Neighbours and excited to do Works of Charity to forgive their Enemies and to repent of their Sins to pray for the King and his Magistrats and for one onother In a word in which all the Duties and Obligations of a Christian are duly inculcated and all this I am sure they are at least in the Countries where I have been as careful to perform as they are to say the Mass So that notwithstanding what Protestants say all the Difference between them and us in this particular is that we do in vulgar Language very near all that they do and over and above give the people an Opportunity of adoring Jesus Christ and of quickning their Memory by the Representation of his Death and Passion which is perform'd in the Latin Mass Lastly If there were no other Reasons the Difficulty of translating the Liturgy into vulgar Languages and preserving it in its purity is enough to diswade us from the Undertaking The uniformity of our Liturgy is the best standing Monument we have of the Faith and Practice of our Ancestors 'T is it that shews us how they us'd to administer the Sacraments and what sort of Ceremonies they judg'd most proper to excite and stir up Devotion and to perform God's Service with that Gravity and Decency suitable to His Holy Religion Now if this Liturgie were translated into all the Vulgar Languages which Catholics use and which is so much subject to Alteration and Corruption even to that degree that what is spoken in one Age is scarce understood in an other at least is so nauseous and grateing that none but the meaner sort of People will hear it without disgust What endless Labour wou'd it prove to be thus every Age modeling and reforming and changing our Liturgies What Confusion and Disorders wou'd the Unskilfulness or the Fancy of Translators occasion Nay what Tumults and Uproars wou'd such frequent Alterations create both in Church and State whilst some to use King Henry VIII his Phrase stood up for their Old Mumpsimus and others for their New Sumpsimus is not easily Imagin'd And whatever our Adversaries may think on 't Experience shews us that this is no Imaginary but a Real and almost insuperable Difficulty For instance The Calvinistâ— in France made use of Marot's Translation of the Psalms and Sung them in their Temples as the French call them for a considerable Time but some of their Learned Ministers finding that this Translation was not agreeable to the Original nor even to decency and good behaviour but on the contrary was full of ridiculous lew'd and prophane expressions resolv'd to give the People a better and more perfect Translation Now what confusions and divisions this last created among the Brethren whoever is curious to know may consult the Writers of those Times Again The Church of England which without doubt is the best because the least Reform'd of the Protestant Party Translated the Scripture Compos'd a new Ordinal and a set Form of Prayer in Vulgar Language in Edward the Sixth's Time but these being found in Queen Elizabeth and King James's Days if we believe their own Writers deficient in many things and in others not agreeable to the then Protestant Religion which was not as yet perfectly lick'd into Shape and Form other new Translations are undertaken but how much confusion and trouble these also occasion'd the said Writers can best inform us Farther The Church of England is the Richest and if we may judge by their Works the most Charitable of all the Reformation yet there pass'd a hundred Years of the Reign of Protestanism before the Welsh were provided of a Liturgy in their own Language tho' most of the common People of that Country do not understand any other Tongue And to this day they have not furnish'd the Irish with a Liturgy in their own Language tho' many thousands in the North of Ireland and in the High-lands of Scotland go to Church which yet understand nothing but the Irish Tongue So that it is no such easie matter to furnish even the Subjects of one Crown with Liturgies in their own Language Now if it be so difficult to supply a few People with Liturgies in their own Tongue and so hard to contain them in their Duty when the said Liturgies must be alter'd Who can imagin all the Difficulties that wou'd attend the attempt shou'd the Catholic Church propose to translate her Liturgy into all the several Languages us'd in Europe Or who can conceive how it were possible for her to keep an Uniformity in Practice and Ceremony or to contain the People in their Duty if she must change her Liturgy every hundred Years or less and speak a new Language The Gentry and Better sort of People cannot abide to have their Ears grated with Obsolete Antick Expressions and the common People who think the Substance chang'd with the Words will not part with their old Mumpsimus And then what fine work wou'd this make Marot in one of his Psalms gives us this Ridiculous Phrase I will cast my Slipper at him The common People who minded only the Rime and Gingle of the Words no