to Salvation and were some of them saved So that he acknowledgeth in some sense the Visibility of the Church Ecclesia vera erat in Papatu sed Papatus non erat vera Ecclesia Alii cautiùs Papatum dixerunt fuisse in Ecclesiâ non Ecclesiam in Papatu Prideaux Lect. de Visibil Eccl. p. 136. even Roman which Protestants deny not who grant that the true Church was in or under the Papacy although the Papacy was not that Church Neither is there any contradiction in this for a Leper is a true Man and as truly Visible as one that is clean Leprosie is not a distinct Body but a Disease cleaving to it In like manner Popery is not of it self a distinct Church but a corrupt humour in latter Ages predominant in the true Visible Church of God. Nevertheless he denies first the Papacy i. e. the Errors and Corruptions in Doctrine and Worship introduc'd of late by the Popes and their adherents to be any part of the true antient Christian Catholick Faith by which our Ancestors were saved any more than Leprosie is any part of a Man. Secondly he denyeth that there is alwaies and at all times in this true Visible Church a visible Company or State of People actually and personally divided from the rest that profess the True Faith perform Religious Worship and exercise Church-Discipline in open and conspicuous manner wholly free from the Corruptions and Abuses of such as have defiled the Church For 't is one thing to be a True Visible Church another to be free from all such Errors and Corruptions as may being wilfully persisted in endanger Mens Salvation and therefore need Reformation The Church of the Jews was the true yea the only true Church of God yet in the time of Elijah and after in our Saviour's days they were generally ten Tribes of twelve over-run with Idolatry and Superstition The like we say of the Church of Rome in the Ages next before Luther when not only gross Ignorance but many palpable Errors and Corruptions in Doctrine Worship and Government did visibly appear which many eminent Professors sufficient The Answer to D. White pag. 354. as a Jesuit confesseth to prove the Churches Visibility under Persecution who lived and died in the Communion of that Church openly opposed lamented and bewailed as S. Bernard See the Articles of Reformation proposed to the Council of Trent by Ferdinand the Emperour and Charles the Ninth Apud Goldast constitut Imp. tomo 2. p. 376. and tomo 3. p. 570. Clemangis Alvarus Pelagius Cameracensis Bishop Grosthead with innumerable more although they were over-born by the predominant Party then bearing rule who could not indure to hear of Reformation tho much desired by many true Catholicks and promised by Adrian the Sixth and other Popes before the calling of the Council of Trent But it is very disingenuous to quote out of any Writer a line or two and not to add with it his explained sense and meaning As for Mr. Perkins who in his Reformed Catholick which I have not now by me saith That during the space of 900 years there was no Church Visible besides the Roman Catholick Church his Words if his admit of the same Answer But I dare appeal to any Christian whether he can possibly believe that any learned Protestant Writer yea any man in his wits Juels Defence pag. 45 46. should think that the Gospel preached by our Saviour and the Apostles asserted by the Antient Fathers and Martyrs should first appear in the World when Luther and Zuinglius began to preach For my part I utterly renounce that Gospel Faith and Church of which Luther Zuinglius or any mere mortal man tho pretending to be Infallible is the Author and Founder Did not I believe the Doctrine generally own'd by the Protestants to be grounded in the Scriptures and the concurrent sense of the Antient Fathers I could not satisfie my own Conscience as to the profession of it The true meaning then of some Protestant Writers could be only this That the Gospel or Christian Religion did in Luther's days begin first to appear more eminently freed or reformed from those after-grown Errors and Corruptions it was in some later Ages mis-figured with being reduced to the prime Rule of Faith Garenz de Sergio de Conciâ—â—â— 706. Aquin. 2. qu. 1. art 7. resp ad 4. the Scripture and its best interpreter Primitive Antiquity And is it not an unspeakable Blessing that we enjoy such a Reformation For I can scarcely think that any sober Romanist will deny that the first were the best and the last the worst Ages of the Church and that there was after the Apostles days and the first 5 or 600 years a manifest declension of the antient purity of Doctrin and simplicity of Devotion altho there still remained a true Church as to essentials The Question concerning the Visibility of the Church stated BUT that we may not beat the air I shall first of all enquire into the true state of the Question Protestants do not as Bellarmine grants affirm the Church to be wholly and absolutely Invisible or utterly hid from the eyes of all men in any Age but comparatively only not being alwaies equally Visible They acknowledg that God ever had and will have a Church in the World which shall make in some degree a Visible profession of Christian Religion even under Persecution Thus it was in the days of Athanasms and Hilary See their words below tho not so illustrious and conspicuous for they say that the Church may be reduced to a small number the Orthodox Pastors may be violently thrust out of their Churches and the best Christians forced to worship God privately in corners And will any man deny but this detracts much from the Visibility and conspicuousness of the Church They of the Church of Rome grant all this The Jesuit Mr. White answers doth not avow yea disowns it that the Church is visible Defence of the Way p. 354. i. e. that it is a Company of Christians so illustrious as it not only may be but actually is known to all men living at all times for saith he Ecclesia aliquando obscuratur tanquam obnubilatur multitudine scandalorum c. Epist ad Vincent 48. Firmiores partim exulabant partim latitabant Ibid. Diligenter animadverti debet non sic accipiendum esse quod dicimus Ecclesiam esse semper conspicuam quasi velimus eamomni tempore dignosci posse aequè facilé Novimus enim illam aliquando errorum schisinatum persecutionum fluctibus esse agitatam ut imperitis quidem nec satis prudenter rationes temporum rerumque circumstantias aestimantibus cognitu fuerit difficilis quod tum maximè accidit cùm Arianorum perfidia in orbâ— pâ—enè tâ—to dominabatur Analys Fid. l. 6. c. 4. I know well enough that the Church hath not alwaies especially in time of Persecution such an outward worldly and prosperous estate
Church or Religion different in essence from the old one Had it not been a ridiculous impertinency for one that knew Naaman before whilst he stood by to ask where is Naaman and being answered this is he for the Enquirer to reply it cannot be he for Naaman was a Leper this man is clean Was not Naaman formerly a Leper and now cleansed the same person A Field of Wheat in part weeded is the same it was as to ground and seed not another In like manner the true visible Christian Church cleansed and unclean reformed and unreformed is the same Church altered not as to Essence or substance but quality or condition That the true Visible Church of God may be generally over-run with corruptions in Worship Errours yea Heresies we see not onely in the Jewish but Christian Churches of Corinth Thyatira c. and all the Eastern Churches yea almost the whole World in Athanasius his days is so undeniable a truth Ad ann 358. Totus mundus abiit post Pelagium Bradwardin de causa Dei in praefat that Baronius and others of our Adversaries are forced as we have seen above to grant it Why should it then seem to them impossible or incredible that the Church of God in the blind and unlearned Ages before Luther should in like manner be over-run with many pernicious Errours in Doctrine and corruptions in Worship If so as Nicolas Clemangis Alvarus Pelagius and others of their own Church confess and bewail V. Caranzam de Conciliis p. 786 789. why might not the King of England as well as Hezekiah or Josiah redress these Abuses and suppress these Errours in his own Dominions Why might not other States and Princes do the same especially when Reformation of them by a free General Council not enslaved to the Popes will and pleasure though promised could not be obtained V. Concil Pisanum Sess 16. 20. Was it necessary for fear of making a new Church or Religion that the Church of God must for ever lie under those defilements and corruptions If not may not our Reformers justly say What Evil have we done Not to be too tedious This Question Where was the Protestant Church in the Ages before Luther ariseth from several mistakes First From want of distinguishing betwixt a true visible Church and a sound one The Roman Church from which Luther and others received their Baptism and Ordination We grant to be a part or member of the Catholick Church but it was unsound and subject to many Diseases i. e. corruptions in Doctrine Worship and Discipline which like ill humours endangered its very life The Reformation wherein Luther with many more were instrumental was not Poison to destroy its Vitals but purgative Physick to remove its distempers and to preserve them Secondly It 's a mistake that they will not distinguish betwixt the avowed and universally owned Doctrines of a Church and the Opinions or practices of some few or many in it In the Churches of Pergamus or Thyatira there were some and possibly not a few who held the Doctrine of Balaam and were seduced by that wicked Jezabel pretending to be a Prophetess and infallible yet these Doctrines were not properly the Doctrines of those Churches but of a party in them The like we say of the Errours in the Church of Rome that they were never universally owned and allowed no not by many eminent Professours and Writers of her own Communion as we have made evident Thirdly It 's a great mistake when they demand that we shew the Protestant Religion and Church distinct and separate from the Catholick in all Ages when we affirm and prove that not onely in the Apostles days but for near five hundred years after the true Apostolick Faith was at least as to substance kept pure and uncorrupt Would they have us to shew Protestants protesting against the antient and Primitive Faith As for their New Tridentine Articles of Faith they were to be sure not some of them then in being to be protested against Fourthly It 's a gross mistake to think that all who live in a true but corrupted Christian Church are either bound to approve of those corruptions or at all times necessary to separate actually and personally from the Church for their sake See Bull against Can. This Protestants condemn in Donatists and Brownists or Separatists The Errors and corruptions of the Roman Church were a long time growing in or upon her The Tares were not seen as soon as they were sown but after they were grown up God forbid we should condemn to Hell all our Forefathers that lived and died in the Communion of the Roman Church In the Prophet Elijah's Isaiah's Jeremiah's days the true Visible Church of God was corrupted both Princes Priests and People severely reproved yet the Prophets advised none to separate therefore from the Temple and Worship of God although no doubt their mind was that all as far as was possible should keep themselves free and undefiled from those prevalent corruptions Likewise our Blessed Saviour forsook not the Temple and although he warned them to take heed of the leaven i. e. false Doctrines of the Scribes and Pharisees yet in regard they sate in Moses his Chair he commands the people to do as they said i. e. according to the Law and consequently to go and hear what they said Much very much as Austin and other Fathers tell us is to be born rather than to make a Schism in the Church of God. On this ground no doubt many of our Forefathers before the Reformation continued till death in the Communion of the Roman Church that so they might enjoy the benefit of the Word and Sacraments although they mourned for and groaned under the overflowing predominancy of many Errors and superstitious Observations in their days heartily desiring yea openly requiring a removal of them but could not obtain it The Jesuit whom Dr. White answered acknowledgeth that the Church is not actually seen at all times Pag. 379. yet it may be discerned with prudent and diligent enquiry in regard even in times of its greatest obscurity or persecution there were always some Eminent and known Members of it He ands although it have not always an outward and illustrious Estate and cannot where persecution rageth practise publickly the Rites of Divine Worship yet the Church never did or shall want an inward Estate or subordination to Pastors c. If this be as he grants sufficient to make good the perpetual visibility of the Church we can easily evince the Visibility of the Protestant Church and Religion under Papal persecutions from the Writings of those times as the Reader may in part discern from what we have collected But in regard they so vehemently urge us to shew some Professours of the Protestant Religion divided and separated from the Roman Church we though it be no way necessary as we have seen above mention the Wicklevists Lollards Bohemians Waldenses
A Brief EXAMINATION Of the present Roman Catholick Faith Contained in Pope PIUS HIS New Creed BY The Scriptures Antient Fathers and their own Modern Writers in Answer to a Letter desiring satisfaction concerning the Visibility of the Protestant Church and Religion in all Ages especially before Luther's time Imprimatur Octob. 26. 1688. Guil. Needham London Printed for James Adamson at the Angel and Crown in St. Pauls Church-yard 1689. Pope Pius his CREED OR THE Profession of the Roman Catholick Faith. V. Bullam Pii 4. super forma professionis fidei sub finem Concilii Tridentini THAT the Profession of one and the same Faith may be uniformly exhibited to all and its certain form may be known to all we have caused it to be published strictly commanding that the Profession of Faith be made after this form and no other I N. do with firm Faith believe and profess all and singular things contained in the Creeds to wit Nicene c. which the Roman Church useth namely I believe in God the Father Almighty maker of Heaven and Earth and of all things visible and invisible c. The Apostolick and Ecclesiastical Traditions and other observances and Constitutions of that Church I firmly admit and embrace I do also confess that there be truly and properly Seven Sacraments of the new Law instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ Extreme Vnction Orders Marriage c. And that they confer Grace All things which concerning Original Sin and Justification were defined in the 4th Council of Trent I embrace and receive Also I confess that in the Mass is offered to God a true proper and propitiatory Sacrifice for the quick and dead and that in the Holy Eucharist is truly really and substantially the body and bloud of our Lord and that there is made a conversion of the whole substance of the Bread into his Body and of the Wine into his Bloud which conversion the Catholick Church calleth Transubstantiation I confess also that under one kind onely all and whole Christ and the true Sacrament is received I do constantly hold there is a Purgatory and the Souls detained there are helped by the suffrages of the Faithful And likewise that the Saints reigning with Christ are to be worshipped and prayed to and that their Reliques are to be worshipped And most firmly I avouch that the Images of Christ and the Mother of God and other Saints are to be had and retained and that to them due honour and veneration is to be given Also that the power of Indulgences was left by Christ in the Church and I affirm the use thereof to be most wholesome to Christs people That the Holy Catholick and Apostolick Roman Church is the Mother and Mistris of all Churches I acknowledge and I vow and swear true obedience to the Bishop of Rome the Successour of St. Peter the Prince of the Apostles and the Vicar of Jesus Christ And all other things likewise do I undoubtingly receive and confess which are delivered defined and declared by the sacred Canons and