sooner understood that this Phrase was alter'd tho' indeed for the better when they were so incens'd upon the matter that the Ministers were like to have not slippers but sticks and stones and such Arms as a popular Fury administer'd cast at them And what do you think shou'd happen in in the Church of Rome where there are so many different Languages so many different Humours so hard to be satisfied so many uncouth unpolish'd people so difficult to be govern'd shou'd she undertake to give them the Liturgy in their own Tongues and continue changing and altering the same as often as the Languages change Truly for my part as I am perswaded that the Design is as vain as it is needless so I may reasonably presume the Holy Catholic Church will never attempt it And thus I have endeavour'd to touch upon some of the Reasons that mov'd the Church in all Ages to hold to one Universal Language which is always the same not subject to Alteration or Corruption no more than the Faith and Religion which it teacheth nor less Pure and Perfect now than it was seventeen hundred Years since And surely such a Language so lofty in its Expressions so beautiful and Majestie in its Numbers so Energic and Expressive in its Sense and as I may say so immortal and indefectible in its Duration is the fittest to have the public and solemn Service of the Immortal and Eternal God perform'd in it And in this methinks we do but what the Light of Nature teacheth all Nations and what our Adversaries cou'd not but see wou'd they but devest Themselves of their Prejudices 'T is well known the Jews lost their Mother Tongue in the Capativity of Babylon yet they never read the Law of Moses or
the Psalms in their public Prayers from that Time to This in any other Language than the Hebrew tho' if we except their Rabbins very few if any of that Nation understand any thing of it The Grecians have long since corrupted their Language as all the World knows and the common People among them know no more of the Genuine Greek than ours do of the Latin yet the Greek Church never chang'd a Syllable in their Liturgy but do still say their Mass in the same Pure Greek which was us'd when they first embrac'd the Christian Faith All other Sects of Christians See Father Symon's Critical History of the Old and New Testament in the Earstern Churches have likewise Corrupted their Languages yet they continue to Celebrate Divine Service in the Languages they first us'd tho' the Communion People do not understand them And if I may be allow'd to borrow an instance from Infidels the Turks still retain the Arabic Language in their Alcaron nor did they ever permit it to be read in any other Tongue in their public Prayers tho' 't is confess'd their common People understand it not But of this enough Let us now see what the Doctor objects to this Point And here I do not intend to pursue him in all the Repetitions He makes of the same thing without any material Addition for then I shou'd transcribe several almost intire Sermons but shall for the Reader 's ease and my own bring all his Real or Apparent Difficulties within the compass of these few Heads First he saith That the celebrating of Divine Service in an unknown Tongue is contrary to the Practice of the Primitive Church and the Great Design and End of Religious Worship which being a Reasonable Service ought to be Directed by our Understanding and accompanied with our Hearts and Affections Secondly That to pray in an unknown Tongue is contrary to St. Paul's Doctrine who has no less than a whole Chapter wherein he confutes and condemns this Practice Thirdly Vol. 1. edit post obit pag. 126 161. That we lock up the Scriptures in an unknown Tongue and forbid the People the use of them which is contrary to Christ's own Design who exhorts the Jews to search the Scriptures to St. Luke who commends the Bereans for examining the Scriptures and trying the Apostles Doctrine by that Test and to the ancient Fathers who do most earnestly recommend to the People the Reading and Study of the Scriptures Fourthly That the Scripture being Vol. 1. edit post obit pag. 264. by our own Confession a principal Part of the Rule of Faith it cannot be imagin'd how People shou'd square or measure their Faith by this Ride unless they are allow'd to read and understand it Lastly Vol. 2. edit post obit pag. 369. That we therefore look up the Scriptures in an unknown Tongue because it is certain that if the People were once brought to understand the Scriptures they wou'd soon quit our Religion and go over to them This is the Sum of what he says upon this Subject to which I shall return my Exceptions as plainly and briefly as I can First he saith That the celebrating of Divine Service in an unknown Tongue is contrary to the Practice of the Primitive Church I answer if he means by unknown Tongue such a Tongue as no body understands it is very True but not to the purpose For the Tongue in which we celebrate divine Service is not such