General Councils and especially the Holy Council of Trent And withal I condemn and accurse all things that are contrary hereunto and that I will be careful this true Catholick Faith out of the which no man can be saved which at this time I willingly profess be constantly with Gods help retained and confessed whole and inviolate to the last gasp and by those that are under me holden taught and preached to the uttermost of my power I the said N. promise vow and swear So God me help and his Holy Gospels A Brief EXAMINATION OF THE Present Roman Catholick Faith c. SIR I Received your Letter wherein you desire I would give you satisfaction concerning the Visibility of the Protestant Religion and Church in the Ages before Luther In order thereunto I send you these Lines requesting you as you love and value the safety of your own Soul laying aside the blind belief of the Roman Infallibility which renders all Discoursing or Writing vain and unprofitable to read them seriously and impartially You begin thus I find your Divines asserting that the Church hath been hidden and invisible How Protestant Writers are to be understood when they argue against the perpetual Visibility of the Church To which I answer That the Church hath been for some time hidden i. e. obscured so that it was not conspicuous or easily discernable by all Christians much less Heathens is a truth so manifest that our Adversaries themselves grant it as I shall shew afterward That the Catholick Church was ever wholly rooted out by Heresie or Persecution or that in any Age all outward profession of the Truth though sometime more secret and private was wholly hidden and utterly invisible in the eyes of all men we affirm not Cardinal Bellarmine himself notes Multi ex nostris tempus terunt dum probant Ecclesiam non posse absolutè desicere nam Fleretici id concedunt De Eccles Militan lib. 3. cap. 13. that many of his Church have taken much needless pains in proving against us the perpetuity and indefectibility of the Church which as he confesses we never denied We only say that any particular Church even that of Rome may utterly fail But you add I find your Divines saying otherwise for Bishop Juel Apol. p. 7. writeth That Luther's preaching was the very first appearing of the Gospel And pag. 8. That Forty years and upward i. e. at the first setting forth of Luther and Zuinglius the truth was unknown and unheard of and that they came first to the knowledg and preaching of the Gospel Let Bishop Juel answer for himself Defence of the Apol. pag. 82. Ye say we confess our Church began only about Forty years since No Mr. Harding we confess it not and you your self well know we confess it not Our Doctrine is the Old and yours is the New. We say our Doctrine and the order of our Churches is older than yours by Five hundred years And he not only saith it but unanswerably proves it by the Testimonies of the Ancient Fathers Hence that Book is appointed to be had in all our Churches so great a respect have we for Primitive Antiquity and so far are we from imagining the Gospel or the Truth we profess to be no older than Luther or Zuinglius But Mr. White in his Defence of the Way to the Church Pag. 355 356. saith Popery was such a Leprosie spreading so universally over the Church that there was no visible Company of People appearing to the World viz. in the Ages next before Luther free from it True he saith so but he explains his meaning in the same place for he acknowledgeth the Churches of Greece Aethiopia Armenia to have been and still to be true visible Christian Churches yea that the Church of Rome is a part of the Visible Church of God wherein our Ancestors possessed the true Faith as to the Fundamental Articles necessary
may in time want snuffing and so may the most Apostolical Church in after-Ages need Reformation The second place is Matth. 18.17 Tell the Church if he neglect to hear the Church let him be to thee as a Heathen or Publican Now saith the Letter It were very hard to be condemn'd for a Heathen or a Publican for not hearing a Church that hath so closely lain hid that none could hear see feel or understand it for 900. years First I answer That these words prove not the Church visible or palpable to all men Heathens and Infidels enquiring after the true Church but at most to Christians only who live under the Church's government and submit to her Censures Secondly The words relate to a particular Christian Church of which a person is a member for it were absurd to imagine our Saviour should oblige any Christian if his Brother should offend him to tell the whole Catholick Church throughout the World his offence per literas Encyclicas Yea it 's plain and undeniable the place respects not the whole diffused number of Christians no not in any particular Church but the Governours only Now our Adversaries will not I hope say that any particular Church except their own much less its Rulers or Representatives shall be eminently visible and conspicuous to all Christians at all times Certainly our Saviour in this place does not promise any special privilege to the Church of Rome more than Antioch Ephesus or any other Apostolical Church to whom that Precept of telling the Church doth equally belong some of whom are long since utterly extinguished by the overflowing of Mahometanism How can they then from this place infer that any particular Church shall be perpetually visible and conspicuous to the World exercising Church-Government over its members Nay farther How could the Christians belonging to their Roman Church when under the persecution of Dioclesian or Constantius at which time the Shepherds being smitten the sheep were all scatter'd the Church dissipated and all Church-discipline interrupted tell the Church or make complaint to the Governours of it when they scarcely knew where they were to whom in case of offence and scandal to make complaint Our Saviour's Precept then supposes the free exercise of Church-government which in times of violent persecution cannot be exercis'd or supposed I might add Acosta de Temp. noviss lib. 2. cap. 15. Telesphorus de Magnit tribulat pag. 32. Aquipontanus de Antichrist pag. 23. That their own Writers Acosta Telesphorus the Hermite and others confess that when Antichrist cometh all Ecclesiastical Order and publick service of God shall be buried the Church-doors destroy'd the Altars forsaken the Church empty c. Now I appeal to the conscience of any man whether at that time it would be possible in case of Scandal to tell the Church when the Church shall be forc'd to hide it self and all Ecclesiastical Order is suppress'd and dissolv'd by the violence of Persecution Lastly Whereas 't is objected that the Protestant Church hath so closely lain hid for 900. years that no man could see or understand it this is very falsly affirm'd as I shall shew afterward unless such as profess'd the Religion of the Scriptures Ancient Fathers and Councils protesting against some new Roman additional Articles impos'd of late by Pope Pius and the Tridentine Council were no true visible Church of God. The last place viz. 2 Cor. 4.5 If our Gospel be hid c. is least of all to the purpose for there Saint Paul plainly speaketh not of the Church but of the Gospel or Christian Faith Hieronym in Nahum c 2. Chrysost Hom. 49. in Matth. Nunc nullo modo cognoscitur quae sit vera Ecclesia Christi nimirum ex quo obtinuit haeresis Ecclesias nisi tantummodo per Scripturas Irenaeus cont Haeres lib. 2. Quae praeconiaverunt pestea per Dei voluntatem scripserunt c Costerus Enchirid. cap. 1. Alphonsus de Castro cont Haeres grant this which is clearly deliver'd by the Scripture to which as St. Hierom and St. Chrysostom acknowledge we ought especially in times of Heresie and Persecution to have recourse for our establishment in the truth and if the Gospel first preached and afterwards written by the Apostles for what they first preached they afterwards by the will of God as Irenaeus saith wrote be hid to any it 's hid to them that perish whose minds the Devil hath blinded Doth not this place expresly confute our Adversaries who affirm that the Gospel as reveal'd by the Scripture is dark obscure and invisible to the Laity that so they may hang their faith by a blind and implicite obedience on the visibility and infallible Authority of their Church or Popes who may be as some of them have been notorious and manifest Hereticks So that these words of St. Paul can do them no service The Fathers alledg'd for the Roman visibility consider'd I come now to the Fathers quoted in your Letter and first for Chrysostom's saying * Hom. 30. in Matth. It is easier for the Sun to be extinguish'd than the Church to be darkned I wonder any sober men should require us to believe that on Chrysostom's Authority which they do not believe themselves For the Romanists Valentia and others as we have seen confess that the Church even their Roman Church may be obscur'd or darkned as it undeniably was under the Heathen and Arian Emperours in times of prevailing Heresie and Persecution So that Chrysostom must even by them be understood of a total not partial Eclipse or darkness for in that place he treateth of times of persecution wherein all grant the Church may be darkned and saith the Tyrants are gone and perish'd but the Church remaineth unconquer'd As to the places quoted out of Saint Austin Tract in Joan. de Unitate Ecclesiae Cap. 7. I answer That he speaketh of the state of the Christian Church as it was in his days in its external lustre and glory retaining the Primitive Faith without addition or detraction It was indeed strange blindness in the Donatists he writeth against not to see the true Church which as a Mountain or light on a Hill was then plainly visible before them all over Africa yea the whole World but to dare to restrain it to pars Donati the faction of Donatus as now the Jesuits restrain it to the Popish party was plain impudence Nevertheless St. Austin doth not say that the Church should always and in all after-Ages remain in that visible prosperous and illustrious state yea contrarily he confesseth that it is sometimes obscur'd thro the multitude of scandals Aliquando obscuratur Epist ad Vincentium 47. Ecclesia non apparâ—bit impiis tunc persecutoribus ultra modum saevientibus Epist 80. ad Hesychium Vide de Baptist contra Donatistas lib. 6 cap. 4. Enarrat in Psalmum 10. that it is like the Moon that may be hid that it shall not appear by reason of the
unmeasurable rage of ungodly persecutors yea so obscur'd that the members thereof shall not know one another This arguing then from the State of the Church of old in St. Austins days is just like theirs who would persuade us that the Church of Rome is now the only true Catholick and Apostolick Church because St. Paul 1600 years ago saith their Faith was commended throughout the World Rom. 1. ver 8. so was their Obedience also Rom. 16.19 But doth the Apostle say they should continue in that Faith more than Obedience unto the end of the World or that their Church alone should never corrupt the Faith or apostatize in any degree from it Tim. 4.1 He seemeth to say otherwise when he thus writeth to the Roman Church Rom. 8.18 19 20 21 22. Boast not against the branches thou bearest not the root but the root thee Because of unbelief they i. e. the Jewish Church were broken off and thou standest by Faith be not high-minded but fear for if God spar'd not the natural branches take heed lest he also spare not thee And as to Christian Obedience De Pontif. in lib. 1. in Praefat. Genebrard Chronol lib. 4. seculo 10. Baronius in Ann. 912. num 8. in ann 985. num 1. it 's granted by Bellarmin Genebrard and others that some Popes have been so scandalously wicked that they were rather Apostatical than Apostolical and scarcely deserved to have their names register'd in the Catalogue of the Roman Bishops Concerning the Papists demanding the Names of such as professed the Protestant Religion before the Reformation As for the second Question wherein satisfaction is desir'd to answer Roman Catholicks when they demand the names of some Professors of the Protestant Religion before the Reformation it being to them strange that if Protestancy be from the Apostles and hath been in all Ages they can shew no Writings of some eminent Professors of it as well before the Reformation as many now since To this I reply first That altho the Apostles were not call'd by the name of Protestants as neither were they by the name of Catholicks or Papists yet they were really of that Religion Protestants do profess for from the Apostles and their Writings have we learn'd the Religion we maintain against additional Popish Errors and traditional or unwritten points of Faith. Such as these reckon'd up by Pope Pius as Articles of the Roman Catholick Faith which all Papists must swear to profess as necessary to salvation That there are seven Sacraments properly so call'd Transubstantiation Purgatory Invocation of Saints and Angels Worshiping Images and Reliques Indulgences the Bishop of Rome's Supremacy over all Christian Churches Real and proper Sacrificing of Christ in the Mass Communion in one kind c. All which are either not mention'd in the Apostles Writings or contradicted and condemn'd by them Secondly I answer That the Ancient Fathers and Councils for 4 or 500 years at least I might say more after Christ were not in the points above-mention'd of Pope Pius his Faith but either say nothing of them or testifie against them or at least speak doubtfully of them whence I conclude that they were of the Protestant not Popish Religion This I shall shew from their Writings Yea thirdly That some of the New Articles of Faith before named cannot be prov'd to be any part of the ancient Catholick belief by the Authority of any eminent Writers for above 1000 years after Christ particularly in the points of seven Sacraments Purgatory Indulgences Communion in one kind and some others Lastly That there is scarcely any point especially of them before rehears'd condemn'd by us in the present Roman Church but we are able to produce multitudes of eminent Writers and some of their own Communion who complain of them or protest against them as well as we in the Ages next before Luther To perform my promise I shall now prove 1. Assertion First That the Articles of the present Roman-Catholick Faith recited by Pope Pius and added by him to the Nicene Creed are either not mention'd at all in the Apostles Writings or refuted and condemn'd by them Seven Sacraments not taught by the Apostles First For their seven Sacraments The Apostles no where teach us to acknowledge seven Sacraments or that Matrimony Orders Extream Unction Confirmation Confession are such and as Bellarmin affirms Nec plura nec pauciora De Sacram. lib. 2. c. 24. Chrysost Ambros Austin c. only such Baptism and the Holy Eucharist we own flowing as the antient Fathers speak out of Christ's side whence came forth Water and Bloud which are answerable to the two only Jewish Sacraments Circumcision and the Passover as we read 1 Cor. 10.2 3 4. More we find not It 's true St. Paul discoursing of the Conjugal Union betwixt Christ and his Church termeth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephes 5.32 a great Mystery The vulgar Latine translation renders it ambiguously and improperly magnum Sacramentum a great Sacrament Hence the Romish Church will needs have Matrimonv instituted by God in Paradise to be a proper Christian Sacrament but St. Paul declareth he meant no such matter In locum for as Cardinal Cajetan observes he immediately addeth But I speak of Christ and the Church St James also mentions Anointing the sick with Oil James 5.14 but that was in order to the miraculous gift of healing the Body as we may gather from Mar. So Cajetan expoundeth that place 6.13 It had no spiritual effect on the Soul as all Sacraments properly so call'd have and must have as is granted The forgiveness of sins was by Prayer to God not Oil ver 15. Nor Transubst Secondly The Apostles did not teach Transubstantiation Durand Biel Scotus Cameracensis Cajetan grant it canbe not evidently proved from the Scripture See below Matth. 26.26 1 Cor. 10.16 17. Card. Contarenus de Sacram l. 2. c. 3. Canus loc Theol. l. 3. c 3. Fisher cont Luther c. 10. say the same 1 Cor. 11.26 27 28. Verse 29. The Church is called Christs Body is it therefore his Natural Body in a literal sense 1 Cor. 10. John 15.1 Did Christ eat his own Body when the Sacrament was administred and taken by him So Chrysostom Hom 40 in Jean 3. or that by consecration the substance of the Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper are annihilated or turned into the substance of Christ's body and blood Yea St. Paul expresly declares the contrary for he calleth it Bread and Wine even after consecration The Bread that we break but Christ first blessed and afterwards brake it is it not the communion of the Body of Christ The Cup of Blessing we bless is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ So that Bread and the Cup i. e. by a Figure or Metonymy as all must grant the Wine in the Cup remain in the Communion as means whereby we obtain the communion of Christ's Body and
in the body thinketh the more that the body so like its own body hath sense also The like we find in his 49th Epistle Who doubts that Idols want all sense yet when they are placed aloft in an honourable sublimity by the very likeness of living members although dead and without sense they affect our minds the veneration of a multitude being added thereunto which crazy and pestilent distempers the Scripture healeth saying They have eyes but see not Whether Images in Popish-Churches have not the very same influence and effect on ignorant and superstitious Women let impartial men and such as have travelled abroad amongst them determine The same Saint Austin quoteth and commendeth a saying of Varro De Civitat Dei Lib. 4. c. 9. 31. that they who brought in Images for the People both took away the Fear of a Deity render'd base and contemptible by representations of wood and stone and added Error i. e. false and unworthy apprehensions of God. To all this it will I suppose be answered First That the Fathers inveigh against making Images of God or false Gods not Saints I reply 1. Some of them expresly condemn all Images 2. Do not Roman Catholicks though some of their own Writers condemn it make Images or Pictures of God the Father in the likeness of an old Man and of the Holy Ghost of a Dove True say they but we do it not to represent the nature of God but certain properties and actions appertaining to God I do not wonder they say they do not what cannot be done to wit to represent by an Image the infinite invisible and incomprehensible nature of God But herein they say what even the Heathens said of their Idols For Hermes Trismegistus quoted by Cyril Xenophon by Minutius Foelix Olympius by Sozomen confessed Hist Lib. 7. c. 15. that it is impossible to signifie the incorporeal God by a Body and that the form of God cannot be seen that invisible Spirits or heavenly Powers dwelt in those corporeal Images but they were not the Powers themselves It 's granted Ne facias nisi tibi Deus jusserit Tertul. de Idololat c. God and the Holy Ghost did appear in such likenesses what 's that to us We have an express command not to make to our selves any likeness of any thing in Heaven c. Is not God the Father with the Holy Ghost in Heaven Secondly They answer V. Concil Constant 6. Can 82. apud Caranzam that they give religious worship to Images not for themselves propter se but for the sake of the Persons they represent The Heathens as we have seen above said the very same If Romish worship of Images be lawful it will be difficult to condemn or convince the Heathens of Idolatry The Jews did not worship the Calf for it self but as a Representative of God. Lastly They affirm that they yield to Images a mean low and inferiour worship not what belongs to God onely I answer that as we have shewn above they give to the Images of God and Crucifixes the same Divine worship they yield unto God and Christ themselves To say they give Images Latria and yet an inferiour kind of such religious worship is to contradict themselves for all Latria as such is summus cultus the highest worship a creature can give if they give them an inferiour religious honour it is not Latria Art. 6 Concerning the Popes Supremacy I come now to the Capital Article of the Roman Catholick Faith The Popes Supremacy over all Emperors Kings Bishops Councils Churches and Christians throughout the World. Concerning the Fathers before the Nicene Council called above 300 years after Christ we need not make any strict enquiry seeing Aeneas Sylvius who was Pope himself afterwards confesseth Epist 288. that before this Council aliquis sed non magnus some but no great respect was given to the Roman Bishops in Clemens Romanus Ignatius Justin Martyr Tatianus Athenagoras I find no mention of any Supremacy in the Bishop of Rome Come we then to the Antient Father Irenaeus He in his third Book Cap. 12. quoting the words of the Church of Jerusalem ☞ Acts 22 23 25. saith These are the words of that Church from which every Church had its beginning If every Church V. Epist Concilii Constant 1. c. 9. Epist ad Damasum then the Roman How can she then be Mater Magistra the Mother and Mistris of all Churches as is now pretended by our Romanists This was that Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons in France who sharply reproved Victor Bishop of Rome for threatning or attempting at least to Excommunicate the Bishops and Churches of Asia Lib. 5. Hist Eccl. c. 15. for not observing Easter on the same day he did as Eusebius relateth At the same time lived Polyerates the renowned Bishop of Ephesus with whom many Catholick Bishops meeting in several Councils concurred who opposed Pope Victor's Sentence and professed he was not at all terrified with his threatned Excommunication but resolutely persisted in the Tradition and Custom received from his Predecessors particularly John the Evangelist as we find in Eusebius lib. 5. Hist c. 23. Hence it is evident that Polycrates as also Irenaeus did not look upon the Bishop of Rome as Prince and Sovereign Head of the Church or more infallible than any other Bishop It 's true Irenaeus had a great reverence for the Roman Church and testifieth to her honour that in his days the Apostolick Doctrine or Tradition remained pure and incorrupt which he opposed to the Heretical Novelties of the Valentinians But this no way proveth that she had Supreme Jurisdiction over all Churches But in regard it would be long as he saith to reckon up all Apostolical Churches as of Corinth Ephesus c. Lib. 3. cap. 3. to whom he giveth the same testimony of purity of doctrine he instances in Rome propter potentiorem principalitatem in regard of its more powerful principality known to all But these words plainly enough relate not to the Roman Church immediately as a Christian Church but to the City of Rome which at that time was the Imperial City and Head of the World. Alas What powerful Principality could the poor persecuted Church of Rome enjoy then living under Heathen Emperours It is not therefore meant strictly and properly of an Ecclesiastical but Civil Power and Principality of the City of Rome V. Concil Chalcedon infra Epist ad Roman in which the Church of Rome sojourned as St. Ignatius writeth to them whereby through concourse of all Nations it was rendred more conspicuous and honourable to the World. The words of Aeneas Sylvius before mentioned confirm the same In Clemens Alexandrinus I find nothing concerning this matter I will go on to Tertullian Run through saith he the Apostolical Churches If ye be near Achaia ye have Corinth if Macedonia Philippi and Thessalonica si Italiae adjaces habes Romam If ye live near Italy ye
86. 97. in himself i. e. his own body and bloud really and yet in the Sacrament not onely every Easter but every day quotidie populis immolatur he is immolated or offer'd to the people He saith not to God but to the people For Sacraments if they had not some similitude similitudinem of those things whereof they are Sacraments they could not at all be Sacraments Hence the names of the things signified are communicated to them Here Saint Austin plainly affirmeth that Christs body and bloud are immolated or offer'd up in and by the sacramental Signs not really properly and substantially but per similitudinem by way of similitude or representation in regard the sacramental Symbols as he saith secundum quendam modum after some manner not proper but figurative Epist 23. are his body and bloud or as Saint Ambrose hath it in imagine in an Image or representation but there in He … at Gods right hand in veritate Lib. 1. de Offic. c. 48. in Psal 38. in truth where he pre … 〈◊〉 his very body and bloud by way of interpellation to the Eyes of his Father as our Advocate In another place As often as the Pascha the Christian Passover is offer'd In Psal 21. Compare in Psalm 75. Memoriâ quotidie nobis immolatur Cùm hostia frangitur sanguis in ora fidelium infunditur quid aliud quam Dominici corporis immolatio significatur Aug. de Cons dist 2. doth Christ so often die No yet anniversaria recordatio quasi repraesentat quod olim factum est The Anniversary recordation at Easter doth as it were represent what was done long since and so admonisheth us as if we saw Christ hanging on the Cross So much for sacrificing Christ in â—â—e Mass or Sacrament which the antient Fathers own not allowing only with Protestants an improper offering of him by way of Image representation similitude memorial and communication Art. 8 Concerning Communion in one kind I come to the last Article before-mentioned of the new Roman Creed Receiving the Communion in one kind in bread onely Evangelistae ita tradiderunt praecepisse sibi Jesum Apol. 2. prope finem Epist 54.56 63. lib. de Lapsis Cypr. de coena Domini Here it is needless to quote many Testimonies seeing our Adversaries themselves confess that herein they have departed from the practice of all the antient Fathers We have already seen in Justin Martyr that both Bread and Wine were administred to all that were present at the Sacrament yea he there informs us that the Deacon carried 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consecrated Bread and Wine to such as were sick and absent In Cyprian's days it 's undeniable that the Sacramental Cup was given to the people yea Infants Bibimus de sanguine Domini ipso jubente Christ commanding us we drink of his Bloud I might alledge Ignatius ad Philadelph Origen Hom. 16. in Num. Tertul. ad Uxorem lib. 2. Cyril Hierosol Catech. c. Ambrose lib. 1. de Offic. c. 41. de Sacrament l. 4. c. 4. Jerome in Sophon c. 3. 1 Cor. 11. Chrys Hom. 18. in 2. ad Corint Theodoret in 1 Cor. 11. Dionysius Carthusian in 1 Cor. 11. Austin in Levit. qu. Theophylact. 1 Cor. 11. Paschasius de Coena Dom. with many more but it 's needless as we shall shew by and by Lyra in Proverb 1.9 and Carthusianus grant it Assert 3 Several Articles of the Romish Faith are not 600 years old I come to my third Assertion That some of the Articles before-mentioned in Pope Pius's Creed and declared by him to be parts of the Primitive Catholick and Apostolick Faith necessary to be believed by all Christians to salvation cannot be proved to be such by the Testimonies of any eminent Writers for above one thousand years after Christ I instance First In the Article concerning their seven Sacraments It was first made an Article of Faith by the Council of Florence 1439. V. Cassand Consul Art. 13 Chemnit in Examen Perkins Demonstr Problem Licet Primitiva Ecclesia c. Concil Basil Licet ab Initio Christianae Religionis c. Trent Council Can. 1. Sess 5. No antient Writer for one thousand years after Christ ever taught that there were seven Sacraments nec plura nec pauciora neither more nor less and that extreme Unction Matrimony with the rest were they Peter Lombard who lived An. 1160. first taught this Doctrine which he could not prove although he endeavoureth it in other Points by the Testimonies of the antient Fathers But of this more below Secondly In the Article concerning Communion in one kind The Councils of Constance and Trent confess that the Primitive Church administred the Eucharist to the people in both kinds as Christ did yet non obstante as if this were little to be regarded they decree the Laity shall not receive both yea anathematize such as say it is necessary from the Institution practice and command of our Saviour Do this c. Drink ye all of this The same is acknowledged by Bellarmine Valentia Costerus and others of their most eminent Writers Consult Art. 13. Cassander confesseth that the Primitive Church at least in all her publick Administrations gave both Elements to the people for one thousand years after Christ Part 3. qu. 80. Art. 12. V. Bellarm. de Euchar. lib. 3. c. 23. Alph. de Castro De Transubst rara apud antiquos mentio p. 572. c. 8. The present Roman Custom in Aquinas his days was but in quibusdam Ecclesiis in some Churches only Thirdly Transubstantiation as Scotus and Biel in Can. Sect. 4. acknowledge was first made an Article of Faith by Pope Innocent in the Lateran Council not much above four hundred years ago Fourthly Opuse de Imagin Worshipping of Images with Latria came in as Camarinus granteth one thousand years after Christ The second Nicene Council condemns it Fifthly V. Caranzam in Concil Nicaeno 2. Art. 2. Alph. de Castro lib. 8. p. 572. V. Concess fidei Cyrilli Patriarchae Constant Dr. Field against Higgons The belief of Purgatory and use of Indulgences were serò recepti in Ecclesia lately received by the Church as we have seen Roffensis and Alphonsus de Castro two zealous Papists affirming It 's notorious that Purgatory was first made an Article of Faith in the late Council of Florence about three hundred years ago which the Greek Church owneth not at this day nor ever did Who can now but wonder at the confidence of our Adversaries who boast of their Antient Catholick and Apostolick Religion accusing Protestants of Novelty and Heresie setting up a new Faith and Church because we protest against and reject these erroneous Novelties they would impose upon us and all Christians as Catholick Truths necessary to be believed to Salvation Assert 4 Several Articles of the Roman Faith condemned by eminent Writers before Luther and by some of their own Communion since But I