but on the contrary the Tongue in the World I believe the best known But if he means by it a Tongue unknown to most of the common people his Assertion has no Degree of Truth in it For first he himself acknowledges and so doth all Mankind that the Primitive Church and all succeeding Generations I mean in the Latin Church till the Reformation appear'd did celebrate divine Service in the same Latin Tongue we now use And secondly even Malice it self cannot deny but that generally speaking all the common people except the Italians were always Ignorant of the Latin Tongue 'T is then manifest our Conduct in this particular is altogether conformable to the Practice of the primitive Church and then the Doctor is out in his first Attempt This he cou'd not but see and therefore in an other place he endeavours to Insinuate tho' he durst not speak it out that the common people spoke all Latin Vol. 3. pag. 469. But this only shews what the Wit of Man is capable of when he must and will maintain a thing What the common people of Spain France Germany Sweden Denmark Norway England Ireland Scotland c. spoke all Latin 'T is indeed confess'd all these People were in Communion with the Church of Rome all receiv'd their Faith and Liturgy from her all celebrated divine Service in the same Tongue and after the same manner with her but that they all spoke and understood the Roman or Latin Tongue is surely so ridiculously absurd that I rather believe I mistook his meaning than that a Man of his Parts shou'd be guilty of so great a Mistake As to what he says that Religious Worship being a reasonable Service ought to be directed by our Understandings and accompanied with our Hearts and Affections I readily agree with him And for that Reason I hope we are as careful to teach the common People their prayers in their own Tongue and to exhort them to say 'em in the same Tongue as our Neighbours Yet this notwithstanding it did not seem good to the Holy Spirit of God who guides his Church into all Truth and consequently into all good Practices to alter that Tongue which venerable Antiquity and a Prescription of now almost seventeen hundred Years have consecrated to His divine Worship The Reasons whereof I have partly touch'd upon before Touching the Second viz. That to pray in an unknown Tongue is contrary to St. Pauâ—'s Doctrine who has no less than a whole Chapter wherein he confutes and condemns this Practice Answ The Chapter the Doctor here refers to is the 14th of the first to the Corinthians which had it been faithfully translated either from their own Greek or our Latin wou'd leave no Room for this Objection The Question is whether St. Paul condemns public prayers in a Tongue which all the common people do not understand This the Doctor affirms and vouches the Authority of the English Translation in the aforesaid Chapter where St. Paul as he says condemns Prayers in an unknown Tongue We say first St. Paul has no such thing as unknown Tongue but the word Vnknown is an Addition of their own Secondly St. Paul does not condemn speaking or praying with Tongues which is the only thing there mention'd And both these we are able to make appear the first from their own Translation in which tho' they give it to us in their Sermons and Disputes for currant Scripture yet they put the word Vnknown in small Italic Characters to
ascribe Omnipotence to them for Omnipotence supposes a power of doing all things whatsoever possible whereas we suppose in the Angels and Saints at most but a power of obtaining of God those benefits and blessings we have need of 2. Nor Omniscience for Omniscience supposes a knowledge of all things past present and possible to be And we only suppose in the Saints aknowledge of those few prayers we put up to them 3. Nor Immense-presence for this supposes an immensity or a being present not only to all the things in the World but to hundreds of Worlds if there had been so many whereas the utmost of what we suppose can amount to no more than that the Angels and Saints are present to those Christians who beg their Charitable Assistance Nor do we ascribe any of those divine Perfections to them if we conceive that God reveals our prayers to them This the Dr. himself does not say but endeavours to elude our Reasons by saying that if God reveals our prayers to the Saints we shou'd pray to Him before every prayer we make to the Saints that He wou'd be pleas'd to reveal that prayer to them but this says he is such away about as no Man wou'd take that cou'd help it To which I answer that such Reasonings are only fit to amuse the common People who as I said above measure all things even the most sublime by the notions they have of those things they are here on Earth acquainted with whereas the Scripture and the Fathers tell us that the manner of God's revealing His Will to His Angels and Saints is so mysterious and the knowledge and power of these blessed Spirits so vast and to us so incomprehensible that