See Bishop Vsher de success Eccl. and Albigenses who were vastly numerous and had Pastors of their own resisting Popery even unto bloud Onely I must mind our Adversaries these persons were rather fugati violently driven out of the Roman Church by Excommunications armed with Fire and Sword than fugitivi fugitives or voluntary Separatists As for their condemning them as Hereticks it signifies little or nothing for that 's the matter in question and seeing the Pope and Court of Rome as Saint Bernard Pope Adrian Bernard de Concil Adri. in legatione ad Principes Germaniae Polycrat lib. 6. cap. 24. Sarisberiensis and others acknowledge were in those days charged as the source and original cause of all disorders and abuses in the Church it 's most unreasonable their known Enemies should be admitted as their Judges in their own cause The truth is some of the Popish Writers of those days have accused Wickcliffe the Waldenses and Albigenses of such inconsisting horrid and self-contradicting Opinions Vsher de Success Eccl. that no ingenuous and impartial man can possibly believe any thing they say of them I verily think their great fault or Heresie was that they were victus populus Dei as they said conquered quelled and subdued by force of Arms not Arguments So were the Catholicks under the Heathen and Arian persecuting Emperours Certainly no prudent Christian will take Prosperity Victory outward Pomp and Power to be certain notes or perpetual properties of the true Church and right Believers nay Adversity and persecution rather as our Saviour intimates when he assures his Apostles they should be hated of all men for his Names sake and that the time would soon come when whosoever killed them should think as the Crusadoes and their Military Saint Dominic no doubt thought they did God service It 's sufficient to our present purpose that we shew some who held with us against the present Doctrine of the Papacy But here I expect their usual Objection That many of the Writers and Persons we alledg did not in all things agree with the Protestants though in some particulars they consented True no more did they in all things agree with the present Roman Church If some who believed not the Popes Supremacy the Sacrifice of Christ in the Mass Merits Purgatory c. were yet Members as of the Catholick so Roman Church and were saved which I suppose no Papist will deny Why are we Protestants condemn'd as Hereticks to Hell for believing as some of their Infallible Popes and Canonized Saints have done I challenge any Papist to shew me one National or Provincial Church I might go farther in the whole World that for at least twelve hundred years after Christ did in all points believe as the Trent Council have decreed or professed that Catholick Religion which Pope Pius hath summ'd up in his Creed We may ask them Where was your Tridentine Faith and Church before Luther Was Pope Leo the Great for receiving the Communion in one kind Was Pope Gregory the Great for worshipping of Images or for that proud profane Antichristian and foolish name as he calls it of Universal Bishop Were Cyprian Saint Austin the Council of Chalcedon the Affrican Bishops for Appeals to the Bishop of Rome and subjecting all Churches to the Popes Universal jurisdiction Were these Tridentine Papists Was P. Gelasius for Transubstantiation Were they in all things agreeing with our present Roman Catholicks Who hath so hard a forehead as to affirm it or so soft a head as to believe it I shall onely add That it is no wonder if many good Men and learned did not at once see and discover in an Age wherein Ignorance and Superstition abounded all these Errours Abuses and corruptions which infected the Church of God but did in some things not altogether so gross and palpably wicked as others errare errorem seculi follow the current of the times To end I hope Sir by what hath been said you plainly perceive that those Doctrines and Practices Protestants have rejected were never any part of the true Primitive and Catholick Faith contained in the Scriptures or the Writings of the Antient Fathers and Councils Yea that in the later and as is confessed worst Ages of the Church were never received and visibly professed by all true Catholicks whether of the Grecian or Roman Communion See Brerewoods Enquiries The most and best that can be said is that at first some of them were the private Sentiments and doubtful Opinions of some Worthy Men as Invocation of Saints Purgatory c. in the fourth or fifth Century Which after many Ages by the Policy and Power of the Pope and his Party were obtruded by the Councils of Lateran Constance Florence Trent c. as Articles of Faith on this Western part of the World but not without visible opposition and open contradiction I have shewn how multitudes of learned and pious Men did complain of them and write against them and others as the Waldenses and Albigenses forced by violence and persecution separated themselves as the Orthodox Christians did under the prevalence of the Arians actually and personally from them besides others who cordially yet for fear of persecution more privately and secretly i. e. in some sense or degree invisibly renounced and detested them I shall here add that indeed this is more than we are in reason bound to shew for it was sufficient to prove the perpetual existence or visibility of the Catholick Church and to denominate the Roman a true though corrupt part or member of it V. Augustin de Baptismo contra Donatist l. 1. c. 8. 10. B. Vsher's Serm. before King James of the Unity of Faith. that she professed the fundamentals of Christian Faith contained in the Apostolick Nicene Athanasian Creeds although she superadded as Hay and Stubble thereunto many additional or traditional Points and erroneous practices whereby consequentially the foundation of Faith was much shaken and undermined yet so as some amongst them not erring wilfully upon a general repentance might be saved yet so as by fire i. e. with much danger and difficulty However undeniable it is that many Eminent Writers and Professors in the Ages before Luther never owned them as Theological truths much less Articles of Faith but visibly openly and couragiously resisted them even unto bloud These and not the Popish domineering Party termed by some the Court rather than the Church of Rome were August Epist ad Vincent as the persecuted Catholicks under Liberius and the Arian Emperours in the strict and most proper sense the true visible Catholick Church which remained discernible though more obscurely in firmissimis suis membris as Saint Austin speaketh in these her most firm and invincible members Others who maintained promoted and tyranically imposed these Errours as points of Faith were in respect of these introduced corruptions like an impostumated Wen growing by little and little on the body of the Church or like a
salvation is to be had or expected are errors and corruptions of it contrary to the doctrine that the holy Apostles have deliver'd to them and us in their Writings So that I may justly ask them Where was your Creed and Church before Pope Pius who was hardly so old as Luther I might add several other Doctrines and Practices as contrary to Scripture if I understand any thing in it as Darkness is to Light particularly Concerning some practices in the Roman Church which are against Scripture As 1. Service in an unknown Tongue that unreasonable service of God in a Tongue the people do not-understand Can any thing be more plainly contradictory to the whole fourteenth Chapter of 1 Cor. Doth not Saint Paul there condemn all Speaking whether in Sermons Prayers or Thanksgivings in the Church in an unknown Tongue ver 2. Unknown not to God who knows all things even Sermons in Latin Greek or any Tongue else but to Men. He prefers Prophecying i.e. Preaching or expounding the Scripture before Tongues i. e. strange and not understood by the Hearers for this very reason because he that speaketh in an unknown Tongue speaketh to God not unto men for no man understandeth him howbeit in the Spirit i.e. by a miraculous gift of the Spirit Ver. 3. as the gift of Tongues was he speaketh mysteries i. e. profound and admirable Truths But he that prophesieth or preacheth in a known Tongue speaketh unto men to Edification Exhortation and Comfort He that speaketh in an unknown Tongue edifieth himself Ver. 4. not the Church But Saint Paul would have the whole Church edifi'd or profited by whatever is spoken Hence he commands ver 26. all things to be done to edification and forbids any one to use his miraculous gift of Tongues in the Church unless he interpret what he saith or another for him that so the Church may receive Edifying i.e. spiritual profit being built up in their most holy Faith. Is it not as clear as the day at Noon that according to St. Paul's doctrine there is no profit or edification redounding to the People by whatsoever is spoken in the Church in an unknown Tongue Neither doth he in that Chapter speak only of Sermons Papists themselves are not so absurd as to preach in Latin to their people or private Conferences as Bellarmine would evade he speaketh generally of whatever is spoken in the Church it must be in a Tongue known to the people that so the people may be profited by it in regard else they are not edify'd or profited at all Neither doth he speak of Sermons only but Prayers and Thanksgivings hence ver 15 16. I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the understanding also I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the understanding also So that in St. Paul's judgment it 's necessary to pray and sing Praises Psalm 47.7 as David saith with understanding Then he adds Else when thou shalt bless God with the Spirit i.e. by an extraordinary gift of strange Tongues bestow'd by the Spirit on many in those days how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen to thy giving of thanks seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest Where two things are as plain as if they had been written with a Sun-beam First That St. Paul in that Chapter discourseth not of Sermons or Conferences onely but Prayers and Hymns Secondly Justin Martyr Apol. 2. Hieron in Epist ad Galatas lib. 2. in praefat That the unlearned cannot as they ought say Amen to Prayers or Hymns of Thanksgiving they understand not We use as the ancient Church did to say Amen to Prayers not to Sermons or Conferences So that Saint Paul expresly condemns Prayers in an unknown Tongue used at this day by the Roman Church in her Latin Service And there is ground to think this is one reason why they suffer not the Laity to read the Scriptures lest they should by them discern this amongst other of their palpable erroneous and corrupt practices This may be a second instance that the Romish Religion is not Apostolical Denying the use of the Scripture to the Laity V. Claudium Espenceum in Titum cap. 2. For what can be more contrary to our Saviour's command John 5.39 Search the Scriptures c And that of Saint Paul Col. 3.16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom and spiritual understanding Yea to the very end of Gods giving the Scriptures than to forbid the generality of the people to read them lest they should by it become Hereticks i.e. Protestants Did Saint Paul write his Epistles to the learned or Clergy only at Corinth Ephesus Philippi c. and not to the whole Church Yea doth he not adjure them at Thessalonica to cause his Epistle to be read 1 Thess 5.27 not onely to the Rulers or Elders of the Church but to all the holy Brethren or Saints Might they hear what was written to them but not read it Were they not Greeks and did not Saint Paul write unto them in their own vulgar Tongue To what end if not that they should read it Otherwise surely he would have written to them in Hebrew or Syriack for he had the gift of many Tongues But say some Politicians The common people are apt to mistake and to wrest the Scriptures to Heresies and their own destruction To which I answer First Plus inde ob hominum temeritatem detrimenti quam utilitatis oriri c. Index libror. prohib Reg. 1. If the Scriptures be so apt to be misunderstood and do more hurt than good why should we look upon them as a singular blessing of God to his Church Secondly Do onely unlearn'd men wrest the Scriptures We know the old Hereticks as Arius Nestorius Pelagius c. were neither unlearn'd nor Laicks Thirdly Why did St. Paul if the Scripture be so dangerous to the common people command his Epistle to be read to all the holy Brethren Might they not mistake his true meaning by hearing it read as well as reading it Lastly I answer The Church of God is not to be govern'd by the late Policies of men but by the Laws of Christ and the example of the Primitive Church who altho many damnable Heresies arose in those Ages Cyril contra Julian lib. 6. and were colourably maintain'd by the Scripture Hom. 2. in Matth. Chrysost Hom. 3. in Lazarum Hom. 9. in Coloss Hieron Epist ad Eustochium Salvinam Celantiam in Epitaphio Paulae as Julian the Apostate objected yet never forbad any man to read the Scripture but exhorted and encourag'd the Laity even Women to do it A Licence to read the Scriptures would have been looked upon in those days as a prodigious Novelty Because many people receive the Sacrament of Christs Body and Blood unworthily to their own damnation may therefore the Laity be wholly and generally kept as well
from that Bread as they are by Romanists from that Cup unless they have a special Licence from the Church But concerning the judgment and practice of Primitive times we shall say more by and by I might add more instances but these may suffice to make good my first Assertion that the present Roman Faith or Religion is not grounded on the holy Scriptures Assert 2 The sence of Antiquity concerning the Points in Dispute The second thing I am oblig'd to shew is That the Points above-mention'd are no parts of the true antient Catholick Faith or were so esteem'd by the holy Fathers and Councils for at least 4 or 500 years after Christ but rather condemn'd and rejected by them Art. 1 Concerning the seven Sacraments I will begin with the Doctrine of the seven Sacraments The antient Fathers when they treat of the Sacraments of the Church in the strict and proper sense of the word for it is equivocal mention two onely V. Augustin de Symbolo Ambros de Sacram. Card. Richelieu hence grants there are properly but two Examen Pacific Epist 118. ad Januar. V. Ambros de Sacram. Incarnation V. Cyprian de ablution pedùm Aug. de bono Conjug 1.18 lib. 1. cont Faust c. 14. Bernard de coena Domini viz. Baptism and the Lord's Supper These Justin Martyr in the end of his 2d Apology where he describeth the publick service of the Church on the Lord's days takes notice of and none of the other five Chrysostom Cyril and Theophylact on John 19. As also Ambrose Austin and Damascen write that the Water and Bloud that came out of our Saviours side signify'd the Sacraments of the Church viz. the Water Baptism and the Bloud the Eucharist Irenaeus no where mentions any more Sacraments than these two Saint Austin saith Christ hath left us a very few Sacraments numero paucissima Baptism and the Eucharist 'T is true The Fathers sometimes term Confirmation Orders c. Sacraments but then they use the word in a more large sense as when they call the Doctrines of the Trinity Incarnation c. Sacraments i. e. Mysteries Our Saviour's washing his Disciples feet the sign of the Cross yea Polygamy are sometimes honour'd by Cyprian Augustin Bernard with the name of Sacraments i. e. sacred or mystical Signs In which sense there may be not onely seven but seventeen Sacraments But to avoid falling into a Logomachia or strife about words it is agreed as Bellarmin himself grants that the essential note of a proper Sacrament is to communicate justifying Grace De Sacram l. 1. c. 11. Costerus Enchir p. 340. Peter Lombard and Durandus say Matrimony confers not Grace See Cassandr Art 14. Do holy Orders communicate justifying Grace or Matrimony either If the latter I wonder why they should prohibit it the Clergy If the former surely there would not be found sons of Eli or Belial in their Church who know not the Lord. But enough of this at present Art. 2 Concerning Transubstant Secondly The Ancient Fathers did not believe or teach the Doctrine of Transubstantiation Alphonsus de Castro de Haeres lib. 8. saith the same It was first taught by Paschasius anno 818. See Bellarmin de Script i.e. that by consecration the substance of the Bread and Wine cease to be and are turn'd into the very substance of the Body and Bloud of Christ which he now hath being at the right hand of God. * Ad Philadelphin Ignatius saith that in the holy Eucharist one and the same Bread is administred to all Justin Martyr calleth it Bread and Wine after Consecration and saith our flesh and bloud are nourished by them In Apol. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In like manner Irenaeus lib. 5. c. 12. Bellar. min lib. 2. de Euch. cap. 4. ad finem V. Bonavent l. 4. Sent. Dist 12. art 3. qu. 1. I adjoin But mere Accidents cannot nourish our bodies Therefore the true substance of Bread and Wine still remain Our Adversaries dare not affirm that our bodies are nourish'd by some substance He addeth a little after that the Deacon useth to carry to the sick Bread and Wine to be receiv'd at their own Houses Irenaeus declareth that the Eucharist consists of two things one terrestrial viz. the Elements of Bread and Wine the other Celestial viz. Christ's Body and Bloud Iren. Lib. 4. adv Haer. c. 34. Ex duabus rebus constat terrena caelesti Clemens Alex. Paed. l. 1. cap. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Paedag. l. 2. c. 2. in fine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 understood those words Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man in a symbolical or figurative sense and disputing against the Encratites who condemn'd all use of Wine he confutes them from the Example of our Saviour who drank in the holy Eucharist of the fruit of the Vine An evident proof that Clemens did not believe any transubstantiation of the substance of the Wine into the very Bloud of Christ Tertullian disputing against Marcion who held that Christ had not a real but phantastick body onely as Romanists speak of the Sacramental Elements which seem only to be what in truth they are not draws an argument from the Eucharist saying A figure of a Body argues a true Body in another place Christ represented by Bread his Body But Christ taking Bread made it his Body In Marcion lib. 1. c. 14. Repraesentat corpus suum pane Ad Marcion lib. 4. c. 4. Hoc est corpus meum hoc est figura corporis mei V. lib. 3. in Marcion c. 19. corporis sui figuram pani dedisse saying This is my Body i.e. the figure of my Body So Tertullian understood it Marcion might easily have retorted this Argument if the substance of Bread remained not in the Sacrament by saying As the Bread in the Sacrament seems to be Bread but is not truly and really so in like manner Christ's body appear'd to to be a true humane Body but was not really what it seem'd Origen in his third Dialogue against Marcion uses the same argument V. Hom. 9. Si secundum literam sequaris occidit haec litera Hom. 7. In cap. 17. Matth. Juxta id quod habet materiale Haec de Typico Symbolicoque corpore and in his seventh Homily on Levit. he saith In the Gospel there is the Letter which killeth him who understandeth not spiritually If according to the letter you take those words Unless ye eat the flesh of the son of man c. Occidet haec litera this letter or literal sense will kill ye And in another place he is not affraid to affirm that the consecrated Elements according to what is material in them go into the belly and so into the draught which it were horrid blasphemy to affirm of Christs natural Body But he ascribes it to his sacramental typical or symbolical Body as he there calls it Cyprian disputing against