nothing on Earth much less such poor stuff as the Dr. brings is able to give us the least glimpse how these things are perform'd Vol. 2. edit post ob pag. 46. The Dr's last Objection is founded in a Parallel which he makes between the Pagan Saints as he calls them and the Christian Saints He tells us the Gentils address'd themselves to God by innumerable Mediators by Angels and the Souls of their departed Herâ—es which were the Pagan Saints This he repeats in several places with no material Addition only that in speaking to the pretended Worship we give to Images he adds that all our distinctions are no other ibid pag. 100. but what the Heathens us'd in the same Case And taking this for granted He leaves his Auditors to conclude that as it was Idolatry in the Heathens to Worship these Pagan Saints so it is in the Church of Rome to worship the Christian Saints Answ The best way in my opinion to remove this difficulty is to take a short view of the Character and Worship which the Heathens gave to their Pagan Saints as the Dr. is pleas'd to call them tho' without any Warrant from the Heathen Writers who always call them Gods and see whether upon the Comparison the Christian Saints be in any thing by us treated like Them And here I shall not distrust any Man's knowledge so far as to bring any Authorites from Heathen Writers to confirm what I say being resolv'd to instance only in such plain things as our very School-Boys are not ignorant of And First As to their Character 't is no less evident that the Heathens gave these Saints the Attributes of the Supream Being than that they are represented in their Writings under such Circumstances of Debauchery Lewdness and Intemperance as the greatest Debauchees are hardly capable of The Doctor cannot deny but Jupiter to omit several others was reckon'd a Hero in his Time according to the Pagan Belief We are told his Father was Saturn that he was born in Crete and that after his Death he was for his great Feats Deified and got the Supream Dominion in Heaven as his Brothers Pluto and Neptune got that of Hell and the Sea This departed Hero is describ'd every where with the Majesty of the true God He has Omnipotence put into His hands He is represented as the Great Rector and Governour of the World and at the same time is said to be sullied with all the Lewdness and Debauchery imaginable Now the Christian Heroes or Saints are quite of another Complexion We give them none of the Attributes of the true God We believe they fought stoutly under the Banner of Jesus Christ reduc'd Kings and Princes not by their Swords but by their Sufferings to his Subjection and laid down their Lives for the Truth of his Doctrine but we do not put Omnipotence into their Hands We believe they did work Miracles and wondrous Things but then we do not say they did these Things by their own Power and Virtue but that they were the happy Instruments by which God wrought these Miracles in Confirmation of the Word which he put in their Mouth We believe the Saints are Great Friends and Favourites of the true God because Jesus Christ has so declar'd He tells us that as his Father hath appointed unto Him so haâ—â— He appointed unto them a Kingdom Luke 22.30 that they might eat and drink at His Table in His Kingdom by which Metaphor of Eating and Drinking He gives us to understand that they are Partakers of the same Glory and Bliss with himself in Heaven But we say the Saints can do nothing of themselves but that all their Sufficiency is from God who made them what they are And then as to their Lives and Conversation I hope the Doctor wou'd not put me upon proving that the Apostles and the B. V. Mary and the Saints in Heaven are in no manner concern'd in the Lewdness and Intemperance of the Pagan Saints or that we do not ascribe any such thing to them So that as to the Character the Pagan and Christian Saints have no more Resemblance than Black and White Secondly as to the Worship The Heathens worship'd their Gods or Pagan Saints as the Doctor wou'd have it upon a false Pretence of their Power and Greatness in Heaven whereas there was no such Gods or Saints But we honour and respect the Christian Saints because we are warranted by the Word of God that they are such as we represent them The Heathens erected Altars to their Gods but we make Altars for none but one God only They offer'd Sacrifice to all their Gods and Saints which is the chief Mark of supream Worship but we offer Sacrifice only to the true and living God as Malice it self cannot deny They made Idols and believ'd that their Gods came and dwelt in them and that many of them spake and eat and drank and for that Reason they worship'd them and therefore are justly call'd Idolaters because they worship'd things that were not but we only put up in our Churches the Images and Pictures of Jesus Christ the Living God and of such as we are sure are truly Saints but do not believe that there is any Virtue or Divinity in
1 Chron. 29.20 Adorate Scabellum podum ejus Psal 99. Adore ye His Footstool Here is Adoration with a Witness and all to one given to meer Creatures and tho' in all these Phrases the very Term is used in the Hebrew and Greek as well as in the Latin which the Scripture uses to express the Supream Adoration given to the true God yet no Man ever said that these Creatures ought to be ador'd in the strict Propriety of Adoration or Supream Worship but the Sense is that they ought to be worship'd with the Honor and Respect that is due to Them In like manner tho' we say in Scripture Language Crucem Adoramus we do not mean nor intend to give the Cross any other Worship than that which is due to a Type or Figure which represents our Saviour and Redeemer to us Thus much concerning this Ingenious Man's Exceptions to Images I now come to Dr. Tillotson's Objections And here his Difficulties are neither great nor many in number Two things only I observe in his Sermons that deserve some consideration The first that worshiping of Images is as point blank against the Second He shou'd have said the First Commandment Vol. 2. pag. 7â— as a deliberate and malicious killing of a Man is against the Sixth Fifth wou'd have been more true The Second 〈…〉 edit post ob pag. 291. That to secure the People from discerning our guilt in this matter we are put upon that shameful shift as he is pleas'd to term it of leaving out the Second Commandment in our common Catechisms and Manuals lest the People seeing so plain a Law of God against so common a Practice of our Church shou'd upon that discovery have broken off from us As to the First I answer If He means by Worship to give the Supream Worship and Adoration to Images which is dâ—o only to God he is very much in the right and I hope shall never be contradicted by me But if He understands by Worship to give Images that Honor and Respect which is due to Things that represent Jesus Christ and His Saints he is contradicted by Scripture by all Antiquity and even by his own Church as well as by us Now that we give Images no other Worship than the latter or that the Decrees of our Church enjoin no more I think I have already sufficiently prov'd Touching the Second I answer that we never left out any of God's Commandments either in Catechism or Manual and that that which he says is left out which yet is not the Second Commandment but part of the First is to be found in hundreds of Manuals and Catechisms in England it self And at this Time I have upon my Table a Manual and Catechism wherein all He says we left out are contain'd The first bears this Title a Manual of Prayers and Christian Devotions the later An Abridgment of Christian Doctrine with Proofs out of Scripture c. The first Edition printed Anno. 1649. Now a Man that can dispense with his Conscience and honor so far as to publish from Press and Pulpit untruths so easily discover'd what Paradox may not he undertake to maintain 'T is true there are some Manuals and Catechisms in which the Ten Commandments are comprehended as it were in so many Verses that Children and People of weak Capacity may learn them with more case But in no Manual or Catechism that pretends to give the Commandments was ever the Second Commandment left out That which he calls the Second Commandment viz. Thou shalt not Make to thy Self any graven Image c. is undoubtedly part of the First only added to inculcate to a Gross Ignorant People what they were to avoid in consequence of the One God which the First Commandment obliges them to have For 't is evident that in these Words Thou shalt have no other Gods but me is necessarily imply'd that they shou'd not make to themselves any Graven Images or Idols to Worship them which to do were to have other Gods And therefore these two Negatives make but one Commandment Unless the Dr. will have it that it is a distinct Commandment from the first because it begins a Verse or contains some Words which are not express'd in the first But he may please to consider that the Law of Moses was extant at least a Thousand Years before it was digested into Verses or that any Points were added to it during which Time there was nothing to distinguish one Commandment from an other but the very Reason and Nature of the things commanded and then since this which the Dr. wou'd have to be the Second Commandment is altogether of the same Nature with the First and prohibits nothing but what the First prohibits namely the having or worshiping more than one God we have all the Reason in the World to conclude that it is but One and the same Commandment with the First And thus all our Ancestors and all the Ancient's Comments upon this Chapter of Moses at least as many as I have seen understood it and even Martin Luther in those Books which he wrote against the Church of Rome makes but one Commandment of the Doctor 's First and Second But if He will have it that it is a distinct Commandment because it has a distinct prohibition then it will