tormented in the fiery flames of Purgatory The same Father in another place hath these words Hom. 5. in Genesin He that in this present life shall not wash away his sins shall find no consolation hereafter this is the time of combating that of crowning I shall onely add what he writeth in his second Homily upon Lazarus quoted by Bellarmin When we are departed hence it is not in our power to repent or to wash away the sins we have committed V. Cyril Alexand in Joan. lib. 12. c. 36. Thus we have seen that the Greek Fathers in the first Ages of the Church were not of the present Roman Faith as to this new Article of Purgatory I might descend lower were it not needless for 't is confess'd by some of the Romish Writers V. Polyd. Virg. de invent rerum lib. 8. c. 1. Alph. de Castro c. 8. p. 572. particularly Roffensis the Pope's Martyr in Henry VIII his days That in the ancient Fathers especially the Greeks there is either none or very rare mention of Purgatory Neither saith he did the Latin Fathers all at once receive it neither does the Greek Church at this day believe it This Concession is true for the Greeks in their printed Confession offer'd to the Council of Basil Jeremy Patriarch of Constantinople Ann. 1438. in his Censure of the Lutheran Confession and Cyril Patriarch of that Church in his Confession of Faith sent by him to Cornelius Hage Ambassadour for the States of Holland at Constantinople An. 1630. deny any purgation of sins after death by fire in Purgatory which say the Greeks in their Apology was condemn'd by the fifth General Council altho it is not now to be found in the late Editions of the Councils From what hath been said I hope it is evident First That there neither is nor ever was any Catholick or universal consent of all Christian Churches as to this new Roman Article of Faith viz. Purgatory Secondly That Bellarmin the Jesuit doth but abuse the World in quoting the Greek Fathers as owning it For is it probable that the Romans should understand their meaning in their Writings better than themselves It 's true some of them as Origen Gregory Nyssen c. mention Purgation of Souls from sin by Fire but it makes nothing for the Popish doctrine of Purgatory For First Origen's Purgatory is universal which all Prophets Apostles Origen in Exod. Hom. 6. the blessed Virgin must pass through not some onely neither very good nor very bad but of a middle sort as Romanists hold Secondly The Purgation Saint Basil Gregory Nyssen and others speak of is not before the Resurrection V. Origen in lib. Regum p. 36. Contra Celsum lib. 5. p. 241. Cyrilli Catech. l. 15. pag. 168. Ego puto quod post resurrectionem ex mortuis indigeamus sacramento nos eluente purgante Origen Hom. 14. in Lucam but at the end of the World by the fire of Conflagration which shall purge as some think the whole Creation so that at last all men even Devils too shall be saved as Origen held who turn'd Hell into Purgatory Such Sentences of the Fathers will not at all be serviceable to our Adversaries purpose So much for the Greek come we now to the Latin Fathers I shall begin with Tertullian who in his Apologetick Cap. 47. mentions onely two places to which Souls go Hell and Paradise In his Book De Testimon Animae Cap. 4. He thus bespeaketh the Soul We affirm thee to remain after death and to expect the day of judgment Expectare diem Judicii proque merito aut cruciatui destinari aut refrigerio utroque sempiterno and according to your behaviour to be destinated to torment or comfort and both eternal As for temporary torments in the fire of Purgatory before the day of Judgment Tertullian takes no notice of them In his fifth Book against Marcion Cap. 6. commenting on that famous place 1 Cor. 3. he rightly understandeth the Gold Silver Hay Stubble not of sins venial or mortal but Doctrines worthy or unworthy of the foundation i. e. Christ or Christian Religion Strom 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with whom agrees Clemens of Alex. in his fourth Book Cap. 34. against Marcion as also De Anima Cap. 35.55 he saith The Souls of all good Christians are in Abraham 's bosom in refrigerio a place of refreshment until the Resurrection as many of the ancient Fathers thought when they shall receive plenitudinem mercedis the fulness of their reward Not as Papists now teach any of them in Purgatorian torments It is farther observable that he there distinguisheth that place from Hell or any part of it as Purgatory is supposed to be And discoursing on those words apply'd by Romanists to Purgatory Thou shalt not come out thence till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing He affirmeth that all Souls abide apud inferos till the Resurrection Which utterly overthrows the Roman Doctrine of Purgatory and renders all their Masses Indulgences c vain and unprofitable From the Master let us pass to his Scholar Saint Cyprian who in his Epistle to Demetrian saith that at the ending of this temporal life we are severed into the receptacles either of eternal death or immortality Ad aeternae mortis vel immortalitatis hospitia dividamur p. 166. And in his Book De bono mortalitatis he comforts the Christians generally in a time of raging Pestilence with these considerations That the servants of Christ when they die depart as Simeon desired in peace Enter into Paradise go to Christ begin to reign with Christ that when they are taken out of the storms of this World they gain the haven of Rest and eternal security Securitatis aeternae portum petimus Lastly That after death the righteous are call'd ad refrigerium to refreshment not torment in Purgatory fire whither some are sent by the Romanists and the unrighteous to punishment All which expressions are utterly inconsistent with this new Article of Faith as every man not blinded with prejudice may easily discern To the same purpose in his Epistle to Antonium he adviseth in contradiction to the bitter doctrine of Novatus that pardon and peace should be granted to Penitents in extremis at or a little before their death Because saith he apud inferos exomologesis fieri non posset in Hell or the state of death or in the grave as the word Inferi is sometimes taken there can be no satisfaction made by suffering penance or punishment for sin It 's true in the latter end of the same Epistle he saith It 's one thing to be presently admitted to the reward of Faith or heavenly Glory and another to be purged from sins by being long tormented in fire But this testimony is no good proof of the Roman Purgatory in regard he there speaketh expresly De die judicii of the day of Judgement after the Resurrection whereas our Adversaries
Church condemns them as Hereticks and rejecters of Purgatory Secondly It 's undeniable that he did not hold the Purgation of sins after death no not by the fire of Grief much less material fire to be an undoubted truth or Article of Christian Faith De Purgat lib. 10. cap. ult as Bellarmin in that place affirmeth it to be But in regard the words of Saint Cyprian in his Epistle to Antonian are much urged by some as clearly confirming the Romish Doctrine of Purgatory where he writeth Aliud est statim fidei virtutis mercedem accipere aliud pro peccatis longo dolore cruciatum emendari purgari diu igne It's one thing presently to receive the reward of Faith and Vertue another for one being long tormented with grief for his sins to be cleansed and purged a great while in fire To answer this place we are first of all to observe the occasion of these words Saint Cyprian a little before takes notice of an Objection of the Novatian Hereticks against the receiving the Lapsi such as for fear in time of Persecution like Peter denied Christ They alledged that if such might be admitted to Absolution and the Communion of the Church none would be Martyrs or lay down their lives for the faith of Christ Saint Cyprian answers not so for altho a time of Penance and then Peace is granted to Adulterers yet Virginity and Continency did not languish or decay in the Church Then follow the words above mentioned Aliud est c. It 's evident enough then that the Fire here mentioned is not to be understood of any proper and material Purgatorian fire which Papists plead for but Metaphorical or of the fire of Grief as St. Austin expounds the Fire 1 Cor. 3. which place most probably Saint Cyprian here alludes unto in regard such as fell away in time of Persecution were not to be admitted to the peace of the Church until they had undergone the grief and shame of a publick As Bellarmin grants de Purgat lib. 1. cap. 5. long and severe Penance termed Exomologesis So much Saint Cyprian's own words intimate It 's one thing presently to receive as Martyrs did the reward of their Faith and Vertue a great encouragement to Martyrdom another to be cleansed longo dolore with long grief and which are Paraphrastical of his former words to be long purged with fire To this I shall add that it was the Opinion of many of the Ancient Fathers as Irenaeus Justin Martyr Tertullian Lactantius Biblioth l. 6. annotat 345. Ambrose with others quoted by Sixtus Senensis that none except Martyrs were immediately upon their death admitted admitted to the presence of God ad oscula Domini to receive the Crown of Eternal Glory but were kept in loco invisibili as Irenaeus or in abditis receptaculis in some secret invisible places until the day of Judgment sollicitously expecting then to receive their final Sentence this is pendere in die judicii ad sententiam Domini as Saint Cyprian there phraseth it Thus I hope I have given let the Learned Reader judge a true and fair interpretation of Saint Cyprian's words which do not import any proper fire to purifie Souls before the day of Judgment so that upon the view of what is abovesaid we may conclude that the Romish Doctrine of Purgatory is no part of the Antient Primitive and Apostolick Faith but in the Fifth Century in Saint Austin's days began to be a doubtful and uncertain Opinion only So much at present for Purgatory I should now make some enquiry in the Writings of the Antient Fathers after Indulgences the fuel that feeds this Purgatorian Fire Lib. 80. Tit. Indulgentiae De Indulgentiis pauca dici possunt per certitudinem quia nec Scriptura expressè de iis loquitur Durand l. 4. dist 20. qu. 3. Ambr. Hilar Aug. Hieronym minimè de iis loquuntur Idem ibid. Roffensis assert Luther confut art 18. But I am much discouraged in regard Alphonsus de Castro a learned and earnest Papist who lived near Luther's time and knew what was the first occasion of his opposing the Church of Rome to wit the abominable abuse of these Indulgences by the Pardon-mongers He I say in that very Book which he wrote against Heresies and Luther by name hath informed me Inter omnes est c. that amongst all the Points in dispute betwixt Protestants and Papists there is not one which the Scripture hath less clearly delivered and of which Antient Writers have spoken less than concerning Indulgences The Popes Martyr Roffensis confesseth the use of them was sero receptus in Ecclesia of late received by the Church Of Purgatory he saith there is especially amongst the Greek Writers ferè nulla mentio almost no mention of it Now Indulgences as is granted are grounded on Purgatory they must stand and fall together So long saith he as there was no care or fear of Purgatory no Man sought for Pardons for on it depends all the credit of Pardons Take away Purgatory and what use of Pardons When therefore Purgatory was so lately known and received in the Church who now can marvel at Pardons that in the beginning of the Church there was no use of them Pardon 's therefore began after that they had trembled a while at the pains of Purgatory Thus he Antoninus Sylvester Pierius Ostiensis the Lovain Divines Polydore Virgil Cajetan and others of whom more hereafter say as much so that it will be labour in vain to search for them in the Writings of the antient Authors Here I cannot but wonder our Adversaries do not blush to boast of their present Roman Faith and Church as if they were the same only the same with the antient Primitive and Catholick one and to accuse us Protestants of Novelty Heresie and setting up a new Faith and Church under the Banner of M. Luther whereas they not we are guilty of those Crimes by introducing new Articles of Faith Purgatory and Indulgences amongst the rest which we only protest against Art. 4 Concerning Invocation of Saints I now come to Invocation of Saints and Angels a grand Article of the Roman Faith according to Pope Pius his new Creed Eximium adorationts genus Bellarm. de Beat. Sanct. concerning which I shall in general take the boldness to say that for above three hundred years after Christ there cannot be produced out of the genuine Writings of one antient Father one clear and pertinent testimony for Invocation of Saints or Angels Besides my own little observation I have good Vouchers for this Assertion to wit the most Reverend and learned Primate Usher who read over all the Fathers and Mr. Mountague in his Treatise of Invocation of Saints V. Molinaeum de Novit Papis p. 388. apud Chemnit in Exam. p. 6. 13. Apol. 2. yea Cardinal Perron acknowledgeth this to be truth who as also Cassander never used in private Devotions to pray to