follow that we must have as many Commandments as we have distinct Prohibitions in that Chapter besides the affirmative Precepts and then we shall have 13 or 14 Commandments at least Thou shalt not make to thy Self any graven Image must be the Second thou shalt not how down to them the Third thou shalt not take the Name of thy Lord thy God in vain the Fourth remember to keep holy the Sabbath Day the Fifth thou shalt do no manner of Work the Sixth and so on But as the Dr. wou'd not I suppose allow of this distribution so He may please to give us leave to stick to the Old Ten Commandments in the same order manner we receiv'd them from our Ancestors of Blessed Memory CHAP. IX Of Purgatory WHat we hold as of Faith concerning this Point is thus declar'd by the Council of Trent That there is a Purgatory and that the Souls there detain'd are help'd by the Prayers of the Faithful but especially by the acceptable Sacrifice of the Mass Here the Council do's not determine what sort of Place Purgatory is or what manner of Pain Souls endure in it nor whether they are purg'd by material Fire or by other Torments or Anguishes of Mind but is content to declare with the Ancient Fathers that there is a Place wherein Souls departed are detain'd without entering upon curious need less Questions concerning the Manner or Duration of the Pains they there suffer In handling therefore this Argument I shall endeavour to tred in the Steps of the Ancient Fathers and follow the Pattern of this Council waving all superfluous and needless Questions relating to this Subject
which that I may the more plainly and distinctly do I shall proceed in this Method 1. I will endeavour to shew that the Doctrine of Purgatory is founded in Scripture as interpreted by the Ancient Fathers of the Church 2. But more especially that it is founded in the Practice observ'd in the primitive Church of Praying for the Dead This I take to be an unanswerable Argument for if it appears that the Primitive Church did pray for the Dead that their Sins might be forgiven them then it will necessarily follow that they believ'd those Souls they thus pray'd for to be in a place where they might be help'd and benefited by their Prayers This is evident for if the Primitive Church were of Opinion that all Souls departed did go strait to Heaven or to Hell it were vain and superfluous to pray for them They knew there was no getting of Souls out of Hell for out of Hell there is no Redemption And therefore it were in vain to attempt it And it were superfluous to pray for the Souls in Heaven for the Remision of their Sins For why shou'd they pray for that which they knew they had no need of So that if they did pray for the Remission of Sins of Souls departed the Consequence is inevitable that they did believe there was a Third Place were some Souls were detain'd and might be assisted by their Prayers which is what we call Purgatory 3. I shall answer what Doctor Tillotson brings against this Point 1. I shall endeavour to shew that the Doctrine of Purgatory is founded in Scripture as interpreted by the Ancient Fathers of the Church To prove this Head I will produce some Texts of Scripture with the Readings of the Fathers upon Them 1. Agree with thine Adversary quickly whilst thou art in the way with him Lest at any time the Adversary deliver thee to the Judge and the Judge deliver thee to the Officer and thou be cost into Prison Verify I say unto thee thou shalt not come out thence till thou hast paid the uttermost Farthing Mat. 5.25.26 Tertullian a Father of the Second Age â— de Anima cap. 58. reâ—ds thus upon this Text. Seeing we understand that Prison which the Gospel demonstrates to be places below and the uttermost Farthing we interpret every small fault there to be punish'd by the delay of the Resurrection no Man can doubt but the Soul may pay something in the places below St. Cyprian a Father of the third Age It is one thing to be cast into Prison not to go out thence till he pays the uttermost Farthing an other Epist 52. ad Anton presently to receive the Reward of Faith one thing to be afflicted with long pains for Sins to be mended and purg'd long with Fire another to have purg'd all Sins by sufferings Here this Father alluding to the foregoing Text says that some Souls are cast into Prison 'till they pay the uttermost Fathing that others immediately receive their Reward that is Heaven Some are afflicted and purg'd by Fire in order to their Amendment whilst others have purg'd all their Sins by Sufferings or Martyrdom The very Language of the present R. Catholic Church St. Jerom a Father of the fourth Age who for his extraordinary Learning and Knowledge in the Scriptures was call'd Magister Mundi the Master of the World in his comment upon the said Text has these Words This is that which he says Comment in 5. Matt. thou shalt not go out of Prison till thou pay even thy little Sins There is then such a Prison in this Great Master's Opinion 2. Every Man's Work shall be made manifest for the Day shall declare it because it shall be reveal'd by Fire and the Fire shall try every Man's Work of what sort it is If any Man's Work abide which he hath built thereupon he shall receive a Reward If any Man's Work shall be burnt he shall suffer loss but he himself shall be saved yet so as by Fire 1 Cor. 3.13.14 15. St. Ambrose or the Author of the Commentaries upon the Epistles of St. Paul annex'd to his Works which the ablest Critics do with good Reason ascribe to Hilary Deacon of the Church of Rome and Contemporary to St. Ambrose speaks thus of this Passage But when he St. Paul saith Yet so as by Fire he shews indeed that he shall be saved but yet shall suffer the Punishmenâ— of Fire that being purg'd by Fire he may be sav'd and not tormented for ever as the Infidels are with Everlasting Fire In cap. 3. Epist 1. ad Cor. St. Gregory of Nisse is so plain and full upon this Subject that no R. Catholic can at this Time speak plainer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Man is cleansed says he either in this present Life by Prayer and the Love of Wisdom or after his Death by the Furnace of a Purging Fire And a little after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 After his Departure out of the Body knowing the Difference between Virtue and Vice it is impossible to be Partakers of the Divinity unless Purgatory Fire doth cleanse the Soul from the Spots that stick to it Orat. pro. Mortuis prope Fin. St. Austin speaks much to the same purpose Purge me O Lord says he in this Life and make me such as shall not need that Puâ—ifying Fire And a little after he adds He shall be saved yet so as by Fire And because it is said He shall be saved this Fire is contemn'd yet it will be more grievous than any Thing that a Man can suffer in this Life Enar. in Psal 37. I might insist upon several other Passages of St. Austin and bring more Texts of Scripture with the Sense of the Fathers upon them with Respect to this Subject but I think what is here offer'd is sufficient to shew that our Doctrine concerning Purgatory is founded in Scripture and that the Ancient Fathers did believe it to be so I shall now proceed to shew 2. That the Doctrine of Purgatory is founded in the Practice observ'd in the Primitive Church of praying for the Dead for the Remission of Sins This as I said before if made out will plainly establish our Tenet For if the Primitive Church did pray for the Dead for the Remission of their Sins it follows necessarily that they suppos'd them capable of being assisted by their Prayers and consequently neither in Heaven nor in Hell but in a third Place which is what we believe and call Purgatory Now that the Primitive Church and all succeeding Generations us'd to pray for the Dead for the Remission of their Sins no one Point in the Christian Religion is more Universally attested St. Epiphanius tells us that Aerius was reputed an Heretic for denying the Lawfulness of it and besides him I do not find since Christianity began till the Begining of the last Age any one single Person that ever denied or question'd it Never was there found any Liturgy without it
very hard if not impossible to receive such an Injury or Provocation from the Governours of the Church as may make a Separation excusable impossible according to St. Austin that there should be any just cause for any to separate from the Church truly Catholic Thus far the Dr. and indeed very right only where the Fathers condemn him and his party he is so much a Friend to his Cause as to alter the Phrase a little For instance whereas St. Ireneus says absolutely It is impossible to receive such an Injury or Provocation from the Governours of the Church as to make a Separation excusable he saw very well that if no kind of Injury or Provocation cou'd justifie a Separation himself and his Party stood condemned in that Holy Fathers Opinion and therefore he changed the word Impossible into very hard if not impossible tho' in the Greek which some will have to be the original or Latin Translation there is not the least colour for it So where St. Austin saith That it is impossible there should be any just Cause for any to separate from the Catholic Church He softens the Expression changing Catholic Church into the Church truly Catholic pretending if I may presume to spell his meaning that they did not separate from the Church truly Catholic tho' they had separated from all other Societies and Congregations in the World upon a ridiculous Pretence as if the Catholic Church and the Church truly Catholic were two different things or where the Expression seems too harsh he thinks himself sufficiently entituled to moderate it as where the Holy Father St. Austin says There is no Crime so great as Schism he makes bold with his Words rendring them thus there is scarce any Crime so great as Schism Mr. Serjeant to whose great Wit and indefatigable Labour we are obliged for several other