us any thing De praescript c. 8. Arnobius Lib. 3. contra Gent. The first God is enough to us in him we worship all that is to be worshipped Lactantius agreeth with him Invocatio supponit omnipraesentiam lib. 6. p. 183. Instit lib. 2. cap. 16. 17. for he adviseth all men to look up and adore nothing worship nothing but the Majesty of God our Father and Maker Eusebius Caesar Demonstr lib. 1. c. 5. lib. 3. c. 3. sheweth that the Jewish Church directed their Adorations to God onely and for Christians he affirmeth lib. 4. c. 6. that they prayed to God onely in the name of Christ not of Saints or Angels as their Mediator For seeing saith he it is peculiar to Christ as the great High Priest to frame for us spiritual Sacrifices in praises and thanksgivings and because as a Priest he hath offered up himself a perfect Sacrifice to God for us V. Origen supra Psalm 20. Si cultus tantum dicatur non soli Deo debetur sed religio c. Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 10. c. 1. De Praep. lib. 12. c. 7. hence we say to him let him remember all thy sacrifice c. Here we see Propitiation is the ground of Intercession As for Angels he granteth to them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 honour according to the dignity of their excellent nature so do we but reserveth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all religious honour or worship to God only This is the very Doctrine of Protestants The due honour of Saints he explaineth thus We go to their Sepulchres 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to make Prayers not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ipsis to them as Trapezuntius falsly if not perfidiously translated it but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at them which is another thing But let us hear the testimony of Athanasius the truly Great who every where in his Orations against the Arians Orat. tertia in Arian proveth as the rest of the Fathers unanimously do Christ to be true God by this argument especially because he is prayed to V. Novatian de Trinit c. 14. Si homo tantummodo Christus cur in orationibus invocaeur c. Quomodo adest ubique invocatus cum haec hominis natura non sit sed Dei which were of no force if any Creature Saint or Angel might be in any sense invocated Particularly in his fourth Oration against the Arians from that Prayer of Saint Paul God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ direct our way unto you He inferreth Christ to be consubstantial with the Father For no man is a true Catholick which appeareth hereby a Papist is not would pray to receive any thing of God and Angels or any Creature Neither saith he hath any Christian as yet then Invocation of Saints or Angels was unknown and unpractised amongst all true Christians used this form of Prayer or words God and an Angel we may add Saint grant it you Laus Dec Virginique Mariae in fine Tom 2. 3. Bellarm. See Dr. Brevint's Saul and Samuel at Endor Whether Papists use not such forms of words in their Prayers is too notorious to be proved to any who are acquainted with their Books of Devotion Then taking notice of one of their chief Arguments now pressed by our new Roman Catholicks for proof of their Invocation of Angels to wit the words of dying Jacob The Angel that delivered me out of all my distresses bless the Lads Athanasius as the other Fathers unanimously expounds them not of any created Angel but of the Son of God who is God and the Angel of the Covenant whom Jacob saw face to face at Peniel and termeth God. So Euseb Hist lib. 1. cap. 2. Ambrose in Psalm 43. Novatian de Trinit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aug. Hi agnoscunt se esse creaturas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanas Orat. 3. in Arian He addeth David prayed to none for deliverance but to God To thee O Lord have I cryed c. and concludes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is evident the Patriarch Jacob joined none in his prayer to God but the Word whom he therefore calleth the Angel because he alone revealeth the Father Do not they then willingly abuse themselves and others who take Athanasius for a Roman Catholick or Invocation of Angels for an Article of the antient Catholick faith held by all sound Christians in all Ages or that the Angel appearing to the Old Patriarchs was a created Angel I will add his Contemporary Saint Hilary who altho he granteth which Protestants deny not that the Angels pray for the Church Militant here on Earth yet he no where alloweth Invocation of them but on Psalm 29 and 124. he adviseth all Christians to pray to God in regard he is Omnipresent in all places ready to help which is not true of Saints or Angels In like manner on Psalm 140. he saith In maledicto est religio creaturae Hil. de Trinit l. 8. p. 106. Magnificentiae Dei est orari It pertaineth to the magnificence or Prerogative of God to be prayed unto Hitherto the Coast is clear and we have the unanimous consent of the Fathers for about 340 years after Christ against Invocation of Saints Angels or any Creature Whence we undoubtedly conclude that it is tho a part of the present Roman yet not of the true antient and Catholick Faith believed semper ubique apud omnes always in all places by all sound Christians for such Doctrines as Vincentius Lyrinensis rightly notes are onely truly Catholick that is Universal as the name it self Catholick signifies To proceed Basil the Great Hom. 3. in Hexaemeron all Honour Worship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is due to God onely In Psalm 7. he saith Our hope is to be placed in God onely In Psal 18. That if any man worship the Creature beside tho with the Creator he giveth not glory to God but the Creature and in Psalm 45. Instead of Saints and Angels he telleth us that in all our necessities God is our onely Refuge In his Funeral Oration on Gordius he acquainteth us with the true ends of those commendatory or commemoratory Solemnities observed on the Natalitia or Festivals of the Martyrs to wit to glorifie God and to stir up the people to imitation of their Virtues but no mention find we there of praying to them I am not ignorant that out of Basil Nazianzen Gregory Nyssen c. their Funeral Orations some Rhetorical Apostrophes to and Compellations of the Saints deceased are urged for Invocation of Saints by Bellarmine and others To which I answer First That in the most Primitive and antient Fathers we as we have seen find them not from the beginning it was not so Secondly That Rhetorical flourishes of Eloquence are no safe and sure grounds to build an Article of faith upon as Theodoret grants Non ego dogmatum regulam ea duco Dial. 3. quae in Ecclesia
another Article of Pope Pius his Roman Catholick Faith to wit worshipping of Images Concerning which it is certain that the Christian Churches for three hundred years after Christ had in them no Images to worship The Temple at Jerusalem had none Philo de Leg. ad Caium To which purpose it is remarkable what Aelius Lampridius * In the Life of Alexander Severus Lib. 7. Epist 109. an Heathen Historian writes When Adrian the Emperour had commanded that Temples should be made in all Cities without Images it was presently conceived that he did prepare those Temples for Christ Secondly That worshipping them came in above six hundred years after Christ for Pope Gregory the Great himself allowed not of worshipping Images as is manifest from his Epistle to Setenus Quia eas adorari vetuisses omnino laudavimus c. Lib. 9. Epist 9. He commends him for forbidding the worshipping them though not his breaking them who broke down Images in some Churches because the People worshipped them Thirdly That a great part of the Writings of the Antient Fathers Tertullian Origen Arnobius Lactantius c. are spent in condemning the worship of Images or using them as helps of Devotion It 's true They speak directly against the Images and Idols of the Heathens but most of their Reasons fight generally against all religious use or worship of Images of what kind soever especially of Images made to represent God himself Let us then hear the Fathers and judge Justin Martyr saith It 's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apol. 2. p. 44. an injury or contumely to God to make an Image of him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of base and unworthy wood or stone pag. 52. That we ought not to worship the work of mens hands Are not Popish Images of the Trinity the work of mens hands made of wood and stone as well as those of the Heathens Origen in Cap. 1. ad Rom. and lib. 3. in Celsum saith the same of whom more by and by Athenagoras in Legat. to the Heathens asking Why the Christians worshipped not Statues Answers because material Statues and God very much differ Not the World or any part of it but it's Maker is to be worshipped Men saith he to the Emperour pass by or through your Palace and above all honour you In your Games they crown not the Harp but the Harpers We submit not an immaterial Spirit i. e. the Soul to worship material and beggerly Elements i. e. Images Doth not this confute submitting our Souls in religious worship to Popish Images are not they material c. Irenaeus testifieth Lib. 1. c. 24. Epiphan Panar Haer. 27. in Anaceph p. 525. c. 20. that the Gnostick or Carpocratian Hereticks the first worshippers of Images we can find amongst Christians crowned the Image of Christ made by Pilate as they said and worshipped it The Simonians followers of Simon Magus worshipped his Image and of Helena his Whore. Ib. Ch. 26. The Basilidian Hereticks used also Images Ib. Ch. 23. Here we see the Primitive Antiquity and first Original of worshipping Images the Authors were then condemned Hereticks but now their Abettors are the only true Catholicks Tertullian saith Apologet c. 12. We Christians worship he speaks generally no Statues or Images which Crows Rats and Spiders understand Do they not as well understand Popish Images They seem to understand them better than Romanists Yea the Antient Fathers so detested Images that they condemned the very Art of Painting and Graving excommunicating such Christians who onely to get a livelihood made them as he sheweth De Idololat c. 4 5 6. In like manner Clemens Alexand. V. p. 46. and Strom. 5. in Protreptico where he farther saith I have learned to tread upon Earth i. e. Images or Statues not to worship them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Protr p. 38. Simiae Imagimbus non decipiuntur vos deteriores Protrept ad gentes p. 39. It would be too tedious to quote all that Origen hath written against worshipping Images in his Books only against Celsus I will mention some few passages Lib. 3. He saith we instil first of all into all young Christians a contempt of all Images and lift up their minds Images then lift not up the mind to God from Veneration of Creatures to God. In the Jewish Commonwealth no maker of Images was suffer'd which turn the mind from God. Lib. 4. Cont. Celsian Pag. 284. Our New Catholicks say they turn the mind to God. In his sixth Book he writeth thus We count them rude and ignorant who are not ashamed to speak to sensless things See Cassander Consult Art. 21. to beg life of the dead although some of them confess they are not Gods as Papists excuse themselves but signs and representations of them onely However they are ignorant in imagining that a vain Smith or Carpenter can make so much as a resemblance of Divinity In the same Book he adds They are blind who regard the fallacious Arts of Painters or Carvers In his 8th Book Celsus the Heathen accuseth the Christians for not having yea not enduring to look on Images See Minutius Foelix Arnobius c. Which saith he none but fools take to be Gods themselves the Heathens were not so foolish but signa signs or Representations of them a not Gods but Daemons Angels To which Origen replieth both for Jews and Christians In regard of those words Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely shalt thou serve And thou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image c. It cannot be that any one who knoweth God should pray also to Images Do these reasons confute onely Heathen Image-worshippers Did not the Primitive Fathers and Christians understand those Texts as Protestants now do He adds We have also Images of what kind not made by impure Workmen but by the Word of God Temperance Justice and other Virtues So that Origen in the name of the Christians in his days rejects and condemns all material Images in order to religious worship Arnobius brings in the Heathens saying non ipsa timemus simulachra c. we fear not the Images lib. 6. but those whom they represent i. e. Gods who were but dead men Daemons Angels and Heroes Yet he grants that by them they strook the vulgar as Papists do with fear and dread of God. And Lib. 7th he acquaints us that the Original of Images was that men could not conceive what God is and therefore resolved to make him like themselves Lactantius Instit Lib. 1. saith We cannot worship God if we give the same honour to any thing else Part 3. qu. 25. Art. 3. Azor. Instit l. 9. c. 6. B. Vsher's Answer to Malon But the Papists as Aquinas Cajetan Catechismus Rom. Azorius Pedro de Crabrera c. acknowledge and defend they give to the Images of God and Christ latria i. e. the very same Divine Honour they yield to God and Christ
themselves In vain then do they worship God teaching for doctrines the commandments of men yea so besotted are they with their Images that they condemn Durand as little less than a Heretick for saying that Images are adored onely improperly Bellarmine de Imag. cap. 21. lib. 2. because they put men in mind of the Persons represented by them so that they properly adore not the Images but adore and worship the Prototypes before them Contrarily Azorius affirms as also Jacob Naclantus following Aquinas that it 's the constant Opinion of their Divines In Rom. c. 1. Constans opinio V. Cassand Consult de Imagin In Rom. c. 1. fol. 42. quoted by Bishop Vsher in his Answer to Malon and Bellar. l. 2. de Imag. c. 20 21. that the Image is to be worshipped with the same worship given to him whose Image it is seeing then for Example Christ is to be adored with Latria so must his Image also The Faithful saith Naclantus must not onely Adore coram Imagine sed adorare Imaginem before the Image but adore the Image it self To return to Lactantius In his 2d Book he disputes against Images thus Images are of the absent and dead But God or the Gods are living and in all places The Heathens replied they are present onely in their Images Then saith Lactantius When they are present what need of Images Again the Heathen Idolaters fear lest all their Religion should be vain if they see not present before their eyes what they worship Religio nulla ubicunque simulachrum sed mimus Ch. 18 10. So Varro apud Augustin Can. 36. and therefore place Images before them Do not Romanists use Images to the same purpose He adds If Images any Images of whomsoever had any understanding they would worship men as more Noble Creatures and concludes it is beyond all doubt that there is no Religion at least true where there is an Image but onely a mimical shew of it This is plain and home The Antient Council of Elliberis Ann. 310. decree that Pictures ought not to be in Churches lest that which is adored or worshipped should be painted on Walls Non solum imprudenter sed impie c. Loc. Theol. lib. 5. c. 4. Melchior Canus out of his great reverence no doubt of Antiquity is not afraid to charge this Council not onely with imprudence but impiety for making such a Canon The Images of Christ and the Woman he healed of her Bloudy-issue as also the Pictures of Peter and Paul in colours Eusebius Hist lib. 7. c. 14. rather excuseth than commendeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Tertul adv Marcion l. 4. c. 22. as implying some favour or imitation of Heathenish Custome to honour their Benefactors but hath not a word of any sort of Worship given by any to them De Praeparat lib. 3. c. 3. he saith What corporeal thing can be like God when we cannot have an image of any mans Soul Ibid. l. 9. c. 2 Clem. Strom. 555. saith the same p. 304. Clem. Strom. 1. He affirmeth that there was no Image in the Jewish Temple V. Philo de legatione and Chap. 3. That Pythagoras taught by Moses advised the Romans not to make any Image of God whence for one hundred and seventy years they had no Images in their Temples Epiphanius conformably to the Canon of Elliberis Epist ad Joannem Hierosâ—lymit Contra Collyrid Haeres 79. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Haeres 79. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Câ—em Aâ— Protrept Divina Majestas in simulachrorum stoliditate facilè contemnitur Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 4. c 31. finding the Image Christi vel Sancti of Christ or some Saint painted on a Veil in a Church rent it in pieces as contrary to Divine Law. In another place he telleth us the Virgin Mary was to be honored but not given for us to worship if not her Person much less say we her Image In the same place confuting the Collyridian Heresie he termeth the making Images of God and dead men to be a coarse Idolatrous and devillish practice whereby the minds of men go awhoring from the onely true God. Athanasius adversus Gentes brings in the Heathens pleading for their Images or Idols that they used them as Letters or Lay-mens Books as Papists speak to help them to spell out the nature of God of which they are marks and significant Characters To which he answereth that then they ought to Deifie the maker of those Images and prefer the Artificers before their work made by them yea he saith in the beginning that Christ the Image of God was made man on purpose to draw men off from the use of Images The same hath Eusebius Caesariensis adding that true Christians spit on the Images of the dead and worship God onely Chrysostome Hom. 4. de poenitentia Let us always fly to God both willing and able to relieve us If we be to make our addresses to men we must apply our selves unto Porters Door-keepers c. In God there is no such thing In like manner Hom. 12. in Matth. If we need not apply our selves to Saints or Angels much less to their Images Saint Ambrose C. 1. ad Rom. agreeth with Saint Chrysostome above and speaking of Idolaters saith They do not deny God yet they serve the Creature whereby they are not excused but more accused because knowing God they honour him not as God. And de fuga seculi cap. ult Rachel hid her Fathers Idols so doth the Church for she knoweth not vain figures of Images Nazianz. in Pascha Orat. 2. saith the same but understands the true sub\ stance of the Trinity Let us then leave the shadow who seek after the Sun. Saint Jerome in Psalm 113. In St. Jerom's and Austin's days there no were Images in Churches say Cassander Consult de Imag. Polydore Virg. de Invent. rerum and Erasm in Catech Dost thou make a God with thine own hands to adore If thou didst adore a Beast it were evil yet a Beast hath Eyes and Feet but that which thou adorest with latria neither seeth nor moveth I will add Saint Austin in Psalm 113 114. The Holy Scriptures arm us against such as say I worship not this Visible Image but the Numen or Deity that dwelleth in it or as others I neither worship Image nor any Spirit but by the corporal Effigies or Picture I see the sign of that which I ought to worship Saint Paul with one sentence condemns both who have changed the truth of God into a lye and served the creature rather than the Creator c. In the former part he condemns Images in the latter their interpretations of Images Turn the truth into a lye But who prayeth looking on an Image who is not so affected that he thinketh he is heard of it and hopes he shall have what he desireth For this the outward figure of members extort from us that the mind living