Learned and Ingenious Works in these two excellent Treatises presses his Antagonist to purge himself and his party of the guilt of Schism since he owns they had made a separation from that Church in whose communion they and their Ancestors were since they imbraced the Christian Faith But among other pressing Arguments he urges this which in my opinion is enough to open any man's eyes that has not sworn never to see the Sun Dr. Hammond gathers from Fathers and Scripture that Schism is so horrid a sin that there is scarce any crime I give you his own words so great not Sacriledg Idolatry parricide not expiable by Martyrdom very hard if not impossible to receive such an injury or provocation from the Church as may make a separation excuseable Impossible according to St. Augustin that there shou'd be any just cause for any to separate from the Church truly Catholic whence Mr. Serjeant reasons thus No Man in his Wits much less any body of Learned Men ought to separate from the Church or withdraw themselves from its Authority unless they had a clear and evident Conviction both that this Separation waâ— absolutely necessary and that the Authority pretended by the Church was a manifest usurpation because they would else incur that horrid guilt of Schism But Dr. Hammond and his Party are so far from having any such Evidence or Conviction for either the one or the other that nothing is pretended but bare probabilities and conjectures Consequently it is the last of madness and folly in Dr. Hammond and his Party to persist in their Separation Now Dr. Tillotson who was a very acute Man foreseeing what effect so plain a Demostration was like to have upon such as tendered the Salvation of their Souls being however resolved to maintain the Cause at any rate cou'd bethink himself of nothing sufficient to justifie so dangerous a Separation less than a clear and evident Demonstration of the necessity of it And this in my opinion was the Reason why he undertook to demonstrate that in regard of the aforesaid controverted Points the common sense of Man-kind natural Reason and the Scripture were as clear and evident on the Protestant's side as that twice two make four But what if I shew that he is so far from having any such Evidence on his side that there is not one of all these Points in which he instances but what is destitute of even the least probable Argument to support it Nay I go farther what if I demonstrate that the R. Catholics have all the Evidence and Reason that the nature of such things will bear for what they hold concerning these Points Then surely I may reasonably hope that Rational Men who ought to tender the welfare of their Immortal Souls will be so just to themselves as seriously to consider into what horrible and dangerous crimes they are drawn by the wilfulness of Men who are resolved to maintain a Separation which all the world knows was begun for no other end than to countenance Things that I am unwilling to name but are too well known to be concealed This I shall endeavour by the assistance of God's Grace to perform in the following Chapters when I have first laid down that chief and fundamental Point of all Controversies namely the Infallibility of the Church CHAP. I. Of the Infallibility of the Church THE R. Catholics hold that the Church is infallible that is cannot err in delivering the Doctrine she received from Jesus Christ nor mistake in her Explanation thereof when by Heretics wrested and perverted to a wrong sense The ground of which Tenet I conceive to be this that Christ has provided such efficacious means for the conveyance of Truth to all succeding Ages as will infallibly secure the Church from error in her Decrees concerning Articles of Faith This Point is to be managed with so much the more perspicuity and clearness by how much it is of greater importance than any other It will be therefore requisite to take some pains to satisfie Mens Reasons and if it be possible to make this Truth so clear and evident that those whose Interest and Prejudices make them unwilling to own it may at least be ashamed to deny it And methinks I have this peculiar advantage in this undertaking that every Pious Christian who tenders the welfare of his Soul cannot chuse but wish me success because I undertake the Proof of that which it is every Man's Interest it shou'd be true for if I can shew that there is an Infallible Church and that such a Congregation of Faithful is that Church then all Christians who are Solicitous about the true Church and the means of Salvation and agitated with various Scruples and Difficulties and which is more dreadful threatned with Hell and Damnation by the furious Zeal of different Parties may sit still and hear what the Infallible Church says to them In the handling then of this important Truth I shall do these three Things First I will endeavour to shew that there is a Church or Congregation of Faithful which is Infallible in her Decisions and Declarations