have Rome Where first observe that he with Irenaeus ascribeth the same Authority to Corinth Philippi c. which he doth to Rome Secondly He speaketh not of Jurisdiction but matter of Faith and Apostolick Doctrine Thirdly It 's conditional if you be near Italy you have Rome Tertullian never thought that all Christian Churches were subject to Rome either as to Doctrine or Government or were bound to appeal and sub mit unto her Again Chap. 20. The Apostles having first preached the Gospel in Judea promulged the same doctrine of Faith to the Nations In regard of this doctrine they are accounted Apostolical Wherefore so many and great Churches are that one first Church from the Apostles of which all are So all are first omnes primae and all Apostolical whilst all prove one Unity Now if all are first all Apostolical how can the Roman Church claim any Primacy or Principality over all even Apostolical Churches Origen in Matth. Petra est omnis Christi imitator 16. Every Disciple of Christ is that Rock If you think the Church to be built on Peter onely what will become of John and the rest of the Apostles What was spoken to Peter was spoken to all the Apostles and Christians All are Peter and the Rock The Keys were not onely given to Peter This now at Rome is no less than Heresie Epist 45.47.49 Let us hearken to Saint Cyprian who usually wrote to Pope Cornelius as to his Brother Colleague and Fellow-Bishop not as his Prince and Sovereign or Universal Bishop especially in his 72. Epistle directed to him ' In which matter we force no man we give Law to no man seeing every Bishop hath the free liberty of his own will in the administration or Government of his Church being to give account of his actions not to the Bishop of Rome but to God. In his Preface before the Council of Carthage he hath these words None of us maketh himself Bishop of Bishops i. e. Supreme Universal Bishop or compelleth his Colleagues by tyrannical terrour to obedience c. where he seemeth to reflect on Pope Stephen Compare those words of Tertullian de Pudicit c. 10. The High Priest the Bishop of Bishops meaning the Bishop of Rome saith I absolve Adulterers Ejus errorem denotabis qui Haereticorum causam defendit Baronius ad Ann. 258. N. 47. A Canonized Saint Menolog Graec. in Octob. 28. ☞ Epist 75. which no doubt he spake ironically and by way of irrision In his Epistle 74. he writeth against Pope Stephen charging him with Errour and pleading the cause of Hereticks against the Church of God. Can any man believe Cyprian took Pope Stephen for his Supream Governour and infallible Head of all Churches But Firmilian the famous Bishop of Cappadocia highly commended by Baronius ad ann 258. num 45. was not afraid to accuse the same Pope Stephen of open and manifest folly who saith he glorying de Episcopatûs sui loco of his Episcopal Seat or Sea and that he is Successour of Saint Peter on whom the foundations of the Church were laid maketh many Rocks and buildeth new Churches He addeth also Eos qui Romae sunt non ea in omnibus abservare quae sunt ab origine tradita De Vnitate Eccles Paci consoretio praedicti honoris potestatis Although he said before of Peter tibi dabo c. super illum unum aedificat Ecclesiam suam illi pascendas mandat oves suas that the Roman Church was guilty of violating the Antient Canons and that Pope Stephen by Excommunicating so many Christian Churches Excommunicated himself I will add that noted passage of St. Cyprian Idem caeteri quod Petrus c. The rest of the Apostles were the same with Peter endowed with an equal fellowship or copartnership of Honour and Power They are all Pastors but the Flock is but one which is to be fed by all not Peter onely or his Successours by vertue of feed my sheep by unanimous consent not by deputation by or subjection to Peter and such as succeed him at Rome A little before he saith Although Christ granted to all the Apostles after his Resurrection parem potestatem equal power breathing on them the Holy Ghost and saying whose sins ye remit c. Yet to manifest Unity he appointed one Chair He speaketh to Peter and to thee will I give c. singularly Why not that Peter had a greater Power or Authority which he expresly denied before than the rest of the Apostles but saith Saint Cyprian to commend to us Unity that the Church ought to be one without Schism to the end of the World which is the intent of all that Discourse Now if Saint Peter had no Supremacy over all the Apostles and Churches the Pope as deriving it from him can have just right to none Let me add Saint Cyprian's 67. Epistle where he adviseth them what to do concerning the Heretical French Bishop whom he would not have the People to own though he had surreptitiously obtained Pope Stephens confirmation He addeth as a reason V. Epist 68. We are many Pastors but we feed one Flock and we ought to gather and succour all the Sheep yea if any of our Society è collegio nostro i. e. any Bishop Si haeresin facere gregem Christi lacerare vastare tentaverit subveniant caeteri Epist 67. should fall into Heresie and rent the Church the rest ought to help where he exempteth not any Bishop no not the Pope from possibility of erring even Heretically as to be sure Pope Liberius and Honorius did In Arnobius and Lactantius I find nothing to our present purpose I pass to Saint Hilary De Trinit l 2. Lib. 6. n. 674. Haec fides est Ecclesiae fundamentum pag. 174. This is the one immoveable foundation this is the Rock of Faith confessed by Saint Peter Thou art Christ the Son of God. Again On this Rock of Confession the Church is built This Faith is the foundation of the Church In the same manner Saint Chrysostome often expounds the Rock In locum Hom. 55. Christus ipse est Petra Greg. M. in Psalm Poenitent 5. Augustin in Joann Epist 1. Tract 10. Matth. 16. of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confession of the Deity of Christ made by Peter in the name of the rest of the Apostles Add Theophylact See Liberius his Epistle to Achanasius Opera Athan. Tom. 1. lib. 1. in Jovinian c. 14. Saint Basil of Seleucia with others Basil the Great Epist 8◠ad Athanasium termeth Athanasius in the name of the Greeks their Head the leader and Prince of Ecclesiastical affairs to whom they did fly for advice Surely Saint Athanasius rather than the Arian Heretick Pope Liberius was like a Rock unshaken in those days Saint Hierome saith the Church is built on the Apostles ex aequo In 1. Epist Joan. Tract 10. equally not on Peter principally or onely much
less on his Successours and that at Rome rather than Antioch Saint Austin agreeth Quid est super hanc petram c. What is it On this Rock will I build my Church super hanc fidem on this Faith Thou art Christ the Son of God. But sparing at present particular testimonies I shall shew that all the four first General Councils These P. Gregory the Great received as the four Gospels Lib. 1. Epist 24. all Popes are sworn to them Ad apicem observaturos Can. sicut Dist 16. Hist lib. 60. c 23. l. 1. c. 6. Roma Metropolis Romanae ditionis Athanas ad solitar vit agentes either expresly or by consequence and implicitly have refuted and overthrown the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome I begin with the first Nicene Council Can. 6. where we read Let the Antient Customs remain The Bishop of Alexandria shall have the Government of the Churches of Egypt Libya and Pentapolis Quoniam Episcopo Romano parilis mos est Because the Bishop of Rome hath the like Custom i. e. to govern Rome and the suburbicarian Region as Ruffinus as Roman Presbyter understood it and the precedent words plainly enough intimate The Bishop of Alexandria is to govern his Diocess as the Bishop of Rome doth the Churches belonging to him of antient Custom Here is a manifest limitation or rather exclusion of the Bishop of Romes Universal Jurisdiction Baronius Bellarmin and Coriolanus answer that those words because the Bishop of Rome hath the like Custome means no more but this because the Bishop of Rome consuevit perinittere hath used of old Custom to permit the Bishop of Alexandria to govern those Churches of Egypt c. A strange gloss and a mere begging of the Point in question As if the right of governing all Churches belonged to the Bishop of Rome when the Council as of antient Custome inviolable and equal to that of Rome parilis mos commit the government of those Churches to the Bishop of Alexandria as his antient Right might not we say as well that the Patriarch of Alexandria permitted the Pope to govern the Church of Rome It is evident enough from this Canon that the Nicene Fathers did not imagine that the Supreme Government of all Churches did belong to the Bishop of Rome or that the Patriarch of Alexandria needed to supplicate him for a Pall. The first Council of Constantinople Can. 2. forbids all Bishops to encroach on the Diocesses of others lest they confound the Churches And Can. 5. they decree that the Bishop of Constantinople ought to have the honour of Primacy next to the Bishop of Rome in regard it was new Rome to wit made the Imperial City by Constantine who called it after his own name Constantinople Here we see the Bishop of Rome is forbid as well as others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to play the Bishop in other mens Dioceses and that the Council out of Reverence to antient custome grants him a priority of Place or Order not a superiority of Power and Jurisdiction The general Council of Chalcedon expounds and confirms this 5th Canon of Constantinople who Can. 27. decree in these words Following in all things the Decree of the 150 Fathers to wit in the Council of Constantinople before mentioned we decree the same concerning the Priviledges of the most holy Church of Constantinople which is new Rome Their Reason is for the Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not God the Father nor Christ his Son Matth. 16 16. but the Fathers the Bishops did of right give Priviledges to the Throne Ecclesiastical of old Rome because it was the Imperial City and upon the same consideration the 150 Bishops before mentioned have granted to the Throne of new Rome i.e. Constantinople 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equal Priviledges rightly judging that the City which is honoured with the Empire and Senate and enjoyeth equal Priviledges i.e. Civil with old Rome the Imperial City should also in matters Ecclesiastical be equally with her magnified and extolled being the second in order after her Here we see plainly First That the Church of Constantinople is in all Ecclesiastical matters and Priviledges equally extolled and magnified with old Rome Gratians corruption of this Canon is abominable for he translates it thus We Decree that the Seat of Constantinople may have not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equal but similia like Priviledges with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not Semor old but Superiour superior Rome non tamen in Ecclesiastic is magnificatur ut illa but is not in Ecclesiastical matters magnified as she is whereas in the Greek it's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Ecclesiastical matters shall be equally extolled An ignorant or shameless man. Secondly Observe the reason why the Fathers in both Councils being near eight hundred Bishops granted Priviledges and Preeminences to the Bishop of old Rome was because it was the Imperial City and upon the very same ground the Fathers in the Council of Chalcedo judged it right and fit to grant the same and equal Priviledges to the Bishop of Constantinople in regard it being made the Seat or Head of the Empire by the Emperour Constantine it was new Rome or the Imperial City Here is no mention made of any Divine Right granted by Christ to Peter or his Successours at Rome This Canon is of more weight than all the Decrees of Popes and the Writings of all the Schoolmen and Jesuits put together It was confirmed in the sixth General Council in Trullo Can. 36. as also by the Emperours Marcian Justinian Novel 115. cap. 3 c. Our Adversaries alledg In Edicto de Confir Syn. Chalced. apud Binium Tom. 3. p. 471. Caranza p. 369. that this Canon was surreptitiously obtained by the Bishop of Constantinople Anatolius when the Bishop of Romes Legates with others were gone out of the Council But Caranza a Popish Collector of the Councils informs us that upon this complaint made by the Legates the Canon was debated the second time and confirmed by the Bishops in Council so much doth Binius Concil Tom. 3. p. 404. 463. acknowledgeth also yea the Bishop of Rome is desired by the Council to consent to it as Baronius himself confesseth I hasten to the General Council of Ephesus where upon complaint of the Bishops of Cyprus that the Patriarch of Antioch claimed a Power to ordain their Bishops contrary to antient custome the Fathers decree that they should enjoy their antient right adding a Canon whereby they forbid any Bishop not excepting the Roman to invade the Diocâ—â—ses of others lest the Statutes of the Fathers be broken and under pretence of the sacred function the tumour of secular power should creep in and so unadvisedly by little and little we lose our liberty which Christ hath purchased by his own bloud Thus those Reverend Bishops decreed V. Bernard ad Eugenium de Consid lib. 3. as if by a Prophetical Spirit they had foreseen the future Captivity of the Church
c. Fulber Epist ad Adeodatum Epist ad Heribaldum To these may be added Bertram de corpore sanguine Domini to Charles the Great who about seven hundred years ago in a just Treatise impugneth the Doctrine of Transubstantiation to whom you may add Fulbertus Carnoton Berengarius Hincmarus in vita Remigii Rabanus Maurus Purgatory As for Purgatory and its Appendix Indulgences whose most gross abuse defended by the Pope first opened Luther's mouth against him much need not be said in regard as we have seen above Roffensis the Popes Martyr and Alphonsus de Castro to whom I may now add Polydore Virgil confess they are late Novelties of which in the antient Greek Fathers there is little or no mention The modern Greek Church as appeareth peareth from their Confession offer'd to the Council of Basil and since that of Cyril late Patriarch of Constantinople denieth any Purgation of sins after death by Fire Lumbard and Gratian take no notice of Indulgences The later Schoolmen Albertus Al. Halensis Durand Cajetan quoted by Bishop Usher and Dr. Field in his Appendix say that Finalis Gratia c. final Grace abolisheth all remains of sin in Gods Children Answer to the Challenge p. 179. Part. prima summae Tit. 10. c. 3. Opusc 15. c. 1. De Indulg lib. 4. dist 20. qu. 3. Primus in Purgatorium extendit Indulgentias V. Chemnit Exam. de Indulg 742. 100 Gravamina what need then of any Purgatorian fire Antoninus acknowledgeth that concerning Indulgences nihil habemus expressè c. We have nothing expresly or clearly delivered either in Scripture or the antient Fathers This same is affirmed by Cajetan and Durand Agrippa de Vanitate Scient cap. 61. saith that Pope Boniface VIII first extended Indulgences to Purgatory they were opposed before Luther by the University of Paris Wesselus Wickliffe Hus Jerome of Prague Savanorola yea the States of Germany complain to the Pope of them as intolerable burdens cheats and incentives to all manner of wickedness Add Platina in Boniface 9. Urspergensis Chron. p. 322. Art. 4 Image-worship Worshipping of Image was V. Polyd. Virgil. de Invent rerum lib. 6. V. Cassand infra See Vspergensis Rhegino ad Ann. 794. and Matth. Westminst ad Ann. 794. Cassand Consult art de Imagin The work of Mens Hands may not be adored no not in honour of their Prototypes p. 213. De Trad. Part 3. De Imagin as is notorious first Decreed though not with Latria in the second Nicene Council about the year 794 but was opposed and condemned by the General Councils of Constantinople and Frankfort in which last were three hundred Bishops called by the Emperour and Pope whose Legates were there present as the Bishop of Rhemes reports apud Alanum Copum Dial. 4. and Suarez grants it in 3. Part. Thomae qu. 25. disp 54. This worship of Images was confuted also by Albinus or Alcuinus out of the Scriptures as Hoveden relates in continuat Bedae ad ann 794. Moreover by the Book of Charles the Great if it be not the same with the former which is still extant in the Vatican and acknowledged to be genuine by some learned Papists Agobardus Bishop of Lyons wrote against worshipping Pictures or Images So did also Jonas Bishop of Orleans in his Book de Cultu Imaginum cap. 5. allowing them onely for Ornament in Churches but detests the giving them any part of divine Honour as accursed wickedness Peresius saith as much Gerson de defect viror Eccles Holcot de Sapientia Lect. 158. Miraudula Apol. qu. 3. condemn bowing before them Durand de ritib. Eccl. Catharinus de cult Imagin grant that their use is dangerous in regard of the peril of Idolatry See our Churches Homily on the Peril of Idolatry Polydore Virgil saith De Invent. rerum lib. 6. c. 13. De Imag. l. 2. c. 22. all the Fathers condemn'd worshipping Images Bellarmine himself granteth that the worship of Images as defended and practised by the Roman Church i.e. with Latria or the same worship we give to the Prototypes cannot be maintained without such nice distinctions of absolutely and relatively or accidentally univocally or analogically properly or improperly as scarce themselves much less the weak common people can understand or if they do can hardly avoid Error in practising them Peresius more plainly They are a scandal to the weak who cannot understand them but by erring Hence the Cardinal accounteth it not safe to teach their Votaries publickly to give Divine Honour or Latria to the Image of Christ for his sake De Trad. p. 226. V. Biel. in Canon Missae Sect. 49. Part 3. qu. 28. Art. 3. Instit Mor. Tom. 1. l. 9. Suarez Tom. 1. Disp 54. Sect. 4. Vasq in qu. 25. disp 110. c. 2. See Orig. in Cels l. 6. 8. Arnob. lib. 6. Apud Bellar. de Imag. l. 2. c. 8. V. Aug. de fide symb cap. 7. Biblioth Patrtom Tom. 5. pag. 609. Concil Trident. Compare Origen Lib. 7. in Celsum Nevertheless it 's undeniable that this is the professed Doctrine of the Church of Rome declared by their Oracle Aquinas and constans opinio as Azorius speaks the constant Opinion of their Divines defended by Valentia Suarez and that as the sense of the Council of Trent Vasquez the Jesuit to defend this Adoration blushed not to write that it is lawful to worship the Sun yea God bless us the Devil himself so the worship be directed ultimately to God and his Honour whereas it 's notorious that the Heathens might and did in this very manner defend their gross Idolatry The very making of the Images of the Trinity is condemn'd by Abulensis Durand Peresius and others yet defended and practised by the Roman Church Walafridus Strabo called it Superstition and blockishness hebitudinem to worship Images I will end that I be not too tedious with the words of Jonas Bishop of Orleans as an Answer to our Adversaries Reply That they place no Divinity in their Images but worship them onely in honour of God and of him whose Image it is seeing they know there is no Divinity in Images they are the more to be condemned for giving to an infirm and beggerly Image the honour that is due to the Divinity I cannot omit what I find in Agobardus it being so consonant with Jonas as making one sentence De Pict Imag. p. 237. They which answer as our Roman Catholicks now do they think no Divinity to be in the Image they worship but that they worship it in honour of him whose image it is are easily answered because if the Image they worship be not God neither is it to be worshipped in honour of the Saints who use not to arrogate to themselves Divine Honour He adds That the Images of Christ and the Apostles were expressed by the Antients after the custom of the Gentiles V. Euseb supra rather for love and memory than for any religious honour or
Gangrene or Leprosie spreading it self by degrees over it the cutting of this Wen the curing this Gangrene the cleansing and removing this Leprosie our Adversaries most unreasonably and absurdly condemn as destroying the antient Catholick Faith and setting up a new Church under the Banner of Luther which we detest and abhor Contrarily we not they contend earnestly for the antient true Catholick Faith once and once for all delivered to the Saints in opposition to their late subintroduced Novelties of Transubstantiation Image-worship Purgatory c. which as we see by Pope Pius his new Creed they will needs add as Articles of the Antient Primitive and Catholick Faith to the Nicene Creed necessarily to be believed and professed by all Christians under peril of Heresie and Damnation If the Pope and Church of Rome may make as many Articles of Faith as they please surely in time we may have a Creed as large as Aquinas his Sum. I shall only add my earnest Prayer that God would enlighten you with his Holy Spirit that you may see the truth and renouncing all secular ends and private interests cordially embrace it Theodoret de curand Graecor affect Serm. 1. in regard as an Antient Father long since said It becometh not wise Men rashly to give up themselves to their Fathers Customs but to endeavour to find out the Truth Amen Your faithful Friend FINIS Books lately printed for James Adamson I. A Treatise of the Celibacy of the Clergy wherein its Rise and Progress are Historically considered In Quarto II. A Treatise proving Scripture to be the Rule of Faith writ by Reginald Peacock Bishop of Chichester before the Reformation about the Year 1450. III. Doubts concerning the Roman Infallibility 1. Whether the Church of Rome believe it 2. Whether Jesus Christ or his Apostles ever Recommended it 3. Whether the Primitive Church Knew or Used that way of Deciding Controversies IV. The Salvation of Protestants asserted and defended in Opposition to the Rash and Uncharitable Sentence of their Eternal Damnation pronounced against them by the Romish Church by J. H. Dalhusius Inspector of the Churches In the County of Weeden upon the Rhine c. V. The present State of the Controversie between the Church of England and the Church of Rome or an account of the Books written on both sides in a Letter to a Friend In Quarto VI. Two Discourses of Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead In Quarto VII Clementis epistolae duae ad Corinthios Interpretibus Patricio Junio Gothofredo Vendelino Joh. Bapt. Cotelerio Recensuit notarum spicilegium adjecit Paulus Colomesius bibliothecae Lambethanae curator accedit Tho. Brunonis Windsoriensis dissertatio de Therapeutis Philonis His subnexae sunt Epistolae aliquot singulares vel nunc primum editae vel non ita facile obviae In Quarto VIII Pauli Colomesii Observationes sacrae Editio secunda auctior emendatior accedunt ejusdem Paralipomena de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis passio sancti Victoris Massiliensis ab eodem emendata editio quarta ultima longe auctior emendatior Octavo IX The Travels of Monsieur de Thevenot into the Levant in three Parts viz. 1. Into Turky 2. Persia 3. The East-Indies In Folio A brief Historical Account of the Behaviour of the Jesuits and their Faction for the first twenty five Years of Queen Elizabeths Reign with an Epistle of W. Watson a Secular Priest shewing how they were thought of by other Romanists of that time Quarto The Argument of Mr. Peter de la Marteliere Advocate in the Court and Parliament of Paris made in Parliament in the Chambers thereof being assembled An. Dom. 1611. for the Rector and University of Paris Defendants and Opponents against the Jesuits Demandants and requiring the Approbation of the Lectors Patent which they had obtained giving them power to read and to teach publickly in the aforesaid University translated out of the French Copy set forth by publick Authority and printed at London 1612. Quarto
named by the Priest but not invocated In the Canon of the Mass Commemorantes memoriam facientes Prayer is directed to God onely In his 8th Book de Civit. Dei cap. 17.22 27. Nos Martyribus non Templa sicut Diis sed Memorias sicut hominibus mortuis fabricamus c. Aug de Civit. Dei lib. 22. c. 10. similiter lib. 8. cap. ultimo Charitate non servitute Ibid. he affirmeth expresly That whatsoever religious Services were performed at the Tombs of the Martyrs as Prayers Sacrifices Thanksgivings were offered not to them but to God. So contra Faust lib. 20. c. 21. Quicquid offertur Deo offertur In his Epistle to Maximus the Grammarian Know saith Saint Austin that of Catholicks true Catholicks not Roman no dead man is worshipped And in his Book of True Religion c. 55. Our Religion stands not in worshipping the dead They seek not such honour This they would have that we with them worship one God according to the Angels admonition Revel 22.9 Martyrs are to be honoured as Origen Cyril Epiphanius granted for imitation not adored for Religion or as he expresseth it Cont. Faustum l. 20. c. 21. colimus Martyres c. we worship or honour Martyrs with a worship of love and fellowship with which the Saints in this life are worshipped Is any religious Worship properly so called to be given to Saints or religious Persons by us in this life Let our Adversaries consider this Lastly in his Book De Cura pro mortuis cap. 10.11 12. He overthroweth the principal grounds and reasons on which Invocation of Saints is built For first He judgeth it very probable at least that the Saints or Martyrs did not really and personally appear to their Friends although it was believed by many Compare Basil M. in Mamantem but in imagination or appearance onely Secondly He proveth which he saith he knew would be ill taken by some that the souls of the departed Saints are in a place where they see or know not what is done by or happens to their nearest Relations from Gods Promise to Josiah 2 Chron. 34.18 That he should not see all the Evil he would bring on his People as also from those words of Esaiah Isai 63.16 Abraham is ignorant of us and Israel knows us not Whence he infers si tanti Patriarchae c. If such great Patriarchs were ignorant of what happened to the People who sprang from them how are the dead interessed or concerned in knowing and helping their Friends He confirmeth his conclusion thus If the dead were interested in the affairs of the living or spake to us in Dreams my dear Mother would no night he absent from me But it 's true as in the Psalm My Father and my Mother have forsaken me c. If our Parents have forsaken us who else among the dead know what we do or suffer Now our Adversaries grant that unless the Saints departed know our particular state and wants it is vain and to no purpose to pray unto them Thirdly He answers an Objection drawn from Dives his desiring Abraham to send to his Brethren on Earth wherefore he knew what they did To this he replieth Dives had such or so great a care of the living although he knew not what they did as we have of the dead although what they do we know not in particular It was onely a general care or well wishing But Abraham knew they had Moses and the Prophets To this he answereth that he might know it by the information of Lazarus Fourthly He enquireth how the Saints come postea afterwards so that this knowledge cometh too late to ground Prayer to Saints in present extremities and sudden dangers He answereth Possunt ab Angelis possunt Deo revelante cognoscere they may know it by Angels who are conversant with us or by Revelation from God they may he saith not positively that they do Fifthly He maketh a difference which Romanists take little notice of between Martyrs and other Saints and denies that because Martyrs per Divinam potentiam miraculously or by special dispensation are sometimes here on Earth in their Temples therefore we are to think the same of all dead Saints generally or that they can come to us quando volunt when they will as Bellarmine determines D. Sanct. Beatit lib. 1. c. 20. But miraculous Dispensations are no safe Rule for ordinary supplications to all Saints promiscuously Lastly supposing it true that the living are helped some way or other by Martyrs prayed unto he saith Whether it be by their being present in so many distant places at the same time where their memories i. e. Monuments or Churches are or which no doubt he could not but think more probable whether they being in some place remote from humane converse are yet generally praying for such as pray not to them but God who might employ Angels in answering their requests as we pray in the general for the dead although we know not where they are or what they do definire non audeo I dare not resolve From all which we may easily discern how uncertain Saint Austin was concerning the presence knowledge and assistance of Saints departed afforded to some not who pray to them but to God from whence we may certainly conclude that Invocation of dead Saints was no part of St. Austin's Creed but at utmost a probable and doubtful Opinion onely as we have seen before from the writings of the Greek Fathers Nazianzen Basil and others I know well our Adversaries urge much Nazianzen's Oration on Cyprian and how a Virgin assaulted by the Devil prayed to the Virgin Mary to help her But Gelasius with the Authority of the Roman Church condemns that Book of the Conversion of Saint Cyprian which Nazianzen supposed to be genuine as false and supposititious neither is it at all probable that Saint Cyprian was ever a Magician of which neither himself in the relation of his conversion Lib 2. Epist 2. nor Pontius in his life nor any more antient creditable Writer maketh any mention They glory also much in those words of Saint Chrysostome Hom. 66. ad Popul Antioch He that is Emperour standeth praying to the Saints to the Tent-maker and Fisherman Peter and Paul to intercede with God for him To which I first oppose Saint Austin's words Epist 42. non Petro sed Deo. De script Eccl. ad ann 398. Hom 39. in 1 Cor. 15. Sixtus Senens The Emperour at the Tomb of Peter prayeth not to Peter but God. Secondly The Homily is supposititious for as Bellarmine himself granteth the true Homilies of Chrysostome ad Popul Antiochen were but 21. Thirdly Chrysostome held that Christian Saints departed are not till the Resurrection admitted to the sight of God and consequently knowledge of our Prayers Of which Opinion were many of the antient Fathers quoted for this Invocation by our Adversaries Art. 5 Concerning Image-worship I come to